RADIOMay 31, 2024

The Most SHOCKING Line From Trump’s Verdict Reaction Speech

In a speech from Trump Tower, former president Donald Trump responded to his “guilty” conviction in his New York hush money trial. He slammed the trial as “rigged” and even called the Biden administration “fascist” — something that Glenn says was “appropriate, but shocking to hear.” Glenn, his chief researcher Jason Buttrill, and BlazeTV contributor Jill Savage break down the biggest moments from the speech. Plus, Glenn reveals the one thing he would have changed about it.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, let's -- as he walks away, into the Trump Tower, I think there was one miss. And that was right at the beginning. He should have walked down with Melania down the escalator, exactly the same way he did in 2016. I noticed that speech ran about 34 minutes. And within the first ten, the mainstream media had already broken away, except for Fox.

He was telling a story, and doing what Trump does best. Just goes out and just wings it. I wish he would have been a little more focused towards the beginning when everybody was watching.

But it was a real embarrassment for our country, the things that he was saying. And I took pages and pages of notes here of it. And we're not going to have time to go over it all. But we're going to move the three of us into the TV studio after this. And we'll record a special Friday episode of Glenn Beck TV. And you'll be able to download that as soon as we're done, with it. We have Steve Deace coming up next. So we can't do it live.

What were your impressions?

JILL: I loved the way that he did come out and say, you know, they -- they were coming after me, and he called them a group of fascists. And he was using very strong language at the beginning.

GLENN: Yeah.

JILL: But then it felt like he hasn't been on the campaign trail for so long, and he wanted to get back out there. That it felt like everything was just spewing out of his mouth. Things that he wish he could have been saying, instead of talking about the trial for the last month. We got all of it in one speech.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

JILL: But this wasn't necessarily the time for that. This is, I am a political prisoner time.

GLENN: I thought the first few minutes. Maybe the first five were very effective. Because he said things that were very powerful, like fascists. I can't talk about this because of gag order.

You know, what's happening in the country, between our finances and the border.

Italy those were all really, really strong.

JASON: He said, this is bigger than my presidency, which that was really strong.

GLENN: Really strong. Several times, he said, it's my honor. It's not pleasant. But it is my honor to do this.

Because somebody has to.

JASON: Yeah. Somebody has to.

Democrats and Bragg released the kraken. Absolutely did. I saw a couple of Twitter posts. One from the Trump campaign. That it took screen shots of every single network that was covering this. And they said, wall-to-wall. ABC.

NBC. CNN. CBS.

Everyone had this. At least the first ten minutes of this.

Everyone. And it's been a complete blackout on him. For, what?

Years now.

Since he left office.

A complete blackout. Now they're forced to cover it. They're forced to allow the American people to listen to what they did to him. It's a big screwup, in my opinion.

GLENN: You know, the one thing that would have made this much more fair.

If they would have covered the trial. The one thing I would like to have seen, if it could have ever been done. Is to release the video footage that we know was taken in the courtroom. They were watching it. Some of the press watching it in the hallways. But we weren't allowed to see it.

What could be more important to the American people?

And that is why they didn't do it. Because they -- they know. If Americans actually pay attention to this, and go, well, is anything that he is saying. Is that true.

And they go, and they actually look for the information themselves, they'll be horrified. And they will understand how -- how much trouble a republic is in.

We're running out of time.

JILL: It goes back to your point of storytelling. And why that is so important. If you're able to sit there and watch it for yourself. You have a completely different view of what this trial would have been.

But they had the ability to manipulate it, and spin it in a way to where they present it to you. And that is a completely different viewing experience, you know, when you're -- when you're watching somebody with a biased agenda. Giving you the facts. Quote, unquote, facts of the case.

You're not going to say, okay. This is exactly from the mouth of the judge. From the mouth of the witnesses. From the mouth of the judge. It's completely different.

GLENN: You know, and I found it interesting. Because he just speaks.

And you can show that -- you can see that there was so much for him to say. You know, I had an experience with George Bush, towards the end of his presidency. And, you know, we were -- we were just -- he was underwater. And, you know, he was like, and -- and another thing. Shoes. And you were like, what the -- every time he would talk. He was just all over the board.

And he said to me, because he was talking to ever in the Oval Office. Privately.

And there were a few of us in there. And I was sitting right to his chair on the couch.

And, man, he was strong. And told me, what was going on, on the ground and everything else.

And I said, no offense, Mr. President. But this is what the American people need to hear. What you just said.

And he gave a couple of caveats that aren't worth getting into now. But the one thing he said was, everything a president says is watched and monitored by Intel all over the world.

And they interpret the shift of my eyes, the shift of my weight when I say it. He said, there are so many things that I can't say, that I'm calculating all the time.

Donald Trump never seems to calculate. However, you could see the subtle calculation there.

When he was talking about -- when he was talking about, you know, that very great guy. That was just raked over the coals.

And yada, yada, yada.

That was Bob Costello.

He said it later, but I think that is, again, him. Where is the line on what will get me in trouble?

Bob Costello, when they cleared the courtroom, I talked to Alan Dershowitz, the very next day. He was sitting in the front row. And he was allowed to see what nobody else saw. They cleared the courtroom.

