Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcast
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2022 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live
GLENNApril 13, 2017

Glenn Speaks With Father of Boy Removed From Home by CPS

Camden Maple is a seven-year-old boy described as “energetic and intelligent” by his parents. However, officials at his public school believe Camden's rambunctious behavior makes him mentally unstable and in need of medication for Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). His parents wholeheartedly disagree, saying he's above grade level and gets easily bored with the school curriculum.

Following a series of disagreements between the parents and school administrators, Camden was forcibly removed from his home by Child Protective Services and local police. He spent nearly a month away from his family before being returned last night. Chris Maple, Camden's father, joined Glenn on radio Thursday to talk about the ordeal he and his family have been through --- and the battle they are still fighting.

Learn more about Camden's situation on the family's Go Fund Me page --- and donate to help ease their legals fees should you feel inclined.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: You feel small and insignificant, don't. I've got something that will actually -- you can sink your teeth into and make a big difference.

If you're a parent, so you know, government agencies and school, they know what's best for your children. A lot of parents are under the illusion that they know how to handle their families and make their own decisions. But father doesn't know best anymore. Apparently, the State knows best, at least in Ohio. In Lebanon, Ohio, a government agency ironically named Child Protective Services has removed a 7-year-old boy from his family and his home. The boy's name is Camden Maple.

Camden is what you would expect from a 7-year-old boy. His parents, dad, Christian, stepmom, Katie, describe him as rambunctious, intelligent, and creative. The administrators at Camden school describe him differently. They say he has ADHD and requires a mental health examination.

In February, Camden was called into the principal's office for disrupting class. According to his stepmom, Camden told the school counselor, quote, he was upset because he felt he was bad and wanted to erase himself from the earth.

The counselor asked Camden how he would do that, he said he would stab himself in the eye with a knife, end quote.

Camden's dad, Christian, immediately came to the school. Picked Camden up. Christian and Katie did exactly what I would have done with my kid. I would have sat down with him, had a long discussion about his behavior, evaluated him myself.

If we had any doubt, we would go to a doctor. Camden said, "No, I don't want to hurt myself. I was just upset. And, quite honestly, just trying to get a rise out of the counselor."

They dealt with it as a family. They believed they could handle the situation. And they moved on. But the story was just getting started. The next day, the Maples got a call from the school. The school was following up on their suggestion that Camden be taken to the hospital for a mental health examination.

The Maples were like, "No, we handled it. It's okay. We got it." The matter was closed.

No. The school refused to let go. Thanks, likely to some protocol handed down from some genius progressive bureaucrat that knows better, they had already badgered the Maples for a very long time about getting Camden diagnosed with ADHD and get him on some medication. The parents didn't want to do that.

Now the school wanted to know what was said during the parents' discussion with Camden.

The Maples said, "That's a private family matter. We dealt with it. And that's the end of it."

Well, the idea that a parent knows what's best for their kid does not sit well with people in school now. That's ludicrous.

The Maples say Camden made very good grades, finishes his classwork before most of his classroom, gets bored. And, yes, he does act out. He's bored, just like millions of other 7-year-olds around the country.

Instead of medicating him, what do you say? Why don't we find something else he can do?

The school didn't like the fact that the Maples were ignoring their ADHD and mental health recommendations, and so they called CPS. They accused the family of neglect. Now CPS was involved. And they called the Maples and said they wanted to investigate, visit the home. Christian, the dad said, no, I don't think so. And, by the way, I think I have some Fourth Amendment rights here.

Two weeks later, they received another phone call saying there's an emergency shelter care court hearing that you have to be at. After the hearing, CPS arrived at the home with police officers and took the 7-year-old boy into custody.

The case is still unresolved, and Camden has been separated from his family for well over a month. All of this because mom and dad and the stepmom say we know our son better than the school.

We have Christian and Katie Maple on the phone with us now. Hi, guys. How are you?

VOICE: Hi. We're great.

GLENN: Good. Christian, do I have any part of the story wrong?

CHRISTIAN: No. Not that -- he was actually, on the good note, returned to us last night by the court.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Oh. By a court?

CHRISTIAN: Yes, the court ordered him to be returned home.

PAT: Wow. That's great.

CHRISTIAN: Yeah, it is. It's really great. But it's still not over. They still want to have him found dependent by the court so they can justify all of their actions that led up to this.

GLENN: Wait. What do you mean by find him dependent? What does that mean?

CHRISTIAN: Well, it's a different category by Ohio statute that -- not meaning neglect or abuse, but a dependent child, they are trying to say who lacks adequate parental care by reason of mental or physical condition of the parents, guardian, or custodian.

GLENN: So tell me -- let's go back.

Tell me when you found out that he said he was going to stab himself with the eye. Tell me, if you don't mind, tell me about that conversation. Tell me what happened.

CHRISTIAN: Well, like I said, the school called me, notified me that he said that. He was -- he never -- like what they are alleging, he never came up with that plan on his own. He was prompted to say that.

GLENN: How do you mean?

CHRISTIAN: Well, the counselor that he saw them at the school was asking him leading questions. She asked him deliberately, well -- when he said that he wanted to erase himself because he was bad. She said, "Well, how would you do that?" Instead of getting to the root issue of why he felt bad, she prompted him to divulge a plan, which he didn't come up with on his own. Like he didn't volunteer that information.

GLENN: Okay. So he didn't -- what you're saying is he didn't walk in and say, "I just want to stab myself in the eye." He said, "I just want to erase myself." And she said, "Well, if you were going to do that, how would you do that?"

"Well, I would stab myself in the eye."

CHRISTIAN: Yes, exactly.

GLENN: So he hadn't made a plan, which is a sign of real suicide. She was asking him of a plan.

CHRISTIAN: Yes, correct.

GLENN: Got it. Got it. Go ahead.

CHRISTIAN: So then the school called me. And to note the seriousness of the situation, before I got off the phone with the school, I was already in my car on the way to the school. I was there within five minutes. And told the school that after they made their recommendations, at first, we were going to come home and have a long conversation, me, my wife, and my son. And then based on that conversation, we would determine if more action was necessary.

Which they completely denied. And they called CPS that same day, before I even had time to respond to the situation, before they knew anything.

PAT: How is it that CPS functions this way, without due process, without having a trial, without -- without giving you a chance?

GLENN: Because somebody has to do something. That's why.

PAT: But it's unconstitutional.

GLENN: No, I know. But somebody's got to do something, Pat.

