BLOGAugust 11, 2017

Bill O’Reilly: ‘Profound Change’ Is Disrupting the Way We Watch News — for the Better

News is shifting to a model where people have more control over their own content. On radio Friday, Bill O’Reilly shared an update on his latest project and explained why it’s important for him to bring news to people without “intrusion.”

Glenn remembered starting his own TV network and how people told him to stay locked into the old school model of cable news instead of making TV available on mobile devices.

“Those days are over,” he said of the shift. “We’ve laid the groundwork and the rails.”

O’Reilly talked about a new show prototype where he was in a studio and talked with guests over Skype, giving him far more independence than he would have with a network.

“We don’t want any intrusion: corporate intrusion or Media Matters intrusion or threats,” O’Reilly said to Glenn. “We want to control the product, as you do.”

GLENN: BillO'Reilly.com. Probably one of the more brilliant businesspeople. Definitely one of the more brilliant people when it comes to how to do a show and what people are thinking. Bill O'Reilly. Now at BillO'Reilly.com. He has his own show. It's a half-hour news show every day, and you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com. He started it earlier this week. It's really good. Not a lot has changed with Bill O'Reilly. Just the background has changed. And we'll talk to him about that.

I want to start here, Bill, with something that really bothers me, and that is the firing of -- what's his name? Jeremy Lions? No, what's his name?

STU: Jeffrey Lord.

GLENN: Jeffrey Lord, that's what it is. That's how much I care about this guy.

I actually care about his firing. I think he is horrible. I think he is one of the worst commentators on CNN. I think he's just a total sellout.

However, they fired him because he got into a Twitter spat with Media Matters. And Media Matters is starting to campaign again to get people fired, get them thrown off.

And he said, "What you're doing is fascistic in nature. This is fascism." And they tweeted something back. And he wrote, "Sieg Heil."

CNN fires him almost immediately because they say, "Nazi salutes are absolutely -- we will not tolerate this --

STU: Indefensible.

GLENN: Are you kidding me? So now he's out. Bill.

BILL: Yeah, I mean, look, anybody -- and I mean anybody knows that this firing was political. It wasn't for cause. It wasn't because he did anything outrageous. I mean, you can debate all day long whether Nazi analogies should be used in any kind of discourse. But this clearly falls under freedom of speech. And he was making a contextual point, which is accurate, by the way, that Media Matters is a fascist organization. It is.

And then when the president of Media Matters struck back at him, he, in a wise guy fashion, went, "Sieg Heil." Who does that offend? Media Matters. So, what? So they were looking to dump him. And this gave them the opportunity to do it. That's the only thing I can figure out.

GLENN: Okay. So, Bill, that's maybe a little bit better than what I thought, but not by much.

Are you saying that they only use Media Matters as a cover? Because, I mean, why not cover him because we don't want him around. We don't like him.

BILL: Yeah, if he were a valued employee, they certainly wouldn't have done that. Look, if Jeffrey Lord -- I don't know what his contractual situation is. But he is an actionable violation of contract, sued against CNN.

You can't do that. He didn't do anything out of the ordinary, in the sense of exercising his freedom of speech to slap back at an organization that he feels is fascistic. So it's got to be something else. I don't know whether -- if he even had a contract.

But it looks to me -- and I've been in this business almost since as long as you have, since the War of 1812, Beck, as you mentioned last week on your program. All right? It looks to me like they just want to get rid of the guy, and this was a convenient way to do it.

GLENN: So, Bill, doesn't this not empower Media Matters like crazy?

BILL: Of course, it does. But Media Matters is in bed with all these people. I mean, Media Matters doesn't attack CNN, ever. Media Matters -- well, let me amend that. If CNN put on a conservative like you or me, maybe Media Matters would attack. But they don't attack their editorial posture. They don't attack NBC. They don't very rarely attack the networks. They only attack people with whom they disagree with politically, which is anybody. Moderate or right.

You've got to be a far-left lune to be in there cogering (phonetic).

GLENN: So we found a Media Matters plan of attack. And we're going to be going over it in the next couple of weeks, with our audience. It is their plan.

BILL: Good.

GLENN: We found it on the dark web.

BILL: The dark web.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, who -- who even puts their stuff on the dark web? Seriously, who does that criminals. Evil people. Why are you putting stuff on the dark web?

