BLOG

Asian NBA Star Accused of Cultural Appropriation Over Dreadlocks Responds With Glorious Quip

Jeremy Lin, an Asian NBA player for the Brooklyn Nets, is being accused of cultural appropriation by former Nets forward Kenyon Martin for sporting dreadlocks.

In an Instagram video, Martin called out Lin for his hair-do saying:

“Do I need to remind this damn boy that his last name Lin?” Martin said. “Like, come on, man. Let’s stop with these people. There is no way possible he would’ve made it on one of our teams with that bulls**t on his head.

“Come on man, somebody need to tell him, like, ‘alright bro, we get it. You wanna be black.’ Like, we get it. But your last name is Lin,” Martin continued.

Lin’s response?

“Hey man. Its all good you don’t have to like my hair and definitely entitled to your opinion. Actually i legit grateful you sharin it tbh. At the end of the day i appreciate that i have dreads and you have Chinese tattoos bc i think its a sign of respect. And i think as minorities, the more we appreciate each others cultures, the more we influence mainstream society. Thanks for everything you did for the nets and hoops…had your poster on my wall growin up.”

Chinese. Tattoos.

What a classy guy. Lin is a Harvard graduate and has faced adversity in the NBA for being Asian.

Read the full story here.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

PAT: It's Pat. Pat Gray. Jeffy for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program. He's back on Monday. 888-727-BECK.

You know, in addition to the political correct speech that we are now bound to and is so evident in that Cam Netwon -- again, I'm not a big Cam Netwon defender, normally. I'm not a big fan of his. But, you know, his flippant comment to the female reporter, just not that big a deal.

JEFFY: When is it a big deal, Pat, when someone puts you down in front of other people?

PAT: Well, when it's really insulting. And that was not -- it's about football. Who cares? Who cares?

Whether women love football or don't love football, who cares? It's about football. Right?

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: You know, had he said something disparaging about her appearance or they shouldn't make the same money as the male reporters around her, okay. You could understand that. That's offensive.

JEFFY: Normally, women are pretty stupid. But you're not.

PAT: Yeah. But it's about football. Relax. But not only are we dealing with all of that right now, but we got this cultural appropriation thing, which is completely out of control as well.

Jeremy Lin, who is Asian-American. He's been in the news before, because the ESPN reporter a few years ago, you might remember, said the chink in his armor of the game was -- and then went on to describe whatever the problem was with his game. Well, he was talking about the chink in the armor, as the expression that there's something wrong with your armor. There's something wrong with your skill set. Not that he was being called a disparaging name for Asian people.

The guy got fired. So that same Jeremy Lin now is being accused by former NBA forward -- who also played for the New Jersey Nets. But they're the Brooklyn Nets now. Kenyan Martin tore into him in an Instagram video because Lin has decided to wear dreadlocks. And that's apparently verboten. I guess only black people can have dreadlocks.

He said -- here's what he said in his Instagram video. Do I need to remind this damn boy that his last name is Lin? Like, come on, man. Let's stop with these people. There's no possible way he would have made it on one of our teams with that BS on his head. Come on, man. Somebody need to tell him like, all right, bro. We get it. You want to be black. Like, we get it. But your last name is Lin.

Wow. So you can't have a certain hairstyle if it resembles a race that normally -- I mean, isn't that also stereotyping? Isn't that kind of racist to say that only blacks can have dreadlocks?

JEFFY: Yes. I mean -- and that's a lot worse than the Cam Netwon. I'll tell you that.

PAT: A lot worse. A lot worse.

JEFFY: I wonder if the yogurt company cancelled his deal.

PAT: Check this out. The response from Jeremy Lin. Just so classy. Keep in mind, the guy went to Harvard. He's pretty smart. He knows how to defend himself. He said, hey, man. It's all good. You don't have to like my hair. And definitely entitled to your own opinion.

Actually, I'm legit grateful for you sharing it. At the end of the day, I appreciate that I have dreads and you have Chinese tattoos.

(laughter)

So this cultural appropriation nonsense --

JEFFY: Thank you.

PAT: -- is coming from a black man with Chinese tattoos up and down his arms.

JEFFY: Thank you.

PAT: He said, but I appreciate the fact that you have Chinese tattoos because I think it's a sign of respect. And I think as minorities, the more we appreciate each other's cultures, the more we influence mainstream society. Thanks for everything you did for the Nets and for hoops. Had your poster on my wall growing up.

Is that a classy, smart, biting response all at the same time?

JEFFY: Wow. Yes, it is. Tremendous.

PAT: Great. I knew I liked Jeremy Lin. Just a classy response.

JEFFY: Although, I will say, that's why I stopped wearing my hair in dreads a few years ago. Because, you know, I'm not big on the dreads.

PAT: So you would have them now?

JEFFY: Yeah, I'm not big on the dreads.

WATCH: FBI ARRESTS, Handcuffs, & Charges a JOURNALIST Over Jan. 6 Reporting
RADIO

WATCH: FBI ARRESTS, Handcuffs, & Charges a JOURNALIST Over Jan. 6 Reporting

Blaze Media investigative journalist Steve Baker has been arrested, arraigned, and handcuffed by the FBI on charges related to his reporting at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Glenn reveals the charges, as well as a segment of CCTV footage that House Republicans released to Blaze Media that suggests a different story. Plus, BlazeTV contributor Jill Savage gives an update from the Dallas, TX, courthouse.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We welcome to the program now Jill savage.

She is a Blaze TV contributor.

And following this story, this is going to be breaking news all day. We don't believe anyone else will cover it. That's why it is so crucial that we cover it. And you spread the news. Or -- or honestly, America just goes down another road, that is unthinkable.

The FBI arrested a Blaze TV reporter. Jill, what do you know, so far.

JILL: Well, we know he will be in court at 10:00 a.m.

He's already self-surrendered at 7:00 a.m. this morning. They handcuffed him. And this is -- it's interesting, because we think there will be four misdemeanor charges.

Right? That's what they've told us so far.

We don't know that for a fact. He's not been told the charges up until this point.

Because they said, they were scared he would tweet out the charges.

Well, at some point, this will all become public record.

So they're also afraid. He is afraid, that it is three or four misdemeanors.

How many misdemeanors?

JILL: Four.

GLENN: Four misdemeanors. But he feels like they will use those four misdemeanors to -- as enticement. You just say you did wrong, otherwise we bump it up to a felony.

