GLENNFebruary 27, 2017

Concessions of a Transgendered Wrestler

Texas high school wrestler Mack Beggs recently won the state championship --- the female state championship --- amid controversy that caused some competitors to forfeit rather than wrestle the junior from Trinity High School in Euless, Texas. Beggs, who is transitioning from a girl to a boy, has been taking regular doses of testosterone.

"Take the emotion and the politics out of the transgendered issue for a second, and we'll just talk about how ridiculous it is that a girl who is taking heavy amounts of testosterone --- for a girl, right? --- would be able to compete at all," Co-host Stu Burguiere said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program.

Many argue that the high levels of testosterone, which build strength and muscles, give Beggs an unfair advantage. Begging the question, if it's Beggs' choice to transition, shouldn't she make concessions during the interim to maintain a level playing field? Concessions like not wrestling until the transition is complete?

Enjoy the complimentary clip above or read the transcript below for details.

PAT: We've had this situation where there is a girl who is transitioning to a boy. And she's 17 years old. She's a wrestler. And so she wanted -- apparently, she wanted to wrestle in the boy's division this year, right?

JEFFY: Correct. Correct.

PAT: Because she's making that switch. So she's going from boy to girl.

STU: And the Texas rule is, you compete in the gender that you were born.

PAT: That's on your birth certificate.

STU: Yes.

PAT: Especially I guess as long as you have that genitalia, which she does. She's a girl.

STU: Yeah, I don't know -- if you've gone through the full transition, I don't know -- again, if you're talking about kids, this is a pretty new development. I don't know if they have a rule for that.

PAT: Yeah, I don't either.

STU: I think the rule is the gender you had when you were born.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: So that's the rule in Texas because it's hateful. How can you possibly ask somebody to compete in the gender category they were born into, how can you ask that?

STU: You can't, Pat. You can't.

PAT: You can't. Because what if you feel differently? Anyway, she does.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: But she was made to -- she was put in the girl's category for wrestling. So she just won the tournament last week.

JEFFY: Yeah, she won the championship.

PAT: She won the championship.

JEFFY: The -- one of the issues is, is that she is actually going through the transition and taking the prescribed medicine to make the change. And so it's working.

PAT: The testosterone.

STU: Right. And, by the way, this ends any argument of all time as to whether men or women are better athletes. Just -- because this whole thing of -- the old Billie Jean King thing back in the day. Let's be honest about it. You take testosterone, you become better and stronger at sports.

PAT: Right.

STU: Sorry.

PAT: Now, that is science. That is science.

JEFFY: That is science.

STU: So sorry. I guess we have to apologize for that.

PAT: Everybody knows it. Everybody knows it. You can -- I guess you can try to deny it and say that women are just as strong in every instance as men. It's just not the case.

STU: No, they're better at certain --

PAT: Yes. They're just not built the same way as we are. And that's a good thing. It was supposed to be that way. We're supposed to be different. And we are. And we are.

STU: Stunning. A stunning development that everyone knew at a level of 100 percent until very recently.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: This is insane. And, by the way, if a man were to take testosterone in the -- in Major League Baseball or the NFL --

STU: I like how you're saying this as a crazy hypothetical.

PAT: I know.

STU: If in some circumstance somehow --

PAT: And they do.

STU: -- some at least decided to take performance enhancing drugs --

PAT: I don't remember who it was. But your testosterone as a man in the normal range is 400 to 800, maybe up to 1,000. And that's fairly normal. I can't remember who the baseball player was. It might have been A-Rod. He had a testosterone level -- and I shouldn't mention him because I don't remember who it was. But I remember their level was 4,000. So clearly they had been --

JEFFY: That's a man.

PAT: No man takes -- or has that much natural testosterone. So clearly, they had been taking testosterone, so they were better at what they were doing than they otherwise would have been. So it works on men as well as girls transitioning to men. So obviously, this girl is going to become stronger, she's going to be faster. She's going to be better able to wrestle than she was as a girl with no testosterone.

JEFFY: Right. And the argument also from the other parents that are suing the school board is that, hey, she is taking this medicine. That's making her into a boy. We don't want her wrestling.

PAT: And in Texas, you can take -- you can compete if you've been prescribed the testosterone by a doctor, and she was.

JEFFY: Correct. And there are several -- there are three or four other things on that list that the Wrestling Association says it's okay as long as it's prescribed and that would not be okay if it was not prescribed, for sure.

PAT: Wow.

