RADIOMarch 12, 2024

Former Trump Official: Liz Cheney & the J6 Committee “BURIED EVIDENCE”

The Federalist has reported that the January 6th Select Committee suppressed evidence that former president Donald Trump requested 10,000 National Guard troops to be stationed at the Capitol during the day’s events. But former Rep. Liz Cheney has denounced the report. So, what’s the truth? Glenn speaks with former Trump intelligence official Kash Patel, who says he was in the Oval Office when Trump authorized the troops. He also accuses former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Capitol Police, and Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser of denying the request, knowing exactly what might happen: “[They] WANTED that political narrative [of] insurrection.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Kash Patel, who is wildly accomplished. Chief of staff to the Department of Defense, where his responsibilities included implementing the Secretary of Defense mission involving, you know, 3 million-plus employees. Blah, blah. He went from the Pentagon to serving with Donald Trump.

He became the DNI. The Director of National Intelligence. You were the -- what are -- you were the acting DNI, I believe, for a very long time. And, of course, you know, they tried to destroy his life. Kash Patel joins us now. Hello, Kash. How are you?

KASH: Great to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: All right. I want to talk about what just came out with Mollie Hemingway this weekend. Where we now know that the January 6th committee, had testimony from you and several others, on what, actually, happened on the White House.

On the takes leading up to January 6th. Where Trump was calling for 10,000 troops, to be on the street. Because he felt that the left was going to act up. And, actually, hurt the people that were coming for these rallies.

But they wouldn't do anything about it. They would not take him up on it, at all.

And that's now proven, and they knew that, but they kept that away, from the official report.

KASH: Yes, Glenn. Just like when the FBI went to a FISA court and lied to them and went to exculpatory evidence, just to target a political opponent and unlawfully surveil him, the January 6th committee took one page out of their book, and repeated that same instance of conduct for a propaganda political end point.

I was in the Oval Office, chief of staff. For the DOD, takes before January 6th. President Trump, unequivocally authorized ten to 20 National Guardsmen women.

And why is that important, Glenn?

Because only the president can make that authorization. But he's not allowed under the Constitution to deploy the order.

Order of deployment, excuse me, of the National Guard. So what do we do?

We dispatch senior DOD officials to Mayor Bowser, who is in charge of DC and the Capitol Police, who are in charge of the Capitol. And reported to Nancy Pelosi at that time.

And they in writing, rejected the use of additional National Guard. Not Donald Trump.

They did that.

And now we find out, two years after I testified to the January 6 committee, demanding a public hearing. Is they failed to release my transcript for almost two years. A year and a half after that, they released the transcript of Tony Ornato, a career apolitical speaker service officer, assigned to the White House for presidential protection. And what does his transcript say?

It confirms that President Trump, days before, authorized the use of ten to 20,000 national guardsmen and women, and the chief of staff by itself, Secretary of Defense and the chairman, were all in the Oval Office when it happened.

This is the exculpatory evidence, that Liz Cheney and company have buried for two years to achieve a political gain.

GLENN: So, Kash, we are so corrupt.

Now, you know, people are saying, if they could do this to the president of the United States, they'll do it to anybody. Well, they are doing it to many nobodies, and anybody. And this has got to stop. It doesn't seem like the mainstream media cares. But at some point, it will reach enough ears where people will say, I am afraid of this government, quite honestly. They are everything that they say Donald Trump is. They're already doing it.

What do you --

VOICE: Their hypocrisy. No. Sorry. Go ahead. Their hypocrisy, as I think you were alluding to, their projection is what they do. And they own the Main State media. So back when we did Russiagate. And if you tied the threats together, to similar concepts, between Russiagate, between FISA, between January 6, between Hunter Biden's laptop, the 51 Intel letters, just to name a few things. They used the same playbook.

Lie at government gangsters, destroy the American faith in the institutions, but utilize their partners in the media, to make themselves look like a hero. And I think the breakthrough we're now having, is we have proven right, each and everyone one of these instances, the truth.

GLENN: So, Kash, at some point, the tables turn. And the countries are already turning against a lot of this stuff.

And you're running a guy who just doesn't -- he's not going to win.

If it's fair. There's no way he will win. It will be Trump in a landslide, I believe.

However, that's if it's fair.

However, they don't seem worried about it at all. What is their end game?

How do you keep your borders open?

Have murders happening on our streets, crime on the streets. We're going to have a terrorist attack. It's only a matter of time.

What's your exit plan? Because Bubba is going to look at this and go, well, you were the ones who caused it.

KASH: Uh-huh. I think the exit plan for the radical left-wing and mainstream media, is Trump Derangement Syndrome. Get him at all costs.

What I think we've done over time, through your brave reporting and your network, some amazing reporting of the truth, is Americans are saying, wait a second. Those things are not right-wing conspiracy.

That's the truth! The mainstream media lied to me. And I think what President Trump is brilliantly doing is taking that on the campaign trail every day.

And saying, yes, there's corruption in DC.

Yes. They're rigging presidential elections, but yes. We can defeat them. Because we are going to win so big, that the rig is not going to matter.

And every time we put out one of these blockbuster truths -- I mean, this is like a Russiagate-style reporting, blockbuster news day, that I'm reporting to you, directly with an op-ed to follow. The American people wake up in droves.

And I think, maybe I'm naive. But I think that is going to educator day. To solve the corruption in DC.

GLENN: I hope so.

Because it's really -- you know, it's disturbing to see how -- how methodical they are.

Do you think they knew that January 6 was going to happen?

KASH: Yes. I think they not only new, but the political monsters like Pelosi, Cheney, et al, wanted that political narrative. Why else would you shut down an authorization for National Guardsmen and Women?

I mean, all you have to do is ask -- they keep calling us liars.

Just ask yourself this: If President Trump didn't authorize it, then how did being the Secretary of Defense -- senior officials to Pelosi and Bowser's office, speaking their request for National Guard? It would have been factually and legally impossible.

