Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcast
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

BLOGFebruary 23, 2018

'Accept Responsibility,' Find 'Vision': Jordan Peterson Defines a Good Man

Canadian author and psychology professor Jordan Peterson has inspired people around the world with his book “12 Rules for Life: An Antidote for Chaos.” He’s found a special audience in young men who respond to his commonsense structure and encouragement.

On today’s show, Glenn asked Peterson a key question: As men, what should our specific goals be?

Being a good man starts with envisioning a better world while knowing that evil exists and that it’s up to you to take responsibility for your life and the lives you touch. A man should be someone other people can rely on, and he must realize that those burdens are a part of life.

“We all need a vision of the way that life and the world could be,” Peterson said. “The least amount of suffering … the most freedom for everyone and the best for everyone.”

Peterson shared some advice “particularly, but not only, to young men.” He called on men to “accept as much responsibility as they can tolerate and then build themselves into people who can tolerate even more responsibility and to accept that gratefully because that’s where the purpose and meaning in life is.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Dr. Jordan Peterson. Who would have thought that a -- a -- that common sense would come from a university professor from Canada? But he is probably the -- the biggest sensation out there now, with especially -- especially with the youth and young males. Because he is speaking common sense and he's speaking it peacefully. And he's talking about God.

And he's got a best-selling book out. Number one best-seller. Twelve Rules For Life: An Antidote to Chaos.

Welcome to the program, Dr. Jordan Peterson. How are you?

JORDAN: I'm good. Yeah, no. A university profess- --

GLENN: You're breaking up. We had this problem last time.

I don't know where you were standing last time, but can you stand there because you're breaking up and we can't understand you.

JORDAN: Oh, can you hear me?

GLENN: I can hear you now. Yes.

JORDAN: Okay. Good.

Yes. I said, well, Canadian and a university professor, the end times must be near.

GLENN: Yes. It's the clippety-clop of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

I want to talk to you about a few things. Here -- and I don't want to get you into politics, just common sense.

I don't know if you've been following, for instance, the CNN town hall this week and this debate that we're having. But we have 16-year-olds that are demanding that America pretty much disregards the Second Amendment and the -- we're not having sensible arguments at all. There's no reason in -- in the debates that we're having. We're not listening to each other.

Do you have any thoughts on this?

JORDAN: Well, I think that can be -- that's true on a much wider scale than merely the debate about what's going on after Parkland. We're not listening to each other at all. We're polarized to a great degree.

GLENN: So how do we solve this?

JORDAN: Well, you know, I've been recommending -- first of all, let me say that in my book, in 12 Rules For Life, Rule 6, I outlined why such things as the Parkland school shooting occur. And it has very little to do specifically with guns. There's something much deeper and more horrible going on that -- that is rather dreadful to look at. I mean, people who are motivated to do the sorts of things that happened in Parkland, they're possessed by a kind of ill will. An evil ill will, whose magnitude is difficult to describe. And it's a problem of disorientation and meaninglessness. And it's expressing itself in gun violence. But it can express itself in all sorts of ways.

And the problem -- the deeper problem has to be solved, as far as I'm concerned. And that's the problem of nihilism in the face of the tragedy of life. And it's that kind of destructive nihilism that drives the actions of people like the school shooters.

So it's very difficult for us to have an intelligent conversation about that. Because nobody wants to look at the darkness enough to -- to actually understand what motivates people like the shooters. And it's not surprising, you know.

GLENN: But we --

JORDAN: What happens, of course, is that the discussion gets politicized. And it goes down the same rails that it's always gone down. Democrats say their thing. And the Republicans say their thing. And it never really ends up -- the discussion never really ends up being about the school shootings, for example. So...

GLENN: Well, you know, I've been saying all week -- you know, I started the -- the week with a monologue on, you know, nobody even wants to talk about seven out of the nine shooters that were under 30 came from fatherless homes.

JORDAN: Right.

GLENN: We have a breakdown --

JORDAN: Well, there's something there, I would say. Because these -- these men, these young men, they -- they lack purpose and direction. And that's really not a good thing. Because life is very difficult.

As the religious sages have always had it, life is suffering. And you need to set something positive against that suffering, or it corrupts you. And when it corrupts you, you become vengeful and vindictive and murderous and genocidal. Those are the stages. And the school shooters are two-thirds of the way towards genocidal, by the time they perform their actions. And it's because they turn against life because life is so difficult. And they have nothing to set -- nothing positive to set against it. It's a real catastrophe. And the fact that we're transforming ourselves into ideologues, both on the right and the left, is a reflection of the same problem. Is that because people lack genuine engaged meaning in their own personal lives, in large part because they don't understand how necessary it is to take responsibility, they turn to pseudosolutions. And ideology, right or left, is a pseudosolution to the problem of the meaning of life. And it's very dangerous. We saw that in the 21st century, as you pointed out, just before our talk.

GLENN: So how do we find -- how do we find meaning as a group, when -- I mean, especially with young men, there is a concerted effort, at least it seems, to eviscerate men. The new catchphrase is toxic masculinity.

JORDAN: I know. In my book 12 rules for life, which is rule 11, don't bother children when they're skateboarding. You know, it's kind of a tongue-in-cheek feel, but it's a very, very serious chapter. And it's about the confusion between masculine -- (cuts out) -- and masculine -- you know, the problem is --

GLENN: Oh. You know what, we're going to have to take a break. We're going to have take a break and see if we can get you to a better space so we can hear you. You're breaking up again. We got to send you a hard-wired phone. That's what we have to do. We'll come back in just a second.

More with Jordan Peterson.

(music)

GLENN: Just so frustrating when he's on with us. Because there's nobody I want to hear every single word of more than Jordan Peterson.

STU: One of the chapters is "Speak Precisely," and yet we can never hear what he's saying.

GLENN: It's like, "Yeah, and what -- and that -- and that's what really -- what really -- really need to remember."

GLENN: Jordan Peterson joining us now on a land line. Thank you, Jordan. I'm sorry for the hassle on that.

JORDAN: Oh, no. No problem.

GLENN: So. So let's pick the conversation up where we were. Where we left it off. And that's toxic masculinity and -- and how do we find meaning? How do -- how do young men find meaning in their life, when society is -- is tearing them down and saying, you know, you're -- you're bad. You're worthless. You're not needed.

JORDAN: Yeah. Well, it's part of an all-out assault as far as I can tell, in some sense, mostly from the radical left on the idea of competence itself. And there's a confusion between tyranny and power and confidence.

You know, in our society, which is a pretty free society. So let's say Western societies. Most of our hierarchies are mostly predicated on competence, which means that if you can do the job, you tend to rise in the organization.

Now, that's contaminated a little bit with tyranny and power, of course. Because no organization is perfect. And what we have is a claim, essentially from the radical left, that male competence is indistinguishable from male tyranny and power. And so that it should be all torn down. Not the hierarchies, but the spirit that generated the hierarchies. And that's fundamentally the masculine spirit, even symbolically and psychologically speaking.

So what we see is an all-out assault on the masculine spirit. That was actually -- that was actually formalized by Jack HEP. He called western culture HEP fellowgocentric. Fellow from HEP felas. And logo from logos. So it was male-dominated and driven by logos. And, of course, that's the Christian word and also the root -- idea behind the word "logic."

