BLOGAugust 08, 2017

'The Big Lie': Dinesh D'Souza Drops Some Knowledge on Neo-Nazi Roots of the American Left

The Nazi movement had deep ties to American liberals, author and activist Dinesh D’Souza said on radio Tuesday.

D’Souza explored the connections between the American left and the rise of Nazism in his new book, “The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left.” In the book, D’Souza argued that conservatives – who are often accused of fascism – are not fascists, and that calling Republicans and people like President Donald Trump “fascists” is actually the left’s big lie.

On Tuesday’s show, D’Souza detailed an example of the ties between American progressives and the Nazi movement that went all the way up to Hitler. He described how Madison Grant, an American eugenicist and conservationist, was excited about getting a letter from Hitler praising his work.

“This is a really good example of how the American progressives were aware that they were shaping the Nazi sterilization program [and] also the euthanasian program,” D’Souza said. “And they were very proud of it.”

GLENN: Hmm. A -- a friend of ours who has gone to jail for his opinion and so much more, he's not going to have any difficulty with his new book, called The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left. Dinesh D'Souza is here. And we begin, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Welcome to the program, Dinesh. How are you?

DINESH: Good to be on.

GLENN: Are you ready for the pushback that you're going to get on this book?

DINESH: Well, I'm excited about the book. Because I -- you know, a lot of my books, I know what I'm going to say when I start out. And I have an argument. And I develop the evidence. I lay it out.

So, for example, in the Hillary book, Hillary's America, I -- I knew that there was a long complicity of the Democratic Party with racism. It was just a matter of documenting it, laying it out.

GLENN: Sure.

DINESH: Here, with this book -- of course, I had read a few things about it, Jonah Goldberg's liberal fascism.

I noticed that there was sort of eerie similarities between things going on, on both sides of the Atlantic. It's really interesting to compare, for example, look at the Ku Klux Klan in America and then look at the Nazi Brownshirts. Right?

They both grow at about the same time. They both get 3 to 5 million members. In both groups, you have people who love to wear ridiculous costumes, love to do songs and salutes, love to do nightly raids, love to humiliate people, are into racial terrorism.

In both cases, they're the wing of a political party. In one case, the Democratic Party, the Klan. In the other case, the Nazi party.

So I thought, this is going to be very interesting, to develop these parallels. But what I didn't realize was that there actually was intimate relations between the left in this country and the Democrats and the fascists in Italy and the Nazis and Germany. And all of this has been covered up.

GLENN: Yeah. The connections between the early American progressive movement -- I mean, I have letters and documentation myself from the -- I think it's the human betterment society in California. From the Germans saying, "Thank you for coming up. You have woken a country of 60 million people to this eugenics project. And Hitler is going to get fully behind this." I mean, it -- they were deeply tied into what became the Holocaust. And it's all buried.

DINESH: And proud of their associations.

GLENN: Yes, very proud.

DINESH: I'm kind of amused about, there's this guy Madison Grant, who was a progressive, head of the New York zoological society.

GLENN: Yeah.

DINESH: Big advocate of eugenics. And he gets a letter from Hitler. He's super excited. So he goes to this other progressive icon, and he goes, "Hey, check out my letter from Hitler."

And that guy goes, "Wait right here." Goes to his library. Produces his letter from Hitler. So this is a really good example of how the American progressives were aware that they were shaping the Nazi sterilization program, but also the euthanasia program.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Yes.

DINESH: And they were very proud of it.

GLENN: I posted a Facebook post maybe two years ago. And it was the -- the national Socialist Party platform in the '20s. And it seemed very familiar to me.

You talk about a speech that Hitler gave in '27 where he said, "We're all socialists. We are the enemies of today's capitalist system of exploitation. And we're determined to destroy this system under all conditions." They have 25-point program. The nationalization of large corporations, trusts, government control of banking and credit. The seizure of land without compensation if it was for public use. The splitting of large landholdings into smaller units. Confiscation of war profits. Prosecution of bankers and other lenders on grounds of usury. Abolition of incomes unearned by work. Profit-sharing for workers and all large companies. Broader pension system, paying higher benefits. And universal free health care and universal free education.

DINESH: If you read that platform at a Democratic National Convention, you would get thunderous applause. And I think that's true of Mussolini's speeches, for example.

Fascism and Naziism were firmly on the left. And in one of the chapters, I trace the genesis of fascism. It arose out of a -- what's called the crisis of Marxism. Marx had made all these predictions that communist revolution was coming to Germany, was coming to England.

And when it didn't happen, the really smart socialists sat around. They scratched their heads, and they said, "We've got to -- we've got to revise Marx. We see he got something fundamentally wrong."

And in the 20th century, out of that crisis of Marxism come two new things: One, Leninist Bolshevism. And the other, Mussolini's fascism. They both are spin-offs from socialism. They are on the same side of the aisle. And because of World War II, and because Hitler was on one side, the Soviets were on the other, this has made it very easy for progressives to pretend that if communism is on the left, fascism must be on the right. But this misses, of course, the fact that sister ideologies do go to war.

GLENN: They're -- they're relatively the same. One is about workers of the world, and one is about workers of the nation uniting. It's pretty much nationalism versus world domination under a grand unifying theory, of we're all in this one together. But it's the same awful stew. Is it not?

DINESH: It absolutely is. And even that distinction is blurred because although Lenin talked about international socialism, as soon as Stalin came in, he said mother Russia. Socialism in one country. So if you think about it, Stalin was a nationalist socialist just like Hitler.

GLENN: So help me out on -- you've seen what's going on with Google.

DINESH: Absolutely.

GLENN: This is not going to lead anywhere good. And I -- I can't believe that those people who have said they've been kept in a closet for their viewpoint or their sexuality or whatever, their whole life, are now shoving people into closets and -- and silencing people. I don't understand how the average person, the average Democrat isn't starting to become afraid of what they're unleashing in universities and in -- in the silencing of those who can make a -- a reasonable, rational, and scientific argument.

DINESH: So this really is the fascist mindset. And I say this because typically if we look around America now, we would think the best example of fascism is these Antifa guys dressed in masks, scaring weapons, bike locks, and bats. They're there to threaten, to intimidate, to beat people up. So they look a lot like Mussolini's Blackshirts from the '20s, but I think there's a deeper fascism that's a much bigger problem than the guys on the street at Berkeley. And that is the fascism of the institutions.

So the Nazis had a term called Gleichschaltung, which basically means coordination. But their idea was, we have a society. Everybody has got to march in line, in lockstep. They've got to be in sync with Nazi ideology. And if they fall out, we have to pressure them. We have to cajole them. We have to force them.

