'Accept Responsibility,' Find 'Vision': Jordan Peterson Defines a Good Man

Canadian author and psychology professor Jordan Peterson has inspired people around the world with his book “12 Rules for Life: An Antidote for Chaos.” He’s found a special audience in young men who respond to his commonsense structure and encouragement.

On today’s show, Glenn asked Peterson a key question: As men, what should our specific goals be?

Being a good man starts with envisioning a better world while knowing that evil exists and that it’s up to you to take responsibility for your life and the lives you touch. A man should be someone other people can rely on, and he must realize that those burdens are a part of life.

“We all need a vision of the way that life and the world could be,” Peterson said. “The least amount of suffering … the most freedom for everyone and the best for everyone.”

Peterson shared some advice “particularly, but not only, to young men.” He called on men to “accept as much responsibility as they can tolerate and then build themselves into people who can tolerate even more responsibility and to accept that gratefully because that’s where the purpose and meaning in life is.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Dr. Jordan Peterson. Who would have thought that a -- a -- that common sense would come from a university professor from Canada? But he is probably the -- the biggest sensation out there now, with especially -- especially with the youth and young males. Because he is speaking common sense and he's speaking it peacefully. And he's talking about God.

And he's got a best-selling book out. Number one best-seller. Twelve Rules For Life: An Antidote to Chaos.

Welcome to the program, Dr. Jordan Peterson. How are you?

JORDAN: I'm good. Yeah, no. A university profess- --

GLENN: You're breaking up. We had this problem last time.

I don't know where you were standing last time, but can you stand there because you're breaking up and we can't understand you.

JORDAN: Oh, can you hear me?

GLENN: I can hear you now. Yes.

JORDAN: Okay. Good.

Yes. I said, well, Canadian and a university professor, the end times must be near.

GLENN: Yes. It's the clippety-clop of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

I want to talk to you about a few things. Here -- and I don't want to get you into politics, just common sense.

I don't know if you've been following, for instance, the CNN town hall this week and this debate that we're having. But we have 16-year-olds that are demanding that America pretty much disregards the Second Amendment and the -- we're not having sensible arguments at all. There's no reason in -- in the debates that we're having. We're not listening to each other.

Do you have any thoughts on this?

JORDAN: Well, I think that can be -- that's true on a much wider scale than merely the debate about what's going on after Parkland. We're not listening to each other at all. We're polarized to a great degree.

GLENN: So how do we solve this?

JORDAN: Well, you know, I've been recommending -- first of all, let me say that in my book, in 12 Rules For Life, Rule 6, I outlined why such things as the Parkland school shooting occur. And it has very little to do specifically with guns. There's something much deeper and more horrible going on that -- that is rather dreadful to look at. I mean, people who are motivated to do the sorts of things that happened in Parkland, they're possessed by a kind of ill will. An evil ill will, whose magnitude is difficult to describe. And it's a problem of disorientation and meaninglessness. And it's expressing itself in gun violence. But it can express itself in all sorts of ways.

And the problem -- the deeper problem has to be solved, as far as I'm concerned. And that's the problem of nihilism in the face of the tragedy of life. And it's that kind of destructive nihilism that drives the actions of people like the school shooters.

So it's very difficult for us to have an intelligent conversation about that. Because nobody wants to look at the darkness enough to -- to actually understand what motivates people like the shooters. And it's not surprising, you know.

GLENN: But we --

JORDAN: What happens, of course, is that the discussion gets politicized. And it goes down the same rails that it's always gone down. Democrats say their thing. And the Republicans say their thing. And it never really ends up -- the discussion never really ends up being about the school shootings, for example. So...

GLENN: Well, you know, I've been saying all week -- you know, I started the -- the week with a monologue on, you know, nobody even wants to talk about seven out of the nine shooters that were under 30 came from fatherless homes.

JORDAN: Right.

GLENN: We have a breakdown --

JORDAN: Well, there's something there, I would say. Because these -- these men, these young men, they -- they lack purpose and direction. And that's really not a good thing. Because life is very difficult.

As the religious sages have always had it, life is suffering. And you need to set something positive against that suffering, or it corrupts you. And when it corrupts you, you become vengeful and vindictive and murderous and genocidal. Those are the stages. And the school shooters are two-thirds of the way towards genocidal, by the time they perform their actions. And it's because they turn against life because life is so difficult. And they have nothing to set -- nothing positive to set against it. It's a real catastrophe. And the fact that we're transforming ourselves into ideologues, both on the right and the left, is a reflection of the same problem. Is that because people lack genuine engaged meaning in their own personal lives, in large part because they don't understand how necessary it is to take responsibility, they turn to pseudosolutions. And ideology, right or left, is a pseudosolution to the problem of the meaning of life. And it's very dangerous. We saw that in the 21st century, as you pointed out, just before our talk.

GLENN: So how do we find -- how do we find meaning as a group, when -- I mean, especially with young men, there is a concerted effort, at least it seems, to eviscerate men. The new catchphrase is toxic masculinity.

JORDAN: I know. In my book 12 rules for life, which is rule 11, don't bother children when they're skateboarding. You know, it's kind of a tongue-in-cheek feel, but it's a very, very serious chapter. And it's about the confusion between masculine -- (cuts out) -- and masculine -- you know, the problem is --

GLENN: Oh. You know what, we're going to have to take a break. We're going to have take a break and see if we can get you to a better space so we can hear you. You're breaking up again. We got to send you a hard-wired phone. That's what we have to do. We'll come back in just a second.

More with Jordan Peterson.


GLENN: Just so frustrating when he's on with us. Because there's nobody I want to hear every single word of more than Jordan Peterson.

STU: One of the chapters is "Speak Precisely," and yet we can never hear what he's saying.

GLENN: It's like, "Yeah, and what -- and that -- and that's what really -- what really -- really need to remember."

GLENN: Jordan Peterson joining us now on a land line. Thank you, Jordan. I'm sorry for the hassle on that.

JORDAN: Oh, no. No problem.

GLENN: So. So let's pick the conversation up where we were. Where we left it off. And that's toxic masculinity and -- and how do we find meaning? How do -- how do young men find meaning in their life, when society is -- is tearing them down and saying, you know, you're -- you're bad. You're worthless. You're not needed.

JORDAN: Yeah. Well, it's part of an all-out assault as far as I can tell, in some sense, mostly from the radical left on the idea of competence itself. And there's a confusion between tyranny and power and confidence.

You know, in our society, which is a pretty free society. So let's say Western societies. Most of our hierarchies are mostly predicated on competence, which means that if you can do the job, you tend to rise in the organization.

Now, that's contaminated a little bit with tyranny and power, of course. Because no organization is perfect. And what we have is a claim, essentially from the radical left, that male competence is indistinguishable from male tyranny and power. And so that it should be all torn down. Not the hierarchies, but the spirit that generated the hierarchies. And that's fundamentally the masculine spirit, even symbolically and psychologically speaking.

