Glenn Predicts Trump's Supreme Court Pick (Kinda, Sorta, Maybe)

It's down to three possibilities for President Trump's Supreme Court nominee --- at least we think so. But Trump is a master of the media, so we'll only know when the fat lady sings or, in this case, when Trump makes the announcement later tonight.

In the meantime, Glenn made a prediction.

"I bet you it's him. This is exactly the kind of guy that every Republican president always nominates," Glenn said Tuesday on radio.

Who could it be?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: President Trump may just be the master media manipulator he is after all. I have to tell you, I'm watching this in awe and sometimes aghast from both sides. I'm just watching this as a casual observer of history, and I can't believe what I'm seeing.

And I haven't figured it out yet. It could be that Donald Trump is the -- is the best watch the other hand guy I've ever seen. Remember, we used to say that about Barack Obama. Right, right, right. Stop arguing about that. What is the other hand doing?

We'll see. But also, he is overwhelming the system. Exactly what happened last time with Barack Obama, to the -- to the right, Donald Trump is doing to the left. There's no way you can keep up with all of this.

Tonight, at 8 o'clock, he's announcing his SCOTUS pick. In typical Trump fashion, don't miss must-see TV, Wednesday night. Is it Wednesday today? Or is it Tuesday?

STU: Tuesday. It is Tuesday. At least for the whole day.

GLENN: It's Tuesday? Wow. Wow. It's only been -- really? Yesterday was only 24 hours. It seemed like 48.

So tonight, don't miss. Ensuring as many eyeballs are possible on him tomorrow night, according to the sources close to our program, out of the 21 candidates that Trump has released prior to the election, it's down to three, and more likely, it's between two of the three men.

But here are the three finalists and what their nominations could mean to the future of the Supreme Court. Coming three at number three is William Pryor, the partisan, if you will. He is right of Alito and left of Clarence Thomas. And Pryor is the judge from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. He's the oldest of the possible choices, but he's still only 54. He still has a long career ahead of him on the bench.

However, he is by far the most outspoken of the three and the -- and definitely the least liked by the Democrats. Choosing Pryor would fit the mold of Trump about not caring about what anybody says, but the president would be in for a fight, if he was going to get him confirmed.

Chances are, he'll get him three, but he would spend an awful lot of political capital, which remains to be seen, if that even matters for this administration.

One sticking point for the evangelicals was when he, as attorney general of Alabama, had judge Roy Moore ousted for refusing to obey a federal court order and removed the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building.

Pryor said at the time, I'm just following the court's order. But this was a knock on him for the far right, and they have held on to that. As well as his recent support for transgendered rights.

He is not afraid to say what he believes, which is why the left calls him a bomb-thrower and considers him a cultural warrior. Many on the right see him as a rising conservative star, and he is a fierce critic of Roe vs. Wade. He has upheld the Georgia voter ID law and has called for sectarian prayers for opening a local commission meeting constitutional. He's probably not Scalia in waiting, but who is?

He is more in the mold of Alito, but all of this may be moot if the reports are correct, because he is, out of the three, the one who is really on the outside looking in.

Second one, the centrist, Thomas Hardiman. He is left of Roberts. Wow. Let's think about that one for a second, Stu. Left of Roberts.

STU: Yeah, I've been thinking about it.

GLENN: And right of Kennedy.

STU: And you might say to yourself, why the heck would Donald Trump appoint a centrist? Well, you know, there's a lot of reasons for it. But the one they're talking about now, as far as the way these games work is the rest of the court, they believe, will take a signal by -- as to who Trump nominates here as to how Trump is going to treat this situation. So if he goes for someone who is really right-wing and crazy, then people like Kennedy might say, "Well, I don't want to retire and let him name another crazy person to the bench."

So they're thinking -- the thought is -- and, again, this is all crazy inside-the-Beltway speculation, but the thought is, if he were to name a centrist, then Kennedy would feel more comfortable in his departure. And then if he departed, they could name a conservative to replace him.

I know that's a lot of --

GLENN: You know what that sound like? Honestly, you know what that sounds like to me? If I were sitting in the seat of the Oval Office, I would say, "Progressive BSer, get behind me."

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That sounds like something that a progressive would say to an incoming president who is really trying to get the president to pick a centrist.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Look, I'm telling you, if you do this, this time, what will happen next time -- I mean, that just sounds like bullcrap.

STU: Right. But the question is, which progressive are you talking about? If that progressive happens to be Anthony Kennedy, then it might be a viable thing. I would not risk it.

GLENN: I wouldn't either.

STU: If you lose a Scalia and replace him with someone who as this article talks about, left of Roberts, you're in -- you're in for some trouble there. That's not a good sign. And if Kennedy doesn't step down, you have no conservative rulings potentially --

GLENN: Yeah, you have nothing. You have nothing.

STU: That's a huge problem. You think with Trump too, all his progressive sort of things with executive orders and all these big changes he wants to make, the last thing he wants to do is put the Supreme Court up to risk. There was obviously a reason that a lot of people who were very skeptical of him voted for him anyway. So, I mean, going for a centrist here is risky.

