RADIODecember 12, 2024

THEORY: Did the Pentagon LIE About the New Jersey Drones?

New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew recently claimed that the mysterious drones hovering over New Jersey are being launched from an Iranian “mothership” off the U.S. coast. Is there any truth to this or the Pentagon’s denial that the U.S. military is involved? Glenn speaks with New Jersey Assemblyman Brian Bergen, who recently attended a “mind boggling” meeting with the Department of Homeland Security. DHS, he says, claimed to have no information at all on the drones, except that they’re untrackable. Something doesn’t add up here, Glenn says. So, he runs his own theory by Assemblyman Bergen: what if the military is lying to us?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So yesterday, Republican Representative Jeff Van Drew told Fox news this about the drones in New Jersey.

VOICE: You know, I'm also on the transportation committee, on the aviation subcommittee, and I've gotten to know people.

And from very high sources, very qualified sources, very responsible sources, I'm going to tell you the real deal.

Iran launched a mothership. Probably about a month ago.

That contains these drones. That mothership is off -- I'm going to tell you the deal.

It's off east coast of the United States of America.

They've launched drones. It's everything that we can see or hear. And, again, these are from high sources. I don't say this lightly.

Now, you know, we know there was a probability. It could have been our own government. You know it wasn't our own government, because they would have let us know.

It could have been some really glorified hobbyist that we're doing something unbelievable. They don't have the technology. But let's pretend that's possible.

A third possibility was somebody, an adversarial country doing this.

Know that Iran made a deal with China, to purchase drones, motherships, and technology.

GLENN: Okay. Stop.

Now, the Pentagon came out and said, that's not true.

There's a state senator, you might have seen this, on X. Last night.

Here's what Doug Steinhardt said, on these drones.

Cut 13.
(music)

VOICE: The best information that we have available to us, at this point, suggest that these drones are coming from offshore. That when we try to make contact with them. They become evasive and elusive. You know, from my perspective, if they're American assets. If they're American military. If they're American drones, and I think we owe the American people answers or explanations.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Now, Brian Bergen is another New Jersey assemblyman. He drove two hours for a private meeting with the FBI, Department of Homeland Security. And everybody else. This was going around last night.

And he left the meeting.

He said, it was the biggest bunch of bullcrap he's ever heard.

He's former military. He said, we don't know what it is. Of course we know what it is. And they gave us no information. He was really angry.

He's joining me here in about four minutes. So stand by.

I think I know what these are. I think -- but I'm not ruling out, the Iran thing.

I mean, that -- that -- I mean, a strike right now, would put the world at war.

I don't think so. The Pentagon said had to. But do you trust the pentagon?

The problem is here. We don't trust anybody.

Because they've all betrayed our trust.

That's why people voted on both sides, for Donald Trump.

Because we have to know the truth.

GLENN: I want to bring in Brian Bergen. I saw Brian on I think it was X yesterday.

He's a New Jersey assemblyman, that drove a couple of hours, for this meeting with, you know, the DHS and the FAA, and everybody that should know, what the heck is going on with these drones. And he walked out early. He was so flaming angry. And I wanted to get him on today. Brian, how are you?

BRIAN: I'm doing great, Glenn. Thanks for having me, man.

GLENN: You bet.

So why did you walk out yesterday? What happened?

BRIAN: Well, so we got called down there. We being all 120 members of the state legislature of New Jersey.

And the assembly and the Senate, got invited to come down to the special legislator-only briefing down in the state police headquarters. And the state police was there, and the Department of Homeland Security was there. And they were supposed to tell us what was going on.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait. Hang on just a second. So they didn't even come to you?

BRIAN: No.

GLENN: They said to all the legislators. Instead of, how many guys were speaking? Ten?

BRIAN: Less.

GLENN: Less than ten. Okay. All right. That's good. All right.

BRIAN: Yeah. Yeah. So we all went there.

And the first thing they say, this is not a classified briefing.

In fact, we could have probably let the press in.

Then they went on and they said, that they know nothing. And they have no understanding what's going on.

They don't know where they're coming from. Where they're going to.

Or who is responsible for it.

And so I was just -- I was just pissed, that we're there to listen to such a Bush-league amateur hour presentation, that they could have given us via text message.

And what really got me upset, was the primary reason why I left early.

Was two things.

The colonel or the state police said he had a helicopter of his, hovering directly above one of these drones, which is called a six-foot drone.

But he felt unsafe for his pilots. And had them land. Ten minutes later, he says, hey. It would be really nice to know, where these things are going or coming from.

I'm like, why did you follow him? When you had it in your sites.

I mean, I have no idea why --

GLENN: Now, I just -- I want the audience to know, you were -- you were an Apache helicopter pilot in Iraq. You have a bronze star, combat action badge. Several honors.

You graduated at West Point. You're not a nobody on what happens in the sky.

BRIAN: Right. Right. That's exactly right.

First of all, what he said, people were hovering above it. I said, well, that's stupid.

Who hovers above a target? You know, you want to get a standoff distance and follow it. You know, so you can use your assistance to track it.

Yes. I'm speaking from some level of experience here.

But more importantly, it was just common sense.

You have this thing in your sites. That you know is potentially a threat.