So what we see is an all-out assault on the masculine spirit. That was actually -- that was actually formalized by Jack HEP. He called western culture HEP fellowgocentric. Fellow from HEP felas. And logo from logos. So it was male-dominated and driven by logos. And, of course, that's the Christian word and also the root -- idea behind the word "logic."

And so it is part of an all-out intellectual -- an all-out war of ideas and the people who are bearing the brunt of that at the moment are I would say young men. Yeah. It's really not good.

GLENN: So what is the -- what is the end goal? Is it -- I mean, is it as clear as it seems to be, that it is the end goal and the -- the -- the motivation is just to destroy the West? Can you -- with you find any logic in there that is -- that is more than that?

JORDAN: Look, if you buy the idea that the West is a corrupt patriarchy, then that's the logical -- that's the logical end goal. I mean, the more radical disciplines at the universities, women's studies and those sorts of disciplines have said for decades that their goal was the destruction of the patriarchy.

It's like, it's very often, you know, that people tell you what they're doing. You just to have listen to them. If you read the school shooter's documents, like the kids from Columbine High School. They told you exactly why they did what they did. If you go onto the websites and read the curricula and the dictates of women's studies, disciplines at universities, they tell you exactly what they're doing. If the West is a corrupt patriarchy, then the right thing to do is tear it down.

So it's not -- it's not a surprise. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's just precisely what -- what -- that's the doctrine. That's the dogma. And the university, especially humanities departments, are overwhelmingly left and radical left. It's actually well-documented by people like Jonathan Haidt, with his hetero HEP dox academy. Jonathan is an extraordinarily reasonable person. He's no one's idea of a radical.

GLENN: Yeah. I greatly respect him.

Who is -- Jordan, who are the people that we should be reading? Besides you and your book, who are the people that inspire you or can inspire men to be -- to be men?

JORDAN: I think that Steven HEP Pinker is doing a fine job. He has a new book out now. It's in the top ten. So Pinker is a good person to read because Pinker is making a very powerful, pro-enlightenment, pro-reason, pro-science, pro-progress case. Well-documented empirically.

I mean, the empirical evidence is pretty clear. Although there is some evidence that inequality is increasing, first of all, no one knows what to do about that, right or left. There's a new book by Walter HEP Shidel called the Great Leveling, which I would also much recommend.

Because he analyzes the problem of inequality with dead seriousness. And traces it back to thousands of years. And points out quite clearly that it's a problem, but that it can't be led at the feet of capitalism. That's just foolish. It's a way deeper problem than that.

But despite the fact that there's increasing inequality, to some degree in the West, overall, the entire world is getting richer. And there are fewer poor people. There are way fewer people in absolute poverty than there were 15 years ago. Far fewer.

And so what's happening is our economic system is generating a lot of surplus. And it's being quite effectively distributed, even to the lowest end of the socioeconomic spectrum. But inequality still remains a problem.

And, you know, that drives a fair bit of theorizing on the left. But I would very much recommend HEP Shidel's book, The Great Leveling. It's very great.

And then there's Pinker. And then, you know, I'm very much a fan of -- of -- of great classic literature.

I'm a great admirer of Dosieski HEP. Dosieski's novels, in particular, are unbelievably profound explanations of the rule of human responsibility in the face of the tragedy and malevolence of existence.

And I have a reading list, that Jordan P. period of time son (?) some of them are psychological in nature. Others are littery. Some are philosophical.

GLENN: Let me take a quick break. (?) and I want to come back. And would you define whether a good man is? What is the goal to be a man? And what does a good man look like? When we come back with Jordan Peterson.

GLENN: Jordan Peterson is with us. He is the author of the number one New York Times best-seller, 12 rules for life. (?) an antidote to chaos. I can't recommend you (?) welcome, Jordan Peterson.

Can you describe what we all should be shooting for as a man?

JORDAN: Yes. Yes.

I was thinking about an image related to that. So there's a cathedral in Montreal called (?) and it's built on a hill. It's a very large cathedral. So it overlooks the hill. It's a beautiful building. And there are many, many, many steps leading up to it. Hundreds of steps. And pilgrims come there to trudge up the steps one at a time towards the cathedral. And there's something deeply symbolic about that. The idea that's being expressed is -- is profound and necessary. And that is that we all need a vision of the way that life and the world could be. We want to have a vision that that could be as good as it could be. The least amount of suffering and the most for everyone. And the most freedom for everyone. And the best for everyone.

And the question is, how do you approach an idea like that? And the answer to that is by carrying your burden one step at a time, up the hill.

And that's what you do in life. You're not a victim. Or if you are, you carry it. You know, and you take responsibility for it. And you're someone other people can rely on. You tell the truth. And that way, you make the world a little better instead of worse.

And that's the alternative to ideological possession and collective action and group hatred and tribalism and all those things that tear us apart. Is to accept that your life is tragic and that you'll suffer. And that there's evil in the world. And that it's your -- it's your responsibility to take that onto yourself and to carry it forward towards the good. That's meaning in life. And that's the antidote to chaos and to catastrophe. And the West knows this. This is why -- this is why we're an individualist culture. Because we know that the individual has to be set above the group. It's not the individual in all his rights, it's the individual in all his responsibility.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

JORDAN: And that's the part of the dialogue that's missing from our culture currently. And I believe that's why my book has become so popular and the lectures as well. Because -- because I'm telling people, suggesting to people, and particularly -- but not only to young men. That they need to accept as much responsibility as they can tolerate. And then build themselves into people who can tolerate even more responsibility. And to be -- and to accept that gratefully. Because that's where the purpose and meaning in life is.

GLENN: Jordan, I -- I have -- I've gone from a man, you know -- for a while, I rejected that I had changed a great deal in the last couple of years. But I have. And I've gone from a guy that was very popular because I was certain of things, to a guy who now really appreciates doubt and is -- and I kind of view certitude as a -- as a dangerous thing. Because if I'm certain of what I believe, then I don't necessarily believe, you know, anybody else has -- has anything to teach me or --

JORDAN: Right.

GLENN: And yet, I find -- I think this is the message of Christ is humility. And yet, people --

JORDAN: Well, the humility -- if things aren't everything they should be for or around you, then clearly you don't know enough.

GLENN: Correct.

JORDAN: So then you better be looking for what you don't know, and that's the opposite of certainty.

GLENN: We are in a situation now that we -- it almost feels like we don't trust that the truth will eventually win, that God is on the side of truth. And so we have to engage in this warfare. And -- and we're engaging online. We're engaging in tribalism.

And the -- the answer seems to be in the opposite direction, of --

JORDAN: Yeah, well, we're trying to transform the political system into a tribal battlefield. That's what identity politics is. And that can be accepted on the right as well. The identity Arizona. (?) they just want to play it differently. It's division into tribes. And it's a catastrophe.

