RADIODecember 13, 2023

Levin: Why the Supreme Court should STAY OUT of the Trump/January 6 debate

The Supreme Court has announced that it will hear an appeal that could have a big effect on the January 6th-related case against former president Donald Trump. But while this case has to do with charges of obstruction of an official proceeding, there's also another case that the Supreme Court could hear. Special counsel Jack Smith has asked the court to rule on Trump's claim of executive immunity. But BlazeTV host Mark Levin has some choice warnings for the Court: "The Supreme Court should NOT take this case up." Mark and Glenn review what a positive and negative ruling in this case would do to the country and Mark explains why he believes one of those rulings would "destroy the office of the presidency."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Mark Levin. How are you my friend?

MARK: Mr. Glenn Beck. I mean, look, good. Thank you.

GLENN: Good. Good. I'm pretty good.

I'm a little concerned about, you know, 2024. I can't come up with a scenario, where it ends well, but maybe you can.

MARK: It's such a mess.

I mean, you can have people talking third party. I think if Nikki Haley -- who I really oppose. I mean, I call her George Bush in a dress.
She pretty much is.

GLENN: With her foreign policy, she is. With her foreign policy, she absolutely is.

MARK: Well, look at her domestic policy. She wanted to invite the Palestinians and Gazans into our country. What, has she lost her mind?

GLENN: Yeah. That's true.

MARK: She gave land to Communist China in South Carolina. And now she pretends she's a hard-liner. She's never been a leader on any of the issues that matter to us, whether it's abortion, whether it's the border, whether it's tax cuts. And I looked at these allegations by DeSantis, and he's right. Go into Google.

Look at them, she refused to sign a bill, that said men use men's room. Ladies use lady's rooms.

Now, when it came to the woke war, she sided with Disney. I'm going, what's going on here? This woman will not be able to fight the Marxist revolution that's swirling around us today.

Which is why Karl Rove and Romney, and this guy at Blackstone or BlackRock, whoever the hell they call themselves. All these people, he put in liberal Democrat billionaires who will vote for Biden are backing her.

So she goes third party. You know, the RINOs are the fifth column. They're the fifth column in our party.

And, frankly, they're the fifth column in this country.

The Democrats, once they get their fighting out of the way, go back Biden.

They would back a kumquat for president. And our guys, they'll splinter. The base is always supposed to march behind whatever the establishment does. But this goes to your point, doesn't it?
Which is: It's concerning.

GLENN: Yeah. Yes, the way you feel about Nikki Haley. Would you fall in line behind her?

MARK: I don't have to. But she will fall before --

GLENN: No. But if she were the candidate?

MARK: No, I've had enough. I'm not falling in line --

GLENN: Me too. However, it's Biden or I think Michelle Obama, I would vote for a kumquat.

MARK: Yeah. I don't think it will be Michelle Obama. You haven't heard a word from her, have you?

GLENN: No, we haven't. But I just -- it's the only scenario that works out.

I mean, let's --

MARK: They have the convention.

GLENN: Yeah. That the -- you know, the superdelegates. They just forget the vote. They just say, you know what, he's too ill or whatever. He's too frail. You know, the Democrats want another choice. Let's just. We nominate Michelle Obama.

MARK: If that happens, I think they will turn to Hillary.

But it doesn't matter what we think.

The problem is, what's happening right now subsidy this grotesque effort to try to put Donald Trump in were an.

GLENN: Yeah, I know.

MARK: You read. You read this A-hole who files this, with the Supreme Court. He always wants him to cut the corners.

He doesn't get attorney-client privilege.

All these privileges.

Presidential privilege.

Executive privilege.

All denied Donald Trump.

He doesn't want to go to the normal appellate process.

Because he can't get his trial going, before the election.

You know, it takes years to have a full-baloney criminal trial. Particularly when you're raising. You're creating constitutional issues of depression.

So he brings us to this point. Now he demands that the Supreme Court hear his motion against Trump as soon as possible.

And they do it, they say, okay. We'll consider your argument. Trump's voters will get one week to respond. What?

You have a case in Pennsylvania, during the course of this election. Not about ballots. Not about voting machines.

A pure constitutional question, a legitimate question. About who gets to decide and write election laws in the state.

The governor?

The board of elections? Or the legislature, like the Constitution says in black and white?

They wouldn't even take up that case. You have other cases. That people are waiting for in front of the Supreme Court. And not to get too much in the weeds. These Enron cases. They use obstruction for the Enron cases, against these January 6ers, which doesn't apply.

