Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

BLOGMay 08, 2017

Greg Abbott Uses Social Media Like a Boss to Ban Sanctuary Cities in Texas

Texas Governor Greg Abbott beat protesters to the punch, signing into law a bill that bans sanctuary cities in the state of Texas and holds lawmakers accountable for failing to uphold existing federal laws. The governor made the the unprecedented move of signing the bill on Facebook Live, reaching over one million followers on his Facebook page.

POLL: Do You Support Gov. Greg Abbott Signing Bill Banning Sanctuary Cities?

Governor Abbott joined Glenn on radio to talk about how the bill works, why its a good move for Texas and what defines a sanctuary city.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: Greg Abbott last night went on Facebook and signed a new bill into law, stopping sanctuary cities. Well, some say the problem is Texas doesn't have any real self-declared sanctuary cities. And how dare him do this on Facebook. What a coward. Or a genius. You decide. Greg Abbott, the governor of the great state of Texas, joins us right now.

(music)

GLENN: Welcome program, Governor Greg Abbott. I think the best governor in the entire United States. Welcome, sir, how are you?

GREG: Glenn, I'm doing great. Great to visit with you again.

GLENN: Great to have you on.

So last night, you go on Facebook and you signed a bill -- this is the first time I think anybody has ever done this on Facebook.

Why did you choose Facebook to do this? Why did you do it last night?

GREG: It won't -- it won't be the last time either.

Listen, this is the 21st century. We've seen an evolution with regard to digital media, with regard to the way that elected officials are communicating directly with their constituents. We saw it first with what Barack Obama did with digital media. We saw what happened in the Trump campaign. And now this is the next step. But listen, I have more than a million viewers. And it's important that I be able to connect directly with them unfiltered through other media. Obviously, other media across the entire country has picked this up and spread the story, which we are proud that they did. But you can expect, going forward, there will be many more ways in which we are communicating directly with the people who are citizens, the people that I have to answer to every single day.

GLENN: I have to tell you, Governor, I'd love to spend some more time talking to you about that. I think that is great. I know that we are living -- and everybody knows. We're living in a time now where you don't need a middleman anymore. And it will change things. And I'd love to talk about the ramifications of that, if we have more time. But let me go to what you signed.

Texas doesn't have any self-declared sanctuary city. And the Trump administration is having a hard time defining what a sanctuary city is. So what did you sign in last night?

GREG: Well, first let's talk about terminology. And if you don't mind, let me correct you a tiny bit.

GLENN: Sure.

GREG: A synonym of a sanctuary city is an outlaw city. It's a city or county that refuses to follow the law. And in the state of Texas, it is my opinion, that we do have a self-declared sanctuary city. In Travis County -- for your listeners, Travis County is the county in which Austin, Texas, is located. And the sheriff of Travis County has a written policy that is tangible for anybody to put their hands on, that says that Travis County is not going to comply with ICE detainer requests. In fact, the Travis County policy is such that if a person who is in the United States illegally and has either committed or been accused of a very violent crime, such as sexual assault -- sexual assault of a minor. Armed robbery. Working in conspiracy with the drug cartels. Any of those crimes and far more, the sheriff of Travis County, who is responsible for upholding the law and keeping our citizens safe, is going to release them, even if the federal government has a request to hold them for the federal government to come and take them. That, I think, is the quintessential definition of a sanctuary city. Travis County is the target and subject of this law that I signed last night.

GLENN: Okay. So now what happens to Sheriff Hernandez? What happens to -- I mean, Dallas is also a city that kind of plays games with -- with sanctuary. What happens to these -- these counties, these cities?

GREG: The new Texas law imposes very serious penalties. One is going to be fines that can add up to $25,000 per day. Two is that these officials -- let's say in this case, the Travis County sheriff, can be subject to forced removal from office, by the Texas attorney general. Three is, these officials can be subject to jail time, if they have sanctuary city policies or if they refuse to comply with the ICE detainer request.

GLENN: Excuse me my ignorance on this. But -- I remember hearing this a long time ago, and it may be complete bunk, that the sheriff is the only one that actually answers directly to the people. Police officers, police commissioners, et cetera, et cetera, don't, but that this is a -- this is a separate office that doesn't really answer to any chain of command. Is that true or not?

GREG: Correct in this regard, in that police officers are not elected by the people. Sheriffs are elected by. The people. That said, sheriffs are one of the county officials who have to work in conjunction with county governance, which in the state of Texas, the leader of the county government is called the county judge, and then there's a county commissioner's court that the sheriff must work with. It's the county commissioner's court that sets the budget for the sheriff.

