RADIOJune 06, 2022

Democrats ADMIT they'll do ANYTHING to take your guns

Glenn and Stu debunk the Left's latest gun lies after two Democratic congressmen admitted that they don't care what's standing in their way, whether it's the Constitution or the Supreme Court: They WILL take AR-15s away from Americans. And President Biden is right there with them, despite what he says about the "respect" he gives to "lawful gun owners." But Glenn has a feeling they won't stop at so-called "assault rifles"...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So let me just go through a few of the clips, before we get to the president's speech. Let's play cut three here. This is a -- this is -- this is a Democrat in Congress. I'm sorry. It's cut five.

David -- is it Cicilline, from Rhode Island. Listen to this.

VOICE: I don't think there's a single incident. And maybe there's one. But I've not found one. Of an assailant using an assault weapon that was stopped by a person with a gun. So this was a --

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop. Never been stopped!

All of them stopped, with a person with a gun.

STU: Every single one of them.

GLENN: Every single one. What are they doing Jiu-Jitsu?

STU: Well, there was that one that was stopped with the slingshot.

GLENN: Yeah. Remember that? Goliath came out with his AR?

STU: Yeah. The question is only, do you want the people with the gun to be there before the shooting starts, or after it begins? That is the only question here.

GLENN: By the way, this congressman should know. Now he's looked. He's looked very hard. And you have to go way, way back, to last Saturday. To find a guy who walked into a party with 40 people. He had an assault rifle. He wounds two police officers. And takes them out of commission. And a woman reaches into her purse, pulls out her pistol, and shoots the guy.

There's one. Now, that was really hard to find. Because, well, you know, a Democratic congressman wouldn't be reading the news from any source that would actually cover that. That just happened Saturday, one woman, private citizen, handgun, saved 40 people.

And here is -- here's the Congressman, the great congressman again. From Rhode Island. Who said this.

VOICE: So spare me the bull shit about constitutional rights. No, I will not yield. And I will not yield for my entire five minutes, so don't ask again.

STU: Oh, the passion. The total and authentic and genuine passion from these people is just incredible.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, let me show you some more. I mean, unbelievable passion. So passionate, that he had to read it. Here is Representative Jones on guns, cut 14.

VOICE: Enough of your thoughts and prayers, enough. Enough.

STU: Enough. See, I'm mad. That's why I'm reading this.

VOICE: You will not stop us from advancing the Protecting (talking over) Act today.

GLENN: Now, listen to this.

VOICE: You will not stop us from passing it in the House next week, and you will not stop us there. If the filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it. If the Supreme Court objects, we will expand it. And we will not rest until we have taken weapons of war out of circulation in our communities. Each and every day, we will do whatever it takes to end gun violence. Whatever it takes. What we will do, is not fail the children of this country, the way that you have failed us.

GLENN: Okay. This is amazing. This is amazing.

We will do whatever we have to do, to take out guns, these guns, from circulation in our community. So get rid of the guns.

STU: Uh-huh. Not a purchase ban. It's removing them from circulation in the community.

GLENN: No. Removing them. And they will do anything. If there's a constitutional limit, we disregard it. If you try to stop us legitimately through the votes in Congress, or the Senate, we will override it. And we will abolish the filibuster.

STU: You left out the part of the script where he bangs his fist on the table there.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: Fist table. I'm sorry.

GLENN: And if the Supreme Court says it's unconstitutional to do that, we'll wipe them out. Wow. The ends justify the means. It's not just for radicals anymore. It's for everyone! Because seemingly, everyone in the Democratic Party is a radical.

So what did the very, very astute, together, wide awake president say in his speech last night?

Well, he came out into the east wing. And he walked down the red carpet that was all lined with candles. Now, I don't know if behind the flag, his lovely wife Jill was taking a bath. Surrounded by the candles. And rose petals in the water. It could be.

But it was a very beautiful and appealing image there, with the president by candlelight to talk to us about guns. And here he is. Cut ten.

VOICE: For God's sake, how much more carnage are we willing to accept? How many more innocent American lives are we --

GLENN: Okay. Hang on. I say 150.

STU: I would say 153. We're in the same ballpark. By the way, that's entirely the standard of this debate. Which is, we are just waiting for the exact amount of bodies. Until we adopt all of their policies.

GLENN: Right. What is it going to take for us to intellectually abandon the principle of the Constitution? What's it going to take?

STU: Right. It's not that we disagree or think you can solve in other ways, or think the Constitution is important.

It's that we haven't seen a high enough stack of bodies yet for us to change our mind.

GLENN: Yeah. And we don't really care. As long as they're killing children, Republicans don't care.

STU: Yeah, we won't care.

Here's the thing, Glenn.

Every time that you hear them say, we need to do something. Translate that to, we need to do exactly what we want. We have passed tons of laws since Sandy Hook. Yet they always say, we have done nothing. Because we haven't done the thing we want us to do. Federal-based legislation that takes people's guns away. Because they haven't done that, we haven't done anything.

Well, we have done tons of things. States have passed laws all over the country. Both on the pro-gun control side of this argument, and the pro-Second Amendment side when it comes to things like making schools more safe, as far as security and stuff. All that stuff has been passed all over the country. We've done tons of stuff, since these actions have gone on. We just haven't --

GLENN: Why are you avoiding the question? Just give me the number. Dear God.

STU: Enough is enough. Enough!

GLENN: Okay. Give me the numbers. 153.

STU: 153.

GLENN: 153. That's the number from Stu. Remember, mine is 150. Once we see another 150. Then I will abandon all of my principles.

Okay. Next cut please. Here's what he wants to do.

BIDEN: Allows the gun sale to go through after three business days, even if the background check hasn't been completed.

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Why is that? Why does a background check, even if it's not completed after three days, why do they abandon that and give you your license? Why is that? That seems crazy, right?

No. No, it doesn't. When you understand why. A federal background check should take about 20 minutes. When Clinton was in office, it strangely took days. Days. And days and days and days and days. Sometimes weeks to get it done. When Obama was in office, what happened? Oh, my gosh. The -- the computers were all just jammed in Washington. They had outages. And it would take so long. We're trying. We're trying super hard. But we've got dial-up modems here. And we just can't do that background check.

STU: And I thought that was a little suspicious. Though, when you saw the way they launched Obamacare and the website. Maybe it was real. Maybe they just were that bad at the computer.

GLENN: Well, no. Because when Bush was in office, you could get it in 20 minutes. When Trump was in office, you could get it in 20 minutes. So what is this law that says, three days. And if you don't finish the background check, they get the license.

That is to ensure that the federal government doesn't do what states like New York does. Drag it out for months. Make it impossible.

