BLOG

EXCLUSIVE: Jim DeMint Weighs in on Russia and His New Role at Convention of States

Jim DeMint has found the perfect home after being let go by the Heritage Foundation: The Convention of States Project. The former senator joined Glenn in his first post-Heritage interview and the two talked about the movement, as well as recent developments with Russia.

"So, Jim, the Convention of States, I think has new life to it. And a lot of it is coming from places like California, of all places. I think this is a real opportunity... Are you reaching out to the people on the left who are more Libertarian-minded?" Glenn asked on radio Tuesday.

DeMint confirmed the Convention of States (CoS) is beginning to see bi-partisan support.

"They understand that what we're trying to do is not tell people what to do or to tell California they have to do something and South Carolina does something else. What we're talking about is where things are decided," DeMint responded.

Supporting the Tenth Amendment and states' rights in order to limit the scope of federal power has been a key agenda item for CoS.

On the election front and Russian hacking controversy, DeMint laid the blame squarely at Obama's feet.

"Everyone in the Obama administration knew that this was a risk, and the fact that it was not addressed, that more was not done, is a gaping hole in our security," DeMint said.

Enjoy the complimentary clip, listen to the full segment or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: We were really excited when Jim DeMint went to the Heritage Foundation. Jim DeMint, if you remember right, in the day, was the only guy in the Senate. This was before we had Mike Lee. This was before we -- we had Rand Paul. This was before we had anybody. He was the lone guy back in -- in '06, '07, and '08. And then the wave election happened. And then he left. Went to the Heritage Foundation.

I hated losing him in the Senate. But he thought he could make some real difference at the Heritage Foundation. I think he did.

But they didn't like the direction. So he left. Where is he now, and what happened at the Heritage Foundation? His first interview since leaving begins right now.

(music)

GLENN: Let's go to Jim DeMint now. Jim DeMint, formerly the former senator from South Carolina, and then with the Heritage Foundation for I think four years or so and made a real impact there. Jim DeMint, welcome to the program. How are you, sir?

JIM: Glenn, I'm doing really well. And it's good to be back on your show.

GLENN: Thank you, sir. Jim, I know you're such a Southern gentleman, you're not going to want to, you know, say anything bad about anybody, and I'm not looking for the bad stuff. But can you tell us what happened at Heritage? Because there's been these stories that, you know, you were too conservative, that you were -- you were taking it too -- too conservative. I don't know what that means for the Heritage Foundation. But trying to take it too conservative. And they wanted to be more G.O.P.-centric.

JIM: Well, Glenn, frankly, I don't know. And the board just decided they wanted to do something different in the future. And, frankly, I feel like the Lord knows what he's doing. And where I am right now, realize that I'm in a place where I can make a much bigger difference. There are some great people at Heritage. But I'm ready to leave that chapter behind and get back to work on two fronts: I realize -- and I'm sure you see it from where you sit, that we can't just work in one area. It's not just enough to be a senator or elect a senator. We have to do a lot of things, if we're going to stop this out of control federal government. And the two things I need to work with conservatives on the Hill and try to equip them and support them. Because as you mentioned, when you started the show just a minute ago is, a lot of times, it's just one or two people working to try to do the right thing. And the system tries to take them apart.

But I've also realized that no matter what happens, no matter who we elect, Congress is never going to stop spending. That they're going to keep spending and creating debt, until we have some kind of crisis or meltdown. And our Founders knew that that was a possibility, that they gave us the fire alarm on the wall, to break the glass and pull the lever. And that's in Article V of the Constitution, where they've said the states could come together and propose amendments to the Constitution. In this case, we have to get the states to force the federal government to have physical restraint. To limited jurisdiction. And hopefully even to term limit members of Congress and maybe even the judiciary.

GLENN: Okay. So you're now going to the Convention of States. What role of Convention of States Project are you going to play there?

JIM: I'm what they call a senior adviser. I'll be working with Tom Coburn and a good team around the country to work with state legislators. Because the secret here is to get 34 states to pass essentially the same call to convention. This is not a constitutional convention. This is nothing about a free-for-all, to rewrite a Constitution. Article V is clear that states can propose amendments. And we want to propose particular amendments that will help force the federal government to not only balance its budget, but limit taxes. But also limit what it can do. Because the Tenth Amendment is clear, that whatever is not prescribed to the federal government in the Constitution, to be left to the states and the people. And the federal government has just run all over that.

And so I look at my fight -- I'm just fighting on two fronts. I'm not going to give up on helping conservatives. And we've started a new nonprofit to do that. But I'm working with the Convention of States, hoping that the states will call a convention to propose amendments, to limit the power and the spending of the federal government.

GLENN: So, Jim, the convention of the states, I think has new life to it. And a lot of it is coming from places like California, of all places. To where liberal are saying, you know, the government is out of control.

Yeah, because now your guy isn't in control. And California had a real movement to actually secede from the union.

I think this is a real opportunity, but it also could be used to exploit the -- the -- the framework of Article V.

Are you reaching out to the people on the left who are more Libertarian-minded, and are you concerned at all about a hijacking from the traditional left?

