Erick Erickson Speaks With Glenn: I Know One of the Sources, and It's Far Worse Than What's Being Reported

Erick Erickson, founder and editor-in-chief of TheResurgent.com, recently posted an article, I Know One of the Sources, which describes disturbing details on what's really happening inside the White House in light of the news Trump may have exposed sensitive information during his meetings with Russian officials. Erickson joined Glenn on radio Tuesday to discuss.

"This is worse in the sense that the president's conversations, I'm led to believe, with the Russians, provided them enough information through his bragging that they could identify the location of the source, how the source obtained the information regarding explosives and laptops, and could therefore identify specifically who the source was," Erickson said.

If true, what does that mean for President Trump? Is his job at stake?

RELATED: The Russia Leak Won’t End Trump’s Presidency Unless Republicans Agree It Should

"I don't think it's impeachable, and that's the problem. Gross incompetence is not one of the areas for impeachment in the Constitution. And I think we have to take that literally. If the president wants to release information to the Russians, he legally has the right to do it," Erickson said.

But there is a deeply troubling aspect to the president sharing high-level intelligence.

"The problem is that it undermines our relationships with our allies and our ability to collect intelligence from other sources and could potentially put the life of a source in jeopardy," Erickson said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Let's go right to Erick Erickson, a friend of the program, a friend of the Constitution, and a guy who has just written a pretty intense and explosive article about, "I know one of the sources on the Washington Post story."

And, by the way, Stations, we're still waiting for McMaster to come out and to begin his press conference. We'll join that, if it begins.

Erick.

ERICK: Hi, there.

GLENN: How are you?

ERICK: I'm good. How are you?

GLENN: Well, I've been better. Trying to make sense of this. And I believe McMaster, however, he has been very, very careful with his words. And he was denying things that the Washington Post never even -- never even claimed last night.

ERICK: Right.

GLENN: So it was an odd response, I thought last night. But I believe him. I'm waiting for him to come out. And now I get this story from you, that says, "This is very credible. And it's worse than what is reported."

ERICK: Yes. So I -- I am friends with someone who works for the president, is -- was enough of a pro-Trump supporter last year, that he and I moderated our interactions because we so vehemently disagreed with each other in the election. And he is concerned enough, at this point, as are others within the national security apparatus, that they are under the impression they have to leak these things to the media for the president to pay attention to them because he is extremely defensive when anyone approaches him in person and tries to explain to him why he should not do the things he's done.

Now, someone this morning interacted with me and said, "Well, maybe the president's reaction was, he was upset because they should have told him ahead of time." And that was my reaction as well.

But according to the source, he said, "That's not the president's reaction. The president's reaction is, I'm the president. I can do whatever I want. And that it's not helpful."

This is worse in the sense that the president's conversations, I'm led to believe, with the Russians, provided them enough information through his bragging that they could identify the location of the source, how the source obtained the information regarding explosives and laptops, and could therefore identify specifically who the source was.

GLENN: So how do -- let's say McMaster comes out and says all of that stuff is not true. McMaster is a guy who has written a book on honor and integrity. How do you square that?

ERICK: I don't know that you can. There's clearly something going on inside the White House, leading to this disparity.

The information last night from McMaster, I thought, was most interesting in that he denied a lot of the rumors and speculation surrounding the Washington Post report, but did not actually deny what the Post, the New York Times now, and other outlets have actually reported. So I'm going to be very interesting to see how he parses his words in this press conference.

GLENN: So if he says -- you know, if he verifies -- I can't imagine he's going to, but if he would verify what you just said or based on what you know -- I mean, I don't know who your source was, that was in the room? They were in the room?

ERICK: No. Was not in the room. There were very few people in the room. Was out of the room and in the post-meeting briefings about what took place in the room.

GLENN: Okay. So if -- McMaster was in the room. If he says -- let's just say he verifies what your source says, should President Trump step down or be impeached?