And this Gleichschaltung is now in America. It's on the left. It's called political correctness. But I don't just mean you use the wrong word. I'm talking about the way in which Hollywood, the media, academia, and now corporations like Google, if you fall athwart the ideology, they will ruin you, they'll fire you, they will humiliate you, they'll make you into a pariah. This kind of thing is very scary. And it has a deep parallel with what was going on with Europe in the middle of the century.

GLENN: You know I have deep respect for you, right?

DINESH: Right.

PAT: Uh-oh.

STU: That's what he says to me usually when he insults me.

PAT: Look out.

GLENN: I'm not going to insult you.

Those on the right who do not agree with my point of view of Donald Trump have done all of those things that you have described. In fact, they have been as vicious, in some ways more vicious than the -- the Soros group that went after me on the left. There is a -- there is a love in this country right now of winning at all costs and destroying anyone who stands against you that is truly frightening.

DINESH: You know, I have to disagree with that. I was thinking the other day that when I came to America in the late '70s -- I'm a young Reaganite from my college days.

American politics was a gentleman's quarrel. And one could envision Reagan and "Tip" O'Neill having it out, but then you could see them having a beer afterward. And then at the end of the day, there was a shared belief that, you know, "Tip" O'Neill, you know, he loved America. And we all want America to be prosperous. We want America to be strong. We want America to be the world's leader.

We might disagree about how to share the spoils. How America prosperity should be distributed. But it's a debate about means, not about ends. And it just occurred to me how -- how much all of that has broken down.

Now, I blame the left. Because I think that the breakdown started with Obama. And by that, I mean the deploying of the government against your critics. The willingness to sort of treat your critic, not just as a political adversary, but as a real enemy, somebody you would like to see put out of business altogether.

And I think that it is that dysfunctional atmosphere that produced Trump. In other words, the ordinary Republican goes, we appointed all these nice guys, one after the other. There was Bob Dole, self-deprecating and witty. There was John McCain, war hero. There was the super squeaky clean-cut Romney. And yet all these guys began to helplessly flail in the wind as they were converted into Lucifer by the other side. All right. Enough of all that. We're going to get a real tough guy, and he may not be all that straight around the edges, but he can throw a punch and he can take a punch. We've got to fight like those guys. It is this kind of bare-knuckled atmosphere that we're in now.

GLENN: And I don't think it is -- to say that -- I mean, you know where I stand on Obama. But to say that it was Obama. I mean, today is the anniversary of the Nixon resignation. Enemy's list. Nixon -- and I think this is the real problem in America: We keep looking at left and right, which is bogus in America, the way it is -- you know, they've made the left and right in America to be the European left and right. And that is not true.

Right is small government, almost anarchy. And left is total government, be it fascism, totalitarianism, whatever. It's -- those are our two rights -- left and right in America.

But it has become this Democratic and Republican thing, when Richard Nixon was a gigantic progressive. It's progressivism in the early 20th century that was -- was fueling much of what was happening in Germany. And teaching -- and they were teaching us in the same way.

I mean, it was a cozy get-together. And when you have progressivism not recognized in both parties on both sides as people who just want control of other people, that's where we're having this battle because we can point to each other and say, "Well, you did this. Yeah, because my side has that gene in it too."

DINESH: Absolutely.

Well, progressivism was in both parties, even at the beginning.

Now, the Republican version of it was softer than the Democratic version. So, for example, Teddy Roosevelt, although he used some Darwinist rhetoric about survival of the fittest, was thinking mainly about foreign policy. And if you talked to him about something like forced sterilization, I think he would -- family man that he was, he would blanch a little bit --

GLENN: I will get you -- upstairs, I have letters from him that will horrify you on sterilization and the selecting of -- we're going to look at humans, I think the quote is, like the dumbest farmers. Even on farms, we don't let our best stock breed with our worst stock. I mean, he was pretty clear on some of that spooky stuff.

DINESH: Yeah, I have read some things that have made my eyebrows go up.

GLENN: Yeah.

DINESH: But this all took such a bad turn in the '20s and '30s in Europe. One of the discoveries in the book that really startled me was the degree to which -- when the Nazis got together to write the Nuremberg laws. And they were all sitting around the table. All these top guys. Head of the Justice Department, and so on.

GLENN: Explain for people who don't know what the Nuremberg laws.

DINESH: So the Nuremberg laws were the laws that made Jews into second-class citizens. They involved segregation of Jews into ghettos. State-sponsored discrimination. Keeping the Jews out of certain professions. And later, they were modified for confiscation of Jewish property and so on. So the Nazis go -- they -- one of the Nazi meetings we have transcripts of.

Why? Because the Nazis go, we are the first people in the world to be creating a racist state. It's fantastic. So watch us do it. And one of the guys who was there had studied in the United States.

And he goes, time-out, guys. Sorry to interrupt the party, but a racial state has already been created by the Democratic Party in America. We're not the first people to this picnic. They've already done it.

And all the questions were exploring. Intermarriage between groups, segregation, discrimination. They've been there for years. So the Nazis then immediately consulted the Democratic laws.

Let's remember, every segregation law in the South, passed by a Democratic legislature, signed by a Democratic governor, enforced by Democratic officials.

So the Nazis take a look at this, and they go, fantastic. Let's just cross out the word "black," write in the word "Jew," and we're off at the races.

Now, to me, the most sort of poignantly pungent aspect of this debate is, at one point, the Nazis begin to debate, who is a Jew? Because there's a lot of intermarriage that's been going on since the Middle Ages. And the Nazis are not sure if you can classify someone as a Jew, who is only, let's say, half Jewish.

Again, the Nazi who had studied in America, I think his name was Cregor, he goes, problem-solved. In America, they have one drop rule. Basically, if you have any black, any visible blackness in you, you're black. And this is where the whole story gets kind of crushing. The Nazis look at each other and they go, "That's too much." Basically they're saying, the Democrats are too racist for us. We can't go with the one drop rule. And, in fact, the Nuremberg laws, as they were written, you need three Jewish grandparents to count as Jewish. So the Nazis, you may say, took a softer line than the Democratic Party on the question of racial identity.

GLENN: The name of the book is The Big Lie. Dinesh D'Souza. More in a second.

GLENN: With Dinesh D'Souza, his book is called The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left.

You say really controversial things in here that I know the -- the research behind it is absolutely solid. I have done the research. I have many of the letters that you are talking about in here.

In one of the chapters, you talk about how FDR was America's first fascist dictator. And people find so -- they find that so offensive. But they -- they are not, again, looking back at the time. At the time, the progressives and many Americans -- this is before it had been all discredited, thought that that's what a big state -- that the big state was the scientific way to go.

