RADIOMarch 19, 2024

Supreme Court Justice Makes CRAZY Argument for MORE Censorship?!

During the Supreme Court hearing on Murthy v. Missouri, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson tried to argue that the government’s First Amendment rights were under attack. According to her, the government should have the ability under the First Amendment to pressure social media companies to censor people. But Glenn had some other thoughts. If the government can violate your rights when there’s “trouble,” Glenn argues, then you don’t have rights. Glenn lays out how that’s NOT the US Constitution. That’s the SOVIET Constitution.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, I don't know if you heard Justice Jackson yesterday.

But woo!

Was she -- she's in tune with our system of government. Here she is, yesterday, where free speech is on trial. The government is making the claim, that their free speech is being limited, because they want to tell social media what to do.

And their First Amendment rights, are being trampled on.

Just so you know, the government doesn't have First Amendment rights. The First Amendment right goes to the people. And it says, that the government can't tell you what you can say and what you can't say.

Here is justice brown Jackson yesterday.

VOICE: Justice Jackson.

VOICE: My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways, in the most important time periods.

I mean, what would -- what would you have the government do? I've heard you say a couple of times, that the government can post its own speech.

But in my hypothetical. You know, kids, this is not safe. Don't do it is not going to get it done.

And so I guess some might say that the government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country.

GLENN: Right.

VOICE: And you seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information. So can you help me?

Because I'm really worried about that. Because you've got the First Amendment operating.

GLENN: Okay. Sure. Uh-huh.

VOICE: In an environment of threatening circumstances, from the government's perspective. And you're saying that the government can't interact with the source of those problems.

GLENN: Okay. Sure.

I would love to help you with that. I would love to help you with that. Let me help you.

And I appreciate your asking for help. Don't usually experience that, you know, cry for help on understanding any of the amendments, let alone the first one from a Supreme Court justice. But I appreciate your willingness to say, I really don't have a clue as to what I'm doing here.

See, we have a Bill of Rights, that was built -- our country is built, up like any other country in the world.

And our Bill of Rights came from a -- a Founding Era, where they had been really living under the thumb of a tyrant. And so they knew tyranny firsthand. And it made them very, very skittish about governments, and what they could do.

Because when governments speak, that's one thing. The government can speak, and say, hey. This is bad. You shouldn't do this.

But when governments coerce people, especially businesses, well, they've got an awful lot of power.

And that can turn into tyranny quickly.

Now, the -- the Bill of Rights was written, and especially the First Amendment, was -- was written, for those bad times.

You know, you -- I know you're worried about, well, these -- I mean, freedom of speech is great. Unless things are, you know, troubled.

Well, okay. But that's why think wrote this down.

Our documents are a negative charter of liberties.

So it means that the Bill of Rights, apply to the citizens, but not to the governments. The government cannot do anything to violate these rights. And if, you know, it changes when there's trouble, or when the government feels there's trouble, well, then, you don't really have the right, do you?

And I really don't have any shackles, on the presidency. The administration, or the government.

What you have, actually, is another Constitution, written in 1936. It was really great. Because of the way it -- I mean, it was way advanced.

All voting restrictions were taken off. Universal direct suffrage. The right to work.

Guaranteed by the previous Constitution. In addition, to 1936, and, by the way, I'm not talking about Germany. Okay.

1936. The Constitution recognized the collective and economic rights. Including the right to work. The right to rest. The health protection.

Care in old age. And in sickness. The right to housing and education and cultural benefits.

It was really a cutting edge Constitution. Because everybody wants that stuff, right?

You have a universal right to it.

And all of the government bodies, had to help provide those things, because you, the citizen have a right.

And they want right direct election, of all government bodies. And they -- they reorganized it, at 36.

And they just -- they streamlined the government. You know, so there wasn't a lot of red tape. So Article 122, in the -- in the Constitution, said that women, are accorded equal rights with men.

Now, this is 1936.

Think about how advanced this is.

Women have equal rights with men, in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social, and political life.

In fact, they were really the first one to make sure that there was, you know, kindergartens, and a universal right to kindergarten, and maternity leave, and prematernity, and protection of the mom and her interests.

It was really, really good. In article 122. In 123. That was the equal rights for all citizens.

It was -- it was equity for everybody. Irrespective of their nationality or their race.

