GLENN

Is the Intelligence Community Systematically Targeting People Who Mislead the President?

Michael Flynn is not the first person the intelligence community has taken out of Trump's circle of influence. He's the second, at least by Glenn's count.

"Paul Manafort was the first. You remember, Paul Manafort, he has direct relations with some of the worst of the worst in the Dugin/Putin circle. And he was taken out early," Glenn said Wednesday on radio.

So what's going on with the intelligence community?

Jason Buttrill, former military intelligence personnel and current chief researcher for TheBlaze, joined the program to talk about his take on Flynn's removal and what it means for the Trump administration.

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

GLENN: I want to bring us -- I want to bring us to a different level and a different point of view on Russia and the General Flynn story.

I don't want to dwell on "he said, she said" why this is happening. I want to dwell on the facts that we do know.

Flynn is not the first person the intelligence community has taken out of the administration. Flynn is the second. At least by my count.

Paul Manafort was the first. You remember, Paul Manafort, he has direct relations with some of the worst of the worst in the Dugin/Putin circle. And he was taken out early. And that just kind of went away.

Flynn is now -- is now out. And this is the intelligence community hopefully making sure that we're not in bed with the bad guys over in Europe. But I don't know. I don't know exactly what's going on.

We have Jason Buttrill, who is former military intelligence and chief researcher for the program, who we have been working on Dugin and Russia for, how many years?

JASON: Oh, gosh. At least two, three.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Easy. Easy three. Maybe four.

Been watching them and warning against some of the things that are now starting to come out. And so let me just get an update from you on how you read the situation in Washington.

JASON: Well, it's funny. I got a -- I sent a tweet out, I think yesterday, a couple days ago, where I was look, "Good. You know, my boys, the intelligence community, are starting to do their job." And I got a firestorm of tweets coming back form people saying, like, "I find it hard to believe that, you know, some Obama-era appointees are joining forces to undermine Trump."

And I'm like, "No, that's not the issue. That is not the issue." This whole thing started when the intelligence community came to Trump and said, "Look, this is what's going on."

You know, they are -- we have a high probability, using the spy talk, high probability that they are involved in some of the hacking involved with the DNC and the election. There's very high probability.

But what he did was, he was listening to his advisers and said, "I don't care what you're saying. I don't care what you're saying. Basically, we've already got an agenda." Now, his mistake there was you cannot call out the intelligence community and just dismiss it because you have other policy -- you know, avenues that you're chasing. You cannot do that.

So what the intelligence community is doing, it's not because they like Obama or they're Obama appointees. What they're doing is saying, "Okay. Fine." I don't even think they necessarily think it's Trump's fault here. I don't think it is.

I think they're saying, "If you're not going to accept our intelligence, based off of the advisers you have around you, then we are going to specifically target those advisers that are giving you bad information."

This is a good thing. They're actually doing their job. Now, they don't have a responsibility to say, "We pledge unyielding allegiance to this man because he was voted in as president." That's not their job. Their job is to protect the United States and the Constitution. That is their job. And that's exactly what they're doing here. They're systematically targeting the people that are misleading and misguiding the president, and I think we should all be grateful for what they're doing.

GLENN: I am. Because that's the way I read it as well. And I -- like you said, I don't think Trump is involved at this level. I don't think he understands.

Stu and I were talking off the air a few minutes ago. Bannon does. Bannon gave a speech in Rome, where he spoke about Dugin cryptically, but he spoke about Dugin and what's going on, in glowing terms

STU: I wouldn't say it's glowing terms. I mean, he I think was aware of the danger. But overall liked the idea of -- of these movements.

GLENN: Correct. Of burn the place down to rebuild something new.

STU: And so I -- you know, it's worth seeing -- I mean, if you have time, I can tweet it out @worldofStu. But the entire thing is worth reading, if you want to look at the direction. Because Bannon has thought about this stuff for a long time. Unlike Trump who is obviously the public face of this. And, you know, he has real ability to move people and, you know, deal with the media and all those things. Where someone like Steve Bannon has been thinking about these things for a really long time in-depth and has talked about them publicly for a really long time.

So if you want to kind of see where the, you know, the movement is going or where the direction might be going behind the scenes, it's important to understand what he believes.

JASON: Yeah, and it's so important. Like you said, we pointed this out years ago. And at the time, when we pointed this out, they were like, "Who is this crazy guy that Glenn Beck is talking about? You know, this Dugin guy. And why should we care about what's going on in Europe and what Russia is doing over there?" I mean, I advise you to go back and look at some of those shows. They're still on TheBlaze: Red Storm Rising.

Go back and watch those. Because you can see, we pointed out, look, there's this guy named Aleksandr Dugin. He's an adviser to Putin. He's the one that initiated the invasion into Georgia and into the Ukraine. He's the one that was reaching out to all these far right groups over in Europe. And, again, people are like, "Why should we care?"

Well, the speech that Bannon gave, he was using the same exact lingo and language that they're using, that you'll hear Marine Le Pen using. That you'll hear Jobbik in Hungary using. All of these groups that are now -- Bannon was talking about UKIP before UKIP was even popular. This was way beyond Brexit even happened. This is way beyond Trump was even considered an actual legitimate candidate. Way beyond all that stuff. His language is exactly the same that Dugin and his group are using.

Now, during that speech, they were like, well -- and, again, you can hear these in a Dugin speech that was given I think in Hungary back in 2014, they said specifically, "There are things to be taken advantage of. There's movements in the world that we can take advantage of to seize power."

