GLENN

Sen. Mike Lee: Neil Gorsuch Is an 'Extraordinary Judge'

President Trump's Supreme Court pick, Judge Neil Gorsuch, is the kind of person that gets lawyers waxing poetic. Just ask Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) who joined The Glenn Beck Program on Tuesday.

"He's a dream to argue in front of because he's the kind of judge who reads all the briefs and reads all the statutes and all the cases cited in the briefs. He's always prepared. He knows exactly where he's going," Sen. Lee said.

Senator Lee went so far as to say Gorsuch's briefs are interesting and fun to read.

"Let's just clarify. That is Mike Lee that just said these are fun to read. So, kids, don't rush out there. It's Mike saying that," Glenn joked.

Enjoy the complimentary clip above or read the transcript below for details.

GLENN: Senator Mike Lee, welcome to the program, sir. How are you?

 

MIKE: Doing well. Thank you so much, Glenn.

 

GLENN: Can we start with -- quickly on the Muslim ban and whether that is legal or not? What is your opinion?

 

MIKE: The short answer is, the president has authority to suspend the entry of certain aliens coming into this country. He has that authority, under section 212F of the immigration and nationality act.

 

Now, there's an amendment to that that came about several decades after that one was put in place that some have read to suggest the president can't do this. But when you read the language on that one, it deals with visa issuance, not suspension on entry. And it deals with visa issuance by those who issue visas, not by the president.

 

That's why, on its face, I can't look at this order and say it's illegal. That's why the order to the extent it causes legal problems, will present legal problems, only in the way it's enforced.

 

In other words, we'll have to wait and see how this thing is implied, how it's interpreted, how it's actually utilized on the ground, before we can say it violates the law.

 

GLENN: Poorly written, Mike? Is that the problem?

 

MIKE: Not ideally. The rollout was suboptimal. The draftsmanship could have been better. But, look, these are people who have got a lot on their plate. And I understand that. That's why I hope they get the implementation right. Because if they get the implementation right, I think it will be okay.

 

GLENN: What did this judge up in Washington -- is he right at all?

 

MIKE: You know, I read his temporary restraining order. And it's been a long time since I've seen an order like that, that dealt with an issue of this magnitude with so few words. And I don't mean that in a complimentary way. What I mean is it lacks analysis. It is full of what I call conclusory assertions, where the judge just sort of found that the basis in law existed for him to issue this temporary restraining order. And so he did. But it was very short on legal analysis.

 

GLENN: So they're making this into a big deal because, well, he was appointed by George Bush. And so, George Bush, of course, you know, how could you possibly go against a George Bush judge?

 

MIKE: You know, Glenn, if I had a nickel for every bad decision made by a Republican-appointed judge or Supreme Court justice, I'd be a very wealthy man.

 

GLENN: Yeah.

 

MIKE: The fact that someone is put on a court by a Republican means absolutely nothing, in terms of his indelibility (phonetic).

 

PAT: Mike, real quick, before we get into the crux of this. There's a new poll out about Democrats that are concerned about Christians and Mormons being just as violent --

 

GLENN: And Jews.

 

PAT: And Jews. Just as violent as Islam. What are you doing to curb the Mormon violence in this country? Are you drafting any kind of legislation?

 

MIKE: Yeah, it's a big problem.

 

PAT: It is. It is.

 

MIKE: I would -- look, Mormons are known for their violent tendencies.

 

GLENN: Right.

 

MIKE: The bicycles -- the bicycles and the short-sleeved shirts with ties strikes fear on the part of all who behold. It's a big problem.

 

GLENN: So, Mike, 63 percent of all Democrats --

 

PAT: Sixty-six.

 

GLENN: Sixty-six feel that's true. Two-thirds of all Democrats feel that Christians, Jews, and Mormons are just as dangerous as Islamic terrorists.

 

PAT: Unbelievable.

 

MIKE: Wow. That's interesting, especially given that it would be difficult to find doctrine to support that.

 

PAT: Yep.

 

MIKE: It would be difficult to find actual statistics to support that.

 

One of the reasons why I find this most disturbing is that it strikes this term of moral equivalency, which I think causes a whole lot of problems. It -- there's no such thing as bad or good -- bad or worse than bad. It's just stuff people do.

