RADIOJanuary 23, 2024

Is THIS why Amy Coney Barrett sided with BIDEN on the border?

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Biden administration CAN cut Texas’ razor wire at the southern border. But why would Trump-appointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett side with Biden on this issue? Senator Mike Lee joins Glenn to give his thoughts: Is this all a political game? Sen. Lee also reminds listeners that this SCOTUS decision doesn’t stop Texas from doing anything — it only allows the White House to thwart Gov. Abbott’s actions. “Is the Biden administration really, seriously, with a straight face going to say, ‘cut the wires?’” Sen. Lee asks. And how should Texas and Americans react if they had to decide between securing the border and defying the rule of law?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Senator Mike Lee.

Because I will lead and not follow.

I believe and not doubt. I will create, not destroy.

Because I'm a force for good. I'm a force for God.

I'm a leader. And we can defy the odds.

I need your help today.

In understanding the news, and where we go from here.

Because if it's -- if it's not this, it will be something, because we're facing constitutional crisis, after constitutional crisis.

And I am -- I am not sure how to react.

But I know there's a lot of people saying, this is out of line. We should ignore the Supreme Court.

But that makes us them. But what else are you going to do.

First, let's go over what the Supreme Court decided yesterday, Mike.

MIKE: Okay. So yesterday, the Supreme Court issued an order, not an opinion. Just a very brief order, undoing an order that was released by the US Court of Appeals, for the Fifth Circuit, on December 19th.

Now, remember, the Courts of Appeals are -- are numbered throughout the company.

The Fifth Circuit includes the state of Texas.

And the -- the Fifth Circuit, on December 19th. Had issued an order, enjoining the widen administration.

From taking down barriers, put in place, by the state of Texas.

The state of Texas wanted to make sure that -- that they restore some semblance of the rule of law in their state. So put up barriers along the border. Say, we don't want to do this. The Biden administration started taking actions indicating its plans to take down the concertina wire and the other barriers.

So Texas brought suit against the Department of Homeland Security.

And others in the Biden administration.

And said, we want an injunction, telling them, telling the Biden administration, that they may not take down these barriers. The Fifth Circuit Court of appeals, on December 19th, issued such an injunction.

And immediately, the Biden administration, went to the Supreme Court.

And filed an emergency application, to vacate that injunction.

In other words, to undo it.

And they offered a portion of the order from yesterday.

Is just found in a sentence.

It's inclusive of a total of four sentences.

But this one is the operative language.
The December 19th, 2023, order of appeals for the Fifth Circuit is vacated. That's it!

And there's a separate line that says, Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would have denied the application to vacate the junction.

So with that, the Supreme Court of the United States undid this.

What this tells this. It was chief justice Roberts, along with Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Jackson, who was in the majority on this.

And that's all we know about their rationale. All we know about what happened.

So all of a sudden, Texas, having won this litigation.

The previous round of litigation in the Court of Appeals.

Is back to square one. Being told, you lose.

And yet, we don't have the analysis as to why, and what this means.

And everything is in a state of disorder.

GLENN: So, first of all, can you explain Barrett's joining the other side.

I mean, any guess to what she was thinking.

MIKE: Yeah. So all I can do is guess. All I can do is offer conjecture. Because there's no analysis.

If I were to guess.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

Before you go on. Is that up usual. That there was no analysis?

MIKE: It's not unusual. Given the procedural posture in which they find themselves.

In other words, this side of the court's docket. The emergency application court's docket. Is itself something that the justices have to do. As they're doing their other ordinary business. If they're writing opinions in other cases. And they -- they -- because the nature of it. It's a yes or no, up or down thing, most of the time.

So that part is not surprising.

But it's surprising, given the nature of this dispute. And the complexity, and urgency of this. That we would have this.

It's at least difficult to figure out what to do.

So if I had to guess, as to what her analysis might have been. And that of Chief Justice Roberts, it would be that they reached some kind of conclusion. That, you know, we don't want the courts to be weaponized.

We don't want to be perceived certainly as justices as playing only on the team of the political party of the presence who appointed us. And therefore, I, we, speaking, you know, either as justice -- either as chief justice Roberts, or justice Barrett, or both of them.

We're going to decide to side with the Democrats on this one. So that we don't overpoliticize this. But I really find that difficult. To grasp. That they would do it in that circumstance.

And yet, I don't see a good reason. I don't see an explanation, that makes a lot of sense.

It goes much beyond that.

Because I don't understand why it's a bad thing, to have the state of Texas, trying to protect the people of Texas from these swarms of people, who are pouring from across their borders.

Without documentation.

And destroying property along the way. Converting property. As if it were their own.

And destroying it, as they -- as they cross in illegally.

I don't understand what the compelling need is.

Or what principle of law would be violated, by the state of Texas.

Trying to protect the people of Texas.

GLENN: Let me ask you something, the Constitution says that it is the -- the federal government's job to protect the borders.

But they're not doing their job, obviously.

In fact, they're enabling those people trying to come in. And they are enabling drug cartels. Drugs coming over. Killing our citizens.

Criminals coming over. We know terrorists have come over now.

