RADIOJune 04, 2021

Viral dad fighting Critical Race Theory says ‘absolutely’ he was CENSORED

Glenn's choice for 'Father of the Year,' Kory Yeshua, joins the show to discuss his recent TikTok video — recorded with his daughter, Royalty — that recently went viral. In it, the adorable pair discuss why Critical Race Theory is so dangerous: it destroys children's innate ability to NOT see skin color. But despite his nearly 300k followers, Yeshua says the video has only received about 20,000 views. It's 'absolutely true,' he believes, the video was censored.

But, Glenn has a plan to help out… In the meantime, check out @koryyeshua on TikTok.

Why Tulsi Gabbard Faces a TOUGH Battle to Get Confirmed as DNI

Tulsi Gabbard faced tons of hostility in her congressional hearing as President Trump’s DNI nominee. Glenn speaks with The Federalist National Correspondent Tristan Justice, who argues that the Deep State will go after her, even if she’s confirmed. “She can’t afford to lose a single vote on the committee,” he says, and there are quite a few Republican senators on this committee who are questionable. Tristan also touches on Kash Patel's nomination hearing and RFK Jr.’s hearing, in which nearly every Democrat was hostile towards him.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: One of my favorite guests is Tristan Justice. The Federalist national correspondent. Coauthor of Fat and Unhappy.

Welcome, Tristan. How are you?

TRISTAN: Good. How are you?

GLENN: So I read your story in the Federalist, and I think it tells everything people need to know about what Tulsi Gabbard is facing. Can you -- can you relay it, your main points here for the audience?

TRISTAN: Yeah. Of course, the New York Times came out with a story that Tulsi Gabbard came under scrutiny from the Deep State for her overseas travel.

That includes intelligence that she apparently met with this leader of Hezbollah. And that is based on two anonymous terrorist sources.

And so this is really just kind of the same playbook, that they always use, whenever there's been a disruptor, threatening to change the status quo. The Deep State can and will make up, and do anything it really wants, to topple that political opponent.

The same thing they do with Donald Trump.

And now it's the same thing they do with Tulsi Gabbard, as she threatens to take over the director of National Intelligence.

GLENN: I think she has the most dangerous job. I mean, the president obviously.

But when you get into the Deep State and Intelligence, you've got spooks everywhere.

And, you know, I -- I wouldn't be -- I wouldn't be sleeping well at night.

Knowing that I was going in to take down black ops.

Take down things that nobody wants to have the light of day come on.

Even people in your own party. Would you agree with that assessment?

TRISTAN: Yeah, I mean, I think out of any of Trump's nominees, I think the one who probably has -- is probably Tulsi Gabbard.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

TRISTAN: But it's not too hard to imagine, because what she is up against.

She is running as the disruptor of the status quo that has been in Washington for decades at this point. You saw how hard the Deep State went after Donald Trump for eight years. You know, it didn't stop once the Russiagate hoax fell apart in 2018, after the Mueller Report.

So you saw host after host after host, culminating in 91 state and federal charges trying to bankrupt their political opponent.

And so I think whenever these cabinet nominees, whenever these politicians raise their hands and threaten to disrupt, that regime in Washington, you know, the nail that sticks up, gets knocked down.

That's exactly what's happening, against the Deep State.

GLENN: Right.

I mean, the church commission happened in the '70s. And it exposed all kinds of things that America didn't understand.

What her job is, as I understand it, you know, the DNI was created after 9/11.

So it is responsible for all of the agencies talking to each other. So she has access to all of the agencies.

And Trump has said to her, I want you to go in and find all the bodies that have been buried. I want to find out exactly what's going on. What's corrupt. What's not. And we will shut it down.

This is -- if people think, well, what about the CIA?

She's going to be the one leading -- how many is it?

How many agencies are there? Like 118?

No. Eighteen. Good, not 118. Eighteen intelligence agencies and bureaus.

That's a lot.

TRISTAN: Can you imagine if there would be 118 agencies and bureaus?

So we just created this massive government, Washington has just been out of control.

And when we think, that, oh, Americans might be safer with someone like Tulsi Gabbard, taking the role of DNI. And making the DNI. And the intelligence community do what it's supposed to do.

And that is protect our national security to the highest standards, while protecting our civil liberties of Americans.

And so, but, you know, Tulsi is about to go into this hearing. It probably will be a hostile hearing.

There should be no surprise on fireworks, that I think people are about to see. Hear in a couple of moments.

But I would just say this about Tulsi. She should not be going into this hearing, guns blazing as the destructor and reformer that she has campaigned on.

Because she has to convince them, that is reluctant to reform that status quo, that her top interest in running the nation's intelligence agencies is protecting our national security while safeguarding American civil liberties.

If she goes in there, guns blazing as the disruptor, and she will not score points to the very senators she has to convince with their vote.

Especially for the secret vote like this one.

GLENN: So Tristan, tell me about the Republicans that are on this committee.

How many of them do you think are interested in reform?

