RADIOOctober 17, 2024

The REAL reason Kamala Harris agreed to the Fox News interview

Vice President Kamala Harris recently sat down for an interview with Fox News host Bret Baier. At first glance, it seems like Harris was unprepared and defensive. So, why would she agree to this interview?! Glenn has a theory: There was one specific answer that Harris gave that, in her eyes, could have made the rest of this disastrous interview worth it. So, did she get what she wanted? Glenn also reviews how Harris’ campaign team cut the interview way shorter than it should have been (apparently, Fox News had originally agreed to an hour-long interview). Plus, Glenn reveals the answer he would have given Harris’ team if they had waved their arms at him to cut the conversation off.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Oh. Wow! Was that interesting.

The Fox news Kamala Harris debate is -- was bizarre.

STU: And it was not a debate.

GLENN: Yeah. Not a debate.

STU: An interview. It did at times feel like a debate. There was a lot of talking over each other.

GLENN: A lot of anger.

STU: There was a lot of filibustering going on.

GLENN: Yeah. So let me just tell you what happened with Bret Baier. He was promised an hour with Kamala. And then they called, I think yesterday. Maybe the day before. And said, it's only going to be a half an hour. And then they got a call when the half-hour is supposed to start. We will be about 15 minutes late.

Now, there's no reason. What was more important for her to do?

Okay?

Is there something else that she was doing that was like more important than the Fox news interview?

I can't think of one.

STU: I mean, if I were one of her aides, though, I would be popping the tire to make her late.

GLENN: Right. It was all planned. Oh, absolutely, it was all planned. And she was part of it.

STU: Why do you think that?

GLENN: Because they needed to throw Brett off. Now, they walked in, just at the time. Because it was supposed to be live to tape. Not live.

Live to tape. So they could not have time to reset during commercials.

STU: Yeah. And people don't always understand that terminology. But that's just basically, it's a live interview. It's just recorded and then you play the whole thing back as is. There's no edits, things like that.

GLENN: No edits. So it's live to tape. And it was recorded right before the show. So you need time to take that recording. It's not like the old days where you take the tape.

Okay? You have to ingest it into the right -- I don't even know. The right system to be able to play it back. Okay?

And that takes time, because it's rendering. So they were at the point to where, we're not going to be able to render this fast enough.

If she doesn't show up in like the next two minutes.

That's when she shows up. So they knew exactly what they were doing.

She shows up.

And now Brett is having to edit all the questions that he had.

I mean, it takes time to put an interview together.

So he has to edit. Now, which ones do I do?

Because I won't have time. He knows also, that they say, she only has 20 minutes. So now they cut an hour to a half an hour. And then down to 20 minutes, and he's flustered. Okay?

So they're trying to get him to be completely flustered. He's not. He does a great professional job.

However, this is why they did this. He has to be aggressive. Because she filibusters.

And I've done -- I've done interviews with Donald Trump before. Where you just can't get a word in edge-wise. Twenty minutes, I can ask him one to two questions, and you're just not going to get anything. If he doesn't want to give you anything, or if he's excited about one thing, he's just going to go. And you cannot shoe horn your way in.

It's why, if you listen to my interviews with Donald Trump, you always hear me go, yeah, but.

And I'm doing that, not to interrupt him. But to signal to him. We have to move on to the next thing. Okay. Pragmatism and you can do that in person, but not over the phone.

You have to make that sound, so he knows. Yeah. I have another question for you.

Well, she knew, he would have lots of follow-up questions.

So she was going to filibuster.

And she started hostile.

Immediately hostile.

Now, I'm going to show you. I'm going to jump to the whole reason why she did this.

Don't pay attention to anything else, that she said.

It's all really important, for you to know.

But she knows the media is in her back pocket.

She knows she has to shore up her own voters. Okay?

She's on the verge of losing the people, that will vote for her.

But they're starting to be like, you know what, she's just a limp noodle. There's nothing to her.

It's, oh, I've got a greatly indie car, with no engine or tires. That ain't going to win. All right?

So she had to speak, not to the Fox audience. She knows she won't get them. She doesn't care. We were all being used for her campaign.