 

And I am very curious about that study and how they reached those conclusions.

 

GLENN: It scares the hell out of me. Because it seems to me that we are living in a time where facts don't matter at all, to anybody, on either side.

 

MIKE: You know, they do matter to the reader. I think there are a lot of readers out there and a lot of people who listen to your program, a lot of people who actually are willing to dig beneath the surface who care. It's not always the case, that reporting those facts case. So when the people care, those who report facts that are not ringing true, can be held accountable. I think that's what we have to do.

 

GLENN: All right. Talk to me a little bit about Gorsuch. You met with him last -- what was it? Thursday or Friday. What did you think of him?

 

MIKE: Love the guy. Just fantastic judge.

 

Look, I already had a high opinion of him because I've argued in front of him. I was a lawyer before I became a politician.

 

GLENN: I argue in front of my children, and I don't necessarily have a lot of respect for them.

 

MIKE: This guy is good though. This guy is good. But I just highlighted two of the reasons of why -- I chose two hated professions. First lawyer and then politician. You know, I'm not sure how it could get worse than that.

 

But in any event, he's a great judge. He's a dream to argue in front of because he's the kind of judge who reads all the briefs and reads all the statutes and all the cases cited in the briefs. He's always prepared. He knows exactly where he's going. And he believes that our laws matter and the words used matter. And he wants to find the meaning of those words.

 

But then in the last few days, I've been reading a whole lot of Gorsuch. I've spent hours upon hours, reading Gorsuch opinions.

 

And so far, I have yet to find a bad opinion among them. This is -- this is an extraordinary judge.

 

His opinions, if you can believe it, are actually interesting. They're fun to read, in addition to the fact that they seem to follow the right approach very consistently, with an eye toward finding out what the law says.

 

GLENN: Let's just clarify. That is Mike Lee that just said these are fun to read. So, kids, don't rush out there. It's Mike saying that.

 

What are the odds of him getting confirmed?

 

MIKE: We intend to get him confirmed. And I expect we will get him confirmed.

 

GLENN: Without the nuclear option?

 

MIKE: Well, there is no reason why we necessarily have to use the nuclear option. And I think most or all of us would prefer not to. It's not clear that we'll have to, to begin with. You know, I do think that at least one Democrat will make sure that we have to get cloture, if they can. And that requires 60 votes, to bring the debate to a close.

 

I think it's possible that we could get those 60 votes. If we don't, there are a couple of options at our disposal, only one of which involves the use of the nuclear option.

 

There's another one called Rule 19, the so-called two speech rule that allows to us bypass cloture when we stay in the legislative day until everyone who wants to speak has had a chance to do so and then we go directly to the final vote, which is set at 51.

 

Look, this is terribly boring, arcane stuff. This from a guy who loves to read Gorsuch opinions.

 

GLENN: No. He loves them. Says they're fun.

 

MIKE: Yes, yes, they are fun. The Gorsuch opinions are fun. Rule 19 is not fun. It's quite arcane. But it's useful here. And I think it might give us a path to confirming Judge Gorsuch without deploying the nuclear option.

 

PAT: Mike, if you had to compare him to a sitting or former judge, who -- who would he mostly closely compare to? Would it be Scalia? Would it be Alito? Kennedy?

 

MIKE: I'd say he's sort of a blend between Justice Alito, my former boss, and justices Scalia and Thomas, which is exactly what we want.

 

PAT: Yeah.

 

MIKE: I had hoped the president would nominate someone in that mold. And as far as I can tell, he appears to be in that mold. This is a guy who really believes deeply that we need to follow certain principles in the law.

 

He's deeply wedded to textualism, the idea that the laws consist of words. The words have meaning, and you have to find out what those words mean.

 

And originalism, which is the idea that in order to understand the Constitution, it's important to go back and understand how the words in the Constitution were used at the time they were put in there, at the time they were drafted and ratified.

 

STU: As someone, Mike, who is really interested in the Gorsuch opinions, can you help -- because speaking of the Scalia comparisons, one interesting place where they seem to split, and it seems that Gorsuch is better than Scalia on, is this idea -- this Chevron deference, where we're talking about basically giving deference to federal agencies -- can you explain that and make it a slightly less boring than it sounds?

