Which six people connected to White House have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood?

Glenn interviewed Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the American Center for Security Policy as well as former Assistant Secretary in the Defense Department under Ronald Reagan, on radio this morning about the rise of radical Islam and the threat it poses to the United States. More importantly, he discussed the legal implications that any politicians and journalists could face if they were found to have knowledge of treason against the United States.

Gaffney explained, "The technical term for it, the statutory criminal prohibition on it in the U.S. code is something called misprision of treason and what that fancy term means is if somebody either knows or had reason to know that seditious activity is underway, seditious activity like trying to overthrow the government of the United States or destroy Western civilization from within, for example, that is a criminal offense under our laws and should be treated as such."

"And it appears in the code right next to, you know, sedition because it's meant to say you can't let this kind of thing happen and not do something about it without being culpable yourself."

Gaffney said that there were six people connected to the White House who "on the basis of just the open source information had extensive ties themselves to the Muslim Brotherhood."

He added that at best these six people are ignorantly being manipulated by the Muslim Brotherhood and their agenda, or at worst going along with it willingly.

Who were the six individuals? You can find out tonight on Rumors of War 3: Target US on GBTV

Interview Transcript:

GLENN: Frank Gaffney is on the phone. He's part of this special. He was ‑‑ what were you? The assistant deputy Department of Defense? What were you? Secretary? What was that title?

GAFFNEY: It was an assistant ‑‑ I acted as an assistant secretary in the defense department under Ronald Reagan. Beck okay. And Frank, you have ‑‑ you've been on the show a million times, you've got tons of credibility in this kind of stuff. When I'm watching this special last night, I was shocked, and I'm ‑‑ I keep up on the news. I don't necessarily ‑‑ you know, I'm not somebody who misses a lot of stuff. I had no idea how much trouble we were in.

GAFFNEY: And if you don't, you can imagine how much further down the power curve most Americans are. And I just want to say, I thought Joe Weasel and your team, Glenn, did just an absolutely superb job.

GLENN: Thank you.

GAFFNEY: Of pulling this complex subject together in a highly accessible way and with what I think of as really, apart from myself, the best people in the country on the subject. And it's a real public service, and I very much hope that your listeners will tune in.

If I may, we have a kind of adjunct to your program that I'd also like to encourage them to take a look at because you've given them sort of a primer there but for a deeper drill‑down on how much trouble we're in and why and what we can do about it, we've just launched a new video course that is accessible via the Internet. It is available for free, ten‑part course at MuslimbrotherhoodinAmerica.com. And I hope that the combination of the two could really transform this from a country that is sleepwalking ‑‑

GLENN: Frank.

GAFFNEY: ‑‑ at the moment when a people who are waging a stealthy kind of jihad against us are getting away with it.

GLENN: We had a president who said he's going to start ‑‑ we're going to start helping small businesses through the Muslim Brotherhood. And then also that the war on terror is over because if you were going to be in Al‑Qaeda ‑‑ we've killed all the bad guys. And if you were going to be in Al‑Qaeda, now you pretty much know that you don't have to go there. You've got a different way of going instead of blowing yourself up. You can go through the Muslim Brotherhood and legitimate organizations.

GAFFNEY: Legitimate Islamism is the way a State Department official put it. And Glenn, what we're getting at in this course is that it's not an accident that we have the president of the United States and for that matter the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense and the secretary of the Homeland Security department and the attorney general of the United States or the Director of National Intelligence, even the national administrator all queueing increasingly to policy directions, to, you know, broad guidelines that are directing us to conform to the dictates of the Muslim Brotherhood. And why this is so important to understand, again why Rumors of War is such a service is that if you recognize that the Muslim Brotherhood's own stated mission in the United States is to destroy Western civilization from within by our hands, it's pretty clear, at least if you've got a lick of sense. Fortunately I know your listening audience does and I think most Americans still do, you're going to recognize this is crazy for us to be helping these guys.

GLENN: So I was watching the part about the Muslim Brotherhood and all the people that Obama has appointed and all the things that we're doing, and it's, Frank, it's shocking. And I paused it because I was watching the rough draft of it, what, yesterday, and I paused it and I looked at my staff and I said, "I'm sorry, but our president is an unindicted co‑conspirator. There's just no way these guys don't know all of this stuff. " Is there?

