RADIOJanuary 18, 2024

Does Biden's new SECRET COURT reveal a partnership to SPY ON YOU?!

Just when you thought the news couldn't get any crazier, Glenn reads a report from Politico on a new secret surveillance court that Biden's attorney general recently staffed. Included in the panel of judges ... former AG Eric Holder of all people. But the story gets more insane. At first, the "Data Protection Review Court" appears to be related to the "lucrative transatlantic data trade" between companies. But then, Politico starts mentioning intelligence agencies, surveillance practices, and visas being denied. Plus, apparently, the court's location is secret, its decisions are kept secret, and plaintiffs aren't even allowed to go to the court. Is this an admission of an international public-private partnership to spy on Americans via European agencies, and vice versa?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: This comes from politico today. In a deal to let companies, and I would like you to stop me, when you don't understand something, or you think you can explain it, Stu. Okay?

STU: Okay.

GLENN: All right.

This one is a wild one. In a deal to let companies keep trading transatlantic data, the White House built an opaque new forum, that could affect national security, and privacy rights, without any paper trail.

STU: I mean, there's a lot of questions in that paragraph. But usually the opening one, setting you up for the explanation.

So perhaps I should wait a second.

GLENN: At an undetermined date, in an undisclosed location, the Biden administration began operating a secretive new court, to protect European's privacy rights under US law.

Known officially as the data protection review court, it was authorized in an October 2022 executive order, to fix a collision of European and American law. That had been blocking the lucrative flow of consumer data, between American and European companies, for three years.

Now, this is because Europe has just put in a very strong privacy law.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And they're enforcing those things.

Well, we have a problem exchanging data now, because of their private laws.

The court's eight judges. Eight judges were named last November, including, oh. Attorney general Eric Holder. He's trustworthy.

STU: Oh, good.

GLENN: Its existence has allowed companies to resume the lucrative does with the blessing of EU officials.

STU: What is the lucrative transatlantic data trade?

GLENN: I don't know.

They say that it's companies. But then, it -- then -- just listen to the whole story. I mean, they say that's companies trading data.

Or like, for instance, Facebook having servers here. With European at that time on their servers.

STU: Okay. So you could argue, maybe that this needs to be sorted out, because there's nothing nefarious going on here.

It's just -- it's just --

GLENN: Why the secrecy.

STU: Very strange.

Also, did we have -- we cover the news every day. Did we have a new bill, that created this?

Was there a new discussion?

Was there a debate?

GLENN: No. Executive order. A dictate.

STU: A dictate from -- create new courts?

GLENN: New courts. New courts.

STU: Wow. Okay.

GLENN: The next sentence -- because you understand clearly what we're talking about, right?

The next sentence of this article is the details get blurry after that.

STU: Okay. So what we just had, was the in-focus part. Okay.

GLENN: Yes. That's crystal clear. It will get a little blurry now.

The court's location is a secret.

The Department of Justice will not say if it's taken a case yet.

STU: Why -- why would you hide the location of a court that is overseeing data transfers?

GLENN: Hmm.

STU: What on earth?

Why would that need to be a secretive location?

GLENN: No idea.

Though, the court has a clear mandate ensuring European's their privacy rights under US law. Its decisions will also be kept a secret from both the EU resident's petitioning the court, and the federal agencies tasked with following the law.

STU: Wait. Wait.

So someone in the EU comes to the American court, that the --

GLENN: The secret court.

STU: That they don't know where the location is.

GLENN: Right. I don't know how to contact them. Don't know anything.

STU: So when that happens. Which I assume it would be very infrequently.

When they don't, they go through some sort of case. And then they don't get to know the result of the case?

GLENN: Well, it's not only that. Plaintiffs are also not allowed to appear in person. And are represented --

STU: How could they. They don't know where it is?

GLENN: Right. And they're represented by a special advocate appointed by the US attorney general.

STU: Okay. So --

GLENN: Okay. So --

STU: I have a problem with my data. And I go to this court, that I don't know where it is.

GLENN: Right. And you can't actually go to the court.

STU: I can't actually -- not physically going.

I contact them. They create a case. They assign an advocate for me, to argue the case.

But I can't know where it is, when it's going on, and what the outcome is?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Okay. Perfect.

GLENN: This is just to restore some trust. Critics worry, that it will tie the hands of intelligence agencies, with an unusual power.

It can make binding decisions on surveillance practices, with federal agencies, which won't be able to challenge those decisions.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Now, I thought this was about corporate data transfers.

STU: Yeah. What does this have to do with intelligence agencies?

GLENN: Until there's some clarity on how that will operate, I think you would expect the intelligence agency to be nervous about what it might mean, especially since it's not even clear what its caseload might even look like.

For the European citizens, it's supposed to help.

The picture is just as murky.

Private advocates argue that it will be nearly impossible for European residents to bring cases, given that they will have to know that they're being surveilled to file a complaint!

STU: Right.