Division into tribes means that we'll fight. It's always been that way. Human tribes have always fought, and terribly. You know, there's an old idea that the hunter gatherer types, the pre-- the prematerialist. (?) hunter gatherers were peaceful. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

GLENN: Yeah.

JORDAN: They have incredibly high (?) tribal people are unbelievably murderous. And we're all tribal, except when we decide not to be. And to decide not to be tribal is to decide to be an individual. But that means to take all the weight, the things onto your shoulders. And who wants that? Right? It's a terrible responsibility. But the paradoxical truth of the matter is that the more you take on that terrible responsibility, the deeper your life becomes. And that justifies the suffering.

GLENN: But the more you take on, the bigger target -- I want to read -- I want to read this to you. This is an article out of the Mercury News in California. These men, particular Elon Musk, are not only (?) who can get their rocket into space first. But into colonizing Mars. To have unquestioned (?) unchallenged and automatic access to something, to any type of body, and use it as will is a patriarchal one. It is the same instinctively and culture (?) that everything and everyone in their line of vision is theirs for the taking.

They're destroying a guy --


GLENN: -- like Elon Musk. (?) and I believe we can be better than this. And this gives me hope. Let's go here.

JORDAN: Right. Absolutely.

See, that's a great -- that's -- your reference hits the nail at the head. You see there, the confusion between male competence and desire to -- to move forward in the world. And tyranny. Those aren't the same thing.

They're not the same thing at all. And Musk is no tyrant. If you can't see that he's a hero, then there's something wrong with your vision.

And symbolically, the author of that article is equating Mars with the unspoiled virgin. You know, and Musk was the rapist.

It's an appalling vision of masculinity. There's no excuse for it. There's no excuse for it. It's all -- there's nothing in that, except destruction. Good men do things for themselves and for everyone else at the same time. That's the right balance. You want to do something that's good for you and good for your family and good for the community and good for the surrounding world, all at the same time. And you can do that, and that takes competence and clear vision and truth. And those aren't -- that's not tyranny. And those people, the people who wrote the article that you described, they're the people that think that emasculated weak men will be good, because they're harmless. And emasculated weak men will be the Parkland shooter. (?) that's the truth of the matter.

GLENN: When do we begin to see this for what -- let me ask you this question: Are we closer to the end of this kind of thinking and movement, or are we closer to the end of the beginning of it?

JORDAN: I don't know. There's been this funny idea. It's been circulating on the internet, about the kingdom (?) where everything is in chaos. And we're in chaos at the moment. Things could go very well. But they could go very badly. And I think we're in a situation now, where the decisions that each person makes, at each moment, are of crucial import, in a way that's not always true.

We're going to decide which way we're going to go, in the next three or four years. And there's lots of positive signs. All the economic growth, for example, that I referred to, that the fact that poverty is being pushed back. And it's about 300,000 people a day. (?) the power grid. And there are a lot of really good things happening.

But there is this terrible polarization and this demand to return to a destructive tribalism. And this ideological attempt led mostly by the universities, to my utter shame, to demolish the patriarchy. It's very, very dangerous. And corporations are playing that game too. They're letting the fifth column diversity equity and inexclusivety types in through the HR back door, (?) failing to see that generating an anti-capitalism fifth column within the confines of your own organization is self-destructive in the extreme.

GLENN: How do you -- I've watched interviews with you in mainstream media. And they always come with -- with an intent. With an agenda. It seems.

You approach these interviews without an agenda. And you're just trying to explain what you believe, based on their questions. And you always seem to win because you don't seem to have an agenda, truth doesn't have an agenda.

Would you say that --

JORDAN: I have an agenda, which is to not say something stupid.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Yes.

Do you believe the mainstream media has crossed the line from bias to activism? And if so, what does that mean for the media?

JORDAN: Well, I think one of the things that might be happening is that we're in a transition period from the mainstream media, print and television, let's say most particularly, to online forms of discussion. And that's happening very rapidly.

And so it's killing the mainstream media. And as they spiral towards their death, they become more polarized to draw attention to their remaining resources. And so they're driving polarization in the broader society, in an attempt to stave off their extinction, rather than adapting to the new media. That's what -- I'm not sure that's true. But that's what it looks like. It looks like it might be happening to me. Because we are in the midst of a technological revolution in communication.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

JORDAN: I mean, YouTube alone has something in the neighborhood of 2 billion people using it.

GLENN: Yeah.

JORDAN: So it's -- and YouTube allows the possibility of the spoken word to have the same distribution as the written word, which is something unparalleled in human history.

So I think that part of what's happening is a secondary consequence of a technological revolution. I don't think that the mainstream media's desperate attempts to use click bait, let's say, to attract additional viewership, to exaggerate, for example, the danger of violent crime and to pit the right against the left in a manor that's more combative (?) than the reality would indicate. I don't think that that will stave off their demise. I think it will accelerate. But there could be a lot of collateral damage, while that's occurring.

GLENN: Jordan Peterson, from Jordan Also, (?) the book 12 rules for life. An antidote to chaos. Did you ever -- you have -- you're approaching a million YouTube subscribers. Number one New York Times best-seller. Did you ever see this --

JORDAN: I don't think I'm on the New York Times. They didn't list me.

GLENN: Shut up.

JORDAN: No, it's true.

GLENN: Well, you're number one.

JORDAN: Yes, I'm number one everywhere, but not on the New York Times best (?)

GLENN: Unbelievable. Unbelievable.

JORDAN: It is rather remarkable.

GLENN: Jordan, did you ever -- did you ever see anything like this coming your way?

JORDAN: Well, I knew when I wrote this first book, this book maps Of Meaning. (?) and their relationship to ideological dispute. And I knew that was important. And I knew that my students, in the course I taught in that book, were very, very receptive to the book. (?) both at Harvard and at university of Toronto, was that one of the few courses that completely changed of student's lives. And it's not surprising to me to some degree because it's the idea of themselves. Ancient archetypal religious ideas are of absolute necessity. People can't live without them.

And so I knew that I was talking about things that have always been of crucial importance to people. But there was no way of foreseeing the magnitude of -- of the effect of that.

I mean, it's -- I'm still in complete shock about it, on a moment to moment basis. It seems to be getting larger rather than smaller.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. You have a lot of (?) runway yet ahead of you. I pray for you. And I -- I know what it's like to have great success come quickly. And if there is anyone who can navigate those waters, I believe it is you. And we wish you all the best.

JORDAN: Well, thank you. Thank you. Well, like I said, I hope I can manage this without making any catastrophic mistakes. And so, so far so good, knock on wood and all that.

GLENN: Thank you so much. Jordan Peterson.