So in it, it talks about how they're now consulting with Google. They're now consulting with Facebook. They're trying to tell YouTube and Google and Facebook exactly what is offensive, what isn't. They're coming in as these moderate arbiters of --

BILL: Oh, they -- this organization, these are the people that orchestrated the sponsored attacks against me and you.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: They organized the demonstrations in front of Fox. They've got money. They pay people. They're awful. They're anti-democracy. And I hope you guys -- you know, I listen when I can. But when you get stuff, send it to me. Because certainly looking at these people hard, these Media Matters people.

GLENN: I'll send you the stuff that we just pulled up.

BILL: And you know what the worst part about this is? The worst part about it is these people were so closely allied with Hillary Clinton. David Brock, who was the founder of this, was Clinton's consigliere. If Clinton had ever been elected president, these people would be in the White House, these Media Matters. And I can't tell your audience how strongly enough how vicious and vile and anti-democratic they are.

GLENN: Actually I want to correct you on one thing.

BILL: Win after win after win because the media will never take them on because the media sympathizes with their far-left posture.

GLENN: Okay. I want to correct you on one thing: They're absolutely pro-democratic, which in the meaning of, all we want is a popular vote and majority wins. I mean, that is -- you know -- remember, Chavez was also very democratic.

BILL: They don't believe in freedom of speech.

GLENN: Yes, you're right. Correct.

BILL: They don't believe in freedom of speech. They operate in shadows on the dark web. They try to hurt people. They try to destroy people.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: This is not what our democracy is supposed to be about.

GLENN: It's a republic.

BILL: This is the most vicious, vile political organization in existence.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: And they have power. And money.

GLENN: So tell me how you feel about what happened with Google this week, with that firing.

BILL: You know, I didn't follow it that much because I'm not really into that world of -- and I know they're super powerful and all of that. But I'm more interested in the political component of this, rather than -- once you get into Google and Facebook and all of these organizations, you get into corporations. They're corporations. I mean, they may not wear ties. And they may give you kale for lunch. But it's a corporation. Okay?

GLENN: That's kind of what I want to talk to you about. As I said earlier this week, look, if Firestone or Goodyear was doing this, I wouldn't care. But this is the gateway to information.

We had this week a report was released that Apple has $58 billion in US Treasury bonds. That's more than most foreign countries will hold.

That gives that corporation real leverage on Capitol Hill. You know what, maybe we should just liquidate our government bonds because that's why we don't -- that's why we worry about foreign countries holding our bonds.

Does -- are these corporations that the left loves, are they becoming worrisome at all to you, Bill?

BILL: That's an interesting question. They are -- they are very, very powerful agents, and they control now most of the information flow. And with the destruction of cable news, and that's coming very, very fast.

GLENN: Very fast.

BILL: Talk radio is pretty much the only counter to the internet information flow, which is not an honest situation.

So, yes, it's dangerous. I'm not so concerned about them holding bonds. Although, yeah, I mean, I guess down the line, they could do a blackmail thing. You better do what we want. Or we'll liquidate or something. I see what you're saying.

GLENN: It's not like it's the top of my concerns. But it is -- it is a part of it.

It's like, wait a minute. These -- these guys are getting really powerful.

BILL: They are very powerful. But there's nothing you can do about that in a capitalistic society. The more successful corporations become, the more powerful they become.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: You can expose it. You can tell folks what's going on. And the information flow they're getting is not honest. That's certainly noble. But you can't stop them from accumulating assets.

GLENN: No. But you can start to say to our representatives, "I don't want you in bed with these people. There are no special favors for these people."

BILL: No, absolutely. Right. Right.

GLENN: So, Bill, I want to take a break. We have a ton to talk about, the news of the week. But I would like to pick your brain, honestly, because I have tremendous respect for you, as you know, on multiple fronts. But one of them is you are a very shrewd businessman. You are very smart.

You took every show. You know, I run on passion and gut and feelings. And you are much more of a scientific kind of guy. And you've made a brilliant move this week in not going -- running to somebody else and saying, "Okay. I'll fall under your umbrella." You're doing it yourself.

I want to talk to you about the future of cable news. I want to talk to you about the future of information.

BILL: Sure. It's fascinating what's happening.

GLENN: It really is. It really is.

BILL: And nobody is talking about it. So your audience is going to get a lot of information fast. After these announcements of interest.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Wow, thank you.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Back in just a second with Bill O'Reilly from BillO'Reilly.com.

GLENN: So let me go to Bill O'Reilly from BillO'Reilly.com, who just started his news program, the No Spin News. Every day you can see it and you can watch it at BillO'Reilly.com.