In all spheres of life. And they wanted to make sure that there was racial inclusiveness, and no hatred, or contempt. Or restrictions of rights and privileges on account of nationality or race.

And if you did any of these hate crimes, it was punishable by law. So this is now the -- the Soviet Constitution of 1936. And it was the longest running Constitution of the Soviet Union. And it was great. Article 124, guaranteed freedom of religion.

Including the separation of church and state. And school from church.

And 124, it ensured all citizens the freedom of conscience. Freedom of religious worship. And freedom of any anti-reckless propaganda, recognized for all citizens. Which was nice, and in 124, Stalin, in the face of real stiff opposition there, eventually said, you know what, maybe we should talk to the Russian orthodox church. Maybe we should allow them to exist. And he did, kind of. But it was all within the Constitution. Because see, this Constitution is a Constitution of positive liberties. Unlike ours, negative liberties. Telling the government what it cannot do. Theirs is a positive liberty. All the things the government must do.

And article 125. Remember, this is 1936. Article 125 of the Constitution, guaranteed freedom of speech in the press. And freedom of assembly.

Then they said, look, the Communist Party really needs to come together.

And we can have diversity in the Communist Party. But it's only one party in the free elections. So you could -- you could do that.

Now, this Constitution, was written in 1936.

And it was thoroughly democratic. Thoroughly democratic.

I mean, yeah. Once the writers of the Constitution. And the organizers, you know, finished it. They were imprisoned, and/or executed right after. Because they were counterrevolutionaries. And, you know, you have to get rid of those people.

There were some people that were just too radical. And they were the writers of the Constitution. But, you know, that's an old dusty document.

Sure, it was written last week. But they didn't foresee everything.

So they started the great -- the great terror.

Is what it's called.

I don't know what happened during the great terror.

But it coincided with the signing of the new Constitution.

But everybody was protected. You could say whatever you want.

You know, you could look at the great terror, or the subcategory of the great purge.

And say, hey. You know what, they're stepping on those rights. There. Those people.

But they are people that the state really doesn't. You know, the state really needs some authority to be -- sure, you have a right to speak. You know, you have the enjoyment of rights and freedoms of citizens. But, I'm just quoting the Constitution, not to the detriment of the interests of society. Or the state.

So if you saw something, you know, like Ketanji -- whatever her name is. Jackson brown. Jackson -- whatever her name is.

I love her. And she is right.

When the state has an interesting, because the state knows best, then we have to, you know, restrain people from saying things. So let me just -- let me just quote article 39. Enjoyment of the rights and freedoms of citizens must not be to the detriment of the interests of society, or the state.

Amen! That's what she's saying. I mean, they've been saying this since 1936 in the Soviet Union. Article 59 obliged citizens to obey all the laws and comply with the standards of the socialist society as determined by the party. So if the party said, you know, let's just say, we can mutilate your children.

You can speak out about that. I mean, you're going to have to go to jail for it.

Because it will be a hate crime.

In fact, hate crimes were even mentioned specifically, in that 19 -- they were so far ahead.

They were just -- they were just way, way, way, way, way ahead. Because they were already on those hate crimes. You know, you don't have a -- you don't have a right to say, you know.

For instance, here it is. Quote, the Constitution prohibits incitement of hatred or hostility on any religious ground.

So you couldn't just, you know, say to the Bible. Bible says this.

If it incited hatred. So -- and the Constitution, you know, gave -- you have a freedom of conscience. You can do that.

You can profess or not profess any religion.

And you can conduct religious worship or atheistic propaganda. As long -- and I'm quoting. As long as it's in the interest of the state. You see.

Because they know better. They know better.

So Ketanji, I just -- I'm trying to help you. Because you asked for help yesterday. Which I find just so refreshing. That a talk show host, that is a recovering alcoholic and former DJ, who is just completely self-educated, you know, knows this stuff, better than a Supreme Court justice. But I think that's great, that, you know, you're humble enough to say, I don't know my ass from my elbow. I think that's great. I really do. I really do.

So let's just remember, the government, you know -- we have inalienable rights. What does that mean?

I don't know. Something about aliens from space, Ketanji. No.

Means no man can change those rights. Alter those rights. Or take away. That's what inalienable means.

And in the Soviet Union, they didn't that have, okay?