GLENN: How do you respond to people who are saying this is going to terrorize the Latino community?

GREG: Well, first, let's be clear about something. And that is that just because someone is here illegally doesn't at all mean that they are Hispanic. Remember this, Glenn, and that is more than half of the people who have been coming across our border illegally this past year are not from Mexico. They're coming in from across the entire world. So that part of the thesis is wrong. Second is that Texas is an open and welcoming state. In fact, even before Texas was Texas, we've been a blend of Anglo and Hispanic culture. And, as you know, my wife is the first Hispanic first lady. And so we're very supportive and open to immigration. People get this wrong in the terminology. They say that laws like this are anti-immigrant. That's absolutely not true. We're very pro-immigration. The only people who are subject to -- to being apprehended under this new law are people who are here illegally, who have committed a crime that ICE has caused them to put on their detainer list. If you are here and you've committed no crime whatsoever, you're never even going to be subject to this because ICE will not have you on their detainer list.

GLENN: So, Governor, here's one thing that I can't solve in my head. And I know you're a compassionate man. And I know this has had to cross your mind. There are those people who are here illegally who then -- who are good, decent people and whatever their situation is -- yada, yada. But somehow or another, a bad guy gets into their life and is abusing them. Beating them. Raping them. Whatever. And if they fear that they are going to be, you know, sent back home and something is going to happen to them or they just don't want to be on anybody's radar because they're pretty invisible, they won't say anything about that. And crime could go through -- really horrible kinds of crime could go through the roof in those communities. How do you solve that? And do you believe that's true?

GREG: We solve that in this law because we put specific exceptions in this law. If you are a victim of a crime, if you are a witness to a crime, you will not be asked about your immigration status, if you report that crime. We wanted to make sure that those people be accepted from those provisions.

GLENN: Now, they're calling this the papers please bill. But that's not what this -- you don't ask for papers if somebody is on a routine stop, right? I mean --

GREG: You're absolutely correct. Let me be very clear about this. Because a lot of critics misconstrue this as being the Arizona law. And the Arizona law that was reviewed by the United States Supreme Court, they specifically, quote, required law enforcement officers to ask about immigration status. First, I will tell you that part of the law was upheld by the United States Supreme Court, even the liberals on the United States Supreme Court.

GLENN: Wow.

GREG: The Texas law does not make that requirement. What the Texas law does, is it allows, but does not require law enforcement to ask about immigration status. Let me explain to you why. And that is, when a police officer pulls over somebody -- let's say in a car -- and they do it for you're driving too fast. You know, whatever the violation may be. Let's say they walk up to the car and they look into the car and the person in the car has tattoos on them that clearly indicates they are a member of MS-13 -- which, by the way, is growing in number in the state of Texas -- it would be right for the police officer to ask that MS-13 member, "Are you here in the United States legally?" And so it allows them in situations where this person could be the subject of an ICE detainer request, which an MS-13 gang member most likely would be, to make that inquiry. But it simply and absolutely does not require law enforcement officers to ask about immigration status. Anybody who says otherwise either doesn't know the law or they're misrepresenting the law.

GLENN: Governor, what do you think about the progress that -- and I don't want to get this into a Trump thing. About the progress of illegal immigration and the border wall, et cetera, et cetera, with this administration. Without -- because I don't want to put you in the middle of something here. Are we moving -- are we moving the way we should be, or have we surrendered this?

GREG: Well, we've had a problem for decades now, with regard to the legal immigration process. We have a completely flawed immigration system that must be fixed, and nothing has been done in the last few administrations, and nothing has yet been done under the current administration to fix our immigration process.

Let's be clear about this: Texas, and I think America, strongly supports a robust legal immigration system. What must be done is, we must implement reforms that overhaul our legal immigration system and couple that with strict enforcement against illegal immigration.

GLENN: I said a few years ago, that what President Obama was doing was sending a message all around the world, come in. We're not going to enforce our own laws. And if I lived across the border in poverty, in a drug-ridden -- if I lived in a place where I knew my kids had no future and the president of the United States was saying, we're not going to enforce this, and if you get here, you're going to be here forever. I would absolutely take my kids across this border, for the promise of America. And I said at the time, it's -- it's -- a lot of this is our fault because we're telling them we don't care about this law. And if you're -- and if you are in their situation, you're going to roll the dice for a piece of this. Is it true --

GREG: Right. Barack Obama's approach to border security was the ole system (phonetic). Such as the matador saying "ole" to the bull charging at them, and just let them on through.

