RADIO

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.

Glenn DESTROYS The New York Times for calling The Constitution a THREAT
RADIO

Glenn DESTROYS The New York Times for calling The Constitution a THREAT

A new New York Times op-ed titled “The Constitution Is Sacred. Is It Also Dangerous?” may be the most delusional thing Glenn has read in a while. Glenn reviews the article, which suggests that the Constitution may be a threat to “America’s politics” (hint: IT IS, and it’s supposed to be), that the Constitution may be to blame for Trump, and that our founding document “could hasten the end of American democracy.” Glenn also spots an argument that’s right out of the far-left’s contingency plan for if Trump won in 2020: The Transition Integrity Project. In the end, Glenn points out that the Times isn't the first to suggest that the Constitution is dangerous ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The New York Times just released an op-ed, the America's Constitution is sacred. But is it also the biggest threat to our politics?

Bum, bum, bum. Yes! It actually is a threat to our politics! Yes! As it should be a threat to our politics. The United States Constitution is in trouble. After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. Really? Is that when it became in trouble, Stu? I mean, I'm just. I'm thinking back. I'm thinking back. You know, a little bit before Donald Trump. Like, I don't know.

Woodrow Wilson. And I've been thinking, the Constitution has been in trouble since about then. Maybe it's just me?

STU: Yeah. That doesn't seem like it was a little bit earlier, considering the words of Woodrow Wilson, who tried to basically do to the founding documents, what happened to that neighbor's mountain.

Like, it just -- light it on fire, and watch it burn.

GLENN: Yeah. That was it. By announcing his desire to throw a Donald Trump.

To throw off Constitutional constraints, in order to satisfy his personal ambitions, Trump was making his authoritarian inclinations abundantly clear. Now, let me ask you.

Who is the one that is currently talking about the redesign of the Supreme Court?

I mean, by the way, I just want you to know, that's what dictators always do.

That is the last step to a banana republic. That is the point of no return.

When you -- when you have the president, or the Prime Minister, or whoever.

Change the makeup of the Supreme Court.

That's the last straw. Now, which one of those is doing that?

STU: Glenn, we're just talking about a return to normalcy.

That's all that is.

That whole renovating the Supreme Court into something that has never existed is a return to normalcy.

GLENN: Yeah. May I ask you, Stu. Isn't this exactly the same thing they did with Joe Biden?

They ran him, and he didn't talk to the press. He never was in front of people.

He was in his basement.

When he was out. He was always on prompter.

And then they just made the case, that he was normal.

He was just like you. He was for all the things you are for. Just a return to normalcy.

That's exactly what they're doing. Again, America!

Come on.

Really.

STU: Yeah. And again, it's important to understand the return to normalcy. Just purveys this throughout the entire campaign.

For example, the return to enormous, of having debates that go through the presidential commission on -- on debates. Remember that whole thing?

That's now basically defunct, because the president of the United States, decided he was going to be cocky. And cancel one of the debates.

Leave the normal format, and then taunt his opponent about it, and lose so badly that he had to end his political career.

And then the person who took over for them, not only didn't go back to the commission and say, hey. Let's start this up again. Let's do three things.

No, no, no. She just had the one that was already there. And tried to change the rules of that.

Then also taunted the opponent in the debate. Let's see if she shows up. Because that would be I think the most normal thing possible.

GLENN: Well, you forgot the most normal part of that story. That is getting the nomination without a single vote cast for her.

STU: Yeah. Normal. Normal, guys.

GLENN: Totally normal. Constitutional.

And totally normal. And, really, what people are demanding.

Anyway, it's no surprise, then that liberals charged Trump with being a menace to the Constitution, but his presidency and the prospect of his re-election have also generated another very different argument. That Trump owes his political assent to the Constitution, making him a beneficiary of a document that is essentially anti-democratic. Wait. Wait. Wait.

You say we're a democracy, okay? You said, we've always been a democracy. What would make us a democracy, would be the Constitution.

But we're not a democracy. The Constitution says we have democratic attributes. But we are a republic. And now you're calling this an antidemocratic document?

I mean, after all, Trump became president in 2016, after losing the popular vote. But winning the electoral college.

Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. You're not going to believe. You're not going to believe this, Stu.

He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court for him article three. Two of whom were just confirmed by senators representing 44 percent of the population. Article one. Whose three justices helped overturn Roe vs. Wade. A reversal that most Americans disagreed with. Imminent legal scholar, Erwin Chemerinsky. Yes. I love Erwin Chemerinsky. They put him in place, long time ago.

He's great. He's an eminent scholar, and he's worried about opinion polls showing a dramatic loss of faith in democracy.

It's never been any faith in democracy!

He writes in his new book, no democracy lasts forever. No.

In fact, that's why we're not a democracy. And that's why our Constitution has lasted. When the average Constitution of the world lasts 17 years, ours has survived since 1781.

I don't know. A little longer than 17 years! Anyway, no democracy lasts from her. It's important for Americans to see that the failure stems from the Constitution itself.

Oh, really? Yes, Mr. Chemerinsky, dean of Berkeley Law School.

STU: Of course. That's Kamala Harris' hometown, by the way. I just wanted to point that out. It's not Oakland.

GLENN: No. It's Oakland.

STU: I know she's a daughter of Oakland. But actually, she grew up in Berkeley and Montreal, and then went to Howard University.

And then went to San Francisco.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So you want to talk about a path to normal middle?

GLENN: She's red, white, and blue person.

She, like, screams Constitution and small-town America from Berkeley, California.

STU: Just a heavy emphasis on the red.

GLENN: So...

(laughter)

What are you saying? Red, red, blue. That's who she is? Red, blue. Yes. She's all American. Anyway, he says, he -- Americans have a problem with the Constitution.

And Chemerinsky deemed Berkeley political law school seems to place considerable faith in Constitution, pleading with federal progressives in the book, we, the people. Not to turn backs on Constitution or the courts, but by contrast, no democracy lasts forever.

Markedly pessimistic, asserting that the Constitution, which is famously difficult to amend. It's difficult to amend?

