RADIO

Glenn CAN'T TAKE Biden's Hypocrisy After the Supreme Court's Trump Immunity Ruling

President Biden spoke after the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity ... and Glenn couldn't believe what he heard. Biden slammed the Court's ruling, which granted former president Donald Trump absolute immunity for presidential actions and presumptive immunity for "official" actions. Biden followed the lead of dissenting Justice Sonya Sotomayor, claiming that the Court basically allowed the president to do anything, including go after his opponents ... Wait? Like Biden is doing right now?! Glenn reviews Biden's speech line by line and highlights all the hypocrisy within it.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, I just don't know what to say. I watched the president's speech last night. And everybody coming out and saying, he could go after us. He could shut us down. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled. Donald Trump, if he's elected, he will come in and he will start putting people in jail.

Huh. I want you to remember that here in just a second. We will get back to it.

Here's what the president had to say last night, at a press conference.

It's cut nine.
(music)

BIDEN: The presidency is the most powerful office in the world. It's an office that not only tests your judgment. Perhaps even more importantly, it's an office that could test your character.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BIDEN: Because you not only need moments where you need courage for the full power of the presidency. You also face moments where you need the wisdom to respect the limits of the power of the presidency.

GLENN: Yes. Stop there for a second. So, Stu, what would some of those limits be?

Because it's an awesome responsibility, to be president of the United States. But you can't just do anything. Right?

Like, what would some of the limits be. You couldn't just go out and kill people, right?

STU: I don't know. That's not what I have been hearing, Glenn. Over the past 24 hours.

GLENN: Really. Wow?

STU: My understanding is the Supreme Court gave James Bond license to kill, to the president of the United States.

GLENN: No. No. No, I don't think that's true. But we'll continue to listen.

STU: Yeah. Immune. Immune. Immune.

GLENN: I didn't hear the whole speech. So we'll go on.

I was thinking something smaller, like -- like maybe you say, hey, you have student loans.

I can't help you with those. That would be the -- the constitutional thing. But the president couldn't just say, I'm going to just forgive all student loans.

STU: Yeah. Yeah. That -- you're thinking of the old-timey America.

There was a version of America, where the -- you know, the head of the executive branch couldn't just spend $500 billion on a whim, without Congress.

But those days are long gone, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay. But it would go to the Supreme Court. If it was wrong, it would go to the Supreme Court. And they would tell a president to stop it. And he would.

STU: No. He would just do it again.

GLENN: Oh, it went to the Supreme Court.

STU: Yeah. They shot it down.

GLENN: Awesome.

STU: So he just did it again.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And then in a slightly different way. Like 1 percent different.

And then sends it through the courts again.

And, again, it will get rejected again.

Then he'll just do it again.

GLENN: Right. So that's weird. It's an awesome power. And, you know, it shows character. You know, when you restrain yourself from doing those things that you can't do. Anyway, I digress.

BIDEN: Respect the limits of the power of the office of the presidency.

Legislation was founded on the principles. There are no kings in America. Each. Each of us is equal before the law.

No one, no one is above the law.

GLENN: Okay. Stop for a second. Stop for just a second here.

Stu, are we all equal under the law here?

I mean, is that true?

STU: It doesn't seem true. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Like, for instance, if you were held in contempt of Congress.

Right? You would go to jail. Right?

Like Steve Bannon just went to jail yesterday.

STU: Sure. Another Trump adviser who said, no. I can't share that. That's executive privilege.

They sent him to jail.

STU: Navarro. But it's all equal, right?

I mean, let's say, somebody was -- yeah. Not releasing tapes of testimony.

And they say, well, that was executive privilege.

And they were in contempt of Congress. They go to jail as well, right?

STU: No.

I mean, I don't know what you're talking about specifically. But what you just described does not sound at all like something you would go to jail for.

GLENN: Okay. Well, let's say you were the head of the DOJ. And Congress said, you have to produce this information, and then you didn't.

STU: Right. Totally fine.

GLENN: You would be in contempt of Congress.

No, no, no. You don't go to jail?

STU: That doesn't seem like a jailable offense at all.

It's like, I can see where you're getting confused here.

Like, for example, if you were to -- like, riot at a federal building.

Right? That's something you would go to jail for. It's wrong!

You don't do those things.

GLENN: Right. Right. The darkest day.

STU: Yeah, and then there's another separate scenario, where let's say you were to riot, at a federal building. You don't go to jail for that.

GLENN: Oh, wait. Was it just a federal building?

STU: If you're rioting at a federal building, you're going to jail.

If you're simply rioting at a federal building, you don't go to jail.

GLENN: So is it kind of like -- it's a very subtle difference, it's kind of like, when you're praying in front of an abortion clinic. You would go to jail.