For this one moment. Let me see here.

It is, I believe, cut 24.

VOICE: Test. He's talked about locking people up. Because they disagree with him.

This is a democracy. And in a democracy, the president of the United States in the United States of America, should be willing to be able to handle criticism without saying he would lock people up for doing it.

And this is what is at stake. Which is why you have someone like the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff saying what Mark Milley has said about Donald Trump being a threat to the United States of --

GLENN: Got it? Got it?

She needed to shore up her own people. And her own people believed that Donald Trump is a threat.

And they needed to show, she's tough as nails.

She knows and she is not afraid of anybody.

And this is a democracy!

And a democracy, a president cannot act like that!

This is the most angry she got.

It really came out of nowhere.

Okay?

It came out of nowhere.

This is the moment she was looking for.

It didn't matter what the question was.

That's why she kept making it about Donald Trump.

STU: Right.

GLENN: She kept going to Donald Trump. And it wouldn't fit anywhere.

It fit right here. Do it. You watch. That's the clip that will be seen by progressives.

And those on the left.

STU: So it was sort of a scripted takedown in her mind of Trump, he's bad for -- you know, hearkens back to the approach of Biden, right?

Which was standing in front of the Revenge of the Sith wall. And yelling about how bad he is with democracy.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

Because there are those who -- she cannot lose the ones who are passionate against Donald Trump.

She has to have that rage, that they have spent eight years. Twelve years on. Okay?

They've spent all this time and money, and energy. Building that up rage.

They need to kindle that rage up here in the last few weeks. Because people are like, I don't even know if I'm going to go out and vote. He's a danger to democracy.

And I have the will to stop it!

STU: Because joy does not make you vote. Right? Like that's not how that works.

GLENN: Nope. Nope. Fear. Fear. Fear and vengeance.

STU: Especially in an election like this, in which you have basically two candidates. Donald Trump and not Donald Trump.

GLENN: Exactly right.

STU: Right?

They need to come up with -- they're realizing, that's their only source of strength.

GLENN: That's why she doesn't say what she's going to do.

She says, I'm not Joe Biden and I'm not Donald Trump.

Okay. But what are you?

You can tell who the author of this whole thing is, Barack Obama.

Barack Obama. I'm hope and change. What the hell does that even mean? We're at change.

We're going to move forward. Yes, we can.

What the hell is that?

That's not a policy.

STU: That strikes me more as similar to the joy approach. Right?

Sort of this generally positive term that doesn't mean anything.

GLENN: Because he could pull it off. Because he had that speech.

Remember? Everybody watched that speech and said, oh, man. He's great.

STU: Not everybody. But, yes.

GLENN: Everybody who watched it, went, this guy could be president of the United States.

Everybody said that. And so he was exciting. He was new. He was

He embodied change. He was the first black president. Okay?

So he could pull that off. She can't pull that off. She's angry. She's mean. Her staff doesn't like her.

She's unlikable. To have

She's unlikable. So this is just about hope and change. This is about joy and not Donald Trump. Not Joe Biden.

Not Donald Trump. Full of joy, I'll stop him!

And I'm going to give you free stuff. How?

What? What does that -- what are you doing?

Somebody who cannot articulate in an interview. All she kept saying, this is very carefully worded. Every time she tries to answer a question, it is, I will follow the law.

STU: I thought the same. What a bizarre response.

GLENN: Oh, no. Crafty. Brilliant.

STU: But in reality, it's not. Of course, you will follow -- what do you mean? Were we supposed to expect you weren't going to follow the law?

GLENN: But who is going to make the laws? Congress doesn't make the laws.

STU: Anymore. Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah, the administrative state makes the laws. So she can change the law to anything she wants.

She can go.

If she changes the Supreme Court, she can change any law she wants.

I'll follow the law.

STU: Yep. And the law will bend to whatever I want.

GLENN: Exactly right.

STU: Which, of course, is so ridiculous about this.

One of the ways she did this. And she did it several times. One of them was on transgender surgery. For prisoners.

Do we have that clip?

I think we do. Yeah. We do.