GLENN: Quote, I don't think anyone sitting around in Spain, is unhappy about his visa being denied.

And is going to a -- is going to think that it could be based on data transfers to the US. And go through this process.

STU: Wait a minute. I thought --

GLENN: I know.

STU: I thought we were talking about corporations trading data.

What would that have to do with a Visa being denied from the government.

GLENN: It's weird, huh.

STU: It feels like, and you tell me if I'm wrong here.

It feels like, what's actually happening. That companies, let's say, in the United States, are capturing data and then EU governments are buying the data from the companies in the United States.

Or, the opposite. Right.

Where --

GLENN: It's illegal for us to spy on Europeans.

I mean, on Americans.

And it's illegal for them to spy on Europeans.

So we spy on the Europeans, they spy on the Americans.

STU: And it goes through companies, that are just in an international data trade?

Which is, quote, unquote, lucrative.

GLENN: Correct.

For the business community, however, the court has already done its first job.

Its very existence allowed EU regulators to finally bless the resumption of the cross border data transfers.

STU: Oh, good.

GLENN: Now. I'm not kidding.

Here's the next sentence. What happens next, or perhaps is already happening, is far less clear.

STU: So -- the part before this was the clear part.

GLENN: No. No.

STU: I thought two parts before --

GLENN: Two parts before, was the clear part. Then it got murky.

STU: Murky or blurry.

GLENN: Blurry. And now it gets even less clear.

STU: Got it. So now you can't even see light at this point.

GLENN: No. Uh-uh. Uh-uh.

The data protection review court is a solution to a transatlantic problem, that had deviled, much of corporate America, and big tech companies in particular.

The global trade in personal data, is large and growing up to $7.1 trillion, between the US and the EU alone.

But governed by legal regimes that differ sharply above borders.

The private data of Europeans. Now, again, we're back to the corporations.

Right.

Next paragraph, the private data of European citizens, can legally be surveilled by US intelligence agencies.

But unlike Americans. Europeans have no recourse, under American law.

If agencies overreach.

Again, I thought -- is this an example of a public private partnership.

STU: Yeah. That's what I'm wondering.

It seems like they're going around these rules. By creating, a -- an entity.

GLENN: Yep.

STU: Within some new industry. Where they can make these data transfers occur, without them going legally from government to government.

GLENN: As Europe began to implemented stringent 2018 data privacy law, that the imbalance set badly with EU authorities.

And in both a 2015 and 2020 ruling, a European court barred companies outright from transferring or processing EU citizen's data in the US, or at least until the citizens had a way to pursue their rights.

So they can now take the data out. They couldn't before.

But now that they've done this secret court, they can take the data out.

Because apparently, people in Europe. Will know when they're being surveilled.

When their at that time has been used against them.

And they'll have a secret court to go. And they -- they -- you know, that's their recourse.

They won't know if anything has been done.

STU: It seems like, in five years. When they find out, they've been doing it for a long time. Well, nobody asked in court. We got that court set up.

Nobody ever showed up. It's weird. We had like no cases for five years. It seems like no one had a problem with what's going on, I guess.

GLENN: So I don't know who appointed the judges. But the one who announced the judges is Merrick Garland.

STU: I think it said earlier in the article, at the age, he was the one who did it.

GLENN: Oh, good.

So it was Garland. Four of them have deep rooted experience with classified information.

From their previous careers, in the NSA, and national security council.

STU: Oh, good.

GLENN: Or the Department of Justice.

Oh!

STU: Perfect.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: I see no problems in those arenas at all, lately.

GLENN: No. When intelligence agencies are, you know, the watchdogs of themselves.

What could possibly go wrong?

STU: Yeah. What could go wrong? They're the experts in themselves.

GLENN: Experts believe the intelligence community is cautiously waiting for the court's decisions, with the hopes that there won't be new restrictions imposed on its operations.

The judge's final authority, however, creates a degree of concern.

That finality, could create an unanticipated problem for the administration, according to some intelligence experts.

They believe the court could not just constrain the government's spying activity. In specific cases.

But set precedence that cut against the administration's policy.

Of what?

Of spying on you!

We're talking about a secret court. A secret agency.

Whose location, we don't know.

We know nothing about it.

We know -- we have no idea what court cases are going through.

And it could -- they're worried that it could set a precedent, to cut against the administration policy.

Of what?

I thought we were talking about corporate data transfers.

STU: And protecting Europeans.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Why would this --

GLENN: The executive order's language, however, specified the court's ruling should apply only to the individual case, that they are hearing.

Which we won't know.

Nor will the people who brought the case.

STU: How could it apply to other cases, if no one knows what the result is?

GLENN: Though experts believe decisions could still create an unofficial precedence for other surveillance operations. Again, surveillance operations.

STU: I thought it was like, you know, corporations. Some handbag company. Is trading data. With some department stores from overseas. I thought that's -- we're not talking about it. Sounds lucrative.

GLENN: No, we're not.