STU: You can get Jordan on Twitter at Jordan B. Petersen. (?), by the way, that reading list he mentioned earlier in the interview, you can find that there. And I would say probably at the top of that reading list would be 12 rules for life, antidote to chaos, by Jordan spirit son.

GLENN: (?), you know, it's amazing, I don't think I've ever interviewed a more careful man. One of his rules is speak with precisely. (?) and you can hear it. He speaks slowly, to not make any errors.

Did the CIA BRIBE experts to dismiss COVID lab leak theory?

Did the CIA BRIBE experts to dismiss COVID lab leak theory?

It's been nearly 4 years since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out and we still don't have a consensus on where it came from. But recently, a whistleblower has claimed to Congress that the CIA bribed experts to suggest that COVID-19 didn't come from a lab. Rep. Brad Wenstrup, who chairs one of the subcommittees the whistleblower has spoken to, joins Glenn with the latest. According to the whistleblower, 6 of the 7 people on the CIA's COVID discovery team believed the virus came from a lab, but the CIA only said it was "unable to determine" the truth. And allegedly, there were "performance bonuses" attached to their findings. Did the CIA bribe experts to remain silent? Is the government trying to steer the narrative in one direction for political reasons? What does that mean about the trustworthiness of our intelligence agencies?


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Congressman Wenstrup, how are you, sir?

WENSTRUP: I'm hanging in there. How are you, Glenn?

GLENN: I'm good. First of all, I want to let people know. You are a doctor. You're also an Army Reserve officer, and Iraqi war veteran. Thank you for that.

You were on the select subcommittee run by this pandemic. You have served as a doctor. You know, overseas. You also were at Walter Reed for a while.

And you are the medical policy adviser for the chief of Army Reserve. Correct?

WENSTRUP: Yes, actually retired from the Army in December.

But since I was elected to Congress, 11 years ago, I served at Walter Reed and as a medical policy adviser as well.

Obviously as a congressman.

And a congressman on the intelligence committee.

GLENN: Okay. So now, tell the story to the American people, in case they don't know. About what is going on, with the CIA. And this bribe, to the so-called experts.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. A little background. As a physician, ever since the pandemic started. I'm looking into what's going on, physiologically, how do we treat patients?

In the process of doing research, we discovered that we were actually engaging in China, in the lab in Wuhan, to create gain-of-function viruses.

That being said, with Intel committee, involved with this for the past three years, at least.

And what had happened now, is we have somebody coming forward, as the whistle-blower, seeking full whistle-blower protection.

And at this time, he wants to be anonymous. He came to both the intelligence committee, and the select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic, which I chair.

And he's made many allegations. Obviously, he summed up a lot of them. But there was the CIA, in trying to figure out, whether this came from a lab. Or from nature. Put together, a COVID discovery team, if you will.

Seven people, as you talked about.

So six of the people, they came to the conclusion with some level of confidence. That this came from a lab. And the senior person, according to these charges, said, it came from nature. Okay. Well, you're entitled to your opinion. What they ended up doing at the end of the day, releasing to the public and to the intelligence community. All they said was, the CIA was unable to determine.

Well, it sounds like they had a pretty high number of people, that were able to determine, as best as they know it. It is our responsibility, on this committee, to follow up on everything to do with the -- with the pandemic.

We take it very seriously. The reaction of the CIA, very serious.

So we're now seeking documents. Communications.

And we also have asked to speak with Andrew McCreedus (phonetic), who the whistle-blower says was the chief operating officer, and had a lot to do with constructing this.

I hope the director of the CIA will be cooperative with us.

But, you know, you hit the big question.

Why? I mean, why would they want to do that?

I mean, this goes back to where Fauci prompted. I'm using their words. Prompted a group of scientists to write what's called proximal origins.

Where in their internal documents, they're saying, oh, yeah. Well, they're doing research. Oh, yeah. They have this capability.

Oh, yeah. This really is something. And then they come out and say, it came from nature. And tried to make that definitive. Why are we not having scientific debate? What is the reason for attempting to steer everything in one direction? And here's one of my concerns, Glenn. And I think you will appreciate this. If this is true, and we have for political reasons. Or whatever.

Changing the -- the notion of changing intelligence. What does that say to our international partners, who rely on us, for intelligence?

Who we work with? Together on intelligence.

If our own intelligence department, is changing things from what people actually did and said. To fit a narrative that they want?

That's a concern I have.

GLENN: Well, not just that.

You know, you would imagine that in some cases, you would say, hey, let's not release that to anybody.

But this is changing things for the intelligence.

The oversight. You guys are -- you guys are engaged with oversight. And they didn't tell you this. A whistle-blower had to come and tell you this.

WENSTRUP: Right. And I would contend if we didn't have Republicans, in terms of the House of Representatives, it would come forward at all. To get an opportunity to somebody, that would seem like would listen. And is a whistle-blower.

And we are. And so we're pursuing this based on letters.

That's the first phase, requesting information. Documents.

You know, when we don't get them. And we dig a little bit deeper.

And we ask a little harder. And sometimes in the form of subpoenas.

GLENN: So they -- do we know if they actually paid these other experts?

These six people out of seven?

WENSTRUP: Yeah. So in the allegations, I would say that the conjecture, is that it may have come in the form of a performance bonus.
Not just out and out, hey, do this, and here's some money, if you are following that. Something to that effect. Right?

GLENN: Right. And do we have any idea how much? This is taxpayer dollars, right?

WENSTRUP: Oh, correct. And, no. We don't know how much. And, again, that's part of the investigation. We're obligated to do it. I mean, we don't really have a choice. This is what we should be doing. You know, keep in mind, I have to remember members of Congress this too. Congress created these agencies. And we fund those agencies. And we have oversight of those agencies. And not only do I have to remind members of Congress. We certainly have to remind the agencies, that this needs to be a working partnership. And you don't get to tell us anything. Especially on the intelligence committee. The intelligence committee is set up, so that there would be oversight over the intelligence committee.

GLENN: Correct.

WENSTRUP: And this is a select committee, so the people on this committee, which, by the way, is functioning well now, and is no longer an impeachment committee, but the intelligence committee, people are selected from both sides of the aisle. We also represent the other members of Congress. Because we're in a place where other members don't get to go. So this is an important role that we have. And the cooperation needs to be there. And sometimes, the community -- the intelligence community, thinks they don't have to tell us things. In the same statute that they do. So we will continue to pursue and find the truth. And we have -- we have to suggest or legislate things into law.

It allows us to hold people accountable, within agencies, when they do things.

And I use an example like this, Glenn. The military just served 25 years.

Uniform Code of Military Justice. Unethical is unlawful in the military.

And our agencies, unfortunately, this is across-the-board.

But in our agencies, if you violate some of your tenets, or what you say, or the rules of engagement within your agency, nothing really happens to you.

Oh, you might get fired.

