Details on Obama trip remain unclear

November 05, 2010

Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program

Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Extreme broadcast, an exclusive feature

available only to Glenn Beck Insider Extreme members.

Learn more...

VOICE: "Obviously you and the Pentagon

have spoken about the India stories that have been out there. Are you surprised

that there are kind of these stories about lots of protection or more planes

than usual? Is there something about this trip that's different than others?"

GIBBS: "No. Whenever you move any president in a foreign country, you're not,

surprisingly, taking certain precautions. This is -- the first stop on our trip

is at a memorial for victims of a terrorist attack November 26, 2009 at the

hotel we're staying at. So obviously the Secret Service takes the duty of

protecting this and any president seriously. They do an amazing job, and they'll

continue to do so."

PAT: Usual nonanswer. Then he's pushed a little bit.

VOICE: "Could you specify which trip President Bush ever took which cost $200

million a day?"

GIBBS: "This trip doesn't cost $200 million a day."

VOICE: "That's what was reported all over the world.

GIBBS: "So let me get this straight, Lester."

Question: "Another questioner asked."

GIBBS: "So you subscribe to the veracity of everything you read in the press,

right?"

VOICE: "No, not everything, but several things.

GIBBS: "But just the things that you previously agreed on that you agree with?

We seem to be several slips, several steps down the slippery slope."

VOICE: "Are you denying $200 million a day."

GIBBS: "For about the third time, yes.

VOICE: "How much is it?"

GIBBS: "I'm not going to get into how much it costs to protect the president.

But the same report, Lester, which you don't believe me I can understand you."

VOICE: "I'd like to believe you. I enjoy you very much.

VOICE: "Should we leave you guys alone?"

GIBBS: "With a slurpy and a twisty straw. I think the same report said there

were 34 warships. The Pentagon said that's not true."

VOICE: "Oh."

VOICE: "But nobody's denying the 200 million except you.

GIBBS: "All right. We now have seem to have come almost full circle on a

circular argument, haven't we?"

PAT: That's bizarre. But that's what he does. He interrogates the interrogator.

STU: But all the other reporters were laughing at the guy. And who was that

reporter?

PAT: That was Les Consulting. World Net Daily.

STU: That's interesting. The idea -- it was reported all over the place the 200

million was thrown around all yesterday.

GLENN: Still being reported by Drudge.

STU: It doesn't seem plausible to me because back of the envelope map means it

would cost more than the entire Afghanistan war, I think. The entire Afghanistan

war doesn't cost $200 million a day. So I don't know what the truth is behind

that. But I don't know why it's being reported, but it is a bizarre story. I

don't know why he wouldn't say how much it costs.

GLENN: It's coming from India. Now, here's the thing. On security, the White

House will never say how much security costs for the president.

PAT: But they do say how much these trips cost. We hear about their vacation

costs. We hear about these expenses.

GLENN: The most expensive trip we can find for a president, not including the

security, the most expensive trip, not including security, was Bill Clinton and

it was $43 million.

PAT: Where did he go?

GLENN: Africa, I believe. And that was the most. And remember it was in the

news. I don't know if you remember that very famous trip to Africa. If I say

Africa and Clinton trip, it doesn't ring a bell with any of you guys?

STU: This one where the plane was running on the --

GLENN: No.

STU: That's a different one?

GLENN: Yeah. But he went over and he was in Africa. And there were a lot of

people that joined him and everything else. I don't remember what the trip was

for or anything. I do remember it was very expensive. It was $43 million. And

that was the most expensive trip that we could find yesterday.

PAT: Such an easy solution to this. Just tell us what it costs.

GLENN: You don't necessarily want to tell everybody what the security costs --

PAT: You don't have to. Just what is this trip costing.

STU: Again, I'm totally fine in receding any information that protects the

president, but what information would we gather for how much it costs.

GLENN: I don't think you would be able -- because I thought about this this

morning. You wouldn't be able to necessarily divine what they were doing with

the money if you had a lump sum. But most likely, they probably don't get into

that, because once they open that door, then you're like, whoa, what is that.

Well, okay. Let's just explain this. And then you've opened the door.