They're enabling those who rape and sell into sex slavery.

I mean, it's -- it's bad stuff. It's not even close.

And what the justices are saying is, Texas, you don't have the right to protect your own borders. That's our job.

Let me -- let me ask you: If a military came over. Let's say these 10 million people all had military uniforms.

But, you know, only a few of them had guns.

Examine it was clear this was an invasion by an army.

And the federal government decided to say, eh. No. They can keep crossing in.

Would they have the right, to say to Texas, or anybody else, you don't have the right to have a militia, or, you know, call up your National Guard. And push these people back?

Is the Constitution a suicide pact?

MIKE: Certainly not. And specifically, in that kind of circumstance, it wouldn't be. There are two separate provisions of the Constitution, to tell us this.

One is found in article four, section four.

Which says, that the United States shall guarantee every state or Republican form of government

And on application of a state, typically the legislature.

Shall protect each of them from invasion.

So that's an affirmative obligation by the United States.

To protect each state from invasion.

Now, if there's also a -- something that defends in the Constitution. Separate right of the state. To stand up for itself. Upon being invaded.

And that's found in article one, section ten. Clause three.

Once in the provision, that tells the states, a bunch of stuff, that they can't do on their own, without the consent of Congress.

But then contains a carve-out for circumstances in which a state is actually invaded.

GLENN: Yeah. But the only the difference in one scenario -- the only -- the only difference is, in these two scenarios, is 10 million people are coming over.

Not in uniform.

But that's it. I mean, it's an invasion.

MIKE: Right. That's right. And it's no less of an invasion simply because they're not organized formerly, as a military or we don't think of them. They were not a military.

But it's an invasion, nonetheless.

Throughout history, there have been instances of invasions of many countries, around the world. Some are armed, organized invasions. Others are not.

But it's an invasion nonetheless. They are being invaded by people who don't belong there.

And people who have threatened to subvert the order of things.

And the rule of law. As they enter. So the fact that there is an invasion, and the fact that the state of Texas feels the need to protect its own citizens from this. Puts Texas, in my view, in a very solid position.

Now, I assume, that for the four justices who dissented, that is, for Justices Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch, that was their rationale. We are all still grasping to understand what the rationale of the majority is.

Other than as you say, immigration is the thing, that is done by the federal government. And it's not done by the state of Texas.

Therefore, case closed. But that doesn't answer the question. That doesn't answer the article one, section ten. Or the article four, section four question, that we just discussed. And as a practical matter, it leaves the state of Texas, in an untenable position.

GLENN: Okay. So now, Mike, I -- I -- we have to have a serious adult conversation.

And we have to start modeling these conversations, and having these conversations.

And have them as rationale, reasonable citizens of a republic. And as adults.

And if you as a listener can't handle that, then you should go away. Because I think some questions need to be asked. And if not now, very soon on whatever the next topic might be.

You know, Mike, there was a guy named Martin Luther King. I know you know.

And he -- he taught people how to resist peacefully.

And nobody is teaching that. Nobody is pushing for that. Pastors are all out to lunch.

But there are people now, who are saying, we need to go. In fact, could you read Tucker Carlson's tweet? From yesterday.

STU: I don't have that handy, but --

GLENN: Look for it. Basically, he says, where are the men of Texas, standing up.

Well, the men of Texas standing up, I don't know exactly what that means, Tucker.

Because many of us are standing up, and we're speaking out.

At what point do people, are people justified at all to say, yeah. It makes me kind of like them. But we have to stop this.

So, in other words, defying the Supreme Court, and just doing it anyway.

I don't like that.

MIKE: No. But look, the rule of law is important to us.

It's the whole reason why Texas is trying to take this action to begin with. Is to preserve the rule of law.

And for that reason, everything possible needs to be done to comply with the rule of law. And if it means going along with a court order, that one doesn't like, and finding other ways to be persuasive to get something done.

But keep in mind something, Glenn. The Supreme Court's order from yesterday, does not order the state of Texas to do anything.

As I read it. All it says, is that they vacate, the fifth circuit's order, from the 19th of December.

Which had itself, enjoined, the Biden administration from taking down the barricades.

So there's nothing affirmatively that the state of Texas has to do in order to comply with this order from the Supreme Court.

It just lifts the legal impediment from the Biden administration.

That previously told them, don't take down the barricades.

GLENN: Right.

MIKE: So one interesting question is, what exactly will the Biden administration do now?

Is the Biden administration really, seriously, with a straight face. Are they going to say, yes. Cut the wires. Remove all the concertina wire and do all that?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

MIKE: Glenn, remember something. We have seen in the last month, more people pouring across our border, unlawfully.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

MIKE: Than has ever been observed.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

MIKE: In our nearly two and a half centuries of existence as a nation.

And our Border Patrol agents, and everybody else, who works with them, on this. They're all overwhelmed.

I've been down at the border. Just in the last few weeks alone.

I've lived down at the border. For two years.

I know this area well.

Are they really going to say, this is where we want our efforts focused to be going New Testament, removing barricades. Whose sole purpose is to protect people in the state of Texas. And, frankly, even people who are being human traffic along the border.