GAFFNEY: The course that we've prepared I think makes it unmistakably clear, at least just on the basis of common sense. And recognize you're like me dealing with what's in the public domain. This is not all of the information that's out there that, you know, congressional oversight committees could subpoena or, you know, extract on the basis of serious investigations, not the kind of information that inspectors general in these various departments could generate, not the kind of thing that, you know, criminal prosecutions could generate. But just on the basis of what's in the public domain, Glenn, we ‑‑ what we've got here at a minimum are useful idiots, as the Soviets used to say, people who are being put in the service of this Muslim Brotherhood civilization jihad agenda unwittingly, haplessly, but to the great benefit of our enemies. And at worse, what we have here is something that I think we've talked about on the show before. The technical term for it, the statutory criminal prohibition on it in the U.S. code is something called misprision of treason and what that fancy term means is if somebody either knows or had reason to know that seditious activity is underway, seditious activity like trying to overthrow the government of the United States or destroy Western civilization from within, for example, that is a criminal offense under our laws and should be treated as such. And, you know, Glenn, when we ‑‑

GLENN: Oh, hang on. I've got to write that down because I'm going to ‑‑ if Romney gets in, I'm going to be pushing for many members of the press to be tried ‑‑ what is the name of that?

GAFFNEY: Misprision, m‑i‑s‑p‑r‑i‑s‑i‑o‑n, misprision of treason. And it appears in the code right next to, you know, sedition because it's meant to say you can't let this kind of thing happen and not do something about it without being culpable yourself. And when you look at the six people we've identified, and I think there's some correlation to the ones you've looked at, the six people we've identified who either are in the Obama administration, in the White House, in the State Department or elsewhere, the people who are serving on advisory committees, in official capacities at the Department of Homeland Security and FBI and elsewhere, people who are being used for Muslim outreach by various agencies, six people who it is possible to show on the basis of just the open source information had extensive ties themselves to the Muslim Brotherhood, well, these folks are, I'm afraid, very much a part of the problem that we're confronting that's keeping us witless, willfully blind or, worse, actively submitting to the Muslim Brotherhood agenda in America.

GLENN: So let me go this because we also talk about in the special about the border and it is probably the biggest expose on the border I have seen on television. Let me go ‑‑ play Clip 1, please. This is Zach Taylor, former border guard agent and what he says he witnessed himself on the border. Here it is. You have Clip 1? Sara? You have Clip 1? He talks here about capturing of Syrian terrorists at the southern border and how that was treated and ‑‑

VOICE: And one worrying about daylights and border patrol agents caught a group of Middle Eastern people there. In the group, they did not catch the whole group, which is common. In the group they did catch were three people from Syria and some people from Yemen. And they brought them to the station. I was the supervisor on duty that day. And one of the agents called me into one of the write‑up rooms and said, this guy claimed he came here from Syria to be a terrorist. Says, you need to talk to him. So I went in there and I talked to the guy for quite a while. And he convinced me that he was serious, that he came here to engage in terrorism. He didn't know what type, what he was going to be expected to do but he was on his way to Chicago, Illinois.

GLENN: We let that guy go. Frank, there seems to be an uptick on connections between the drug cartels and Islamic terrorists. There is an uptick in Iran's activity in Venezuela. They just signed a deal to put missiles, Iranian missiles in Venezuela. And all of this stuff seems to be moving at a more rapid pace. Are we approaching an event, do you think? Your time in the defense DERNTHS is this, does this feel like event, events are coming?

GAFFNEY: Well, it is interesting we're having this conversation of course, Glenn, on the day that the Supreme Court is weighing the question of whether somebody should enforce the law, if the federal government is not going to do it, the State of Arizona should do it as they have asked to be able to do it. They've passed a law in the formal democratic process to do. And in the absence of that especially, I think we're looking at an event or a series of events.

We know, according to congressman Pete King who shares, as you know, the Homeland Security committee in the House that there are hundreds, as you know, hundreds of Hezbollah operatives in the United States right now.

GLENN: I think he said 200 just in New York.