 

MIKE: Yes. First of all, I'm thrilled, I'm ecstatic that I get do explain Chevron deference.

 

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. People are pulling over.

 

PAT: Chevron deference. I can't go to work yet!

 

GLENN: I'm about to wet my pants, I'm so excited.

 

MIKE: Okay. So Chevron deference is this legal doctrine created out of whole cloth by the devil himself within the federal court system.

 

And it says that the courts, rather than doing their own thinking, are just going to defer to executive branch, bureaucratic agencies, when they interpret a regulation developed by that agency. In other words, hello, Mr. Fox, here are the keys to the henhouse. Please enjoy it.

 

That's what we do.

 

Now, for reasons that astound me, for reasons that sometimes allow me to argue with Justice Scalia, when I go to dinner with him, that is a doctrine that doesn't make sense. And yet, Justice Scalia wanted it in one way or another.

 

Judge Gorsuch appears to have real concerns, with Chevron deference. And he pointed out that this is a doctrine that runs against the doctrine of separation of powers embedded deeply in the Constitution. And I just -- I had a huge grin on my face when I was reading that opinion. It was fantastic.

 

STU: It essentially means if the EPA has regulation and there's disagreement about it, the legal system just says, "Eh, ask the EPA what they meant."

 

JEFFY: Yeah, yeah, exactly. Exactly. And if other people disagree with the EPA's interpretation of what it meant, they say, ask the EPA. And whatever the EPA says stands, stands. And that's a problem, that's really a big problem.

 

GLENN: Yeah. So, Mike, help me out on this, I have -- I don't have a problem necessarily with some of the direction that this president is taking.

 

MIKE: Oh. I was afraid you were going to tell me you didn't have a problem with Chevron.

 

GLENN: No.

 

I know. The controversy. People would have been fighting across the country over this.

 

STU: Mike Lee was actually legitimately excited to answer the Chevron deference question.

 

GLENN: I know. I know. God bless him. God bless him.

 

MIKE: Who wouldn't be? Who wouldn't be?

 

GLENN: So, Mike, my problem has been with the lack of concern on the number of -- of executive orders that are being issued. Do you have a problem with the -- with the system that we're using here with this president? Is it any different, or is it just my perception?

 

MIKE: It's not now. And never has been and never will be, the number of executive orders that are a problem.

 

I said this repeatedly throughout the eight years of President Obama's presidency. It's not the number that matters. It's the nature of the executive order, how they're used. It's whether or not they're used in a manner authorized by law.

 

GLENN: Right. So are these executive orders falling in line with what is authorized?

 

MIKE: So far, the executive orders on their face don't fly in the face of the law. So far, these executive orders could be implemented in a manner fully consistent with the law.

 

Now, that doesn't mean that all executive orders this president issues will necessarily, going forward, fall into that category. But I haven't seen one yet that I look at and say, "He doesn't have authority to do that."

 

GLENN: Oh, that's really good.

 

STU: That's great news.

 

MIKE: Yeah.

 

There are some ambiguities in this order we were talking about earlier. There is some language in there, that depending on how it's implemented could cause a problem. That's why I'm watching that one carefully.

 

GLENN: Like what?

 

MIKE: Okay.

 

You're going to yell at me for getting into this level of detail, but there -- there are subsequently enacted provisions of the immigration code --

 

GLENN: Hold on just a second.

 

Jeffy, assuming you're awake by the end of this, wake me so I can yell at him for getting into the weeds. Go ahead, Mike. What now?

 

MIKE: They can be read to restrict any type of effort on the part of the president to deal with the visa issuance program -- process. Depending on how the courts interpret that, that could end up creating a problem.

 

Likewise, depending on how they interpret this, this could cause other problems. I don't want to get into all the details of that. I don't want to pick any fights that the administration doesn't need picked.

 

GLENN: Okay.

 

STU: People are like, "Oh. Go back to Chevron deference on that one."

 

GLENN: One last question: Mitt Romney said he won't rule anything out, but he won't rule anything in yet. He's not sure if Orrin Hatch is going to run for Senate. How do you feel about your partner being possibly Mitt Romney?