STU: And the reason for that, by the way, quickly, steroids are like standard treatment for a lot of illnesses.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: Yes. Right.

STU: If you break out in a rash or if you have -- if you're sick in any number of ways.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: One of the first responses is to give you a shot of steroids because, you know, it works. It's pretty effective.

PAT: It reduces swelling, aids in healing. It just -- it calms down infection. I mean, it does a lot of different things. I've taken steroids quite a bit. Because I've been sick lately. And it helps. They help.

STU: A lot.

PAT: So it kind of makes sense that there are certain circumstances under which -- you know, because if you're taking anabolic steroids, that's one thing. But if you're taking steroids that a normal doctor would prescribe for an illness that's a different deal.

JEFFY: Which is pretty much what they were covering when they made the rules, before this.

PAT: Right. So, anyway, Stu heard this interview on the way in by Chris Cuomo. And is it the lawyer representing the other girls in the tournament?

STU: No, this is Ben Ferguson, who is a talk show host. He's a CNN contributor, so he's there to take the evil right-wing side of this argument. Chris Cuomo who purpose or it is I guess to be a journalist. I don't know that for a fact. But it seems like he wants to come off as evenhanded on the show is a straight-out activist on this show.

PAT: Yes.

STU: And the reason is because he's in the middle of his own personal issue with the transgendered argument, which is last week someone tweeted to him -- when talking about the transgendered issue, what do you tell a 12-year-old girl who doesn't want to see a man's unit in the locker room?

So a 12-year-old girl is in the locker room, someone changing next to them, takes down their pants and has a guy junk. Right? He's got guy junk.

What do you tell that 12-year-old girl? His response was, I wonder if she is the problem.

PAT: Good gosh.

STU: Or her overprotective and intolerant dad. Teach tolerance. That was his response.

PAT: That's unbelievable.

STU: Now, look, that's unbelievable, to put that on the 12-year-old girl.

PAT: Unbelievable response.

STU: A 12-year-old girl is not equipped to -- even if this were the most logical thing in the world, is not equipped to make that determination. She's going to be interested in what she's interested in at that age. That's going to be -- it's a moment -- it's an era of discovery, right. And so that is not something that you would necessarily want -- that's why they have separation.

Because honestly, with this standard, why bother with two different bathrooms? Why bother with two different locker rooms for any reason? Why bother? Why not just be tolerant of male genitalia all the time for 12-year-old girls? Why is it only when someone else outside of their decision-making process makes a decision they identify a different way. Right? Someone else has done that, that doesn't affect the 12-year-old girl in this scenario. She hasn't made any judgment, well, I identify that person as a female, therefore the junk that I'm looking at is not male. That's not her determination. It's someone else's determination. So that is -- it's an absurd argument on its face.

But he got so much heat for that tweet, blaming the 12-year-old girl and her intolerant dad of not being accepting of penises in the locker room, which is essentially what he said: You should be tolerant of the penis.

That was the word they used. He got so much heat for that. He's now in, I've locked myself in the corner, and I'm going to be defensive on this point no matter what. Which, it brings out the best in Chris Cuomo. Because he's now so desperate to prove that this wasn't a mistake, he'll say anything.

PAT: Yeah. Listen to this.

VOICE: What's your take on the tournament, my friend?

VOICE: Well, first off, I think this -- take the transgendered issue out of it for a second. If you are taking testosterone, which is a performance-enhancing drug in sports, you shouldn't be able to wrestle.

PAT: Correct. There you go.

VOICE: And this gave a completely unfair advantage to this participant. You can talk about that whether you are in your age-group or in your sex group that are associated with. If you're taking something that is performance enhancing, you're not a real champion. You cheated and you won.

Now, the state I think has some blame for this, by having it where they're even allowing these testosterones to be used if they're prescribed by a doctor. That's where I think the big fix probably needs to come.

STU: Stop for a second. Because this is -- so, first of all, this is his first response. Take the emotion and the politics out of the transgendered issue for a second. And we'll just talk about you how ridiculous it is that a girl who is taking heavy amounts of testosterone for a girl, right? Would be able to compete at all. So taking out the transgendered issue, it's still wrong. So he's already won the argument at this point, right?

JEFFY: Right. Right.

STU: But not with Chris Cuomo who can't possibly accept this.

CHRIS: If there was acceptance, we wouldn't have had this issue because this kid would be wrestling against boys.

PAT: Oh, good gosh.

STU: So here's his argument: So Chris, he falls back to --

PAT: If there were acceptance.