JIM: Glenn, that is one of the arguments that opponents of this use. But, frankly, it -- there is literally no chance that this -- you can have a chance that proposes some kind of crazy amendment, that in 38 states ratify. I feel much more comfortable in that second balance, than I do with what the courts could do in Washington, or even what Congress can do.

You mentioned something that's very insightful, actually. Because liberals, once they understand this concept, like it -- at least a lot of them do, because they understand that what we're trying to do is not tell people what to do or to tell California they have to do something and South Carolina does something else. What we're talking about is where things are decided.

And that's the difference here that -- the thing that creates disunity all over the country now is you've got so many things being decided in Washington about what we should do and how we should live our lives.

What we need to do is let states and local communities and people themselves make more of their decisions. As long as power keeps gravitating to Washington, the more I think this disunity we're going to have in America.

GLENN: Uh-huh. So let me take this now -- for the liberals, let me take this -- the conservatives. Do you think the conservatives fell asleep on Article V after Trump was elected, and has that changed?

JIM: No, I don't think so. Because I believe that most of what President Trump is trying to do are things that we agree with. But we see that ever since he was elected, that they have made this big deal of Russia. If Russia did anything, that's on Obama. I mean, Obama was supposed to be watching our country and our security systems and stuff like that. But I think what we've seen is despite the strong personality of Trump, he's put some good people in the agencies. They're still making it almost impossible for him to get anything done. And even with Republican majorities, we see in the budgets that they pass, we're going to keep spending and keep growing the government. Hopefully we can have some small successes. But I don't think the country is falling asleep. And I see this as a mission that the grassroots, the folks who are involved with the Tea Party, who are discouraged now, that people can see, this is a very focused idea. If we come together, this is maybe the only way we can restrain an out-of-control federal government.

GLENN: Jim, the -- who are you more disappointed with? Congress or the presidency? Because I have to tell you, Congress is, in my opinion, absolutely shameful. Shameful the way they're acting and spending. And, you know, the way they dealt with Obamacare is just -- is mind-boggling.

JIM: Yeah. I agree. No, I'm disappointed in Congress. I frankly think the Trump administration has done a lot of good things that they can do on their own. But they're in a boxed canyon. Everybody is shooting at them, including Republicans. You go to the White House, it's just surrounded by tents of media people who every day are looking for something they're doing wrong.

But one of the things I want to do on the Hill is work with conservatives to try to make him more effective. Because once you get there, whether you're in the House or the Senate, you're in your own little foxhole. Everybody is firing at you, every time you try to do something right. They try to throw you off a committee or get you back home with your constituents. We can do a lot better uniting and equipping conservatives once they're elected. And that's what I'm going to try to do, along with a small team, is to get them to work more closely together and try to protect those who are trying to do the right thing.

GLENN: More with Jim DeMint, who is now one of the senior advisers of the Convention of States Project, in just a minute.

[break]

GLENN: Former senator Jim DeMint is with us now. He's with the Convention of States. Just left the Heritage Foundation.

Senator, let me ask you a couple of questions. As a former senator, it came out last night in a very weird sort of way, the head of NewsMax left the White House at 5:30. Went over to PBS to do the news hour and said that President Trump is considering letting go of Bob Mueller and shutting down the independent counsel. Paul Ryan said today he has confidence in Mueller. The White House has since denied that that is happening. But has said that he's at least thinking about it.

What would that -- what would your reaction be if -- if you were a senator to something like that?

JIM: Well, I think that now that he's in place, it would probably be a mistake for the president to -- to terminate that. I think it was a mistake to appoint a special prosecutor because if you look at how they worked over the years, they almost have to find something. And if they can't find something that they were supposed to be looking at, they'll look at something else.

And I was hoping, when it happened, that maybe it would settle. The Russia thing. And Trump could go on to leading the country. But apparently they're not going to let that happen. I just think that now that he's in place, they're going to have to ride it out for a while, at least until there's some more testimony that proves that Trump has not only never been under investigation, but there has been no evidence since all this started, that Trump or his team had anything to do with it.

So more testimony like that, I think it would be good if members of Congress, particularly in the Senate, called on a resignation and the termination of a special prosecutor. But the president needs some help with this. So if Republicans are taking cover, it's going to be hard for him to do it himself.

GLENN: Jim, there is evidence that came out today -- we're going to share it in about five to eight minutes -- there is real disturbing evidence now that has nothing to do with Clinton or -- or Donald Trump, that the Russians did target our election in incomprehensible ways. And hit and actually broke into 37 of our states and got into the polling numbers in 37 states. Did not, luckily, affect the election. But that is the one thing that I got out of the testimony last week that I don't think the media or anybody else is paying attention to, because we're so busy playing politics.

JIM: Right.

GLENN: The Russians are not just coming, they're here.

JIM: Exactly, Glenn. We've known for years, Russia has the most sophisticated propaganda machine in the world. And has been interfering with elections for decades. It's one of the problems we've seen in Ukraine and former Soviet republics. They're constantly destabilizing governments and being engaged in elections. Everyone in the Obama administration knew that this was a risk, and the fact that it was not addressed, that more was not done is a gaping hole in our security. So it does concern me that our cyber security for our US government and our country is so weak. We've lost military secrets, and now they're in our election booths.