The one thing about this, which is -- we mentioned it I think yesterday is that he works with Trump's sister. Trump's sister knows him very well, and --

GLENN: I bet you this is the guy. I bet you this is the guy.

JEFFY: That's a big in. That's a big in.

GLENN: Yeah, that's a huge in.

STU: Because that was his initial reaction, right? I would name my sister. She would be a great judge.

And then obviously, over time, he kind of realized that that was just reactionary.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But here's a kind of way you can do it. He's got to have inside information on this person from his sister.

GLENN: Yep.

STU: He's going to know -- now, assuming his sister likes him. Maybe his sister hates him. But he's lasted this long on this list. You think he's got to be fairly well liked. They sided together on a lot of major decisions. So, you know, this one is -- it's interesting. He was not really one of the ones talked about, up until the last couple of weeks.

GLENN: I bet you it's him.

STU: It could be.

JEFFY: That's a good bet.

GLENN: This is exactly the kind of guy that every Republican president always nominates.

STU: I know, but that's not supposed to be what Trump does. Right? So maybe he won't.

GLENN: I know. I know. All right.

So the name again is Thomas Hardiman. I hope this isn't the guy. More moderate than the other choices. He's left of Roberts. Right of Kennedy.

Many conservatives are wary, after Kennedy and Roberts haven't turned out the way they hoped. He is only one of the candidates or sitting members of the bench without an Ivy League pedigree. He grew up in public schools, blue-collar family. Went to Notre Dame -- or, Notre Dame. And put himself through law school at Georgetown by driving a cab.

Is he the Catholic of the group? Can you find out if he's Catholic?

STU: Sure.

GLENN: He fits the bill with pro-life stance. He's strong on the Second Amendment. But he is seen as government-friendly. He has sided with Big Brother on censorship issues. He's 51 and would have influence for decades to come. He might be the most confirmable of the three, having been confirmed 95 to zero on the appellate court, receiving votes from Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein. Feinstein. Stein. Stein.

Former -- he's a former trial judge who has been serving on the Third Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. Happens to be the same court as President Trump's sister. He receives a glowing recommendation from her, and he is thought to have -- and she is thought to have significant influence on her brother.

This may be the nominee.

The number one pick, according to GlennBeck.com, is Neil Gorsuch. He's a Libertarian. He is -- listen to this -- right of Scalia and left of Clarence Thomas.

STU: I'm comfortable with that. If that description is accurate, I am comfortable with that.

GLENN: I am so comfortable with this. This would be the guy. Out of these three, this would be the guy.

Gorsuch is not a name that many people know outside of political junky circles. He has quickly risen to the top of the list over the past couple of weeks. He's 49 years old. So he has the best chance theoretically of having the longest lasting influence. He is pro-life. He has sided against assisted suicide, but he has yet to rule on an abortion case. But they believe because he has stated pro-life and he has gone against assisted suicide -- which I don't understand how a Libertarian does that. A Libertarian should be for -- should be pro-life, if they think it's murder. Which I do. So it should be protecting -- the rights of the unborn child. But then to protect the rights of the living, should be able to say, "What you do with your own life is your business."

STU: And I don't know that he's -- I think they're describing him as a Libertarian. I don't know that he's stated that I am a Libertarian. You know --

GLENN: Well, I doubt he's stated he's a Libertarian. You're not going to get elected.

STU: Right.

GLENN: This might help win some votes from the Democrats, while conservatives can still feel relatively comfortable on where he stands. His lack of record makes him less likely to be borked than the Pryor nomination could.

I will tell you that where we get in trouble is people saying, "Hey, he doesn't have a record on these things," and so we guess on what their record is going to be.

STU: Yeah, that is an issue. And, by the way, also, a big issue with Hardiman -- I mean, I think his record is even thinner than Gorsuch. You know, they're both on the younger side, as far as justices go. They don't necessarily have the really long record of an older judge. But, I mean, you look at the -- there's a sentence in the longer profile of Hardiman, which says he's never had any abortion rulings either. So the only one -- you can be pretty darn sure that Pryor is going to be on the right side of that one, of these three.

And I think Gorsuch, reading in context, I mean, he has ruled in cases that would -- you know, one of the big things about Gorsuch, which I liked was, this was the guy we talked about who is -- he doesn't seem to be friendly to things that aren't in the Constitution.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: The Dormant Clauses, like the Dormant Privacy Clause, which leads to abortion or the Dormant Commerce Clause. And that's why there's a large indication that he would be pro-life. But it's true. The record is not extensive on the topic.

GLENN: If you look at his record that we know -- and there are some disturbing things in there, but if you look at the record of the things that we know, he has the best chance I think of being game-changing for the Supreme Court.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Let me finish.

Let's see: He has sided with Hobby Lobby. He also sided with Little Sisters of the Poor, in upholding their right to follow their religious belief when it came to mandatory birth control for the nuns. And he's believed to have the Libertarian streak of Scalia and the style of Roberts. He has stated that he's an originalist, meaning he believes in the interpretation of the Constitution as written, rather than pronouncing the law as they might wish it to be in light of their own political views.

STU: It's amazing that there's another side to that argument: Have a written or how you might think it might be because of your political views -- which one do you think? How should we rule on this? Ugh.