That's why that's there. That's there to keep the federal government honest. It doesn't take more than 20 minutes.

Okay. Next, please.

BIDEN: For so many of you at home, I want to be very clear.

GLENN: Okay.

BIDEN: This is not about taking away anyone's guns.

GLENN: What?

BIDEN: It's not about vilifying gun owners.

GLENN: Gun owners.

BIDEN: In fact, we believe we should be treating responsible gun owners as an example of how every gun owner should behave.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: What about responsible gun owners?

GLENN: Don't walk while chewing --

BIDEN: I respect culture and tradition of lawful gun owners.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop. No, you don't. No, you don't.

Lawful gun owners aren't killing people. Lawful gun owners are saving people's lives. I don't get the same respect. You -- you think you're treating me and my friends, who own guns, and are completely responsible. You think you're treating me with respect?

By telling me things like, you know, they just let these people -- they get them without even a background check.

You think you're treating us with respect by saying, you know, these guns blowholes into people. And you can't even recognize them. The DNA. Oh, you have to use DNA to be able to identify the bodies. Because AR-15s, which is now every semiautomatic weapon, they just -- they blow the faces off. People explode. And so you need to have a DNA test done, to identify the children.

Wow! Have we gotten that quick with DNA testing? Because the victims. You know, as soon as the parents are notified. And that usually takes, well, shorter than it takes Democratic states to count the votes on Election Day.

STU: People have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. And they say it with exclamation points next to it, to make it sound like they do.

GLENN: They are morons. Most of them are morons. There are those like Joe Biden, that know exactly what he's doing. There are those who are running the Democratic Party right now that know exactly -- they know what the truth is.

But they will tell you, that when we banned assault weapons, when we banned them. Well, I'll tell you, we saw the murder rate go down. No, we didn't. No, we didn't. Every study. Including the studies from the federal government show no difference was made. None.

You know, in Chicago, they have rounded up I think, what was it? 4,000 weapons. Here in the last year or two.

How many of them are legally owned? I would like to know. It just says, the number of weapons that have been used and confiscated because of shootings and everything else.

Why don't they tell us, were those legal or illegal guns?

Because that's where -- if those are legal, responsible gun owners. If they're all members of the NRA. And they've gone through all the NRA testing, well, then I'm wrong. But you're treating me, Joe, as if I'm the one with the illegal gun that is shooting kids and innocent people in Chicago or a school.

STU: We're going through all this stuff for the special tonight on Stu Does America. To debunk it.

GLENN: Really, really good special tonight. You need to see it.

STU: All the gun myths. One of the studies we came across, they looked at criminals. People who were arrested and in prison. And gun-related offenses. What they found was 2 percent of them had gone through retail sources. But 2 percent of the criminals, they got their guns from retail sources.

GLENN: So they went to a -- they went to a gun show?

STU: No. I bought a gun at a gun show. It seemed pretty retail to me.

GLENN: So I thought that -- oh, it must be they got it from a grandfather.

STU: No. Not a lot of borrowing from grandpa going on in the criminal world today. It's almost as if they don't care about your background checks. It's weird. But keep the border open. You can ban all these weapons. And pass all these new laws. But keep the Mexican/American border wide open and see what happens with guns.

GLENN: Yeah. Because drug cartel. They're not involved in drug smuggling. They're not involved in human smuggling. And they certainly -- they stay away from firearms. Okay? Especially those illegal ones.

JFK Files: 4 Big Revelations

President Trump is releasing the JFK Files after decades of secrecy. But Glenn warns: it’s important that we don’t chase the “who.” The question that really matters is, WHAT were they protecting? Was the government hiding the illusion of competence? Do these documents reveal the Deep State of the 60s? Did Lee Harvey Oswald have help? Did elements of our government look the other way? Or were they trying to stop the domino effect? Glenn predicts that the Kennedy Files aren’t about Oswald. They’re about us. If we can stare down 1963, we can demand 2024’s truth too. The “what” they’ve protected has kept us blind. Trump is betting we can handle it.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. I want to talk to you about the JFK files. Which were three hours -- two hours away from being released now.

If you're listening to us live.

Two hours away. And I'm interested to see what's in it.

Tulsi Gabbard is the one who is overseeing it. Representative Anna Paulina Luna. She has been relentlessly pushing for this since February. Trump has seen all the files.

He calls them, quote, very interesting, but he's leaving the judgment up to us.

Now, very interesting is different than when he said, he was talked into making sure, they don't go out. By others.

He didn't name the others.

But here we are, 62 years after Kennedy was killed here in Dallas.

And we're finally getting the vault cracked open?

I think it's important, and I could be wrong on this. I think it's important for us to not look and chase the Who. But there was somebody else in the grassy knoll.

There might have been. I don't know. I don't think that's what we were looking at though. I think we're looking at the "what." Not who they have been protecting, but what have they been protecting?
Why has it taken so long?

And not for names, but for the principles, the systems. The intangibles, that have been buried with these papers.

The steaks are pretty high here. You know, what happens if we get 80,000 pages and there's, meh. I mean, that's a possibility.

That's going to be really bad for the conspiracy theorists.

Because they're going to say, see. They didn't release it all. 80,000 pages, and they didn't release it all.

The question that has to be answered is, why did it take this long?

Let's go back.

Look at the steaks. November 22nd. 1963. Kennedy is shot.

And America changes at that moment.

I mean, our innocence goes away.

We have a president that is killed. And our innocence takes a bullet as well.

And the Warren commission pins it on Oswald.

But the doubts fester. Witnesses. Ballistics. Missing pieces.

The note from Evelyn Lincoln, the secretary of Kennedy.

Who said, I -- my husband, was in a restaurant, two days before President Kennedy was going to Dallas.

And overheard two people in the booth saying, well, he will be dead. He won't come back from Dallas.

Her husband listened to it, called the White House. And said, Evelyn, you've got to tell him not to go. She went in. And told President Kennedy, my husband just overheard a plot.

He said, if -- Evelyn, they're going to kill me in Dallas. They're going to kill me, going to my churchgoing on Sunday.

They will kill me one way or thorough. So I'm not changing my life.

Two days later, he was dead. Now, the witnesses, the ballistics, the missing pieces, tomorrow I am going out. I will do some live thing out, with just -- on, I don't know, X. We have the exact copy of the gun. I don't know if there is another one like it. Because it -- it took -- a friend of ours, Paul Vienes (phonetic). He is from the World War II museum, the Museum of the American soldier down in College Station. And it's this great museum.

And he is -- I mean, you put him on something, and he is like a dog with a bone. He's not going to stop. And it took him like two years to re-create this rifle. And to get exactly the rifle, it's very -- kind of a rare rifle in itself.