 

MIKE: You know, look, Mitt Romney is a great guy. Not ruling anything in, not ruling anything out describes the entire context of the Utah Senate race coming up in 2018. Nobody knows what the heck is going on. Nobody knows who is running and who isn't.

 

I have absolutely no idea how to predict this thing. So I don't know what to say. I think people, before they decide they're going to get in, kind of like having their name floated out there. And they enjoy the process a lot. Sometimes that causes the process to drag out too far.

 

But we still don't know whether Senator Hatch is going to seek reelection. And I suspect that would strongly influence whether or not Mitt Romney decides to get in.

 

GLENN: Hey, do you have a second to hang on for one more -- or do you have to run?

 

MIKE: Hey, for you, anything. You let me talk about Chevron deference.

 

GLENN: I know. I know. You owe us. You owe the whole nation for that.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Are Epstein's "Blackmail Videos" Being Used for Leverage RIGHT NOW?

What was Jeffrey Epstein's operation all about. If he was at the center of a massive blackmail operation to compromise those in positions of power, who is in possession of that information now? Glenn Beck and ATF Whistleblower John Dodson analyze the details of this situation and give their thoughts on what is the most likely reality surrounding Epstein.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with ATF Whistleblower John Dodson HERE

TV

WARNING: How America Elects a Socialist President in 2028 | Glenn TV | Ep 444

The rise of Zohran Mamdani, the 33-year-old socialist who just won the Democratic primary for mayor, is not just a political earthquake shaking New York City — it’s a warning for the rest of America. Backed by Bernie Sanders, AOC, and the Democratic Socialists of America, Mamdani promises free everything, to tax the rich, and to dismantle capitalism. There’s nothing new about this tired strategy, but the media is propping him up as a new political genius. And with Democrat leaders lining up behind him, it’s clear: This radicalism isn’t fringe anymore. It’s the Democratic Party’s future. Mamdani’s rise is part of a larger movement that’s rewriting America’s values. Glenn Beck explains how New York is the prototype for the Left’s socialist makeover of America. Victor Davis Hanson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Standford, gives a terrifying prediction on Mamdani’s mayoral race chances and warns the revolution is coming for mainstream Democrats. He also dives into MAGA’s frustration with the Trump administration's handling of the Epstein files.

RADIO

Did CLOUD SEEDING cause the Texas floods?

Did cloud seeding cause the 4th of July Texas floods? Rainmaker founder and CEO Augustus Doricko, who has been blamed for the flooding, joins Glenn Beck to make the case that it’s impossible for his July 2nd operation to have caused the disaster.

RADIO

INSIDE Trump’s soul: How a bullet changed his heart forever

“I have a new purpose,” then-candidate Donald Trump told reporter Salena Zito after surviving the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. Salena joins Glenn Beck to reveal what Trump told her about God, his purpose in life, and why he really said, “Fight! Fight! Fight!”, as she details in her new book, “Butler: The Untold Story of the Near Assassination of Donald Trump and the Fight for America's Heartland”.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Salena, congratulations on your book. It is so good.

Just started reading it. Or listening to it, last night.

And I wish you would have -- I wish you would have read it. But, you know, the lady you have reading it is really good.

I just enjoy the way you tell stories.

The writing of this is the best explanation on who Trump supporters are. That I think I've ever read, from anybody.

It's really good.

And the description of your experience there at the edge of the stage with Donald Trump is pretty remarkable as well. Welcome to the program.

SALENA: Thank you, Glenn. Thank you so much for having me.

You know, I was thinking about this, as I was ready to come on. You and I have been along for this ride forever. For what?

Since 2006? 2005?

Like 20 years, right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

SALENA: And I've been chronicling the American people for probably ten more years, before that. And it's really remarkable to me, as watching how this coalition has grown. Right?

And watching how people have the -- have become more aspirational.

And that's -- and that is what the conservative populist coalition is, right?

It is the aspirations of many, but the celebration of the individual.

And chronicling them, yeah. Has been -- has been, a great honor.

GLENN: You know, I was thinking about this yesterday, when -- when Elon Musk said he was starting another party.

And somebody asked me, well, isn't he doing what the Tea Party tried to do?

No. The Tea Party was not going to start a new party.