Those should be walk in park! We should be able to -- like mama makes apple pie, when she makes that apple pie, she puts it on shelf. And some neighbor can come and just get it.

I see it in American cartoons. And it should be that easy to amend Constitution.

But it's not. It's very difficult. And he says, what would need to happen is a new constitutional convention.

And in the books, more somber moments. Which I wrote, I entertain possibility of secession.

Vladimir Putin not for secession at all. No. He -- he loves the Constitution of the United States.

And west coast states might form nation called Pacifica.

Red states might form their own country.

But he -- he hopes that any divorce, if it comes, will be peaceful.

STU: Oh.

GLENN: Wait. So hang on just a second.

So this guy is from Berkeley.

And he's talking about Pacifica. Where did I hear this before?

I remember. Before the 2020 election, Stu. The Democrats had some group together, that was going to save America. Remember? In case Donald Trump won. And one of the things they said was, we will have California break up west coast into Pacifica.

California, parts of -- of Oregon. Maybe parts of Washington state. Would become Pacifica.

And that we would break away. And if they didn't want to us breakaway. Then we demand that Trump add two states.

One would be Washington, DC. And the other one would be make a state out of Puerto Rico.

Oh, I remember that now.

Gee!

And what was their problem.

Oh, their problem was, the electoral college.

Which is weird. Because he just didn't mention the electoral college. The prospect of secession sounds extreme, he says. But in suggesting that the Constitution could hasten the end of American democracy.

Chemerinsky is far from alone. Lots of people have got Boris and Natasha, say same thing.

The argument, that what ails the country's politics isn't simply the president or Congress or the Supreme Court, but the founding document itself.

Right?

That's been our problem for the last 250 years?

Thing longest running Constitution, in the longest running republic, in human history.

And that's our problem. All along. That's our problem. Uh-huh.

STU: It's not like we haven't had a good run of success here.

It would be one thing, if we were -- there's an area of outer Mongolia that the United States looked like. And we were a little disappointed in the progress that we had made.

It's kind of the most advanced country ever -- you know, developed. It's -- it's -- it's overseen. This incredible -- you know. All these incredible innovations.

GLENN: Have you looked at it lately. Have you looked at Aurora, Colorado? That's the Constitution's fault.

STU: Oh, when the Venezuelans are taking over the apartment complexes?

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Constitution's fault. How is that Constitution?

Donald Trump.

STU: Yeah.

That's a good point. But you didn't quite -- maybe you need to go a little bit more into depth. Why the words Donald Trump --

GLENN: I won't listen to you, conspiracy theory, anymore. Really honestly.

I'm just looking at this. He says, that the Constitution has incentivized the tyranny of the minority.

It's the Constitution's fault!

You see?

You see? Now, if I remember right, one of the things they put in there, to make sure that there wasn't the tyranny of the minority, was the -- was the electoral college.

That way, California, New York, couldn't dominate everybody in the red states.

You know, kind of what they're doing. And when you talk about tyranny of the minority.

Stu, if it wasn't for -- I mean, it's still a minority. But it's a growing minority.

You know, if it wasn't for 30 percent of all future adults, in America, now claiming to be transgender and gay, and, you know, My Little Pony.

You would say, maybe this is all happening, you know, with the tyranny of the minority.

But no.

No.

STU: Well, that is okay. And as we have talked about, many, many times.

You know, 40. Thirty to 40 percent of the population, being in the LGBTQ population. Is the return to normalcy. We were promised with Joe Biden.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And Kamala Harris. This is -- everything about this is normal.

Everything.

GLENN: Everything is normal. Now, they always say, that they love the Constitution.

But now they fear the Constitution. And they should.

You know, somebody else feared the Constitution.

It was -- I think it was -- oh. King George.

He thought it was a very dangerous document too.

In fact, every dictator, all around the world has thought for the last 250 years. Wow, that's a dangerous document.

But, hey. The New York Times and the left, they love it. That's it why they've just run, is the Constitution -- is the Constitution sacred?

But is it also dangerous? Or this story, the Constitution is broken, and should not be reclaimed. Or MAGA turns against the Constitution.

Or we had to force the Constitution, to accommodate democracy.

The Constitution won't save us from Trump.

Or the story in the New York Times, is the Constitution obstructing the American democracy?

Let's give up on the Constitution. Or the headline, the US lacks what every democracy needs. Or this is the story how Lincoln broke the US Constitution.

They love it!

Why RFK Jr.’s former running mate chose Trump over the Democratic Party
RADIO

Why RFK Jr.’s former running mate chose Trump over the Democratic Party

RFK Jr.’s former running mate, Nicole Shanahan, has thrown her support behind Donald Trump in the 2024 election. She joins Glenn to explain why a liberal like her has endorsed Trump over Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party. Shanahan lists her biggest issues with the current Democratic Party, including why she no longer believes the Democrats are the party of true liberals. Plus, she reviews her viral “TDS” ad and explains how to cure people of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the program, Nicole Shanahan. We are thrilled to have you on, Nicole. How are you?

NICOLE: Hi, I'm very good, Glenn. How are you doing?

GLENN: I'm good.

You know, I'm excited on it talk to you for multiple reasons. But we're not going to really talk about policies.

Because I'm sure we disagree a lot on policies. But there is a -- there is a bigger umbrella, that we both really agree on.

And that is the Bill of Rights.

And what is happening to our country right now. Can you take us from where you were, when you first signed up with RFK? And what changed you to the point, to where -- you're now saying, yeah. I mean, Robert is right. He should be running with Trump.

NICOLE: Uh-huh. Yeah. You know, I have been, I'm a lifelong California Democrat, liberal.

And worked really hard, over the last 15 years of my life. To try to do the right thing.

Create, you know, a merit-based society.

I've -- I do it with a lot of love.

I do it with a lot of desire.

And I do it with a lot of science as well.

I'm an AI developer.

In Silicon Valley. Affiliated with Stanford now for over ten years, went to law school, in Silicon Valley. Was an IP lawyer. Entrepreneur.

So I -- you know, was very comfortable within the Democratic Party for many years.

But I have to say, something happened in 2016, that started a cascading series of events. That has led to amorphous, in the Democratic Party, that make it immoral, in my opinion.