STU: I don't know what level we're going to fall back to on this. It's going to be hard to keep track of. But he falls back to, if there was -- if we taught acceptance, this wouldn't be an issue because she would be able to wrestle the boys like she wants to.

PAT: And in that eventuality, we wouldn't be talking about the story at all because she would have lost in the first round, and it would be over.

STU: Right. That's true.

PAT: It would be over.

STU: That's true. However -- however, we still would be talking about the issue. Why?

Because in a liberal state, let's say California, there would be a -- it would go the opposite way. You would have a boy who was transforming to be a girl and wanted to identify as a girl and then went into the girl's division and then destroyed all the girls. So the issue would still exist, it would just be in a liberal state and the opposite way. So he's completely wrong there to say the issue goes away if -- if we, quote, unquote, teach acceptance. The issue still exists, it's just on the opposite side.

VOICE: We know. And for those as you're learning about -- just so people know.

VOICE: Here's the thing.

VOICE: But hold on, Ben. Let's just clarify one thing: The science, you have to be careful about.

STU: This is argument two.

PAT: The science now.

VOICE: The amount of hormone that this kid is given is the minimum standard they can give to replicate the output of a boy.

STU: Okay. Stop. There's so much there.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: Does he know the amount she's being given?

STU: First of all -- yes. So that was one of his big arguments in this. I assume he knows it because he quotes -- he kept saying, you have to look it up. You have to look it up. So, again, that's a bad assumption on my part.

PAT: Look it up, Jeffy. See how much testosterone --

STU: However, it's not the minimum amount that a girl would have, right? It's actually way more than a girl would have, which is what makes the transition happen.

PAT: Yes. Way more. It's the minimum amount for a boy.

STU: For a boy. Now, let's just say that that's true. So even if his argument is true, it's still cheating --

PAT: So even if his argument is true, it's still cheating.

STU: It still would be cheating as the girl. So his point is, well, then they should allow him -- her -- him to wrestle with the boys, right? Because he wants -- she identifies as a man. So we should think that she's a man. We should allow her to wrestle with the boys. Because she's not getting -- his point there is, he's not getting so much -- she's not getting so much more testosterone than the boy would normally have. So she's not a superhuman boy, she's just a boy, right? First of all, his wording is interesting there. The amount to replicate a boy.

If she's a boy, you do not need to replicate the boy.

If you're replicating something, you're replicating it because it's not actually happening. Therefore, your whole scientific argument is flawed. The thing that you're saying you want to happen isn't happening.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: She is not a boy. So if she was a boy, you would not need to replicate it.

PAT: Yeah, if you need to talk about science, what is she scientifically? She's a girl.

STU: She's a girl.

PAT: She's had no surgery. There's nothing been changed on her body. She's a girl. So if you want to talk science, she's a girl. And then -- so it's unfair for the girl to be getting testosterone, when the other girls aren't getting it.

STU: Right. Exactly. Now, his point seems to be, what he wants to happen is that she wrestles against the boys and then loses because she is getting only the appropriate level for a boy of testosterone.

Again, it's a ridiculous argument in and of itself. But if you're going -- even if you're going to entertain it, the point is, getting performance-enhancing drugs -- it's not to say that you let everyone come to the same level of testosterone. The point is, you don't get additional testosterone as to what you have naturally. That's the point of the rule. It's enhancing. Whether you think it's enhancing it only to equal, it's not the point. The point is, you don't enhance it to what you have naturally.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: She has very little naturally. And they're enhancing it to get a higher level, regardless of what level.

PAT: And all we're talking about here is -- the level of the other competitors is what we should be talking about, not the level of the boys.

STU: Yes. Right.

PAT: Because is it unfair for her to have beaten all these girls whose level of testosterone is ridiculous?

VOICE: Kids are going to be superhuman -- it's the opposite.

PAT: No, it's not the opposite.

VOICE: Scientifically, that is the outcome. If you look and do the research as I have, you'll see that.

STU: Oh, God.

PAT: What a condescending ass.

STU: Yes. Remember, this is a guy who is in full standing in the Douche Hall of Fame. And this is him showing off why he's there.

PAT: Exactly.

STU: And, by the way, on Pat and Stu today, a vote on Chris Cuomo as the Grand Nozzle after this interview. Because he deserves it from Harry Reid.

VOICE: If this state allowed this kid to wrestle against boys, which is what he wants, we wouldn't be talking about this case right now.

