RADIOMay 04, 2022

SCOTUS leak is already UNMASKING the dangerous far-left

A draft decision from the U.S. Supreme Court was leaked late Monday, showing a majority of the nine justices may be ready to overturn Roe V Wade. The source of the SCOTUS leak remains unknown, but the fact it happened at all is demonstrable of ANARCHY, Glenn explains. And now, how the far-left already is choosing to move forward from it — like Bernie Sanders calling to pack the court — could UNMASK their dangerous beliefs. Could the far-left use THIS to further burn our cities to the ground?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Wow. Holy cow. Holy cow.

Last night, something happened that I thought would not happen in my lifetime. Something that I think actually -- it's going to be -- it's going to be rough getting through all of this. But I think that this is something that may have given us more time.

Or at least some blessings. We effectively stopped abortion last night, at least in some states.

Any state that decides, that they're not going to provide abortion, or they're going to make it illegal. That's fine.

You're going to see California and New York, I think after birth abortions are going to be in -- in the legislative body very, very soon.

Now, this was leaked, and that's another story. A big story. There's only about four people. That could have leaked this.

I talked to some people, that know people on the Supreme Court, and very close last night. And they were livid. Livid.

They said, this is -- this has not happened. Now, this has happened with the first Roe vs. Wade decision. But that happened like an hour before. And it didn't release the whole decision.

This is clearly, clearly to ignite our streets on fire.

And it was clearly done, by a -- well, I shouldn't say this. It is most likely done, by a left-leaning court clerk.

That person should lose their law license. They should never be able to practice again.

They should not be held up as a hero. And they will be, by the left. If Roberts does not do an investigation, and does not out this person, fire this person, and make sure that they lose their law license, then the Supreme Court is not safe. In anything that they do.

Now, we don't know for sure, that this is going to last. And that is the reason for the release. This is the opinion. It is very well thought out. I read all 90. Or 95 pages this morning. It's very, very well thought out.

It has -- there's just no way around it. It is very, very bulletproof, because it uses even Ginsburg's words about Roe vs. Wade.

And -- but it does not ban abortion. It gives it back to the people, where it says, it belongs.

STU: So just to set the foundations to this. You believe -- and I think we seem to know that it is, a legitimate document.

GLENN: It is a legitimate document.

STU: It did -- it was written by Samuel Alito.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: We know that it looks like five justices are voting for it. So we're siding with --

GLENN: Right before.

STU: Yeah. The three liberals were against it.

Then John Roberts was --

GLENN: Undecided.

But 5-4.

STU: It's 5-3. And him on the side. One of the reasons, of course, the speculation is if Roberts is trying to crack a third way. That will maybe uphold the Mississippi law. But maybe not completely uphold Roe vs. Wade.

This document clearly states, over and over again.

It is not. I think it actually throws Obamacare, into question. Although, it does say at the end of the document, this is not -- this -- this ruling, should not be interpreted to affect any other ruling.

But the way it's -- the way it's laid out, it -- it clearly should affect Obamacare.

We are not a legislature. We are not a political arm.

Our job is to interpret the law. And to see, based on the Constitution, if there is this right. And it takes apart, the right to privacy. All of this stuff. And says, that that is -- this was a dubious, at best, back in 1972.

STU: Egregiously wrong from the start, I believe was the quote. Which was very powerful. And it's been used multiple times, in abortion rulings in the past.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: The difference, of course, between Obamacare and Roe vs. Wade. Is Obamacare is at least the law that was passed.

GLENN: Yes, correct. Correct.

STU: In a somewhat legitimate fashion. Roe vs. Wade is made up.

GLENN: Correct. And purely from the Supreme Court.

STU: Right. They're saying here, states can come back and pass laws.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: That's how this should happen. So this is not going to eliminate abortion.

The far left, Bernie Sanders, for example, is arguing hard today. To -- to act that this is the justification to overturn the filibuster. And then you would be able to put a national law in.

GLENN: And you would also pack the court.

STU: You would also pack the court. And do all sorts of things. Where, this is it, for them. The left really wants children not to be born. So they'll do whatever they can on that.

GLENN: Well, Planned Parenthood said, abortion is sacred. Just so you know, when there are things that are sacred, you're into religious territory.

This, they believe, is sacred. So abortion is up on the altar. I think that's -- I think you're going to see the left completely unmasked now.

If they pack the court, that is the -- that is the last thing.

No government has ever recovered from the courts being packed. Check out Venezuela. What do they have? Like 47 judges?

Something like that. Yeah. They just started packing the court. And it's crazy. No government has ever survived that.

That is the road to totalitarianism.

STU: Thirty-two.

GLENN: Thirty-two. Yeah.

STU: Yes. And --

GLENN: And what did they start with?

STU: I don't have the whole list. But that's where they're at now.

GLENN: So the left is being unmasked. They want an end to the filibuster. Which means, they just want straight up, you know, 50 -- 51, 50. They don't want anybody to be able to slow things down. That's what our Constitution is all about.

Slowing things down.

When people complain, Congress isn't doing anything. That's what the Founders wanted. They didn't want your federal government, doing things.

What they wanted was your state government to do things. That's why this particular ruling, on Roe vs. Wade is so good. It passes it back to the states.

It says, this will never be settled. This has always been controversial.

And no one can force the people into an acceptable position.

STU: It goes on to say, in -- in the ruling -- the draft ruling. Again, we don't -- this is not passed or anything. Or, not put into effect.

But it goes on to say, before Roe vs. Wade, 30 states had decided upon a complete ban.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: And there had been some states, moving in the opposite direction. And this just upended that entire process. You know, there's another world where Roe vs. Wade doesn't exist. And legislatures just passed abortion rights in most of the states. I don't like that world. But that could have happened.

And probably would have happened in a bunch of states over the years. Instead, they tried to upend the process, and say, you're not allowed to have these restrictions on abortion.

And that is, what has made this issue so divisive. When it's life or death, it should be divisive. I have no problem fighting for this one. But there's an argument, where this could have gone a different direction. That's really a good chunk of focus of Alito in the ruling.

He says, look, I --

GLENN: We have no credibility, if we legislate from the bench.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Especially on things that are this divisive.