Are they really going to say, that's where they are. Bring up the wire cutters. Stop everything else. Stop everything that you're doing.

GLENN: They've already done that, Mike. They've already done that. They were cutting the wires in Texas.

What makes you think they won't do that.

MIKE: They were cutting them. They had to stop for three weeks. In the meantime, Texas put down a whole lot more wire.

And they've got more wire now.

I mean, this really would be a massive undertaking.

And if after -- after the month of December, 2023. Just last month. Are they really going to go back in, and undertake that huge effort again?

If so, this raises all kinds of other questions.

And if so, I think this could end up being the very best thing that a single greatest momentum of producing exercise for the Donald Trump campaign.

Because this is a president of the United States, who loves lawlessness, if this is true the way he wants to do it. And we have to make that point loud and clear.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

"Everything is For Sale" — How the Cartels Control Mexico's Government

It is widely accepted that the cartels in Mexico not only control significant swaths of land, but they also have incredible influence over how the country's government operates. Border Expert Brandon Darby sits down with Glenn Beck to explain exactly why this is the case and what the Trump administration's strategy truly needs to be in order to crush these powerful cartels.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Brandon Darby HERE

We're being played. THIS is the REAL threat to America

Conservatives in America are being divided over the wrong things. Glenn Beck asks: Who’s the real threat to America: Sen. Mike Lee, who wants to sell 3% of federally-owned land to states and cities, or the rising radical communist wing of the Democratic Party, who recently chose Zohran Mamdani as their NYC mayoral candidate?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to talk to you about the enemy being clear. Crystal clear!

But I'm not sure to everybody.

I'm so sick and tired of us turning on each other.

We saw it with Elon Musk and Donald Trump. I like both men. Can we stop?

Thankfully, they did.

You're seeing it with Trump's bombing of Iran. Where you were either a Jew-loving Zionist or raging anti-Semite, or if you're me.

Both!

And then there's something that really caught me off-guard. The people who are turning on Utah Senator Mike Lee over a housing proposal, he's had this housing proposal since 2022.

But if you go on X, you're going to learn, apparently Mike Lee, one of the most Constitutional loving conservatives I know, wants to sell off our national parks and forest.

You know, he was probably in Coeur d'Alene lighting the matches, because he hates our forest so much. He wants to make sure you never get to hunt.

All he wants to do is take away your fishing and hunting rights. And build cheap housing complexes. Amazon warehouses. And whatever China and BlackRock want.

You know, I addressed this a few weeks ago. I invited Mike to clarify where he stands. Because some of my family are very concerned.

You can find the segments on my YouTube channel. Go and subscribe to my YouTube channel. Will you please? But since then, apparently, there's a crusade out to cancel Senator Lee.

There have been a few major updates. So today, let me just take a look at just the facts here, where we stand on this right now.

Over the weekend, Mike Lee decided to withdraw his federal land sale provision from the big, beautiful bill.

He said, quote, while this has been a tremendous amount of misinformation, and in some cases, outright lies about my bill. Many people brought forward sincere concerns.

Because of the strict constraints of the budget reconciliation process, I was unable to secure clear, enforceable safeguards to guarantee, these lands would never be sold.

Only to American families. Not to China. To not BlackRock.

And never to any foreign interests.

Wow! What a shill for the globalists, right?

Or maybe how it should work. Members of Congress propose something presented to the people. And then they listen to the community. Instead of just insisting, we have to pass it, to know what's in it.

And I didn't hear this kind of outcry for that!

Here's one of the bigger issues here. We're speaking two different languages.

A lot of criticism online is that Mike Lee wants to sell off our public lands!

Our public lands. Pragmatism to a lot of Americans, those lands are the lands we use for recreation. And hiking. And haunting. And fishing.

And things like that. That's whatnot he wanted to sell. And he promised to make that much clearer in the revised bill.

Now, let me remind you, on the public lands. President Biden, under his administration. The federal government was ordered to conserve 30 percent of our lands. And our waters by 2030. So apparently, our public lands are being gobbled up even more.

That's another, I think six percentage points. Another 6 percent of the entire land in the United States, going to be seized by the federal government, by 2030. And it falls directly in line with the UN's 30 by 30 plan.

It's an initiative for governments to seize 30 percent of all land and water by 2030. Now, do you think the UN wants to give you more hunting and fishing land?

Do you think they're all for that? Or do you think these radical environmentalists want to restrict your access in the name of fighting climate change?

By the way, current -- currently, the US government owns 640 million acres of land. That's nearly a third of the country. So they've almost met that 30 by 30 goal.

And they will meet it, and then what's next? The 50 by 50 UN goal.

And in order to seize the rest of the land, there's the Sustains Act that passed. Do you know about this? I didn't hear about any outcry for this.

Where was the right on this one? It was enacted in 2023, allows the government to receive private funds to advance conservation programs.

So BlackRock, if they wanted to, could buy up the conservation lands! Does your property contribute to pollination, photosynthesis. The air we breathe. The water we drink?

