Bishop: ‘We Are Disrespecting One Another’ Because We Only Care About ‘My Rights Over Your Rights’

Bishop Jim Lowe joined Glenn today on TV to discuss why God, love, and respect should be at the center of the protests around the nation.

Following events in Charlottesville, Virginia, over the weekend, the hateful rhetoric, and increased unrest, the bishop did not mince words when it came to diagnosing the state of the nation.

He harshly criticized today’s activists and pointed out the fundamental characteristics they lack that civil rights leaders of the 1960s were admired for, saying, “If you do what Martin Luther King did, civil disobedience was also based upon a principle that was number one in civil disobedience: love and respect for every individual.”

“They were led by spiritual leaders. Where are the spiritual leaders in what we see that’s going on now? In fact, there’s no reference to love. There’s no reference to God in these things. It’s based upon what a man thinks his right. And remember, the Bible has taught us when everyone goes their own way, there’s going to be chaos. There’s going to be confusion. And people are going to suffer, because it’s not based upon the fundamental principle of who God is, and that’s love,” said Bishop Lowe.

The CLEAR WINNER of the 4th Republican debate

The CLEAR WINNER of the 4th Republican debate

The RNC's 4th Republican debate of the 2024 primaries is over and Glenn has a clear winner. But it may not be who you think it is. Glenn and Stu review the debate, which they say was the best one yet thanks to moderator Megyn Kelly. And they also discuss whether former president Donald Trump has sat out the debates long enough. How would he perform against his fellow candidates? And if he does win the nomination, would any of the other candidates make a good vice president?


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Great to be here, last night.

I thought it was interesting. I thought it was the best one.

GLENN: Me too. Me too.

I think the real winner last night out of all of it was Megyn Kelly. She was really, really good. She's on a plane today. We're hoping to catch her in between. But she was the winner. This was the best debate.

She held everybody's feet to the fire.

She asked tough questions.

She was fair. She told people, shut up.

Nobody can hear you. They were talking over each other. And it ended it. I mean, I thought she was really, really good.

STU: Yeah. Really, really good.

You know, her questions. And this goes back to her previous debate performances as well.

They're very well laid out.

You may not like the question. And I tink that's kind of the point with her. She's trying to ask a question that will put you in a difficult situation. To see what you can do with it. That's the whole point of these debates.

GLENN: Right.

STU: They weren't unfair.

GLENN: But she wasn't asking them for liberal reasons.

She was framing all of her questions, the way a conservative, would want it framed.

There are certain things that we want answered. That the liberals don't even understand.

STU: Yeah. If you think about how the left handles these debates. They ask the questions that they care about.

Which makes sense. But they ask, hey. What about January 6th? Or whatever.

And instead, you've got questions last night, that were substance related. They were actually issue related. They were policy related.

They were important questions that all the candidates needed to answer.

And I thought she did a great job. The whole debate overall, I thought was really good.

Maybe it's a low hurdle to clear. To say it's the best one of the four.

But I thought, look, if you take it out of the context of the actual election, which is difficult here to do. I understand it. You have a candidate, who is 20 or 30 points ahead, depending on which day you are looking at. And he's not there. So there's a big asterisk to all of this.

GLENN: But, you know what, I wouldn't do it either.

If I were Donald Trump, I was this far ahead. I wouldn't do it either.

STU: I think that's -- strategically, I agree with you.

GLENN: Yes. That's all there is.

When you are trying to win, you -- you used strategy. This is the best strategy. Honestly, if I were Donald Trump.

I would consider running the campaign, that Joe Biden did. With an exception of the one chair, and then a big circle around it.

And then like 12 feet later, another circle with a chair in the middle.

STU: Oh, my gosh, remember that? What a weird time.

GLENN: Yeah. It was horrible. But I would just stay quiet. Because everybody is hanging himself. And Joe Biden's economy. And the way he speaks. And hope he would be shamed in a debate. Because we do need a debate between the two of them.

STU: Do you really think that's an option for Donald Trump? Because I think he's doing that now, at some level with the assistance of the media.

The media seems to not really be focusing on Donald Trump right now, for whatever reason.

You talked about this, I think, a couple weeks ago. A former president of the you United States was testifying on stand, in a trial.

And I -- did we see any coverage of it at all. Other than a quick mention or headline.

Normally, they would be wall-to-wall. Saying how bad this guy is.

Or whatever they want to say.

Right now, it seems like they have made the decision, along with a bunch of Democrats, that the person they want to face. In this election is Donald Trump.

That may very well be a terrible decision for them. As we saw in 2016.

They made the same call. And it didn't work at all. But if they're making that choice, it seems like, once we get past the primary. Donald Trump is locked in as the candidate.

They're no longer going to leave every word he says on the sidelines.

GLENN: Okay. Unless --

STU: Do you believe that?

GLENN: They're dumb enough, and out of touch enough to do that.

STU: That's a prequalifier for sure.

