Glenn talks with American documentary filmmaker, Ami Horowitz who is also running for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. He is a writer, producer, and director of Ami on the Streets, a satirical short film series on Fox News and he also co-wrote, co-directed, and starred in a documentary in 2009 providing a critical examination of the United Nations. Today, Glenn and Ami Horowitz discuss putting party over country and how sad it is that we're dealing with anti-Semitism in this day and age.
©2023 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
TIME’S UP: Will Congress FINALLY stand against the IRS & FBI?
A second IRS whistleblower has emerged, sharing with Congress concerns about the handling of Hunter Biden’s alleged crimes and tax fraud schemes. This IRS agent — who joins the first whistleblower, his or her former supervisor — was ‘ousted without explanation last week,’ the New York Post reports. So now with two IRS whistleblowers ready to speak out AND with at least three FBI whistleblowers speaking out about retaliation last week, will Congress FINALLY take a stand against these corrupt and all-powerful agencies? Glenn and Stu discuss that, plus the debt ceiling negotiations and why Democrats claim there’s so little in our budget that can be cut…
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: So let's look at some of the political things going on. A second IRS whistle-blower has alleged retaliation now for raising concerns that the Justice Department leadership was acting inappropriately on the investigation into Hunter Biden. So what these guys -- this is the second now.
What they're saying is that the Justice Department came in and said, yeah, you guys don't need to look at all of that stuff.
And they were like, excuse me, we're the IRS. We're looking at all the banking stuff. All the money stuff.
Eh, you don't really need to. And then that whole staff was let go.
This guy is now coming forward, and he is going to be giving testimony on Friday. Our client learned that one of the agents he supervises, so is this not a low level guy. This is a supervisor at the IRS. The case agent on the case, our client is blowing a whistle on. Sent you an email on Thursday. In which the IRS case agent raised concerns about the Hunter Biden investigation. This is what the lawyers wrote in a letter.
But the IRS leadership quickly responded with accusations of criminal conduct and warnings to other agents in an apparent attempt to intimidate into silence, anyone who might raise any similar concerns.
So in this, Congress is saying, you've got to stop harassing these whistle-blowers. It's got to stop now.
Now, the FBI has just failed yesterday, to sign over a document, that whistle-blowers say the FBI have. Which is showing a criminal scheme, involving vice president Joe Biden and a foreign national.
They won't admit to having it, or admit to not having it. It's just part of an ongoing investigation, and we can't really comment on that.
So they -- Congress, which oversees the FBI. Congress has said, you have to produce this.
They -- they said first, by May 3rd, May 3rd, you have to release it May 3rd.
Then they said, by yesterday, they were going to have a closed-door meetings with the FBI.
So we want to see that at the closed-door meetings.
They still won't produce it.
So now, I guess the House oversight and accountability committee, are going to -- what?
I don't know. Maybe a -- maybe another sternly worded letter. Or I'm not sure. But they're backing Congress into a corner. And I just -- I don't know. I'm starting to have hope, that there are enough people in Congress, at least. I don't know about the Senate. But in the Congress. That they're going to fight their way out of this. They're not going to take this.
STU: For so long, there's been the belief that eventually Congress would step up and take the power they have.
GLENN: They have to.
STU: Right? We talked about the REINS Act with Mike Lee, recently.
GLENN: And by the way, that is in. If it's left in there, that -- the REINS Act is in the budget deal.
STU: That would be massive.
STU: A really big improvement to our government and our country. It would basically limit them from making these little rules that no one votes on.
What is it? $100 million in effect. It should be so obvious. That you shouldn't need a new act to do it.
STU: But if you're going to affect the economy by $100 million or more. You have to get a vote of approval. You can't just do it willy-nilly.
GLENN: Yeah. It pretty much takes away the power of the administrative state to do things like the ATF is doing right now. You can't just make up laws. The laws are created by Congress.
STU: This is so -- you talk about the Constitution. And the importance of it all the time.
But it's so important.
Because what people have done, have decided -- they've decided, you know what, we want things. We can't have the things by these rules. So let's come up with new rules. The REINS Act is a good example of this, where they just decided, well, we'll just give all the power to the administrative state. And we'll let them make all these rules up, therefore we don't have to go through all the trouble of the vote and the debate, and exposing this to the American people. We might get voted out.
