RADIOAugust 22, 2022

Expert predicts Donald Trump’s ‘MAJOR’ news after FBI raid

President Trump recently teased on Truth Social a ‘major’ announcement ‘pertaining to the Fourth Amendment’ and concerning the FBI’s recent raid of his Mar-a-Lago home. So what could Donald Trump be planning to do next? Journalist John Solomon, author of ‘Fallout,’ gives Glenn his best guess. Plus, Solomon details more information concerning the raid, and he recaps FBI corruption that’s existed for DECADES: ‘This is an agency that has…a very big history of abuses. Time and time and time again.’

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: John Solomon. Welcome to the program. How are you, sir?

JOHN: Great to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: It's great to be with you. We are living in insane times. I remember we -- you know, we've talked for years now.

Did you -- did you ever really believe that it would ever get like this?

JOHN: I didn't, no. Yet, we've had this great American experience for 246 years. And I think back to that speech you gave at CPAC on February, and all the things you said, somewhere along the way, we jumped out of the roots of this great country. And we're in a place now, that doesn't resemble the America that we all grew up in. It's a very troubling time.

GLENN: Yeah. So I think a lot of people during the last couple of weeks, have learned a lot about what to do, and what to expect, when you're served a warrant at your house. It's actually a good way. It's God's way of teaching us the Constitution, I think. What happened with Donald Trump, is, again, I believe a horror show. There's no way he is selling secrets. You know, nuclear secrets to Finland, this is ridiculous.

It does now seem to appear, to be a shot across the bow because he was trying to release documents, that showed who was involved in the Russia hoax. Is that true?

JOHN: Well, listen, there is this long six-year battle between the FBI and Donald Trump. And of course, it starts with Russia collusion, which we now know as completely contrived and political investigation, but had no predicate, no merit whatsoever.

As the presidency is coming to an end, as Donald Trump is leaving office on January 19th, 2021, he declassified the documents, the FBI never wanted out in public.

They didn't want these documents out. These are the ways they handled their informants. What they do before they sign the FISA warrants. What they were telling the court, versus what they knew internally.

That just inflamed the FBI all the more. And for the last year, as I reported. The FBI secretly grabbed those documents. The president declassified them. He ordered them to be released. In the last hour of the Trump presidency, I'm told at 11 o'clock on January 20th, 2021, the FBI and the Justice Department grabbed those documents. They made up an excuse. Saying, hey, we left a couple of Privacy Act pieces of information in there, from the declassified documents.

Let's grab them. We'll fix that, and we'll release them. They grabbed them for 19 months. They kept them from the American public despite a lawful order of a sitting president.

GLENN: Unbelievable. So he had the documents, but they hadn't been redacted?

JOHN: They were redacted. They were completely ready. They were declassified. All the declassified markings. At the last minute, the Justice Department raised an issue that maybe there was a piece of information there still covered by the private sector. Let's go look at it real quickly. It looks like it was really just an excuse to grab the documents.

GLENN: All right. So did he have those at Mar-a-Lago? Do we know? Is that what they were going off of?

JOHN: No one has told me -- I haven't found anyone who told me that they had the documents there. And, of course, I've asked the president. Do you have the documents?

He's told me no.

That's why he gave me permission as a journalist, to go to the non-public section out of the national archives to try to find these documents.

That's what led us to the discovery just three weeks ago, that these documents had been grabbed by the Justice Department. And a secret hand, grabbed them and put them in the Justice Department.

GLENN: So you haven't been able to find them?

JOHN: No. We know where they are now. There's two sets. There's a classified set at the national archives. I can't see them. Because I don't have any security clearance, nor does anyone else in normal America.

Right. I could have -- that's probably not advisable. And then the second part, is there is a set with the Justice Department. And I'm taking multiple actions to try to force the Justice Department. And I hope to have really good news later this week. I've been negotiating with the archives. They have been working with the Justice Department. I have a sense, an inkling, that we might get these documents in the near future.

GLENN: All right. So what was it that the FBI do you think, was looking for?

JOHN: It's a great question, right. The first possibility is maybe what they said, is all that it is. Right? This is a dispute between the archives and former President Donald Trump, and they actually went through this unprecedented means to get documents back, by raiding his home.

I haven't found any other great explanation for people. And I think when people look bang. If that's all this was. If this was a dispute over documents, there is a civil process, that could have been followed. And that means they will have criminalized a dispute over paper. And with some serious issues involved. And I think there's another part of this, Glenn, that we haven't been able to dig into. I'm really working on now.

It is impossible for this sort of a dispute to go on, and for it to become criminalized without the Biden White House -- there's just no way, the way the system of government works. So what was the Biden/White House's role in these conversations?

I think that's the next big shoe to drop. I don't know what it is. But I'm determined to find out what it is. The way government works, you have these issues of privilege. You have these issues of I would dispute, between the current administration, the past administration. The Biden White House had to be in the loop

And I don't think their story adds up.

GLENN: Well, I have to tell you, just on common sense, and the way the world has worked in America. There's no way a decision that large, that would come back to the White House, eventually, and affect the presidency, not just Biden and Trump. But the entire presidency. There's no way the Justice Department doesn't call and at least give a heads-up. Am I wrong?

JOHN: I'm 100 percent with you. And I think there's another issue here. Remember that there -- the grand jury subpoena. Which I broke the story a couple weeks ago, was executed on June 3rd. In a collaborative way, by the way. Both sides were still working together then. That didn't address the issue of executive privilege. What does that mean?

It means somewhere earlier in the process, somebody to wave executive privilege in order for a grand jury subpoena to be issued for executive documents. The only way Donald Trump is going to be waving it. I think we're going to find out that the Biden administration waived executive administration for Trump. And that they were deeply involved in it. That's just the only plausible explanation for why there wouldn't be a privilege claim back in June, when the grand jury first showed it to be. This first --

GLENN: Wow. So, John, I'm doing a special on Wednesday. On the history of the FBI. And how -- and how corrupt it has been. I mean, it really was corrupt from the very beginning.

You know, we had Hoover doing all kinds of stuff, that was really, really dark and bad. Are we at or beyond the Hoover days?

JOHN: Well, listen, one of the big stories I did when I was at the Washington Post, and I worked with 60 Minutes. For 40 years, for 40 years, the FBI would go into -- take it out of politics for a second.

They would go into a case, and say, that guy on trial for murder, I can assure you, that the bullets we found in his bedroom door, matches the bullets that were shot out of that gun.

And for 40 years, they testified that hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of murder defendants were convicted based on the FBI scientists. The story I broke in 2007, showed the FBI knew all along, that that science was junk science. It wasn't true. That they couldn't make such a representation, and yet they continued to make it, well past -- I mean, during the Hoover years. Well-past -- all the way into the Mueller easier. So the history of the FBI. Which was the church hearings. Which went into the Hoover era. Or what we learned in 9/11. The mistakes of the Oklahoma City bombing. The problems with the FBI.

This is an agency that has a very big representation. But it also has a very big history of abuses. Time and time and time again.

GLENN: Any way to reign that in.

JOHN: It's a great question preponderance is some of the policy makers I've talked to in Congress. For the first time, I've heard Republicans tell me privately, you know what, it's time to break up the FBI. Maybe have them -- make them like Scotland Yard, and put the Domestic Intelligence into a different agency. There is clearly a moment of reckoning for the FBI within on the immediate horizon. The real question is, if you just take the counterintelligence division up. You put it somewhere else. The mentality still exists that there's not a regard to the Constitution. That's the part, whether it's inside the FBI or outside of it, the lack of regard for the Fourth Amendment, for our liberties in the face of a big government, that's the part that hasn't been flesh out. I'm not sure just dividing the FBI.

GLENN: Well, especially the intelligence arm.