GLENN: I know. Right.

So we don't know. You know, there's speculation that Justice Roberts was blackmailed at the last hour. That is something that I would really like to hear some -- if there are any good facts on that one. Because that ruling from Justice Roberts was just bizarre.

STU: Bizarre.

GLENN: Bizarre. And the fact that he showed up with puffy red eyes -- it was obvious that he rewrote it in the middle of the night because of the way it was written. It shows that he was actually on the other side and then just changed things. But it was rushed so quickly, he didn't change all of it. It was just bizarre.

But, anyway, he is a champion of small government conservatism like Antonin Scalia. Chances are the nominee will stand in the vast shadow of his legacy and never eclipse the works that he was able to accomplish. That being said, there will be a nominee, and it appears to be one of these three.

According to conservative circles, Hardiman is the least liked. Pryor is beloved by some, questioned by others.

And when the dust settles, Donald Trump lands on Neil Gorsuch. Conservatives could do much worse. But let's see what happens.

STU: Yeah, that's all up on GlennBeck.com, by the way. You can read that whole analysis.

GLENN: Right.

STU: And this is assuming, by the way, the purports are right. Who knows? Maybe Trump goes a totally different direction.

GLENN: Yeah. And it will be interesting because this is the one the religious community said, "This is the most important." And they put all of their eggs in this basket and had been telling him, "We want our pick." And it is not Hardiman. Let's see if it's paid off.

"Never forget" is not only a tribute to those we've lost, it's a warning that it could happen AGAIN. On "Glenn TV" Wednesday, Glenn Beck looks back 20 years ago to the modern generation's Pearl Harbor moment. A day of infamy we're STILL feeling repercussions from.

But in remembering 9/11, we need to look toward the future because the Biden administration is setting us up for the NEXT 9/11. They bungled the Afghanistan withdrawal, and now we have video of top al Qaeda commanders — who served with Osama bin Laden — returning to the country. But could America survive another terror attack?

Glenn asks former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the leader who brought America back from the brink. He tells Glenn about the moment he learned the Twin Towers were struck, the actions he took to prevent more terrorism, and if he thinks NYC could survive another attack under Mayor de Blasio's leadership.

Glenn is also joined by Rev. Johnnie Moore, author of "The Next Jihad." He warns that Biden's policies in the Middle East are Obama 2.0, and "if you thought ISIS was bad, you haven't seen anything yet. We must keep our eyes on Iran."

Watch the full episode of "Glenn TV" below:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Glenn Beck and The Nazarene Fund have been working tirelessly to evacuate Americans and our allies from Afghanistan, thanks to the U.S. government's failure to do so. But it's been far from easy. A recent Newsweek article, titled "Taliban Holds Up Glenn Beck Group's Planes," addressed some of the most recent challenges. The article claimed that six planes — filled with Americans and SIVs ready for takeoff — were "grounded by the Taliban amid negotiations with the U.S. State Department." So, what's actually going on? Why is the State Department meddling in the rescue? And what are the next steps to get these Americans home?

Watch the video clip below to hear Glenn breaks down the whole story:

UPDATE: Leaked Email Shows State Department STILL Blocking Afghanistan Rescue Flights


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Bill O'Reilly joined "The Glenn Beck Program" Friday to discuss a recent House Homeland Security Committee briefing on the impact of the 9/11 terror attacks, during which "national security experts" claimed "right-wing" groups pose a greater threat to the United States than groups like the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.

Glenn played two video clips from the briefing that showed Senior Fellow Brookings Institute Center for Middle East Policy, Daniel Byman, and former National Intelligence Council Chair during the Obama administration, Christopher Kojm, in apparent agreement that "right-wing extremists" are a bigger threat to Americans today than "jihadists."

"I'm someone who has written extensively on both jihadist groups, but also right-wing, white supremacist groups," Byman says in the first video clip. "And in my mind, there's no question that today in the United States, the right-wing and white supremacist violence is a much greater risk."

"I agree with your assessment and those of my colleagues who have spoken already, there's little doubt that the domestic terrorist threat from white nationalists and right-wing extremist groups is greater than the jihadist threat today," Kojm states in the second clip.

"Who are those idiots?" O'Reilly exclaimed. "It's just unbelievable ... they're not even in the same universe. Yeah, there are bad neo-Nazi Americans running around, yeah, but there are very few of them. I mean, the jihadists are causing death and destruction, death and destruction all over the world. Not just in the United States. These people are so blatantly irresponsible and ignorant, it's just staggering."

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

The Biden administration was recently caught lying about the White House dog, Major, and his history of biting Secret Service agents, according to newly released emails.

On "The Glenn Beck Radio Program," Glenn argued that, if the current administration is willing to lie about something so meaningless to the American people, what else are they willing to lie about? For instance, the State Department claims that there are only about 200 American citizens left in Afghanistan who want to be evacuated. But Glenn has heard very different reports from people on the ground. Is it safe to assume they're currently lying to us about all kinds of things — from the "new and improved" Taliban, to the number of Americans left behind in Afghanistan?

Watch the video clip below for more details:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.