And they shut that down because they wanted to hang that narrative, and have that painting of no client says, that a malicious style, downtown -- in downtown Washington, DC, to achieve their political narrative, which was? Insurrection. It failed in court, and now it's failing in the court of public opinion. Because the truth has finally come out. That the January 6th committee buried evidence, which corroborates what we've been saying for three years.

GLENN: How deep does the corruption in the military and Intel go?

When you -- did we have incognito Special Forces on the ground on January 6th?

KASH: No. No. That's not to say, a civilian who was a Special Forces operator, he didn't himself go. But me and the Secretary of Defense would never have allowed that. That would have broken the chain of command.

It's just not what would have happened. And we didn't that have there, on that day. Go ahead.

GLENN: And you know the Intel.

I mean, you were DNI. The Intel industry, is doing stuff, that you wouldn't have liked or wanted to happen either. Do you agree with that?

KASH: Absolutely. Absolutely.

Chris ray has the intelligence. Just ask yourself this: How is it that Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts knew to board up the windows in and around the Capitol, but the intelligence community and the FBI didn't?

Well, as it turns out, Christopher Wray had an Intel report, saying that there could be violence in and around January 6th. And what did he do?

He withheld it. He suppressed it. The calling card of the Deep State. As long as your political narrative is advanced, suppress the truth.

And that is what they did. And the Intel community -- the bottom is corrupt. It's corrupt at the top, with a couple of minor players in between. And we can reform that by removing them, and putting them in the right personnel package.

GLENN: Did you see the story that came out today, in 2022. When Putin was threatening with nuke.

And how President Biden, you know, went to the Murdoch's house. And was talking to all these people about a briefing he just had. About how this is going to become true.
And the government went on -- on high alert.

Does the government have a responsibility, when its Cuban Missile Crisis, kind of crisis, to come on television like Kennedy did? And explain what's happening.

KASH: They do. And a commander-in-chief, with all its faculties should do that.

But Joe Biden is not that commander-in-chief. I don't want him anywhere near a television set.

Because every time he does, he exposes the United States to another national security attack, via cyber or otherwise.

Because they put on blast, the ineffectiveness and ineptitude of our commander-in-chief.

And right now, we don't need any more of that.

GLENN: As somebody who has been around the military and an Intel, for -- for a very long time. What did you make of the opening of his speech on Thursday, where his number one priority, right out -- I mean, didn't even say the State of the Union was strong or anything.

He just went right into, we're at war. Inside and outside of our country.

And we must fight it.

What do you think he was signaling?

KASH: He was speaking to the defense industrial complex. That owns the slum.

The state of our union, from our commander-in-chief, was the state of Ukraine.

That's what he led out with. And that should never happen.

It is a world war of his making, and he is hustling DC, along with the corrupt politicians, who are owned by defense industrial complex, to do one thing: Print money, and send our men and women overseas to fight yet another war for another person and another political target, to achieve victory at home on the political battlefield. Damn the cost. Get blood and treasure. That's what Joe Biden was doing, putting America last.

GLENN: And when you -- when he talked about Israel. I don't know if you saw the report again, that came out today. About Joe Biden saying, I am -- I am going to have a come to Jesus meeting with Bibi Netanyahu. Which is kind of an awkward sentence to say. But said that, which, you know, Bibi has responded with, I have my own red lines.

And then we're putting. We're building a dock for Gaza.

And we're going to be delivering food. Does that sound like a good idea.

KASH: It is an overaggressive, act of aggression. He is building a dock, and saying, we're not going to put boots on the ground. So we're going to put boots on planks and wooden boards, in territorial waters of a sovereign nation. Would the United States of America, ever stand for anyone building a dock on the eastern seaboard, to provide aid for any inner city folks?

Absolutely not. It is a violation of domestic federal statute, and international law. It's an act of overt aggression. And Israelis, and the people in Gaza, are going to be offended and probably take action against it, which is going to harm American men and women in uniform.

GLENN: And what would we do in response with this commander-in-chief?

KASH: We would unfortunately, double down on the fight.

And we would be looking at another 20-year Afghan campaign. Because Iran is flush with cash, thanks to Joe Biden. They launched the war in Israel through Hamas, a proxy. And they are buying Republicans at a rate that has never been seen before. And Joe Biden is weak on the global stage.

All he can do is send men and women to die. So far, five American service members killed in that region, under his watch.

And now he's building a flotilla, off the coastline of a world war. Only bad thing can happen when Joe Biden is --

GLENN: I know people have said this since I was a kid. This is the most important election of our time. Blah, blah, blah.

But, lately, it has gotten to be more and more important. And I, honestly, feel we are in a place that this may be the last election in America, if -- if things don't go right. And people don't stay calm. And everything else.

Do you think that's hyperbole?

KASH: No. We are at an inflection point. Because for the first time in forever, it's national security. National security. National security, and Americans have seen the cost at our border. The cost that we're seeing in the Ukraine and Israel wars.

The cost in terms of Russia and al-Qaeda on the rise.

They have seen Joe Biden politicize intelligence, the Department of Defense and law enforcement, creating a two-tier system of justice, to prosecute political targets.

And they have seen a total weaponization of our government. And that's what we are at an inflection point, come this election. America is seeing that Donald Trump, in my opinion, must be commander-in-chief. The guy who went through all of what we just talked about successfully.

GLENN: Kash, thank you so much.

Kash Patel.

Why Is the Pentagon already WARGAMING Trump's presidency?!

CNN has reported that Pentagon officials are already wargaming their plans for Trump’s second presidency. If Trump issues “controversial” orders, the Department of Defense may have a plan in place to thwart him. This would include the possibilities that Trump would deploy U.S. troops domestically or “fire large swaths of apolitical staffers.” Glenn points out how misleading CNN’s reporting on this is and asks, why is the Pentagon “having secret meanings wargaming what they’ll do against Donald Trump … All of those people should be fired.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So listen to this from CNN. Pentagon officials are holding informal discussions about how the Department of Defense would respond if Donald Trump issues orders to deploy active duty troops domestically. He's not going to do that. He might call out the National Guard. With the permission of the state.

The governor.

I mean, that's what he did last time.