It doesn't even meet the elements. So they appeal to the Supreme Court, and the same day the Supreme Court says, okay. We want to hear these arguments from Jack the Ripper Smith there.

The court says, we're going to pound this for now. Well, maybe we will consider it later in the year or next year. You have people sitting in jail. So this is really amazing.

You have a case -- this Judge Chutkan. I had a great lawyer on my program. Shone is his name. David Shone. And he said, Mark, I think in three years, waiting for a decision from this judge, who wants to have a trial on Trump in a five-month period.

It's all a setup.

And so this guy Jack Smith, the courts are bending over backwards. To accommodate this guy.

He wins every single motion.

Trump loses every single motion, in front of this radical Obama judge. The appellate court is overwhelmingly Democrat. Because when Perry Reid was the Senate leader and Obama was president, they added a seat to the DC circuit and filled it with Democrats.

This recent panel had two Obama appointees. And one Biden appointee.

The judge that he was filling was an Obama appointee. A judge Trump was dealing with, was another Obama appointee.

And now we go to the Supreme Court, and I'll tell you, Glenn. John Roberts is a huge problem. John Roberts is like this guy Michael Lewis. They hate Trump.

The Republicans. But, you know, they're proper Republicans. They don't like the tweeting. You know, they don't like the language.

Oh, my goodness. All the stuff going on here. It's just so unseemly.

It's so improper.

You know, they're just used to losing the country very properly, you know. But what's happening here, in my view, is we have a potential criminal justice system.

We have judges that wear black robes, going to these mahogany-paneled courtrooms. You have a prosecutor standing over there. He gets his desk. They get their desk.

Eventually, the trial. The jury sits over there. It all looks so proper. It all looks so constitutional.

And it's all bullcrap. Because all these movements and actions before this trial. The motion filings. The decisions on the motion filings and everything. They will determine the outcome of this elections. And just finally -- I know I'm rambling a bit, but I tend to do that.

One of the things that has troubled me a lot here is this.

GLENN: Yeah.

MARK: This guy charges Trump with a Klan act violation. With two Enron violations. And a federal contractor violation. These four statues, so it was bogus.

It is bogus!

But his arguments, which have been allowed by this judge. His paper filings are all about insurrection.

And seditious conspiracy.

In other words, this is a grotesque violation of -- of a prosecutorial ethics.

Grotesque.

He is making the case, without having proved the elements of the crimes that he's basically arguing for. That Donald Trump knew or had to know.

That what he was saying, what he was doing, what he was texting. What he was reading, proved that he wanted a violent event to occur that day. So why didn't you charge him with that? They didn't charge him with violence about anything.

He charged him with the Klan act, and obstruction, and all the rest of these things. And the judge ruled, oh, that's okay.

What's okay? So he's charged with four phony charges. But this guy is arguing something completely different. And other serious litigators or former federal prosecutors whatever, say this is not the way this is supposed to be done.

And it's all happening.

The Supreme Court should not take this case up.

There's no reason why this case has -- if you read this motion, this clown keeps talking about the public interest.

People have a right.

What does he about an the public interest?

He sits holed up. He is in a room with ten other reprobates.

They're making all these decisions, and then they speak for the public. Well, they for sure don't speak for 80 million people.

And so the judiciary, I would argue is doing severe damage to this country.

Allowing incredible interference in this election process.

And when it's all said and done. They will never recover.

GLENN: Well, I will tell you that John Roberts is the kind of guy that thinks, we should rule on this. And let this go forward.

Otherwise, we'll be blamed for it. And they will say, oh, it's the judicial activism of the Supreme Court.

So we're protecting the Supreme Court. By letting this small injustice, they would think.

Just let this past.

Let them do it. Then they hash it out, and our hands are clean. It's an act of Pontius Pilate quite honestly.

MARK: One hundred percent.

I call him Hollywood John.

He's very worried about what's said about him and thought about him. And his wife, and Thomas Friedman over there at the New York Times.

They're best friends.

They got caught up in these social circles, which always goes the way of the left.

And I don't trust this guy. I don't even trust Kavanaugh. And Barrett is a complete disappointment because she's right under Roberts' wing. Really, three tremendous constitutionalists. Then you have a couple of RINOs. Then you have a couple of Democrats. I'm worried about this.

GLENN: So Alan Dershowitz said, just based on the speed of this trial.