But, you know, there -- this is -- this is a problem, that we have.

And so we are trying, on so many fronts, to put punitive measures in place when violations are occurring.

Such as, with the FISA court. Et cetera.

You know, the IG said 17 times.

Well, what actually happens? Where is the punitive measures? We're trying to implement those.

GLENN: Yeah. So do you -- is there a way out from -- I mean, your Justice Department looks horribly soiled. Your NSA. Your CIA. Your DNI.

All of these things, look like they've been a part of some really bad things, including the State Department. Now the IRS is involved. How are you possibly going to beat this?

I mean, it's like Whac-A-Mole.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. On my particular subcommittee. What I keep saying.

From the beginning. Is honesty and truth is non-negotiable. And we're going to be looking for it.

And if it's not there. We're going to point it out. And hold people accountable.

We have to.

GLENN: But you can't -- excuse me for interrupting.

But you can't really hold people responsible, if you say if they're in contempt for Congress.

Attorney general Garland. Is the one who has to prosecute. And he just came out and said, I'm not the prosecutor, for Congress.

Well, yes, you are.

But he gets to decide, who he prosecutes.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. And obviously what you're seeing, I know I heard Jim Jordan's voice when I came. And obviously you're seeing all kinds of things, where this is just wrong.

And I don't know how we get it all out from the American public. Most people don't know.

Obviously, I have the opportunity right now. To get to your listeners.

And that's important.

But there are things, that are going on today, that should be above the full front page headlines.

Each and every day.

And the mainstream media comes to our challenges, is definitely greater.

And elections matter.

And I hope people understand that. I grow up watching Superman. The beginning show.

Watching for truth, justice, and the American way. And then that's where we have to go.

And Americans have to understand, if that's what they want, or not. Because it's been deviated from, tremendously.

And let me make this suggestion too for our agencies. You know, in the military, you either move up, or you're out.

And you're required to be agnostic politically. And that's what we need in our agencies.

You either move up or you're out.

And when you get to the top, there's a mandatory retirement. You don't get to sit there with mounds of authority. And covert authority, if you will. And we have to make changes like that, within our system.

We started our country, with just three agencies. State Treasury and War.

Look what we have now. They have rule of law. They put out regulations.

We try to get laws to stop them.

It's completely backwards.

So Americans need to understand. To elect people that are willing to make that change, and get us back to the government, that you are Founders set up.

STU: Representative Brad Wenstrup. Thank you very much for what you're doing.

Please keep us informed, if there's any other news that starts to break here about the CIA apparently bribing members of the team.

The experts on COVID. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. Thank you so much.

GLENN: You bet.

Did Soros 'Republicans' make it ILLEGAL for Texas AG Ken Paxton to prosecute voter fraud?!

Did Soros 'Republicans' make it ILLEGAL for Texas AG Ken Paxton to prosecute voter fraud?!

In his interview with Tucker Carlson, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton mentioned how the Texas Court of Appeals (which is 100% "Republican") recently made it illegal for him to prosecute voter fraud. Paxton joins Glenn to elaborate on this ridiculous ruling and why he believes it's (of course) all tied to George Soros. Plus, Paxton pushes back against the Wall Street Journal's take on why he was acquitted in his impeachment trial and reveals whether Texas will finally start acting like Texas again after the Biden administration cut razor wire at the southern border, allowing thousands of illegal immigrants could cross over.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Last night, the fed -- because the federal government decided, they were just going to cut the razor wire at the border, on Texas.

At Eagle Pass. Just came in. Cut it. Cameras were rolling. There were, hmm, about four how thousand Venezuelans waiting on the other side. And 14,000 announced a state of emergency in Eagle Pass.

When is Texas going to actually become Texas?

My first or actually my second question to Ken Paxton, and we begin right now.

Ken, welcome to the program. I'm glad that this is all behind you.

It seemed to me, to be an absolute witch hunt. But I -- I wanted to ask you, one question, on this. Because I know you covered a lot of this with Tucker Carlson yesterday. But let me -- let me go into the Wall Street Journal.

Why Ken Paxton was acquitted.

It's by the entire editorial board. It's just ridiculous.

Listen to this. Mr. Paxton's defenders are spinning that he was saved by a populist national conservative groundswell to put an end to the bush era in Texas. What a joke. There is no longer a Bush era in Texas or anywhere else.

George P. Bush. Jeb Bush's son lost to Mr. Paxton. Yeah. Well, yes.

So how is that the end of Bush? What really happened on Saturday, is that Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick chose to rescue in a reboot of his rival, House Speaker Dade Phelan. The acquittal is perhaps a satisfying victory for Mr. Patrick over his House rival.

But it may not play out so well for Texas Republicans in the longer run.

A federal investigation into Mr. Paxton is continuing amid reports that a grand jury has been impaneled.

What do you know about that, Ken?

KEN: Well, first of all, I have seen people of Texas. I am here.

Because by the grace of God, and the -- those people that I just mentioned, the Biden administration, I have seen it 48 times. The Biden administration, 27 times.

This was organized by the Biden administration. And I thought, well, how could that be? It happened because in Texas, the Speaker is elected by 65 Democrats. And ten Republicans. That's all it takes.

And what the Democrats do is they block votes, they figure out which Republicans will give them the most.

And they -- they agreed to this deal with the Biden administration. Went straight to the Texas Democrats. And they came after me. And shoot, I've been investigated ever since the day I walked into this office. And I have no doubt, the Biden administration would love to find some way. They've been working on it for years.

To get rid of me. And part of that process was the impeachment.

GLENN: So I have to tell you, I think Phelan should be impeached himself. This is such a sham of everything that was going on.

But let me talk about the border here. Because, Ken, while you've been away, Texas has been a wuss in many cases.

Yesterday, the razor wire at Eagle Pass was cut. We had this gigantic colony in Houston. Which is, you, you know, they're change girls up, and raping them. One escaped. Tried to.

And was killed. Both of them ended up dead. There's all kinds of cartel activity going on.

This is a colony in Houston. The size of Washington, DC. More people are on the way. When is Texas going to become Texas?

KEN: So I literally had my first briefing yesterday from my office. We spent probably four months, and I have people that have left. There's lots of stuff that I didn't know what was going on.

I didn't get information from my office. So yesterday, I spent more time talking about immigration. And what's going on in the border. What can we do.

We're in the process of looking into potential lawsuits.

I don't have an army to do anything about it. All I can do is what I can do, of course. So we already had a bunch of lawsuits, against the Biden administration. But we're definitely looking at more.

We're trying to figure out, how can we stop this travesty, with the Biden administration, is promoting. It's pretty clear to me.

They do not care about the American people. This is so horrible. And a consequence for people on the border.

That are US citizens. And for our sake. Are devastated. And those consequences with drugs, and crime. Will be sold in this country, for a long time to come.