It's impossible to find the scope that he used.

And it was augmented in different ways. And so Paul has put this whole rifle together.

He brought it up. Gave it to our museum. And I will take the rifle out. We've had to go order, because it takes special shells as well.

So we will -- we will go out to the range tomorrow or the next day. And we will try to do the shots.

And I am bringing a couple of sharpshooters as well. I know I won't be able to do it. I might be able to hit the shot, but I don't know if I'll be able to hit the time. Maybe a couple of sharpshooters can do it. I don't know!

But it's not an easy shot. It's not an easy shot. But it could be done.

Here's the problem: In 1992, Congress passed a law saying, release everything by 2017, that isn't a national security risk.

Well, that deadline passed over and over and over again. And we got it in dribs and drabs. Now Trump is saying, release all of it.

80,000 pages, unfiltered.

On what's the -- what?

They have been guarded. I don't think it's a who. It's a what.

What have they been guarding?

It's got to be something kind of big, right? So what could it be?

Let's go through some of the options. Maybe what they've been covering or hiding, is the illusion of competence.

What if they've been protecting the myth that the government knows what its doing. We're totally competent.

No, you're really not. Don't ever show any of this stuff.

Because it will show how bad you really were. You had Oswald in your sites, so to speak.

And you did nothing. You just dropped the ball.

That could very well be it.

Just the hiding the illusion of competence.

I suspect we'll find that. 1963 was absolutely chaotic.

Cold War paranoia. CIA plots against Castro. FBI fumbling domestic threats.

Maybe the files just show Keystone Cops. Missed signals. Botched surveillance.

Agencies tripping over. Like the Keystone cops. Or Charlie chaplain follies. You know, okay. George.

Releasing that in the '60s, maybe even in the '90s, could have tanked public faith when we needed it. But we don't have any faith left, does anybody think our government is competent?

Really? Honestly?

Any? Bueller. Vietnam was heating up at the time.

The Soviets were watching.

If the files prove Kennedy died, just because of screwups, not masterminds. They're not hiding the villain.

They're hiding fragility. I think that's the most likely what, that we're going to find. That we are just the Keystone cops!

Okay. Option two. And feel free, Stu, to though an option here.

Option two. I am so sick and tired of carrying this whole show on my back. I carry you every day.

Option two. The architecture of power. This one is structural. What if those 80,000 pages map how decisions got made? How intelligence, military, and politics intertwined in ways that we're not supposed to see? Not a who shot him, but how did we operate? Think about this.

Kennedy was pushing back on the CIA. After the Bay of Pigs.

He was telling the pentagon follow-up, no.

On Cuba.

He was telling the pentagon. I'm going to get rid of all our nuclear programs.

I will negotiate with Russia. I will stop these never-ending wars.

Maybe it's the files revealing a machine that doesn't bend. And a network of influence, that outlasts any president.

Maybe it is go that reveals the Deep State that was happening back then. And they haven't held it back, because they're protecting a guilty party. But to shield the blueprint, you expose that, and you don't just rewrite 1963. You question every power play ever since.

The what, is the skeleton of authority, itself.

That's a pretty good option. Right?

Okay.

As I see it, option number three. The ghost of democracy!

What if they've been protecting the story that we tell ourselves about who we are. Kennedy's death wasn't just a tragedy, it was a mirror.

If those files say Oswald had help. Foreign or domestic. And I think this is the least likely.

If Oswald had help, foreign or domestic, or that elements of our own government looked the other way. That's possible.

It's not just history. It's an indictment. I don't know in 1963, if we could have handled that. Riots were coming. MLK. RFK would fall next. You know, maybe they locked it away, to preserve the what, of American exceptionalism. The belief that we're the good guys.

I shouldn't say that. Because I think we're the good guys. That our government and the&its many, many agencies are the good guy. So the delays about keeping that narrative alive, even if it's a lie! Fourth option.

And this one is pragmatic, but a little profound. What if the what, is the precedent of exposure?

The JFK files, and you can't stop there. We release the JFK files, we're going to say, now release Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump's brush with a bullet. Secret Service whistleblowers are already saying, the shooter wasn't a lone wolf. He was modeled. A product of a tactic that we've used abroad. And the product of a tactic that they say, we're not only using currently. But I say we were using at the time of JFK as well.

And I'm not saying that we did it. But that's what whistle-blowers in the service, is they're now saying, that that's what Butler, Pennsylvania, was all about. So if those 80,000 pages spill secrets, methods, failures, cover-ups.

It's a road map for the next demand.

Butler's files. The 9/11 loose ends.

Every classified corner.

They held it to not hide the Kennedy truth, but to protect the dam from breaking!

The what is the containment of accountability itself!

Keep everything secret.

And, you know, that's -- that's what our government does.

Thee keep, they're overclassifying everything.

Why?

Why?

Why is the left freaking out so much about DOGE?

Because there's a lot to hide there. And that's just in comparison to this kind of stuff.

That's just corruption, or waste, or incompetence.

One of the options. Maybe we're just not competent. We weren't in 1963. We know we're not now. Maybe that's what they're hiding.

Or was it -- was there more going on? Kennedy's era because of the Cold War, it was just nothing, but proxies and shadows.

And what we were doing then, became doctrine. It's why we were still at NATO. Why the hell are we still at NATO?

What is it that we're keeping at bay from NATO?

Why at least are we not demanding that the other countries start defending themselves a little bit more?

Because it's just -- it's the way it's done now.

I -- I have to tell you, the worst thing that will happen, is there's nothing in this. That the average person goes, I don't know what they were hiding.

Because if that happens, conspiracy theories go through the roof.

I mean, remember, this is from the guy who told you in what, 2005.

Or '6. You will see the time. If the government doesn't correct what they're doing right now. This was under George Bush. If they don't correct this kind of secrecy and everything right now. You will see a time where many Americans. 20 percent of Americans. It was at 6 or 7 percent at the time. Will say, we never went to the moon! We never went to the moon! Look at where we are! Look how many people are saying, we never went to the moon. We never went to the moon.

STU: And this is the thing, with like most conspiracy theories, there's no way to disprove them.

GLENN: No, I know. I know.

STU: If what comes out of this, eh, actually, we know most of the story. And it was a major failure.

But there's no -- no big conspiracy behind it. The people who have believed this, this whole time, will do exactly what you said. They'll say, well, they must be hiding all of the real stuff. Somewhere I know. I know.

There's no win.

STU: There's no live forever.

GLENN: That's why you should just release stuff going forward.

Just release it. You hold it back like this. You're not helping. You're just making things much, much worse.

Here's why it matters. Secrets have to be outed. Not for gospel. Not for revenge.