ERICK: I don't think it's impeachable. And that's the problem. Gross incompetence is not one of the areas for impeachment in the Constitution. And I think we have to take that literally. If the president wants to release information to the Russians, he legally has the right to do it.

The problem is that it undermines our relationships with our allies and our ability to collect intelligence from other sources and could potentially put the life of a source in jeopardy. But it's perfectly legal for him to do it. That's the problem here. And that, I suspect, would be General McMaster's answer here, is that everything the president did was legal. And he's absolutely right.

STU: I mean, Erick, you have to think, if he's getting this venue and making this statement, there's no way he's going to say anything other than completely back the president.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: Now, I believe McMaster is a really honorable guy, but, I mean, he would not have this venue to come out and theoretically clarify all the things that he kind of left hanging in his previous statement, if he wasn't going to say something supportive of the president. Am I wrong on that?

ERICK: That would be my reaction as well, which is why I'm very interested to hear what he has to say.

GLENN: So, Erick, you didn't really answer the question. You did answer -- here comes McMaster.

Real quick. You didn't answer the question. Should he be -- should he be asked to resign?

ERICK: You know, if everything about this story that I'm being told is true, I think the president needs to consider the good of the country and not necessarily the good of him liking the phone system in the White House.

GLENN: Okay. Erick, thank you very much. Erick Erickson from theresurgent.com.

The Biden Admin EXPANDED abortion access because they DON'T believe in the Constitution

Joshua Lott / Stringer, JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

This month has already produced an extreme example of why we need a functional and more conservative Congress in order for America to have a chance at moving forward—because the Left does not believe in the Constitution.

Sure, if you confronted a Democrat in Congress, they would probably claim some sort of allegiance to the Constitution—but as a practical matter, they do not believe in it.

Instead, the Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch. Why? Because it has the furthest reach through all the various departments, and it can move the fastest—in short, because it’s the most dictatorial. It only takes a department head to write a new memo, or even better, the President to sign a new executive order to carry the force of law.

The Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch.

Do you recall any of the Left’s favorite Supreme Court decisions over the years—something like gay marriage for example—and how Republicans immediately tried to subvert it, using the executive branch to try to nullify the decision? Yeah, that never happened. But that is exactly what Democrats have done in recent weeks to expand abortion access.

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions. When the miraculous overturning of Roe v. Wade happened last summer, President Biden called it “a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions.

Recently the FDA approved local pharmacies to issue abortion pills. For the first 20 years after these pills were developed, they were not treated like typical prescription drugs. They had to be dispensed in-person by a doctor. That in-person requirement is now gone.

Keep in mind that the Left’s go-to line is that abortion is always about the health and safety of women, yet a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions. Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of abortion-related ER visits following use of the abortion pills increased by 507 percent.

Chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions.

And now the Biden administration is making these less-safe abortions much more accessible. Thanks to the FDA’s rule change, Walgreens and CVS have already agreed to dispense abortion pills in states where abortion is legal—effectively turning these stores into new abortion clinics.

As for states that have abortion bans, "Team Biden" announced a new way around those too. Three weeks ago, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal. What’s their rationale? That the sender cannot know for sure whether the recipient will use the pills illegally or not. So it’s totally okay.

The U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal.

Georgetown Law professor Lawrence Gostin told the Washington Post that this Justice Department opinion is “a major expansion of abortion access in the United States.”

So, to recap—the Biden administration has used the FDA, the Justice Department, and the Post Office, which all fall under the executive branch, to provide an end-run around the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Expanding abortion was easy—simple policy tweaks and declarations that carry the force of law without an ounce of input from actual lawmakers in Congress—all because it comes from the grotesque, bloated, apparently pro-death executive branch.

