RADIOJuly 22, 2024

5 DISTURBING Questions After Biden Dropped Out & Endorsed Kamala Harris

President Biden has dropped out of the 2024 presidential race and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to take his place. But something doesn’t seem right about this, Glenn says. Glenn reviews the 5 questions that he has after Biden’s announcement: Was Biden forced out and did he get anything in return? Will Kamala Harris actually be the candidate come November? Why didn’t Biden also resign from office? Are the Democrats stuck with Harris because of DEI? And how can the Democratic Party say they’re “saving democracy” when – for the THIRD election in a row – party elites are choosing the candidate, not the people: “The ordinary Democrat, do you realize you don’t have a voice anymore?!”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So it was interesting, wasn't it, this weekend?

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: We started Friday with someone releasing that Joe Biden would on Sunday, resign.

Now, this is not what Joe Biden said. In fact, nobody in the White House agreed with that, on Friday. In fact, just before the tweet went out, nobody in the White House even knew he was going to. I'm going to get back to that here in a second, because I think something descended smell right. Now, the reason why they say, is because of money, polling, it would wipe out the Democratic Party, staff, friends, donors, all abandoned Joe Biden. I don't think that's it. Why -- why did they announce on Friday, and who announced on Friday that the -- that a missive would be coming from the White House, and he would resign.

Now, this is why this bothers me. When you do something this dramatic, first time in American history.

When you do something this dramatic, you don't usually just spring it on everyone.

You usually will go in and have a speech. And they will announce that the president -- and they will speculate what he is going to say, et cetera, et cetera. Then he gives a speech from the Oval Office.

In his -- in his stepping down, from the party, he said, he would be addressing it later this week. Why?

Why didn't he address it, from the Oval, like all other presidents. Why would he just pop it out?

My guess is, there was another gun waiting to go off. You have until noon. You have until 2:00 p.m. on Sunday, to resign.

Or what?

What did Joe Biden get in return, for resigning?

Was there -- were there promises made by anyone, that we will make sure that you're not -- you're not held responsible for any of those crimes, that you might have committed?

And was it said, this way. Look, Joe. You and I both know. There are some real flaming hot evidence here. That you're selling your country out. We will make sure that goes away. And you and your family will be pardoned.

But you have until noon on Sunday. I don't know. That feels like speculation.

But it feels like there was a gun that was going to go off on Sunday, at some point.

And there was also, you know, they can -- they can pardon him, if he steps down from presidency. I don't think he's going to be president until the end of the year.

Or until January 20th. But they can pardon him, if he's not the president. They can pardon his family. And they can very easily blame that now, on if Trump gets in, it will just be revenge. He will just put all the Biden's in family. And we had to. And that will be good enough, apparently, for a lot of Democrats. Nancy Pelosi was the driving force behind all of this. And I love Nancy Pelosi in the last few weeks, where she was like, you know, we want Joe Biden to make the decision himself.

I made the decision. I'm staying. Yeah. Right. But he'll make that decision. And we're waiting for that decision.

I already made that decision. As like I said, he'll make it. And we're very excited for him to make that decision. (laughter)

It's -- it's like Barack Obama used to say. You know, we can get along. You just have to get in the boat with me.

Oh, wait. So wait. I'm a radical that needs to be destroyed, but you'll forgive me if I sign up for everything you want to do?

Oh. Okay.
All right.

So she was the driving force hipped this. Now, Alex Soros said he would not endorse Kamala Harris. Yet, he did. Right away, yesterday.

In fact, people are lining up. Barack Obama strangely did not endorse Kamala Harris. Hmm.

Hmm. Hmm. I personally don't think, and I would love to hear your just on this. I don't think Kamala is going to be the -- the candidate in the end.

PAT: Who do you think it's going to be?

GLENN: I don't know.

PAT: I don't see how they pass her up. Because she's a black woman. So you've got double identity politics going there.

She's the next in line. She would be really tough to jettison. But if they open it up at the convention, pretty much anything could happen.

So I think they like it to be Gavin Newsom.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: Or Gretchen Whitmer.

GLENN: Oh, I hope.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, here's the thing, you know, they -- they -- first of all, why didn't Biden step down? There's a couple of questions. Why didn't he step down as president of the United States?

If he is not capable of running a campaign, he is certainly not capable of running the White House.