GLENN: Right.

GREG: But remember this, Glenn, and that is, why is it that so many people want to come to America as opposed to let's say Venezuela or some other place? The reason is because the United States of America more than any other country in the entire world is a nation of laws.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

GREG: And it is imperative that we as a people continue to ensure that America remains a nation of laws so that we will be the aspiration for people around the entire globe.

GLENN: Has our immigration here in Texas -- our illegal immigration, have you seen a decline in it?

GREG: There actually has been a decline.

GLENN: Small or significant?

GREG: During this calendar year, a very meaningful decline during this calendar year, where people who were coming across the border illegally has shrunk dramatically.

In this last calendar year, before the one we're in right now, there were more -- or about 1,000 people crossing the border a day. And now that has shrunk dramatically compared to where it was before. But we'll need to see. Because as most people known, the increase in cross-border activity typically increases during the May, June, and July months.

GLENN: Have we moved our border agents closer to the border since Obama? I mean, there was this huge gap for a long time.

GREG: You're exactly right. If you're going to secure the border, the best place to secure the border is at the border.

GLENN: Right.

GREG: One of the policies of the Obama administration was to remove more into the interior, the border security operations, so that people will have already crossed the border. It simply made no sense whatsoever. And so, yes, one of the changes is to move border security closer to the border. Another is to increase and enhance border security efforts. But that is something that the state of Texas is also doing. We're about to close out our new budget during the coming weeks. We continue to add more money from the state of Texas to secure the border because it is important that we be a state as well as a nation of laws. We welcome people here who want to immigrate to the United States legally. But we want to make sure that if there's anybody who is not following the law, the law will be enforced.

GLENN: I would love to have you back -- we're running out of time. I would love to have you back and talk a little bit about the culture of Texas and how -- if we're doing anything to protect the culture of Texas. It's one of the only states left that has -- or almost -- I can almost say had a unique culture. And it's -- it's really being destroyed. And I'm -- I'm -- and not intentionally or anything like that. Just because this massive influx from people all over the world and the country who were creating jobs here. And what we're doing to protect that. But let me leave you with just this one question here. Have we signed now officially to the Convention of States?

GREG: Yes. As of last week, Texas became the 11th state to sign on to the Convention of States. And Texas will be in the vanguard of leading that effort. Now that Texas passed it, I think many more states will come behind us. This is a common sense opportunity to return power to the people, away from the entrenched forces in Washington, DC.

GLENN: I -- I have to tell you, I think you are the best governor in the country right now. That's pretty easy to say. But the best governor I think I have ever lived under, and big supporters.

Greg Abbott, thank you so much, sir.

GREG: Thank you, Glenn. God bless.

GLENN: You bet.

Great, great leader. As you heard, very well reasoned. Doesn't get into hyperbole or name-calling. He just does it. Love him.

I have a theory about Trump's nuclear testing…play icon
RADIO

I have a theory about Trump's nuclear testing…

President Trump recently ordered the Pentagon to resume nuclear testing after Vladimir Putin announced a new underwater nuclear device. Are we heading towards a potential nuclear war, or does Trump have another goal? Glenn Beck explains his theory: Trump just won this fight...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, President Trump said yesterday, truly great meeting with President Xi.

This is a the problem. So much is hyperbole is -- truly. Like everybody said that meeting couldn't happen. It happened. And they said couldn't be done. It was done.

I got up this morning. People said I couldn't open the door, and I opened the door. Okay? It was the greatest door opening I've ever seen.
But from all accounts, this was a really, really good meeting.

Let me just say this: He's getting ready to meet with Putin. And with what Putin has done in the last couple of days, and now everybody is upset.

Oh, my gosh. Donald Trump said he's going to start testing nuclear weapons again!

Yeah. Yeah.

You know why?

Well, China is testing them.

And Russia is testing them.

We've had a moratorium on that. And here's what he's really doing. If I -- if I heard the news. And I was in the Donald Trump White House, I would be -- I would have walked in, after I heard the news, especially yesterday.

That Vladimir Putin has a new nuclear missile, that he can shoot 6,000 miles away.

Underwater. And it can navigate, and then blow up like a hydrogen bomb under the water, just off the coast of California, which would create a radioactive tsunami. This is what I would tell the president. Congratulations, Mr. President. You've won.

Now, why would I say that?

Because Vladimir Putin is not going to do that.

He's not going to do that. It would make him the pariah of the entire world. You're not going to set off a nuclear, radioactive tsunami to cover Los Angeles.

