GLENN

The Gorsuch Pick: We're Thrilled to be Wrong

Throughout the primary, Glenn and his co-hosts remained skeptical about the likelihood of Donald Trump choosing a conservative candidate for the Supreme Court. However, following President Trump's announcement Tuesday evening, it was time for a promised mea culpa.

"Let me start with this because we always say we lead with our mistakes," Glenn said Wednesday on radio. "I was completely wrong on that. I stand corrected. I apologize to Donald Trump. He said last night, I promised you that I would do that. I'm a man of my word. He was. So kudos to Donald Trump on that, and I stand corrected."

In light of Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court, Glenn and his co-hosts not only stand corrected, they're thrilled to do so.

Enjoy the complimentary video above or read the transcript below.

GLENN: Well, boys, what do you think of Gorsuch? What do you think of what happened last night with Trump's nominee?

STU: Well, I mean, you know, we said on the air, leading up to this, that Gorsuch was the one that we would pick of the finalists.

GLENN: Yeah, out of the three.

STU: Yeah, he was my favorite of those three. So obviously there's nothing else to say, other than, I'm very pleased by it.

You know, I did -- you know, we talked about this throughout the primary. One of the main reasons why I did not like Donald Trump throughout the primary -- one of them -- was I did not have any confidence of him making this pick and making it well. And I am thrilled to be wrong on that.

GLENN: Yep.

STU: Because this is a great pick. He stuck to the list. He picked one of the ones I would say in the upper echelon in that list.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

STU: And there's a lot of really positive things to talk about with Gorsuch. And you're right, you never know. He might not get confirmed. He might be a Roberts. And the one point I would disagree with you on is it's part of his legacy. It's part of Bush's legacy. It is Bush's fault.

GLENN: Oh, no, no. Correct. Hang on just a second. But wait a minute. Bush had this idea. And Ted Cruz told us because he tried to talk Bush out of this. Bush had the idea of, "Let's get somebody who doesn't have a record that we can push through who tells us they're conservative, but they don't really have a record on anything."

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And so I think that's why it belongs to Bush. I mean, everybody who vetted this guy, with an exception of a couple of areas, which we mentioned, but last week, this guy looks really, really good. So if he gets into office and he is not what his record holds, I think that's on Gorsuch and not on Trump.

STU: Well, it's mainly on Gorsuch, clearly. You know, individual responsibility.

GLENN: Yeah. Correct.

STU: However, with the amount of information that Donald Trump has about this guy that we don't, you know, you -- it is part of it. That doesn't mean. I can't -- you know, can't blame the guy. I don't even think you can blame Bush for the Obamacare ruling fully.

GLENN: I don't either.

STU: It's Roberts' choice, and he's the one who got into the Douche Hall of Fame because of it.

GLENN: Hang on a second. Let me start with this because we always say we lead with our mistakes.

One of the things that I said all the way through the primary was, "You think Donald Trump is going to put somebody, who is anti-abortion -- he's going to listen to his daughter. He's not going to listen to us. He's not going to fulfill that promise." I was completely wrong on that. I stand corrected. I apologized to Donald Trump. He said last night, "I promised you that I would do that. I'm a man of my word." He was. So kudos to Donald Trump on that. And I stand corrected.

STU: Yeah, and what a great way to be corrected.

GLENN: Yes. And we said we would do this -- nobody believes it. We said we would do this if we were wrong. We would apologize. I just did. And I'm celebrating that I'm wrong. I will stand -- I learned this from Abraham Lincoln. He said, "I will stand with any man when he is right, and I will walk away when he is wrong." That is my philosophy on Donald Trump. When he's right, I will stand with him and support him. When he is wrong, I will not stand with him, and I will fight him.

But that's the way -- you know, somebody wrote on Twitter last night, "All knees will bend." They were referring to Donald Trump. And they were mocking me for not supporting him. And said, "See, all knees will bend." No. All knees will not bend to the president of the United States. What is wrong with you?

PAT: Let's hope not. Let's hope not. Wow.

GLENN: What is wrong with you?

STU: You can keep that standard. No, thank you. Not going to participate in that one.

GLENN: No.

PAT: Isn't this the guy that Ted Cruz said he tried to talk Bush into, instead of Roberts in the beginning?

STU: I don't remember that. I do remember that story, but I don't remember --

GLENN: Yeah, we should call Ted Cruz. See if we can get him on today.

JEFFY: Ted Cruz and Mike Lee both --

STU: We're not hearing you, Jeffy. He would have been awfully young.

GLENN: Oh, it's a dream come true. Hang on. Take a moment and just thank the Lord. That is something we've all been praying for: We can't hear you, Jeffy. Thank you, Lord. Amen.

STU: This pick is better than we thought.

GLENN: Yes. This is a day of miracles!

STU: Jeffy.

JEFFY: Knees will bend.

STU: His mic is not -- can someone turn his mic on, please?

GLENN: No, no.

STU: Or, I'm sorry, keep it off.

GLENN: Yes, thank you. Whoever is doing that, thank you.

STU: By the way, Gorsuch, I would say -- one of the reasons I liked him over some of the other justices is that he has kind of a Libertarian streak. There are elements of -- you know, there's a particular stance we can go over later where he's actually better than Scalia on it. And, I mean, he might not be better than Scalia overall. That's to be seen, of course.

GLENN: We'll see.

STU: However, when you can find anything where you're better than Scalia on an issue, it's pretty freaking impressive. And this is a good pick. A smart guy. And, you know, look, I'm thrilled to have been wrong about this one.

GLENN: Right. Right.

So I will tell you this: For anybody who said all they were voting for, for Donald Trump, was SCOTUS, thank you. You were right. You got that done.

And -- and I am stunned by it. Just stunned by it. Let's see now what the left does.

I will tell you, you know, I'm trying to have quick 144-character conversations with people. Let me go through a couple of -- a couple of things.

There was a couple of things that came out on this yesterday that independent to go -- let's see. Obviously, listener. You're corrupt. Media is uncorrupt. Hard stance against Trump.

Here. Glenn, we're enemies. I think I used to watch you -- I think I used to watch you every night on Fox. I was a fool.

Why are we -- why are we enemies? And one of them was from a liberal who said, you know, you are -- you know, I was -- I was just starting to consider you a friend. This is why you're not my friend.

Well, wait a minute. You were a fool if you think that I changed my principles -- anybody on the left who thinks that I'm suddenly a progressive, you're out of your mind. I've never said that. I've made that very clear. I've said that to everybody I've met with.