Now, they don't care if it's a far left movement. They don't care if it's a far right movement. They don't care if it's communism -- there's a rebirth of communism that's going to sweep the world. They're looking for a geopolitical advantage.

GLENN: In fact -- in fact, they don't believe in fascism, communism, and capitalism. They don't believe it. They believe there's a fourth way. And in Dugin's words, it is the combination of the best of capitalism, communism, and fascism.

JASON: Which can only happen after the rebirth, after this all burns down.

GLENN: Correct. I mean, it's very apocalyptic. It's very apocalyptic. And when you know that -- when you know that Bannon believes the whole world is going to burn down. You just want to be the guy who is standing there with the plan, you want to ask: What is your plan? What is your plan?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And the plan is not the Constitution. It's not a reset. It is -- and I can't say for Bannon that it's this fourth political theory. But it's not the Founders theory, I can promise you that.

And we have to understand -- I've said this for years. The entire -- the rules and the borders, everything, are all being redrawn. Right now, there are people who are standing in those rooms, looking at the maps and saying, "I'll take this. You take that. You'll do this. I'll do that." Those things are happening.

And best case -- least conspiratorial model is that somebody is around the sanest leaders of the world, and they're saying, "Look, this is what's happening in some of these really dangerous areas. And, look, the banking system is about to collapse. And, look, people have unrest." You know, we might want to pull the plug ourselves. We might want to be the ones that come out and be in front of this thing because maybe we'll be able to control the events as they begin to unfold. That never works. But you would be disappointed if somebody wasn't having that conversation with the president of the United States. They are doing those things now. And unfortunately, this is why, you know, Jason has said the -- the intelligence community is doing their job. They're taking bad guys away from the president.

Now, are they really away from the president? We asked this question with Van Jones. Or do they become more powerful?

JASON: I'm -- I'm concerned.

GLENN: Your mic just went off for some reason. I don't know why. Can we get mics to work in here? It's worried. It's only a national show.

STU: Shake it or something.

GLENN: The other thing I really want to talk about on this -- no, it's not working. Jeffy, could you --

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: -- give a microphone again.

The -- the -- the other thing is, Bannon is trying currently to get -- I think is trying to get rid of Reince Priebus.

STU: That is the -- I mean, when you start seeing, we have White House sources at Breitbart who are saying, "You know who needs to go is Reince Priebus." Where do you think that's coming?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Inside sources say that Reince Priebus is not -- is next to go because there's real problems and internal squabbling over Reince.

Well, where do you think that inside source is?

STU: The guy who used to run the website, potentially.

GLENN: Yeah, I mean, maybe it would be that guy.

STU: Or one of his underlings. He has several that he's brought over there.

GLENN: Right. I mean, so the next target of the Bannon crew seems to be Reince Priebus.

GLENN: Now your mic is still not working. Please, for the love of God.

PAT: You need to turn it on.

STU: He got a new mic by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, it should be on.

STU: Yeah. Still not working?

GLENN: Tell you what, we're going to take a break. And then we're going to try this new microphone thing out.

STU: I mean, is it just possible that the audience all kind of mentally voted and they didn't want to hear more from Jason?

GLENN: It could be. It is possible.

STU: Is it possible. Okay. Okay. Good.

SHOCKING: You Need HOW MUCH Money to “Live Comfortably” in Each State?!
RADIO

SHOCKING: You Need HOW MUCH Money to “Live Comfortably” in Each State?!

With inflation still on the rise, Glenn and Stu review another shocking number: how much money you need to “live comfortably” in America. The numbers have gone through the roof and it’s no surprise that the most expensive states are blue states. Thanks to inflation, a single adult now needs to make over $100,000 a year in order to live comfortably in many states. So, can you afford your state?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So there's a new number out now, on what it costs to live in the United States of America. It's a little higher than it used to be.

And I -- I don't know if anybody has noticed they're having a hard time making ends meet.

Comfortable to live comfortably is defined as the monthly income, needed to cover a 50/30/20 budget, which allocates 50 percent of your earnings for necessities like housing and utility costs, 30 percent for discretionary spending, and 20 percent for savings or investments.

STU: Wow. I don't think a lot of people are living like that.

GLENN: Nobody is living like that. Nobody is living like that.

STU: That -- but wait. Percent of what? If you're making $10 million. You know. What is it -- you don't need to have a 50/30/20 lifestyle to live comfortably, right?

GLENN: Right. Right.

They're saying this is the minimum. This is what it takes to, you know, live comfortably. In America.

STU: So -- this is not talking about -- I think Jeff Bezos is pretty good. I don't think he needs an article.

STU: You're saying, they're basically reverse engineering the number you need to hit that. Is that what you're saying?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

Okay. All right? Jeez.

STU: I was trying to understand.

GLENN: Here they are.

Most costly states: Massachusetts. $116,000.

STU: Hard-core conservative state.

GLENN: Hawaii. You'll see this a lot. Hawaii, 113.

STU: Another conservative -- red state.

GLENN: California, 113.

STU: Big red state there.

GLENN: New York, 111.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: I'm rounding out the top. Topping out the top five is Washington State, with 106.

STU: Another big red state. That's amazing. So $100,000, and you cannot live comfortably.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: That's incredible.

GLENN: Okay. Now, to live comfortably in these states, you need to earn double what most single earners typically make. The median income for a single full-time worker is around $60,000. The national median for living comfortably is $89,000.

So there's a shortage there.