And fire large swaths of apolitical staffers. Well, I think -- I think he could do that. I could see that happening. Trump has suggested, he would be open to using active duty forces for domestic law enforcement. He's talking in case of mass riots all over the country.

And mass deportations. Wait a minute. Why is the Pentagon involved in mass deportations. What?

Why are they discussing this? He's indicated they want to stack the federal government with loyalists and clean out the corrupt actors in the national security establishment.
(applauding)

I don't know about you, I'm for non-corrupt actors. You know, to be in our government. Corrupt actors, to be nowhere in our government. Trump in his last term, had a fraught relationship with much of his senior military leadership, including now retired General Mark Milley, who took steps to limit Trump's ability to use nuclear weapons while he was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. First of all, let me just say this, if you are worried at all about Donald Trump using nuclear weapons, you haven't heard a thing he said.

Second, you need to read Nuclear War by -- what's her name, Stu?

Annie Jacobson. You need to read Nuclear War by Annie Jacobson. It is terrifying. Donald Trump has read it. Donald Trump knows it inside and out. Donald Trump has said over and over and over again.

Why is nobody talking about the use of nuclear weapons? That can never happen. There's no way to win. And it will destroy all life on the planet.

He gets the use of nuclear weapons. So why is the Pentagon trying to limit his use of nuclear weapons?

If he ever asks for the football, it is your constitutional duty to give it to him.

Now, if you think he's impaired, that's when the 25th Amendment comes in.

But no one -- this is a civilian-run military. You don't have the right to subvert the president of the United States. That's not honoring the Constitution. You have -- there's no right for you to do that.

None. None.

The cabinet can. But you can't.

In fact, in Annie Jacobson's book, it's a little terrifying, because you realize, no man can make this decision in six minutes.

And you actually have only about two, once you have all the information.

There's nobody that could -- that could make this decision, wisely and completely.

Nobody!

It should -- I mean, this is what Gorbachev and Reagan came to. They both actually looked at it.

Both talked about it and said, we'll never fight this. Because we'll both lose.

Everybody will lose.

And that's where Donald Trump is!

So thank you, Mark Milley for limit Trump's ability to use nuclear weapons.

The president-elect, meanwhile, has repeatedly called U.S. military generals woke, weak, and ineffective leader. You disagree with any of that?

Pentagon leadership: Woke, weak, and ineffective leader.

STU: Now, Glenn, I want ineffective leaders.

GLENN: Especially woke ones.

STU: I want woke -- these are things that are not always easy to figure out. But if you know who they are, you get them out of there immediately.

GLENN: It's pretty easy to figure out, with the string of successes they've given us here in the last four years.

STU: Right. He's going to find the right people to replace them. Not always easy, but certainly the goal you should be aspiring to.

GLENN: Right. And, by the way, they're saying, you can't let him do this to the military.

Excuse me? What did Biden do the first few days he got into office? He told the military to stand down, worldwide. He shut them down, so they could do a witch hunt. So they could find out, who is naughty, who is nice? Who has voted for Trump? Who says popular things for Trump? And who is on our side?

And they fired those people.

STU: There are some questions on some of this stuff, as to how far executive power reaches.

The commander-in-chief of the military indicates he has the right to do these types of things pretty clearly.

GLENN: Yes. Exactly.

And I'm sorry. The mandate that he just got, also tells us, he has the right to do this.

Now, I'm not for him getting a bunch of zombies in there.

Going, yes. Donald Trump.
That's not what he's looking for.

That's not what I'm looking for.

Remember, this is a guy who doesn't want war.

My gosh, the left should be all for this guy. Anyway.

We're all preparing and planning for the worst-case scenario. But the reality is, we don't know how this is going to play out yet.

They are war gaming the next president of the United States.

Think about that!

The Pentagon is having secret meetings, war gaming what they will do against Donald Trump.

That just in and of itself, all of those people should be fired. Troops are compelled by law, to disobey unlawful orders.

Yes! I remind the troops all the time. Every time I'm with troops. I always say, thank you for your service. Blah, blah, blah. Remember, you serve the Constitution.

Not a man. The Constitution. And I stand by that today. Even with Donald Trump getting in.

STU: Of course.

GLENN: You honor the Constitution.

Troops are compelled by law to disobey. But the question is, what happens then?

Do we see resignations from senior military leaders, or will they view that as abandoning their people?

I don't think your people -- nobody -- nobody that I know, that's down -- the fighting men and women. Nobody thinks that the people at the very top, are their people.

They just don't. Those are career -- they're politicians in military outfits. That's all they are. That's all they are. And they know it.

Why Trump's free speech plan is the "MOST AMAZING" Glenn has ever heard

Donald Trump has released a video explaining his plan to "shatter the left-wing censorship regime" and it's "the most amazing thing" Glenn has heard "any president ever say." Trump promised to stop government officials from colluding with private companies to censor legal speech, clear the bureaucracy of people who had done so, push for a "digital bill of rights," reform Section 230, and do much more. Glenn and Stu discuss this long, detailed list and also review a few concerns they have, which Trump must address very carefully.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Stu, this is like constitutional porn. I just want to warn you. I just want to warn you, you might hear some sexy music, in your own head. You might be like, oh, yeah. Ding-dong, pizza delivery

You might hear that.

This is the most amazing thing I have heard any president ever say. This is Donald Trump.

STU: Wow. That's quite a standard.

GLENN: Just, I want you to make a list. Okay.

When he says, oh. And I'm going to do this.

Just make a list. Okay?

This is his plan to end the censorship cartel.

DONALD: We don't have free speech, then we just don't have a free country. It's as simple as that. If this most if you then right is allowed to perish. Then the rest of our rights and liberties will topple, just like dominoes, one by one.

They will go down. That's why, today, I'm announcing my plan to shatter the left-wing censorship regime. And to reclaim the right to free speech for all Americans.

And reclaim is a very important word in this case, because they've taken it away.

In recent weeks, bombshell reports have confirmed that a sinister group of Deep State bureaucrats, Silicon Valley tyrants, left-wing activists, and depraved corporate news media have been conspiring to manipulate and silence the American people.

They have collaborated to suppress vital information on everything from elections to public health.