STU: It basically -- he criticizes the previous court and says, hey. Basically what they did was, hey, you know, this is -- this is a thing that's tucked aside. So we'll just settle this one now. And we just stick with what we say here. But that's just not how it works. That's not how our system of government works.

GLENN: Right. So there are a lot of things in this. We'll give it to you. But Mississippi one.

STU: Not, yeah. I am not of the opinion, that you can count these chickens. And I know when you're talking about abortion, chickens.

Hatching is a big thing.

STU: I want this thing to hatch. The reason this was released, is to put enormous, impossible pressure on these justices.

GLENN: This is anarchy.

STU: It's potentially to encourage George Floyd riots around the country, to change someone's mind. God only knows. I mean, if we have anyone that is a high-level security person, that is not guarding a Supreme Court justice today. They need to be reassigned to that job. Because what the left would do, to have this right, to end so many lives. You can't overstate. You can't overstate, what end they would go to, to try to stop this.

And now they think it's a done deal, but something could be country to prevent it. I fear for all these people.

GLENN: I do too. I do too.

STU: Remembering people, on the left, are insane.

They will do anything to fight for the right, to make sure these children don't live for some freaking bizarre reason, I'll never understand.

GLENN: Can I imagine, had they gone the other way? If it were leaked. I mean, I can't imagine that there was anybody that would do that.

STU: Yeah. Because there's some speculation that somebody on the right did it.

GLENN: Really? Politico.

STU: Yes. And that the argument is, one, that Alito has lost somebody. He might be losing somebody's wavering at the five. And he wants to put pressure on them, to know that they were on the end Roe vs. Wade side.

And let's say Kavanaugh. And Kavanaugh is wavering, and he wants to put pressure on him to say, hey, no. You stick with this. Everyone is going to know, you changed your mind. That's one idea.

GLENN: Right. And, you know what, investigation. FBI. Do you trust the FBI?

An investigation needs to be done. John Roberts needs to call for it. And we need to know who did it. Whoever did it. Whatever side. They're wrong.

That's not the way we deal with things here. If it was someone on the right, you were wrong. You were wrong to do it.

That's not how we do business here. You do not influence the Supreme Court, or threaten the Supreme Court.

You don't do it. Period.

STU: And the idea that the right would do this. The other theory being floated out there, is that conservatives wanted people to kind of be ready for this happening. So it's a sort of -- like they're putting it out there early, so it doesn't affect the elections. There's no way that someone in the Supreme Court would risk this blowing up by leaking it on the right, I don't think. If they thought that they had lost someone. Which is not the news. In the political reporting, they say, this standard of five justices, to overturn Roe vs. Wade, is at least in effect, until last week.

So this was written back in September. It was circulated in February. But as of last week, this was still holding.

So we don't know if something has changed. And that's why it got leaked. I don't believe it. I think it's somebody on the left, to try to get people to change their mind.

GLENN: It was so interesting, how fast, that giant crowd, cut around that Supreme Court, isn't it?

STU: That was really quick, yeah.

GLENN: Really fast. Interesting.

STU: A lot of people live right around there. They had signs.

GLENN: Walking their dogs.

STU: And they brought their signs on the walk.

GLENN: What's weird. They all brought their dogs apparently, which we couldn't see. And their signs for that casual walk. And they were all chanting, pack the court.

Just again, you are going to see the left, fully unmasked. They are not interested in a republic. They are not interested in the rule of law.

They were screening and shouting and chanting, pack the court. This may be -- this may be the place where we separate. And I'll go into that, coming up in just a second.

I think this is where -- I think this is where we might come to blows. And I don't mean that, you know, we're going to have violence on both sides on the street. I think the left is going to use this. This is their catalyst, to do I think what they did before. They just burn our cities to the ground.

And this is on something that I'm willing to die on my sword for. I don't know about you. But I think this is -- this is the most righteous cause, to stand up for.

You know, protecting our children, from all of these lies in our school. Righteous.

Standing up for the right, for babies to be born. And to stop killing. Righteous.

To stand up, against court packing, righteous.

We can talk about tax rates, all we want. And they're important. But there's nothing like this. I think we can morally justify doing every show, every day about this. Until it stops.

Worldwide we're talking about something like a million people were aborted.

GLENN: I want you to know, the only reason why Stu and I were talking about this, because as men, we know now that we can have a baby. We do have an undeniable voice at the table.

STU: That will have died out real fast last night. I was listening to CNN as they were breaking this story, because I torture myself.

And they immediately -- the first act -- what this shows, is that men and women are not equal in this country. Now, I don't know, it may show a lot of things. I don't know how it shows that men and women aren't equal. Men also wouldn't have the right to have an abortion. So I don't know what you're talking about.

GLENN: Men can have a baby now.

STU: And then immediately, it was, you know what, it was these men. They don't understand. Because they can't have children. It's like, wait a minute. What happened to your programming from last week?

Remember of all those lessons you were telling us about how men can have children. Remember how everybody had to put their pronouns on everything, because we didn't even know what genders were.

Now, all of a sudden again, it's the most important thing. Now women are once again, we can tell who they are.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: We're now, again, able to identify women this week. And this week, because it's convenient to their outcomes, once again, women are vitally important. And their special needs are very important. And men can't understand them. Because they don't have -- they can't have babies. They don't have reproductive organs this week.

It's so transparent and pathetic.

GLENN: All right. Back with more. Coming up in just a second. Words from Alan Dershowitz.

And five observations and outlooks from the Supreme Court's likely reversal of Roe and Casey, Daniel Horowitz coming up.

Why Trump SHOULD Dismantle USAID

President Trump has faced major backlash from the Left and media over his plan to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), or at least merge parts of it with the State Department. But Glenn explains why Trump SHOULD either dismantle USAID entirely or let Secretary of State Marco Rubio clean house. This isn’t a “humanitarian aid” organization, Glenn explains. USAID is a CIA front and the reason why the rest of the world hates us. It has been used to influence regime change and force nations to embrace things like transgenderism and abortion. But if Elon Musk, DOGE, Trump, and Rubio succeed in reforming it or dismantling it, the America people are in for a good surprise!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. Let me tell you about what happened this weekend with DOGE.

This is something that was tucked beneath the political squabbles, and the Grammy night celebrity nonsense.