STU: That's fine.

GLENN: I don't want to know about the president's security. Nobody needs to know

about the president's security. There's no need to. There's no need to know.

STU: That's fine. I'm fine with that.

PAT: But if they just released the cost of the trip, security's rolled into

that, we don't know how much is this and how much is that, just tell us what it

costs. You dispel everything if you tell us it costs $50 million, then okay.

GLENN: I think the problem with that is every American would go out of their

mind with the price of security. You know what I'm paying for security for me.

STU: It's very high. It's very expensive.

GLENN: It's extraordinarily expensive.

STU: Multiply that by how many times for the president in a foreign country.

GLENN: Taking mailboxes off the streets and replacing them.

PAT: India where they had a massive terrorist strike that killed 119 people.

STU: In the same hotel.

GLENN: So I think people would have a coronary if they understood how much money

-- well, what they would say is the president doesn't need to go all the time.

He doesn't need to go everywhere.

STU: Right. That's a fair argument. But I don't know anyone who would care about

the cost -- it's one thing I'm not going to complain about cost.

GLENN: But I think people would say stop going so many places, because nobody is

going to say, hey, cut back on security. They'd say he doesn't go places all the

time. Period. The one thing I love they say the president went over here for

this fundraiser or whatever. Well, yeah, okay, so that wasn't paid for by the

taxpayers, but the security was. And the security for the president is

expensive. Wildly expensive.

STU: But he does have a role going overseas.

GLENN: Of course he does. Of course he does.

STU: And fund raisers.

GLENN: I don't need to know the cost of his security. I don't need to know it. I

would like to know how much this trip is costing.

PAT: So would I.

GLENN: I would like to know in the end how many warships were there. I'd like to

know exactly what we did and the reason why I want to know, and I want to know

in advance: Did this president -- and somebody in the media needs to ask this.

Did this president have his schedule or his itinerary changed? Did he allow the

Secret Service to change his itinerary from the last two trips? You don't have

to tell me the itinerary. You don't have to say anything. I would like that

answered. Did this president allow the Secret Service to change up the

itinerary? Is he staying at exactly the same hotel? Is he meeting with the same

people in the same ball rooms? Is he taking the same routes, is it the same

itinerary while he's there.

STU: Because isn't typical protocol to change that all the time.

GLENN: Of course. Of course it is. So has it been changed? Has the Secret

Service said, "Mr. President, it's good."

STU: Because if the Secret Service signs off on it I'm fine with it from a

Secret Service perspective. Assuming they sign off on it.

GLENN: Assuming they sign off on it willingly.

STU: Right. Yes.

GLENN: Look, here, the Secret Service can stop the president from going

someplace.

STU: But they never do.

GLENN: They never do. Because it would be a fire storm. The only way they're

ever going to do it -- they're not going to do it on a hunch. They're not going

to do it because the hair on their back is standing up or neck is standing up

they're saying this isn't good, they're not going to do that. They will stop the

president if they have a direct threat and they say, Mr. President, you're not

going in there we have a direct threat, period.

PAT: If they tell him that he's not going to go.

GLENN: Right. So this is what I would like to know. There's something wrong with

this trip. And now he's taking his children. If your security is so valuable, if

another country is going crazy with their own security team and you have to

close down entire beaches, you have to put people -- there were stories in the

Indian Times yesterday that people are going out of business because of this

trip because they're closing down whole roads and everything. This is a big time

in India. People won't be able to go to these stores and everything. How am I

going to survive. You don't take your family and your children.

STU: I'm very willing to entertain the idea that I'm just a wuss on this, but

when you look at the footage of the Taj Mahal the hotel they're staying at, all

I can think about is watching the footage of those attacks last time. This is a

dangerous, dangerous area. And I don't want to risk the president's life for

really anything, especially a trip that doesn't seem to have too much purpose to

it.

GLENN: Yeah. So he's going over there, and the other question that they won't

answer is: Are there 3,000 people traveling with the president? Is he truly

traveling with 3,000 people? The trip happens tomorrow.

PAT: They did say virtually the entire staff is going. How many is that? Staff,

family members. Might bring along some friends.