STU: And those are statewide numbers to point out. It's a lot worse in these cities.

Like, there was a time. I don't know this is eight to ten years old now.

When I remember looking at this. They gave you these guide lines, what you need to earn to buy an average home in the market. In the market of San Francisco, the -- several of the players on the roster of the San Francisco giants, did not earn enough money, to buy the average home.

GLENN: It's crazy.

STU: In the market.

GLENN: So let me go through this. Alabama, to live comfortably, $83,000.

Alaska, $96,000.

And I don't know if that's ever -- I don't know if you're ever comfortable living in Alaska, unless you can change the climate completely.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

Arizona, $97,000. Arkansas, 79

STU: Gosh.

GLENN: California, 113. Colorado, 103. Connecticut, 100. Delaware, 94. Florida, 93.

Think of that. In Florida, it's 93. In Colorado, it's 100. Georgia, 96. Hawaii, 113. Idaho, 88. Illinois, 95. Indiana, 85. Iowa, 83. Kansas, 84. Kentucky, 80. Louisiana, 82. Maine, 91.

Why? Bear traps? Maryland.

STU: That's a northeast state.

GLENN: Maryland, 102. Massachusetts, 116. Michigan, 84. Minnesota, 89. Mississippi, 82. Missouri, 84. Montana, 84. Nebraska, 83.

STU: A lot of these -- these are like the bargain basement states. You are having $85,000 to live comfortably.

GLENN: I know. Yeah.

STU: That's just putting away some money for retirement. That's not living -- you're not flying private.

GLENN: I know. Yeah, but you're not living paycheck to paycheck. If you would live that way. If you would do 50/30/20.

STU: Right. Right.

GLENN: Nevada, 93.

Nobody does that. Do you know anybody who is young, that put 20 percent of their salary away for savings?

STU: Depends what you mean by young. As you're starting out, you're just trying to make it, pay your bills. As you get older, you're trying to put some money away.

GLENN: 20 percent?

STU: It's hard to do.

GLENN: Really hard to do. Nevada, 93.

STU: By the way, 50/20/30. What are the taxes on this one? This is post-tax revenue, I assume.

GLENN: Yeah. Where are the taxes?

STU: Another 30 is going to taxes. So which part of it are you taking out?

GLENN: That's why nobody saves. New Hampshire, 98. New Jersey, 103. To live in New Jersey. New Mexico, 83. New York, 111. North Carolina, 89. North Dakota, 52.

STU: North Dakota. This is -- this is hwy people go to the Dakotas, I suppose. It's --

GLENN: Is it worth Dakota, though? You don't even have the presidential thing on the mountain, that Dakota.

STU: That's true. Was that the Doug Burgum state?

GLENN: Yes, it is. Fifty-two.

STU: You got those eyebrows. They are kind of like -- on the Mount Rushmore of eyebrows. I don't know if that counts.

GLENN: Ohio, 80. Oklahoma, 80. Oregon, 101.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Pennsylvania, 91. Rhode Island, 100. Oh, my gosh, for Rhode Island!

South Carolina, 88. South Dakota, 81. Tennessee, 86. Texas, 87. Utah, 93. Vermont, 95.
Virginia, 99. Washington, 106. West Virginia, 78.
That's a state you could live in. Wisconsin, 84. Wyoming, 87.

Wow.

STU: First of all, the red and blue state is -- I don't know if it's perfect. It's darn close to perfect, as far as the difference is.

GLENN: It is. It is.

STU: You look at that, and you think -- it wasn't that long ago, that we would say, oh, my gosh, nap guy is earning six figures. Doing really well.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: That's just not even doing really well.

GLENN: No.

STU: It's the way you're supposed to plan for your future. And now you need to earn six figures, in most states. Or at least close to most states.

GLENN: And it's going to get worse. That's the problem. It will get worse.

How will companies be able to keep up with it? How is that going to happen?

GLENN: The presses.
STU: Yeah. But eventually, people can't afford to produce the products that people want, and people can't afford to buy the products that they need.

STU: I mean, you just recited the slogan for Bidenomics. That's exactly --

GLENN: Yes, I did. Starts bottom up. Bottom up. First people to be heard.

The bottom. And eventually, it's heard all the way up.

The -- in another remarkable story, the IMF has come out and said, that Biden has got to stop money.

Printing money, and spending money.

The International Monetary Fund, sounded the alarm on the Biden administration's rampant spending as, quote, out of line with what is needed for long-term fiscal stability.

STU: No!

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: What? It feels like it's right in line with the exact -- what you're supposed to do with each budget is spend trillions of dollars than you have.

I thought that's the way you're supposed to be fiscally responsible. What is the 50, 30, 20 number for the United States right now? It's like 80, 50, zero. Eighty, 50, negative 30. Right?

That's what we're doing. The savings is negative 30 percent of the budget. We're spending mandatories, like 80 percent of what we have. Then there's another 50 percent discretionary. It's insanity. And we're getting to the point very soon. Just the interest on the money already spent will be more than our entire defense budget.

GLENN: We will have to borrow over a trillion dollars a year, just for the interest.

STU: My God.

GLENN: I mean, this is unsustainable.

And I really don't understand, why more people can't see this.

STU: You keep seeing this word.

I don't think it means what you think it means.

What Would Happen if Israel RETALIATED Against Iran's Missile Attack?
RADIO

What Would Happen if Israel RETALIATED Against Iran's Missile Attack?

