BLOG

Stephen Crowder: Google Clearly Doesn’t ‘Want to Discuss Issues Anymore’

A Google software engineer lost his job this week after writing a 10-page internal memo critiquing the company’s diversity efforts.

In the memo, the engineer gathered some general observations based on research about men and women and what they can both offer to a company, suggesting some ways that tech jobs could become more friendly to women. He also objected to company programs that are only offered to employees based on race and gender.

“Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story,” he wrote in the memo.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in a statement that “portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”

Stephen Crowder of LouderWithCrowder.com joined Glenn on radio Thursday to share his take on Google’s decision to fire the engineer.

“Is that still hate speech?” Crowder sarcastically said of the memo. “When you read the entire memo in context … I go ‘OK, this is a guy who’s a classical liberal … and he’s writing something genuinely trying to be productive.’”

 

GLENN: Steven Crowder, welcome to the program. I was talking to a millennial yesterday, a very smart, well-thought out millennial who said, "You know, I don't agree with this, but I have to tell you what my feelings were when I first heard about this memo." She said, "I don't like people telling me what I can and can't do because of my genetics.

And she said, you know, "I heard the quotes, that he was saying that I can't do these things because I'm genetically predisposed to X, Y or Z." And she had a big problem with this.

Now, the good thing about this millennial is she moved past her feelings into thought, but that's not really happening, especially even in the press.

STEVEN: Yeah, well, thanks for having me, Glenn.

You're absolutely right. You know, a couple of points about the memo. I hate to use the fake news hashtag, but when CNN goes out and says, anti-diversity manifestos, they call it, like it's The Count of Monte Cristo writing on the stone wall, next to days in prison. Manifesto. Anti-diversity. And then it says anti-woman. Well, the quotes they take are where this guy essentially says, listen, Google is essentially pushing diversity, hiring for diversity's sake. And it hasn't really been that successful. We may want to -- and, by the way, I'm not saying that all men and women are the same. There's a significant overlap. Of course, there are people who would fall on both signs of the spectrum when it comes to attributes and perhaps some shortcomings.

But as a general rule, this may be why we don't have as many women in tech, and he talks about how women generally value work-life balance over status, whereas men will drive themselves into the -- they'll work themselves into the ground for status. It does say, "Yeah, you know, listen, women tend to handle stress more emotionally. It does list some characteristics that might not lend themselves well to high-stress tech situations."

But then, and here's what the media doesn't cover: On the flip side, he says, "No, I strongly believe in diversity." And I think if we want to hire more women, we might want to place emphasis on the -- on the issues where women perhaps are more valuable to the company.

For example, they're more cooperative. In general, they're more agreeable than their male counterparts. In general, they're more people-oriented. They're more empathetic.

We don't really place a strong value on those attributes that Google in these positions -- we might do better to do so.

So, listen, is that still hate speech? Do you lock this guy up with the Nazis? I don't know. Leave it up to people to decide. But when you read the entire memo in context, I can't see -- you know, Glenn, this is one of those issues where I read it, I go, okay. This is a guy who is a classical liberal. He even gets some digs in at conservatives in this memo. People read it. He's certainly not a right-winger. And he's writing something genuinely trying to be productive. Generally writing out points as to where Google may be able to improve.

And Google says, we can't -- this is hate speech. We have to fire this guy. Which tells me, if this guy can't do it, you know, you and I haven't got a shot. They're not interested in a dialogue. For the same reason we couldn't have anyone from Google or anyone on Google's side come on my program to argue this issue. They don't want to discuss issues anymore. They've gone too far around the back.

GLENN: So a couple of things: I would agree with you. And I have not been able to find somebody that can make a cogent argument on how this isn't the beginning of fascism in the Google world. The institutionalization of fascism in the Google world.

I really want to understand how silencing somebody who is really, truly making valid points. You don't have to agree with them. But bringing out a valid argument. How the best way to deal with that is to silence them and to shun them and to name-call. That's fascism.

And why this is concerning -- you know, if they were just making ashtrays, I wouldn't really care. But they're not.

STEVEN: Yeah.

GLENN: These are the people who are the gateway to information. And if they are saying, "This information isn't worthy to even be discussed at the levels in Google," are they really going to allow us schlubs who don't know anything to access that information in an equal and fair way? I don't think so. It wouldn't -- it wouldn't make any sense at all. It would be completely inconsistent.