And so it is part of an all-out intellectual -- an all-out war of ideas and the people who are bearing the brunt of that at the moment are I would say young men. Yeah. It's really not good.

GLENN: So what is the -- what is the end goal? Is it -- I mean, is it as clear as it seems to be, that it is the end goal and the -- the -- the motivation is just to destroy the West? Can you -- with you find any logic in there that is -- that is more than that?

JORDAN: Look, if you buy the idea that the West is a corrupt patriarchy, then that's the logical -- that's the logical end goal. I mean, the more radical disciplines at the universities, women's studies and those sorts of disciplines have said for decades that their goal was the destruction of the patriarchy.

It's like, it's very often, you know, that people tell you what they're doing. You just to have listen to them. If you read the school shooter's documents, like the kids from Columbine High School. They told you exactly why they did what they did. If you go onto the websites and read the curricula and the dictates of women's studies, disciplines at universities, they tell you exactly what they're doing. If the West is a corrupt patriarchy, then the right thing to do is tear it down.

So it's not -- it's not a surprise. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's just precisely what -- what -- that's the doctrine. That's the dogma. And the university, especially humanities departments, are overwhelmingly left and radical left. It's actually well-documented by people like Jonathan Haidt, with his hetero HEP dox academy. Jonathan is an extraordinarily reasonable person. He's no one's idea of a radical.

GLENN: Yeah. I greatly respect him.

Who is -- Jordan, who are the people that we should be reading? Besides you and your book, who are the people that inspire you or can inspire men to be -- to be men?

JORDAN: I think that Steven HEP Pinker is doing a fine job. He has a new book out now. It's in the top ten. So Pinker is a good person to read because Pinker is making a very powerful, pro-enlightenment, pro-reason, pro-science, pro-progress case. Well-documented empirically.

I mean, the empirical evidence is pretty clear. Although there is some evidence that inequality is increasing, first of all, no one knows what to do about that, right or left. There's a new book by Walter HEP Shidel called the Great Leveling, which I would also much recommend.

Because he analyzes the problem of inequality with dead seriousness. And traces it back to thousands of years. And points out quite clearly that it's a problem, but that it can't be led at the feet of capitalism. That's just foolish. It's a way deeper problem than that.

But despite the fact that there's increasing inequality, to some degree in the West, overall, the entire world is getting richer. And there are fewer poor people. There are way fewer people in absolute poverty than there were 15 years ago. Far fewer.

And so what's happening is our economic system is generating a lot of surplus. And it's being quite effectively distributed, even to the lowest end of the socioeconomic spectrum. But inequality still remains a problem.

And, you know, that drives a fair bit of theorizing on the left. But I would very much recommend HEP Shidel's book, The Great Leveling. It's very great.

And then there's Pinker. And then, you know, I'm very much a fan of -- of -- of great classic literature.

I'm a great admirer of Dosieski HEP. Dosieski's novels, in particular, are unbelievably profound explanations of the rule of human responsibility in the face of the tragedy and malevolence of existence.

And I have a reading list, that Jordan P. period of time son (?) some of them are psychological in nature. Others are littery. Some are philosophical.

GLENN: Let me take a quick break. (?) and I want to come back. And would you define whether a good man is? What is the goal to be a man? And what does a good man look like? When we come back with Jordan Peterson.

GLENN: Jordan Peterson is with us. He is the author of the number one New York Times best-seller, 12 rules for life. (?) an antidote to chaos. I can't recommend you (?) welcome, Jordan Peterson.

Can you describe what we all should be shooting for as a man?

JORDAN: Yes. Yes.

I was thinking about an image related to that. So there's a cathedral in Montreal called (?) and it's built on a hill. It's a very large cathedral. So it overlooks the hill. It's a beautiful building. And there are many, many, many steps leading up to it. Hundreds of steps. And pilgrims come there to trudge up the steps one at a time towards the cathedral. And there's something deeply symbolic about that. The idea that's being expressed is -- is profound and necessary. And that is that we all need a vision of the way that life and the world could be. We want to have a vision that that could be as good as it could be. The least amount of suffering and the most for everyone. And the most freedom for everyone. And the best for everyone.

And the question is, how do you approach an idea like that? And the answer to that is by carrying your burden one step at a time, up the hill.

And that's what you do in life. You're not a victim. Or if you are, you carry it. You know, and you take responsibility for it. And you're someone other people can rely on. You tell the truth. And that way, you make the world a little better instead of worse.

And that's the alternative to ideological possession and collective action and group hatred and tribalism and all those things that tear us apart. Is to accept that your life is tragic and that you'll suffer. And that there's evil in the world. And that it's your -- it's your responsibility to take that onto yourself and to carry it forward towards the good. That's meaning in life. And that's the antidote to chaos and to catastrophe. And the West knows this. This is why -- this is why we're an individualist culture. Because we know that the individual has to be set above the group. It's not the individual in all his rights, it's the individual in all his responsibility.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

JORDAN: And that's the part of the dialogue that's missing from our culture currently. And I believe that's why my book has become so popular and the lectures as well. Because -- because I'm telling people, suggesting to people, and particularly -- but not only to young men. That they need to accept as much responsibility as they can tolerate. And then build themselves into people who can tolerate even more responsibility. And to be -- and to accept that gratefully. Because that's where the purpose and meaning in life is.

GLENN: Jordan, I -- I have -- I've gone from a man, you know -- for a while, I rejected that I had changed a great deal in the last couple of years. But I have. And I've gone from a guy that was very popular because I was certain of things, to a guy who now really appreciates doubt and is -- and I kind of view certitude as a -- as a dangerous thing. Because if I'm certain of what I believe, then I don't necessarily believe, you know, anybody else has -- has anything to teach me or --

JORDAN: Right.

GLENN: And yet, I find -- I think this is the message of Christ is humility. And yet, people --

JORDAN: Well, the humility -- if things aren't everything they should be for or around you, then clearly you don't know enough.

GLENN: Correct.

JORDAN: So then you better be looking for what you don't know, and that's the opposite of certainty.

GLENN: We are in a situation now that we -- it almost feels like we don't trust that the truth will eventually win, that God is on the side of truth. And so we have to engage in this warfare. And -- and we're engaging online. We're engaging in tribalism.

And the -- the answer seems to be in the opposite direction, of --

JORDAN: Yeah, well, we're trying to transform the political system into a tribal battlefield. That's what identity politics is. And that can be accepted on the right as well. The identity Arizona. (?) they just want to play it differently. It's division into tribes. And it's a catastrophe.

Division into tribes means that we'll fight. It's always been that way. Human tribes have always fought, and terribly. You know, there's an old idea that the hunter gatherer types, the pre-- the prematerialist. (?) hunter gatherers were peaceful. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

GLENN: Yeah.

JORDAN: They have incredibly high (?) tribal people are unbelievably murderous. And we're all tribal, except when we decide not to be. And to decide not to be tribal is to decide to be an individual. But that means to take all the weight, the things onto your shoulders. And who wants that? Right? It's a terrible responsibility. But the paradoxical truth of the matter is that the more you take on that terrible responsibility, the deeper your life becomes. And that justifies the suffering.