And he berated him, because when the judge made a ruling, that was an unusual ruling, in fact.

Alan Dershowitz said, one of the only -- I've never heard a ruling like that. It made no sense. He said, Bob looked up at the judge. And raised his eyebrows. Like, really.

And then he cleared the courtroom. And berated him.

You will -- you will not do that.

I think he might have even threatened him with jail.

If he raises his eyebrows again. This guy is unhinged. Just unhinged.

And, you know, Donald Trump is going to continue to tell the story as much as he can.

But the American people should have seen it themselves.

The other things that I think were important, that he said he continued to come back to the border. He continued to talk about the terrorists that are in. He said something I've never heard him say before.

You know, 2019.

And this was good for me. But they said in 2019, no terrorist entered the country.

But I don't believe that to be true.

I've never heard him take a compliment. And say, I don't believe that.

But I agree with him.

I don't either.

But now we're at the highest level.

He also talked about our debt. Our dependence on oil.

He called -- he not only called Biden stupid. And worse -- the worst president we've ever had.

He referred to the president and those who were in the administration as fascists. Which I thought was really strong language. And appropriate, but shocking to hear.

JASON: It will be shocking for many people on the left that don't even know the definition of the word, that have been throwing it around willy-nilly to hear that about themselves.

GLENN: Yeah.

JASON: I hope there's a little bit of self-reflection.

GLENN: Yeah. There won't be. But the definition of a fascist is an authoritarian state that partners with corporations and the media to control. And that's exactly what we're doing.

It's exactly what bide citizen doing. He is technically 100 percent accurate.

On his labeling of this administration. Fascistic.

WARNING: The Feds could SEIZE your private land under THIS act

There’s a new law in the works that would drastically harm Americans’ ability to own land. Called the SUSTAINS Act, it would give the USDA the power to monitor “natural processes” and decide who owns “environmental services.” Glenn breaks down what that means: “They are claiming the processes that are on your land. You may not own the air, the trees, the water … nothing! What is your land worth without water?” Glenn also reviews how Kamala Harris' plan to tax investment income could further hurt the economy.

But it’s not too late to STOP this. You can submit public input on the SUSTAINS Act until Sept. 16, 2024, HERE: https://www.federalregister.gov/docum...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I don't trust anybody anymore.

But I will tell you, we have no country left. I mean, let's just give you some of the headlines from today.

Harris calls for higher taxes, on investment income.

Now, what is that going to do, Stu. Just noodle this with me. She's giving more taxes on investment income.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: What do you think that is.

STU: Some would say, when you tax something, you discourage it. So if you're taxing investments, you're discouraging investments in American companies.

GLENN: Right. Right.

Yeah. But she says, she's only going to be taxing people who have a million dollars or more.

STU: She can say that all she wants. She's lying though.

GLENN: Yeah. I know.

But she's also, just so you know, she's only going after the people who have money to invest.

She's not going to go after the poor people on the investment thing.

STU: Good. Really?

She's not going to hit the people in massive debt with no income on their massive 401(k)s.

GLENN: Right. No. They're not going to.

Great story about workers feeling Bidenomic's pain as job creators fear the worse for Kamala. And this is what -- you know, this is what's happening. If you think your employer is going to be like, you know what, I'm going to add jobs. If Kamala gets in, you're out of your mind.

They're all going to batten down the hatches. By the way, job openings fell more than expected in I couldn't like. Which is huh.

What does that even mean? Hmm?

US Steel shares plunge as Biden/Harris prepare to block Nippon Steel takeover. People familiar with the matter told the Washington Post that President Joe Biden is preparing to announce that he will block the $14.9 billion deal. US shares have fallen now 41 percent this year.

Kamala Harris, the presidential nominee said, US Steel should remain American-owned at American operated. That was during a campaign event in Pittsburgh.

STU: What do you --

GLENN: Well, that would be good. That would be good. I would love that. Is anybody offering that to US Steel?

STU: Not according to US Steel. Which is kind of the issue. Which they say.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: And I'm interested in your thoughts on this. Because it's not China. It's not Russia. This is an ally, a close ally, Japan, who is trying to purchase US Steel. Obviously US Steel being like this iconic company, makes us feel weird.

Has the word US. United States in it.

Their point is like, we are screwed without this deal. We're leaving Pittsburgh. We're firing a bunch of people.

A lot of union jobs go away, if you do not let us go through with this deal. And I can kind of -- I kind of have some understanding of like why you would be hesitant to want US Steel to go into foreign hands.

It kind of makes sense to me.

GLENN: No. I don't think it should.

You have to -- as a country, you can recommend against it.

But do you have a plan to save it?

I mean, do you have a plan?

What is the plan?

No. We're not going to approve that deal. Okay.

Are you working on anything that maybe you get some Americans to pool their money together. And think, you know what, we think this is important.

US Steel. This is critical infrastructure, if we can't make steel in the United States, we're screwed. But don't worry about it. She's got everything under control. And you're not going to have to worry about cars or tractors or things like that.

Because we're all going to be living in 15-minute cities. And if you don't believe me, that you will own nothing. And you will be happy about it. Let me just share this.

The -- who owns the environmental services?