GLENN: We were talking about this earlier today. I think in any other time in American history, with what they did -- what I believe they did with WikiLeaks. You know, how they hacked into the DNC. And now we have stark evidence that they hacked into 37 states. I think at any other time in history, that would be akin to an act of war. Am I wrong or right, historically?

JIM: Well, it's definitely the new type of warfare. And we've lost billions of dollars in military secrets, not only to Russia, to China. We need to do a whole -- I know I worked on it some in the Senate, to build a better cyber security system. But the government is always ten years behind. And they've been hesitant to use a lot of the private sector sources, haven't figured out what to do there. But we need to catch up on that because lives are at stake on our intelligence system. And certainly if our whole Democratic system now is in jeopardy, then that's a huge problem.

GLENN: We're in Texas, Jim. I know 12 states now have called for the Convention of States. Thirty-two other states are considering it this year. I didn't think Texas was going to -- I mean, first I thought it was insane that Texas wouldn't pass it. Then I thought, oh, my gosh, the Texas legislature isn't going to do it. They eventually did. How are the other states shaping up? And did Texas make a difference in momentum?

JIM: Texas always makes a difference. That's one of the reasons we're working now with Texas on school choice. The more they -- they set a pattern for the country in a positive way. The opposite of what California opposite does. But it's the grassroots strength of the conservative movement in Texas that made the difference with your legislature there. Because there were a number of people trying to block it or hide from it. And that's what's happening around the country. The Convention of States Project is building a grassroots network of millions of people who have come to understand that this may be the only way to save our country. And so they're engaged in every state. And during the next legislative cycle, you're going to probably see ten or 20 states come play with a lot of grassroots support. So that's what I'm going to do all over the country. Call on people who have been trying to elect good people. Who have worked in the Tea Party. Who have been active, to come help us call this Article V convention of the states.

GLENN: And it's -- it is -- I really, truly believe this is the -- this is the fix. This is the Founders' fix. I wish we would have thought of it when the Tea Party was roaring because we could have really gotten things done. But we need people to be involved in the Convention of States. The things that you want to -- and believe you can get done if the convention is called.

JIM: It's in three categories. The thing that interests me most about how we're doing it, with the convention of state project, is we're not proposing the specific amendments. Because we found, like, for instance, if you're working on term limits, then everybody wants term limits, is going to disagree, whether it's six, eight, or 12 years.

GLENN: Yeah.

JIM: But what we're doing are three areas, that we will pass amendments restrict fiscally what the federal government can do to borrow money. Generally it will deal with a balanced budget. But also tax and spending restrictions. The other is jurisdiction and authorization. It will restrict what the federal government can do on the regulatory front, on what it can do, for instance, controlling education, health care. Give states much more latitude there.

The third subject is to be to put term limits on federal officials. Congressmen. Senators. And perhaps even federal judges.

GLENN: What do you say to people who say -- and I've got about 30 seconds for this answer. What do you say to people who say, you know, you put term limits on, then it's going to be the bureaucrats that are going to be running everything?

JIM: That's just not true. Every time you have a new wave of people coming in, they bring a lot of their own people. They will get something done. They know they have a short period of time, and they're not going to put up much of this, let's do it after the next election. So it's a way to clean the plate up and get people to think about the country rather than a political career.

GLENN: It is always an honor to talk to you, Jim. Thank you so much for your service of the country. Thanks for what you did at Heritage Foundation. And now, joining the Convention of States Project. If you want to get involved with the Convention of States, how do you do it, Jim, quickly?

JIM: Just go to the website. Just Google "Convention of States Project," and you'll be right there on our site. GLENN: Former senator Jim DeMint is with us now. He's with the Convention of States. Just left the Heritage Foundation.

Senator, let me ask you a couple of questions. As a former senator, it came out last night in a very weird sort of way, the head of NewsMax left the White House at 5:30. Went over to PBS to do the news hour and said that President Trump is considering letting go of Bob Mueller and shutting down the independent counsel. Paul Ryan said today he has confidence in Mueller. The White House has since denied that that is happening. But has said that he's at least thinking about it.

What would that -- what would your reaction be if -- if you were a senator to something like that?

JIM: Well, I think that now that he's in place, it would probably be a mistake for the president to -- to terminate that. I think it was a mistake to appoint a special prosecutor because if you look at how they worked over the years, they almost have to find something. And if they can't find something that they were supposed to be looking at, they'll look at something else.

And I was hoping, when it happened, that maybe it would settle. The Russia thing. And Trump could go on to leading the country. But apparently they're not going to let that happen. I just think that now that he's in place, they're going to have to ride it out for a while, at least until there's some more testimony that proves that Trump has not only never been under investigation, but there has been no evidence since all this started, that Trump or his team had anything to do with it.

So more testimony like that, I think it would be good if members of Congress, particularly in the Senate, called on a resignation and the termination of a special prosecutor. But the president needs some help with this. So if Republicans are taking cover, it's going to be hard for him to do it himself.