A citizen compliant, first has to shuttle between an EU data protection official, and the US office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Which will decide whether there was a civil rights violation from the data collection.

So the national intelligence agency, is going to decide, whether or not that's even worth bringing up to the court.

Regardless of the results, the response to the initial complaint, will neither confirm nor did know that the EU resident was under US surveillance.

This is insanity. If you don't think our government is building -- a secret court on surveillance?

That you don't have access to?

If you don't think that we are living in a time where this administration, and past administrations, have been building a -- a cage for you, where they know absolutely everything about you.

You're -- you're fooling yourself.

And you don't have a way to stop it.

I mean, well, you could, of course, apply. You'll find that in the blue pages, I'm sure, in your -- in your phone book.

STU: But it sounds worrisome.

But at the end of the day, remember, Eric Holder is there to watch the process.

GLENN: Amen, brother.

Thank you for that ray of sunshine.

The Truth Behind Biden's Cognitive Decline Unveiled

A new book by Amie Parnes and Jonathan A. P. Allen, called “Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House,” details the real mental state of President Biden during his time in office and how much was kept secret from the American people. Glenn and Stu review some of the biggest revelations, like how the Harris team had prepared a list of judges who could swear in Kamala Harris if Biden’s heart stopped, how they marked his paths with fluorescent tape, or how Biden once completely forgot who Rep. Eric Swalwell was. Glenn also asks: who sanctioned all of this? How many people knew about this when it was happening? And why did NO ONE tell us the truth?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I don't know if you saw the news yesterday. This was a little frustrating, predictable, but frustrating. By 2023, Joe Biden's allies were quietly preparing for the unthinkable, we find out yesterday.

His death in office! By 2023.

STU: I mean, I'm glad he made it. However, it wasn't unthinkable.

GLENN: No. I know. I know. I know.

STU: I just have to say, not unthinkable.

GLENN: Well, because they kept saying, he was in perfect health.

And not healthier than anyone else.

There's a new book out called Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House by Amie Parnes and Jonathan Allen.

Hey, thanks for the update now, guys. We had no idea. I mean, you did if you paid attention.
And you realized, you weren't being told the truth.

And you just watched. But what we were never shown, were the -- you know, the -- the fluorescent tape marking his path at public events to keep him from wondering off.

Did you know that?

The death pool roster that the White House had, that Kamala Harris' team drew up, listing the federal judges who might swear her in, if his heart stops.

Did you know this was happening?

Did you know -- I mean, his health and his -- his brain activity was so bad, that they had a resident makeup artist on hand, all the time.

Not just to make him up, to enhance his appearance. In case he goes on television.

But to mask the shell, that he had become.

Stephen Miller said, they were literally Michael Jacksoning him. A reference to the late pop star's own cosmetic coverups, while dismissing skeptics as conspiracy theorists.

In some days, Biden would endure the makeup ritual, only then to cancel all of his briefings, entirely, and call it a day!

STU: What?

GLENN: Uh-huh. So I want to know, who sanctioned all of this?

STU: Yes!

GLENN: Because the AIDS knew it. All the leadership in the White House knew it.

The people that applied to makeup knew it. The schedulers who cleared his calendar, knew it.

I mean, why wouldn't they say?

Were they protecting the president.

Because you're supposed to protect the presidency.

The president and the presidency.

And the presidency is even more important. That's why, if Barack Obama, and we talked about this years ago, Barack Obama would have invited me to the White House. I would have absolutely gone, like Bill Maher did. I would have been polite. I would have shaken his hand. I would respect him. Because I respect the office.

I don't have to like the man. I respect the office. Because the office is more important than any man!

Then came the moments, we're finding out in this new book, of the cognitive unraveling. It was there in plain sight.

But if you said anything about it, remember, you were a conspiracy theorist. So Swalwell. Eric Swalwell, the Congressman. He comes to the White House. And he is supposed to meet with the president. They meet. And Biden doesn't even know who he is.

Has no idea who Congressman Swalwell is. Swalwell had to say, remember me?

I'm a Congressman. I worked on this with you and this. And he was like, oh, yeah. Yeah. That's right. That's right. I remember.

Holy cow.

STU: How do we make it through that? Only God could have got us through that, I swear.

GLENN: How did we not know?

Why were no cameras allowed to capture it? Why didn't anyone say anything? Why were there no leaks on this?

You are committing an act of treason, I believe, to the country.

If you swore an oath to the country. To the Constitution. Why are you not warning on this?

Who is making the decisions?

Why did no one sound the alarm?

Shouldn't Swalwell do it himself?

Of course. Of course.

Then everything comes crashing down in 2024.

Biden steps down as the democratic nominee. It was forced on him by Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

And then what we didn't see, was the backstage, back stabbing that was going on.

Harris, remember. When this happened, Biden came out and said, I'm stepping down.

No endorsement. Then like 30 minutes later, this endorsement for -- for Kamala comes out.

Right?

Well, now we know what happened. Kamala calls and says, hey. You've got to endorse me.

Or they will go for an open.

Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. They want an open primary.

You've got to endorse me!

And so he does. He endorses.

Just to screw Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama!

Nobody is talking about the screwing of the system. He's painted as a hero for doing something brave, when he intentionally viewed the system, because he wanted to screw Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama.

Okay. Nobody says anything about it. Just the noble farewell to him. He's just great. Nobody heard about the power plays. Nobody heard about the back stabbing.

Nobody heard about the subversion of the Constitution. Here.

Okay. Great. And, again, nobody says anything. Nobody says anything.

Huh. Why?

Why weren't we allowed to see? And how deep did this actually run?

Who was responsible? Who was giving the orders?

Who was telling everybody to shut up, as they Michael Jackson him?

Why did no one say, I've got a real problem. We have to put little fluorescent stickies on the floor, so he knows where to walk.

Isn't that a problem?

Well, there was nobody that said, by the way. We're just -- we're just trying to line up the right justice to swear her in.

Because we want that photo op. We want that to look really good. We want the correct justice.

Holy cow.

What else don't we know?

What about the -- the memos?

Any memos buried?

How about the doctors. Remember when the doctors were going, no. He's fine. He's fine.

You know what, I had a problem. I had some toenail fungus. I asked him to look at my feet. He is so fine.

That he is almost a doctor, right now.

He is so sharp. What happened, in those?

Remember those meetings. And the doctors came out. Wait a minute. Aren't you a guy that specializes in dementia?

No! Why weren't we told this?

These are the questions that you must ask, because no one else will.

Who else knew? Cabinet members. Obviously, the first lady. And I'm going to stop calling them the press Corp. Because they really are.

They're dead to me. They are the Press Corps. They really are.

Let's pronounce that, as it's sounds -- as it's spelled. Pronounce it incorrectly. Because they're the Press Corpse. They're just -- they're as useful as dead people.

Why -- why were they so eager to debunk anybody as cheap fakes?

Why wouldn't they dig into any of these?

Why weren't we trusted with the truth?

What medical reports were suppressed?

Who gave the orders to keep this going?

And what's going to happen to the media?

All those that knew. Here's what's going to happen. Nothing. Believe me. Nothing.

They all knew. At best, they all just convinced themselves that it wasn't try. They allowed their own mob to convince them, that nobody really knows what the truth is. And it's better for America to hide it. That's what they've convinced themselves of. But that's not their decision. It's not their job. It's our decision. Their job is to tell America the truth of what's really going on, and let us decide. Because this is all of our country. This is not just the Democrats, or the Republicans. And it's certainly not the elites in Washington. It's we, the people. Not we, the press. Not we, the educated. Not we, the elite. But we, the people. All of us.

We're paying a price for all of this. Will they pay a price?

Will anyone who still watches them, stand up and say, wait a minute? Wait a minute. Wait a minute.

I just read the New York Times. And you're now covering all of the things that you told us, were conspiracy theories on Ukraine.

In fact, it's worse than what the conspiracy theorists were saying, about what we were doing in Ukraine.

You told us, that we weren't funding Colour Revolutions, with USAID. But now it comes out. Yes. We were. The Great Reset. Conspiracy theory? No. It's real.

COVID. No. Didn't tell us the truth.

Masks. Vaccines. Russia gate. On and on and on.

All of the lies.

Will they pay with the price -- the price they should pay.

Embarrassment and shame, for what they've done, just for power.

No!

They won't pay.

And you know why? Because the tale that we are reading or expected to read, in this new book out. The tell-all book, that nobody knew, except everybody knew. The real story there of Biden's decline is a mirror.

And it's not reflecting one man's fall. But it reflects our -- our willingness to look away, until it's too late.

That has to change.

And until it does, that goes right back to the opening monologue in today's broadcast.

Donald Trump is at least telling us, we have to do these things, if we want to be competitive.

That's the closest we've gotten to a doctor, that actually, one, that will tell you the truth.

The country has cancer. And we have to cut it out.

Here's the chemotherapy. It's these trade barriers.

You may not like them.

But you hired me, to cure the patient. And I think chemotherapy, is the only way.

And it will hurt a lot. When was the last time you heard a president tell you the truth on anything?

When was the last time you heard the press tell you the truth?

And here's the truth: Everything we're facing right now, is a little scary.

And you know why?

Because we haven't faced it, when it wasn't scary.

When it was just a choice.

We made all of the easy choices. You know this with your kids.

Just put a little extra work into it.

Your choice. All these doors will open up.

But the more you don't do, the more you avoid, the more doors that close for you. And at the end, you won't like the doors that are left. Because they will be so few. And you will be like, okay. I guess I will be that guy for the rest of my life.

Well, that's what we're doing as a nation. The same thing that we bitch about with our kids. Just do the right thing, and all of these options are in front of you.

But every day, you choose not to do the right thing. Those doors close. More and more, every single day.

Let's open those doors back up. But that requires all of us, and I don't know if you're going to get those people. I talk about it if I have time today.