PAT: You can't just take children out of homes.

GLENN: Somebody's got to do something.

PAT: If there's -- if there's proof of abuse, that may be the case. But there wasn't. There just -- there wasn't abuse, right?

Were they even alleging that you guys were physically or mentally abusing him?

CHRISTIAN: No, but the school had priorly -- before all this instant, they called four times alleging two cases of abuse. And the CPS didn't even investigate because it was unfounded.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. What did they accuse on abuse, and why would they do that?

CHRISTIAN: The school? I'm not exactly sure. I just know that they called twice to report physical abuse by me done to my son.

GLENN: How did you respond to that?

CHRISTIAN: Well, I'm -- obviously I was upset. But I didn't even know about that until after this last actual investigation by CPS was open.

PAT: Wow.

STU: Were you able to track down why they believed that? You know, were there -- he got bruised playing and they thought it was you? Do you have any idea where that came from?

CHRISTIAN: No. I know the school called and alleged that. I don't know why they think that.

GLENN: Okay. And CPS said, we didn't -- we just didn't investigate.

CHRISTIAN: Yeah, they said it was unfounded. And there was no reason even to investigate.

GLENN: Okay. And were they upset at you because you wouldn't put your son on ADD medication? And why wouldn't you put your son on ADD medication?

CHRISTIAN: Yes, the school has been pushing for the ADD medication for a long time.

GLENN: Sure.

CHRISTIAN: It's brought up every time we have a meeting with the school.

GLENN: Sure. Sure.

CHRISTIAN: No, I don't -- because that's going to stifle his creativity. And I don't want to medicate my son because he's an average 7-year-old boy that is creative.

GLENN: Amen.

CHRISTIAN: That's nothing wrong with my son. That's nothing wrong with the curriculum and the school being able to handle a little boy.

GLENN: You're exactly right on that one. I'm so glad to hear you answer that way.

We -- why are we letting the system say I don't need to change the system to adapt to different kids. Instead, I'm going to medicate kids and claim the system is okay.

It is absolute craziness what we allow.

Okay. So -- go ahead.

CHRISTIAN: No, I was just agreeing with you. It completely is.

GLENN: So what do you do for a living?

CHRISTIAN: Well, I was -- until recently, I was a welding supervisor. I've taken a long leave of absence because we just had our sixth child. And right before Christmas. And I am staying home to take care of her and our other younger daughter.

GLENN: And what does this cost you? I mean, how has this affected the family?

CHRISTIAN: Well, emotionally, what it's cost is us I can't even put any kind of amount on it.

GLENN: I don't mean money-wise. What does this cost you? What's the payment been like? I mean, are your friends staying by you? Do people look at you differently, like, oh, my gosh, there goes that family? There's something wrong with them.

CHRISTIAN: No. For the most part, a lot of my friends are behind me. I haven't had any of my friends change any of their attitude because they know me. And they know that this is all ridiculous and completely false.

STU: Christian, have you mixed it up with the school at all with anything else? Are they going to come out and say that you're a troublemaker or one of these parents that are always complaining about everything? Is there any other reason that this would happen?

CHRISTIAN: I did have a dispute with the school. Because like I said, after my baby daughter was born just recently, they -- I tried to get our bus stop moved because I have a kindergartener and I have to physically be out there to pick him up from the bus stop. I tried to have them move it two houses down the street so I could see from our house when the bus was there and go out. Because I did not want to wait out there with my infant.

STU: Right.

CHRISTIAN: And they said absolutely not. And they would not change the stop. So, I mean, we had a disagreement over that. But --

GLENN: What a bad parent. What a bad parent you are. Holy cow. Don't want to be standing out in the freezing cold in Ohio in the winter with your newborn. Holy cow. What will they think of next?

All right. So yesterday, the court ruled in your favor. And he's back home. How is he?

CHRISTIAN: He's really excited and happy to be home.

(chuckling)

PAT: Hmm.

CHRISTIAN: He wasn't sleeping well before. And he slept like a log last night. So -- and he's -- right now, I know he's just really, really happy.

GLENN: Do you -- how are you affording the financial hit with the -- with the attorneys? I got to believe you're taking on the State. That's not cheap. Do you have people volunteering their time? Are you paying for it? How is that working?

CHRISTIAN: Both. But mostly paying for it out of pocket. Just barely making it. I have help from my parents who have loaned us money. But it's -- yes, it's taking its toll.

GLENN: Well, I -- I wish you -- I wish you the best. And we're going to follow this. When is the next court date?

CHRISTIAN: The next court date is the education hearing on the 17th of May.

GLENN: And what's that going to decide?

CHRISTIAN: That is CPS and the prosecutor's office wanting him to be declared dependent so they can justify all their actions from the moment this started.

GLENN: If somebody wants to get a hold of -- there's got to be a great attorney. And I know some attorneys -- who helped the Pelletiers? Remember the story out of Boston?

STU: Justina Pelletier.

GLENN: Who was that? That was a friend of ours. See if we can find out. We might -- we're going to hold on to your number. Is there a public way anybody can get a hold of you?

STU: There's a GoFundMe page, right?

GLENN: There's a GoFundMe page?

CHRISTIAN: Yes.

GLENN: What is it?

CHRISTIAN: I will -- my wife set that up, so I will let her answer to that.

PAT: Okay.

GLENN: All right.

CHRISTIAN: I don't want to misspeak or say something --

GLENN: That's all right. That's all right.

Is it Katie? Is Katie there?

Hi, Katie.

KATIE: Yeah. Hi, the link is just help us get our son home. I'm assuming you can search it.

STU: Yeah. If you actually search for -- as we were talking here, search for GoFundMe and Christian Maple. You'll get a link to it. And we'll also tweet it out from all of our accounts and everything so people can get to it easily. @worldofStu or at Glenn Beck. We'll get it all out there.

GLENN: How are you holding up?

KATIE: All right. It's taken its toll. I've had to take a lot of days off work.

GLENN: What do you do for a living, Katie?

KATIE: I'm a mail carrier.

GLENN: A mail carrier. Six kids. A father who is staying home. Boy, the GoFundMe page might be very well needed. Katie, best of luck.