He said, there's no way Donald Trump could even prepare for a -- a defense.

And he said, we are at a banana republic if that doesn't stop. He said, there's no way that this trial shouldn't go forward next year, only because of the amount and volume of documents, that have to be processed.

He said, it's -- it's criminal, if they speed this trial up. Or they let it go, at this rate. Do you agree with that?

MARK: I mean, you denied him a time privilege. You did it in a secret proceeding. That's a violation of the Fifth Amendment.

The phony claim of a crime, fraud exception. So his lead lawyer, the January 6th case, had to testify in front of the grand jury. And he had to provide his notes that he had taken with Donald Trump. And we've never seen anything like this.

We don't know what they're talking about. It's all done in secret. That happens. I'm told other things happened in front of that grand jury that were absolutely unacceptable by some of the lawyers working on this case.

So what he's talking about, there's a violation of due process. Fifth Amendment.

And the Sixth Amendment. Which is the right to effective counsel. You can't have effective counsel when they're drowning in documents and witnesses and everything else.

And for no reason. No --

GLENN: He said, there's no way that he said, if that lawyer stands in front of that judge and he says, no. You have to proceed.

And they aren't ready because they -- there's no way possible. He said, he should quit immediately.

And say, I'm sorry. I'm not going to abide.

And if that means you're going to hold me in contempt.

Hold me in contempt.

But this is a travesty of justice.

MARK: Well, I think that's right.

Every lawyer has to make that decision on how to proceed.

So I don't know if I would do that or not. I really haven't thought go.

That said, he's right on the substance of the issue. 100 percent right.

The problem is that this lower court judge and this prosecutor. Oh, no, that they're setting Donald Trump up for conviction. So when he runs for office, as president in the general election. Beating everyone else. They'll keep calling him a convicted felon, a convicted felon.

So the people who are kind of on the edge, kind of leaning toward Trump, because they can't stand Biden. We know who these people are. We have lived with people like this right in our communities, in our neighborhoods. We meet them. He might lose them, and that's the goal.

GLENN: Right.

MARK: And you can see there are hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funding, that's going to be spent by the Democrats. The Biden campaign, or in your case, the Michelle Obama campaign. Talking about how Trump is a convicted felon. And then -- so we won't be talking about inflation.

And the border.

GLENN: All right.

So can we gain this -- I don't know how much time you have allotted in your schedule. I know you're so busy. All right. All right.

MARK: For you, the whole week.

GLENN: I want to war game this out with you a little bit. Because I have no idea, it's my understanding the Constitution will allow him to run and to be president. And run a campaign from jail.

But I don't know.

So can you go through this?

What happens if the court comes back, and the jury comes back, and says, he's guilty.

And he's a convicted felon.

What happens then?

We'll get into that in 60 seconds.

First, let me tell you about MyPillow.

If you've slept on a MyPillow, you know they're great. Now they have the MyTowels out. And, yeah, we have in the bathroom, in case, Mr. Levin, a guest in our home today needs to use the restroom.
He has the special towels. You know, he has the -- he has the towels for our guest. Our visitors.

You know, mom, we never use those towels.

Because we don't ever have guests.

They're guest towels.

Okay. Well, they're out for Mark Levin today.

And you get 50 percent savings. Whether you get the regular one, for I guess the poor schlubs in our family.

Which are great towels. Or the designer premium line. A/k/a guest towels for just $20 more. But no matter what, 50 percent savings.

You can also get free shipping. No minimum spent required.

But today is the last day to find this offer.

Free shipping. No minimum spent required.

If you haven't gotten your husband or somebody you love the my slippers, you are missing out.

You are missing -- I help -- I already have like three pair. I'm ordering them. Some day, they will stop making them.

And I want these slippers for the rest of my life. They're fantastic. Fifty percent in savings right now in the six-piece towel set and other savings. You can find them all at MyPillow.com. That's MyPillow.com to get the savings. Enter the promo code Beck, or you can call them right now at 800-966-3117. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
So all of the best legal minds, that I know, all say, that no matter what the evidence, in Washington, DC, he's going to be convicted.

Do you believe that?

MARK: I share that.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay. Go ahead.

MARK: And I'll tell you why.

Because you're not really able to present your case.

If you're not really able to study the evidence.

GLENN: Right.

MARK: And in addition to that, for counter evidence. Exculpatory evidence.

Because you can't get your head around it, because of the time frame.