STU: I don't know.

PAT: Because they won't tell us anything, they leave it all up to the

speculation and reports from India that have circulated all over the world.

GLENN: Here's the problem. When a free press lets you down, you start to believe

$2 billion.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: Because you can't trust the press anymore.

PAT: And you certainly can't trust the White House Press Secretary.

GLENN: No, of course not.

PAT: Because he lies through his teeth every day.

Message to America after the Nashville massacre: We are worshiping a FALSE GOD

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor , DEA / A. VERGANI / Contributor , Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images.

We had yet another tragic school shooting. There is only one way to begin to address this tragedy, a tragedy that has repeated itself all too often. We must begin by mourning with the families of the victims. Our hearts break for the victims, their families, and the entire community affected by this senseless act of violence.

I'm a parent, and I mourn with you as one.

I'm also a concerned citizen deeply concerned with the profound brokenness that pervades our current culture. All of us fear for the safety of our children and our loved ones. We share the same goal of creating a safe and secure environment for everyone, especially for our children, in our schools, in places of learning and growth.

It is natural for all of us to feel anger and fear during these times, and it may seem unnatural to rise above it. But we must. It's essential to remember that we have to come together as a society, together, and address the root causes of violence. Let me state it plainly: the root cause is not the gun, but rather, the misuse of them by individuals who are mentally ill or have criminal intent. I, for one, want to address the problem of gun violence. I am worried about this with my own children. Every American, regardless of who you voted for, feels the same.

But enough is enough.

When will we address mental health? Do you know the damage we have done to our children, just because of COVID? We have destroyed the mental health of our children. Our country's suicide rate is proof enough that something has gone deeply awry within the soul of our nation—the souls of our children. What is causing all of this? It is the loss of the old guards of our civilization.

Something has gone deeply awry within the soul of our nation.

There are several groups that we need to address. First, to the parents and families of the Nashville victims, I'm sorry. We love you. Our society is sick—it is sick and unrecognizable to most of us. Your loved ones have paid the ultimate price for that illness. I'm sorry because I'm part of the society that has an unwillingness to see the truth, apparently.

Second, to the mother of the 27-year-old shooter, we mourn with you as well. I've read your old posts. You've been fighting against guns in school. While we disagree, we both want this violence to end. I've also read your posts about your children, and how proud you are. There were so many moments of beauty. You feel the same way every mom and dad feels about their child, and you were right to feel that way.

Today, I can only imagine how confused you must be. You should know, we love you too. You lost a child as well. You lost a child to the same society that has an unwillingness to see the truth. You should also know, you are part of our community, and we mourn with you as well.

You lost a child to the same society that has an unwillingness to see the truth.

Now, lastly, to the political class and the media elites. You have been dividing us for years. At first, I think I was a part of that. I've tried really hard not to be. However, you're not sincere in anything you do. At first, maybe you thought you were right in your motivations, but then every time society proved you wrong and you just dug your heels in.

Why do you continue to divide us? Is it just to win over your opponent? Is it just to crush the other side? Is it because you believe that everyone who doesn't vote your way is evil? Or is it that you just no longer care? I'm one American among many who no longer believe in you.

I can understand how easy it is to think people who vote differently than me are the problem. I really can, and those people aren't the problem. The problem begins with people, like you, who only care about money or power, or are so arrogant that they think they know better than the rest of us. You make yourselves and your system into a false god. The arrogance.

You make yourselves and your system into a false god.

You go after the disaffected, the weak, and the hopeless, and you prey on these people, promising to be their savior, hoping they will help you gain power over those who you call your enemies. You have lied. You have lied through half-truths. You have lied through omission. You have lied through fabrications. You have distorted the truth to the degree that it's no longer recognizable.

You call men women, and women men. In your world, our children are legally children until 25 for insurance purposes. Yet you also consider our children "adult" enough to alter their own bodies at eight years old. You have called evil good, and good evil. We do not have a gun problem in America. Per capita, there were more gun owners 50 years ago than there are right now, yet they didn't have these problems. Is it the gun, or is it the people?