GLENN: Let me give this. Comedian Bill Burr. He came out, launched into a rant. And he said, you F-ing stupid liberals. What are you doing?

You're making Donald Trump a martyr. And he's going to come back and win again.

And I think that's true. Remember, his -- his poll numbers went up when they started putting him up as a martyr and going after him.

And the left just doesn't understand. You know, this is Chris Christie. He got booed. Do we happen to have that clip?

Last thing he said was Donald Trump wasn't going to be -- wasn't going to be voting.

STU: Right. He was part of his final statement there. He was saying, picture yourself going to the polls in November.

One thing you won't be seeing is Donald Trump there. Because he won't be able to vote. Because he'll be a felon by then.

GLENN: And the whole place booed. And it's because -- here's what he's missing.

If -- if Donald Trump were being tried fairly. He was charged fairly.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Then it would be a different story.

But nobody. Most people don't feel that this is anything, but a political trial.

And so they're -- every time you go after him, you make him stronger. Because people are like, this isn't going to stand. This is the problem with this country.

STU: And I think we can all agree, with certainty, that that is the effect on Republican primary voters.


STU: The question is whether that's the effect on general election voters. That's a much more complicated question.

GLENN: Yes, especially independents.

STU: Right now, Donald Trump's polls look pretty good in the general. They look as good or better than any of the other candidates.

You know, Nikki Haley's polls have also looked pretty strong. But there's even some polls where Trump is ahead of Haley, running in a general election.

The issue, of course, with this, is we also are showing in these polls. Ten and 12 percent for RFK Jr. And you're seeing -- you're seeing Cornell West at 2 percent.

When we get further on in this process, what happens?

If you look at the latest polls on Joe Biden. He's down. These are terrible polls for him.

And typically, I think we would all look at that and celebrate. Right?

People are waking up. This is a good thing. Joe Biden's polls are county down. He's a weaker candidate. That's good.

The problem with that, when you look deeper at those polls.

One of those reasons you're seeing an erosion is because younger voters, that are hard-core Democrats.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Are saying, I don't like the way Joe Biden is so pro-Israel.

Now, number one, it's possible, that's just the reality. And they never want to vote.

They just go somewhere else.

It's possible. When we get, after a couple billion dollars are spent.

And we are now in October of 2024, do you think those younger voters whose complaint about Joe Biden is that he's too pro-Israel right now, are going to come back home?

They might just stay home. That might be the best thing possible. Because they're not going to Donald Trump. He's pro-Israel, clearly.

Much more than Joe Biden.

So that weakness, is -- we don't know how real it is.

We know that Joe Biden is a weak candidate.

But the reason why other candidates on the Republican side are beating Joe Biden handily.

Is largely because of this type of erosion.

Erosion from Democrats. Younger Democrats that are not typical Republican voters.

So if they come home, like they usually do. We know what happens with these Republicans.

Or, these third party candidates.

Gary Johnson was showing up at 10 and 12 percent of the polls. People forget that.

It didn't happen. It never holds.

So if that does happen. And people say, okay. Forget that. I'm going back home. I'm going to Joe Biden.

This election is too close. We know the arguments. If that happens, it will get much more difficult.

GLENN: I believe the only way that happens is if the press brings the -- the -- half the country back to this place that Donald Trump is Hitler.

And I don't know if that works universally anymore.

And here's why: Joe Biden conned a lot of people.

The Democrats conned a lot of people. That he was going to bring back normalcy.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Well, we know this isn't normal. Okay?

The country is hurting. Both Republicans and Democrats, the country is falling apart.

And everybody knows it. So he doesn't have the, well, I'm not going to be him.

Right. But you're you.

STU: Right. That was his strength in 2020.

His strength was to say, I'm not him. And look at me. I'll return you to the normal times. That didn't happen.

GLENN: Right. That didn't happen. So there's a lot of people that will just stay home.

Unfortunately, if Donald Trump is the nominee, there might be a lot of Republicans, that would stay home, as well.

Although, I just don't think that that is as true as everyone wants you to believe.

GLENN: Yeah. I really don't think there's a problem with Donald Trump and Republicans.

GLENN: You have the Liz Cheneys.

STU: Liz Cheneys. Yeah, but that's nobody.

GLENN: I think that may actually hurt Biden.

STU: It could. It could. It really could. And some polls show the RFK thing going both ways. But it seems to be hurting Joe Biden more.

I think if you look at where this might go, over a long period of time, you just have to factor it in. I think you have to price it in, in your head. The media is not going to act like they are now. During the general election.

That might be fine.

Donald Trump has survived that already. He already had a really negative media. And won in 2016.

He's already been able to do it.

So maybe he'll be able to do it again.

But you can't look at the current situation, and think, this is how it will go.

It may very well be also, he goes through these trials. People are so upset about it, that he's being targeted, that they all side with him, and he wins easily.

That's a possibility too.

But the media is going to do everything they can, once he gets this nomination, to take him out. In some level, it's true with these other candidates as well.