Censorship cartel must be dismantled and destroyed.

And it must happen immediately.

And here's my plan.

GLENN: Here we go.

DONALD: First, within hours of my inauguration, I will sign an executive order, banning any federal department or agency, from colluding with any organization, business, or person, to censor, limit, categorize, or impede the lawful speech of American citizens.

I will then ban federal money from being used to label domestic speech as mis or disinformation. And I will begin the process of identifying and firing every federal bureaucrat who has engaged in domestic censorship, directly or indirectly, with whether they are the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health, Human Services, the FBI, the DOJ. No matter who they are.

Second, I will order the Department of Justice to investigate all parties involved in the new unlined censorship regime, which is absolutely destructive and terrible. And to aggressively prosecute any and all crimes identified.

These include possible violations of federal civil rights law, campaign finance laws, federal election law, securities law, and anti-trust laws. The Hatch Act. And a host of other potential criminal, civil, regulatory, and constitutional offenses.

To assist in these efforts, I am urging House Republicans, to immediately send preservation letters. We have to do this, right now.

To the Biden administration, the Biden campaign, and every Silicon Valley tech giant. Ordering them not to destroy evidence of censorship.

Third, upon my inauguration as president, I will ask Congress to send a bill to my desk, rerising Section 230.

To get big online platforms out of censorship business. From now on, digital platform should only qualify for immunity protection under Section 230.

If they mean high standards of neutrality, transparency, fairness, and nondiscrimination.

We should require these platforms to increase their efforts to take down unlawful content, such as child exploitation and promoting terrorism, while dramatically curtailing their power to arbitrarily restrict lawful speech. Fourth, we should break up the entire toxic censorship industry that has arisen under the false guise of tackling so-called mis and disinformation.

The federal government should immediately stop funding all nonprofits and academic programs, that support this authoritarian project.

If any US university is discovered to have engaged in censorship activities, or election interferences in the past, such as flagging social media content for removal of blacklisting. Those universities should lose federal research dollars and federal student loan support for a period of five years, and maybe more.

We should also enact new laws, laying out clear criminal penalties for federal bureaucrats, who partner with private entities to do an end run with the Constitution.

And to deprive Americans of their First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights. In other words, deprive them of their vote!

And once you lose those elections, and once you lose your voters like we have, you no longer have a country.

Furthermore, to confront the problems of major platforms being infiltrated. By legions of former Deep Staters.

And intelligence officials.

There should be a seven-year calling off period, before any employee of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DNI, DHS, or DOD is allowed to take a job, at a company, possessing vast quantities of US data.

Fifth, the time has finally come for Congress to pass a digital Bill of Rights.

This should include a right to digital due process. In other words, government officials should need a court order to take town online content. Not send information requests such as the FBI was sending to Twitter.

Furthermore, when uses of big online platforms after the content or accounts removed. Throttled. Shadow banned or otherwise restricted.

No matter what name they used. They should have the right to be informed, that it's happening. The right to a specific explanation, of the reason why.

And the right to a timely appeal. In addition, all users over the age of 18 should have the right to opt out of content moderation and curation entirely.

And receive an unmanipulated stream of information. If they so choose.

The fight for free speech is a matter of victory or death for America and for the survival of Western civilization itself.

When I'm president, this whole rotten system of censorship and information control, will be ripped out of the system at large. There won't be anything left. By restoring free speech, we will begin to reclaim our democracy and save our nation.

Thank you, and God bless America.

GLENN: Wow!

STU: I mean, that is -- first thing that strikes me on that, is just how different it was than 2016. That is not a guy who is just walking in. I don't know. Who should we pick?

Like, that is somebody who has a plan.

GLENN: No. That's one of the exciting things is.

This is so detailed. Even what he just said -- you know there's much more than this behind each one of these. And so much thought behind all of this.

This is a guy who has sat there for at least the last two years. Probably the last four years. Going, all right.

I'll get a second chance.

What do we do? What do we do?

This is the most comprehensive thing I've ever heard a Republican president, ever lay out.

Now, the Democrats do it. But usually they do it in about a bill of 3,000 pages. And you just don't find out, until after the happy meal bill.

You know, and you're like, wait. Is this for Happy Meals?

STU: The Inflation Reduction Act?

GLENN: Yeah. Kind of like that.

I mean, look at the list.

STU: Yeah. There is a lot in there.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: Going after the federal employees colluding to censor speech.

GLENN: And put them jail.

STU: Taking the federal money. And away from people who are kind of walking that line, and drawing our guardrails on mis and disinformation.

GLENN: That's that -- that's that -- what was the name of that organization over in England, that we helped start? Over all the people -- all the people that were involved in that, buh-bye.

STU: And I think a lot of the people on the left and the media take it as, oh, he just wants to be able to say conspiracy theories and not fact-checked. And that's just not -- the truth is, the federal government should have no role in that.

You want to have a media organization -- that's not going to stop ABC News from doing misinformation reporting, as dumb as it might be. It will just stop federal money going to that process, which is totally appropriate for a country which has a 14th amendment. Prosecuting crimes that happened. I'm sure, this is punishing enemies.

But in a reality, if you commit a crime, it's supposed to be --

GLENN: Yes, and this is a constitutional crime. Government getting involved in freedom of speech. That's a constitutional crime.

STU: And sending preservation letters, so that these suites can go forward. So they're not clearing out and deleting all these files now, before he gets into office.

That's tough, and by the way, not something he can do personally. That's going to be something Sanders --

GLENN: No. That's why he said, they have to send that right away.

STU: Look, all of this is I think good.

Is there any part in there, that makes you at all nervous?

There's a couple of points in there that I could see going the wrong way, if we're not careful. Which is rewriting Section 230.

GLENN: Yes. That could be dicey.

STU: That could be -- there's nothing wrong with rewriting Section 230. But you just have to -- you have to be careful with it.

GLENN: What he said is --

STU: I think what he said --

GLENN: -- as long as you have quality --

STU: High standards of neutrality.

GLENN: Yeah. High standards of neutrality. You have to qualify for that. And you should -- you should ban things that are illegal. You know, child porn, terrorism. Things like that.