It is a story far more important than any of our daily distractions. And it makes me, oh, so very happy.

And you'll understand why, in a minute.

This story pulls the curtain back, on who really holds the reins of power in our country. I want to connect a few dots with you, here in the next 40 minutes, or so. We will talk about USAID.
We are going to talk about Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and DOGE.

The Department of Government Efficiency. DOGE and the Trump team are battling it out with USAID. Okay? We cannot let Elon Musk see our books! We are not giving him. Really?

You run an aid program. What's so top secret that you can't let him see it?

This is about control, control over the flow of information, over government secrecy.

And, yes, control over your tax dollars.

So here's the story in a nutshell. In case you didn't know, USAID, the US agency for the International Development, had its Director of Security, Jonathan Voorhees and his deputy, Brian McGill, placed on administrative leave.

Why? Because they refused to grant access to security systems, and systems containing sensitive personnel files, security clearance information, even classified materials, to employees of DOGE.

When Voorhees and McGill said, no, you're not allowed to see any of this. That's when the DOGE team threatened to call in the US marshals. The US marshals over a bureaucratic disagreement? No. Uh-uh.

Remember, this is about something much, much bigger. It's about who controls the machinery of the government, when it comes to foreign influence.

Covert operations. And the shadow games, our government is playing overseas.

So let's start with USAID.

On paper, it sounds great. Right?

The US agency for international development. They're the folks who help develop countries, build schools. And fight diseases.

And support democracy.

First of all, I don't want to be in that business, as a government.

But if you've been paying attention, history will tell you something else.

It's well-known that USAID has been much more than an aid operation.

Since its inception in 1961 -- by the way, can you tell me anything that happened, you know, with the government and overseas, things that was good that happened in the '50s and '60s. Maybe the Peace Corps. Maybe the Peace Corps. But I doubt it.

USAID say covert CIA operation. They do covert black ops, all around the world.

And their money just comes in, and it just -- no. This is aid. Black hole.

Now, this is not a conspiracy theory. This is historic fact. In the Cold War, USAID funded cultural organizations. And student groups.

And agricultural projects. Uh-huh.

They were covers for intelligence gathering. And they have been accused of everything from influencing elections in foreign countries, to helping overthrow governments that didn't align with our interests. Do you want any country doing that?

Don't we have a big problem with other countries influencing our elections? How dare they! Uh-huh.

Black ops. Do you remember the Colour Revolutions in Europe? Yeah. Yeah.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that every employee at USAID is a covert operative. Most, I'm sure, good, decent people trying to do their jobs.

But the agency has always had a dual identity, part humanitarian, part shadow extension of US foreign policy through the CIA.

And that's really the part that I think is interesting here.

Because every nation knows, that this is a CIA front.

Except, the American people. We don't -- we don't know that apparently.

No, no. We're good. You know, it has billions of dollars, in black covert money, flowing through it.

We just -- we just don't know it. Because those with oversight. Can't see the records. President team has just been denied access.

Wait a minute. Who works for who?

This is an aid thing. What do you have that is so very top secret.

So here comes DOGE. The department of government efficiency.

Sounds pretty harmless. Yeah. Like a bunch of accountants, trying to balance the budget. That's all we're trying to do.

But those who are running black ops, know that DOGE has two agendas. And the president has made it very clear.

Yes. Cut the waste. Downsize the government.

But it also has another very specific mission. Except, this isn't a black op.

Again, this mission is right out in the open. Where all missions should be.

They -- their mission is not only to cut the budget.

But to break up the entrenched bureaucracies, that have been running Washington like their own personal fiefdoms.

Trump's goal was to drain the swamp. And DOGE is supposed to be one of the tools that is headed by Elon Musk, to drain that swamp.

Now, I personally like it for a couple of reasons. Elon Musk is one of the world's greatest minds. I mean, when he goes into his own companies, he sits with every employee for about five minutes.

And just says, what are you working on, this week.

And if they don't have something that he feels is really moving the company forward, you're not necessary.

You're fired. Okay.

He has a knack for cutting waste, and making companies more efficient and also coming up with some really good products.

He's a disrupter.

He doesn't do things like everyone else. He doesn't think like everybody else.

That's his strength. He advertise erupts industries. He challenges the norms.

And he's been a very public mission to expose and challenge what he sees as government overreach.

Whether it's with Twitter for X. Or even the critiques of regular agencies. Now, he can come in and look at these things and go, wait a minute.

This doesn't seem to be exactly, you know, what you're supposed to be doing. This is different. This isn't about posting memes and calling out the woke mind virus.

This is about accessing the very heart of the government's covert machinery.

That's what's happening with USAID because it's not about aid programs.

It's all about data. It's all about networks.

It's all about the hidden influence, that the US experts, you know, flex all around the world.

Including perhaps inside the United States, against their own people.

But we don't know. And now for the first time in decades, somebody from the outside of traditional power structures are -- are saying, huh.

What is it that you guys do here?

And guess what? The machine doesn't like it.

The people who have been running that machine, also don't like it. I want you to remember who was in charge of USAID. Does anybody remember?

Anybody. Bueller. Anybody?

Samantha Power. Now, Samantha Power. She's the wife of Harvard professor. Obama adviser.

And author of the really super important book called Nudge.

How to get people to do what you want them to do, without them knowing. Nudge.

So the wife of that guy, who I'm sure has nothing to do with nudging or dig do go anything like that.

Even though she was with the Biden -- or the Obama administration, forever! She didn't know anything about that.

GLENN: This is why John Voorhees and Brian McGill push back.

That's why they're risking their careers to say, no. You can't come in here. Because they weren't just protecting the files!

They were protecting the status quo. They're protecting a system that has operated in the shadows for decades, with that to no accountability to the American people!

And here's where it gets even more fascinating. The employees at USAID and across the federal bureaucracy, aren't just fighting to protect sensitive information.

They are fighting to protect their power. He's getting in to the roots now.

He's opening up to -- you know how Donald Trump is kind of like a -- a human hand grenade. I've said this to his face. You know, I think you're kind of like a human hand grenade.

What do you mean? Well, you're the greatest human hand grenade I've ever seen, don't get me wrong. You just kind of throw yourself into things, and then a wall comes down.