With these other candidates, you have the possibility of essentially what the Biden approach was, right?

Look, you guys just lived through four years of Joe Biden.

I won't be him.

It will be difficult for Donald Trump to make that same argument. Because he's got that same type of thing built into him.

Everyone has made up their mind on both of these people.

You know, Haley, DeSantis, have a little more have an opening there.

GLENN: It may come down to the vice president.

Because I think everybody is like, man, if he wins, I don't want Kamala Harris to be the president.

That would be a nightmare.

And so it may come down, to the vice president.

STU: If you were doing a draft of who you thought Donald Trump would pick as his VP, who is your first pick?

GLENN: First pick --

STU: Again, not who you think it should be. But who he will pick.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: This is a tough one.

GLENN: I know.

I go back and forth between Ramaswamy and Nikki.

Nikki would be smart, because she'll pacify the -- the old guard Republican.

And she's a fighter.

But he's not going to like that.

STU: Yeah. I can't -- I mean, he obviously put her in his administration.


GLENN: I know. There's been a deep falling out since then.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Ramaswamy is still fighting for Donald Trump.

STU: Oh, yeah. There's no -- there's no like between them at all, at this point.

It's interesting. Haley strikes me as a Pence-like pick.

Right? It's a little bit different, obviously.

But it's someone who is I think respectable. Quote, unquote.

Would please a lot of those voters who think Donald Trump is -- is -- you know, his tweets are too bad.

And all that other stuff. And that's what he needed in 2016, honestly.

GLENN: And could take the job.

STU: Does he need that in 2024, though?

GLENN: That can take the job?

STU: He needs someone who can take the job, clearly. That's obviously the number one role.

But with Pence, he picked someone, number one to please evangelicals. Who were very on the fence about Donald Trump, early on.

And, you know, you get somewhat of that, with Nikki Haley.

I think you still get -- I don't think that is what he needs anymore. The evangelicals are through the roof.

But you do get a steady hand feel from Nikki Haley. Ramaswamy, you don't really get that. I like Vivek. But --


STU: You get a game changer. And you get a bulldog who will go on television 900 times a day, and just say.

And just argue with passion for every point that Donald Trump makes. I think Donald Trump would like that. He likes those people.

GLENN: I agree.

Except Ramaswamy is a star to some degree.

Now, that has faded. People don't like him as much, which Donald Trump would like. He doesn't want somebody that will compete with him. You know what I mean?

STU: Yeah. I just that's true.

GLENN: He wants someone who is solid for certain reasons. Whatever.

But you work for me.

And Ramaswamy, I think, could do that. And you're right. He's a bulldog.

I would lean towards Ramaswamy as Donald Trump's pick.

I have for a long time. And I thought Donald Trump would pick him.

But I -- I think if Nikki Haley is a strong, you know, number two in the primaries. If she starts to -- to become just a juggernaut, next to him. He would probably be foolish not to take her.

STU: We should also point out, that precisely zero votes have been cast in the primary.

So he has not won the primary yet.

GLENN: That can all change.

STU: You're looking ahead a little bit. I thought it was an interesting night last night.

Megyn Kelly's biggest WINNER and LOSER of the 4th Republican Debate

Megyn Kelly's biggest WINNER and LOSER of the 4th Republican Debate

Glenn believes there was a clear winner at the 4th 2024 Republican presidential debate: moderator Megyn Kelly. So, he invited her on to reveal her biggest winner and loser. Kelly breaks down the performances of each candidate — Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Chris Christie — and her biggest issue with the previous debates: "They didn't let the candidates debate each other." She also describes why she "prayed to God" that Chris Christie would be on the debate stage and explains whether she believes former president Donald Trump (who will be 78 if he wins the presidency) is fit for office.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We go to Megyn Kelly who is calling us, I think probably from the airport. Hi, Megyn.

MEGYN: Hi, Glenn.

GLENN: How are you?

MEGYN: I'm great. A little tired you, but good.

GLENN: I'll bet you are.

Last night, I said when I first got on today, that the big winner, I thought last night was you.


GLENN: You were spot-on. You asked really tough questions. But you phrased them in a way that conservatives want to ask them.

I thought you were fair, tough, and when you said, nobody can hear any of you, everybody shut up. You ran a tight ship. You did a fantastic job, last night.

MEGYN: Thank you so much, Glenn. You know, for me, watching some of the earlier debates, it's very frustrating. Because I knew that there was a way of controlling them.

You know, it was clear to me. There was a way of controlling them.

And I have a repour with all of these guys, same as you do. They know you. If you were out there, they would respect you. They know you don't hate them. You're not trying to hurt them.

You're trying to foster a great debate, good TV. And so when we had that opening exchange, for me it was fun. Because it was kind of like what I imagined, it's like to be in the NBA. Where you're kind of passing the ball behind your back, and somebody catches it with ease. And they go. Like, we kind of got into a rhythm. Where, I go, you go. We make eye contact. I'm coming for you.