GLENN: Jim, there is evidence that came out today -- we're going to share it in about five to eight minutes -- there is real disturbing evidence now that has nothing to do with Clinton or -- or Donald Trump, that the Russians did target our election in incomprehensible ways. And hit and actually broke into 37 of our states and got into the polling numbers in 37 states. Did not, luckily, affect the election. But that is the one thing that I got out of the testimony last week that I don't think the media or anybody else is paying attention to, because we're so busy playing politics.

JIM: Right.

GLENN: The Russians are not just coming, they're here.

JIM: Exactly, Glenn. We've known for years, Russia has the most sophisticated propaganda machine in the world. And has been interfering with elections for decades. It's one of the problems we've seen in Ukraine and former Soviet republics. They're constantly destabilizing governments and being engaged in elections. Everyone in the Obama administration knew that this was a risk, and the fact that it was not addressed, that more was not done is a gaping hole in our security. So it does concern me that our cyber security for our US government and our country is so weak. We've lost military secrets, and now they're in our election booths.

GLENN: We were talking about this earlier today. I think in any other time in American history, with what they did -- what I believe they did with WikiLeaks. You know, how they hacked into the DNC. And now we have stark evidence that they hacked into 37 states. I think at any other time in history, that would be akin to an act of war. Am I wrong or right, historically?

JIM: Well, it's definitely the new type of warfare. And we've lost billions of dollars in military secrets, not only to Russia, to China. We need to do a whole -- I know I worked on it some in the Senate, to build a better cyber security system. But the government is always ten years behind. And they've been hesitant to use a lot of the private sector sources, haven't figured out what to do there. But we need to catch up on that because lives are at stake on our intelligence system. And certainly if our whole Democratic system now is in jeopardy, then that's a huge problem.

GLENN: We're in Texas, Jim. I know 12 states now have called for the Convention of States. Thirty-two other states are considering it this year. I didn't think Texas was going to -- I mean, first I thought it was insane that Texas wouldn't pass it. Then I thought, oh, my gosh, the Texas legislature isn't going to do it. They eventually did. How are the other states shaping up? And did Texas make a difference in momentum?

JIM: Texas always makes a difference. That's one of the reasons we're working now with Texas on school choice. The more they -- they set a pattern for the country in a positive way. The opposite of what California opposite does. But it's the grassroots strength of the conservative movement in Texas that made the difference with your legislature there. Because there were a number of people trying to block it or hide from it. And that's what's happening around the country. The Convention of States Project is building a grassroots network of millions of people who have come to understand that this may be the only way to save our country. And so they're engaged in every state. And during the next legislative cycle, you're going to probably see ten or 20 states come play with a lot of grassroots support. So that's what I'm going to do all over the country. Call on people who have been trying to elect good people. Who have worked in the Tea Party. Who have been active, to come help us call this Article V convention of the states.

GLENN: And it's -- it is -- I really, truly believe this is the -- this is the fix. This is the Founders' fix. I wish we would have thought of it when the Tea Party was roaring because we could have really gotten things done. But we need people to be involved in the Convention of States. The things that you want to -- and believe you can get done if the convention is called.

JIM: It's in three categories. The thing that interests me most about how we're doing it, with the convention of state project, is we're not proposing the specific amendments. Because we found, like, for instance, if you're working on term limits, then everybody wants term limits, is going to disagree, whether it's six, eight, or 12 years.

GLENN: Yeah.

JIM: But what we're doing are three areas, that we will pass amendments restrict fiscally what the federal government can do to borrow money. Generally it will deal with a balanced budget. But also tax and spending restrictions. The other is jurisdiction and authorization. It will restrict what the federal government can do on the regulatory front, on what it can do, for instance, controlling education, health care. Give states much more latitude there.

The third subject is to be to put term limits on federal officials. Congressmen. Senators. And perhaps even federal judges.

GLENN: What do you say to people who say -- and I've got about 30 seconds for this answer. What do you say to people who say, you know, you put term limits on, then it's going to be the bureaucrats that are going to be running everything?

JIM: That's just not true. Every time you have a new wave of people coming in, they bring a lot of their own people. They will get something done. They know they have a short period of time, and they're not going to put up much of this, let's do it after the next election. So it's a way to clean the plate up and get people to think about the country rather than a political career.

GLENN: It is always an honor to talk to you, Jim. Thank you so much for your service of the country. Thanks for what you did at Heritage Foundation. And now, joining the Convention of States Project. If you want to get involved with the Convention of States, how do you do it, Jim, quickly?

JIM: Just go to the website. Just Google "Convention of States Project," and you'll be right there on our site.