I don't know if you will get those people who have been sucked into this system.

I mean, here's another example. They're just showing you, they lied to you. They lied to you.

Over and over again.

Are you ever going to be able to convince those people that are still watching the people that lied to them?

You ever going to get them to wake up?

I don't know.

I honestly think, that the left is creating a new Palestinian state.

They are creating, the same thing, that honestly, they created, over the last 70 years.

This bogus story, about Palestinians. This is their land. And the Jews had nothing to do with it. And whipping these people up into a frenzy.

To where they have no other options, other than, kill the other side.

They won't listen to reason, anymore.

They can't even see it! Because they have been trained almost since birth, to hate the other side!

And if you think that's hyperbole, just look at who is supporting the Palestinians and all of the lies.

Look who is saying, on October 8th,, well, that's okay.

The Israelis deserved it.

What?

The same people who are the other of these lies, about our country.

Let's pray, for our neighbors and our friends. And our family.

That haven't woken up yet.

ill Trump's 'Liberation Day' Tariffs Lead to a Manufacturing Resurgence in America?

President Trump has declared April 2, 2025, “Liberation Day.” But will his reciprocal tariff plan work and bring manufacturing jobs and prosperity back to America? Glenn speaks with economist Stephen Moore on what Americans can expect once the tariffs hit. Yes, there will be pain, Moore says. But “Trump is the single best negotiator I have ever met in my life and I think, in the end, he will prevail.” Moore also urges the White House to emphasize its regulation and tax cuts along with the tariffs. Plus, he predicts what America could look like a year from now and what Americans should prepare for.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Stephen Moore. My good friend, how are you, sir?

Stephen, are you there?

STEPHEN: Good morning.

GLENN: How are you, man?

STEPHEN: Hi, Glenn. Great to be with you.

GLENN: Thank you very much. Today is Liberation Day. How are you feeling?

STEPHEN: Well, you know, I -- I think it's a Liberation Day. But I'm feeling a little maybe trepidation day as well.

We will see what's out there. I don't know exactly what the details are. I don't think anybody does.

Except Donald Trump at this moment.

Look, I'm a free trade guy. I understands the benefits. Benefits both countries.

But I would say, on the other hand. Because this is really a debate. Where I can go at either side of it.

Trump has an important point.

A lot of people don't understand. You have a wise listenership.

But A lot of Americans don't understand, that we're the lowest terror country in the world right now, among all the major trade partners. And what Trump is simply saying is it's not a level playing field. It's not fair. These other countries are not playing by the rules.

And they need to trade with the United States. So they better get their act together, they better start treating us fairly, or he will hit them with these tariffs. I've been listening to you, for the last 15, 20 minutes. There will be some costs to Americans.

In buying cars. And we might see a little rise in prices of things. Trump describes this as, you know, short-term pain for long-term gain. And I think it's for every American to kind of figure out where they stand on this right now.

I'm a little bit worried about it. I will say this, Trump is the single best negotiator I've ever met in my life. And I think in the end, he will prevail.

GLENN: So is he going just for a strange level field?

You can't say it's a -- it's a free market. Because there are tariffs involved. But if our tariffs are only reflecting everybody else's. Then it is a free market, if you will.

Just trying to bring everything level up to the -- you know, the place where everybody else is. Is that the goal here, which would lead me to believe, there might be some short-term effects, because we can turn the negotiating power on. Pretty quickly.

Or is he trying to bring manufacturing back, which is -- I mean, I think he's calling it Liberation Day. Because it harkens back to World War II. And he's liberating us from almost everything that we set up, right after World War II.

He's saying, effectively, with almost -- in almost every category. All of that stuff is broken. And we can't do that anymore.

So is he saying, we're not going to be part of this global thing anymore. We will bring manufacturing back here. And that will be tough. But it's the only way to really, truly grow our economy.

By building things here. Which is it, or is it both? Stephen.

STEPHEN: These are complicated questions. You know, and I can't get into Donald Trump's mind. Look, let's start with why he won this election. He won the election by winning blue-collar, middle class voters into the Republican Party, many of whom have voted Democratic, but realized that Trump was the one who really stood behind them.

I believe, gren, to answer your question about how do we make America number one in manufacturing and, you know, obviously technology. And other industries that are so important.

I believe many of the other things that Trump is doing.

For example, lead article in the Wall Street Journal this week, didn't get a lot of attention.

Front page. That Trump is deregulating our economy. It will reduce costs for American companies, by as much as a trillion dollars. So that will make us very competitive.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

I was just talking about, I'm not seeing enough about cutting the regulation, and also cutting of tax cuts.

STEPHEN: Right. That's right!

GLENN: Because if you don't have those to go along with the tariffs, this isn't going to work. This is just not going to work.

STEPHEN: Exactly. Yeah. Great minds think alike. And that's exactly what I was going to say.

And it was almost like we were saying the same thing.