USDA now is monetizing natural processes, under the Sustains Act. So the Sustains Act, we told you about a couple of weeks ago -- we told you, that you had to speak out against this and stop it.

It doesn't look like it's going to be stopped. But there's a free market now, on environmental processes. So, in other words, one environmental process is trees breathe in, carbon dioxide. And they breathe out, air. Okay?

So they take the pollution, and breathe it in.

And then they give us, what we need to live, as they breathe out.

It's kind of a weird thing. I haven't heard anybody talk about that for a long, long time now.

But that's how they survive, and thrive.

But now, for instance. I've planted in the last ten years.

I can't count the number of trees, that I have planted up in a treeless area.

And I may not own those trees now.

If the USDA has their way. And this is already passed. They're just looking at how to implement it.

The secretary is allowed to -- to go in and say, you know what, these trees are really important. That water. You're pumping that water out of your well.

Well, that's not your water. That's part of the environmental process. And we don't think you should pump any of that water.

They will -- well, I can't say this. They will regulate. But they won't own.

They are claiming the processes that are on your land. So you may not own the air. You may not own the tree.

You may not own the water. Nothing.

What is your land worth? Without water.

Especially in the West. What is your land worth without water farmers. What is your land worth, when you can't till the soil yourself, because the minerals and the -- the soil is not really owned by you.

You own the space. But you don't own anything other than -- maybe -- maybe your house, if it's already built.

Who owns that? Well, people like Bill Gates will own that. Bill Cosby will come in and say, I just want to save the planet. So I will just buy up all of this farmland. And I will buy the air. And I will buy the trees. And I am going to buy everything.

So that way, when somebody wants to farm on it, like these farmers that have been farming on it for generations, I can tell them no.

No. Because it will hurt the environment.

And all of this is done, by the Secretary of the USDA. I don't even know who that is.

Do you?

This is why our government is out of control.

Who is to answer for this?

It's all at the Secretary's discretion.

No, thank you. (no, thank you. So the Department of Agriculture and USDA, they have administered the program. And the Secretary -- can you look up the Secretary of Agriculture, Stu, because I don't know who that is. I would like to know what brainiac we have put in on that. But I'm sure they're smarter than all of that put together.

STU: A name from the past. Secretary Tom Vilsack. Remember him?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Former senator --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. I don't know why I remember him. But I do remember him. Yeah. Good. So we have a senator. You know, and senators know so much about farming and land.

You know, and trees. And all of that.

I think that's -- I think that's fantastic. So the new law sets out how the secretary is to determine ownership of the environmental services that are created on private land. Through the federal conservation ram. Contributing entity, the one who contributes the private funding to the conservation program. Is to prescribe the terms of the environmental services. Subject to the approval of the Secretary.

So that's great. That's great.

The landowner really doesn't have anything to say about it.

So don't worry about it. Don't worry about it.

You can live in a city, a 15-minute city. And you're not really going to have a job. Because you don't have to really have a job because you won't own anything. You will just rent it from your overlords. If you think this sounds like hyperbole, read the news!

Read the news. You can get our -- our daily newsletter, which has just the news stories of the day.

And you can find these, and share them with your friends and family.

What do you mean they're monetizing the natural processes under the Sustains Act? This is a way for them to take control of the land, through private/public partnerships. So the public owns the land.

Well, I shouldn't say that. I mean, it's still a private person.

But he's, you know, part of the public.

So he owns the land. And he partners with the government. To control it.

And I think that is exactly the direction we all want to go in. I really don't understand how people -- you know, I understood when it was my word, saying, you know, I feel like this is what's happening.

We're so far beyond that.

When I came out with the book, on the WEF.

And was starting to tell you about how you were going to, you know, own nothing, and be happy.

I could even understand, that you would say, well, that's what all the documents say. But they're not going to do it.

I can't understand your burying your head in the sand, anymore.

There's no excuse for it, anymore.

This is not my opinion. You can do your own homework.

You'll find all of this, being done, not talked about.

But being done.

What else are you waiting for?

What else are your friends and your family and your neighbors waiting for?

We have to start talking to our friends and our family, not about politics.

Not about Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. We need to start talking to them about principles, and the things that are actually happening.

These things are actually happening. The economy is going to the crapper. The -- the jobs going to the crapper.

If they believed in all of these things, why wouldn't they do them right now?

Because they don't believe in turning the economy around.

They don't know how to do it.

And what they're going to do, is put you all back in chains. You will work for the government, how the government wants you to work, where they want you to work.

Where they want to you live. You will own nothing!

By 2030. This election, takes us to 2028. Do you think maybe this is an important election?

Why exposing Epstein List would be Trump's MOST DANGEROUS move

During an interview on the Lex Friedman Podcast, Donald Trump hinted that he would release the Epstein client list if he wins the White House. But would that be the final straw for global elites? Glenn explains why he believes Trump’s life is in danger: the global cabal was blindsided once. They can’t let him win again, especially if he’ll expose everything. And Glenn isn’t the only one who believes this. He reviews a clip of Eric Weinstein, who recently made the same argument on the podcast Modern Wisdom.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Did you hear Eric Weinstein?

What the podcast he was on. Modern wisdom?

STU: I didn't hear the clip. I was reading about it, though.