Should we listen to that clip?

GLENN: Yeah. Go ahead. Every transgender inmate in the prison system would have access --

VOICE: So are you still in support of using taxpayer dollars to help prison inmates or detained illegal aliens to transition to another gender?

KAMALA: I will follow the law. And it's a law that Donald Trump actually followed. You're probably familiar with now it's a public report.

That under Donald Trump's administration, these surgeries were available to, on a medical -- necessity basis.

To people in the federal prison system.

And I think frankly they can't be ad from the Trump campaign. Is a little bit of like throwing stones when you're living in a glass house.

VOICE: The Trump aide said that he never advocated for that prison policy. And no gender transition surgery happened.

KAMALA: Well, you have to be responsible for what happened in your administration.
It's black and white.

VOICE: So would you still advocate for using taxpayer dollars for gender reassignment surgeries?

KAMALA: I will follow the law. Just like I think Donald Trump would say he did.

VOICE: You would have a say as president.

KAMALA: Like I said, he spent $20 million on those ads. Trying to create a sense of fear in the voters. Because he actually has no plans in this election, that is about focusing on the needs of the American people.

GLENN: And saying exactly what she's going to do.

You have a say in the law. She doesn't say yes.

But that's why she's saying, I will follow the law. And the law already says. But he didn't use that.

No surgeries happened.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Will you advocate for it?

He's not advocating for that.

STU: Right. What is -- you're supposed to be the candidate of change?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Your answer is, I will follow the law.

What do you want the law to change to? That's what we're talking about.

The whole point of the presidential campaign. She wants to change a zillion laws. That's the whole point. What do you want the law to be?

And, by the way, that's a master class by Bret Baier there. He asked her the question. He knows where she will go with it, which is to blame Donald Trump.

He's already got her cut off at the pass. Knowing the answer. That there were no transgender surgeries. And then keeps pushing back on her. When he says, you have a say in the law.

I would have preferred they kept going.

Of course, they cut off half of the interview.

GLENN: He expressed his frustration afterwards. That I couldn't do anything.

With 20 minutes.

And you can't. With 20 minutes. And they had -- I would have made a different choice.

But I'm -- I'm -- you know, more of a renegade. He's an actual journalist. I'm not. He said, four people that were in her entourage. Four were standing off camera, behind one of the cameras, looking right at Brett. Giving him the wrap-up sign.

We have to go. It's over. Wrap it up. Wrap it up. I would have said, Ms. Vice president, you were -- you were 15 minutes late.

You've cut our interview to 20 minutes. It was supposed to be an honor. Now it's 30. And can you turn that camera around.

Will you show those White House people that are now wrapping this up? Telling me to wrap this up. Do you have something more important to do than to talk to the American people?

GLENN: All righty then.

So kind of -- kind of interesting.

What happened yesterday.

There's a lot more that we should probably get into.

Kamala, in one of the worst moments, Bret Baier brings up the murdering illegals that were let in.

Listen to this exchange. Cut 19.

VOICE: Jocelyn Nungaray. Rachel Moore. Laken Riley. They're young women who were brutally assaulted and killed by some of the men who were released at the beginning of the administration. Well before a negotiated bipartisan bill. Former president Clinton actually referred to Laken Riley Sunday, campaigning for you in Georgia. Saying, if those men had been properly vetted, Laken Riley probably wouldn't have been killed. So if -- it wouldn't have happened.

This is well before any negotiation.

This is well before Donald Trump got involved in the politics.

This is a specific policy decision by your administration to release these men into the country. So what I'm saying to you --

KAMALA: No, no, no. I think --

VOICE: Do you owe those families an apology?

KAMALA: Let me just say, first of all, those are tragic cases. There's no question about it. There's no question about it.

And I can't imagine the pain that the families of those victims have experienced.

GLENN: Now apologize. Don't think about it.

KAMALA: For a loss that shouldn't have occurred. So that is true.

It is also true, that if a border security had actually been passed, nine months ago, it would have been nine months, that we would have more border agents, at the border. More support for folks who are working around the clock, trying to hold it all together.