That's what I hated about the NBC debate, is they just -- he didn't let the candidates debate -- I don't want to hear a Kristen Welker interview of Nikki Haley. I want the other candidates to talk to Nikki Haley. So, anyway, thank you for saying that, it was a relief for me to get out there, and let them let it rip.

GLENN: So who did you think was the big winner and the big loser?

MEGYN: Well, with all respect to her, I thought Nikki Haley lost last night. Because she shrunk away. She's not really a presence. And she's been increasing her poll numbers by getting out there and being futuristic. And that version of her, did not appear on stage last night. I thought Ramaswamy, if you didn't like him, he became even more unlikable to you. If you love him, he became even more lovable to you.

I thought Ron DeSantis had his best debate yet.

And so I think you could probably say he's the winner, because he's in the best poll position of the four.

And he not only didn't hurt himself, although there was one bad exchange. He didn't hurt himself, he actually did help himself. He was tougher than we've seen. And I think that was the DeSantis we fell in love with, back when he was battling nasty voters during COVID.

Chris Christie, look, the same rule for him as Vivek. If you're one of the 25 percent of Republicans who likes Chris Christie, you probably said, yeah, good.

Now, screw Trump. He did the same thing.

And if you were one of the 75 percent that doesn't like him, you probably enjoyed watching some of the other candidates get into it with him, and some of the questions that the moderators had.

GLENN: I have to tell you, we were watching it, as a team last night. And we all cheered when you went to Chris Christie on transgenderism.

We were like, oh, this is going to be good. This is going to be good.

MEGYN: You know, can I tell you? And he tried to tell me, that I didn't have my facts on my second question. And, of course, I did, and he was misleading.

But those are the two questions I showed up to ask, Glenn. I'm like, you know how much work goes into these things. Right?

Every single question we ask, takes hours and in some cases, days. You know, you have to research so much. And you craft it, you recraft it. So on. And you know, this is an issue, near and dear to not only my heart, but to most conservative's hearts. And he's been so weak on it.

He is too radical on this issue, to be the Republican nominee in my view.

This is way out of step with where the Republican Party is.

And it's -- it's -- it was the one reason why I wanted him to make the debate.

I prayed to the -- all the angels above.

Please, please, let him make --

GLENN: Last night, I thought there was one weird moment with Chris Christie.

And I think it really did not look good, for -- for Nikki Haley. When Chris Christie came out, and tried to defend her.

I -- I -- that was nice and everything.

But I think she should have turned and said, I don't need a man's help here. I'm fine. I don't need anybody's help. I can defend myself.

The way she kind of looked down as he was saying that, I thought it made her look weak. And she's not a weak woman.

MEGYN: It was her lowest moment. And I have to give credit to Chris Steyer Walt. Because he had said to me, here's my prediction, Chris Christie is going to try to white knight Nikki Haley. And, man, he was right. She did look weak.

I thought, man, she's been so strong in these debates in terms of defending herself and attacking others.

And of all moments, she should have put her hand out and she should have said, Chris, I appreciate the help, but I got this.

And then defended herself. And I could only conclude, was it because she was shaky on the Ukraine, you know, counties? Like the provinces? She did eventually come up with a few.

I couldn't read it. Maybe she didn't know the answer, and she was stalling. Or she wants this pass, because it was a bad moment for her.

GLENN: I read that moment with the free provinces as, wait a minute, I know them. But are they provinces or regions? You know, just that -- that moment of hesitation, where you don't want to get it wrong.

And then that moment just passed her.

MEGYN: Yeah.

GLENN: And then she came in. Unfortunately for her, when everyone was talking. And nobody really heard her, give the answer. And I still know. Because I didn't hear all of them. I don't know if she was right or wrong.

MEGYN: I know. The only other one I heard was Crimea. We all know that one.

GLENN: Right. Right.

MEGYN: So it is awkward. It could be -- it's -- if the body language were different.

It could be the power move to not take your opponent's little test. You know.

I could see that, being screw you. I don't take your little exams, Vivek. You're not at Harvard anymore. But her body language was not projecting, I am confident, and I'm dismissing this twerp. It projected, I have no idea! Help me!

So that was not her finest moment. I do think -- I bet you, there will be a little movement in the polls after this.

Because DeSantis, it was the guy we kind of thought he could be.

And it wasn't in any way, set up like in me

But DeSantis had issues, that were important to him, brought up last night.

It's not like we said, oh, let's bring these up for Ron DeSantis. We brought these issues, because conservatives care about these issues.

Trans. The vaccine issue. COVID.

And he was very strong on this.

He hasn't really had a chance to speak on a lot of these issues in the debates.

You have the Univision anchor out there, talking about the dreamers.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: I agree. I thought DeSantis was really good last night.

What did you make of the one exchange, where he wouldn't say, he thought Trump was fit to be president or not.