GLENN: But the more you take on, the bigger target -- I want to read -- I want to read this to you. This is an article out of the Mercury News in California. These men, particular Elon Musk, are not only (?) who can get their rocket into space first. But into colonizing Mars. To have unquestioned (?) unchallenged and automatic access to something, to any type of body, and use it as will is a patriarchal one. It is the same instinctively and culture (?) that everything and everyone in their line of vision is theirs for the taking.

They're destroying a guy --

JORDAN: Yep.

GLENN: -- like Elon Musk. (?) and I believe we can be better than this. And this gives me hope. Let's go here.

JORDAN: Right. Absolutely.

See, that's a great -- that's -- your reference hits the nail at the head. You see there, the confusion between male competence and desire to -- to move forward in the world. And tyranny. Those aren't the same thing.

They're not the same thing at all. And Musk is no tyrant. If you can't see that he's a hero, then there's something wrong with your vision.

And symbolically, the author of that article is equating Mars with the unspoiled virgin. You know, and Musk was the rapist.

It's an appalling vision of masculinity. There's no excuse for it. There's no excuse for it. It's all -- there's nothing in that, except destruction. Good men do things for themselves and for everyone else at the same time. That's the right balance. You want to do something that's good for you and good for your family and good for the community and good for the surrounding world, all at the same time. And you can do that, and that takes competence and clear vision and truth. And those aren't -- that's not tyranny. And those people, the people who wrote the article that you described, they're the people that think that emasculated weak men will be good, because they're harmless. And emasculated weak men will be the Parkland shooter. (?) that's the truth of the matter.

GLENN: When do we begin to see this for what -- let me ask you this question: Are we closer to the end of this kind of thinking and movement, or are we closer to the end of the beginning of it?

JORDAN: I don't know. There's been this funny idea. It's been circulating on the internet, about the kingdom (?) where everything is in chaos. And we're in chaos at the moment. Things could go very well. But they could go very badly. And I think we're in a situation now, where the decisions that each person makes, at each moment, are of crucial import, in a way that's not always true.

We're going to decide which way we're going to go, in the next three or four years. And there's lots of positive signs. All the economic growth, for example, that I referred to, that the fact that poverty is being pushed back. And it's about 300,000 people a day. (?) the power grid. And there are a lot of really good things happening.

But there is this terrible polarization and this demand to return to a destructive tribalism. And this ideological attempt led mostly by the universities, to my utter shame, to demolish the patriarchy. It's very, very dangerous. And corporations are playing that game too. They're letting the fifth column diversity equity and inexclusivety types in through the HR back door, (?) failing to see that generating an anti-capitalism fifth column within the confines of your own organization is self-destructive in the extreme.

GLENN: How do you -- I've watched interviews with you in mainstream media. And they always come with -- with an intent. With an agenda. It seems.

You approach these interviews without an agenda. And you're just trying to explain what you believe, based on their questions. And you always seem to win because you don't seem to have an agenda, truth doesn't have an agenda.

Would you say that --

JORDAN: I have an agenda, which is to not say something stupid.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Yes.

Do you believe the mainstream media has crossed the line from bias to activism? And if so, what does that mean for the media?

JORDAN: Well, I think one of the things that might be happening is that we're in a transition period from the mainstream media, print and television, let's say most particularly, to online forms of discussion. And that's happening very rapidly.

And so it's killing the mainstream media. And as they spiral towards their death, they become more polarized to draw attention to their remaining resources. And so they're driving polarization in the broader society, in an attempt to stave off their extinction, rather than adapting to the new media. That's what -- I'm not sure that's true. But that's what it looks like. It looks like it might be happening to me. Because we are in the midst of a technological revolution in communication.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

JORDAN: I mean, YouTube alone has something in the neighborhood of 2 billion people using it.

GLENN: Yeah.

JORDAN: So it's -- and YouTube allows the possibility of the spoken word to have the same distribution as the written word, which is something unparalleled in human history.

So I think that part of what's happening is a secondary consequence of a technological revolution. I don't think that the mainstream media's desperate attempts to use click bait, let's say, to attract additional viewership, to exaggerate, for example, the danger of violent crime and to pit the right against the left in a manor that's more combative (?) than the reality would indicate. I don't think that that will stave off their demise. I think it will accelerate. But there could be a lot of collateral damage, while that's occurring.

GLENN: Jordan Peterson, from Jordan Peterson.com. Also, (?) the book 12 rules for life. An antidote to chaos. Did you ever -- you have -- you're approaching a million YouTube subscribers. Number one New York Times best-seller. Did you ever see this --

JORDAN: I don't think I'm on the New York Times. They didn't list me.

GLENN: Shut up.

JORDAN: No, it's true.

GLENN: Well, you're number one.

JORDAN: Yes, I'm number one everywhere, but not on the New York Times best (?)

GLENN: Unbelievable. Unbelievable.

JORDAN: It is rather remarkable.

GLENN: Jordan, did you ever -- did you ever see anything like this coming your way?

JORDAN: Well, I knew when I wrote this first book, this book maps Of Meaning. (?) and their relationship to ideological dispute. And I knew that was important. And I knew that my students, in the course I taught in that book, were very, very receptive to the book. (?) both at Harvard and at university of Toronto, was that one of the few courses that completely changed of student's lives. And it's not surprising to me to some degree because it's the idea of themselves. Ancient archetypal religious ideas are of absolute necessity. People can't live without them.

And so I knew that I was talking about things that have always been of crucial importance to people. But there was no way of foreseeing the magnitude of -- of the effect of that.

I mean, it's -- I'm still in complete shock about it, on a moment to moment basis. It seems to be getting larger rather than smaller.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. You have a lot of (?) runway yet ahead of you. I pray for you. And I -- I know what it's like to have great success come quickly. And if there is anyone who can navigate those waters, I believe it is you. And we wish you all the best.

JORDAN: Well, thank you. Thank you. Well, like I said, I hope I can manage this without making any catastrophic mistakes. And so, so far so good, knock on wood and all that.

GLENN: Thank you so much. Jordan Peterson.

(music)

STU: You can get Jordan on Twitter at Jordan B. Petersen. (?), by the way, that reading list he mentioned earlier in the interview, you can find that there. And I would say probably at the top of that reading list would be 12 rules for life, antidote to chaos, by Jordan spirit son.

GLENN: (?), you know, it's amazing, I don't think I've ever interviewed a more careful man. One of his rules is speak with precisely. (?) and you can hear it. He speaks slowly, to not make any errors.

Congress Will Allow the FBI to SPY on YOU, But Not THEM?!
RADIO

Congress Will Allow the FBI to SPY on YOU, But Not THEM?!

Congress is voting on whether to re-authorize FISA Section 702, which would allow the FBI to secretly spy on Americans without warrants. Glenn speaks to 3 congressmen who are leading the charge to prevent this. First, Rep. Chip Roy accuses House Speaker Mike Johnson of standing in the way of an amendment to force the FBI to obtain warrants before spying on U.S. citizens. Then, Rep. Thomas Massie lays out the "biggest red flag" he's seen: “There’s 2 carve-outs in here for congressmen…Only if you’re a Senator or US Representative do they have to notify you” if they’re spying on you without a warrant. And lastly, Rep. Warren Davidson explains his his “Fourth Amendment is Not For Sale” amendment, which would put an end to this shady practice.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: House Republicans are divided. I don't know how they're divided on this.