It was to -- you know, it was to coerce and convince the Republican Party to do the right thing. And it worked in many ways. It didn't accomplish what we hoped.

But it did accomplish a lot of things.

Donald Trump is a result of the Tea Party.

I truly believe that. And a lot of the people that were -- right?

Were with Donald Trump, are the people that were with the Tea Party.


SALENA: That's absolutely right.

So that was the inception.

So American politics has always had movements, that have been just outside of a party. Or within a party.

That galvanize and broaden the coalition. Right? They don't take away. Or walk away, and become another party.

If anything, if there is a third party out there, it's almost a Republican Party.

Because it has changed in so many viable and meaningful ways. And the Tea Party didn't go away. It strengthened and broadened the Republican Party. Because these weren't just Republicans that became part of this party.

It was independents. It was Democrats.

And just unhappy with the establishment Republicans. And unhappy with Democrats.

And that -- that movement is what we -- what I see today.

What I see every day. What I saw that day, in butler, when I showed I happen at that rally.

As I do, so many rallies, you know, throughout my career. And that one was riveting and changed everything.

GLENN: You made a great case in the opening chapter. You talk about how things were going for Donald Trump.

And how this moment really did change everything for Donald Trump.

Changed the trajectory, changed the mood.

I mean, Elon Musk was not on the Trump train, until this.

SALENA: Yeah.

GLENN: Moment. What do I -- what changed? How -- how did that work?

And -- and I contend, that we would have much more profound change, had the media actually done their job and reported this the way it really was. Pragmatism

SALENA: You know, and people will find this in the book. I'm laying on the ground with an agent on top of me.

I'm 4 feet away from the president.

And there's -- there's notices coming up on my phone. Saying, he was hit by broken glass.

And to this take, that remains part of this sibling culture, in American politics.

Because reporters were -- were so anxious to -- to right what they believed happened.

As opposed to what happened.

And it's been a continual frustration of mine, as a reporter, who is on the ground, all the time.

And I'll tell you, what changed in that moment.

And I say a nuance, and I believe nuance is dead in American journalism.

But it was a nuance and it was a powerful conversation, that I had with President Trump, the next day. He called me the next morning.

But it's a powerful conversation I had with him, just two weeks ago.

When he made this decision to say, fight, fight, fight.

People have put in their heads, why they think he said it. But he told me why he said that. And he said, Salena, in that moment, I was not Donald Trump the man. I was a former president. I was quite possibly going to be president again.

And I had an obligation to the country, and to the office that I have served in, to project strength. To project resolve.

To project that we will not be defeated.

And it's sort of like a symbolic eagle, that is always -- you know, that symbol that we look at, when we think about our country.

He said, that's why I said that. I didn't want the people behind me panicking. I didn't want the people watching, panicking.

I had to show strength. And it's that nuance -- that I think people really picked up on.

And galvanized people.

GLENN: So he told me, when he was laying down on the stage.

And you can hear him. Let me get up. Let me get up.

I've got to get up.

He told me, as I was laying on the stage. I asked him, what were you thinking? What was going through your head? Now, Salena, I don't know about you.

But with me. It would be like, how do I get off the stage? My first was survival.

He said, what was going on through his mind was, you're not pathetic. This is pathetic.

You're not afraid. Get up.

Get up.

And so is that what informed his fight, fight, fight, of that by the time that he's standing up, he's thinking, I'm a symbol? Or do you think he was thinking, I'm a symbol, this looks pathetic. It makes you look weak.

Stand up. How do you think that actually happened?

SALENA: He thinks, and we just talked about this weeks ago. He -- you know, and this is something that he's really thought about.

Right? You know, he's gone over and over and over. And also, purpose and God. Right? These are things that have lingered with him.

You know, he -- he thought, yes.

He did think, it was pathetic that he was on the ground. But he wasn't thinking about, I'm Donald Trump. It's pathetic.

He's thinking, my country is symbolically on the ground. I need to get up, and I need to show that my country is strong.

That our country is resolute.

And I need people to see that.

We can't go on looking like pathetic.

Right?

And I think that then goes to that image of Biden.

GLENN: You have been with so many presidents.

How many presidents do you think that you've personally been with, would have thought that and reacted that way?