The intelligence agencies are completely out of control. The things I've read about the intelligence agencies. And I've heard from people on Capitol Hill. Is they really don't answer to anybody right now.

JOHN: Yeah. Yeah. They have their own mindset. Their own mentality. So much of what they do, can say secret, no matter what. As we're seeing in this search warrant today. We never get a visibility, to know if the excuse they're giving to us, is real. And only years later, through lawsuits and FOIAs that we find out. Well, the officials in the intelligence community didn't match, what we were told at the time. It's that secrecy, that I think creates so much concern.

There was an opportunity to know of Russian collusion. Why Republicans were still in control of both -- to do something, to trade a permanent advocate. So that all intelligence cases that occurred in secret, there would be someone advocating on behalf of the American, whose liberties were about to be violated. They when I find on that, Paul Ryan whiffed on that. But I think there's a lot of people today, that would go back and say, you know, if I had to do over, I would probably create that public advocate who goes into the court and argues on behalf of you and me and everybody else.

GLENN: Yeah. So, John, what do you think Donald Trump is talking about, when he says that, you know -- he said over the weekend, it might be within hours. It might be Monday, that I'm going to be filing something. And big news coming. What do you think that might be?

JOHN: My reporting indicates that that the president is considering, filing a motion to remove Judge Bruce Reinhart, who by the way, just a few minutes ago ruled that the entire affidavit cannot be kept sealed. He believes, he used the word unprecedented. I'm glad he recognizes what he approves as unprecedented, but he is rejecting the Justice Department's request to keep the affidavit secret.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait. He rejected the -- the Department of Justice?

JOHN: Just broke just a few minutes ago.

It's up on Just The News right now. Judge Reinhart this morning said the Justice Department's request to keep the entire affidavit for the search warrant, under seal, is rejected. That this is an unprecedented case. It requires transparency, so people can understand why the FBI was authorized to raid a former president's home. That just happened this morning. That's something that the president was cheering on.

GLENN: And how long will it be before we see that?

JOHN: Well, there are two options. Either they have to deliver the unredacted version of the affidavit on Thursday. Or a more likely scenario is the Justice Department will slow walk this. Go to a district judge, then go to an appeals court. Maybe even go to the Supreme Court.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

JOHN: My guess is they will go that route. But meanwhile the president -- to answer your question, I think the president is going to ask that a special master be appointed. A court-appointed independent person. Take the documents from the FBI and go through them and say these are -- these aren't. These are overly expansive. They shouldn't have be collected like your passports. And not leave the FBI on an honor system, given all we know. So I think that's what we'll see the president do.

GLENN: That would be great. John, thank you so much.

JOHN: Great to talk to you. Always an honor to be on your show.

GLENN: Likewise.

All right. When I say back to school shopping scam, I would assume you're thinking I'm just talking about that list of stuff you're supposed to get for you kid. Know, a bag full of stuff, that he's probably never, ever going to use anyway. Now, that's true. But there are also real back to school shopping scams out there. Buyer beware. It is important to understand cyber crime and identity theft. And how they will affect your life. And they will come cloaked a million different ways, which is why no one can prevent all of it, or catch all of the bad guys. And only LifeLock is the one that comes to the table. And says, look, we're going to do our absolute best. And we have the best track record at it. We're the longest running in the industry. But also, we have a team of experts, that are going to fix it. And work with you, to fix it.

And it is only at LifeLock by Norton. Now, join, and you'll save 25 percent off your first year with the promo code Beck. Call 1-800-LifeLock. 1-800-LifeLock or LifeLock.com. Use the promo code Beck. Save 25 percent now.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)
There is a -- I can't say this anymore. An unbelievable story.

There is another believable story, because it's only believable because of everything else that's going on.

You know, it's funny. We're called extremists. But only common sense and tradition now is extreme. It's extreme because everything else is insane.

We have an amazing story about a guy, who was canceled by Google, that you have to hear. Because this one affects you. And I haven't really heard anybody really tie this together, on how this will affect you. It's an outrageous story. We will have this coming up in a second. What do you think of John Stossel, and what he just said?

STU: Pretty amazing. You know, it does seem like -- the overreach is clear. And the -- and the courts may back up some of the Trump side of this. Which is always a plenty surprise, I suppose. When you go into this level of scrutiny. But I do think that there's a chance that this stuff really backfires on them. I think -- you know, you've always had the right, be the one who is defending the FBI in a lot of these institutions. And say, look, we understand. And we've said this a million times. We understand there are some problems in some of these institutions. They need to be rooted out.

It seems like the right after this, is getting to the point, where they're just giving up on that. Like, we can't.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

Would you call John Solomon back just a second and say, sorry, Glenn has one more question that I forgot to ask him. I want to ask him about the whistle-blowers. Because he's in a position, to know. Are we seeing more whistle-blowers, than usual?

Because that's the feeling I get, reading some stories.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And hearing from Congress. That FBI agents are coming forward, and going, this has got to stop. And that to me, is heartening.

STU: You're also hearing this from people -- was it Grassley that came out with a big list -- was it 14 whistle-blowers on this one story?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: That's not the typical -- this isn't like, I don't know, a hard-core Trump ally. He's just a normal kind of institutional Republican. He's been there for 500,000 years. And he's the type of guy you wouldn't necessarily think would be making erratic claims about this type of thing.

GLENN: No. He's kind of old school, reasonable reasonable, just consistent. Just consistent.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: But he's been saying that -- and if they're not -- if you are in the FBI, I plead with you. Plead with you to have zero tolerance for anything unconstitutional and whistle-blow. Come to us. Come to Project Veritas. Come to anyone. Anyone.

But please blow the whistle.

Because you're all going to be painted with the same brush, you know. What happened -- what happened with the police, in many cases, now, this is not the case with BLM. It just gave fuel to BLM.

Is the -- the -- for a long time, the police officers would close their ranks. And they would protect their own.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: You can't. If there's a practice bad guy, you've got for rat them out, otherwise, you'll all be deemed bad.

And I would like to be in a position where I trust the FBI. I don't know if I'll ever be there again. I don't know if I'll ever be there.

STU: And that's probably a healthy thing. There should be some general skepticism. You know, many of our people more on the Libertarian side of -- of the right have pointed this out many times. That conservatives tend to have a real skepticism of government, except for law enforcement and sometimes the military.

And that's not always the best thing to do. You should have the skepticism of government on all these facets. You just shouldn't wildly blame law enforcement for being wrong every single time.

GLENN: I want to be in a neutral position, you know.

STU: Hey, judge things by the facts. That's all we're asking here.

GLENN: Right. And the problem is, if the Intelligence and Justice Department have gone bad, who do you call? Because Ghostbusters is out of business. I don't know if you know that.

STU: No. Yeah, they're in business.

GLENN: No. That's a parallel universe.

STU: Really? That didn't really happen?

GLENN: No. Uh-uh.

STU: A better universe.

GLENN: No. The last I saw, all the equipment was, you know, buried in some place in the middle of the country.

STU: Probably better than what actually happened, you know.

GLENN: So we -- we need the trust in our institutions, and our FBI.

Please, if you're in the FBI, set the record straight. And -- and get rid of all of the bad things in your life, and whistle-blow!

You see something, say something. Are you getting tired of being told that you're what's wrong with America?

Are you tired of corporations going woke right and left?

Well, the good news is, you're awake. And so you don't have to pay for -- for services from a company that hate you. And then have some of the profit that they make, invested in the organizations that also hate you. And want to destroy everything that you love.

Patriot Mobile is your phone company. It is the one that will give you your cell phone and give you the same great service. The coverage. They're on the same cell towers as all the others.