And then as the dust is settling, everybody goes, wait a minute.

What's on the other side of that wall? That's what's happening.

Except, this time they're not just lobbing grenades in. They know where it is.

Over the years, we've created this massive administrative state. Which is a fourth branch of government that nobody votes for. Wholly unconstitutional.

No one really controls it. You noticed that the people on Capitol hill, they're afraid of the intelligence agencies.

Hmm. So who is really boss then?

They operate with a level of secrecy, that would make our Founding Fathers roll in their graves.

This many of us state has been the gatekeeper of information.

Deciding who gets to know what.

Both here, at home.

And abroad.

Does the president even know?

So when Trump and Musk come knocking, knocking, knocking, at the door.

Trying to peak behind the curtain. The reaction is swift and fierce.

Because if they succeed, they'll manage to pull USAID's operations. And put it right under direct control of the State Department. Or even worse, in the public eye! They'll be held accountable for things!

We can't have that. It will expose decades of covert actions.

Questionable alliances.

The dark side of US foreign policy.

That has been hidden under the guise of aid.

It's why the rest of the world hates us.

Think about some of the crazy things we've done in the name of foreign aid.

We funneled money to warlords in Afghanistan.

We gave money to the Taliban.

Money to Gaza to prop up Hamas.

We've run guns to the Syrian groups ISIS, propped up dictators in Latin America. Even funded opposition groups in countries, where we wanted regime change all under the banner of freedom and democracy.

Again, this is why everybody hates the American government.

Her people see our influence as good and benevolent.

And sometimes, I think we are.

Other times, America is anything but!

So in exchange for our tax dollars, we've asked countries to change their laws. To accept abortion, in places where the people are morally outraged. We promote transgenderism in their schools.

We -- we tell them, that this is the enlightened way to go.

Otherwise, they lose their aid.

We force them to open their markets to multi-national corporations that sometimes don't have their best interests at heart. And we conduct military operations on their soil. You will do it our way. And yet, you don't know anything about it.

Most Americans don't have any idea. Because it's all wrapped up in the nice shiny package of humanitarian assistance.

So here's what happens if DOGE succeeds.

What happens if Musk and Trump manage to pry open the lid to this operation?

Well, for once, the bureaucrats lose control of one of their many hiding places.

Intelligence community loses one of its more useful tools.

And the American people might finally get to see just how much of their hard-earned money has been used, not to build schools or feed the hungry, but to manipulate foreign government and maintain our empire of influence. And here's the kicker.

This isn't about just the past. It is about the future. Because if Musk and Trump can break through this wall, it sets a precedent. It says no part of the government is beyond scrutiny of our elected officials.

And that tariffs people who have been running the show.

So what do we take away?

One, pay attention.

Stories like these are not bureaucratic squabbles.

This is the battlefront.

This is the battle line, right there, that will decide who actually runs the country.

We will see more on this, and the intelligence agencies are not going to like it.

So one thing I would take away from this is don't take any news story at face value, for a while.

There are many hiding places. And those who receive and use dark money for black ops are going to fight back.

Second, ask questions.

Continue to ask questions.

Why does USAID have classified systems that other government officials can't access?

Why is there so much resistance in an aid organization to transparency.

And third, remember the people that are screaming the loudest about protecting democracy are often the ones most afraid of the people actually seeing how the sausage gets made. So this isn't about USAID, DOGE, or even Trump or Musk.

It's about whether you have the right to know what our government is doing with your money.

Stay curious, America.

We will get to the bottom of this. But we have to be willing to go through the tough times, remain determined, and vigilant.

Adam Schiff Spews INSANE HYPOCRISY in Kash Patel Confirmation Hearing

Trump's pick for FBI Director, Kash Patel, recently sat down for his Senate confirmation hearing. And like many of Trump's picks, he faced a hostile room. But Glenn reviews some of the highlights, including how Kash said that "having been the victim of government overreach and a weaponized system of justice and law enforcement" makes him uniquely qualified for the job. Glenn and Stu also address Kash's comments on Trump's January 6th pardons and Sen. Adam Schiff's painful lecture about the word "we." Plus, Glenn reveals the "point I coldn't get past with any" of the Democrats from the hearing: "I can't take it! The Democrats don't understand what just happened!"

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I only have really one thing to say today.

And that's because I threw out everything else, because it took me about two hours, to just gather my thoughts and jot them down.

Because I wanted to be searingly accurate.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So the rest of the show, we're just going to kind of wing. Because I wanted to make sure, when I give you my opinion on what's happening, it's actually very clear. What I believe.

So that's coming up in just a little while. The rest of this show. We have today -- yesterday, last night, for Blaze TV subscribers, one of my favorite podcasts, because this is something I've been interested in as a kid.

The shroud of Turin. We had the exact linen copy of the shroud of Turin, in the studio. Plus, one of the leading experts on it.

And if you don't know what the shroud of Turin is. First of all, it's -- it's not a Catholic artifact. That's what people have said in the past.

But now evangelicals and everybody else have started to say, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute.

There is some new information on this.

This thing is the shroud of Christ, they believe. New data has been released, with something that is better than carbon dating. I can't remember what it's called. But it's better than carbon dating. And it looks at the fabric.

Dates it. It's 2,000 years old.

And what's more. There are spores and pollen. Et cetera, et cetera.

On and in the fabric.

That only are found in Jerusalem, in and around April, in the spring.

I mean, that's a pretty elaborate fraud! Plus, all of the bloodstains. The things that science has found about this, I think this is the shroud of Christ.

And you have to make up your own mind. But we're going to talk about that, later. And play some pieces of it. We have Jeremiah Johnston on, to talk about it on hour number three today.

You don't want to miss this.

People who say, it can't be done, it's not the shroud of Jesus. It's the greatest shroud of Jesus you've ever seen. I can't believe it. So, anyway, that's coming up.

So let's start with some -- hmm. Beautiful people in the Senate, shall we?

Let's start with Kash Patel first. Here's Kash Patel, testifying in front of Congress yesterday. Cut one.

VOICE: Senator, it may be one of the scenarios that most uniquely qualifies me to take command at the FBI.

Having been the victim of government overreach, and a weaponized system of justice. And law enforcement.

