BLOG

Jake Tapper Doesn’t Back Down From Asking FL Sheriff the Tough Questions

What’s going on?

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel seemed certain when he debated NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch in a CNN town hall last week and advocated for police officers to get more control and power to take away guns from people. But in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday, Israel revealed how little he knew about the school shooting in Parkland, Florida before he appeared in the town hall.

Remind me:

Seventeen people died when a shooter opened fire in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14. As teenage survivors advocate for gun control, investigators and journalists are pointing out more and more red flags that show the shooting suspect should not have been able to keep his gun.

The Broward County Sheriff’s Office is being investigated for not acting on a tip that the teenage gunman could be a “school shooter in the making.” Israel’s office reportedly received 18 calls about the shooter before the tragic incident.

Glenn’s take:

The office heard about the “school shooter in the making” in advance and did nothing. As we learn about the sheriff’s department’s incompetence, we should be even more leery of handing over more control.

“He wanted more law enforcement power. That should always scare people,” Glenn said. “What are you doing with the power that you do have?”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: All right. So I want to talk to you about the school shooting and where we go from here, but I want to do it with this in mind: If it meant -- if it meant that we could stop all shootings, would you consider an infringement on your Second Amendment right? If it meant?

To me, the answer is yes. But I know the evidence shows that it doesn't work. So no.

If you could show me real evidence that this was an outdated mode of thinking and that, you know, we had somehow or another solved the reason why you should have guns in the first place, and that is against tyranny, and you need it for self-protection, well, then you could talk me into it.

But I've never seen that evidence. I've looked for that evidence. But I'm open to hearing new evidence. Share away.

If you are on the other side and I could show you evidence that we could do a few things beside not taking away guns and it was effective, would you change your mind? Would you say, well, let's start there.

And for both sides. If we could get to a place to where I could just say, look, you know, we want to have this gun debate, that's fine. But this is one of the oldest debates in American history. What is a militia? So we're not going to solve this in the next couple of weeks.

Do we all believe that more -- that more shooting is coming?

I think it's safe to say that, yes, we all know that. Okay. So what are we going to do to solve it? Well, the first thing is, what can we learn from this shooting? What can we learn from the last shooting?

We learned in the last shooting, in the church, that, A, somebody who is just a civilian with a firearm can stop the shooting. But we also learned that the Air Force was not reporting people with mental health issues or issues with guns and domestic abuse, to put them in the system.

That had to be changed. Now, what have we learned on this one? Well, I think one thing that we've learned is there's something wrong with this sheriff. There's something wrong -- deeply wrong in Broward County. It's one thing to have one guy that stays out of the building and waits while the shooting was going on. But there were four sheriff deputies.

STU: He denies that. Although, his denial has lots of -- you know, qualifications to it. Which maybe we'll hear some of that here in this interview.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: But I think, you know, there's also the thing of, what do you learn from this mass shooting. And one of the things, I think, when you're leading up to the mass shooting, is if every citizen in America has told you that one specific person is going to do a school shooting, that might be a time to understand that perhaps, that person is in danger of doing a school shooting.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Maybe you should do something about that.

GLENN: When you have the number of reports and the number of altercations with this student that they did, and the sheriff's department did nothing, that's a problem. That's a real problem. And that's easy to fix. Let's make sure that's not happening anyplace else. Let's discuss this. And get to the bottom of it.

Jake Tapper started unraveling this hero sheriff's story over the weekend. And let's start with, why was there no report when they called and said, he's going to be a school shooter. He's a school shooter in the making. And he has access to guns.

Why was there no report? Listen.

JAKE: Fewer than three months ago, your office received a call from a tipster explicitly saying that crews could be a, quote, school shooter in the making. According to notes released on that call, no report was even initiated.

At this point, sir, do you understand how the public, seeing red flag after red flag after red flag, warning after warning after warning, they hear that your office didn't even initiate a report when they got a call saying that this guy could be a school shooter in the making? How could there not even be a report on this one?

VOICE: Well, if that's accurate, Jake, there needed to be a report. And that's what we're looking into, that a report needed to be completed. It needed to be reported to either our Homeland Security or violent crimes unit. And they would have followed up on it.

JAKE: That's from your notes. That's from notes released by your office. I'm not making this up. This is from Broward.

VOICE: No, and that's -- and that's what -- the officer who handled that is on restrictive duty. And we are -- that's an active internal investigation. And we're looking into it.