If you're in a city that goes 94 percent of from Biden.

Out of that population. If you have an Obama judge that's ruling in every single instance, for the government.

When you have a prosecutor who is ultra and completely unethical.

Who is using tactics, that in most courtrooms would be rejected.

You're setting up a scenario, where nobody, nobody could survive.

Because you're targeting this defendant.

The charges are preposterous.

And by the time you can actually get to an appellate court, it's over.

And so that makes what Jack Smith is doing.

Is so horrific.

Because he's trying to jump the appellate court on a constitutional issue, to get to the Supreme Court.

And the court is at least entertaining the idea. Whereas, the defendant, Donald Trump, can't get his constitutional issues up there.

That fast. Because the Supreme Court has decided over and over and over again.

No. You go through the trial. You go through the appellate court.

You need to fine-tune the constitutional issues. Then we might take a look at it.

So the whole system. And really, as you well know. And your listeners well know.

You can have the best Constitution on the face of the earth.

The best judicial system on paper. But if you don't have people of virtue.

Particularly judges, none of it works. It doesn't matter what's on paper. There's no due process. There is no right to counsel. Effectively that's what's going on here. So the likelihood is very high.

Now, here's the problem: If the court does take up this case, and rules against Jack Smith, that is that Donald Trump does have immunity from actions he took while president, after he leaves the presidency, then the government really doesn't have a case.

They're in huge trouble.

And this case will go on.

GLENN: No way. No way that John Roberts allows that to happen.

No way.

MARK: That's my fear. But I want your audience to understand why this is important.

It's important because if you don't retain the protection when you leave the presidents, any opposing administration of the Department of Justice will wait for a president to do whatever he does.

And then when he leaves, indict that president.

You will destroy the office of the presidency. That's the problem. So when this judge says, he thinks he's a king. He can have immunity.

That's not what he thinks. He is saying, look, all these bogus allegations you're making against me occurred when I was president.

As president, you certainly couldn't indict me for these, so you can't indict me now. Oh, no, no. That protection doesn't go beyond the time that you're in the office of the Presidency.

EXCLUSIVE: Chip Roy Explains His FIERY Rejection of Spending Bill

According to the media, there’s a big fight going on between Republicans over the House’s new slimmed-down continuing resolution spending bill. Some, including President-elect Donald Trump, wanted the bill to pass. But others, like Texas Representative Chip Roy, argued that it still wasn’t ready. However, is the Republican “unity coalition” really crumbling, like the media claims? Rep. Chip Roy joins Glenn to explain what’s really going on. He argues that he IS trying to give Trump and DOGE a 100-day “runway” to fix the country. But he makes the case that, by increasing the debt ceiling by $5 trillion without agreeing on other cuts, this bill gives bad actors the ability to be an “obstacle” to Trump’s agenda further down the line. Plus, he reveals to Glenn that he believes some of these bad actors LEAKED false information about his stance to Mar-a-Lago.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN:

I think we have a great opportunity today. To show you how to have a -- tough conversation, with friends, friends. Where you deeply disagree on something.

But you know that their intent is good. They know my intent is good. Or our intent is good.

And we actually have the same end goal, but we disagree on the path. And we're going to walk away friends.

Chip Roy is joining us today. And, Chip, I love you. And I always will. And I agree with your, we've got to cut spending. We have to. But Liz Wheeler is with me. And we've been talking about it all morning. It's the -- the -- the -- the system of DOGE and Trump, the call-out to the world, in saying, you've got to surrender the Capitol. You know, the bad guys are in and about to take all the money.

Surround, and tell them, come out with your hands up. And that happened. And we scored a massive win, in an entirely new way.

Ask then you stood on principle, one we both agree with.

And it failed!

And so here's -- here's what Liz and I were talking about. Here's what we want to say to you.

And then get your response.

LIZ: Hi, Congressman Roy, this is the way I see it. I want your take on it. I love you. I think you're one of the best members of Congress. I disagree with you on the process that's happening. And I think that is the difference. The process. We elected Donald Trump to be a disruptor. Because Republican members of Congress for decades have been telling they're fiscal conservatives. They want to decrease the debt SEAL. It hasn't happened.

It hasn't -- it hasn't been done. And so Donald Trump comes in with Elon Musk, and uses this DOGE process to first identify these pieces of garbage in the first 1500-page bill. And take those things to the people. We took them to members of Congress. Congress said, okay. We'll listen to you.

So that new process was very effective.