They didn't have inalienable rights. You as a citizen can, and I'm quoting. Enjoy rights. When the exercise of these rights, do not interfere with the interests of the state, and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, they alone have the power and authority to determine policies for the government and society.

What a utopia that is. Man, if we could just model our Constitution on something as open-minded as this, we would certainly be fixed. Kind of in the way, my dog was fixed. But we would be fixed all right.

Are Antidepressants (SSRI's) Worsening America's Mental Health Crisis?

A former FDA psychiatrist reveals what Big Pharma never told the public: the “chemical imbalance” story behind antidepressants was never proven — and SSRIs don’t fix a biological defect, they numb the brain. Glenn Beck and Dr. Josef Witt-Doerring break down how America became the most drugged nation in the world and how millions are being overprescribed medications that can cause paradoxical agitation, emotional blunting, and even suicidal behavior. With 15% of Americans — including millions of children — on SSRIs, are we facing a public health crisis hiding in plain sight?

Cracker Barrel's internal crisis EXPOSED

Cracker Barrel’s massive public meltdown didn’t happen by accident. Behind the scenes, the company was bleeding institutional knowledge, taking disastrous advice from DEI strategists, and making decisions that alienated the very customers who built the brand. A major board shake-up, the quiet removal of DEI frameworks, and the sudden resignation of a key DEI-linked board member reveal how deep the problems ran — and how desperate the company was to course-correct. This breakdown uncovers what really went wrong, how Cracker Barrel was influenced internally, and why the Glenn Beck interview triggered major internal moves that the public was never supposed to see.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So, Stu, you can just questions about the special tonight.

STU: Yeah, for sure. I'm interested in this.

It's a big -- you know, a big special. You're back and forth with it. With them there. Was kind of fascinating. Right?

You have a situation where they -- they do seem to be sort of avoiding the question there on DEI. Is that how you read it? Oh, we lost connection with Glenn. Is that what's about to go?

Well, that's how I read it at least. You know, you listen to that clip of them going back and forth and it does appear to be them just sort of avoiding the question. We should get back to Glenn. Because I know he has this breaking news on this happen. Should we go to another clip on the Cracker Barrel thing, while we're waiting for Glenn to reconnect? Because it sort of sets the stage. You know, it was interesting to see their approach here, which is to try to explain themselves and try to work themselves through what is one of the biggest PR disasters probably in our lifetimes.

And let's go to this next clip.

VOICE: If we came out of COVID, A, trying to hire 50,000 people, we have a lot of our employees, original -- we did -- we lost a lot of very long tenured employees. A lot of them, a little bit older, and scared to come back into the -- into the environment.

And so --

GLENN: That's a lot of institutional knowledge.

VOICE: Oh, it hurt. I mean, it really hurt.

And in '22, as we started opening back up, we had the new menu that we had. So we lost a lot of people. We put a ton of training into that new menu.

Now we're coming back to open up, guests, any way we can get them. We had patio dining. We were testing a rock garden.

They were going to sit out in the landscape. And I always say that co-ed even made Cracker Barrel start drinking alcohol.

Because that's how -- it was out of COVID, that it was like, how are we figuring out how to drive top line sales and try to get a guest in.

GLENN: Okay. So that is a good example of you don't know any of the story. You think Cracker Barrel has never served alcohol before. Why are you shoving alcohol? That's a cultural. So it's easy to think, you're selling people alcohol now. What other values are you --

VOICE: And it's fair.

GLENN: That one, is at least understandable. Now that I understand the story.

VOICE: Yeah. Exactly. And so as we got into '23, I came out of my office administration role, and came into operations.

And I was leading field operations. And the best way for me to describe it, we were throwing Velcro balls at a wall to see what would stick.

STU: And it's understandable. You know, it's easy to kind of look at the Cracker Barrel situation and get lost at how badly it went.

A lot of these decisions come down to the information they had at the time. Right?

And they're looking at the time as a place that maybe people aren't coming into as much as they would like.

They are trying to -- maybe it's fading a little bit. Maybe some people find it's stale.

They think the situation at Cracker Barrel is not one that they're not necessarily trying to get involved with on a week to week basis, like they used to.

Maybe they had those warm feelings of the past. But they're not going in it anymore. Well, we'll freshen it up. We will do all these new things.

This will be great! And you realize, sometimes, when you're in that moment, you hit a -- you hate a vein. Right?