STU: Of course. And that is theoretically already there. But we have really loose standards on these companies for enforcing it.

It's basically like, if you get multiple requests to take some material down, and you don't, you could be in trouble.

Generally speaking, they are -- they don't have to take action to go get the stuff. They have to just wait for it to be reported to them, and then they have to do it after that process. But the process of course is really weak.

You have millions and millions and millions of posts going up. They would argue, that it's impossible to get to all of it. Oh, well.

Oh, well. Oh, no. Maybe you don't get to be as large a company. Maybe -- you know, look, my fantasy, of course, here is, maybe this doesn't work within the law.

And the social media companies just go away. That would be tragic. That would be terrible.

GLENN: It would be.

STU: Now, of course, Zoren. Max Zoren. Zoren Industries, if you go back to A View to A Kill, the documentary from 1985 --

GLENN: Right. I believe that was a James Bond movie.

STU: Actually, he advocated for explosives under the earth that would cause an earthquake that would flood all of Silicon Valley.

He must get to that. Unfortunately. I was waiting for it, one of the action steps.

Didn't quite get there.

Maybe that's step seven.

We'll get there eventually.

GLENN: The digital Bill of Rights is so important.

STU: Yeah. That's interesting.

GLENN: What's interesting about that, you have a right to go without an algorithm. Love that.

STU: And it's interesting because the -- Europe has a digital Bill of Rights.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: I would assume it won't look much like the Trump one.

GLENN: No. I don't think so.

STU: First of all, there's some similarities there. You own your own data.

That's the concept between the European one. Some of those concepts, you could say are good. And I'm sure will be brought over.

Also, just the idea, that you don't have to be manipulated by this.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Now. It's tough.

Because you should be able to run a website, that you own. Right?

TheBlaze should not need to go neutral. And give all sorts of information from the left. Right?

We should be able to do what we want to do with our own website.

Now, there's that distinction between publisher, and sort of cure rater.

Social network, that I think will probably be the line there. Again, the details matter on this stuff.

As we've seen over and over and over again.

If you don't get that exactly right. It could be a problem. But, you know, that's what the process will be for.

GLENN: First of all, you're in public square now.

STU: I --

GLENN: I know.

STU: I hate the public square argument.

GLENN: I know, but it's digital now.

STU: I know.

GLENN: Nobody gets on their soapbox and we're walking in our town square. And you see somebody stand and up say, I want to give a speech.

STU: Well, if you want a town square, then it's like, then make a town square. These are companies that have spent their own money on this stuff. I just feel like they should be -- look, there's a lot here, that I understand. And I think is a good thing. Making essentially, just turning giant private companies into utilities -- I mean, should Elon Musk have to deal with all that?

If he -- he bought the company. When is the next -- the next government -- the next time the Democrats get in control, and they take this public square and make their own rules with it. It makes me really nervous. I get what he's saying.

I think the -- I think we'll be able to walk this line. But let's be honest that we have to walk a line here and just be careful here.

GLENN: I agree with that. But you have things like an algorithm. You have a right to unmask. I don't have a right to necessarily know their algorithm.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: But I do have a right to say, you know what, I don't want you filtering stuff.

Why don't you have a right to do that.

STU: This is the sort of thing that they should have just done.

It wouldn't have been an issue, if they just did it.

It would have been easy. They should have just had an off button. But they couldn't bring themselves to do that. Because they wanted, A, money and, B, to control the public opinion.

GLENN: Correct. How many people will have their eyes be opened if you have that, and say, just unmask it. Just unmask it for a week. See what you see. It would be pretty amazing.

5 GAME CHANGING moves Trump could make in his second presidential term

Glenn and Stu discuss what they’re most excited to see in a second Trump term. Will Trump have BOTH the House and Senate so he doesn’t have to rely on executive orders? Will Elon Musk be able to clean out the bureaucracy? Can Trump lower the income tax or abolish the 16th Amendment altogether? Will his tariff plan work? Will he be able to reduce the government’s spending? Will we finally see term limits for members of Congress?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So, Stu, are you -- are you almost giddy at what is possibly coming?

STU: Yeah!

I think I'm really -- I'm excited. I was trying to think of what I'm most excited about. Because there's a good chance the Republicans get the House.

And, by the way, this is going to be close.

GLENN: Don't toy with my feelings here, Stu.

STU: Yeah. I was interested. Because there's so -- I think this is the right thing to feel.

But there's very little panic over the house. I think the Republicans will get it. But if you think about like, the shenanigans that have better than been worried about over the years.

GLENN: I don't know if it was shenanigans.

STU: Yeah. I was going to go a different direction.

The shenanigans that we have been worried about over the years. It would be a heck of a lot easier to steal this election. Than anything else that you could possibly imagine.

We will be completely dependent on California districts that take two weeks to count. That is legitimately what the House comes down to.

The fact that we're not freaked out about that. Is good.

Maybe that means, at the end of the day, whatever problems we have had before, have been solved.

At the end of the day, we are looking at a very close, 220, maybe 221, if we're lucky, in the House.

It will be in that general vicinity. Markets say, it's a 93 percent chance that Republicans will get the House. Not 100.

So that's still out there.

But if you are able to get that. I was thinking, what does that mean?

You will have 53 senators, at least. McCormick, by the way, even though some places haven't called that race. McCormick will get that race in Pennsylvania.

You still have two possibilities. Kari Lake in Arizona and Sam Brown in Nevada, that are possible.

I would say probably less than 50 percent on those. But 53 isn't 50 or 51. So you've got a little bit of a cushion there.

The more cushion you have --

GLENN: You just have enough for Murkowski and Collins.

STU: Right. And Collins. You at least you have that going for you, which is nice.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And the more cushion you have, the better bill you can get out of let's say reconciliation, to keep it nerdy as possible.

You will get one bill, basically, that is going to give you, that will pass with 50 votes.

This is how Donald Trump passed the tax break package. He passed back in his first term. And we may very well get a good tax break package.