I have changed my tone, and I want to listen to you. And I want to reach out because we have to be able to model friendship. And here's what I responded: Scalia was a good friend of Ginsburg. They respected one another. Why can't we respect one another as well? We disagree, but we're not enemies.

And that was one of the biggest disappointments that I had. You know, I wasn't running the Scalia funeral, obviously. But the selfish part of me wanted Ginsburg to stand up and speak. And she has spoken out about him, but I wanted it at the funeral when everybody -- when all eyes were there. I would have loved Justice Ginsburg to stand up and talk about their friendship. That was one of the things that we've all missed.

Here's Scalia and Ginsburg, and the supporters of Ginsburg hate Scalia. And the people who support Ginsburg -- I mean, Scalia, hate Ginsburg. Why? They don't hate each other.

There's a difference -- let me say this. Let me correct something that is a long-standing problem of mine.

I use the word "evil" too easily. There is evil. I believe there is evil. But I will use the word "evil" sometimes with people, and I can't judge if people are evil. That's wrong. And I can't -- there's -- I'm going to try to stop using that word, unless, you know, we're pretty clear.

(chuckling)

GLENN: And stop using that word. I want to replace that word with wrong. They're just wrong. That doesn't make them evil. They're just wrong.

And we have to stop literally demonizing people. And I've done that for a long time. You got to stop.

Ginsburg is just wrong. Now, I don't know her. But Justice Scalia sure seems like a really nice guy to me. Not to the people on the left because all they do is look at his record of how he votes, and they just assume all kinds of things about him.

We look at Ginsburg, and we just assume all kinds of things about her.

But wait a minute, Scalia -- if we're right about Scalia, how were they really, truly good, deep friends. How is that possible? If he's really a good guy, he wouldn't be hanging out with evil. He would be hanging out with somebody who he profoundly disagrees with, but he likes.

Why is it that this pick has to be either saintly or evil, depending on which -- he's just either right in your opinion or wrong in your opinion.

And one more thing on this: I would fully expect if the court -- the only real conservative left on the court was Ginsburg and there was a progressive president, I would expect the president to bring in a progressive. If half the country was a liberal, progressive -- were liberal, progressive citizens, I would not expect the Supreme Court not to represent their point of view.

I think -- and I don't know -- but I think I would actually be saying on the air, "Look, guys, it's Ginsburg. There's no one else on the court that represents 50 percent of the country." It's ridiculous to think that we shouldn't have one voice on the court that is actually making this case for a true constitutional conservative. If you don't -- if you can't see that as split as we are, would I love to have everybody a constitutional conservative on the Supreme Court? Yes. Do I think that's what the Founders would want? Yes.

But half of the country will feel completely alienated from the Supreme Court. We have to have faith in our system. You can't replace Ginsburg with Scalia. And you can't replace Scalia with a Ginsburg.

You have to have a real conservative replace Scalia. I think it's only right and fair.

We -- we -- we need to fight for our principles, but we also need to stand up for other people's points of view and let the best man win and the best idea win.

I have no problem fighting for my ideas. And I think -- I really think -- yesterday -- I want to tell you a story later. Yesterday, I went to a place, to a studio, and we all were driving over. And we were like, "This should be interesting." Because this individual used to be a progressive. And I mean a progressive that would make your eyes bleed, on a network that you would -- would, again, you would -- you would have no blood left on your body.

He invited me over to his studio and said, "I want to do a sitdown with you." And I said, "Fine." And before we started, he said, "You know, I saw the interview with you, with Tucker Carlson." And he said, "Tucker Carlson was going after you, and he didn't make any ground." And I said, "Yeah, because I really don't care anymore, so."

(laughter)

GLENN: And I said, "That's the secret. You know, everybody always told me, Glenn, stop caring anymore. And when you're trying to not care, it doesn't work. But when you really don't care, it's fantastic." So he said that, and I thought, "This is going to be an interesting hour. He may start to go after me."

He started the interview with, "Look, I used to be a progressive. I used to be a hard-core progressive. And then I noticed that during this last election that all of my friends who I thought believed in something were all switching tables and they were all starting to fight for things because the conservatives were picking things up that we believed in and the -- and the Democrats were excusing things from Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party that I'm like, wait, we're against all that stuff." He said, "So I'm finding myself now in a situation where people who are being intellectually honest on the conservative side, I'm there."

We had an amazing conversation. An amazing conversation. Are we going to agree on everything? No.

But the end of the conversation was, "So how many people in the country are actually tired of this back and forth bickering of the press that has no intellectual curiosity and no intellectual credibility or integrity?" How many people are sick of that?

He believes that we're in the silent majority. I think that may not be the case now, but I do think that may be the case down the road.

If you are intellectually honest and have integrity and you don't want to fight because it's nothing but a stupid game and you actually want to stand for things -- like Scalia and Ginsburg -- they disagreed, but they were good to each other. They liked each other. They respected each other. And they were friends.

Man, that's the world I want to live in. Because this one isn't working. This one is getting much, much worse.

Jan. 6 Journalist Facing an FBI ARREST Reveals Who’s Calling the Shots
RADIO

Jan. 6 Journalist Facing an FBI ARREST Reveals Who’s Calling the Shots

The FBI has ordered investigative journalist and Blaze Media correspondent Steve Baker to turn himself in, but he believes the full story is even more corrupt than it sounds. Baker is facing misdemeanor charges connected to his reporting at the Capitol on January 6th, 2021. But he still hasn’t been told what the charges are. Steve joins Glenn to lay out how he’ll respond. For starters, the FBI told him to show up in shorts and flip flops so he can be marched out in an orange jumpsuit and leg chains — which is an extremely unprecedented move. But Steve tells Glenn what he’ll wear instead. And he also explains who he believes is really behind his arrest and the prosecution of many others who were at the Capitol: “There is ever more evidence of the insane corruption at the top of the Capitol Police…they are more powerful than Congress itself.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Steve, been praying for you this week. I know many members of the audience are doing the same.

This is crazy. What's about to happen to you tomorrow.

STEVE: Yeah. I'm always worried about more my unpaid parking tickets from college.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

You're a nice, gentle, regular guy.

And do you even know what the charges are?

STEVE: No. They haven't told us yet.

GLENN: Is that unusual.

STEVE: No. Back two and a half years ago, when they initially threatened me and said I would be arrested within the week. In November of 21 take it. They actually told my attorney at the time, what the charges are going to be then.

But because I'm a little outspoken and vocal about what's happening with me. We were -- we were told at the time, by an assistant US attorney.

This a judge would not be happy with me, you know, going out to the press, in the manner that I've done. So I just intensified that, accelerated that.