That was the one moment. It was very strange to me. Did you think he wanted to say no?

He's not fit. Did you think he was trying to say yes. He was trying to walk the line. What was he doing there?

MEGYN: That's when I said, he did great except for one moment. That was the moment. He did not handle that well.

And I got to give credit where it's due. Chris Christie is great at that kind of thing. He didn't answer it. Like forensically diagnosing somebody that answer, there's no one better than Chris Christie at it.

And he honed in on him, and it was uncomfortable. DeSantis doesn't want to make news.
He doesn't want to alienate the Trump base, with a big headline from him, saying Trump was unfit. So he was, you know --

GLENN: But why not say, right now, he's fit?

MEGYN: Hmm. He doesn't want to say that either. He doesn't believe it.

And I think he understands that there's a certain psychology, within the Republican Party, that is recognizing the two people that are likely to be the nominees are too old. They are really not as fit as we would like them to be.

Either one of them, let's face it.

GLENN: Hang just a second.

Because I think, I would love for the Nancy Pelosi generation, to sit down, and retire.


Let the younger generation now take this.

However, do you think that Donald Trump has faded from where he was in 2020?

MEGYN: Yeah. I do.

I mean, I would take him over Joe Biden any day of the week.

I don't think he will fill out this term, never mind the second.

But there's no question that Trump has lost awe step. Or multiple steps. He is confusion Joe Biden from Obama.

I know he's saying, he intentionally did that. Go back and look at the clips. It wasn't intentional. Anyone could have a slip of the tongue. It's happened to him repeatedly.

The reference about how someone will get us into World War II.

Confusing countries. Confusing cities where -- it's happening more and more. With all due respect to Trump. This is what happens when you're 77 years old. Trump seems inhuman, but he's not inhuman. He's a human. He's a man. DeSantis didn't lie, Father Time spares no one. Was a good one.

So, look, if it's between Trump and Biden, I don't think there's any question who is more fit, more capable.

But are we really going to pretend that Donald Trump is just as vibrant and mentally sharp as he was at 16? Well, okay.

GLENN: I only have about 70 or 80 seconds here for this. But do you think Trump is going to jail?

MEGYN: I'm starting to worry. I didn't -- he definitely will get convicted, in multiple jurisdictions. But Andy McCarthy, who is very smart on these things, was pointing out that Judge Chutkan in DC, in the federal case, on J6, you know she hates him. In DC, the jury is going to hate them.

That he thinks there's a -- there's some pretty good odds, she will not release him from jail, pending appeal after his lengthy conviction.

GLENN: So what does that do, to the system?

MEGYN: Glenn, that's why we have to have an undercard.

GLENN: Yeah. No. I agree with that.

I agree with that.

They have to run all the way to the end.

Somebody has to run all the way to the end.

We have to have an undercard. That is going to -- is that just chaos in the streets.

MEGYN: There will -- America will burn if they put Trump in jail before this election. It will burn. I don't want it.

GLENN: God help us.

MEGYN: I just see the reality, the same as you do. And we will need the National Guard city to city. You know, MAGA is going to rise up. And there will be a lot of sympathizers who understand it, and won't try to stop it.

They cannot be allowed to do that.

GLENN: All right. Thank you very much, Megyn. Best of luck to you today. And, again, great job last night.

Thank you for bringing a reasonable debate to America.

MEGYN: Thank you.

GLENN: Appreciate it.

MEGYN: Aw. Thank you so much, Glenn. Good to see you, Stu, all the best.

GLENN: Don't give him any love.

MEGYN: I love Stu.

STU: Yes!

STU: Thanks, Megyn.

GLENN: Get off my phone, Megyn. All right. Megyn Kelly.

Biden's new fentanyl 'Strike Force' is a TRAP

Biden's new fentanyl 'Strike Force' is a TRAP

The Treasury Department has launched a new "Strike Force" to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking. But that's not all that's going on. Glenn and Stu discuss the bigger story: According to reporting from Blaze News, the strike force will be led by the Treasury Department as a means to crack down on money laundering networks, particularly those utilizing cryptocurrency. Instead of closing down the border, the government is once again taking aim at Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. But Glenn isn't letting this story slide under the radar ...


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the Treasury Department launches a new strike force, to crack down on elicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

Stu, this is a story in Blaze media today.

Just tell me just from the headline, what you think this story is really all about.

STU: Give me the headline one more time.

GLENN: Okay. Treasury Department launches new strike force to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

STU: Okay. Well, it seems like, you know, you have the stuff coming over the border. Maybe in from China.

They have a crack team, making sure that they can stop this.

GLENN: You really think that's what that's about?

STU: Look, now it's probably something terrible.

But from the headline, it would say, okay.

GLENN: Okay. I'm going to read it.

Stop when you realize what this really is.


Biden administration Treasury Department announced Monday, the launch of a new strike force, dedicated to cracking down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

Agency recently formed the counter fentanyl strike force to marshal the Treasury's resources and expertise in a coordinated and streamlined operation to combat the trafficking of elicit fentanyl. Any idea yet?