GLENN: So did the governor reach out you to, yesterday, about the wire cutting?

VOICE: I did not hear from his office yesterday. My staff may have. But I didn't. I didn't know about it until you just said something.

GLENN: No one from the governor's office called you about the federal government cutting the razor wire and letting thousands of people in across our border at Eagle Pass? No one called you?

KEN: I heard about that story, on -- right before your show started as I listened to the news. That's when I heard about the wire cutting. I did not know.

GLENN: Okay. The -- you said to Tucker yesterday, in your interview with him. And this kind of -- just kind of went and he didn't follow up. And I found this quite important.

The Court of Appeals and the state of Texas, apparently now, you cannot prosecute voter fraud in Texas. Is that true?

KEN: Yes. That is correct. They struck down a law from 1951. And, by the way, I have four things that I'm supposed to do in the Constitution. And the final thing is, such things that are required by law. In 1951, the legislature, directed by the attorney general, the only thing that I have jurisdiction on, as early as criminal matters is voter fraud.

And a court of criminal appeals. All Republican, by the way.

And, by the way, no one knows who they are. This is why they've been put there. And I'm convinced they're not Republicans. Because they struck down this law. And they said, I don't have the authority to go to court. As an attorney general.

Because I'm in the executive branch. That was their rationale for striking down things. Unconstitutional for the attorney general to be in court. I'm like, is that the most insane thing ever?

But they did it. And now it's up to the local DAs to prosecute. The Dallas county. The Harris County. Houston.

They won't prosecute voter fraud. Guess what, they just talked about voter fraud. And the people of Texas, need to know that. And if there's three of the nine members, coming up in March, for a primary. We have to find people to run. And we have to beat those people. Or we will lose this state.

Because I tried to get this law passed again. So I always have -- I can start doing it again, and making them strike again. And guess who killed it?

Dade Phelan. I called him. He never returned my calls. I was told by his team they didn't have time to pass this law. Even though --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

KEN: That's where we are with Dade Phelan. That's where we are with the Texas House. And that's where we are with the Court of Criminal Appeals.

That's our highest court.

Like our Supreme Court. One of two states have this, for all criminal matters.

So I have no appeal. When they strike down and say this is unconstitutional, I can't prosecute criminal fraud, I have no way around it. I'm stuck. That's what I'm saying.

GLENN: Okay. So who needs to be called? The House?

KEN: The House needs to pass this. They lost two years. And in March, I think we're -- I just we're going to have three people running against the members of the Court of Appeals. We have to get those people elected, because we lost eight-one. And if we have three new members, we'll at least be 5-4. And we'll be sending a message, we cannot strike down --

GLENN: Okay. Who are the three members?

KEN: I do not have it on me. Yeah. Three members will be up this time. I think one of them is Michelle (inaudible). I think Barbara Kirby. And I'm trying to remember the third one. I think those are the three that are up.

GLENN: We'll find it.

KEN: Glenn, I don't think there's any more important issue than fixing this court.

GLENN: Why did this happen? How did this happen?

KEN: Okay. So I think George Soros, my opinion, he was trying to do three things.

One, get the DA -- he beat all these Democratic DAs that were prosecuting crimes. He did it in Travis County. The Democrat County there, was actually prosecuted.

He did the same thing in San Antonio.

So he got control of that, knowing full well that this would affect voting.

Second, he put -- he helped put nine members on the Supreme Court. Actually eight. Kevin is awesome.

The other -- eight.

No one knows who they are. And I think he -- because Republicans don't know who these people are. He was able to get the numbers to court. And strike down this law. And then the third strategy -- and then there's nowhere to go.

So that was the goal. They didn't hear it from me. So there's still hope. We have to get the criminal court of appeals. We have to get the House next time to pass this law.

GLENN: You know, Donald Trump said, yesterday, let me see if I can actually quote him on -- on something. He said yesterday, that we -- if there is a defeat in 2024, it will mean the end of the country. The 2024 presidential election will mean nothing less than the final battle for the US. I am beginning to think that's absolutely true. If we make it to 2024.

KEN: I told him, when he was running for reelection in May, that I was fighting a battle to stop massive bailout ballots. In all the biggest counties.

Travis County. Then Harris County, to Houston. We have 12 lawsuits. If I don't win every single one of those lawsuits, you'll lose Texas. He said, what? That's not possible. I said, it doesn't matter what your polling says. If they can cut out six or seven million ballots for just one count. Say Harris County sends $2.5 million out.

You won by 600,000 votes, you won't win votes. They will count votes.

Because we can't verify. If they mail them out to everyone. There's no signature verification. Which is still not even the best way to make sure people are voting right.

We have no way to verify. They will count as many ballots as they want. They will figure out how their numbers are. And guess what, we thought every one of those lawsuits, even though this is a terrible place. Terrible judges. I watched election night.

I said, this is exactly -- they will stop counting votes for a couple of days. So they can figure out, how many votes they needed to count with these mail-in ballots.

And that's exactly what happened in these other states.

Whenever I bring it up, they say I'm crazy. That's exactly what they did.

GLENN: You know, one thing I really worry about is the number of illegals, in you're country. The ones we don't even know about. We already, since Biden got into office. We have already passed the population of 15 different states. Combinations of three states. Would equal the amount that has come in.

It is -- it's -- you're seeing crime and everything else.

And we're only seeing the surface of this.

I -- I wonder if Texas can stand. How much is this changing?

If they can just register, or -- or get people to get in here to do voting. Which is their plan? Beyond that, the crime, the social services. The hospitals.

I -- I -- we're so close to the border. If we don't get this border sealed, we're done.

KEN: No, this is the plan.

People are like, why did Biden do this?

One, first, voting. Getting as many people, in the Republican states, that they can come.

Voters, whether it's legal or illegal. Right now, they can vote illegally.

No one is going to do anything about it. It won't matter.

Second, they wanted to get as many illegals into these Republican states.

Guess what, we're doing better than Democratic states.

We have low taxes, less regulation.

More opportunity.

Better governance.

And they want to bring in more problems.

They want to take us down, because the story is too good for Texas, Florida, and Tennessee, Utah. The Republican states were successful.

The Democrat states are losing people.

Because people are voting with their feet. The Biden administration said, okay. We'll make you pay for it. We'll make you pay for all the schooling, health care, law enforcement, crime.

Your kids are going to die. We will get you, and that's what the Biden administration is all about.

GLENN: Well, any good news to report?

KEN: Yeah. There's always help.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Well, I have to tell you, it looked like they were going to be able to railroad you.

And, look, I know you're not a perfect person.

But, you know, I had a real problem, when they came to the impeachment hearings after promising, just like the Democrats. All kinds of evidence. All kinds of -- and then literally nothing.

KEN: Their lawyers, Glenn, said it will be ten times worse than the public.

Guess what, it's ten times less.