Because we don't know where it's coming. Where it's going. And who is controlling it.

And it's 6 feet big in the sky.

And you just let it go.

I mean, it was mind-boggling to me.

The second thing that they said, that really sent me through the moon.

Was the Department of Homeland Security. Has some device. That they will give to the state police, that will help them identify drones in the sky.

And it's supposed to be pretty cool technology.

It filters out birds and stuff like that.

It's supposed to be really good.

Anyway, one of my colleagues said, well, when are you going to get it?

And the colonel of the state police said, it should be here in a couple of days.

And I was like, in my head, should be here in a couple of days? What the hell are you doing?

Somebody go get in a van. Drive it to freaking New Jersey, right now. You know, Glenn. This is the level of stupidity, that we're dealing with here.

And that's why I was so frustrated. And continue to be frustrated.

GLENN: Okay. So let me run a couple of things by you.

First, a Congressman came out yesterday. And said, I have it on good authority, that it's Iran.

And I have to ship off -- if that were true, would we not have followed these things back to the ship?

Why aren't we -- if they're going back over the water, and they're not ours, why wouldn't we be blowing them up, over the water?

BRIAN: Well, so that's a great question, and it was Congressman Van Drew who said that. And I think very highly of Congressman Van Drew. And he's not someone who normally says something outlandish like that. But in this case -- I rag on our state government all the time. And in this case, Homeland Security.

But our US Navy is a force to be reckoned with. Now, I'm a West Point grad.

We beat the hell out of the Navy this weekend.

But I have to give them some respect.

Because they would not allow an Iranian ship of any kind to get close to us.

So I find that to be pretty unusual, that that happened.

GLENN: Correct.

So the next thing is, if we couldn't track these things.

I've been in the new jersey and New York area.

There's a lot of airplanes in the sky.

If you can't track these. And you don't know where they are, you would ground all of the planes. Because you don't know if they're hostile to planes.

You don't know if someone of them just gets into the flight path of another.

There are planes everywhere in the sky.

So, again, that leads me to believe, you can track these. And you know where they're coming from.

BRIAN: Yeah. I don't know all the technology available to them.

What I do know. We're the United States of America. I live in a state. New Jersey, which has a 56 billion-dollar budget.

The fact we don't have the resources to figure this out. Is ludicrous.

You're right. There's a lot of -- the concerns are piling up now.

That you mentioned. What if they go dark, as the governor said. You know, that's a danger to other aircraft that operate in visual flight rules at night.

You know, there's a lot of potential issues here. You know, some lawmakers are calling for a -- a shutdown of drone activity in the sky. But, you know, we don't even know who these people are. What they're doing. They certainly won't live listen if we shut down activity.

GLENN: Right. What if we take all the guns from the good guys?

BRIAN: Right.

But what we do need to do is common sense. It just needs to be an all hands on deck approach.

The state police, the National Guard, which can be mobilized by the governor.

The Department of Homeland Security. And they need to follow one of these suckers to wherever it goes, and let's figure who is responsible.

GLENN: So here's what baffles me, Brian. You get one guy with a laser pointer in his backyard, and he points it at an airplane and a pilot, and the FAA tackles that guy, they -- they grapple down from helicopters and make sure that never happens again. How do we -- if this is some private citizen or citizens doing it. How would we not know that?

BRIAN: You're 100 percent right. And that's why, in an interview I had yesterday, I said, it's a lack of effort.

It has to be a lack of effort.

You know, the FBI is an amazing organization. That takes down people, all the time, before they do all kinds of crazy stuff.

They have a litany of successes that they can point to, of stopping things before they happen. Because of the counter terrorism effort. And the intelligence efforts. Why the hell they can't find anybody responsible for this. Or pick up any chatter is crazy.

GLENN: Okay. Let me give you my theory.

And please, if you think it's nonsense. Shoot it full of holes.

My uncle used to be in military intelligence, back in the '60s and '70s. And he did all of the nuclear stuff. And when the stealth B1 bomber came out. The wing. He said, old technology. And I said, what?

And had he's -- because remember, it was first spotted. And they were like, what is that?

It's a UFO. And he's like, that's been available for a while.

They'll announce it to the country.

And they'll fly it around. And people will speculate.

Oh, yeah. We have a B1 bomber.

It's new.

I think a good chance is, we are sending someone a message. Or we're doing something with the -- I mean, Russia just launched, you know, a hypersonic missile.

It doesn't make sense that our government doesn't know what this is. And can't stop it. And doesn't see it as a danger.

What makes sense, is they're lying to us.

They know what this is.

And it's not extra terrestrial. And it's not any of that crap.

What do you think?

BRIAN: Well, so I don't disagree with the premise here. One of the things I will say is unique to this area, and where all this is happening.

We have a military inflation called Picatinny Arsenal.

And it's very important, to Picatinny Arsenal, that there's good community relations. Because, you know, we want to maintain that here.

And it's a huge resource for the army where it's at. Any uncertainty about what's going on military-wise around here, is bad. Bad for them. And bad for the future of Picatinny.

So they have an incentive to overcommunicate when things are happening. And they often do that, when they're giving testing. They overcommunicate. So in this area here. It's probably unlikely, that there will be anything that government would want to do, that would cause, you know, public concern.

