BLOG

Stephen Crowder: Google Clearly Doesn’t ‘Want to Discuss Issues Anymore’

A Google software engineer lost his job this week after writing a 10-page internal memo critiquing the company’s diversity efforts.

In the memo, the engineer gathered some general observations based on research about men and women and what they can both offer to a company, suggesting some ways that tech jobs could become more friendly to women. He also objected to company programs that are only offered to employees based on race and gender.

“Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story,” he wrote in the memo.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in a statement that “portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”

Stephen Crowder of LouderWithCrowder.com joined Glenn on radio Thursday to share his take on Google’s decision to fire the engineer.

“Is that still hate speech?” Crowder sarcastically said of the memo. “When you read the entire memo in context … I go ‘OK, this is a guy who’s a classical liberal … and he’s writing something genuinely trying to be productive.’”

 

GLENN: Steven Crowder, welcome to the program. I was talking to a millennial yesterday, a very smart, well-thought out millennial who said, "You know, I don't agree with this, but I have to tell you what my feelings were when I first heard about this memo." She said, "I don't like people telling me what I can and can't do because of my genetics.

And she said, you know, "I heard the quotes, that he was saying that I can't do these things because I'm genetically predisposed to X, Y or Z." And she had a big problem with this.

Now, the good thing about this millennial is she moved past her feelings into thought, but that's not really happening, especially even in the press.

STEVEN: Yeah, well, thanks for having me, Glenn.

You're absolutely right. You know, a couple of points about the memo. I hate to use the fake news hashtag, but when CNN goes out and says, anti-diversity manifestos, they call it, like it's The Count of Monte Cristo writing on the stone wall, next to days in prison. Manifesto. Anti-diversity. And then it says anti-woman. Well, the quotes they take are where this guy essentially says, listen, Google is essentially pushing diversity, hiring for diversity's sake. And it hasn't really been that successful. We may want to -- and, by the way, I'm not saying that all men and women are the same. There's a significant overlap. Of course, there are people who would fall on both signs of the spectrum when it comes to attributes and perhaps some shortcomings.

But as a general rule, this may be why we don't have as many women in tech, and he talks about how women generally value work-life balance over status, whereas men will drive themselves into the -- they'll work themselves into the ground for status. It does say, "Yeah, you know, listen, women tend to handle stress more emotionally. It does list some characteristics that might not lend themselves well to high-stress tech situations."

But then, and here's what the media doesn't cover: On the flip side, he says, "No, I strongly believe in diversity." And I think if we want to hire more women, we might want to place emphasis on the -- on the issues where women perhaps are more valuable to the company.

For example, they're more cooperative. In general, they're more agreeable than their male counterparts. In general, they're more people-oriented. They're more empathetic.

We don't really place a strong value on those attributes that Google in these positions -- we might do better to do so.

So, listen, is that still hate speech? Do you lock this guy up with the Nazis? I don't know. Leave it up to people to decide. But when you read the entire memo in context, I can't see -- you know, Glenn, this is one of those issues where I read it, I go, okay. This is a guy who is a classical liberal. He even gets some digs in at conservatives in this memo. People read it. He's certainly not a right-winger. And he's writing something genuinely trying to be productive. Generally writing out points as to where Google may be able to improve.

And Google says, we can't -- this is hate speech. We have to fire this guy. Which tells me, if this guy can't do it, you know, you and I haven't got a shot. They're not interested in a dialogue. For the same reason we couldn't have anyone from Google or anyone on Google's side come on my program to argue this issue. They don't want to discuss issues anymore. They've gone too far around the back.

GLENN: So a couple of things: I would agree with you. And I have not been able to find somebody that can make a cogent argument on how this isn't the beginning of fascism in the Google world. The institutionalization of fascism in the Google world.

I really want to understand how silencing somebody who is really, truly making valid points. You don't have to agree with them. But bringing out a valid argument. How the best way to deal with that is to silence them and to shun them and to name-call. That's fascism.

And why this is concerning -- you know, if they were just making ashtrays, I wouldn't really care. But they're not.

STEVEN: Yeah.