GLENN: Okay. So there's another person under his command that has failed to do the job.

Yet, he wanted more law enforcement power. That should always scare people.

What are you doing with the power that you do have? But he's been asking for more power.

Listen.

VOICE: The whole crux of this is giving law enforcement, giving deputies, giving police officers, not only in Broward County, but in Florida and around the nation, expanded power, to be able to do something more than just write a report. That's the whole reason I went on CNN and town hall --

VOICE: Sir, isn't making a threat against the school a crime?

VOICE: Not if the person doesn't have the ability to carry it out. You could say a nonspecific threat, I'm going to go to a school. It's not a crime. If the person doesn't have the apparent ability to carry it out, it's not a crime.

JAKE: Well, in September 2016, the shooter indicated that he wanted to buy a gun. Deputy Peterson knew about that. He initiated the report. The school launched a threat assessment.

At this point, you have somebody saying that they're going to shoot up a school and somebody with a gun. That's not enough?

VOICE: That's not enough.

GLENN: That's not enough. Huh.

STU: And that's just one of the incidents. Of course, there's dozens.

GLENN: Is that true?

STU: His first answer is, do they have the ability to carry it out?

GLENN: Yes. Wait. You're using reason.

STU: Okay. Should I calm down?

GLENN: You should calm down. Stop using reason. Let's just jump on his side or against him, depending on what our religion tells us to do.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: This is the problem. This is the problem.

So reason would tell you, well, let's stop here. Let's stop here. Is that true?

Now, we know that's not true. We know that's not true. There was a paper trail, very long against this kid.

So you obviously have enough power to make sure that he is not around guns, to make sure that he gets some sort of medical treatment, et cetera, et cetera. Whatever it is.

You may not be able to throw him in prison, but you certainly can restrict him, with all of the stuff that we had. So we know that's not true.

If it was true, that should be the first thing the sheriff is asking for. Right there. Here's specifics. I had 31, you know, complaints against this guy. Nineteen of them, we did exactly right.

Okay. We'll get back to the others that you didn't get right. But on those 19, I couldn't do anything. And we knew he had a gun. We knew that he was holding it to people's heads who he knew. That he was threatening to shoot up the school. And, "We couldn't do anything." We know that's not true.

But if it is true or if it were true, that should be the first thing we work on. Don't you think? Because there has to be other schools and other sheriffs that are facing the same thing.

I know this kid is going to go and do something, because of the 19 reports that we have. But I can't do anything.

We should hear from those sheriffs. We should know. Let us help you protect the children.

All right. Next cut.

When did he know about Peterson? I love this one.

JAKE: When did you find out that Deputy Peterson had not gone into the building? How soon after the shooting did you know that?

VOICE: Not for days. We --

JAKE: How many days?

VOICE: Our investigators looked -- I'm not sure.

JAKE: Because you spent much of the Wednesday night town hall on CNN with the entire Stoneman Douglas community, students and teachers and parents attacking the NRA, saying the police needed more powers, more money, to prevent future tragedies.

You didn't disclose any of this to the crowd then, the stone man Douglas High School community. Did you know it then? Did you know it Wednesday night?

VOICE: It was spoken about during that -- earlier, during that day. I'm not a time line for TV or any news show. We need to get it right. We need to get it accurate. We're talking about people's lives. We're talking about a community. We need to corroborate. We need to verify. And once we did, the next day -- and I looked at the tape, and I was 100 percent certain that it happened the way I was told about the investigators initially told about. I didn't even release it that second.

JAKE: You didn't look at the video -- one week after the shooting, you hadn't looked at the video yet?

VOICE: I looked at the video as soon as the investigators -- it wasn't my job to look at the video. It was investigators' job to look at the video. I'm still sheriffing this -- this -- this -- this county. There were many things to do. We have investigators -- homicide investigators, internal affairs investigators dissecting it. And when they felt there was a video ready for my view, that I might take action on one of our deputies, I looked at the video.

STU: I mean, if you believe this guy hadn't seen that video before that town hall in a week's time --

GLENN: Then he needs to be dismissed as incompetent just for that.

STU: I mean, there's tons of things that I would love to sell you.

But the other thing is, can you imagine -- forget even if he saw the video. He tells you there that he knew about it going on stage.