What we have in America is a TRUTH problem. We have turned ourselves inside out. We have turned ourselves against the basic principles that gave us life and freedom, and the promise of a fuller life. Our women have no more children, and our men have lost all meaning, reason, and faith.

What we have in America is a TRUTH problem.

Just yesterday, the Wall Street Journal released a poll that showed what principles the American people value most. Children, God, family—the values that used to define us as Americans—were LAST on the list. What was on the top? Money was in the top three. Money? Since when has money become a principle?

Perhaps it is because money is the god that so many worship—money over principles every time a corrupt bank is bailed out, money over principles for those who never want to pay their school tuition, every time we make someone who didn't go to school pay for someone else's tuition.

What kind of god do we worship, that makes children so allegedly flawed that we lay them on our metal alters to the gods in the surgical gowns, who can mutilate and sterilize them to make them "just the way they were intended?" That's an ancient god I don't recognize.

We all know the words that were written in the summer of 1776: "We hold these truths." But other words were written later that year when things weren't so sunny. It was December 21st: "These are the times that try men's souls." These words turned our nation around. These truly are the times that try men's souls, and the modern-day patriots—the lovers of truth and justice—must stand firm in the face of an ever-growing storm of disinformation and division. The weak-hearted are not going to be able to weather the storm, but those with the courage to fight for what is true will emerge victorious.

Lovers of truth and justice must stand firm in the face of an ever-growing storm of disinformation and division.

We live in a time when our faith in institutions, our faith in everything we know, is at an all-time low. Our republic is under siege, and the only way out is to remember our founding principles. We are drowning in a sea of lies. Cling to the life raft! Cling to the enduring belief in life and liberty, truth and justice. We'll only be able to find our way out if we can rekindle the flame of unity and embrace the American spirit that carried us through so many crises before. We have been here before.

But this time, in our current American crisis, we have to constantly remind ourselves that our fight isn't against an external enemy that we conquer. Our enemy is causing the internal divisions that are threatening to tear us apart, divisions that are created by monsters of men. These monsters are not just tearing us apart individual to individual, but tearing us and our children out from the inside out.

Cling to the enduring belief in life and liberty, truth and justice.

America, it is high time to reaffirm our commitment to the values that define us as a people. It is our collective responsibility, as free people, to stand up for those principles of truth. The seeds of division have been sewn by those who seek to manipulate and exploit us for their own gain. They shatter our trust in one another to instill fear and hatred where there should be understanding and compassion.

Truth is now clouded by conspiracy. The lines between fact and fiction have been blurred. Truth is a light. Everything we face is not insurmountable, but now is the time to return to truth and decency and justice for all.

Our kids are the ones who are going to pay the highest of prices for what we do now.

What's on Glenn's desk? THIS graphic novel's dystopia has TERRIFYING similarities to our world.

Matt Battaglia

Imagine a global health crisis. Everyone is ordered to "stay-at-home" and only to venture out for "essential" purposes. Travel is regulated by government surveillance, with only permitted workers allowed to go into the city. Inflation is at historic levels, and basic necessities, such as food and gasoline, become invaluable commodities.

Sound familiar?

As the COVID pandemic begins to recede into our cultural memory, it is harrowing to remember the sheer breadth of power we surrendered to our government in order to "keep us safe." We would be foolish to think that the pandemic wasn't a repetition of an age-old tale in the west, and we would be even more naive to believe that we aren't at risk of repeating it in the future: the government's manipulation of a crisis to secure its complete control over its people.

We would be foolish to think that the pandemic wasn't a repetition of an age-old tale

Filmmaker Matt Battaglia published a first in what is likely to become an emerging genre of post-pandemic apocalyptic literature, bringing to life the harrowing consequences of what could happen if we continue to surrender our liberty to the government for the sake of "safety and security."

Battaglia's graphic novel, House on Fire, brings this world to life in an even more vivid dimension through pictures, telling the story of a single day of a man living in this apocalyptic world that doesn't seem too distant from our own.