Christian, thank you very much. And we will continue to watch this.

youtu.be
RADIO

How the Fed's digital currency could END ECONOMIC FREEDOM

Right before Thanksgiving, when Americans were distracted with travel plans and family feasts, the Federal Reserve announced it is testing its own CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency). Carol Roth, former investment banker and author of ‘The War On Small Business,’ joins Glenn to detail how this CBDC is the OPPOSITE of decentralized cryptocurrencies that interest millions of Americans. Yet, the Fed is trying to confuse Americans into believing the two kinds of digital currencies are just alike: ‘It’s a new scheme to maintain power and control.’ Plus, Roth explains how this CBDC — if it becomes the norm — WILL END our economic freedom...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Carol Roth, how are you?

CAROL: Glenn, you're sounding very feisty for a Monday morning. I'm not sure I can handle this. But coming up the weekend here.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I can't take the mainstream media, and half of the country, that is like, that's a conspiracy theory. What? That you're stupid?

That you don't pay attention.

That you can't read?

What is the conspiracy theory at this point? Because all of the things that people like you, people like me, we have been talking about now for years, are just being verified, one right after the other.

CAROL: Yeah. I think the definition of a conspiracy theory at this point is something that the media will report on three years later after we all knew that it happened.

GLENN: Exactly right. Exactly right. There's a difference between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts. So let's -- let's talk about the -- the facts -- let's start with the CBDC. The central bank digital currency.

CAROL: Yes. First of all, CBDC is not a bar at New York City. So this is actually something different.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: But it is tied into the monetary system. And basically, this is something that more than 100 countries around the world, who are losing control of their Fiat currencies, because of their government overspending. And because of their central bank printing. They're trying to come up with a new scheme to be able to maintain that power and control. So the idea of the central bank digital currency is to confuse you. People are interested in cryptocurrencies because they're deindustrialized and because they don't have that centralized power. And so they're trying to glom on to that interest and say, oh, yeah. We're just like that. Except for, they're exactly the opposite. They are completely centralized. And they give entire control to the central banks. So imagine today, you know the Treasury prints up a Federal Reserve note. We call it a dollar, route?

And imagine that dollar had a chip in it. And so when you went to go pay with your dollar, the fed was trapping you. The government was tracking you and saying, nah, you know, Glenn, you've had too many burgers this month.

We really don't want people eating meat because it's bad for the environment. So this dollar is no good anymore.

This is what a central bank digital currency, assuming that it's a retail facing one, one that the consumers will use, is going to do. And, oh, guess what, the New York fed is doing a 12-week digital dollar pilot. That is including Wells Fargo, the very Group, MasterCard. And about six others.

GLENN: So, Carol, they are saying that because they're not sure. If they can convert our system of transferring money, which doesn't involve any trucks.

But the digitizing of actual physical dollars. And sending them overseas in bulk. They're not sure they can work out the math, on how to do that, without the US dollar.

That sounds like the biggest bunch of bullcrap, I've ever heard.

They're wondering if it's going to work for the data transfer?

You're doing it every day now.

CAROL: Yeah. So the US is the leader in payments. And if you go and look at all the different -- the Bank Policy Institute. All the different folks who are kind of looking at policy around this, everybody is going, you know, America doesn't need this.

It's one thing for a small country that doesn't have the infrastructure. But we have laser fast settlements of payments. We have laser fast transactions through private entities. There is no need for this.

The need is a wanton and a desire for control and power by the people who are in charge and by the people who have not been taking care of those dollars. And so they need a new scheme. And this is the scheme. And, oh, by the way, this is how they're going to do this, Glenn. And my best guess right now. All this stuff we're seeing with the crypto woes. The FTX collapse. The -- you know the hacking, the fraud. They're going to tell you, oh, we need regulation. We need regulation around crypto. Because crypto is bad.

And they are going to regulate it, and they're going to sneak in congressional approval. Because that's the one thing. That a central bank. Digital currency. The fed does not have authorization from it. It must come from Congress. Not that that stops anyone anyway.

Just theoretically speaking. So keep an eye out. Whatever bills are coming down the pike. They are going to try to stuff this in here. And I'm not joking at all. I'm not -- this is not hyperbole. This will be the end of economic freedom. If a retail CBDC comes to fruition.

GLENN: I -- you know I'll go a step further. I'm not saying this is the mark of the beast. But it has all the earmarks of just not being able to live in society without it.

You won't be able to do anything, without it. Correct?

CAROL: Yeah. I mean, listen, it impacts your livelihood. You know how you get paid. How you transact.

I mean, it is the foundation.

Stable money is the foundation of a stable society.

GLENN: Now, people will say, though, Carol. That I already -- I already interact with my money this way.

I don't get an actual paycheck and bring it to the bank. It's digitally transferred into my bank. And then I spend, either a credit card or a debit card, everywhere I go. I go to a gas station. Put a card in. What's the difference?

CAROL: If I really, you're doing by choice. And you have a choice of providers. And the providers aren't the government. And it doesn't have the authority to come in and say, I'm sorry.

We're just going to cut off your ability to take in money. Or to put out money. We're going to freeze it.

Think about the trucker convoy up in Canada. They just froze their assets. They can do this, you know with just a flick of a switch.

Just one off, and say, I'm sorry. But that's it. You can't -- we've abandoned -- we've gotten rid of cars. We're not going to let you hail an Uber. Let you do this.

You said something bad on social media. We didn't like it. So we'll let you come down. This is a tool to let people submit to what the government wants. And it's the ultimate bullying tactic. The ultimate control tactic, to be able to control every facet of how you transact.

GLENN: I will tell you, that it is -- it is -- what people will say, well, I'm not doing anything wrong. You don't have to do anything wrong.

You just have to want to spend your money on hamburger. As opposed to fish or bugs or whatever it is.

You just want -- you want gasoline, and there's a shortage, and you're not part of the crew, that is deemed essential.

So you get no gasoline. This -- this is -- you know everybody complains about socialized. -- or, you know about free market health care.

First of all, we don't have free market health care. We haven't had free market health care, in a very long time. Government is all over it. Now with Obamacare, it's worse.

However, this is the point. Look at what's happening now, with Canada.

Canada actually said to a Canadian veteran, who just needed -- she's like probably 40, she couldn't walk up her stairs anymore.

Because of the pain. So she calls Veterans Affairs, and they say -- she says, I just wanted one of those chair things that go up the stairs.

She said, that they told her. And she's not the only one. We can assist you in suicide, if it's just so bad. She's like, what!

This is what's happening.

CAROL: Yeah.

GLENN: You'll have no options. No options.

CAROL: You will own nothing. They'll put it out there. And like you said, the word I wanted to key in from what you were talking about earlier. Was essential.