And lit that candle brighter. Yeah, I see the look on your face. I see the look on your face.

GLENN: Yeah. What right is it, for them to say, we're coming after you. And then when you say, hey, by the way. Everybody, they say they're coming after had he.

They haven't said why they're coming after me.

This is all I've done. Why would you be in trouble for defending yourself in the public square?

Because once they arrest you. Well, now you've been arrested we the FBI.

That's a really bad thing. Even if you're innocent.

GLENN: Well, two years ago, the US attorney said to my attorney, that a judge will not look favorably upon this.

To which my attorney responded, are you saying that my client should forego his First Amendment right under the threat of persecution from the federal government?

And she said, oh, no. We're not really saying that. Just, we're concerned for him and his --

GLENN: Oh, they're concerned for you.

STEVE: I kid you not. Now, fast forward two years. Under the current threat. And they won't tell me the charges this time. Literally, quote, unquote, from the US attorney, because he'll tweet it out.

GLENN: Well, what? Yeah. Yeah. We'll do it for you.

STEVE: Yeah. Technical the charges are under seal, until you're actually arrested. So they are technically not in violation of any law.

GLENN: Right.

STEVE: So tomorrow morning, at 7 o'clock, when I arrive at the FBI field office here in Dallas, I will know what my charges are.

GLENN: And how are you supposed to dress? What advice did they give you on that?

STEVE: They notified my attorney that I needed to arrive in shorts, a T-shirt, and flip-flops.

GLENN: And why is that?

STEVE: It's easier to change into the orange jumpsuit and leg chains.

GLENN: And is that something that everybody does?

When they bust down everybody's door, do they say, hey, change into a T-shirt and flip-flops?

STEVE: I don't think that when they bust in your door, you get that opportunity of choice.

GLENN: Yeah.

When they -- when they invite people to turn themselves in.

I've never seen people turn themselves in. You know --

STEVE: This is exactly what they did to the independent journalist, Stephen Mauren, from Raleigh, North Carolina, coincidentally, where I live.

And when they arrested him, and they brought him in. They did exactly same thing. They put him in an orange jumpsuit, put leg chains on him, and made him March before the magistrate in leg chains, on misdemeanor offenses.

STU: It's one of the interesting parts here. Because you don't know, as you point out, what you're being charged with.

But you do know they're misdemeanors, right?

STEVE: That's what they've told my attorney.

STU: So why on earth would you need to be in leg chains?

We have -- prosecutors all over the country, that won't charge people who have sexually assaulted individuals, with crimes. And they won't hold them.

And they are released the next day.

And they will put you in leg chains for misdemeanors.

STEVE: Well, let's start ourselves with the bigger question. And work our way to that answer.

This is the first time in history, since January 6th, that the FBI is even involving themselves in misdemeanor offenses and misdemeanor defendants.

And swatting misdemeanor defendants. With sometimes 50, 20, 25 agents, swatting misdemeanor. The FBI has never done that, in their history. Until ordered to do so, by Merrick Garland's DOJ, after January 6th.

So fast forward to this.

Why are they doing that?

Why are they requiring -- my attorney told me, when he told me, that this is what they will have me -- requesting that I arrive dressed in flip-flops and shorts.

I said, why are they doing this to me. He said, you know why. He said, you've been poking them in the eye for three years. This is retribution.

GLENN: This is evil. It's just evil.

When you have a government -- I mean, I don't know if you saw the story today from California. But there was a judge in California who said, you can't arrest just people on the right, when Antifa was there.

And they were being violent. Beating up these people.

You arrest the people they were beating up. You don't arrest Antifa. That didn't make any sense at all.

When -- when a -- when a United States government can come after individuals. And, you know, we've been saying this from the beginning.

If they'll do to Trump. You don't think they will do it to you?

STEVE: Well, the selective prosecution is exactly what's happening here.

We have over 60 -- we have documented over 60 journalists that entered through those doors.

Or broken windows.

That day. The fifth person through the broken window that day, was a New York Times reporter.

The New Yorker reporter, Luke Mogelson, went through the broken window. And he paralleled another independent photo journalist. They went through the same window, paralleled the other journalist.

He had spent a lot of time working on the Latinos for Trump campaign.

Well, even though he didn't parade, he didn't do any protesting. He did no chanting. Anything of the sort.

And was contracted at the time, as a video photo journalist for a TV station in Mobile, Alabama.

Even though that was the groundwork laid, four misdemeanors. Swatted by over 20 agents at his home, with the red dots on his wife, his children, and, of course, obviously himself.

At 6:30 in the morning. And then, he was convicted. He said, I will go to -- he said, Luke Mogelson from the New Yorker, we went through the same window at the same time. And he hasn't been charged. I will go stand before a judge. He did a bench trial. He was convicted on all four misdemeanors. And because he went to trial, and he wasted the government's time and resources, not taking the plea deal he was offered.

The judge put him in prison for eight months. Sentenced him to eight months. They put him in a medium security facility, in -- in Georgia. Where after spending the first two months in solitary confinement. And gets out into the general population. He learns from all the other prisoners, that they never put misdemeanor defendants in that prison.

All of the other guys -- actually, they distrusted him. They thought he was some sort of plant inside the prison. They were like, people don't come here for misdemeanors.

You know, we're -- this is what we do for a living. We're pros. We go to prison.

You know, we commit crimes and go to prison for a living. You're not supposed to be here.

He says, well, you are here, if you're a J6 defendant.

GLENN: So mentally, how are you?

STEVE: I have my moments. I'm okay. I -- you know, I've had -- I've had over two years to prepare for this.

I've game planned it all out in my head. I'm not going to sleep tonight. I'm not even going to try.

It is my way. Anyway. And so I'm just going to, you know, prepare. Pray. And then I'm going to put on my suit and tie.

GLENN: Good for you.

STEVE: And walk in with my head up.

GLENN: Good for you. Good for you.

More in just a minute with Steve Baker. He's an investigative journalist. A Blaze media correspondent. He has been -- he's the guy who worked with Congress, to expose the video that was being held back.

And for this, he is being arrested and arraigned tomorrow. In what city?

STEVE: Here in Dallas.

GLENN: Here in Dallas. Will it happen? Will the trial happen here in Texas?

STEVE: We will certainly be filing a motion for change of venue out of DC, but none of those have been granted yet on J6 cases.

GLENN: Jeez. Because they know they can't win, anyplace else.

GLENN: It is -- it's amazing to me, Steve, that I'm doing an interview with a man, that I know is innocent.

Who I know is a journalist.

Who I know just did the job of being a journalist. And tomorrow, it might be your first day going to jail and then prison.