Because here's -- if I'm the president, and maybe this would make me a very bad president. But if I'm the president. And I hear that he has just launched a nuclear missile, towards Los Angeles, my decision is: Do I stop it?

Yes, I do everything I can to try to stop the missile from hitting. Do I respond before it hits?

All unconventional wisdom is, you've got to launch now, Mr. President. You have to launch now!

Hmm. Now, maybe this makes me a very bad president. I don't know.

I think it probably does. But I would say, no.

I'm not launching. Let it hit. And then I'm going to say to the rest of the world, immediately after it hits, this man just bird Los Angeles, killed all of these people, by launching a missile, a hydrogen bomb, underwater. God only knows what it's done to the environment.

But here's what it's done to people. And here's what it's done to Los Angeles. I give the world an hour before I respond.

I don't want a nuclear war. Because we all know what that means.

But rest of the world, you need to condemn him, and he needs to go on trial for crimes against humanity.

Nothing -- nothing warrants that kind of abuse of nuclear weapons.

That's what I would do as the president. Because I know the rest of the world, would not be kind to anyone who launched a nuclear weapon at the West Coast.

Wouldn't. If we launched a nuclear weapon, you know, even if we blew up Israel, with a nuclear weapon, the world would be like, look at what America has just!

They've killed all these Jews. Wait a minute. I'm so confused right now, what I'm for and what I'm against. But they would still condemn it.

Nobody can get away with that. He knows. Putin knows, the president is the most concerned about nuclear weapons. So what does he do?
He describes two nuclear weapons he has.

He's pulling out all -- there's nowhere to go from there. What are you going to do next? I'm going to blow up the moon?

He's just used everything in his bag of tricks. There's no place bigger that he can go. Other than actually launching those things. Mr. President, Congratulations, you've just won. So that's what I think is happening with -- with what Donald Trump has done this week. And the way Putin is now reacting. And he's about to turn his sites on Putin and Ukraine.

So let's start and see what happens.

Why this Deep State spy campaign is the WORST scandal of my lifetimeplay icon
RADIO

Why this Deep State spy campaign is the WORST scandal of my lifetime

According to the records released now by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and the House Judiciary Committee, The Biden era DOJ and special counsel Jack Smith drove an investigation that sprayed subpoenas like a firehose. There were 197 subpoenas sent to 34 people, over 160 businesses, and vacuumed up communications tied to more than 400 Republican individuals and entities. Fox News, Turning Point USA, OAN, all engulfed in what has been called "Operation Arctic Frost." And all this was predicated on NEWS CLIPS?! Glenn explains why this Arctic Frost is MUCH worse than Watergate.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: While we're talking about winter, let's talk about Arctic Frost. That's the code name. And according to -- according to the records released now by senator chuck Grassley and the -- and the House Judiciary Committee. The Biden era DOJ and Special Counsel Jack Smith drove an investigation that sprayed subpoenas like a firehose. We now know, there were 197 subpoenas, spanning more than 1700 pages. Sent to 34 people. One hundred sixty-three businesses, and then vacuumed up communications, tied to more than 400 Republican individuals and entities.

Okay? That's reaching into everything. They reached into media companies. CBS, Fox, Fox Business, NewsMax, Sinclair, into financial institutions, into political organizations.

Even members, employees, and agents of the legislative branch. So now you have congressmen and senators being vacuumed up into this whole thing.

This is not a precision rifle shot. This is a net and a very big dragnet.

Okay? This is not the way justice in America works. You do not go after, you know, an entire party, 400 people? Now, what were they looking for? How did it start?

Well, let me say, the opening memo to justify Arctic Frost is to call -- does in legal terms, it would be called the predicate.

And it was stamped sensitive investigative matter, okay?

And it's cited. And I love this. Listen to this language. It's cited, evidence suggest a conspiracy around alternate electors.

I'll get to that here in just a second. But it -- it relied on -- leaned on news clips. News clips!

To vacuum all these people up, to get the -- to get the engine turning. News clips were used.

Suggesting, not proving. Suggesting, and it just rose up the ladder.

Ray, Garland, Monaco, even coordination with the White House counsel's office. It surfaces now in the record. This went all the way to the top.

This is not my language. This is what the documents now on the table imply.

Okay? Now, let me just pause for a minute, in the reading room of American memory. What is this all about?

Alternate electors. That's not a Martian invention. Okay?

That's not something completely foreign. We've seen it before. 1876, and 1960. They were messy. Contested. Deeply political moments that produced zero criminal prosecutions for their existence of rival slaves.