You will. It noted that the strike force will be led by the office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence and IRS criminal investigations. Okay? You're starting to get it. Right? Okay.

In Monday's statement, Secretary of the Treasury, Janet Yellen, reaffirmed the Biden administration's commitment to stemming the flow of deadly fentanyl into communities across the United States.

She noted the new strike force will allow us to bring the department's unrivaled expertise in fighting financial crime.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Treasury will use every bit of every tool, at its disposal to disrupt the ability of drug traffickers to peddle this poison in our country.

The strike force aims to crack down on money laundering networks.

Do you know what this is about yet?

STU: I mean, it seems like a money grab by the federal government.

Financial -- sorry. Financial monitoring of every citizen.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. Financial strike force aims to crack down on money laundering networks. Particularly those using --

STU: Bitcoin.

GLENN: Yes! Yes.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: You want to stop fentanyl, you close down the border.

STU: You know what it would really help, Glenn.

Because obviously, the way to stop fentanyl. Is to stop Bitcoin.

GLENN: Yes, it is. Isn't it?

STU: It's not just stopping Bitcoin. You need a central bank digital currency. That you can turn off for purchases of this bad things.

That you can stop people from doing all these naughty things.

GLENN: Exactly right.

Everything would go through the financial crimes division of the IRS and the Treasury.

STU: That's perfect.

It's like a department of pre-crime.

GLENN: Something like that. Something like that. We would have to come up with newspeak, to be able to come up with the right terms.

STU: That will solve all our problems. Stop the problems before they start.

GLENN: Yes. I like that. I like that.

STU: Did you see this story from Los Angeles?

Where they had this potential serial killer, and how they caught him.

GLENN: No. I hate these stories. Because I'm always like, good, serial killer caught. The way they did it, really bad.

STU: Oh, yeah. This is all over the country. Basically, this guy had a car. He went in. They found -- they saw him around one of these neighborhoods. He went in and killed someone. Some poor dad in his garage. In his home to kill these kids.

Along with a bunch of homeless people. Anyway, they got his license plate. And every time anyone pulls into Beverly Hills, they scan every single license plate.

So they -- he just drove through Beverly Hills, and they're like, oh, there he is. And just went and got him.

That's -- because every single person who enters the city, has their license plate scanned to see if they're any problem at all.

And the people of Beverly Hills are like, we're really rich, and we don't want people here that we don't like. So we love this idea.

GLENN: Wow. Sometimes just because they're driving a Prius, we say, get out.

STU: Yeah, four cylinders. Get out of town.

BETTER options for TIME's 'Person of the Year' than Taylor Swift

BETTER options for TIME's 'Person of the Year' than Taylor Swift

TIME Magazine has named Taylor Swift its 'Person of the Year' for 2023 and Glenn and Stu have some ... thoughts. Yes, Swift has cemented herself as one of the most popular people in the world. But she also ruined football for Stu. So, are there any better options for person of the year? Glenn and Stu go through a few, including who the leftists should really choose: The presidents of Harvard, MIT, and UPenn who shockingly made excuses for anti-Semitic chants and threats. How, in the world of freakouts over "microagressions," can you make excuses for calling for the genocide?!


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Stu, who would you choose? Who would you choose?

Think of the entire year, all of the things that have happened. Who?

Who would be the person of the year?

STU: Wow. Well, they usually name some horrible dictator.

You know what, the Hamas freedom fighter.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: Person of the year. Yes. There you go. No?

GLENN: Not the Israeli story.

Soldier. I think Hamas would have had a better chance of winning it.

STU: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: That's not who it was.

Come on. Come on.

Person of the year. Hmm.

STU: I mean, Zelinsky?

GLENN: Let me give you -- no. He's already --

STU: Putin?


STU: How about Zelinsky and Putin, arm and arm on the cover?


GLENN: Let me give you a hint.

With yet another dramatic reading.

Our secret moments in your crowded room. They have no idea about me and you. There's an indentation in the shape of you. Made your mark on me, golden tattoo.

You know yet?

STU: No.

GLENN: All this silence of patience, hiding in anticipation. My hands are shaking from holding back from you. Oh. Oh. Oh.

All of this silence and patience, pining and desperately waiting. My hands are shaking from all of this. Oh. Oh. Oh.

STU: Sounds like a person with an issue.

GLENN: Say my name, and everything just stops. I don't like you like a best friend. Only bought this dress so you could take it off.

Take it off.

STU: -- I appreciate at you not reading anymore of this. Whatever it is.

GLENN: Really? Come on. Who is it? Who is it?

STU: It sounds very interesting. And I would really like to know.

GLENN: It's the bicycle woman that just won.

STU: The bicycle woman?

GLENN: Yeah. The won that just won the bicycle race. You know, the guy who -- the --

STU: Wait. The transgendered guy who won the bicycle --

GLENN: Yeah. The women's bicycle race.