GAFFNEY: Yeah. These are people who are presumably good to go, if the order is given to launch terrorist attacks against us. Heavens knows how many others of Al‑Qaeda or Hamas or other stripes the al‑Quds force of Iran, for example, are also either here or preparing to take the, you know, easy, well, relatively easy route into our country across a porous southern border without proper enforcement that imposes real obstacles to them doing it.

And here's the kicker: If you add to that violent jihad the prospect of it, the distinct possibility that we will find these guys killing Americans in the future, perhaps not so distant, as they have in the past, you add on top of that this other kind of jihad, not so much nonviolent but previolent jihad that actually we're helping to build to, according to the phase plan we talked earlier about the strategic plan of the Muslim Brotherhood, there was also a phased plan introduced into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial, Glenn, and what the phase plan says is you use these stealthy techniques until the point where you're able to seize control of the government. So it is all about building the violence, and under the doctrine of sedition ‑‑ of Sharia as we've discussed before, under that doctrine if they sense we are being submissive, their doctrine says they must redouble their effort to make us feel subdued; in other words, bring on the violence. So you put all this together and there's a, I think a very high probability, not just a possibility, probability that we will see death and destruction meted out at the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood and its other Islamist associates inside the United States, not just somewhere else, and it will be in part our own fault because we have been witlessly blind and we have been submitting, we have been encouraging, we've been enabling.

GLENN: Frank, I appreciate it. We'll see you tonight.

GAFFNEY: Sure.

GLENN: Frank Gaffney who is part of this documentary, Rumors of War III, really important documentary. I ask you as a 9/12 project or a Tea Party, gather your friends together. Get to watch it together. There's a live portion of this hour‑long documentary that will make your hair fall out. Hour‑long documentary on what we're facing. You'll understand the Muslim Brotherhood. You'll have a pretty good idea. And when you hear that anybody in the White House say, "Oh, Muslim Brotherhood," you'll know. You'll know they're lying to you. Ask the border and how this all ties together and the steps that people have tried to take to protect us and who's thwarting it. Rumors of War III tonight at 7:00, then an hour‑long special after that where we get together with all the players and we'll take your questions. You can tweet the questions during the broadcast when you're watching it or right after, and we'll address them live tonight, GBTV, my regular show at 5:00, which is powerhouse, and then real news and then 7:00 is the beginning of the special.

STU: Yeah, you can tweet your questions with the hashtag Rumors of War. Also to remind you you've got a two‑week free trial. So if you want to try it, this is probably a good time to try it because you'll get the documentary and you'll get the after discussion and everything else, see if you like it.

GLENN: Yeah. Rumors of War III tonight, 7:00, GBTV.

Presidential debate recap: The good, the bad and the ugly

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The second presidential debate was many things--some good, some bad, but one thing was made clear: this election is far from over.

If you were watching the debate with Glenn during the BlazeTV exclusive debate coverage, then you already know how the debate went: Kamala lied through her teeth and Trump faced a three-pronged attack from Harris and the two ABC moderators. This was not the debate performance we were hoping for, but it could have gone far worse. If you didn't get the chance to watch the debate or can't bring yourself to watch it again and are looking for a recap, we got you covered. Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly from the second presidential debate:

The Good

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Let's start with what went well.

While there was certainly room for improvement, Trump's performance wasn't terrible, especially compared to his performance in other debates. He showed restraint, kept himself from being too brash, and maintained the name-calling to a minimum. In comparison, Kamala Harris was struggling to maintain her composure. Harris was visibly emotional and continued to make obnoxious facial expressions, which included several infuriating eye-rolls and patronizing smirks.

The Bad

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite all that, the debate could have gone much better...

While Trump was able to keep his cool during the debate, he was not able to stay on track. Kamala kept making inflammatory comments meant to derail Trump, and every time, he took the bait. Trump spent far too long defending his career and other extraneous issues instead of discussing issues relevant to the American people and revealing Kamala's failures as Vice President.

Trump's biggest blunder during the debate was his failure to prevent Kamala from leaving that debate looking like a credible option as president. Kamala was fairly unknown to the American people and had remained that way on purpose, giving only one interview after Biden stepped down from the campaign. This is because every time Kamala opens her mouth, she typically makes a fool of herself. Trump needed to give Kamala more time to stick her foot in her mouth and to press Kamala on the Biden administration's failures over the past four years. Instead, he took her bait and let her run down the clock, and by the end of the debate, she left looking far more competent than she actually is.

