RADIOMay 23, 2023

TIME’S UP: Will Congress FINALLY stand against the IRS & FBI?

A second IRS whistleblower has emerged, sharing with Congress concerns about the handling of Hunter Biden’s alleged crimes and tax fraud schemes. This IRS agent — who joins the first whistleblower, his or her former supervisor — was ‘ousted without explanation last week,’ the New York Post reports. So now with two IRS whistleblowers ready to speak out AND with at least three FBI whistleblowers speaking out about retaliation last week, will Congress FINALLY take a stand against these corrupt and all-powerful agencies? Glenn and Stu discuss that, plus the debt ceiling negotiations and why Democrats claim there’s so little in our budget that can be cut…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let's look at some of the political things going on. A second IRS whistle-blower has alleged retaliation now for raising concerns that the Justice Department leadership was acting inappropriately on the investigation into Hunter Biden. So what these guys -- this is the second now.

What they're saying is that the Justice Department came in and said, yeah, you guys don't need to look at all of that stuff.

And they were like, excuse me, we're the IRS. We're looking at all the banking stuff. All the money stuff.

Eh, you don't really need to. And then that whole staff was let go.

This guy is now coming forward, and he is going to be giving testimony on Friday. Our client learned that one of the agents he supervises, so is this not a low level guy. This is a supervisor at the IRS. The case agent on the case, our client is blowing a whistle on. Sent you an email on Thursday. In which the IRS case agent raised concerns about the Hunter Biden investigation. This is what the lawyers wrote in a letter.

But the IRS leadership quickly responded with accusations of criminal conduct and warnings to other agents in an apparent attempt to intimidate into silence, anyone who might raise any similar concerns.

So in this, Congress is saying, you've got to stop harassing these whistle-blowers. It's got to stop now.

Now, the FBI has just failed yesterday, to sign over a document, that whistle-blowers say the FBI have. Which is showing a criminal scheme, involving vice president Joe Biden and a foreign national.

They won't admit to having it, or admit to not having it. It's just part of an ongoing investigation, and we can't really comment on that.

So they -- Congress, which oversees the FBI. Congress has said, you have to produce this.

They -- they said first, by May 3rd, May 3rd, you have to release it May 3rd.

Then they said, by yesterday, they were going to have a closed-door meetings with the FBI.

So we want to see that at the closed-door meetings.

They still won't produce it.

So now, I guess the House oversight and accountability committee, are going to -- what?

I don't know. Maybe a -- maybe another sternly worded letter. Or I'm not sure. But they're backing Congress into a corner. And I just -- I don't know. I'm starting to have hope, that there are enough people in Congress, at least. I don't know about the Senate. But in the Congress. That they're going to fight their way out of this. They're not going to take this.

STU: For so long, there's been the belief that eventually Congress would step up and take the power they have.

GLENN: They have to.

STU: Right? We talked about the REINS Act with Mike Lee, recently.

GLENN: And by the way, that is in. If it's left in there, that -- the REINS Act is in the budget deal.

STU: That would be massive.

GLENN: Massive.

STU: A really big improvement to our government and our country. It would basically limit them from making these little rules that no one votes on.

What is it? $100 million in effect. It should be so obvious. That you shouldn't need a new act to do it.

STU: But if you're going to affect the economy by $100 million or more. You have to get a vote of approval. You can't just do it willy-nilly.

GLENN: Yeah. It pretty much takes away the power of the administrative state to do things like the ATF is doing right now. You can't just make up laws. The laws are created by Congress.

STU: This is so -- you talk about the Constitution. And the importance of it all the time.

But it's so important.

Because what people have done, have decided -- they've decided, you know what, we want things. We can't have the things by these rules. So let's come up with new rules. The REINS Act is a good example of this, where they just decided, well, we'll just give all the power to the administrative state. And we'll let them make all these rules up, therefore we don't have to go through all the trouble of the vote and the debate, and exposing this to the American people. We might get voted out.

We'll give the responsibility for those things to other people. And let them do it, without a vote. Without approval.