STU: Right. This case. You would be talking about a different case in a different state that went the opposite way. The issue would not go away at all based on that. You would just be arguing the opposite side of it.

PAT: True.

VOICE: But you also have to look at, there has to be a standard. And I think it's not insane or crazy for a state to say that you compete with the sex that's on your birth certificate. That's what I would refer to as logical. It is illogical to somehow imply that this kid is a victim because he decided to do something or change something and therefore you change the entire sport around it. That is the part that I think many people are sitting here and saying, "Hey, if you want to compete in a sport, period, then you cannot be taking performance-enhancing drugs and do it." But to say that we should change the entire way that sports is done because of one person and their decision to do something, that is unrealistic.

VOICE: Right.

But the premise is flawed. Because the logic requires --

STU: We got to come back. We're not going to have time to get it --

VOICE: I disagree. That's why we're having a discussion. That transgender doesn't count. But it does count, and that's why we're having this bigger debate about what you allow trans kids to have access to and what you don't.

PAT: He goes on to say that she identifies as a girl.

STU: Yeah, but we have to come back and play -- because that part is unbelievable as well.

PAT: Unbelievable.

STU: His scientific argument is that she identifies. Well, that's not science.

PAT: That's not science. Now you're talking feelings. You're not talking science.

STU: As you said, they're replicating it. She's identifying. You're laying it out -- subconsciously, you're saying the truth. You can't help yourself. You can't help yourself. You keep saying the truth.

PAT: I can identify as a gerbil, if I want to, but I'm not. I'm not one. And I won't fit into the little thing with the wheel that goes -- spins around and around. So...

STU: Right. And any other circumstance, this argument would be completely bizarre.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Jeffrey Epstein's SHOCKING connections to intelligence agencies | The Glenn Beck Podcast REPLAY

Journalist Whitney Webb has worked to uncover some of the most dangerous stories of our lifetime, and she joins Glenn to reveal just how eye-opening it’s been. Her new two-volume book, “One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Crime that Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein,” examines Epstein’s elaborate network of corruption and power, from Bill Clinton to Ghislaine Maxwell and many more. Her research into transhumanism has given her a terrifying perspective on the World Economic Forum and tech elites, including Elon Musk. And she tells Glenn the dark truth about Biden’s push for electric vehicles that she noticed while living in Chile.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Whitney Webb HERE

RADIO

$13.8 TRILLION in interest ALONE: Can America survive this debt bomb?

The United States is facing possibly the largest debt crisis in our history as our national debt rises faster and faster. Glenn Beck warns: is our bankruptcy inevitable? Plus, Glenn and Stu discuss the recent protest during an ICE raid on a farm in California.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, here's another thing. And I will hit this once.

Because it's a little -- it's a little overwhelming.

But I just think you should know it.

Since the dead ceiling was raised on July 3rd. July 3rd.

The US debt is up $410 billion.

Just in the first two days.

Let me say that again.

We raised the debt ceiling. And the US debt goes up 410 billion, almost half of a trillion dollars in two days!

Now, this comes after the US Treasury ended extraordinary measures, raising the debt ceiling by 5 trillion.

We are in the midst of the US' largest crisis.

Largest one ever. Now, listen to this.

After hitting the debt limit of $36.1 trillion in January of 2025, Treasury began extraordinary measures to conserve cash. Last week, when Trump's big, beautiful bill was signed into law. The debt ceiling from 36.1 to $41.1 trillion. And what happened?

In two days, up 410 billion. Raised due to a technical process.

Now, Stu, I don't want to get all technical here. But I think that -- that the debt ceiling going up, and then us spending an additional $410 billion. I think that technical process. And, again, if I'm too wonky, maybe you can explain it, is out of control politicians that are just spending too much.

But maybe that's just me. Is that too technical. Is that too wonky, to get to?

STU: Yeah. You're in nerd world with that one, Glenn. People aren't going to understand it.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

So they were just -- they were just doing what you do, when you don't have the money. They were just moving bills around. And paying what they absolutely had to. Until the debt ceiling was raised.

And then when they did, they were like woo. Because we were completely out of money.

Now we can print some more. Now we're free to borrow a record 41.1 trillion dollars in debt.

Now, here's the part that kind of opens your eyes. To put this into perspective, at the start of 2020, the US had $23.2 trillion in at the time. In 2020, $23.2 trillion.

Where are we now?

Well, we just moved that debt ceiling up to 41 trillion, because we're at $36.1 trillion.