Glenn is one of the most outspoken critics of the World Economic Forum and their vision to use crises to reconstruct the world order known as The Great Reset. The recent WEF summit in Davos confirms what Glenn has long warned about: globalist elites seek to upend our democracy, freedoms, and way of life to achieve their utopian climate goals. Here are 15 quotes from the 2023 Davos Summit, revealing their true intentions in their own words:

1. Saving the planet

When you hear the word, "Davos," the first thought that should pop into your mind is an elite group getting together to save the world from imminent climate disaster... at least they think of themselves that way. According to John Kerry:

I mean, it's so almost extraterrestrial to think about saving the planet.

2. Private jets

What most people think when they hear the word "Davos" is a group of global elites flying in on private jets to talk about climate change... and yes, John Kerry does own a private jet, no matter how many times he denies it:

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

You always hear some weird, dystopian projects coming out of WEF, like "The Global Collaboration Village," a new metaverse community aimed at strengthening "global cooperation." It sounds like the next installment of Brave New World. According to Klaus Schwab, Founder and President of the WEF:

The Global Collaboration Village is the pioneering effort to use the metaverse for public good, to create global cooperation and to strengthen global cooperation in the metaverse or using metaverse technologies. For me, it's a dream coming true because the village allows the Forum to create a more larger and open platform where everybody can participate.

4. Climate revolution

However, the core theme throughout WEF summits is the immediate need for a climate revolution and how businesses are selfishly blocking the revolution because they want to make an extra buck. Here's how John Kerry summed up the sentiment:

How do we get there? The lesson I have learned in the last years [...] is money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

5. Do or die

This often turns into alarmist language, like having to choose between wealth and our planet's survival... Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at University of Amsterdam, said it eloquently:

If we do the minimum at this pivotable moment in our history, then we and our children – even if we are rich – will live in the danger zone. But if we – business people, governments, citizens, cities – take action today, then we and our children will have a future worth looking forward to.

6. Colossal risks

Potsdam Institute's director Johan Rockström, used similar language, claiming we are "taking colossal risks with the future of civilization":

We are taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth, we are degrading the life support systems that we all depend on, we are actually pushing the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization, pushing Earth outside of the state that has supported civilization since we left the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago.

7. Rain bombs

"Colossal risks" like... rain bombs? We didn't make that up. Ask Al Gore:

That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs.

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

How do we secure our survival? According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we have to "end our addiction to fossil fuels." This entails wiping out our entire energy industry, displacing millions of workers, and relying on global governments to usher in a new green industry. In his words:

So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap, and that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution, to end the addiction to fossil fuels, and to stop our self-defeating war on nature.

9. Complete transformation

It isn't hyperbolic to argue that the globalist climate goals will completely transform the world economy. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted:

The net-zero transformation is already causing huge industrial, economic and geopolitical shifts – by far the quickest and the most pronounced in our lifetime. It is changing the nature of work and the shape of our industry.

10. Scientific necessity

Of course, to bring about this "net-zero" transformation, we will have to override small, "political expediencies" like democracy to do what is "scientifically necessary." According to Zurich Insurance Group’s head of sustainability risk John Scott:

We’re living in a world right now where what’s scientifically necessary, and what is politically expedient don’t match.

11. Illegal hate speech

Doing away with "political expediencies" would also require the censorship of dissent, which would likely manifest in hate-speech laws. When asked by Brian Stelter how the discussion of disinformation relates to everything else happening today in Davos, European Commission VP Věra Jourová shared this prediction:

Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.

12. Climate first

We will also have to forego national interests on the international stage. America won't be able to advocate for policies and interests that benefit Americans. Instead, we will sacrifice national interests for the sake of global climate interests. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said:

The key question is not China First, US First, Europe First. The key question for all of us is Climate First.

13. The role of war

We can also expect globalist leaders to use crises, like the war in Ukraine, to expedite the "net-zero transformation." Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz said:

Ultimately, our goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 has been given an additional boost by Putin’s war. Now we have even more cause to move away from fossil fuels.

14. Blame game

Globalist leaders will continue to blame ALL of the crises in our society on climate change to justify the "net-zero transition," from the energy shortage to "mistrust, selfishness [and] xenophobia." Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez said:

Our present struggle is not only against Putin or the energy shortage. It is also against fear, mistrust, selfishness, xenophobia, and environmental disaster. And its outcome will define life in the West and beyond for decades to come.