I know what it feels like to have the full weight of the United States government barreling down on you. And as the Biden inspector general determined, those activities at the FBI and DOJ are wholly improper, and not predicated on law and facts.

I will ensure if confirmed that no American subjected to that kind of torment, to that kind of cost, financially and personally. And most importantly, I will make sure that no American is subjected to death threats, like I was.

And subjected to moving their residents like I was.

Because of government overreach. Because of leaks of information about my personal status.

If confirmed as FBI director, Mr. Chairman, you have my commitment, that no one in this country will feel that pain.

GLENN: Wow!

Why is he on such a rant here? He's going to weaponize the government. Is this just all about payback? Oh, my gosh!

Did you hear what he just said he went through!

Yeah, it's not about payback. It's about justice.

Making sure that anyone that was involved in that kind of activity, with anyone, no longer works for the United States government.

And if they broke any laws, they go to jail. I don't know about you! I kind of -- I kind of like the idea of jail for some people.

You know what I mean?

Not everybody. But the guilty?

No matter if they're the poorest person in the world. Or it's George Soros.

I don't really care. You break the law. You go to jail. But he's on your side.

I don't care.

Go to jail.

That's what he's trying to restore. Now, let's go to cut two. He was called out on the January 6th pardons by Senator Durbin. Here it is.

VOICE: Was President Donald Trump wrong to give blanket clemency to the January 6th defendants?

VOICE: Thank you, Ranking Member. A couple of things on that. One, the power of the presidential pardon is just that. The president.

VOICE: Well, I can see he has the authority. I'm asking, was he wrong to do it for him?

VOICE: And as we discussed in our private meeting, Senator, I have always rejected any violence against any law enforcement. And I have including in that group, specifically addressed any violence against law enforcement on January 6th.

And I do not agree with the commutation of any sentence of any individual who committed violence against law enforcement.

VOICE: So do you think America is safer because these 1600 people have been give up an opportunity of coming out and serving their sentences and living in our communities again.

VOICE: Senator, I have not looked at all 1600 individual cases. I have always advocated for imprisoning those that cause harm to our law enforcement and civilian communities.

I also believe that America is not safer, because President Biden's commutation of a man who murdered two FBI agents, Agent Coler's and Williams' family deserve better than to have the man that at point-blank range, fired a shotgun into their heads and murdered them, released from prison. So it goes both ways.

GLENN: Okay. All right. I think you're pretty clear.

STU: I like that answer.

GLENN: I love that answer.

STU: So what do you take -- part of the -- trying to stir things up on the left.

Saying, he took a different position than Trump on that.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

You mean people are the different, they're not zombies.

STU: That's true. Though not common.

GLENN: The presidents. Presidential pardons are just that.

His pardons.

I'm not for releasing people who have ever, you know, harmed cops. I'm not for that. I don't think the president is for that.

STU: Well, he -- he did commute sentences of people who were the violent offenders in there.

GLENN: I would like to look at each individual case.

STU: But he did all of them.

So we don't to have look at each individual case.

GLENN: Well, here's my feeling on this.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I've already expressed this over and over again.

You cannot say that the system was corrupt for some and then just allow that corrupt system to sentence and put people away that might have been guilty. You can't do that! We never do that. If there was a corrupt prosecution, and a corrupt judge, or whatever.

And it's found out.

It's not only that person that is parted. And you throw the case out. And you can't try it again.

Sorry, it was corrupt. Then you're supposed to go on and see, when did this happen?

Did this team see anything else?

And if you look and see this as a pattern, you have to throw it all out.

It's not the president's fault. It is the prosecution's fault. It is the DOJ's fault.

STU: I think that's a defensible point.

He hasn't explicitly said this. Donald Trump's point, why he did all 1600. That's not Kash Patel's point. Kash Patel is saying, I can't agree with any of those commutations.

GLENN: He didn't say that. He said, I don't agree with --

STU: Any commutation of anyone.

GLENN: But that's a blanking statement. I don't really care anyway.

STU: I'm just curious. Because I think they're too slightly different points.

I would say, they're kind of representative of our two points here.

My point is more consistent with Kash Patel, I think on this. And yours is maybe more consistent with Trump. I don't think it's a big deal if they disagree, as you point out.

GLENN: No.

STU: It's interesting what the left was trying to do with that though.

They're trying to get that little wedge of separation.

They're trying to say, hey, to know, this guy doesn't agree with you.

Look, he doesn't need. Because the whole -- it's funny, they want to separate them. And say, hey, they don't agree.

At some point of time, of trying to make the point, the only reason he has this job, that he's a loyalist that is an automatron robot. Which is like, you don't get both of those things.

They'll try. You can't have both of them.

GLENN: They'll try. Yeah. Touchdown, either direction. You know? Which I think you would be for with the Eagles, so please don't get on your high horse.

Okay. So the thing that drives me nuts is -- and this is the point I couldn't get past with anyone of them.

Excuse me, Durbin. Hang on just a second. Wait. Wait. Wait.

You're worried about the safety of the American people, because people who, in your words, not mine. Rioted and tried to burn the republic down, you're worried about them. But all of the riots from BLM. Burning Minneapolis almost to the ground.

You didn't have a problem with that one? I can't take it. I can't take it.

And I don't think the American people -- I just -- they don't get -- the Durbins of the world. And the Democrats. Don't understand what just happened. America changed on Election Day. This isn't just, you know what, we're going to -- we're going to switch and go with another party.

That's not what happened!

People didn't vote for the Republicans. They voted for Donald Trump's agenda.

They voted for massive change. And they're playing the same game.

And I'm sorry, but it's not going to work, dude. It's just not going to work. And it will come and bite them in the ass like nobody's business.

Look, whenever you try to con people, it's going to come out. It's going to come out.

All of their illegalities. Everything that they tried to do, is any of that really hidden anymore?

Do you really think that Donald Trump's going to let these secrets lay secret?

Let's go to cut three.

VOICE: Trump recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Then we went to a studio and recorded it. Mastered it. And digitized it. And put it out as a song released exclusively on the war room.

We, we, we.

If you had nothing to do with it, Mr. Patel. Why did you tell Mr. Bannon and all his listeners, that you did.