STEVEN: Well, you're talking about a company -- my friend Owen Benjamin talked about this on the program. You're talking about a company where when you Google how to be a better man, it shows you articles written from lesbians. So they can't help you be a better man, nor do they have any interest in doing so.

As a matter of fact, you mentioned fascism. You know, if you Google fascism, it says far-right ideology. You know, and then description. Description. But if you Google communism or socialism, there's no mention of the left. There's no mention of the left side of the political spectrum.

It really is -- and here's the deal: They have the right to do what they want. They have the right to fire this guy. I think we all agree on that.

GLENN: Yep.

STEVEN: What they can't do is say, we believe in diversity. We believe in difference of opinions and then fire somebody for a difference of opinion. That's the issue here, is the dishonesty. When like you've said, I've read anywhere from between 60 to 80 percent of our online interactions occur either somewhere between Google, Facebook, Twitter, or Amazon.

So when you think of how much information is controlled, it really is -- and there are a few. Listen, what's so offensive, are we really going to start firing people because someone says men and women are different? Are we at that point where it's offensive to say, hey -- and anyone who is married knows that it's true.

And, by the way, hey -- hey, men -- you can't say men and women are different. Men and women are exactly the same. Men can do everything women can do, and women can do everything men can do with the exact same results.

By the way, let's celebrate diversity.

Did I step into a time? What happened? What world did I fall into?

GLENN: And the fact that women and men are exactly the same, except they can't play the same sport. That's unfair. You're going to put women. Really? Women are going to have to compete with men on the basketball.

Well, wait. You were just saying that there wasn't a biological difference. What are you talking about?

STEVEN: Yeah. Unless it's a transgender, then just let him into the octagon to beat the living daylights out of women. That's progress.

I think, Glenn, I think that this is a real opportunity -- the pendulum swing states both ways. We've talked about that. You kind of saw that with Bush. Then the sort of anti-establishment sentiment from young people. Then it swung the other way with Barack Obama.

But the pendulum is swinging so quickly now. And I think the left has gone too far for it to swing back. I think you're seeing too many liberals. And we see this with our content, a lot of people who used to be liberal going, I just can't get on board with this. Once they read the memo, people go, "You know, it's offensive to say that men are more task-oriented. It's offensive to say women are more emotional."

It really is at a point -- and, by the way, really, what hurts people here is that they don't feel good about it. The women took a sick day at Google. They were so offended at the notion that they might find work too stressful, that they read this memo and took a sick day.

By the way, not all women are this weak, just the feminists at Google. That's important to note. I'm sure -- I'm sure your wife isn't.

My wife's reaction was so earnest. And it just hit me like a Mack Truck. She just said, "Do you have to talk about it? It makes me just so ashamed. Ugh, women who complain like that. They're just so weak. They're so obnoxious. Most women don't like to be around them. They're just draining." That's what my wife said. Isn't it ironic that a non-feminist, conservative, Christian woman finds feminists to be obnoxious in their weakness? And that's where we are.

GLENN: That's really -- but that is the progressive mantra, is weakness. Celebrate -- not celebrate diversity. Celebrate your weakness, and we will compensate. We will be your defender.

I think your -- this -- this millennial who said this, you know, I -- you know, this is the way I felt. I don't like people telling me one thing.

Well, wait. The other side is telling you that, oh, yes, you can do it, but only with special exemptions. Only with special protections. Only with special training.

No. I'm telling you if that's what you want to do, go do it. Go do it. How is that offensive to say, you don't need somebody in between you. That's just somebody sucking you dry of all of your power.

STEVEN: Right. A couple of things: You know, they say, I don't like being told what I can and can't do. And conservatives are saying, well, listen, we're not really telling you what you can and can't do. But we can all find common ground on one issue: Pullups. Right? Liberals want to lower the PT requirements in the military with pullups so that women can join more easily. And we say, hey, women biologically can do fewer pullups. So there's a great litmus test.

As far as what's offensive -- you know, offensive now isn't about intent. And we've talked about this with the Google algorithms. You know, for the most advanced tech company in the world, right? On my videos, Muslim singles and gay cruise ads are playing.

Well, we're trying to fix the algorithms. You're Google. If you can't associate proper advertisers with my -- who can?