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

While we sacrifice our national interests for the sake of the "greater global good," we can expect our foreign enemies, like China, to benefit. Suisse Chairman Axel Lehmann said:

The growth forecasts now for China is 4.5%. I would not personally be surprised when that would be topped.

Conclusion

Glenn has been clear about the distinction between wanting to transition to green practices on your own accord and being forced into that transition by globalist, unelected elites. Leaders at Davos will continue to use alarmist language to justify their crackdown on democracy and freedom to bring about their leftist utopia. We have to cut through the alarmist language and in order to protect our freedoms.

Glenn has focused on exposing the dark side of the gender movements waging our culture war, and now, there's a new "trend" emerging as an offshoot to the transgender movement. A growing online community, particularly of men, who consider themselves "involuntarily celibate" or "incels" believe they can live a better life as a trans woman. Why? This community purports the world is rigged against men, particularly against traditionally "unattractive men." What's the solution? Stop being a man...

Incel or "involutarily celibate" communities have existed online in the dark corners of Reddit and Discord for years. The groups are marked by a hatred towards women, blaming them for rigging the world in their favor and denying them of sex. Several members of this growing community have been responsible for large acts of violence, most notably Alek Minassian, who killed 10 and injured 16 after driving a van into a busy area of Toronto in 2021.

However, the transgender movement has presented a new option for incel members: if you can't beat 'em, join 'em... or, in the Transmaxxers' case, "become them."

The online Transmaxxer's Manifesto says, “Since females have the upper hand on the dating market, transitioning from male to female will usually improve your options when it comes to getting sex.” According to the manifesto, transitioning to female not only opens up a different pool of sexual partners, but moreover, you gain access to female-only spaces and are “able to extract resources from males.”

“Since females have the upper hand on the dating market, transitioning from male to female will usually improve your options when it comes to getting sex.”

Another member wrote, "If you do not currently feel like living as a female you might have to work on fixing that ... Identifying as male or being emotionally attached to a male body is bad for you if being male results in you living a bad life.”

This new movement is significant because it is in stark contrast to the mainstream narrative that "transgenderism" is an innate quality. Now, it can be an "option" people choose for social advantage. A moderator going by the alias “Vintologi” on the Transmaxxing Discord server, which boasts over 1,200 members, told The Daily Caller:

Transmaxxing is about transitioning for personal gain rather than focusing on things like "gender identity." ... What matters when it comes to medical transition is whether or not said transition would actually be beneficial, thus the extent to which gender identity is innate does not inform us much regarding when medical transition is appropriate.

One incel member on Reddit lamented that he can't Transmaxx to "have sex with white trans women" and to have "all the benefits of [being] female."

Transmaxxing sheds light on a concerning issue as an increasing number of people, particularly the youth, identify as "transgender." What used to be considered as a "finge case" is now being seen as a social advantage. Glenn recently sat down with de-transitioner Chloe Cole, and the amount of pressure she experienced to become a transgender man AS A TEENAGER was ASTOUNDING. She discussed the new community, friendships, and affirmation she gained when she started her transition journey, and she lost ALL of those social perks when she began de-transitioning. She exchanged affirmation for death-threats, friendships for stone-cold silence.

Transmaxxing is a very specific example of a larger movement that is deeply concerning. Not only is the thansgender ideology problematic on its own merits, but now, we are seeing a rise of a distinction of "social advantage" based on gender affiliation. This is deviating away from the original notion that transgenderism is an innate quality. Now, many consider it more "socially advantageous" to identify as transgender than with your biological gender.

At the same time President Biden's misplaced classified documents were sitting in his house, garage, and office at the Penn Biden Center, a whole lot of Chinese money was flowing around him. Is this just a coincidence, or did the Chinese get anything in return? Investigative journalist John Solomon joins to break down what was going on here ...

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.