DINESH: It's very difficult for us in the aftermath of World War II, in an era where fascism and Naziism have been completely stained by the order of the Holocaust, it's very hard for us to think why anyone would have been attracted to those ideologies. So in order to understand this, it's almost like you've got to put some historical -- you better get in a time machine and go before those things happened and see what appealed about fascism. So the fascists talked about society as an organism. And each individual is a cell. Your life has no value by itself. But like any cell, your value is what you contribute to the whole.

GLENN: Pick it right back up with Dinesh D'Souza, The Big Lie, when we come back.

(OUT AT 10:31AM)

GLENN: Dinesh D'Souza is here. The Big Lie is the book: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left.

He was explaining how FDR was America's first fascist dictator. And I know that sounds horrible to say now. But we have to look at history as it is at the time. They thought fascism and totalitarianism, big state was the future. They thought it was the new scientific progressive way. And all of this other stuff, where, you know, people got together in their towns -- it was just outdated and old and antiquated and wouldn't work.

DINESH: Socialism, fascism, and progressivism, these are the three great collectivist movements of the last century. It was an era in which words like "dictator" were positive because a dictator was somebody who gave instruction and got things done.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

DINESH: Totalitarianism, for Mussolini, was a good word. Mussolini's point is, you can't have a fragmented society. We need to have a totalitarian society, in which everything is operating toward a singular purpose.

GLENN: It's Nebuchadnezzar. I mean, it's as old as history itself. Nebuchadnezzar: Let's make bricks. If we all make bricks, if we all are the same and we're working toward one goal, we'll be able to build a tower to reach heaven. It's the same thing, and it never works.

DINESH: And the progressives, like the fascists, saw democracy as a mechanism to achieve power, but not something to take too seriously.

I mean, when FDR's New Deal schemes were being blocked by the Supreme Court, what does FDR do? He basically goes, let's stack the court. Let me appoint six new justices, so I essentially have created a majority. And the only reason he didn't do it is the court essentially buckled in and gave into him.

Now, the progressives today in the textbooks, they wittingly describe this as the switch in time that saved nine. They're basically talking about the trampling of democratic institutions as some kind of a joke. But that's how FDR treated it. And so there's a fascist streak. I wouldn't say that FDR became a full-fledged fascist dictator. But there was a fascist streak in him that was exactly why Mussolini and even Hitler thought that he was like them.

GLENN: So you have to read a book -- they're hard to find. But I think I actually have an extra copy. And when you do find them, sometimes this section of the book is taken out. But it was written by Stewart chase, who you know named the New Deal. And he was instrumental in the shaping of the -- of the totalitarian view of the government.

So he -- he writes a book called The Road On Which We're Traveling. And it's after -- it's just at the end of the war, when we know we're going to win. And so he says, so after the war, these things are going to happen.

It's towards the end of the book. And he says, we now know that fascism and totalitarianism are discredited. So I don't know what we're going to call this. But we'll, for our purposes here, just call it System X. And he says, the United States now, through the last 20 years, has put so much in, that you will see System X, which is totalitarianism and fascism. He just couldn't bring himself to call it that. But he explains how it has been grown and put in, under the guise of freedom.

DINESH: Well, interestingly, if you think about the Democrats today and ask this question: Are there economic policies -- and I'm thinking here, not just Obama and Hillary. But let's say Bernie, Elizabeth Warren, are their economic policies more socialist in the Marxist sense, or are they more fascist? Now, if you look up fascism, it says -- the definition is really clear: State-run capitalism.

If we think of Obamacare, we have private corporations. We have private hospitals. We have private insurance companies. But the government is directing them. The government is setting prices. Deciding on reimbursements. Deciding on who gets coverage and for what.

GLENN: It is what they have said: China is the new model, which is state-run capitalism anyways.

DINESH: And then under Obama, state-run control of banks, insurance -- investment companies, the energy sector, increasingly higher education.

So this is -- you know, the old socialists would go and nationalize it all. The socialists would take over the energy industry, and the government would go take out oil in Midland, Texas. But we don't do that.

Our economic policies that the Democrats advocate are more classically fascist. You go to Midland, Texas. You drill the oil out. You put it in the barrel and label it, and then we will saunter in, kind of take control of it, and tell you what to do with that wealth.

GLENN: So reading your book, there's very little in there that isn't well documented. And you're making a strong case.

However, we're at a place now to where nobody even knows what fascism is. Nobody even knows what communism is. It's just a smear that both sides use. You're making an intellectual case and saying, "This is what it is. And this is what the roots are here in America." You can agree or disagree. But we're not going to have that conversation. We're not going to have a conversation of, you bring your facts to the table. I'll bring other facts to the table. And we'll see which ones really hold up in the test of time and scrutiny. How do we -- how do you share facts like this, without jamming fingers into the other person's chest and -- and being able to have a dialogue?

If we don't start -- if we don't come to a place to where Martin Luther King was, where he said, stop trying to win, you've got to reconcile. If we can't come to the reconciliation of just ourselves with the historic truth, we're doomed.

DINESH: No, I agree completely that that is the goal. In other words, kings, beloved community, that's where we're trying to go.

Here's the problem: That for a generation, for example, as long as the left felt that they could play the race card with impunity, they were not going to stop. As long as Republicans were on the defensive, "No, we're not racist," as long as Ken Mehlman of the RNC was running around apologizing for the Republican Party's racist history at black churches, the Democrats, they just had us where they wanted us. The moment we hit back hard and said in effect, "Actually, you're blaming us for the stuff that you did --

GLENN: Uh-huh.

DINESH: -- and you haven't apologized for it," that's when you now have a pause in the race debate. And it's precisely the counterstrike that's produced that.

GLENN: So I agree with you. Because I think there's -- when I say reconciliation, don't misconstrue Martin Luther King for a weakling. He was a strong defender of the truth and where he was going. So I'm not by any stretch saying, "We don't make these points." We must use history as our guide and be able to expose this.

But how do we now get this to the ears of people who are so wrapped up in the game, that it's just not going to make a difference.

DINESH: Well, if you ask me what I'm trying to do with this book, I'm sort of trying to take away the fascism card in kind of the same way I tried to take away the race card from the left. I'm trying to blunt the force of it.

I'm not using the words "Nazi" and "fascist" as a verbal javelin. Because, first of all, I'm not saying -- and I don't even think the left is saying -- when they say Trump is a fascist, they don't mean that Trump is Hitler, circa 1945. Trump hasn't started a World War. He hasn't gassed 6 million Jews.

GLENN: Correct. Correct.

DINESH: They're saying Trump is Hitler, circa 1933. He's a demagogue, who just came into power, promising these dreams about greatness.

GLENN: Yeah.

DINESH: So I'm saying, all right. The way to take away the kind of smear campaign is to -- is to take a pause and dive into the meaning of these terms, really show that the left is the party of fascism. And I'm hoping that, in the same way, it will strip the fascist card of its kind of power to shut down debate. And not just shut down debate. The left is using the charge of fascism to justify all kinds of behavior that would never otherwise be condoned.