And they love you. And they are actually in fighting for you. Go to PatriotMobile.com/Beck. Or call 972PATRIOT. PatriotMobile.com/Beck. 972PATRIOT. Use the offer code Beck. Get free activation. Join the movement. Pay less. Get great coverage. And actually be with a company that is fighting for your God-given rights. PatriotMobile.com/Beck. 972PATRIOT.

STU: BlazeTV.com/Glenn. The promo code is Glenn to save ten bucks to BlazeTV. More coming up.
(OUT AT 9:28AM)

GLENN: Hello, you sick freak. Yes, what would Monday be without a monkey pox update?

The CDC, the Center for Disease, Control, and Prevention has released a study over the weekend, suggesting that people should wear a mask, to protect themselves from monkey pox.

Now --

STU: Wait. There's no evidence that this is an airborne virus?

GLENN: No.

STU: So why would we wear a mask to avoid monkey pox?

GLENN: Well, I've said --

STU: It's an airborne virus. Would have seen how little they work. But why would --

GLENN: Well, because we've had -- we know now, monkey pox, the CDC came out last week, and said, monkey pox is something that is being spread, mainly through men having more than ten partners, and it is a sexual disease. It is being spread sexually. It's not a sexual disease. But it's being spread sexually.

STU: It's sort of a long-term intimate contact needed to spread this.

GLENN: Correct. So they didn't say that everyone should wear a mask.

STU: Uh-oh.

GLENN: I'm wondering if that's like a face condom, or what exactly -- how do you -- I mean, unless they're just lying to us, and one of those two things is wrong. Either the mask or how it spread.

If you're trying to logically figure it out, you've got to do some pretty complicated Common Core math. And show me your work, on how you got there.

STU: Hmm. I have a question about monkey pox.

GLENN: Yeah. I don't think I should answer it.

STU: No. Probably not. But they keep saying, we were talking about this phrase, men who were having sex with men. Which is the phrase now used. It's not gay people, or bisexual people. It's men who have sex with men. They keep saying that phrase over and over again. For some reason.

GLENN: Well, because gay sex, I think, could be sex between two women.

STU: Well, it's usually, there's an L in the LGBT, right? They could -- they keep saying, like, this is happening in the LGBTQ --

GLENN: I don't know what words mean anymore. I don't know what words mean.

STU: So this is my question, what about men who have sex with trans women? Could they be affected with this?

GLENN: No, that's completely different. It is to them.

STU: Here's the thing, they're biological men who have transitioned to women. I think this is what I would be accused of.

GLENN: Hater. Hater. Hater. I don't think monkey pox --

STU: Will the monkey pox -- is that --

GLENN: I don't think you can label someone who is now claiming to be a woman.

STU: Monkey pox will essentially approach the trans woman and say, I was thinking about infecting this particular man.

GLENN: You. Yeah.

STU: Then I realized, actually, this person is identifying as a woman, therefore, it's totally safe to have sex with this person.

GLENN: Right. Monkeys are not animals, man.

STU: Wait.

GLENN: All right. We have a really important story to share with you. It broke over the weekend. And it involves Google and a dad.

STU: Yes. So a dad in San Francisco, this is February 2021. If you know anything about San Francisco, this was like mid-lockdown. They were still in pull full fledge, right. Of lockdown. So the dad. Stay at home dad, had his son. And his son is having some issues in a sensitive area, if you would. And a rash of some sort, some redness, some swelling, breaking out.

GLENN: Monkey pox.

STU: Now, of course -- now, this wasn't monkey pox. This was pre-monkey pox era. This child is having some discomfort. You're of course not allowed to go outside for some reason. So they're doing a virtual doctor's visit. While they're doing this virtual doctor's visit. The doctor requests photos to understand what's going on.

GLENN: Look, I'm not going anywhere really dark with the doctor, is it?

STU: No.

GLENN: Good. I'm just asking for the listener.

STU: Well, if you survived the monkey pox update, I think you already are here.

GLENN: Right. This one is a lot more tame.

STU: Yes. This is more tame. So he takes some photos, to give to the doctor of his child's area. Sends the photos.

The doctor recognizes what the rash is, what the issue is, sends antibiotics. Gets it knocked out immediately. Everybody is happy.

GLENN: Got it. So, I mean, want to recap this story. It's during covid lockdown. Dad is locked in the house. The doctor has these virtual visits. The doctor, a good guy. Asks the father, a good guy, to take a picture of the sensitive areas of the son who is a good guy. So the doctor can diagnosis and give the right prescription.

STU: Which he does, and it works. Everybody is happy. Apparently not. Not according to the people over at Google. Who have an algorithm, running over all his photos, that are in the cloud.

GLENN: Oh.

STU: And this photo that was apparently uploaded automatically to the cloud.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Sends -- sets off some alerts, that say, this could be child porn. Now, of course --

GLENN: But it's not child porn.

STU: It's not child porn.

GLENN: Now, was Google monitoring this guy, because they suspected child porn?

STU: No. This is an automated algorithm, that is scanning the photos much every single person who uses Google cloud.

GLENN: Everyone. Uh-huh. Okay.

STU: Now, you might say, there's some utility to this. If it was child porn, it would probably be really good that this was alerted. And maybe some child could have been protected from some horrible, horrible incident.

GLENN: Sure. So they should have maybe reached out to some doctor. Well, but the doctor could have been -- he was on the receiving end, so to speak.

STU: Right. But what needs to happen here? The algorithm sets off these alarms. And then it goes to a human. And the human would have to determine at some level. So this happens, apparently. It's egregious enough for the people at Google, to alert the police. And shut down his entire account. Shutting down his access to his email. Deleting all of his photos from the beginning of his child's life all the way through. Deleting all of his documents.

GLENN: Okay. So wait a minute. Hang on just a second. If you were trying to catch somebody who was in child porn, the last thing you would want to do is tip them off that the authorities are on to them. So Google just -- they call the police. Then they just delete everything?

STU: At least from his access point. So he cannot access any of his stuff. Now, of course, this means he can't access the photos to prove he's innocent. Because now he no longer has excess to the photos that he took, that were his.

GLENN: What happened to the doctor's office that received the photos?

STU: Well, nothing at this point.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: So this goes on. He goes to Google, and appeals it. And says, look, my kid was sick, the doctor asked for these photos. I sent them. They reject his appeal.

Then months later, he gets a letter from the San Francisco police department. San Francisco police department has alerted him that they have begun an investigation. Have looked at all these photos.

He gets in touch with them, and explains to the San Francisco Police Department, hey, look, this is what was the situation. The Police Department sees all the evidence, and agrees with them. And says, okay. Obviously, no crime here.

He did not commit a crime here. This was not child porn. He was sending them to a doctor. So now you have the dad. You have the doctor. You have the police department, all saying the same thing.

GLENN: And the boy.

STU: And the boy. This is not a crime. There is no abuse here. Seems all appearances. All the evidence that we have. A good dad, trying it help his son, through a difficult moment in his life. The only standout here is Google.

So now the story escalates to the New York Times. The Times comes in, documents all of this. Has actually, apparently looked at the photos now. And has also determined, this is not child porn. Right? So we're sure on this one, it seems. Every point of evidence.

GLENN: I think people at the New York Times might be able to know what child porn looks like.

STU: They may very well be able to do that.

GLENN: So he wanted -- so they've gone through all of this. The dad wanted to sue Google, because, you know --

GLENN: They've shut --

STU: They shut him out. They say no. Even with the word of the police department. They still said no.

So he wanted to sue Google. He realized it was too expensive. He didn't have the money to do it. So he is just basically now in the constant state of trying to get them to change their mind, even with all of this. The Times contacts Google and gets a comment on the record where they say, yeah, we're not reversing it. After all of this. The police department is on the record saying, we have a copy of all of his data, but on a jump track. And they are saying, they want to work with the dad, to get him access to all his information back. But at this point, Google is still denying it.