TRISTAN: Well, she can't afford to lose a single vote on the committee. Or else, she won't pass the committee.

But it's not unprecedented for a nominee to be voted on for the full Senate vote. While not passing the committee.

One lawmaker that people are watching here, is Senator (inaudible) called -- she had just voted against Trump's pick for the Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth last week.

She's not -- she never was intimidated to reject nominees from President Trump. There's also a number of other senators on the committee, who are questionable. Senator Todd Young, who did not support Trump.

People are saying, he -- so I think Collins and Young are the two primary senators to watch this process, continues to unfold.

GLENN: Are we going to find out. It's my understanding.

DNI. The committee vote is always a secret vote.

You will know the number. And you won't know who voted what.

But I think is an abomination. Are we going to have that vote out in the open?

Are we going to know?

TRISTAN: Well, I certainly hope it will be public and transparent. I think Americans deserve that, especially after elections where President Trump was given such a mandate.

Right?

I think his nominees should enjoy that same mandate, unless something is abjectly disqualifying, that were issued to keep them from a power position. Democrats have often picked their battles. Some of their other nominees made it through, no problem.

Sean Duffy, transportation. Doug Burgum can confirm. And these other nominees have gone through with very little drama.

Obviously, honed in on unsurprisingly the two nominees who were former Democrats, prior to this last election. Robert F Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. It seems one of their biggest defenses to Democrats, is meeting the party in the first place.

So I'm a little surprised, Democrats honed in on details in particular.

GLENN: Right. Right.

So let's talk about the other nominations.
How do you think RFK did yesterday?

TRISTAN: Well, Robert F. Kennedy as big Pharma and the chief antagonist is no surprise.

He went into another hostile hearing yesterday.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. It was insane. It was insane.

TRISTAN: But I do think there was some surprise as to how hostile Democrats were in that hearing yesterday. The hostility was near unanimous among every Democrat on that panel. And I think there was some -- at least some hope from the Trump transition team and the Kennedy's team, that they might pull a Democrat or two. But I think those hopes probably faded. And right from the getgo, when the first thing Ron Wyden did once they opened the questioning period was, enter into the Congressional Record, a letter sent from Kennedy's cousin, Carolyn Kennedy, the former ambassador to Australia with still personal hysterical attacks that Robert F. Kennedy that he has predators as pets, and putting chickens in the blender.

I mean, the fact that the Democrat-ranking member on the Senate finance committee would enter a letter full of personal attacks from a family member, said all you needed to know about how the rest of those three and a half members went for the Democrats and Kennedy.

GLENN: Is he going to make it, do you think?

TRISTAN: I think Kennedy is up in the air. I think Republicans largely showed, that they're not too willing to resist Trump's wish for this pick for Health and Human Services. I think if Republicans are going to reject Trump's pick on any of these nominees, it will probably be Tulsi Gabbard after they pose -- oppose Pete Hegseth for McConnell.

But I -- I'm not sure Kennedy is a sure thing. And I don't think Kennedy thinks he's sure in a confirmation bill either.

So I think a lot hinges on this next hearing here in a couple of moments.

GLENN: So tell me about Kash Patel.

TRISTAN: Hmm. Well, Kash Patel is running against the same apparatus of Tulsi Gabbard, of course. He hasn't faced the same level of attacks with anonymous sources, leaking to the New York Times. These terrorists are claiming, that he met with -- overseas.

GLENN: Right. Right. No pictures of him with Hitler. Yet!

So it's good.

TRISTAN: But Kash Patel, he's been a conservative media personnel for the past four years.

He's blown the whistle on some of the lies of the January 6 committee, claiming that he was formerly the chief of staff, the Department of Defense at the end of Trump's first term, and he blew the whistle on, no.

Trump did actually demand 10,000 national guard troops to the Democrats, both to the Democrats, both within the Department of Defense and running Washington, DC.

And running House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's death, reduce the president's request at every opportunity they had. And so Kash Patel, Democrats, and probably some of the Republicans, with someone more in the role of Christopher Wray.

Who was perfectly weathering to weaponize the agency, to -- to prosecute political dissidents.

And I think it's -- it's -- but Kash Patel, what Tulsi has to do today.

And that is, convince what the senator, what his top priority is.

Returning the FBI to its intended purpose. Which is to keep Americans safe, while protecting civil liberties.

GLENN: Tristan, thank you.

I'm a big fan of your writing.

And thank you for being on the program. I appreciate it.

TRISTAN: Thank you for having me.

GLENN: The Federalist National Correspondent Tristan Justice.

Will DOGE’s “Fork in the Road” Strategy Save the Government BILLIONS?

Elon Musk’s DOGE has gotten to work. Glenn and Stu discuss the “fork in the road” email that some US federal workers recently received, which is very similar to the memo that Elon sent Twitter employees after he bought it. The email offers employees a choice: either resign now and get paid until September, or probably get fired at some point. So, will this save the government billions of dollars a year?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Where should we begin, Stu? Should we start with the golden parachutes?