STU: Jail.

GLENN: And but if you burn down an abortion clinic. You don't go to jail.

STU: Depends on -- are you burning it down, because they're not doing enough abortions? If you're burning it down because they're frequently aborting enough kids, then yes. You cannot go to jail. But if you burn it down because you think they're doing too many abortions. Then obviously, you go to jail.

GLENN: Okay. So if you burn down an abortion clinic, you would go to jail, if you disagreed with them. But if you burned down the people's business, where they were pro-life, I also go to jail.

STU: Well, they're pro-life? The owners of the business. Yeah. No. You would not go to jail for that.

Why would you go to jail for that? That's stupid.

GLENN: Okay. I want to understand, that I understand equal justice under the law.

I think we have it. Go ahead with President Biden.

BIDEN: Not even the president of the United States. Today, the Supreme Court decision. On presidential immunity.

That fundamentally changed. For all. For all practical purchases.

Today's decision almost certainly means that that there are no limits to what a president can do. It's a fundamentally new principle. It's a dangerous precedent.

GLENN: Yeah, dangerous.

BIDEN: Because the power of the office, will no longer be constrained by the law. Even the Supreme Court of the United States.

GLENN: Wow. Stop for a second.

That is news, isn't it?

Especially to the Supreme Court.

That is news. That no matter what the president does. Even if it breaks the law, you're not going to have pay a price for it.

I didn't know that. I didn't know that.

See, what the left is afraid of right now is what they're saying is, he is going to silence speech. Donald Trump will silence any dissent.

And that's not happening now. Uh-uh.

Or he would put his -- he would put his -- you know, former allies -- I mean, his former foes in jail.

For instance, let's say, you're running against a guy who Donald Trump didn't think he could beat. Then he would just make up some charges.

And then get the guy arrested.

And then keep him, you know, in the court system, until you finally got him into jail.

That's what Trump could do. Trump could do that.

Because of yesterday's rulings.

So that's pretty -- pretty frightening.

You know, I think if we're really going to go all the way. What should be terrifying, is that Donald Trump could just round up a whole group of people, because he didn't like them.

You know what I mean?

Just round them up.

And then put them like in a concentration camp. Kind of like FDR did with the Japanese. And that wouldn't be legal. You know, he would get out of office. And he would never pay the price. that FDR had to pay.

STU: Which is that he named our best president.

GLENN: Well, yeah. That's weird.

STU: Over and over again.

GLENN: Yeah. The guys who would violate these are always the progressives. Always.

The deep, deep progressives are the ones, who violate all these things.

Now, when it comes to just killing people, or doing something illegal, the Supreme Court case laid out it must be constitutional. So if the -- if the president acts in an unconstitutional way, then you can get him!

But unless it's -- unless it's unconstitutional, he can't do it. So it would be unconstitutional to round up the people that disagreed with you.

It would be unconstitutional to silence those who oppose you!

It would be unconstitutional to go after your opposing political foe, and try to put them in jail. All things that Joe Biden is currently doing.

STU: Yeah. I mean, it's funny, this ruling is coming from Roberts. Who is an institutionalist. Right?

If anything, we've complained about him a million times, because he's so unwilling to shake up things. Just because, you know, it happens to be the constitutional way.

I mean, Obamacare is a great example of that.

It will shake things up. I don't want to give the impression, that we're too impactful on society.

He's always doing these things. That's in a way, what this ruling is.

What he's saying is, hey. We shouldn't have -- I mean, in a way, it's designed specifically to protect Joe Biden.

Because everybody knows, if there's no immunity. What do you think Donald Trump will do when he's president of the United States, after what he's just been through. He will go in there, and find everything that he can. And go after Joe Biden on that.

He promised to do with Hillary. He didn't do it. He now says he regrets not doing it.

And now they've done it to him! So you think he will just sit back and say, you know, let me show you what I will do as president.

It's a shoulder shrug. I don't think that's the way it will go down. In a way, Roberts is protecting both sides from this back and forth that can easily come.

GLENN: However, what the president has done, is not constitutional.

And he should go to jail. Not for the things that he's done in office.

I disagree with all his policies. The whole thing, of, you know -- of, you know, taking away your student loans. And things like that.

You know, that's unconstitutional. But I don't think that's something that you go after.

However, the business dealings with China?

Yeah. I think that should be prosecuted.

STU: At least as far as we know.

GLENN: That didn't happen as president.

STU: As far as we know, none of that happened while we were president. That wouldn't help at all. I think what Roberts is doing here, is just setting a high bar.

GLENN: That's what he's saying.

STU: Of course you can go after a president for the worst things in the world. However, there's a high bar for you to clear. So don't bother bringing up your BS nonsense every ten seconds because it's not going to work. That's beyond the fact that we all knew what he said was true.