And my question to you is: Once that process was proved to be effective. Which I think is exciting and wonderful.

How do we bridge this divide, with you, to say, okay.

Let's put some faith in this new process. And trust Elon Musk and Donald Trump and the Dow Jones process, to eventually address the debt ceiling, but get this done right now?

GLENN: And not blind trust. Chip.

CHIP: So appreciate you guys. Appreciate being on the show. Particular order. I have to go through a couple of things.

GLENN: Yep.

CHIP: Number one, it's important to remember that my job and my duty is to the Constitution, to God, and the people I represent. I told them, when I came to Washington, I would not -- I would not let the credit card and the debt ceiling and the borrowing of the United States without the spending restraints necessary to offset it.

GLENN: Okay.

CHIP: Right now, all we have are promises and ideas and notions. What I know, that neither of you respectfully no, and that none of your listeners respectfully no are the people that are in the room, that I was in with yesterday. And the day before, who are recalcitrant.

And do not want to do the spending cuts that we need to do.

That I believe the president and the DOGE guys. And everybody want to do.

My job, is to force that through the meat grinder. To demand that we do our damn job. Okay?

GLENN: Okay. So hang on. Okay. So wait. Wait. You're right. You're right. You're right. Go ahead.

CHIP: Number thee, when we were going through the bill, I'm glad the bill dropped from 1,550 pages to 116 pages. Three-quarters of Twitter or X or whatever you want to call it, have been out there spreading false facts that we supported a bad bill and didn't like the better bill.

That's not true. But let's be Lear. The 1400 pages that were cut out. It's a panacea.

There were some good stuff in there. There were some bad stuff in there. There was a lot of disinformation.

There wasn't a $70,000 pay raise. There was a 3,000-dollar pay raise.

I didn't support any pay raise. I didn't support a lot of the stuff in there.

But there's a lot of misinformation. And here's the thing: The 116 pages that were left, and I opposed violently the first bill. I was leading the charge on fighting and killing the first bill.

GLENN: And I love you.

LIZ: The second bill for 116 pages. Turned off -- turned off the pay go requirement. That we slash 1.7 trillion automatically.

And added a 5 trillion that are increase.

My view was, I could not support that, without a clear understanding of what cuts we would get, in mandatory spending next year. And undo any of the Inflation Reduction Act.

The undoing of the student loans. The undoing of the crap with the food stamps.

And everything else. I yield back.

GLENN: Okay. I yield back.

Chip, you're not in a hostile room. We love you. And we agree with your end goals. It's our end goal too. We didn't make that promise that you made to the people that voted for you. So we have more wiggle room here.

But you say -- I think our big difference is, you say, I know the guys in the room.

You're right. You do. And we -- we ceded that earlier today on the show.

You are -- one of us is wrong on trust.

I don't trust any of the weasels in Washington.

But I think Donald Trump and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have earned enough trust, to get a grace period, here for the first -- maybe the first year.

Or at least six months.

To turn the economy around, and also reduce the size of the government.

And totally flip this thing.

And I know, as somebody who is -- you know, run a company, mainly into a ground. But run a company, and have to switch it, in the middle, and totally reshuffle. That -- that actually costs money, while you're doing it, to bridge the gap.

Because you have to fill up holes while you're filling in the gap.

You don't trust the people in the room. Neither do we.

But we do trust the system that worked on Wednesday with DOGE and Donald Trump.

Where do we disagree?

Can you give them --

CHIP: We don't disagree. And yesterday morning, I was making that precise argument in a room full of conservatives and then a follow-up room with people who will call it, less conservatives.

GLENN: Republican. Yes.

CHIP: And so we were making this argument. And then someone infamously. Something leaked out of the room, somehow out to Mar-a-Lago. That I was being resistant. Because I was negotiating trying to get the agreement to achieve the objective that you just said. I was trying to get, okay. In fact, yesterday morning, I made the argument to a group of conservatives. We need to give the president runway. We need to give him his first 100 days. We need to appreciate JD, and Vivek, and all the people -- and everybody involved. For the president to achieve the objective.

But to get there. We have to make sure that the guys in the room, that are an obstacle to that, don't have the ability to block it.

Because information flow matters. And when those guys tell the president, they can't achieve X.

Then the president will not achieve X. Our job was to force and demand, guys, we need actual understanding of what the cuts will be.

And because otherwise, we're asking us to accept a 5 trillion-dollar limit in our credit card increase. In exchange for nothing!