Because this is what they did to us in 2020. They said, some of us were essential. Some of us were not essential. So it's not like we don't have a case study, that's less than a couple of years old, to say that they will pick winners and losers. They will do that based on political clout and connections.

And guess who will not be in that inner circle? Probably everybody listening to the program. Including you and me. So this is an epic, epic disaster. And this is something everybody should be writing their representatives and senators. Saying, absolutely not. This is a complete affront to our freedoms.

youtu.be
RADIO

Far-left goal in Colorado SCOTUS case is FORCED COMPLIANCE

The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments in a new First Amendment case involving a Christian graphic artist who does not want to be forced to design wedding websites for same-sex couples. This case — coming from Colorado — marks the second time in five years that SCOTUS will grapple with religious business owners vs. gay weddings. But the far-left’s goal in this case seems to be much more sinister than hoping the two sides can conduct business peacefully. Rather, Glenn predicts, this case is about forced compliance: ‘It’s about forcing everyone to do exactly what they say, when they say it, and [to] have you profess a belief that you don’t have.’

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So does the First Amendment even exist anymore? We have a White House telling us, no. Will we have the Supreme Court telling us no, as well?

I want to play a couple of things that happened in the Supreme Court, and outside, concerning the court case now, that is involving this web designer, who says she cannot make a website, you know, with gay marriage announcements and everything else, because she's a Christian.

Well, let's start here. This is the Colorado attorney general that is insisting on television here, that even if you have moral objections, you have to do the work.

Listen to this, cut three.

VOICE: You talk about -- it's the slippery slope argument. If this happens, what is the next argument to fall. There are 29 states, including Colorado, that have nondiscrimination laws. What is the impact? If the court sides with Smith, what is the impact for, you know, makeup artists, hair stylists?

You know, people in this sort of -- considering themselves having expressive professions?

What is the actual big implication here, if this case doesn't go your way as you see it?

VOICE: Well, first off, we're going to have to figure out where to draw that line.

If someone makes specialized lattes, do they have an expressive interest in saying, I'm sorry. I don't want to serve Mormons, because I don't believe in the Mormon religion?

That set of hypotheticals could become reality if we lose this case.

GLENN: Hmm.

Now, hang on just a second. Isn't this what cancel culture is doing?

Aren't these businesses that disagree with your political view, not a status as a human being. But your political view, aren't they canceling you?

So aren't they already having the right to do it, you are just trying to take away the religious right?

Because I don't want to cancel anyone. But I'm not going to work for MSNBC.

You know they're never going to hire me. But I'm not going to go work for them. I don't do that. I don't want to do that.

I don't want to say those things. If I worked at MSNBC, well, then I had made a choice to take that job.

Because that's what they do. Do I have a right to get on MSNBC and do the exact opposite? Don't I have a -- a right to my own conscience, and what I deeply believe. Especially when it comes to faith.

Now, listen to Ketanji Brown.

She got a lot of heat on this. She was talking about It's a Wonderful Life from the stand yesterday.

VOICE: Public business. I'm a photographer, my belief is that I'm doing it's a wonderful life scenes. That's what I'm offering. I want to do video depictions of It's a Wonderful Life. And knowing that movie very well, I want to be authentic, and so only white children and families can be customers for that particular product. Everybody else can -- I'll give to everybody else, I'll sell them anything they want, just not the It's a Wonderful Life depictions. I'm expressing something, right? For your purposes, that's speech.

GLENN: Okay. Ketanji Brown Jackson, sit down. You're a moron. You're a moron. First of all, yes. I am making It's a Wonderful Life scenes. That is clearly a vision that we've seen. We can put the standard side by side.

So if I'm creating that scene, yeah. I can discriminate and say, no. I need white people in this. Because I'm re-creating that scene.

Now, if I'm updating that scene, if I'm showing It's a Wonderful Life in today's America, well, then, I could include and should include everyone. I don't even know what she's talking about here. First of all, It's a Wonderful Life is not a religious objection. If I have a religious objection, I can't change what I believe, just like you can't change your skin color. I cannot change a deeply held religious belief.


STU: But in -- it's true, first of all. But it's also, an additional thing. Right?

Like, the religious part of this gives you additional protection, beyond what is already there. You can't compel someone to say something.

That is like really a bright line in our country. You can't -- take it to this example.

If -- if -- if Kanye West opened up -- decided to open up a website that said, hey, I will customize birthday songs for you.

Which, by the way, given his career arc, may be a real possibility very, very soon.

GLENN: He's working on the pancake recipe now.

STU: Right. And let's just say, hey, I will customize your Happy Birthday rap, just give me your name. And then someone decides, hey, in fact, how about do my bar mitzvah instead? Does he have to do that?

The answer to that is no. You can't ask -- despite his anti-Semitic views being abhorrent to most, you cannot force him to sing a positive song about a bar mitzvah because that would be compelling his artistic expression. You cannot do that.

That's already there. Whether it's a religious belief or not. Just because he does --

GLENN: And in his case, it is both. In his case, it is both.

STU: You can argue, I guess the black Israelite -- maybe that's where it is. Even if it's just not about religion at all, you still can't make somebody do that. Add on to that, the religious protection. It's a whole 'nother layer. I mean, really a lot of this case has been less about religion and more about the idea whether you can compel speech.

There was a famous case that happened recently, where it was a religious institution. I can't remember which one it was.

But was saying, hey, there's a new state law that says, if you're going to counsel people on pregnancy, you have to post a poster that says, abortion is an option and here's how you can get one if you want to. And the Supreme Court said, no. You can't a religious organization, who doesn't believe in abortion, to post that. You can't compel them to speech. And that speech was defined as posting a poster.

This has been a bright line forever!

And hopefully, this Supreme Court will actually have the balls to cast a very broad net here, to make sure this is protected for everyone.

You should never be forced to say or express something you don't believe.

GLENN: So here's what Barrett said, yesterday. She said, Canada's designer declined to serve a Catholic club because they disagreed with their views on marriage.

The -- the -- the Colorado attorney respond, yes.

Because that's not status-based discrimination.

Wait. Hang on just a second. She went in and said, wait. But the designer can't decline to do a same-sex marriage design.

Yes! Because same-sex marriage is inextricably intertwined with status. And religion isn't.

Hold on just a second. Hold on just a second.

There is a -- a whole right that was defined as a very bright line, as Stu just said. So it's not like we're looking and trying to read in, well, we've got to have freedom of speech. And does freedom of religion fall into that?