Unprincipled. Lacking honesty, lacking transparency, lacking competence.

And they feel entitled, to throw away revery important principles. Principles like the Bill of Rights. Principles like the, you know, our First Amendment. Free speech.

Principles like not using sabotage in Democratic processes.

It's -- and they feel entitled, entirely.
And I've done this investigation.

I did this investigation. Prior to leaving for the party. Because I tried to reform the party.

I tried for years, to find someone at the DNC.

You know, they gutted, you know, any real leadership, at the DNC.

They put in, a guy who is just -- you know, they don't even bother to talk to the official leadership of the DNC. Because they think it's irrelevant.

It's just a carry along program now.

It's just a carry along group, that is just almost an administrative pocket, for the Pelosi contingent.

And so I -- saw it falling apart from the inside. With a great deal of concern.

And, you know, at some point, as a donor, they kind of just push you into a corner. And they say, well, if you don't want Donald Trump, you have to support us.

And that's their bottom line. That's all they have left, as a policy.

Is not Donald Trump.

And my last response, in the weeks before I left the party, was that is not a policy. That is not leadership.

GLENN: Yes.

NICOLE: You can't run on a platform of not Donald Trump.

GLENN: Nicole.

NICOLE: And, you know. Oh, go on.

GLENN: It amazes me, that so many people, are willing to say, to the person who was the lowest ranked vice president, really despised by the -- she couldn't hold anybody in her office.

Her policies were all upside down. For -- for America in 2020 when she was running for president.

And now, people are saying, oh, she's the greatest. Oh, she's great.

They don't care about the policies. They're voting for an oligarchy.

They're voting for a machine. They don't care!

NICOLE: Yeah. And, you know, I think that the thing that makes me really sad is that they're using, these wonderful American sensibilities.

And they're abusing them, to manipulate their voter base. And, you know, she's a woman of color. She -- you know, it's selling that. For everything it's worth right now. And that to me, is the kind of thing that goes against the very liberal principles, that I was raised with.

I was raised with, you know, yes. We should have a social net. We should not be racist.

We should fight for the underrepresented.

But that is not what this is. This has morphed into, something else, entirely.

That tells people, that it doesn't matter, how -- incompetent you are.

If you can check a box of a minority, on a sheet, that is enough.

And you should be celebrated for that fact.

And the -- and that to me, is really sad. And that's why when people say, oh, the Democratic Party is all of these liberal progressives. That's not what this is.

That's actually a form of racism, in my opinion. Because it creates a hierarchy based on race.

GLENN: Yes! It goes against everything Martin Luther King taught. Everything that Martin Luther King taught.

NICOLE: Everything.

And all of the things I was raised on in Oakland as a little girl coming up, and I'm a brownish woman.

Like, I -- like, I have -- I grew up in Oakland. And Oakland public school systems. And you was in a very multi-cultural place. And these are not the principles I was raised with.

So this is coming from someplace else.

And it -- it does ring more closely to what my mother grew up in. With -- in communist China. Which is this single narrative, totalitarianism.

Which uses phrases and slogans.

And really kind of a form of cultural brainwashing.

To really solidify power.

GLENN: So talk to me about -- look, I really don't mind, there's opposition in all things.

And we should be having debates. I don't want my way or the how.

And I'm perfectly willing to accept that America might disagree with me, and go another way. And vote for another candidate.

If we're actually talking about the issues.

You know, if we're actually talking about real policies.

We're not lying to each other, you know. We're not, you know, just operating with chaos. And confusion.

Or, you know, rigging the system.

But that's I think what's happening.

And I don't know how, Nicole, we can reach out to our -- you know, our neighbors. I believe Democrats are good people. I think some of them are bad. Just like some Republicans are bad.

But the average person that lives on my street. That votes differently.

I don't think they want totalitarianism. I don't think they want another war. How do we talk to them, to get them to wake up and go, wait a minute.

This is not what they say they are?

This is -- this is not the democratic party, anymore.

NICOLE: Yeah. I'll just be honest with you, Glenn. My lived experience now, running for office, with RFK Jr., as a third party, and seeing how low the Democrats went and how they qualified their behavior with these beliefs. That, you know, some of them know, are just not true.

Like, let's talk about what Rachel Maddow said about, if Trump wins, he will be a dictator, and he will send people like me to camp.

That is a big statement, for someone on the mainstream media to say.

This is not a joke. And so, people who respect the mainstream media, are watching this. And taking it as truth. And it really -- so, you know, I feel like my job has been trying to take statements like that. And unpackage them for the -- for the Democrats, who are listening to that.

And only receiving their news through those channels. And telling them. I'm really sorry you believe this. It's a scary thing to believe.

I know you believe it fully in your being right now.

But she's lying to you. And let me tell you why.

So I just --

GLENN: Okay. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Can you unpack that for us here? Let me take a break for one minute. Then we'll come back. Then you unpack it. Tell us -- do what you do.

And convince people, who are dead asleep, why that's a lie.

Back in just a second with Nicole Shanahan, in just a second. First, let me talk to you about Lear Capital. You know, everything that is happening right now with the global economy.

You know, we are lucky enough to be in the situation, where we are the world's reserve currency.
But that can destroyed.

And I think it's being destroyed by using Cloward and Piven's strategy of collapsing the system. Just -- just get everybody on to the dole, as much as you can. That's why, you know, we're I guess in California, now. They're just, if you're an illegal. Or you're -- you know, an undocumented, you can now get a loan, through the government.

That's insanity! Insanity!

So what is going to happen?

Well, eventually, we will lose our world reserve currency status.

And that will mean, we will be Venezuela, overnight.

Please, somebody has to have something, when -- when this happens.

And when it's really not a question of if, anymore. I don't believe.

That's why I would like to recommend that you consider putting maybe five or 10 percent of what you have, into gold or silver.

Gold or silver is where the world traditionally always has returned.

It's, you know, the gold standard.

Have some of your life put on a gold standard. $3 billion in trusted transactions at Lear Capital.

They have thousands of five-star reviews. A 24-hour risk-free purchase. They are the leader in precious metals. And please, do your homework.