You're trying to do something positive for the company. And you hit a vein, and everything starts bleeding all over the place.

Let me give you another piece of this interview. Glenn Beck, up in the headquarters of -- of Cracker Barrel.

And somehow, I will give Glenn credit. Not eating throughout the interview.

I kind of thought, when they put food in front of him. He would just be shoveling it down his gullet the entire time.

You wouldn't be able to hear him. It would be like talking with his mouth full.

He got through it, without taking as many bites. Here is Glenn with the CEO of Cracker Barrel.

GLENN: Let's just get this out.

VOICE: Okay.

GLENN: What happened to the choices that were made?

I said on day one of this. I remember when they rolled out new Coke. And I thought, that was the dumbest marketing move, the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

We're taking the original formula and ditching it. And let's start over with a brand that people love.

The day this broke, I said on the air, new Coke!

That's what this is. And it was -- no offense. Stupid!

Just stupid from start to finish.

Can you walk me through how that happened?

VOICE: Yeah. Sure.

Look, our guests have every right to be upset.

GLENN: Yeah. You want to watch this. And I -- you know, what I really want to you watch for is a moment where I said to her, are you surprised you haven't been fired yet.

That spoke volumes. Her answer, and I hope it is captured on camera.

But that answer was the first non, you know, when you're a CEO. You know, I've -- Stu, do you remember when we used to have to do really important interviews.

And our PR people would be like, drill, drill, drill.

No, don't say that. Don't say that. And we would be like, yeah. Whatever.

And when you are in charge of a Fortune 500 company. And you're in the trouble that they're in, you do -- you know, you follow the people that you have hired to make sure crisis management. You don't make any more mistakes.

And so everybody was very, very careful.

They were very honest. But, you know, like that DEI thing.

She didn't really answer the question.

Of course, we want everybody to be welcomed. Yeah. I know. But that's not answering the question.

When I asked her, are you surprised you still have a job, and you haven't been fired yet. Her answer spoke volumes.

Now, the other thing that you need to know, that while she didn't answer me on the DEI thing. And I -- I -- you know, I can't tell you exactly how this happened.

I just know that they knew, that they didn't answer the question.

And somebody has been in touch with my people. And said, hey. You might want to watch the board meeting that is happening.

We can't tell you that anything is going to be happening. But the DEI thing may be solved. At the board meeting. That happened this morning. And they were going to release something at 11:15 today.

We didn't know exactly what it was.

We had -- we had an indication that it might be about DEI.

And what they've done, at first.

Remember, in August. You know, they just deleted the Pride pages. And the DEI pages.

And they just got rid of it all, at Cracker Barrel. That is just hiding who you are. The real problem was, they had a guy who was on the board of directors. Named Gilbert Davila.

And he's just resigned from the board, today!

Okay? They had a meeting with the board, and shareholders and everything else. And they voted on all of these people. And they did not renew him. And so he is -- he has resigned.

Now, his job -- he was a member of the standing board committee.

And his job was to assess the social and political risk to the company's business.

Well, who is he?

Well, he's also the CEO of a company called DMI Consulting.

That's a DEI strategy firm, that's been in business since 2010.

So he's one of the guys. He was the guy who, his job as the CEO -- as the CEO of DMI, is to promote, you know, DEI.

To make sure everybody is living up to the DEI standards. So Robby Starbuck, who is a friend of the program and, you know, great conservatives, who has been responsible for -- you know, getting a lot of these people out of these companies, or at least drawing attention on what these companies are really standing for.

He's been asking trial. What does he do to deserve this seat on the board?

Well, that's it. He owned a DEI consulting and strategy firm. That was pushing DEI and DEI advertising. So what's happened here is I think while she couldn't answer that question at the time, because the board hadn't acted, I think it's -- I think it's not not coincidental that the day the interview with her drops. With us.

Which they've known for a couple of weeks. This is when this interview would drop.

They -- they announced that morning, that seat has been eliminated. DEI is gone from Cracker Barrel. So I think that's really, really good news if you're a fan of Cracker Barrel.

And the things that I saw at Cracker Barrel, I'm -- I'm going to tell you some stuff tomorrow.

I just have to make sure that it's exactly accurate. Because I don't want to cause more problems.

For us!

And I want to make sure that I get it exactly right. But there were some things that I learned in the show prep.

And, you know, studying up for this interview.