In fact, Al Gore, if he didn't set an alternate slate of electors, he was counseled, and I've talked to Dershowitz about this.

He said, they're counseled to have an alternate set of electors. Because once -- if you don't do that, and the tables turn and you're like, you know what, there was a problem -- if you haven't ceded those electors before a certain time, you have no case. You can't change anything. So it has to happen. And it has happened two times before, I think three, but definitely in 1876 and 1960.
In Hawaii, in 1916, Democrats signed certificates while a recount was still underway. The recount flipped. So it was ultimately certified. The democratic slate was certified. Ugly? Yes. But that's the way it worked.

It's not criminal. And history has said no. It's not criminal.

But it doesn't matter, when it's about Donald Trump. So let me go back to Arctic Frost thousand. As the subpoenas flew, the FBI reportedly snooped phone records of Republican members of Congress!

The scope widened to donor analytics. Broad financial data. Trump world advisers.

The lawyers. The media contacts. We said, during January 6, we said, internally, if you don't think they are going after a massive tree, because remember, this is -- this is what the Patriot Act allows you to do now.

You go after one person. If anybody is calling somebody else, well, that person now can be Hoovered up. And who has that person called?

So you can get pretty much everybody that you want, with one subpoena.

But that's not where they stop. They didn't stop with one subpoena. Okay?

When the state casts a dragnet over the opposition's political ecosystem with the authority to seize all their communications, compel testimony, and chill the donors, that's not tough politics.

Okay?

That is the government, with badges and grand juries, leaning its full weight into one side of the national scale.

Watergate. Please!

Watergate. Let me compare Watergate. You know what Watergate was?

Watergate was a gang of political operatives who broke into an office to get information. They weren't even. They weren't even losing the election. Nobody even knows why they would even do this. It is so stupid that they would even do this. But it was a local office. They broke in. They wanted to get some information that was there, you know, on the -- on the candidate and on the race.

And then they covered it up.

And they tried to keep the public from the truth.

It was wrong!

It was criminal.

And it forced a president to resign. And people went to prison over it. But Watergate was a private burglary, executed by a campaign, and covered up. By the White House.

Terrible!

Awful.

That's not the DOJ blanketing the opposing party's entire world, with federal subpoenas while citing news hits as the predicate.

Do you see the difference?

Watergate was an attempt to weaponize a campaign. Arctic Frost, if the emerging records hold, was the attempt to weaponize the entire state against a political party.

The difference there is the whole ball game. Under a constitutional republic.

You don't have a constitutional republic, if that's allowed to happen.

In America, the state is supposed to be the neutral referee. Not a sideline enforcer wearing one team's colors under the stripes.

And don't even start with me on, well, what about Donald Trump?

We'll play that game all day long. And you know where that gets us?

Nowhere. You want to make a charge against Donald Trump and what he's doing.

Good. Let's take that separately.

Let's do that. I'm willing to. Let's take that separately. Let's deal with this one, first. Okay? The moment the referee picks up the ball and starts running, the game is over!

It's not a fair game anymore. And if it can be done to them, today. It will be done to you, tomorrow.

That's not a slogan. That's a law of political gravity.

Yeah. But Trump did -- okay. Let's have that conversation.

But can we at least have it honestly?

Because if you think this is about, whataboutism. You believe so see the nose on the front of your face.

You're completely missing this.

You cannot make a weaponization of a government, a partisan inheritance that each side can claim when it holds power.

If any president, any prosecutor red, or blue, uses federal power to criminalize political opposition, rather than prosecute clear crimes.

It is an offense gets an equal protection under the law. So let's -- let's lay down a standard here, that I'm willing to apply to Donald Trump and to Joe Biden and any other president that comes our way. Because if we don't lay this clear standard down, we're done.

The predicate. Predication. It has to be real. Not rhetorical.

Evidence suggesting via TV interviews, is circular sourcing, at its best.

It's not something that you launch a sprawling investigation on into a presidential rival's universe. If you can't articulate the crime, specifically, you don't get to launch a dragnet on the people that are running against you!

The scope has to be narrow, and tied exactly to the alleged crime!

Not a sweep through media organizations, and donor records, and opposition infrastructure, under vague theories, that come from TV reports!

Journalism.

Political advocacy.

Fundraising.

All of those things are protected activities. Separation from the White House, also must be unmistakable. If the White House Counsel's office is coordinating device transfers into an investigation of its chief political rival, alarms should clang in every corridor of every main justice call hall.

Everywhere! The alarm -- the Claxton should be going off right now. Also, historic practice matters!

