RADIOMay 30, 2024

How Trump’s Jury Was Transformed Into a DANGEROUS Commission

The jury in former president Donald Trump’s New York hush money trial is deliberating on whether to convict him. But there are some major issues: For one, the judge didn’t give the jury a printed copy of the jury instructions — something Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey says he has “never” seen before. Plus, the jury doesn’t even have to agree on WHAT crime Trump committed. Attorney General Bailey joins Glenn to explain why this is dangerous: This isn’t the American justice system. The judge has created a “roving commission” more akin to the system the British used to jail dissenters in the colonial era.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The judge in President Trump's hush money trial, told the jury, that they don't even have to agree on the crime. They could all think, you know, I think his hair is a crime.

You know, four of them. I think his suntan is a crime. And four of them can say, I think, you know, he falsified checks. Whatever.

Whatever they think the crime is! Because it wasn't really defined.

Even if they don't agree on the crime, if 12 of them thinks he committed some crime, well, then he's guilty. I've never heard that before.

I've served on a jury. I've served on a jury with multiple counts.

We had to discuss each count!

And we found this person guilty on some counts. And not on others.

It would have been the easiest thing ever. We could have been done in ten minutes! If all we had to do was just, hey. These seven counts on this guy. Does everybody agree, he did one of them?

Yeah. Okay. We're out of here.

Is this normal? Andrew Bailey is here. He's the Missouri attorney general. Kind of knows the law.

Attorney General Bailey, welcome to the program.
ANDREW: Thanks for having me on.

GLENN: So, again, I don't know the law. But this does not seem like the American way of I couldn't wait if had our courts. Am I wrong?

ANDREW: No. You are absolutely right. This reeks of desperation by the prosecutor and the judge to obtain a conviction. If people were not previously convince that had this was an elicit witch hunt prosecution. They should be so now.

This is insane. Look, since 2020, the United States Supreme Court has said that jury unanimity under criminal law is required under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution. It was not always that way. There were two states prior to 2020, that did not require jury unanimity under the Sixth Amendment criminal trials. Louisiana and Oregon for lesser offenses.

And the Supreme Court fixed that in 2020. And so for this prosecutor and this judge to say, hey, whatever you think. Go ahead and do whatever you want. It violates the Sixth Amendment. It violates the president's due process rights. Because how many folks know how to offer a defense, if he doesn't even know what the -- the target crime is.

That he's -- that is an element of the office for which he's charged. It also empowers the jury to be a roving commission.

And, again, that reeks of desperation. They don't care. They will throw everything against the wall.

This is not giving the jury instructions, and convict them of something, whatever you want.

GLENN: Well, there is -- 32 charges. Thirty-two counts. Thirty-four counts. So if two of them believe, you know, he's guilty on 29, and two of them believe something else.

But they don't agree on the same counts. How is that justice?

ANDREW: No. I think that's absolutely right. And, again, it creates a roving commission. And that violates the basic constitutional tenants that underpin the due process clause of the Sixth Amendment rights to a jury trial. That's been incorporated against the state, and certainly at least since 2020.

And again, I think it's desperate. It's throw everything against the wall. It also reminds me of, there was a Roman emperor who used to nail the walls to the highest points on the columns. So the Roman citizens wouldn't be able to read them. That's a lot what this is like. The judge is saying to the jury, I will charge you to find a crime. Any crime you want. And I'm not going to let you read the jury instructions.

Trust me. You guys go back and convict him on something they want to convict them on.

GLENN: Okay. So tell me what the jury instructions mean. And why would he not print. Because I understand also, that it is clearly printed all the time. So --

ANDREW: That's right. I would never try a case, where you didn't give the jury, the jury instructions. Why would you not want to. Again, that's the law. Judges determine law. Juries determine facts. And it's up to the jury, to apply the facts to the law.

And so in closing arguments, the prosecutor gets up and says, here's the elements of the offense. Here's the evidence that proves each of these elements. And it's like a checklist. Then you tick down it. Then you show them the verdict form.

And say, this is how you find them guilty.