GLENN: So then what is your -- what are you left with, that makes sense to you, the most?

BRIAN: You know, to be honest. I'm not left with much.

Before this briefing, I would have told you, it's FedEx. Or UPS. Or Amazon testing out delivery capabilities of aircrafts.

You know, and they want to do it at night. So as not to freak people out. But then by this point, it's blown up so much.

You would think somebody would say something.

They would say, oh, yeah. It's us. Chill out.

So I really -- I really don't know.

I am legitimately concerned. And I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm not one that jumps to conclusions.

But the -- the fact that nobody knows. And the people that are supposed to know, they give us no confidence.

GLENN: And you believe they don't know. You believe they don't know.

BRIAN: Yeah, I do. Could the CIA know? Maybe I was briefed by them.

But I believe the State Police, and the Department of Homeland Security, and the Pentagon do not know. I really do. And that's scary.

It's equally scary if I'm wrong. And they do know, and they're doing this to us.

GLENN: That's the world we live in today.

You know, it's always like, it could be this. Which would mean that Jesus is coming. But it could mean this. Which means Jesus is copping.

BRIAN: Yeah. That's right Glenn. In this situation, this is the part that frustrates me. They can figure it out.

A couple of Apache helicopters. We'll follow these freaking things.

And we will figure it out for you. Someone can get this done. They're just choosing not to do it.

GLENN: I know somebody with an Apache. A private individual with an Apache helicopter.

BRIAN: Well, let's get it over here.

A little rusty probably. But I think I can probably figure it out.

GLENN: They're probably listening right now. If you want to check in, we'll maybe line that up. Thank you so much, appreciate it.

God bless you, Brian. You bet.

The REAL Reason Democrats are TERRIFIED of Elon Musk & DOGE

Democrats are mad that President Trump is trusting Elon Musk with so much. Glenn explains why it’s dumb for them to whine about Elon being an “unelected billionaire” and getting rid of USAID – which isn’t even an “aid” agency. Plus, Glenn reviews how Democrats tried to force a security guard to let them into the Department of Education: “It’s quite amazing how these people are so freaked out. They’ve got to cover their tracks!”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So Bret Baier asked Donald Trump if he trusts Elon Musk. Cut nine.

DONALD: I don't know if it's kickbacks, or what's going on.

Look, I ran on it, and the people want me to find it, and I've had a great help with Elon Musk, who has been terrific.

VOICE: You say you trust him?

DONALD: Trustee Elon, oh, he's not gaining anything.

In fact, I wonder how he can devote the time into it, he's so into it.

But I told him to do that. Then I will tell him, very soon, like maybe in 24 hours, to go check the Department of Education. He will find the same thing.

Then I will go to the military. Let's check the military. We will find billions. Hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud and abuse. And, you know, the people elected me on that.

GLENN: He's absolutely right about this. I don't know how everybody is squealing.

First of all, you know, he's an unelected bureaucrat. Well, almost all bureaucrats are.

I don't know if you --

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: If you follow that. But, you know, the Treasury Secretary, is also somebody who, you know, wasn't voted in.

Unelected bureaucrat.

He was appointed by the president to do this.

And we're going to -- we're going to find out about what's happening with this judge. See if it's overruled. Did you hear about what happened with the judge over the weekend, with the Treasury Department?

PAT: Yeah. Where they blocked going into the treasury books. Which --

GLENN: It was so -- it was so poorly written, that they didn't even differentiate between Elon Musk's people, and the Treasury secretary.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: So as it's written, the Treasury secretary can't even look at any of the data.

PAT: It's incredible.

He also, the judge who did the block.

Also didn't mention what law they're violating. He just said, it's violating the law. What law is being violated here?

GLENN: What law? What law?

PAT: This is a person appointed by the president to look into this.

So I don't see how that could violate any laws.

GLENN: No. No.

I mean, and who is not for looking into all of this stuff?

Honestly, I mean, you know, I can't wait until he gets to the Pentagon. Because how are the Democrats going to say, that we somehow or another, are, you know -- we don't care about national defense? We care about national defense!

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I also care about fraud. You know, it's -- the same thing with all of this stuff about aid.

First of all, aid, USAID, it's not aid. It's AID. Okay? It is for international development. That's what that's for.

It's not an aid program. Or an aid agency.

We have aid agencies. That's not one of them.

This is soft power.

And, quite honestly, it is from the beginning, been a CIA operation.

So how are -- I'm not against aid.

I'm against corruption. And I'm also against a lot of this soft power being done, that nobody knows about.

Why are we just finding out about this stuff?

And what we going to find in the Pentagon, oh, my gosh. We're going to find really bad stuff in the Pentagon. Really bad.

PAT: And none of us is against aid. It's just the aid that is being dispersed to people that you mentioned isn't aid.

And the other thing, it's not government agencies, that should be doing this.

It's individuals who are tasked with charity.

GLENN: No!

PAT: And helping others.

We're the ones, individual choice. To -- we shouldn't be forced!

Once you're forced into it, it's not charity anyway.

GLENN: No. It's not.

PAT: So I don't understand how all of the responsibility for aid worldwide is now on the US government.

That's not the way it's supposed to be.

GLENN: Nope. Nope.

And I don't know if you saw this.