Well, as I -- as I exposed, on a show back in September, the Sustains Act allows all of that to be monetized through the relationship of private investors like Bill Gates. And the government!

And it occurs without the landowners permission.

So they can take your land. Or tell you exactly what you want to do, or what they want you to do on that land, what you cannot do on that land, because photosynthesis happens.

Where was I?

Where were you on that?

This is the real seizing of American assets.

This is the real seizing of American assets, by the global corporations. That you were all so afraid of!

Mike Lee, oh, my gosh.

What about the Sustains Act?

In his revised bill. Which he's still working on.

Lee has promised to remove all forest land. Good. Significantly reduce the amount of BLM land in the bill.

Good. Only land within 5 miles of population centers is eligible.

Yeah. But when he gets that, then he'll build buildings there, and then he'll have another five.

And next thing you know, he will be putting a cap on -- on Old Faithful.

He'll establish freedom zones to ensure these lands benefit American families. Ranchers. Recreational users. But there's a lot of claims online.

Whatever.

Charlie Kirk said, the Democrats -- this is their war on single family housing.

Hmm.

Do you remember when we talked on the program about the globalist plan of 15-minute cities. That all of BlackRock and everything else is for.

Remember when BlackRock came in, and just started buying up whole neighborhoods. Just priced every regular citizen out of the neighborhood.

Why?

Because it's part of the plan to pack the majority of humanity into easily controllable cities where everything you need is just 15 minutes away. And you never need a car. But is that the American dream?

Currently, rural land is getting so expensive. Most Americans can't afford rural land!

I know. I'm living in a place that has a population of 400 -- I think it's 51. Might have had a baby, so maybe it's 452. And nobody can afford it.

How is it possible you're living in the middle of nowhere, with a population of 451 people, and you can't afford a house!

The elites don't need Mike Lee's proposal. But take more of your land.

They're already doing that. But here's my biggest issue.

This is not about Mike Lee's proposal. Okay?

It's not.

There is a much bigger issue.

And I'll share that when I come back.

GLENN: Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. So I was talking about federal -- I want to get off that. I want to change to, instead, what the real problem here is.

What the real problem is. The real problem on the seizing of the federal lands. Is that we are so quick to turn on ourselves.

We are so quick, lately, to turn on our -- our allies.

See, that's -- the issue isn't Mike Lee's proposal.

It's how fast we turn on each other!

If you believe Mike Lee's proposal didn't go far enough to safeguard our land from adversaries. Great!

That's fine. And, you know what, you won!

He's revamping that.

He listened.

The government listened. Good!

But can you say that without calling him a traitorous shill for the elites?

I mean, I don't know what traitorous shill for the elites that actually listens.

Do you?

Donald Trump Jr. He was against my plan. He thanked him over the weekend for pulling the proposal saying, quote, Mike is a great friend. And we usually agree on almost everything. But this was a rare exemption of where we didn't! Hello!

We don't need to hear people tear each other down. Who is our real enemy?

Who is -- who is more dangerous?

Can we go to -- can we go?

I don't have number on these, unfortunately. Six.

Seven, eight, nine, ten. Let's go to cut ten, please, on whiter neighborhoods.

VOICE: I realized there's a policy proposal, and I'm going to quote it for folks to shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer bureaus toward expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.

Explain why you are bringing race into your tax proposal.

VOICE: That is just a description of what we see right now.

It's not driven by race.

It's more of an assessment of what neighborhoods are being undertaxed versus overtaxed. We've seen time and again, that this is a property tax system that is inequitable. It's one that actually Eric Adams ran on, saying that he would change in the first 100 days.

He since sought to defend it, and lost at every juncture in court.

VOICE: And I understand, you're saying, we're simply describing the types of neighborhood that would see these increases in taxes.

And yet by invoking race, do you run the risk of potentially alienating key constituents.

STU: I think I'm just naming things as they are. And ultimately, my -- the thing that motivates me in this, is to create a system of fairness.

It's not to work backwards from an original assessment of our neighborhood or our city. Rather, it's to ensure that we actually have an equal playing field.

And right now, what we see with the property tax system, is one that is overtaxing a number of New Yorkers and undertaxing others. And inability of political will to resolve that.

VOICE: So no plans to change that language on your website?

VOICE: The focus here is to actually ensure a fair property tax system, and the use of that language is an assessment of the neighborhood.

GLENN: Just want it to be fair. Just want it to be fair. Play the next cut. This is Mamdani, by the way, the candidate in New York, that looks like he might win, to become the next mayor of New York. Next cut.

VOICE: You are a self-described democratic socialist. Do you think that billionaires have a right to exist?
(laughter)

VOICE: I don't think that we should have billionaires, because frankly it is so much money, in a moment of such inequality.

And ultimately, what we need more of is equality across our city, and across our state, and across our country.

And I look forward to work with everyone. Including billionaires. To make a city that is fair for all of them.

GLENN: Wow!

That is fantastic.

We shouldn't have billionaires.

Hmm. So how would we get there?

What would be his ultimate goal?

Listen.

VOICE: Do you like capitalism?

VOICE: No. I have many critiques of capitalism.