But when you bury the what, competence, power, identity, whatever.

You bury the ability to fix it. The Kennedy files, I'm guessing, not about him. They're not about Oswald.

They're about us. If we can stare down 1963, we can then demand 2024's truth as well. The what they've protected has kept us blind! Tomorrow, maybe we see!

And when we do, we don't just read it. We rebuild!

That's what's at stake today.

Can Trump Void Biden’s Autopen Pardons?

President Trump is now insisting that the preemptive pardons that President Biden issued in his last days in office - like those given to Hunter Biden, Dr. Fauci, and members of the January 6 Committee, should be null and void. Trump argued that if they were signed using an autopen, without Biden’s knowledge, a court should disqualify them. But will this happen? How prevalent was Biden’s use of an autopen? Did he even know he signed many of these documents? Glenn, Pat, and Jason discuss. The guys also review Conor McGregor’s recent appearance at the White House and a terrifying story out of Mexico.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There's a couple of really disturbing things. We will start getting into them tomorrow. So working towards tomorrow's show. We will spend a lot of time on the auto-pen thing. That thing is a mess. I mean, the president didn't -- I mean, we have the audio. Let's see if we can get that for tomorrow.

We have the audio with the President. And who was it? With Tapper? And he's like, I didn't do that. Yes, you did, sir. You just signed a bill two days ago.

No, I didn't.

Yes, you did.

Oh, well, I guess I did. That shows he was either absolutely incompetent, which is very, very vile.

And/or somebody else is just using the auto-pen, and he didn't know what he was signing.

That is -- I mean, everyone involved in that, should, quite honestly, be tried for treason.

You are -- you are a traitor to the Constitution of the United States.

You are taking on the power of the presidency, yourself.

You don't have the right to do it.

And I don't think Kamala Harris wasn't the, you one doing it.

It wasn't like it was in the chain of command.

Do we have any idea who was doing it. Susan rice comes to mind.

Ron Klain comes to mind. Right? Who else?

VOICE: Neera Tanden. So she was the center for America Progress president. She came in as an adviser. I think she's an OMB, I think, Stu, for a while.

I think she took -- yeah. Then she was -- she took Susan Rice's position, as the head of interior policy or something like that, after Susan Rice left.

All these were Obama people, that we were like, why in the hell are some of these people getting so close to the president, and sticking with him, that were from the Obama administration.

GLENN: Because, I mean, the reason they were all sticking with, is because they held the power. They held the power.

I'm convinced of it. Where does the auto-pen live, do we know? Is that out of his desk kind of like a printer?

JASON: I don't know.

GLENN: Honestly, where is that? That should be under lock and key. But who has access to that? Because that's important.

It the secretary of the president need to give people permission.

That has to be chain of command for the auto-pen.

JASON: We should be looking now specifically for that question.

Heritage foundation did a deeper dive on it.

They found, the president was on vacation golfing, while some of these pardons are being signed.

GLENN: Which president.

JASON: Biden.

GLENN: Wait.

He was golfing?

What? Did he have an auto club that just like hit the ball for him?

He could swing a golf club? No way. I'm having a hard time believing that. There's no way. I just see a ball on a tee just kind of falling -- yes. On his first hole, he only had 1,747 strokes. And an actual stroke or two. But that's a different story.

JASON: We should look more into that. There's probably an auto walkup to the stairs of Air Force One. Let's open this investigation even more.

STU: Well, then they did auto president, kind of --

GLENN: This is bad. This is really bad.

JASON: Yeah.

STU: And I guess it's been used since the Bush administration.

GLENN: No, I think it was used. First order to be signed was Barack Obama had to sign a big order. And he was on I think vacation.

STU: That's legislation. That was the first legislation.

I think it went all the way back to 2005, I believe, during Bush.

And the Department of Justice issued a -- an okay, basically to use it.

But it's never been challenged in the Supreme Court.

GLENN: I think it should be.

STU: Kind of odd.

You kind of have to. I don't know, maybe actually sign the bills.

GLENN: Well, I wouldn't have a problem with an auto-pen in a way that, it needs to get to the president.

Has to have his signature. If it was like the nuclear football.

You know what I mean?

Where it's with the president at all times. And it could feed go B something.

And improve it.

Why not have him sign it?

GLENN: I think we may not -- back in 2004, 2008, we may not have realized what they would use this for.

Because we used to think people had some integrity. But obviously not.

I mean, this is really, really bad.

Again, where is Pam Bondi?

SPENCER: If you're thinking about it though, if you're a second term president, that wants a third term. But you just want to be the guy behind the guy in the shadows. The auto-pen is the perfect thing for you. You have a puppet like Joe in there.

STU: Trump did use it a few times as well.

GLENN: I'm not saying it's bad.

STU: I'm not saying -- it should be challenged. And like, look, the proper way to do this. Is to send the documents to him. And let him sign it in person. And not send a signature across the -- like some machine that replicates his signature back in Washington, while he's on vacation.

GLENN: And I don't know if you know this, but we're past the age of the fax machine. And even the fax machine would have been okay.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

Fax it to me, and I'll sign it. The signature is the important part of that.

JASON: Well, this is going to be a huge conversation. Because President Trump this morning was tweeting out that a lot of pardons were giving J6 committee people, those preemptive pardons. He's now saying, those should be null and void. And there's nothing in the Constitution, that even comes close to addressing this.

GLENN: Come on. I've never seen a president doing that many pardons. How did that system work, you know what I mean? Six thousand.

JASON: That's a lot of batteries on the auto-pen.

GLENN: And a lot of batteries on the president, just to understand 6,000 names and cases. So we will get into that tomorrow.

Also, what's his -- what's-his-face was with Donald Trump this morning.

STU: Connor McGregor. Yeah, yeah. Do we have a clip of that.

Go ahead and play this.

VOICE: It's a travesty. Our government with zero action and zero accountability. You know, our money is being spent on overseas issues that has nothing to do with the Irish people. It's overrunning, running ravage on the culture. There are rural (inaudible), that have become a minority in one swoop. So issues need to be addressed. And Americans, as I understand, need to hear this. Because if not, there will be no place to come on and visit.

GLENN: What a clever way to get him into the White House on St. Patrick's Day.

I mean, I think this guy is -- I mean, I don't know about him personally. I just know that he wants to run, I think for Prime Minister.

STU: President.

GLENN: For president in Ireland. And Ireland is in trouble. I mean, they all are. They're in trouble.

Ireland, you know, it's not the sweet little -- I mean, first of all, it's now the home of Rosie O'Donnell. It's not the sweet little place it used to be. But, Rosie, I don't know -- you should peek outside your window from time to time. The Islamic Brotherhood are setting up shop there. And I don't think they like gay people. They like them even less than the people you think hate them here.