I mean, for example, we said about Obama, A, we're not going to show up at his inauguration. B, we're going to disrupt it. C, we're going to get him on obstruction of justice, even if there was no underlying crime. People would be apoplectic. They would think -- they would think we had lost our minds. But the left goes, of course, we do all this stuff. But we're doing it because we're fighting Hitler by the '30s. We're using by any means necessary.

GLENN: But do you believe that -- because I think this is actually a losing strategy. Because I do believe that I know Democrats who say, you know, they were out marching against the guy on the first weekend. We have absolutely no credibility. Would you just shut up. And when something is real, deal with it.

I think both sides, excusing anything and being offended by everything, those are both losing strategies in the end. Do you agree with that or not?

DINESH: I do agree with that. I mean, I do agree with that. The other problem I think is that the intellectual quality of our public debate has really dropped.

GLENN: There is an intellectual --

DINESH: I mean, I think back when I was 22, I looked up to people like Milton Friedman, Solzhenitsyn, Friedrich Hayek, even William F. Buckley. Not only their -- their rhetorical excellence and philosophical range, but their style. There was a kind of elegance to them that seems to have diminished, if not disappeared, from public life.

And there is no -- you know, the other problem is, you know, for example, ever since the election, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher, they've been bloviating about fascism almost non-stop. So now I have a book. And I said to them, okay. Guys, let's have it out. Let's see if fascism really belongs on the right or the left.

Dead silence, you know. Not a word.

GLENN: They won't put you on.

DINESH: They won't put me on. Because I think they're scared. I think they know that they don't know what they're talking about, and they know that the moment --

GLENN: Well, it's all footnoted. You have all the sources in the back. I mean, you can disagree with conclusions that you might make. But facts are facts. Facts are facts.

DINESH: That's absolutely true. When you -- when you look at the -- the actual attributions by Hitler, "I'm getting this idea from the Jacksonian Democrats of the 19th century, and they're the ones who threw the Indians off their land, they displaced them, they took over their land, they enslaved the ones that remained. I'm going to do that in Poland. In the Slavic countries in central Europe, in Russia. I'm going to settle it with German families." I mean, this is out of the mouth of Hitler, you might say. And very hard to deny. Either he said it or he didn't. But it's right there in Mein Kampf.

STU: We were talking in the break about similarities of the rise of the Ku Klux Klan and the Brownshirts and how they rose to power at the same time. The same strength, really. The same types of tactics.

Obviously, in America, so far, thankfully, we've been able to avoid the worst parts of what happened out of those movements. Even though they were terrible here, they never rose to those levels. Was it the Constitution? Is it the Founders that -- that prevented that rise of those terrible elements in our country? What was the difference?

DINESH: Well, first of all, I don't think you can say that we were spared those horrors.

GLENN: No, we weren't.

DINESH: Because if you think about it, number one, the racist regime of the Nazis lasted for 12 years. 1933 to 1945. The racist regime that the Democrats established lasted for over 100 years, from I would say the 1820s until at least the 1950s and in both cases, you had racial terrorism, the Klan, the Brownshirts, that was then replaced by systematic laws that inferior-ized a whole group. So even Hitler talked about -- he said -- Hitler shut down the Brownshirts. He goes, "This is emotional anti-Semitism."

GLENN: Uh-huh.

DINESH: He goes, the Nuremberg laws and the subsequent laws, those are, what he called, "rational anti-Semitism." The state will treat you as the inferior creature you are. We don't need to have hooligans beat you up on the street.

And the Democratic South did exactly the same thing. The ruling power said, we don't need the Klan running around burning people's homes. We will just establish two separate societies: White people on top, black people at the bottom. They won't associate a whole lot with each other. Two separate societies inside of one.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Dinesh D'Souza. The name of the book is The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left. The Big Lie by Dinesh D'Souza. Always good to have you. Thanks, Dinesh.

DINESH: A real pleasure.

RADIO

INSIDE Trump’s soul: How a bullet changed his heart forever

“I have a new purpose,” then-candidate Donald Trump told reporter Salena Zito after surviving the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. Salena joins Glenn Beck to reveal what Trump told her about God, his purpose in life, and why he really said, “Fight! Fight! Fight!”, as she details in her new book, “Butler: The Untold Story of the Near Assassination of Donald Trump and the Fight for America's Heartland”.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Salena, congratulations on your book. It is so good.

Just started reading it. Or listening to it, last night.

And I wish you would have -- I wish you would have read it. But, you know, the lady you have reading it is really good.

I just enjoy the way you tell stories.

The writing of this is the best explanation on who Trump supporters are. That I think I've ever read, from anybody.

It's really good.

And the description of your experience there at the edge of the stage with Donald Trump is pretty remarkable as well. Welcome to the program.

SALENA: Thank you, Glenn. Thank you so much for having me.

You know, I was thinking about this, as I was ready to come on. You and I have been along for this ride forever. For what?

Since 2006? 2005?

Like 20 years, right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

SALENA: And I've been chronicling the American people for probably ten more years, before that. And it's really remarkable to me, as watching how this coalition has grown. Right?

And watching how people have the -- have become more aspirational.

And that's -- and that is what the conservative populist coalition is, right?

It is the aspirations of many, but the celebration of the individual.

And chronicling them, yeah. Has been -- has been, a great honor.

GLENN: You know, I was thinking about this yesterday, when -- when Elon Musk said he was starting another party.

And somebody asked me, well, isn't he doing what the Tea Party tried to do?

No. The Tea Party was not going to start a new party.

It was to -- you know, it was to coerce and convince the Republican Party to do the right thing. And it worked in many ways. It didn't accomplish what we hoped.

But it did accomplish a lot of things.

Donald Trump is a result of the Tea Party.

I truly believe that. And a lot of the people that were -- right?

Were with Donald Trump, are the people that were with the Tea Party.

SALENA: That's absolutely right.

So that was the inception.

So American politics has always had movements, that have been just outside of a party. Or within a party.

That galvanize and broaden the coalition. Right? They don't take away. Or walk away, and become another party.

If anything, if there is a third party out there, it's almost a Republican Party.

Because it has changed in so many viable and meaningful ways. And the Tea Party didn't go away. It strengthened and broadened the Republican Party. Because these weren't just Republicans that became part of this party.

It was independents. It was Democrats.

And just unhappy with the establishment Republicans. And unhappy with Democrats.

And that -- that movement is what we -- what I see today.

What I see every day. What I saw that day, in butler, when I showed I happen at that rally.

As I do, so many rallies, you know, throughout my career. And that one was riveting and changed everything.

GLENN: You made a great case in the opening chapter. You talk about how things were going for Donald Trump.