The setting

Imagine there is another global pandemic of a respiratory virus that is similar to COVID. The government implements COVID-like lockdowns and restrictions from their 2020 blueprint, but this time, the regulations are here to stay. After all, this pandemic isn't the only threat allegedly facing the American people. The future of our planet is at stake. On top of the pandemic regulations, our government restricts the types of food available for consumption, implements individual carbon quotas, mandates electric vehicles, eliminates gas-powered heating, cars, stoves, etc.

Of course, the pandemic and climate change policies require major government funding, so the President uses his emergency powers and executive orders to push through a multi-trillion-dollar proposal that secures the funding necessary to finance the "clean and safe transition." Yes, inflation will be an issue, but that is a small price to pay to secure our health and the future of our planet. Don't forget to include foreign aid for our warring allies in the multi-trillion-dollar packages as well.

Inflation is a small price to pay to secure the future of our planet.

Now fast forward 20 years of living under these all-too-familiar draconian policies. This is Battaglia's apocalyptic world where we meet our nameless main character, causing the reader to question whether our world could devolve into Battaglia's in such a short amount of time.

The plot

Battaglia's story begins with our character kissing his wife goodbye and leaving their country home on a one-day mission to the city in search of a cure for his wife's most recent bout of the illness that is, presumably, a result of the pandemic.

All of the themes that contribute to the apocalyptic nature of Battaglia's world are familiar to us, disturbingly so. Our character drives through country roads, passing by gas signs that list $20 per gallon prices. His radio reports on another invasion of Poland, while country fields transform into steeple-like towers of run-down factories, like old monuments to former industries of a time long past.

Our character reaches the city limit, a border-like security checkpoint where he is required to scan his identity card to enter the city, the likes of which we see in China today. Masks required. He then drives through empty streets of a once bustling city, save for several suspect people who seem to blend into the crevices of alleyways and corners, shrouded by their masks.

Finally, our character meets with his "contact," who gives him some type of canister, supposedly a remedy for his wife's ailment. He barters with several cuts of meat, a rarity more valuable than inflated cash in this "Green New World." From this point onward, things take a turn for our character—for the worst.

Glenn's warning

Many of these scenes bring to life themes that Glenn has been warning about for years, from the government's use of a pandemic to seize control over its people, the depleted dollar and record-high inflation resulting from government spending and foreign conflicts, the Great Reset's goals to eliminate meat, gas-powered products, and other "high emissions products." All of these will be done in the name of seemingly righteous goals: "health," "safety," "security," and the "future of our planet" come to mind. However, we won't realize our freedoms will be a faint memory of the past until it is too late.

All of these measures will be done in the name of seemingly "righteous" goals.

House on Fire's poignant ending leaves the reader with a terrifying yet vitally important question: are the issues plaguing our society latent within society itself, or do they stem from the troubles within our own souls? Does society mold the human soul, or is society, as Plato puts it, the human soul "writ large?"

Battaglia's short yet powerful graphic novel brings to life many of the themes that Glenn has been warning his listeners. It is sitting on his desk, and we hope it will sit on yours too. It gives the reader a glimpse into our society after years of decay and oppression, calling on the reader to halt its progression before it's too late.

Click HERE to get your own copy!

Elon Musk comments on Glenn's podcast with David Sacks, takes jab at U.S. foreign policy

Pool / Pool | Getty Images

Elon Musk chimed into Glenn's conversation about foreign policy with PayPal's founding COO David Sacks on the most recent installment of the Glenn Beck Podcast.

Musk tweeted, "US foreign policy is bronze tier on a good day!" He hit the nail on the head, as Glenn and Sacks discussed the deterioration of U.S. foreign policy and the rising probability of war with Russia and China.

None
— (@)

Glenn asked Sacks, "How likely do you think it is that we'd be headed towards war?" Sacks responded that he has been warning about the imminent threat of war since the Ukraine situation started and lamented that we have entered into a "proxy war of choice" with Russia.

"We engaged in a series of actions going back to 2008 that the Russians have viewed as highly provocative," Sacks said, decrying the continued expansion of NATO into Ukraine. Russia has continually warned the U.S. against expanding NATO into Ukraine, yet the State Department "crusaders" have persisted in their NATO-driven objective, which is "unacceptable to the Russians," Sacks said, "in the same way the Soviet Union trying to put nukes in Cuba was unacceptable to us in 1962."