And I think ultimately, the definition for me, of why I call myself a Democratic Socialist.

Is the words of Dr. King decades ago. He said, call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism.

There must be a better distribution of wealth for all of God's children in this country.

And that's what I'm focused on, is dignity and taking on income inequality. What the purpose is about, about this project, is not simply to raise much consciousness, to win socialism.

And obviously raise class consciousness. We were a part of that. But making sure that we have candidates that both understand that and are willing to put that forward, at every which moment they have.

Every which moment that they are given.

We have to continue to elect more socialists. And we have to ensure that we are unapologetic about our socialism. And there are also other issues that we firmly believe in.

Whether it's BS -- right? Or whether it's the end goal of seizing the means of production, where we don't have the same level --

GLENN: Wait. Can you say that again for me?

Whether it's the end goal of ceasing is the means of production.

Let me ask you the question: Which is more dangerous to our country, and our heritage?

Is it the -- the senator?

That controversial maybe. Says 3 percent of federal land should be transferred back to the states?

Or is it the politician standing at a modem declaring, you know, not in some offhanded gap, that he has a real problem with capitalism. That he wants to tax white neighborhoods. That he wants to get rid of billionaires. And seize the means of production.

Now, for those who studied history. I don't need to tell you why your blood has suddenly run cold. Seize the means of production, that's not economic theory.

That is a revolutionary war cry. It always has been. It's the heart of Lenin, of Marx, of Mao. Of Gulags. Of five-year plans. A food line. Total state control. It is the slogan, whispered in the barracks of all of the camps.

Printed on the walls of the Khmer Rouge Torture cells.

That's not American. That's not a goal any of us should look for. But let's take down Elon Musk.

Let's -- let's take down our FBI.

Let's -- let's take down Mike Lee. Let's take down Tucker Carlson. Let's take down at the scene. Because we don't have enough enemies. Riley rightfully, somebody on this program, asked around on this time, on Friday. Glenn, why did you have Steve Bannon on? This is why I had Steve Bannon. We have enough enemies, don't we?

Can we find people we generally agree with, maybe 80 percent. Even if that 20 percent is massive!

If I'm going to be friends with anybody, for the times I'm going to be friends with.

Then I have to say, I part with you here.

You will have to go on your own way. But when you come back to this, I'm with you.

We are -- we are being -- our college campuses, the floor of our own legislative bodies. As if it were another just regular day in paradise of America.

You know, let me -- we want to talk about highway funding and seizing the means of production.

Wait. What?

Meanwhile, the man who says, we should return a tiny sliver of public land. Land that Washington hoards like a miser. While local communities struggle to pay for schools and police.

Why you can't afford a house!

That's an extremist. A radical. A threat. But this guy, I don't see anybody on the right, really standing up against this guy. Where is the big movement against this guy? It's almost as if, that whole federal lands thing, was orchestrated. And so many of our side played right into it!

That man who says, let the states manage their own forests, their own minerals, their own resources.

Just give us 3 percent of our land, so we can actually have a tax base, so we can build some houses there that people can afford. Let's make sure that the land is controlled by the people, who are closest to that land.

Let them be the stewards of it. Not the bureaucrats 2,000 miles away, who have never set foot in a pine thicket, or a desert mesa.

Which one is more in line with the Constitution? Which one is our bigger enemy here? Which one echoes Jefferson's belief in a government closest to the people? Which upholds the vision of the Founders who feared centralized power, more than foreign armies. Which one is calling for the seizing of the -- of the production?

You know, not all ideas are morally equivalent.

We're not dealing here with difference of opinion on tax rates. Or zoning codes.

One wants to give power back to the states.

And, you know what?

People rose up, and said, I don't like that idea.

So that idea has to be closed and forfeited.

Great! But where are the people standing up saying, seizing the means of production?

This guy wants to take control of your factory. Your farm.

Your business, your labor.

One believes in federalism. The other believes in collectivism. One respects the individual as a moral agent of society. And the other sees the individual as a cog in the great machine of the state that's just going to make utopia. Because they always do!

As you just -- you just can't see it. Because you're behind the barbed wire fence!

When somebody shrugs and says, you know, both sides are really pretty extreme. You know, it's time we say, no, no, no, no.

It's that kind of false equivalence that got us into this mess. That's how the frog stays in the pot as the water slowly boils. You know what, they're both really kind of extreme, no, they're not. No, they're not.

If you believe in America, is a place where rights are granted by God, not government.

Where property is yours. It is sacred!

The fruits of your labor belong to you. That we cannot pretend these are equal threats.

Because they're not. Because one man questions how much land the federal government should own.

The other questions whether you should be allowed to own anything at all!

If the government should not own everything!

Which one is dangerous? Which one snuffs out your rights?

It's not about land. This is all about economics. It's about freedom. And history has already told us where these roads lead.

One road leads to liberty. One road leads us to having a discussion and a debate.

Without calling each other names and killing one another.

The other road doesn't allow debate. And if you try to debate, you're disappeared, or you're killed! One leads in liberty, one ends in chains!