Can you imagine the balls to go on stage on national television, and yell at Dana Loesch and say that she's not standing up for these kids, when you know that your deputy was actually not standing up, he was crouching behind a wall, while people were being executed inside the school. Can you imagine the balls to go on television and not bring that up?

GLENN: Now, listen to this. Listen to this idea.

STU: That's incredible.

GLENN: Let's just fix reason firmly in her seat. And let's use his logic. He doesn't want to go on television. Because there's a crowd there. It's a community. It's a community that's grieving.

And he wants to make sure, you just don't go in front of that community, in front of that crowd, unless he can verify everything and he's 100 percent sure, that that's what happened.

So he was 100 percent sure that the NRA caused this shooting? He's 100 percent sure that it was the gun and not the kid?

He was 1 percent sure, even though, he had evidence presented to him, that things could have been different if -- not one. But four of his deputies would have moved in. He was 100 percent sure that it was the NRA's fault. But he wouldn't bring anything -- he wouldn't bring anything about his group, unless he was 100 percent sure. And he just wasn't -- he wasn't there. But he was so sure that the people who weren't there, were at fault.

I don't -- I don't understand that. That doesn't seem like you're really doing an investigation. That seems like a witch hunt.

STU: Well, and he did want to let that fact out in front of the families, in a public forum. He wanted to do it one-on-one. He wanted to make sure that was one-on-one.

GLENN: I know. I know. Well, he did the very next morning in a press conference. So he didn't do it one-on-one.

STU: Hmm. He just put it out on a press release, talked to reporters about it.

GLENN: Yeah. Talked to reporters. But in this interview with Jake Tapper, one of the reasons why he didn't do it was because -- you just didn't tell people like that in a crowd or just an impersonal forum, like the town hall. You needed to -- you know, there was one parent that wasn't there. And he wanted to make sure everybody was there so he could personally tell them.

STU: So all of the parents were there at a press release? That's interesting.

GLENN: Press conference. No. No. It's strange, isn't it?

STU: You let that crowd attack Dana Loesch, calling her a murderer and all these other terrible things. It was mob -- it was Christians and lions, as you've been talking about it. I mean, absolute mob.

And you knew, as you were sitting on that stage and -- and making it worse by putting more blame on her and the NRA, you knew your own deputy -- you were going to fire him the next day for dereliction of duty because he didn't go in there. You, your judgment of it, his actions are so bad, and you don't even bring that up. In fact, you make it worse. You make people go after her. You make her life be threatened. That is an incomprehensible -- this guy makes it through this thing with his job, that is -- I don't even -- there is absolutely no justice.

GLENN: I will tell you that during -- during the town hall, during the town hall, CNN people wondered if Dana and others had security to be able to get them out. They've started to worry about the guest security.

Wow. Wow. Huh. I know I felt that way. But it's strange to hear CNN might have felt that way. And yet, they continued to go.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Ron Paul EXPOSES How the Federal Reserve Keeps Up its Scam!

Former Congressman Ron Paul breaks down how the Federal Reserve operates and how it has become so entrenched in the American economic system. He tells Glenn Beck that the problem is continuing to get worse and offers up his advice on what really needs to happen to begin to fix this situation.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Ron Paul HERE

RADIO

Canada FORCED this hospice center to EUTHANIZE its patients?!

Canada is forcing its Medical Assistance in Dying program, which offers euthanasia as a “medical treatment” option, on hospice centers. Delta Hospice Society executive director Angelina Ireland joins Glenn Beck to give the horrific details of how far the government went to try and get her to bend the knee: “I call it a culling. It’s a Canadian cull.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me take you to Canada for just a second.

And I want to -- this is a story that happened a while ago. But I want to just show you the dangers of public/private partnerships.

You're hearing this all the time. And every time, Joe Biden would say, public will she private partnership. It was all the Green New Deal and everything else.

I kept saying, that is fascism. That is exactly the deal that Mussolini and Hitler made. That's the difference between Communism and fascism.

They let you do your own thing. But you're a partner with the government. And as long as you abide by all of their rules, you're fine!

But the minute you disagree, you don't have a say. They'll throw you out on the street, so fast, your head will spin.

And that's exactly what happened to a hospice center. The Delta Hospice Society.

I have the -- the executive director on. Angelina Ireland.

And I asked her to come on today, to tell us the story of what happened, to her hospice facility.