To ensure that no future harm would occur.

And this election in 20 days. Will determine whether we have a president of the United States, who actually cares more about fixing a problem, even if it is not to their political advantage in an election.

Because there was a solution, Brett.

GLENN: No.

KAMALA: Madam vice president, it was a policy decision, in the early part of your administration.

GLENN: So she wouldn't -- she just won't answer it.

STU: Unreal.

GLENN: By the way, notice that she's always talking about comprehensive immigration reform.

She never talks about the border.

She talks about comprehensive. Our system is broken.

Yes!

We all agree with that.

But the border policy, you broke!

That's why we're having these problems.

You guys broke the border.

We all know that.

So don't talk to me about comprehensive.

Because that's something that people have been trying to do for 50 years.

And it won't happen.

Because we're so far apart.

You want amnesty.

No! You wanted 6,000 people, still to be able to come across the border every day!

No! It's -- this is the biggest con -- I mean, lie after lie after lie.

STU: Just to watch that happen.

Where she -- he -- he specifically picks cases, that she can't use, this border policy.

Which, by the way, there is a 0 percent chance she will actually pursue, when she's president of the United States.

She's just acting. Like they all talk about how Donald Trump, all he wanted out of this. Was a taking point for the election.

That's all this is.

She's doing the exact same thing she's accusing Donald Trump of.

GLENN: Yeah. That's why they released that bill. Knowing the Republicans would never go for it.

They would never go for it.

So they had that talking point.

And she will get in. And she will say, see!

They're standing in the way again.

STU: I hope the Republicans that went along with it. I hope they realize it now.

I hope they realize they were part of it. Maybe unwillingly.

But they were.

EXCLUSIVE: Chip Roy Explains His FIERY Rejection of Spending Bill

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN:

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

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

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

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

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

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

And it failed!

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

And then get your response.

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

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

So that new process was very effective.

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

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

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

GLENN: And not blind trust. Chip.

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

GLENN: Yep.

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

GLENN: Okay.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: And I love you.

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

And added a 5 trillion that are increase.

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

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

And everything else. I yield back.

GLENN: Okay. I yield back.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Or at least six months.

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

And totally flip this thing.

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

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

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

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

Where do we disagree?

Can you give them --

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

GLENN: Republican. Yes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

So our job was to force that change.

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

But now I have to now manage that.

GLENN: Right. I know. I know.

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

GLENN: So hang on.

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: Thank you for that, by the way.

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

Is that the one you're talking about?

Or is this another bill that could be another nightmare?

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: Okay.

Chip, thank you.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Where were we, Liz?

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

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

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

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

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

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

And he's hired 1200 of them.

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

I've got news for you.

Donald Trump is going to cut those positions.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There's nothing more un-American than that.

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

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

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

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

Look under your seats.

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

Ugh!

Now...

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

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

Or this is the purpose of this position.

To, quote, promote health equity.

To promote health equity.

What does that mean?

It means racial criminalization in health care.

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

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

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

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

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

It's discrimination.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yeah. Okay.

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

Slaves need to be free. Okay.

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

Let me limp up to explain this once more.

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

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

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

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

It's already covered!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We would go to jail.

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

We're going to look at everybody.

But we lean towards white people.

Did you have Wheaties for breakfast?

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

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

It's the same thing.

But don't expect the Democrats to get it.

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

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

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

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

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

It's not Kamala Harris.

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

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

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

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

What he really believes.

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

And then he rapes you.

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

And you should elect me.

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

But thank you for telling me who you really are.

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

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

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

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

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

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

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

No!

They have representation. Of all the small towns.

All the farming towns.

Everything else.

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

I think there should be electoral colleges in states now.

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

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

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

Or Idaho!

Or Alabama!

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

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

And we have completely different values than you do.

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

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

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

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

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

But you don't have a case.

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

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

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

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

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

You know, every time. Look at Wyoming.

Jackson Hole now controls Wyoming. Just controls it.

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

All the big cities.

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

That's why we have an electoral college.

And it didn't used to be this way.

But our cities are becoming mega cities.

Almost states in and among themselves.

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

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

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

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