Official acts would be -- you would be having immunity for. Like you're not able under the law, Glenn, to kill people. Right?

Like you can't just -- like, you couldn't send a drone to start murdering people, in other countries.

The president, with his powers, as commander-in-chief, has -- powers that we don't have.

Like, we all know that. There was some sort of implied immunity for official acts. We all knew that. We all knew unofficial acts would not be covered here.

There was nothing new in this ruling. It was blatantly obvious. Yet they have to do this charade every single time. And act, oh, SEAL Team Six might come and just start being utilized to kill people. You know how many -- how many different layers of checks and balances would have to -- including SEAL Team Six, just going along with this.

Which they would not be covered to do. They would all get prosecuted. They would all be put in prison. But we're supposed to believe, that Donald Trump would be fine for doing this.

It's insanity.

GLENN: All right. Well, let me just end with this.

As the president was saying this, two things happened yesterday. Christian pro-life father of 11 is now facing over a decade in prison.

He will be sentenced today, okay? For a peaceful protest in Tennessee. It was a violation of the Face Act, you know. They were praying in the hallway.

What he said, yesterday, is this: Quote, it's real easy for me. I can go and go to battle and go to jail as an individual. And it's not a big loss.

The challenge comes, when you're leading your family through it. When you're talking to your 3-year-old and your 23-year-old and your other family. Von said that he wanted to pray to God, quote, every day. And get up ready to take on the day, with whatever circumstances believe my way, with a humility and a grace and a spirit-led life. That represents all of us in our society. Represents him and our community around us.

How many politicians order their life after truth and justice, versus power, greed, negotiation, and negotiating principles?

So here's a guy who said, I believe what I believe. God will be with me.

I'm going to go to jail. At the same time, Bannon also went to jail.

For contempt of Congress. There are now 15 -- I believe 15 people in the Biden administration that have been deemed in contempt of Congress.

None of them are being prosecuted.

But Donald Trump's people are. Bannon said this, and I don't like Bannon. Okay?

I don't agree with Bannon on everything. I think he's -- a thought leader, that I really strongly disagree with many times. But he should not be going to jail.

He said, I am proud to go to prison. If this is what it takes to stand up to tyranny, if this is -- if this is what it takes to stand up to the corrupt criminal DOJ. If this is what it takes to stand up to Nancy Pelosi, if this is what it takes to stand up to Joe Biden, then I am proud to do it.

You have people crying that they might go to prop. While they're putting people in prison, for the things that they have done themselves.

Please, Mr. President, don't talk to me about out of control tyranny from the Supreme Court. They have done exactly the opposite.

They have protected the presidency, while they are dismantling the administrative state.

RADIO

"The Most Dangerous Place on Earth Right Now!" - SHOCKING Details of Nigeria's Christian Genocide

Across Nigeria, Christians are being hunted, churches burned, and entire communities wiped out — yet the world remains silent. In this powerful discussion, Glenn Beck and Rep. Riley Moore uncover the horrific truth behind Nigeria’s Christian genocide and the shocking indifference from global leaders. This silent war on faith is one of the greatest humanitarian and moral crises of our time. Will America stand up for its brothers and sisters in Christ before it’s too late?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. Riley, let me talk to you about Nigeria, and what's happening in Nigeria. It's the scariest, most deadly country in the world, if you happen to be a Christian. And nobody seems to -- to be talking about it. And, you know, you have been involved in, you know, urging Secretary Rubio to say Nigeria is a country of particular concern, which I don't what an that means exactly. What doors does that unlock?

RILEY: Yeah. So that is -- that designation actually fits in the U.S. Code. So it does unlock 15 different Levers for the President when a country is designated a country of particular concern. That could be holding development money, that could be going to international institutions to free assistance through there. That could also halt security assistance, which would be arms sales and training and things like that, that have been going on in Nigeria. We could sanction individuals. It gives the President the authority to do a number of different things that can really, I think, leverage the Nigerians to actually start caring about our brothers and sisters in Christ, who are getting murdered for the professions they're facing in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

So I think this is a good first step, and we're going to see how the Nigerians react to this now. I've been having meetings with Departments of State.

We are going to meet with the Nigerians here at some point as well, here in DC.

So we're going to see what they're going to bring to the table. But also the President, who always puts all options on the table, has said, if they don't start fixing this, they're there couldn't potentially be kinetic military actions on -- in Nigeria.

GLENN: What does that mean?

Boots on the ground?

RILEY: No. To me, it does not mean that. To me, you have -- you have complex issues that are going on, over there. Where you have in the middle band of the country. This is where the Fulanis are. And these are herdsmen. And this is where you get this radical strain, obviously. Islamic terrorists, these Fulanis. These are herdsmen, tribes, and they have been attacking Christians in that middle band. In the northern part of the country is mostly Muslim. Southern part of the country is mostly Christian.