GLENN: Okay. You really. This is a good podcast you should probably listen to. A lot of wisdom there. A lot of wisdom.

And it's kind of what we've been saying for a while now.

But I don't know. Eric says it, and it just seems much, much smarter.

It's kind of like, Eric is much, much smarter.

But if he had an English accent, it would be game over.

Everybody would listen to everything he has to say.

So here he is, on Donald Trump. Listen.

VOICE: I don't know whether -- I don't know whether Donald Trump will be allowed to become president.

VOICE: What do you mean by that?

VOICE: I think that there's a remarkable story, and we're in a funny game, which is, are we allowed to say, what that story is?

Because to say it, to analyze it, to say it, is to bring it into view.

I think we don't understand why the censorship is behaving the way it is. We don't understand why it's in the shadows. We don't understand why the news is acting in a bizarre fashion.

So let's just set the stage, believing that was in in February.

There is something that I think Mike Benz is just referred to as the rules-based international order. It's an interlocking series of agreements, tests, and understandings. Explicit understandings.

Clandestine understandings.

About how the most important structures keep the world free of war. And keep markets open.

And there has been a system in place, whether understood explicitly, or behind the scenes, or implicitly. That says, that the purpose of the two American parties, is to prune, the field of populist candidates. So that whatever two candidates, exist in a face-off, are both acceptable to that world order.

So what you're trying to do, from the point of view.

Let's take it from the point of view of, let's say, the State Department, the Intelligence Community, the Defense Department, and major corporations that are -- have to do with international issues, from arms trade to, oh, I don't know, food. They have a series of agreements that are fragile and could be overturned, if a president, entered the Oval Office, who didn't agree with them. And the mood of the country was, why do we pay taxes into these structures?

Why are we hamstrung?

Why aren't we a free people?

So what the two parties would do is they would run primaries. You would have populist candidates, and you would pre-commit the populist candidates to support the candidates who won the primaries. As long as that took place, and you had two candidates that were both acceptable to the international order. That is, they aren't going to rethink NAFTA or NATO or what have you.

We called that democracy. So democracy was the illusion of choice.

What's called magicians choice. Where the choice is -- pick a card. Any card. The magician makes sure the card that you pick, is the one that he knows.

In that situation, you have magician's choice in the primaries. Then you would have the duopoly. Two candidates. Either of which was acceptable. And you could actually afford to hold an election.

And the populace would vote. And that way, the international order wasn't put at risk every four years. Because you can't have alliances, that are subject to the whim of the people in plebiscites. So under that structure, everything was going fine until 2016.

Then the first candidate ever to not hold any position in the military. Or position in government.

In the history of the Republican Party. Or Donald Trump. Broke through the primary structure.

This was a full-court press. Okay. We only have one candidate acceptable to the international order. Donald Trump will be under constant pressure, that he's a loser. He's a wild man. He's an idiot.

And he's under the control of the Russians. And then he was going to be a 20 to one underdog. And then he wins.

And there was no precedent for this. They learned their lesson you cannot afford to have candidates, who are not acceptable to the international order. And continue to have these alliances. This is an unsolved problem.

GLENN: Now. I've been saying for a long time, they're going to kill him.

Because it upsets their plans, and he's the one standing in the way, because he won't play their game. Now, Eric may have expressed this -- expressed this, in a more understandable way. But he's absolutely right.

100 percent right.

And that's why honestly, they're playing the game in the Democratic Party.

Where you didn't get a choice. You didn't have a primary.

You didn't have a primary.

And that's because the president is going to run. But the president can't run. So now, you didn't have a primary, and you have the most unpopular candidate. Ever!

She's never been, she was never popular. She wasn't popular just two months ago.

But now, oh, my gosh, she's hung the moon and the stars.

And we don't know anything about what she plans on doing. Okay.

All right. But she won't upset the international order.

She won't upset the -- the plans, that places like the WEF, and the United Nations. And now all of the western leadership, has come up with.

But you'll notice, those plans are extremely unpopular, with the people, all around the world.

Every -- every Western country now, is in turmoil.

Because they're doing the same thing to them, that they're doing to us. And that is collapse us.

Now, I believe this is to be true, I believe they'll do anything to stop him from winning.

They would put us into chaos. They would put us into Civil War, before they would have him win. They would put us in world war, before they would have him.

And Donald Trump, I just -- please, Mr. President. Please.

They've tried to kill you once. Please.

Don't make it worse. Don't make it worse. Yesterday, he was on a podcast, and he was on the Lex Friedman Podcast. And he got a lot of questions on Lex on foreign policy, et cetera, et cetera. The future going forward.

You know, he started talking about, you know, the Kennedy files. And how the Kennedy files, he kept classified.

Because it was protection of people. Which I'm not sure is exactly accurate.

I don't know what is in the Kennedy file. I have talked to people who have seen it.

And they have led me to believe, that it is not about people. It is about institutions.

But who knows? But Trump said, you know, I probably would not release the Kennedy files. However, Stu, what's the one thing you could say as a presidential candidate, that's pretty much guaranteed that you -- you're dead?

STU: Well, you're going to release the Epstein files.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: And that would be --

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

But I am going to release the Epstein files. And the client list.

It's very strange for a lot of people, that the list of clients, that went to the island has not been made public.