The Soros-DAs are another great example of this. We can't get people to approve laws that let violent criminals out of prison.

So what if we instead, spend a bunch of money. It's a very effective process financially. Because you don't have to spend that much money, to win a local DA election. Spend a bunch of money. Get some local DA elected. And then tell them, and ignore all the laws.

Ignore them. You have prosecutorial discretion, so just don't do any of it.

Just bend that rule to the millionth free. And go out there, and ignore all the laws that have been passed. You don't want criminals to go to jail. Fine.

You want sanctuary cities. Just ignore all that stuff. Who cares if they're laws. So they decided to go around the Constitution. And around the rule of law. By doing these things.

That happened in the executive state. It happened on a state-by-state basis. As localized by cities.

And is this their plan. They have given up trying to actually win these debates. They've just decided to go around them. And wait for you to think it's normal.

And then they don't have to win the debate.

GLENN: Well, hopefully the REINS Act will be left into this bill.

But I don't know what is left in the bill. We are talking about the bill -- on the debt ceiling.

STU: The debt ceiling.

GLENN: You know, I'm watching McCarthy, and he seems rock solid on this. You know, they always started too late.

We've been telling the Republicans since November, that they had the (yelling). And this time, it's the Republicans because the first thing McCarthy did when he got in, was send a letter to the White House. We have to start working on this right now.

Because there are some things that we are not going to approve. So we need to start negotiating it now.

The Democrats are behind the eight ball.

STU: Yeah. What did McCarthy say?

They didn't negotiate for 97 days, after it was initially proposed.

What was so silly about this. They keep saying, well, we don't want to set the -- we have to negotiate every time we need a debt ceiling increase. That would be crazy. What? Why?

STU: Why? First of all. And if you're telling me that the default is so terrible, right?

It's the worst thing out there. And I do agree, it would be catastrophic if we went to default.

GLENN: But we won't.

It just requires Congress and the secretary of the treasury to sit down and select what's going to be paid. And what's not going to be paid.

STU: Right. And you'll have a long road there. Now, you shouldn't even get to that point, of course.

Because the Republicans have put out a bill, that was pretty sensible.

I mean, it has minor, minor cuts in our government spending. Not even cuts. They're just cuts in the future increases. They're not even cuts. They're cuts to the future increases in spending. We're going back to, what? 2019 spending levels in a lot of these categories. Oh, no.

This is not that catastrophic. It's not that ridiculous.

But to -- for us to default, the Democrats would have to say, that these minor cuts to future increases, is worse for the future, than default.

Because they have an option. There's been a bill that's already been passed by Republicans. It's already been passed. All they have to do is get on beard with it.

So if they thought that this was worse than default. Then perhaps it would be sensible for us to go into default.

But obviously, it's not worse than default.

It -- so just get in there, and negotiate something out, that's in between.

We get that the Republicans may not get everything that they may want. But find out a place to settle this.

Because they keep saying, if we negotiate, that will encourage future negotiations around the debt ceiling.

GLENN: Yes!

STU: Well, yeah.

That's the whole point of the debt ceiling. The point of the debt ceiling is a gut check. Like, hey, guys. You keep bumping up on this number, that has trillions in it. Maybe instead, you talk about how to get more fiscally responsible. They say, well, we'll basically show them by defaulting.

We'll show them, that we don't want to default so much. That we will just default. That's an insane argument.

GLENN: What do you think he's going to do?

You think he will come to something, or you think he will play hardball? And go, nope. No negotiation.

That's where he's at. No negotiation.

STU: He seems to be weakening a little bit on that.

I do think eventually, we will get to a place, where Republicans can claim a little bit of a win. Democrats can say. We didn't give them everything they wanted. They held us hostage. They're mean. And eventually we get this. I will say it's May 23rd. Now, I don't believe the June 1st date. The June 1st date is not true. But fundamentally, it could be true if the right number of people pushed in a direction that was hurtful to the United States. I mean, people with bad intent could make that true. As you point out, Glenn, they can stop funding turtle tunnels for a while and give us extra days. There's a lot of things they can stop funding, instead of not paying our debt.