If prior episodes -- by the way, this was all thrown out by the Supreme Court. So you know. Okay? Nothing there.

If prior episodes, 1876, 1960, and I believe 2000. If they were treated as political, not criminal, especially where alternate electors were explicitly conditional, then you need compelling new legal theories and clean facts to criminalize it now.

You can't just say, yeah, well, history, never did anything about it before. And, actually, they said it was fine.

But now, now it's going to be a crime.

Wait. Can you be specific on what has changed? Well, we really just liked the people that are doing it this time. That doesn't count. That doesn't count.

Now, before anybody clips this monologue and screams, so Glenn Beck said, nobody -- the Trump administration did anything wrong. Well, I don't think so.

But that's not what I'm saying, because I'm not the judge. I'm not your juror. I'm the guy insisting that the rules are rules, and they should be applied to everyone on all sides.

Smith has his report. He says, he wants to tell his side. Great! Put him under oath. If he didn't do it, then he should be set free.

But it should be on a clear set of laws! What's happened in the Biden administration, they just kept changing laws. Well, yeah. I mean, the bank said there was no crime. But Donald Trump. And so all of a sudden, there was a crime.

Nobody has ever been prosecuted. Ever before that. Even the bank said, this is ridiculous.

There's no crime here.

It didn't matter.

That's not justice.

I want real justice. Smith says he has a side, let's hear it. Bring forward the memos. Publish the predicate. Let the country see where weather we had a criminal case or an election cycle dragnet. Because that's what it looks like. If the emerging picture looks like, if the Arctic Frost opened up on thin evidence, escalated on political pressure, and metastasized into a government-wide sweep of the sitting president's chief rival and his entire ecosystem, then this is not just like Watergate. This is much, much, much worse than Watergate. In kind.

Not just degree.

Watergate tried to steal the information. That's it. They potentially attempted to steal legitimacy to criminalize opposition by wielding the sword of the state.

That violates, you know, more than statutes. That violates our creed, that free men govern themselves by consent, and the process is sacred. And the law is the wall that even presidents and prosecutors can never climb over. If proven, the remedy is not a sternly, terse letter, or an op-ed, and a shrug.

The remedy is the full force of the law. Inspector general referrals. Special counsels where appropriate, prosecution where crimes are clear. Statutory reforms to bar this from ever happening again from -- from press clippings?

Being your predicate? Bright lines need to be drawn. Protections for the press, for donors, and legislators in political cases. Sunlight. All the sunlight on how this began, who approved it, and why no one in the administration said stop.

And to my friends saying, well, Trump is doing the same thing. I hear you. I don't agree with you, but I hear you. Why don't we codify the guardrails right now?

So when emotions are high and temptations are strong, the republic doesn't survive by trusting that our guys will be angels. It survives on the chains on power. Everyone's power.

You know, when I hold a founding sermon in your hand, when you read the ink of Washington scratched in the margin notes of James Madison. You discover that America's miracle wasn't that we selected saints. It's that we built a system where even the sinners are fenced in by law.

That's the process. When justice is blind, to banners and bumper stickers and political parties, that's when America is America. Arctic Frost. If the record stands, it took a blowtorch to that fence.

So the choice is really simple. Retreat into teams. Each side cheering for its prosecutors. And its dragnet. Or you can do the harder, nobler thing, just like our founders did. And insist that the same rules that bind all power, especially when it's aimed at people that we dislike, are enforced. That's how you keep a republic.

That's how you make sure that there's not a second Watergate. Because we learned the lesson the first time. But it we?

Because if we haven't. If we don't learn it this time, and by God, we are done!

The story of America is not a story of who got whom. It's a story of the people who refuse to let the government become a weapon. And if that spirit still lives in us, then this cold wind called Arctic Frost will pass. And the Constitution will withstand. Because you stood for equal justice. For due process. For truth. That doesn't bend to politics.

And that, that is how we relight the torch of America!

Disease-Infested Monkeys LOOSE in Mississippi?!play icon
RADIO

Disease-Infested Monkeys LOOSE in Mississippi?!

A truck carrying 21 'aggressive' monkey's allegedly infected with contagious diseases such as COVID-19, herpes, and Hepatitis C crashed in Mississppi, causing the monkey's to be let loose. While most of the threat was taken care of, one monkey is reported to still be on the loose. This sounds eerily similar to the beginning of an outbreak movie...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Big thing some good news. Let's start with some good news.

President Trump has just -- is touring Asia and making all kinds of deals.

Donald Trump is single-handedly reshaping the earth!

He really is. He is reshaping everything. Single-handedly.

