GLENN: It's going to be hard because they are so blind to the hypocrisy. And quite honestly, it's going to be hard for them because many of us are very blind to our own hypocrisy. What wasn't okay for Obama to do is suddenly okay for us to do because it's our guy. When we say how could they possibly be for this when they were against it four years ago? Where were they then? We can't have people say that about us. We have to be consistent. And like I said, it's going to be hard because in Ohio state today, at Ohio state, they have a safe space for anybody who's afraid of the inauguration.
STU: Oh, god.
PAT: How can you possibly think that's preparing these kids for the world? Are there going to be safe spaces isn't life? Where you don't have to hear anything that bothers you?
GLENN: A safe space.
PAT: I think it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard of in my life.
GLENN: Greg is on the phone. There are counselors in public schools now in Connecticut for today. Greg, are you a teacher?
CALLER: Yes, I am.
GLENN: Okay.
CALLER: By the way, good morning to you and your assembled coworkers.
GLENN: Thank you very much.
[Laughter]
So, Greg, tell me what's happening in Connecticut.
CALLER: Well, you can -- if you dig a little bit deeper and pardon me my voice, I have a cold. But if you dig a little bit deeper, it's not just my district, it's quite a few districts where not only after the election but now with the inauguration, they're charging the social workers, psychologists, and counselors in the schools to provide grief counseling for any faculty or students that are not happy with the state of the nation right now.
GLENN: Greg, was there anything to reach out to those in the last eight years that might have been upset with the direction of the country under Barack Obama?
CALLER: No, and it was -- I was listening to you talk about it eight years ago. Eight years ago I had left my full-time career of 20 years in business to go back to school to be a history teacher, and I was in college at the time that Obama won, and it was complete ecstasy amongst the kids. They were kids compared to me. That I was going to school with. And I think back to that now, and I think now I'm looking at these young people instead of learning to cope with change. They're being -- their feelings are being enabled, and they're never going to learn how to deal with this stuff.
GLENN: Yeah, and it's -- to me, it also says that you're right and half of the country is wrong.
CALLER: Correct. I totally agree.
GLENN: Because what about the grief of the people who disagreed with you last time? What about those people? You were called names if you disagreed.
CALLER: Oh, yeah, and I live in Connecticut, so you can imagine what it was like.
GLENN: Oh, no, eight years ago, I was living in Connecticut.
CALLER: Yes, I remember. I listen to you all the time. I remember when you were doing radio in Connecticut.
GLENN: Oh, my gosh. I'm so sorry for that. What were you? Three?
CALLER: Yeah, I wish.
GLENN: Eight years ago if you were in college, then --
PAT: Well, he was older, though.
GLENN: Because I was doing radio in the '90s. It must have been grade school for you.
CALLER: No, I was in my 30s.
GLENN: Okay. I can't work out the math. You're in your 30s now.
CALLER: I'm in my 50s now.
GLENN: Oh, okay.
STU: I was in school and listened to you on the radio.
GLENN: Shut up. My wife was neither junior high or high school, so it wasn't -- you know, I first met her, we first started dating and stuff. She was, like, I used to listen to you when I was a kid. And I was, like, all right. Stop what is that? That's creepy.
Thanks, Greg, for your phone call.
This plays a bigger role than I think we realize. We have to find a way to not -- to not dismiss people's feelings or call them names when we hear about the grief counselors. But we have to find a way to talk to people now and show them that this is not healthy for our society.
If you would have had grief counselors, you know, we're moving into a new studio tomorrow. Sorry. Thinking out loud here.
PAT: Monday.
GLENN: Yeah, Monday we're moving into a new studio for the radio show. Brand-new season. Brand-new president. And I've painted some paintings for the walls. And one of them is the mask of George Washington. The life mask of George Washington. And he's weeping, and you'll see it on Monday. And I call it the mask of civility.
This is a prime example of what that means. The mask of civility. Here we have -- here we have social workers. We have the most caring, the most loving, the ones who understand the human psyche who had no compassion for those who felt their country was being ripped apart. No compassion. They were called outsiders. They were called old thinkers. They were just trying to block progress. No compassion to somebody who said wait. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Let's remember who we are in the first place. No compassion.
The ones we pay to help teach us to be compassionate. It's the mask of civility.
Now, how do we get that across to people? Because we can either whine about it, bitch about it, call people names, say what babies they are, which is not going to -- nobody will listen to that. And we'll miss possibly an opportunity. I don't know how to get there.
Because my first response is what a bunch of two-faced hypocritical babies.
PAT: Well, yeah, that should be your first response.
GLENN: That's what they are.
PAT: It is. What a bunch of numskulls. How could you possibly think this is good for these kids? Say, yeah. Let's shelter them from reality. Why would you do that? Why?
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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?
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.
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.