GLENN: These are the people who are the gateway to information. And if they are saying, "This information isn't worthy to even be discussed at the levels in Google," are they really going to allow us schlubs who don't know anything to access that information in an equal and fair way? I don't think so. It wouldn't -- it wouldn't make any sense at all. It would be completely inconsistent.

STEVEN: Well, you're talking about a company -- my friend Owen Benjamin talked about this on the program. You're talking about a company where when you Google how to be a better man, it shows you articles written from lesbians. So they can't help you be a better man, nor do they have any interest in doing so.

As a matter of fact, you mentioned fascism. You know, if you Google fascism, it says far-right ideology. You know, and then description. Description. But if you Google communism or socialism, there's no mention of the left. There's no mention of the left side of the political spectrum.

It really is -- and here's the deal: They have the right to do what they want. They have the right to fire this guy. I think we all agree on that.

GLENN: Yep.

STEVEN: What they can't do is say, we believe in diversity. We believe in difference of opinions and then fire somebody for a difference of opinion. That's the issue here, is the dishonesty. When like you've said, I've read anywhere from between 60 to 80 percent of our online interactions occur either somewhere between Google, Facebook, Twitter, or Amazon.

So when you think of how much information is controlled, it really is -- and there are a few. Listen, what's so offensive, are we really going to start firing people because someone says men and women are different? Are we at that point where it's offensive to say, hey -- and anyone who is married knows that it's true.

And, by the way, hey -- hey, men -- you can't say men and women are different. Men and women are exactly the same. Men can do everything women can do, and women can do everything men can do with the exact same results.

By the way, let's celebrate diversity.

Did I step into a time? What happened? What world did I fall into?

GLENN: And the fact that women and men are exactly the same, except they can't play the same sport. That's unfair. You're going to put women. Really? Women are going to have to compete with men on the basketball.

Well, wait. You were just saying that there wasn't a biological difference. What are you talking about?

STEVEN: Yeah. Unless it's a transgender, then just let him into the octagon to beat the living daylights out of women. That's progress.

I think, Glenn, I think that this is a real opportunity -- the pendulum swing states both ways. We've talked about that. You kind of saw that with Bush. Then the sort of anti-establishment sentiment from young people. Then it swung the other way with Barack Obama.

But the pendulum is swinging so quickly now. And I think the left has gone too far for it to swing back. I think you're seeing too many liberals. And we see this with our content, a lot of people who used to be liberal going, I just can't get on board with this. Once they read the memo, people go, "You know, it's offensive to say that men are more task-oriented. It's offensive to say women are more emotional."

It really is at a point -- and, by the way, really, what hurts people here is that they don't feel good about it. The women took a sick day at Google. They were so offended at the notion that they might find work too stressful, that they read this memo and took a sick day.

By the way, not all women are this weak, just the feminists at Google. That's important to note. I'm sure -- I'm sure your wife isn't.

My wife's reaction was so earnest. And it just hit me like a Mack Truck. She just said, "Do you have to talk about it? It makes me just so ashamed. Ugh, women who complain like that. They're just so weak. They're so obnoxious. Most women don't like to be around them. They're just draining." That's what my wife said. Isn't it ironic that a non-feminist, conservative, Christian woman finds feminists to be obnoxious in their weakness? And that's where we are.

GLENN: That's really -- but that is the progressive mantra, is weakness. Celebrate -- not celebrate diversity. Celebrate your weakness, and we will compensate. We will be your defender.

I think your -- this -- this millennial who said this, you know, I -- you know, this is the way I felt. I don't like people telling me one thing.

Well, wait. The other side is telling you that, oh, yes, you can do it, but only with special exemptions. Only with special protections. Only with special training.

No. I'm telling you if that's what you want to do, go do it. Go do it. How is that offensive to say, you don't need somebody in between you. That's just somebody sucking you dry of all of your power.

STEVEN: Right. A couple of things: You know, they say, I don't like being told what I can and can't do. And conservatives are saying, well, listen, we're not really telling you what you can and can't do. But we can all find common ground on one issue: Pullups. Right? Liberals want to lower the PT requirements in the military with pullups so that women can join more easily. And we say, hey, women biologically can do fewer pullups. So there's a great litmus test.

As far as what's offensive -- you know, offensive now isn't about intent. And we've talked about this with the Google algorithms. You know, for the most advanced tech company in the world, right? On my videos, Muslim singles and gay cruise ads are playing.