And if you're the defense, you stand up and say, the state didn't prove this! They didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt of that. And it etches in the jury's mind, what to look for, in that instruction packet, when they go back in delivery. But how is the jury supposed to look back to the law, if they can't see the law in front?

GLENN: Also, may I ask, when -- when the -- oh, shoot.

He did something. Oh, in the closing arguments, for the prosecution. Didn't they introduce new evidence or evidence that wasn't presented, and he let it ride?

ANDREW: Completely objectionable. It should have been stricken from the record. And the jury should have been admonished to ignore that. It's called facts not in evidence.

It's one of the first objections you learn in any evidence class in law school, and to have the prosecutor for the state of New York. Matthew Colangelo, Alvin Bragg. Having that team stand up and testify, as if they're witnesses. The fact that it has not been introduced. It's completely impermissible. It demonstrates an abuse of the judge's discretion. It should have been stricken from the record.

But, again, I will go back to this idea of a roving commission. The -- think about our experience under colonial England.

Where general warrants were issued by magistrates, and the British soldiers could search your home and quarter in your home for no basis whatsoever, just on any -- any level of suspicion.

And you didn't even have to be charged with an actual offense. That you would then be able to defend against.

They, allegations were sufficient to jail you. And so the Founders erected these Constitutional barriers, that kind of government intrusion into our individual liberties.

And again, the Sixth Amendment requires your anonymity which has been violated here. It also prevents the due process clause. It prevents a roving commission, where the law is so abstract. That the jury can roam freely through the evidence. And choose any fact it wants to create liability.
That is not -- again, that is not what this country is founded upon, that violates the Constitutional rights. And it's to demonstrate. This was never about a legally valid conviction. There's never about an actual crime.

There was never a crime. It's always about taking President Trump off the campaign trail, and that has been violating all of our rights.

GLENN: Okay. So -- so, Andrew, I'm -- I'm thinking about why this guy would do this. Because I would imagine with be this is a slam dunk, overturn.

Wouldn't it be?

ANDREW: Yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely.

It should have been dismissed at the state's evidence for failure to actually prosecute a criminal defense. Failure to offer, prove beyond a reasonable doubt on some of the elements. It then should have been dismissed once again, disclosed of all the evidence. This shouldn't have even gone to the jury.

And the fact that they have now rigged the jury process, to avoid the anonymity requirement, and to create this roving commission.

It's just once again, just one more piece of evidence to prove, the witch hunt nature of this prosecution.

GLENN: So do you believe this was done possibly. Excuse me.

Do you believe this was done possibly, because they just want the none name after. And then just dispute. Well, it was some conservative court that overturned it.

You know, we know the truth. And that's the only reason I can think of -- why you would do this. Why would a judge want to be overturned, especially when it is so clearly going to be overturned.

ANDREW: Glenn, I think you're absolutely right.

I think two other points to make here. The process and the timing.

This is a crucial period. Where President Trump needs to be courting the electorate and republic. Instead, he's tied down in a Manhattan courtroom.

But secondly, think about how long an appeal takes. That doesn't happen overnight. To the extent he's convicted, to the extent they obtain an illegal illicit conviction this week or next, sentencing will be pushed out 45 to 60 days at most. And then an appeal will take a year or more.

And so this takes us in. Even if President Trump is elected president, this will haunt him and this will undermine the first few years of his administration.

GLENN: This is just nuts.

ANDREW: They poisoned the well we will be drinking from for years now.

GLENN: I mean, you want to talk about the end of the republic. It's this kind of stuff that ends the republic. You don't. And because it's not just about him.

This goes back to what Stalin created. What the king. King George created.

Find me the man, I'll find you the crime.

You know, it -- it -- there is no justice, if things like this happen. One last question: I served on a jury once. And it was a serious case. But not a -- not a murder or anything else.

But it was -- it was, you know, abuse of a wife.

And we had, I don't know how many charges. And we kept calling the judge in. Because we thought the judge was, you know, our friend. And fair.

And we would ask him. And he would say, I can't tell you that. I can't tell you that.

Here are the instructions. You would have to go. And we would call him back in.