The TERRIFYING Reason Why the Northern Lights Were Visible So Far South
RADIO

The TERRIFYING Reason Why the Northern Lights Were Visible So Far South

Many people across America were excited to see the northern lights in states where they’re almost never visible. But Glenn points out the terrifying reason WHY the light show happened. “We really dodged a bullet,” Glenn says. The massive solar flare that caused the aurora borealis to be visible in even southern states could have caused “a blackout situation.” Glenn breaks down what it would mean if all our tech was to go down, or even just our GPS systems, and also asks why the government hasn’t taken the steps to protect our infrastructure from something like this.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, I know this is probably not on anybody's charts. But seeing the aurora borealis. Is a very big story that nobody has been talking about. Everybody is like, look at the sky. It's so pretty. Sure. But why is it pretty? Why is that happening? This is the first time in 20 years that we have seen the aurora borealis as low and as South as possible -- or, as it was. But we had an event and I talked about it in our meetings, Stu, last, I think Monday. A week ago Monday. And everybody looked at me like I was crazy. I said, there's a huge CME that just happened. There's a huge solar flare that just happened.

Luckily, it was on the side of the sun.

But it was coming our direction.

But not directly.

It was the biggest solar flare since the Carrington Event in what, 1860, or whatever.

STU: Yeah. 1860, sure.

The Carrington Event you're talking about? That's, yeah, 1860.

PAT: How many times have we talked about the Carrington Event? We're all over the Carrington Event.

STU: Well, Pat just started a new podcast called Pat and the Carrington Event.

GLENN: Pat, wait a minute. I'm trying to look, to see through my eyes. But are you wearing a I'm a fan of the Carrington Event?

PAT: Yeah. I am. I do. I have it available in different colors.

GLENN: Available at Patisajerk.com.

So the Carrington Event happened in the 1860s. And we were hit by a massive solar flare. And at the time, the only -- we didn't really have electricity or anything. But we had telegraphs.

Telegraph wire all over the country, burned up. I mean, literally started on fire. From the telegraph, all the way through all of the poles, it just burned out.

And that is, you know, a significant problem with today's electricity and all of our wires.

That -- that could have been a -- a blackout situation.

An EMP. We dodged a bullet. It could have shut down power companies. And power lines all over the country.

All over Europe as well. For at least a year.

The problem we have is: All of our power transformers, it takes them, I think it's a year to build and replace giant transformers. And we don't have extras.

Nobody is thinking about this stuff.

PAT: And we haven't protected our infrastructure.

GLENN: No.

And it would be very expensive

Bret Weinstein wrote a great article on this, last week. About, you know, he was kind of making fun of how everybody was saying, oh, look at the beautiful sky that will happen next week.

And he was like, it would take so little to protect our infrastructure. And nothing is protected.

We really dodged a bullet.

PAT: Well, this is a few years ago. But they were talking about not just a solar EMP. But an EMP from, you know, a foreigner. A foreign adversary.

And how we could protect our infrastructure from it, for it seems like it was only a billion.

GLENN: I think it's under 5 billion now.

PAT: Yeah. It's dirt cheap in comparison to what we would lose if it actually happened. And they won't do it.

GLENN: You know, that's one of those low probability, high -- what do they call those things?

STU: High impact.

GLENN: Yeah. High impact.

This impact, if we were hit by an EMP. And it takes three nuclear weapons. Launched into space.

Iran could probably do it. You know, when they get their missiles.

PAT: North Korea, yeah.

GLENN: North Korea. All you have to do is put two barges. One on the east coast and the west coast.

You fire two on one. One goes over the middle of America. One goes over the west coast. Then you have another on the east coast.

It takes three missiles, detonated at the right altitude, above America. You would shut us down. And in the first year, 95 percent of our population would die.

PAT: Yeah. Because we're back to the cave time.

GLENN: Stone Age!

PAT: You don't have refrigeration. You don't have transportation.

GLENN: And you cannot repair it fast enough. Because we didn't protect anything.

This is one of the craziest things.

Congress. You're spending money on so much. A turtle tunnel. Spend $5 billion to protect the infrastructure.

PAT: It doesn't make sense not to.

GLENN: No. It doesn't.

STU: It seems like one of the basic things that government is designed to do. There's a lot of things they're doing that they're not supposed to do. Wouldn't this be something that falls into the category of must do?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

PAT: Yes. And how often do they talk about infrastructure and bridges? We have electronics that could be protected, and they're not being protected.

GLENN: To an that this -- this solar event could have knocked out all of Elon Musk's satellites. They were afraid of those. And all of our GPS.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: Do you know what would happen if we lost all of our GPS?

PAT: EMS.

GLENN: So the GPS. Our magnetic field is so far awry right now, that it's about a 30 -- a 30-degree switch, and so it's drifted about 30 degrees.

Okay. So it's not up at the poll. At the top and the bottom.

It's 30 degrees off.

And because of that, it's causing all kinds of holes and thinning of our ionosphere.

So, you know, all of this stuff, can come through.

And we have such a problem with it. It's moving so rapidly, we used to have to adjust our GPS I think it was every five years. Now it's every two years. Because our polls are shifting, it's then a year. It's now every six months, we have to reset our GPS satellites. The poles are moving that rapidly.