And how this moment really did change everything for Donald Trump.

Changed the trajectory, changed the mood.

I mean, Elon Musk was not on the Trump train, until this.

SALENA: Yeah.

GLENN: Moment. What do I -- what changed? How -- how did that work?

And -- and I contend, that we would have much more profound change, had the media actually done their job and reported this the way it really was. Pragmatism

SALENA: You know, and people will find this in the book. I'm laying on the ground with an agent on top of me.

I'm 4 feet away from the president.

And there's -- there's notices coming up on my phone. Saying, he was hit by broken glass.

And to this take, that remains part of this sibling culture, in American politics.

Because reporters were -- were so anxious to -- to right what they believed happened.

As opposed to what happened.

And it's been a continual frustration of mine, as a reporter, who is on the ground, all the time.

And I'll tell you, what changed in that moment.

And I say a nuance, and I believe nuance is dead in American journalism.

But it was a nuance and it was a powerful conversation, that I had with President Trump, the next day. He called me the next morning.

But it's a powerful conversation I had with him, just two weeks ago.

When he made this decision to say, fight, fight, fight.

People have put in their heads, why they think he said it. But he told me why he said that. And he said, Salena, in that moment, I was not Donald Trump the man. I was a former president. I was quite possibly going to be president again.

And I had an obligation to the country, and to the office that I have served in, to project strength. To project resolve.

To project that we will not be defeated.

And it's sort of like a symbolic eagle, that is always -- you know, that symbol that we look at, when we think about our country.

He said, that's why I said that. I didn't want the people behind me panicking. I didn't want the people watching, panicking.

I had to show strength. And it's that nuance -- that I think people really picked up on.

And galvanized people.

GLENN: So he told me, when he was laying down on the stage.

And you can hear him. Let me get up. Let me get up.

I've got to get up.

He told me, as I was laying on the stage. I asked him, what were you thinking? What was going through your head? Now, Salena, I don't know about you.

But with me. It would be like, how do I get off the stage? My first was survival.

He said, what was going on through his mind was, you're not pathetic. This is pathetic.

You're not afraid. Get up.

Get up.

And so is that what informed his fight, fight, fight, of that by the time that he's standing up, he's thinking, I'm a symbol? Or do you think he was thinking, I'm a symbol, this looks pathetic. It makes you look weak.

Stand up. How do you think that actually happened?

SALENA: He thinks, and we just talked about this weeks ago. He -- you know, and this is something that he's really thought about.

Right? You know, he's gone over and over and over. And also, purpose and God. Right? These are things that have lingered with him.

You know, he -- he thought, yes.

He did think, it was pathetic that he was on the ground. But he wasn't thinking about, I'm Donald Trump. It's pathetic.

He's thinking, my country is symbolically on the ground. I need to get up, and I need to show that my country is strong.

That our country is resolute.

And I need people to see that.

We can't go on looking like pathetic.

Right?

And I think that then goes to that image of Biden.

GLENN: You have been with so many presidents.

How many presidents do you think that you've personally been with, would have thought that and reacted that way?

SALENA: Probably only Reagan. Reagan would have. Reagan probably would have thought that.

And if you remember how he was out like standing outside.

You know, waving out the window. Right?

After he was shot.

GLENN: At the hospital, right.

SALENA: Had he not been knocked out, unconscious, you know, he probably would have done the same thing.

Because he was someone who deeply believed in American exceptionalism.

And American exceptionalism does not go lay on the ground.

GLENN: And the symbol.

Right. The symbol of the presidency.

SALENA: Yeah. Absolutely. And I think that affects him today.

GLENN: So let me go back to God.

Because you talked to him the next day. And your book Butler.

He calls you up.

I love the fact that your parents would be ashamed of you. On what you said to him.

The language you used. That you just have to read the book.

It's just a great part.

But he calls you the next morning. And wants to know if you're okay.

And you -- you then start talking to him, about God.

And I was -- I was thinking about this, as I was listening to it. You know, Lincoln said, I wasn't -- I wasn't a Christian.

Even though, he was.

I wasn't a Christian, when I was elected. I wasn't a Christian when my son died.

I became a Christian at Gettysburg.

Is -- is -- I mean, I believe Donald Trump always believes in God, et cetera, et cetera.

Do you think there was a real profound change at Butler with him?

SALENA: Absolutely. You know, he called me seven times that day. Seven times, the take after seven.

GLENN: Crazy.

SALENA: Talked about. And I think he was looking for someone that he knew, that was there. And to try to sort it out.

Right? And I let him do most of the talking. I didn't pressure him.

At all. I believed that he was having -- you know, he was struggling. And he needed to just talk. And I believed my purpose was to listen.

Right? I know other reporters would have handled it differently. And that's okay. That's not the kind of reporter that I am.

And I myself was having my own like, why didn't I die?

Right?

Because it went right over my head.

And -- and so I -- he had the conversation about God.

He's funny. I thought it was the biggest mosquito in the world that hit me.

But he had talked profoundly about purpose. You know, and God.

And how God was in that moment.

It --

GLENN: I love the way you -- in the book, I love the way you said that as he's kind of working it out in his own he head.

He was like, you know, I -- I -- I always knew that there was some sort of, you know -- that God was present.

He said, but now that this has happened.

I look back at all of the trials.

All of the tribulations. Literally, the trials.

All of the things that have happened. And he's like, I realized God was there the whole time.

SALENA: Yes. He does. And it's fascinating to have been that witness to history, to have those conversations with him. Because I'm telling you. And y'all know, I can talk. I didn't say much of anything.

I just -- I just listened. I felt that was my purpose, in that moment.

To give him that space, to work it out.

I'm someone that is, you know, believes in God.

I'm Catholic. I followed my faith.

And -- and so, I thought, well, this is why God put me here. Right?

And to -- to have that -- to hear him talk about purpose, to hear him say, Salena. Why did I put a chart down?

I'm like, sir. I don't know. I thought you were Ross Perot for a second.

He never has a chart. And he laughed. And then he said, why did I put that chart down?

By that term, I never turned my head away from people at the rally. That's true.

That relationship is very transactional. It's very -- they feed off of each other.

It's a very emotive moment when you attend a rally. Because he has a way of talking at a rally. That you believe that you are seeing.

And he said, and I never turn my head away.

I never turn my head away.

Why did I turn my head away?

I don't remember consciously thinking about turning my head away. And then he says to me, that was God, wasn't it?

Yes, sir. It was. It was God.

And he said, that's -- that's why I have a new purpose.

And so, Glenn. I think it's important, when you look at the breadth of what has happened, since he was sworn in.

You see that purpose, every day.

He doesn't let up.

He continues going.

And it brings back to the beginning of the book.