STEVE: You know, I'll correct you on one thing. There are 60 of us that are guilty.

We are guilty of crossing a restricted line, and that is common for law enforcement to allow the press to come inside the police line to document the public interests.

GLENN: I was going to say. Correct.

STEVE: There is no license. There is no credential. There is no press pass on the planet. Or in the United States of America, local, state, or federal, that allows any journalist to cross a restricted line.

But over 60 did.

And only those whose voice is more on the right side of the political spectrum are being prosecuted.

No one from the left.

GLENN: So what is your -- I mean, if you care to share it.

What is your game plan?

STEVE: I think the first thing we have to do is find out who our judge is. That's the most important aspect.

It's the first major piece of the puzzle.

Because the judges and the J6 lottery. Are -- are -- they come in all -- all shapes and sizes and intensities.

So it will depend upon whether we get a hanging judge, or we get one of the more reasonable common sense.

GLENN: Let's say you get a hanging judge, and they offer you a deal.

BRENDAN: That will be very tempting, if it's one of the hanging judges to take the deal.

Because we already know what the threat of not taking the deal is. That would be a superseding indictment that would include a felony. Because they're going to punish you. They don't want to work. They're government employees. They don't want to do a trial.

GLENN: What kind of felony?

What could they come up with this felony?

STEVE: It would be the one that is currently before the Supreme Court. The 15-12, obstruction of an official proceeding.

They could -- well, first of all, show me the man, I'll show you the crime. They could come up with anything.

GLENN: Right.

STEVE: So they could go back on years and years, on tax record. They could do anything. So it's not a matter of what could it possibly be that I did that day?

It's going to be something else. But that is the punishment. And it is the threat. And they have used it in other January 6 cases.

GLENN: Jeez.

STU: I know you've done a lot of work, Steve, going back, when you're doing your reporting. And looking through all these videos. And you've been able to isolate a bunch of really interesting things, that nobody knew about.

GLENN: That exonerate a lot of people.

STU: Exonerate.

GLENN: And take down the police and, you know, whoever they were. FBI agents or whoever they were.

STEVE: And there's more coming. As a matter of fact, I just heard from a senior congressional aid this morning. That there will be a very significant release tomorrow.

That's all -- he gave me permission to say. That I could say on the air today.

And some of that has to do and it intersects with my work.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: My question is. Do we see video of you?

STEVE: Oh, yeah.

STU: Will we see this? I think they want to paint this idea, that you were not a journalist at this event.

And I think it would be pretty clear.

As you said, there's cameras everywhere.

You have to be on camera, all over the place.

Were you doing something different than the New York Times reporters that were there?

STEVE: I am happy to say, that myself and TheBlaze team, back in December, we harvested a day in the life of me.

Capitol CCTV cameras, and we will be showing that.

GLENN: Right. Excellent.

STEVE: Every second of me inside the Capitol, doing my job, never participating in any parading, milling around.

You know, or as they say, picketing.

Protesting. Never chanting. None of that. We have it all on film.

GLENN: That's fantastic. Now -- now, if you have a hanging judge, will that judge allow that to be -- I mean, the fact that these cases have not been overturned. The minute we started seeing video. Where you're like. Wait a minute.

That makes that guy innocent.

And they didn't allow the attorney to have that. Or see that. Or use that.

I mean, it -- the fact that those haven't been overturned yet. Is a real crime.

A real crime.

STEVE: And we're continuing to work on that process. I will tell you, that there is ever more evidence of the insane corruption, at the top of the Capitol Police.

Which is -- which is holding back these -- you know, series of documents that we need.

To bring justice.

In those particular cases, that you're referring to.

They are more powerful, than Congress themself.

I never believed that. I had Capitol police officers, my sources, unnamed, and known.

That have told me, over and over again. You do not understand how powerful the Capitol Police are. So I'm thinking to myself. Okay. Okay. Okay. Right. Right.

And then I talked with Speaker Johnson. And Speaker Johnson tells me, his lips to my ears, he says, I have 100 percent authority over the -- the distribution of those videos. I can -- I can either let them out. Not. It's all on me. And then all of a sudden, they stop. There's not been anything released in weeks. And suddenly, it stops. Get back with my sources. They said, I told you, it's the Capitol Police. Why is the Capitol Police so powerful?

They know where all the bodies are buried. They know who buried them. They know who is sleeping with who.

They know everything.

GLENN: Jeez.

STEVE: And they are -- and they are the personal security guards of Congress. That's why they're so powerful.

GLENN: It's amazing that it was said that this is Nancy Pelosi's police force. The Speaker has control. Well, she might have. But according to you, Johnson doesn't.

STEVE: There's somebody more powerful than him.

GLENN: Hmm. All right.

Best of luck. We'll keep you in your prayer -- in our prayers. And please, please, stay in touch, and tell us how we can help.

STEVE: Well, we're not going to stop working. So I'll tell you that.

GLENN: Thank you.

STU: And we'll try to get you a flip-flop sponsorship.

STEVE: Can we do that?

GLENN: You need an orange jumpsuit to make it even easier for the feds. Call this number.

How China is Using REAL Disinformation to DIVIDE America
RADIO

How China is Using REAL Disinformation to DIVIDE America

Many Americans feel more divided than ever. But are we really? Investigative journalist Peter Schweizer joins Glenn to expose how the Chinese Communist Party is using real disinformation to divide us. As described in his new book, "Blood Money," China has funded and pushed everything from the trans agenda to radical violent protests in our streets. Schweizer also exposes how the Chinese military is running thousands of social media accounts posing as Americans: half claim that America is racist and bigoted and the other half spew white supremacy. "This is clearly an effort to destabilize the United States," he argues. And that's just the beginning of China's secret war against America ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We're with peter Schweitzer. He's the president of the Government Accountability Institute.

He's also a guy who has written several books, exposés on both the right and the left.

The left now forgets that he does that, and they just call him a tool of the right, but he lets the chips fall where they may.

Thus, why he's talking about people in several books, like Mitch McConnell.

So, Peter, we're talking about in your book, blood money. How the Chinese Communist Party is sewing chaos in the United States.

Is there -- is there -- not that there needs to be. But do you have evidence of more things, other than just the fentanyl?

PETER: Oh, absolutely. Take the issue of the trans movement in the United States. This just erupted in the last five years.

If I point out in the book, two of the biggest funders of the trans movement in America, are China-based billionaires.

One is an American Marxist named Roy Singham.

He worked. He built a company called Thought Works. He was a consultant adviser to Huawei, a Chinese military-linked company.