So that middle part, where they graze their cattle and all that, is where you see a lot of these flash points and murdering going on. But then in the northern part of the country is where you have ISIS, Boko Haram. They are operating there. And where they're taking over towns and communities, as we saw in Syria, right? Previously. Same type of thing.

GLENN: Yeah.

RILEY: CAIR is enfranchising, going on over there, all through the Lake Chad region, actually. So that's where I think, if it made sense to have some type of military action in forms of an airstrike or something like that, to -- to be able to tamp down some of the leadership and break up some of that structure in there.

That's something that would make sense. But to me, just speaking for myself, I want to try to work with the Nigerians, for them to do the right thing here.

President Trump obviously I mentioned, on Truth Social. Needs to specifically look into this. Which we are doing here in Congress. I want them to do the right thing.

I think the Nigerians actually have the chance right now to actually strengthen their relationship with the United States, if they're going to do the right thing.

But we can't allow to continue the slaughter of Christians where we have over 7,000 just this year, have been killed, for being Christian.
We can't allow that to continue, as a Christian country ourselves, which we are.

I know we're -- you know, some may debate that. I promise you, and nobody knows more about the founding of the country than Glenn Beck. Is that this is a Christian nation, founded on Christian values.

And we have to stand up for these people. Because nobody else is paying attention to this. Other than you, and some folks at Fox news. And that's really about it.

GLENN: Oh, I tell you, you know, I was planning on bringing my cameras with me. And I was going to go to Nigeria in the first quarter. And I have had briefings and warnings from the highest levels. Do not go.

You are not going. And I said, yes, I am. I want to bring this story.

You can't go. I've been to war zones. And this one, they're like, this is the most dangerous place on earth right now!

That's pretty remarkable, that nobody is really talking about it.

RILEY: It really is, and it's this silent genocide, that has just continued on since 2009, where we've had in between 50 to 100,000 Christians murdered for their faith. Our brothers and sisters over there, suffering, and no one has done anything about it. You might remember the bring back our girls movement around 2012ish, '14.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

RILEY: Seventeen of those girls have still never been brought back. People forgot about it. It's fine. Boko Haram just has them. It's not fine.

It's not okay. And there are a lot of Levers that the administration is able to pull here, I think to get the Nigerians on the right course.

It's not that they don't have resources. This is an oil rich country. With a lot of critical minerals.

They have the means to be able to do this, at the end of the day, it's a question of prioritization. And what their goals actually are. And we need them to focus on this. Or the President will start to focus on it.

GLENN: Well, I will tell you, 19,000 churches have been burned.

And yet, from what I'm hearing, there are some in the Nigerian government that are like, no. This is not what's happening. This is not about genocide. It's not about Christians. It's just squabbles.

Really? Fifty to 100,000 people. And 19 thousands of individuals people have been burned in little squabbles, that don't have anything to do with radicalized Islam?

RILEY: Exactly. And this is the excuse I've gotten from people on the ground, look, do terrorists kill other people other than Christians? Yes, of course they do. But we're talking about five to one is the ratio, Christians versus non-Christians are being killed over there right now.

Secondly, I want to point out for everybody, President Trump has a designation in Nigeria. It means his first term.

It was taken off by the Biden administration. Because they claimed the killings had more to do with arable land and herders, and actually the root cause was climate change.

GLENN: Climate change.

RILEY: Yeah. That's why these killings were happening. Because of climate change. Where that's why we saw the murder rate just skyrocket during the Biden administration.

And President Trump, who cares very deeply about these issues, he's not going to allow that to persist anymore.

GLENN: He said, if there is an attack, it will be fast, vicious, and sweet. Just like the terrorist thugs that attack our cherished Christians.

I will tell you, I've -- you know, been reading up on it. And doing our homework.

And, you know, it reminded me of how the Germans went into Poland. Where they would just take whole communities. They would put them in the church. And lock the doors. And burn it to the ground.

That's what's happening in Nigeria. They're doing the same thing. They're burning churches. Not just burning churches. They're gathering Christians up. Putting them in, locking the doors, and then burning it down so that all of these women and children and men die in a fire in their church. And it's horrific. It's horrific.
What does the average person need to do?

RILEY: Yes. The average person needs to call their number of Congress and elevate this. And make this an issue that is on their radar, that they care about.

I'm introducing resolution which would be a sense of Congress, that we support the President. And we support the people and the Christians of Nigeria, and their plight.

And we condemn what the Nigerian government is doing, in action around this. That resolution should be getting introduced here soon.

So that would be something that would be hugely helpful.