What do you say, we -- we have enough enemies. Why do we need to turn on ourselves? And do you think there's a possibility that the communist, the socialist, the anarchist, the Islamist will all band together, to destabilize the Middle East. Europe, come America to destabilize that, to end the Western world. Do you think there's a chance you're being played?

Because I do. And I refuse to be played. I'm not a moron. And neither are you.

See, here's the thing. This is why, when Ben Shapiro says, facts don't care about your feelings. This is why that's so important.

Because they've hit an emotional spot with you. They've hit a spot of, they're going to take my right away to fish or to hunt.

And that's not what he was doing. But that's what it turned out to be. Our sacred public lands.

It's not what he was talking about.

And if it was, he's not talking about it now.

He wants to make it very, very clear. Exactly what he was talking about.

But see, the idea of going hunting and fishing and hiking. And these glorious places.

We all love that.

I mean, I don't like to actually -- I like to hunt. I don't like to fish.

I don't like to be outside, really.

But I love the lands. I love to be in an air-conditioned car, driving through Yellowstone, going, wow. Look at that. And look at that moron, trying to feed the car, to feed the buffalo.

That's going to be fun to watch.

Why are we so emotional, about that? When it's not really what the argument is about. And it's coming from our friends, when we really should have listened more and had a conversation.

And we're not emotional about someone who says, the end goal is to seize production.

Seize the means of production.

That's Karl Marx!

Why is that one not emotional for us?

Why is it we cannot see the actual enemy?

“General Lee” stuntman REVEALS ALL about the fountain jump

A stuntman took the internet by storm when he jumped a "Dukes of Hazzard" General Lee replica over a fountain in Somerset, Kentucky. The driver, Northeast Ohio Dukes founder Raymond Kohn, joins Glenn Beck to reveal what happened behind the scenes, why he did the jump, and where he wants to jump next (hint: it would involve President Trump)!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There was something just amazing that happened over the weekend in Somerset, Kentucky. It was like a Dukes of Hazzard Show.

Thirty-five thousand people gathered together, to line the streets of Somerset, as a very brave driver, who you're going to meet here in a second. Raymond Kohn. Raymond Kohn got into a car. Was an old Dodge Charger?

He jumped over the historic fountain, in the center of the town.

Can we play a little bit of this, if you happen to be watching?

GLENN: I mean, that is just crazy. It just makes me proud to be American, in a very strange sort of way. I don't even know why. It's just so satisfying. The world is on fire, and you're like, yes! We still got it. Raymond Kohn is on with us now. He is the founder and lead stuntman from the northeast Ohio dukes. And they -- they do this kind of stuff all the time. Raymond, welcome to the program.

How are you?

RAYMOND: Thank you for having me, Glenn. I am great.

I feel like a million bucks.

GLENN: Do you really?

When I saw you land, I thought, ow, my back. Ow, my back. It didn't hurt coming down?

RAYMOND: Well, you know what, we are thankful that the legendary stuntman who inspired me to do this. Like the late great Al White Jr. Ted Barba. Corrie Uvey. Jumping John Kid. (all phonetic)

These are the guys who risk everything, back in the '80s on the set of the Dukes of Hazzard, to figure out, how we can do this safely without killing ourselves.

GLENN: I've got to say -- I have to say, I saw a video from the -- from in front of you, as you landed.

And you hit a wall. And you're just tearing through this wall.

And there is a photographer, that is in front. Did you see him, and think, get out of the way, dude! Almost killed him.

RAYMOND: Yeah. So Centerville is our producer. His series that follows us in -- like a global episode, of what we do.

And Mike Cullvich (phonetic) is the -- the -- the executive producer, and that was him there.

And they carefully --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

RAYMOND: They know the risks. They know the risks.

He had a little -- just in case, if I go to the left or to the right, that he would be able to squeeze through.

And he did!

So all of the spectators. They were safe.

They were at a safe distance.

You know, we can't do the jump, if we're out there risking people's lives.

And with the help of the summer night crews, the city of Somerset, all the police and fire and EMS, everybody worked together with my team.
I have the best crew in the world.

And, yes, I am the driver that does the jump. And, you know what, we had to build that tarp.
We had to build that tarp, and there was a team of us. And my crew was so great.

They said, look at everything -- we'll get everything done.

Relax. They knew I was nervous.

You know, and they know that my team -- you couldn't ask for a better stunt team.

GLENN: I have so many questions for you.

But let me start here. Before we go too much further away from the town.

Who the hell is the mayor of the city council?

I love these guys.

I can't think of another city in America, that would be like, yeah. We got that historic you fountain, right downtown.

Yeah. Go ahead.

RAYMOND: America is back, baby. I'm telling you. You couldn't have been telling -- from the Dukes of Hazzard. Forty-five years. Forty-seven years after the show ended.

GLENN: Oh.

RAYMOND: I'm telling you, people love -- from all walks of life, people love the Dukes of Hazzard, they love the General Lee.

Listen, if there was -- if there was ever a non-racist TV show for all, it was the Dukes of Hazzard. And that's my main goal.

My pain goal is to get this TV show back on television, that way, we have our children. And our grandchildren. Watching a TV show that has family values good.