Now, that may have been the gun that was going to go off. Twenty-fifth Amendment, we are going to take you out of the Oval. We will leave you as president, so you can finish your term, and we will have parades for you, and everything else, and you will be remembered as one of the greatest presidents of all time. And, gee, look at how George Washington you are, by stepping aside for the good of the country and the good of the party. That is a possible gun that could have gone off. Otherwise, the 25th Amendment is going to be exercised. So there's no reason why the man can't run a campaign.

You know, because all of this is he's cognitively not there. He can't do it. He can't debate. Well, if you can't debate, I don't want you in a room with Putin, or Xi! I don't want you on the telephone with anybody!

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But the Democrats are suddenly fine with that. Because they say, he can't win.

Well, Pat, look at Kamala Harris' poll.

Kamala, she is -- she is below Joe Biden. She is more unliked than Donald Trump is!

So why would they go for somebody else, who has this horrible, horrible image and likability problem, who polls just the same, if not a little below Joe Biden?

Why would you have that as your replacement? That doesn't make sense.

PAT: No. Really, nobody makes sense though, on the Democrat side. Who does make sense? Gavin Newsom has a terrible record in California, that can be exploited easily.

Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, I mean, she's terrible.

GLENN: Horrible.

PAT: They have nobody on the bench.

GLENN: Right. But I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about, what doesn't make sense to am, is why you jettison somebody, and you say, because he's not capable.

Okay? We'll lose. He's not capable. He's not capable of running a campaign.

But he's okay to run the country the next six months.

PAT: Yeah. It doesn't make sense.

GLENN: That bothers me. That's an inconsistency. Also, the other thing that bothers me, the honest ones will be like, well, he just can't beat Donald Trump.

His poll numbers are too horrible.

Well, Kamala's poll numbers are just as horrible. So why wouldn't you -- why would you let him in, and then accept this person?

And why wouldn't you push for him to retire?

Is it because then you lose the first female black president, to be president, as a -- as a -- an election trick?

I mean, why wouldn't he just resign, and her take over?

And then she can run. And she'll have, you know, she'll be the president. And you can show what she can do. And that, you know, people get used to it. Or do you need the fact that she'll be the first black, you know, Asian president? Female.

I mean. I don't think they want to waste it on her. I honestly don't.

They are holding that back, and I don't know how they get away with not running her as president. Because of that.

Wait. Wait. Wait. You took her on. You know you took her on because of DEI. You took her on for DEI purposes, and now you're not going to let her go because you say she's not qualified?

You want, what? A white woman?

A white man? They can't get away with that. They're so screwed.

PAT: They are. Yeah. It's going to be a fun convention. I mean, if you thought 1968 was chaos, wow. I mean, they didn't have the kind of chaos within the party, that in 1968, that they have now. This -- this is unprecedented stuff. And this is something that you really want to pay attention to. Because this is American history, in the making.

GLENN: So how is it, Pat, that we have Democrats, that have been saying that this is the end of democracy. And yet, the -- the same ones that have been telling you, he's fine. He's fine.

Are you now the ones saying, boy, he's not fine. They called us a conspiracy theorist to say that he was not fine. Then when it was exposed, they're the ones saying, it's -- it's okay.

They were also the ones -- or, that it's not okay. They were also the ones that said, no. He doesn't need to have a primary.

We don't primary him. He doesn't need to go and actually campaign and primary.

They wanted to keep this quiet for as long as they could.

So they're the ones, because remember, when there was no primary, the reason why people were talking about it. Because a lot of democratic voters didn't want Joe Biden!

They didn't think that he -- but those people were crazy and dangerous.

Their own voters. So they had 14 million people vote for Joe Biden.

And now, for the third time, the presidential election and the Democratic Party is going to be decided by elites.

The first time it occurred was 2016. When the Democratic National Committee manipulated money and the process, to help Hillary Clinton beat Bernie Sanders.

Remember that?

And all the Sanders people were pissed off.

PAT: Superdelegate.

GLENN: Right!

The second time was 2020, when the party elites pushed out Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar. So Elizabeth Warren, would split the progressive vote with Bernie Sanders.

Which then made Biden the candidate. Both times, both times, people knew this was happening. Now, this time, even though, she was deeply, deeply unpopular with democratic voters. Remember, she came in last. She bailed. Nobody liked her.