GLENN: Wow.

It will be interesting to see who votes for that, and who doesn't.

That would have been -- that would have been a no-brainer 15 years ago. Just a no-brainer.

And now, I wonder if you can even get that passed. That's sad. Sad.

RILEY: It's sad. And I think we need to put it to the test. Put it to the test.

Certainly, if I'm whipping the votes, I don't have Ilhan Omar in my "yes" column.

But, you know, let's -- let's put it to the test here.

RADIO

The TRUTH about Zohran Mamdani and communism

Is New York City’s new mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani a socialist or a communist? Glenn Beck takes a look at history to explain why it doesn’t really matter: BOTH lead down the same road …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, we've been talking about socialism, and Donald Trump is getting pilloried in the press for calling Mamdani a communist. And I find this ritual here, that we're going through is just, you say the word socialist, and, you know, 25 years ago when I said that these people were socialist, everybody said, "Oh, my gosh. You can't call them socialists. That's an outrage." I said, "The mask is going to come off, that they can't wait to tell you they're socialists."

Now Donald Trump said, you know, Mamdani is a Communist. And everybody is like, oh, my gosh. Look at this hysteric from the Cold War. He's just -- he's out of the Cold War radio drama.

So let me just clear this here. Because the difference between the two terms, you know, is really not some great firewall of virtue here. As if one leads to like Scandinavian candles and the other leads to gulags. That's not what's happening.

What we've forgotten here is what always is forgotten. And that is how Karl Marx actually talked and saw the two. He didn't draw, you know, polite little distinctions. He described socialism as the transition. The necessary scaffolding that leads to communism. That's Karl Marx. So socialism for Karl Marx was the road, not the destination.

Communism is the end of that road. He wrote -- he wrote an essay, the Critique of Gotha Program. And Marx said, under socialism, from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution. Under communism, to each according to his needs. The only difference here is timing. It's not philosophy.

It's not goals. It's just how far along the revolution you are, okay?

Socialism is the bridge to communism. According to Karl Marx, don't take it from me. Communism is the completion of socialism. It's -- it's the antithesis of a free market system. Even Lenin called socialism the first and necessary phase of communism. So it's not partisan rhetoric. Okay?

This is the literal architecture of Marxist thought. But can we get out of the theories of all of this?

I mean, history gives us warning. Much more vivid than any theory. You know, we would like to imagine that the worst horrors of the 21st century came from one beast alone.

And we think that's Hitler. But actually, a bigger beast was Stalin. But if you want to look at Germany from 1930 to 1945. You see something really uncomfortable.

A socialist movement that curdled into something monstrous, while it never called itself communist. In fact, the Nazi government. The national socialists. The Nazis were not communists. They were against the communists.

They killed communists!

But they shared the same foundational belief. That the rid is disposable, and that the state defines the truth.

They both believe that rights are not given by God, but administered by political power. And that dissent on any of this, has to be crushed for the good of the collective.

That is the -- that's the definition we should care about!

Socialism doesn't to give full marks communism to become catastrophic. It just has to replace the individual conscience with the will of the state. And don't you see, that's what's happening here? They'll crush you! They'll destroy you. You disagree with them, they'll destroy you. Even if you've been on their side. I am going to share eye story with you, from 1979 that happened. That I don't think most people understand. And in New York, you better understand it.

When a society accepts the premise, that premise, history shows the -- the slide can accelerate from a utopian promise to industrialized cruelty. Horror show.

Like that!

Germany saw it. Russia saw it. China saw it. Cambodia. North Korea.

Cuba. I mean, it's all right there, just different flags. Different slogans. But it's the same structural error.

So can we stop with this mocking of the language?

You know, people laughing. Oh, you said Mamdani is a communist, but he's just merely a socialist. You're missing the point entirely.

The issue is not whether the label is technically perfect. The issue is the philosophical DNA is exactly the same. Collectivism over the individual.

State control over personal agency. Central planning over free will.

And that the belief that human nature can be engineered by a political force. That's where it always goes wrong. It doesn't understand human nature. So you can argue all you want, about where socialism ends and where communism begins, but honestly, that's like, hey, kids, memorize the date of this war.

Why? Why? I'm never going to use that fact again. What difference does it make? The thing we should care about is, why was that war fought? What happened at the end of that war? When communism and socialism, we should be saying, where does that road lead?

I can tell you that the road always begins with the state controlling your choices. Okay?

It will control your choice of energy, money, your children's education. Your speech.

Your job. What you drive. And it always ends with never greater liberty. It always ends the same place. In a society that has forgotten that freedom is fragile.

That power concentrates. That people are the same over and over and over and over again!

Human beings. They go bad! Especially when you give them power, and they're told they're part of a grand collective. Humans are willing to commit horrors they would never do as an individual.