STU: I don't know who that person's name is.

GLENN: I only bought this dress so you could take it off.

You don't think that TIME Magazine would do the transgender movement?

STU: Maybe the male athletes. Trans women in sports is the person of the year?

GLENN: Yes. No.

STU: Did they write a very mediocre song?

GLENN: No. It is, of course, Taylor Swift.

STU: Oh. Tay Tay, congratulations.

GLENN: Person of the year. Now, I don't think that's shallow.

STU: I mean, she's a big entertainer.

GLENN: She is a big entertainer. She is a big entertainer.

STU: You know, lots of impact on my football watching. I got to see.

GLENN: I just want to bring it up because I know how much she means to you.

STU: She does.

I get to hear the pitch of, hey, did you know a player on your favorite team is related to the person who is dating this woman that you don't care about?

Let me talk about it for 48 straight minutes.

That's -- I love that, in every NFL broadcast.

GLENN: I know you do.

STU: But no. Taylor Swift. I mean, look, you can -- she had a heck of a year.

GLENN: Oh, she did.

STU: It really was an amazing year.

GLENN: She did. She's the entertainer to do.

STU: If you're going to give it to an entertainer, she's the obvious choice.

GLENN: Her or Jimmy Fallon. What a year he had.

STU: Trevor Noah. Would you put -- there's another one. But if you will give it to an entertainer -- it feels like there's a lot going on this year.

GLENN: She's the one. No. What was happening?

STU: There were multiple wars that broke out.

GLENN: Huh. Really?

STU: Yeah. Kind of had that. You had a lot of stuff going on, that was of large impact.

But maybe --

GLENN: The whistle-blowers? They would have been --

STU: Which ones?

The Hunter Biden ones? Any of the anti -- the ones that pointed out that we were just targeting Catholics for no reason, and calling them terrorists. Which ones -- none of them, by the way, that you would mention, would go to this. Unless it's a whistle-blower like Donald Trump. Then you have a chance.

GLENN: Right. Right. Right.

Sure. But how about the Ivy League presidents of Harvard MIT?

I mean, they're women. And they were -- they were fantastic, yesterday.

Fantastic on anti-Semitism.

STU: They've been very strong on that.

GLENN: They have been.

STU: Very strong.

GLENN: They're very anti-Semitic.

I mean, they're very good on that.

STU: You can put Rashida Tlaib. She's been the queen of the anti-Semites.

GLENN: Well, I think it's pretty hard to -- let me play a little of the testimony on Capitol Hill.

From the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and Penn. They were asked about, you know, the calls for genocide, of all the Jews on their campus.

Listen to this.

VOICE: At MIT, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate MIT's code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment. Yes or no?

VOICE: Targeting individuals, not making public statements.

VOICE: Yes or no, calling for the genocide of Jews does not constitute bullying and harassment?

VOICE: I have not heard of calling for the genocide of Jews on our campus.

VOICE: But you've heard of chants for Antifa?

VOICE: I have heard chants, which can be anti-Semitic, depending on the context, calling for the elimination of the Jewish people.

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Stop. I just have to say. I have heard chants on campus. That could in the right context, be anti-Semitic.

Calling for the genocide of the Jewish people.

STU: Well, sometimes, when you call for the genocide of Jews. You're not being anti-Semitic at all.

You're looking for more living space.

Living space. That was a big -- that was another catchphrase, you might remember from Mystery. A living space.

GLENN: Not for them. But for us.

STU: For us. We need to spread out. Spread our wings out a little bit. Not enough room for the German people. They love our living space.

GLENN: All right. So she's heard chants that could --

STU: In theory. Now, we're not going to say that they were.

GLENN: No, they could be anti-Semitic in the right context.

You know, I don't know what context it would be anti-Semitic to say, we should have a genocide of all the Jews.

STU: There's probably one, though. Somewhere out there.

If we really searched.

GLENN: Okay. Let's continue.

STU: Incredible.

GLENN: So those would not be according to the MIT's code of conduct or rules?

VOICE: That would be investigated as harassment if pervasive and severe.

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Stop. If pervasive and severe.

Now, I think anybody standing at a rally, chanting death or genocide to all the Jews, I don't know. I think that's pretty severe.

STU: I would say, it is pretty severe.

And it seems, if it doesn't violate your code of conduct. Perhaps your code of conduct needs to be adjusted.

GLENN: Right. Did you go to Harvard, though?

STU: I did not.

I don't know what his policy is.

GLENN: I don't either. I don't either.

And I don't understand, you know, the intellect of Harvard. Let's go to MIT where they're even smarter.

VOICE: Ms. McGill, at Penn, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn's rules or a code of conduct? Yes or no?

VOICE: If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Okay. Stop.

So --

STU: Interesting. Interesting.

GLENN: So if they're changing "death to all the Jews," and then -- but they round them all up.