VOICE: That's why it says, we, when it's highlighted.

VOICE: Yeah. And you're part of the we. When you say we, that includes you, Mr. Patel.

VOICE: Not every instance.

VOICE: Well, that's new!

So when you said we.

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Is it? Is it?

Maybe I identify as we!

Really? You mean these words have meaning?
Good God Almighty!

This is Adam Schiff, talking to Kash Patel about January 6th! Like he has any credibility at all.

STU: None. Zero.

It's the royal we, is it not, Glenn? The royal we.

GLENN: Well, it's whatever Kash Patel decides it is, quite honestly.

STU: That's right! You're not allowed to ask.

GLENN: That's new.

So when you said we, you didn't really mean you, is that your testimony?

VOICE: Not unless you have a new definition for the word we.

VOICE: Oh, okay. I always thought we included the person that announced the word.

GLENN: Stop! I always thought them/them refers to a group. But it doesn't.

STU: So true. I cannot even read news stories anymore. They say they, and I'm like, who are they talking about?

And they're talking about one person who says they're they. Like, that is not --

GLENN: Right. I wish Kash would have -- I mean, he's too -- he's too cool to do this.

He's too smart to do this, but I would have unleashed on Schiff.

Really? Because I thought, I'm sorry. They told me. Who is they?

Well, that's how I refer to myself. And I was talking to myself. You have a problem with them/they, sir.

STU: So true.

GLENN: You have a problem with we? I call myself we. What's the problem with that?

Now, it's not a logical answer.

But it's certainly worth shoving right down his throat.

STU: We come up with words. As a society. To describe things.

Right?

GLENN: Yes! You've done everything you can, to destroy the meaning of almost every word!

That's what's so -- we always talk about. Oh, well, it's not scientific.

It's not reality.

All that is true. But you're destroying the way we communicate with each other.

GLENN: When you say we, what do you mean by we?

STU: I mean they. Thank you.

GLENN: All right.

STU: But it's true. You destroy that. And you have nothing. You have nothing.

How can you listen to a show? You can't listen to a show. Because you can't understand what people are saying.

When you go to a court of law. This is what they try to do in court cases all the time.

That's not what the founders meant there.

That's what they always do. They're manipulating the language. You said this 100 times. Control the language. Control the argument. If you do control the language, you control that argument.

And we're starting to stop that.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

So sorry, Adam Schiff. We don't like it.

Me don't like it, either.

IHEART FEED

Will Trump's Cabinet Expose the Obama CIA’s BIGGEST Secrets?

During her Senate confirmation hearing to become Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard mentioned an Obama-era CIA program called “Timber Sycamore.” The program gave weapons and training to Al Qaeda affiliated groups with the goal of toppling the Assad regime in Syria. But the American people and many soldiers fighting in the Middle East were kept in the dark. What other secrets are government bureaucrats still hiding from us? Is the CIA connected at all to the Benghazi tragedy? And would Tulsi Gabbard reveal the truth as DNI? Glenn and Stu discuss.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: FBI agents are starting to pack up their desks. As fear of FBI mass firings swirl. That's -- that's sad.

And good. I'm glad.

Benjamin Netanyahu just arrived in DC. He said that he's meeting with Trump. And they hope to redraw the lines in the Middle East.

That's an interesting thing. I think Donald Trump is absolutely headed that way. The USAID headquarters have been closed.

Thank you, Donald Trump, for that. And there was something else.

Oh. And Mexico just came out.

The Mexican president just talked to Donald Trump.

And that 25 percent tariff?

Well, that's on hold.

She said, I talked to Donald Trump, we had and a great conversation.

And he put that on hold.

And I'm sending 10,000 troops to the US/Mexico border right now.

So I've got that under -- and Justin Trudeau. God bless his soul.

He's going to talk at 3 o'clock this afternoon. Yeah. Who is a good Prime Minister?

What a joke. Now, let me tell you about -- I just told you about USAID. And how that is a CIA front.

And Donald Trump is going to do two things with DOGE. He's going to cut all the bad guys. Try to find them.

He may not find all of them. But he will find a lot of them

Oh, did I mention that the FBI people are clearing out their desks.

Getting ready for a firing.

Anyway, he will clean out a lot of the mess, and a lot of the black ops that are happening.

And he will also cut the budget.

So he has that going for him. Now, the left and the Deep State. They're a little freaked out.

If they could have shredders at their disposal, 24 hours a day. I don't think there would be a lick of paper left, in I forget these agencies.

Consider some of the questions that have been swept under the rug. All the way back to Obama.

Let's see. Consider the American lives that are lost, overseas.

Consider the foreign lives lost. Consider the regimes that have changed.

And the chaos that is spread all over the world, in our names, with our tax dollars.

Now, consider what Donald Trump's team has pledged to break and uncover.

So if you listen to some of the confirmation hearings in the Senate, you might hear a little sneak peak at what's to come.

Tulsi Gabbard over on Friday, revealed for many Americans, they don't know about it. It's a clandestine, Obama program, that sought regime change in the Middle East.

And unloaded over a decade of violence and chaos.

Listen to this.

VOICE: Senator, as someone who enlisted in the military, specifically because of al-Qaeda's terrorist attack on 9/11 and committing myself and my life to doing what I could to defeat these terrorists. It was shocking. And a betrayal to me. And every person who was killed on 9/11. Their families. And my brothers and sisters in uniform.

When as a member of Congress, I learned about President Obama's dual programs that he had begun. Really, to overthrow the regime of Syria.

And being willing to -- through the CIA's timber sick more program, that has now been made public. Of working with and arming and equipping al-Qaeda, in an effort to overthrow that regime, starting yet another regime change war in the Middle East. DOD train and equip program, again, begun under President Obama, has widely been known, looked at, and studied that ultimately resulted in half a billion dollars being used to train who they called "moderate rebels," but were actually fighters working with and aligned with al-Qaeda's affiliate on the ground in Syria.

GLENN: Hmm. That's weird.

Most Americans have never heard about Obama's Timber Sycamore. It's possibly the largest gun running and training operation our little spy agencies have ever pulled off.

How many people died in Syria, as a result of this? How many people died all over the Middle East?

How many terrorists received weapons and training from our government?