STU: Ah. Yes, the email.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: I mean, this is DOGE entering the chat. Right? DOGE has turned -- I don't know if it's a fully powered battle station yet, but it's definitely powering up.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, it's -- I think we're not far away from a million voices crying out and then suddenly being silenced.

STU: Right. It's kind of one of those things.

This is straight out of the Twitter playbook from Elon Musk.

GLENN: Oh, my.

It starts the same way.

In fact, do we have the fork in the road tweet.

Okay. Let me show you, the fork in the road is -- is an art piece, that Elon Musk, I guess financed in the -- looks like it's in the middle of nowhere.

STU: I didn't know --

GLENN: A giant fork sticking out of it.

STU: I had no idea this part of it.

GLENN: This is real.

STU: I know the phrase. He put a fork this a road.

GLENN: He put a giant. He had a road built, where it goes off. And there's a gigantic fork sitting in the middle of it.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So this is the thing with him.

STU: Kind of the fork in the fork.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Because the road forks by itself when it turns into the Y, but it's a fork in the fork.

You don't have to believe that, Stations.
I'm just saying that. It feels close to it, but you don't have to.

GLENN: Yeah. You use the F-word a lot.

STU: I do.

GLENN: So when he went to Twitter, he put a fork in the road memo out that said, hey. You might want to get out now.

Because it's going to be a different place here, so I'm giving you the opportunity to bail right now.

Just let me know. And he said, at the very beginning, it's a fork in the road. They have issued a memo that is almost exactly like it, except it's got a bunch of subsections. You know, 1CB.

STU: A little more legalistic.

GLENN: A little more legalistic.

But Trump is offering the people, the money to not be hit with a giant fork.

STU: Yeah. It's -- it's sort of two approaches.

One is anybody who wants to leave right now, will pay you to September.

So we'll give you --

GLENN: That's very generous.

STU: A nice eight, nine month ramp to get a gig.

If you don't work here. Please go. Of course, this combines with the hiring freeze. The idea is five, ten, 25 percent of people accept this deal, and you shrink the government employment.

And then you don't rehire those people.

This is the way you cut. This is the way he did it at Twitter. And then secondarily, it's sort of a carrot and stick approach. The carrot is, hey, we'll pay you to September for no work. It's great for you.

And then the stick is, by the way, if you stick around, we'll probably fire you anyway.

That's kind of what the tone of it is. Like, look, I'm sorry. If you stick around, we will really be cutting. So it might be you.

GLENN: This is what it actually says: During the first week of his administration, President Trump issued a number of directives concerning the federal workforce. Among those directives, the president required that employees return to in-person work.

Do you know what that number is?

How many federal employees actually show up for work, since the beginning of COVID-19?

STU: You know, I don't know the number. What is it?

GLENN: Take a guess.

STU: We're now many, many years past COVID-19, Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah. What is the number of federal workers that are actually showing up for work?

STU: I really -- I have to guess, it's very low.

But if I were just to guess, without any preknowledge, I would have to say, it's like 60. Right?

I don't know. 40 percent of people not showing up seems significant.

GLENN: The number of people not showing up to work is 94 percent.

Only 6 percent of federal workers are showing up.

STU: What? With the knowledge that it was going to be a low number, I'm shocked by that. 6 percent.

GLENN: Six. Six. It is 6 percent.

STU: No way. Is there certain categories? You go to the Pentagon right now, 94 percent empty?

That can't be true.

GLENN: I don't know about the Pentagon.

STU: Okay. Certain areas of the government.

GLENN: Well, I do know this also, that the mayor of Washington, DC, said all of our businesses are dying. And said this to Biden. You have got to get people to go back to those buildings. Or let those buildings loose.

And let's bring other businesses into Washington, DC.

STU: Because we're holding them empty, essentially.

GLENN: We're holding them empty, so there's no business on the street. Because nobody is coming in.

So restaurants are going out. Shops that aren't for tourists, are all going out.

STU: Now, complete economic destruction happened to Washington, DC, would you be able to tell the difference, I guess is the question.

We were just there.

GLENN: No. I think if there was a raging wildfire, I'm not sure I could tell the difference.

Among those directives, the president required employees to return to work in person. Restored accountability for employees, who have policy-making authority.

Let me hang on. I think I hear the knives sharpening here. Restored accountability for senior career executives, and reformed the federal hiring process to focus on merit.

As a result of the above orders, the reform of the federal workforce will be significant. Want out?

STU: Yeah, take your out now.

And like, just a couple of things.

GLENN: I would.

STU: It's interesting. He sent it to everyone.

Basically said, none of you are essential. Any one of you can be replaced. Which is a message you send.

Important message.

You're not too important, essentially. I know you've worked here for a few decades. You're a career employee and all that. It doesn't mean anything anymore.

That's one message it sends. If you put yourself in a position of, you're someone on the left. Who got into government. Because you have left-leaning ideas.