But the NIH. They're going crazy now.

Because the NIH. When Trump's people first came in.

They said, we're going to cut the maximum indirect cost rate for research institutions.

Now, most people read that. And they don't even understand what that is. That means, how much of this is going?

How much of 1 dollar is going actually to the program, of research, and how much is going for overhead?

Again, we told you before, any charity that is 85 cents on the dollar. Is one that you start to look at.

If it's 80, 75 cents. You're getting a bad rating for that.

This is 60 cents on the dollar, goes to the management.

Goes to overhead costs.

I want 40 cents on every dollar? You think that's wise?

This is going to save us billions. They're predicting now $9 billion for this project alone. $9 billion.

So go ahead and play cut two, here.

If members of Congress -- peoples cut 12.

This is members of Congress, trying to get into the Department of Education over the weekend.

VOICE: Do they know that --

VOICE: Ask the question again. That's important.

VOICE: Were you told. Are you making the decision to stand in front of the store, on your own behalf. On behalf of the Department of Education.

GLENN: This is the security guard.

VOICE: So everybody is --

VOICE: We're doing our jobs.

GLENN: Okay. So here they are, members of Congress trying to get in, trying to break into the Department of Education. It's closed for the weekend. And they say, they're doing their job. And they're questioning the security guard. Why aren't you letting us in. And all he said, it's not going to happen. Not today. It's not going to happen. You're not going in.

It's quite amazing how these people are so freaked out, they've got to cover their tracks.

I'm convinced that's what it is.

Here's Donald Trump responding to this. Cut 13.

VOICE: Democratic lawmakers trying to get into the Department of Education earlier today.

VOICE: Oh. I see the same ones.

I see Maxine Waters.

A low-life. I see all these people. They don't love our country. They don't love our country.

We want great education. So they ranked 40 countries in education, we're ranked dead last. Dead last.

But the good news is, we're number one in one category. You know what that is? Cost per pupil. We spend more per pupil than any other country in the world.

You look at Norway, Denmark, Sweden, various countries all up and down, Finland. China does very well in education, and then you look at us.

We spend much more money than they do per pupil than any other way. But we spend much more money than they do, and yet we're ranked this year, Biden's last year -- congratulations, Joe. We're ranked dead last. So what I want to see is education -- number one, I like choice. We all like choice.

But beyond choice, long beyond choice, I want to see it go back to the states, where great states who do so well, have no debt, they-re operated brilliantly. They'll be as good as Norway or Denmark or Sweden or any of the other highly ranked countries. They will -- I figure 35 to 38 states will be right at the top.

And the rest will come along. They'll have to come along, competitively. And, by the way, we will be spending --

GLENN: I will tell you -- I will tell you that it feels a little like when the allies marched into Germany, and the Germans were burning all of their documents to hide all the crimes.

It kind of feels a little like that.

Why Did Qualcomm FREAK OUT Over This Glenn Beck Interview?

Why is the big tech giant Qualcomm so nervous about ParkerVision CEO Jeffrey Parker appearing on The Glenn Beck Program? After Parker’s last appearance on Glenn’s show, Qualcomm filed a motion to shut him up and named Glenn over a dozen times. Parker joins Glenn again to give updates on the case and refute some of Qualcomm’s accusations against him.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So a couple of weeks ago, we had a guy on named Jeff Parker. He's the CEO and chairman of ParkerVision. He was making allegations that Qualcomm was in bed with the government, and -- and had screwed ParkerVision. Because what ParkerVision had done is come up with a chip that allows all of our phones and everything else to connect. To Bluetooth. They went into negotiation with Qualcomm.

Had all kinds of NDAs with them. And had to show them the technology. And suddenly, the deal fell apart. And then just a couple years later, Qualcomm comes out with this new amazing technology that can connect everybody's phones and other things to Bluetooth. Huh.

The story only gets more twisted and turned when you run into Eric Holder, and the DOJ. And a jury that says, Qualcomm took this technology and a judge who says, I'm going to sentence Qualcomm and talk about the -- the penalties. And a month later, the judge overturns the jury, and -- and says, no. Qualcomm didn't do anything wrong.

There's some weird stuff going on. Now, here's the update. Qualcomm freaked out about his appearance on this program.

And they filed a cease and desist against Jeff Parker and told him, not to speak out again!

And we called him.

And he said, I'll tell you what, why don't you book me for the show. I'll show you how much ceasing and desisting I'll be doing.

All right. Jeff Parker is with us.

Jeff, how are you, sir?

JEFF: Good morning, Glenn. I'm fine.

GLENN: So let's go over the part just quickly about you sign a cease and desist. All of a sudden, two years later, your technology is introduced by Qualcomm. They pretend, no. What are you talking about? That's not your technology. That's our technology. You take them to court. The jury rules in your favor, unanimous. The judge says, I'm going to apply penalties. Then a couple of weeks after that, Qualcomm has a fundraiser for Barack Obama. The head of Qualcomm has it at his house. Obama shows up. Then a couple of days after that, the DOJ under Eric Holder starts to probe your website. Finish that story.

JEFF: Sure. So thanks for having me back again.

GLENN: You bet.