But for the life of me, I cannot understand what -- what even the misdemeanors are. You know, they were parading. What were some of the other ones that they charge people with?

He's not parading. He went as a journalist. And we have, and we'll show you in a few minutes. We just got in the middle of the night, from Barry Loudermilk's office and the Speaker of the House. Those two have just been amazing. They got all of the tape of Steve, reporting in the Capitol on January 6th.

And so we have all of the -- I think there might be a couple more minutes. I don't know.

We don't know how complete it is. But it's fairly complete of him in the Capitol that day, just reporting.

And our understanding is, from the Capitol, that there is no parading. There's nothing, but journalism, taking photographs.

Taking video. And reporting.

JILL: Yeah. Steve Baker is a Blaze media reporter now. But on the day of January 6th.

When he went into the Capitol building. He was an independent reporter. He said, he went in trying to document the day. He said, he didn't know what January 6th was going to turn into. He just followed the story where it went. He was outside with the crowd, and said, okay. A lot of people are going in the building, let me go see what's going on in there. And from that, they are now turning his life into hell. And you can see, that they are not just going out. And he said, they could have easily just said, an order to appear in front of the court today. But that's not what they did. They put an actual arrest warrant out for him. And Steve this weekend asked his lawyer, why are they doing this to me? And his lawyer looked at him and said, you know why they're doing this to you. You've poked them for three years.

That's the other point. They've been doing this to him for almost three years now.

In December of 2023, they said an arrest warrant would be imminent. They've been making him wait and wait for these charges to come down. He's just living his life, thinking, okay. What time is this going to happen to me?

GLENN: When you know people have been railroaded and if they didn't cooperate, they got 20 years, 20 years!

This is like a cancer diagnosis. Can you imagine, the doctor saying, you might have cancer. You might be fine.

Here. I'm going to give you the results of your test. They're imminent, any day now. And then you wait two and a half years.

That's -- they're making the process, the punishment. Because they don't have anything.

And so they're making -- they're setting an example by scaring everyone. And I swear to you, America. If you don't wake up on this one, if these reporters, if these journalists don't report this. May God have mercy on your soul! For what you've done to the republic. This is a journalist. That is being arrested. And you say nothing?

May God have mercy on your soul.

So they arrested him. Now, they told him to show up in shorts and sandals, right?

JILL: Right.

STU: Which you just can't picture -- told him, I can't picture you in flip-flops. He does not look like a man who has ever worn flip-flops in his entire life.

GLENN: No.

JILL: And theoretically, it's to make it easier just to put the orange jumpsuit on, and put the chains on. And go through, right? They want to make this as humiliating as possible. This is not just, here, let's do X, Y, and Z. Let's go through by the book. No. We want to humiliate you. That's why we're telling you, not what charges you're facing. But we're telling you to show up in shorts and flip-flops.

GLENN: So this is what is what happened about an hour ago. Do we have the video of Steve?

STU: Not wearing shorts and flip-flops notably?

GLENN: No. He went in a suit. And he's on his way to the FBI. There's first picture of him.

Do we have the video of him being handcuffed?

That's all we have right now. But he was -- I am told, I have not seen the video. I am told that he was -- he was leaned up against the car.

And then his face was pushed down on to the -- on to the hood.

STU: Come on.

GLENN: And he was handcuffed.

They're going to put leg irons on him, and an orange yomps.

Now, for four misdemeanors, why do you need leg irons?

JILL: It's all the humiliation game.

And that's exactly what -- everything is going back to. None of this needed to happen. The way that it is.

I hope that that is what people take away from today. None of this needed to happen this way.

It could have been an order to appear in front of the court. It didn't have to be duress. It didn't have to be an orange yomps. It didn't have to be with the chains.

But they're doing this for show.

STU: He told me yesterday, Glenn. That the fifth person to breach the Capitol building.

The fifth, was a New York Times journalist.

GLENN: Who went through the window.

STU: The window. The broken window. The fifth one.

Now, look, I am not at all advocating that the New York Times journalist who went in there, should be arrested. Should not.

Quite clearly, this is a story worth covering, and it's -- it's vitally important we have video that Steve took. Which, by the way, was then used by documentaries.

GLENN: HBO.

STU: By the House -- the -- whatever that counsel -- the committee was.

GLENN: The committee of clowns.

STU: The committee of clowns that went after everybody. They used his footage. And now they're going to arrest him for taking it. It's incomprehensible what they're doing.

GLENN: He said, there's a possibility that they get him on some sort of crossing state lines.

Because he crossed state lines and then sold the video. It's like, what?

What kind of law is that?

I've never even heard of that.

STU: These are the Commerce Clause for anything, as you know.

GLENN: Yeah. No. I know. I know. Okay. So you're on your way down to the courthouse, right?

JILL: Yes, I will be there today, reporting back with whatever comes out of the courthouse today.

GLENN: Okay. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

JILL: Thanks, Glenn.

GLENN: I have done this job, since 1978.

I have never seen anything like this.

I believe, they left Steve alone, for two years. He was not a Blaze TV correspondent. They left him alone. They first contacted him, and they had nothing. Literally nothing.

He is a journalist, an independent journalist, when he was at the Capitol. He did not engage in anything.

The guy is a Libertarian. He wasn't for Trump. He wasn't for anybody. He was an independent journalist.

There are, I think, 60 journalists, that were on Capitol Hill that day. Now the federal government, as soon as he joined us. And started putting his stuff out, and it got eyeballs.

All of a sudden, they're after him.

And I don't think this is -- I mean, I know they need him to stop. Because he's the guy who has revealed everything.

We're getting down to the Kamala Harris stuff. He told me yesterday, some things that he's working on.

And he said, Glenn, there are other people, who know it.

Other people have my work, in case, I become suicidal, in jail.

He said, and he told me a story, I'm not going to tell you.

He told me a story, if he can prove this. I mean, it's game-changing.

This is the clip of him. Is this the clip of him in the Capitol, being handcuffed?

Here he is, the clip of him being handcuffed today if you're watching Blaze TV.

STU: Got to be kidding me.

GLENN: Look at that. Perp walk. This is the nicest, quietest, gentlest man I know.

STU: It's incredible.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

STU: Charges are as follows. Knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority. Now, that's one he's talked about. And he said, you know, look, I'm a journalist. And I know, even as a journalist, I --

GLENN: New York Times was there.