With the new limit, we will mark $17.9 trillion increase, since 2020. That's a 77 percent increase in our debt. Have you thought of it this way?

At our current pace, we will reach the new debt ceiling much sooner than expected.

The treasury posted a 316 billion-dollar deficit in May. That's the third largest in record.

For the first eight months of 2025, the budget gap hit $1.3 trillion. The third largest in history.

Over the last 12 months. The US borrowed 1.9 trillion.

Or 158 billion, every month.

That is half -- this is half of the May levels.

But let's take 158 billion to be conserve.

US current debt stands at 36.6.

We are 4.5 trillion below the limit now.

At our current pace, it will take us 28 months, to hit that limit.

STU: Jeez.

GLENN: In fact, the debt ceiling crisis. It looks like it will hit us now, every two years. The debt ceiling is hit faster than it can be moved. From June 2023 and October 2021, we're the last debt ceiling crisis. The US budget deficit has averaged 9 percent of GDP over the last five years.

But over the last 12 months, the budget gap has hit 7 percent of GDP. That is higher than during 2001, or any of the 1980 recessions.

We now spend 7.1 trillion dollars, 24 percent of our GDP. We have a spending problem.
That's our problem. We are issuing so much debt now, bond prices are falling. And yields are rising. What does that mean? It means, we're charging less, and we're paying out more in interest. That's not going to help us!

The US spent a record of $1.2 trillion on interest expense alone.

That's more than the total spending on defense. Medicaid, and the veterans program.

At our current pace, we're set to see US cost exceed $2 trillion within a matter of years!

Over the next ten years, the US is projected to pay $13.8 trillion just in interest.

For interest alone. This is not taxpayers. This is per person in the United States.

For interest alone, we are now on the hook for $40,500 per person, just for the interest!

This is four times Social Security cash deficit in the next ten years.

Five times the cost of 403 US weather and climate disasters. Since 1980.

403, weather and climate disasters.

It's the cost of 403 of those! Sorry.

It's the -- it's five times the cost of those, since 1980! I just wanted to -- I mean, just want to start there. Wake up to your situation.

People are arguing about all of the wrong things right now, and they are -- we think we are skating. And we think that this can last forever. It's not going to last forever, and then you add things on top of this.

Like, what is happening with -- with ICE?

I don't know if you saw the video of the protesters. Some protester that was firing some sort of a weapon, at a federal agent during the ICE raid at a farm in California. Let me play this. Cut two, please. This is the raid --

VOICE: Take a look at this video right here. It appears a protestor fired some kind of gun at federal agents. This happened this afternoon.

It was a really chaotic scene at the time.
A lot of smoking was being launched at the protesters. Again, it appears that a protestor fired back with that weapon.

It looks like he fired at least a couple of times. We've not heard about any agents being hurt.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So we are entering a very violent. Very, very violent time. First of all, let me talk about this particular raid. This was at a legal pot farm!

Okay. I think we can probably in the past, just done an hour on that. You know, oh, it's a legal pot farm.

Okay. Forget about that. That's not a problem apparently anymore.

It's being tended, this legal pot farm is being tended by illegals. That are coming across the border.

Well, we don't want to hurt our farming community.

I don't think of our farming community, as pot farms. But maybe that's just me.

Again, why get -- why get down in those details?

STU: Yeah. Glenn, this is just an existential question here.

But is it a legal pot farm, if the workers are illegal?

GLENN: Stu. Stu, again, that would be hour two of any past show that we have ever done together.

STU: Okay. All right.

GLENN: All right. So they go in, and they're trying to bust the illegals.

All right. What happens? Well, there starts to be protests. These protests come.

They start firing at ICE.

ICE has to put tear gas down.

Now the illegals are running to save themselves.

But who is running amongst this crowd?

Apparently, a bunch of children.

Now, I suppose those legal pot farms are providing a good education for those kids.

You know, probably has a pot farm day care center for those kids. So they can be out of the fields. And of course not working for their parents. Because that would be underage labor. You wouldn't want that to happen in America.

You know, all these people that have these bleeding hearts. Like, oh, this is just so wrong.

You're not even thinking anymore.

You're not even thinking.

You just see a video where you have kids running with their parents. Children running from the fields of this pot farm.

What were they doing there?

Certainly, that wasn't underage labor, was that?

Because you would be against that.

Wouldn't you?

Or are you?

Or are you only against that, if it's white children?

I'm not sure. I'm confused.

So you have the underage children. And these bleeding hearts, who are saying, we have to let these people go.