They tried to railroad me out. No testimony that's required by law.

No due process. No chance for me to refute any of this stuff.

All done secretly. No transparency done in three days. Some other things. Now, I have no resources.

I spent all my money on a campaign.

I have no -- I had no lawyers.

I had three months to figure out what they had.

And they kept hiding information, even though they were requiring the turnover. And then, of course, I had the gag orders. I couldn't defend myself. I couldn't go out and talk, couldn't call you.

On the other hand, they were able to leak information to the press. Every day, I've been impounded. All of that, was against me.

And yet, because of the people in Texas, because of my strong family support, because of my wife's support. And because of the grace of God. You know, I just decided, I'm going to fight this to the last second.

I will not resign. Because if they win this. Because they can just do this to anybody they want. I will not let the voters down.

GLENN: So who will pay for this?

Is any -- is any investigation -- I don't want revenge.

I want this to not be able to happen again.

KEN: No. So Dan Patrick, God bless him for this. He called for an audit. Which I think was fair. They were trying to figure out how much money they were spending. I think we will find out how much money they spent. Which is millions.

And look, it's totally unfair to push someone out of office, with no proof.

And I have to pay for it.

And I have to lose, just because they have all the money for the taxpayers. And I'm left with just nothing.

Most people would not have made it through that. With no resources.

And that is unfair to the House bill, is that suspended with no proof. And then take away one -- illegally cuts my salary off to punish me.

Even though he had no authority to do that.

And I'm supposed to survive this.they did everything they could to make it impossible for me to get the truth out, and to survive.

GLENN: This is so weird.

KEN: Again, against the will of the voters.

GLENN: We are becoming an old Soviet state. It's terrifying.

KEN: This is Texas, Glenn. Texas.

GLENN: Oh, I know. I know. Ken, thank you very much. I appreciate it. God bless. Thank you.

STOP thinking about the Roman Empire. Do THIS instead

STOP thinking about the Roman Empire. Do THIS instead

Apparently, men think about the Roman Empire a lot — often in a positive light. But that's NOT the solution, Glenn warns. We don't need a Caesar to fix our problems. We need to start standing for the Constitution again. Glenn reviews some of the insane news of the day, from Attorney General Merrick Garland's infuriating Congressional testimony to the Biden administration's decision to go after a German family who fled to America for religious freedom. "I'm not sure I know how to help anymore," Glenn says. "The hour is growing very, very late." But there is hope. Conservatives just need to get their act together.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Honest to God, America. What is wrong with you?

How is this not clearly a problem? Look at what is happening in our court system. Look at what Massey has to say yesterday to our attorney general.

You've seen this yet? Here's the first clip from Massey and our attorney general, the chief law enforcement officer of our country. Listen to this.

VOICE: That was your answer to questions made two years ago. When I said, how many agents or assets of the government were present on January 5th and January 6th, and agitating in the crowd, to go into the Capitol. And how many went into the Capitol? Can you answer that now?

VOICE: I don't know the answer to that question.

VOICE: Oh, last time, you didn't know how many there were, or there were none?

VOICE: I don't know any of those questions, if there were any. I don't know how many, or whether there are any.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

VOICE: I think you may have just purged yourself, that you don't know that there were any. You don't know that there were any?

VOICE: I have no personal knowledge on this matter.

VOICE: You've had two years to find out.

And the day -- by the way, that was in reference to Ray Epps.

And yesterday, you indicted him. Isn't that a wonderful coincidence on a misdemeanor?

Meanwhile, you're sending grandmas to prison. You're putting people away for 20 years, who weren't really filming.

Some people weren't even there. Yet, you got the guy on video. Saying, he's going into the Capitol.

Directing people into the Capitol, before the speech ends. He's at the site of the first breach. You have all the goods on him. Ten videos, and it's an indictment for a misdemeanor?

The American public isn't buying it.

GLENN: Okay. Listen, this is what he said about that question in 2021, listen.

VOICE: I was hoping today to give an opportunity to put to rest the concerns that people have, that there were federal agents, or assets of the federal government, present on January 5th, and January 6th.

You can tell us, without talking about particular incidents. Or particular videos. How many agents or assets of the federal government were present on January 6th.

Whether they agitated to go into the Capitol. And if any of them did.

VOICE: So I will not violate this norm of the rule of law.

I won't comment on an investigation that is ongoing.


How do you -- how do you investigate January 6th, and you don't -- you haven't even asked, if we had any agents on the ground?

How is that even possible!

How is that possible? Is anyone else, beside people who voted differently than Joe Biden. Is anyone else saying, wait a minute.

Ray Epps, he was on the FBI's most wanted list. Then they removed his picture after a few days.

Then when people said, wait a minute. Who is this guy? Others identified him as Ray Epps.

He then becomes no big deal.

The New York Times does this love letter to Ray Epps.

He's on videotape. Saying, we have to go in there. We have to go in, tomorrow.

We go in. We have videotape of him actually looking at one guy, who is standing at the gate, who is not trying to open it up.

And he leans in, and whispers in his ear. And pretty soon, not long after the whisper in the ear, within seconds, that guy starts shoving the gate open. And letting everybody in.

And Ray Epps actually said in testimony, I was just telling him, is this isn't you. The cops are our friends. Don't do this.


Because he was peaceful before.

And this guy is now getting a misdemeanor.

He's everything. The Biden administration says, is a problem.

He's everything. All of the people, that were there, around him, when he was giving the speech, the night before. Everybody around him. Trump supporters. Real Trump supporters, were shouting, fed, fed. Fed.

Because they sensed that this was a setup.

Does anybody have a problem with that?

Does anybody have a problem with what Garland is doing, slow walking every investigation, in Washington. And then putting grandmas in jail.

Look, we don't usually prosecute people, who lie on their form.

You know, for their gun. Excuse me, what?

This administration? This one, isn't looking for every opportunity to put somebody in jail.

A white guy?

Huh. I -- I -- I'm not sure I know how to help anymore. I really don't.

I'm having a very difficult time, because the hour is growing very, very late.

And I don't see the movements. You know what, here's what I see. Here's what I see. I see people if we go to very frustrated, and they're going, you know what, get them.

I see that. I see guys apparently talking about the Roman empire all the time. I don't even know what that is.

Stu, how many times do you think of the Roman empire a day?

STU: I mean, zero. But I have read two Marcus Aurelias in the past year. So that is a -- I would like style zero. That was my initial response. But actually more than that.

GLENN: My answer is never. But I spell never N-E-5-E-R. I mean, this is ridiculous. And we need a new Caesar Day. No, we don't. No, we don't. Where are the people that are learning the Constitution? Where are the people that are standing for the Constitution?

You have brave whistle-blowers now. But nobody seems to care about what the whistle-blowers are saying. And these whistle-blowers are credible.

You know their names.

They're taking the heat.