STU: -- I'm not allowed to be in these buildings, even if I'm covering these stories.

However, the fifth person, through a broken window, to enter the Capitol, was a New York Times journalist. And they are not being charged.

GLENN: And he didn't enter through a broken window. The other two -- three charges.

STU: Disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted HEP or grounds. Disorderly conduct in the Capitol building.

GLENN: Didn't happen.

STU: Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building.

GLENN: Didn't happen.

So we are waiting now in front of the -- the justice building, if you can call it that. The courthouse, here in Dallas. One of our colleagues has been arrested today for January 6th. Could we just play the footage, that we got from the Capitol, last night?

There, I mean, look at this. He -- Steve is in this footage, this the Capitol from January 6th. He is up against the wall, right there. He's either writing or he's checking the pictures on his camera, to make sure he has the shots he wants.

STU: He's not even looking at what's going on at that point. He's writing.

GLENN: Yeah, he's not engaged in anything, other than writing and something.

And then soon, he's going to move around the crowd. And he's going to stand in a doorway, doing exactly the same thing, except taking pictures.

RIKKI: Doesn't look very disorderly to me.

STU: No. He's just texting or taking notes.

RIKKI: Not a lot of parading. His tripod is actually up against the wall.

GLENN: Have I seen all of this footage?

RIKKI: No, we've only got -- you heard the Congressman telling --

GLENN: No, no, no. Have you seen all 5 minutes of this -- it's boring as not.

RIKKI: Oh, yeah. It's very boring.

I could see why the FBI didn't want to look at this.

STU: I mean, this is not parading. He's not even engaged with the crowd. He's leaning against the wall, as the crowd passes by. And takes notes. We have seen him try to document the events that are going on.

But like people in front of him are cheering, waving their flags.

He's just leaning against the wall.

GLENN: Writing, writing.

And taking photographs and videos.

This is -- this is insane. But then again, this is -- this is not the only journalist. The other journalist that all other journalists seem to have turned their back on is Catherine Herridge.

She was at CBS, right?

She was just fired. She's been all over. She worked at ABC. NBC.

Fox. And she was at CBS. They just fired her.

And now, she is facing jail time. Because she won't reveal the source of a witness.

And that witness, that whistle blowed to her, was whistle-blowing on how there is an infiltration in our universities. From China.

And the government wants to know who her source was. And so they're putting her in jail.

What a surprise, it has something to do with China, hmm?

So that's two journalists in jail today. Rikki, I'm sorry.

Jill Savage is down at the courthouse. And she's -- we're waiting for Steve to come out. But what is the situation, have you heard, Jill?

JILL: Yeah. I was just up in the room with Steve Baker as he was going through his arraignment. He was there with four -- four defendants, who walked in. Steve, it was nice enough that they were letting him wear his blue dress pants and dress shirts.

So the orange jumpsuit that we were talking about earlier on the show, Glenn, did not happen. But he was indeed shackled at his wrists and ankles.

Steve looked over at us, as he walked in to the courthouse, and definitely showed those -- those shackles there on his wrists and ankles. And, Steve, it is going to be known that he will be released some time today. They were asked that. The government lawyer said that that was fine. That that was going to be part of today's proceedings. And then he will be set to appear in court, in the District of Columbia, on March 14th, at 12:30 Eastern Standard. So that will be the next thing that we should look for, for Steve Baker.

GLENN: Do we know the judge?

Stu, in the charges, it was signed a District of Columbia judge.

We should look up the judge.

Is that the hanging judge?

I mean, he's going into territory now, where he -- good luck getting a fair trial.

JILL: Yeah. Absolutely. And I think that was one of the things that the lawyers definitely knew what they were getting in for today. We were able to speak to them just briefly before they went up into the courtroom. But that is now the unknown.

What happens when things do get into the District of Columbia on March 14th.

GLENN: Tell Steve that I talked to Alan Dershowitz today. And Alan is willing to get involved pro bono, to help him, for free speech cases.

This isn't the only one, unfortunately, that is now popping up.

How the Supreme Court’s Presidential Immunity Decision Could Change EVERYTHING
RADIO

How the Supreme Court’s Presidential Immunity Decision Could Change EVERYTHING

The Supreme Court has decided to take up former president Donald Trump’s presidential immunity case. This is good news, Glenn says, but the decision could have huge ramifications for the 2024 election and future presidents. Glenn and Stu discuss what might happen: Will special counsel Jack Smith’s case against Trump take a massive hit? Or will the Supreme Court practically gut the power of the presidency? Glenn and Stu also discuss why they believe Trump is in a great position right now in his 4 trials: “There’s a good shot that none of this comes to anything.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So there's a couple of things. Let me start with some good news.

A judge -- let me just read this.

No individuals associated with the left, who engaged in far right speech, and violently suppressed the protected speech of Trump supporters, were charged with a federal crime for their part in starting riots at a political event.

This is textbook viewpoint discrimination.

Okay. You ready?

That was said by a judge in California. He threw the charges out of the -- two far right political agitators. Saying, this is selective prosecution.

Now, these two guys, I don't know if they're necessarily -- you know, I don't consider Nazis far right. But maybe you do.

But they're white nationalist group. I shouldn't say Nazis. They're a far right nationalist group. So they're people I really don't like.

Kind of like the people in Antifa. I don't like them either.

So what the charge was, is these guys were holding a rally. And the Antifa guys came with, you know, all those things that they do. Intimidated and beat some of the people in this. Police came.

Only arrested the far right people. Not anybody at Antifa. And a judge said, no. Sorry. Can't do it.

Not going to do it. If you didn't arrest the other side. You can't arrest these guys. I think it's a step in the right direction. That's what I've always been saying.

Wait a minute. January 6. Why did you arrest all those people.

When you had people stealing. Breaking windows. Burning cities.

And none of those people were arrested.

STU: Yeah. I would think my preference would be, everyone would be arrested for burning it down.

GLENN: No. That's not my preference.

That's the way America should work.

STU: But my secondary choice is nobody does. It at least should be fair.

However, I would like all the people who burn things to the ground or start riots or beat the heck out of police officers, they should all go to prison. I'm fine with that.

GLENN: Let me give you this now. Bump stocks. Supreme Court.

The justices heard the case to legally -- to repeal an executive order from Donald Trump. Or was it an executive order?

Or was it just redefining guide lines?