STU: Big job.

GLENN: I know. He's done more than The Great Reset did with all of that money. All of the campaigns. Everything that they were doing.

Listen to this. What he's just done. Signed a framework agreement, August 28th, between Trump and the Japanese Prime Minister, mutual stockpiling of rare-earth elements, REEs. Okay?

To ensure supply security. That's Japan. Cooperation with international partners, US allies, to shield the supply chain from disruptions.

The goal is to reduce China's 90 percent control over the global rare earth minerals.

For tech, EVs, defense, and AI. Okay. They have a 90 percent stranglehold.

So that's what he did in Japan. Now, also bundle that with the 550 billion dollar strategic investment from Japan, in the US. Including a 490 billion-dollar launch phase. 200 billion for nuclear AI and energy projects, small modular reactors with Westinghouse and Mitsubishi, and supply chain boosts in critical minerals.

Trump tied that to the tariffs. Japan got an auto import tariff slashed from '27 to 15 percent in exchange for the investments. In two weeks in the last two weeks, listen to what he has done. He has made multiple pacts with allies. Australia, critical minerals framework, mining processing, and rare earth mineral recycling scrap. Then in Japan, I just told you, Malaysia, he just did a memo of understanding on critical mineral diversification. In Ukraine, a ten-year access to titanium and rare earth minerals.

In Thailand, an MOU on rare earth mineral supply. Add that to what else he has done. He is -- he is outflanking China. He is trying to break the back of China! He is friend shoring, is what he's actually doing.

He is -- he is putting all of this emphasis on rare earth minerals. He's cutting Asia away from China.

He's cutting Europe away from China. He's cutting South America away from China. He has moved all of the resources of rare earth minerals to us. Anything outside of China, is coming our way now!

That is massive! Massive! We were sitting ducks with rare earth minerals, six months ago, a year ago. Total sitting ducks! They had everything coming their way. We were not doing any kind of -- any kind of strategic thinking on this, at all!

And this isn't piecemeal. This is operation warp speed for rare earth minerals. He is -- the guy is so ahead of everyone else. He is reshaping global trade and permanently, hopefully, sidelining China.

So we are never having to put our hand out to China.

It's remarkable, what is happening. Just remarkable! Now, let me give you another story.

A truck halling 21 monkeys to a testing facility in Florida, overturned in Mississippi.
(laughter)

STU: How did -- how did we make this jump? Has he signed a memorandum of understanding with the monkeys?

GLENN: Nope. Nope. They're still negotiating. According to the Jasper county sheriff's office, the accident occurred on Interstate 59, near the 117 mile-marker just north of Heidelberg. Six recess monkeys from Tulane University escaped. Officials said, five of the six that escaped have now been destroyed.

We've been in contact with an animal disposal company to help handle the situation. The Mississippi Department of Wildlife Fisheries and Parks and I guess now monkeys is still looking for one diseased monkey, still on the loose.

STU: A hundred percent, the beginning of an outbreak movie. That's exactly how it happens. The one gets away. Oh, we've got five of the six. What's the big deal?

GLENN: What was the one. What was the movie with -- oh. What's his name?

Tommy -- remember, he was the escaped convict. He was the doctor, and they were hauling him. He was the doctor from Ohio.

Based on a true story. And he -- they're hauling him. And he escapes. He has to try to prove himself innocent. Remember?

STU: Fugitive?

GLENN: Fugitive. Yeah. That's right.

STU: I was looking for a deep cut there.

GLENN: Fugitive. Sorry, I couldn't remember. It's a fugitive, and outbreak. That's what this is.

STU: That would be a good movie. I wouldn't want this in real life.

GLENN: I prefer a lot of this to not happen in real life.

STU: What are the diseases? We have help C going on?

We have COVID. I think there's three of them. Help C. COVID. And what was the other one? Herpes.

What happens if we combine all three into one monkey, and then release it into the wild?

What could possibly go wrong?

GLENN: Let me tell you something.

You know, we are in real trouble. I mean, I hate to bring this up too. Okay. Did you need diseased monkeys on the loose today from me?

No. No. Can I make it worse?

Absolutely, I can make this worse.

You know when we have the COVID thing. And we were all like, we shouldn't have these labs everywhere, you know.

STU: Oh. Like the labs.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Gain-of-function research, and things like that.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

We've built hundreds of new labs now. Hundreds of new labs. There are more than 35 hundred BSL3 and over 110BSL4. Bio safety level four laboratories. And all of them are now working on pathogens that could kill all of us.