If NATO expansion isn't enough to provoke a response from the Russian bear, our ongoing and escalating aid to Ukraine certainly is. As Sacks explained, "We're not just providing [Ukraine] with money and weapons. We are providing them with intelligence, we have commandos on the ground" and we are even directing Ukrainian soldiers on how to use our weapons on how to hit specific Russian targets. As Sacks said, "We are providing the kill chain" for Ukraine.

To put this in perspective, that would be equivalent to Russian soldiers instructing Taliban members on how to use Russian weapons to hit specific U.S. camps in Afghanistan. In that situation, wouldn't we accuse Russia of engaging in an act of war? The term "proxy" is increasingly diminishing in its relevance towards the U.S.'s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. We aren't engaging in a "proxy war" anymore. As Sacks said, "We are effectively a co-belligerent in this conflict."

It is no wonder that we are driving Russia into China's arms while both Putin and Xi continue to forge ties with sworn enemies of the U.S., including Iran and North Korea. If we continue to "poke the bear," it is only a matter of time before Russia finds its confidence with its newly-forged allies to retaliate against its aggressor.

Musk rightly said, "US foreign policy is bronze tier on a good day." But U.S. foreign policy has not even had a "good day" in some time. We are not only jeopardizing our own international reputation with ongoing aid to Ukraine; we are jeopardizing the whole world order by marching NATO increasingly toward war. Elites in the Biden administration and the military industrial complex may benefit from aggravating Russia towards war, but it certainly doesn't benefit anyone else, in the U.S. and abroad.

There are few tools in the conservative's kit to fight back against the elites' dangerous agenda. However, Musk mentioned one of these vital tools in a comment he tweeted on Glenn's interview with San Fransicko author and Twitter Files contributor Michael Schellenberger back in January: "Citizen journalism is vital to the future of civilization."

None
— (@)

As Glenn continues to give people a platform to speak out against the elites, it is encouraging to see Musk continue to help make Twitter a platform where people can voice their challenges to the machine's agenda.

Here are the TOP 5 things you NEED to know about Trump's potential indictment

Brandon Bell / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Trump's potential indictment is one of the most historically significant events in our nation's history—and no, that is not a hyperbolic statement.

If Trump is federally prosecuted, by a state-level District Attorney no less, then America may be entering a new territory past which there is no return: the weaponization of our judicial system against the top political opponents to the ruling class. As Glenn has said, weaponizing our judiciary is something we see in banana republics. Is America about to become one?

With all of the news and hype around Trump's potential indictment, it is easy to lose sight of the core issues that truly give this story historical significance. Here are five core aspects of this story that have the potential to transform our nation going forward.

1. Trump committed a misdemeanor, NOT a felony.

The allegations against Trump pertain to "hush money" given to the porn star Stormy Daniels during his 2016 Presidential Campaign. Trump's advisor Michael Cohen gave Daniels $130,000 of his own money after Daniels threatened to publicize her alleged affair with Trump just days before the 2016 election. Cohen wrote off the money as "legal fees" under his campaign finance funds. Trump then reimbursed Cohen for the expenses once he was in the White House.

Trump has maintained that he never had an affair with Daniels and that he is the victim of an extortion scheme. But that is besides the point. New York DA Alvin Bragg is potentially indicting Trump based on mislabeling the "hush money" as "legal fees" under campaign finance laws.

Even NBC acknowledges that mislabeling campaign finances is a "misdemeanor," not a felony, yet Trump is being prosecuted as if it were. The only way the "crime" could be turned into a felony is if the mislabeling was done to cover up another crime. Yet, as NBC admits, it is unclear whether Bragg has evidence of another crime that Trump was trying to cover up.

If you are thinking, "Wait, this is old news, right?" you would be correct. There is a reason why no one has prosecuted Trump based on the Stormy Daniels hush money in the seven years since it occurred—because there simply is no federal case. So why has Alvin Bragg decided to prosecute Trump now? Well, for one thing, Trump announced he is running for President again in 2024, and the Left simply can't let that happen.