That no one was prepared to talk to me on camera about. And always says to me, oh, well, there's something there.

And so we have done even more homework on it. And tomorrow, I will tell you about something that you might have heard about. This guy who owns, what is it?

Steak and Shake?

STU: Yeah. He's a big activist shareholder, isn't he?

Kind of against some of the leadership there at Cracker Barrel. I think I read about that.

GLENN: Correct. Yes. Yes.

And he has an interesting history.

And I want to -- I want to take you through some of that tomorrow.

I think by tomorrow, you're going to understand, what you saw with the DEI vote on the board today. Get that gone. That's gone.

The interview that you'll see tonight with Julie. The CEO. She's not who you think she is.

It doesn't mean she didn't make huge mistakes. She says she makes huge mistakes. But she's not who you think she is.

You may not agree with her or whatever. But it's important you know who she is. And what she said.

And the key tonight is that question: Are you surprised that you haven't been fired yet.

And really, what happened after she answers the question. And she's very uncomfortable. Answers the question.

And then she immediately switches topics. And I'm like, wait. Wait. Wait.

Stop. Stop. Go back. Why are you switching topics here?

Because it was an amazing moment. Is she immediately changes the subject. After she answers. And then she comes back, and she he says a few things. You'll see.

And then I bring it back to her again. And she switches topics again. And I'm like, why are you doing that?

Why are you doing that?

And she said a very interesting answer on all of that.

That is one of the most honest things I think I've ever seen a fortune five company or CEO ever say.

It was really uncomfortable. But really, really honest.

I think once you see this. And then I tell you tomorrow about the -- the board member, on the things that I can verify. I'm not sure what we can verify yet.

But the things that I've heard. And the things I think I can verify tomorrow. You will see that -- that I think they made stupid moves. They have really bad advice from DEI people.

And they were set up.

To some degree.

They were set up.

The company was. Not individuals. The company was set up.

I think it will -- I think you will have every question you needed to know about Cracker Barrel and what happened answered.

WARNING: The Threat of Sharia Law in American Cities is Now a Reality

Texas is becoming the front line of a growing ideological struggle. While courts block the Ten Commandments from classrooms, public schools are opening Islamic prayer rooms as CAIR and other Islamist political groups gain influence across the state. Glenn Beck and Chip Roy warn that this isn’t about private worship, but rather a coordinated movement to weaken the nation’s Judeo-Christian foundations, undermine constitutional law, and smuggle Sharia-aligned norms into American institutions. As judges enable these shifts and political factions fracture, a broader conflict is emerging that most Americans refuse to acknowledge. Texas may be the battleground that determines whether the West wakes up in time.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We're talking to Chip Roy about the Islamification of Texas and the United States. What's going to be done. A -- a -- a -- a new attitude from Governor Greg Abbott yesterday. And a new proclamation that came out and said, enough is enough.

On CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood. We're going to deem them terrorist organizations. We were just talking about what's happening with the Ten Commandments. And before we -- before we switch here, one more thing on this -- this Muslim thing. In schools.

You know, we can't have the Ten Commandments, Chip.

However, at liberty High School in the Frisco ISD in Texas, they now have prayer rooms for Islamic prayers.

How is it we can't have the Ten Commandments in Texas, but Frisco ISD public school, Liberty High School, can have prayer rooms, and nobody says anything?

CHIP: Well, first of all, this is the double standard of the left. But let's take a step back. What you just said out loud. Frisco, Texas. Frisco. My daughter was born in Frisco.

GLENN: Yeah.

CHIP: Has now got Islamic prayer rooms, okay? That should concern you.

GLENN: It does.

CHIP: And by you, I mean the listeners out there. Like, Texas listeners.

And, yes, the Ten Commandments case. It's judicial activism. The Supreme Court has upheld the ability to have the Ten Commandments displayed in public form.

Again, the Ten Commandments sits on the grounds of the Texas Capitol. And the case like I said, Ted Cruz litigated as solicitor general. Working for then attorney general Greg Abbott. Governor Rick Perry, and we won that case.

And I think we will be able to win that case, when it goes up, and it's no doubt, it's being challenged in the fifth circuit.

Then likely the Supreme Court would look at it.

With past presidents and say, we have the Ten Commandments.

Look, we have to decide who we are as a people.