So, I mean, we're talking about people's feelings. That is what it comes down to Google. It's not about intent. It's not about context. Leftists don't really understand context. Or they don't value context, I should say. Certainly, as a whole. Anyone can feel bad about anything. I'm feeling miserable this morning. You know why? It's stupid. But I have some nagging injuries.

So I haven't been able to go to the gym. So I've been doing these -- these water weight exercises. You know, those foam dumbbells in the pool. And I was thinking, you know, hey, good for me. I'm going out. I'm doing something.

So I go on Amazon to look to buy some, as opposed to the public pool where I've been going. And then I read the reviews, and it's nothing but 77-year-olds talking about their aquatic aerobic classes. And then all of a sudden, Amazon is tracking with advertisements and the ads, every time I'm in my browser of reverse mortgages. Or Wilford Brimley with diabetes. And I feel bad. I feel bad. It's my own doing.

STU: I believe it's pronounced diabetes.

It's interesting, Steven, it's a great point on the physical part of it. Because it's exactly the point he made in the memo, which is: If you look at the top 100 meter times of all time, the world record holder for women is slower than the yearly best times for high school men. I mean, there's a clear difference here. Right?

However, what that does not mean is that the all-time world record holder is not going to be a hell of a lot faster than me trying to run 100-meter. Point being, yes, on average, there are differences. But there are women in Google all the time that are outperforming men all the time. It's just a commentary on averages, and nobody is going to bother to take a look at that.

STEVEN: Sure.

GLENN: And who is it that is devaluing the basic intrinsic worth of the sexes? I'm not.

I believe that Women Are From Mars, Men Are From venus, or whichever planet it is. I believe that we are different for many different reasons. But it's important that we -- oh, my gosh -- celebrate that diversity. That we look and say, "This trait in a woman of being less about stuff is good." It's a good thing.

STEVEN: Right.

GLENN: And at the same time, the man is worried about stuff or thinking about stuff. When you put those two together, you have a nice balance. Why are we trying to destroy -- first, say that what men are is -- has no value. And what women are naturally also has no value. You have to be this thing that is not -- neither male nor female.

STEVEN: Right. And that's kind of -- you know, I want to go back to Stu real quick. I want to answer that. But I'll throw another one into the mix. We talked about 100-meter dash. You want to know something else?

Chess. There's a women's division for chess. Think about that for a second. It's not even close, if you look at the top players of all time. There is no female Bobby Fischer.

Now, women can enter the men's division in chess, and there have been some outliers. Maybe a couple cracked the top ranks throughout time, but then they have an exclusively women's division in chess, which is just significantly further behind.

Now, that does not mean that women are less intelligent. Chess is not an indicator of intelligence. But it is -- let's remove the physical. It is absolutely an indicator of how someone's brains work, how it processes information.

We can see the difference between standard people and ADHD people. We can see the difference between, you know, people who simply read differently, who have different faster reading comprehensions. It doesn't mean they're smarter. Some people are wired differently biologically.

To what you said, Glenn, you know, Christians, we have used this term for a long time, complimentarianism. You know, it goes back to Christ. Really, the first diversity celebrationist, I guess you'd say, where he said, hey, husbands, be good to your wives.

That was kind of new, the way he really placed emphasis on treating the women as the best among you. And then, women, submit to your husbands. And submit in the Biblical sense. Not submit like Muhammad. You're going to get a fresh one if you don't do exactly what I say, but submit meaning respect the authority in the household and love your husband. So this is what we've known for a long time, the truth we believe to be self-evident.

And I do think -- and you guys can tell me if you've noticed this or if you think I'm wrong, I think it's forced a lot of people to reexamine issues. They thought they were liberalized. You know, people -- I've had people go back to the same-sex marriage issue and say, "You know, I really just thought conservatives were just a bunch of anti-gay bigots." But now when I go back and I see some of the arguments, whether I agree with them or not, but I see some of the arguments where people said, "You know what, I just don't believe men and women are interchangeable. I do believe that a father is of intrinsic value and a mother is of intrinsic value. And that they are unique and not interchangeable." You know, once we said that's not the case culturally, we kind of opened the floodgates. And I've had people say, you know, I have to look back and see where we went around the bend.

GLENN: Steven Crowder from Louder with Crowder. I think you're exactly right. And I'm seeing it in not just this, but in many things. Sitting in Los Angeles with, you know, liberals who would have just thought that we were all just racist bigots for the last ten years. Actually sitting around a table and them saying, you know what, I'm actually for the Tenth Amendment. And I thought that was all racist. And now, suddenly, I find myself going, "Yeah, you know what, maybe we should have that Tenth Amendment." And then realizing, "Holy cow, wait a minute. I may have been wrong on this. I have to reevaluate a lot." That is happening.