STU: I can personally guarantee you, though, wherever Rosie O'Donnell is living. These problems probably don't exist. It's probably very beautiful and lots of grass and hills. That's probably where she is.

GLENN: Ireland is in deep trouble. I mean, they're losing their churches. They're just being made into mosques all over. And I'm telling you, I think -- I think by 2030, you could see Great Britain become an Islamic state.

SPENCER: Yeah. To your point, Stu. That's a really good point. Connor McGregor is an shutdowns on Netflix or something. I can't remember. But it shows his entire background. He's talking about rural communities and like harder communities are being affected by this. That's where he comes from. Like, he was their champion. Like he grew up very tough streets. Worked his way up. Like a lot of solid blue collar neighborhoods.

GLENN: Deep State will do everything. Do everything they can to kill that guy. Not ours, theirs.

JASON: Oh, gosh.

GLENN: Liz Truss said to me, the interview I did with her, coming out next week, we talked about, where are these people, that could be like a Donald Trump for all these countries. And she said, they're coming. They're coming. And I think he's one of them. That will be very good.

JASON: I do too. Absolutely. Did you ask Liz about the annoying use of vowels within their language? Because that's what I want to know.

GLENN: No, if you look at -- it's so funny you would say that.

If you watch the video, I tried right at the beginning. I couldn't get it in. She just kept going.

You know, you have U's in words that shouldn't have U's. Like there's no U in colour. Anyway.

I don't know if she would have thought that was funny. She would be accused by you Americans. I have a feeling.

There's another story that I want to get on to tomorrow. That I couldn't believe.

I spent a couple of hours just trying to verify this. And reading all the stories from the Washington Post. And from the New York Times and everything else. So it's not some sort of crazy conspiracy theory. Because it's everywhere.

And it's about these concentration camps in Mexico.

Did you hear about this? Did you hear about this, Stu? This should be on everyone's front page.

This should be a very big thing.

You know, we've been saying all the time. People just go down, they disappear in Mexico. Where did they go? Well, outside of the town of Guadalajara, they have found this abandoned torture camp, with underground crematories, underground ovens.

Okay? They're finding teeth and bones.
And they found remnants of at least 700 people. And what they were doing was kidnapping people. Kidnapping their families. And then saying, you're going to do work for us. Or we're going to kill your whole family.

And they would torture these people. And torture the families.

And then just burn the bows.

And some of it was apparently was done to just -- not to recruit new people. Just to learn how to torture people.

I mean, I'm a telling you, I don't know how we don't send in the Special Forces, pretty soon.

JASON: They're talking about the cartels doing this?

GLENN: Yeah. Well, also in the -- what is it? The Cente Muarte (phonetic).

JASON: The Cente Muarte.

GLENN: What is that? A religion, a gang?

JASON: Yeah. It's kind of like an offshoot of Christianity. Something like that. My wife --

GLENN: Meaning that Christianity believes in Satan?

JASON: It's hard. Yeah. It's really hard. I know they have witches and things like that. That can cast spells. And all that.

You can walk through Mexico City. Like a really public square. That looks really normal.

You've been to Mexico City. And then all of a sudden, you'll see, one of their statues, it's like a woman, but a skeleton. She's a grim reaper outfit.

GLENN: That's a symbol of it.

JASON: They'll come up to it, and pray to it. And it's very formal.

GLENN: Is it a twisted offshoot of -- it seemed. As I was reading about it this weekend. Is this something like the Lady of Guadalupe gone wrong?

What is this?

GLENN: Don't quote me. Somebody will be listening and smacking me in the head.

It seemed like a saint that looks after bad people, or something like that.

So cartels are heavily in that. They've gone way off the deepened.

This is not surprising that this is happening. Have you ever seen narcos Mexico on Netflix?

GLENN: No.

JASON: So you watch through that, and it's based on real events, and things that happened, as the cartel spread through Mexico.

They'll just kind of randomly throw in the attorney general is on board, or getting paid off by some of these cartels.

GLENN: Oh, Donald Trump is not going to -- the people of Mexico.

If we go in with Special Forces. And we kill all these groups. People in Mexico, are going to love Americans.

They are going to love them.

Because nothing will happen. Because all of their -- you know, all of the -- you can't get elected. Unless you either just turn a blind eye, or with the cartels. You can't. They kill you.

And they kill everybody around you. And everybody who wants to replace you.

So, I mean, you know, it's got to stop! It's got to end.

JASON: I don't know how you separate the Mexican government. Dirty Mexican officials that are on the take, and part of this whole thing.

We did a story probably last year. There was like a general signed to crack down on this one cartel in one region. They found out a couple months later that he's on the take and getting paid off.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I think Mexico is a drug state. I don't think it's a failed state.

I think it's a drug state at this point.

EXCLUSIVE: Why Was Pelosi’s "Fixer" at Jan. 6?

Blaze News’ Steve Baker exposes Aaron Black, who he has dubbed “Pelosi’s precious,” for allegedly lying about his role at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Did Black, known to associates as Nancy Pelosi’s “fixer,” orchestrate agitators at the riot and skew the narrative to benefit Democrats? And did he lie about his presence at the Capitol during the riot? Baker joins Glenn Beck to break down the findings recorded in a Blaze News exclusive report, including Black’s history of fomenting unrest using CIA-style color revolution tactics and his deep connections to Pelosi.

Read the full article HERE: https://www.theblaze.com/news/pelosis...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Steve Baker, investigative journalist, Blaze news. Opinion contributor. And a guy who almost went to jail for just covering January 6. Welcome, Steve. How are you?

STEVE: It's good to be back.

GLENN: How is it to have that monkey off your back?

STEVE: Well, I didn't realize how heavy of a burden that was.

GLENN: That's crazy.

STEVE: Because I lived with that for over three years.

Then even after the arrest, I didn't realize the stress levels that I was living under, until as it began to slowly lift over -- took about a week, before I felt normal again. I just didn't know it was there.

GLENN: It's weird. I go to my doctor all the time. My wife usually will come with me. It's fine.

And she'll say, she'll look at him and go, no. It's not. No, it's not.

But you live under it for so long. And until you get away from it, you have no idea. I can't imagine what that stress was.

Let's switch subjects. You have a new Blaze exclusive out.

Nancy Pelosi had a fixer at the Capitol on January 6th.

This is -- this will just piss you off. But it pissed me off for a couple of reasons. One, it is so evil!

But the second thing is, is I looked for these people during Occupy Wall Street.

STEVE: Right.

GLENN: We were looking for -- and this guy never came up on our radar as connected to anything.