Yeah. It's interesting, isn't it? Said Donald Trump.

It probably will be.

He said, I'll take a look at it, on the client list. But, yeah.

I'm inclined to do the Epstein thing.

I would have no problem with releasing that list.

Okay. All right. All right.

Remember, Donald Trump is definitely not suicidal.

But if they could put him in jail, he might become suicidal. And some cameras might go down.

Oh, my gosh.

STU: It's happened before, Glenn.

GLENN: This is -- oh, it did?

STU: Yeah. It's happened before.

GLENN: Really? But not related to Epstein?

STU: No. A philanthropist. No.

GLENN: The philanthropist. Yeah.

STU: Do we have this clip here, do you want to hear it? Yeah. Here we go.

DONALD: But a lot of big people went to that island.

Fortunately, I was not one of them.

VOICE: It's just very strange for a lot of people. That the list of clients that went to the island, has not been made public.

DONALD: Yeah. It's very interesting, isn't it? Probably will be, by the way.

VOICE: If you're able to -- you would be --

DONALD: I would certainly take a look at it. Now, Kennedy is interesting because it's so many years ago. They do that for danger too. Because, you know, in dangers, certain people, et cetera, et cetera. So Kennedy is very different from the Epstein thing. But, yeah, I would be inclined to do the Epstein. I would have no problem with it.

GLENN: Hmm. Hmm.

It's currently with the FBI. And it's under the control of one person at the FBI.

So what could possibly go wrong with that?

If it disappears, that would be unfortunate, wouldn't it, Stu?

And completely unexpected.

STU: Yeah. It would be shocking. That would be a shocking development. Look, sometimes, people lose documents.

You know --

GLENN: Happens all the time.

GLENN: Oops. I just dropped it in the shredder.

STU: Yeah. My daughter lost her homework, just last week.

And it was a rough day at school.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: This happens to people all the time.

There are shredders all over the place.

GLENN: All the time. You sometimes -- sometimes, you get up in the morning. And you almost exit -- I will step in the shower. And you almost step into the shredder. It happens. It happens, all the time.

STU: All the time.

Another example is, you noted yesterday, that your neighbor's property was on fire. What happened if a fire broke out, where that document was.

GLENN: Yeah. What happened? Oh, man. In the safe. In the safe. In the safe at the FBI.

STU: Yeah. Sometimes. Fires can happen anywhere, Glenn. Sometimes there are little fires that start up in safes.

GLENN: I knew we shouldn't have put it in the same safe, where we put the matches and the gremlin. You know.

I don't know what were we thinking?

What were we thinking? Oh, that's too bad.

Some misinformation here, I want to point out. Few fans left divided by major changes to ABC's daytime show, as Whoopi Goldberg and co-host return for a brand-new season.

Just want to give you -- you know, people say it all the time. How do you know when a story is true or not?

This one is pretty easy to point out. Just really in the first few letters. The View fans. There are no fans of the view.

And I would just like to correct that story. And make sure that you know.

We're on top of misinformation.

Alleged New York CHINESE SPY is just the tip of the iceberg

A former top aid for New York Governor Kathy Hochul and former Governor Andrew Cuomo has been indicted on suspicion of being a Chinese spy. Glenn speaks with independent reporter Peter Schweizer, whose book “Blood Money” exposes the shocking amount of shady connections to China that exist on both sides of the political aisle. Schweizer breaks down the story of Linda Sun, who is accused of acting as a foreign agent for the Chinese Communist Party in return for a luxurious lifestyle … and a surprising amount of salted ducks. He also explains whether he’s optimistic that the 2024 election can turn things around, or whether Chinese connections will thrive under a “Vice President Tim Walz.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We are under attack in so many different ways. One of those ways is we have been infiltrated by China. And there are Chinese spies, everywhere, and they're at the highest level.

We now find out, we now find out, that we have Kathy Hochul's assistant, the governor of California, high-level adviser, has been being paid by the Chinese government to help them out. How much is your citizenship worth?

How much -- how much would you sell your country out for?

Peter Schweizer is here to tell us, any details, that he has. He has been following the Chinese infiltration for a very long.

Welcome, Peter. How are you?

PETER: Hi, I'm great, Glenn. Always good to be with you. Thanks for having me.

GLENN: Thank you.

So in your book, Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans. You talk about how many and both on the Republican and the Democratic side, how many people are selling their souls to China.

Tell me about this case. What do you know about it?

PETER: Yeah. So Linda's son was the deputy chief of staff for Kathy Hochul. Before that, she served for years in senior positions for Andrew Cuomo. She was his chief -- deputy chief diversity officer, for example.

And essentially, what she's being charged with in a 60-page indictment. Is getting millions of dollars, from the Chinese government and from the CCP.

And she took her position and used it, for the benefit of China.

So, for example, she blocked representatives from the Taiwanese government, from even having access to the governor's office. She altered state messages, that were important to Chinese officials. So she literally would change a message, to benefit them.

She also helped Chinese officials travel to the United States. She issued unauthorized invitations, that weren't approved by anyone else.

That allowed government officials to come into the United States. And she gave Chinese officials access to private New York government conversations, during the COVID-19 crisis.