GLENN: Why else would you get into government?

STU: That's true.

GLENN: I can't think of a reason on the right, why they get into government, except to stop the people on the left.

STU: To stop it. And that is a real problem we have. Because it's the same thing with universities.

GLENN: Yeah, it is.

STU: We don't go in there. We don't mix it up in those areas, and then they take them over.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: But let's say, you're someone who leans left. You get in there, you think, you support all these big taxes and big government programs. And you're working on administrating them. And you realize, Trump is coming in. He will try to cut them anyway.

Do I really want to be here, supporting -- like cutting people, and not distributing this money I think is so important? Maybe I do just take it.

Just because I'm opposed, and I don't want to go through this agenda. I don't want to be responsible for these evil cuts.

So maybe I just take the money and leave.

GLENN: I think if you're a career politician or career, you know, government worker, if you've put in your time and they're going to give you, you know, really good exit package.

I don't know if you're -- if you've been there for 25 years. Do I get -- do I get my pension?

STU: Yeah. You probably do.

GLENN: So, you know, I would definitely look at it.

If I had been there for a long time. I would be like, I'm getting out now.

Because you just don't know.

You know, Vivek Ramaswamy said, we should just say, everybody with an odd Social Security number. And ends in an odd number, you're fired.

STU: What helps him here.

Because there are dumb protections built into some of these places for civil service types.

That makes it sometimes difficult to fire them.

And this is like sort of like the self-deportation option when it comes to the border.

GLENN: It is.

STU: You go. You take it. It's optional for you.

And if they do that, you not only will likely get rid of more people that will thwart your efforts. Because they typically will be able to take that deal. But you also get a portion of your cuts done, without having to make the cuts.

There are some legal questions to this.

Of course, it will get challenged. There is a clause, I think it's in the Homeland Security Act.

That allows the government to offer employees $25,000 to resign, essentially if they want to make cuts.

So that much of it is pretty much straightforward protected.

The -- when you say all the way to September, some of those numbers will go above $25,000.

And there, they might get legal challenges.

GLENN: That's amazing -- that people will challenge you.

STU: You're giving me too much money. You're giving me too much --

GLENN: That will never happen.

STU: In reality, of course, the left does not want these employees to go away.

They don't want the size of government to shrink, so they will find any legal loophole they can to challenge what he's doing.

GLENN: It will be fascinating to see the conversations of people right now in Washington, DC. That are those die-hards.

I mean, because he's doing exactly what he's doing on the border, for the government.

He's -- he is --

STU: It's the --

GLENN: We're coming for the bad guys.

And we will cut.

There is in more fooling around. There's a new sheriff in town.

He hopes, just like on the border. He will get the bad guys. But a lot of people, just like you said, will self-deport.

I don't want any part of it.

STU: Yeah. I don't want any part of it.

Not to mention, in nine months of pay. Combine that if you happen to be an entrepreneur type. Of leaving a job. Getting paid for nine months. Then getting paid for another job.

It could be great for your finances.

GLENN: If you had another job. If you knew you could get another job, you would be stupid not to.

STU: Yeah. To get paid 9 months for doing nothing.

Of course, it's taking it out of our pockets, which I'm not exactly thrilled about. But long-term, it's great!

GLENN: Yeah, if he gets enough people. It's like 100 -- 150, or $150 million a year is what they're expecting to get out of this. That's a lot of savings.

STU: Hmm. Hmm.

I mean, it's a drop in the bucket, unfortunately.

GLENN: No, I know it is. I know it is.

STU: $150 a year is a pretty small acceptance.

GLENN: A million or billion.

As I said that, you don't pay attention. Million, billion. It doesn't matter anymore.

STU: Just wait until the quadrillions hit. Then you'll know. Then you'll know.

GLENN: And million will seem like.

You know, it's like -- it used to be like, they're a millionaire. And then it became, they're worth like 100 million dollars. And then it became, they're a billionaire.

It's going to be soon. They're a trillionaire.

STU: You knew we would cross that line, when Bernie Sanders needed to take millionaires out of his speeches. Because he used to say millionaires and billionaires.

Now he says billionaires because he's a millionaire.

And it's like hilarious that Mr. Socialist, with his multiple houses, can't even criticize millionaires anymore.

GLENN: Right!

Because he's most likely a millionaire.

STU: He is, 100 percent.

GLENN: I mean, how does a socialist get that?

STU: I mean, he's making a decent six figure salary and has been forever. He has multiple houses.

Just the equity in those homes, I'm sure, makes him a millionaire.

You know, I mean, he's pretty -- he wants to spend everyone else's money. If he spends like that in his own life.

He doesn't seem to be all that -- he doesn't seem to take advantage with fancy cars or anything like that, that we know of.

But he has a couple nice houses. He saves on hair products, that's for sure.