It's not right for everybody.

But do your own homework. And don't listen to the people who tell you, oh, that will never happen in America. Yeah. It's going to. God forbid.

But it's going to. They'll also credit your account $250 towards your first purchase. Just call them today. 800-957-GOLD. 800-957-GOLD. It's Lear Capital. 800-957-GOLD.

Ten-second station ID.

And then....

GLENN: So how do you convince people, Nicole?

Go through that, and unpack that.

NICOLE: Yeah. So I've been toying with different ways of doing this with my team.

I don't know if you saw the ad we released last week.

GLENN: I love it. Love it.

NICOLE: You know, I had never even heard of that term, until I went on Tomi Lahren, and she used that phrase.

GLENN: Wow.

NICOLE: And after my interview with Tomi, I had to look it up.

GLENN: Wow.

NICOLE: And I thought it was really interesting. Because when I -- when I paired, this idea of like, you know, people are so afraid. Of Donald Trump. For these reasons.

For the reasons, that, you know, Rachel Maddow is propagating.

It really creates a -- an environment of psychosis.

So I try to approach it, in the same way, I approach somebody, who is having a really hard time.

And maybe it's because they don't have full information.

Or they've been shaken by something. Or someone.

Or there's peer pressure around them. And I -- you know, humor always breaks through, that first layer. If you can get people to laugh, they -- they loosen up.

It sends these either happy chemicals through the body.

And it actually opens up the brain for receptivity.

So we -- I was just -- like, we produced that video, for I think under $10,000.

And it's gotten 65 million views.

We didn't have to buy influence or anything.

GLENN: It's fantastic.

NICOLE: We just had to be good. We had to be funny. And we also had to kind of show truth in it. If you go through that TDS commercial, there's a lot of truth in it. We don't mince words.

GLENN: Right.

NICOLE: We're really gentle. We don't even endorse Trump at the end of it. We're just calling for people's independence, to return to them.

Their critical thinking.

And they laugh. Even the Dems, truly showed it to -- laugh. You know, some people were resentful.

There was a -- my father-in-law is actually a never Trumper. And he was a little resentful. But he still chuckled.

So that opened up a conversation. That then allows us to dig a little deeper.

And that next layer is really going, point by point through.

All of the top ten things that Never Trumpers believe. They believe that January 6 was an insurrection, and innocent service members on Capitol Hill died, as a result.

And so you have to unpack that. Megyn Kelly did a really, really good job with that one.

But there are certain facts that are just being kept from Democrats, about January 6th, and the insurrection.

You know, for one, that Trump called for peace.

He said, go forward peacefully.

GLENN: Right.

NICOLE: And then issues around the National Guard not being deployed.

There were so many inconsistencies. And unpacked there at that. You have to do it patiently. There are really smart Democrats. They take time to get through.

But once you get through that first layer of TDS, you can start to be -- the second one is that -- go on.

GLENN: No. Go ahead. No, no, go.

NICOLE: I'll just go through the top three.

GLENN: Okay. All right.

NICOLE: The second one, I keep hearing, about Donald Trump.

Is he's bad for women.

And gays.

And I've had many of my gay community, come to me, and say, how can you be supporting someone who could hurt me.

And I -- my response is, you know, he was actually one of the first presidents on day one, to -- to say gay marriage was okay.

He never attacks gay marriage. And they don't know that. People don't know that. And then reproductive freedoms I hear a lot as well. And this is one in which I think that the Democrats really screwed themselves. Because it -- it was the Supreme Court. The highest court in our nation, handed down effectively constitutional reframing of reproductive freedoms, from being a federal issue, to a state issue.

That's all that happened.

GLENN: Thank you.

NICOLE: That's all that happened.

So when people say, he took away my reproductive freedoms.

And I'm like, what state are you in?

New York. Well, my sister works at Planned Parenthood. I'm like, how many -- how many abortions did she do last year? And they're like, oh, she's done a lot actually.

GLENN: Right.

NICOLE: So I'm kind of just, you know, trying to level it in the most compassionate way I can. Any time you're dealing with somebody, out of fear, the best thing to do is to have compassion.

GLENN: Nicole, I would love to have you for a podcast. I find you fascinating.

And I hope, that more ask more people catch on to what you're doing.

And wake up. Our republic depends on it.

Nicole Shanahan. Thank you. God bless.

Is THIS LOOPHOLE allowing illegal immigrants to vote?
RADIO

Is THIS LOOPHOLE allowing illegal immigrants to vote?

Are illegal immigrants registering to vote in the 2024 election? Glenn speaks with Election Integrity Network founder Cleta Mitchell, who believes “YES, illegals are voting.” Mitchell lays out how it’s happening: “The 2 ways states have historically confirmed identity and residency were driver’s license and social security number. You don’t have to be a citizen to get either of those.” Plus, she explains a massive win for election integrity in Georgia.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome back to the program, Cleta Mitchell. How are you, Cleta?

CLETA: I'm good. How are you this morning?

GLENN: I'm good. I'm very good. Thank you for all of your hard work, and for all the people that are working with you to ensure the election has some integrity. But I want to talk to you first about the Georgia battle against the Democrats.

What is happening in Georgia right now?

CLETA: Well, what we have going on, Georgia seems to always be -- Georgia is always on my mind, I guess. But the -- what has happened is that the state-owned election board is a five-member board that has one member appointed by the Republicans, one member appointed by the state democratic party. Up member appointed by the Speaker of the House.

One member appointed by the lieutenant governor, who is president of the Senate and the chairman is appointed by the governor.

That should be a four to one Republican to Democrat ratio. However, historically, there have always been these Republicans, who vote with the Democrats.

And so the idea is -- how many places do we see this, Glenn?

Everywhere.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. It is just so exhausting. The Republicans are such -- they're just limp noodles. God, they're bad.

CLETA: Exhausting is the best word.

But as of June of this year, we finally have a rule of law, majority. Three, that the Republican appointee, from the state party. The lieutenant governor's appointee. And then in June, the Speaker of the House, replaced his pro-Democrat Republican appointee. With a firebrand, smart, capable, conservative woman.