So a 2025 journal of public health study reveals over90 percent of the countries that operate these labs have no oversight whatsoever!

STU: All of them are working on diseases that can kill us all?

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: There's not one that is doing yogurt flavors or something?

There's not one.

GLENN: No. There's not. There's not one. I wish there were!

You know, they keep saying, these are shields from -- no. These are match sticks. That's what these labs are. These are giant match sticks.

And we're sitting in a bunch of kindling -- they're -- they say they're developing vaccines. But what they're really doing is enhancing the viruses. Which, when I say enhancing, what that really means, they're weaponizing viruses. So don't worry. You know, it's just gain of function, which translated is, loss of sanity.

STU: I mean, because the research makes me very nervous. I mean, the fact that we have more labs that have higher safety standards. In theory, should be -- that was one of the problems with the COVID outbreak. Right?

They were doing research that should have been done at a BSL4. BSL1 and BSL2.

So, I mean, having more fours, that could be good, right?

GLENN: Eh. Did you see the BSL4 in China? In Wuhan?

STU: Well, I think that was the issue, it wasn't a BSL4.

GLENN: I think they called it a BSL4, and then it wasn't one.

STU: I don't think it was. Do we have a BSL4 for monkey research? I think really --

GLENN: I'm not really sure -- I know Georgia.

STU: Don't transfer it. Keep it in one place. You don't need to transfer them anywhere.

GLENN: In Atlanta, they're doing -- they're building another 150,000 square feet of a BSL4 in -- in Atlanta. So that's the place, oh, yeah, where all the zombies will be. Can I just tell you a quick little story? 1979. Soviet Union.

You know, they're trying to maintain this BSL4. They're not very good at it. Because, you know, they're not good at anything in 1979 in Russia.

STU: Except for nuclear power.

GLENN: Exactly right.

Okay. So there was a cloud released from this bio safety level lab four.

No flames. No alarms. Just a faint, invisible mist. It's kind of like hmm, my teenage son's farts. It's invisible, and it's deadly.

STU: Okay. Hmm.

GLENN: And it was carrying anthrax spores, okay? From the weapons lab.

Well, people began to die, clearly. We don't know how many. They think hundreds. Entire families suffocated because the bacteria devoured their lungs. And they were like, I have no lung!

GLENN: Okay. And the Kremlin was like, not happening. What do you say?

People were eating tainted meat. That's what's happening.

And it's eating their lungs.

STU: They Chernobyled it.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

So for a decade, nobody really knew what was going on, until the fall of the Soviet Union, and then people were going in. And they were like, oh! Here's what happened.

In one of these bio safety labs, a technician failed to replace an air filter properly.
And that was -- that -- just that allowed this microscopic storm of death to be released into the air.

I don't know! I mean, if your air filter not being installed properly can kill a bunch of people. And only tainted meat. McDonald's. I don't know. I don't -- I don't really think that we should -- we have them all over. 149 nations have them now.

149.

STU: There's definitely not 149 nations that should have stuff like that.

GLENN: You don't think so?

STU: No. I don't even think I can name 149 nations.

GLENN: Try this one. In India, the labs now are experimenting with the Crimean Congo viruses. Fatality rate of 75 percent.

In Russia, under its sanitary shield initiative, they are building 15 new BSL4 sites. In Brazil, Project Orion, a high-containment complex integrated with its particle accelerator.

Oh. And as I said, Atlanta, 160,000 square feet.

Apparently, we don't have enough room for all the monkeys that we're releasing in all the wild. And eventually, we'll find. And put them in there.
And torture them. Or do whatever it is we do. No international body tracks or regulates what's happening in any of these fortresses. What the hell is wrong with us?

STU: We should note an international body does not necessarily solve the problem.

I mean, as we've seen -- when they do monitor it, they usually import people to rape the citizens around the facilities.

GLENN: Exactly right. But you know what I'm really sick of it? There's no international body that does anything, except just let these people put really bad things into our body!

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Can we -- can we stop with this?

STU: We're good with this on our own. Put all sorts of things in my body. That should not have been in there.

We're good at doing that.

As Americans, on our own. We don't need your help.

GLENN: I really -- just stop.

The arrogance. The arrogance of these -- hey, you know what, we need to fiddle with some more viruses. And let's make a digital God that we can't control!

What the hell is wrong with us?

STU: Especially when the digital God that we can't control can make new viruses.

GLENN: Exactly right! Exactly right.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And maybe -- maybe -- maybe what we do, is we put it into a self-driving car. And it directs. And monkeys just start flying out of everyone ever seen butt.