STU: Yeah. It was that type of thing. An administrative change.

You know, this thing we already approved for eight years.

What if we don't approve it anymore.

What if we let a guy build an entire business, based on this thing that we were okay with. And then just pull the rug right out.

And make him send, what was it?

80 pallets of unused and unsold bump stocks to be melted down. What if we do that instead?

GLENN: It's one of the worst things Donald Trump did in his administration.

Was just use that executive, administrative branch to single-handedly say, no. Can't do that.

Supreme Court looks like they're torn.

Usual lines.

But there's a chance the bump stocks survive.

STU: The ban, you mean?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: It's weird. The way the case is set up, is basically the question of, they should have at least passed a law to do this. If you want to get rid of bump stocks. You need to pass a law to ban bump stocks. You can't just do it. And I don't know. That just seems overtly obvious. However, I don't even think, the law if it was passed, would be constitutional. That's maybe, you know, being a Second Amendment extremist, or something.

GLENN: But at least that's the way our Constitution and the system of government is supposed to work.

You can pass a law. And it's not constitutional. Go back and rewrite the law and make it constitutional, if you can. You know what I mean?

STU: Or take the advice as unconstitutional and maybe don't do it again.

I take your point. At least it would be a normalized process.

Instead, what they did was basically say, I don't want these.

GLENN: It's the administrative state.

STU: It's bad on both sides.

GLENN: And I don't know how to convince people that this is one of the biggest problems we have in America.

Congress does not do their job.

They're not required to anymore.

Many of them are there fighting, to do a job.

But everything is a back door deal, that you got to rush to sign. And then it just gives more power to the agencies. Where the agencies can say, oh, no. You know what? We have this guideline. Why don't we write it to include this?

STU: Yeah. And, look, I get the motivation here. This is the worst mass shooting, that was not government-involved, in -- in history.

GLENN: Yes. Right.

STU: And it was really, really a bad incident.

But emotions of that incident do not overwhelm our system of government.

And, you know, they -- they -- this is just completely unfair.

They changed tens of thousands of US citizens into felons overnight.

GLENN: So there is -- there is another court case, that the spouter yesterday, said they would take up.

I think this is good news. And not just politically good news.

The real question here is presidential immunity. Does the president -- is he immune from a criminal trial for things he did as president?

Not while president. As president.

The answer to me would be, yes. No trial for -- because that should have been stopped by Congress. Or the Supreme Court. Or whatever.

As an official act, there should be -- we shouldn't have a bunch of people putting their hands in their pockets. Going, well, I was just following order. No. If it's illegal. No. Stop it.

But can the president do an official act, and then be held in criminal court. If that happens, you will just continue to be able to prosecute any president that is running a second term.

STU: So -- and I think pretty much the line is set. That while a president. If you do something as president, and you're currently still president. The answer to this, is pretty much. They can't throw you in prison. While you're president of the United States. That's been at least the guideline.

GLENN: No. No. But it's also a separation of, if the president murdered somebody while he was president, he should go to prison.

You know what I mean?

STU: Right. I would agree to that.

GLENN: He would murder somebody, while he was president.

STU: However, I believe the way that would play out. He would need to be impeached first.

And removed from office. And then he would be thrown in jail.

At least the -- it's not like a constitutional -- it's not in the Constitution.

There's not a founding, really reference toward this. The guidelines they've used is one year actually operating as the chief executive. We can't take you out of that room.

GLENN: Well, yes.

And the thing with Biden is -- Biden's crimes were before he was president.

STU: Uh-huh. But still, if he was -- if they went to this level of -- they found enough evidence. And they decided they would --

GLENN: Oh, he would have to be --

STU: He would have to be impeached and removed. Before he dealt with the punishment of that. And when he was removed from office, then be able to go through the trial as a normal person would.

GLENN: So here is the -- here is the ramifications of this decision.

Can Donald Trump be held now, in -- in a criminal case, for his acts as president?

The answer is, always been no. Always been no.

Otherwise, you're president if he decides to execute military operations. And somebody says, that that's illegal. Then it has to go to a court.

It would be very -- it would be very bad for the presidency.

It would just completely gut our president. This goes to the trial now, that everybody is so excited to hear.

All right. So the Supreme Court is hearing this, which would stop or at least because they're going to hear it, slow down the Jack Smith trial on Donald Trump.

Which is

STU: Which --

GLENN: Which trial.

STU: So you've got four major ones, right?

You've got the January 6th.

There are two of those.

You have the federal one, which is the jacks Smith.

And you have the Fani Willis one in Georgia.

Then you have the other two. Which are the New York. With Alvin brag. And you have the documents case in Florida.

Those are the four.

And it's like, I don't know, Glenn. Tell me if I'm wrong on this.

I think Trump is in the best position he's been in, since he started now.

GLENN: Oh, everybody has been saying, I don't know if I can vote for Donald Trump. Because he might go to jail.

At this point, there's a good shot, none of this comes to anything.

STU: Especially before the election.

GLENN: Yeah. Before the election, it won't now.

STU: Right. If you think about the four of them individually, you have -- one of them is the Alvin Bragg Stormy Daniels, which everyone acknowledges is the weakest case, it's the weakest case. He has all sorts of ridiculous laws he's bending to even bring the law in the first place.

It makes no sense.

Everyone, on the left, kind of blew that one off as frivolous. Then you have --

GLENN: And even if he's convicted of that, he won't lose any votes. Because it's just such a sham.

STU: Yeah. And plus, people knew that story already, a long time ago.

So second is the documents case. And, look, there is a lot of evidence against him on that, especially on how he handled it, when they asked for the documents back. He fought it.

And potentially did not tell them the truth about it.

Does he wind up being convicted of that?

It's possible. But what person -- you know, picture the Trump voter with the Trump sign in their lawn.

Then they're just like -- they're walked out one day. And say, I'm ripping this thing out of the ground. That man stored documents improperly.

I just don't believe that person exists. I don't know. I could be wrong. I just don't think he stored documents, frankly.

GLENN: The insurrection or stealing the election. Those -- are those big.

STU: Those could be big.

But think about what one of those two are. One is delayed in April. It could even be heard. Nothing can happen from now to April. April 22nd.

GLENN: Right. But after it's heard, their decision won't come out until June.

STU: Until June.

So you're all the way in June. Before they could even start this thing.