SALENA: Probably only Reagan. Reagan would have. Reagan probably would have thought that.

And if you remember how he was out like standing outside.

You know, waving out the window. Right?

After he was shot.

GLENN: At the hospital, right.

SALENA: Had he not been knocked out, unconscious, you know, he probably would have done the same thing.

Because he was someone who deeply believed in American exceptionalism.

And American exceptionalism does not go lay on the ground.

GLENN: And the symbol.

Right. The symbol of the presidency.

SALENA: Yeah. Absolutely. And I think that affects him today.

GLENN: So let me go back to God.

Because you talked to him the next day. And your book Butler.

He calls you up.

I love the fact that your parents would be ashamed of you. On what you said to him.

The language you used. That you just have to read the book.

It's just a great part.

But he calls you the next morning. And wants to know if you're okay.

And you -- you then start talking to him, about God.

And I was -- I was thinking about this, as I was listening to it. You know, Lincoln said, I wasn't -- I wasn't a Christian.

Even though, he was.

I wasn't a Christian, when I was elected. I wasn't a Christian when my son died.

I became a Christian at Gettysburg.

Is -- is -- I mean, I believe Donald Trump always believes in God, et cetera, et cetera.

Do you think there was a real profound change at Butler with him?


SALENA: Absolutely. You know, he called me seven times that day. Seven times, the take after seven.

GLENN: Crazy.

SALENA: Talked about. And I think he was looking for someone that he knew, that was there. And to try to sort it out.

Right? And I let him do most of the talking. I didn't pressure him.

At all. I believed that he was having -- you know, he was struggling. And he needed to just talk. And I believed my purpose was to listen.

Right? I know other reporters would have handled it differently. And that's okay. That's not the kind of reporter that I am.

And I myself was having my own like, why didn't I die?

Right?

Because it went right over my head.

And -- and so I -- he had the conversation about God.

He's funny. I thought it was the biggest mosquito in the world that hit me.

But he had talked profoundly about purpose. You know, and God.

And how God was in that moment.

It --

GLENN: I love the way you -- in the book, I love the way you said that as he's kind of working it out in his own he head.

He was like, you know, I -- I -- I always knew that there was some sort of, you know -- that God was present.

He said, but now that this has happened.

I look back at all of the trials.

All of the tribulations. Literally, the trials.

All of the things that have happened. And he's like, I realized God was there the whole time.

SALENA: Yes. He does. And it's fascinating to have been that witness to history, to have those conversations with him. Because I'm telling you. And y'all know, I can talk. I didn't say much of anything.

I just -- I just listened. I felt that was my purpose, in that moment.

To give him that space, to work it out.

I'm someone that is, you know, believes in God.

I'm Catholic. I followed my faith.

And -- and so, I thought, well, this is why God put me here. Right?

And to -- to have that -- to hear him talk about purpose, to hear him say, Salena. Why did I put a chart down?

I'm like, sir. I don't know. I thought you were Ross Perot for a second.

He never has a chart. And he laughed. And then he said, why did I put that chart down?

By that term, I never turned my head away from people at the rally. That's true.

That relationship is very transactional. It's very -- they feed off of each other.

It's a very emotive moment when you attend a rally. Because he has a way of talking at a rally. That you believe that you are seeing.

And he said, and I never turn my head away.

I never turn my head away.

Why did I turn my head away?

I don't remember consciously thinking about turning my head away. And then he says to me, that was God, wasn't it?

Yes, sir. It was. It was God.

And he said, that's -- that's why I have a new purpose.

And so, Glenn. I think it's important, when you look at the breadth of what has happened, since he was sworn in.

You see that purpose, every day.

He doesn't let up.

He continues going.

And it brings back to the beginning of the book.

Where you find out, that there was another president that was shot at in Butler.

And that was George Washington. And how different the country would have been, had he died in that moment.

And now think about how different the country would be, had President Trump died in that moment. There would be --

GLENN: We're talking to -- we're talking to Salena Zito. About her new book called Butler. The assassination attempt on President Trump. And it is riveting.

And, you know, it is so good. I wish the press would read it. Because it really explains who we are, who Trump supporters are. Who are, you know, red staters. It is so good at that. She's the best at that.