Angelina, thank you for joining me.

ANGELINA: Hello, again. Thank you so much for having me today.

GLENN: You bet. You bet.

So you -- the hospice society is a public/private partnership with Canada.

You guys raised $8.5 million to build this property. And you negotiated a 25 or 35 million-dollar lease for the property. Right?

Tell me about this.

ANGELINA: Right. So we're a private society. So a 34-year organization.

Palliative care is basically, you take care of people, when they're chronically ill or terminally ill. You take care of them well.

So we fundraised over a couple -- a few years ago, $8 million to open a hospice and a palliative care support center next door. And so we raised that money.

We got a 35-year land lease with the public health authority. We built two buildings. A ten-bed hospice, a 7500 square foot supportive care center, where we did our counseling, all the supportive programs.

And then the service agreement was for operating costs. So every year, they give us $1.4 million, and we built those buildings. We opened them, and we operated our program, at the hospice for ten years.

Everything went fine, until this thing they called, the state euthanasia program called MAID. Right?

GLENN: Maid.

ANGELINA: And then the province basically came to us and said, you will have to start providing euthanasia. You will have to start killing your patients in the hospice. Because you're getting -- you're getting public money, right?

We said, absolutely not. We absolutely will not.

At which point, you're exactly right.

The fascism kicked in. I just call it stone cold communism.

And said, you're not getting any money, if you don't start killing your patients.

So then they cancelled that service agreement.

Which means, that's fine.

Look, we don't need your money. We'll be fine without your money.

Which apparently is the wrong answer.
(laughter)

GLENN: Yeah.

ANGELINA: Then they went after the lease. And we had 25 years left on that land lease, and they cancelled it.

And now, these incidentals like the buildings on them, they just consider those to be some kind of an old shack or fence, and they expropriated. So at the end of the day, they evicted, the organization from our buildings. They expropriated those assets, which were valued at eight and a half million dollars. Kicked us out, and took -- took our stuff.

And then they -- they started to operate our hospice, and they put in the euthanasia.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

They give no money for the buildings. I mean, it was their land, right? That's kind of the public/private partnership. You're taking money from them to run it, but you said to them, we don't need it.

But also, that was -- was that not federal land, that you were on? Or some sort of medical kind of preparedness of Canada.

JASON: It was. Well, it was.

Which is considered to be -- well, it was belonged to the health authority, but it was a registered lease. The titled office with 25 years left.

GLENN: Right. Right.

ANGELINA: So we had a right to be there. And of course to continue on for another 25 years.

But, of course, no, they didn't allow it.

GLENN: So when you went to the court. What did the court say?

ANGELINA: Well, you see, we didn't that get far. Because we went to three very, very prominent lawyers. And they told us straight-up.

You're not going to win.

You understand this, people?

You might walk in with one lawyer. They're going to walk in with 15 lawyers, all funded by the taxpayer.

GLENN: The government. Yeah.

ANGELINA: And you may win the first round. But you will not win -- they will tie it up. And it's called lawfare. They advised us again and again and again, to just move on. Take our punches. Take the licking from the government, and move on.

The important thing for us, was to hold on to our organization.

Because then the euthanasia after this, came for us. To try to take everything.

And we still have assets. But we did lose our bricks and mortar in the moment.

GLENN: That is crazy.

You know, I have described what's happening all around the world. With the -- with the extreme left.

With Islamists.

Not Muslims.

Islamists.

What is happening with the Communists and the fascists, is a death cult. It all seems to revolve around death. They take glee in death.

And Canada is shockingly, in many ways, leading the way on this with MAID.

You don't even know how many people are killed now with MAID a year, do you?

ANGELINA: No. We don't. We do not. I call it a culling. It's a Canadian cull. They're killing the sick people, the mentally ill, the disabled. Veterans. Homeless. The poor.

And then they're going after the children. But we do not know the numbers, exactly. I mean, the government is admitting to 60,000. There's absolutely no way it's 60,000.

I think they forgot a zero.

It's widespread. It's now considered a health care option.

When the doctor comes to a sick and vulnerable patient and saying, how would you just like to die? It's gotten completely out of hand.

It's truly a national horror for Canadians. For certainly people of faith in my country.

Pro-life for my country.

That we have no control over this.

We have no access to authentic true numbers, information.

And this whole consortium, that I call empire MAID has taken over the health care system.