Al-Qaeda?

We know that many of those same terrorists now control the government of Syria, right now.

And the horror show is not over yet.

Why haven't we heard about this?

Why does every school kid know about Reagan and Iran-Contra, but not Obama and Timber Sycamore?

It is because it not only reveals terrorists receiving our training and weapons, that we supplied. But it also reveals American lives that have been lost.

We still don't know the full details on what happened in Benghazi.

Why is that?

Why is it that Hillary Clinton and Obama made sure of that?

That wasn't part of some gun-running operation to Syria, was it?

Is this part of the peace of the fallout from Obama's Timber Sycamore?

Why was the US ambassador even in Benghazi? Why was there a State Department annexed in such a dangerous place? And why was it so unguarded?

Why was there a secret CIA substation there? Why was it kept so low-key?

Why didn't the military respond? Why were they so quiet and ineffective? Were they trying to keep Obama and Clinton's little secret hidden?

And all at the cost of four American lives. Say their names. They like to say that. Say their names.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Sean Smith. Tyrone Woods. Glen Doherty.

They still deserve justice. We deserve answers. I just want you to know, what's happening in Washington, DC, right now, is because cutting the budget.

But it has a dual purpose. In everything they're doing. They're cutting the heart out of these secret ops. They are exposing what our government is doing. By moving USAID over to the State Department. USAID can't that have.

I mean, I don't think of the State Department as someplace that's clean and has a good agenda.

But apparently, that's being cleaned up as well.

What is it we are going to learn, over the next few months?

What is it we're going to see exposed?

It's quite amazing. It is quite amazing.

By the way, Sunday, yesterday, Musk wrote, that career Treasury officials are breaking the law every hour of every day by approving payments that are fraudulent or do not match the funding laws passed by Congress.

Oh, boy. What's this? Apparently, the Treasury Secretary, the new one, has allowed the department of government efficiency to gain access to the federal government's payment system.

Okay. Wait a minute. So USAID won't allow the DOGE officials any access to their aid programs? But the Treasury is like, yeah. Open up the books!

They discovered, among other things, that payment approval officers, at Treasury were structured to always approve payments, even to known fraudulent or terrorist groups!

They literally have never denied a payment in their entire career.

Not once!

So why do you have them.

And why would they be told that? My gosh, this house of cards is going to come crashing down.

They are in -- they're going to have serious issues.

Trump's Tariffs EXPLAINED: Will Canada Cave Like Mexico?

Did Donald Trump start a trade war with Mexico and Canada, or is it all part of his negotiation strategy? Mexico has already agreed to help improve border security. But Canada has pushed back against Trump’s promise to slap 25% tariffs on many Canadian goods. Glenn explains what Justin Trudeau doesn’t seem to understand: This isn’t about “punishing” Canada. It’s about national security and getting the best deal for Americans.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. Welcome to the program. Donald Trump just got off the phone with Justin Trudeau.

Apparently, they're going to talk again at 3:00 this afternoon.

But he's not -- he's not going -- he's not going light on Justin, which I'm very happy about. Canada, immure -- I'm sorry. When we're there too.
-- I don't want to feel like we're pointing out Canada going, you guys suck! We sucked too. We just woke up and changed leadership.

And we're -- we are going in a different direction. Because we've learned the same things you know. Okay? You know it!

This can't continue this way. Right?

STU: Yeah. The one. I have several issues with some of these policies.

One that I do, is really -- a little bothersome to me. Trudeau is so unpopular, in Canada. So on the way out.

Now there's this nationalist Canadian thing going on. Where they're --

GLENN: Wait a minute. Trudeau is becoming a nationalist?

STU: It's hilarious. He's now getting the benefits of the support, of people who are just rallying around him mindlessly.

Whether the policy is right or not. I just don't like good things happening to Justin Trudeau.

I don't know if that's part --

GLENN: That was an unforeseen consequence.

STU: We will see, obviously, with where this lands, much more important than not.

GLENN: Here's the thing. We have a president that is not actually trying to destroy us.

STU: Yeah. That's true.

Whether you like this policy or not, when it comes to tariffs. You know that the motivation behind it is to make the country better. And I don't know if it's always the motivation behind these policies, when we've seen previous presidents go after them.

Obviously, a lot of Democrats have gone after similar policies. I think a lot of times, their motivations have been much, much worse.

So at least we've got good motivations behind this.

I mean, I think Trump is looking at this and saying, he thinks this will work long-term. I think most clearly, you pointed this out, Glenn, with Panama. With Colombia. Most clearly, he believes they're going to back down from this eventually.

And give us concessions. And I think that's probably the most likely outcome.

GLENN: That seems to be what's happening with Panama.

STU: Yeah, definitely happened with Colombia.

It does seem to be, we are the big boys on the block. And Donald Trump is not only familiar with that fact, but also comfortable with it, unlike other presidents. He's comfortable with us being the big boys on the block.

He's comfortable with us being the world power. That's okay in his eyes. It's okay in my eyes. It's okay in your eyes.

GLENN: As long as you don't become a big bully. I mean, listen to what Justin Trudeau said.

Let's go to cut three, please.

VOICE: Now is also the time to choose Canada. There are many ways for you to do your part. It might mean checking the labels at the supermarket. And picking Canadian-made products. It might mean opting for Canadian rye over Kentucky bourbon, or foregoing Florida orange juice altogether. It might be changing your vacation plans to stay here in Canada and explore the many national and provincial parks, historical sites, these tourist destinations our great country has to offer.

STU: Useless job, yeah.

GLENN: I know he is. I know he is.

STU: He's using this to turn around his own political fortunes. Which is infuriating. He doesn't care about any of this other stuff. He's motivated by his own political interest here.

GLENN: Here's cut six.

VOICE: I think Canadians are a little perplexed as to why our closest friends and neighbors are choosing to target us, instead of so many other challenging parts of the world.

I don't think there's a lot of Americans who wake up in the morning saying, oh. Damn Canada! Oh, we should really go after Canada.

GLENN: You're right!

Why were you targeting us? Why -- why was your -- your number two in command that just quit, why was she targeting people here for, you know, giving to a freedom movement in Canada?

I mean, it's not like you've been our best friend, Justin.