I can't tell you that. Here are the instructions. And we couldn't agree on all of the counts. And so we ended up, I think on maybe two counts out of eight. Or something like that.

Because we were split.

If we would have been able to say. Oh, you four want this. And you four think that case.

And that four think this. We would have been out of there by now.

Does it say anything, that they have such a wide berth to agree on anything?

And it -- it takes them a while to get through this. I mean, I would have been done. We would honestly, if we had those instructions, we would have been done the first day.

ANDREW: Yeah. That's right. I mean, that's why jury anonymity is so important to our constitutional structure, to our individual rights.

You know, and also the due process clause. To prevent that kind of roving commission. The prosecution here is best summed up as, there is no crime. So let's see how much garbage we can throw on a wall. See if any of it sticks. And try to convince someone that it's criminal behavior. And the judge is going to collude with us. Not allow the jury to see the law. And then agree that, yeah, you are a roving commission. Anything that you want to find that is criminal, it's a grab bag. You pick it. You choose it. You don't have to agree. Let's get out of here with the conviction as fast as we can.

It undermines the credibility of our criminal justice system. I also think it's dripping with irony, that this is happening in a state like New York, where they're not prosecuting actual criminals. This is a state the prides itself on criminal justice reform and bail for everyone. Cashless bail for everyone. And one standard of justice, as Alvin Bragg launched on his website.

How can he even look himself in the mirror and keep a straight face with that kind of nonsense going on.

GLENN: I know I promised one last question. But, again, one last question.

The jury just sent the judge a note. They want to reread the instructions, beginning with how they should consider facts and what inferences can be drawn. What have what do you take from that?

ANDREW: I think it's problematic. It means that they know they don't have direct evidence to prove some of the elements of the event. But remember, there are two attorneys on that jury. And those attorneys are telling them, look, we don't need direct evidence.

Circumstantial evidence which includes reasonable inferences is sufficient to obtain a conviction stop it means they're stretching.

And I think it's a reasonable inference for us and outsiders to draw.

If those attorneys are inviting them to stretch and use circumstantial evidence to try to find any crime.

GLENN: Jeez. Thank you so much.

Andrew, I appreciate it. Andrew Bailey. The Missouri attorney general. I -- I really appreciate it.

Thank you.

ANDREW: Appreciate you having me on. Thank you.

GLENN: You bet.

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

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Where were we, Liz?

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

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

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

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

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

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

And he's hired 1200 of them.

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

I've got news for you.

Donald Trump is going to cut those positions.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There's nothing more un-American than that.

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

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

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

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

Look under your seats.

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

Ugh!

Now...

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

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

Or this is the purpose of this position.

To, quote, promote health equity.

To promote health equity.

What does that mean?

It means racial criminalization in health care.

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

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

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

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

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

It's discrimination.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yeah. Okay.

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

Slaves need to be free. Okay.

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

Let me limp up to explain this once more.

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

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

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

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

It's already covered!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We would go to jail.

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

We're going to look at everybody.

But we lean towards white people.

Did you have Wheaties for breakfast?

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

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

It's the same thing.

But don't expect the Democrats to get it.

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

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

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

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

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

It's not Kamala Harris.

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

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

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

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

What he really believes.

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

And then he rapes you.

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

And you should elect me.

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

But thank you for telling me who you really are.

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

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

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

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

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

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

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

No!

They have representation. Of all the small towns.

All the farming towns.

Everything else.

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

I think there should be electoral colleges in states now.

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

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

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

Or Idaho!

Or Alabama!

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

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

And we have completely different values than you do.

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

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

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

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

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

But you don't have a case.

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

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

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

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

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

You know, every time. Look at Wyoming.

Jackson Hole now controls Wyoming. Just controls it.

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

All the big cities.

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

That's why we have an electoral college.

And it didn't used to be this way.

But our cities are becoming mega cities.

Almost states in and among themselves.