Iran’s attack against Israel made barely any impact (despite what Iran is telling its people). But will Israel strike back? It has the right to, and many Israeli leaders seem to want to, but SHOULD it? Glenn and Stu discuss whether it’s worth risking World War III, or whether Iran is too weak to do anything else.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So let's just recap what we know now, what happened over the weekend with the Iranian attack on Israel. First of all, the Iran state TV used footage from the Texas fire. Also, there was footage of One Direction.

STU: The band?

GLENN: The band. And it was Israelis, panicking while under attack while under missiles and drones. Unfortunately, it was just a throng of excited One Direction fans.

STU: Wow, the fact that those things look the same, may make you rethink things if you're a One Direction fan.

GLENN: It really does. They also use a picture of a forest fire in Chile. So, you know, they're running all kinds of lies. I don't know if their people understand that they really made no impact at all.

STU: I'm kind of -- look, I kind of hope -- this is weird. I kind of hope they are able to convince their people, that they made an impact.
Because maybe this will somewhat calm down.

GLENN: So the president boasted the attack had, quote, taught a lesson to the Zionist regime. They were chanting with their fists in the air, death to Israel. Death to America. Yay. And Hezbollah supporters were out in the streets, of southern Beirut, honking their horns and celebrating.

And they warned that Jordan would be the next target, if it took any measures in Israel's defense.

So everybody is just like holding back.

Except for Israel. Now, my goals may not be the same goals, as the Israelis. My interests are, let's not have any terrorism here in America.

And let's try to bring peace to the world.

Israel has played this game for so long. They're not going to sit back. At least the word we're getting from their -- their war committee, was that it was a brawl.

The defense minister stated yesterday, that Israel's confrontation with Iran is not over yet.

The public security minister demanded a crushing attack, against Iran. Another minister, declared Iran's audacity in such an attack, must be erased.

Meanwhile, Iran's mission to the UN said, should the Israeli regime make another mistake. Iran's response will be considerably more severe.

And warned the US to stay away. Okay. I don't know what they can do with their -- their missiles. Quite honestly.

I think it was embarrassing. If that were us, well, that would be us. Because Joe Biden is in charge. Maybe Joe Biden helped them with planning of this mission. But that were us. That would be humiliating.

Absolutely humiliating.

And, I mean, it's the -- wouldn't you say, it was the most lopsided thing you have seen, possibly ever? With the amount that they fought back?

STU: Yeah. It goes back to a couple of examples. The first gulf war.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Remember that.

GLENN: Except they fought back. And they did hit targets. This one hit -- they say three -- the outside is ten. That they hit ten -- that missiles hit ten things. They fired over 300.

STU: 300, right. The other one that comes to mind. The way we reacted in Afghanistan, when the Taliban started taking it over again. We kind of just all ran. And that -- that seemed -- that was embarrassing. I was embarrassing that way. The way I think Iran should be embarrassed this way. That's if their intent is to actually get a lot of damage. Look, we have an alternate theory. We talked about it yesterday.

They floated a bunch of flying lawn mowers over there. With 12 hours notice for a reason.

To say, hey. Shoot all these town.

We don't want to start an international war. If we don't do something in our country. Our people will overthrow us.

GLENN: So you're sitting in Israel.

And I say, Stu. What are you going to do? Now, you're an Israeli.

You're in the defense cabinet. And I say, what are you going to do?

Because the whole world hates us right now?

And if we retaliate, then we're in trouble. Should we just walk away and call this thing?

GLENN: Again, there's so much to weigh here. And I'm an idiot. But I will tell you, my initial instinct is, you have a free hall pass to --

GLENN: No. No. No. No. Your first impression is you're an to it. I just don't want that to get lost.

STU: The second impression was --

GLENN: The first one was, again --

STU: I'm an idiot. Number two. And I should not be making these decisions for any nation. We should be clear about that. That's not a good policy, because I'm an idiot.

GLENN: Sure. You're an idiot. You could work for the Biden administration.

STU: I will say, maybe I should leave the country. This one here, because it seems that's the path to success these days.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: But I will say, what my thought would be, is you have a free hall pass to do another Syria type of operation. Right?

You can -- of course, are justified. If I was an Israeli, you would be justified to launch at least 300 missiles towards Iran. You're justified morally to do so.

However, what I would like to do is tamp this down, so it doesn't inflame into something worse. If you were are to do something like they did in Syria. Where you took over some important, overseas. Not in Iran. Type of operation. That would actually benefit you.

Not like as a show of power or strength. If you're Israel, you don't need to do that. What you need to do is do something that would actually benefit you.

And I think it would be difficult for the world to be all that upset.

If you went and did another operation like that.

GLENN: I forgot.

I was going to say, no. No. No.

STU: That's a smart answer for an idiot.

GLENN: I forgot you were an idiot. It would be tough for the world to say.

You remember, you're a Jew here.

STU: Right. So they --

GLENN: They can say whatever they want.

STU: They can say whatever they want.

GLENN: They're always the pad guy.

STU: But there is a line.

The world wasn't overly outraged about the Syria operation in the first place.

Iran was.

And everyone was talking about what their response would be.

No one was like, oh, gosh. I can't believe they did that.

Some people did, of course.

Look, there was 150 countries, that voted not -- that voted to condemn Israel, over the whole Gaza situation.

And when given the opportunity, I think it was Austria, that proposed an amendment that said, hey. Shouldn't we condemn Hamas for October 7th in this thing?

Ask they voted no.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Of course, they said no to that.

At some level, you can't care at all, what some of these countries think.

They will just think, Jew equals bad.