As you know, you look at the tax plan. As you know, Larry Kudlow and I -- the very first version of that tax plan. Eight or nine years ago.
And it was a huge success. Huge success.

Glenn, one of my frustrations right now, with the Trump administration, with the president. I love this guy. I mean, I would -- I would go through a burning building for him.

And he would do those things for the country. Have you heard him talk a lot about the tax cut in the last month? No. And have you ever heard him talk about deregulation last month? No.

GLENN: No. No.

STEPHEN: No. It's all been about tariffs. And, you know, that's the medicine, but people want to see the good stuff. There are issues that unify the Republican Party, like lowering tax rates, deregulating the economy, pro-America energy policy. Those kinds of things.

Frankly, the tariff issue is the kind of issue that divides us. Some of my best friends are in favor of it. I'm kind of on the fence on it. Others are strongly against it. So I want to see Trump talking a little bit more about all of the benefits of these other things that he's doing.

In fact, I've waited 40 years, Glenn, for a president to say, we're going to dismantle the US Department of Education because it's totally useless. It probably does more damage to our schools. Well, he did it.

I was there when he signed that executive order. That was amazing. He's doing incredible things for our country.

But a lot of it gets overshadowed, because all he's talking about right now is tariffs.

GLENN: Well, he's got to bring a lot of people to the table. So what do you think is going to happen?

He obviously picked 4 o'clock, because the stock market is closed, right?

STEPHEN: I guess so. He may very well be right. I think it's going to be -- nobody knows exactly what he's going to say.

But I think he is going to call for a ten to 20 percent across-the-board tariffs, on just about anything that comes into the US. Now, that will raise prices. I mean, if you put a tax on things that come in, to some extent, you know, consumers will pay the cost of that.

And then, I think he's going to go after certain countries, that are the worst abusers like China.

And, by the way, I'm all in favor of going after China. I think China is a menace. You were one of the first people that started talking about this, 25 years ago. So China is the enemy. One thing I don't get.

And I say this with all due respect, because I do love this president. I don't understand why we've got so much discussion about Canada.

Canada is one of our most important allies. And why aren't we talking about China, and some of these other countries, that are -- you know, dangerous to our economy and national security.

GLENN: I know. Yeah. I've been questioning that.

And so let me ask you, best case scenario. What happens?

What do we look like in a year from now?

STEPHEN: Other countries dramatically bring down their tariffs. Not just tariffs, by the way, Glenn.

Trump made an important point here.

Also, nontariff barriers. The fact that many of these countries have various rules that close the markets to American products. And I'm not just talking about manufacturing products. You know, we're the breadbasket of the world. We have the greatest, most productive farmers in the world. We produce more of our food and agricultural products than any other country.

And yet, many countries lock out our wheat and our corn and our barley and our meat. Our dairy products.

So I think, if this works out. And I would never bet against this president. I think you will see other countries having to open up their markets to American manufacturers and American farmers and American technology. Because, by the way, our technology company is completely discriminated against by these Europeans and these other countries.

So there's a lot to be angry about.

GLENN: Brussels said, I think yesterday, or early this morning. We've got war plans. You know, economic war plans. You go ahead, you launch these.

We're relaunching our own attack. You know, tomorrow.

Bluster or real?

STEPHEN: I'm sorry, who said that?

GLENN: Brussels. Yeah, the EU.

STEPHEN: Oh, the EU. Yeah. Right. Okay. Well, let me address that.

Because, first of all, I'm so sick and tired of these sanctimonious.

GLENN: We don't hang out enough, Stephen. I just love you. Go ahead.

STEPHEN: You know, oh, my gosh. How tear Donald Trump do this. He's starting a trade war.

I know what Donald Trump would say, if he was on your show right now. He would say, what are you talking about?

I'm -- one-third as high as theirs now. They have a lot of nerve to say Trump is causing a trade war!

I mean, you know, it's like -- if I came up to you, Glenn, and punched you in the nose.

And then you tried to fight back. How dare you start a fight with me! I mean, so Trump has the moral high ground here because we do open up our markets.

And the other countries. By the way, there was a very famous incident that happened, I wasn't there.

But my buddy Larry Kudlow was there.

At one of the G20 meetings, I think it was in Ottawa.

And the Europeans were sitting there and complaining and grousing about Trump talking about tariffs. I don't know if you're aware of this.

But Trump, it's on the record. People were there. Trump said, okay! You know what, why don't we all go to zero on tariffs?

They ran to the doors as quickly as they could.

GLENN: I know. I know. I know.

So now, tell me what you think is -- is -- say likely nor a, if things don't go exactly the way. You know, bring this up. Because Paul Krugman. The New York Times.

He said, with Biden. Don't dismiss the careful work of our statistical agencies because you're feeling angry on the check out line.

I don't want to say that about tariffs.

I mean, it's going to make things harder to buy what you need.

And we shouldn't downplay that.

The president is not even downplaying that.

He says, it's going to be a little painful for a while, right?