Where you find out, that there was another president that was shot at in Butler.

And that was George Washington. And how different the country would have been, had he died in that moment.

And now think about how different the country would be, had President Trump died in that moment. There would be --

GLENN: We're talking to -- we're talking to Salena Zito. About her new book called Butler. The assassination attempt on President Trump. And it is riveting.

And, you know, it is so good. I wish the press would read it. Because it really explains who we are, who Trump supporters are. Who are, you know, red staters. It is so good at that. She's the best at that.

RADIO

Is Pam Bondi hiding something? The truth behind the Epstein tape blunder

Glenn Beck makes the case that Attorney General Pam Bondi should resign over her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation - not because of any potential cover-up, but solely because of how incompetent her rollout of the investigation has been.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. I want Pam Bondi fired. I want Pam Bondi fired.

STU: This escalated quickly.

GLENN: And here's why. Here's why. Do you release a tape that is supposed to be the evidence, do you release the tape, and then let the public find out for themselves, that there's an edit in the tape?

STU: That's an excusable mistake. I mean, I don't know that she did it, I guess.

GLENN: You know what, it could have been just a digital jump in the tape.

It's a minute lost. Okay?

So let's just say -- let's just give them every benefit of the doubt, and say, it was just a digital jump in the tape.

Okay?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Do you not put an intern on it, just to say, watch the clock!

And make sure there's no jumps or edit in the tape.

Because we know.

STU: Everyone is going to watch.

GLENN: 300 million people will be watching it. And somebody will take the time to watch the clock.

So watch the clock.

Is every minute accounted for? You didn't do that? You didn't do that.

STU: I think you can pretty easily say, that if you wanted to, right?

And your goal was -- you wanted to edit out -- it would be very easy to edit in a minute of footage.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: And that no one knows. Just make the clock continuous.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: It would be clear.

If you were trying to cover that, it would be --

GLENN: This is incompetence.

STU: However, highlighting your point to incompetence. At the very least, if you have a jump, you say at the beginning. There's an error at this point.

This is -- we know this is there.

You know, the fact that you release it as proof without acknowledging that minute is -- I just don't understand how you can make a mistake like that.

When your goal here is supposedly to put everyone's mind at ease.

I don't know. I don't know.

But there's more to it, than that.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

Let me go back to before we leave. Just this one.

Remember when I said yesterday, your wife finds receipts for you buying presents at Tiffany's that she never got.

That, you know, you were in a hotel that she never came to.

You were -- you were not coming home for dinner. You had long weekends and everything else. It doesn't mean you were cheating.

STU: And a traveling jewelry investor.

GLENN: Right. But she -- she should demand the evidence, because it -- you don't want that hanging there. On your relationship.

It will just fester.

Now, you give her the evidence. But then she finds out that, oh. Well, it's the wrong receipt.

It was a -- it was a receipt, you know, that you explained away. But what you -- what you used as proof, was not the same receipt.

You were like, no.

See, honey. This is when we went to the hotel, together.

And she looks at it. And she's like, oh, okay.

And then she has it for a while. And she looks at it.

Like, wait a minute. The date is different on this one. This is not the same receipt.

That's a problem! That's a problem.

And it doesn't mean that he was cheating on you.

It just means. What the hell is going on?

Are you this stupid?

STU: And it would certainly make you have legitimate questions about --

GLENN: It just makes you question things for. Now, if it wasn't for the jump in the tape. And I'm not even going to call it an edit. Because I don't think it was an edit. I think it was jump in the tape. As if the jump in the tape wasn't incompetent enough for you, listen to this one. Jason is here with us.

Hi, Jason.

JASON: Hi, Glenn. What a morning, wow.

GLENN: What a morning it is, wow.

So, Jason, what else have you found?

JASON: Okay. So the more and more we looked at this tape.

I started looking.

It was weird. Because it looked like a janitor's closet.

Door 26.

And you were like, shut up, this is not a janitor's closet. I don't know what this is.

But I was like, I can tell you, there's a woman that looks like a janitor that comes out and supposedly the person that that they're saying is his cell. Which they're not, by the way. This was people on social media was saying, this is his cell.

Was coming out with a trash can.
So I looked around to see, if there was any confirmation of what this cell was.

I found an OIG report from the Justice Department two years ago, that shows the camera angle, and the one camera that was actually working.

So you can see the diagram, and I think we actually have it if you're watching this right now. There's a diagram that shows where this camera is.
It shows where Epstein's cell is. And the big thing that stands out, Glenn, is this camera does not even have eyes on Epstein's cell at all. Like, not at all.

STU: Incredible.
JASON: There's four different wings here. There is a service wing. And that's what we're looking at, with the Door 46.

That's a service entrance, or staff entrance. Now, you can't see on the lower level of Epstein's cell at all.

So this is what it makes it look even crazier for that one minute that's missing.

And I will say -- that okay. Let me just say it this way.

I've spent years and years and years, looking at surveillance and security camera footage as you know, in my previous job.

I've never seen an over one-minute jump right at a time that would be very, very I don't know, just convenient.

I've never seen that before. In all my years looking at these things.

STU: There's no reason. Why would you say that minute would be convenient? You're just saying, that one minute being gone could be convenient.

JASON: It's convenient in this entire time frame.

Based on this camera angel.

It's convenient, that 60 seconds would be great for someone walking across that lower level.

60 seconds would be perfect if you wanted to conceal the fact that someone would have worked across that area. That's why --

GLENN: Here's why -- here's why I didn't buy into this, at first.

Okay. Sixty seconds, to open the door, kill him. And then leave.

Okay?

But look at the diagram. If you look at the diagram, where the camera is, there is a -- just a -- maybe a foot space, where the camera is not able to see. Where there is a door, from the staff area.

Okay?

STU: Are you looking at -- because I think -- it's hard to tell from this.

Are you looking -- is this diagram the top floor or the bottom floor.

Jason, do you have any idea?

JASON: So I think Epstein is on.

STU: The upper floors. Right.

GLENN: Okay. So I'm looking at where the staff area is, okay. See the yellow triangle and the red box, where it's his cell.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Okay. So there is one way out of the staff area. And it's right below the camera.

STU: Like underneath the floor, essentially, of where the camera is.

GLENN: Yeah. On the floor. If the camera is up on a ceiling. Is that what you -- what -- you're saying.

STU: Yeah. The camera is -- the camera is from on the second floor, shooting down.

And the evidence that they're basically proclaiming here. And this is true.

You know, what Jason is saying, is true.

That you can't see the door of the Epstein cell. What you can see is a common area, that in theory, you would need to cross to get to the cell.

STU: What you're saying, Glenn. The camera does not actually show 100 percent of the potential paths to get there. Right?

JASON: It doesn't.