JEFF: Yeah. So we win a unanimous jury verdict. We come back to the courthouse, after that jury verdict, and the judge hears the parties argue about what should happen next. And after listening to the arguments, the judge says, you know what, there is certainly going to be an ongoing royalty here, which is what Qualcomm would have to pay us for the continued use of our patents and technology.

GLENN: Right.

JEFF: And we are all excited. We leave the courthouse. A few days after that, we have a visit to our website by the White House.
The executive office of the president of the White House.

GLENN: Hmm.

JEFF: Just a few days before that visit, there's a fundraiser at the head of Qualcomm's home. One of the cofounder's homes. Raising money for the DNC.

And after that fundraiser, a few days later, there's this visit from the executive office of the president.

And about a month after that, is when the judge issued his final order, after having indicating before that his final order was going to include royalties. He not only didn't include royalties.

He reversed the jury verdict. And threw the case out.

GLENN: Unbelievable. So Eric Holder was at the DOJ at the time.

You start getting visits at your website, and you can track all of this. You have all of this. Eric Holder and the DOJ start to visit your website, that's only about this litigation. That's the only part they do.

And lo and behold, we find out that Eric Holder before he went to the DOJ, he worked for Qualcomm's largest lobbying firm. When he left the DOJ, guess where he went?

Back to Qualcomm's largest lobbying firm. So you're on the program, you lay all this out.

And now what has happened?

JEFF: Correct. So we're on your program about two weeks ago.

And literally, Glenn, the next day, Qualcomm contacts our attorneys, and they say, if your client doesn't remove his social media, and furthermore agree not to do anymore social media, we will file a motion with the court to gag him, to have this court take down the social media and prevent further conversation.

And, of course, I -- my attorneys are handling a patent case. So they say to me, we're not really experts in First Amendment rights. Freedom of speech rights. Could you please find an attorney who could help you with this?

So I ended up reaching out. And we engaged Marc Kasowitz of his firm. And the Kasowitz firm is a very fine law firm that handles these types of areas and many other areas of law. But Mark --

GLENN: Yeah. He's done a lot of work for Trump, has he not?

JEFF: He has. He has. Mark has handled a lot of president Trump's legal issues over the years. And I approach Mark.

And he heard this request from Qualcomm. And he said, outrageous. He said, this is -- this is ridiculous.

They can't gag you. So a couple days later, Qualcomm, in fact, filed a formal motion with the court that said, take down your social media and stop adding additional social media. And we were actually getting ready to file our opposition, but we first wanted to wait and see what the court was going to do.

And a few days later, the court finding this motion, frankly merit-less. And without any basis for what they're asking for, ruled at the end of last week, just this last Friday.

No. No Qualcomm. You don't get that request. So --

GLENN: Absolutely.

JEFF: So that was good to hear.

GLENN: That's fantastic. That's fantastic.

By the way, I don't have any firsthand knowledge of this.

But I -- I will bet you that our new director of the FBI and our new head of the DOJ saw that Blaze article, that lays all of this out. I'm just saying, that might have happened.

PAT: Well, Glenn, I hope so. Look, what Qualcomm has accused us of, is trying to taint a jury pool. We don't even have a trial date yet, set for this case.

So how are we going to taint a jury pool. But the thing that is really frustrating is the way they characterized our social media. And what we're saying. It's just completely false.

I'll give you an example. So an example of their -- of their characterization is they say, ParkerVision disparages the judicial process in the middle district of Florida and maligns the fairness of the forum.

Namely, ParkerVision impugns Judge Dalton's ruling, in the prior ParkerVision trial, falsely claiming that he improperly reversed the jury's verdict as a result of collusion between Qualcomm and the administration of then president Barack Obama.

Well, let me tell you, that's not true. What ParkerVision is doing is bringing public just facts. We're simply bringing facts. Here's the facts.

The facts are, the Department of Justice has been on our website 37 times.

We discovered shortly before our first trial, all the way until 2022 when I filed a freedom of information act request, asking, hey, Department of Justice. What are you doing on our website? Why are you on our website, so many days at the same time, looking at the same pages as Qualcomm.

Hey. What's this White House visit we had? Why were you only looking at litigation on Qualcomm on our patents? What's that about?

We've never had that fulfilled. So I'm not drawing any conclusions what this means. I'm simply stating the facts. The facts are that these visits happened. And we think we have a right to know, what they're about.

That's what they're asking for.

GLENN: Yeah. They're very suspicious. But that doesn't mean anything happened.

But, you know, there's enough there, not beyond a reasonable doubt. There's enough there, that, you know, we should probably ask some questions here.

JEFF: Yes. Exactly.

GLENN: There was a short seller. Can you tell me about the short seller? Whats his name? Farmwald. What's their name?

JEFF: Yeah, so when Qualcomm accuses us of trying to influence a jury. Again, a date hasn't even been set for a trial. It's pretty rich, Glenn.

Because back in our first trial. There was this persistent short seller. Who had been out posting on the financial message boards. Again and again and again. Trying to drive our stock price down. Our patents are no good. We don't have anything, blah, blah, blah. Well, let me tell you, from the time we filed this case against Qualcomm in 2011, until we won the jury verdict in 2013, over two years, he posted 200 times. Every business day he posted. And he posted predictions. The patents would fall.

They didn't.

The -- the patent case wouldn't go forward.