And now, in retrospect, you're showing how connected he is.

And it's all this -- it's all this USAID kind of crap.

STEVE: Right.

GLENN: Who is he? And what did he do?

STEVE: Well, first of all, he was one of the principle organizers of Occupy Wall Street, which is amazing that he doesn't come up.

Now, we can go back in retrospect. And we can find him.

We can find YouTube videos of him speaking and doing --

GLENN: I'm sure we covered it.

We had no idea who he was.

STEVE: No idea who he was.

And fortunately, for us, you have a connection, which we can't get really deep into.

But you were on this, you know, back -- before Occupy Wall Street.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STEVE: You were on this story, fifteen, 17 years ago back at Fox.

And it was because of that connection, that someone came to me, because he's a fan of yours.

GLENN: And I didn't even know -- by the way, I hopefully will talk to somebody at this point.

You're not going to believe. You're not going to believe this. You came to me a couple weeks ago. I have a story coming out. I want you to know.

Shut up. It's an amazing whistle-blower. Thank you for everything you have done in the past. And thank you for this.

STEVE: Right. And as a result to that. He came forward, and he said, well, let me just reset the stage just a little bit here. When Joe Hahnemann and I were assigned to do the first stories on the assassination attempt on July 13th, at Butler, PA. Well, when we revealed in that story that Thomas Crooks, the shooter. Our sources said, you know, they're in an Intelligence Community, and Special Ops. They're all saying, now, this kid was groomed.

We recognize our handiwork. This is what we do overseas.

So suddenly, I get this call. Or private message from a guy. You know, great story, by the way.

I really appreciate it. By the way, I think you got it right.

Thank you for telling me that. Who are you?

Then he started revealing who he was. And then I started vetting, and finding out who he was.

And what he said to me was, yeah. I recognize my handiwork in Thomas Crook.

And so we started the process of sharing things, developing a relationship. And then one day, as our relationship was growing, he says, oh, by the way. I have a couple of names to give you. If you really want to know what happened in January 6th. And one of those names is Aaron Black.

GLENN: This is the story. Exclusive story on the Blaze.com right now.

The Nancy Pelosi had a fixer, at the Capitol on January 6th.

That's what you search for. That's what's there now, at the Blaze.com. Go ahead. Tell the story.

STEVE: So what ended up happening was, is I started doing what you're supposed to do. I started looking at it. The more I did, the more interesting it got.

The more research it did, the more people he had to bring in. Because this guy is dark. And we had to go and actually scrape the dark web for him.

He's good at cleaning out his trail. The one thing that he couldn't clean out was that there were some Project Veritas videos out there from 2016. Where he was caught in one of their stings. Actually admitting to the fact that he and his guys were responsible for the violence at a Donald Trump rally in 2016. March, I think it was.

Early in the campaign. In which they had actually cancelled the rally. Because not only was there violence outside. They had over 100 of their people infiltrated inside, in a project they called bird docking. Which is they get old ladies there, early in the morning, 6 o'clock, 7 o'clock in the morning to get in line first with their posters. And, you know, their placards inside their bags.

And then they'll get up either on the stage or front row, they will open those anti-Trump posters of things, and then get the men, the MAGA guys irritated and hopefully violent. That's what it's called. It's called bird dogging. And so this is what this guy has been an expert at that.

Creating these types of situations throughout his entire career. From Occupy Wall Street. All of a sudden, he shows up on the radar again, in 2016.

And a couple of very specific events. Then he goes silent again.

Then all of a sudden, he remarriages as, quote, unquote, senior political adviser at team Pelosi.

GLENN: So -- I just want you to -- get your arms around this here for a second.

What this guy is doing, is what we showed you our State Department, through USAID was doing all over South America and Europe. We told you. I did a chalkboard on this, just I don't even know. Just six years ago. We'll have to look at it. This chalkboard laid this all out. And showed how this money was being used. And how Barack Obama started with the Arab spring to teach how to overthrow governments. And then they started. They kept doing it all across Libya. And then Syria. And then we went into Ukraine. And elsewhere.

We went into South America. This is what they were perfecting. These Colour Revolutions.

STEVE: Right.

GLENN: Paid for by your tax dollars. And I told you about five or six years ago, I think they're doing this to America. I think that's what's happening here. Well, yes. This is the guy.

STEVE: Exactly.

GLENN: Exactly.

STEVE: He, among others, he's not the lone wolf out there. But I actually tweeted out. And it just dawned on me this morning.

Because we have this photo at the top of the article on TheBlaze. If you go look and Nancy Pelosi is cradling his face in her hands. And just giving him the most adoring. So I'm now calling him Pelosi's precious. I changed his name.

GLENN: Yeah. He is. He is.

Okay. So what did he do at January 6th?

STEVE: Well, what we believe through our contacts, sources, whistle-blowers. Both named and unnamed.

Is that he did, in fact, organize, this is what we've been told. Is that he had paid agitators. I didn't say violent people. Paid agitators, because his expertise is controlling the narrative.

Like, you know, confederate flags being carried through the Capitol rotunda, things of that nature. Now, the most interesting aspect of January 6th.

I think everybody focuses on the violence. They pick their sides. The police started it.

The Proud Boys started it. Pick your -- you know, your nefarious actors. The most interesting aspect of January 6th was the same organizers of the rally got it delivered that day. Also organized the Jericho march on December 12th, just a month earlier.

And then also organized the million MAGA March on November 12th.

Now, when I said organizing, they pulled the permits for the stages and the speakers. And the people that part of those -- that weekend activities.
But all of those events, this was extreme violence.

Antifa. BLM.

You know, Proud Boys, knocking heads. They were -- Antifa was attacking old ladies. You know, elderly couples going back to their cars, after attending the rallies.

On the December 12th rally, a Proud Boy was critically injured. He was stabbed by an Antifa guy.

Then suddenly on January 6th, the largest event of them all, by multiples larger, zero counter-protestors.

GLENN: And that was at the ellipse, right?

STEVE: Anywhere. Anywhere.

GLENN: Anywhere.

STEVE: You saw no counter-protestors anywhere.

GLENN: I was going to say, that was weird.

I was thinking. Well, no. They were there at the Capitol.

Those are the ones I deemed not part of the movement.

That I've looked at it, and said, there's no way that person was part of the movement. They were acting like they were part of the movement.

STEVE: That's correct. This is what his expertise is. It's controlling the narrative. And what did Nancy Pelosi most famously say, when she set up the committee?

She said, that this was to establish and preserve the narrative of that day!

GLENN: And preserve the narrative.

STEVE: That's an exact quote.

GLENN: So what was the narrative?

Did he help design it? Did he help execute it? What was his role on January 6th?