That's the biggest thing. You get these horror shows of 100 million dead, because it's a collective!

We're all doing it. I'm not doing it. Everybody is doing it. That's the warning.

That's historical. And we ignore it at our own peril. Now, the problem here is, is that socialism is on the rise. And communism will be next.

Remember, when I first started talking about Obama, they -- I was -- I was raked across the rolls -- the coals, every day for even suggesting he might kind of like socialism. Now, socialism is fine!

So that road is still going to -- we're going to continue rolling down that road. And any country that goes into socialism -- we're not talking about a capitalist. We're not talking about Sweden anymore.

In fact, we are actually talking about Sweden. Look at the road they're going down now.
I mean, they're going into their own kind of authoritarian rule with Sharia law.

That is coming to Sweden. We are not talking about this friendly socialism. We're talking about the complete abandonment of the free market entirely. We've been this stupid little hybrid, that doesn't work. It only causes misery. We've been this hybrid.

And it doesn't work in a country this large and a country this diverse.

But look if you're -- you know, if you grew up after 9/11, where have you seen capitalism work for you?

Okay? You've seen, I know I've seen it. I've seen the rich get richer. And I don't mean the rich.

I mean the really, really, really rich. The ones that the Democrats never really talk about. They say they hate the rich. The rich have to pay their fair share.

But they're hanging out with George Soros. They're hanging out with the Ford Foundation. They're hanging out with Bezos and all of these other people. Because that's -- that's -- that's real control! Okay?

They don't hate those guys. They never do anything to affect their taxes. They don't pay taxes. Because they have the money to put it into trusts and everything else.

You don't have that!

So when I say, I've seen it happen. I've seen the rich get richer.

You know who the rich are?

Citibank. These banks that have been taking our money through bailouts, when do we get that money back?

When do you get that money back?

You don't!

You don't. That's why this is working. That's why you can say, socialism is neat. Because nobody knows the killing machine that socialism actually is. Nobody has any idea. Look at the killing machine. Look at the killing machine that's being built in socialist Canada right now.

What is it? MAID is the third or fourth biggest killer. It kills one in every 20 Canadians. Why is that happening? That's not out of compassion. That's because they're running out of money for health care. That's what that's about. Get them off the dole! Stop it. Now, if they're earning a lot of money, get them in, because we can still get their money, but let's make sure they're making money. If they're getting old, if they are cripple, if they fought in a war and just can't has come it themselves, if they're super, super young, if they have an expensive cancer, let them die. Help them die!

That's because they're looking at the collective, not the individual. And that's -- that's the beginning of the dark killing machine in a socialist country. And Canada is -- is -- I mean, it has socialized medicine. The problem is, it's all failing. Socialism always fails.

Capitalism has -- has taken people out of poverty. Solved problems. Healed people. Given people heat and houses and cars and airplanes. All of that is because of the free market. All of that is the free market.

You get rid of the free market. You put it in the hands of governments. And you have monsters. Monsters. And we know it, because we've seen it over and over and over again.

But our -- if you're -- if you -- if -- if you don't remember, or barely remember 911, you've never been taught any of this.

You've never been taught what it actually means. So you're seeing this play out, over and over again. Look at that guy, look at, he's not going to have to pay a price. He's just going to get away with it. And he's taking all of our tax dollars. Okay. I hate all of that.

This capitalist system, it's corrupt!

You're seeing that play out in real time. You're not seeing anybody actually go to jail for these things.

Of course, you think that it doesn't. I don't think it works the way it is right now!

But then you're -- you're given this false utopian promise. Without any information.

Read the warning label on socialism!

Where has it ever worked?

Show me where it has worked!

And don't say Sweden. Sweden.

Sweden is falling apart right now. Do you know why?

Because Sweden, everybody was blond hair, blue eyed, they were all related to each other. It was a small, little country.

You can do it when everybody is the same, and it's small. It will work in -- to some degree!

But the minute you start going diverse, the whole thing falls apart. So you want to be Sweden?

Go ahead. Look at Sweden today.

I don't want to be Sweden.

Read the warning label. That's our job, to show that warning label.

It's our job to teach what's not being taught. This is a death cult.

Stay away from it. Warning. Warning.

RADIO

Could Comey FINALLY go to JAIL thanks to this smoking gun?

Is this the 'smoking gun' evidence that could put former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation James Comey behind bars? Just the News CEO John Solomon joined Glenn Beck to reveal some shocking new revelations, including Comey’s own emails allegedly authorizing anonymous leaks to the NYT on the Clinton case, potential handwritten notes proving he KNEW Hillary’s team approved the Russia collusion hoax, and a possible email from Comey referring to Hillary Clinton as “President-elect Clinton." Will a Northern Virginia jury hold the Deep State accountable? Or will politics bury the truth again?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: John Solomon is with us. He is the CEO and editor-in-chief. In chief of Just the News. If you don't check that every day, you're really missing out on a really great news site. Justthenews.com. John, I have made a promise with my audience a long time ago, I do my best not to waste their time.