And we got to start acting like it. Because this nation has been blessed because we are a Judeo Christian people who formed a country. That is a -- liberal, in the classical sense. You know, republic liberal democracy.

And we allow the full range of views to be discussed. And for people to believe whatever they believe.

And you and I will die on the hill to protect that. To protect the government over the mind of man. But we are also are a group of people that's bound together by a common sense of ideals, in our history, in our founding. And when you break that down, you will no longer have a country. And that's what we've got to -- you know, when those men --

GLENN: Go ahead. Well, you were saying a minute ago. You know, that should concern you, that there are prayer rooms in Frisco, Texas. It doesn't concern me that there are prayer rooms.

What concerns me, this is a coordinated effort to bring Sharia law into our country.

I don't care if you're Muslim. And you respect the Judeo Christian laws that we have. That's what our country are built on.

That's what our laws are based on.

And you say, this is a really great system. Because it allows me and everybody else to worship God of our own understanding.

When you're part of a movement to subvert that law. And to fundamentally transform the United States into something that it is not.

That's when I have a problem! And that's when we should stand up, but that's one of the things that CAIR does. CAIR makes anything that we have said, Islamophobia. And so they shout you down, and make you afraid and try to paint you as a hater.

I don't hate. I don't hate Muslims.

I don't. I do despise Sharia Law, and I despise anyone who comes here, and wants to supplant the United States Constitution, and replace it with Sharia law. That's -- that's a no-go zone.

No. Sorry. Not going to do it.

JASON: And the history of Sharia law. And the history of those inherent to it, which would suggest that that is the goal.

GLENN: Yes.

CHIP: And that's what we've seen borne out in countries across the world. So we should recognize that in carrying out our policies and these activist judges, and they are going to cede the ground. Okay?

In the name of the First Amendment, they are going to cede the ground with a supposedly secular society.

And, you know, essentially, genuflecting to -- the Bill of Rights, while walking away from God.

They're going to cede the ground for a world in which we are going to invite those who wish to destroy America, to have a front row seat right here to do it, and we've got to stop those judges.
And we've got to act. And so, you know, the House of Representatives should act on such an obvious case like Boasberg.

We should -- and I know that my religious liberty friends will do that on the Ten Commandments.

And they're going to be litigating that. And I will be quite confident the state will litigate that to defend the state law and defend the schools.

Then you go to the -- you know, redistricting opinion. Right? It's really extraordinary. I don't know if you read the scathing rebuke of the two judges. The -- particularly, the one judge, Judge Brown by Jerry Smith, right? Who was dissenting judge in the three-judge panel. So for those of you who don't understand, when you have a case on the redistricting issues. Right? It goes to a three-judge panel. And this three-judge panel, it was a two-to-one opinion, and it was a Democrat appointee. Appointed judge.

It was a Trump-appointed judge. Judge Brown. And then Judge Jerry Smith, who has been on the bench for a long time. Very respected, conservative --

GLENN: Thirty-seven years.

CHIP: Yes, and Jerry was basically cut out. They didn't do their normal deliberation. He wrote a scathing letter yesterday.

In addition to them filing a dissent. Because he was blocked out of the process.

It was an extraordinary essentially power grab by the two judges.

Just to run this thing through. I don't think the Supreme Court will take kindly to that.

I think that the stay application that will be filed with the United States Supreme Court. I think that by tomorrow. They filed the stay last night with the strict.

In the district court.

But I think they will go to the Supreme Court, with the stay, probably tomorrow.

That attorney general Paxton and Abbott to strategize for the timing.

But I think that's right.

And, you know, I think the you court. Judge Roberts, his faults on many opinions, has been pretty good on race. You'll remember, the Supreme Court opinion that -- that struck down the abhorrent, you know, language in section five that was unconstitutional, Voting Rights Act. And they cleaned that up.

And in that opinion, Robert said, that divvying us up by race was a distorted business. That was his quote. And I think Roberts will be on the right side of this. I hope so.

Because this is very clearly political exercise by the legislature.

The judges tried to indicate that it was racial gerrymandering. No! It's the opposite.

Texas is trying to undo racial gerrymandering, which we believe is unconstitutional on its face. You've got California out there, who is taking five of the nine Republican seats away.
So it's currently, what?

I think, what? 45 to nine?

And it's now going to be something like 50 to four? My numbers may be off one or two. It's crazy.