And if we can open our arms and not say, "Yeah, told you so," and just be decent human beings with -- with the -- with the open mind and honest arguments, I think we will welcome a lot of people into the fold.

Steven Crowder, LouderwithCrowder.com. Thank you so much. We'll talk to you again, Steven. Appreciate it.

TV

Unmasking Antifa: The Dark Truth Behind Its Well-Funded Network | Glenn TV | Ep 461

The cities of Portland and Chicago are turning into war zones. Federal agents have been ambushed, police have been ordered to stand down, and mayors are defying the Constitution. It’s insurrection in plain sight. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to uncover the hidden support and funding networks propping up Antifa. Glenn debunks the myth that Antifa is decentralized and leaderless, tracing connections from Soros to Tides and other shadowy nonprofits. Plus, independent journalist Nick Sortor joins from outside an ICE facility in Portland, where he was wrongfully arrested by police following attacks by Antifa members.

RADIO

This INSANE answer may have cost this Democrat her election

Katie Porter, a Democratic candidate for governor of California, was the most favored candidate to replace Gavin Newsom. But her recent meltdown during a basic interview may have cost her everything. Glenn and Stu give their commentary on this trainwreck...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Can we play the audio of Katie Porter?

Katie Porter, she's a Democrat representative from California, who ran for Senate and lost. And now she's running for governor. Yesterday, about this time, she was the frontrunner.

Today, she's not. I just want to play a clip of the interview she did yesterday.

VOICE: What do you say to the 40 percent of California voters who you'll need in order to win, to vote for Trump?

VOICE: How would I need them in order to win?

VOICE: Unless you're going to get 60 percent of the vote.

Everybody who did not vote for Trump, will vote for you.

VOICE: In the general election?

VOICE: Yes.

VOICE: If it's me versus a Republican, I think that I will win. The people who did not vote for Trump.

VOICE: What if it's you versus a Democrat?

VOICE: I don't intend that to be the case.

VOICE: So how have you intended that not to be the case? Are you going to ask them not to run?

VOICE: No, no, I said, I will build the support. I have the support already in terms of name recognition, and so I will do the very best I can, to make sure that we get through this primary in a very strong position. But let me be clear with you.

I represented Orange County. I represented a purple area. I even stood on my own two feet and won Republican votes before. That's not something every candidate in this race can say. If you're from a deep blue area. If you're from LA or you're from Oakland, you don't have --

VOICE: You just said you don't need those Trump voters.

VOICE: You asked me if I needed them to win. I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question?

VOICE: The question is the same thing I ask everybody, that this is being called the empowering voters who stop Trump's power grab. Every other candidate has answered this question. This is not --

VOICE: I said, I support it.

VOICE: And the question is, what do you say to the 40 percent of voters who voted for Trump?

VOICE: Oh, I'm happy to say that. It's the do you need them to win part that I don't understand. I'm happy to answer the question as you have it written, and I'll answer it.

VOICE: And we've also asked the other candidates, do you think you need any of those 40 percent of California voters to win? And you're saying, no. I don't.

VOICE: No. I'm trying to say, I will try to win every vote I can. And what I'm saying to you is that -- I don't want to keep doing this. I'm going to call it. Thank you.

GLENN: She gets up and walks away.

VOICE: You're not going to do the interview with us?
VOICE: No. Not like this, I'm not. Not with seven follow-ups to every single question you ask.

STU: Oh, God forbid.
VOICE: Every other candidate has --

VOICE: I don't care. I don't care.

I want to have a pleasant, positive conversation, which you ask me about every issue on this list.

And if every question that you're going to make up a follow-up question, then we're never going to get there.

I've never had to do this before, ever.

VOICE: You've never had to have a conversation with a reporter --

VOICE: To any interview.

VOICE: Okay. But every other candidate has done this.

VOICE: What part of, I'm me -- I'm running for governor because I'm a leader. So I am going to make --

VOICE: You're not going to answer questions from reporters?

Okay. Why don't we go through -- I will continue to ask follow-up questions because that's my job as a journalist. But I will go through and ask these, and if you don't want to answer, you don't want to answer.