It did. Oh, even if we won. We would only win ten or $11 million.

He was only off by a factor of 20.

I mean, it went on and on and on.

Here's the real punch line. We got to depose this guy. And subpoena his emails, because after Qualcomm lost the case. He filed challenges to our patents. Which we found kind of suspicious.

And guess what we figured out in deposition of this guy?

Guess who he had been working against when we filed this lawsuit against Qualcomm.

GLENN: Qualcomm.

JEFF: Qualcomm.

GLENN: Do we have payments? And how do you mean working?

JEFF: Well, it turns out that Qualcomm was paying some of his lawyer's bills. Because he was worried apparently, about us suing him for something. I mean, if you're not doing something wrong, what are you worried about?

But he was worried about that. So he went to Qualcomm and he said, look, I'm not looking for you to pay me directly. But pay my legal bills. And our attorney said to him, you don't consider that to be some compensation?

No. I don't consider that to be any compensation. The point though --

GLENN: Why would --

JEFF: Yeah.

GLENN: Why would he meet his legal bills? If I'm not mistaken, this is years before -- three years before you knew that they were infringing, right?

JEFF: Yes. So we believe that he actually started communicating with them. Even before we filed our lawsuit.

So there's a lot of fishy things here.

But to keep it to the point of Qualcomm's motion to try to get us to be gagged, it's pretty interesting. That they would be so willing to work with a party, whose only mission was to put out mischaracterizations and falsehoods about ParkerVision. Its patents. Its technology. Et cetera.

But they be they turn around and accuse us of what they were supporting. Back during the time trial.

GLENN: All right. More in just a second. I have a new video, and I want to show you something from the judge in just a second.

First, let tell you about American Financing for just a moment.

What would it look like to be out of debt, especially all of our your high-interest debt? All of the stuff you have to put on your credit card. Even though, that interest rate is 20, 25, 30 percent?

It's not a fantasy to be out of debt. It could be your reality. If you're a homeowner, and you want to get out from under high-interest debt. Give American Financing a call today.

Last year, their salary-based mortgage consultants help customers save an average of $800 a month.

Now, imagine giving yourself a $10,000 raise. That's exactly what they can do for you today, if you start today. You might even be able to delay up to two mortgage payments, which could help you get out even further from that debt.

Don't take my word for it. I want you to do your own homework, as always. Go to American Financing at 800-906-2440. 800-906-2440. Or go to AmericanFinancing.net. That's AmericanFinancing.net. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

VOICE: NMLS 182334. NMLSConsumerAccess.org. APR rates in the five, starts at 6.725 for well-qualified buyers. Call 800-906-2440 for details about credit costs and terms.
(music)

GLENN: All right. Let me see this full screen here, if I can.

So tell me what this is, Jeff. This full screen, that we have up on the monitors.

This is from the judge, is it not?

VOICE: Oh, hold on. Yes. Yes.

GLENN: That's the ruling.

VOICE: Yes. This is the ruling from the judge, correct.

GLENN: My gosh, they are freaked out about you being on this program.

PAT: Wow.

VOICE: Yes. Yes.

PAT: You seem to be all over that document.

Wow!

VOICE: I know.

JEFF: You know, Glenn, the sad thing about it is, he does dismiss their motion, which we're very happy about.

And we thought it was meritless when they filed it. But he does go on, and he talks a little about some of his unhappiness with the things that we say.

And I've already had people call me up and say, what do you think about that?

I said, look, he only has that side of the story. He rules so fast, which we appreciate.

That we didn't even have time to file a reply. So he is simply looking at Qualcomm's reply, and assuming they are telling him the truth, which they're not telling him the truth.

Look, they say, I have no basis for thinking that Qualcomm has taken our technology to China. I mean, you're kidding. Here's an article, Glenn, I found. 2017, New York Times. How this US tech giant is backing China's tech ambitions. Interesting article. People should go read it. 2019. Jenwa Net (phonetic) of Asia. Interview: Qualcomm president says China to lead the world in 5G scale.

Look, I understand why Qualcomm wants to be a big player in China.

It's a big market. But we have to do this smartly.

We can't just put engineering facilities there.

Teach the Chinese how to develop their own products.

And then expect for the long hall, that we're going to be anything other than from the outside looking in.

I mean, their Belt and Road Initiative is being helped by big tech companies right here in the United States.

It's insane.

GLENN: So when do you suppose -- are you going to file and go to court again?

I know you've been waiting for 11 years.

JEFF: Well, we have a case. It is -- it is -- by the way one of the things Qualcomm mischaracterized is in our first video, they say, oh, Jeff Parker says, we've been waiting ten years for our case, I show you indicating that there's something I feel is nefarious.

No, I didn't say anything was nefarious.

GLENN: Right.

JEFF: What I said was it's been a long -- let me tell you why it's in ten years. Qualcomm filed challenges to the validity of our patents. That ate up four years.
Then they had a couple other ridiculous motions, which took the judge a year or two to sort through.

Now we're up to six years. Then we had the pandemic. That's another two years. The point is, it's been a long time. And all we're asking for is our day in court with the jury who can hear our case. And make a decision.

We think we have a compelling case to the jury.