Well, we're trying to fix the algorithms. You're Google. If you can't associate proper advertisers with my -- who can?

So, I mean, we're talking about people's feelings. That is what it comes down to Google. It's not about intent. It's not about context. Leftists don't really understand context. Or they don't value context, I should say. Certainly, as a whole. Anyone can feel bad about anything. I'm feeling miserable this morning. You know why? It's stupid. But I have some nagging injuries.

So I haven't been able to go to the gym. So I've been doing these -- these water weight exercises. You know, those foam dumbbells in the pool. And I was thinking, you know, hey, good for me. I'm going out. I'm doing something.

So I go on Amazon to look to buy some, as opposed to the public pool where I've been going. And then I read the reviews, and it's nothing but 77-year-olds talking about their aquatic aerobic classes. And then all of a sudden, Amazon is tracking with advertisements and the ads, every time I'm in my browser of reverse mortgages. Or Wilford Brimley with diabetes. And I feel bad. I feel bad. It's my own doing.

STU: I believe it's pronounced diabetes.

It's interesting, Steven, it's a great point on the physical part of it. Because it's exactly the point he made in the memo, which is: If you look at the top 100 meter times of all time, the world record holder for women is slower than the yearly best times for high school men. I mean, there's a clear difference here. Right?

However, what that does not mean is that the all-time world record holder is not going to be a hell of a lot faster than me trying to run 100-meter. Point being, yes, on average, there are differences. But there are women in Google all the time that are outperforming men all the time. It's just a commentary on averages, and nobody is going to bother to take a look at that.

STEVEN: Sure.

GLENN: And who is it that is devaluing the basic intrinsic worth of the sexes? I'm not.

I believe that Women Are From Mars, Men Are From venus, or whichever planet it is. I believe that we are different for many different reasons. But it's important that we -- oh, my gosh -- celebrate that diversity. That we look and say, "This trait in a woman of being less about stuff is good." It's a good thing.

STEVEN: Right.

GLENN: And at the same time, the man is worried about stuff or thinking about stuff. When you put those two together, you have a nice balance. Why are we trying to destroy -- first, say that what men are is -- has no value. And what women are naturally also has no value. You have to be this thing that is not -- neither male nor female.

STEVEN: Right. And that's kind of -- you know, I want to go back to Stu real quick. I want to answer that. But I'll throw another one into the mix. We talked about 100-meter dash. You want to know something else?

Chess. There's a women's division for chess. Think about that for a second. It's not even close, if you look at the top players of all time. There is no female Bobby Fischer.

Now, women can enter the men's division in chess, and there have been some outliers. Maybe a couple cracked the top ranks throughout time, but then they have an exclusively women's division in chess, which is just significantly further behind.

Now, that does not mean that women are less intelligent. Chess is not an indicator of intelligence. But it is -- let's remove the physical. It is absolutely an indicator of how someone's brains work, how it processes information.

We can see the difference between standard people and ADHD people. We can see the difference between, you know, people who simply read differently, who have different faster reading comprehensions. It doesn't mean they're smarter. Some people are wired differently biologically.

To what you said, Glenn, you know, Christians, we have used this term for a long time, complimentarianism. You know, it goes back to Christ. Really, the first diversity celebrationist, I guess you'd say, where he said, hey, husbands, be good to your wives.

That was kind of new, the way he really placed emphasis on treating the women as the best among you. And then, women, submit to your husbands. And submit in the Biblical sense. Not submit like Muhammad. You're going to get a fresh one if you don't do exactly what I say, but submit meaning respect the authority in the household and love your husband. So this is what we've known for a long time, the truth we believe to be self-evident.

And I do think -- and you guys can tell me if you've noticed this or if you think I'm wrong, I think it's forced a lot of people to reexamine issues. They thought they were liberalized. You know, people -- I've had people go back to the same-sex marriage issue and say, "You know, I really just thought conservatives were just a bunch of anti-gay bigots." But now when I go back and I see some of the arguments, whether I agree with them or not, but I see some of the arguments where people said, "You know what, I just don't believe men and women are interchangeable. I do believe that a father is of intrinsic value and a mother is of intrinsic value. And that they are unique and not interchangeable." You know, once we said that's not the case culturally, we kind of opened the floodgates. And I've had people say, you know, I have to look back and see where we went around the bend.