And as I'm looking through the things I want to talk to you about, I have to start with this question: Is any of this going to mean anything in the end, or is this -- are we just spinning our wheels and wasting our time, talking about how the deep this scandal with James Comey is becoming?

JOHN: That's a great question. And I don't think history has an answer yet. It will really depend on the tenacity and the focus of the Justice Department, the prosecutors, and the jurors that are going to catch these cases. Right? Are they willing to rise above politics and say, "We don't want an FBI that goes after people based on their political color, not the quality of the evidence against them."

And that is what began on 2015 on James Comey's watch, a different type of FBI that seemed to go after Donald Trump and his associates, regardless of evidence, and protect Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden, even though the evidence against them was pretty strong, as we ultimately found out from the IRS whistleblowers. So we don't know yet. Listen, these are going to go to trial if the judge lets them go to trial.

The judge in the Comey case seems to be giving the prosecutors a hard time there already. But that's going to be litigated. I'm going to go up to the Supreme Court. It will be a long battle.

But the question is, is the fight worth it?

I think if you don't punish the people that created this mentality, you have deficits in America for a long time.

Banana republic, prosecution arc. And I think that's not what Americans want. They want to say, the FBI is above politics. It hasn't been in the last texted, until the last few months, under Kash Patel.

GLENN: Okay. So let's talk about what the new evidence is the -- the burn bags.

The hidden rooms. And the evidence that now has been found that -- that shows Comey looks like he was lying. To Congress. When he said, no.

I didn't know anything about it.

JOHN: Yeah. Yeah. So let's remind people what the alleged lie is, what he's been accused of and indicted of. He told Congress in '17, and then reaffirmed, unequivocally in 2020, that he never asked any of his staff to provide information to the news media. The government, Kash Patel found significant documents that go to the contrary. They chose not to go after James Comey. So in the Bill Maher administration, they knew the same evidence, but they didn't go after him. What is the lie?

He told Congress, I didn't -- one, I never authorized anyone to leak to the media anonymously about the Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump cases. And, two, I don't think I knew anything about an intelligence intercept that Hillary Clinton was setting up a fake Russian collusion hoax, that we ended up investigating.

Well, we now know, first, his own emails, with his own top lieutenant, Daniel Richmond. A former lawyer who he brought into the special government. The FBI. There's an FBI employee, showed that James Comey, told him, good job, and make them wiser as he was briefing them on how he was anonymously trying to spin the New York Times and provide information to the New York Times about the Hillary Clinton case.

So directly on point to the testimony he gave. I didn't authorize him to leak about Hillary Clinton in their emails. So this guy was leaking it. He was affirming it, and saying, go ahead. And he was encouraging him to make that reporter wiser. In other words, give them more information anonymously.
So that's the first lie. The second lie -- and, by the way, the grand jury bought that evidence, that we believed he lied.

GLENN: Okay.

JOHN: And that is what we call the Clinton planned intelligence. Was Comey, as John Brennan claimed. And as other evidence -- did Comey know, did he pay attention, did he have some awareness that as the FBI was starting to investigate the Russia collusion ruse, the hoax, that Hillary Clinton had been interpreted, or her people had been intercepted, showing that she approved the plan. He said, it doesn't ring true. I don't think I knew about it.

Well, in a locker, in a burn bag, they found some handwritten notes of James Comey, that appeared to include the briefing from John Brennan where he clearly knew, that Hillary Clinton had been intercepted -- or, her team had been intercepted, saying she approved this plan to hang a fake Russian shingle on Donald Trump's campaign house. Now, those are handwritten notes.

GLENN: Yeah. That is in his handwriting, that he clearly understood. And so now you've got him on -- on two really significant lies. That show that this whole thing was -- was -- they were in collusion with one another. And all of this was bogus.

And they knew it from the beginning.

JOHN: Yeah. That's exactly right. That's why, when you look at this. And then take the third bag of this. Those notes were never produced in earlier subpoenas to Congress or other investigations. They were found in a room, where it appears, according to the government, there is an effort to get rid of or hide this evidence.

So it hadn't been hidden from prior subpoenas, according to the government, according to Lindsey Halligan, the prosecutor. And then, two, it looked like they were in burn bags. Meaning, they would never be there.

Now, some other people said, oh, well, there's electronic records of it.

It turns out according to the government, there was no electronic record of the note. Meaning, if they had been burned or destroyed, it would have never happened.