But I think to not make this go over the top. And flame out of control.

And also, get and done, that you're completely justified for. And will benefit for your country.

If you can walk that line. If there's another target like that. That seems highly justified and appropriate.

What do you think? You're not an idiot, right? You're a doctor.

GLENN: I'm a doctor, so I'm not an idiot.

STU: Do you notice this? Does anyone in the audience, even notice he does this? He asks these tough questions, and he never gives his own answer. It's pathetic.

GLENN: Because I'm trying to move the show. I'm trying to move the show.

STU: Move the --

GLENN: See, you don't want me. You don't want me anywhere near the buttons of any -- for any country.

Because we would run out of missiles quickly.

Because I have -- I have a short attention span.

And I also have a short fuse. It would be like, hmm. They did what.

Yeah. Launch.

I would be over there, saying, the world is going to hate us, anyway. They're building a nuclear weapon supply.

We know now what they're capable of doing from the sky. That's great. But if they get a nuclear weapon over our border, any way, shape, or form.

Millions will die.

And we know they're serious. And the rest of the world, can say whatever they want. But take up out their nuclear facilities.

STU: In country.

GLENN: In country.

STU: Look, he's been wanting to do it for a long time. And I think that's entirely justified.

GLENN: He has to. He has to.

No one in the world will do it, until he ignites one of those things.

STU: That is true. It probably does extend this though, right?

That's the risk.

GLENN: Oh. It's going to --

STU: Netanyahu has been wanting to do this forever, and I think has been looking for an opening to do it.

GLENN: Justifiably so.

STU: Justifiably so. Again, I'm not being critical. If I were Israeli. I think probably I would be for a much more aggressive response.

GLENN: Enough is enough.

STU: But I'm not. And I'm -- I'm thinking more selfishly frankly as an American.

GLENN: Yeah. Me too. Me on top.

STU: I think that's appropriate for us to do. America first is a dumb sort of slogan, but also very true.

It's also misused by many factions over the years.

GLENN: Yeah. Correct.

STU: But, I mean, it is the appropriate priority list for the United States.

GLENN: If you're going to take care of somebody, you don't swamp the lifeboats. That is what we're doing with our border. We're swamping the lifeboats.

How had we help anybody, if we can't help ourselves?

How will we help anybody, if we're fighting terror here?

I don't want terror here. But we've already swamped the lifeboats with a whole bunch of terrorists, apparently that are already here.

But we're not doing anything about it. So my America first kind of has to go to, let Israel do what Israel cares to do.

They can handle it. They're big boys. They can handle it. We'll handle our thing over here.

Now, with that being said. I know that Iran will not let us get away with that.

Iran will immediately activity. They're already activating the people. Who do you think. Hamas is paid for by the Iranians. So when you're in New York City. And you're holding a Hamas flag, you are doing the bidding of the Iranians.

So they're already here. And it's coming. And I would like to delay it, quite honestly, as long as possible.

But, you know, let Israel be Israel.

By the way, we have a news from Israel's Channel 12 News. They carried a report, that the country's Air Force, which includes US-made 16s, fifteens, and F-35s are already gearing up to deliver a retaliatory counterstrike against Iran.

According to the report, the strike will be intended as a message that Israel will not allow an attack of that magnitude, to pass without reaction.

That's actually good. That's a good reaction from them. Because doesn't that sound limited?

I'm just looking for happy things.

Turning rocks. Oh, no. That's a friendly worm. That's a friendly bug.

The strike intended a message, Israel will not allow an attack of that magnitude, to pass without a reaction.

You’ll NEVER GUESS Who’s Behind the "Free Palestine" Bridge-Blocking Protests
RADIO

You’ll NEVER GUESS Who’s Behind the "Free Palestine" Bridge-Blocking Protests

“Free Palestine” protesters connected to the group “A15 Action” recently blocked roads and even the Golden Gate Bridge to demand the America stop supporting Israel. This caused Glenn and Stu to wonder if there has ever been ONE person whose mind was changed by these kind of disruptive protests. Glenn also reveals that this group is far from “grassroots.” You’ll never guess who is paying for the bail and legal fund for A15 Action...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The free Palestinian protesters.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Love them.

STU: They're doing a great job out there. In the streets. Blocking airport access for people.

GLENN: Bridges. Bridges.

If I were in San Francisco traffic. And I had to use the Golden Gate Bridge, and you blocked it, I would be having great thoughts about you.

You could be there and saying, you know, we love Jesus. We love Jesus. And by the end, by the time I got home, I think I might hate Jesus, because of you. You know what I mean?

I'm serious. It's the fastest way to turn me against you, is to block me from going home.

STU: Right. And I mean this sincerely. Has there ever been an example of this tactic working?

Has any person, in history, ever been convinced by not being able to access the thing that they wanted to go to?

Gosh, you know, I was really pro-Israel. And then I got stuck in traffic for eight hours. And now I love the Palestinian cause. Has that ever occurred?

GLENN: No. No.

But here's the good news.

They are being arrested.

And they're being immediately released.

Yeah, because there's somebody stepping in to give them bail money.

And legal support.

Yes. Yes, so it is. Come on. Come on. Come on. Guess. Guess. Guess.

Come on.

STU: Kamala Harris.

GLENN: No. That's too obvious.

STU: Kamala. Tweeting. Tried to bail out criminals.

GLENN: Yeah. But not this time.

STU: Thanks, Kamala.

STU: More obvious?

GLENN: Yeah. More obvious.