Explaining how they were going to respond.

She would actually patch them in, on these high-level group telephone calls.

And in exchange for that, according to prosecutors, she received a lot of benefits from the Chinese government. She was able to buy a 4.1 million-dollar Long Island home, a 2.1 million-dollar condo in Hawaii.

She and her husband also bought a 2024 Ferrari Roma, and I guess maybe my personal favorite, Glenn, she also is accused of getting 16 meals that were prepared by a Chinese government chef. They were salted duck, which sounds good to me.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, it changes -- I mean, once you hear the salted duck thing, that she got 16 of them. You think, well, maybe. Maybe. It changes things dramatically.

Why did it take so long for this to become apparent? What does her husband do, by the way? Do you know?

PETER: Yeah. Her husband in New York, ran a sort of export/import business, a little bit, maybe.

GLENN: Really?

PETER: But the other thing, Glenn, is that she apparently, according to the indictments, think about this, she's a senior state official for Andrew Cuomo and the current governor of New York.

She apparently ran her own business in China, in mainland China, which is where she was born.

She's a naturalized US citizen. But she actually had a business in China, that nobody knew about it.

And the Chinese government also apparently the gave her cousin, a cushy job.

That is mentioned among the indictments as well.

GLENN: How -- how -- how many more are there?

How widespread is this, Peter?

PETER: Oh, it's a massive problem.

And look, this is something you and I have been talking about since 2018.

You've talked about it on Blaze TV.

And that is, that they have avoided, really enforcing the foreign agent's registration act.

Which requires, if you do anything to benefit a foreign government or a foreign government-linked business. You're required to file with the Department of Justice.

And they didn't really support this law, at all.

And then, of course, they used it against various Republicans.

Which, you know, look, if they're guilty of it, they're guilty of it, they should be charged.

But it's selective. This case was a long time coming.

Of course, there is back -- I think a strong case fort same violations, that took place by Hunter Biden.

Faced millions of dollars.

GLENN: Yep. From the Chinese.

PETER: Yep. Yep.

By the Chinese. By the Ukrainians.
By the Romanians. By the Russians.

I think you can make a fair case in every one of those instances, when it relates to Hunter Biden.

And the Department of Justice now in their tax case against Hunter Biden has even said that he ran a for-influence peddling scene, but he's yet to be charged under this foreign agent's registration act, which is what Melinda's son has now been charged with.

GLENN: And he got more than salted duck.

Well, maybe.

I mean, I saw some of the videos.

He might have. Anyway, let's move on.

You know, Peter, I can't thank you enough

For all the work you've done. My mood never improves after talking to you. But I'm appreciative of the not only.

Can I get a read from you, on -- how optimistic are you, that we can turn things around, with this election?

PETER: I'm cautiously optimistic. Look, the bottom line is we have to be realists. You know, the reminder here is we don't want to be optimistic, because you're naive. And you don't want to be pessimistic. Because you just give up all hope. But the bottom line, I do think there are people around Trump, that have Chinese connections. But there are also people around Trump that recognize this problem. I believe those are in the closer inner circle. When you look at Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.

I mean, Tim Walz, does not get -- did not get money from the Chinese.

But he fits the definition of a fellow traveler. And my fear is, that with him as vice president, because he's at an exchange program, with China for 30 years.

They will make him the point person on China policy. And then God forbid, I think we will be in deep trouble.

GLENN: So -- going to be in deep trouble. Peter, when you look at everything that is going on, and what they are now admitting to, and saying, you know, we're going to do price controls. We're going to do unrealized gains tax. You know, the -- their stance on war. Their stance on everything.

I mean, there is no way, that if that's your plan, which is coming together, oh, so nicely, especially when it comes to controlling free speech, all around the world, and we're involved with it, in England and in Brazil, there's no way that Donald Trump, that they could allow him to win.

Because he really is the only thing standing in the way, of all of these very nefarious plans.

PETER: Yeah. I mean, this is the weird place where we are in America, Glenn, where you have Donald Trump, who sort of breaks all molds.

And one of the people that's vigorously supporting him.

Is Robert Kennedy Jr. Who also breaks a lot of molds.

And they will disagree with a lot of policy positions. But the point is, they've recognized the essential problem.

And the essential problem is this desire for control, and dominance.

Where the left has essentially been fused with corporate America. Big government and big business are not enemies. They're actually allies.

And this is the place that we find ourselves.

And I think what the Harris campaign is really trying to do is bank, that a sizeable proportion of the American population, voting population, is going to be ignorant.

So they play this game, where they talk about these policy prescriptions, that really don't have widespread popularity. You know, this tax on unrealized gains is just ridiculous.

But they're -- they're obscuring it enough, to where they think, that a lot of people won't even be aware, that that is her position.

That's the game that they're playing.

And I still want to have enough faith that people will see to that, and understand what's going on.

GLENN: Yeah. I hope so. Peter, thank you so much.

God bless you. Keep on the trail. You bet.

Peter Schweizer. Investigative journalist, who used to be one of the most beloved investigative journalists, when it came to government corruption. Because he rats out both sides. That's not good enough anymore.

You can only rat out one side. And it has to be the conservatives. If you do it to the other side, you're over.