I mean, maybe they try to put this in -- I mean, the conventions are going on. I mean, we are deep into the election at this point.

Maybe they'll still try it. But it will be very difficult. And really amps up all of the problems with trying to persecute your opponents even more.

And then the last one is Fani Willis. Which is completely falling apart.

I mean, the texts that came out from this lawyer.

Who is texting the lawyers of the defense. Saying, yes.

Absolutely. This happened in 2019. And I'll tell you exactly where they met, and then he's on the -- the stand saying, I don't know.

I'm just speculating about that. Can he was not doing. He was given multiple chances to correct the actual filing about this. And said, there's no problem with it. And that's just what we know so far.

I mean, they completely lied --

GLENN: So far, there are three attorneys that should lose their license.

STU: Yeah, at least.

GLENN: At least. And personally, I think they should pay a very hefty fine.

And, well, possibly I think Fani Willis and her boyfriend, absolutely should go to jail. They were defiant.

They knew what they were doing. They didn't even have to test. She didn't even have to testify about it.

But she wanted to. She walked on that stand with the intent of lying. Gone.

STU: Everyone I talked to, said, nothing ever happens to these people when it happens. There's no I couldn't wait.

That may be true. I will say, this judge in particular. Remember, the Federalist Society. Appointed by a Republican.

He seems to have the right approach here, at the very least.

I don't know. Maybe we'll still be disappointed.

I don't think he's just taking this, as, oh, I can't wait. To give Fani Willis. A free pass on this.

I don't think that's his approach. We will see how this turns out. You all of these things -- at the very least, Trump will have a really good argument, even if he gets convicted in the Georgia case and come out -- these people are obviously corrupt. And it won't be one of those reflexive defenses where you're complaining about everything. They will have a really good case that this was corrupt.

GLENN: And the other one, if it makes it to court, is the District of Columbia.

So, I mean --

STU: I don't know.

GLENN: I think he's had a great week. Donald Trump. I think he's had a great week.

STU: Yeah. A lot of this stuff will probably cost him money in the long run. When it believes to this election. I think he's been in the best position he's been in, in a long time.

GLENN: Once again, the seems to be in the position, we got him this time. We got him this time.

Oh, crap, maybe we don't have him.

Jan. 6 Journalist Facing an FBI ARREST Reveals Who’s Calling the Shots
RADIO

Jan. 6 Journalist Facing an FBI ARREST Reveals Who’s Calling the Shots

The FBI has ordered investigative journalist and Blaze Media correspondent Steve Baker to turn himself in, but he believes the full story is even more corrupt than it sounds. Baker is facing misdemeanor charges connected to his reporting at the Capitol on January 6th, 2021. But he still hasn’t been told what the charges are. Steve joins Glenn to lay out how he’ll respond. For starters, the FBI told him to show up in shorts and flip flops so he can be marched out in an orange jumpsuit and leg chains — which is an extremely unprecedented move. But Steve tells Glenn what he’ll wear instead. And he also explains who he believes is really behind his arrest and the prosecution of many others who were at the Capitol: “There is ever more evidence of the insane corruption at the top of the Capitol Police…they are more powerful than Congress itself.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Steve, been praying for you this week. I know many members of the audience are doing the same.

This is crazy. What's about to happen to you tomorrow.

STEVE: Yeah. I'm always worried about more my unpaid parking tickets from college.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

You're a nice, gentle, regular guy.

And do you even know what the charges are?

STEVE: No. They haven't told us yet.

GLENN: Is that unusual.

STEVE: No. Back two and a half years ago, when they initially threatened me and said I would be arrested within the week. In November of 21 take it. They actually told my attorney at the time, what the charges are going to be then.

But because I'm a little outspoken and vocal about what's happening with me. We were -- we were told at the time, by an assistant US attorney.

This a judge would not be happy with me, you know, going out to the press, in the manner that I've done. So I just intensified that, accelerated that.

And lit that candle brighter. Yeah, I see the look on your face. I see the look on your face.

GLENN: Yeah. What right is it, for them to say, we're coming after you. And then when you say, hey, by the way. Everybody, they say they're coming after had he.

They haven't said why they're coming after me.

This is all I've done. Why would you be in trouble for defending yourself in the public square?

Because once they arrest you. Well, now you've been arrested we the FBI.

That's a really bad thing. Even if you're innocent.

GLENN: Well, two years ago, the US attorney said to my attorney, that a judge will not look favorably upon this.

To which my attorney responded, are you saying that my client should forego his First Amendment right under the threat of persecution from the federal government?

And she said, oh, no. We're not really saying that. Just, we're concerned for him and his --

GLENN: Oh, they're concerned for you.

STEVE: I kid you not. Now, fast forward two years. Under the current threat. And they won't tell me the charges this time. Literally, quote, unquote, from the US attorney, because he'll tweet it out.

GLENN: Well, what? Yeah. Yeah. We'll do it for you.

STEVE: Yeah. Technical the charges are under seal, until you're actually arrested. So they are technically not in violation of any law.

GLENN: Right.

STEVE: So tomorrow morning, at 7 o'clock, when I arrive at the FBI field office here in Dallas, I will know what my charges are.

GLENN: And how are you supposed to dress? What advice did they give you on that?

STEVE: They notified my attorney that I needed to arrive in shorts, a T-shirt, and flip-flops.

GLENN: And why is that?

STEVE: It's easier to change into the orange jumpsuit and leg chains.

GLENN: And is that something that everybody does?

When they bust down everybody's door, do they say, hey, change into a T-shirt and flip-flops?

STEVE: I don't think that when they bust in your door, you get that opportunity of choice.

GLENN: Yeah.

When they -- when they invite people to turn themselves in.

I've never seen people turn themselves in. You know --

STEVE: This is exactly what they did to the independent journalist, Stephen Mauren, from Raleigh, North Carolina, coincidentally, where I live.

And when they arrested him, and they brought him in. They did exactly same thing. They put him in an orange jumpsuit, put leg chains on him, and made him March before the magistrate in leg chains, on misdemeanor offenses.

STU: It's one of the interesting parts here. Because you don't know, as you point out, what you're being charged with.

But you do know they're misdemeanors, right?

STEVE: That's what they've told my attorney.

STU: So why on earth would you need to be in leg chains?

We have -- prosecutors all over the country, that won't charge people who have sexually assaulted individuals, with crimes. And they won't hold them.

And they are released the next day.