Read the Constitution. Where do you find in the Constitution warrants, Pat?

PAT: Well, you have the Fourth Amendment. For instance.

GLENN: Which is?

PAT: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.

And no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause. Supported by oath or ampliation.

GLENN: So wait. Wait. Wait.

That's the Fourth Amendment. What does that mean?

The reason why this was written in, is because the king used to issue general warrants. And that meant Pat Gray, there's something wrong with him. Go find it. And they could look into anything.

They could go into your house, go through all of your papers. Where a warrant, now, our kind of warrant has to be sworn out. By the police and somebody else, you know, somebody tips them off.

And they say, look, I know he robbed somebody, or he killed somebody. And he's keeping their necklace in their house.

It's in his safe, in his wall, and in his bedroom. They go to the judge, and the judge says, really?

And listens to all of it. And he's supposed to be skeptical and protect your right to privacy.

But if they have enough evidence to make the judge go, I think you're right. He did.

Then he issues that specific warrant. They can't just go into your business. And everything else.

And just look through stuff.

They have to know what they're looking for, and generally, where it is.

PAT: And if they find something else, that incriminates them on some other issue. You can't use it.

GLENN: You can't use it, okay?

That's the Fourth Amendment. This is where we get warrants. This is why you can't just stop people in the streets, and search them.

Okay?

This is why America doesn't say, papers please. You can't do that! Because of the Fourth Amendment. Now, we were all really drunk and stupid, when we passed the Patriot Act. And in the Patriot Act, it has Section 702.

And it's the foreign intelligence surveillance act.

And we ail talked about it, at the time. And we all trusted our government, at the time.

Strangely, except for actual liberals, which I don't think exist anymore.

And they were the ones that were saying, tonight. Don't do this.

This -- this will -- they will scoop Americans up into this.

PAT: And we said at the time, eh, that's fine. It's not going to happen. Because I was for it, at the very beginning.

A few weeks into it, I was like, oh, wait. It's going to be a problem.

I remember thinking, all they have to do is just change the meaning of terrorist. If they -- if they decide a group of Americans are terrorists, we're done.

And that's exactly what they've done now.

So what happens is, they -- they get a warrantless surveillance of foreigners.

We don't have to have a warrant on foreigners.

So they go to the FISA court, and they say, look, we're going to listen to these people.

And they don't need a warrant. And they go and they listen to those people.

The problem is: It's a giant chain.

That person, if that person is foreign, and he calls somebody here in America, then that person is tracked.

And everyone else that he talks to. And everyone else that they talk to.

And so on. And so on.

Do you remember the old -- you know, the shampoo commercial?

And so on. And so on. And it kept dividing itself, until the whole screen was just nothing, but faces.

That's exactly what is happening. And they are scooping up all kinds of information on you. That doesn't have anything to do, with terror overseas.

This has got to stop. You know, when they -- when they built, after 9/11, they built the visitor's center of Washington, DC.

What you don't know, is -- or may not know.

Is underneath the visitor's center, we don't even know how many floors, there are.

Underneath that.

It's all top secret.

Your -- some of your senators and some of your Congressmen can't even get into the floors. They're top secret, because they're FISA courts.

We know now, that the FISA courts are completely corrupt. We know that the FBI is changing the facts, when they go to the court.

They're changing -- they've actually changed, sworn testimony. And no one is punished for it.

We cannot allow section 702 to pass.

Now, there is a -- an amendment to the bill. That has been suggested.

But the bill is coming up, this week. The G.O.P. representative Laura Lee of Florida, is the one who has put the amendment in.

Titled reforming intelligence and securing America act. It would reauthorize section 702 of FISA for five years.

And aims to impose a series of reforms. I don't believe any of the reforms.

I don't believe those will ever happen. We have given the keys to everything about us.

To the government. And the government has turned hostile on many Americans.

So, what do we do? We have Chip on yet?

CHIP: We passed a rollout committee yesterday, that would include -- that had a rule that said we will have a vote on a warrant. The problem is that the Speaker of the House, has now come out against the warrant amendment. That's a problem. Because the Speaker has pit his finger on the scale to shift the conversation. And to say publicly, we don't need the warrant.

GLENN: What the hell is wrong with this guy?

CHIP: Well, that's for another conversation. For the purpose of today, when we go to the floor, in an hour and 40 minutes, we're bringing to the floor under a bill that has an amendment to add the Fourth Amendment protection, the warrant protection that we could still pass, but seems like we won't. Because the speaker has put his finger on the scales.

So now since the speaker has done that, we now have to decide, whether or not we stop the whole process by killing the rule.

And then force it to be only reauthorized under its current form.

Which, of course, still wouldn't give us the protection of the warrant.

GLENN: No.

CHIP: But our concern is, there are other amendments in this, that would expand FISA in the name of going after --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

CHIP: Right. And so, for example, there is well-intended legislation, to go after. To be able to collect data. Collect information. Relative to drug trafficking like fentanyl.

The problem is, in the definition, about precursors, and other stuff. It expands FISA. Expands the amount of information they were collecting. You could be about talking about an American citizen, buying, you know, whatever. Cold medicine.

That's the precursor for making meth.

So we're all alarmed, that it's expanding FISA, and we're trying to run all these pieces to ground.

Meanwhile, that's all stuff that's been added to it. You know, by the leadership.

So now, we're trying to figure out, what we do. With a rule here at noon.

We are conflicted because of the current regime, doesn't have the Fourth Amendment warrant, you know, a language in there.

Obviously, we still have protections in American citizens under the Constitution. But if you don't put this provision in place, it's not as strong in terms of what we're trying to do to protect American citizens.

THOMAS: The biggest red flag in this. And I spent 15 minutes last night. The rules committee, going back and forth to the chairman of the Intel committee. We finally got him to admit, this is inside his bill. A carve-out for congressmen. I don't know if Chip mentioned it.

GLENN: No. He didn't.

THOMAS: Okay. They are trying to tell you, they have 53 reforms in here that will take care of all the problems. Well, the congressman who are voting for this aren't convinced, because they get a carve-out. There's two carve-outs here for congressmen.

Number one, the FBI is surveilling you, using FISA. They're going into this database, and searching with your name and your congressman. And they're ostensibly doing it for your own good.

Because they're worried about foreign actors. They have to notify you.

Only if you're a congressman. Only if you're a senator or US representative.

Do they have to notify you. And I asked, why did they put that in there? They were afraid of political bias.

What about school boards? Aren't you afraid of political bias there? And oh, by the way, does this apply to candidates, or just incumbent congressmen? It only applies to incumbent congressmen. How special is that?

So my solution here is, get a warrant. And then you don't have to put out carve-outs for congressmen.

GLENN: Correct.

THOMAS: And here's what's especially despicable about the carve-out. That's to get congressmen's votes. There's at least one Congressman we know -- Darin LaHood. He's said this publicly. He's on the Intel community, and he was being spied on by the Intel community.

He's responsible for their oversight. So he was worried enough about this. That he insisted, there would be some provision. Now, his concern is legitimate.