The Ugly

If anything, the debate reminded us that this election is far from over, and it's more important now than ever for Trump to win.

The most noteworthy occurrence of the debate was the blatantly obvious bias of the ABC debate moderators against Trump. Many people have described the debate as a "three vs. one dogpile," with the moderators actively participating in debating Trump. If you didn't believe that the media was in the back pocket of the Democrats before, it's hard to deny it now. Kamala stood on stage and lied repeatedly with impunity knowing that the moderators and the mainstream media at large would cover for her.

The stakes have never been higher. With so many forces arrayed against Trump, it's clear to see that the Left cannot afford to let Trump win this November. The shape of America as we know it is on the line. Kamala represents the final push by the globalist movement to take root and assimilate America into the growing global hivemind.

The election is far from over. This is our sign to stand up and fight for our nation and our values and save America.

Glenn: Illegal aliens could swing the 2024 election, and it spells trouble for Trump

ELIZABETH RUIZ / Stringer | Getty Images

Either Congress must pass the SAVE Act, or states must protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Progressives rely on three main talking points about illegal aliens voting in our elections.

The first is one of cynical acceptance. They admit that illegal immigrants are already voting but argue that there is nothing we can do to stop it, suggesting that it’s just another factor we should expect in future elections. This position shows no respect for our electoral system or the rule of law and doesn’t warrant further attention.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches.

The second talking point targets the right. Progressives question why Republicans care, asking why they assume illegal immigrants voting would only benefit the other side. They suggest that some of these voters might also support the GOP.

On this point, the data says otherwise.

Across the board, immigrants vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, regardless of what state they’re in. The vast majority of migrants are coming up from South America, a region that is undergoing a current “left-wing” experiment by voting for far-left candidates practically across the board. Ninety-two percent of South America’s population favors the radical left, and they’re pouring over our border in record numbers — and, according to the data, they’re not changing their voting habits.

The third main talking point concedes that illegal immigrants are voting but not enough to make a significant dent in our elections — that their effect is minuscule.

That isn’t what the numbers show either.

Texas just audited its voter rolls and had to remove more than 1 million ineligible voters. The SAVE Act would mandate all states conduct such audits, but the left in Congress is currently trying to stop its passage. Dare I say that the left's pushback is because illegal immigration actually plays in Democrats' favor on Election Day?

Out of the 6,500 noncitizens removed from the voter rolls, nearly 2,000 had prior voting history, proving that illegal aliens are voting. But do the numbers matter, or are they “minuscule,” as the left claims? Let’s examine whether these illegal voting trends can make a dent in the states that matter the most on Election Day.

The corporate legacy media agree that Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will swing the election in November. By Election Day, an estimated 8 million illegal aliens will be living in the United States. Can these 8 million illegal immigrants change the course of the 2024 election? Let’s look at the election data from each of these seven swing states:

These are the numbers being sold to us as “insignificant” and “not enough to make a difference.” Arizona and Georgia were won in 2020 by a razor-thin margin of approximately 10,000 votes, and they have the most illegal immigrants — besides North Carolina — of all the swing states.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches. The progressives are importing an electorate to extend their ground by feet, yards, and often miles.

This is why Democrats in Congress oppose the SAVE Act, why the Justice Department has ignored cases of illegal voting in the past, and why the corporate left-wing media is gaslighting the entire country on its significance. This is a power play, and the entire Western world is under the same assault.

If things stay the status quo, these numbers prove the very real possibility of an election swing by illegal immigrants, and it will not favor our side of the aisle. Congress must pass the SAVE Act. If it fails, states must step up to protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Hunter pleads GUILTY, but did he get a pass on these 3 GLARING crimes?

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Last week, Hunter Biden made the shocking decision to suddenly plead guilty to all nine charges of tax-related crimes after claiming innocence since 2018.

Hunter first tried an "Alford plead" in which a defendant maintains their innocence while accepting the sentencing, typically due to the overwhelming evidence against them. Hunter's Alford plead was not accepted after the prosecutors objected to the suggestion, and Hunter quickly pleaded guilty.