He sold his business, made him a billionaire to a private equity company, partly owned by the Chinese government. He moved to Beijing. He's very close with people.

He gets invited to their events. He's put more than $160 million into radical causes in the United States, including the trans rights movement.

The other Chinese billionaire doing that, is a guy named Joe Tsai, who is the cofounder of Alibaba. He has poured tens of millions of dollars into the trans rights movement.

And in addition, he owns the WNBA Team in New York. The New York Liberty, which was the first professional sports team to have a trans athlete play.

Now, here's the -- the -- very troubling part for me, Glenn. About this, Glenn.

These guys do not push for these rights in China. They only push for these rights in the United States.

There's no -- they're not trans. They don't have family members that are trans. This is clearly an effort to, you know, destabilize the United States.

If you look at a lot of violent actions in the streets, in 2020, with BLM. Or the violent actions in the streets now, involving pro-Hamas demonstrators. There are a couple of groups. FRSO. PSL, that spearhead these really radical, violent protests.

As I lay out in the book, these organizations, that take their marching orders from China, in some cases, there are financial ties.

They consult with Chinese officials.

And I quote from Chinese government reports. Where they, actually, monitor and track the behavior of the organizations.

Then the other part I would add. Online.

There's so much craziness online.

The Chinese military. The PLA. Has thousands of experts, that run individually, thousands of social media accounts, where they pose as Americans, into the United States.

Basically half the account, Glenn, say America is a hopelessly racist, bigoted society. And the other half of the accounts say, I only like white people. And they're posing as Americans.

I think we're actually less divided, than we believe we are.

Examine China is trying to create fissures between us.

And they're very explicit, that this is part of the disintegration worker's strategy that they've embraced.

GLENN: Where would you put this on the scale of psyop operations of the past from Soviet Union, and everything else?

How big is this?

PETER: Oh, no comparison. Look, the Russians lacked sophistication when it came to this stuff. They lacked capacity. China is very, very aggressive, in their approach here. And if you think about it, it's brilliant. It's basically saying, we're going to beat the United States without actually fighting a war. And as we focus exclusively on how many battleships do we have? Or how many aircraft carriers do we have? What is the situation in Taiwan? Those are important issues, I'm not saying they are.

That's the exclusive focus on Washington. Nobody wants to focus on China's meddling in the United States.

GLENN: I will tell you, I -- I somewhat disagree with you.

We -- that's why our -- that's why our -- that's why we're doing a Colour Revolution op, really, I think, on ourselves, and all over the world.

We are doing that. But we are not doing it, with China.

We'll do it in Ukraine, and everything else.

Where we'll have these Colour Revolutions. And use many of these tactics on our own people, now, it's been shown.

But -- but China is approached as a friend in many ways.

PETER: Yeah, no, exactly.

I agree away with you. Yes, there's no question that the Colour Revolutions that started in the Obama administration. The Chinese, actually, site those as examples of what to use.

But, yeah. I mean, the problem is, we don't have an awareness of this. And there are people on the political left, that have some affinity for Beijing, that don't want to have this conversation.

I have in the book, for example, quotes from -- there's a Chinese organization. Called the center for the center of foreign Marxist parties.

Political parties. It reports directly to the central committee, the CCP.

We got asked to do an analysis in the United States. And one of the points of analysis is, that, yes. The Communist Party USA. Is disorganized. It's small, and it's irrelevant.

Why?

They talk favorably about the role of people like AOC and Bernie Sanders.

Examine they say, while these are not perfect vehicles.

They're still very helpful vehicles. This advancing the agenda, that they have in the United States.

So, you know, the political left does not want to talk about it.

Because these are their champions. Yet, there it is in black and white.

According to the Chinese point of view.

STU: Talking to Peter Schweizer. The book is Blood Money is out tomorrow. You need to get a copy of it.

Peter, can you talk about how much of this stuff, that China is trying to do, would be ineffective if we had a secure border?

And is this one of the reasons why we continually treat the border with such little significance in the federal government?

PETER: Yeah. That's a great point.

There's obviously the issue of illegal immigrants coming, particularly from China. It also involves certainly with fentanyl. There's problem.

I talk about in the book. Part of the Chinese strategy is sow violence in the American streets. China has a history of selling machine guns, to radical groups, and criminal organizations in the United States.

Going back to the 1990s.

They do it today, this a very clever way.

With a small device called a Glock switch.

It's a small switch that you put on a Glock handgun. It converts a Glock handgun to a fully automatic machine gun.

It's obviously highly illegal in the United States, highly illegal in China. You can't even own a firearm.

Yet, the Chinese are openly marketing and smuggling them into the United States.

And selling them to criminal gangs in this country.

It's a massive, widespread problem.

The rate of machine gunfire on American streets has escalated.

And customs and border protection first identified this in 2018.

They finally have started to detect these things as they arrive in the mail.

So what are the Chinese now doing?

They're now going south of the border. They're setting up machine tool operations. With the cartels.

And they're starting to smuggle these devices, across the open border.

So it's illegal immigrants. It's fentanyl.

It's now these devices that will sew chaos in American streets.

Because these devices are being targeted specifically, at drug organizations.

And violent criminal organizations, in the awes.

GLENN: So, Peter, at some point in the book. Blood money.

You say the CCP tricked the Trump administration into COVID lockdowns.

PETER: Yeah.

GLENN: What do you mean by that? What evidence do you have of that?

PETER: So a couple of things. One, if you remember in March of 2020, there was a report issued by imperial college of London, by a professor Ferguson. And it presented this apocalyptic view, that if we did not imitate the Chinese and have lockdowns.

There would be 2 million Americans dead within the next six months. And there will be 500,000 dead in the UK. And if you look at the accounts, the memoirs that have come out.

This had a very profound effect on Donald Trump.

And the administration.

And this moved us to the point of saying, maybe we need to start looking at some of these things.

And, in fact, we did.

Here's the problem. That imperial college of London study, was done, under Chinese influence.

Imperial college of London is a leading academic partner of the CCP. A government in China. They have a long cooperation there.

That particular study, included Chinese data. Included Chinese scholars.

Then the Chinese.

And again, I quote extensively from them. Had a strategy to impose the authoritarian model, for responding to disease on us. Because if you talk about us then.

Before the point, the response was, people that are sick should stay home.

Everybody else should go about their lives ordinarily. That's not the Chinese model.

The Chinese actively pushed that, in the United States. One of the things they reportedly do. I report in Blood Money. They donate in quotation marks. To American cities. Particularly in California and New Jersey.

Hundreds of drones. Our own government started using to monitor their own people. To make sure they were hearing the lockdowns.