Trump Team Reveals the TRUTH About the New Jersey Drones

The Trump Team is handling the media amazingly, and Glenn and Stu have the highlights. They review the first press conference for White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and her big revelation about the mysterious New Jersey drones: the government knew about and authorized them. So, why did the Biden administration not tell us that?! It’s time for the truth to be revealed about this and much more, Glenn says, including about who was running the government during the Biden administration and who forced Joe Biden out of the 2024 election.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's just first start with how I think how competent this administration is. All of the people that are being put into roles. How competent they are.

Let's start with an interview, with Stephen Miller.

With Jake Tapper. I mean, you can see the disgust in Jake Tapper's face. He's -- hmm, he's -- he's pretty transparent. Listen to this.

VOICE: How does President Trump make sure that the effort to deport people who are not in this country, legally, doesn't end up hurting Americans who want safe borders, absolutely. But also, don't want to see even more higher prices in groceries.

VOICE: Well, I'm sure it's not your position, Jake. Just asking the question. That we should supply America's food. With exploitative illegal labor. Obviously that's what you're applying. One percent of alien workers in the entire country work in agriculture. The top destination for illegal aliens are large cities like New York, like Los Angeles, and small industrial towns, of course all across the heartland, as we've seen with the Biden flights. None of those illegal aliens are doing farm works. Those 30,000 illegal aliens that Joe Biden dumped into Springfield --

VOICE: Yeah. I'm talking about the --

VOICE: No, no, no. But I'm explaining this to you. It's important to understand.

VOICE: No, you're kind of changing the subject.

GLENN: Is he changing the subject?

STU: Not really. Yeah.

VOICE: You and your audience.

VOICE: I'm talking about the ones that could -- that work in the agriculture industry.

I'm not talking about the ones in the city, I swear.

VOICE: I'll do the whole answer!

The illegal aliens that Joe Biden brought into our country are not, full-stop, doing farm work.

They are not!

The illegal aliens he brought in from Venezuela, from Haiti, from Nicaragua. They are not doing farm work. They are inner cities collecting welfare.

As for the farmers, there is a guest worker program that President Trump supports.

Over time, as well, you will transition into automation, so you will never have to have this conversation ever again.

But there's no universe in which --

GLENN: Look how disgusted his face is. Jake Tapper.

VOICE: -- to flood our nation with millions of illegal aliens, who just get to stay here.

GLENN: I think that is a totally reasonable answer.

And I really think that we should start asking people about farm labor and cheap labor, and they're using that as a defense.

Oh! I'm sorry. I didn't realize we were in the 1850s, again.

Okay. So you have no -- no problem with exploiting people, as long as they're out picking your food. Okay. I've got it. I just want to understand where you're coming from. Because that is what they are arguing.

STU: It's amazing too. The media really hates Donald Trump. I'm not breaking news with that.

But they may hate Stephen Miller more. They can't stand him!

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: And I will say, you may not agree with Stephen Miller's opinion on these things.

He knows this stuff really well.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: You're not going to -- he knows immigration issues. These are the issues that got him to the position that he's in.

And you're not going to get on there, and stump him on that stuff.

GLENN: And I think everyone needs to learn from what this administration is saying.

They've been saying for the last couple of days is: Are you okay -- I just want to be on the record with you.

Are you okay saying that we should exploit people for cheaper prices?

I just -- because it puts you -- it puts the Democrats where they have always been, since the 1800s. Yes.

It's going to affect our life, if we get rid of these slaves. Yes. It's going to affect my lawn care prices. It's going to affect my food prices. My orange prices.

Okay! That's fine.

I just want to make sure that I understand clearly, that that is where you stand. Because then we can take a conversation, honestly, now, and we can talk about two things.

Is that right for you to think that? Or does that kind of put you back into the old-timey days with slavery?

STU: Even if -- it's one of those things that even if it made the prices go up slightly.

It will be the type of thing that Americans will be okay with.

They didn't like the slavery thing. I think we're off that bandwagon.

GLENN: And it's different.

Because I have an Apple product. Okay. I have Apple products in my house. I know those are made by slaves. I hate that. But it's the best product. And how I justify it, in my head.

And this is exactly the thing they did in the 1800s, as well.

I justified in my head, well, I'll never be able to change China.

Not going to change China. And we are working to change China, in any way we can.

STU: Also -- context also matters there. A lot of the jobs that we -- again, slavery, it was a is specific thing. We compare a lot of things to slavery. To be clear, even illegal immigrants here, are not slaves. Typically. Some of them are. Some of them are, probably.

GLENN: But it's still exploitation of people for cheaper prices.

STU: And I will say, especially when you're talking about China, and products in other countries, you have to put context into it.

You know, the pay that they get there, if it were here, would be terrible! If it's there, lots of times, it's the best job in the area.

That's not always true. It's something that you have to consider.

GLENN: Yeah. So now let's go to the new press secretary.

Caroline Leavitt. She was I thought really, really good yesterday.

She did seem a little nervous.

When you're walking into a shark tank --

STU: To be expected, your first day. Right?

GLENN: Absolutely.