She's now apparently going to be the candidate, because they thwarted the primary system. So they didn't let the people speak. And now, they're going to go to an open primary. That's what they're actually calling for.

GLENN: It is crazy for the democratic party, the ones that are shouting that, you know, we're headed towards a dictatorship, where the elites will call all the shots.

They have the elites calling all the shots.

You know, it was a very small number of Democratic Party donors and the media. That chose Hillary Clinton, Biden, and Harris.

It was the media, that influenced the donors and decided, Biden should go after, you know -- they should go after him, on the disastrous debate performance.

The ordinary Democrat really -- do you realize you don't have a voice anymore?

When the media insisted he was fine, you just jumped on board with the media, saying, yeah. See. You guys are liars.

How many times do they have to do this to you, before you wake up and go, gosh, these guys are really not good people?

They're just not good people. Well, Trump. Trump. Trump. Trump.

You are sacrificing your own influence, your own liberty, your voice.

What? At the altar of not Trump.

How many people do you think in China and Russia, and Iran, right now, were like, well, I don't know.

I mean, now it's a toss-up. Do we go for Kamala or Trump?

They're all going for Kamala Harris!

It's going to get even easier for them.

And here's how this is going to work. So the -- in early August, they're trying to put this together.

And early August, they're going to have an open primary.

So it will be an open convention. And they will go out, and say, to all the delegates, who do you want to be president?

If they come up with Kamala Harris, then they'll all be like, Kamala is the one. But then on the second vote, it is open to the superdelegates.

These are about 5,000 of the super elites.

And the super elites get to vote.

And whatever the super elites get to vote. Whatever they vote, well, that's going to probably be. Well, that's more important than the other delegates, I'll tell you that.

So you have about 5,000 people, total, that are going to be making the decision in Chicago on who you can have, as your choice for president of the United States.

And it's all caused by the same people, who are now voting.

They're all the ones who told you, he was fine.

They're all the ones who said, no, no, no, no. He's super, super moderate.

This is the fuddy-duddy. He's just a little old man, that just means well.

PAT: And these are the people who are saving democracy. Let's not forget.

This is all about democracy. And how they're trying to save this country.

From the non-democratic Donald Trump.

And you know that that's right.

I mean, the superdelegates will decide this thing next month.

They're -- it's absolutely what's going to happen. And I don't think the superdelegates and the super elite in the Democratic Party. I don't think they want Kamala Harris.

GLENN: Oh, I don't think so either. I don't think so either. You'll notice, that Barack Obama did not endorse --

PAT: Right. And they spoke yesterday.

GLENN: Kamala. Yeah. And it's interesting to me.

I don't think that she's going to be the nominee. I could be wrong. But I just don't think -- something -- something is going to happen, that will make it easy for her not to be the presidential candidate. At least that's what I -- that's what I think.

I mean, they just -- they don't want. The American people aren't going to stand for another cramdown. They're not. Oh, she's the first female black Asian president. Nobody cares anymore. They just don't care anymore.

And she's wildly unlikable. Wildly.

I mean, first of all, the first female president didn't work with Hillary.

Because she's as likable as Kamala Harris, okay?

The two are just. You put them in a room together. I think they cancel each other out. I think they just disappear. And her policies are -- are a little crazy.

She does have policies kind of.

At least we can look at her record and see what she was for. And what she was against.

And it's going to be a -- well, it's not an easy transition to make. For most Americans, and I believe most Democrats.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

How to Find God in a Divided World | Max Lucado & Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck sits down with beloved pastor and author Max Lucado for a deep conversation about faith, humility, and finding unity in a divided world. Together, they reflect on the importance of principles over politics, why humility opens the door to true dialogue, and how centering life on God brings clarity and peace. Lucado shares stories of faith, the dangers of a “prosperity gospel,” and the powerful reminder that life is not about making a big deal of ourselves, but about making a big deal of God. This uplifting conversation will inspire you to re-center your life, strengthen your faith, and see how humility and love can transform even the most divided times.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Max Lucado HERE

Confronting evil: Bill O'Reilly's insight on Charlie Kirk's enduring legacy

Bill O’Reilly joins Glenn Beck with a powerful prediction about Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Evil tried to destroy his movement, Bill says, but – as his new book, “Confronting Evil,” lays out – evil will just end up destroying itself once more…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Bill O'Reilly, welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

BILL: Good, Beck, thanks for having me back. I appreciate it. How have you been?