We have to let them just do what they do!

Really? You mean work in the shadows?

You mean engage in possible child labor? Okay. Possibly making, what?

A dollar an hour. Yeah. No, no, no. That's really, really, really good.

Then let's just let these protesters, and they're not protesters.

They are terrorists now.

We just let these terrorists get away with firing guns at our -- at our ICE agents. Things are changing in America. Let's just look at the violence, just in the last couple of weeks.

You have the July 4th ICE ambush, which is what?

ICE 25 miles outside of the city of Dallas. They have a detention center.

A coordinated well-planned attack.

Guy is covered in black. You know, in -- in military gear. They come and they start shooting fireworks at the detention center. Then a few of them break off, and they start spray painting the cars. Which brings unarmed ICE agents out of the building, to try to stop them from defacing the -- the cars.

They're unarmed. Well, this group has snipers in the woods. Hiding in the woods.

As soon as those unarmed agents come out, they start shooting them. Shot one of them in the neck. Thank God, he's still alive. What do you call that?

What do you call that? A Revolutionary War. Terrorism. It's certainly not a peaceful protest. Neither was it yesterday.

And, meanwhile, we have Congressmen who are actually trying to pass a bill in Congress right now, saying that the ICE members can't wear masks.

Well, you know what, when your bad guys stop wearing masks. When your people who are on the -- on the college campuses stop wearing masks, maybe we can live in a community and live in a society where our police officers don't have to wear masks.

Don't give me this. That's gets appear zero stuff.

By the way, the gestapo never wore masks.

They didn't care.

This is the kind of stuff that you see in the third world countries.

You mean like riots on the streets?

Yeah. It's stuff you see in third world countries. And you're dragging us into a third world country.

And, you know what, it's just -- it's -- it's time!

It's time. It's just time to say, enough is enough. And I'm not saying take extraordinary measures.

I'm saying, can our US government, our FBI, our department of justice stop acting like every Bond villain I've ever seen.

And here's what I mean by that. It's like you take these guys off the street, and then you strap them on to a table. And you say, the laser is going to cut your head in half.

No. It's not going to. We all know it's not going to.

Can we stop acting like Bond villains? Can we actually take care of the problem?

Actually arrest these people. Try them. And put them in jail.

We need to start setting a few examples. Otherwise, this is going to ton spiral out of control.

RADIO

Obama's CIA chief behind Steele dossier deception – exposed!

The FBI has opened a criminal investigation against former CIA Director John Brennan. But will Americans finally see justice for his alleged crimes and cover-ups? Or will the Deep State protect him? Former Department of Defense intelligence analyst Jason Buttrill joins Glenn Beck to give his prediction.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's bring in Jason Buttrill who is our chief researcher on the program.

You know, I'm reading a lot about John Brennan, and, you know, I think everybody knows he's a bad guy.

Well, everybody, but MSNBC and CNN.

They know he's a bad guy. But, you know, Jason, as I was starting to really refresh my memory. And look into Brennan, as we're -- it looks like maybe the Department of Justice is going to take him on.

And maybe prosecute him for some pretty bad perjury. I started looking into him, and I didn't realize. I had completely forgotten.

He was the guy who was the main guy that was pushing for torture, during the war.

I mean, he couldn't torture enough people.
And then he actually had a little group that would meet with the president, and they would develop the kill list. Do you remember, Stu?

Talking about the kill list, that Obama was doing? You know, every week. They developed a kill list. And everybody was like, what do you mean a kill list? Who is on the kill list?

It was John Brennan who was doing all of that stuff. He's a really, really dark dude. And, you know, hopefully we'll actually send him to jail for the things that he allegedly has done, besides, you know, develop the kill list. Jason, welcome to the program.

JASON: Hey, thanks, Glenn. I don't -- you know, it depends on -- I don't know. John Brennan has been one of the most slippery, I don't know how to describe him.

Whether it's like Bond villains. Or actually maybe it's more accurate to kill him like a Batman villain.

You remember like in Batman. You know if like the Joker is connected and remains in that comment or cartoon, or if it's the Penguin.

You know at the end of the comic, they're going to get away.

You will just see them in a slide. You know, all of a sudden in page where they slip away. They have to live again. You know, to the villain in another comic book.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

Yeah, I know.

And we are playing the role of a -- of a -- of a Bond villain as well, when it comes to justice.

Our DOJ is like, oh. And we have sharks that are going to eat you.