So nearly every legislative --

VOICE: I -- I don't want to have an unhappy experience with you, and I don't want this all on camera.

VOICE: I don't want to have an unhappy experience with you either. I would love to continue to ask these questions so that we can show our viewers what every candidate feels about every one of these issues that they care about.

And redistricting is a massive issue. We're going to do an entire story just on responses to that question, and I've asked everybody the same follow-up question.

GLENN: Didn't go well.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Didn't go well.

STU: This is somebody who is -- she kind of even says it. She's never had to deal with follow-up questions before.

GLENN: No. No.

STU: What an amazing -- we sometimes don't appreciate what -- what a great life it must be on the left.

GLENN: Oh. I've thought about that a lot.

STU: You just go -- oh, my God. You never have to deal with anything. No one ever asks you a follow-up. No one ever pushes you on anything. You just say whatever you want, and everyone just walks away, as if it's the greatest thing of all time.

That must be so fun.

GLENN: You would be so intellectually weak. So intellectually.

STU: Oh. I mean, you see it there. She asked one minor follow-up question that isn't adversarial at all, and she pulls the plug on the interview. I'm not going to do this. I don't want all of this on camera.

GLENN: Well, there's a lot that I haven't wanted on camera. It didn't stop anybody else.

STU: Right. That's when they get most excited with you.

GLENN: Yeah, I know. I know. I know.

STU: That's so bizarre. The reporter wasn't even going at her hard. It was like, hey. What do you mean, you don't need -- it's such a -- what a layup of a question, Glenn. No offense. But it's like, do you need the 40 percent of people to -- Trump voters to win.

You say, well, I want to get as many of them as I can. And, of course, I want to get as many as I can.

But I want to stand on my principle.

Any politician. That's not even a follow-up question.

It's like, "Do you want more voters?"

That's the hard question she walked out of an interview for?

GLENN: But remember who she is. Remember who she is.

Okay.

STU: Must we?

GLENN: Well, I mean, I think we have just proven, everything they said wasn't true. According to people who had worked in her office, she has made several -- multiple staffers cry. People are so anxious to even -- to even staff her, because if anything goes wrong, she flips out on whatever staffer is present. She just talks to staffers however she wants. One criticism of Porter is that she allegedly is a terrible person, according to some accounts, abusive and racist. Separate text messages surfaced in which Porter scolded a staffer for giving the congresswoman COVID.

One message said, she was rage-prone and had a tendency to disparage staffers. Others suggested her expectations were wildly unrealistic. One message accused her of making racist comments.

Those are from her staffer. And remember, those are from 2022. I mean, we've seen this. And they just buried all of that. And now you're starting to see it. You know, when you force people into uncomfortable situations, you generally see who they really are.

And that wasn't really an uncomfortable. That was a normal situation for anybody who is -- you can't handle that, sweetheart, you can't handle anything.

But imagine, you're in California. She was the front runner yesterday!

That's who everybody was like, "Yeah, I'll probably vote for her."

It was yesterday!

STU: Yeah. Looking at Kalshi, running the prediction markets, and she was at a 40 percent chance to win, which was double anybody else in the race.

And today, she's now a slight underdog in the race from that interview. It was that bad.

Now, we don't know how the electorate actually responds to it --

GLENN: We don't know how much people will actually see it.

It can run and go away.

STU: Oh, conservatives will see that today. Because conservatives will play it like crazy. Will people who might actually vote for her see it, is a totally different question.

GLENN: How do we -- you know, we watch ABC, CNN. We have MSNBC on in front of us all the time. We listen to NPR. We listen to -- you know, the New York Times. We read the New York Times.

STU: Maybe it's time to appreciate us a little bit more. Just saying. We do that for you, every day.

GLENN: Yeah. We do it, so you don't have to. However, we bring those things up all the time. On the air.

We know where the other side stands.

There are stories that just don't hit that side.

STU: Yeah. They have no idea.

GLENN: And they don't listen to anything else. And so there are stories like that -- that stupid story of -- the judge's house burning down. There will be people forever, that believe that was a hate crime.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: There is no evidence of anything.

STU: Even of arson.

GLENN: There's nothing.

STU: Let alone some conservative that did it.

GLENN: It was a house that burned down.

That's all we know now.

They had to immediately jump to, it's a house of a judge. That judge stopped Donald Trump. Harmeet Dhillon wrote a really, absolutely innocuous, you know, hey, this judge just made this ruling.