But I thought she did really well.

At first, she started the press conference with some breaking news about the drones. Cut three.

VOICE: And before I turn to questions, I do have news directly to the president of the United States. That was just shared with me in the Oval Office.

From President Trump directly.

An update on the New Jersey drones.

After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons. Many of these drones were also hobbyists, recreational, and private individuals, that enjoy flying drones. In the meantime -- in time, it got worse due to curiosity. This was not the enemy.

A statement from the president of the United States, to start his briefing with some news.

GLENN: How do you feel about that? That answer?

STU: I mean, you know me. I don't --

GLENN: That's where you were.

STU: That's kind of where I was. Kind of where I figured it would land. Now, those are words directly from President Trump's mouth. I don't know why he would lie about it.

GLENN: I don't think he would.

STU: I don't think he would. I'm not shocked where that lands.

GLENN: I'm not satisfied. And I know President Trump is not satisfied with these things either. That's a good opening statement. What I would like to see is the transparency of, here are the documents from the FAA approving these things. I don't need to know what they were testing. But here's what they said.

The -- the Biden administration decided to close that down, because -- or, you know, not tell you about this.

Not spread these to the American people.

I don't know why. Maybe it's they cause chaos.

But they were also very incompetent on a lot of things. So I don't know why it wasn't verified.

But I would like to see the documentation. It would help, because we don't trust anything anymore.

I do trust Donald Trump to tell us the truth. Because I do believe he -- he answers to us. I do believe that. He doesn't have an ulterior motive.

I think the -- I think the shooting, honestly, proved that out.

STU: For people -- I mean, you were -- I wouldn't say the biggest, you know, theorist of this.

But you were concerned and asked a lot of questions. There are people who are much, much more deeply into this, than you were.

What's the reaction from that side? Do they buy that?

GLENN: No.

STU: I mean, a lot of them like Trump.

GLENN: No. I think -- here's where I would go in my mind, is, well, Trump is saying that, because of national security.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: He can't say anything else. You know what I mean?

I think you've got to -- you will go down a road. And that's why I say, I would like to see the documentation. Just show me the documentation, so we can write these things off.

We're talking to comber next hour. And it's the same kind of thing.

I don't care if people are arrested anymore. I just want to know the truth. And I want to see it in documents. I want the proof of what was going on.

I want to know who was running the White House, and our country, in the last six months.

STU: I'm with you on that.

GLENN: I think that's really important.

STU: Huge one. We have these big things. We just kind of stop.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: You know, the -- there is some news on this that broke the other day.

But like, the lab leak, COVID situation. Like just -- China just gets away with this. Is that how this works?

Like we just -- you know, 25 million people died in the world. And we will just be like, oh, man.

Remember that whole story of the Pangolins? Like we will try to shrug our shoulders, and let that go on.

We all lost a year of our lives, and we will be like, you know. What's the big deal?

I mean, I don't know exactly how you punish them. I know Trump is obviously very focused on.

Not only punishment, but also getting answers on this stuff. But we can't just let that go.

GLENN: I don't think he is. With the stopping all funding on everything to make sure for 90 days. We want to make sure that this is all in line with the agenda of the United States.

But also, I think it was over the weekend.
He stopped any communication from NIH, CDC. Any of these organizations.

GLENN: Yeah.

You are not to change your website. You are not to make any statements on, hey, we just did a research study. Nothing. You do nothing, until we get a handle on what's really going on.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I think that's really good.

STU: I'm not saying, that wasn't a Trump criticism.

GLENN: No. I know.

STU: It's a society criticism. We do tend to just move on from this stuff. China, especially here.

If the foundation of all of that chaos, was them letting this out of this lab. Which I believe it was, there has to be ramifications for that. Same thing with the last six months. Six months isn't long enough.

The last year, year and a half of the Biden administration.

Where we have multiple well-reported news stories, saying that at least six people, inside Joe Biden's inner circle, actively hid what he was doing behind the scenes, so that he could win that election.

That's not okay. We have -- something has to be done about what happened there.

We need to know. I want to know -- I want every single text, from those six people when they were planning that out.

GLENN: I want to know.

I want to know, not only who ran the government. But also, who actually forced him out?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Who was the one that actually. Was it Nancy Pelosi?

Was it Kamala?

Was it Barack Obama?

How did that actually come down?

STU: Oh, it will be incredible. Someone will actually write a book about it.

GLENN: I'm telling you, the corruption that has happened in the last four years, the American people may not understand it, but they've got a pretty good gut. They knew something is really wrong.

And it -- you know, I think Tulsi Gabbard, DNI position, if she -- I think she's going to be the one that has the hardest time getting through.

I think everything else, before this, was, you know, rookies. Compared to what they are going to do to her. And this vote is secret. Hmm.

I've got a problem with that. We'll get into that here in just a second.

But that DNI position is I believe, and Kash Patel's position at DOJ.

Those are two of the most important. Or FBI.

The two of the most important positions.