And so for the first time, we have a rule of law, majority.

Election board members. Who are determined, to -- that the law be implemented. That the Georgia law be implemented.

GLENN: Which is?

CLETA: So they have issues -- which is that -- let's just start with one of the things that the Democrats are going for. A rule that will take effect next week. That requires reconciliation of the ballots, before and the votes, prior to the time when they're certified.

And what that means, is that at every voting location, before those results are set to the county, that voting location, the workers must make -- they must look at the number of voters. Who are shown as having been issued ballots.

And that number must match the number of ballots issued, and that number must match the number of votes, cast in that precinct.

GLENN: That's arise. That's -- I mean, you want to make sure that the numbers match. Wow. Wow.

CLETA: As we say, it's kindergarten arithmetic. But the left is going berserk. Absolutely berserk.

And they are saying, well, it will delay certification. Well, no. It doesn't delay anything.

They just to have make sure those numbers match.

And that the results are accurate.

The Democrats are literally saying, they want speed over accuracy. Now, why would they do that?

GLENN: Okay. Yeah. Especially from the people who say, it may be days before we know.

You know, we have to get used to this new system.

So they want speed.

CLETA: We want to -- we want to receive ballots for two weeks, right?

GLENN: But how hard is it to have a tally sheet of everybody who signed in, and got a ballot, and start numbering them as they come in, one, two, three, four, five.

And look at the counter on the machine and see if they match. I don't think a problem.

CLETA: That's right. But it was a problem. And county after county after county in 2020.


And so they also are taking the position. This is another rule that they -- a new rule. Now, mind you, this is already the state law. Let's not forget that. The statute requires it.

It's just that there's been no procedure in the state board's rule that says, here's how you do this, step by step by step. So this just --

GLENN: You wouldn't think you would need to.

CLETA: You wouldn't think you would need to.

But another rule says, that the members of the board, at every county, you have either a three- or five-member board. It's up to the county.

And it's -- it's a bipartisan board. It's either -- it's either -- it's either three to two, from whatever party controls the county. Because it's appointed by the county party and the county commissioners.

So if you have a democrat county commission as in Fulton County, the Democrats will control. If you have a Republican county commission, as in some of the red counties, the Republicans will control.

But it says, the law -- the state law says that they must -- they take an oath to certify the elections, which -- that it's a true and accurate -- that each of them have to sign.

GLENN: A big deal. Yeah. Kind of like part of the job.

CLETA: Well, yes, except, that Mark Alias, the Democrat's election cheating lawyer, has come up with a theory that he is advancing, and now the left wing, the ABA, their Bar Association -- all these left-wing advocacy groups are advancing this all over the country. Just to say, that these bipartisan boards are just ceremonial. That they have no authority --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

CLETA: I'm not making this up. They have no authority.

The Democrat legislature in Michigan, about a month ago, passed a bill to strip the bipartisan canvassing boards, that has historically performed this role, of looking at the data, and looking at the results. And certifying, agreeing, certifying, that what the administrators, election workers had done, that this is a true and accurate result.

And I -- I call it -- you know I call it. I decide. This is like Fauci-izing the election process. Don't ask any questions. Trust the experts.

Do what we say. And don't look behind the curtain. And that's --

GLENN: So we're talking --

CLETA: That's what they're doing in Georgia.

GLENN: We're talking to Cleta Mitchell. Her website is whoiscounting.us.

But what is happening in Georgia -- and I want to expand this a bit. Are illegals being registered to vote?

CLETA: Yes, they are.

And here's how it's happening. You have -- you have them going into the Department of Motor Vehicles, or whatever it's called in your state.

Department of transportation. Department of driver services.

And you know, 31 years ago, Congress passed a law saying that states must -- at the -- when issued a driver's license, that people must be given the voter registration forms. They must be given those forms at the DMV, or if you go to sign up for food stamps, or welfare benefits. That they -- that wherever people interact with these two types of government agencies, they must be registered to vote.

And so they're -- the end of that law, also requires, that states must accept and use the federal voter registration form.

Well, that form, just has a box, to check.

Are you a citizen?

And we have ample evidence, over a number of years, where people will check the box, no.

I'm not a citizen.

And they get sent over as registered to vote anyway.

Well, now what you have. And I have had reports. People have seen this all over the country.

That they have been going in. These normal people. Going in to get their driver's license renewed.

Or a tag for their new car. And they see these clusters. Of people who clearly don't speak English.

In Michigan, a fellow sent me something that a woman had a big sign around her neck that said, interpreter. And she was taking them in to get their driver's licenses. Or their ID card.

And I have absolutely no reason to think, that they're not automatically being added to the voter rolls, because Michigan has a new law, that if you -- that you have to opt out. You have to opt out, in Georgia.

And these people don't even speak English. How are they even going to know, that they will be added to the voter rolls? Because they're automatically added. And once they get on those voter rolls. It's very difficult to get them off.

And the two ways that states have historically confirmed identity and residency, were with the driver's licenses. And with the Social Security number.

Well, you don't have to be a citizen, to get either of those.

And in 19 states, illegals are issued driver's licenses.

It's been a big push by the ACLU. It's a very big problem.

It's a very big problem. And what we've finally figured out. Go ahead.

GLENN: No, no, no.

CLETA: What we've finally figured out is the only way that -- that the states could, if they wanted to, right now, they could run their voter rolls against the database, that the DMVs have of citizenship, because -- because of the real ID. That the DMVs are required to only issue a driver's license. You know, one of the real ID licenses, to someone who is a US citizen. Or permanent resident. You don't to have be a citizen to get a real ID.

But in Wisconsin, last week, a suit was filed to force the voter rolls to be run against in Wisconsin, by the Department of Transportation database.

They have said, they have acknowledged publicly, that they have citizenship data.

But so far, the Democrat regime in Wisconsin has refused to run those -- to run the databases to see who on the voter rolls is a non-citizen, and then require them to come in and provide proof of citizenship to be able to stay on the rolls and vote.

It's a very big problem.

GLENN: All right. So Cleta, in listening to this. I can imagine the average person says, it's already taken.