STEVE: Both. He's a boots on the ground kind of guy.

One of our main sources in the article, Dustin Stockton, who has had a 15-year relationship with him, going back to Occupy Wall Street days. Countermovement to the Tea Party movement at the time.

And so as a result of those two things, there was a lot of collusion between Stockton and black during that time.

Over the years. All the way up until and through January 6th.

And so one of the things that we learned was, is that Stockton had been told by Aaron Black, that he was out of town January 6th. Until Stockton saw a photo of him on the steps of the Capitol that day.

And then, additionally, because he was very, very worried, that he had been seen. He started reaching out to other people, within our network, and security people.

And asking them about -- he was very concerned about whether his comes had been caught in the geofence that day.

Became very, very concerned about that.

And these are stories that are coming to us, through sources, that you can't even believe.

We're talking about the Rolling Stone. Politico. Other places.

GLENN: I want to -- I want to ask you. Let me take a quick break.

And when we come back.

I just want to know, I'm really excited what Trump has been doing.

I'm very -- very, very excited what's happening. I'm a little underwhelmed.

And I just said to Stu, put this on your calendar, a year from now, if we're not seeing things.

Then this is not strategy. I think it's strategy so far. But I've been underwhelmed what's happening at the FBI and DOJ. Because that's critical to the rot that's in there. And undoing the damage of the Deep State. And I've not seen any moves on it yet. Let me get your opinion on that when we come back.

So, Steve, this is just part one of a series of articles that you're going to be doing.

Now, in my world, this guy would be called in by the FBI.

And they would start questioning him. You know, what are you doing?

What happened?

We haven't found even the pipe bomber yet.

That's a little odd.

Are we -- are you disappointed at all, in Pam Bondi ask what the FBI is doing?

Do you think this is strategy. Incompetence. Are they no different than the rest of them? What's happening there?

SPENCER: Glenn, we revealed a year and a half ago irrefutable proof, that two federal officers perjured themselves in federal court.

And nothing has ever happened about that either.

GLENN: Yeah. But we had -- I only count from Pam Bondi getting in. You know what I mean?

STEVE: Right. Right.

GLENN: There should have been things.

Everybody else. Every single office that has been occupied. They had a list.

And they went boom, boom, boom, she should have had that list.

Does it exist. Is there a reason for this hesitation?

STEVE: Yeah. We've seen other department heads or ministers that are steamrolling through their list right now.

We're not seeing that there. I don't understand it.

I will tell you this, they're connected to what we're working on. To the stories we're working on, related to January 6th right now.

Whether we're going back to those federal officers who perjured themselves. Or we're talking about Aaron black and this revelation here. Someone who needs to be investigated. I can tell you right now, with all confidence that the blockade is coming from the G.O.P.

GLENN: Why?

STEVE: There are -- people in leadership, in the G.O.P. right now, who are stopping, and have been the object obstructionists since take one.

Since the first committee.

Since Loudermilk's subcommittee was working at the oversight committee, the work he was doing.
There were obstructionists at the top, who were stopping him and blockading him. Is now there's a new committee, has been founded. Been formed.

Are being formed. Has been announced an actual press release went out from the speaker. And now they're narrowing the focus of what they're even allowed to do, down to the point of, what's the point?

And so there are some problems there.

GLENN: So do you have the names? I know you won't give them to me on the air. Will you give me the names?

I'll --

STEVE: I'll talk to you about it off the air.

GLENN: Yeah. Please do.

STEVE: The problem is. Let's just be perfectly honest. The establishment G.O.P. did not want Trump in 2020.

GLENN: I don't want the names.

STEVE: They participated in the election. Let me say that.

GLENN: I am -- I am just sitting here thinking, what are the legal ramifications of me doing that?

What are the ramifications?

Then I thought of you listening wherever you are.

Thinking, what are the ramifications, if we don't get those names. Give me the names.

I'll expose it.

STEVE: We will get there.

GLENN: Good. Good. Thank you so much. Do you know if you have a next piece dropping on this?

STEVE: I actually have to spend a couple more days here in Dallas. Then I have to hit the road and talk to the people for the next installment.

GLENN: On the shooting of the president, is anything going to happen on that?

STEVE: Again, we're going back to the same office, aren't we? Where, you're asking the same question to the same office. What's happening at DOJ? What's happening at FBI? Now, today is Dan Bongino's first day, maybe he unplugs the clock. I don't know.

GLENN: I can't believe Kash Patel is part of that clock.

I just can't. I can see him being told, back off. Back off. Back off.

I mean, can't see him being part of the clock. And I couldn't see Bongino doing that. Now, I don't know pam Bondi at all, but there is a clog there. And it's got to be unclogged. And I'll tell you, this is the Achilles' heel of the president. He may not know it. Most people may not know it.

This will be the Achilles' heel to his supporters.

If you don't go after even your own kind, to clean this out, I really think Americans, even had you seen own supporters will go, you know. Mr. President, I'm a supporter of yours on many, many things.

But that one is too important. And if you don't get that one done, I don't know where I stand.

STEVE: Right. Exactly.

GLENN: Appreciative of what you are doing.

But I can't count you as the revolutionary that I thought was going to fix our republic. That has to be done.

Thank you so much. Appreciate it. All right.

Should Andrew Tate Be a Role Model for Young Men?

Controversial influencer Andrew Tate has become a role model for some young men on the Right. But should he be? Is he even “conservative” or “based”? Fellow BlazeTV host ‪@AllieBethStuckey‬ joins Glenn to discuss what Tate actually believes, in his own words, about women and feminism: “Do we need strong male leadership examples for men? Andrew Tate is not that.” But should the Trump administration and Florida prosecute the Tate brothers?

Allie also talks about her next "Share The Arrows" event, which you can get tickets for at https://www.sharethearrows.com/

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Can you hit the Andrew Tate thing at all? I don't know how much you've gone into it. I don't really know anything about him.

ALLIE: You know, I thought that you were a huge Andrew Tate fan. You struck me as that. Wow.

GLENN: Here's the thing, my son said to me, dad, I don't know how to feel about Andrew Tate. I think I kind of like him. I'm like, son, I don't know anything about him. But I will figure this one out. Because I'm not -- I'm not sure that should be -- and that's where young men are going. And it seems to me, to be dangerous.

ALLIE: Yeah.

GLENN: But I don't really know. I haven't done any work on it.

STU: I did the one thing where it's like you're going through Twitter, and someone posts. You keep seeing his name. I keep seeing people post about him. I've never heard of the guy. If you think Andrew Tate is a real conservative. And I clicked on it. And it was a video of him saying the worst things possible for about ten straight minutes. And I was like -- and seemingly physically abusing a bunch of women. And I was like, I don't -- are there actually conservatives who think guy is a good guy?