GLENN: Now, imagine when Google and the United States are in bed with each other more than they already are. Imagine the ESG aspect of this. Dad is put on a list by Google. Google shares information by the government. The government shares information by the banks. Dad does not just lose all of his pictures. All of his contacts. And his Google phone. Dad would lose all phones. Dad would lose his banking. Dad would lose absolutely everything, because he would be too much of a risk.

And who do you go to? Who do you go to?

The New York Times? Who do you go to, to say, hey. I need to get my name off of this list. It doesn't -- now, let me add one additional thing to this. I told you last week, that the World Economic Forum, has said, that bullying and everything else, online and disinformation, misinformation, malinformation is too big of a problem globally.

So they are now pushing for high-tech and governments to endorse a system that would look at your tweet or whatever in question, and the algorithm would decide whether or not that is good or bad. If it's bad, it then makes a tree of everything that you do. So it goes back, and it looks at, who is influencing you?

And if those people -- it deletes you. Then it goes to all of the people with contacts. All of the people in your social media realm. And it looks for anyone else, that is spreading that information. And on each of those people, there's made a tree. And they lose their access. All the way down -- this is according to -- look it up at the WorldEconomicForum.com. Or org. Would you look it up, which one is it. But look it up at the main page of the World Economic Forum. It was there at least last week. Where they were talking about making a tree that would -- I mean, 7 degrees from Kevin Bacon. If this happened with this guy, I guarantee you, it's only a matter of time, before they get my name or your name. Because it trees out. And the World Economic Forum says that it's not enough to get the problem, that is manifesting itself on social media.

They need to see where that idea originally came from. Because they now need to silence ideas, before they get into the bloodstream of the population.

If that's not terrifying, especially coupled with this, that is actually happening. And you have a chance of stopping this. But you won't have that chance to stop these kinds of things. Look at how hard it is to get your name off of a No Fly List. You're on there -- you're on there by mistake. Look how long it took people to get their names off of no fly lists. You can't even find out from the government, if you're on it or off it. What the status is. Or why you're on it or off it.

STU: Yeah. In fact, one of the things that came up in this investigation. They said, well, we've also flagged a video from six months ago.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And we thought that was problematic too.

He's like, well, what video? They're like, well, we're not going to give you access to it. So he can't even defend the video that he supposedly had on his phone.

GLENN: You can't -- you have a right to face your accuser.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: But that's only in governmental law. Back in just a second.

I don't know about you. But I tend to think, that I can immediately tell quality work when I see it. Taking and buying and selling homes, for example. You know the quality work, you know when somebody is going beyond the job that they just have to do. And they love their job. And they're excellent at it. This is a free service to you. To find the people that we think are the best real estate agents, with the best track record. And the -- and the best work ethic in your area. It's RealEstateAgentsITrust.com. Free service to you. You just go there. Say where you are. If you're selling or buying. And if you're moving across the country, or across the street, we'll find the real estate agents, that can help you. RealEstateAgentsITrust.com.
(music)
(OUT AT 9:49AM)

GLENN: This is the Glenn Beck Program. Back to John Solomon. John, I'm sorry to call you back.

JOHN: No problem.

GLENN: I just needed one more question from you. We were talking about the FBI and the warrant and what happened to Donald Trump. I have been hearing from Congress, that they're seeing tons of whistle-blowers come forward. And that gives me kind of hope. You're in a position to know, are we seeing whistle-blowers, and is it -- and is it more than just one or two?

JOHN: Yes, it is. That's a great question. And it's true. We've been writing a lot about it at Just The News. Fourteen separate different Justice Department and FBI whistle blowers, including at least one in the very senior ranks, have come forward to either Congressman Jim Jordan in the House or Senator Chuck Grassley in the Senate, and their allegations were, as we were discussing earlier in the show, that there was this politicization particularly in the Washington field office, where the current raid was conducted by -- the two examples that Chuck Grassley has put out there, that is very clear. An analyst wrote a document, trying to take legitimate evidence against Hunter Biden. And claimed it was disinformation that caused a part of the Hunter Biden investigation. Temporarily closed down in the election. That's one example of a bad politicization going on in the FBI. According to the whistle-blowers. The other is the same office, the Washington field office, opened an investigation on Donald Trump. Not the one we're talking about now, but an earlier one. Without having a proper predicate, meaning there wasn't evidence, much like the case in Russia --

GLENN: Jeez.

JOHN: -- to open up. That's what these guys are talking about, these men and women that are coming forward. Fourteen of them, you're right on the money, Glenn.

GLENN: So that's a good sign. We're seeing more than usual. It's not just maybe the political guys on the other side.

JOHN: Yes. No. I think this is right. This is a greater heartburn among career people.

GLENN: Good. Thank you for that. John, I appreciate it. God bless. John Solomon, of course, is the CEO and editor of chief of Just The News, which is a news site you should go to every day and check the news. That's good news. And, again, I want to encourage anyone -- anyone at any level, if you're seeing it in your city level -- you're seeing it to the FBI level, the NSA, CIA. Please, whistle-blow. We need to know good guys are in there.

100% of FAKE Applications Were Approved! - The Obamacare Scandal that MUST Be Prosecuted

A new GAO report reveals that 100% of fake Obamacare applicants—fake names, fake Social Security numbers, even dead people—were approved for taxpayer-funded subsidies, exposing a system so bloated and politically insulated that fraud has become indistinguishable from function. Tens of thousands of phantom identities received coverage, billions were lost through COVID-era credits, and yet no one in Washington is being held accountable. This isn’t a clerical error—it’s a national crisis. When fraud is routine and oversight is nonexistent, the question becomes unavoidable: is this incompetence or a system designed to fail?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There is a story going on right now. That -- that shows you what happens when a government grows so massive, so unaccountable, so convinced of its own benevolence. That it can no longer tell the difference between literally the living and the dead.

Now, I want to preface this with I want to give everybody the benefit of the doubt here. But I'm not sure they deserve it.

Let me give you the facts. We now have, in black and white, a new accountability government office report.

It's not some blogger in the basement. You know, this is not me saying it. This is GAO. And it shows that faith people. Phony Social Security numbers. And even the dear departed, were routinely approved for taxpayer funded Obamacare subsidies. Now, I emphasize the word routinely, because what I mean by that is 100 percent of the GAO's fictitious applications were approved.

100 percent!

Every single one that was fake was approved.

Okay?

You could -- honestly, you could have taken a napkin and scribbled the words John Doe. Totally real citizen. Thrown some numbers up for a Social Security number. That you pulled out of a fortune cookie, and the federal government would have said, you've got to send this guy a check.

It says right here, he's a citizen here. They would have sent tens of thousands of dollars to your insurance company to reward the fraud.

Okay? This is not a glitch. This is not a clerical error. This is massive fraud.

Once again. Systemic failure engineered, by design. Protected by politicians and politics.

Funded by your sweat. How long do you have to work every day, to pay for just the fraud?

I mean, it is getting to the point to where it's -- it's obscene.

And honestly, if I don't start seeing people go to jail, I said this -- I will start saying this every day now for the next couple of weeks.
I said at the beginning of the Trump administration.

And when they appointed Pam Bondi, I'm not going to give Pam all the room she needs for a year.

Because you just don't throw prosecutions together. Okay?

But I have seen these investigations going on now, for a year. I have seen these investigations going on in Congress for, what?

Two years! It was happening during their -- the last Trump administration. And it's happening now. I've seen Congress do these investigations. I haven't seen a single person's go to jail. What the hell are you spending my money on? Are you just chasing smoke? Because that's what it seems like, except you keep coming out and saying, oh, my gosh, look at this, look at this. But I never see a name attached to it, and that name also, attached to an indictment.