GLENN: What is the -- what's the goal of this?

Do you think?

What's really behind it?

ANGELINA: Certainly. You know, so they want to talk about -- they -- they have captured the moral high ground on this, right?

If you want to be compassionate. You will have to start to kill people.

That's the only way to be compassionate. That's the only way to provide human rights.

So that very potent message, they've been able to roll it to a narrative, which is incredibly horrid.

The word is like -- it aches me. It's overwhelming.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

ANGELINA: But why? Our public health care system, which is what happens when any government goes completely public. We have no private available.

It is illegal. It's bankrupt. We have --

GLENN: Hold on just a second. I want Americans to hear this.

Private health care, being a doctor and providing private health care is illegal in Canada.

ANGELINA: Yes, it is. The only thing you can do is to have cosmetic things done privately. That's it. You want a boob job, a nose job. You can go ahead, get a doctor and pay for that.

Everything else, it must be administered through the state, period. It has to go up to the Supreme Court of Canada. So this is undisputable.

Private health care is illegal.

GLENN: You know, I look at -- we're -- you have several states that are now trying to pass much of this.

And they are in the laws, that are being passed.

It is -- it is -- it's a requirement not to put assisted suicide down on the death.

So you have cancer.

But you didn't die of cancer.

You had cancer.

You have depression. And the doctors said, well, you can kill yourself over that.

It does not say, assisted suicide.

It is going to be illegal to put that on the death certificates.

It just has to say, depression.

Cancer.

Whatever it is.

That they helped you kill yourself over, that's -- that's what the cause of death is.

So you'll never, ever be able to count it!

You'll never be able to track it!

It is just evil, evil what's happening.

ANGELINA: It's true.

And how many people will be killed by the state? That is going to be the question. You will never know, that you are giving far too much power to the state.

Unaccountable.

Unquestionable.

GLENN: Are you -- are you shocked at the -- because I am here in America.

I mean, we just -- New York just voted for an Islamist who is saying, you know, he is for Hamas.

He is also a communist.

And they just elected him, or, you know, chose him as the Democratic candidate.

And nobody really seems to care!

When it comes to death all over, when you're seeing these things happen, I am shocked by my own citizens! Do you feel that way in Canada?

ANGELINA: Well, I personally am not shocked.

Because I know that the only thing that the socialists and the Communists ever do well, was kill people.

This should not come as a shock to anyone.

The -- the short sightedness unfortunately of a people. Is that they tend to get rewarded in the short term.

They give them stuff, money. Benefits.

It's only crops.

Ultimately, it will -- at the literal demise to allow, this kind of philosophy, political ideology.

To come into your country. Somewhere are you hopeful for the future, Angelina?

ANGELINA: You know, I love my country. To be honest with you, I am not. I am not.

We have seen in my country, an overwhelming immigration. That has come in. Talking about millions of people in a very short time.

That has literally destroyed our infrastructure, brought the health care system, to its knees.

A lot of people in my country, don't even have a family doctor.

They can't find a family doctor. They have to wait for months, upon years for the simplest of procedures.

And it isn't getting any better. So, you know, I pray because, of course, I am a person of faith. And I'm an apologetic Christian.

This is, again, very unpopular in my country.

But, you know, only God will be able to help us.

At this point.

GLENN: Thank you for ending it that way. Angelina, I appreciate it. Thank you for standing up and being vocal, and letting people of the world know that light still does exist, even though the darkness is growing.

Darker, faster. Thank you, Angelina. Appreciate it.

From Canada.

RADIO

Did the Swamp RUIN the Big Beautiful Bill?

The Senate just sent the “Big Beautiful Bill” back to the House. But Rep. Chip Roy joins Glenn Beck with a warning: This isn’t the same bill President Trump proposed! The Swamp has made sure to cut back on its reforms. But are Trump’s tax cuts too important to fail?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Chip Roy is with us from the great state of Texas.

Chip is a congressman, and welcome to the program. How are you, Chip?

CHIP: Well, Glenn, I'm -- you know, I'm continuing to work through, and trying to deliver the American people. But it's getting hard.

I'm with you. I'm tired of this bill right now.

GLENN: Yeah, you're living the dream, brother.

You are just living -- who doesn't want your job?

My gosh, what's -- what -- a glorious. Glorious, fun-filled life you must live.

CHIP: Yeah, there's -- there's been -- no, no, no.