Because they will be. You will be able to see. And they can unlock doors.

And we have a chance at a church commission.

Which must happen!

Is THIS the Answer to Trump's Cartel Problem?

How should President Trump handle the Mexican cartels? Glenn is “in love with” an idea that Sen. Mike Lee proposed: Hidden deep within the Constitution is a clause that allows the government to let private citizens basically act like pirates against hostile forces … MAGA pirates?! Sen. Lee joins Glenn to explain what “letters of marque and reprisal” are, why the government hasn’t used them in centuries, and whether Trump can issue them to stop the cartels.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Boy, there are no crazy ideas, right now. It is an interesting time to be alive, in America.

Senator Mike Lee is joining me now.

Yesterday, he proposed using letters of marque and reprisal to weaken the drug cartels.

And I -- I mean, I'm in love with this old timey constitutional idea. But it basically would make private citizens or companies. It would give them permission to kind of be like pirates.

Where they could just go and bust them up.

And take all their booty.

As long as they share it with the United States.

It would be great. It would be cheaper.

And we wouldn't have to put our military in harm's way. Mike Lee joins me now.

Mike, explain the letters of marque and reprisal.

MIKE: A letter of marque and reprisal amounts to a government-issued commission of sorts, authorizing private citizens, known as privateers, to perform acts that would otherwise be considered piracy, like attacking enemy ships during wartime.

And privateers are typically rewarded with a cut of whatever loot they will bring home.

But they're able to make it back to the United States, and bring home assets that can be sold, liquidated, reduced to an economic value, then the government sets up what's called a prize court, which decides who gets what.

And typically, the government keeps half of it. And then has -- has a system for giving the privateers involved in it. Each -- each -- their fair share, of the 50 percent.

GLENN: So -- so these guys.

Let's say Eric Prince -- Eric Prince loves this idea. He was like, I'm all in.

He would go down to the border, and he would, what?

Break up the cartels, by -- as they're shipping stuff across the border. Grab their cash. Their guns. Their cash. They're using boats, whatever.

And the drugs. And then give those to the government. And the government would say, okay. Eric, this part is yours.

MIKE: Yeah. Now to be clear, when you say the border, we're talking outside the United States.

I don't think this works for things found in the United States. But if outside the United States, they recover assets, typically, what we would be looking at are assets that could be liquidated by the government.

Gold, silver, cash, equipment.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

MIKE: If they can bring those things back into the United States, then they can be sold.

It also raises the question of the drugs. You notice, they won't allow those to be sold.

So you either will have exclude those, or the government would just have to go out of pocket to reward them for bringing that back in.

And that's one of the things that have to be discussed.

This is a tool that hasn't been used by the United States for a long time.

But it's a tool that harnesses, you know, self-interest. It harnesses what people could gain by this, in a way that could be really advantageous for the United States.

GLENN: Boy, I have to tell you, I love this idea.

Donald Trump Jr loves this idea.

But it does seem like something that Mexico would hate.
(laughter)

MIKE: Sure. Sure. It depends on who you are talking about with Mexico. Hard-working, independent, Mexican citizens who have lived under the tyranny of these cartels who have been affected by the violence, that is rampant throughout the country.

And sponsored by the cartels.

A lot of them would perhaps not have much an objection. If any objection at all.

Because they want to be free of this stuff.

But, yeah. I can imagine that the Mexican government might have feelings about it.

GLENN: Yeah.

MIKE: But this is different. This is different in the sense, that it's not the United States, undertaking any kind of effort to have a military presence in Mexico. Which would, of course, be unacceptable to Mexico.

This is about private citizens, going out and trying to seize assets, of these chair organizations.

Of this international criminal enterprise, bring it back to the United States. With the understanding, that they will be entitled to a cut of about half of it, once they get back.

GLENN: So one thing that I was thinking before this idea was, we're going to send in SEAL teams.

And they'll just be gone before the sun comes up, and you will never know who did it. And there will just be a lot of dead cartel members laying there in the sun, as it starts to rise.

And, you know, Mexico will hate that. But as long as we're gone in the morning, I mean, we've -- we've deemed them a terrorist organization. Don't we have the right to do that?

Well, once that happens, you can imagine, there might be circumstances in which that would occur.

But again, a letter of marque and reprisal allows to avoid doing that, that creates an additional set of difficulties for us, that we wouldn't face if we were sending -- if we were authoring privateers to do that. It matters to the degree, of course.

But it would be foolish for us to assume, that our only option involves sending in the Marines, so to speak.

US boots on the ground has a very different feel than privateers going in and doing something on their own.

And it's one of the reasons why I felt important enough, I put out a thread for my at base Mike Lee account, in which I explained a brief history of letters of marque and reprisal. How they function, and that they ought to be considered here.

GLENN: So, I mean, I really like it.

And I like the fact. I mean, I'm for anything constitutional.

Anything extra constitutional, I'm against. But this is literally in the Constitution, that you can do this.