GLENN: Okay. So let me -- let me -- one more question on this, before I -- what the hell is wrong we?

When did you decide, this is what I want to do with my life?

RAYMOND: Okay. So I was always a fan. I was born in '77. The show came out in '79. And I loved that big orange car. I loved that car.

GLENN: So great. So great.

RAYMOND: So in 2005, I watched legendary stuntman Corey Spence jump over my roscoe cart. By my police car that I have.

They jumped over it, at the very first General Lee jump site, in Oxford College, in -- in Georgia.

And that's when I got bit by, what I called the stunt bug.

And I was like, I've got to do this. I've got to do -- if I on me do it once, I've got to do it.

And this was my 30th General Lee jump.

For our 30th -- Detroit. We jumped the General Lee downtown Detroit. And then for our 30th, we're jumping over the historic fountain in Somerset, Kentucky.

GLENN: I don't know. This is different. You know, downtown Detroit, you crash into buildings. There's nobody around.

Oh, well.

In Somerset, Kentucky, though. It's just a different thing.

Okay. Let me -- let me -- I think this is amazing.

In looking into you, while the jump is phenomenal. And makes you feel good. What you have gone through in the last few years, is even more amazing.

You had a -- a rare brain surgery, right?

A rare hormonal disorder, that you were like, living another classic TV show, the hulk!

You -- it was changing you, right?

Tell me about this!

JASON: Yeah. So in 2015, I started to feel a lot of pain in my knees, and my elbows.

I started noticing my voice was changing.

My face was changing. And then here comes, hey, Ray. You have to give up blood pressure medicine. You're prediabetic.

You're 335 pounds.

You know, I was always around 220 pounds.

And so nobody -- because -- it's over a long, long, long period of time.

The people that are in my life, every day, they couldn't see the changes.

You know, but the people I haven't seen Ray in a year or two years. You look different, Ray.

You know, and so I went to our local dermatologist, because I started getting these creases in my head. It's bad enough. I'm bald. What are these lines in my head now?

So the dermatologist, she said, let me see your hands. Yeah. You have big hands.

Yeah. Every time I shake somebody's hands. It's like shaking hands with a cinder block.

GLENN: Like banana hands.

JASON: Yeah. My feet went from a size ten to 12.

I had to get a 2X helmet. Because my helmet wouldn't fit.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait pick up wait.

Did you think you were ideas just gaining weight. Or did you know it was something more?

You weren't starving yourself, were you?

RAYMOND: Yeah. Because heavy stunt drivers don't make good stunt drivers. You get hurt a lot easier. It's a lot more weight.

GLENN: Of course.

RAYMOND: All of my loved ones and my crew. It's the jumps are tearing you up.

I'm like, no. No. No. No. It's not the jumps. Don't blame the jumps.

So I said, okay.

So went to the doctor. They said, go give this blood work. You may have something serious going on.

The blood work came back. My growth hormone was 900. 900. Now, normally it was 70 to 270. I'm 47 years old, and I'm still a grown boy!

So that opted for me, to get the -- or, the -- yeah, the MRI of my brain. To scan. And say, I had a 9-millimeter tumor on my 10-millimeter pituitary gland.

And we can have it on my body. And the surgeon, up in the Cleveland Clinic said, Raymond, if we don't get this out of you, it's going to kill you.

And my wife is crying. My daughter is crying.

The first thing that came to my lips was, can I still jump the General Lee after the significant other?

And the doctor said, yes, yes. And I'm like, okay. Let's do does this surgery. Let's get the thing out of my head. And then as soon as I was okay, we went up to the radical speech board in Canada. Joe came up there. We did the first international General Lee jump in front of like 30,000 people up there. And it was awesome.

I'm telling you. I'm living the dream, man. I can't believe this is happening to me.

All because of a TV show, called the Dukes of Hazzard.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I have to put an event together, just because I want to invite you to jump the General Lee over something.

We have to do --

JASON: Glenn, we want. We want to build an American patriot be General Lee.

And we want to put like, you know, 47, 45 on the doors. Put a big old American flag on the roof.

And we will call it The Jump for Trump 2045, and we want to jump in front of the White House. That's what we want to do.

GLENN: That's fantastic.

I'll bring it up to him. If there's any president that will do it. It will be him. He told me a story. He will probably do it on the White House grounds.

RAYMOND: Again, that would be awesome. He would want to do that.

GLENN: He told me a story, he said, you know, about the flagpoles. And he said, you know, he was afraid that all of the -- you know, all of the paperwork and, you know, government everything.

And he wanted to build a ballroom, and put the flagpoles up.

And he went to the guy at the White House, who runs everything at the White House. The architect.

And he said, so what is the paperwork like? And he said, you know, Mr. President, the White House belongs to the president while he's there.

So there's no paperwork. You would have to be the one that would sign all of it. And he's like, this is great.

I bet he could build that jump!

I bet he could build that jump, without any permits.

That is so fantastic.

JASON: In a few weeks. My team --

GLENN: That's fantastic.