I'm not tingeing him, per se.

GLENN: No. I know.

THOMAS: For asking for this. It should be solved for everybody, not just congressmen.

GLENN: Thank you. So tell us what your amendment actually will do.

WARREN: Okay. So the amendment we have is called the Fourth Amendment is not for sale. So one of the most important ones in the bill is to get a warrant.

And let's go back in the fall. The base tax had getting a warrant, and the -- what is the Fourth Amendment not for sale do?

It prevents the federal government from buying data from data brokers that they would otherwise have to get a warrant for a subpoena to obtain. So it was in the data broker loophole. So it was in the base text. The Speaker essentially works with the Intel committee to gut the bill, of some of these important provisions.

And at least the warrant requirement is going to be able to be offered as an amendment. But he basically strips the Fourth Amendment is not for sale, from even getting a vote.

And part of the reason, I still remember, you know, a long time member of Congress, again, Walter Jones, asked him one time when a bill was popular in the House. Passed with like 420 some votes.

Only seven no votes. Would help solve a problem. Be popular with the public. Why in the world won't the Senate pick this up?

And he said, well, I hate to be cynical. But probably because it would pass. And why would they strip this out?

Well, because Dick Durbin, who is the Chairman of Judiciary in the Senate has a similar bill in the Senate, and Chuck Schumer is a cosponsor.

So this is an issue that does not break on party lines. When it was offered as a standalone bill in the Judiciary Committee last summer, it passed 36 to one through the committee. So how often did Jim Jordan and Jerry Nadler agree on something? Pretty rare.

But this is one that at least, this isn't a total party line issue like so many other things are.

GLENN: So they're stripping it out.

And he's actually going around the rules to make sure that it's -- that it never makes it to the floor, is it he not?

WARREN: Well, it doesn't make it as part of this debate. He has offered to give us a vote at a later time. But this is the problem.

If it's not attached to something that has passed like FISA. Well, of course, the administration wants to keep spying on Americans. They have already said that. So if there was a way to pass it through the House -- and even if there is a way to pass it through the Senate. The administration, you know, simply would veto it.

That's why it should be part of the FISA debate. That's why the judiciary committee had it as part of the base text of the bill, that essentially the Speaker reworked.

GLENN: So I'm hoping that most of the people that are hearing your voice right now, are the kind of people that maybe used to say. Well, I don't have anything to worry about.

Because I'm not doing anything illegal.

And realize now, the government has turned hostile towards American citizens.

And all of the information that is out there, it's very dangerous for individuals.

Tell me what -- why the average person should care. Why does this matter?

You know, to those people who are not breaking the law, et cetera, et cetera?

WARREN: Well, the barbecue to the founding of the country, and why was the revolution ticked off. One of the major causes according to John Adam was the general warrant stop the king. King George was basically saying, well, we're looking for bad people. So under the guise of looking for bad people, we will just come and rummage through your personal effects. And, you know, in the concept of privacy.

Well, the Fourth Amendment doesn't say, well, if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.

It says that as an American, you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

That without probable cause, and they can't search your stuff, and with probable cause, they have to get a warrant. Even for really bad people.

Even to go after pedophiles. You have to get a warrant. And that's the way. The foreign surveillance act, is designed to collect intelligence on foreigners. That part is broadly supported.

It's been very effective. We want to stop threats to our country. But when it comes to citizens, there's a reason there's no Domestic Surveillance Act. It's because the Fourth Amendment says that we have an expectation of privacy.

And we have to defend that. It's probably the most infringed part of the Bill of Rights at this point.

GLENN: So what is the most effective thing people can do today?

WARREN: Call their member of Congress. Tell them to demand that their number of votes are for a warrant requirement. And ask them to say, we should be voting on the Fourth Amendment is not for sale.

The government should not be circumventing the warrant requirement, to buy data, that they would otherwise get a warrant. They don't want the warrant requirement in the first place. But in the event, that should pass, in a lot of ways, they're saying, well, it's not as consequential. Because we could just buy our ways around it.

What’s Happening in Brazil is EXACTLY What’s Coming to America
RADIO

What’s Happening in Brazil is EXACTLY What’s Coming to America

Elon Musk is challenging a Brazilian judge who is trying to clamp down on free speech. The judge has demanded that X take down alleged “far right” accounts or face severe punishments in the country … sound familiar? In its attempt to "prevent" a right-wing “dictatorship,” Brazil’s leftist government has created a fascist dictatorship of its own. And allegedly, the United States played a big role. Glenn breaks down the story and warns that what’s happening in Brazil is exactly what’s coming to America: “If we don’t get out and vote, this is our future in America.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Pat, are you following what's going on in Brazil?

PAT: Not terribly closely.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

So I haven't either.

And I just started paying attention to it, over the weekend.

Because of Michael Shellenberger.

He did a video that was just incredible.

And very disturbing.

He's talking about the -- you know, the same kind of corruption, that is happening in our government.

Down in Brazil. Where they are stifling the media. But it's much, much worse than that.

Let me give you a couple of things that we have found during our -- during our research.

Listen to this.

This is from the New York Times.

He's Brazil's defender of democracy.

Is he actually good for democracy?

Alexandre De Moraes. A Brazilian Supreme Court justice. Was crucial to Brazil's transfer of power.

But his aggressive tactics are prompting debate. Can one go too far to fight the far right?

Think of that question.

How unbelievable that question is. Of course. And why is it just the right?

When Brazil's highway police began holding up buses full of voters on Election Day, he ordered them to stop.

When right-wing voices spread the baseless claim that Brazil's election is stolen. He ordered them banned from social media. When thousands of right-wing protesters stormed Brazil's halls of power this month, he ordered the officials who had been responsible for securing the buildings, arrested.

Alexandre De Moraes, a Brazilian Supreme Court justice has taken up the mantle of Brazil's lead defender of democracy.

Using a broad interpretation of the court's powers, he has pushed to investigate, prosecute, and as well, silence those on social media. Anyone he deems a menace to Brazil's institutions.

As a result, in the face of antidemocratic attacks from Brazil's former far right president, Bolsonaro and his supporters, Mr. De Moraes cleared the way for the transfer of power.

Many on Brazil's left that made him the man who saved Brazil's young democracy, yet many others in Brazil say he's threatening it. He kind of has a -- hmm. Heavy hand. These are some of the things, according to the New York Times he has done. He has jailed people without trial, for posting threats on social media. He helped sentence a sitting Congressman to nearly nine years in prison for threatening the court.

He has ordered raids on businessmen, with little evidence of wrongdoing. He has suspended an elected governor from his job. He has unilaterally blocked dozens of accounts and thousands of posts on social media, with virtually no transparency and no room for appeal.

In the hunt for justice after the riot, he became further emboldened. His orders to ban prominent voices online, have proliferated. And now he has the man accused of fanning Brazil's extremist flames. Mr. Bolsonaro in his crosshairs.

Last week -- now, remember this is an old New York Times from about two years ago.

De Moraes, included Bolsonaro in a federal investigation of the riot, which she is overseeing, suggesting the former president inspired the violence.

Sound familiar? His moves fit into a broader trend of Brazil's Supreme Court, increasing its power and taking what critics have called a more repressive turn in the process.