STU: No, he's been horrible.

GLENN: Terrible. But Canadians are great. I love Canadians, and I love Canada. And Canada should love Canada.

STU: Sure.

GLENN: And you should be concerned about what the state of your country is in.

You know, look at your immigration problems. Look at what's happening to your country.

That's what started all of this.

Is the fentanyl coming across our borders. Both north and south.

And the illegals. Stop it. Stop it.

And the great way to stop it is to make sure you stop it at your borders.

From them coming into your country!

That's -- that's really what this is about.

STU: Right. And that's what's clear here.

You know, Trump always says tariffs are his favorite word.

You've talked to him privately about that.

GLENN: I disagree with him on that happen.

STU: A way, I don't think that's exactly what he means.

Tariffs are good, to the extent that they get something else done. Right?

They're not good in and of themselves.

They're just taxes in and of themselves.

They do raise prices on us. The calculation however is, will the pain, that is applied to both sides as Trump has outwardly stated. And it's important to be fair to him.

A lot of people are saying, he's not saying this.

He's saying, there will be pain.

Those are his word. There will be pain on us.

The calculation is, the pain on us, will be the pain less on them.

And they will give first. And then he will get what he wants, outside of the tariffs.

That's the calculation here.

I mean, it is a risky one at times. And, you know, these -- you can call it a trade war or not.

But the bottom line is, when we escalate them, then they escalate. It's -- you could say it's not a trade war. But it kind of is.

I mean, it's a trade competition, if you feel more comfortable with those terms.

But the bottom line is, we believe we're going to win it. That's what he's saying!

And he believes we will win it. And at the end of the day, we get concessions that improve the country. The proof is going to be in the pudding on that.

Will it work? As you pointed out, it has worked kind of with Panama, so far, it seems like.

It's worked kind of with Columbia. It's going to work with some of these countries, it will be more difficult with a country like China.

I think what we saw in his first term.

Was a renegotiation of NAFTA, which basically became the US embassy. Right?

GLENN: Which he still doesn't like. It was the best he could do.

STU: It was the best he could do at the time.

He's I guess not happy with it now.

Because, you know, you're not allowed to put new tariffs either one of these countries in that agreement, which he negotiated. But he wants something better. I mean, how can we be upset with a president who wants something better for the country?

It -- it's just a question as to whether it works or not. The guy -- the Dallas Mavericks traded Luka Doncic this weekend.

The DM came out and said, you'll have to judge me as to how it turns out. We will!

Right? Congratulations, we will!

GLENN: In fact, we kind of already have.

STU: Well, that one, we already have.

That's probably a bad example.

That's exactly what will happen. If this works, and you get something out of it.

People will probably be okay with it, even if it is short-term pain.

Generally speaking, though, the American people only have so much tolerance for that.

And Donald Trump has a finally tuned eye for that type of thing. And I'm sure he will walk that line carefully.

GLENN: He does. Oh, yes, he is.

Yes, he is. And like I said, he's not trying to destroy America. He's trying to save America. And I know that's a new concept, to the American people.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I'm sure it's new to Americans as well. Cut one.

Here's Donald Trump talking about tariffs on Europe.

DONALD: Well, you're asking me a question.

There's a period in here, am I going to oppose tariffs by the European Union? You want the truthful answer, or should I give you a political answer? Absolutely.

STU: He wants stuff, and this is how he gets stuff.

GLENN: Yeah. But what does he want?

STU: I mean, various things from various countries, right?

GLENN: Yeah. He wants. The big things, he wants an end to the World War II order.

Where we are protecting Mercedes Benz. Allowing Mercedes to come in here, and have all kinds of access to our market. And Ford can't.

We don't have that!

We don't have that in Germany.

Why? Because we wanted to make sure the German countries could recover. And all the car companies could recover.

You know, the world is just not a good place without all that citron.

So that's what that is all for.

That's why we did that. And it never changed.

And it's got to change. It's over.

It's got to change. The other thing that absolutely has to change. They have to pay their 5 percent. Into NATO.

You've got to pay it.

STU: That's -- everyone is in this agreement.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: It exists with the terms of the agreement.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: In place. Follow them.

That's not a difficult thing. We're doing a lot more than everyone else, anyway.

Even if we all pay 5 percent, we're the ones footing the bill. We're the ones basically running that organization.

The least you can do is get to whatever that percentage is.

GLENN: Yeah. And that's fine if you don't.

If you don't want to do that, that's fine.

Then the agreement doesn't exist, and we're not going to protect you all the time.

You know, Winston Churchill. He had to beg the United States to come in because the Americans don't want to be involved in everybody else's business. We don't!

Our government, our state department seems to want to.

The military industrial complex wants to. But the American people don't!

So we're totally fine with that, Europe.

We don't think that's a good idea for you. But, you know, in time, you will learn to defend yourself. And then you will probably get pissed off at the French and start bombing them.

And then we'll be in it all over again. Again, we don't recommend it.

But go ahead. We're not protecting.

What do you think Justin Trudeau will say, if we said, oh, well, you don't want to protect your borders.

Okay. All right.

You want a trade war. Okay.

Well, I think we're done helping your military.

I mean, that's -- we win at the end. Hopefully, we'll never get to that. We win at the end.

STU: They have to know that.

GLENN: Yes, they do. They do.

STU: They have to know that.

I'm not surprised they're retaliating, with the 25 percent tariffs of their own.

Obviously, there are a lot -- we do send a lot of products to Canada as well.

We are the second largest exporter in the world.

GLENN: But --

STU: So we do send products to a lot of these countries. And it will burn those companies. And it will hurt at times.

If these things even get into place. We're not even in place yet.

Would it be surprising at all, if there was a most of negotiating. No.

GLENN: Let me ask you. He was just on the phone with Justin Trudeau just a few minutes ago.

Hung up the phone. What's he doing at 3:00 this afternoon?

Getting back on the gonna Justin Trudeau. This is a negotiation.

GLENN: Yes. Exactly. You can't get too worked about it. Because you don't know where the story ends.

GLENN: We have no idea. We're not the ones negotiating.

Here's what we do know, our negotiator is trying to get the best deal for us.

And he's a businessman. He understands it. Unlike attorneys who run the rest of the world.