We have strapped you to this table. But they are going to start with your shoestrings. And then, we will leave. But before you know it, you will be dead in the belly of a shark. And they're not going to -- it's not going to kill them.

Just shoot them in the head. What are you doing?

Stop with the shark thing. That's what our DOJ is like. They just have these guys get away with murder.

JASON: Yeah. As you point out, with Brennan, it goes way, way back.

He was -- as you outlined. He was one of the guys that were right at the center of the enhanced interrogation, or torture controversy.

He -- he always said, hey, I was not in the enhanced interrogation techniques, air quoted, program.

But he was one of the guys, that was defending transferring some of the suspects, the country, where, you know, the rules are a lot less, you know, strict than they are here in the United States.

Where you can employ some of these.

Yeah. It goes beyond that.

He actually withdrew his name. You know, from being in the BCI director because of this.

But like any fat man villain or Bond villain, if he decides to run again, and he's confirmed by a massive amount. He just keeps on slipping through.

GLENN: Well, how does he get -- let me ask you: How do you think he gets this power?
Because he just keeps slipping through.

And, you know, if I remember right, it was Dianne Feinstein that -- that actually came at him, and said, you and the CIA are spying on the committee in -- in the Senate.

And they were investigating the torture, or enhanced interrogation. And he was knee-deep. Maybe neck-deep in that. And he said, we're not spying -- the CIA would never do that.

It's just unthinkable. Well, it turns out, yes. They were spying.

And then he never -- they never pushed for any kind of penalty on him.

He said, well, I'm going to find out, who did this.

And then they will pay.

Nobody paid. Nobody. Nothing. Does he have stuff on -- on members of the Senate and the House? Is that what -- is that what's happening here? How does he keep getting away with this?

Understanding John Brennan, in my opinion is understanding how the Deep State operates.

That example that you just put out there, with spying on the intelligence committee.

Deny. Deny. Deny.

Later it comes out, Glenn. That five CIA employees. Five, improperly accessed.

Five!

And then finally after a while. Like months later. He's apologizing to the Senate intelligence committee.

You know, all, but admitting this happened.

But no resignations.

No prosecutions. This goes on and on and on.

STU: Hang on.

And then on that same case, five years later, he writes his -- you know, his biography.

And he talks about how none of that happened.

So he admits it.

First, he denies it.

Then he's caught. Then he admits it.

He says, I will take care of it.

Nothing happens. Time goes by.

And then he writes a book. And then he goes, all of that. None of that happened.

That was all wrong. This guy is just --

JASON: Yeah. It really is.

And it's the same with the Steele dossier.

You know, did think it in front of Congress.

And then later, now we're coming out. Now we can see that he totally -- it appears like he was just completely lying.

Now we're trying to figure out what about he told John Durham. Because maybe they can get him for saying the same statements to John Durham. If they can, then maybe we can go after him.

But I really don't know.

I really don't know if the audience wants to hear this right now.

I don't know if it will make a difference.

This is how the Deep State operates.

To understand it, and understand John Brennan.

You understand, the executives don't control Deep State apparatuses. That's not how it works.

You have multiple people, and people that were under John Brennan and the CIA, are still there. They're still there.

The Deep State controls the Deep State apparatus, not the executive. Not Congress.

None of them. It is the shady individuals that continue to get away with things. We catch them in lies that never really matters.

I think if we could actually get some justice on this, that John Brennan could actually get -- you know, outed publicly, that he had in the past. This time, something actually happened. That I think that would be a huge step forward in getting rid of some of these people. That just linger. And secretly pull strings, while we're demanding I couldn't wait.

STU: So tell me what happened with the -- the ICA.

You know, the new report out, about the intelligence community assessment.

What is this story all about?

JASON: Yeah, it's a trade craft. The CIA trade craft review.

GLENN: What does that mean?

A trade craft review?

JASON: It's kind of a sexy way of juts saying, how did we operate, you know, from this time, to this time period?

GLENN: Okay.

JASON: And it points out, you know, how things -- like I said. It points out, in part of it. How things like the Steele dossier, ended up getting included into the, you know, whole Russia gate scandal.

And it looks very, very clear, that -- you know, that should not have -- unverified intelligence should not have gotten as far as the president's desk?

It should not have done it.

Even if it had, then it should have been heavily caveated showing, that this is just opposition research bullcrap.

Well, it didn't.

And if you look at it, very, very physically. It shows that if you are, let's say a Bond villain. Or a Batman villain. And you really, really want this damaging information, that's just opposition research, to somehow make it into the hull of the White House. And then knowing that that's going to get leaked down to the media.