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

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

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

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

3 INFURIATING Reasons to REJECT the New Spending Bill

Republican leadership in the House of Representatives is trying to push through a “continuing resolution” bill right before Christmas. But this CR bill has grown so bloated that it’s practically an omnibus, which Speaker Mike Johnson promised he wouldn’t back. Yet here we are again … Glenn and fellow BlazeTV host‪@lizwheeler‬ review 3 of the worst things included in this bill – but just ONE of them should be enough to make every TRUE conservative in Congress vote AGAINST it. First, it includes a 1-year renewal of the Global Engagement Center, which is a State Department sub-agency that has become “the nexus of the censorship-industrial complex” against Americans. Then, there’s an expansion of the “Pandemic and All Hazards Preparedness and Response Act”, which would give the government the power to conduct gain-of-function research in the case of a national emergency. And lastly, it holds hurricane relief hostage. "Does that sound like you’re negotiating with honest people?" Glenn says. Maybe we should just let the government shutdown happen. Turn it off and back on again.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So Liz Wheeler is joining me. The Liz Wheeler show. You can watch it on YouTube or on Blaze TV.

She is fabulous. And really, really smart. And actually, a conservative. I know, because early this morning, we talked about the spending bill from Mike Johnson.

It -- what part of that do you like the most, Liz?

LIZ: I like the fact that in order to print all of those pages, we had to have American workers chopping down some trees. Which helps our industry.

There is nothing else positive about this bill.

Here what I would say to Republicans in the United States Congress. Who are there, of course. To represent us.

You don't have to post on X, telling us that you spent the whole night reading this.

Don't even bother. There is one thing in this bill that should an immediate disqualifier. You don't have to read another word after you realize that included, in this 1,547-page monstrosity, there is a one-year renewal of what's called the global engagement center. It's such -- it's such a vanilla sounding name, isn't it?

GLENN: Oh, yeah, and it's not! It is not. We talked about the global engagement center on this program, over and over again.

But I'll bet you most people, even in this audience. I'll bet, don't know how dangerous that is.

And the Republicans are giving it another year's worth of funding. What to do!

LIZ: It's unacceptable. It's unacceptable. The global engagement center is a subagency of the state department. And the purpose or the stated purpose, it was conceived in 2014, 2015, 2016. That's when it kind of came into being.

Was to combat disinformation. It's a narrative setting body. It's supposed to be a fact-checking organization for hostile foreign adversaries.

That's what they told us! Which is funny, Glenn. Because right at the time that they were saying, that they -- that they conceived of this global engagement centered to combat foreign disinformation. Not here in America, they said, just abroad.

Suddenly, everything that you and I say, has been labeled as, oh, that sounds an awful lot like Russian propaganda.

That sounds an awful lot like, you know, someone being a patsy for a foreign government.

And suddenly this global government agency was aimed at us.

It is the nexus of the censorship industrial complex. Which has obviously been used against President Trump.

But think of the Hunter Biden laptop story being censor odd Facebook and on Twitter of old. This global engagement center is behind that.

And the fact that any Republican in the United States Congress could look at this bill, see a one-year renewal for the global engagement center and think, oh, I should read the rest of this bill.

Mind-blown.

GLENN: You need to say no to this bill.

LIZ: Yeah.

GLENN: You need to call your House of Representatives and say, no, no, no.

That's not what we just voted for. No.

And we will primary every single one, that votes yes.

What are they going to do? They are going to shut the government down? First of all, they will not shut the welfare system down. They're not going to shut the military down.

No. Nothing that is critical, is going to be shut down. They should shut the government off.

With everything that we have learned and known. What good are they going to be up to, while we're all thinking about Christmas and New Year's?

Shut it off!

You know what, here's -- here's where I start with DOGE.

This is my beginning place.

Hey. Can you give me a list of everybody who raised their hand and said they were an essential employee for the government.

And has been showing up to work, all through the pandemic.

And beyond. Okay? Good. Give me that list.

Everyone else, you're nonessential, by your own definition, or your boss' definition, you're fired.

That's what it should be. You're not in an essential worker?

Than what the hell are you doing? What are you doing?

Why do we need you?

This government is so bloated. It is so rife with corruption. The best thing -- here -- I've said this for years.