And this was part of a Chinese strategy, to get us to embrace some of these authoritarian approaches.

And it's really actually quite extraordinary. And, you know, one of the reasons, that we have a certain individual on the front cover of the book.

Tony Fauci, is because we revealed in emails that we obtained, et cetera, that he covered for the Chinese in this regard.

That he would not criticize the Chinese. It's not just about the lab leak. He would not criticize the Chinese, he embraced their lockdown approaches.

And he kind of pooh-poohed, and criticized Americans.

There's a famous exchange, where a New York Times reporter is emailing with Tony Fauci. And says, China has been heroic in their response to this crisis with COVID.

Unlike, you know, Americans who are basically being fat, selfish slobs.

And Tony's response was, yeah. You make a really, really good point here.

On the record, he agreed with him.

That's the disdain that a lot of these leaders had, for their own countrymen.

And the embrace that they had for this authoritarian model, that the CCP imposed.

GLENN: So I'm out of time.

Peter, would you come back in a couple of days. When you can come up for a breath of air.

And tell us where we need to start to dismantle.

Again, I thank you for exposing all of this. You're usually so far ahead of the curve.

But I think Americans sense now, something is really wrong.

Especially with our relationship with China and the border.

And fentanyl. So you're right on the money here. I would love to have you back, to talk a little bit more about where we should begin to dismantle. And how that can be done.

PETER: Yeah. Would love to do it, as always, Glenn. I appreciate your encouragement and support as always, and I'm glad to come back.

GLENN: Got it. Thank you so much Peter. Peter Schweizer. He's an unbelievable -- an unbelievable author. Good friend of the ram. Known him for years. He never, never holds back any punches, from either side.

He is as fair as they come. And extraordinarily well-buttoned up. His book, the latest. You should get it.

Comes out tomorrow.

Is blood money. Blood money by Peter Schweizer.

How Leftist Immigration ‘Reform’ Made YOUR Streets DEADLIER
RADIO

How Leftist Immigration ‘Reform’ Made YOUR Streets DEADLIER

In the aftermath of the death of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley, the media is insisting that the increase in crime across the country has nothing to do with illegal immigration. But Blaze News Senior Editor Daniel Horowitz joins Glenn with the real stats. Daniel warns that Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro is practically emptying out his prisons and sending the criminals — many part of the brutal gang Tren de Aragua — to America. He also uses the latest data to make the case that YES, crime has gone up because of our open border and progressive "criminal justice reform" policies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the media is now doing their best to say that crime is not a problem.

Because of illegal immigration. We know that that's not true. That doesn't mean that everybody who comes across illegally is a law breaker, other than come here illegally.

You know, they're not all rapists and murderers.

But we seem to have our fair share now, from overseas. And I love the people, who are saying, you cannot violate the rights of people. Just because of this one murder. Review, yeah. Yet they're the same people, who say, we should take away everyone's guns. Because if it will just save up life, it's worth it.

Well, you know what, not letting the illegal immigration would have saved one life.

In fact, would have saved a lot of lives recently.

To talk about it is Daniel Horowitz. He did a podcast yesterday, on this.

He's compiling the stats of crime, from illegal aliens.

Daniel, what did you find?

DANIEL: Hey, well, it's great to be back with you, Glenn. And, look, if last decade criminality from foreign nationals was defined by MS-13, I think we should start to familiarize ourselves with Tren de Aragua. Because that's the Venezuelan prison gang, that was essentially sent up here by President Maduro in Venezuela. And why not him blame him? He knew that our door was open. He figured he would get rid of his problem.

We focus a lot on the quantitative act that -- of this border nation. That quantitatively, it's much greater than we've ever seen.

Probably about 10 million, between the apprehensions and gotaways, since Biden took office.

But qualitatively, when I speak to border agents, ICE agents, and then reporters down at the Darien Gap in Panama, they say they have never seen so many young male belligerents, with tattoos, that kind of look like they want a piece of you.

And now if you go to the New York Post, every day, you will find stories of those arrested, and then turned out loose, within 24 hours in New York City. We find it in Chicago.

So this alleged murderer of Lincoln Riley is not in a vacuum.

This is something that we're going to deal with, for years. You know, in the next number of years, if we don't get rid of them very soon.

STU: Daniel, when you talk about the border issue. You mention the issue between the qualitative and quantitative problem here.

And it is significant.

Obviously, the quantitative problem as has been well documented. When you talk about the people coming across the border, though.

You know, we hear about potential terrorists. We hear about drug dealers. What is the biggest issue the border agents are facing.

DANIEL: Sure. I mean, again, we've seen all these pictures, where we have young military-aged males, just marching through the border, that we've never seen before. And it turns out, I mean, at least from what I'm hearing. Is that the Venezuelan the highest concentration of criminal element. Simply because it's not by natural.

It's not natural selection.

That you will have a lot of ruffians come over our border.

That's what a lot of them do.

A lot of them are criminal elements.

This is a concerted effort on the part of Maduro. To send his prison gang up here.

And you're finding this a lot in spaces like Miami. Places like Chicago and New York. Even local media is reporting on it. Where they're having a number of gangbangers arrested. Chicago arrested.

Just a handful. You know, five, ten Venezuelan nationals. In 2022.

But then last year, in 2023, they arrested seven hundred of them.

And again, this is not looking like you're an illegal alien.

These are people, it's shoplifting. It's assault.

It's driving without a license. Drunk driving. You know, I've chronicled this for about 15 years. Now, you can't use the numbers now, because Biden doesn't enforce the law. But when Trump was president and they were trying to apprehend people, in just one given year, we would typically get -- and this is recurring every year. Enough people arrested in that kind of suite. That net of enforcement. To account for 2,000 homicide-related offensive -- meaning both conviction and arrests. Six hundred kidnappings. Thirty-eight hundred robberies. Thirty-seven thousand assaults. 10,000 sex crimes. And usually about 80,000 or so DUI's.

The numbers were pretty consistent every single additional year. Now, typically, especially back then, before the George Floyd crime rates. We typically had maybe 14,000 homicide arrests in a given year. To 2,000 accounted for, among the jurisdiction of ICE.

Illegal aliens, sometimes illegals. But criminal elements that are deportable. That is an astounding share.

That is one in seven. And, again, this is before the Biden wave.

So you can imagine now, they are having all these belligerents from Venezuela.

Just think about this. We had 335,000 Venezuelans come in, just in the first few months.

I'm sorry. Just in 2023.

Plus, Biden granted temporary status of 470,000 others. Just 834 have been removed.

Okay?