So he is -- he is taking extra constitutional powers. Over the weekend, he said, if you don't give me your data, Facebook, Google, and X, on all of the people that are posting. If you don't give that to me, you're banned from being in Brazil.

A judge. So everybody did, except for Elon Musk. Elon Musk said, the guy is a fascist.

Michael Shellenberger is down saying, Brazil is becoming a fascistic dictatorship with this guy in charge.

Now, if you remember, the left was saying Bolsonaro was a dictator. And so now, to prevent the dictator, they have become dictators.

The exact scenario, that we were worried about here, in America. But nobody seems -- nobody really seems to care.

So there's a guy named Mike Benz, who I'll follow and watch from time to time, he had a really good look at this.

He was down, looking at censorship in Brazil. And he said, I found the United States, all over it.

He said, the United States department funded NGOs. And not just State Department funded NGOs. But National Endowment for Democracy is also down there. He said, you had USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, funding a bunch of domestic censorship groups in Brazil. And he says, it goes back to the beginning of Bolsonaro's reign as president down there in 2019. So the same thing that was happening here with Donald Trump, the United States through NGOs took your tax dollars and started fighting against Bolsonaro.

In June 2019, the Atlantic Council convened a meeting about what to do about the rise of disinformation in Brazil. That was pro-Bolsonaro in nature. What a surprise.

The Atlantic Council panel called election watch in June 2019. Bemoaned the fact that in Brazil, people were paying attention to their own friends, family, and clergy, than they were institutions. Global institutions such as the Atlantic Council, which is a CIA pass through. It has seven CIA directors on its board.

It's annually funded every year by the Pentagon for the State Department. And the National Endowment for Democracy. Which is also a CIA cutout.

In addition to that, a bunch of these university centers in Brazil and civil society groups, get National Endowment for Democracy funding.

So this is the CIA and the State Department, and USA ID, directly funding, in June 29, the censorship apparatus, in Brazil, against Bolsonaro.

In 2019, social media was already censored in Brazil, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube were hit hard bit censors. The same way it did in the United States.

So the Bolsonaro supporters switched to WhatsApp and Telegram to spread their messaging, because they were basically kicked off of Facebook.

Does any of this sound familiar?

This is why one of the biggest audiences for Gab, one of the first free speech alternative platform attempts, was the Brazilian population in 18 and 2019, because they were hit with that first leg of the censorship board.

So what the Atlantic Council and a bunch of these other national endowment for democracy-funded CIA proxies did, is they then targeted WhatsApp and Telegram.

And then promoted these activities, these proxies within Brazil, to put pressure on the Brazilian government to take out WhatsApp and Telegram.

So WhatsApp and Telegram then censored populous supporters. Right-wing populous nationalists. Bolsonaro supporters.

This -- this -- this is the United States government.

He goes on to say, let me ask you something. When has an ally ever threatened major corporations?

American corporations, and said, you will give me this stuff. Or you will be chased out of the country.

Since when doesn't our State Department go down and say, excuse me. Really good friend of Brazil.

We've been there for you, forever. We're helping pay for stuff in your country.

You do not hurt American corporations. You don't tell them, what they can and can't do. When it's in violation of your own doctrines.

PAT: Except that sadly, our American government is behind it.

GLENN: Is behind it.

PAT: Yeah. They're pushing it.

GLENN: It's behind it.

PAT: Yep. Because they're doing the same thing here.

GLENN: Exactly right.

PAT: They can't -- they can't win on the battlefield of ideas. So they have to shut down the battlefield.

GLENN: Correct. And I want you to know, what's happening today in Brazil. The Supreme Court, which was messed with. The Supreme Court now has ultimate power, to do everything. There's no checks or balance there, on the Supreme Court.

So the Supreme Court takes over and says, just, we're going to put people in jail without trial. You don't have a right to speak out. We can tell companies exactly what to do.

And in their hunt for dictators, they have become a dictatorship. That's really important for everyone in America, to understand.

Democracy dies in the darkness. Yet, shut everything down, and keep it real dark.

What's happening in Brazil, is what's coming here if we don't get out and vote.

This is our future, in America.

The Disturbing TRUTH About Biden’s “Job Growth” LIE
RADIO

The Disturbing TRUTH About Biden’s “Job Growth” LIE

Glenn can’t take Biden’s LIES about “creating jobs” anymore! Biden claims he has created 15 million jobs while in office. But Glenn reads an article by Daniel Horowitz on theblaze.com that breaks down why that’s a massive lie. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Biden only created 2.3-5.5 million jobs when you take out people returning to work after the pandemic. But even that isn’t the full truth. When you account for population growth, illegal immigration, and people taking second jobs to fight inflation, the jobs market is actually DOWN under Biden! So, where does Biden’s 15 million number come from? Glenn reveals the truth …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So I can't take it, every time that Joe Biden says, well, we've created 15 million new jobs, since January 2021.

Can't take it. Cannot take it. Why, Pat.

Why did you roll your eyes?

PAT: Well, he didn't create 15 million new jobs. Nowhere near. Those jobs came back after the -- after the COVID situation was over. And people went back to work.

GLENN: Okay. It's much worse than that.

It's much worse than that. I want to give you just the facts. This is compiled in a great story on Blaze media. Just go to Blaze.com. Blaze.com.

Daniel Horowitz writes an unbelievable. This should be sent to everyone you know.

He says, he says, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, publishes two jobs reports. The establishment survey and the household survey.

The establishment survey samples actual employers and shows the growth in nonfarm payroll jobs as well as a breakdown from specific industry. While the household survey, samples individual households.

And measures broad census data. Such as total of employment age population.

Size of labor force. The U3 unemployment rate. And the total of employed and unemployed.

So he always has this talking point, where he says, oh, I created 15 million jobs.

Daniel Horowitz starts with, his talking point about job creation is the ultimate self-indictment.

Listen to this. Getting a precise picture of the US unemployment -- or employment, requires conflating data, from both of those surveys.

Typically, the data compliment each other. But in the last couple of years, the numbers have diverged.

For example, the establishment survey shows 3 million additional people employed, since January 2021.

This may be due in part because the employer-based survey picks up more illegal aliens, than the survey of households.

The White House obviously prefers to tout the establishment survey's figure. In any event, the reality is, Biden has a much worse record on job creation, than Donald Trump.

And that's before we delve into the nature of these jobs. When COVID-19 shut down the world in March 2020, employment cratered.

It took well over a year to come back from the lockdowns and nearly get back to par, with the pre-COVID baseline in February 2020.

As such, the only fair comparison for Biden to make, is to measure the number of employed individuals today, compared to February 2020.

I think that's fair, right?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And not even all jobs. I think it's being generous. Not everybody's job was back by February 2020.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: Viewed that way, we don't have 15 million new jobs. We have 5.5 million new jobs created between January 2021 and February of this year.

According to the establishment survey. And just 2.3 million according to the Household Survey. Let's go with the more impressive 5.5 million figure, even though the Philadelphia Fed believes that's overstated.

Although 5.5 million still sounds meaningful. Remember, the country is constantly growing. Since February 2020, the civilian noninstitutional population of working-aged residents grew by 8.1.