GLENN: Steven Crowder from Louder with Crowder. I think you're exactly right. And I'm seeing it in not just this, but in many things. Sitting in Los Angeles with, you know, liberals who would have just thought that we were all just racist bigots for the last ten years. Actually sitting around a table and them saying, you know what, I'm actually for the Tenth Amendment. And I thought that was all racist. And now, suddenly, I find myself going, "Yeah, you know what, maybe we should have that Tenth Amendment." And then realizing, "Holy cow, wait a minute. I may have been wrong on this. I have to reevaluate a lot." That is happening.

And if we can open our arms and not say, "Yeah, told you so," and just be decent human beings with -- with the -- with the open mind and honest arguments, I think we will welcome a lot of people into the fold.

Steven Crowder, LouderwithCrowder.com. Thank you so much. We'll talk to you again, Steven. Appreciate it.

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

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

STU: The band?

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

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

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

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

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

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

So everybody is just like holding back.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Absolutely humiliating.

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

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

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Remember that.

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

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

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

To say, hey. Shoot all these town.

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

GLENN: So you're sitting in Israel.

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

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

Because the whole world hates us right now?

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

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

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

STU: The second impression was --

GLENN: The first one was, again --

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

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

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

GLENN: Correct.

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

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

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

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

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

If you went and did another operation like that.

GLENN: I forgot.

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

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

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

You remember, you're a Jew here.

STU: Right. So they --

GLENN: They can say whatever they want.

STU: They can say whatever they want.

GLENN: They're always the pad guy.

STU: But there is a line.

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

Iran was.

And everyone was talking about what their response would be.

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

Some people did, of course.

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

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

Ask they voted no.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Of course, they said no to that.

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

They will just think, Jew equals bad.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

STU: Move the --

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

Because we would run out of missiles quickly.

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

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

Yeah. Launch.

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

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

Millions will die.

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

STU: In country.

GLENN: In country.

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

GLENN: He has to. He has to.

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

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

That's the risk.

GLENN: Oh. It's going to --

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

GLENN: Justifiably so.

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

GLENN: Enough is enough.

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

GLENN: Yeah. Me too. Me on top.

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

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

GLENN: Yeah. Correct.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But, you know, let Israel be Israel.

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

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

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

I'm just looking for happy things.

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

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

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The free Palestinian protesters.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Love them.

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

GLENN: Bridges. Bridges.

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: No. No.

But here's the good news.

They are being arrested.

And they're being immediately released.

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

And legal support.

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

Come on.

STU: Kamala Harris.

GLENN: No. That's too obvious.

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

GLENN: Yeah. But not this time.

STU: Thanks, Kamala.

STU: More obvious?

GLENN: Yeah. More obvious.

STU: George Soros.

GLENN: George Soros.

STU: We figured it out.

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

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

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

STU: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

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

Oh, my gosh!

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

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

STU: Open Society.

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

Think bigger. Think bigger. What do they start?

STU: Oh, gosh.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: They're for the people.

STU: A humanitarian cause.

GLENN: Absolutely.

STU: That happens to also.

GLENN: Problem with the Hezbollah flag.

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

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

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

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

For climate-related purposes.

I like the bridge for Gaza purposes.

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

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

STU: I am of the opposite.

I will absolutely oppose anything that you're doing.

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

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

STU: It never is. More capitalism!

That never happens.

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

No. Not happening.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Right?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I contend it did.

STU: You think Occupy Wall Street worked?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why?

Leave us alone.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

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

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

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

JASON: Should.

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

They have the Iron Dome.

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

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

STU: Fireworks.

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

JASON: Exoatmospheric.

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

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

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

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

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

Absolutely world war.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: Yeah.

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

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

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

GLENN: That's the one shooting in space.

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

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

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

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

Or is this as amazing as it sounds?

JASON: It's as amazing as it sounds.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JASON: They probably used that too.

GLENN: With the disposal, which is weird.

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

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

JASON: You're not now.

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

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

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

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

GLENN: It's not just that.

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

I would like to delay it as long as possible.