It's done. They've already won. Because they're going to cheat. And it doesn't matter anymore.

And if they're not saying it now, they will say it by the episode of this election season, if things look shady. Which I can't imagine that they won't. Just because of the number of illegals.

So what do we do, to help shore this up?

Every American, Republican, Democrat, independent, should all be on board. With making sure there is no funny business, in a blue state or a blue district, or a red district.

It doesn't matter. Nobody should be voting that shouldn't be voting.

And every vote should be counted, that should be -- should be counted. That is an actual voter. All of this fraud.

So when we come back, will you just tell us, how we can help. It's Cleta Mitchell. She's with Election Integrity Network. She's the founder of that.


So Cleta Mitchell is with us. She is the election integrity network founder. And we've been talking about Georgia, and some of the other places. All of these -- all of these swing states are so important right now. She's with whoiscounting.us?

So what do we do, Cleta?

CLETA: Well, there are a couple of things. Specifically talking about a noncitizen voting. We have formed a national coalition, and people can sign up at -- it's called.

It's www.onlycitizensvotecoalition.com, and you'll get the weekly newsletter. And we have a national working group, that meets virtually, every Thursday at 11:00 a.m. Eastern time. And we are having a -- we are going to sponsor a national Only Citizens Vote Week.

And that will be September the 15th through the 20th. We have resources. People can download. We'll have full kits by next week, where people can download, take them to your local printer. Print signs. Go -- go to your local DMVs, and find out. Talk to the manager. Say, what are you doing?

Making sure that you're not inadvertently or deliberately registering non-citizens. Going to election boards. We will have step-by-step instructions about what people can do, talking to their county commissioners, going to their state legislators, calling on their governors, and their secretaries of state. We have specific action plans to create visibility, and, you know, the reason we pick that week, is because September 17th Tuesday of that week.

Is the take we -- it's national Constitution day. It's the day we commemorate the ratification of the Constitution.

And it is to say, if you are a citizen, voting -- the duty and the privilege of voting, belongs to you. From our Constitution.

From our beloved US Constitution.

You must register. You must vote if you're a citizen. But if you're not a citizen, it is illegal for you to vote in a US election.

And we want to -- we basically, Glenn, have to build a national neighborhood watch. I'm calling it like the national DMV watch, to try to make sure -- if we put enough eyes and enough noise and enough people saying things, talking on local radio, talking to their -- writing letters to the editor.

It will deter some bad actors. It will. That's why they -- that's why neighborhood watch is important. Is that it changes the law. It's just people watching in their neighborhoods. And saying, we better be watching in our neighborhoods.

About these left-wing NGOs. Nongovernmental organizations. That are bringing illegals all over our country.

Into the communities. We need to be watching, how is that translating into registrations of new voters, illegally in my county?

GLENN: All right. It's Only Citizens Vote --

CLETA: Coalition.

GLENN: What's the word? Coalition.org.

CLETA: .com.
.com.

GLENN: .com. Okay. Only Citizens. --

CLETA: OnlyCitizens --

GLENN: Go there now. Please get this packet. Please stand up. This is -- you know, I can't do thinking.

You can do this. You can do this. Go to onlycitizensvotecoalition.com, and get that packet now.

Cleta, thank you so much. I appreciate all of your hard work on this.

CLETA: Thank you, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet. Onlycitizensvotecoalition.com.

EXPLAINED: What happens if Trump wins from PRISON?
RADIO

EXPLAINED: What happens if Trump wins from PRISON?

Special counsel Jack Smith has revived his classified documents case against Donald Trump. But why is he doing this so close to the election? Will the Supreme Court's immunity ruling apply here? And what would happen if Trump wins the election from prison? Former U.S. DoJ Assistant Attorney General and Center for Renewing America senior fellow Jeff Clark joins Glenn to break it all down: “I would not be surprised if [this judge] sentenced President Trump to prison.” But he also explains why he believes the American people will see through the Left’s attempt to “criminalize politics” and realize that we have become a banana republic.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Jeff Clark, he is a senior fellow at the center for renewing America. And he knows this case, quite well.

The case against Trump. The latest indictment filed against special counsel Jack Smith.

Jeff, I have been trying to understand this story.

It's very complex. Can you just break it down for dummies, like me?

JEFF: Glenn, thanks for having me.

And, you know, you're definitely underestimating yourself, Glenn, but hopefully I can help the audience to understand the case.

GLENN: Okay.

JEFF: So, look, obviously this case was filed a way back.

And it's resulted in several important decisions, first as the district court, and then in the DC circuit, holding that President Trump was not immune.

You know, they tried to last that argument out of the lower courts, especially with this ridiculous SEAL team six hypothetical.

The idea that President Trump could order Seal Team Six to assassinate his political rivals.

And so the argument goes. You know, because that would not make any sense.

Therefore, he can't have any form of immunity. And I always thought that hypothetical was totally ridiculous, when the case eventually reached the Supreme Court. In a case called Trump v. United States, which was decided by the Supreme Court. Six to three, most of it, on July 1st of this year.

GLENN: Right.

JEFF: They gave that argument, short trip too. And they held, consistent with the fact, that every branch of government, has some form of immunity. That the president of the United States, and the one that was just applied to Donald Trump, it was applied to all presidents of the United States. Have to have, you know, a set of immunities. And the immunities they decided that he had, were basically a -- in a trichotomy.

So the first tier is that the president exercises his core executive powers.

You know, the things that are at the heart of being president. He is absolutely immune from those.

Full stop. Then second, per anything else that he does. Which is not within his core powers.

So that would include things like speaking, using the president's bully pulpit.

He's immune to the outer boundaries of his office. As long as it has the nexus to his official duties, which a lot of things do. And that there he has presumptive immunity. And in order to overcome it, you have to show that it would really make no impingement or inroads into the executive power. You know, to -- to be able to pierce that immunity. So that's also a very strong form of immunity.

GLENN: But that would be something like he's saying, you know, WWE is real. And somebody sues him. And says, it's not real.

It has nothing to do with the presidency. Right?