I wonder if this is even counting the illegals.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: So job growth has not kept pace with population growth. Especially judging from the household survey.

This is why the civilian labor force participation rate is down, from 63.3 percent. Ahead of the lockdowns to 62.5 percent.

When factoring in population growth, the fact is, we find an additional 729,000 unemployed, individuals, today.

Put another way, 611 out of every 1,000 Americans, of unemployment age, were working before COVID. Compared to 601 today.


PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: Also, an additional 5 million people are no longer in the labor force, but of working age, which means that for whatever reason, they gave up on job -- the job market.

Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell explains these missing workers are the result of excess retirements.

Really? Those are the workers that we're missing. The ones who are ready to retire?

In short, we have a much larger population without jobs than before COVID. Compared to the same period under Trump, the current labor market today is terrible.

After 37 months into Trump's tenure the establishment survey showed 6.7 million jobs created.

But here's the kicker. The population only grew by 5.6 million. Which means the job growth under Trump outpaced population growth by 20 percent.

Under Biden population growth has outpaced job growth by 47 percent. Or 252 percent, going back the household survey.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Okay? Hence by virtue of population growth, alone, we have gone backward in job creation since COVID.

But it get worse. As Daniel Horowitz noted before, we have been losing full-time jobs.

All the net job growth has come from part-time employment. In total, 3.4 million part-time jobs have been added since January 21. With 1.7 million just in the past nine months. This isn't a story of growing economy, of go-getters seeking upward mobility. These are people taking second and third jobs, just to afford the basic standards of living.

In fact, the number of those who have held multiple jobs has surged by 1.6 million since Biden took office.

That's why the establishment survey shows greater job creation.

It is double counting the increasing number of employed people with more than one job.

Also, many of the new jobs are classified as self-employed. Thanks to tax change laws. Tax law changes, it now includes a number of Uber and Lyft drivers. Are records of numbers of people starting their own businesses?

No. These are unemployed, and underemployed people taking nebulous jobs, or struggling workers, forced to take a second gig just to tread water.

Meanwhile, thanks to the endless revisions of the unemployment data, full-time jobs are now down 1.8 million since June of last year.

A large share of the remaining lethargic, full-time job creation has been fueled by government itself.

Over the past year, government employees have -- government employment has doubled the growth rate of the private sector work.

Government jobs have comprised between 21 and 58 percent of all job creation, in the past six employment surveys.

Between 21 on the low end. And 58 percent. 60 percent of all job creation. It takes no skill or ingenuity to print trillions of dollars and create phantom jobs, while saddling consumers with the consequences.

This is perhaps one reason why all the job creation has been concentrated in 15 percent of US counties.

Think of that. All the job creation has been concentrated in 15 percent of US counties.

All of the job growth over the last year, came from just 59 out of 389 metro areas, across America.

They were part-time. They went to foreigners. And 15 percent of the country.

Perhaps the most shocking data point.

I mean, I'm already spinning.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Perhaps the most shocking data point, that nukes the Biden administration's entire job growth narrative. Is the drop in -- since October 2019, native-born US workers. They have actually lost 1.4 million jobs.

Over the same period, foreign-born workers have gained 3 million jobs.

In fact, there has not been a month of net job creation, for native born workers since July 2018.

PAT: Wow!

So -- where do they even get the 15 million figure? Because it's not even from COVID jobs coming back.

GLENN: No. No. The 15 million is with COVID.

At the present million in COVID. 5.5, they say.

PAT: So you add -- when the jobs come back. And then the 5 million they created. That's where they get the 15 million?

GLENN: Yeah. So if you stop after February 2020, or February 21, I can't remember.

When they say, okay. Jobs were come back.

People were going back to work. If you take all those jobs, that people were going back to work in. Okay?

Then you start from there. You only have 5.5.

PAT: But we've had over 8 million new people.

GLENN: Correct. And I don't believe we should call Daniel. I don't believe that counts for the illegals.

PAT: The illegals. Jeez.

GLENN: That's another 10 million.

And the natural-born citizen, not the foreigner.

But the natural-born citizen here, has actually lost employment.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That employment number is going down.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: So all of the jobs created are from foreign workers.

Part-time jobs.

Or government jobs. That's not good.

PAT: No.

GLENN: That is not good.

Biden All But DEMANDS a Yellow Star on Jewish-Made Products From the West Bank
RADIO

Biden All But DEMANDS a Yellow Star on Jewish-Made Products From the West Bank

The Biden administration is now weighing whether to change the way products made by Jews in Judea and Samaria (AKA the West Bank) are labeled. The rule would force these products to state that they were made in the West Bank, instead of in Israel, allegedly as a way to make boycotting them easier. But who's vote is this buying? Maybe, Glenn says, it's the vote of the pro-Palestinian Muslims in Dearborn, Michigan, who have been organizing anti-American protests featuring chants of "death to America." "We are on the side of evil," Glenn says, if our government continues down this path.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Hey, what did I do for al-Quds day? Right?

Al-Quds that's the Muslim word for Jerusalem, because Jerusalem doesn't exist. It's al-Quds, of course.

So they were celebrating al-Quds in Dearborn, Michigan.

And, oh, what a celebration it was.

Do you have -- can you pull this up a little bit?

VOICE: Why are our protests, on the International Day of Quds.

VOICE: This is Dearborn, Michigan.

VOICE: Why don't we just focus more on Israel and not talk so much about America?

GLENN: Yeah, amen.

VOICE: They've shown the entire world, why these protests are so anti-America. Because it's the United States government, that provides the funds, for all of the atrocities, that we just heard about.

And this is why Khomeini, who declared the International day of Quds.

This is why he would say, to pour all of your chants and all of your shouts, upon the head of America.

GLENN: Death to America. Death to America. Death to America.

VOICE: Malcolm X said, and I quote.

GLENN: Hmm.

VOICE: We live in the rottenest countries that has ever existed in this country. It's not genocide Joe that has to go. It's the entire system that has to go. Any system that would allow such atrocities, and such devilry to happen. And would support it. Such a system does not deserve to exist on God's earth.

GLENN: Amen!

Now, I -- you might quibble.

We might quibble a little bit on certain things.

Like death to America.

I mean, wanted to play that. Because this was happening in Dearborn, Michigan.

By the way, in unrelated news, that great-grandmother, 71 years old, that walked into an open door in the Capitol. They busted her, finally. Finally.

STU: Oh, good.

GLENN: She's been convicted. She's going to jail.

We don't know. You know, we don't know how strong.

I hope it's ten years, for parading. But they got her over the weekend.

This guy, anyway. Back to the real story. This guy is chanting death to America, in the city that is known as the jihad Capitol of America.

Dearborn.

STU: Is that on their, like, sign when you pull in?

Dearborn, Michigan. The jihad Capitol of America.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

STU: It is?

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Yeah.

So, by the way, the US is on high alert, and actively preparing for a significant attack that could come as soon as this week by Iran, targeting Israeli or American assets in the region of -- of Syria. So we might get hit over there. But who knows?

We have the protesters there, shouting death to America.

You know, but they're not -- that's not really terrorists. They're just speaking their mind. Some would say, that's maybe mis or disinformation.

Maybe even malinformation.

But not our government, I'll tell you that right now. Instead, President Joe Biden is -- is trying to garner the votes of those people.