No. Freedom of religion is entirely separate. Entirely separate. And so it is protected, clearly. There is no trouble so my comma in this one. It is clearly protected.

But if you want to argue that you have the right for a designer, a web designer to discriminate against a Catholic church. Which they do have that right. I don't want to do your design. Great. I'm glad you told me, that you hate us, because I don't want you designing our website. I don't think you'll do a good job. If I can decline the church, why is it the church, that has a deeply held religious belief. I mean, my church was founded on the family. And the sacredness of men and women and gender. Gender is ordained by God, before birth. There is no confusion. That's like 40 years old in my church.

Wait. I have to change now? No. Because I can't change because the government tells me I have to change. This is something I believe to the core. And I either believe it, or I don't. Now, you think that I can just change my belief, because you're right. No. No.

I believe God has set these standards. Not man. Not you. Not me.

I can't change the standards. Neither can you. And as long as I'm consistent in that, I have a right to assert my religious exemption, from your little rule.

I'm sorry. I -- my faith tells me, I cannot go there.

If you have a religious object injection to war, and you are a pacifist, and it's a religious exemption, you don't have to go fight in war.

Because you're a Quaker. And it is a deeply held religious exemption.

And it's a deeply held relief. Or belief.

STU: That's a great example too. Like, we have come. Think of what that particular exemption is. We are saying, our country is under attack. Our nation may fall. It's the literal most important thing, that a government can do, right?

GLENN: Without your nation. Without people fighting this war, we could fall to the Nazis, and you won't have your right to your religion. That's the argument against.

STU: Right. And even with that scenario, we say to the Quakers, you know what, you don't have to do it. Your religion is more important than the war. Your religion is more important than the entire country falling or not.

GLENN: Because we don't have the right.

STU: Because we don't have the right.

GLENN: To get between you and God.

STU: And here we have an argument about lattes?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: We're acting as if wedding sites. Are they even a thing? I guess I got married too early. Wedding websites, we're acting as if that's as important?

We've said the actual defense of our to Nazis is not important enough to overwhelm this right. And we're talking about lattes and photographers and cupcakes. This is completely ridiculous. And then you add on the free speech element of this. Which is what this case seems to be surrounding more than anything else.

Whether the government can say you must say two plus two equals five.

With this -- with the way they're describing this right, the government could tell anyone to say anything.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And either one of these rights, is clearly defined. Either one of them overwhelms the left's case on this, and they have both of them working in conjunction here. This is not a close call.

GLENN: This is a freedom-breaking decision.

If they decide in favor of Colorado, this is a freedom-breaking -- you have no right anymore. You'll have no right.

And this done in conjunction with what they just passed, the Defense of Marriage Act, or interracial act. This is what they're hoping for.

This is what they're shooting for. To be able to shut down anyone that objects. It's not about living together and tolerating one another.

It is about forcing everyone to do exactly what they say, when they say it. And have you accept and profess a belief you don't have.

That's a dictatorship. That is Naziism. Communism.

It -- it is a religion. We are headed towards a -- a theocratic autocracy.

Their religion is just a Gaia. And Baal. And whatever it is that worships the earth in slaughter and perversion of children.

youtu.be
RADIO

Glenn: 1 reason Elon Musk's 'Twitter Files' are DISTURBING

The information Elon Musk handed over to journalist Matt Taibbi concerning Twitter corruption during the 2020 election season — which has now become known as the ‘Twitter Files’ — probably isn’t shocking to conservatives. After all, we already knew most of the information a LONG time ago, even if the mainstream media refused to accept the facts. But there is one, big takeaway from the Twitter Files that you should recognize. In this clip, Glenn reveals what he believes is the 1 reason this information drop is truly ‘disturbing.’

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's talk a little bit about Twitter. Did you go over the exposé, that was done this weekend on Twitter?

STU: From Matt Taibbi?

The journalist?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Elon Musk, basically seemed to give him a cache, of some sort of a bunch of emails about whatever the Democrats were doing, around the Hunter Biden laptop era. Right before the 2020 election. And he was going to go through it, and kind of see what was there. It was interesting, Musk wasn't trying to do it himself. He was doing it to, he was a responsible journalist to go through it.

GLENN: Oh, boy. Oh, boy. Okay. That's the second time you've said that word. And I just can't -- you said a journalist. And then respected journalist. The guy is a blogger. I know because I've read it in the New York Times. I've read it in politico. I've read it and heard it from NBC. MSNBC. CNN. ABC News. He's a blogger. I heard it from the rolling stone.

STU: Wait.

GLENN: And they should know.

STU: Because he worked for them, didn't he?

GLENN: Well, he was a contributing editor to the rolling stone. And took down some major things. But, I mean, does that make you a journalist?

STU: And now he's -- so even rolling stone is saying, now he's a blogger.

GLENN: He's a blogger. He's a blogger.

STU: Okay. And I assume they would say the same about Bari Weiss, who is one of the bigwigs over at the New York Times.

GLENN: Of course. She's a Substack blogger.

STU: Right. That is what they're trying to do here, to push this off.

GLENN: Which to me, don't you think that's changed?

I think journalist is actually less credible, than blogger. I mean, especially a Substack blogger.

I mean, oh, that -- you mean like Glenn Greenwald, and Bari Weiss.

And Taibbi. Yeah. I think I'm -- I think I'm going to run in that PAC and not the others. You listen to Bari Weiss, talk about her departure from the New York Times. And she talks about how there were all sorts of pressures within the organization, to not say what people believed.

GLENN: Right.

STU: And they went after people who questioned the narrative the wrong way, over and over again. So you would think, when you're free to do whatever you want to do you at least will be honest about it. You will come out and say what you believe. And I think you got that from the initial Twitter files release. Which kind of deal with both sizes.

Saying, well, there were some stuff on both sides. And there were good Democrats in all this. But generally speaking, what it pointed to, was a real effort by the Biden campaign, as we suspected, to go after narratives, they thought, didn't serve them. But part of that was the Hunter laptop. Part of the reason why I wasn't all over this so far, is because I don't think we have the real picture yet. We have only a small slice.

GLENN: Right.

STU: These documents were turned over to a couple of journalists, who have not had -- or, bloggers, who have not had the time to fully go through them and give us, you know, a moment by moment look as to who did what and how they did it, and I think it will take time for that to sort of marinate and go through the system.