2. Hillary Clinton committed the SAME crime.

The double standard of Trump's potential indictment is made even more clear when compared with Hillary Clinton, who committed the same misdemeanor.

Hillary Clinton's 2016 Presidential campaign "misreported" funds received from the Democratic National Convention (DNC) that went towards the infamous Steele Dossier, which aimed at linking Trump to collusion with the Russian government (which was proven to be a complete farce). Clinton's campaign wrote off the Steele Dossier funds as "legal services"—sound familiar?

She and the DNC paid the Federal Election Commission $113,000 to the Federal Election Commission, and the issue was swept under the rug. Yet Trump is being accused of the SAME misdemeanor—mislabeling campaign finance funds—and he is being threatened with federal prosecution.

3. Trump's possible indictment is "very conveniently" timed to overshadow the Biden family's corruption.

On March 16, 2023, the House Oversight Committee released a scathing memorandum detailing the illicit business dealings between the Biden family and the Chinese state-owned energy company, State Energy HK Limited.

According to bank records subpoenaed by the committee, the Chinese energy company wired $3 million to Delaware-based Robinson Walker LLC two months after Biden left the White House in 2017. At the time of the wire transfer, the business account only had $159 thousand. Now it had over $3 million.

The very next day, Robinson Walker LLC wired over $1 million to a company associated with James Gillar, a business partner of Hunter Biden’s.

Over the next 3 months, Robinson Walker LLC would send incremental payments to multiple members of the Biden family and their companies, including Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's brother, James, and Beau Biden's ex-wife, Hallie. The transfers included another "mysterious" recipient titled simply, “Biden." Who could that possibly be?

Let's get this straight: Trump's potential misdemeanor-turned-felony is making front-page news while Biden's DOCUMENTED business dealings with a foreign entity and enemy to the United States are being swept under the rug. How "convenient" for Biden.

4. Weaponizing judiciary

This week, we published a poll to see what YOU think of Trump's potential indictment, and most of you overwhelmingly believe our judiciary is being weaponized against anyone on the right side of the aisle—and you are absolutely correct.

Glenn aptly pointed out that using the judiciary to attack political opponents is something we see in banana republics, but now we are witnessing it in the U.S. before our eyes. As Glenn said, the strategy in banana republics is, "Show me the man, and I will find you the crime." They want Trump GONE, and now they are trying to conjure up the crime to do it.

It is very telling that conservatives are fearful of protesting Trump's potential indictment. As Glenn said, we all want a peaceful response. However, conservatives are now taking pause before peaceful protest after seeing the DOJ ruthlessly prosecutethousands of individuals on January 6, even those who never reached the capitol grounds. Is protesting Trump's indictment worth the risk of arrest?

The fact that this question arises in people's minds is extremely indicative of our current political climate. Our judiciary has been weaponized against conservatives, and now we have to think twice before publicly standing up for our beliefs. Sounding more like a banana republic?

5. This is the FIRST time a U.S. President has been federally prosecuted.

If Trump is federally indicted, it would solidify the judiciary's ability to become a weapon against political opponents, even up to the position of a U.S. President. This should give all Americans grave concern. This issue is much bigger than Trump; it is about whether we want to live in a nation whose ruling power can use its judicial system to go after its opponents.

Consider, for a moment, if the tables were turned. What if a Trump-appointed DA federally indicted President Obama for a state-level misdemeanor that resulted in throwing him in prison? Is that the "America" you would want to live in? It would arguably cease to be "America" as we know it and devolve into an ungovernable shell of what it once was.

This harrowing possibility is materializing beneath our very noses. There were many events that led up to the fall of the Roman republic into an empire, but it was the singular event of Caesar crossing the Rubicon that tipped the republic past the point of no return. Could this be our Rubicon moment? Are we, like Cicero, witnessing our republic mutate into something unrecognizable before our very eyes?

Though prosecuting Trump may yield some political vengeance and satisfaction for one side of the aisle in the short term, it poses an insurmountable threat to both sides of the aisle in the long-term trajectory of our country.

Glenn's Show Prep