STU: George Soros.

GLENN: George Soros.

STU: We figured it out.

GLENN: George Soros is bailing people out. Now, who would have seen this coming?

The protest which took place in dozens of US cities, including San Francisco, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, were organized by A15 Action. A newly formed group, that worked to coordinate, a multi-city economic blockade, on April 15th in solidarity with Palestine.

You know, I really -- I forgot, you're blocking me, from going home on tax day. That makes me even more favorable to your point of view.

STU: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: The group's website, directs users to bail and legal defense fund, hosted through Act Blue, the Democratic Party's online funding juggernaut. Those who donate to the fund, the Act Blue page said, are sending money to the community justice exchange, which provides money, bail, court fees, and fines and other legal services to community-based organizations that contest the current operation and function of the criminal, legal, and immigration detention systems.

Oh, my gosh!

The exchange is the project of? Come on. Come on. You've got George Soros.

Come on. Who else is in there? What organization? Come on.

STU: Open Society.

GLENN: Oh, that's good. That's good.

Think bigger. Think bigger. What do they start?

STU: Oh, gosh.

GLENN: The Tides Foundation. Yes. The Tides Foundation.

It's a network funded by Soros and other liberal billionaires. The protesters, who organize the global event, under the title A15. Targeted economic choke points, with the express purpose of causing as much financial disruption as possible, according to their website.

You know, that's the kind of thing I really want to be involved in. I go to the websites. And I'm like, I don't know.

How can we inflict as much damage on this country, fiscally as possible? And then I realized, I've already done my part. I voted for people in Congress.

And so, really, that's all you have to do. There's nobody that can do more damage that than people in the House and the Senate.

That's why I don't protest. Anyway, the A15 protesters on Wall Street, were photographed wearing Hamas bandanas and flying Hezbollah flags.

STU: But they're just -- Glenn, they're just --

GLENN: They're for the people.

STU: A humanitarian cause.

GLENN: Absolutely.

STU: That happens to also.

GLENN: Problem with the Hezbollah flag.

STU: Right. Hamas. Hezbollah. They seem like wonderful people.

GLENN: Banks located to the protests were vandalized with red stray paint and graffiti that read, funder of genocide, and free Gaza. Those protesters later blocked the Brooklyn bridge. Which is one of my favorite bridges to block.

STU: Oh, really? See, I only like to get the Brooklyn bridge.

I like to sit in traffic on the Brooklyn bridge, for 12 to 15 hours.

For climate-related purposes.

I like the bridge for Gaza purposes.

GLENN: Yeah. I do really want to know. Those people who are Gluing themselves to freeways and things.

Because whatever. I don't listen to you. I just look at you, as a moron. So I don't really check in on you what you're protesting for.

STU: I am of the opposite.

I will absolutely oppose anything that you're doing.

If you are -- if you're Free Gaza. I'm going to -- if I was pro-Palestinian, I think I would flip my viewpoint just based on the fact that I was sitting in traffic.

GLENN: Well, see, I don't look. Because I never think it's anything I'm for already.

STU: It never is. More capitalism!

That never happens.

GLENN: It's not like, I'm gluing myself to the freeway because I like steaks.

No. Not happening.

STU: No. You're right. That's true.

And I don't think it's any secret of their success. Right?

The left does a lot of things strategically that I think are -- are -- I don't want to say admirable. But like things that are -- if conservatives can benefit from learning a little bit from, at times. Not necessarily, certainly not the ends.

And some of their tactics are down right evil. Some of them are smart. They message things well, at times. There are certain things they do.

You can look at. This is not one of those tactics, I won't want to keep up.

You're taking -- you're taking life, and you're making it bad for the people you're trying to convince. This is the opposite of what you're supposed to do.

GLENN: Okay. Let me just point out. How do you learn that lesson, when you've burnt cities to the ground?

STU: Yeah. And everybody in the city is like, I support you. I don't think they did, though. Did they?

Even in Minneapolis, the defund the police thing, died on the vibe. None of this stuff has worked.

Like, there are certain parts of the movement, right?

That have occurred. I think you can even look at those. I don't remember anyone blocking streets for gay marriage.

Right?

I don't remember that. They worked, they tried to persuade people over a long period of time. And were successful.

GLENN: Be really hard to not just step on the gas.

I saw a guy who was trapped by these people. And someone glued themselves to the freeway in Germany or something.

Don't piss the Germans off. Man, don't do it. Especially if they're driving a Volkswagen. Hello!

But, anyway, he was -- the guy was trying to get through, and these people were sitting there. And one of them was glued. And he just kept going. And they were like, what are you doing? You're trying to kill us. And he's like, no. Just trying to get through.

And -- and he did almost kill one of them. But he got through. He got through.

And, you know, I didn't have a lot of sympathy for the people that were glued to the streets. And maybe that was just me. But I don't know how they expect this to work. Other than causing real damage. Kind of like Occupy Wall Street. I don't know. Did it work? Did it work?

I contend it did.

STU: You think Occupy Wall Street worked?

GLENN: Uh-huh. Why did they go away? Why did they go away?

STU: They kept raping each other all over the place. Lots of rapes.

GLENN: Lots of rapes. Lots of bad things. Why didn't they go away all of a sudden?

They had everything. They had the media on their side. They had Hollywood on their side. They had everybody on their side. What happened?

It's almost, I'm going to go out on a limb here. It's almost as if the big banks. And all the big corporations got together and said, look, just leave us alone.

Like me, I always joke. Someone comes into my house.