It may be really good, you know, maybe he gets even more aggressive. Because, remember, that was sort of an off-the-shelf government proposal, largely, that they passed in 2017. So maybe we'll get something even better.

But honestly, I was thinking about. That's not what I'm most excited about. I think what I might be most excited about is the prospect of Elon Musk coming in and identifying places to come.

GLENN: Oh. Me too.

STU: Like, there's something about that. Because that is really his -- all of his brilliance.

We all know the guy is a genius.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But of all his brilliance, that is what you take most away from what he was able to bring to all of the companies.

Sometimes, it's even presented as soulless and heartless. Right?

He just comes in, and he has no care. We don't need --

GLENN: Hang on just a second. It's a company.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, it's not a charity. It's a company.

STU: Agreed.

GLENN: And look at how many people this heartless bastard cut from Twitter.

Well, it's doing better than it ever has. You know, you might have your complaints here or there. But I believe X saved the republic.

I wonder if it wasn't for Elon Musk, buying Twitter. If we would have won.

STU: I think that's very true.

I think remember, when you say it's doing better than it ever has done. You can definitely look at financial measures that do not agree with that comment. However, that's not what his goal was.

What was his goal? His goal was to allow people to speak freely?

And it was an expensive genre, into that world.

I mean, you know, but it was worth it, I think. And it was something -- he was protecting the First Amendment. And I didn't mean to say it in a negative way. When I said heartless and soulless, that was how it was portrayed by many.

GLENN: That's how it was spun many times.

STU: Yeah. And there are plenty stories of him being tough on employees. Maybe too tough on certain employees.

But that attitude, 100 percent is necessary in the federal government.

Whatever he thought was waste, at Tesla, or SpaceX, or Twitter, is nothing compared to the burden we all carry with incompetent employees and complete waste. And nonsensical programs, that accomplish nothing.

We all carry that burden.

And if Donald Trump empowers him, and he wants to take this on, as they talked about in the campaign. I feel like, it's one of those things we could actually see a real difference made.

Not just a little, hey, we should get 4 percent off of this rate, which I will cheer on.

I will be happy with tax rates going down.

But like, that's something I think that could really change the country in a positive direction.

GLENN: So I want you to bring your best hat, your best thinking cap on Monday.

Because I scheduled a -- an economist, who said, the way that Donald Trump is thinking about -- thinking about tariffs, would mean an 18 thousand dollar raise for everybody.

And could actually work to pay our -- to pay our -- you know, our bills every month. And now, I don't know.

I haven't heard the full argument. But I just want to hear it. Because if we can cut back our spending, so it's fairly reasonable.

And we're still, you know, providing a safety net and everything else.

I am very interested in rebuilding our industries. Rebuilding our factories. And -- and actually motivating people, to go to work.

And -- and learn a real skill, and start making things here in America. And having pride in that.

STU: Yeah, for sure.

GLENN: And I think, for the first time, I think if I can -- if I can get somebody to tell me all of the metrics and the numbers. Because I -- you know, the numbers have to. They have to work out.

But that to me, is thrilling.

Even if you went to a 5 percent income tax. I would rather abolish it.

But if you did something track. You imagine the money that would open up. That could be invested in job creation.

New businesses. Can you imagine what would happen in a country, where we didn't have income tax?

STU: I -- look, the -- there is a three-pronged approach, right?

That he's talked about. One is raising tariffs. One is -- as you mentioned, getting rid of the income tax.

And a third would be cutting the government down level to levels. You know, roughly, you of course adjust for inflation, and you adjust for population growth and all these things.

But roughly to the 1800s. As he talked about 1880s.

GLENN: Or 1920s. Calvin Coolidge did this.

STU: Calvin Coolidge did this as well. He was more friendly to tariffs.

Even though, it's not my favorite policy. But he's one of my favorite presidents.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But, you know, those three things are, if you could do all three of those together. It adjusts the country in a way that is so dramatic.

It would probably be do a lot of really positive things.

GLENN: Yeah. Like 5 percent growth.

Like 5 percent growth a year.

That's -- that puts us into the -- when China was doing well kind of growth.

STU: And I think we can get locked into the sort of fantasy league here.

GLENN: I like to.

I've been doomsday for a long time.

STU: Hey. This is the right time to do it. He just won. What can we do here?

The issue with these policies together is one of them is really easy to do, which is raise tariffs. Donald Trump can do that just on his own.
The other two are nearly impossible.

I mean, get over -- and I'm not -- I have literally sold mugs at StuDoesMerch.com. That's a repeal the 16th Amendment. So 100 percent, this should be our goal.

But you're right. Like there might be a modified version of this that makes sense. If you can control spending, if you can cut some, and you can lower the income tax, a great deal, and replace some of that income with tariffs.

I don't think that that would be the type of situation, that would be horrible.

I don't -- I mean, we do forget at times, we are the second largest manufacturing country in the world.

We do make a lot of things here.

GLENN: I know. I do.

STU: And a lot of times, those measures I think are a little bit out of whack. That being said, I'm happy to trade.

I'll trade getting rid of the income tax for a lot.

There's a lot of stuff I'm willing to deal with on the policy front, if we could get a win like that. And why not go for it?

Why not?

GLENN: I know.

I mean, he's the guy who could do it.

Donald Trump is the guy who could do it.

He could get that constitutional amendment passed on the -- the term limits, on Congress. I think he could get that passed.

If he backed it, he could get it passed.

If he wanted to repeal the 16th amendment, with another constitutional amendment, and he really laid it out.

Here's what this would mean for you. I -- think the numbers are so staggering, that who wouldn't be for that?

STU: Well, certainly. Constitutional amendments are difficult.

Because you need the other side involved in them.

That makes them -- I mean, there are other approaches.

But you know how hard it is. It's hard. We've done it 27 times, in a couple hundred years. And most of them are at the beginning.

It's really hard to do. And it should be hard to do, by the way. That's a change that I would absolutely love.

Term limits are one. Term limits, I would say, are arguably more interesting, from a pragmatic doable circumstance.

This is a really popular policy.

People can't stand the fact that Nancy Pelosi just won her 20th term in Congress.