But people are on the edge financially. And, you know, no amount of political theory helps people pay for the groceries, or makes it feel better when you're paying for the groceries, so I don't want to be in that camp.

What should people mentally respect for, that is a likely scenario, even if it turns out, that it was the right thing? What's coming our way?

STEPHEN: So I think that Trump has -- has -- has made a mistake here, in the sense that, we should have done this tax bill, first!

GLENN: Yeah. I agree.

STEPHEN: That would have been a huge victory. I hope your listeners understand, if we don't get this thing done. We're talking about a 3,000-dollar per family tax increase. On January 1st. And, by the way, every single Democrat in Congress voted for that.

$3,000 per family tax increase. So we should -- I -- I hope as he's talking about these tariffs. He links that to the fact that he's talking about, you know -- a major growth enhancing tax reduction.

You know, I like his idea, for example, Glenn. Where he said, look, if you will bring something into the country.

You will pay a 15 percent tariff on.

But if it's made in America. You will only pay a 15 percent tax.

I love that. Let's do that.

Let's implement that now. What you're doing is giving a little bit of favoritism to some, in Ohio and Maine and Vermont.

GLENN: My guess is, he would have done that, if he could count on the Republicans.

STEPHEN: He can't! I know.

GLENN: I know. There are two groups of people that worry me.

Congress. And, quite honestly, the Justice Department. I don't know where Pam Bondi is, but that's a different story. But Congress needs to do their job.

STEPHEN: And, you know, I think you're right. What are we?

Day 89. I can't keep track.

But it's amazing what Trump has done already. I mean, Trump should have that tax bill -- he has the voter mandate.

Why have the Fed been sitting on this for five weeks?

GLENN: I can't tell you. I can't tell you. So tell me about the -- tell me about the -- tell me about the regulations that you're seeing.

Is the regulation -- because tariffs, tax cuts, regulations.

Tell me about the regulations that you're seeing.

Is it significant? The regulation slicing!

STEPHEN: Enormously so. So remember, you remember. What was the first thing that Joe Biden did when he became president?

GLENN: Energy.

STEPHEN: Yeah. He killed all our energy infrastructure project.

That's something our enemies would have done to us.

Biden did it to us. He shut down the pipelines.

He put incredibly onerous climate change taxes on our goal and gas and coal industry.

Remember Hillary saying, well, that's okay.

The coal miners can become computer programmers or something.

GLENN: That's working.

STEPHEN: Exactly. So Trump is opening up our energy. We have more oil, gas, and minerals, by the way.

You know, this new Secretary of Interior, Governor Doug.

GLENN: Burgum. Burgum.

STEPHEN: Burgum. He's doing an amazing job. You know, we have $10 trillion of mineable, critical minerals in this country. In the mountains of Utah and Dakotas. We can do that.

You know, he's --

GLENN: So, but what I want to ask you.

STEPHEN: He can allow more mergers and acquisitions. So our companies can be more effective. It's all over the board.

It's on transportation policy. And that will cut costs dramatically for American consumers and that's a really positive thing. In fact, when I give talks to small businesses, you give a lot more talks than I do.

I always ask the men and women, I say, which is worse for you? The tax burden or the regulation burden? And you know what they said, the regulations.

GLENN: The regulations, every time.

Why Tesla Vandals May Be the DUMBEST "Activists"

Teslas are being vandalized all over the country by leftist “activists” who, Glenn points out, aren’t that smart. Not only do they fail to realize that they’re committing the “hate crimes” they claim to despise, but they’re vandalizing cars that have cameras all over them! Glenn and Stu review the tape of one vandal who completely changed his tune when the car’s owner confronted him. Then, Stu crunches the numbers: Are leftists who burn Cybertrucks doing more damage to the environment than people who drive gas-powered vehicles?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to play a couple of things. First of all, I want to -- Stu, if untilled. We will describe this video here.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: This is a vandal, working some arc on a Tesla. Go ahead. Play this.

There he is. Describing. He's getting out of the car.

STU: He's hiding. Which is always --

GLENN: He's hiding. Now -- he --

STU: Again, these people don't realize that Tesla have cameras. Every angle.

GLENN: Just so stupid.

Okay. So he's hiding in that. Now, he was caught on camera. And so the person that -- who had the Tesla. It was -- his car was keyed. He confronted him in the parking lot. This is satisfying.

Listen to this.

VOICE: Tree service. Free service. (?) how about you pay for the repairs.

Write a check. You bought a Tesla. (?)

VOICE: No. It is a hate crime, sir. Did you write a swastika on there?

VOICE: I'm sorry you're upset. It didn't even work.

VOICE: Did you write a swastika?

VOICE: It's a key, sir. We see it on the video.

VOICE: It's not a keep I was putting my keys in the --

VOICE: Is there a key (?)

VOICE: Yes. Is it a swastika. It's at the police right now. It's being fingerprinted.

VOICE: What do you mean, (?) thankfully, Facebook tracked you down. So your business, your freaking livelihood, everything now. Because you chose to write -- tell Facebook that you're sorry for writing a swastika eye Tesla. (?)