JASON: We can build a great American -- they'll give us the panels to make the car, red, white, and blue. Big old American flag theme.

GLENN: That's fantastic.

RAYMOND: We'll call it the jump for Trump. We love Trump! The jump for Trump, and we will rock the White House.

GLENN: It is so great. I will bring it up to him. I will make sure he sees it, okay?

That is fantastic.

But listen, if he takes you up. I have to be there. I have -- you have to get me invited.

RAYMOND: Yeah. Glenn, I would be honored to put a passenger side seat in the car, and you can ride with me.

GLENN: No. No, no, no. No, no.

RAYMOND: Come on!

GLENN: I saw you come down, and my back -- I have a really bad back. And all I could really think of was, ow. Ow. That must have hurt.

RAYMOND: No. Last year, I hit the ramp at 72 miles an hour. I slide 200 at 17 feet. That's the longest General Lee jump in front of a large audience. And I landed a flat on all four wheels.

Had it not been for the safety equipment. That the legendary stuff that came up.

I would have either been killed or worse, paralyzed for the rest of my life.

And it's because of that safety equipment.

I'm not even sitting on the -- I'm painting from the ceiling with bungee cords.

GLENN: Unbelievable. Unbelievable.

I've got to meet you. I've got to meet you, Ray? Just --

RAYMOND: Let's jump in the White House. Let's jump in the White House.

GLENN: Thank you. Raymond. Northeast Ohio. Dukes founder and lead stuntman. You can find the website, north -- northeast Ohio.
Dukes.net.

Ray, we'll talk again. Thank you so much, God bless you, man.

RAYMOND: God bless you. God bless, America.

Introducing 'The Torch'

Tough news week. Tough news month. Always, it seems, another five-alarm fire, or the spotting of arsonists that no one will pay attention to.

The people who watch and support this show—you—are extraordinary.

You don’t just consume information; you act. You don’t just care—you sacrifice. And I’ve seen the receipts. In the last decade alone, you’ve given over a quarter of a billion dollars through Mercury One to help people in crisis.

You didn’t just write checks. You showed up.

Over 45,000 of you volunteered—some of you driving across states, organizing your churches, bringing your kids along—to take part in the largest single volunteer effort completed in one weekend.

That’s not normal. That’s rare. That’s powerful.

You launched The Nazarene Fund, rescuing over 260,000 people from persecution. You funded the largest civilian airlift in history to get Americans and our allies out of Afghanistan.

You’ve changed lives.

You’ve shaped history.

So when people ask me, “Glenn, what more can I do?” my answer is always the same:

First, look at what you have already done. Do you realize how far ahead you are of most Americans? Then start where you are. That feeling inside you—that restlessness, that pull to do something more—isn’t random. It’s a calling. But with everything that is happening in the world, it is hard to keep up as well as keep your chin up.

I get it. I’m tired of the bad news, too.

I’ve spent my life digging through it so you wouldn’t have to. But we must know what is happening and what is ahead. And while next year I’m not walking away from the radio or the stories that matter—in fact, I will be doubling down,

I’ve also told you for nearly two years: I feel something shifting. I feel like I’ve been called to something more. I have only felt this twice in my life—after I sobered up and just before I left Fox.

On January 1st, that “something” begins. I’ve named it The Torch. We started the blaze together; now it is time to take that bit of fire and light the way to a brighter future for our kids.

I wish I could tell you every detail today—but the truth is, some things are still being built, beta-tested, and negotiated. And some things I just can’t tell you until later this year. But here’s what I can tell you:

At its core, The Torch is about education, but not the kind that comes from textbooks or bureaucracies. It’s about self-directed learning rooted in history, liberty, faith, philosophy, and personal responsibility. It’s the kind of education that changes lives—and civilizations.

You’ve heard me say it before: If we want better kids, we have to become better adults. If we want stronger communities, we have to first strengthen ourselves. And if we want truth to survive, we have to fight for it—intelligently, faithfully, daily.

That’s what The Torch is:

A daily connection.

A movement.

A mission.

One part of it will be the culmination of almost a decade of hard work. It will include a new kind of museum—physical and digital—preserving the story of America in ways most museums never could.

You’ll learn through original artifacts, original sources, and real stories from real people who are doing real things. Right now, every summer, we hand-pick around 100 young adults from over 1,000 applications to spend two weeks with us in this kind of immersive learning. Now, for the first time, we’re building a way for anyone, anywhere in the world, in any language, to do the same.

We’re partnering with people of faith, business leaders, educators, innovators—people who know the truth and know how to live it. And they’re coming together not to sell you something, but to empower you.

I’m not asking for anything today—not money, not a sign-up, not a download. Just your attention. Stay connected. Watch what’s coming. I promise you: this is worth your time.

If you want to be one of the first to sign on, join the newsletter at glennbeck.com. But only if you’re serious about discovering your purpose—and lighting a fire that doesn’t go out.

Because we don’t just need new tools or new platforms—we need a renewal of the human spirit. That’s what The Torch is. That is my next mission.

And I hope, when the time comes, you’ll carry it with me.

For future updates on this mission, sign up for my newsletter, and read more background here.