Why Michael Cohen’s “BOMBSHELL” Melania Trump Testimony Should NOT be Trusted
RADIO

Why Michael Cohen’s “BOMBSHELL” Melania Trump Testimony Should NOT be Trusted

The mainstream media is gawking over testimony from Stormy Daniels and former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen former president Donald Trump’s hush money trial. But despite the media’s insistence that Cohen dropped “bombshell” revelations about Melania Trump, there’s a good reason we SHOULDN’T believe a word he says. Glenn, Pat, and Stu explain why Cohen should have lost all credibility years ago and why salacious testimony should have no place in this case. Plus, they review the telltale signs that Trump’s trials are more akin to the Soviet Union’s propaganda machine than American “democracy.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: It looks like -- I mean, no pun intended, but absolutely intended. Looks like the Stormy Daniels case is a bust, in some ways. I mean, you know, it's a New York -- it's a New York jury.

But I don't know if you saw what Bill Maher said over the weekend. About, you know, how the prosecutors have blown it -- I hate.

They have screwed it. They haven't done their job very well.

And Michael Cohen took the stand yesterday, right?

PAT: Yes, yeah.

STU: And today.

PAT: And CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, seemed to take it, everything he says, as if it was gospel truth.

GLENN: I mean, he was lying before. But now he's telling the truth.

PAT: Right. Now he's honest Abe.

GLENN: I saw that. He was splitting rails on the way to the courthouse.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: It was weird. And returning a penny.

PAT: Yes. Walked 5 miles to return a penny.
(laughter)

PAT: I mean, it's really amazing. I mean, Stormy Daniels had no credibility. This guy has no credibility. And I think Trump's lawyers have done a decent job showing that. But they're still getting bludgeoned. It's still New York.

And they have all the media on their side.

So I don't know how this will go. But if he gets past this one unscathed. Then I think it's smooth sailing for maybe the next four years. It will be a while.

GLENN: It is absolutely amazing.

You know, they started with, he's got 9,874 billion charges against him. And he's skating past them all.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: They're just all falling apart.

STU: They're all at least getting delayed until after the election, which is really the only important thing at this point. He can worry about the other stuff later on. And he probably will have to worry about it later on.

GLENN: If he lost the election, every single one of these things would just go away. Just go away.

STU: Probably true. If he decided, you know what, I'm not going to run. I'm done with this nonsense.

I don't think any of these charges occur.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: It's so obviously about this particular election. And, you know, they waited for so long, for most of this stuff, to be filed. And for them to even go after it because they were waiting for him to announce he was running.

And once they announced he was running, they scampered as quickly as they could to put this together. And it's all shoddy. It's pathetic.

I mean, most of these charges against him, were charges that they had previously themselves, in this case, decided not to pursue. You know, they're tying it to -- to other crimes, that have not even. He's not even been charged with.

And they won't even identify, in the middle of the trial. And Michael Cohen is probably the most ridiculous example of this.

And we've said this at the very beginning with Michael Cohen. This is back when he was still an ally of Donald Trump. There was no reason, to believe anything that comes out of Michael Cohen's mouth. He says whatever he has to at any given moment, to benefit himself.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what is amazing?

At least we're consistent. We didn't believe him, when he was saying good things about Donald Trump.

We don't believe him when he's saying bad things about Donald Trump. He has no credibility.

STU: Yeah. I mean, he's gone on every single side of this. Of course, at the beginning was saying, how wonderful Donald Trump was. And how perfect he was.

And he was the greatest president of all time. And blah, blah, blah, blah. Just stuff that is typical, over the top praise. And I think a lot of people missed this.

But once they had their falling out. He turned into like a resistance guy.

And to -- with the still -- the same absurd persona. Where he was like, you know, this guy, who is an Oompa Loompa. And you're going to run against him as a Democrat?

Like, I'm serious. This guy went completely insane, like beyond Keith Olbermann levels of opposition to Trump. And then when this whole buildup came up to this.

People in the media, rightly noted that that persona of, you know, he's an Oompa Loompa, is not going to work on the stand.

So now he's reworked his persona again. Is now on the stand, with this very calm, measured tone of a man just trying to get to the truth.

GLENN: He was very hurt.

STU: He was very hurt.

And his ego has been bruised. And his family. Blah, blah, blah.

How can anyone believe this? He was just on TikTok like three months ago, as a completely different human being.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what, can we get a cut of those for tomorrow?

Let's make a compilation of how insane he went.

STU: Yeah, for sure.

PAT: We could.

STU: Pause there's plenty of stuff to choose from.

PAT: And CNN is accepting everything as if it came out of the Bible. They're talking about this bomb he dropped in court. That Donald Trump didn't care if Melania was upset about his affair with Stormy Daniels.

Because he wouldn't be on the market for very long.

GLENN: I don't believe that.

PAT: Now you buy that? They certainly do. CNN is all over it. MSNBC is all over it.

GLENN: I've always thought Donald Trump was a guy who was like, hey, baby. And maybe he is, I don't know.

But with Melania, I think he really respects her. I really do.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I think it bothers him, when people don't show her the respect that she deserves. And I think she's -- she's no dummy. She's absolutely no dummy.

PAT: No. She's not.

STU: No. But, I mean, look, I hope their relationship thrives. It's got nothing to do with this case.

PAT: Me too. No.

STU: It has absolutely nothing to do with what we're supposed to be talking about. Their relationship is between them. Right?