Literally, in exchange for nothing, but -- but hope.

So our job was to force that change.

Unfortunately, while I was trying to make the argument that we needed something in order to get the votes, someone leaked that down to Mar-a-Lago, and the president reacted.

But now I have to now manage that.

GLENN: Right. I know. I know.

CHIP: They're trying to enforce change in town.

GLENN: So hang on.

We have to leave this. Because I'm going to run against the clock.

I could talk to you all day about this. You were in a meeting this morning about J.D. Vance. Can you tell us anything about that meeting?

CHIP: That meeting happened, because despite what happened yesterday, I'm trying to get this done. Last night, talking to JD, we worked to get this meeting done. We had some good progress this morning.

But there still remains people concerned about spending. That we can work out, what agreement we can reach. On what spending cuts. We can actually get next year, in exchange for giving the vote on a debt ceiling increase.

So it remains fluid. Progress was made. But we have to keep working on it.

And I left that meeting to talk to you. Soil get an update in a minute.

GLENN: Thank you for that, by the way.

I hear there is a new bill that may be coming today.

Is that the one you're talking about?

Or is this another bill that could be another nightmare?

CHIP: Despite other people leaking crap, I refused. I can't say, because it's not been decided by the speaker.

And it's not right to talk about things they're talking about in private meetings.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's -- it's this speaker. I mean, is he really the speaker anymore, Chip, really?

CHIP: We need to hear what bill we need to get forward. And I can't talk about the private meetings. But, look, I'm going to keep fighting for what I promised people that I represent.

I'm going to fight to cut spending. I am going to represent article one.

I'm going to support the president's agenda, but we've got to do that together.

GLENN: Okay.

Chip, thank you.

I think we can -- I think we agree, but I await to see what that means to you. Because we may just have to agree to disagree on this.

But I love you. And I still want you to replace Cornyn.

CHIP: The short version is, for inflation's sake, we cannot increase the debt ceiling $5 trillion without knowing what we're getting for it.

And I don't think anybody should disagree with that.

GLENN: But you don't disagree that Elon Musk and Trump and Vivek are serious about gutting the system.

CHIP: I believe that is their objective. I believe there are obstacles to that objective. And I need to know the sincerity of how we deal with those obstacles, both structural, and human. And we have to figure that out. And that's my job.

America's Favorite Villain Is Ready for Nuclear Fallout. Are You? | Glenn TV | Ep 401

In this episode of Glenn TV — a theatrical how-to guide to survive the breakdown of society after a nuclear attack, according to the new movie “Homestead” from Angel Studios. Glenn Beck interviews the movie’s star and executive producer, Neal McDonough, who plays the head of a family trying to survive as society is breaking down in a postapocalyptic world. You’ve probably seen Neal in everything from the hit TV shows “Yellowstone,” “Suits,” and “Justified” to movies like “Captain America,” “Minority Report,” and the groundbreaking mini-series “Band of Brothers.” Glenn asks Neal what it’s like to play a villain so often, how TV and movies are changing, and how he survived Hollywood as a devoted Christian and husband who refuses to do onscreen kissing scenes with any of his female co-stars. They also discuss his battle with alcoholism, what it’s like working the legends like Sylvester Stallone and Kevin Costner, and the cultural craving for Western cinema. Note: Angel Studios is a sponsor of “The Glenn Beck Program.” Get your tickets for “Homestead” at https://Angel.com/Beck.

Biden FLOODED the Government With DEI, But Trump Has ONE Way to Win

With just weeks left in office, President Biden (or whoever’s actually calling the shots) has decided to hire 1,200 DEI officials. Is this part of a plot to undermine Donald Trump’s plans and make it harder for him to rid the government of woke Deep State bureaucrats? Glenn and fellow BlazeTV host ‪@lizwheeler‬ discuss how other Democrats have recently proposed things like this, including a UK-style “shadow cabinet” that would oppose Trump. Liz also gives her advice to Trump on how to deal with these new DEI officials, who will be paid hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to focus on things like “health equity” …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Where were we, Liz?

LIZ: The Biden administration. Although, not Biden. Because he can't tell the difference between a nickel and a dime, trying to sabotage the Trump administration.

GLENN: Yeah. So the latest on this is now Biden is hiring 1200. Biden is not doing it.

But he's hiring 1200 DEI officials, and putting them just under the appointed official. So there will be 1200.