ALLIE: Yes. 100 percent.

GLENN: I think there are young men.

STU: Do they not see this stuff?

GLENN: I don't know. We have made men so wimpy. This is -- this is from zero homework. Okay. So this could be proven wrong six ways to Sunday.

ALLIE: Don't worry, I'll check you.

GLENN: So I'm just saying, this is me shooting from my hip. Kids, men, boys have become -- wearing skirts. And it's totally fine. And you want -- it's bad to be a man. And there's no tough men. And everything else.

I think he is the overreaction. The pendulum swinging so far the other way, that young people are looking at him, and going, you know. You know, it's time for men to be men.

But that's not what men are. That's not what a good man is.

STU: No.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

ALLIE: Yeah.

GLENN: And I could be wrong.

ALLIE: No. I think that's part of it. That's certainly why people defend him.

And I've listened to things he says. Of course, he says things we would agree about feminism. About the emasculation of men, about how men to be providers. They need to be tough. They need to take care of women. But at the same time, he's a self-proclaimed pimp, who has prostituted young girls on video, talking about his academy -- his academy. It's an online academy, where he has trained other men to pimp out women online.

And so that was how he made his money.

GLENN: That sounds like Hollywood.

ALLIE: Yeah. PhD. Course. Pimping hoes course or whatever. Is what he called it. And, yeah, he is on tape beating women with a belt and threatening them.

GLENN: Jeez.

ALLIE: And so he might say he's different now, but I don't know how anyone can say he's redeemed because he became a Muslim, which is basically just a religious justification for oppressing women. And he still says --

GLENN: Wow. What a brave statement. I'm off the hook for my earlier statement.

ALLIE: I overshouted it.

GLENN: Did you hear what Allie Beth said after I said it?

ALLIE: I mean, it's just not surprising that he didn't become Christian or something like that. So that's who Andrew Tate is. I would say no. No young man should follow him. Do we need strong male leadership examples for men? Yes. Andrew Tate is not that.

GLENN: Yes. And that's going back to this whole thing, Christ is king.

It's the same thing. You'll see, this is what Satan does. He'll take a little bit of truth. And then mix it in with a whole bunch of lies. And pervert everything.

And that's what's happening with these things. Is you'll see the truth of, yeah. You know what, men should be strong.

And then you look at it. Stu, I haven't seen this video.

Where he's beating women. I don't know. That doesn't seem like a strong man.

ALLIE: Yeah.

GLENN: That seems like a bully. And the exact opposite of what I think a man is.

STU: And when we say women. It's underaged girls.

ALLIE: That's the allegation we're talking about, 14 and 15-year-old girls in some cases.

STU: I saw Ron DeSantis' reaction to it in Florida, and it seemed completely appropriate.

ALLIE: It seemed proportionate. Now, there are some issues about whether or not as American citizens they should be here or not.

But I do think that it's wrong to spin any political capital by the Trump campaign on the Tate brothers.

GLENN: Okay. Hang on just a second, Allie Beth. She's the host, in case you don't. I'm sure you do. Of relatable on Blaze TV.

She is -- who was the lefty. What was it?

The New Yorker. Or the Atlantic. That claimed that you were --

ALLIE: Well, the new Phyllis Schlafly. Which is -- that is an honor. I've not filled those shoes.

But, yes.

STU: That was a great article.

ALLIE: Yeah. It was actually --

STU: I assumed it would be some kind of hit piece.

I thought it was very positive.

GLENN: They might have meant it as a hit piece.

ALLIE: They probably did.

GLENN: Normal people read it and say, yeah. Absolutely.

GLENN: So last year, we had like a billion women from everywhere, show up here in the Dallas area, in your Share the Arrows event. I unfortunately was out of town. Because I was ready to put in my skirt and go. There were like four guys there. But it was an amazing event.

ALLIE: Oh, thank you.

GLENN: And you're doing it again, when?

ALLIE: Yes. October 11th, outside of Dallas, Texas. And we have an actual arena this time. And we are super excited about it. We are announcing our speaker lineup next week.

And I just hope, by the grace of God, it's another really supernatural event.

GLENN: It will be. It will be.

STU: My wife Lisa went to this, absolute loved it. Brought seven or eight of her friends. They loved it. They want to go to the next one. Like, they spoke about it for weeks afterward.

ALLIE: Oh, good. Oh, that means a lot, thank you. Yeah.

STU: You did a great job with it, and I think you affected a lot of people.

ALLIE: Well, thank you. Blaze TV also, helped me pull it off. Everyone here. I wish I could list them all by name. It wouldn't have happened without them, truly.

GLENN: Maybe we could get one of the Tate brothers on October 11th, to go -- his crowd could go beat your crowd up.

ALLIE: Oh, that sounds perfect.

STU: That is a good idea.

ALLIE: Hmm. Wow.

GLENN: Wow. Thank you, Glenn, for that idea.

Anyway, how do you get tickets?

ALLIE: SharetheArrows.com. People can find out all about it. If you've got any questions. Go there. That's where you can get tickets. Bring your small group. Bring your mother-in-law. Sister-in-law. Sister's friends. Anyone. As long as they are a woman. They have to be an actual woman to be there, though. Glenn can't just grow out his hair and attend. Sorry.

STU: He loves Broadway. Does that help?

GLENN: I'm practically 100 percent chick.

ALLIE: So you're nonbinary is what you're saying.

GLENN: Anyway, what are the topics? Well, you can't tell the speakers, but can you tell the topics?

ALLIE: Yes. So Share the Arrows is a call to action. When your fellow believer is getting lambasted or rejected or bullied or whatever for standing up for what God says is good, right, and true. Rather than saying, I'm glad that's not happening to me. You stand up and say, okay. Enemy, whatever arrows, you are throwing against her, I will take them too. And that can really turn things around. I have watched that happen over and over again. There was one attendee, who sent me a message last year. And said, I walked out of Share the Arrows with zero fear of man. And that's what I want every mom, every young woman, every grandma to walk out with Share the Arrows feeling.

So we will hit on really controversial topics. We will talk about the typical gender abortion all of that, but motherhood. Apologetics. The New Age. Reproductive technology. All this stuff that people don't tend to hear at women's conferences. We will hear from a Christian perspective.

GLENN: That is great.

ALLIE: Thank you.

GLENN: You're just a gem. Allie Beth Stucky. You can find her on Blaze TV. She's the host of Relatable. Look at the podcast wherever you get your podcast. Share the Arrows.com. Again, it's happening in October 11th.

In Dallas, Texas. October 11th. You can get your tickets and find out all the information at SharetheArrows.com.