Just leave me alone. You can do whatever you want to the wife and children. Just leave me alone.

It's almost what they get, I think. Look, just leave I say alone.

Why did their funding of all of these things that BLM, and the extreme left was all about?

Why did they start funding all of those things coincidentally, just about the time that Occupy Wall Street left?

Why?

Leave us alone.

And we'll fund you. Leave us alone, and we'll help you.

I think that's what happened. So when you say, well, gluing them themselves to the streets.

I don't know. I don't know. Except, they're blocking I, now. And not the big bankers.

And I'm not sure you have anything they want, besides, oh, I don't know. Oh, everything of yours.

Will Iran’s Attack on Israel Lead to NUCLEAR WAR?
RADIO

Will Iran’s Attack on Israel Lead to NUCLEAR WAR?

Over the weekend, Iran launched over 300 missiles and drones at Israel. But in a response that could only be seen as “miraculous,” Israel’s defense systems neutralized 99% of the attack. However, the world might have been a very different place if even a third of those missiles had hit their targets. Former Department of Defense intelligence analyst Jason Buttrill joins Glenn to lay out just how close we were to global nuclear war. So, is there still a chance that this will lead to World War III? Will Israel retaliate? And can Iran even respond a second time? The guys break it all down.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So yesterday, Israel, Iran attacked over the weekend, and it was a significant attack.

JASON: Yeah. You know that scene in war games, where it shows all these missiles. That's what it looked like. It was insane. 350 missiles. Missiles drones. All that. It was --

GLENN: So significant attack. They are launching the missiles, some of them into space. Did we get the video in yet?

JASON: Should.

GLENN: Of the -- what do they call this? The C Dome? I think.

They have the Iron Dome.

JASON: Oh, it's it is Arrow System.

GLENN: Watch this. Watch this. If you're watching TheBlaze. There.

STU: Fireworks.

GLENN: That is -- I feel like a million voices were all screaming and then suddenly silenced. That is a hit in space.

JASON: Exoatmospheric.

GLENN: So that's the Arrow system, going up out of the atmosphere into space, and hitting a missile as it's starting to come back in.

I mean, it's one of the most incredible things I've ever seen. And I think this is the first time it was ever captured on film, right?

JASON: This was the third interception in space. The others were last year, when the Houthis launched Iranian missiles against Israel. So just the weapon technology involved this weekend is nuts.

GLENN: So 99 percent, 99 percent of these missiles will tell you what was going on, but the biggest thing you need to know is, we could have very easily been in World War III today.

I think because of the Arrow missile system, which is a joint project between us and Israel, that really, truly saved the day. If these 300 missiles would have struck the ground, it would have been world war.

Absolutely world war.

JASON: Oh, if a quarter of these missiles actually got through. We're having a completely different conversation right now.

GLENN: Please tell us we have the Arrow system here.

JASON: I don't think we do. It was the second half of the development for that. So it's also an American.

We have dibs on it. We have our own system that is kind of pre-deployed on naval ships all around the world, so we do have the same capability.

GLENN: That's the Aegis System, right? That's not shooting things from in space.

JASON: It is. I don't remember. There's two parts of it. I don't remember the second part of it.

GLENN: The Aegis System on ships, is just a buttload of bullets, coming out.

I mean, it's just -- it's just round after round. Big butt of bullets.

JASON: Yeah. It's called a BLB. Buttload of bullets. Military technology.

GLENN: Yeah.

JASON: It was more than just the Arrow system. To try to get the scope of this. You have to look at the graphic of this. Submitted. Of where all this ordinance was coming from.

Yemen. Iraq. Iran. Lebanon. All converging on multiple different fronts. All down on Israel.

They have a three-pronged system. The further one out, is the arrow two and three system.

GLENN: That's the one shooting in space.

JASON: That's the one that can reach up and touch you in space. The second one is David's Sling. That shoots lower -- yeah, I know. They have such cooler names than ours does. That shoots like cruise missiles or like missiles that are flying low to the ground. And then you have the Iron Dome, which everyone is talking about.

All of those things were firing all at once, going on over the weekend. But you also had Israeli planes, going up and firing on cruise missiles, way the heck out there. Then you had US planes, and planes from the UK.

All of this converging in the skies, over the weekend.

GLENN: So is it that Iran's missiles suck so much?

Or is this as amazing as it sounds?

JASON: It's as amazing as it sounds.

So these are current generation weaponry that we're talking about. Iran is exporting some of this weaponry, giving it to Russia, to Russia can attack Ukraine. This is amazing.

99 percent success rate, does not happen. It doesn't. So, I mean, granted there was great technology here.

But I think there's some God work going on as well.

GLENN: I was going to say, isn't there Scriptures, when the whole world goes to attack.

That God just protects. It's like a dome over Israel.

JASON: Yeah. Yeah. It was so effective, that I think that Iran probably is rethinking some of their first strike strategy against Israel.

Now, you know they've all gamed this out.

And I'm sure, part of this attack, that goes into their plans. Like, they know that they want to take out Israel. If they had to, what do they need?

Well, they threw everything, but the ayatollah's kitchen sink at Israel oar the weekend.

GLENN: I think I was flying. I think I saw does that hit the ground.

JASON: They probably used that too.

GLENN: With the disposal, which is weird.

So if you would have had one of these nuclear-tipped. It -- I mean, so you -- so all of that work for a nuclear weapon. You ain't going to deposit it through a missile. Right?

Wouldn't that be the message that Iran would get?