STU: If you cross right in front of the banister here on the bottom floor.

GLENN: There's no way you will see.

Okay. So wait a minute. I just want to make sure. We are talking about the same thing. If you look at the videotape, it's the white room, down stairs.

Right? And so it's where the garbage can is, down there.

STU: Below that.

GLENN: So Epstein's room would be below the garbage can.

STU: No. Epstein's room, if you look out -- the area that you can see.

And I apologize for radio listeners here that aren't seeing the visual. But I want to make sure we get this right.

There's an open area, where the banister is, and it shows the common area behind it. Right?

If you go on the right side of the common area from our view.

Outside of the view, to the right. Is where the entrance to the cell is.

The stairs up to the cell.

GLENN: So all you have to do. You don't have to cross the floor.

Why do you have to cross the floor? You can go through the door. You can go through the door, and see. And just stay against the wall.

STU: Yeah. I guess, maybe.

And Jason, maybe you know this.

Maybe it's explained somewhere else in the report.

Is it possible that they're saying, all the other entrances, to get to that area, have cameras. So they didn't see anybody walking into those areas.

GLENN: Why wouldn't you show the other --

STU: Right.

GLENN: You know, this is not proof that anybody did anything.

STU: No!

GLENN: This is proof, they're -- Pam Bondi needs to be fired.

Who is rolling this out?

The Little Rascals.

Panky, look, I've got some videotape. What are you doing? This is ridiculous!

This is such absolute incompetence! Incompetence.

STU: It's incredible. The fact that they would release that because I think everybody had the same -- even Jason, as a super-duper skeptic on this, even you had the assumption that what they were saying was, the green doors were the cells, or at least the cell area.

GLENN: Right, that's what I thought.

STU: That's what everyone thought, when they saw it. Now, to be clear, the report, as you pointed out, Jason. Previously had stated in June, this diagram that shows they're talking about the common area.

So that's not like -- but like, they, A, should have been very clear about that. What they're talking about is the common area.

They shouldn't put that in the announcement.

GLENN: Stu, we're going upstairs today.

Okay? To my house. And, you know, I have that balcony, upstairs by the fireplace.

Where you haven't -- like at midnight last night.

Because it's like a day's journey from anywhere.

GLENN: Right. But we're going to go upstairs. And you put a camera, okay? Down into the great room.

STU: Right. You want to recreate it in your house.

GLENN: I do. And I want to show you, I can get to places in the room, as long -- because there's a whole floor.

The balcony shows part, but it doesn't show the door.

I can -- wait until -- I got to prove, that we're going to do this live on YouTube, or something on -- maybe on X today, as soon as we get off the air.

Because I -- this is ridiculous.

STU: It's unbelievable. Again, it doesn't prove that this -- you know, he was killed.

However, it is -- the fact that they're releasing a video that has this many holes to it, to a passing -- again, the person you're trying to make feel better about all of this is someone very interested in the detail of it. Right?

It's not someone who has a passing interest. You're not releasing this to some person who kind of knows who Jeffrey Epstein is. This is intentionally designed to try to push down some weird argument as a conspiracy theory.

GLENN: You're also -- also -- and, you know what, I'm not arguing anything.

I'm arguing this is incompetence.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: I'm not arguing that he killed himself.

Or he didn't kill -- I don't know!

I don't know. I don't know.

But this isn't helping.

You know, not only are you saying, that these people have some interest in it.

Well, you know, these people are interested in the details.

No!

You're releasing it to a bumbling of people, who many of them have the details. But many of them are hostile to what you're saying.

So you better have a buttoned up case.

STU: Right.

GLENN: You better not have anything that they find out later, wait. Wait a minute.

What?

STU: Right. And it could be -- you know, you could make the couple of arguments that you probably could make here.

One, they don't actually care about this. And they're annoyed they have to deal with it.

So they threw it out there.

Terrible incompetence. If that's the truth. That's inexcusable.

The other thing they might argue. And this could be part of it.

There were reports at least, that this got leaked. That this came out essentially earlier than they wanted it to.

So the rollout was not as planned, as they thought it was going to be.

Axios reported this exclusively. Now, it's possible, they linked it to Axios.

It's not exactly a typical location of a Trump leak.

GLENN: Who? The Justice Department, or the FBI? That's what I want to know.

First of all, this administration has no leaks. We just bombed Iran without any leaks.

STU: Yeah. Different -- different wing of the government. Still, I get what you're saying.

GLENN: Yeah, right.

STU: A lot of this has been tight.

But there does seem to be.

You know, there's a lot of big personalities. There's always reported squabbling going on.

Who knows how this was released and who didn't.

That may be true. That part of the rollout was heard.

Right? Because it was released when they were ready. That might be true.

It still doesn't really explain. The video is a video.

They definitely posted it. They posted it like that. They posted it -- they had a memo that explained what the video was, and did not mention anything like that. That mentioned the --

GLENN: That's all you have to do.

Hey, there's a one minute jump. Here's why it's there.

STU: Again, even with that explanation, which would making me happier.

Right? That it's available.

It still wouldn't make a person who believes in this theory.

GLENN: Right. I can tell you -- I can tell you for a fact, nothing is going to satisfy everyone.

STU: Right.

GLENN: But you at least have to try to make the easy things go away.

RADIO

Will Medicaid cuts KILL Americans? Glenn reveals the FACTS!

Democrats claim that the Big, Beautiful Bill will take Medicaid and Medicare away from many Americans and even “kill” people. But is any of this true? Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere review just the facts and explain who’s actually affected by the changes.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Can I address some of the hyperbole around the big, beautiful bill, just a little bit.

If there's anything in the big, beautiful bill to worry about, it's the increase in spending.

Because the spending ourself into oblivion is an actual threat.

To the country. But that's not what anybody is talking about. What everybody seems to be talking about is the tax cuts. Which were already there. Or the tax cuts like no tax for tips. Which you would think the party of the little people. You know, the Democrats. Would all be for. But they're not.

Because they're not party of the little people anymore. And those had to be offset.

Okay. Offset. By what?

Well, by cutting spending. But cutting what spending?

Not cutting spending. Let me just say this. If I said, you know, I made $250,000 a year. And this year, we were going to spend $300,000.
Okay?

And you would say, immediately, Glenn. You can't do that.

And I would say, I've been doing that for 30 years. Okay. You might say, the bank is not going to give a loan.

But then if I came to you and said, yeah. I'm spending $300,000 a year. And my wife and I make 250 or 200,000 a year. But, you know, next year, I was going to spend $500,000.

Did you get a raise? No. I didn't get a raise. I still make 250,000 dollars a year between my wife and I.

But I'm going to spend 500 and not 300. And then somebody came in, like an accountant with some muscle.

And they said, Glenn, you cannot spend $500,000 a year!