So that is how you think what that problem is.

GLENN: What is amazing to me is at the same time that is going on. By the way, that is exactly what -- what was his name in Iraq?

Saddam Hussein did, right before we went in.

To cause chaos in the streets. He emptied the prisons. That's what Maduro did except into the United States.

And his reward for that was the United States, allowing him to sell more oil, even to us.

So there -- this is -- this is a chaos operation.

But we're also all seeing stories almost every day. If you're paying attention to it.

Your key word there was belligerent.

They feel like, they are above the law. They know they're not going to be charged.

And so they'll beat police officers.

They'll -- they'll flip people off.

They are super citizens, almost. That's the way they act.

DANIEL: And what you're finding, especially in these blue areas is an amalgamation of the invasion and then jailbreak. What they call criminal justice reform in New York City. So they turn out all criminals. The next day.

But in this case. You have, you know, the people let out of Rikers Island.

Domestic criminals being let loose. And then now, you have all these Venezuelans coming in, committing crimes. Often three or four crimes. And they get released every time.

I want to throw out another number that's very important.

I've tracked for a number of years. There's something called ISIS undetained document.

So what that means by its very nature are these are the people that are on ISIS' radar to at least investigate, often target for removal.

But they remain undetained right now, there's only about 37,000 people in ISIS custody. That's the maximum of what they can handle.

The undetained docket is 6.2 million.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

DANIEL: 6.2 million. Now, I don't have the numbers. But in the old days, I don't think this has changed. About 80 percent were criminal aliens. So they had criminal charges and/or convictions, in addition to being here illegally. Think about that. There's only five, 6,000 ICE ERO officers. Deportation officers around. Limited resources.

We already know that under this administration, if you're caught drunk driving, you're not really a priority. That's not considered a high level crime.

So there are 6.2 million. In their undetained docket. Just think about the needless murder victims, rape victims that are seeing this now every day.

The media tries to cover it up. We saw, you know, a rape of a minor, allegedly committed by an illegal alien. South of Lynchburg, Virginia, yesterday.

There was a case in Montana.

I was just looking at.

If the American people would actually know, the extent of how many of these heinous crimes are committed by people that should never be here.

And there would have been multiple opportunities to get them out. They would be up in arms.

And this would be our George Floyd moment.

GLENN: Imagine if you are a citizen, and your governor is telling you, hey.

We need homes for people. Take them into your home. How stupid do you have to be.

DANIEL: I mean, it's unbelievable. Picture the worst of the Bloods and the Crips in your own downtown. That's what we're deporting from all over the world. Each country's problems. You know, you'll have some desperate, impoverished people that are kind of peaceful too. Certainly not in our best interest to let them in.

But this time, we're just seeing a total invasion.

And what's important, is legally, this definitely meets the definition of an invasion under the compact clause, that should trigger state authority for removal. I think this is where it's important.

When you look at that 6.2 million number. You look at what we're seeing, from that individual charged with murdering Lincoln Riley. Along with his brother.

They were caught in a red state, here illegally, and having committed other crimes prior to this alleged murder.

And yet, they remained. Some of them are because of sanctuary policies. But sometimes, even if you're not a sanctuary state, but now you're a sanctuary nation.

Here's the thing, let's say a state might want to deal with that individual. Maybe lock them up.

Maybe try to remove them. But ICE now grants them with a detainer. And now a detainer is a double-edged sword. Because they'll place a detainer, enough that the state cannot enforce the law against them. But it's not like the feds will actually remove them or even detain them.

They will be on their undetained docket.

Out free to commit more crimes.

This is where the red state governors need to get together and say, look, if we catch someone here, illegally. Committing an assault.

Of drunk driving.

They need to be out of here.

STU: Daniel, can you address one more thing before you go. Which is the media's response to this talk every time.

Is to say, actually, immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate that be US citizens.

They're not the problem here.

DANIEL: Sure. They're right in the sense immigrants. Okay. So legal immigrants on average commit fewer crimes. And the reason is, because on average, they come to the United States. At an older age. That sort of the criminal career age. Sixteen to 30. They're usually older when they believe.

They're more established. With that, I will say, there are certain pockets of the world, that we accept who didn't notice illegally, that still commit too many crimes. The crimes that we commit should be zero.

Because they're vetted. You know, it's kind of like your draft pick. You get your choice. You can pick your immigrants. You can't pick your natives.

Native born, that is.

But as it relates to the people coming from the border. Again, you look. As we -- I want to give you a statistic that is, again, astounding.

GLENN: You have about 45 seconds, before I have to break.

DANIEL: In 2020, Trump's ICE director, Matt Albence. He said that in one year in New York City, they issued 7500 ICE detainers.

And out of those 200 individuals, they included 200 homicides.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

DANIEL: I looked up that area of operation. There were fewer than 300 people arrested for all homicides in that area of ISIS operation, in that one year.

I'm not saying they necessarily commit two-thirds. You have to study that.

But it is surely greater than their share of the population.

GLENN: Daniel Horowitz. You can hear his podcast on TheBlaze.

Blaze TV.

He did a whole podcast about this, yesterday. And he's always, always really buttoned up.

And has a different view on a lot of things, that I think you should hear. Daniel, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

DANIEL: Thanks for having me. Take care.

Don’t Blame JUST the Border Crisis for the Murder of Laken Riley
RADIO

Don’t Blame JUST the Border Crisis for the Murder of Laken Riley

Glenn reviews the murder of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley and the media’s grotesque spinning of the story. The media would rather blame her death on “jogging” than our open border. But Glenn says we shouldn’t JUST blame the flood of illegal immigration. Also at fault are the leftist policies that allowed her suspected killer — an illegal immigrant from Venezuela — to be caught at the border, released, then charged in New York, and released again! Glenn also reviews the media’s panic over former president Donald Trump’s promise to begin mass deportations if he wins the presidency.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: White House spokesman finally commented on a report about Lincoln Riley. Her death late Monday afternoon. They spoke about it.

They just said, the murderer should be held accountable.

We would like to extend our deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Lake and Hope Riley. People should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law if they're found to be guilty.

Given this is an active case. I love this. They'll comment on anything. Unless it hurts them. Then it's like, you know, you have to talk to the Justice Department.

I mean, we can't comment at this point.

What about Hunter Biden and his crack cocaine and hooker thing?

You will have to talk to the Justice Department.

What about -- what about Donald Trump and his documents?

That guy is a big, fat liar. And he's spying on America with Russia.

Shouldn't we discuss that?

No. You don't need to go to the Justice Department.

We have that one handled. So, anyway, finally, they said something.