Glenn could not believe just how disrespectful this situation was to the justice system and the American people. After years of lying about his innocence, which only served to deepen the divide in our country, Hunter decided to change his tune at the last minute and admit his guilt. Moreover, many expect Joe Biden will swoop in after the election and bail his son out with a presidential pardon.

This isn't the first time Hunter's crimes have turned out to be more than just a "right-wing conspiracy theory," and, odds are, it won't be the last. Here are three crimes Hunter may or may not be guilty of:

Gun charges: Found guilty

This June, Hunter Biden was found guilty of three federal gun charges, which could possibly land him up to 25 years in prison. Hunter purchased a revolver in 2018 while addicted to crack, and lied to the gun dealer about his addiction. While Hunter could face up to 25 years in prison, it's unlikely to be the case as first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum sentence. That's assuming Joe even lets it go that far.

Tax evasion: Plead guilty

Last week, Hunter changed his plea to "guilty" after years of pleading innocent to federal tax evasion charges. Since 2018, Delaware attorneys have been working on Hunter's case, and just before the trial was set to begin, Hunter changed his plea. According to the investigation, Hunter owed upwards of $1.4 million in federal taxes that he avoided by writing them off as fraudulent business deductions. Instead, Hunter spent this money on strippers, escorts, luxury cars, hotels, and, undoubtedly, crack.

Joe's involvement with Hunter's foreign dealings: Yet to be proven

Despite repeated claims against it, there is ample evidence supporting the theory Joe Biden was aware of Hunter's business dealings and even had a hand in them. This includes testimony from Devon Archer, one of Hunter's business partners, confirming Joe joined several business calls. Despite the mounting evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's overseas business dealings and was using his influence to Hunter's benefit, the Bidens still maintain their innocence.

Why do we know so much about the Georgia shooter but NOTHING about Trump's shooter?

Jessica McGowan / Stringer | Getty Images

It's only been a few days since the horrific shooting at the Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia, and the shooter, Colt Gray, and his father, Colin Gray, have already made their first court appearance. Over the last few days, more and more information has come out about the shooter and his family, including details of Colt's troubled childhood and history of mental health issues. The FBI said Colton had been on their radar.

This situation has Glenn fired up, asking, "Why do we have an FBI?" It seems like every time there is a mass shooting, the FBI unhelpfully admits the shooter was "on the radar," but what good does that do? While it is great we know everything about the Georgia shooter, including what he got for Christmas, why do we still know next to NOTHING about Trump's would-be assassin? Here are three things we know about the Georgia shooter that we stilldon't know about the Trump shooter:

Digital footprint

Just a few days after the shooting, authorities have already released many details of the Georgia shooter, Colt Gray's, digital footprint. This includes extensive conversations and photographs revolving around school shootings that were pulled from Gray's Discord account, a digital messaging platform.

Compared to this, the FBI claims Thomas Crooks, the shooter who almost assassinated Donald Trump, had little to no digital footprint, and outside of an ominous message sent by Crooks on Steam (an online video game platform), we know nothing about his online activities. Doesn't it seem strange that Crooks, a young adult in 2024 who owned a cell phone and a laptop left behind no digital trail of any relevance to his crime?

Home life

The FBI has painted a vivid image of what Colt Gray's home life was like, including his troubling relationship with his parents. They released information about his parents' tumultuous divorce, being evicted from his home, several interactions with law enforcement and CPS, and abuse. Investigators also found written documents of Colt's related to other school shootings, suggesting he had been thinking of this for some time before committing the atrocity.

In contrast, we still know next to nothing about Crooks's home life.

How he got the weapon

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Colt Gray was gifted the rifle he used in the shooting from his father for Christmas last year. We also know Colt's father is an avid hunter and would take Colt on hunting trips. In 2023, Colt was the subject of an investigation regarding a threat he made online to shoot up a school. During the interview, Colt stated he did not make the threat. Moreover, his father admitted to owning several firearms, but said Colt was not allowed full access to them. The investigation was later closed after the accusations could not be sustained.

In comparison, all we know is that Crooks stole his father's rifle and did not inform his parents of any part of his plan. We have no clue how Crooks acquired the rest of his equipment, which included nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bullet-proof vest, and several homemade bombs. How did Crooks manage to acquire all of his equipment without the FBI taking notice?

It feels like the FBI is either incompetent or hiding important information from the American people. Or both.