JASON: You're not now.

Yeah. I don't. This sent Iraq back, I'm sure. Probably several years, as far as whatever their eventually goal is.

And that right there, is the problem. Because we know, they won't stop. So when you're saying, you know, when everyone is like pleading with her.

When Biden was pleading with Bibi over the weekend, to don't retaliate. On the one hand, I'm like, yeah.

Because I don't want to see the Middle East completely change overnight.

GLENN: It's not just that.

If they retaliate, Iran has the ability to set Europe and America on fire in the streets. And that's only a matter of time, before it happens. But I don't know.

I would like to delay it as long as possible.

JASON: But if you're Israel. Look at the overall picture here.

They're surrounding them. Look at the graphic of where all the missiles are coming from.

Israel is surrounded.

The strategy now. International community. Israel just keep your walls.

Just keep your walls up, and you will be safe. When has that ever worked, in military history?

Never. Constantinople. Greece. Troy. Pick your time. Your walls are an illusion. They will keep you safe, for a limited amount of time. But the eventual goal of an invading army is to topple those walls. That's Iran's plan.

So how long do you delay? And if they decide -- and Iran says, they're not delaying anymore. That is when the entire region changes forever.

They've been playing this little proxy war for 40 years.

GLENN: This is the first time, that they have, not used a proxy. Right? No proxy, it was Iran.

And so I saw -- and honestly, I thank God, that we are pausing at least. You know what I mean?

Because this will escalate into a world war that fast.

Just, everything in me says, once the Middle East is set on fire, Russia and Ukraine, and everything else, it's just going to be you. Just dominoes.

Because if the Middle East is on fire, and Iran is losing, which they would.

They're just setting all of our countries on fire, you know, internally.

So I was glad to see the pause. However, I was a little disturbed, that the news came out from the White House. Because that should have come out from the Prime Minister's office in Israel. But instead, Joe Biden calls Bibi Netanyahu. Who apparently, the war ministry, all voted to retaliate. And then Joe Biden called and said, hey. We won't support you.

Tonight -- don't do it. Don't retaliate. That's what the White House is saying, and so Bibi changed his mind. Well, gee. Thanks for backing me into a corner. I mean, it might be a corner I like to be in. But that's not the way you deal with an ally, is it?

JASON: No. How they're dealing with this all across-the-board, is what you're not supposed to do. This attack happened because of the Biden administration's overall foreign policy in the Middle East.

GLENN: You think?

JASON: When you refuse to stand up to their proxy, Hamas. When you coddle them as they have, things like this happen. When you give billions of dollars back to Iran. When you try to go back into the JCPO, nuclear agreement with them. When you're doing everything possible, to say, let's play nice. Let's play nice. When you have refused to stand up to a bully, this is the type of crap that happens. And I'm not saying that we go off and militarily attack them. There is a formula for dealing with this.

It was actually working. The Abraham Accords are happening. When you abandon them. This is the kind of crap that happens.

GLENN: But when you're having the possibility of Trump getting back in, and quelling all of this. I just want to make it to, you know, January, in case he wins. If he doesn't win, I mean, we're just going to keep seeing more and more of this.

You're right. It is our policies. We are weak. We don't command any respect. And honestly, we're on the other side.

We're giving money to Iran. So our tax dollars went to Iran. And to Israel.

So you could feel good on April 15th today. You paid for both sides of this.

STU: What do you guys make of the really strange way this all unfolded.

It was like, hey! Drones are going to be there in a few hours. They're all coming.

GLENN: I think that is. That is -- and correct me if I'm wrong, Jason.

You would know more than I would.

I think that was the signal from Iran.

Hey. We're going to do this.

STU: Right.

GLENN: We're going to -- because otherwise, you surprise.

Hey, surprise!

But they let Israel.

STU: Israel did.

GLENN: Yeah. They telegraphed it. Let Israel know.

Prepare your people for this. And then we will stop.

And that gives -- that gives the Israelis an opportunity to say, okay.

Well, we stopped you. Don't do it again.

STU: Because their statement right after. Hey. By the way, that's the end of this.

Wait until you know. That's what we're doing.

The matter is settled.

JASON: Concluded.

STU: Yeah. They're trying to say to our people. Hey. We did something.

To Israel, hey, we told you it was coming. You blocked it all.

Let's just call it a draw. Now, Israel, of course, gets the win here. They wiped out important military officials, and people they really wanted to target in Syria.

And they stopped the entire attack from Iran.

I mean, it's a massive escalation. No way of denying that. Maybe there's a chance for us to avoid a real inflammation of our entire region.

GLENN: I think we did. I think we did.

STU: You think it's over? Netanyahu said, it's going back for years.

GLENN: It's going to go back to terror now. The missiles are over.

STU: I mean, Netanyahu said, he wants to basically go after Iran directly.

He believes they're doing all this --

GLENN: Wow, they are the head of the state. They are the problem.

STU: It's true.

JASON: It's all up to Israel's response now.

GLENN: So you don't believe. So you don't believe, they are finished. Because -- according to the White House. They're done.

JASON: I think that's what Israel is juggling right now. Because it was heavily telegraphed. Iran told Turkey they were going to do this attack. And Turkey transmitted it to us.

GLENN: Let me take a quick break. And then I want to come back. Because I want to lack at this from the Israeli point of view.

I'm in addition they're stopped.

But if I'm an Israeli, I'm like, go get them now.

They've just blown everything that they have most likely. Let's go get them, while they're weak. We can overthrow them.