But it seems old timey. You know, it does -- does anybody do this anymore?

MIKE: No. And the United States hasn't done it arguably.

GLENN: In over 100 years.

MIKE: In a couple hundred years.

GLENN: Yeah.

MIKE: But the focus of this, would be something that I think may well be perfectly suited for our time. And for this situation.

Focus on disrupting supply lines. Capturing high value targets.

Or seizing assets like boats, vehicles, cash, gold. Equipment used in criminal activities.

Because we all know, you know, private entities and individuals can operate with a degree of agility, that you can't replicate in government.

Allowing them to adapt quite quickly.

To the tactics of the cartels. And to max those.

GLENN: But what would other countries say?

Is anybody using this country anymore? It used to happen, when there were pirates. With the black flag. With the bones on it.

Does anybody use anything like this anymore? What would they say, if we started?

I don't really say, but what would they say?

GLENN: Not aware of any countries using them right now. And I'm sure there are countries where they say, this violates this or that principle of international law, either of some treaty, that we haven't ratified or of what they refer to as customary international law, which is a fancy way of saying, people don't do this anymore.
And so, therefore, it violates international law.

But all of that is beside the point. If it is within our authority to do this, and if we haven't forsworn the authority through some treaty that we have ratified, which I'm quite certain we have not.

So that's why this is a tool that we shouldn't take off the table. And it's -- they may have well come. We haven't used it in a long time.

But where has -- we have a different type of adversary, than we sometimes face in the past.

This is not the government of Mexico.

But these are criminal organizations, within Mexico, that have an international footprint. That affect the United States.

And that have taken actions that are hostile to the interests of the United States, and her citizens.

So with this circumstance, would it be irresponsible of us, not to consider it.

And I think we ought to explore this. And perhaps issue some letters of marque and reprisal.

The fact that it hasn't happened in a long time, likely since the 1800s, doesn't mean that the power does not exist. And certainly does not mean that we couldn't benefit from it.

GLENN: Right. Right. Mike, I love this idea.

I hope it gains some traction. Just because, it will make Mexico. You know, I was talking to my wife the other night about this.

She would say, what would Mexico say?

And I said, you know, just like you said, the people of Mexico will love this.

Because they're tired of this. You would know pretty quickly, who is under the thumb of the cartels. And who is not.

Just like we would with our government. If someone is coming in and saying, hey, you've got terrorist organizations. And we will take them out.

If we knew them to be terrorist organizations. I think, you know, we might say. Well, come on now. We can take care of that.

But if they could do it, for us. I'm all for that. I would be all for that.

The people who would be against are the ones really under the thumb of the cartels.

And the people of Mexico, should know who those people are. As if they don't already know.

Mike, one last went. How do you think RFK will fare in the Senate?

RON: Look, he faces a tough fight. Democrats are institutionally inclined to oppose anyone, who was at once part of their party. And has moved in the other direction.

Particularly with someone with as prominent a name as RFK Jr has. And particularly someone who has shown a degree of contempt for the Deep State. For the administrative state.

For things that have gone wrong.

And so we're going to have to -- rely on. My hope is that we can pick up some democratic votes.

GLENN: You're for him?

MIKE: We have to assume that we won't be able to do to. And we will need to produce enough Republicans to make sure he gets through. Just we did with Pete Hegseth.

It will be a tight vote there. I do think he can get through. But it's by no means certain, and that's why we have to line up behind him to support him.

GLENN: Wow. And you're for him?

MIKE: Oh, 100 percent. I had a great meeting with him the other day. And I think he brings to the table, an innovative approach with a fresh set of eyes that can see, that we've created a lot of problems through our own government.

The very department that he's been asked to head, as the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Has been a big part of the problem.

He recognizes that. That's exactly why we need him in there.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

And our other nominees is -- is Kash Patel going to get through?

MIKE: Yeah. So similarly, to what we face with RFK, with Kash Patel and also with --

GLENN: Tulsi.

MIKE: Tulsi Gabbard.

We're going to have to confront both of those with the expectation, that we may not get a single democratic vote.

And so that's why Republicans are so important. Remember, it's unusual for an incoming president to not have his top level picks supported by pretty much every member of the president's own party in confirmation votes.

And we've -- we've got to remember that. So a lot of the same people, who are on the list of those who might oppose them. Are people who time and time again, voted to confirm democratic nominees.

Named by President Biden.

I hope they will give Republican nominees, nominated by President Trump, at least the same degree of deference, that they give to those nominated by President Biden.

Often, by the way, with the justification, that he is the elected president.

We -- we can't run the world as if our guy were president.

Well, if that's the case. It should be the case here.

GLENN: Well, that's a nice way of saying, what I believe, which is vote these weasels out, if they -- if they fail to support the president.

We have one shot at this.

And so far, Donald Trump and those who are supporting him, are doing amazing things in the first week.

Things that I never thought that I would see.

And I for one, am excited about it. Mike, appreciate it very much.

Senator Mike Lee.