And they will put you in leg chains for misdemeanors.

STEVE: Well, let's start ourselves with the bigger question. And work our way to that answer.

This is the first time in history, since January 6th, that the FBI is even involving themselves in misdemeanor offenses and misdemeanor defendants.

And swatting misdemeanor defendants. With sometimes 50, 20, 25 agents, swatting misdemeanor. The FBI has never done that, in their history. Until ordered to do so, by Merrick Garland's DOJ, after January 6th.

So fast forward to this.

Why are they doing that?

Why are they requiring -- my attorney told me, when he told me, that this is what they will have me -- requesting that I arrive dressed in flip-flops and shorts.

I said, why are they doing this to me. He said, you know why. He said, you've been poking them in the eye for three years. This is retribution.

GLENN: This is evil. It's just evil.

When you have a government -- I mean, I don't know if you saw the story today from California. But there was a judge in California who said, you can't arrest just people on the right, when Antifa was there.

And they were being violent. Beating up these people.

You arrest the people they were beating up. You don't arrest Antifa. That didn't make any sense at all.

When -- when a -- when a United States government can come after individuals. And, you know, we've been saying this from the beginning.

If they'll do to Trump. You don't think they will do it to you?

STEVE: Well, the selective prosecution is exactly what's happening here.

We have over 60 -- we have documented over 60 journalists that entered through those doors.

Or broken windows.

That day. The fifth person through the broken window that day, was a New York Times reporter.

The New Yorker reporter, Luke Mogelson, went through the broken window. And he paralleled another independent photo journalist. They went through the same window, paralleled the other journalist.

He had spent a lot of time working on the Latinos for Trump campaign.

Well, even though he didn't parade, he didn't do any protesting. He did no chanting. Anything of the sort.

And was contracted at the time, as a video photo journalist for a TV station in Mobile, Alabama.

Even though that was the groundwork laid, four misdemeanors. Swatted by over 20 agents at his home, with the red dots on his wife, his children, and, of course, obviously himself.

At 6:30 in the morning. And then, he was convicted. He said, I will go to -- he said, Luke Mogelson from the New Yorker, we went through the same window at the same time. And he hasn't been charged. I will go stand before a judge. He did a bench trial. He was convicted on all four misdemeanors. And because he went to trial, and he wasted the government's time and resources, not taking the plea deal he was offered.

The judge put him in prison for eight months. Sentenced him to eight months. They put him in a medium security facility, in -- in Georgia. Where after spending the first two months in solitary confinement. And gets out into the general population. He learns from all the other prisoners, that they never put misdemeanor defendants in that prison.

All of the other guys -- actually, they distrusted him. They thought he was some sort of plant inside the prison. They were like, people don't come here for misdemeanors.

You know, we're -- this is what we do for a living. We're pros. We go to prison.

You know, we commit crimes and go to prison for a living. You're not supposed to be here.

He says, well, you are here, if you're a J6 defendant.

GLENN: So mentally, how are you?

STEVE: I have my moments. I'm okay. I -- you know, I've had -- I've had over two years to prepare for this.

I've game planned it all out in my head. I'm not going to sleep tonight. I'm not even going to try.

It is my way. Anyway. And so I'm just going to, you know, prepare. Pray. And then I'm going to put on my suit and tie.

GLENN: Good for you.

STEVE: And walk in with my head up.

GLENN: Good for you. Good for you.

More in just a minute with Steve Baker. He's an investigative journalist. A Blaze media correspondent. He has been -- he's the guy who worked with Congress, to expose the video that was being held back.

And for this, he is being arrested and arraigned tomorrow. In what city?

STEVE: Here in Dallas.

GLENN: Here in Dallas. Will it happen? Will the trial happen here in Texas?

STEVE: We will certainly be filing a motion for change of venue out of DC, but none of those have been granted yet on J6 cases.

GLENN: Jeez. Because they know they can't win, anyplace else.

GLENN: It is -- it's amazing to me, Steve, that I'm doing an interview with a man, that I know is innocent.

Who I know is a journalist.

Who I know just did the job of being a journalist. And tomorrow, it might be your first day going to jail and then prison.

STEVE: You know, I'll correct you on one thing. There are 60 of us that are guilty.

We are guilty of crossing a restricted line, and that is common for law enforcement to allow the press to come inside the police line to document the public interests.

GLENN: I was going to say. Correct.

STEVE: There is no license. There is no credential. There is no press pass on the planet. Or in the United States of America, local, state, or federal, that allows any journalist to cross a restricted line.

But over 60 did.

And only those whose voice is more on the right side of the political spectrum are being prosecuted.

No one from the left.

GLENN: So what is your -- I mean, if you care to share it.

What is your game plan?

STEVE: I think the first thing we have to do is find out who our judge is. That's the most important aspect.

It's the first major piece of the puzzle.

Because the judges and the J6 lottery. Are -- are -- they come in all -- all shapes and sizes and intensities.

So it will depend upon whether we get a hanging judge, or we get one of the more reasonable common sense.

GLENN: Let's say you get a hanging judge, and they offer you a deal.

BRENDAN: That will be very tempting, if it's one of the hanging judges to take the deal.

Because we already know what the threat of not taking the deal is. That would be a superseding indictment that would include a felony. Because they're going to punish you. They don't want to work. They're government employees. They don't want to do a trial.

GLENN: What kind of felony?

What could they come up with this felony?

STEVE: It would be the one that is currently before the Supreme Court. The 15-12, obstruction of an official proceeding.

They could -- well, first of all, show me the man, I'll show you the crime. They could come up with anything.

GLENN: Right.

STEVE: So they could go back on years and years, on tax record. They could do anything. So it's not a matter of what could it possibly be that I did that day?

It's going to be something else. But that is the punishment. And it is the threat. And they have used it in other January 6 cases.

GLENN: Jeez.

STU: I know you've done a lot of work, Steve, going back, when you're doing your reporting. And looking through all these videos. And you've been able to isolate a bunch of really interesting things, that nobody knew about.

GLENN: That exonerate a lot of people.

STU: Exonerate.

GLENN: And take down the police and, you know, whoever they were. FBI agents or whoever they were.

STEVE: And there's more coming. As a matter of fact, I just heard from a senior congressional aid this morning. That there will be a very significant release tomorrow.

That's all -- he gave me permission to say. That I could say on the air today.