But luckily, his books are well-read by, you know, millions of Americans. So he continues to do his job.

Glenn DESTROYS The New York Times for calling The Constitution a THREAT

A new New York Times op-ed titled “The Constitution Is Sacred. Is It Also Dangerous?” may be the most delusional thing Glenn has read in a while. Glenn reviews the article, which suggests that the Constitution may be a threat to “America’s politics” (hint: IT IS, and it’s supposed to be), that the Constitution may be to blame for Trump, and that our founding document “could hasten the end of American democracy.” Glenn also spots an argument that’s right out of the far-left’s contingency plan for if Trump won in 2020: The Transition Integrity Project. In the end, Glenn points out that the Times isn't the first to suggest that the Constitution is dangerous ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The New York Times just released an op-ed, the America's Constitution is sacred. But is it also the biggest threat to our politics?

Bum, bum, bum. Yes! It actually is a threat to our politics! Yes! As it should be a threat to our politics. The United States Constitution is in trouble. After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. Really? Is that when it became in trouble, Stu? I mean, I'm just. I'm thinking back. I'm thinking back. You know, a little bit before Donald Trump. Like, I don't know.

Woodrow Wilson. And I've been thinking, the Constitution has been in trouble since about then. Maybe it's just me?

STU: Yeah. That doesn't seem like it was a little bit earlier, considering the words of Woodrow Wilson, who tried to basically do to the founding documents, what happened to that neighbor's mountain.

Like, it just -- light it on fire, and watch it burn.

GLENN: Yeah. That was it. By announcing his desire to throw a Donald Trump.

To throw off Constitutional constraints, in order to satisfy his personal ambitions, Trump was making his authoritarian inclinations abundantly clear. Now, let me ask you.

Who is the one that is currently talking about the redesign of the Supreme Court?

I mean, by the way, I just want you to know, that's what dictators always do.

That is the last step to a banana republic. That is the point of no return.

When you -- when you have the president, or the Prime Minister, or whoever.

Change the makeup of the Supreme Court.

That's the last straw. Now, which one of those is doing that?

STU: Glenn, we're just talking about a return to normalcy.

That's all that is.

That whole renovating the Supreme Court into something that has never existed is a return to normalcy.

GLENN: Yeah. May I ask you, Stu. Isn't this exactly the same thing they did with Joe Biden?

They ran him, and he didn't talk to the press. He never was in front of people.

He was in his basement.

When he was out. He was always on prompter.

And then they just made the case, that he was normal.

He was just like you. He was for all the things you are for. Just a return to normalcy.

That's exactly what they're doing. Again, America!

Come on.

Really.

STU: Yeah. And again, it's important to understand the return to normalcy. Just purveys this throughout the entire campaign.

For example, the return to enormous, of having debates that go through the presidential commission on -- on debates. Remember that whole thing?

That's now basically defunct, because the president of the United States, decided he was going to be cocky. And cancel one of the debates.

Leave the normal format, and then taunt his opponent about it, and lose so badly that he had to end his political career.

And then the person who took over for them, not only didn't go back to the commission and say, hey. Let's start this up again. Let's do three things.

No, no, no. She just had the one that was already there. And tried to change the rules of that.

Then also taunted the opponent in the debate. Let's see if she shows up. Because that would be I think the most normal thing possible.

GLENN: Well, you forgot the most normal part of that story. That is getting the nomination without a single vote cast for her.

STU: Yeah. Normal. Normal, guys.

GLENN: Totally normal. Constitutional.

And totally normal. And, really, what people are demanding.

Anyway, it's no surprise, then that liberals charged Trump with being a menace to the Constitution, but his presidency and the prospect of his re-election have also generated another very different argument. That Trump owes his political assent to the Constitution, making him a beneficiary of a document that is essentially anti-democratic. Wait. Wait. Wait.

You say we're a democracy, okay? You said, we've always been a democracy. What would make us a democracy, would be the Constitution.

But we're not a democracy. The Constitution says we have democratic attributes. But we are a republic. And now you're calling this an antidemocratic document?

I mean, after all, Trump became president in 2016, after losing the popular vote. But winning the electoral college.

Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. You're not going to believe. You're not going to believe this, Stu.

He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court for him article three. Two of whom were just confirmed by senators representing 44 percent of the population. Article one. Whose three justices helped overturn Roe vs. Wade. A reversal that most Americans disagreed with. Imminent legal scholar, Erwin Chemerinsky. Yes. I love Erwin Chemerinsky. They put him in place, long time ago.

He's great. He's an eminent scholar, and he's worried about opinion polls showing a dramatic loss of faith in democracy.

It's never been any faith in democracy!

He writes in his new book, no democracy lasts forever. No.

In fact, that's why we're not a democracy. And that's why our Constitution has lasted. When the average Constitution of the world lasts 17 years, ours has survived since 1781.

I don't know. A little longer than 17 years! Anyway, no democracy lasts from her. It's important for Americans to see that the failure stems from the Constitution itself.

Oh, really? Yes, Mr. Chemerinsky, dean of Berkeley Law School.

STU: Of course. That's Kamala Harris' hometown, by the way. I just wanted to point that out. It's not Oakland.

GLENN: No. It's Oakland.