GLENN: So here -- from 40,000 feet, here's what we discovered. Elon Musk released some of this inside information, and some of the documents that showed, a couple of things. One, the FBI was meeting with them monthly. And that is, as it got close to the election, they were meeting with them weekly. That is troublesome. Again, not something that we didn't know. But it is something that was called a conspiracy theory for a long time.

That's they were taking the Hunter Biden story. And they were getting advice from the FBI.
And the people inside of Twitter, were the ones that were torpedoing it, with the advice from the Biden campaign.

Well, that's what we found. So it's not new to any conservative. However, it is new to the press.

And it is new to the press. This is why this is a big deal.

You're not going to -- in my opinion. You're not going to feel like, whoa. Wow.

Look at that smoking gun. Because we've been talking about it.

We've known this was going on. The whole world has known, this was going on. And what they found was, the -- the right will get some things, you know on their side. As well.

But the disturbing part to me was, it comes through personal contacts. So it is truly -- would you call it nepotism. You know you have to know somebody. And if you knew somebody in Twitter, you could get the world changed.

And so you had people reaching out to their friends in Twitter. Reaching out to their former coworkers. Maybe at the White House. Saying, hey, look. This is a problem. Can you take care of it?

Yep. I got it. I'll take care of it for you.

STU: Of course, implicit in that, 90 percent of the people who worked in that, were liberal.

All their friends were liberal. So most of the stuff that got edited, were stuff that people wanted edited.

So it was not fair, as they pointed out. It's not balanced. It's not like both sides did the same thing by any means. The only thing --

GLENN: Well, both sides did the same things. But not anywhere -- you know when it's -- you know when it's one time for every nine times.

STU: Right.

GLENN: That's not doing the same thing.

STU: Right. And I think the only thing that we need to see here. This is one of the things that confirmed what we were seeing going on. And what we had he would have of always occurring.

We already have evidence going down this road pretty significantly. This has backed it up. It hasn't reached to the level yet. That is to what I expect. I set the standard so high, for this. Because I assume what they've done is so terrible, during these election periods.

That we haven't seen that evidence yet. I think it will come out. We'll see it eventually.

So far, we haven't seen it. We have only seen 80 percent of what was going on. Not 100 percent.

GLENN: So here's why this is important. If you are in with the it crowd, the it crowd controls really, the narrative still in America.

Because the New York Times and television and everything else, still is caught in that.

Now, I don't know if the American people are still caught in that. But unless you get both sides, talking about something, it's not going to filter down to the average American.

Okay? And here's -- here's the really interesting part. First, they said, that this was a conspiracy. That that wasn't happening.

Now that we have the evidence and the actual documents to show that it is that way. What do they do?

Now, I am somebody that I just don't believe in coincidence. I just don't.

Sometimes, wow. What a coincidence. Sometimes, but I always look first, hmm. That's a weird coincidence. Are we seeing this anyplace else?

For instance, when they talked right after COVID started. They were all saying the same thing. And then they all started to say, the new normal. And then it went from the new normal to the great reset. And everybody -- all of a sudden, one day, everybody is talking about The Great Reset. As a positive. And they're not explaining what The Great Reset is. They're just saying, we need a Great Reset. Do you remember any of that?

This is what happened over the weekend. To take Taibbi. And destroy him as a journalist, they accuse him of PR work. He is just being a public relations person. To whom?

To, quote, the richest man in the world.

And what does that make it? Sad. Embarrassing. Humiliating.

Now, let me go through some of these things. This is the prime time editor for Mediaite. Matt Taibbi went from a fierce and intrepid journalist taking aims at the wealthy and powerful, to doing mundane PR for the world's richest huckster. Embarrassing.

Ben Collins. Senior report for NBC.
Imagine throwing it all away to do PR work for the richest person in the world.

Humiliating.

Bloomberg. Editors are great at not just because they make your work sharper, but because they will ask things like, hey, should you be doing PR work for the richest man on the planet? MSNBC. Imagine volunteering to do online PR work for the world's richest man.

Let's see. Media Matters.

Matt Taibbi thread is a great example of overwriting when you don't have the kids, but you want to admit you're just doing PR for the world's richest person.

Matt McDermott. Doing PR for the richest person in the world should come as no surprise.

The correspondent for the New York Times, CNN, Daily Beast, Huffington Post, and as a host on Al Jazeera. Tweeted, Matt Taibbi, what sad, disgraceful downfall. I swear. He did good work in the old days. Should be a cautionary tale for everyone. Selling your soul for the richest white nationalist on earth.

Oh, my gosh. The editor-in-chief. Something called popula.com, wrote one minute, you're scouring Goldman Sachs. The next, you're doing PR for the richest man in the world. Funny.

It goes on and on and on.

They all said the same thing. They're doing -- he's doing PR work for the richest man in the world. So what they're doing is, he sold out.

But did Matt sell out?

I mean, Matt left the mainstream media for a reason. What was that reason?

Bari Weiss left the mainstream media for a reason. What was that reason?

What was it? To sell out? Or to be able to tell the truth, that they saw, without some editor going, nah. That Hunter Biden is not really a story. Because it's a conspiracy.

No. No. It turns out, that the FBI was lying to you. It wasn't a conspiracy.

It is a big deal. Now, Elon Musk has put the Democrats on notice. He said that there's more smoking guns, to come.

He also said, he's not going to sign autographs, anymore. And he doesn't -- he doesn't want to be in crowds anymore.

He's -- he's a little concerned for his health. And I don't think it's because he's a smoker. He believes that he's living in some sort of a spy novel. And I think he -- he might be.

By the way, according to the Daily Wire, it looks like they may have interfered at Twitter. May have interfered in the Brazilian election as well.

Interesting. It's almost as if, these public/private partnerships, between those who want to control the world, and those who are the mouthpiece for the world, are seeing the opportunity by coming together and working together to make sure that the little people know exactly who they should vote for, and what they should think.

youtu.be
RADIO

Bill O’Reilly: White House LIES are creating a ‘TURNING POINT’ in America

The biggest story for the week for Bill O’Reilly is Karine Jean-Pierre. Why? Because, thanks to Fox New’s Peter Doocy, the White House Press Secretary recently was caught in even MORE lies — this time about President Biden visiting the border. Americans are becoming numb to the lies our politicians continue to spew. O’Reilly predicts — because of the sheer dishonesty — America is now facing a ‘turning point.'

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So tell me, what is the biggest story of the week?