And the judge right now is considering when to set the trial date. We're hoping it's going to be early, early to middle. Maybe this fall, of this year.

But soon. Very soon.

GLENN: Well, we will continue to follow the case. Are you releasing another video?

JEFF: We just released another video this morning.

GLENN: Yeah.

JEFF: And that video talks about the benefit of the technology.

Our interaction with Qualcomm. How we took this technology to them.

I hope people will go to against giants. And watch the video.

I think you'll find it highly informative.

GLENN: You'll find it on Twitter. At against underscore giants.

At against underscore giants.

Make sure you check that out. And share it with a friend. Share it with the DOJ.

With the FBI. With anybody that you feel would have interest in this.

I think this is something that should be looked into. And if there was corruption, it needs to be routed out.

People need to go to jail, if they did wrong.

And the -- the patents need to be set right.

If we can't count on our patents as small-business people, which Jeff Parker is and ParkerVision is.

If we can't count that those patents can be held by small people, against these giants!

We've got nothing in America.

We have nothing.

JEFF: Totally.

GLENN: This is David versus Goliath.

And they deserve their fair shake in a courtroom.

Jeffrey, thank you so much.

JEFF: Glenn, thank you for having me back.

GLENN: You bet. ParkerVision.com.

ParkerVision.com.

Did USAID Really Fund Chelsea Clinton’s Wedding? Here's the FACTS

As DOGE continues to expose the many, many ways our government has wasted taxpayer dollars, Glenn gives a warning: “You have to be really careful [what you believe] because we don’t want to wreck our credibility.” While the things DOGE has uncovered have been true, there are also a lot of rumors and misinformation spreading online. Glenn addresses some of those rumors, like the seemingly-unfounded claim that USAID helped fund Chelsea Clinton’s wedding through the Clinton Foundation. We must ask questions, but we can’t jump to conclusions without being sure that we have the real facts. Glenn also addresses some provably true stories of government waste, like how the Pentagon overpays for things and why Glenn supports Trump’s decision to stop minting pennies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Looking at the DOGE stuff, and I want to talk about this next hour.

We have to be really, really careful. Because I don't know about you, but when I heard that we possibly paid for Chelsea Clinton's wedding.

PAT: Yeah. Do we have that substantiated though?

GLENN: We don't. We don't.

And that's why I want to bring that up.

PAT: You have to be careful with that stuff. A ton.

STU: A lot of stuff coming out online.

And you can't quote this stuff. You have to be really, really careful.

Because we just don't want to, A, wreck our credibility.

And, you know, when we find out that it is absolutely true, that's when we can go and say, round them up!

Let's put them court.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. There's -- there's a viral chart going around that shows Chelsea Clinton got, I don't know. Something like $84 million from the foundation from the Clinton foundation.

And that 3 million of that went to her wedding.

GLENN: Okay. So I think -- I think they did get $84 million.

PAT: I think that went to the foundation, right?

GLENN: Yeah. It went to the foundation.

Got it for the whole run. For Haiti or whatever.

And, you know, we know they spent $84 million in Haiti.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Because look at the place now.

Oh, it's beautiful he has not it's beautiful.

PAT: Well, we were there, how many years after the earthquake.

And it still looked the same. As if the earthquake had just happened. You remember that?

GLENN: Oh, yeah. And the people from Haiti were saying to us, where is the money?

PAT: Where is the $10 billion? Yeah. Because that could have rebuilt. That could have rebuilt the entire country. 10 billion.

GLENN: About four times. About four times over, I think.

PAT: Yep. Yep.

GLENN: I mean, it is -- Haiti is just -- it's a sad, sad situation.

It's been ripped off by everybody in the world over and over again.

And I think the Clintons are, you know, they kind of lead the way on the -- on the charity for Haiti graft.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: But we don't know anything about that. We do know the Clinton initiative got $84 million.

But we don't know any more than that.

And, you know, honestly, if you're spending your tax dollars, I mean, that's what people have to realize.

Even if it is, you know -- even if it is -- it didn't go to Chelsea's wedding.

Which I would be surprised.

I would be shocked, if they were that bold!

PAT: Yeah.

STU: But, you know, this isn't an effective use of your money.

And people who are looking at it, and saying, well, it was only $5 million.

How much money have you paid your entire life in taxes?

Because I guarantee you, it's not going to be $5 million.

It's not! Very few people to have pay $5 million in their lifetime of taxes.

So that means, that everything that you paid. Everything that you worked for. When you work four months a year, to pay your income tax.

All of that has been wasted, your entire life.

I don't know!

I'm kind of pissed about that.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I mean, what could you have done with all of that money?

And I -- I just don't -- I don't get people who are, you know, again, like we said, I'm for aid.

I'm absolutely for aid. I'm absolutely for looking at countries, and saying, how can we help you, if it's in our interest, and that's not aid.

That would be development. But I'm not for most of the development that has been happening. I'm not interested in nation building!

You know, so, you know, even if you're for that, are you cool with it going 60 cents on every dollar? To the government officials?

Or to the charitable officials. And only 40 cents of that dollar?

I mean, I'm not happy with that. We've gotten so used to corruption, in our government, on, you know, the Pentagon spent $400 on, you know -- on a toilet seat.

We're so used to that. That we just expect it.

This is not that.