GLENN: So tell me.

Tell me, is this thing gotten better or worse?

CHIP: Unfortunately, Glenn. I believe it's gotten worse.

Now, we've not seen the final product of the Senate. We don't have the tax. We've got to review it.

I try to be level-headed during these things. I had enormously strong and good friends in the administration, who in good faith, want to see this pass. Just as you do. Just as I do, just as the American people do.

They want to see a move forward in legislation to make tax cuts permanent. To deliver on the border funding that we need. You know, Steven Miller is a long-time friend. I've known him 25 years.

Russ Voit is a long-time friend. I've known him for 25 years. We've been working together in the trenches for as long as I can remember. We all want to deliver.

The problem is, the swamp is going to swamp.

And right now, we have a bill, that in my estimation, violates the house framework.

But more importantly, would add significantly to the deficits. Now, we have differing views.

GLENN: More. More than it did. More than it did, right?

CHIP: Quite a bit, in my view.

And look, there is going to be a debate about this. About tax cuts. And revenues. And all the stuff.

And I get it. Baseline. CBO. All these different things. I'm just telling you, Glenn, as objectively as I can, I look at the math, and I look at how you factor in economic growth, which I'm doing. Factor in revenues. And expenditures.

And what we're doing, on mandatory spending.

Which is not enough.

The fact that we're only repealing half of the green new scam, if we're lucky.

The fact that we're continuing to allow Medicaid. To go to illegals. Because of some arcane center rules.

The fact that we're continuing to allow Obamacare subsidies to fund transgender surgeries.

The fact that we're going to -- in my estimation, have probably a couple of trillion of deficit spending in the first four years.

Which means, you will have more interest.

Which means, it's going to stack up, all to get savings, in five years.

That's not what you and I signed up for.

Now, I'm looking at this, trying to say, okay.

The president wants tax cuts. So does I.

The president wants borders, so do I.

I think the president wants us to repeal the entire Green New scam. I think the president wants us to get good reforms. Be careful.

Like handle Medicaid appropriately, and all of that, for our American citizens that depend on it.

But we haven't delivered. Because the Senate has a bunch of people in it, who don't want to deliver, and they are hiding behind the parliamentarian, and they're delivering the product that I didn't come to Washington, to sign up for, Glenn.

GLENN: All right. So let me ask you this. They're hiding behind the parliamentarian.

Is that -- I mean, they -- they say, there was a change in the bill, because of the Medicare paid to the illegals. And the parliamentarian said you have to keep it in there. Some arcane rule or whatever.

Couldn't the Senate Republicans just ignore that?

Is it fair -- what?

CHIP: They could overrule the parliamentarian. They could make a change, if they wanted to do so.

GLENN: Right.

CHIP: Now, some of these things take 60 votes. If they want to address this, they can address it.

But the real issue here is that behind the closed doors, what you know, is that there are senators, who don't want to make the reforms.

Don't want to make the changes. They're making their own policy choices. Based on what they want.

Right? You've got Lisa Murkowski right now. Instead of wanting to reform Medicaid, she wants to get a special carve-out for additional spending, for people in Alaska.

You've got, you know, Tillis. You've got others. They want us to go the wrong direction, when it comes to Medicaid reform.

And, Glenn. I've got to be honest. How many times have you and I been on the phone over the last decade, talking about shutdowns by discretionary spending. Like every two years.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

CHIP: Countless times. Every time we have one of those fights. The people of this town say, Chip, you need to shut up because the real problem is mandatory spending. Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid.

It's not fighting over all this stuff. You're wasting all our time.

I didn't think it was a waste of our time.

I didn't think we should be funding weaponized government.

I didn't think we should continue to jack up spending for the alphabet soup of regulations in America.

But I said, okay. Guys, here we are.

We are going to do this reconciliation package. We will reform Medicaid, right? We ended up fighting like cats and dogs to get the reforms, the work requirements we got out of the House. It was good. Not great.

The Senate, now they're working through it. And they are fighting every inch. And it got actually a little better in certain respects, thank to Rick Scott.

He's been fighting hard. Mike Lee, Ron Johnson. We've got a little bit more of what's called provider taxes. But overall, we're not meeting the moment.

We're not getting enough Medicaid reform.

We're getting watered down, somewhat on illegals. How about missed taxes, Glenn?