It's not, like, when you hear what this whistle-blower. We won't tell you who it is. Even though, everybody knows who it is already. And that makes it suspect.

We're not going to tell you, that that's him. Because he has stuff, that you won't believe.

And then where is the stuff?

Just exactly what happened to Ken Paxton.

Do you know that the governor yesterday.

Well, let me just tell you this one. Let me just tell you this one. This one shows me how deep the problems are.

Do you remember talking about a couple from Germany, who had seven kids?

The Romakey family.

And they came over here. This was like 2013. And they came over here, because the state said they had to teach their kids.

I don't remember what it was. And they were like, no. That violates our religious point of view.

No. We can't do that. And so they were going to take the kids away. And so they decided to come over here.

And after a battle with the Obama administration, they were allowed to stay here in Virginia. Do you know what the Biden administration just did. After leaving these people alone, for ten years, give theming hope, that America was a place that they could actually have freedom of religion without any notice or anything.

They just called them up. And said, by the way, you have to return to Germany, or you're out.

We have two and a half to 3 million people in the last two years. Coming across our border. And yet, you have this family, in Virginia. That is peaceful, kind, productive.

All they want, is to teach their kids about God.

And our government -- this shows you, how much money and how deep this goes.

When you have time, in these days to go,, oh, you remember that family? Get them.

The governor in Pennsylvania yesterday, just signed a new order, where now you can be registered to vote with your driver's license. Okay. Except, that's not what the law says.

The governor cannot do that. The legislature has to.

And they currently have a system, where you go to get your driver's license. And you have to check a box. I want to register my vote now, or not.

All you have to do is check a box!

That's too much work. They took the box off. The government did, by himself.

Disregarding the Constitution of Pennsylvania. Don't worry. They can do it.

I -- I have got something prepared for next hour. That is the answer. But I don't -- I don't think. I'm not sure if people want the answer.

I'm not sure. I'm not sure.Ing I think so many people have buried their heads. And the people who are actually aware of it are like, what are we going to do? What are we going to do?

I'm so close to just saying, get to the mountains, gang. Get to the mountains.

Let God sort all this stuff out. It will be ugly. It will be ugly. Because we refuse to turn back to him. After September 11th, well, we learned our lesson. Oh, God, help us. Oh, God help us. And we actually meant, oh, God, help us.

Eh. We went our own way. And now look at where we are.

I pray for you every day. I ask that you would pray for me. And my staff. And for guidance. I don't even -- I'm getting to the point where, I don't know what is true anymore.

I don't know what is true. I mean, I've been duped and fooled so many times, in so many ways. That I'm like, and, you know, I believe in the best in people.

I believe in the people of America. I believe in you.

And I know we can turn this around. I mean, wonder, where the hell are our armies are?

And I mean armies of even bureaucrats.

Of think tank people. Who are actually doing something.

These people have thought this through for years.

This is not happening through happenstance. It's not because Biden sucks.

This is a plan!

Where is ours?

Where is our -- where is the group that is -- we can coalesce around?

Will Biden let YOUR tax money BAIL OUT striking California writers & actors?

Will Biden let YOUR tax money BAIL OUT striking California writers & actors?

California is already struggling to pay its unemployment insurance and has been taking out federal loans — aka YOUR tax dollars — to pay unemployed residents. Now, California's legislature has passed a bill that would give striking writers, actors, and other union members unemployment insurance. Glenn warns that this ridiculous system would practically allow people to strike forever on YOUR dime. Is the Biden administration okay with this? Because if Gov. Gavin Newsom signs this bill, the state will probably ask for a lot more money from the federal government. Will your tax dollar pay for the unions? And even worse ... will your tax dollar bail out California's far-left welfare state?


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, let me tell you two other things that are going on. In California, you also have California, now struggling. They can't pay their unemployment insurance.

Because they've been in the hole, forever.

With this. They've been taking out low-interest loans, from us. The United States government.

Your tax dollars have gone to pay for the unemployment insurance of the state of California. Because they can't balance a budget.

They can't get it done.

So they're paying us, low interest on the loans.

Do you think that's ever going to be paid back?


Here's what they're doing now. California's far left government, is now working with the Biden administration, to bail out striking Hollywood actors. On your dime.

This is happening. California's ultra liberal leaders are on the verge of giving unemployment payments now, to striking Hollywood actors and writers.

Both houses of the legislature, passed a bill to that effect, this week, it only needs Gavin Newsom's signature. And do you think he's not going to sign that? So here's what you have: You have unions who are taking all of this money, from all of their union members.

And part of the deal is: If you have a job, and the union says, we have to strike. Then you're going to get a portion of your pay.

The union will help you out.

But you can't get unemployment insurance. Because you are employed. All you have to do is go back to work. If you're paying people to strike from the union. And also get unemployment insurance. You can strike forever. See, the idea is: Which one is going to fold first? Is it going to be the labor union, or is it going to be the business? Which one -- and it hurts both sides. And so beet are incentivized to get to the table. Would you be for bailing out the giant Hollywood moguls. And the studios. I wouldn't be for that. No, you can't make it work. You can't make it work.

It's your choice. So why are we bailing out the union workers?

Why are we bailing out California, who now cannot making its own payments on insurance for everybody else. Unemployment insurance.

Can't do it.

They're in the hole.

Now they want to add unions to that.

And what happens, when it happens in California?

You think it's not going to happen in Michigan?

You will be paying for the unions. But that's what happens, when you have over $2 billion going into Joe Biden's campaign, from the labor unions.

He's the most labor-friendly president of all time.

Oh, by the way, so you get Gavin Newsom's signature. That's happening. Then what has to happen?

Well, then, it's just because it's the administration. So does the president need to act?

No. It's in the secretary's purview. So the Secretary of Labor, has to make this decision on how to spend our tax dollars. So the Secretary of Labor has to personally approve the request.

Now, who is this? Well, she's the acting secretary for the administration. Because the Congress won't approve her. So they're just going ahead with it anyway. Go ahead. Take the job. And you're just acting. You're not, actually, the secretary.

Why won't Congress approve her?

Because she was the one who came from California, and was in charge of the state's unemployment program. She oversaw $32 billion in fraudulent payments, occurring the pandemic.

Time for a promotion.

That's my red line. My red line has always been, I'm not bailing out California. I'm not bailing it out.

I'm not bailing out any of these perform

I've always wanted to live in California. You know why I didn't?

Because it was insane. I knew it wouldn't work. I didn't want to spend all of my money. Paying for taxes, for things I knew would only make society worse. And knew it would collapse at some point.

So I never got the beach of California.

And yet, now I have to pay for their mistakes?

How do you feel about that, Alabama? How do you feel about that Michigan? You probably like it, at least if you're a politician. Because, you know, your state will need it. Another reason not to live in Chicago. It wouldn't work!