GLENN: Last week was really tough. I know it was tough for you and everybody else.

But, you know -- I haven't -- I haven't seen anything.

BILL: Family okay? All of that?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Family is okay. Family is okay.

BILL: Good question good. That's the most important thing.

GLENN: It is.

So, Bill, what do you make of this whole Charlie Kirk thing. What happened, and where are we headed?

BILL: So my analysis is different for everybody else, and those that know me for so long. About a year ago, I was looking for a topic -- it was a contract to do another book. And I said, you know what's happening in America, and around the world. Was a rise in evil. It takes a year to research and write these books.

And not since the 1930s, had I seen that happen, to this extent. And in the 1930s, of course, you would have Tojo and Hitler and Mussolini and Franco and all these guys. And it led to 100 million dead in World War II. The same thing, not to the extent.

But the same thing was --
GLENN: Yet.
BILL: -- bubbling in the world, and in the United States.

I decided to write a book. The book comes out last Tuesday. And on Wednesday, Putin lobs missiles into Poland.

Ultra dangerous.

And a few hours later, Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

And one of the interviewers said to me last week, your -- your book is haunting. Is haunting.

And I think that's extremely accurate. Because that's what evil does.

And in the United States, we have so many distractions. The social media.

People create around their own lives.

Sports. Whatever it may be. That we look away.

Now, Charlie Kirk was an interesting fellow. Because at a very young age, he was mature enough to understand that he wanted to take a stand in favor of traditional America and Judeo Christian philosophy.

He decided that he wanted to do that.

You know, and when I was 31 or whatever, I was lucky I wasn't in the penitentiary. And I believe you were in the penitentiary.
(laughter)
So he was light years ahead of us.

GLENN: Yes, he was.

BILL: And he put it into motion. All right? Now, most good people, even if you disagree with what Mr. Kirk says on occasion, you admire that. That's the spirit of America. That you have a belief system, that you go out and try to promote that belief system, for the greater good of the country. That's what it is.

That's what Charlie Kirk did.

And he lost his life.

By doing it!

So when you essentially break all of this down. You take the emotion away, all right?

Which I have to do, in my job. You see it as another victory for evil.

But it really isn't.

And this is the ongoing story.

This is the most important story. So when you read my book, Confronting Evil, you'll see that all of these heinous individuals, Putin's on the cover. Mao. Hitler.

Ayatollah Khomeini. And then there are 14 others inside the book. They all destroy themselves.

Evil always destroys itself. But it takes so many people with it. So this shooter destroyed his own family.

And -- and Donald Trump, I talked to him about it last week in Yankee stadium. And Trump is a much different guy than most people think.

GLENN: He is.

JASON: He destroyed his own mother and father and his two brothers.

That's what he did. In addition to the Kirk family!

So evil spreads. Now, if Americans pay attention and come to the conclusion that I just stated, it will be much more difficult for evil to operate openly.

And that's what I think is going to happen.

There's going to be a ferocious backlash against the progressive left in particular.

To stop it, and I believe that is what Mr. Kirk's legacy is going to be.

GLENN: I -- I agree with you on all of these fronts.

I wonder though, you know, it took three, or if you count JFK, four assassinations in the '60s, to confront the evil if you will.

Before people really woke up and said, enough is enough!

And then you have the big Jesus revolution after that.

Is -- I hate to say this. But is -- as far gone as we are, is one assassination enough to wake people up?

JOHN: Some people. Some people will never wake up.

They just don't want to live in the real world, Beck. And it's never been easier to do that with the social media and the phones and the computers.

And you're never going to get them back.

But you don't need them. So let's just be very realistic here on the Glenn Beck show.

Let's run it down.

The corporate media is finished.

In America. It's over.

And you will see that play out the next five years.

Because the corporate media invested so much of its credibility into hating Donald Trump.

And the hate is the key word.

You will find this interesting, Beck. For the first time in ten years, I've been invited to do a major thing on CBS, today.

I will do it GE today. With major Garrett.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: Now, that only happened because Skydance bought CBS. And Skydance understands the brand CBS is over, and they will have to rehabilitate the whole thing. NBC has not come to that conclusion yet, but it will have to.

And ABC just does the weather. I mean, that's all they care about. Is it snowing in Montana? Okay? The cables are all finished. Even Fox.