Bill, let's switch gears. I'd kind of like some advice from you and to pick your brain. What we did six years ago, when I left Fox and I built TheBlaze and the first OTT model around this, everyone said, "Glenn, no one will watch this on the Internet. They're not going to watch it on the phone. They want it on this."

It's why, honestly, we spent as much money as we did to make my network look -- quite honestly, the model was MSNBC. If it -- if it can't look as good as NBC in visuals, then people won't accept it.

Those days are over. We've laid the groundwork and the rails. And now you are the first one to come out as a really big guy and say, "Okay. I'm going to go and do this model, and I'm going to do it by myself. I don't need to join a network or whatever. I'm going to do it by myself." How long before, Bill, this becomes the absolute norm?

BILL: You know, it's hard to say. Our blueprint is that we want to deliver on a daily basis 30 to 40 minutes of honest news analysis, honest in the sense that it's fact-based.

And we're going to do that. And so we did a prototype this week on BillO'Reilly.com, where I was in a studio in a spiffy jacket and tie. And we had guests via Skype. And it went very well. I mean, it looked good. People liked it.

We have it up now, BillO'Reilly.com. Anybody can see the prototype. And it -- and it was tough. It was tough analysis. Talk about North Korea and stuff like that.

Now, we haven't decided exactly when we're going to launch this on a daily basis because we're doing our podcasts from my home office now. And it's working very, very well. But it's going to happen. And even if I decide to come back to cable TV, we'll still do this 30 to 40 minutes per day, because we don't want any -- I'm sorry about that. That's enthusiasm.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

BILL: Enthusiasm from the --

GLENN: That's Bill's head writer.

BILL: From the community.

Anyway, we don't want any intrusion.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: Corporate intrusion or Media Matters intrusion or threats or any of that. We want to control the product, as you do.

GLENN: Right. So you can control --

BILL: And I think this prototype that we put out is going to take root. And I think it's going to be very successful.

GLENN: Right.

BILL: The reason this is necessary, this is the key to it all, is there's been a profound change in cable news. And as we discussed in previous episodes of the Beck program, network news is largely irrelevant now. Remember Scott Pelley, the anchor of CBS News?

GLENN: No. Neither does anybody else.

BILL: Well, Scott packed it in, and nobody even knew.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: I mean, nobody even said a word. It was like, poor Scott. He was there six years on every night. He was taking Walter Cronkite's seat, and he's out of there, and nobody even cares. That's how irrelevant the Nightly News is.

The morning is entertainment. So when cable news starts then to change -- fundamentally change, not into a news service anymore. They're not a news service. They're basically a party apparatus. So MSNBC, CNN, they're a Democrat Party apparatus. And Fox News, to some extent, not to the extent of the others, it reflects a Republican point of view. Well, where do Americans go for the truth? People seeking the truth and not having a vested interest in one political party or one political philosophy. There's nowhere to go.

So that this, in a capitalistic society, this Blaze, the Beck Blaze, O'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com, this now presents a very, very attractive alternative to millions of Americans who love their country and want to know about it in a truthful way.

GLENN: Bill.

BILL: You're stunned at that analysis?

GLENN: No, no, no. I was actually --

BILL: You're absolutely stunned. It's so right on. Nobody has ever talked that way to you.

GLENN: I was actually hoping for a deeper insight. Why don't you put the dog on the phone?

(laughter)

All right. When we come back --

BILL: Corgi.

GLENN: When we come back, we're going to have to go over the strategy of North Korea, how Bill thinks that is going, where that ends up, and all the rest of the news of the week with Bill O'Reilly. You can hear him every day at BillO'Reilly.com. That's BillO'Reilly.com. BillO'Reilly.com.

GLENN: So let's bring Bill O'Reilly from Bill O'Reilly back. BillO'Reilly.com. And talk to him a little bit about North Korea.

First of all, Bill, are we going to war with North Korea?

BILL: No.

GLENN: Okay. If -- if it is just between us, we're having a private council, you're the president of the United States, and you've got your council split in half. And half says, "Mr. President, we've got to go. They've crossed too many red lines. It's only going to be a problem down the road. We got to go, and I'd like to recommend a first strike." The other half says, "No first strike and, no, don't go to war because millions will die." Which do you lean towards?

BILL: Okay. You can't do a preemptive strike with nukes on anybody. That's not acceptable in the world we live in. You could do, you know, some bombing like -- like you did in Syria, take out a strategic military target. I mean, that's certainly possible. But I don't see that happening.