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

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

Israel is surrounded.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Because this will escalate into a world war that fast.

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

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

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

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

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

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

GLENN: You think?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You would know more than I would.

I think that was the signal from Iran.

Hey. We're going to do this.

STU: Right.

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

Hey, surprise!

But they let Israel.

STU: Israel did.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The matter is settled.

JASON: Concluded.

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

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

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

And they stopped the entire attack from Iran.

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

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

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

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

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

He believes they're doing all this --

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

STU: It's true.

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

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

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

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

I'm in addition they're stopped.

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

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

Why Megyn Kelly is “DISGUSTED” by New York’s Criminal Trump Trial
RADIO

Why Megyn Kelly is “DISGUSTED” by New York’s Criminal Trump Trial

The hush money trial of Donald Trump has begun — the first criminal trial ever against a former president — and Megyn Kelly is “disgusted” by it. “The United States of America DOESN’T do this,” she tells Glenn. But will Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg actually throw Trump in jail? Megyn explains why she doesn’t believe so, but she also debates whether a criminal conviction will help or hurt Trump in the November election.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Megyn Kelly, welcome to the program.

How are you, Megyn?

MEGYN: Hi, Glenn. Good to see you. How are you doing?

GLENN: What's going to happen this time? Are they going to get him this time?

MEGYN: They're going to get him. And I don't know about you. You can kind of laugh at it. And kind of absurd. But now that it's -- I mean, the first criminal trial of Donald Trump has just begun. They're in the courtroom.

The witnesses will be called eventually, after they pick the jury.

And they're going to try to put this guy behind bars, potentially.

They're 100 percent taking their best shot at stopping him from winning this race. And it really, for me as a lawyer, it's been very sobering morning.

I'm just disgusted.

I cannot believe we're doing this.

I -- it's like -- it's like Princess Diana behaving like a straight whore. That's what we're doing. The United States doesn't do this. And because we're in the hands of this scummy prosecutor. Multiple. It's not just Alvin Bragg, but he's the lead on this.

We've gone down this road, pretending a payment to a porn star, who is threatening to expose an affair, is a crime that warrants 34 counts. And they're going to make it as sleazy as humanly possible.

We're going to hear about David Pecker, who ran the national inquirer, owned AMI Media, and to bury negative stories on Trump and to inflate stories on Hillary.

Great. I can't wait to hear about Fusion GPS. Was Trump the only one trying to get dirt printed on his opponent.

That's what this jury will be left with. He worked with dirty magazines to get Hillary painted as fact. And unwell.

And without talking about how his campaign was spied on. She's been trying to get him impeached or thrown in jail, along with President Obama, for years.

Politics is disgusting and dirty and underhanded. And we wish it weren't so.

But guess what, it's so. Welcome to America.

And never before, have we put somebody on trial. Antics around it. Or a man on trial, for not screaming from the rooftops, I paid off a porn star, so she didn't humiliate me with my wife.

We're embarrassing ourselves with this trial. I feel appropriately disgusted.

GLENN: What is the difference between this trial, and the trial that didn't happen, because I only lied about sex? You know, to save my marriage, to make sure I didn't humiliate my wife. That's basically why Donald Trump perjured himself. Or not Donald Trump. Bill Clinton perjured himself, and nothing happened there. Everybody just walked away. What's the difference between these two?

MEGYN: One is a Democrat. One is a Republican.

GLENN: That's what I thought. That's what I thought.

MEGYN: Yeah, if you're a Democrat, you can lie. Ask Fani Wilis, ask Nathan Wade. Fine. You can lie on the stand, under oath. Like Bill Clinton did.

It's okay. It's just -- oh, wait. That's what Trump was doing too, allegedly.

That's -- wait. He was lying to cover up an affair. In only one lane does it become a felony.
And just not to get too deep in the weeds, Glenn, but let's not forget what really is happening here is a misdemeanor bookkeeping snafu or error or just statement, that the statute of limitations has run on. They reinvigorated a dead claim, by saying, well, it was made to cover up an underlying felony, which was a campaign finance violation.

You made $130,000 donation, quote, unquote, to your own campaign by paying off Stormy Daniels to win an election.

Well, guess what, that's not a campaign finance violation. The only way you get the kind of campaign finance violation, is get the payment, who could only have been made for one purpose, and that is to help your campaign.