This is -- this is a case about business records. This is a case about business -- it has nothing to do with whether Donald Trump cares about his wife or not. It has nothing to do with that. It might be important to us or them. It has nothing to do with this case.

And they keep pushing it down this road.

GLENN: Because he has such problems with, you know, suburban women, that's why they're doing this.

It has nothing to do with the actual case of money.

The -- the -- I'm if we saying the New York jury is going to find him guilty. No matter what it was. But they're making this so salacious, because they're hurting him with women.

They're trying to make him look into just an absolute pig. So they hurt him even more with women. This is all political.

We are living in the former Soviet Union, in many ways. When it comes to the media and our court system on Donald Trump. That's exactly what's happening.

STU: Do you think, Glenn, there's a snapback effect to this, if he is able to somehow get through these charges, and not be convicted by a New York jury?

GLENN: How do you mean a snap back?

STU: Like we've been talking for a lopping time. At least the media has. If he's convicted of a felony. There's a certain percentage of people, who will not vote for him.

And that shows up in polls.

I don't know that you could take it seriously, honestly.

I don't think people correctly predict their emotions in a moment like that.

But take it for what it's worth.

That's what everyone has been saying.

And, you know, the idea here, obviously, is to hurt Donald Trump with all these charges.

Make him look like a felon. Make him look like this terrible criminal.

STU: If now -- you know, after being told, there's 11 billion charges coming his way. If they can't get one conviction before the election, does this snap back against them and turn into a massive positive, for Donald Trump, electorally?

GLENN: I don't think so.

If they find him not guilty on this, then I think there might be.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, it's interesting to me, more than a snapback, it's interesting to me, you're not hearing. At least I'm not hearing. Maybe they're saying it. But I don't listen to them. So what do I know?

I haven't heard a big movement on how he has conned the courts. He's done all kinds of illegal or unethical maneuvers to get things delayed.
I haven't heard that. I think people just know, this isn't working. This is all a sham. And it's not working for them. And the -- it will just be neutral. It just won't matter.

PAT: We went through some of the numbers yesterday. And it certainly looks like, at least in the swing states, this is -- this is working in his favor. Right now. Like he's gaining sympathy.

GLENN: Can I tell you? I heard this morning, they say he fell asleep during the court.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And he said he didn't. I think he should have said, yes. What? There's nothing happening here. I took a nap.
(laughter)

STU: I mean, it pushes I think against his sleepy Joe criticism.

Which is why supposedly he -- he likes the idea. He's the high energy guy. And everything. Which we all know. And I think is true.

But I would be bored out of my mind.

GLENN: Oh, that's what I mean, though.

He is high energy.

He has been attentive on all of this stuff.

I think he could have used that as, do you know what's going on?

I don't have to worry about it. I was a little tired because I was out, you know, campaigning.

And I was doing this. And doing this. And I had nothing else to do. I could have made origami. But I decided just to take a nap.

PAT: I think that would be a smart move right now. Because Biden is trying to use the falling asleep in court. He's the worst. He's calling him sleepy Don now.

GLENN: That's so clever.

PAT: Isn't it? Isn't it? Yeah. Because Donald has called him sleepy Joe. So he's done it back. Can you believe it? All creative and clever.

Why Glenn Beck Predicts America Has Reached PEAK WOKENESS
RADIO

Why Glenn Beck Predicts America Has Reached PEAK WOKENESS

Woke progressivism has taken over much of America, from our schools to our corporations, and of course, many aspects of our government. But Glenn is optimistic that the pendulum may be starting to swing back. As Americans wake up to how wokeness has destroyed the country, they are standing up and pushing back. So, have we already reached "peak wokeness?" And can we change course without going too far in the opposite direction? Glenn and Stu give their predictions.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: our problems are so easy to fix. You could go into any coffee shop in America. And you could grab, you just the five -- people who are paying attention. Out of everybody. There are five people here who could name the president. And the three branches of government. Can you come on over to my table. We would be able to fix this. If you were put this charge, you would be able to fix this. A lot of this stuff is so common sense.

STU: That's interesting. Because I think if applied. If applied, common sense would solve a lot of these problems.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: But think about that in the real world. In this world that we live in. How? Even if you convinced the medical establishment. Which I think is a real goal here. And I think it is, something that is potentially achievable. The medical establishment. Look, what you guys have done over the past 15 years. With all this gender stuff, and all this is bad.

We're seeing it happen in foreign countries. Right? The reversing path.

GLENN: France. Sweden.

STU: Yeah. The UK.

But we're seeing progress in that world.

To get back to some sort of rational view here. But even if you were to accomplish that, there are so many people, with so many goals, that are at odds with that approach. You think the mainstream media will abandon this. Because the medical establishment changes? I doubt it.

Think about all the sites and bloggers and influencers. And all the people, that people actually get their news from. That would continue down this road anyway. And would still -- would still create people, like the person who seems to be in this case today. What we know of them. Those many examples.