And I'm sorry. But on the year anniversary, I'm -- I'm going to start coming after Pam Bondi and the DOJ. Because enough is enough. How much time do you need? There's obvious problems here. On multiple fronts. Not just this. And I am really happy to see the DOJ and everybody else, come after, for instance, everybody who was guilty in Minnesota. I want to see jail time. You've taken a billion dollars of the taxpayer's money, and you have just given it away. And in many cases, to terrorists! You've taken literally food out of the mouth of children. You have taken money that was supposed to go for kids with autism. And you've sent it over to Somalia, to Al-Shabaab.

I don't know. I think some people should go to jail.

And I am not happy, if it's just the people who are at the low end.

I want to see the names that excused it, that covered it up. Because you don't get away with a billion dollar heist. And then this is just one. This is just one. You don't get away with these, without protection high above.

Okay?

So let me go back to what the GAO found here. This is not Minnesota. This is another case, okay?

This is Obamacare. Every fake identity submitted in 2024 was approved. Eighteen out of 20 fake people were still getting subsidized coverage the following year. So they got coverage the first year. They still were getting coverage the next year. One Social Security number, just one, was used for the equivalent of 71 years of coverage in one single year.

So they've got coverage that you -- it would take you 71 years to be able to amass. They got it in one year. That's one Social Security number. 66,000 Social Security numbers received subsidies, didn't match a single living person. 66,000.

58,000 matched Social Security death records. So 66,000 didn't exist. 58,000 did exist. But they weren't out dead, God rest their souls. They didn't need health insurance. Okay. Know

There's upwards of 6 million people who aren't actually within the income category that they're claiming credits as if they were in that income category. Yeah. I -- I don't make enough money, so I should get this.

Oh, really? Except, you do make that amount of money. In certain states, there are three to four times as many people enrolled in 100 to 150 percent of the poverty rate in those $0 plans. There's three to four times as many people enrolled in those states that actually exist in those states.
Three to four times. How do you make that error?

How's this happen?

So these COVID credits have just produced upward of 27 to $30 billion in fraud. This is just in Obamacare. That's it! Oh. But this is going to reduce -- this is going to reduce your payments.

No. It didn't. In fact, now it's just pushing us deeper and deeper into debt. Just in a deeper way than we project. This is not about health care. This is about national survival or national suicide. Which do you choose?

This is about a government program that is so unbelievably bloated. So politically insulated. That they become impossible to distinguish fraud from function.

Hmm.

But maybe that's the point.

That possible?

Glenn Beck Warns of Dangerous Flaw in Proposed Trump Accounts

Glenn Beck breaks down the newly proposed “Trump Accounts” and explains why this seemingly good idea hides a dangerous flaw that America has seen before. Drawing parallels to Thomas Paine’s rejected 1797 proposal and the Founders’ refusal to endorse redistribution, Glenn warns that once a federal entitlement is created, it never stops expanding, especially once future administrations take control. He argues that this is a line the Right cannot cross without paying a heavy price in the future. Is America about to open a door it can’t close...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to talk about the Trump, you know, savings account or what is that called. Savings. Trump accounts. I -- I want to talk to somebody. And so they're -- they're lining up today, hopefully for the show today. They're lining up the person that actually was the designer of these Trump accounts.

And I want to -- I want to ask him about, what's the difference between this and Thomas Paine?

You know, Thomas Paine. Do you know what it was called? When he -- he suggested it in 1797 and it was basically a Trump account. When you turned -- and, I think, let me look at this here.

Was it 1521? I can't remember.
Yeah, at age 21, for a start-in life, you got 15 pounds. That's about $3,000 today.

Then you get 10 pounds per year after 50, for a retirement.

The problem was, the Founders, they rejected this -- just, right wholesale. Just nope!
It didn't get very far. And that's because they were like, no, you're raising taxes. On, what? Inheritance.

If you had money, they wanted to add a 10 percent tax to what you were going to pass to your children. So then that would go to others. And they were like, that's redistribution of wealth. We have no right to do that. No right to do that.

At all. So, no. We're not doing it. But you know what they called it?

You know what Thomas Paine called it? You want to talk about things just repeating over and over and over again.

He called it agrarian justice. It was social justice.

It was farm justice. Land justice.

Isn't that incredible?

STU: Yeah. The whole thing makes me very nervous.

I have to be honest with you.

You go back, obviously to the historical basis of it.

It doesn't seem. Like, a founder liked it.

It's not without any bases in our history.

GLENN: Thomas Paine was not a founder.

No. No. No.

It's very -- and I learned this.

It's actually a tight group. To be a Founder, you had to be one of them that signed the Declaration of Independence, or helped write it.

And also, the Constitution!

So to be a Founder, you had to be involved in one of those two moments. And he wasn't.

He was very important.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: But he was not a Founder.

STU: I do think of him in that category.

As an influence. But not maybe technically accurate.

GLENN: Influence. Okay.

STU: I think about the modern consequences of it as well.

Because, yeah. Sure, we can say it's a thousand dollars now. What happens when God, Gavin Newsom gets control of this program. What happens when, you know, some leftist, they're going to -- every Congress is going to have a new argument about how they want to expand that accounts. Not thousands. It's 3500. It's 6200. It's 8500. It will continue to go up, year after year after year after year. And it will be almost impossible to oppose.

GLENN: So here's where it did pass. It passed in the 1860s. Something like his agrarian justice passed. But it was called the homestead act.

And that was different because we wanted to settle the West. We had all of this land. We wanted to settle. And so we would give you the land. But you had to work and improve the land.

So the government. The country got something out of it. We had all this land, you can go settle it.

You can have a plot of land. However many acres. But you have to do something with it. You have to improve the land, because that will improve everybody ever seen lot in life. Okay?

The next thing that we did that was like this, was GI Bill.

But if you were in war, you got education. You did something for that. You weren't just born.

That's the problem with these things.

You can't just say no. Because then it becomes a right. And rights continue to grow and grow and grow. Rights are given by God. You don't have a right to this.

STU: Is there a reason -- there's a reason why the left keeps saying health care is a right. Right?

GLENN: Yeah, exactly right.

STU: Because once people are convinced of that, they can grow it to any level -- and have any level of control over you and your money.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

STU: But there is a movement on the right, that is relatively defined at this point. I'm curious to see where Mike Lee is on the accounts. Senator Mike Lee from Utah, at times, talks about certain tax breaks, making for families and trying to improve those. And his -- the opinion there. And I think this is a growing movement on the right. Which is, we need to take steps through the government, to encourage the nuclear family.

To encourage things we think are good. Right?

The government should step in and work toward goals, that are -- that we believe are good. Rather than just letting the free market kind of run itself. And that's been a debate on the right obviously. That's been going on for the past few years. Do you happen to know where Mike Lee is on that?

GLENN: I just texted him. I'll see if he texted me back there.

STU: I was going to Google it. I'll just text him. That's much better.

GLENN: I guess I could Google.

STU: Yeah, no.

GLENN: He's probably like, why don't you just Google it?

STU: That --

GLENN: It will be easier to have you write it to me.

STU: It is an interesting thought. Because I think the motivation here by Trump is -- is good, right?

He's trying to say, hey, kids, get a positive start in life.

GLENN: No.

STU: Obviously savings is good. Sometimes parents start off on the wrong foot, they're not able to save for their kids. I get the motivation being good. Obviously, we could see how this spirals out of control. It's not the way the government is supposed to run in my view. The concern level for me on these is massively high.

GLENN: And rightfully so. Because you're absolutely right. What it starts as is not necessarily what it's going to end as.
And what other doors open up because of this.