And I think their argument based on the 14th Amendment, where they say, it says in the 14th Amendment.

Our debt, we have to pay them. So we have to pay them. Well, that would indicate that they would have to not pay a bunch of other stuff, before they got to not paying the at the time.

It's just like in your own household. Hey, we have the kid's summer camp budget here, but we don't have enough to pay the rent. Which one do we pay?

You don't pay the summer camp thing first. And then you get to the --

GLENN: And there's lots of summer camps.

STU: Lots of summer camps. Now, according to Joe Biden, there's literally not one dollar we can cut from this budget. That's actually his position.

GLENN: You know what is really weird. Because that's what Nancy Pelosi said years ago.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: The cupboards are bare. Nothing to cut. And then we added like $7 trillion, and it's still bare?

STU: Yeah, apparently.

GLENN: How much money?

STU: I mean, everyone knows, of course, there's money to save. You might even say that there are important programs that you like. But still, every organization has waste. I mean, waste would at least buy us some time.

But, you know, nonessential programs would also buy us a lot more.

And so there is more time than -- than June 1st. But it is -- you know, a little -- it's a little -- it's a little close.

You kind of like to get this thing settled.

And maybe put in a little bit of a harder cap for next time.

Maybe put a cap out there, that is a few years in the future. That says, we actually shouldn't get to this guys.

Let's not worry about the next time, when we get there. Let's come up with a plan to not hit it next time. Maybe we go the other way. Maybe instead of increasing the debt, every single time. We go the opposite way. And decrease it.

What do you think of that idea?

I know it's wild and crazy. Maybe that's more fundamental to what the Founders were talking about with the 14th Amendment.

Than what you're doing here. Where you're just increasing it all the time. And yelling at people, when they ask you to spend a little bit less.

GLENN: Well, I just don't think we can spend less, Stu. I just don't think that's even possible.

STU: Cupboards are bare.

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

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

Watch This FULL Episode of 'Glenn TV' HERE

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

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

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

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

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

Like, whoa. Whoa. Whoa.

You want people to die that you disagree with?

Where are we now on the scale of Civil War?

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

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

Okay?

Here's step one.

Step one. Loss of civic trust.

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

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

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

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

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

Political disagreement is normal!

Identity conflict is fatal!

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

Have we crossed this one into step two?

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

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

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

And that -- does what?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Churches. Churches are useless. Useless.

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

Are you ready for this one?

Parallel information realities.

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

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

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

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

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

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

We can't agree on facts, right?

Crime rates. Border numbers. Inflation. Election security.

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

Social media algorithms are creating customized political universes.

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

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

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

Loss of neutral rule of law.

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

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

Are we there yet?

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

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

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

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

History is really cold and unforgiving on this point.

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

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

Are we there?

I think we are.

Step six. Normalization of political violence!

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

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

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

Calling for his children to be killed.

Was called on it, never apologized.

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

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

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

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

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

The rise of militias and parallel forces.

When a state loses he is monopoly on force.

Countdown accelerates. So where are we on this one?

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

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

Right?

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

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

Entirely!

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

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

Step eight. The trigger event.

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

So where are we?

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

Political assassination or major attack.

Supreme Court decision that ignites mass unrest.

Financial crisis or dollar crisis.

A state federal standoff turning violent!

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

This is the point of no return.

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

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

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

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

Know where you are.

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

Step five, happening!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Where the hell are you?

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

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

You don't own that right.

I don't own that right.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

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

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

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

GLENN: Yeah. No.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It's already out!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: Terrible story.

STU: Yeah. She passed away.

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

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

GLENN: Is ridiculous.

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

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

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

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

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

They pointed out, this is not new information.

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

You're presenting this as a new scandal.

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

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

Oh, okay. All right.

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

GLENN: No.

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

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

Said, it was nothing!

GLENN: Right.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Okay?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Get it out. Lance this boil.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why is no one talking about that?

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

Huh. Interesting.