We will fight that every way, we possibly can. That can't stand!

They took that and said, Harmeet Dhillon was targeting this judge. So somebody went on the right, and burned that judge's house down.

None of that -- there's no evidence of any of that. They don't even know what caused the fire yet. And I'll bet you, you're going to find out, that it wasn't arson, it was just a normal fire.

It was 11 o'clock in the morning.

It was just a normal fire. The house burned down. A tragedy. Glad that nobody was hurt. Well, her husband was hurt in it.

He had some broken bones and stuff, as he tried to get out of the house. And we wish them the best. But you're going to find, I think. And I'll correct it if we find differently. It wasn't any of those things.

But they have reported that now as fact. How many people are going to believe that forever?

I can guarantee you, I have members of my own family, who will bring that up to me. Well, you say violence. What about burning the judge's house down?

And I have to say, that's not true. Yes, it is.

And they won't believe me, because they heard it on MSNBC. They heard it on CNN. They heard it on the Washington Post. And so they just believe it. There are no facts to back them. None! Now, there may be in the future. Maybe in a couple of days. Let the process work. But there's none. These journalists on the left are so unbelievably irresponsible. And then because they have zombified their entire base, their base will not listen to the other side.

There are stories, I guarantee you. Think about how many people are going to believe from here on out, that Charlie Kirk was either killed by a Jew or somebody in his own camp or it was a left-winger. It was a Donald Trump MAGA killer.

Because that's what they said. And they're not listening to you.

They're not watching Fox. They're not getting their news.

They don't -- all news from major traditionally trusted sources. They watch all of that. And they think they're getting a variety.

Well, I read the Times and the Post. Oh, New York Post or Washington Post?

Well, not the -- the New York Post.

The Washington Post. There's no variety there.

STU: It's the same thing.

And this is how something like you can change your gender with a series of magical words comes into effect.

GLENN: It's how global warming is real.

STU: A liberal hears something like the gender stuff, for example. And they hear it for the first time.

And they just like you, react the same way. They -- what? What do you mean, you can just become a girl? What are you talking about?

They, in their minds, react the same way when they hear that. And then they hear it 500,000 times unchallenged.

GLENN: And saying, science is settled.

STU: And they're like, wow. I must have been wrong about that.

GLENN: If they have nothing to back it up, like in this burning down the house. They just say it over and over. And people go, well, they wouldn't say that, if it wasn't true.

STU: Right. And I don't hear anybody else. Oh, except for the crazy conservatives. That's what they're saying.

So, I mean, this is why -- I have hope, again. There's a lot of work to be done. She has a difficult job. But I hope for the Bari Weiss situation. It would be great if there was just an organization out of all of the ones that exist, that just comes out and gives you fair -- you know, balanced stuff. Now, I know Fox does that. But they're seen more as a conservative network obviously. But their slogan for years was fair and balanced. And it was seen by people who watched it and watched other networks. As the most balanced.

GLENN: Yeah. I think it was 40 -- 30 or 40 percent of the audience was Democrat.

STU: Democrat. So there's plenty of people who -- who will actually go and read and listen to other things.

But it's not particularly common. And I don't know -- what might happen is if the coverage by Bari Weiss over at CBS is, quote, unquote, too fair. They will be --

GLENN: They will be --

STU: They will be seen as a right-wing network and dismissed again.

GLENN: Yeah. That's how they will make them. And, by the way, congratulations, I was so glad to see GLAAD and everybody else, you know, LGBT celebrate Bari Weiss getting that position.

STU: Smashing another glass ceiling.

GLENN: Another glass ceiling. Yeah, it is amazing, what can be done.

STU: Too much fanfare. I was really overwhelmed by it.

GLENN: It really was. Yes. It's a first. But do we have to make that big of a deal out of it?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Or did you hear anything?

STU: I didn't hear one word about it. Not one word of celebration. No one -- no one -- again, this is a person who founded the free press. With her wife!

It was just bought by a major media organization for nine figures. And she's now the editor-in-chief. Or, yeah.

Is it editor-in-chief of CBS News.

Not a -- no flowery discussions about her sexual preference.

GLENN: No. No.

STU: Her sexual orientation.

GLENN: And she's not even conservative.

STU: No. She's not.

GLENN: She's just fair.

STU: She describes herself as center left. And this is how desperate we are in the race.