And that's -- that's my biggest concern -- so he says I haven't spoken about them.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: But between you and me. So I'm not going to tell you. Between you and me.

STU: I was going to say, please just don't just read this text cold.

GLENN: No. When we get into the break, I'll write it back. With what can I say about your opinion?

STU: Yeah. That's interesting.

GLENN: It's the interesting. What I'm reading from him is actually interesting.

STU: Tilt that screen.

GLENN: Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

But, anyway, yeah.

I mean, the -- the idea is noble. And it is good.

It's -- it's honestly.

It's -- it's a little like getting rid of the filibuster.

If you return the filibuster back to what it was, before the progressives destroyed it. So you had to stand up, and you had to make your case.

And as long as you could stand there, you can make your case, and you can stop things. But the progressives got rid of all that. Okay?

Now, you don't even have to stand there.

Just vote on a filibuster.

Yeah. I don't even know. But if you want to return it to the way it was. Which was nothing, but a break. It was not a stop.

It was a break.

So you could -- you could slow the system down, so people could go, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute.

I disagree with this. You know, let's -- let's rally the people. And let's rethink this.

That's good.

But to get rid of it, it might be good for us right now. I can guarantee you, it will be very bad for us in the future.

Because you're not going to have control of the House and the Senate.

You're just not. And when they have it, I mean, that's what they wanted to do. And we were against it. And we were against it because we know what they would have done with it. Well, you're going to have it. And then, what?

And then when you lose it, what do you think they're going to do with it?

You just can't cross these lines. Because it -- it will come back to roost with you. And you won't like it. This is why -- this is -- we say this all the time.

You can't -- the Constitution cuts both ways. You know it's Constitutional -- you know, when you look at something and go, oh, I really want that to happen, but it's not constitutional. Okay.

Then we don't do it. Because the Constitution will slap you in the face sometimes. And be your best friend the other time. It cuts both ways. It doesn't cut the way you always want it to.

That's the problem. People try to make the Constitution. And our system into something that always serves us.

Well, it doesn't.

It will serve the other side. It will serf the purpose that is across to your purpose every once in a while.

But it's steadfast.

It's always based on something real, and eternal. Not your emotions. Not what you want to happen. But what is the best system of fairness man has ever devised. And once you start getting into the mix of that. You are going to screw everything up.

And that is why our country is in the mess it's in.

STU: I think, Glenn, too. When you break the seal for a thing like Trump accounts. You just wind up with all.

Medicare is a good example of this to me.

Medicare is this program. Obviously, even though a Democrat started it. Like, in theory, outside of their behind the scenes motivation of wanting to expand the government and all of that.
Of course, it's a good motivation for health care for seniors. Right? Of course.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: And also, I will say this, you know, when Medicare Part D comes out.

Which is the medicine, prescription drugs.

And that was a massive expansion of Medicare. That happened under a Republican.

And while I don't want that massive expansion, once you have Medicare, how is there not a Medicare part D? How is there not a prescription drug part of it?

GLENN: So that is my case, and we're seeing it now. Once you have Obamacare. Once you have universal.

Then you have the right to tell people. You must tell people, you can't have that food!

You can't have it. Because it's costing all of us money.

Your health is now -- it now involves all of us.

So now, how do you have that? It's just this horrible slope, that once you start going down. It's logical. You just to have logically think it all the way through. And not say, that will never happen.

Because it always does.

PREVIEW: George AI tells me the ONLY way to SAVE America

Glenn Beck previews his upcoming interview with George AI, an artificial intelligence he's creating for The Torch using ONLY writings from the founding era. And George has some incredible advice for how to save America ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. I was at Mar-a-Lago last night. I've been trying to help raise funds for several organizations. I've been speaking at several fundraisers at Mar-a-Lago over the last couple of weeks. And it's -- it's an amazing thing to see how many people are just deeply, deeply engaged in saving our nation. And, you know -- you know, our -- our life. Our -- our fortune, and our sacred honor, comes to -- comes to mind.

The denegation of people. Last night, I was there, for the American Journey Experience. Which is an offshoot of Mercury One.

It's our history section. We announce that we are building a museum. A brick and mortar museum. We begin early next year.

And we had some really exciting things to say about that. We'll give you updates on that, as it goes. But we would love to have -- right now, you can come into a very small museum. I think we have -- I don't know. Maybe 10,000 square feet. I think our vault is 5,000 square feet. And, you know, we invite people in to see some of the things.

It's really by invitation only. Or if you call Mercury One, you can get in. But we will open up the museum. And it's not just a museum, it's also the teaching center.

So we were talking about that last night, and last night, I introduced for the first time, George AI. The interaction that I had with AI. Now, remember, this is proprietary technology. And information.

This is based on the library, that we have. Which is the third largest collection of founding documents in the world.

Only behind the national archives, and the library of Congress.

And it's all original sources. So it's all the writings of the Founders. All of the -- all of the writings that influence them. That we know, from their writing, they read this. Or they were basing these things on these different items.

It's the Federalist papers. It's all of the documents. It's all of their letters to each other. It's their personal writings.

It's the Bible. It's Blackstone's law. It's all of the things that they had access to that influenced them.

In a positive way, to build America. And we have George, which is the librarian.

And George is going to be a -- a system that will be able to give you answers to things.

And show you the actual documents.

But will be able to speak to you, in your own language. If you try to read the Founders now, it's so hard!

Because they were so smart! They're using words, like, I don't even know what that means.

And when you read the Founders, you usually to have read it with a dictionary, side by side.

It's difficult. And their language is so formal.

So it's hard for us to relate to them. But all of the knowledge, this deep, deep knowledge is there from these guys.

Ritually, they wrote.

I'm trying to remember, is it George Washington?

One of them wrote at a 70th grade level.

Seventieth grade. You know, and so they're just way advanced. Way advanced. We put all of this information into our own system. This is an AI system built by me and my team.

And it has pretty much like, if you will, an electric fence around it. It cannot go and pull information from the outside. And mix it, with the information from the inside. So it can go and we can import things and say, hey. I want you to look at this bill, and tell me, is this bill even constitutional?

What would the Founders even say about this bill?

And it will look at that bill, and then it will go through all of their, you know, discussions and everything else. Everything that is in that system, memorized from start to finish. Which starts hallucinations. And it will analyze that bill. Or it will analyze that story.

Or you can say, hey. I want my kids to understand the Bill of Rights.

In George AI, right now, is I don't even know how many thousands of sermons there are, from the pulpit, where the churches where these guys attended.

Because almost everything from the declaration and Bill of Rights came from the pulpits.

And it's amazing, when you read some of these sermons that these guys gave.

It will be on, you know, the right to life, liberty, and property.

I mean, that will be the sermon.

And today, everybody will be like, oh, I can't say that from the pulpit.

We have all these sermons that our laws were based on. These whys were based on.

And so you can ask him anything.

And so when you sit down, for the very time, and you're going to talk to George Washington or a reasonable facsimile of him, when you ask him -- my question was, we fed in all the conditions of what's happening in America today. And I wanted to have a conversation. And here's a bit of the very first conversation with George AI. Listen.

VOICE: George, we have programmed a lot of information and given you a lot of information on what's going on in today's America. Based on your writing and the writings of the rest of the Founders, what do you feel like is the biggest problem or where we should start to fix things?

VOICE: If I may speak plainly, my countrymen, the danger -- the greatest danger in our republic lies not in foreign arms or.

GLENN: May I stop you for a second. Can you dumb it down just a little bit.

VOICE: Okay. I do have 29 points and they're all referenced to exactly what we said in the past.

VOICE: Just in today's language. Okay. Okay. I get it.

Let me speak to Americans. If I'm honest, America's biggest problem isn't political or economic. It's all moral. You've drifted from the virtues that make liberty possible in the first place. Freedom. To be free, you have to discipline. You have to have faith. You have to have character.