Once Trump leaves the stage, there's nowhere for FNC to go. Because they've invested so much in Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.

So the fact of the matter is, the corporate media is over in America. That takes a huge cudgel out of the hands of the progressive movement.

Because the progressive movement was dependent on the corporate media to advance its cause. That's going to end, Beck.

GLENN: Well, I would hope that you're right.

Let me ask you about --

BILL: When am I wrong?

When am I wrong?

You've known me for 55 years. When have I been wrong?

GLENN: Okay. All right. All right. We're not here to argue things like that.

So tell me about Skydance. Because isn't Skydance Chinese?

BILL: No! It's Ellison. Larry Ellison, the second richest guy in the world. He owns Lanai and Hawaii, the big tech guy and his son is running it.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

I though Skydance. I thought that was -- you know them.

BILL: Yeah.

And they -- they're not ideological, but they were as appalled as most of us who pay attention at the deterioration of the network presentations.

So --

GLENN: You think that they could.

BILL: 60 Minutes used to be the gold standard.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: And it just -- it -- you know, you know, I don't know if you watch it anymore.

GLENN: I don't either.

So do you think they can actually turn CBS around, or is it just over?

BILL: I don't know. It's very hard to predict, because so many people now bail. I've got a daughter 26, and a son, 22.

They never, ever watched network television.

And you've got -- it's true. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

They don't watch --

BILL: They're not going to watch The Voice. The dancing with this. The juggling with that. You know, I think they could do a much better job in their news presentations.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

BILL: Because what they did, is banish people like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.

Same voices, with huge followings.

Huge!

All right?

We couldn't get on there.

That's why Colbert got fired. Because Colbert wouldn't -- refused to put on any non-progressive voice, when they were talking about the country.

GLENN: I know.

BILL: Well, it's not -- I'm censoring it.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's not that he was fired because he wouldn't do that. He was fired because that led to horrible ratings. Horrible ratings.

BILL: Yes, it was his defiance.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: Fallon has terrible ratings and so does Kimmel. But Colbert was in your face, F you, to the people who were signing his paycheck.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: Look, evil can only exist if the mechanisms of power are behind it.

And that's when you read the front -- I take them one by one. And Putin is the most important chapter by far.

GLENN: Why?

BILL: Because Putin would use nuclear weapon.

He wouldn't. He's a psychopath.

And I'm -- on Thursday night, I got a call from the president's people saying, would I meet the president at Yankee stadium for the 9/11 game?

And I said, when a president calls and asks you to meet them, sure.

GLENN: I'll be there. What time?

BILL: It will take me three days to get into Yankee stadium, on Long Island. But I'll start now.

GLENN: Especially because the president is coming. But go ahead.

BILL: Anyway, that was a very, I think that Mr. Trump values my opinion. And it was -- we did talk about Putin.

And the change in Putin. And I had warned him, that Putin had changed from the first administration, where Trump controlled Putin to some extent.

Now he's out of control. Because that's what always happens.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: It happened with Hitler. It happened with Mao. It happened with the ayatollah. It happened with Stalin. Right now. They get worse and worse and worse and worse. And then they blow up.

And that's where Putin is! But he couldn't do any of that, without the assent of the Russian people. They are allowing him to do this, to kill women and children. A million Russian casualties for what! For what! Okay?

So that's why this book is just in the stratosphere. And I was thinking object, oh. Because people want to understand evil, finally. Finally.

They're taking a hard look at it, and the Charlie Kirk assassination was an impetus to do that.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think it's also an impetus to look at the good side.

I mean, I think Charlie was just not a neutral -- a neutral character. He was a force for good. And for God.

And I think that -- that combination is almost the Martin Luther King combination. Where you have a guy who is speaking up for civil rights.

But then also, speaking up for God. And speaking truth, Scripturally.

And I think that combination still, strangely, I wouldn't have predicted it. But strangely still works here in America, and I think it's changed everything.

Bill, it's always food to talk to you. Thank you so much for being on. I appreciate it.

It's Bill O'Reilly. The name of the book, you don't want to miss. Is confronting evil. And he takes all of these really, really bad guys on. One by one. And shows you, what happens if you don't do something about it. Confronting evil. Bill O'Reilly.

And you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com.

Should people CELEBRATING Charlie Kirk’s death be fired?

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

Could passengers have SAVED Iryna Zarutska?

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?

STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.