We passed a measure in the House, to tax money going from America, so people going here illegally back to their own country.

The Senate -- it's crazy!

GLENN: Why? Why? Why?

CHIP: Because they don't like the policies, Glenn. Because here's the thing, there are bankers. Banks. Who came here and said, guys, this would be really hard on us.

If we had to enforce this policy.

Money flowing from our banks and institutions.

Mexico.

And Columbia.

And places. We really need a carve out, so the banks won't be taxed by this, and then they will go.

It would be way too burdensome on the people who come here and they're working hard, and they want to spend money on their families. But you and I both have a heart for what people face. And want to say, hey, I get it. You've got an honest person here, who is following the law, who came here illegally. They want to send money back home to their country. They can still do that. They can still find a way to do that, but we're taxing. Instead of saying, no, we're not going to do it.

But the biggest thing at the end of the day. Deficits go up, and I didn't sign up for deficits to go up.

GLENN: So you're not going to vote for them?

You're not voting for this.

CHIP: I can't. I cannot vote for this as it's currently structured. If we can come to some agreement.

And, Glenn, this is important.

The president rightly wants us to find a way to get a bill up. I get that. And I want to deliver. For six months, I've been busting my butt.

I voted for a bill that came out of the house, that I didn't like. It wasn't good enough. But I thought it was an important step.

I worked to come up with a budget framework with Jerry Harrington and others, to figure out, how to get this done and get it out of the House.

I think we made progress. We did get Medicaid reforms that are good. We did get some tightening down on the green new scam, and others didn't want to do it.

But we are now fighting a Senate that's watering down important stuff.

And importantly, the way they tax to spend policies. Overall, I can't look at this any way objectively, without telling my voters, the people that sent me to Washington to represent them. That the deficits will go up.

Now, last point, the president and the administration will say, look, guys, don't worry about that. We'll make it up with tariffs, and we will pay higher economic growth. Well, two things.

Number one, on the economic growth front, we assumed growth in our bill, Glenn.

We assumed 2.6 percent growth.

Now, you might say, well, gosh, we need three or four. Yeah, but we have to do a ten-year budget. 2.6 percent growth is a lot higher than what we've been experiencing the last two decades on average.

We picked a sweet spot of 2.6 percent growth. It is true, that if we have 4 percent growth for a decade, we will have much more of it.

I hope that's true. You hope that's true.

And if it is true, then great. It's gravy, that will give us money to buy down the debt. And save money. And get the deficits down further.

But I can't budget to two and a half percent. Sitting at 2 percent growth

It would be irresponsible.

GLENN: So I'm with you, Chip. I'm with you. And I've said this for a long time -- the Republicans are going to lose. They are going to lose, and they're going to lose because you're just not delivering for the American people, what you promised you would.

Donald Trump seems to be.

You know, at least he is trying.

He's doing a lot of the things he promised he would do.

I don't see that happening with the Republicans.

And so, you know, I don't know what -- what the midterm is going to look like.

But I will tell you this. He has to have that tax cut passed.

He's got to have it.

If we don't get that tax cut. Everything the Republicans have been trying to do. Or the Republican voters have wanted.

It's over. It's over.

Because the economy will spiral out of control without that tax cut. Agree or disagree?

CHIP: So I agree we must deliver on the tax cut. And I believe we will. When push comes to shove, there's no way we will get to December, and not provide an extension of tax cuts, that were so important in 2017.

Now, I'll remind everybody, the corporate rates were made permanent already.

Right?

What we're talking about dealing with is the expiration of certain personal tax issues. Marginal rate. But also child tax credit. Also standard deduction, et cetera. Now, I'm not sure.

I've got different views, on different ones of those policies.

Overall, we want to ensure, this stays in the pockets of the American people.

We have to deliver on that.

I will tell you this, if we don't address the inflation tax.

If we don't address the extent to which people are fleeing the American bond markets.

Because we are so irresponsible.

Then we're going to be doing a disservice to our kids and grandkids who can't afford a house.

They can't afford a house because the mortgage rates are too high.

GLENN: They can't afford it now, Chip.

They can't afford it now.

CHIP: So I think what we need to do, is I'm prepared to go back to the drawing board today. I want to go home tomorrow, or the next day.
Let's just get busy. We've been working on it.

Let's tighten down some of the spending.
Let's tweak what we've been doing and get the tax policy done. Get it set. Let's go back to the House bill, for example, that we passed.