They have perfected, you know, the CIA perfected this kind of operation. They know exactly what they're doing. Who would be responsible for doing it?

Why would they be doing it? And it would be for election interference.

And then that's allegedly what John Brennan was actually doing.

That's what it looks like he was doing.

Now we have the intelligence community assessment, showing that this is what happened. With that information and with now being able to go back to people like John Durham or looking at exactly what statements were made to him. So we can fit them into the statute of limitations. Or before it runs out.

GLENN: Which is in the middle of August.

Which really pisses me off. It's another thing like the -- the debt ceiling. Oh! You know, we've had all these years to fix it. But now we have to fix it tonight, and then it's never fixed.

I mean, I'm telling you, this is -- this is not going to be good!

You know, this -- this Epstein thing is not going to go away. It's just not going to go away.

And I'm sorry, but I think the president is on the wrong side on this.

And I'm not assigning any kind of reason for it, but he wants it to just go away.

And I have my belief, I expressed them yesterday.

It's about Intel, again. But you can't keep stacking these things up. You just can't.

John Brennan is a known bad guy, Russiagate. You would think that Donald Trump would be all over this. Because it affected his life so much. This guy is a very, very bad guy.

And both sides of the aisle know it.

And for some reason, nobody can ever do anything about John Brennan. He's got to be investigated and prosecuted if that's where the evidence leads.

But you can't just walk -- if the statute of limitations runs out on this guy, I think -- I think you've got another chink in the armor. A big one!

JASON: Yeah. Yeah. And not just him. I mean, I would go a lot further and say, who were the people that were directly underneath him?

Who were his subordinates? Who were their subordinates?

How many people had knowledge of this?

What we're really talking about is how it operates.

This is how things happen, outside of the wishes of the president.

You know, the executive or even Congress.

This is how -- you know, this is how outside.

This is how justice and how operations work, you know, from people who are not elected.

People that we did not give a mandate to.

This is how this operates. You have to root out every single one of them.

Identify them.

Have them stand in front of justice and see if we can just finally start to will this thing away.

If we do not, then the future does not look great for what we want for this country.

GLENN: Oh, and it's everywhere.

You know, Kevin O'Conner. He's the White House physician for Biden. The testimony that he gave, well, fine. You know, give him -- give him immunity. Give him immunity.

I don't want to know about the private conversations, you know, about his health.

Although, I do think that is really important. We're talking about the president of the United States. He's not just a private citizen. He's property. You know, the president can't say -- if the Secret Service says, sir, you're not going into that room.

The president no longer has the right to say, I'm going into that room.

Sorry, while you're prosecute. It's almost F you're property of the United States of America. And control over your own person in many ways. I'm sorry. But, you know, the physician, client. Or physician patient confidential, I'm not sure that exists, when you're president of the United States.

But there's no reason why you shouldn't give this guy immunity, and then say, okay. Who said, what?

Were you ever told to lie?

I'm not sure you will get the truth out of this guy. Because he is a -- he is a Biden guy, through and through. But people should start going to jail on that.

I'm so sick and tired of these investigations, that start to show promise and then nothing happens. Nothing.

It's been 20 years of investigations, and no one goes to jail.

It's been 20 years of riots on the streets. You know, people burning cities down. People, you know, looting stores. Destroying our economy.

Destroying the safety in our city. And no one goes to jail. President Trump has got to start sending some big, big messages. And he is on so many fronts.

But this one cannot escape his view.

He's got to be on this one.

All right. Jason, thank you very much.

RADIO

Are fired USAID workers plotting REGIME CHANGE in America?!

Glenn Beck reviews a potentially terrifying story: some former USAID workers, who were fired under Trump, may be planning to use their color revolution tactics to “undermine Trump’s power” and plot regime change. Also, former Department of Defense intelligence analyst Jason Buttrill joins to discuss how the ambush at a Texas ICE detention facility looked eerily similar to what he saw while fighting in Afghanistan.

Glenn's Show Prep

Concessions of a Transgendered Wrestler

Jeffrey Epstein's SHOCKING connections to intelligence agencies | The Glenn Beck Podcast REPLAY

$13.8 TRILLION in interest ALONE: Can America survive this debt bomb?

Transcript

Obama's CIA chief behind Steele dossier deception – exposed!

Transcript

Are fired USAID workers plotting REGIME CHANGE in America?!