And some of that has to do and it intersects with my work.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: My question is. Do we see video of you?

STEVE: Oh, yeah.

STU: Will we see this? I think they want to paint this idea, that you were not a journalist at this event.

And I think it would be pretty clear.

As you said, there's cameras everywhere.

You have to be on camera, all over the place.

Were you doing something different than the New York Times reporters that were there?

STEVE: I am happy to say, that myself and TheBlaze team, back in December, we harvested a day in the life of me.

Capitol CCTV cameras, and we will be showing that.

GLENN: Right. Excellent.

STEVE: Every second of me inside the Capitol, doing my job, never participating in any parading, milling around.

You know, or as they say, picketing.

Protesting. Never chanting. None of that. We have it all on film.

GLENN: That's fantastic. Now -- now, if you have a hanging judge, will that judge allow that to be -- I mean, the fact that these cases have not been overturned. The minute we started seeing video. Where you're like. Wait a minute.

That makes that guy innocent.

And they didn't allow the attorney to have that. Or see that. Or use that.

I mean, it -- the fact that those haven't been overturned yet. Is a real crime.

A real crime.

STEVE: And we're continuing to work on that process. I will tell you, that there is ever more evidence of the insane corruption, at the top of the Capitol Police.

Which is -- which is holding back these -- you know, series of documents that we need.

To bring justice.

In those particular cases, that you're referring to.

They are more powerful, than Congress themself.

I never believed that. I had Capitol police officers, my sources, unnamed, and known.

That have told me, over and over again. You do not understand how powerful the Capitol Police are. So I'm thinking to myself. Okay. Okay. Okay. Right. Right.

And then I talked with Speaker Johnson. And Speaker Johnson tells me, his lips to my ears, he says, I have 100 percent authority over the -- the distribution of those videos. I can -- I can either let them out. Not. It's all on me. And then all of a sudden, they stop. There's not been anything released in weeks. And suddenly, it stops. Get back with my sources. They said, I told you, it's the Capitol Police. Why is the Capitol Police so powerful?

They know where all the bodies are buried. They know who buried them. They know who is sleeping with who.

They know everything.

GLENN: Jeez.

STEVE: And they are -- and they are the personal security guards of Congress. That's why they're so powerful.

GLENN: It's amazing that it was said that this is Nancy Pelosi's police force. The Speaker has control. Well, she might have. But according to you, Johnson doesn't.

STEVE: There's somebody more powerful than him.

GLENN: Hmm. All right.

Best of luck. We'll keep you in your prayer -- in our prayers. And please, please, stay in touch, and tell us how we can help.

STEVE: Well, we're not going to stop working. So I'll tell you that.

GLENN: Thank you.

STU: And we'll try to get you a flip-flop sponsorship.

STEVE: Can we do that?

GLENN: You need an orange jumpsuit to make it even easier for the feds. Call this number.

How China is Using REAL Disinformation to DIVIDE America
RADIO

How China is Using REAL Disinformation to DIVIDE America

Many Americans feel more divided than ever. But are we really? Investigative journalist Peter Schweizer joins Glenn to expose how the Chinese Communist Party is using real disinformation to divide us. As described in his new book, "Blood Money," China has funded and pushed everything from the trans agenda to radical violent protests in our streets. Schweizer also exposes how the Chinese military is running thousands of social media accounts posing as Americans: half claim that America is racist and bigoted and the other half spew white supremacy. "This is clearly an effort to destabilize the United States," he argues. And that's just the beginning of China's secret war against America ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We're with peter Schweitzer. He's the president of the Government Accountability Institute.

He's also a guy who has written several books, exposés on both the right and the left.

The left now forgets that he does that, and they just call him a tool of the right, but he lets the chips fall where they may.

Thus, why he's talking about people in several books, like Mitch McConnell.

So, Peter, we're talking about in your book, blood money. How the Chinese Communist Party is sewing chaos in the United States.

Is there -- is there -- not that there needs to be. But do you have evidence of more things, other than just the fentanyl?

PETER: Oh, absolutely. Take the issue of the trans movement in the United States. This just erupted in the last five years.

If I point out in the book, two of the biggest funders of the trans movement in America, are China-based billionaires.

One is an American Marxist named Roy Singham.

He worked. He built a company called Thought Works. He was a consultant adviser to Huawei, a Chinese military-linked company.

He sold his business, made him a billionaire to a private equity company, partly owned by the Chinese government. He moved to Beijing. He's very close with people.

He gets invited to their events. He's put more than $160 million into radical causes in the United States, including the trans rights movement.

The other Chinese billionaire doing that, is a guy named Joe Tsai, who is the cofounder of Alibaba. He has poured tens of millions of dollars into the trans rights movement.

And in addition, he owns the WNBA Team in New York. The New York Liberty, which was the first professional sports team to have a trans athlete play.

Now, here's the -- the -- very troubling part for me, Glenn. About this, Glenn.

These guys do not push for these rights in China. They only push for these rights in the United States.

There's no -- they're not trans. They don't have family members that are trans. This is clearly an effort to, you know, destabilize the United States.

If you look at a lot of violent actions in the streets, in 2020, with BLM. Or the violent actions in the streets now, involving pro-Hamas demonstrators. There are a couple of groups. FRSO. PSL, that spearhead these really radical, violent protests.

As I lay out in the book, these organizations, that take their marching orders from China, in some cases, there are financial ties.

They consult with Chinese officials.

And I quote from Chinese government reports. Where they, actually, monitor and track the behavior of the organizations.

Then the other part I would add. Online.

There's so much craziness online.

The Chinese military. The PLA. Has thousands of experts, that run individually, thousands of social media accounts, where they pose as Americans, into the United States.

Basically half the account, Glenn, say America is a hopelessly racist, bigoted society. And the other half of the accounts say, I only like white people. And they're posing as Americans.

I think we're actually less divided, than we believe we are.

Examine China is trying to create fissures between us.

And they're very explicit, that this is part of the disintegration worker's strategy that they've embraced.

GLENN: Where would you put this on the scale of psyop operations of the past from Soviet Union, and everything else?

How big is this?

PETER: Oh, no comparison. Look, the Russians lacked sophistication when it came to this stuff. They lacked capacity. China is very, very aggressive, in their approach here. And if you think about it, it's brilliant. It's basically saying, we're going to beat the United States without actually fighting a war. And as we focus exclusively on how many battleships do we have? Or how many aircraft carriers do we have? What is the situation in Taiwan? Those are important issues, I'm not saying they are.