Can we try unplugging it. And plugging it back in?

Reset to factory settings.

If we have these non-stop continuing resolutions. You know what that means?

It means, there is no budget.

LIZ: Right.

GLENN: They're not discussing the budget. They're not saying where you're going to spend -- none of that -- none of that happens.

They just keep saying, you know the budget we had?

I believe in 2008, was the last one we passed. Do you know, Liz?

LIZ: No. It's also a betrayal, by the way.

When you talk about the budget process, it's a betrayal on the part of Speaker Johnson.

Because he specifically promised not to do this. This happens every year. We get to Christmas.

Congress knows that we're busy, taking care of our families, enjoying the holiday.

And going to church.

And they try to cram all this poison through.

Speaker Johnson, you promised not to do this. You're betraying, not only your constituents.

But the entire American public. Give us one good reason, why we should not have a vote to vacate your chair?

Why should we not do that to you? Because you have betrayed everything you've promised.

GLENN: We will probably hear that from Chip Roy in about an hour. And Thomas Massie is just blood shooting from his eyes today.

This is everything Thomas Massie said would happen. Everything we have seen over and over again.

And I want to go back to the budget.

We haven't had a passed budget, since 2008.

What's happened to our deficit since 2008?

Why is it, your family has to live on a budget? Because if you got to the end of the year and went, you know what, I don't have money for taxes.

Oh, well.

I'll just get some from the Federal Reserve.

And I'll write them an IOU.

That wouldn't happen.

That only happens in the Biden family.

Okay. Doesn't happen to you.

You have to have a budget. Your company has to have a budget.

Here's the world's largest corporation, if you will.

Employs more people than any other thing in the entire world. The history of the world!

And we don't have a budget?

How is that possible?

LIZ: Modern monetary theory.

GLENN: Yep!

LIZ: From the Obama administration.

It's the chicken -- I mean, it's coming home to roost. This is what we said would happen. If you stop. If you stop acting like your money has value.

And instead, you just printed at will, you don't have to have any -- government officials.

Congress members, specifically, don't have to have any accountability to their voters.

Because they never have to answer for the question that voters would pose to them and say, well, you passed this bill, and you're spending my money in order to fund whatever your project is. Justify that to me.

But if the Congress members aren't appropriating money, via taxes. They're just printing it. There's no accountability. It is a blank check, for their pet projects.

GLENN: You keep asking, as an individual American.

Because I know, this is the way I feel. What -- where is -- where is Joe Biden finding -- oh, I will send another $900 million to Ukraine.

A week later. I'm going to send another $500 million. Where is the debate on that?

Because if that had to go through Congress, we wouldn't be approving all of those.

He's pulling from all kinds of different budgets. He's just pooling the money. Pull from here. Pull from here. Pull from here. And he's giving it, without any debate. No congressional approval. No budget ramifications.

No one is even saying anything about it. No one is saying, the president is out of control.

They're not even saying, he can't control his bladder or his bowels, anymore.

Let alone, control himself with spending.

And live within the definition of the presidency.

LIZ: Well, here's the thing. Here's the thing. It's a hostage situation happening right now.

Joe Biden can't tell the difference between a nickel and a dime. He's not in control of what's going on. I think you know that.

GLENN: You think?

Hang on. Hang on. Hang on.

You think, or you know?

LIZ: We know. Imagine a situation. Holding up a nickel and a dime. Joe, can you tell the difference?

I don't think so. Maybe he would be like, vote for ice cream, please.

GLENN: Yeah. And also, he's not the president. He's not making these decisions.

If he is -- this is the Wilson administration!

They are -- Wilson had a stroke. He was completely incapable of running anything the last year in office.

His wife was shoving the orders underneath his hand.

Putting her hand on top of his. And then signing his name. That's what's happening here. That's what's happening. There's -- he might be able to sign his own name. But I can guarantee you, he didn't -- he didn't approve 9,000 people. Who did?

Who approved all of those pardons? Who did?

Not him. Not him.

LIZ: We're going to look at those, the signature later. When someone gets a chance to scrutinize it, and we're going to find that it's signed by Corn Pop.