GLENN: Those people existed before. They just didn't have positions of power. So the first thing that has to be done. Is you fire a lot of people. I'm sorry. You know, here's -- here's the problem. Common sense. Common sense should always rule with rare exception. You know, there are times, that you are like, okay. I know that makes sense. However, this time, cut the white wire. You know what I mean? You know. No. It should be the green wire. No. No, no, no. Usually red and green. But this time, don't cut the green wire. But the problem is: Everything is so over Ivy Leagued, that the average person goes, well, I don't know. You know what I mean? Because they'll be like...

STU: Right.

GLENN: You're like, what?

STU: Well, we saw this with the Claudine gay situation. Everybody knows, when you steal other people's work, you will get fired as an academic. And yet every institution went to bat for this woman, to explain why what she -- how what she did was not actually bad. And it was actually racism. And you guys don't understand the systemic racism that pushed her to have to do this. And why we should ignore.

GLENN: Right.

STU: And everybody is like, all right. I just don't want to get involved in that.

GLENN: And the thing is. Most people will back away from it. Because they will feel stupid. I don't know. Who am I to argue against Harvard.

STU: Fewer and fewer.

I think that's going away.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

Because we used to have. You know, there's balance in all things.

Balance in all things.

There's somebody to be pushed and pull. If you don't have that. There is no growth.

So what happened is, we had common sense.

And then common sense was looked down upon from an Ivy League. Isn't that cute? Well, I have uncommon knowledge.

And everybody was like, well, he must know something, that I don't know.

No. Really. Really, the only thing that you may know, that he doesn't know, is humility. And the one thing that he may know, that you don't know is arrogance. You know, I know.

Me and my people. We know. You need to be taken care of.

STU: Are you concerned that the balance is not something we're finding right now?

GLENN: No. Because I think it's coming.

STU: Is it coming. And is it closer to what you've talked about for a long time. More of a pendulum effect.

I'm worried, it had seem at times, that we're getting to a place where we're completely ignoring experts. I don't think that's the answer either, right?

GLENN: No. It's not. Until the experts are held by other experts.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Until the medical community can say, you know what, enough is enough.

This COVID thing, it was good here, here, and here. It was really bad here, here, and here.

And we have to stop, you know, just saying that, oh, no.

Now science knows. Because that's happened throughout all of mankind.

And then science learns. And they're like, oh. Well, now we know. As soon as it's cleaned out by its own people, you know. God will clean out his own house first. That's in Isaiah. I will clean out my own house first. And he will. And that's what needs to happen in all of the institutions. In media. It's got to be cleaned up.

Now, it's going to probably take outsiders to do it, or a new generation.

But look, it's already happening. It's already happening.

It's just that there's so much money involved, at the establishment level, and they're just holding on by their fingernails.

And they'll -- I mean, they'll pull all of us down, to stop from drowning themselves.

STU: Are you optimistic about the path here?

Are you optimistic that the pushback that has come from, I think, common sense.

I would argue, that usually equals a lot of conservative-type values.

But like, there has been a pushback in the media. There has been a pushback, when it comes to our institutions.

From more constitutional, common sense type thinking.

Will that result in something that is positive in the end? Are you comfortable with that?

GLENN: We are at the wire. We are coming around the fourth turn. And we're all dead even, as we're coming towards the wire. Who is going to win. And it will be won by a nose. And I think it will happen this year. But what is encouraging is we're seeing things that we haven't seen before. I think we're at peak wokeness.

You know, I had been talking about that pendulum theory that Stu has been saying. I've been saying for a while. 2020 -- what did I say? 2024. 2025. Is where we hit the peak. And then it starts going the opposite way.

I've said that for -- forever. Now, this means, it's going to take just as long, as it did to get here. But we will -- the dog returns to its vomit. We will go back to being a very selfish, me, me, me, you know, forget the collective culture. It will take us 40 years. But we will get right back to where we were. The key is, don't destroy yourself at any of the peaks. Because it's the middle where we really flourish. It's the balance of, no. The individual is really important. But so is the collective. We have to balance that. Right now, we're just not balancing. The individual just doesn't matter anymore. It doesn't matter. But I see this coming back, from really important people.

I think Elon Musk has been a turning point on that. You look at what Bill Ackman said this week, or Mark Cuban. What a difference. What a difference.

STU: Well, the Mark Cuban thing, it was bizarre. We should go through that.

GLENN: No.

STU: I don't even know if he knows what the word mean.

GLENN: He doesn't. He doesn't. He doesn't.

STU: It's weird.

GLENN: Again. It's the arrogance of people thinking they know. That's what Bill Ackman said. He said, I went to talk to the students.

And you realized, what I thought they were saying, is not what they're saying.

I didn't understand it.

Mark Cuban just hasn't gone through that. But he will. Because it's happening. It is happening.

But keep running flat out. Because it's going to be won by a nose.

The 6 BASIC STEPS to Prepping For a Disaster OR WORSE
TV

The 6 BASIC STEPS to Prepping For a Disaster OR WORSE

Getting prepared for a disaster may seem outright overwhelming. But Glenn breaks it down step-by-step: “It’s actually really easy and inexpensive. You just have to take it one bite at a time.” Glenn heads to the chalkboard to lay out the “6 basic steps to prepping,” as well as everything you’ll need to pack a bug-out bag.