VOICE: I said, I'm sorry.

VOICE: For what? For what?

VOICE: I apologize. I have nothing against the car. And I have nothing against I.

VOICE: So why did you put a swastika against a Tesla?

VOICE: Obviously that's.

VOICE: Because (?) it was bought and paid for. It was bought and paid for a long time ago.

VOICE: That's why it's misguided. And obviously I did not intend to.

GLENN: Total change. What do you mean it's at the police? They're finger printing it? (?), boy, was that, oh. Wow. I feel completely different.

STU: Yeah. His explanation at the end there, say good one.

For like a mean tweet.

Right?

Like, you know, you're right.

I shouldn't. I got carried away.

And I'm upset.

I shouldn't have done that.

You're keying a car. I mean, he says he wasn't keying it.

A lot of people have crayons on their (?)

GLENN: Come out of car. Holding it like a key.

STU: Yeah.

Are Illegals Getting "Maximum" Social Security Benefits?

Elon Musk and Valor Equity Partners CEO Antonio Gracias recently announced a shocking discovery made by DOGE: over 4.8 million “noncitizens” have been given Social Security numbers since President Biden entered office. Even more shocking was the discovery that “the defaults in the system, from Social Security to all of the benefit programs, have been set to max inclusion, max pay for these people — and minimum collection,” according to Gracias. And some of these noncitizens even registered to vote! So, how many were legal immigrants on work visas, and how many were illegal immigrants? Musk and Gracias noted that under Biden, applying for asylum became much easier and there was “no interview” required to obtain these Social Security numbers. Glenn and Stu discuss the story …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Let me get into the SSI thing.

Social Security insurance.

So Elon Musk and a friend of his, they were out in Wisconsin. Doing a -- doing a rally or a town hall.

And they were talking about how -- how they -- what they found on Social Security, is just horrible.

The government was giving away Social Security numbers. And it wasn't haphazard. It was planned. People were coming across the border.

And they were handing them a Social Security number.

And it was clear, I don't remember the numbers. But it's a very high number.

We are paying people who came here illegally. We're giving them Social Security.

When our -- when our old people can't afford to eat, we're just giving this away, to people who are here illegally.

That's crazy!

Crazy! So, you know, we don't survive as a nation. Without some accountability.

And without some common ground. And I don't know -- again, when did it become okay, to cheer or jeer. For somebody who is stopping corruption in our government.

When did it become okay? I mean, how did we get here? How did we get to the point to where people actually cheer the idea of our government, secretly, and denying it, if you ask them.

Giving them taxpayer funded benefits like Social Security, to millions of people, who are here illegally. And most people don't even blink now.

How did we forget? Forget politics.

Forget red team, blue team. Just let me say this. Let me ask your friend. Ask yourself this question.

If the people who you trusted the least were doing this, would you be okay with it?

That's to my son. Would you be okay with it? I would be fine, if you had an Elon Musk in there, doing this.

Would be totally fine, and exposing all of this.

Yep. It's not a gotcha. It's a principle. It's critical thinking. Would you be okay?

You know, critical thinking really needs to make a comeback. Because when we stop thinking critically. We start defending nonsense. Because our side is doing it.

And we lies something bigger than an argument. We lose trust. We lose connection. We lose the ability to have any kind of honest conversations with the people that we love.

So how do you talk to your friends and family, who just don't seem to see, what we see?

Well, it doesn't start with confrontation. It starts with curiosity. Which brings us to questions you can ask.

You ask them, can we just look at them, as if we didn't know who was in office?

Because then we can find our principles.

Would you still feel like this was okay?

What's the limiting principle here?

If this is allowed, for the government to deny that they're doing this, but give all of this money. All of these benefits to people who are here illegally, while denying they're doing it. And it's not within the bounds of the law!

If we can just do this now, is there any limiting principle? What can't we do?

What happens to a country when the law no longer means what it says? Don't accuse. I -- we just need to start inviting people to answer these questions. Show respect for their mommy. Because deep down, most people don't want to be hypocrites.

They don't.

And that's the conflict they're having in their head right now.

Okay. They want to be consistent.

They want to be fair. But sometimes they need a little help connecting the dots. What they'll say is, well, Trump did. Stop them right there. It's not about Trump. It's about policies and principles right now. Can we judge this on its own merits. The dishonest ones will end the conversation there, and they will want to just go back to the outrage machine. But you stay in reality, because we can't see our neighbors as enemies, just because they see the world differently.

But the first step to helping each other is ask honest questions.

Have the courage to listen to their answer. Not be thinking. Oh, good. They said that. Just listen. Even when it makes you really uncomfortable.

Because we have to find our way back to actual truth. We have to find our way back to logic. Because it's not political.

It's just about right and wrong.

And if we can't do this, then the fight isn't about left versus right anymore.

It honestly isn't even about good and evil.

It's about sane versus the insane.