That's the exclusive focus on Washington. Nobody wants to focus on China's meddling in the United States.

GLENN: I will tell you, I -- I somewhat disagree with you.

We -- that's why our -- that's why our -- that's why we're doing a Colour Revolution op, really, I think, on ourselves, and all over the world.

We are doing that. But we are not doing it, with China.

We'll do it in Ukraine, and everything else.

Where we'll have these Colour Revolutions. And use many of these tactics on our own people, now, it's been shown.

But -- but China is approached as a friend in many ways.

PETER: Yeah, no, exactly.

I agree away with you. Yes, there's no question that the Colour Revolutions that started in the Obama administration. The Chinese, actually, site those as examples of what to use.

But, yeah. I mean, the problem is, we don't have an awareness of this. And there are people on the political left, that have some affinity for Beijing, that don't want to have this conversation.

I have in the book, for example, quotes from -- there's a Chinese organization. Called the center for the center of foreign Marxist parties.

Political parties. It reports directly to the central committee, the CCP.

We got asked to do an analysis in the United States. And one of the points of analysis is, that, yes. The Communist Party USA. Is disorganized. It's small, and it's irrelevant.

Why?

They talk favorably about the role of people like AOC and Bernie Sanders.

Examine they say, while these are not perfect vehicles.

They're still very helpful vehicles. This advancing the agenda, that they have in the United States.

So, you know, the political left does not want to talk about it.

Because these are their champions. Yet, there it is in black and white.

According to the Chinese point of view.

STU: Talking to Peter Schweizer. The book is Blood Money is out tomorrow. You need to get a copy of it.

Peter, can you talk about how much of this stuff, that China is trying to do, would be ineffective if we had a secure border?

And is this one of the reasons why we continually treat the border with such little significance in the federal government?

PETER: Yeah. That's a great point.

There's obviously the issue of illegal immigrants coming, particularly from China. It also involves certainly with fentanyl. There's problem.

I talk about in the book. Part of the Chinese strategy is sow violence in the American streets. China has a history of selling machine guns, to radical groups, and criminal organizations in the United States.

Going back to the 1990s.

They do it today, this a very clever way.

With a small device called a Glock switch.

It's a small switch that you put on a Glock handgun. It converts a Glock handgun to a fully automatic machine gun.

It's obviously highly illegal in the United States, highly illegal in China. You can't even own a firearm.

Yet, the Chinese are openly marketing and smuggling them into the United States.

And selling them to criminal gangs in this country.

It's a massive, widespread problem.

The rate of machine gunfire on American streets has escalated.

And customs and border protection first identified this in 2018.

They finally have started to detect these things as they arrive in the mail.

So what are the Chinese now doing?

They're now going south of the border. They're setting up machine tool operations. With the cartels.

And they're starting to smuggle these devices, across the open border.

So it's illegal immigrants. It's fentanyl.

It's now these devices that will sew chaos in American streets.

Because these devices are being targeted specifically, at drug organizations.

And violent criminal organizations, in the awes.

GLENN: So, Peter, at some point in the book. Blood money.

You say the CCP tricked the Trump administration into COVID lockdowns.

PETER: Yeah.

GLENN: What do you mean by that? What evidence do you have of that?

PETER: So a couple of things. One, if you remember in March of 2020, there was a report issued by imperial college of London, by a professor Ferguson. And it presented this apocalyptic view, that if we did not imitate the Chinese and have lockdowns.

There would be 2 million Americans dead within the next six months. And there will be 500,000 dead in the UK. And if you look at the accounts, the memoirs that have come out.

This had a very profound effect on Donald Trump.

And the administration.

And this moved us to the point of saying, maybe we need to start looking at some of these things.

And, in fact, we did.

Here's the problem. That imperial college of London study, was done, under Chinese influence.

Imperial college of London is a leading academic partner of the CCP. A government in China. They have a long cooperation there.

That particular study, included Chinese data. Included Chinese scholars.

Then the Chinese.

And again, I quote extensively from them. Had a strategy to impose the authoritarian model, for responding to disease on us. Because if you talk about us then.

Before the point, the response was, people that are sick should stay home.

Everybody else should go about their lives ordinarily. That's not the Chinese model.

The Chinese actively pushed that, in the United States. One of the things they reportedly do. I report in Blood Money. They donate in quotation marks. To American cities. Particularly in California and New Jersey.

Hundreds of drones. Our own government started using to monitor their own people. To make sure they were hearing the lockdowns.

And this was part of a Chinese strategy, to get us to embrace some of these authoritarian approaches.

And it's really actually quite extraordinary. And, you know, one of the reasons, that we have a certain individual on the front cover of the book.

Tony Fauci, is because we revealed in emails that we obtained, et cetera, that he covered for the Chinese in this regard.

That he would not criticize the Chinese. It's not just about the lab leak. He would not criticize the Chinese, he embraced their lockdown approaches.

And he kind of pooh-poohed, and criticized Americans.

There's a famous exchange, where a New York Times reporter is emailing with Tony Fauci. And says, China has been heroic in their response to this crisis with COVID.

Unlike, you know, Americans who are basically being fat, selfish slobs.

And Tony's response was, yeah. You make a really, really good point here.

On the record, he agreed with him.

That's the disdain that a lot of these leaders had, for their own countrymen.

And the embrace that they had for this authoritarian model, that the CCP imposed.

GLENN: So I'm out of time.

Peter, would you come back in a couple of days. When you can come up for a breath of air.

And tell us where we need to start to dismantle.

Again, I thank you for exposing all of this. You're usually so far ahead of the curve.

But I think Americans sense now, something is really wrong.

Especially with our relationship with China and the border.

And fentanyl. So you're right on the money here. I would love to have you back, to talk a little bit more about where we should begin to dismantle. And how that can be done.

PETER: Yeah. Would love to do it, as always, Glenn. I appreciate your encouragement and support as always, and I'm glad to come back.

GLENN: Got it. Thank you so much Peter. Peter Schweizer. He's an unbelievable -- an unbelievable author. Good friend of the ram. Known him for years. He never, never holds back any punches, from either side.

He is as fair as they come. And extraordinarily well-buttoned up. His book, the latest. You should get it.

Comes out tomorrow.

Is blood money. Blood money by Peter Schweizer.