BILL: All right. And you're going to think this is very strange. But it isn't strange, when I explain it. The biggest story of the week is Karine Jean-Pierre. You know she gets out there in a press conference. And there's Peter Doocy, the only contrarian. Well, there may be two or thee. You've never heard of them. They're way in the back. But Doocy is there to shake out the Biden administration. That's what his job is.

So he's not there as an objective reporter. He's up there to shake them off. Like Sam Donaldson was for Reagan. And it's a tradition.

GLENN: Ellen Thomas.

BILL: And Doocy does a very good job. Peter Doocy. So he sits there and he says, you think President Biden is going to go to the border?

And Karine Jean-Pierre looks at him, goes, he's already been at the border.

But he hasn't. He hasn't gone to the border as president or vice president.

So everybody is looking around. And then Doocy follows up and goes, well, can you tell us what -- at least none of us know. It's not on the records. It's not on the White House logs. Not on the Secret Service logs. Then she launches into this ridiculous BS, which she does every day.

Now, I've been saying to myself, I've been in this almost 50 years, as a child prodigy, 8 years old, writing Scripture, Walter Kronkite.

GLENN: Right.

BILL: But I've never seen that before.

I've never seen. I mean, that's just a lie. That's not spin.

You know I started the no-spin zone. I do the No Spin News now on BillO'Reilly.com.

This is my concept, that spin comes out of political precincts, every single day. And the job of a journalist, is to knock it down. This is not spin. This is Karine Jean-Pierre, being paid by the White House. Paid every day. Lying to the world. There's not two sides to the story.

It's not like she's not lying.

So shouldn't that be on every single page one of the newspapers, in America?

GLENN: Sure.

BILL: Shouldn't that be incorporated into the Nightly News casts?

GLENN: But I think people, Bill, have been so beaten down on all sides. They just know you're being lied to, and they don't care.

BILL: That's true. People are numb to this. And I'm not talking about the folks. But when you have a press, that doesn't report, the historical occurrence, like this. This is history. All right? We all know that these people are full of BS. And they do what they're told to do, because they want to have money, and they get paid. But when a White House is basically lying, you know and they don't have any shame of that. They don't care. So what's the difference, I ask you, Beck, between the United States apparatus of information distribution, and Putin?

GLENN: I don't think anything. I mean, other than Putin will actually have some reporters killed. But I don't think anything.

Well, no. Let me give you another -- I think many people in the press, are afraid to say anything for their safety in Russia. Here, most of our press is gleefully joining in.

BILL: Yeah. They don't care. So I wrote a message of the day, outlining why this is an important situation for history. And this is a turning point now. So before it was spin. Before we knew you know it was all this. Okay. But now it's, hey. We're just going to lie. We don't care. We're going to lie. And once you start lying about going to the border, then you can start lying about everything. Which, you know the Biden administration has walked that line ever since he went into office. And they don't really care.

And to me, really, really a turning point in the culture of this country.

GLENN: We are also, I think at the most dangerous time, in my lifetime, to be a Jewish person.

In most places, in the world, including the United States.

This Kanye West thing that happened yesterday. Did you pay attention to that at all?

BILL: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I did. The Kanye West thing falls under Killing the Legends: The Lethal Danger of Celebrity. He has lost his mind.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: Okay? And you know that book Chronicles these hugely famous people, Elvis Presley, John Lennon, Muhammad Ali, and how they got crushed by their fame. This is exactly what's happening to Kanye West. Exactly. All right?

GLENN: Yeah. I think it's a mixture of exactly what you say in your book. You know with the people that are just expunging off of you, introducing themselves into your life, taking you way off track.

BILL: Right.

GLENN: And clinical insanity. This guy is --

BILL: He's over the line.

GLENN: Yeah. He's over the line.

BILL: Right.

GLENN: And he is medically treatable, and he's not apparently taking his medication. And this is -- this is -- this is what insanity looks like.

BILL: Well, I use the word delusional. Look, Kanye West knows nothing about the Third Reich. I mean, he didn't read Killing the SS. I mean, he doesn't know anything.

He, for whatever reason, okay? Has gone into a delusional world, where whatever Kanye West says is right. All right?

And there are a lot of people on this planet in that world. Okay? So do I pay attention to Kanye West? I do when it elevates into, he's having supper with Trump. Huge mistake, by the way. Oh, my God.

GLENN: Yeah, big mistake.

BILL: And it really reflects on Trump's staff too.

GLENN: Yeah, on his staff more than anything else. However, I don't blame Trump, he didn't know what Kanye was going to say or do.

BILL: But he is -- with Trump, and, you know, I know him really well. Is, if you like Trump, then he likes you. Kanye West, African-American, big-time entertainer, saying good things about Trump, then Trump's going to have supper with you. That's what it is.

GLENN: Right.

BILL: But Trump didn't pay attention to Fuentes coming in.

He didn't know who he was. I don't even think Trump knows what Kanye West is peddling out there by -- on this anti-Semitism. I don't think he knows.

GLENN: No, I don't think so. No, I don't think so.

BILL: But he should. He's got to. He's got to stop.

You know, if he wants to be reelected and his chances now are below 50 percent, I would say -- I would put them at 35 percent and falling.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: If he wants to make a comeback in this area, he has to discipline up.

GLENN: Before we go -- before we go there. Let me take you back to one of your messages of the day, I think it was yesterday. And you talked about Mayorkas, warning that the far right anti-Semites might be planning an attack on Jews and other minority -- minority groups.

What's this about?

BILL: Well, with -- as soon as -- and remember, Biden doesn't run any of this at the White House.

It's not like he's sitting around. Going, let's do A and B. He's just way above it. Oblivious. He's out with Jill. Looking at the Christmas lights. Okay?

He's eating escargot with Macron. He doesn't know what's happening day to day. But as soon as the White House saw this unbelievable error with Trump dining, they said, okay. We're going to issue a warning. That far right people are going to kill Jews.

Okay?

And that's what -- and Mayorkas got the call. Put out a warning. And he did!

So let's exploit this. Now, my point was, they've been looking for these far right loons, for two years. Okay?

And outside of January 6th, they haven't been able to find them. Okay?

So I'm not sure, that this is -- I can't say that this could never happen. It could. There are violent people on the right. That would hurt Jews.

GLENN: And who the left -- let's not forget. The guy who is now the --

PAT: Yeah. Absolutely. You're right. Thank you for making --

GLENN: Yeah. Let's not forget all the members of Congress, that have hung out with Louis Farrakhan. And also, the -- the new lead for the minority in Congress.