JEFF: Exactly right. So it certainly -- to my mind, let's take the speech, that he gave, you know, outside the -- the White House. On January 6th. He was clearly talking about matters of public concern, which the president can express himself on. And I think that that is presumptively immune. And I think to tell a president that he could not set out his views about an election, would be an inroads into the presidency. And therefore, he would also be immune for that.

GLENN: Yeah.

JEFF: So the left category, and the trichotomy is a category for which a president would not be immune, Glenn. That's the category of -- of an unofficial act. An act in a private capacity.

And so, after the Supreme Court's decision on July 1st, you know, it -- it kind of goes down each step. It steps down to the Court of Appeals level.

And they remand it back to the district court to Judge Chutkan.

And then Judge Chutkan started to set proceedings. More -- more on that in a minute.

And then what's ultimately come, once she now has jurisdiction back in the case, is that Jack Smith was off to the side, working with an entirely different grand jury, and he got this superseding indictment that came out yesterday.

And in -- in a phrase, what that indictment is, you know, new indictment. Meet the old indictment. You know, it's just the same as that old indictment.

He's just reformulated to try to make it consistent with and fit everything into the third box.

The box of everything President Trump did. That he had indicted before.

The first time. Is actually -- as opposed to a set of official acts.

And therefore, Jack Smith argues, he's not immune.

GLENN: So are they doing this, to smear him yet again. So late in the campaign.

Or is this a plan just in case he wins, they think this will keep him out of office?

JEFF: I think, Glenn, that they're doing it for all of those reasons. Right? Because they absolutely want to block him any way they can.
So this is election interference. There's no way you should be issuing a new indictment like this, using a new grand jury.

This close to a major presidential election. Especially --

GLENN: Correct.

JEFF: And it also shows me that this was being concealed. So what happens is that the court was told.

Because it was ready to go. Trying to set deadlines to try to march back toward a trial.

And Jack Smith made a filing. The last couple of weeks. Saying, no. No. No. Hold on. I need more time.

We're doing consultations inside the Justice Department.

Well, I'm sure they were doing consultations inside the Justice Department. But that's not the real reason. It's now clear, that the real reason is that he was actually in secret grand jury proceedings, getting this superseding indictment.

GLENN: Jeez.

JEFF: And the media, right? The media has been all over, watching the DC courthouse.

I mean, back in the real height of this, a year ago, you know, no one could walk into the courthouse, even if it was for an entirely different reason.

And not have the media report X, Y, Z. You know, this person went in. They must be going to the grand jury. Or there was speculation. But for this proceeding, for some reason, it surprised someone.

All the mainstream media, purported to say, well, Jack Smith was just consulting inside the Justice Department.

I think that that was essentially running a cover story for the fact that they were conveniently not -- purporting not to watch the courthouse.

Because they would have seen the prosecutors, regularly going to the grand jury to get this new indictment. And yet there was entire radio silence on that, until the surprise of yesterday.

GLENN: So what is supposedly new in this one, that changes the ground?

JEFF: It's not. It's essentially just a reformulation, right?

So the original indictment started out by saying, you know, Donald Trump, president of United States. You know, from -- from these dates, to candidate Trump.

So everything has been reframed. In the light of trying to fit it into the third box of being a private unofficial act.

GLENN: Person.

JEFF: Yeah. And otherwise, it's the same. It's the same four counts. There are -- even, you know, particularly remarkable to me, Glenn. Is not just that they have the -- trying to repackage the allegations, right? To go against Trump in his private capacity.

But the fact that two of the allegations were to this statute -- 28. I'm sorry. 18USC1512.

And that statute went to the Supreme Court, also this past term, involving the January 6ers. And the Supreme Court decided that -- that 1512C2, about obstruction with official proceeding, which I'm sure you and many of our your listeners would have heard of. You know, a statute, that really, they stretched to try to apply to January 6th. Even though they didn't. The Supreme Court held, that it did not apply to the January 6ers. And it remanded.

So, you know, Jack Smith has never said aye. He's still using 1512. Many commentators thought that after the Supreme Court's Fischer decision, that's the one about 1512C2, that he would drop the 1512 counts. And he would just go with the conspiracy counts.

Two conspiracy counts. There's 118USC371, conspiracy to defraud the US.

And then the second conspiracy count is a conspiracy against civil rights. But, no. He's using exactly the same four counts that he used before.

That's why I say, you know, the new indictment is really the same as the old indictment.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I don't think the Rosenbergs went through this kind of trial and tribulation. That Donald Trump. I've never seen anybody treated like they treat Donald Trump.

Never. What -- what the courts have done to him, what the prosecutors have done to him, in these cherry-picked courthouses and districts is absolutely obscene.

And I -- I would love to them your point of view, Jeff. I think they will put him in jail in September.

JEFF: Well, I'm actually, Glenn, making preparations to go up there, to be in Judge Merchan's court in Manhattan, on September 18th if the sentencing goes forward.

Look, two days before that time, on September 16th, Judge Merchan is supposed to issue his decision about whether the Supreme Court's immunity decision, Trump v. the US, that I've been talking about.

Whether that essentially requires a new trial to be granted. And I don't see how it couldn't possibly -- you know, you could come to any other conclusion, to the fact that it requires a new trial. Because President Trump is immune for his official acts. And there's even, in addition to the three tiers of immunity that I've described to you.

The Supreme Court created a new exclusionary rule, and said that, in terms of liberation inside the executive branch, are -- are protected. And they cannot be presented in court, as evidence against the president. And so the Alvin Bragg prosecution, it presented precisely such prohibited evidence. It had Hope Hicks in the Oval Office, talking to the president. And testifying about various things.

The jury heard that. And you can't unring that bell. They produced a verdict, based on hearing that evidence.

Alvin Bragg is trying to argue. Oh, it's all harmless error. Right?

We would have gotten that, even if we hadn't presented that evidence. Well, who knows? No one knows that. And I don't believe it. And so he needs a new trial.

So I predict, sadly, you know, for the same reasons you say that the lawfare is just so intense and unprecedented against President Trump. And it really is a dagger at the heart of the republic, that I bet, you know, Judge Merchan is going to go ahead and deny the unite-based motion for a new trial. And then he will do the sentencing. And I actually would not be surprised if he sentenced President Trump, to prison.