Some of these people make almost $400,000 a year. $400,000 a year! That's your tax dollar!

Will you -- in your -- in your life, your average person, I don't know if you'll ever even -- if you'll ever even pay $400,000 in taxes?

So you could be working your whole life, for that one hire.

And he's hired 1200 of them.

And all he's trying to do is make sure the DEI positions just can't get cut.

I've got news for you.

Donald Trump is going to cut those positions.

He's going to. And it's going to get ugly.

I mean, the ACLU was all over this, saying, oh, we've got plans. We're going to -- we're going to -- this is obscene.

This is absolutely obscene. What the Democrats are trying to do. By thwarting the president.

And honestly, thwarting the will of the American people. Remember the speech that was given by I don't know, some boob from -- well, one of the Carolinas.

I don't want to besmirch the other one for electing a boob. But he was -- he was giving a speech in the well of the Senate. And he said, we need a shadow government. What?

Hold it. You mean a Deep State. Because we already have one of those. And he said. This is a quote.

One of the most obscene things I've ever heard from an elected representative. We failed to make our case. That our policies are better.

Now, in my world, growing up in America, the next sentence is: We need to sit down and talk and find out why we're out of step, with the American people.

His was, but we know we're right. So we need a shadow government, to make sure we put our policies in, anyway.

There's nothing more un-American than that.

By the way, Ted Cruz also said, he thinks there's criminal charges that could be lodged against Biden and his administration for the selling of the steel and the walls for the border.

I think so too. I think so too. He'll probably end up blanketing or pardoning everybody that has either lived by a Biden. Or a Democrat.

Worked for the administration. Everybody will get a pardon at the end.

Honestly, it's like, hey. Everybody, Oprah is here.

Look under your seats.

Because you've got a pardon. You've got a pardon. And you've got a pardon.

Ugh!

Now...

PAT: The Department of Health and Human Services on November 15th. This is posted immediately after President Trump has been reelected.

They advertised for the following position. A deputy assistant secretary for Minority Health. With a salary of up to 221 thousand dollars. This is the goal of this position.

Or this is the purpose of this position.

To, quote, promote health equity.

To promote health equity.

What does that mean?

It means racial criminalization in health care.

It means, if you are seeking, I don't know.

Think about during the pandemic. When there was limited resources. Limited beds in the emergency room.

Limited amounts of drugs and therapeutics, that people could access, in order to treat COVID when it's at its worse.

Well, now you will be screened based on the color of your skin.

That's what health equity is. Health equity is a word used to disguise the reality, that it's just -- it's socialism.

It's discrimination.

It requires, a government official to look at you, and make a decision about whether or not you are going to have access to health care that you might need, based on what you look like.

Not based on the severity of your illness. Not based on your ability to pay. Not based on your request for care. But based on the color of your skin. That's not only wrong and immoral and completely absurd, that a bureaucratic in that position would make over $221,000. That's evil. The left likes to pretend, that you're a racist. Or I'm a racist. Just for voting for Donald Trump. This is evil racism. This is the kind of stuff that we eradicated from our country.

And Biden is trying to plant the Trump administration. With these evil little minions before he leaves.

GLENN: I mean, why are we -- why are we surprised?

How many anti-slavery amendments do we have, to the Constitution.

I mean, it's amazing to me. With very few exception, after ten, most of these seem to be like, oh.

Yeah. Okay.

You're so stupid, you don't understand.

Slaves need to be free. Okay.

Then the next amendment is like, okay. All right.

Let me limp up to explain this once more.

That means, they're Americans, and can vote!

How many amendments are -- are just one after another, especially on slavery.

And, by the way, who was it that didn't understand that slaves should be freed? The Democratic Party.

It -- I swear to you, these amendments are just, God, we didn't think you would be this stupid.

It's already covered!

But let's lay it out clearly, for you.

You cannot discriminate by color! By race! By religion.

We thought that had already been covered, but apparently, not.

LIZ: What I would do if I were the Trump transition team. This is obviously a deliberate effort by the Biden administration. Because within the first ten days after the election, 33 of these jobs were posted on government websites.

So this was -- they were like, okay. Trump is coming in. Let's start ceding the deep state with these races. What I would do if I were Trump transition is I would say, we take racial equality, very seriously. We take civil rights very seriously.

In the administration, of the 47th president of the United States, and anybody who engages, especially a government official who engages in racial discrimination will be prosecuted. And prevent these people from even accepting these jobs. Because they will be threatened with legal action if they do.