What I see happening is this is -- Trump is basically telling the world, "Look, I'm capable of this," which is true. I'm capable of it.

Which Obama was and everybody knew, no matter what you did, Obama wasn't going to do anything drastic. And it was like Merkel today, the German chancellor comes in and says, "Well, there really isn't any military solution to North Korea."

Now, just step back and analyze how stupid that statement is from Angela Merkel. What if North Korea launches a missile at Guam or Japan or South Korea? What if they do that? I mean, that's what this idiot is threatening to do.

And Merkel says there's no military solution to that. So, what, you let them do that? That's exactly the wrong message.

And Trump's message is basically symbolic. It's a symbolic message. I'm capable of this. But will he do it? No. Only if they attack, they being North Korea, one of our allies or any interest that the United States has. Then he will. But I don't see any new component in this. Because that's Armageddon. Once you start with the nukes, then, you know, the stuff kills south Koreans. It kills Chinese. You really can't do that.

GLENN: So here's where I've come down on this, on my understanding of what Donald Trump is doing. And it may be more wishful thinking. But I don't think it is.

As I've watched this game play out and I know, you know, how horrible war with North Korea would be and now especially with China saying, "You do a first strike, we're on their side. You fight back, we're going to leave them to their own business. And you guys can have at them." There's no way we're going for a first strike.

If we do, we turn the whole world against us, I think.

BILL: Yeah. And the generals -- look, Kelly is the guy calling the shots, a lot of the shots now. He's never going to do it.

GLENN: Yep, I agree.

BILL: People got to calm down. And the reason that this has taken on hysteria is because it's August. There's no other news. Cable news is all -- I mean, they're just going crazy. And they're whipping everybody up. And the left wants everybody to think that Trump is Dr. Strangelove. And so that's why it's whipping up.

But if you look at it, it's probably not going to lead to anything. It's going to fizzle out like most of the North Korean missile tests do.

GLENN: So here is the second part of that: If this indeed is strategy and Donald Trump is playing the strong hand because nobody has the United States for a long time and wants to put everybody on notice and does have a little bit of a twitchy eye, he may in the end, if this works, be remembered as Ronald Reagan, when it came to the Cold War. This is exactly the argument we had from the left on Ronald Reagan.

BILL: Yeah. But it's a different situation because you have irrationality in North Korea. I mean, this guy is pretty irrational.

But, you know, I want to personalize it a little. And I can do that by a plug. You know, Killing the Rising Sun is about -- primarily about the atom bomb drop on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the power of those bombs was so horrific -- now, they're 10,000 times as powerful. And if you really want to know what happened -- and kids should know it too. We have a kid's book: The Day the World Went Nuclear, off Killing the Rising Sun. We take you right down, we put you right down at Hiroshima when that bomb dropped, and you can feel what happened. And so that's why the horror of nuclear war, it gets people crazy. I mean, it really does. It gets people crazy.

And all Americans should know what the actual horror is. That you're going to have people vaporized on the spot, that you're going to have fallout that states for 50 to 60 years. Makes Chernobyl look like Disneyland. So I think that when you take that into consideration and then you're President Trump or whatever, you're not going to do that unless you absolutely have to do it. But I can see a surgical, you know, conventional strike on North Korea, if they keep it up.

GLENN: Bill, you were probably, oh, around retirement age back in '82 and '83, when -- when The Day After came out. And that was -- '82 was the year I graduated from high school. So I had a very different look at it then. I just looked it up this week. I was just kind of zipping through it on YouTube. And I remember how scary that was. But because of my age back then, I really didn't see it as really what it was. Nothing's changed. That is Hollywood and the press and the networks trying to make you more afraid of Ronald Reagan's rhetoric than really the Soviet Union. And trying to thwart Ronald Reagan. Would you agree with that?

Did you see that that way?

BILL: Yeah, the left historically never wants to fight for anything. And anybody who counters that is a war-mongering fascist. So even before World War II, there was a big strain of Americans that didn't want to confront Hitler or Tokyo. They didn't want to get involved.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: And some of those were conservative people.

GLENN: Yeah. The America First -- the America First campaign.

BILL: Yeah, just stay away. We got two oceans protecting us. Well, now we don't have any oceans. Okay? So it is an emotional issue, but people should know, this isn't like Iraq or Afghanistan. You know, sending in the Special Forces to track down ISIS. It's nothing like that.