It was a good, solid bill.

And get the Senate to adopt it, and pass it.

Or make some modest changes. But we have to get rid of some of these ridiculous things. Like Medicaid for illegal aliens, like pork that's going to Alaska.

Like specific giveaways.

And, you know, get rid of those things.

Go back to the House bill.

Make sure the inflation act is getting terminated.

Deliver on the tax cuts. Deliver on the border.

Deliver for the president.

I'm prepared to do that. But I will not swallow a crappy bill because the Senate tries to jam me with it.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I don't know how it's unpopular to say, no. We're not giving illegals any Medicare.

We're not.

Do you remember -- who was it, when we were in Congress. Barack Obama talked about Obamacare. He said, you lie!

Joe Wilson, wasn't it?

And everybody had a cow. Well, look at what we're doing. Look at what we're doing.

Look at what we're giving illegals.

The answer is no.

No, no, no, no. And I don't understand how that is not so simple.

I don't understand any Republican that doesn't understand, the green new deal, no! No!

USAID. No!

DOGE. Cut it. Why can't they see what -- I mean -- there is -- I mean to tell you, Chip. I don't mean to take this out on you. You're one of the good guys. You're trying to do this.

We're in between a rock and a hard place.

The president has to have what the president needs. To get the economy going.

We wait until January. You're right on top of the midterms.

You have -- the president is not turning this economy around, fast enough.

Because he can't get anyone in Congress to do Jack crap on anything!

You need to cut the freaking spending. And the waste. And the garbage.

And I tell you, I am with Elon Musk 100 percent.

100 percent.

You are one of these weasel Republicans, who don't -- who just go along, and just be like, you know what, we're going to have another five or $6 trillion to our debt.

I'm done. I'm done.

And Elon has said, I will -- if it's the last thing I do. I will make sure that none of these people get reelected. That's not going to be good.

That's not going to be good. For the republic.

Let alone, the Republican parties.

But, you know what, I've had enough. I've had enough.

And I think the American people have too.

CHIP: Well, Glenn, I will tell you this, July 4th is obviously Friday, Independence Day. Two hundred forty-nine years ago, and we already celebrated. We celebrate their courage. We celebrate Lexington and Concord.

We celebrate all the things -- we celebrate the men that stormed the beaches in Normandy.

And we celebrate all of the great courage that our men in women in uniform have done to fight in this country. How can I say, no, sorry, I'll have to vote for this bill, because there will be some political pressure.

When I regale the boys at the Alamo, sitting there, taking bullets. Knowing they were going to die.

But ran into a wall of bullets in Normandy.

Look, we have to deliver.

We have no choice. We all agree on that.

I'm sure I'm going to get labeled, you know, a -- any number of things.

That I'm not delivering on the president's agenda, that I'm jamming up a bill. Look, and I get it.

And I won't get defensive about it. The president wants this bill. And he is right to want this bill.

The Congress has to deliver a bill worth sending them. And I'm prepared to stay here, until we do.

But I won't vote for a bill, because I'm told I have to. Because a bunch of losers who are swamp creatures, who want pork and giveaways. Who don't have the cojones to stand up and deliver for the American people. And to actually reduce spending, and not hide behind parliamentaries. Not hide behind tax cuts.

They want to hide behind a tax cut, to tell me at the border, to tell me, you have to vote for this bill. Don't worry about this spending.

No, kiss my ass.

I will stand up and fight for the border and the tax cuts and the spending cuts. We've got to do it!

STU: It was very reminiscent of Daniel Boone there for just a second. Or I'm sorry. Not -- Davey Crockett, not Daniel Boone.

So thank you for that. Chip, God bless. Have a great holiday. Stand -- stand firm in what you believe in.

And just keep the fight. I appreciate the attitude that you have towards the president.

Give the president what he needs. Fight for the president, what he's asking for.

But you got to fight the swamp at the same time. Have to. Have to. Thank you, Chip. Appreciate it.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

"Everything is For Sale" — How the Cartels Control Mexico's Government

It is widely accepted that the cartels in Mexico not only control significant swaths of land, but they also have incredible influence over how the country's government operates. Border Expert Brandon Darby sits down with Glenn Beck to explain exactly why this is the case and what the Trump administration's strategy truly needs to be in order to crush these powerful cartels.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Brandon Darby HERE