Would it make sense if I went back to spending 300, not 200, which I had.

But 300, which I had been spending every year, would it make sense to you to -- for me to say, my children are now going to starve? My children are now going to starve.

Look at the austerity program that I am on.

My gosh, they just -- no. They didn't cut anything. They must cut thinking.

They cut the increase inning spending.

That's what they cut.

And, Stu, could you please explain Medicare.

I mean, all of the people. I know they warned us.

I didn't believe the death squads would actually go out.

And, you know, they want these people off Medicare so badly.

Or Medicaid.

They just sent out death squads. Trump is not waiting for them to die, because he's not waiting for them to get their prescriptions now he just wants them slaughtered in the street.

STU: Yeah, that's the efficiency of the Trump administration. He wants these people dead so badly, he's just killing them in the streets. Actually, no, none of that is happening.

And the Medicaid cuts as you point out, are largely cuts to future increases that have not occurred.

The biggest chunk of this is the work requirements. You've heard this, Glenn.

And, you know, I went through this. And I was like, this can't possibly be what they mean.

I said, wait a minute. When they say work requirement cuts, what does that mean?

So I dove into it a little bit. Basically, what they're saying, you, if you're an able-bodied adult, so that does not include old people, does not include people who are sick and can't work. And it also does not include people who have small children, even if they are able-bodied.

And when I say small, I mean 12 and under. So if you have a 12-year-old. You're completely exempt from this.

But able-bodied adults.

GLENN: Okay. On people in wheelchairs.

STU: No. Gosh, again, I know this is tough. Yeah, this is where it gets difficult.

GLENN: Wait. I'm having a hard time following this. What now?.

STU: So you're an able-bodied adult, that does not have small children.

GLENN: No small children.

STU: You would be required to get Medicaid, to work 20 hours a week.

Now, you might --

GLENN: Twenty hours a week.

STU: Or 80 hours a month.

GLENN: Or 80 hours a month.

That's almost half a full-time job.

STU: Now, you might say to yourself. And this is actually true.

Some people can't get jobs. Right?

I'm sure, there are people trying to get part-time jobs. And maybe can't get them.

Those people will just lose their Medicaid. Well, as you may understand.

Of course not.

Because what you have to do then is go through a process, that you're basically telling them, you're attempting to get a job. Or you're volunteering somewhere, to meet that requirement.

So basically, you have to fill out -- yeah. It's like unemployment.

You have to at least fill out some paperwork here.

GLENN: It's the exact opposite.

Let me see if I have this right.

It's the exact opposite of unemployment which we've had forever.

Which if you're looking for a job, but can't get it. You can still have unemployment.

But it's the exact opposite. Right?

Especially if you're nursing sextuplets.

STU: Again, you're not very close to the truth.

You're a little bit off on this one.

GLENN: No. Huh!

STU: By the way, Glenn, you might say to yourself, wait. How is that a Medicaid cut?

Because they're not cutting anyone's eligibility here. Unless they don't want to meet the requirement.

Of course, there's always been requirements to all of these programs.

So meeting the requirements have always been part of getting on to Medicaid.

This requirement, if you decide basically not to do it. And not participate. And not fill out the paperwork.

Then, yes. You will lose your Medicaid coverage.

What they're saying, hold on. All right.

GLENN: No. I just want to make sure I have it right.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: If you are blind, you're deaf.

STU: No. Again, no.

GLENN: You have no friends, and you can't get out of the house, and you've been on Medicaid, somehow or another, you signed up for that. But now, you don't even know, because you can't hear the news. You certainly can't fill out a form. Because you have no eyes.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: They just come in and rip your Medicaid away?

STU: No. None of what you said is accurate.

Though, it is calm considering some of the accusations -- comparisons made bit left right now.

But, yeah.

So if you are an able-bodied adult that decides, you know what, I don't feel like filling out the paperwork, or I don't feel like going to job interviews, or I don't feel like volunteering, then yes. You could lose -- but that's what they're saying the cuts are.

They think 317 billion dollars worth of people will not bother doing those things. For whatever reason. Maybe because they had more money than they said. Maybe because they're lazy.

Maybe because -- I'm sure there's some case where some -- I don't know.

I can't think of the case.

GLENN: Blind person.

STU: Because the ailments are covered here.

But, yes. Maybe it's some particular skin color. Then they would reject you.

I don't know.

And it's not just that. There are other cuts. For example, some of the cuts are, they're eliminate duplicate Medicaid enrollment.

If you happen to have Medicaid.

GLENN: I can't double-dip.

STU: In two different states. They're going to try to stop you from having it in two states.

And instead, make you have it one state. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Hold on just one second.

I have two legs. I have two arms. I have two eyes. I have two nostrils. I have two ears.

I can't have two Medicaid coverages. It's insane!

STU: I know.

It's really, really brutal.

GLENN: I have two kidneys. I can only have one kidney now, you know, repaired?

STU: Now --

GLENN: Is that what you're saying?

STU: That's not what I'm saying. But, yes. I'm sure that's what's being reported out there by Dana Bash.

Another one, I will give you here, Glenn. They talked about immigrants.

You know, immigrants getting on their Medicaid cut. Now, this is tough. What this bill does, I want you to hold on to your hat here, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: If you have green card holders and other certain immigrants, some will lose their coverage. Or actually, sorry, eligibility will -- retain for those people.

Certain other immigrants may lose their coverage. The current law says, all who are lawfully present.

That will kick in after a -- how many year waiting period?

Let me guess, it's a five-year waiting period.

So it will be the next president who has to deal with this, when future Congress will just put it right back in. And it's not a savings at all.

And then you have Medicaid death checks. They're going to require --

GLENN: They're checking on whether your debt? Look at this! It's crazy.

STU: It's brutal. It really is.

GLENN: You're going to kick all of the immigrants off in five years.

STU: No.

GLENN: And then you're checking to see if old people are dead!

When will you leave these people alone?

STU: I know. So, anyway, we can go through this stuff all day. But as you point out, most of this stuff is not at all, what the left is saying it is.

It's not the desperate Medicaid cuts that are going to ruin everybody's lives. A lot of them are just really common sense stuff, making sure you don't have them in two states. I don't know what the positive argument is for that. But they'll make it.

GLENN: Well, they don't have one. That's why they don't make it about that.

Glenn's Show Prep

'The Big Lie': Dinesh D'Souza Drops Some Knowledge on Neo-Nazi Roots of the American Left

INSIDE Trump’s soul: How a bullet changed his heart forever

Transcript

Is Pam Bondi hiding something? The truth behind the Epstein tape blunder

Transcript

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's Connections to Intel Agencies

Will Medicaid cuts KILL Americans? Glenn reveals the FACTS!

Transcript