Well, guess what, again, hush payments have been made by men to shut women up since the dawn of time. It doesn't have to be to save one's campaign. And that is the relative legal test expect Alvin brag should know. It's the reason the feds were not interested in pursuing this claim against Donald Trump.

GLENN: Correct. So is it just a corrupt judge that is making all the -- because the judge should look at that and said, no. You can't do this?

MEGYN: Yeah. Yes. I mean, it's not just. Because we have Mr. Bragg. But, yeah. The judge say serious problem.

A nonpartisan judge would you have thrown this out in the papers. Pretty easily.

And I do believe there's a very good chance, this will ultimately, no matter what happens with the area. Get thrown out on appeal.

Like most of the prosecutions against Trump. Not the obstruction case. But the J6 case could get thrown out soon, actually. The Supreme Court throws out the obstruction charges. Other cases involve J6 defendants not Trump.

If the Supreme Court does anything on presidential immunity. And then if he loses that J6 case. If there's a trial. I think it can get thrown out on appeal.

But he has to go through the humiliation.

We -- we -- America have to go through the humiliation of this criminal trial first.

We just saw our former president dragged into a criminal courtroom today.

And in typical Trumpian fashion, he said, I'm proud to be here. I'm very proud to be here.

That's smart. Trump is smart. He always does it. Positive spin for anything that happens to him. Let's be honest. This is not a proud moment.

Not for him. Not for us.

GLENN: Not for his family.

MEGYN: I'm ashamed of us for doing this.

GLENN: So what do you say about Donald Trump, this is, you know, something that, you know, we would be disgusted by, if it was something that was happening on the other side? Bill Clinton comes to mind. That we as conservatives, would say, this guy, he shouldn't be doing this as president. But in the Clinton case, it was illegal. He perjured himself. But there -- there really isn't anything illegal here. And if it was, it's past the statute of limitations.

MEGYN: There's a difference between those two cases. Let me tell you, Glenn. No one is allowed to lie under oath. It's a felony. It's a felony. It's perjury.

GLENN: Correct.

MEGYN: And a lawyer really isn't allowed to lie under oath. You have additional duties of candor to a court, before they admit you into the bar. You swear not to do things like that. So there are additional obligations on a lawyer, which Clinton was.

And on top of that, there are additional obligations as president. He violated them all. He committed a felony. Donald Trump made a bookkeeping misstatement. That's what he did. And for that, he's being hauled into court.

There's just no comparison between the legal scent -- and, look, I don't have any doubt, Trump will be convicted.

And to be honest, I don't have any doubt that Trump did this. I'm not -- I don't really doubt, that Trump didn't write down the hush money, to Stormy Daniels. Porn star. Who is threatening to go to my wife and the media about an affair, I may have had. He probably did do that.

GLENN: Right. Well, there was another one he paid off, that it wasn't true.

So I mean we don't know. Right?

MEGYN: The doorman? Yeah. Well, that's another piece of the AMI media piece of this case, which hasn't gotten much attention. But it's going to, when I think you hear, David Pecker will take the stand. The guy who ran, and I owned it. He will take a stand. And say, yeah. We caught and killed stories, including from this Karen McDougal who was the 1998 playmate of the year, who allegedly had an affair with Trump.

And also took a payout from AMI, to write health columns, instead of take the story to a publication that would run with it. This is what the allegation is, that if you're a friend with Pecker, like Trump was, you could get this kind of thing done for you.

And that's what he was doing for Trump. And we will have with this testimony, to that effect. And that's -- okay.

Is anyone shocked, that Trump didn't want all his affairs come out? I don't care. I'm sure he has had affairs. I'm sure, you know what, I'm sure Obama did too. The sainted Obama. And I'm sure Bill Clinton did. And the only reason the Clinton thing became a story is because Linda Tripp cited it -- and go public with the story. Neither pair of the lovers wanted that public.

Linda Tripp brought it public, and then Bill Clinton, rather than being a man and owning up to it, lied under oath. We're back to that problem.

But this is just -- we shouldn't be knowing about any of this. We shouldn't be humiliating ourselves, and getting neck deep into the gory details of it. But the Democrats are going to be awash in -- in seedy Trump affair details, for the next six weeks.