20 terms in Congress. People don't like that. They don't like it on Republicans or Democrats. You're talking about 80 percent approval numbers for a proposal like that. And I think Trump also looks at it and says, you know what, good chance, you know what, if I ran again, I would win.

I'm limited. Why aren't you? I think he looks at that as a general idea of fairness, why is the president limited for -- to two terms, when they are -- when senators get to go for two -- multiple six-year terms. Congressmen can go forever, with two-year terms.

Why not make it so there are limits across-the-board?

GLENN: Wouldn't it be amazing if the last time they put term limits on was through Congress. Because they saw how out of control FDR was.

And it was the Democrats that led that, and thought, we can't. We can't have that. We can't that have.

And now, to come back after Congress has done nothing. And our government is -- is out of control. Like it was at the beginning of FDR, and through Woodrow Wilson.

To have now the president come back and say, all right. Let's finish that job.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: The progressives always take people's breath away. They always go too far. And they hit a point to where you're like, oh, my gosh.

That is like, oh, what are we doing here? And they've done it again.

STU: You notice that, when you see people with bulging in their swimming suits winning gold medals.

GLENN: Yeah. For the women's.

STU: For the women's swimming events. Yeah, no. I mean, I think that's true.

You can get something like term limits.

I think there's very, very limited opposition to Donald Trump, for what he makes a priority from the Republicans. So when you're talking about laws, you're not going to get much pushback from Republicans on this stuff. I think, you know, when you get into constitutional amendments, it becomes much more difficult.

But it's all a matter of what Donald Trump prioritizes. If you remember 2016 and 2017, he also ran on a proposal to -- to do term limits.

He just never made it a huge priority.

He would mention it in speeches. This time, I think he's serious about it. In his first -- that speech we played earlier. The first ten things he wants to do.

GLENN: If you haven't heard it. Oh, it's so great.

Will Trump’s 10-point plan to DISMANTLE the Deep State work?

Donald Trump has released a 10-point plan to dismantle the Deep State during his second presidential term and Glenn can’t see how anyone can be against it. Glenn reviews the plan and how it should unite America. Glenn and Stu also discuss some possible moves Trump should make to troll the media and the Left …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me go to Trump, announcing his ten-step plan to dismantle the Deep State. Listen to this. If you haven't heard it, you will love this.

DONALD: Here's my plan to dismantle the Deep State and reclaim our democracy from Washington corruption, once and for all. And corruption it is. First, I will immediately reissue my 2020 executive order restoring the president's authority to remove rogue bureaucrats. And I will wield that power very aggressively. Second, we will clean out all the corrupt actors in our national security and intelligence apparatus. And there are plenty of them.

The departments and agencies, that have been weaponized will be completely overhauled, so that faceless bureaucrats will never again be able to target and persecute conservatives, Christians, or the left's political enemies, which they're doing now at a level that nobody can believe even possible.

Third, we will totally reform FISA courts, which are so corrupt, that the judges seemingly do not care whether they are lied to in warrant applications. So many judges have seen so many applications, that they know were wrong, or at least they must have known. They do nothing about it. They're lied to.

Fourth, to expose the hoaxes and abuses of power, that have been tearing our country apart. We will establish a truth and reconciliation commission, to declassify and publish all documents on Deep State spying, censorship, and corruption. And there are plenty of them.

Fifth, we will launch a major crackdown government leakers who collude with the fake news to deliberately weave false narratives and to subvert our government and our democracy.

When possible, we will press criminal charges.

Sixth, we will make every inspector general's office independent and physically separated from the departments they oversee, so that they do not become the protectors of the Deep State.

Seventh, I will ask Congress to establish an independent auditing system to continually monitor our intelligence agencies, to ensure, they are not spying on our citizens, or running disinformation campaigns against the American people. Or that they're not spying on someone's campaign, like they spied on my campaign.

Eighth, we will continue the effort, launched by the Trump administration, to move parts of the sprawling federal bureaucracy, to new locations, outside the Washington swamp.

Just as I moved the Bureau of Land Management to Colorado, as many as 100 thousand government positions, could be moved out. And I mean, immediately, of Washington, to places filled with patriots, who love America. And they really do love America.

Ninth, I will work to ban federal bureaucrats from taking jobs, at the companies they deal with.

That they regulate. So they deal with these companies. Or they regulate these companies. Then they want to take jobs from these companies.

Doesn't work that way. Such a public display, cannot go on. And it's taking place all the time, like with Big Pharma. Finally, I will push a constitutional amendment, to oppose term limits on members of Congress. This is how I will shatter the Deep State, and restore a government that is controlled by the people and for the people. Thank you very much.

GLENN: I just -- now, tell me, what is -- what is possibly objectionable about that? Everybody wants term limits. And he's going for a constitutional amendment.

Everybody wants it, except for the people in Congress. He wants to ban the bureaucrats, from going into the businesses that they regulate after they leave government.

That's absolutely fantastic. That stops all of this graft and all of this corruption. But Democrats have been asking for that, for forever.

Moving government, breaking it up, and moving it to different parts of the country. I think that's smart just for Homeland Security. I just hope they don't poison the places where they're moving them to.

Independent monitoring of the intelligence agency. So they're not spying on Americans.

How could you possibly, as a Democrat, how could you possibly be against that?

They're not spying on us. And there's no disinformation campaigns, which we know happened. The inspector general's office of each thing that they monitor, being independent from those -- from those institutions.

So if I am monitoring, and I'm the inspector general, of the Pentagon, I'm not part of the Pentagon. So I can't be shut down. That is fantastic.

How could you be possibly against that.

This one is a little -- we have to look at the wording. Government leakers. He will fire any government leakers, and prosecute where possible. If they are trying to subvert the government or working in collusion, to give false narratives to the press. Okay?

I think I'm for that one. But I want to make sure that leakers and whistle-blowers are protected.

The FISA courts, Stu. How could you possibly be against that, if you're a Democrat?

And the Justice Department. Clean up the Justice Department. What was the other one? Oh, going for the truth and reconciliation.

That's a document dump. Who is against document dumps? I would like to know exactly what the truth is on all of these things.