The corruption that we're finding now, is beyond imagination.

It's going to be hard for people to get their arms around, what you're actually looking at.

Because we expect a certain amount of -- unfortunately, a certain amount of corruption.

But nothing like this!

And if you're -- you know, if you are a Democrat and you're inclined, not to believe it.

Okay!

I can understand that.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, for a while.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. And say, I probably would have been skeptical, if Joe Biden -- I would have been skeptical if Joe Biden would have come in and said, we will route out all of the corruption.

I would have thought, well, no.

They're getting rid of anybody who is conservative on corruption.

That's why I'm so excited about the Pentagon because that's going to be a lot of conservative love.

You know what I mean?

So called conservative love. It's just graft and greed and cronyism.

But still, it -- it's -- we're supposed to be in love.

The left is supposed to be in love with aid.

We're supposed to be in love with death. I'm not -- I -- I am not blind to either one of those things.

But go into the Pentagon. I would love to see them take.

At you see the congressman or the senator last week, that held up a bag of bolts, and said, this is about $10 at the store?

It's $10,000, if the Pentagon buys it!

PAT: Jeez.

STU: Where is that money going?

PAT: Incredible.

GLENN: Who is getting that money?
And, you know, you would say, well, they're charging ten thousands of individuals dollars a bolt, because, you know, the aircrafts that they're building.

They're so expensive.

And they can't actually charge the price of what it takes.

No, they're charging us the price with all of the overruns.

All of the hundreds of billions of dollars in overruns.

They're charging us that as well.

So my question is: Where do those billions of dollars end up?

In just the pockets of, what? McDonnell-Douglas?

PAT: Raytheon?

GLENN: Raytheon.

PAT: Congress people?

GLENN: Right!

PAT: You know, a lot. A lot of it -- you know it's winding up in their pocketbooks. Has to be.

GLENN: And you know what really bothers me is, these people are taking our tax dollars. And then they're giving that money, through lobbying. To our politicians. Who are allowing the corruption to happen.

So it's just this giant circular -- I'm just going to leave it at that.

This giant circular, something.

I don't -- I don't know what happens in circles.

But there it is.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: By the way, the other thing that Trump said, first of all, he's getting rid of pennies.

Did you hear that?

Executive order. Thank you!

I mean, you know, takes 3 cents to create 1 cent. What are we doing?

That's the dims thing I've ever, ever seen.

PAT: Yes. Especially when nobody wants pennies. Nobody uses them.

If you ever use cash. And you get pennies back.

You just put it in their take a penny jar, usually.

And don't even want it messing up your pocket.

GLENN: Right. I mean, it's absolutely worthless to the American people.

And it's costing our government 3 cents to make 1 cent.

Finally, the president is -- I mean, all of this stuff is so common sense. That's what's so frustrating about all of this.

Should had it should have been done long ago.

But for some reason, we just couldn't. We've known about the penny thing.

I've known about the penny thing, when it was a cent and a half to make a penny.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: That long ago.

PAT: He's -- he's leaving no stone unturned right now.

You've got the penny thing.

And then he just did the straw situation.

Did you see that?

We're going back to plastic straws.

He signed an executive order, or he is going to. Ending the ridiculous Biden push for paper straws, which don't work. Back to plastic, he tweeted out! Or truthed out.

GLENN: I love that.

PAT: It's just -- it's amazing the things that he's covering, at a breathtaking speed.

GLENN: I love that.

Do we have the CBS anchor trying to explain how Trump's approval ratings are going through the roof? Listen to this. Cut ten.

VOICE: What's driving this?

VOICE: I will keep it simple, Margaret. He's doing what he said he would do in the campaign. There's political value in that. In fact, 70 percent of people say he's doing what he's promised. That's whether they approve of him or not.

Now, there's another part of this that continues over from the campaign. There are words he was described as being tough. Being energetic.

And he still is today, in big majority numbers.

So as people take a look in these first few weeks, there's been a lot of activity. They're getting that general sense of governance. And that's being reflected in these early numbers.

VOICE: So that's perception. What about the actual policies?

VOICE: Well, let's start with the ones that are popular.

Again, these echo the ones we see in the campaign. The idea of deporting those in the country illegally continues to be popular. We saw that in the campaign.

GLENN: 59 percent.

VOICE: Sending troops to the US-Mexico border. Again, majority --

GLENN: 64 percent.

PAT: Wow! Wow.

GLENN: I mean, it is -- and they're just baffled by it. I don't understand. No. Really.

Trump Border Czar WARNS Cartels, Illegal Immigrants, & Anti-ICE Politicians

White House Border Czar Tom Homan joins Glenn with the latest updates to the illegal immigration crackdown. He lays out why he took the job, how the deportations are going so far, and what’s coming next. Homan also explains why he’s “very concerned” about violent threats from the cartels. But he has a warning for them: “If they harm a SINGLE Border Patrol agent or soldier, President Trump is gonna rain hell down on them and I think he'll wipe them off the face of the earth." Plus, Homan has a message for anti-ICE politicians in sanctuary cities: "[Pam Bondi] will have NO PROBLEM if I recommend prosecution of a politician for impeding or knowingly harboring and concealing an illegal alien.”

Watch the FULL episode of Glenn TV HERE