And it's anything, but accidental.

GLENN: How do you think this plays with the American people?

MEGYN: I think they will be disgusted like him.

But unfortunately, I think the very group Trump is struggling with, women, former Republicans, in the suburbs, like where I live. They're not going to like this. You know, because most of our husbands don't cheat on us with porn stars and playmates of the years. And --

GLENN: Well, I would hope -- I would hope that it doesn't just -- we don't. Yeah. We're all cheating. But not necessarily with porn stars. And play boys.

STU: There's also so many playmates of the year. They would be way too busy if everybody were cheating.

GLENN: Yeah. Way too busy. I don't think most husbands cheat on their wives.

MEGYN: I don't think they do. So they're not going to like this. You can't forget MAGA. Those guys who are out in front of the White House now, amazing.

The pro-Trump guys with all their pro-Trump gear. And they're like the anti-Trump guys. Did you see the guy with the flute?

He hates Trump! Like liar. Narcissist. Felon. And then he's playing the lovely flute. Saying God bless America.

Anyway, the hard-core MAGA, they're not going to care. We all know. Nothing is going to change their mind. And most Republicans are on Team Trump, and realize it's a political persecution.

But there is a group of independents now, center right independents. Who used to be Republicans. Who don't like Trump. And it would be helpful to the Republican Party and to Trump. If those people could be more disgusted with Biden than with Trump.

GLENN: Right.

MEGYN: And they might yet be. And I don't mean the conviction. The conviction won't help either.

Six weeks of Trump is a shitty husband. That won't help.

GLENN: Remember.

STU: Broadcast.

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

So, Megyn, does he go to jail? You said he will be convicted. Does he go to jail? And what would that mean? How much time would he be facing on this?

MEGYN: He's not going to jail on this case. He's not.

But you have lunatics like Andrew Weissmann, who honestly, he's not a -- like, this guy has done a very legitimate legal resume. I realize he left the FBI and all that.

But he was general council of the FBI, was a US attorney, and he's out there saying nonsense like, well, Trump is a recidivist. A recidivist is someone who continues to commit crime after he's served time or been convicted. You know, like you can't stop yourself from selling the heroin.

That's not Trump! So it is true, that there's some potential for jail time, if this judge somehow turns him into a repeat offender because he is facing three other criminal trials.

That's not happening. So I don't think he will go to jail for this one. I think it will be a matter of fines. But if -- that doesn't change much. I mean, jail time would be far, far worse.

But they still have their conviction.

And the thing is, guys, half of independents and still one-third of the Republicans, are saying they like Trump. But they can't vote for a convicted felon.

And I had this conviction -- I think it was with you guys, Stu. You and Dave Marcus were on my show this week. What if they mean it.

I know we don't think they mean it. What if they do mean it.

I look at this. Huh. What if we're wrong?

What if we're downplaying this, like, everyone knows this is BS, but we're wrong? When we misread the polls. And we do often. Because who the heck knows what to believe on polls anymore.

GLENN: Yep.

MEGYN: We get burned.

And so today really could be day one, in Trump losing this election. It could be.

GLENN: My gosh.

MEGYN: I don't think it will be.

But I recognize the danger of what they're doing here. And, of course, we all know, that's why they're doing it.

GLENN: I was hoping that it would backfire on them. I think it has to some degree.

I don't know when you add the actual felony. You know, to this.

MEGYN: That's the thing. That's the question.

Is the backfire bounce, already baked in.

GLENN: Hmm.

MEGYN: Right?

Have they already gotten all the bounce there is to get, from the outrage, over resetting norms that have been in place for almost 250 years.

And that, of course, would be the Democrat's plan, to boost him in the primaries.

He'll get whatever bounce he gets in the backlash.

And then it waned over the course of what they hoped would be four criminal trials. Now it looks like just this one.

But this is their best shot. Six weeks. Disgusting man. Horrid husband. And now convicted felony.

They don't need to hurt him much. You know, Joe Biden only one by 45,000 votes. They don't need to hurt him much.

GLENN: I know.

Megyn Kelly, host of the Megyn Kelly Show. Follows this program on SiriusXM. As always, Megyn, good to talk to you. Thank you.