STU: That's not -- and then they actually kill all Jews.

GLENN: Then it's harassment.

STU: At that point. Once they've wiped out all the Jews, we're going to act. Okay?

GLENN: Hey, they can build showers. They can build gas chambers. But the minute they start to use them.

STU: Well, and technically the speech is calling for genocide. So they probably have to wipe them all out before we act. That's when our code of conduct will kick in.

When there's no Jews left. We will be like, you know what, hey, guys, stop. And I bet they will at that point.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay. Here we go.

Well, there won't be any left.

STU: Right.

VOICE: Specifically calling for the genocide of Jews. Does that constitute bullying or harassment?

VOICE: If it is directed and severe and pervasive, it is harassment?

VOICE: So the answer is yes?

VOICE: It is a context-dependent decision. That's your testimony today, calling for the genocide of Jews?

GLENN: Context.

VOICE: It's based upon the context. That is not bullying or harassment?

PAT: This is the easiest question to answer yes, Ms. McGill. So is your testimony that you will not answer yes?

VOICE: If it -- if it --

VOICE: Yes or no?

VOICE: If the speech becomes conduct, it can be harassment, yes.

VOICE: Conduct meaning committing the act of genocide? The speech is not harassment?

This is unacceptable, Ms. McGill. I'm going to give you one more opportunity for the world to see your answer. Does calling for the genocide of Jews, violate Penn's code of conduct when it comes to bullying and harassment? Yes or no?

VOICE: It can be harassment.

VOICE: The answer is yes for him.

And Dr. Gay, at Harvard, does calling for the genocide of Jews, violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment?

Yes or no?

VOICE: It can be, depending on the context.

VOICE: What's the context?

VOICE: Targeted as an individual. Targeted at an individual.

VOICE: It's targeted at Jewish students. Jewish individuals.

Do you understand your testimony is dehumanizing them?

Do you understand that dehumanization is part of anti-Semitism?

I will ask you one more time, does calling for the genocide of enjoys, violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment?

Yes or no?

VOICE: Anti-Semitic rhetoric -- anti-Semitic rhetoric when it crosses into conduct. It amounts to bullying and harassment --

GLENN: I can't believe this. I can't believe this.

If you have a microaggression, which is not saying --

STU: Right.

GLENN: -- we should kill all of you.

Okay? A microaggression, they need a safe space.

Everybody needs to go cry. And be protected.

STU: If you use the wrong pronouns. They put these things in these categories.

And calling for the genocide of Jews.

You know what, if it's targeted toward an individual. Well, technically, if you're calling for the genocide of the whole race, it's not targeted at an individual. It's all individuals.

Every single one of them.

So I guess, maybe that's their out.

Also, I will say, you know, that's one of the best grilling -- I mean, that is -- she did a really good job of that.

GLENN: Oh, really good job.

STU: Now, I will say, it should have been easy for them to say.

You can look at. What you don't maybe get on radio.

The faces of these women, as they are trying to answer these questions.

They are so smug, and so like, oh, this -- she -- I see what you're trying to do here.

And I'm not going to fall for it.

Well, it depends on the content.

GLENN: Hang on. What are you trying to do there?

STU: Yeah. You're trying to trap her.

To make them say the Palestinian protestor kids are bad.

It's like, yeah. When they're calling for the genocide of the Jews, yeah, they are. You should be able to say that. With real confidence.

GLENN: Yes. Should be really easy. By the way.

STU: Even more confident than the pronoun mistake. That you will throw ten kids out of your school for next week.

GLENN: Here is a Jewish student. That is suing UPenn, describing anti-Semitism.

VOICE: On October 7th, Israel was attacked.

Since October 7th, American Jews have been under attack. My name is Aioli Cody (phonetic), and I'm a proud American, studying at the University of Pennsylvania.

I love Penn. I have wanted to attend this university since before I could remember.

I am here because the Penn I attend today is unrecognizable from the Penn I once used to know.

Penn, once renowned for groundbreaking discoveries, like the mRNA vaccine, is now a chilling landscape of hatred and hostility.

Our university revered for its pursuit of knowledge, has devolved into an arena where Jewish students tiptoe through their days, on certain and unsafe.

Not only are tensions palpable, but there have also been materialized actions to intimidate and harm students, a bomb threat against Halal, a swastika spray-painted, the Hilal and Shabbat houses vandalized. A professor in the armed wing of Hamas' logo on Facebook. A Jewish student accosted. Jews are Nazis, etched adjacent to Penn's Jewish fraternity house.

Why doesn't the University hold the perpetrators of such acts accountable?

Is the university fearful that they may offend those who wish to intimidate and harass their fellow students.

Penn's ambivalence fuels a crisis that is shattered by academic sanctuary.

Policies meant to safeguard us, have become hollow promises. And let us be clear, if they fail Jewish students today, tomorrow they will fail the rest of us.

GLENN: It was powerful. Yesterday was a very powerful day.