And maybe he tries to, you know, soften it a little bit at the end. Just by saying, this sentence wouldn't begin to run until after the election, or something like that.

Or if you really wanted to go full bore, right? You can say, no, you're remanded into custody immediately. Or you're remanded into home confinement immediately. He has a lot of different options.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. I have to tell you, I think the American people will lose their mind.

Both Republican and Democrat. And especially I think independents. I think there are a lot of people who are sick of this. And they will see, this is a banana republic.

JEFF: I agree. It's already gotten to a banana republic level in terms of the level of lawfare directed at President Trump, at myself.

GLENN: Right.

JEFF: You know, at Steve Bannon, and Peter Navarro. You know, all of my folks down in Georgia, with Fani Willis.

GLENN: It's crazy.

JEFF: Now they have a new case out in Arizona, which they're trying to press on. You know, it's relentless.

It really is something that is trying to criminalize politics. And criminalize the ordinary operations of laughter. And pretend that Donald Trump was the chief executive of the United States.

That he -- you know, some unprecedented threat, that requires a level of treatment, that no one has ever gotten before, in the history of our country.

Just take, Glenn, the Mar-a-Lago raid. Right?

What did they do with Vice President Pence and President Biden? They negotiated an agreement to go and search through their -- their homes, right? But did President Trump get that treatment?

No. He got a jackbooted raid. With armed agents. That wouldn't even show the president's lawyer, Christina Bobb at the time, the warrant initially, until she basically had to pry it out of him.

GLENN: Would you hold on just a second, Jeff?

Because I have to take a 60-second break. And then when we come back, I would just like to know, what happens if he go to jail? Can he be president of the United States?

How would that work? Does Secret Service go with him?

What happens? We'll talk about that in 60 seconds. First, getting poor sleep is not just an inconvenience. It absolutely ruins your day, for one thing. That's -- you know, that's not the worst part. It's also terrible for your health. And it can be very dangerous. If you've ever fallen asleep, during driving. Because you have such a terrible night of sleep. Or you've fallen asleep in a meeting. And you're like, I've got to stay awake. You're screaming at yourself, and you just can't do it.

If you're somebody who has difficulty sleeping, either once in a while or all the time, there is something I've taken when I've had sleep issues. And I would like for you to give it a try.

It's all natural. It's called Z Factor. It comes from the makers of Relief Factor. It's a 100 percent drug-free way to help you fall asleep faster, sleep better, and stay asleep longer.

Z Factor, uses a formula of four all natural ingredients to calm your mind. Relax your body, so you can ease into sleep faster, and sleep right through the night.

It's worked for me. It works for my wife. Rediscover the joy of a great night of sleep with Z Factor. Get the best sleep you've ever had. Try Z Factor from Relief Factor, and save 46 percent on your first order.

It's ReliefFactor.com. ReliefFactor.com. Call 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
From the Center for Renewing America, he's the senior fellow there. Also, former US DOJ Assistant Attorney General Jeff Clark is with us.

So if they put him in jail, can a president be in jail?

If he -- let's say he wins the election. But he's in jail. What happens?

JEFF: So there are two periods, right? One would be a period, prior to inauguration. There to answer your question, right before the break.

You know, the Secret Service would still protect him.

And, you know, indeed, Alvin Bragg had been talking to the New York jail system, about trying to make accommodations for that.

And then in the period after he's inaugurated, then I think all of the -- any kind of imprisonment would have to be ended for suspended.

It would be what lawyers call preempted by the Constitution since he would be the dully elected and inaugurated president of the United States.

He can't be kept from exercising those functions by a state conviction.

GLENN: That is absolutely unbelievable.

I mean, I don't think our Founders ever -- they -- I don't think they ever saw something like this happening.

I mean, you know, our -- our checks and balances are so far out of whack. And the administrative state is so strong now.

That, you know, almost anything can happen. It is really crazy. Jeff, thank you. Go ahead.

JEFF: Thank you. Yeah. I was going to say, you're absolutely right. The republic is hanging by a thread at this point. Hopefully Judge Merchan will come to his senses. And I think the Supreme Court is always in the background to make this all come out right, like they did in the Trump immunity case on July 1st.

GLENN: Hmm. Jeff Clark, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

You can follow him on Twitter, @JeffClarkUS. @JeffClarkUS. Thanks, Jeff. Appreciate it.

I mean, can you imagine, Stu?

STU: Yeah. I was thinking about that, as you were playing out the situations.

What if -- you putting them in jail, would send a message.

I think, as you pointed out. I think would backfire on them.

Could you see them do House arrest?

So he can't campaign anywhere.

He can't do any rallies. They put an ankle bracelet on him. I don't know. That one, I could see.

Especially if they're losing. I think the more -- the more dire they feel their situation is. The more likely that happens. That he goes to prison.

Because, you know, they will see this as, well, I mean, we've got this other card to play. Why not give it a shot?

We're losing. Right now, I don't think they feel like they're in that situation. I feel like they think they're winning, and why would they shake it up?

GLENN: I have to tell you though, I think if Donald Trump was under House arrest and he couldn't leave his house, first of all, he could do video from his house. I'm sure.

And there would be people like me. You know, I would be willing to take a hiatus and go campaign for the man, if he couldn't campaign himself. And not -- and not because, well, he's a Republican or anything.

Because --

STU: It's wrong.

GLENN: -- this is an American that has been wronged. And we all have to stand up for it.

I mean, they are out of control.

STU: That's going to be fascinating to see.

GLENN: Can you imagine if they win?

Oh, my gosh. Can you imagine how much trouble we're in if they win, Stu.

I mean, everything we've ever talked about, is happening right now.
(music)
As Jeff just said, a republic hangs by a thread. Who is going to rush in and save it?

Well, I will tell you, it will only be good and godly people.

Because it's got to be people of merit, that are trying to find favor in the eyes of God.

And say, we will be a fruitful nation. And we will bear good fruit, otherwise, he will curse us and we will whither on the vine. Quickly.