Wait. Someone who is center left, and actually kind of means something with her. She will actually say it, because sometimes conservatives are right on stuff.

We're like fine. We're not even asking for --

GLENN: Look at how desperate we are. But look at the other side. How authoritarian they are, on the other side.

You can't even say, occasionally they get it right!

No! Never.

STU: Never.

GLENN: And we're the authoritarians.

RADIO

The FBI secretly SPIED on Republican senators?!

According to newly released information, the FBI under President Biden secretly obtained the phone records of 8 Republican senators as part of an investigation called “Arctic Frost.” But while the FBI claimed it was about “election integrity,” Glenn has another take: This could be a WORSE scandal than Watergate…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I fell compelled to tell you today, that if your church, your synagogue, you know, is -- is not telling you these things and -- and helping you deal and navigate through the waters today, and showing you how the Bible actually is the answer to the things that you're dealing with in real life every day, you need to go find another church or synagogue. You must!

You must.

Anyone who is ignoring this, at this point, is either so under-equipped for the times. And so blind to the times, and clearly not getting any promptings from the spirit. Or they don't get it, or they are afraid because they're afraid of controversy. You know, in times where the truth is controversial, there's nothing you can do accept tell the truth. I mean, if you want to fix things. The truth right now is the most controversial thing you can say. A man is a man. Never will be a woman. Never.

The problem is: We keep conflating all of these problems with politics. And that's the problem!

I want you to just for a second play this monologue for your friends, who don't agree with me: You don't have to like Donald Trump to see the danger we're now in. You don't have to vote Republican or wear a red hat or cheer at rallies. You just really, all you have to do is love the idea of America. Not the flag-waving. The idea that man can rule himself, that we do not have a king or a dictator, or a cabal of people that run things.

There is no master. Government serves us! We are in charge of government, not the other way around. That's -- that's the American dream. That's what makes us different.

You also have to believe, that the scales of justice must stay balanced. I have told you from the first day, you know, after 9/11 when things got serious. I stand with the Constitution. Anyone who violates the Constitution, I will stand against. And I am a hawk on that! If the story that I'm about to tell you is true, and so far, all signs point that it is, then something has gone very, very wrong in our constitutional republic. The FBI under this administration, secretly obtained the phone records of nine Republican lawmakers. Sorry. Not this administration. The former administration.

They've released it, Trump has just released it. They have the phone records of nine Republican lawmakers, eight sitting US senators. They were not suspected terrorists. They're not foreign spies. They're elected officials. They're public servants. They work for you. People who work to represent millions of people, just like you.

And the FBI had a -- a vet investigation that we have now just found out, and all of the documents are there. It was called Arctic Frost.

The bureau said, this is about election integrity. But we now know, it swept up elective representatives, all from one party, without any -- anybody's knowledge.

Now, this is not 1972. We're not talking about a couple of thugs, that broke into a file cabinet, at Watergate.

This is much bigger than Watergate. And I want anybody who disagrees with Donald Trump to ask themselves: The documents are here.

If this was Donald Trump doing this, I would be with you and saying, this is authoritarianism, and it must stop now!

Why will you not join my voice with this? We're talking about digital surveillance. Invisible, vast, far more powerful than a hidden microphone in the Watergate building.

Chuck Grassley said, "It's arguably worse than Watergate."

And he's right! Because this time the government did not just spy on its political enemies from a smoky back room in DC in a hotel. It did it from inside the federal agencies that we're supposed to trust, that are supposed to protect people's rights. Now, if you have been told all your life that the real danger only comes from the right, that corruption, dishonesty, abuse of power is exclusive to conservatives, then I'm asking to you pause and to look again. Because the documents have just been released. When one side can weaponize the justice system and the other side cheers it on, justice dies for everyone. And it makes people who now want to say, "But look what they did."

They feel justified to get revenge. "Well, if they're doing it, we can do it."

And that leads all of us to hell. Then we're all in trouble.

People have been defending James Comey and have been saying, then this is just a political hit job by Donald Trump.

No, it is not. Again, look at the facts. He was accused to lying to Congress. It's not political persecution. When a grand jury recommends charges, that's not politics, that's the process! That's how our system is supposed to work. Now he goes to trial. That doesn't make him guilty. But it does mean, he has to face the same standard of justice, as you or I would! In America, no one is supposed to be above the law. Not Donald Trump. Not James Comey. Not Joe Biden or Hunter Biden. Not anyone sitting in the White House today or yesterday! Because in America, no one is above the law!