STU: I know she's a daughter of Oakland. But actually, she grew up in Berkeley and Montreal, and then went to Howard University.

And then went to San Francisco.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So you want to talk about a path to normal middle?

GLENN: She's red, white, and blue person.

She, like, screams Constitution and small-town America from Berkeley, California.

STU: Just a heavy emphasis on the red.

GLENN: So...

(laughter)

What are you saying? Red, red, blue. That's who she is? Red, blue. Yes. She's all American. Anyway, he says, he -- Americans have a problem with the Constitution.

And Chemerinsky deemed Berkeley political law school seems to place considerable faith in Constitution, pleading with federal progressives in the book, we, the people. Not to turn backs on Constitution or the courts, but by contrast, no democracy lasts forever.

Markedly pessimistic, asserting that the Constitution, which is famously difficult to amend. It's difficult to amend?

Those should be walk in park! We should be able to -- like mama makes apple pie, when she makes that apple pie, she puts it on shelf. And some neighbor can come and just get it.

I see it in American cartoons. And it should be that easy to amend Constitution.

But it's not. It's very difficult. And he says, what would need to happen is a new constitutional convention.

And in the books, more somber moments. Which I wrote, I entertain possibility of secession.

Vladimir Putin not for secession at all. No. He -- he loves the Constitution of the United States.

And west coast states might form nation called Pacifica.

Red states might form their own country.

But he -- he hopes that any divorce, if it comes, will be peaceful.

STU: Oh.

GLENN: Wait. So hang on just a second.

So this guy is from Berkeley.

And he's talking about Pacifica. Where did I hear this before?

I remember. Before the 2020 election, Stu. The Democrats had some group together, that was going to save America. Remember? In case Donald Trump won. And one of the things they said was, we will have California break up west coast into Pacifica.

California, parts of -- of Oregon. Maybe parts of Washington state. Would become Pacifica.

And that we would break away. And if they didn't want to us breakaway. Then we demand that Trump add two states.

One would be Washington, DC. And the other one would be make a state out of Puerto Rico.

Oh, I remember that now.

Gee!

And what was their problem.

Oh, their problem was, the electoral college.

Which is weird. Because he just didn't mention the electoral college. The prospect of secession sounds extreme, he says. But in suggesting that the Constitution could hasten the end of American democracy.

Chemerinsky is far from alone. Lots of people have got Boris and Natasha, say same thing.

The argument, that what ails the country's politics isn't simply the president or Congress or the Supreme Court, but the founding document itself.

Right?

That's been our problem for the last 250 years?

Thing longest running Constitution, in the longest running republic, in human history.

And that's our problem. All along. That's our problem. Uh-huh.

STU: It's not like we haven't had a good run of success here.

It would be one thing, if we were -- there's an area of outer Mongolia that the United States looked like. And we were a little disappointed in the progress that we had made.

It's kind of the most advanced country ever -- you know, developed. It's -- it's -- it's overseen. This incredible -- you know. All these incredible innovations.

GLENN: Have you looked at it lately. Have you looked at Aurora, Colorado? That's the Constitution's fault.

STU: Oh, when the Venezuelans are taking over the apartment complexes?

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Constitution's fault. How is that Constitution?

Donald Trump.

STU: Yeah.

That's a good point. But you didn't quite -- maybe you need to go a little bit more into depth. Why the words Donald Trump --

GLENN: I won't listen to you, conspiracy theory, anymore. Really honestly.

I'm just looking at this. He says, that the Constitution has incentivized the tyranny of the minority.

It's the Constitution's fault!

You see?

You see? Now, if I remember right, one of the things they put in there, to make sure that there wasn't the tyranny of the minority, was the -- was the electoral college.

That way, California, New York, couldn't dominate everybody in the red states.

You know, kind of what they're doing. And when you talk about tyranny of the minority.

Stu, if it wasn't for -- I mean, it's still a minority. But it's a growing minority.

You know, if it wasn't for 30 percent of all future adults, in America, now claiming to be transgender and gay, and, you know, My Little Pony.

You would say, maybe this is all happening, you know, with the tyranny of the minority.

But no.

No.

STU: Well, that is okay. And as we have talked about, many, many times.

You know, 40. Thirty to 40 percent of the population, being in the LGBTQ population. Is the return to normalcy. We were promised with Joe Biden.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And Kamala Harris. This is -- everything about this is normal.

Everything.

GLENN: Everything is normal. Now, they always say, that they love the Constitution.

But now they fear the Constitution. And they should.

You know, somebody else feared the Constitution.

It was -- I think it was -- oh. King George.

He thought it was a very dangerous document too.

In fact, every dictator, all around the world has thought for the last 250 years. Wow, that's a dangerous document.

But, hey. The New York Times and the left, they love it. That's it why they've just run, is the Constitution -- is the Constitution sacred?

But is it also dangerous? Or this story, the Constitution is broken, and should not be reclaimed. Or MAGA turns against the Constitution.

Or we had to force the Constitution, to accommodate democracy.

The Constitution won't save us from Trump.

Or the story in the New York Times, is the Constitution obstructing the American democracy?

Let's give up on the Constitution. Or the headline, the US lacks what every democracy needs. Or this is the story how Lincoln broke the US Constitution.

They love it!