Replacing Nancy Pelosi. He's not exactly Jewish friendly.

BILL: No. Because it ties into the narrative on progressive left. The far left. That the Jewish state is oppressive and fascist. And they get hosed. That's what it's all about. Go ahead.

GLENN: All right. Take me to, why did the New York Times keep Sam Bankman-Fried on their schedule?

And -- and also, Stephanopoulos having him on.

I think this is a whitewashing of his reputation.

BILL: First of all, Beck, do you feel sorry for anybody who lost their money in the crypto?

GLENN: No. I feel bad for people who had their money stolen by him. Yeah.

BILL: Immingles. I said very early on, because we do a smart live segment every night on BillO'Reilly.com on the No Spin News. And I got letters. What about crypto?

What about this? And I said, you would have to be blanking insane. To invest in that.

GLENN: Well, then I'm insane.

BILL: Did you really?

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

BILL: You invested in crypto?

GLENN: Oh. And made -- made a lot of money.

BILL: You made money before it crashed?

STU: Remember, this crash, Bill, is still above the bubble from 2018. If you --

GLENN: Yeah. I invested in '15? '14?

STU: Yeah. If you got in early enough.

GLENN: I have a long way to go, before I lose money.

BILL: Boy, you're lucky.

GLENN: Yeah, well, you don't invest in FTX. That's the ding. You know, and that was not bitcoin.

BILL: Listen, the whole concept is not grounded in reality. It's grounded in this grift, that you get something hot. You push it on the internet. People get excited. You attach things to it.

GLENN: That's Dogecoin. That's what --

BILL: Dogecoin.

GLENN: That's what he was doing too. He was playing with these made-up coins. That's completely -- that's completely different.

Anyway, this guy was a huge donor.

BILL: To the Democrats.

GLENN: To the Democrats. Number two behind George Soros.

BILL: Right. Yeah.

GLENN: Ken Lay was arrested right away. Bernie Madoff was in jail in 24 hours. What is happening here?

BILL: Well, this is because he's in the Bahamas. That's what he's shielding him. And, you know, he's paid off everybody in the Bahamas. So they're going to protect him.

Now, why the FBI hasn't sworn out a warrant because obviously this grift goes across state lines.

GLENN: And international.

BILL: I don't know if it's millions. Hundreds of thousands of Americans lost everything. But the message to me is two-fold. Number one, that if this idiot -- and you just have to see him one time. And you go, I'm not going to this guy. I'm not giving him any money.

GLENN: Oh, I know. Especially his girlfriend.

BILL: Yeah. I'm not going to get involved with business with these people. I would rather give my money to Daffy Duck. What is this? Just one look. Okay?

GLENN: Right.

BILL: But if this guy were a Trump supporter. If this crypto guy were a Trump supporter.

GLENN: Doomed. Doomed.

BILL: The noose would already be around his neck.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah.

BILL: But I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything like that. I think Stephanopoulos --

GLENN: That's the way it works.

BILL: -- is desperate for ratings. You know, if I could get this guy on the No Spin News, if you get him on the Glenn Beck Program, you take him. Because, you know, you chop him up. But, you know, at this point, in this world, I mean, you have to respect your money. You have to guard it. In my opinion.

So, anyway, when I was following it, I was going, well, I warned everybody. But look at this.

GLENN: So let me ask you: There's a couple of things regarding media.

In fact, I have to take a break. I'm running so break. Hang on just a second, Bill. Back in one minute. LifeLock gives you the courage that you didn't know you needed. You didn't know you would have somebody try to take all the things that you have, including your ID. Everything we have pretty much is online. The regular world and armed society, is a safer society, in the online world, people are armed with cyber criminals, you know and you're sitting there. You're not a a cyber criminal. What do I have?

You need somebody on your side. That is fighting that battle for you. Every single day. We do everything online. 25 percent off a subscription to the protection that I, my wife, and my kids have. LifeLock. LifeLock. No one can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions. But I think these guys are the best in the business. And that's why I've had them for about 20 years. Twenty-five percent off your first year with promo code Beck. 1-800-LifeLock. 1-800-LifeLock or LifeLock.com. Promo code Beck. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: Bill, we're going to have to race through a couple of things. You see CNN has laid off all kinds of people. They have apparently not learned their lesson. The media, NBC, will still not explain what happened to the reporter on the Paul Pelosi story. That's not explained.

And their ratings are just going down and down and down. GMA is literally celebrating the fact that two of their hosts are having an affair on their spouses. And they're like, it's good for ratings.

BILL: Look, we've talked about this before. It's over for television news. It's over. And independent contractors like you and me are the beneficiaries of that. Because people don't trust them anymore. Why would you watch this stuff when, you know, it's just BS. They're not telling you the truth. And they're not even fun people to watch. Is anybody saying, you know I have to watch George Stephanopoulos, you know this guy is great? Has anybody ever said that? I don't think so.

GLENN: Yeah. Let me take you to China quickly. What's going to happen there?

BILL: Uh-oh. This is great for America. I believe in God and I think God looks out for the good things in America. So now, Xi, Mr. Bluster, you know, strutting around, we're going to do what we want, he's in dire trouble. Because you don't come back from, you better not come out of your house, and if you do, you're going to disappear. You don't come back from that. So now the Chinese people, who don't have much, anyway, unless you're a businessman in Shanghai or Beijing. But if you're out in the countryside, you have nothing. They can't even come out of the house. And this is causing unbelievable personal angst. Which is not going to go away. That's what you want. You want China to basically disintegrating from within.

GLENN: Yeah, they're rooting and helping us disintegrate from within.

BILL: Yeah. They're trying to push it, but Iran is the same way. You shoot down a young woman because she's not wearing a burqa properly, people aren't going to forget that.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: So these are good things for let's say the free world.

GLENN: For the free world. Not necessarily for our economy, if they spiral out of control.

BILL: Yeah. But we don't need them, Beck. We don't need them.

GLENN: We do until we start building our resources here.

BILL: I have to tell you, I don't care what happens to Apple. I don't care.

GLENN: No. Neither do I.

But if they take Taiwan or Taiwan goes down, China goes down, there are no computer chips that are made. Not nearly enough. Everything now has a computer chip in it. And if we don't start making them here ourselves, we're going to be in trouble. But that goes for everything. Bill thank you so much for being on.

BillO'Reilly.com. Make sure you join him every night for the No Spin News. At BillO'Reilly.com.