I want to know. I think this is uniting. Now, the press will make this into a horrible dictatorial stuff. But it's not. Practice have if -- if the Biden administration would have done this, I would have been for all of these.

Now, what is the problem with them, Stu?

STU: Yeah. I mean, I think if you go through all those proposals, probably the worst thing you can say about them, is that several of them are sort of just not particularly interesting to the average person. Like, I think a lot of people don't even know what a FISA court is. Like, when you're talking about it from that perspective, they might be good policies. But they're not going to be exciting.

And they range from that, to the most popular proposals in our public discourse. Immure talking about things like term limits.

Which you talk about 80 percent popularity, around a proposal like that.

And the only thing stopping it is Congress. They've been, you know, doing this forever. Because they're protecting their own gigs.

Now, I will say, I am going to be very, very entertained when part of this proposal, he floats to taunt the media, a third presidential term. That's going to be fun.

And I can't wait until he does it. Because you know he will do it.

If senators get 12 years, why wouldn't a president. Your favorite president. Why wouldn't he get 12 years?

That's coming.

GLENN: I want him to float the idea of packing the court. I want him to do that, just so badly. Because everybody would be like, that's -- you can't do -- that's ridiculous.

He's going to control the court forever that way. That's unconstitutional. I would love him to just float it for about a week. And then say, huh. Thank you for all of those sound bites. We will use them against you, if you ever get in power and try for pack the court. Because you clearly know why this is wrong.

STU: Yeah. Honestly, I would -- I'm sorry -- I love that approach.

I think he comes out. He says, I'm going to start studying those proposals made by the left, during the last couple of years, as some of them sound interesting. Let them all get excited.

Then come back. Pull the rug out from underneath it. Then propose something that locks it at nine, forever.

Seriously. This is ridiculous. Let's just set it at 9:00. And then be done with it.

This shouldn't be something that is even talked about. It is a ridiculous manipulation of power.

We've seen the left try to do it hundred times. Let's get rid of that one forever.

You are going to have it, go through a constitutional process. Check that one in there too.

GLENN: So friends of mine sent me a text message, between two friends, that just came in.

And I really -- this -- this is mental illness. It really is mental illness. Listen to -- listen to this exchange via text. Okay?

Did you all vote Republican?

Just trying to figure out who to trust.

We voted both ways. We're Libertarians.

Okay. This is the response.

We voted both ways, we're Libertarians.

Sorry. If you feel our choices in this election is needed to end the friendship.

I feel like we've trusted one another throughout the years. Unfortunately, no one is perfect, in either way that you choose.

I hope you can still feel comfortable, reaching out to us. If you ever need anything.

And still be friends.

Now, this is a long-term friendship.

Men are hurting us!

They're laughing gleefully at our pain.

If you voted Republican, that's all because you're okay with that.

Men are hurting us. Could you be more specific? Men are hurting us. Could you also show us where the men are that are laughing in your face? They are holding up signs saying women are property. Could you help me out with that one. Could you show me a picture of those signs?

STU: That one, I did see a real estate listing, that did list women as property. So that is happening.

GLENN: Okay. So it's a real decision --

STU: Online.

GLENN: Okay. All right.

Are your daughters property? Well, they are now.

STU: Huh.

GLENN: What?

Now, this person responds in a way that I wouldn't have. I would have saved this one for later. Because I have too many questions on what she just said. She said, are you all going to sell the Tesla now? Isn't that supporting Musk and the Republican Party. Then the friend responded. I saw your Ted Cruz sign.

He wants my child dead.

STU: That was a weird part of his campaign. The whole, I want your child dead, vote for me, instead of Allred chanting.

But it worked. He won.

GLENN: Right. And then she responded the Tesla thing. No. We bought it used. And there's no way to escape capitalism right now.

But you chose this. You chose to make women property.

Well, I'm sure I'm sorry that you feel like you have to you be friend us. There were good things on both sides. If you hate us, then you really never knew us.

I hope you get everything you voted for.

I hope it all affects you personally.

Me too, actually.

I hope it affects you too, because it will be good.

You hate me and my child if you voted for people who openly called for our deaths. Who called for your deaths?

Please, give me. Before you break up a long-term friendship, can you please just give me the original source, of people calling for your deaths.

Now, I'm sure there are people online, that have said, really crazy things.

Because honestly, let's go up about four paragraphs, and what you just sent. You say really crazy things, too.

So let's just deal with who said that, when it was said, what the context was. Because I've never heard that before. So now, we all know. I already knew, but I hope you were able to see what was happening because you're not stupid.

Please, forget we exist.

I beg you not to talk to anyone about my son, who is disabled.

We're first on the chopping block.

Now, apparently, the son is trans, and disabled. Well, you know what, I think there are rules at Auschwitz. Yeah. He would be first. Oh, we don't live in Nazi Germany, do we?

Please forget we exist, and don't turn us in. Wow. You are 100 percent, I guess we voted wrong. Sarcasm in the face of my pain?

What pain? What pain?

Your pain is being caused because you believe lies. If you actually think that Donald Trump wants your trans handicapped child dead, you have no idea. You are so far out of reality.

I hope you have a lovely day. God bless you and your family. Typically.

I'm kidding. Please don't hurt us. We don't exist. You don't know us.

You're so compassionate with your name-calling, and if you believe that, stop texting us. What name did I call you

I will stop. But I didn't call you any names. I did not. I truly hope that you would see the light, because the Cruz sign didn't come back. I thought you would care that women are dying.

Again, give me a fact. Show me an original source.

Where are women dying?

We are now literally property of men.

You say literally, show me the source on that.

My mistake.

You said we were stupid with, for who we voted for.

No. I said you were not stupid. Which means you did it with purpose.

Oh, so I'm not stupid. I'm just evil, voting knowingly for your child to be killed?

May your daughters bleed out in the hospital parking lot now. I hope you have the good sense to be lesbians or childless cat ladies.

Again, as I said, you're 100 percent right. Maybe four more years, we can be friends. L-O-L.

Women are property now.

What the hell is wrong with people?