And if you don't have any of those things, laws -- laws can't stop anything. And I mean little government terms, either weak or oppressive.

You have grown skeptical of truth. You're reckless with debt. You're comfortable blaming instead of building anything. And this my time, we've understood that self-governance begins with self-control. Do you even recognize what self-control is?

Public virtue matters more than public opinion. You keep electing these people, expecting things to change, but you haven't changed. The fix is not going to be found in Washington, DC. It's going to be found in every home, every school, every heart.

You know, where are the citizens who value duty over comfort? Principle over popularity?

America was built to be a moral and self-governing nation. It's only that foundation that will still save her.
(music)

GLENN: Beginning January 5th, on the Torch. You can find information at Glenn Beck.com. You'll notice he started speaking. Because this is what you will see. At the beginning, I will have to do the interviews with him. Because compute power is so expensive.

And we'll ask you to write in. In fact, you can do it now. The Torch at GlennBeck.com.

What would you like to learn from the Founders. What would you like the children to learn from the Founders.

Would you like a posts from the Founders, on the Bill of Rights, or the Federalist papers. Or whatever.

What would you ask, if you could ask the Founders a question, what would you ask them.

At the beginning, because of compute power, we will be feeding those in. Examine then producing and rolling out every day, different podcasts or answers or whatever, from George AI. I -- I pray and I hope, and I'm -- and I'm -- I have pretty good advisers on what we're going to be able to do. And it depends on how many people are -- are using it. And -- and, you know, if we get people to help us in support.

Compute power, the cost of it will go down.

And we'll be able to afford bigger amounts of compute. And you'll be able to have a one-on-one conversation like I just did. Have a one-on-one conversation, and you'll notice at the beginning, he came out. Because this is the way. It's trained to give you the actual verbiage. And when he said, I have 29 points. Believe me, because we edited there. He went on.

And, oh, my gosh.

It gets tedious. But he has the 29 points. He can show you the documents. And it's all in his language. Or you can do what I did and say, just speak in language. Dumb this done. This needs to be understood by an 8-year-old.

And it will continue to adjust. You'll eventually, hopefully in the first year in 2026 for the 250th anniversary, you will be -- you will be able to say, I have a 15-minute commute, and I'm taking my kids to school every day. And it takes me 15 minutes to drive to solo.

And they need to understand, whatever it is.

They need to understand the civic responsibilities, they need to understand the
responsibility part of our rights.

Whatever it is. Can you develop a podcast? I need them to understand the Bill of Rights, so I would like to do it in the next ten days.

And it needs to be no longer each episode. Each episode needs to be no longer than 14 minutes. So you get into the car. And it's 14 minutes.

Eventually, when it's coming to you live, it will ask you questions. At the end, it will finish the podcast.

Then it will ask each member. You can say, I have an 8-year-old. 12-year-old.

And me. And I'm 40.

It will each of you questions, just to gauge, did you understand what was just taught?

And if you don't -- if -- if AI decides you don't really have it, you don't understand the real essence of this, it will then rejigger the next posts. So the next time you're in the car, going to and from school, it will adapt to you, to be able to go back and teach it more clearly.

And it will learn you. So it will learn, ah. The deficit is here. Or they're a more visual learner.

They're more of this kind of learner or whatever. They'll understand in stories or they understand just in facts, whatever. It will understand each member. And it will be able to teach them, directly, in their language.

The way they learn. I hope, this is my goal.

Because I feel like I -- I accomplish what I set out to accomplish with TheBlaze. I feel like I've accomplished that a few years ago, and I'm not good at treading water. And I feel like we accomplished our goal of my goal, at least, was to just open a door that others could walk through.
Open the door.

And show America and show talent, that you can start something yourself. You can do this on your own.

And you can present it in a way, that is just as credible and more -- just as, if not more powerful than any of the networks, and you don't have a boss breathing down your neck. You don't have people that you are having to answer to. You can speak your mind and tell the truth as you understand it and chart your own course. Nobody was doing that when I started TheBlaze.

I mean, the only people that had a spine. A backbone, if you will. A digital backbone, that could provide a live network kind of feed was Major League Baseball. They were the only ones. They were the first in to say, we can do a live sports coverage.

I partnered with Major League Baseball and say, can we use your spine? We want to do live news. We did. This is at a time when Netflix was still sending movies through the mail. Now, look at what's happened. So I think we've disrupted the news industry, we've disrupted all of that, destroyed it and reinvented it. This is my next phase of my life, probably the last chapter of my life. I want to do the same thing and disrupt education and the way we learn, and to show you an ethical way to use AI, one that you will not get lost into, it will always remain a tool in your hands, not the other way around.

FACT-CHECK: Is Tim Walz (politically) RETARDED?

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is mad that President Trump called him “retarded”, and that now people are driving past his house and calling him a retard. Glenn looks at the cold, hard facts: Is Tim Walz actually retarded…at least politically?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You're going to be upset by this. You're going to be seriously upset by this, okay? And I'm going to use -- only because I have to. Only because I have to. And 99 percent of me wants to. Okay. I lied. One hundred and two percent of me wants to use the R-word in this particular case. Tim Walz. Tim Walz is upset because the President has called him retarded.

Now, I think he might be retarded. Now, not necessarily, you know, I don't know what his IQ is. Probably pretty low. But I don't know if he's down to 60. But had you seen PQ is definitely under 60. His political quotient is definitely under 60. You know, the guy, hmm, he's, you know, I put him in the category of -- what was his name? Dean. Howard Dean. Yeah! Remember that guy who walked out. We're going to go to Virginia and Kentucky and Minnesota. Yeah!

And you're like, no. Dude, you just lost. You're not going anywhere past here.

I am not sure that he is clinically retarded. But in the playground sense, he's definitely retarded. You know what I'm saying, Stu?
STU: Yeah. Like how, you know, kids used to say it back in the day. Like that --

GLENN: Yeah, the playground.

STU: That general. Certainly, that definition, it would apply to him, I assume.

GLENN: Right. And, remember, that's the same point to where, all of us heard from our mothers, sticks and stones can break your bones, but words will hurt you. Remember? Remember that one? Remember that -- when you were called retarded or whatever on the playground. And you would go home, they called me retarded. And your mom would look at you like, yeah, well, maybe you are.

Or she just immediately said to you, sticks and stones will breaking just remember that. Just remember that, son. Words can never hurt you.

It doesn't matter what they say about you. We don't say that anymore.

STU: It was pretty good advice. Especially with the internet in mind. I don't think that's what our parents thought of at that time.

But it's much, much worse. And much more people seem to be affected by the words are violence sort of thought process. Like, that is -- that is real these days.

GLENN: I -- I also have a problem with a guy who, you know, surrounds himself with people who call the president a Nazi. I don't know. Which one is worse? A Nazi or a retarded?

STU: Yeah. Nazis were really bad. That's actually a serious accusation.

Fascist is another one.

Pretty serious accusation.

GLENN: Yeah, or just weird.

STU: I was just about to say that. That is exactly the reason he was on the ticket is because he was name-calling other people, and calling them weird.

It was his only qualification outside of he's -- you know, massively inept and corrupt.

All the other things that would, of course, qualify him to be on a democratic ticket. Outside of that. The only reason he stood out from all the other loser Democrats. Is that he said the word weird on TV once.

And Kamala Harris, who has admitted that the reason that she made. Or at least the day she made that decision. She was, quote, unquote, overtired. Why would you point that out?

I don't understand. But that the only theoretical reason he was on the ticket was because he was calling people names. He called them weird.

Which was another school -- was another like school play ground, like insult back in the day.

You're weird.

GLENN: Yeah, weirdo.