GLENN: You can make a legal case. A solid, legal case, that that is exactly right. And that's what should be done.

They would be doing that to us, if we were -- if we were discriminating on race. If we were like, you know what, we're only going to hire white people.

We would go to jail.

Oh, you know what. We're just going to shuffle the deck here.

We're going to look at everybody.

But we lean towards white people.

Did you have Wheaties for breakfast?

If you had Wheaties as a childhood, you're in a different category. Okay?

I mean, we would go to jail. We would be shut down.

It's the same thing.

But don't expect the Democrats to get it.

Did you see the new -- or the DNC chair front runner?

The one they're thinking should be the head of the DNC?

He said, the problem with the election is, the convention should have featured pro-Hamas activists.

LIZ: I totally agree. That absolutely should have --
GLENN: At least they would have been honest.
LIZ: Think about how many Democrat voters, and really prominent people too.

I'm talking about Joe Rogan. I'm talking about Elon Musk. I'm talking about RFK Jr. These were fairly hard-core Democrats, who not only converted to being like, okay. We'll tolerate a Republican. Because it's not Joe Biden.

It's not Kamala Harris.

These people are the biggest supporters of President Trump right now, because of that kind of garbage. So DNC, if you are going to be radical, please be honest and tell us.

Thank you. It's just ushering new Republican voters right into our arms.

GLENN: I respect you, more than I respect people like Mike Johnson.

Mike Johnson doesn't tell me what -- he doesn't tell me what he really is.

What he really believes.

He tells me what I want to hear. I don't believe it. Then he's elected. Then he gets in.

And then he rapes you.

You know, I have much more respect for -- for people who are like, yeah. I'm pro-Hamas.

And you should elect me.

Well, I don't think I'm going to do it.

But thank you for telling me who you really are.

LIZ: Yeah. Great. Let's take all of the Democrat members of Congress. And let's Jamaal Bowman them, let's Cori Bush them.

Because as soon as they were honest about being pro-Hamas, voters were like, actually, we're good.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

By the way, Hochul has come out. And she has now tried to stir up support to end the electoral college.

Because no offense, Wyoming, according to her words, New York voted for Kamala Harris.

You know, it is so dishonest. And this would -- this would have no space, if -- if we were actually teaching you students, what the electoral college is for.

You want to talk about fairness. Here's fairness: Should New York City dictate what all of New York does?

No!

They have representation. Of all the small towns.

All the farming towns.

Everything else.

New York City, should not be the one that tells everyone else, exactly how to live!

I think there should be electoral colleges in states now.

Because the cities are just devouring, all of the communities outside of those mega cities.

The electoral college is to make sure, that New York, California, and let me say, Texas, doesn't run over all of the other states!

And force how they're living in those cities, and those big states. In Wyoming!

Or Idaho!

Or Alabama!

Yeah. I don't have to live like you do in New York City.

I don't want to live like you do in New York City.

And we have completely different values than you do.

We should have a say, and an even, equal seat at the table.

That's why we have the electoral college. And we have the popular vote.

So you can see. And it's usually pretty close.

This time, however, Hochul, you lost the popular vote!

So you don't really have a case here, on the electoral college.

But you don't have a case.

If you're an American, you don't have a case on the electoral college anyway.

LIZ: Wait a second. Have we war gamed the scenario that you just proposed.

If there was an electoral college on the state level in California or on the state level in New York, what would the -- have we actually looked at a map here. If anybody has done this. Tag me on social media.

Because I am fascinated by this idea. I've not thought of this before. But I -- would we actually swing those states Republicans, if there was a state level?

STU: I bet we would. I bet we would.

You know, every time. Look at Wyoming.

Jackson Hole now controls Wyoming. Just controls it.

Who is -- who is so close to controlling Texas?

All the big cities.

You know, you don't have a chance. When these cities grow so large, they tip everything.

That's why we have an electoral college.

And it didn't used to be this way.

But our cities are becoming mega cities.

Almost states in and among themselves.

You -- you have to balance. Otherwise, the farmer and everybody else, that makes your life possible, in a city, gets screwed.

GLENN: And also think about cheating for a second. If you have a popular vote across the whole country, versus an electoral college system, it's a lot easier to impact the outcome of the entire presidential election because you can have one county somewhere with corrupt election officials.

And if they cheat by 10,000 votes, that could change the outcome of the election.

But if you're an electoral college, it doesn't necessarily.