This guy is playing with something that could obliterate millions of people. And so I -- I have, you know, confidence in the American system that we're not going to do anything irresponsible. That's the key word. The rhetoric is the rhetoric, all right? Trump is definitely sending a message to the world that he's capable, like Reagan. Okay? But I don't think anything more will come of this, at this point.

GLENN: Okay. Let me give you just some quick hits here and just get your comments on. Chelsea Manning being described as an American beauty in a woman's swimsuit on the beach in Vanity Fair. Comments?

BILL: What do you want me to say about it?

GLENN: Just any comment on --

BILL: I mean, look, if she wants to be in a bathing suit and on a beach, she has the perfect right to do that. If Vanity Fair wants to make a deal about it, I don't care.

GLENN: It's not that. It's that she's an American traitor. How many people lost their lives because of her?

BILL: Oh, I see. Okay. Yeah.

GLENN: And now we're being spoon-fed, that, no, she's just a beautiful woman.

BILL: And if I could just remind everybody, President Obama commuted her sentence. Okay. So that's why she's in the bikini. Now, maybe that was part of the deal. I'll let you out, if you go into a bikini in Vanity Fair. That's the deal.

PAT: That's a weird deal.

GLENN: That's a weird deal.

PAT: But okay.

BILL: It could have happened.

PAT: It could have.

GLENN: Paul Manafort, the raid of his residence by the FBI.

BILL: You know, not since Eliot Ness and the Untouchables has there been a crime drama at this level.

You know, Manafort, I've always said this from the very beginning: If there's one Trump person that's got a deficit in this whole thing, it's him. Because he made some big money representing pro-Russian interests in the Ukraine situation. He had the contacts. He knew the guys.

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

BILL: He knew Boris and Natasha. And so, you know, they went in. They try to find out what he has, and I'm glad I'm not Paul Manafort.

GLENN: Mitch McConnell said the reason why the G.O.P. is getting a bad brand or bad name is because Donald Trump and others had excessive expectations.

BILL: I just think this guy is such a dweeb. I hate to be -- you know, I just think McConnell is such a dweeb. D-W-E-E-B. Word of the day.

GLENN: Yeah. Word of the day.

BILL: I mean, this guy, when I was very close to getting Kate's Law on the floor of the Senate, it was him who sabotaged it. Because he wanted to attach all kinds of stuff that he knew wasn't going to pass it.

I just think this guy is just -- I don't know him. I don't -- he never came on my program. He was always afraid to do that.

I just don't have any use for him at all. So I wish -- I wish there was more dynamic leadership on both sides. On the Democratic side, you have Chucky Schumer threatening all of his people.

If you don't do what I say, we're going to run somebody against you in the primary and cut off your money. That's why he's got all these Democrats, you know, voting against their country's best interests.

And on the other side, you've got Mitch McConnell playing whatever game he's playing. So it's just really -- and I think Americans have got it. It's disgusting. It really is.

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly, writing some great history books and books now for your kids as well. You can hear his commentary every day at BillO'Reilly.com.

You can get his podcast and his members also are chiming in now on, how do we make this internet newscast work for you? And he's taking your comments on it. And you can watch it now at BillO'Reilly.com. Thanks, Bill, appreciate it.

BILL: Now, Beck, one more thing before you dump me here, if I send you an advanced copy of Killing England: The Brutal Struggle for American Independence, will you read it, Beck? Will you read the book if I send it to you in advance? It's out September 19th.

GLENN: Are there some things in the pages that maybe might fall out?

BILL: You're going to find out what Franklin, Washington, and Jefferson were really like.

GLENN: I only care about Benjamin. If Benjamin happens to be in those papers and it slips out of the book, I might read it.

BILL: All right!

GLENN: But I'm interested in the Benjamins. Thank you very much, Bill. Appreciate it. God bless. BillO'Reilly.com. BillO'Reilly.com.

RADIO

Salena Zito reveals WHY Trump said “Fight! Fight! Fight!”

“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

The REAL reason Pam Bondi should RESIGN

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 the Big, Beautiful Bill’s Medicaid changes really “KILL” people?

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

Bill O’Reilly: ‘Profound Change’ Is Disrupting the Way We Watch News — for the Better

Salena Zito reveals WHY Trump said “Fight! Fight! Fight!”

Transcript

The REAL reason Pam Bondi should RESIGN

Transcript

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's Connections to Intel Agencies

Will the Big, Beautiful Bill’s Medicaid changes really “KILL” people?

Transcript