STU: Yeah. Weirdo.

Yeah, that was the way it was.

And so he's able to enjoy the benefits of calling people childish names.

But when he gets called those names, it gets really scary for him.

GLENN: I know. Well, he hasn't listened to his mother. He thinks words can actually hurt him.

Now, Stu, do we know, does he agree, does he agree with the -- the state senator that says that Minnesota won't survive without Somalians?

Can we play this, please?

It's cut four.

VOICE: State Senator Zaynab Mohamed said these attacks will stop with Somalis, and their contributions can't easily be erased.

VOICE: We are in every industry. And Minnesota will not be able to survive, nor thrive without Somalis.

STU: Hmm. Really? Is that accurate?

That the -- the state of Minnesota cannot survive without the Somali community.

Now, my understanding was that they are relatively new to the state, which has survived for a very long time before their arrival.

I would also note, Glenn. And you might be able to help me with this one.

This one, we will get deep here. And I understand at times, the audience hears us get deep into science and mathematics.

GLENN: Oh, we're known for that. We're known.

STU: We're known.

And I understand sometimes it will be confusing. You're driving to work. Hearing all these numbers.

Maybe if you looked at them on a spreadsheet, you would be able to recognize what's going on.

When you're in your car, it's hard to internalize all of this.

I'm going to try to lay it out. Because I don't understand it. And maybe you do.

What we understand is about a billion dollars of fraud, not all of it from the Somali community. But the vast majority seemingly coming from the Somali community. And then the comeback to that was that Somali community pays about 67 million dollars in taxes, every year.

So can you do the math on this?

One of the numbers is a billion. And the other one is 67 million.

Which one do you think is more important?

Which one is higher. Do we need to get AI.

GLENN: Tim Walz. Tim Walz.

67 million.

STU: 67 million. Or a billion. That's the question. Which one is larger?

GLENN: Four.

You mean with four?

Four.

STU: Now, if you think about it, Glenn, the first number in both of those. Like 1 billion, the first number is a one.

67 million, the first number is a 6.

GLENN: Six is bigger than one!

STU: Right? Six is bigger than one. Six is bigger than one!

GLENN: That's what's going on here.

GLENN: I would say. I would say, there are 933 reasons to say, anyone who says that that math works out. Is retarded.

Okay? It doesn't work out. Now, look, even though, they generate $500 million every year.

Okay. All right. And then they give back out of that, their taxes. Out of that.

Which this itself, it doesn't make sense to me. $500 million in revenue is what they generate. But then they pay in taxes $67 million. But what we're missing here is the $1 billion of fraudulent money being taken from the taxpayer.

So the 500 million doesn't do anything.

Okay?

STU: Still smaller.

GLENN: Still going to the Somali community.

Half. Half.

Dare I say it. Half of the size of what they just -- yeah. Okay.

I don't know. Can Grok do that? That's like a ten-year problem.

Ten-year problem!

Anyway, you have half. That number doesn't even -- you have 1 billion that's been stolen. 67 million that has been paid in taxes. That leaves $933 million, that is a deficit.

That -- you remain -- $933 million in the hole. I think we can survive without that. You mean -- I mean, sure, we don't get your 500 million.

But that's -- that's okay. That's okay.

Because we would have a billion dollars, that you didn't take.

STU: Yeah. That's right. I think we would be ahead. And, by the way, that's if -- that's if we took every Somali and just lumped them into this, which is not.

I'm sure there are some Somalis that are, you know, part of that 500 million, that are not crooked.

STU: I'm sure.

GLENN: They can stay. They're fine.

STU: I'm certain of that. In fact, I would argue, those are the people likely paying the 67 million people in taxes.

The people who were stealing all the money. Weren't paying taxes on it, which is kind of the problem. In fact, all that money that came from the state was specifically designed so they don't have to pay taxes on it.

The programs were designed, of course, when you're talking about a low income person, right?

You're not going to charge them taxes on their autism treatment. Of course, those weren't really treating kids with autism. So the actual productive members of this society, were instead paying those taxes to fund the corrupt Somalis who were stealing all the money.

And, you know, again, we've made this point a million times. And I think it holds here. Maybe treat people like individuals, right?

Maybe don't -- don't -- people -- there are members of the Somali community, that I'm sure are very important to -- to the -- to the state. They probably are great. Probably great people in that community.

I can tell you, we know with these charges. That there were a lot of people that were not living up to that expectation. Those people should be punished.

We shouldn't hide from it. We shouldn't act as if this isn't a massive problem from this group people. Charge the people responsible for it. Stop acting like we need them to survive. We don't need criminals survive as a country or a state.

GLENN: Let me just -- I have to go back to Tim Walz being upset about the retarded thing.

Play cut two, please.

VOICE: This creates danger. And I'll tell you what, in my time on this, I had never seen this before. People driving by my house and using the R-word in front of people. This is shameful. And I have yet to see an elected official, a Republican-elected official say, that's right. It's shameful. He should not say it.

Look, I'm worried. We know how these things go. They starts with taunts. They turn to violence.

STU: Taunts! Founder of the taunts of weird.

GLENN: That's weird.

STU: Thinks that that taunt can lead to violence. That's so strange.

GLENN: Who is living in the world of, he's a fascist Nazi.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Okay. Now suddenly, and I've never seen this.

I've never seen anything like this, Stu.

Never seen anything like this. I'm in my house, and people are driving by my house, rolling down their windows, and just screaming "retard" out.

That's going to lead to violence. That's going to lead to violence.

STU: Violence.

GLENN: No. No. It's not nice. And it's wrong. Jesus wouldn't have done it. But I don't think Jesus had to put up with all these retards as politicians, quite honestly.

I mean, I can't -- I can't answer for that. I don't know.

STU: I --

GLENN: I'm not a Biblical scholar or scientist or mathematician.

STU: We've learned that. We can't even tell numbers apart.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But I will say, while you're right, it's obviously not -- I wouldn't tell my -- teach my children to behave that way.

GLENN: No. It is shameful. It's not right. It's not right.

STU: I will say, it's wrong to do. I will also say, it's objectively funny, picturing Tim Walz looking out his window and hearing people yell the R-word at him when he's going out to get his mail.

And people -- like, it's an objectively funny scenario.

GLENN: Every time. It is. It is. It is funny.

STU: It's bad. It's wrong that it's funny. But it's objectively funny.

GLENN: No, it's horrible.

STU: But it's objectively funny. There's no way -- there's no way to read it.

Look, I'm sure the left laughed, because -- think of what they did with J.D. Vance. They called him weird, right?

Because he ran, came up from a very poor upbringing. And rose to the levels of -- high levels of wealth and achievement and power.

They called that weird.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: That he loved his family.

And they -- they celebrated.

GLENN: We call that the American dream.

STU: Yeah. That used to be the American dream. Now it's weird. They, of course, yell this all the time.

They make the meme of him looking like you would say, potentially retarded would be the example of the meme they've created, to mock J.D. Vance.

They constantly mock him with this. But that doesn't lead to violence. Calling people Nazis don't lead to violence.

Despite the fact that we have seen the president of the United States, taking a bullet after all of this has happened. We saw a Charlie Kirk get assassinated at a stage. After people said that about him.

But it's the R-word being yelled at Tim Walz when he goes to get -- when he waddles out to get his mail.

That's the thing we're supposed to be concerned about?

No. No.

GLENN: I mean, I don't want to see this in real life. I don't want this to happen.

Because it is wrong. But I do want somebody to create an AI reproduction of just some kids driving by.

And he's in his fuzzy slippers getting newspaper in the morning.

And these kids, like in American graffiti, going, hey, retard.

I mean, I do kind of want to see that. I do. I do. Yeah. It's wrong. It's wrong of me.

All right.