And then in Texas, we were kind of trying to rebalance it a little bit.

Add four or five new states. A lot of growth in Texas. And now, they will say, that that's somehow not profitable. Because we somehow are doing racial gerrymandering.

We're undoing I think racial gerrymandering with a politically motivated goal of having more Republican seats in a very Republican state. So I hope the Supreme Court sees this for what it is.

And issues a statement. You know, we'll have to see what they do.

GLENN: Let me take to you Washington again. This Comey thing is driving me out of my mind.

Because once again, here's somebody, that looks like they will not pay a price for anything.

James Comey. A judge has said that the government has screwed this -- this up. In gathering information.

And filing.

And so now it looks like the Comey case will not move forward. Any thoughts on this?

CHIP: Well, look, I have not had a chance to dive into this as deeply. I know that the district Judge Nachmanoff, or whatever the judge's name was. Pressed, you know -- this -- this opinion forward.

And, you know -- or I'm sorry. Not pressed the opinion. Pressed prosecutors. A hearing.

And I don't know what the exact result is going to be.

The Biden appointee. And, you know, we're -- we're going it to see what the result is.

Obviously, Comey, we believe lied to I think the Senate judiciary committee, among others. Under oath.

And that is, in fact, an indictable offense.

And so, you know, I'll go look and see what they're claiming in terms of whether the grand jury got to see the final indictment.

Or whatever these issues are.

Obviously, the former prosecutor is important. You have to follow the procedures.

GLENN: You have to.

CHIP: Do it right. But also can't lose the forest for the trees. I think Comey very clearly lied. And so, we're going to -- hopefully, this will proceed. That's about all I've got on that one.

GLENN: All right. Chip, thank you very much. If anyone wants to get involved in your campaign for Texas attorney general, how do they do it?
CHIP: ChipRoy.com. C-H-I-P-R-O-Y.com. You can follow me at Chip Roy TX on X/Twitter.

And, Glenn, always appreciate what you're doing out there. Thanks for being on the tip of the spear. And the forefront of talking about this important issue. About defending Western civilization.

And all the issues. I'm deeply appreciative.

GLENN: I tell you, Chip. I -- I've been saying recently -- I've been saying it for a while, since I wrote the chalkboard on what was going to happen, back on Fox days. And I said, all these people will gather. And then they'll sort it out.

Once they think they have it, they will start eating each other.

And they're starting to see that with the left now eating the Democrats. So Democrats are over. Now it's just going to be Marxists. But it will come down to the Marxists and the anarchists and the Islamists. And as I said then, in the end, it will just be the Islamists, against the Western world.

Because I would bet on people who believe something, much more than the Marxists.

These people have religious zeal. And they will -- they will eat the Marxists. And then it will just be western world against the -- the Islamists. And I think, chip, we are in World War III.

We have just not declared it yet. And people haven't woken up to it yet.

We are in the beginning stages. You will see history in 100 years from now. Will write, this is the 1930s, if you will.

This is the beginning of a world war, and nobody has caught up with it, yet.

Would you agree with that?

CHIP: Yeah. Glenn, I agree with you. You have, and you were a long time ago -- others have caught up to it. And, frankly, caught up to where you were. And, look, it is one of the core reasons I'm running for attorney general.

Look, I can keep doing what I'm doing up here. God blessed me the ability to fight and make changes up here.

We've done some good things.

Look, we have to preserve in the state of Texas. And the battle is exactly what you said. You can't win a war. If you don't even acknowledge that it's happening.

That's the problem. People are asleep at it. Again, like I said, it's what I last talked about. Because of the reality that you just said.

And that vast network, we have got to follow the money and destroy that network. It's an integrated, related network. You know it. I know it. I can promise you, smart people in Washington are looking at this.

I can tell you, I'm building teams in Texas, to look at this right now. And connecting those teams in Texas and in Washington. And other AG's offices, which is what I'll do on day one of AG. Frankly, once I'm blessed with the nomination, I will be working on it all next year. We will build the team, and we will fight to dismantle it.

Glenn Finally Gets a REAL Job: Cracker Barrel Biscuit Maker | Glenn TV | Ep 471

If this whole media thing doesn’t work out, Glenn can always fall back on his biscuit-making skills! Take a break from the apocalypse and enjoy some Cracker Barrel carbs made by everyone’s favorite son of a baker!