Now we have candidates. One running for attorney general in Virginia. Who openly flirt with violent rhetoric. And the media yawns! They call it, quote, colorful language. Quote, that's just politics!

No, it's not. When threats and intimidation become normal, when justice becomes selective, when the press decides who's innocent and who's guilty before the evidence is even in, the republic begins to rot from within.

So many people -- so many of our neighbors are just exhausted. And they've tuned everything out because it all sounds like noise. You know, they all lie. And nobody is going to pay.

That's what people say to themselves.

You stop caring, because the truth seems impossible to find. But when documents are -- are produced. And prove the truth! There is no argument. And the truth still does matter! If you want a civil society, justice still matters! And whether you voted for Trump or can't stand him. Whether you think Biden was a saint or a disappointment. None of that matters. What matters is: Do we still believe in equal justice under the law? Because if we lose that, we lose the promise of America itself, and you will get a dictator on the left or the right!

So I'm asking you, not as a conservative or a liberal, but as an American: Do not look away from this story. This is worse than Watergate. What happened in Watergate?

We had all kinds of hearings. Not to get the president. We had all kinds of hearings, to make sure that never happened again!

I can't tell you how many private conversations I have had with senators, who have said to me, whispered in my ear, they're monitoring everything I do and say!

No senator should ever feel that! No Republican, no Democrat, no independent, no communist. No one should ever feel that way in America!

But that will only stop when we demand fairness, when it makes you and your side uncomfortable, when you hold power accountable, even if it's your team holding it!

What will happen is: This story will go out. People will talk about it. The right will talk about it. They'll try to show the evidence. The left will not listen. The media will not report it. And then when it is all proven to be true, the media will say, "That's all old news."

And everyone will move on. And what does that do to the machine? It means the machine is never turned off. It means the machine gets more power. It means, next time, it could be you. If you don't punish whichever side is doing it, what happens? If you don't -- if Democrats don't tell the AG in Virginia, "This is unacceptable, and we do not tolerate that at all," what happens next? Stop dealing with what's happening now. Look over the horizon. What does that mean for tomorrow?

Justice can never be partisan. Never! Truth must never depend on who's in office. And America, this beautiful, fragile idea will only survive if both sides refuse to let blindness become loyalty.

Okay? Whether you like it or not, we are in this together. Gold just hit $4,005 an ounce. I have told you for 15 years, if gold hits $5,000 an ounce, you don't want to live in that world. That means the world is coming apart at the seams. Goldman Sachs just said their prediction is gold at $5,000 an ounce. That means, the trust of all of our institutions, the trust of our dollar. The trust of our government. The trust of our banking. The trust of our business.

All of that is up for grabs. You do not want to live in that world.

I told you yesterday, when I was talking about Civil War. That's not a TV show!

That means the end of all of the dreams that you have had for your children, coming to an end!

You no longer will be able to predict what their life will be like!

Now, you may not like it the way it is. But believe me, it is better than living in Somalia or Haiti!

Haiti is what revolution looks like.

Haiti is what Civil War leaves behind. Start looking at the news. What does this mean on what's coming next? And because of what that will lead to, what must I do today?

Today, you must look at the facts. Today -- today is an easy day. You must look at the facts of what was released yesterday on Operation Arctic Frost. And then you must demand Republican and Democrat, this must end!

TV

Dr. Oz reveals truth About shutdown and healthcare

Democrats are playing "high-stakes poker" with the government shutdown, and they’re "running out of chips," says Dr. Oz, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administrator for President Trump. He joins Glenn on this week’s "Glenn TV" Friday Exclusive to debunk the Left’s lies — like is the shutdown REALLY about providing "lifesaving" care for illegal migrants? (Hint: No, no it’s not.) Plus, Dr. Oz explains why Americans are paying higher prices for medicine than Europeans and what the Trump administration is doing to remedy the situation, WITHOUT losing medical innovation here at home (there’s a reason why wealthy Europeans come to America for cancer treatment). He explains how TrumpRx — to be launched next year — will "bring transparency to the process" of finding affordable medicine, in an effort to ensure that no U.S. citizen has to "decide between groceries and medicine." Plus, Dr. Oz explains why the initiative will begin with Pfizer, despite the dark cloud COVID left over the pharmaceutical giant.