But the reaction from the press has been grotesque.

CNN reported yesterday. In case you don't know.

Lincoln, Riley, she was jogging. She was a university student in Georgia.

She's jogging in the morning.

And she's brutally killed.

And what a surprise. It was an illegal alien. And this time, from Venezuela.

So CNN reports yesterday, quote, there's little evidence leaking in illegal immigration and crime. After the Venezuelan migrant was charged in connection with murder of the 22-year-old Georgia nursing student.

Found dead, Thursday.

University of Georgia campus. Signs of blunt force trauma, after setting out for a jog, in the morning.

The suspect is 26-year-old José Antonio Ibarra. He had crossed into the US illegally near El Paso in September 2022. The -- the Border Patrol caught him at the border. And then just gave him a ticket and released him into the United States.

So he had been stopped, but then, he goes up to New York.

And he got in trouble in New York.

He was arrested last year in New York, by the NYPD.

And charged with acting in a manor to why you are a child less than 17, and a motor vehicle license violation.

They didn't do anything, up in New York.

They just -- they just let him go.

And now -- and now this.

So now, a new poll shows, that many Americans think that there is an influx of illegal immigrants. And that is causing an increase to crime.

And let me just say, that's not true.

That's not true. Well, it's not entirely true. It is the administration's new regulations and guidelines, that are letting all of these people in.

We're having all of these problems because of the new guide lines. And then, on top of that, we have new guide lines issued by all these district attorneys all over the country. That was hired by none other than George Soros.

Good. So we have that going for us. That's what's causing crime.

That we're not enforcing our laws at the border. And then we're not enforcing our laws in our cities.

Our government isn't enforcing the law. Our DAs aren't enforcing the law.

And that's why you have criminals going crazy.

Because they know, I don't -- I'm not going to be charged with anything.

I will be let go. Not a problem. So yesterday, Biden was taken on by Donald Trump, he said, this is -- this is the problem with the Biden administration. And our border.

And everybody went crazy.

By the way, he was charged with malice murder.

Felony murder.

Aggravated battery. Aggravated assault. False imprisonment. Kidnapping. And hindering a 911 call. And concealing the death of another.

I don't know. That seems pretty serious.

So they are not letting him go, this time.

The reason why they let him go last time in New York City. Is because New York City is a sanctuary city.

Hmm. By the way, his brother, also charged on Friday.

For possessing a fraudulent green card, being held in state custody now.

The federal arrest affidavit for Diego, the brother who killed the girl. Says that in September '23, Evans County Police charged him with drunken driving and driving without a license.

Oh. So he just did it in New York. And then came down to Georgia.

And he was also later arrested for shoplifting.

And then skipping out on anything having to do with showing up for court.

A majority of Americans now say that a border wall has to be done.

This is the first time since the history of polls, that the majority of Americans say, border wall, please.

Trump says, I'm going to have a massive deportation. He said, it's going to be the largest deportation. If I'm elected, massive deportation. It will be the biggest in -- in history.

Okay. Well, how do people feel about that?

Well, I don't know. But I'll tell you how the Washington Post feels about it.

After hundreds of thousands of Mexican migrants were put on buses, planes, and boats, during the scorching summer of 1954, and sent across the US border, into often unfamiliar part of Mexico.

The head of immigration and naturalization, declared the border secured.

It was the so-called wetback problem. But the military-style campaign, which used the same slur in its name, operation wetback.

Tore families apart. Forcibly uprooted people, in the name of securing the border, experts said.

And sometimes those turned deadly. Now, first of all, can I ask why it was a smear in 1950, to call this operation wetback.

That's because before it became a slur. Operation wetback was called that, because the people that were being deported. Were the people that crossed the Rio Grande. And swam across. Or came across.

And they were wet when they came out. Now it's a slur.

But it wasn't in the 1950s.

Now, former president Donald Trump is using the Eisenhower Era operation as a blueprint for his vision.

It will be the largest domestic deportation in American history. It will remove 10.5 million undocumented people in the United States. Of whom, 23rd have lived in this country for more than a decade.

Now, wait a minute. Hold on just a second. Why is it that we're going after the ones who have lived here for a decade? 10.5 million?

I think we should probably start with the ones that are here, that just came here. And have no reason to be here.

And are causing real problems. You can go with the -- the last 10 million, that have come in. And they aren't the ones who have lived here for a decade.

Got to get them. Because if you don't get them now. What will happen?

The press will say, they've been here for more than a decade. Americans can expect.

This is Donald Trump. Americans can expect, that immediately upon president Trump's return to the Oval Office. He will restore all of his prior policies. Implement brand-new crackdowns that will send shock waves to all the world's criminal smugglers and marshal every federal and state power necessary to institute the deportation operation.

That's a spokesperson from him yesterday. Undocumented illegal immigrants should not get comfortable because very soon, they will be going home. Now, that's what the Trump people said yesterday. The post is saying, that's horrible.

You watch. The number of people come across the border. The more this is publicized.

What he's saying, the number of illegals coming across our border, will go down.

Why?

Because what the president says matters. When Joe Biden said, no. I'm not encouraging people.

I'm not at all. Yes, he was.

Is Donald Trump discouraging people?

Yes, he is. Is that a good thing?

Yes, it is. But when describing the operation on what Trump's plan was built, says the Washington Post, experts commonly land on the same word.

What's that word, Stu?

What do you think it is? What do you think it is?

Experts -- all the experts are saying the same word.

STU: Hmm, gosh. There are so many that pop to mind. But I don't know. What --

GLENN: Inhumane. It's inhumane.

STU: Inhumane. Just inhumane. I'm wondering if they're talking to any experts that agree with, you know, border policies that secure the border.

I wonder.

When Trump hearkens back to that. I have to be really clear what kind of law enforcement campaign, he's threatening to unleash, says Little Hernandez, who holds the Thomas E. Lifka, endowed chair history of UCLA. It's not just mass deportation. It's mass racial banishment.

No. No. If you're coming in from Russia, I want you out. I mean, if you're -- if you're doing it illegally. If you're coming in from China, I want you out.

You're coming in from Sweden, I want you out.

England, I want you out.

If you're coming from Iran, I really want you out.

You're coming from hostile countries. Buh-bye.

If you're coming here just because you're a family trying to better themselves, go through the front door. And, you know what, bring your family, instead of just sending your 20-year-old son. I just think, you know.

We've got enough of angry 20-year-olds. We don't need anymore. If you would like one, if you would like to take an angry teenager, I will gladly invite you to house one of my children. House them. See what happens with that one. If that's what you're really looking for. I can help you in that department.