Now, why would James Comey want to lie about this? Because as we see in these same emails, it appears he had a motive.

His motive, as he wrote, his colleague is, I fully expect to be working for president-elect Hillary Clinton. She's talking this way, before the election in 2016.

He thought Hillary was going to be his boss. And as he wrote Dan Richmond, he said, I think Hillary Clinton will be, quote, unquote, pleased by the way I handled her email chase. In other words, he reopened it and cleared her a second time.

And when the smoke cleared, Hillary would like to keep him out as FBI director. That's the insinuation of those notes. So --

GLENN: Yeah. I want to get the exact. I want to give the exact phrase he wrote. A president-elect Clinton will be very greatly.

JOHN: Yeah. Grateful, I'm sorry.

GLENN: Wow.

JOHN: Yeah. Grateful. So he expected it -- that's his mindset in the fall of 2016.

And he opens up an investigation on Hillary Clinton, what we now know to be a ruse. Bad evidence. An agency had to lie to the FISA courts to get the FISA warrants. If his motive was that, or his thinking was that. He probably does not want to admit that I was warned, that maybe this was all a joke before I allowed this investigation to go forward. Before I affixed my name to a FISA warrant that the courts have now said was misleading, false, and violated the law. So that is the context at which the prosecutors are going to try to bring this -- bring this case. Now, it's going to be in northern Virginia, where there are a lot of federal workers and a lot of anti-Trump sentiment.

Can they get a conviction? We don't know. But is it worth trying to do it? Most people I talk to said yes, because the alternative is you have by inaction a sanction, which is what Bill Maher and John Durham did by not bringing this in 2020.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. All right. Can I switch topics. There's something that came out today. James Comey's daughter, and the Epstein case. Apparently, James Comey's daughter sent a message to Epstein, that if you don't have to prove it. But if you can show us anything that ties Donald Trump to this, it's going to go a lot easier for you.

Can you give me this story?

JOHN: Yeah. I've seen it. I've not been able to corroborate it. In this world of media today. I've been super careful. It's hard to know if things are true. I haven't found anyone yet who seems to know the proof on it.

It's possible. Who knows? I mean, prosecutors make these sort of deals all the time. And as we know, it seems in the last decade or two, I think when you have to go back to the era of the Ted Stevens prosecution. The IRS pursuit of conservative groups. And maybe the prosecution which turned out to be malicious and wrong of Virginia governor McDonald.

There is a culture that began at the beginning or around the time of the Obama era. Where winning for prosecutors is more important than winning fairly or on the face of the evidence.

And that's why these cases ultimately got overturned. That mentality exists in the Justice Department.

And then when you add the nature of politics, the Trump Derangement Syndrome that seems to come in, in 2015. You have a very dangerous prosecutorial and law enforcement system that's easily weaponized and can easily cheat.

And unless you got multi-million lawyers, you probably will get hosed, because very few people will find the grounds to overturn this.

And that it is crushing power of the state, that Jim Jordan talks about. Chuck Grassley talks about. That Donald Trump wants to reform.

And I don't know, in this case, whether Mr. Comey did this or not.

Because I can't confirm it yet. But if I knew, I'll come back to you.

GLENN: Right.

JOHN: The scenario does go on. And we've seen it. And it's very, very troubling.

There's a case coming up in New York, where the FCC has to admit that there were journalists writing fake stories that were then used to justify investigations of companies.

A system of cheating to get a consequence regardless of whether it's warranted, is something we all have to take a deep breath. We have to fix it. Or we won't be any the different than rectangles and Iran.

GLENN: I will tell you, that I am so glad to say, that you said, I can't confirm this.

I haven't found a source to confirm it.

Because when I read that story, it looks as though one of the people that is telling this story is the guy who was in jail, with Epstein, who would also have motive for making something like this up. So, you know, I don't want to exonerate her.

And I don't want to condemn her. I just want the truth.

And he doesn't seem like a reliable source.

JOHN: Yeah. I think we have to get the evidence, and try to -- listen if the lead is something -- let's check it out and true -- find out if it's true.

We learned that Russia collusion wasn't true. I think we'll learn that most of Ukraine impeachment wasn't true.

And I think today, we just have to dig in first. Get the facts.

But we will -- we will do that. I promise, I'll get back to you, as soon as I know what I can find out for the government.

GLENN: Yeah. Thank you, John. I appreciate all your hard work.

John Solomon from Just the News. Go to JusttheNews.com. Follow him. John Solomon. JSolomonReports on X. But he is an old school journalist. Investigative reporter. Has worked for everybody, until everybody was like, you can't say those things. That's our side!

And then he just left and did his own thing. And I'm very grateful for it.

Editor-in-chief of Just the News. John Solomon