All right. Let me tell you something else that's in this bill.

GLENN: Okay.

LIZ: There's an expansion of the pandemic and all hazards, preparedness with and be response act.

GLENN: Oh.

LIZ: This act. Problematic from the name itself, perhaps.

We can anticipate what's in it.

It allows the government to declare a national emergency.

You know, in the case of another COVID-19-like virus.

Enforce vaccines on us. Vaccine passports on us.

Masking. All the COVID tyranny.

This expands it, and actually gives the government power to do it.

Again, there's a lot wrong with this bill.

If this isn't a deal breaker.

Why even call yourself a Republican?

GLENN: And I do want to remind you, this is a Republican bill. This is not the Democrats -- this is the House. This is the House's bill.

It only gets worse when it goes over to the Senate.

And they're putting it -- what additional powers on -- on declaring a national emergency does our president and government need?

Haven't they --

LIZ: Well, according to this bill, it would give them additional power to conduct gain of function research, of course, just defensively.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait.

I'm sorry. I've got so much blood in my eyes right now. What did you just say?

LIZ: The pandemic and all hazards, preparedness and response act, if expanded, would give the government, in the case of the president declared an emergency, if there is another COVID-19. It would give them the power to conduct gain-of-function research.

GLENN: I -- I -- I wish this wasn't FCC regulated radio. I can't think of anything that's not obscene to say after that.

GLENN: You don't usually, like at this point, Christmas music will cheer me up.

But as a dad, I'm practically vomiting blood. My daughter is on the stage at the Grand Ole Opry. I was on the airplane, and just going true my music. And I started listening to Patsy Cline. I loved Patsy Cline. And I'm like, oh, my gosh, she's going to be standing on the same stage that Patsy Cline sang these songs from.

And that's happening tonight.

So tomorrow, I will be much more relaxed. And less scattered than I am today.

But that happens tonight. By the way, name of her album is Home for Christmas. You can there it wherever you get your music.

And thank you so much. Tonight, she's on with for King & Country.

She's doing a couple of songs before they come out. And for King & Country, if you've never seen them in concert. You need to see them.

They are fantastic!

Okay. So Chip Roy, just read something from Chip Roy. He said, we get this negotiated crap, and we're forced to eat this crap switch.

Why? Because freaking Christmas is right around the corner. It's the same dang thing every year.

Legislate by crisis! Legislate by calendar! Not legislate, because it's the right thing to do. I love Chip Roy.

I do. I do.

LIZ: He's my favorite member.

GLENN: Is he? I think he's mine too. Massie is pretty great.

LIZ: He is.

He predicted this, by the way, I think it was from -- it was early in September, Massey said, I will tell you exactly what the Republicans are going to do. This is before we even knew who was going to control the House. He predicted this to a T.

GLENN: Yeah. They always do this. They always do this.

And we always give in. Because they scare us.

Stop being scared by what the government is saying!

You should be afraid of the government, on what they're not telling you.

What they're doing behind the scenes.

When they say shut down the government, you really think our missiles won't fly if North Korea, you know, pushes the button.

Do you really think we can't scramble our jets.

Do you really think, that our budget -- that this little game that we play, every time people are going to starve?

No!

It's not going to happen. This -- what happens every single time, is they scare people. And they're like, well, we can't shut down the government.

We can't shut down -- yes, we can.

You will be surprised at how much we can take care of by ourself. How sweet ass your life becomes, when the government ain't showing up!

They're holding the -- the hurricane relief hostage in this bill.

Now, does that sound like you're negotiating with honest people?

With good people?

With people that actually care about you?

They're holding hurricane relief hostage?

Hmm. Congress, don't -- do not bitch at me.

Do not bitch at me.

Oh, we can't even read -- you don't have to.

Reject this bill. There's -- there's -- we just gave you three things in the bill.

You should be like, oh, well, that's ridiculous.

By the way, very few mentions of the border in this.

Okay?

Call your Congressmen.

Hey, we're not around the tree yet.

Tube this bill!