He is reaching out to Michigan, and jihad city. And he is wanting the Muslim vote.

Now, I will tell you. Not all Muslims, you know, want jihad.

Some of them came over here and went, hey. You know, I kind of like the idea that, you know, we're not going to be killed, if we disagree.

Yeah. Well, things are changing in America.

So Joe Biden is doing everything he can, to cater to this vote.

To the people who are against Israel.

And for the Palestinians. And, I mean, want to say, that would leave out, then, people from Jordan.

People from Egypt.

And -- and people from Syria. Anywhere in that region, because none of them want the Palestinians. None of them.

None of them will do anything, except condemn Israel and the United States.

So they're not there helping at all. Why? Because the Palestinians are a revolutionary people, when it comes to their leadership. Always a revolutionary people.

And they've -- and they've experienced it firsthand. Both in Egypt. And in Jordan.

So everybody is like, yeah. I don't think so.

I don't think so. Let Israel. Let them just be the revolutionaries in Israel.

And we can all say, we support them. Even though, they really don't.

But Joe Biden is catering to those people, to the point that he is preparing to force Jewish-made products from Judea and Samaria. To be clearly labeled so consumers know where the products are from.

STU: What?

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: That can't be real. Really?

GLENN: It is. Reports said, the move from the administration would reverse a policy enacted by President Donald Trump. That required goods made in Judea and Samaria as to be labeled, Made in Israel.

Biden administration -- what do you think? Hang on. Hang on. What do you think, if we put just a little yellow star on those products? You know what I mean?

STU: Oh, that would be helpful for people.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

And you can only use those products. Or if you buy those products, maybe you get striped pajamas. With a little yellow star on it. We could do that.

STU: Interesting roach. Is it too subtle though? What about big block letters that say, made by them Jews?

Something like that. So people really know.

GLENN: How about, made by them enjoys, in Jew land. Yeah. We can do that. We can do that.

STU: That's the way to go. That's the way to go.

GLENN: Pretty good.

Joe Biden. I don't know if he's thinking about that.

We are actually talking about changing labels, to make sure everybody knows that's in Judea.

Stu, why does that sound so much like Jew, just with dea at the end? You know, it's weird.

STU: It's a real mystery. It is a mystery.

You know, but this hopefully will help to win over that gentleman, that was speaking so nicely in front of the death of America crowd. Maybe he can win that swing vote.

Won't that be so worth it?

You know, abandoning Israel and labeling all the Jews. But you might get that Dearborn, Michigan, vote. Maybe you'll get Rashida Tlaib to support you again.

And what an honorable pursuit that would be.

GLENN: We are actually on the side of evil now. We're on the --

STU: Who is we?

GLENN: The country.

STU: The country's leadership.

GLENN: Yeah. The United States of America, as an endorse factor.

Not the people, per se.

But we are actually fighting for the side of -- of evil now.

We are -- when you can't see, in a nation, that, you know, many people in Washington might remember something called 9/11.

When you have somebody on the streets, chanting, death to America.

Death to Israel.

Quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iraq.

I'm sorry. In Iran.

Who we are worried is going to attack us this week. When that happens, and you have the government coming out and condemning Israel and trying to get the vote of those people who are on the streets. Condemning America.

We're on the side of evil. We are on the side of evil.

And, you know, God bless it. If that's what the people want, that's exactly what the people will get.

It's not what -- it's not what God's people want, quite honestly.

STU: And you listen to the coverage of it.

It's as if -- first of all, and we were six months away from October 7th.

Six months in a day.

GLENN: Six months.

Took the world six months.

STU: And it didn't take the world six months.

It took the world like six weeks tops.

But, I mean, you know, the -- the administration who initially came out. And Biden doing his old school Democratic calculus, which there were some.

You know, there were some supporters in the Democratic Party of Israel. I don't know if there were any left. But Chuck Schumer is a great example of this, right?

He would be a guy that would at least come out and say things about Israel.

Seems to be gone now, entirely from the party.

GLENN: Nancy Pelosi.

STU: Nancy Pelosi. It's incredible.

Even Hillary Clinton. Go back and listen to Hillary Clinton a few weeks after.

She was on, I think The View.

If that's not the worst collection of people. Hillary Clinton as a guest.

It's like a wormhole.

GLENN: Of bad people.

STU: Of bad people. But she even --

GLENN: The Nuremberg might have been a bigger collection.

STU: There's an argument.

But I think there's a -- not helpful.

You go back and listen to even her explanation of this situation.

Hey, you guys don't understand the history of this.

Let me lay that out for you.

She even has encapsulated to what has happened. They all started to ignore it now.

The guy who is running the world central kitchen.

And I get it. He's, first of all, a lefty. Second of all, in the middle of a ridiculously tragic situation, a bunch of his workers are killed.

It's hard to even -- I don't know we should be listening to any -- he's a chef. I don't know if there's any reason why we would be listening to his political opinions anyway.

He's completely accusing of killing these workers intentionally. Like, why on earth would they do such a thing?

Even if they were evil, and their whole goal was to rule the world with their Jewish evil, why on earth would they kill aid workers intentionally?

It would work against their interests. In every way. But like, because Jews are just comic book evil. We're supposed to believe this nonsense.

It is -- it's incredible.

It's so absurd. And if and thankfully, I have not even all of the footage. And I am going to avoid it, if at all possible. Of what happened after -- we talked about this off the air. I made the decision, I don't want to see it. I understand what it is. I've read a lot about it. I understand it. You're talking about potentially seeing it.

GLENN: Yeah. I'm going to see it.

I think in a couple of weeks.
STU: And I don't think that's a bad -- I think that's a good thing for you to do.

GLENN: I think it's been -- I'm not sure. But I think it's been offered to many people at the Blaze. I asked for a briefing.

I want to see -- I want to see the details.

I want to know what Israel knows. Okay?

And so it's a -- very high security thing.

STU: Yep.

GLENN: And so I've asked for it. And I think selected people here at the Blaze are going to be able to see it as well.

And I think you should see it, Stu.

STU: I understand what happened. And I don't need to see to understand it. I think if you're on the fence and you don't understand it, you should definitely see it. But I talked to Dave Marcus, who will be on with Megyn Kelly by the way today. With Dave. He saw it. And his summary of it, walking out of it, after watching the footage.
He said, if this happened in the United States, there would be a million people dead somewhere.

That's how serious it was.

And I don't doubt it.

I -- the -- he said. And I think this is accurate.

Israel showed restraint here. This is not -- Israel does -- could be doing a lot more than they're doing. And I feel like, the media would think that that's the most insane thing for them to say.

And I don't think if they think that. I -- the fact that they have eliminated or captured something like 60 or 70 percent of what they believe is Hamas.

And we're asking them to just leave the other 30 percent hanging out. Which, by the way, has still not returned, the hostages.

GLENN: Right. Won't even let the Red Cross in to see the hostages or talk to them.

STU: Yeah. When does Hamas get asked about a cease-fire?

They don't. It's just supposed to be Israel doing it. And Hamas is able to do whatever they want. Well, forget -- I'm sorry. We would -- everybody calling this show, if this happened in America, would be asking for what Israel is doing and more.