We'll give the responsibility for those things to other people. And let them do it, without a vote. Without approval.
The Soros-DAs are another great example of this. We can't get people to approve laws that let violent criminals out of prison.
So what if we instead, spend a bunch of money. It's a very effective process financially. Because you don't have to spend that much money, to win a local DA election. Spend a bunch of money. Get some local DA elected. And then tell them, and ignore all the laws.
Ignore them. You have prosecutorial discretion, so just don't do any of it.
Just bend that rule to the millionth free. And go out there, and ignore all the laws that have been passed. You don't want criminals to go to jail. Fine.
You want sanctuary cities. Just ignore all that stuff. Who cares if they're laws. So they decided to go around the Constitution. And around the rule of law. By doing these things.
That happened in the executive state. It happened on a state-by-state basis. As localized by cities.
And is this their plan. They have given up trying to actually win these debates. They've just decided to go around them. And wait for you to think it's normal.
And then they don't have to win the debate.
GLENN: Well, hopefully the REINS Act will be left into this bill.
But I don't know what is left in the bill. We are talking about the bill -- on the debt ceiling.
STU: The debt ceiling.
GLENN: You know, I'm watching McCarthy, and he seems rock solid on this. You know, they always started too late.
We've been telling the Republicans since November, that they had the (yelling). And this time, it's the Republicans because the first thing McCarthy did when he got in, was send a letter to the White House. We have to start working on this right now.
Because there are some things that we are not going to approve. So we need to start negotiating it now.
The Democrats are behind the eight ball.
STU: Yeah. What did McCarthy say?
They didn't negotiate for 97 days, after it was initially proposed.
What was so silly about this. They keep saying, well, we don't want to set the -- we have to negotiate every time we need a debt ceiling increase. That would be crazy. What? Why?
STU: Why? First of all. And if you're telling me that the default is so terrible, right?
It's the worst thing out there. And I do agree, it would be catastrophic if we went to default.
GLENN: But we won't.
It just requires Congress and the secretary of the treasury to sit down and select what's going to be paid. And what's not going to be paid.
STU: Right. And you'll have a long road there. Now, you shouldn't even get to that point, of course.
Because the Republicans have put out a bill, that was pretty sensible.
I mean, it has minor, minor cuts in our government spending. Not even cuts. They're just cuts in the future increases. They're not even cuts. They're cuts to the future increases in spending. We're going back to, what? 2019 spending levels in a lot of these categories. Oh, no.
This is not that catastrophic. It's not that ridiculous.
But to -- for us to default, the Democrats would have to say, that these minor cuts to future increases, is worse for the future, than default.
Because they have an option. There's been a bill that's already been passed by Republicans. It's already been passed. All they have to do is get on beard with it.
So if they thought that this was worse than default. Then perhaps it would be sensible for us to go into default.
But obviously, it's not worse than default.
It -- so just get in there, and negotiate something out, that's in between.
We get that the Republicans may not get everything that they may want. But find out a place to settle this.
Because they keep saying, if we negotiate, that will encourage future negotiations around the debt ceiling.
STU: Well, yeah.
That's the whole point of the debt ceiling. The point of the debt ceiling is a gut check. Like, hey, guys. You keep bumping up on this number, that has trillions in it. Maybe instead, you talk about how to get more fiscally responsible. They say, well, we'll basically show them by defaulting.
We'll show them, that we don't want to default so much. That we will just default. That's an insane argument.
GLENN: What do you think he's going to do?
You think he will come to something, or you think he will play hardball? And go, nope. No negotiation.
That's where he's at. No negotiation.
STU: He seems to be weakening a little bit on that.
I do think eventually, we will get to a place, where Republicans can claim a little bit of a win. Democrats can say. We didn't give them everything they wanted. They held us hostage. They're mean. And eventually we get this. I will say it's May 23rd. Now, I don't believe the June 1st date. The June 1st date is not true. But fundamentally, it could be true if the right number of people pushed in a direction that was hurtful to the United States. I mean, people with bad intent could make that true. As you point out, Glenn, they can stop funding turtle tunnels for a while and give us extra days. There's a lot of things they can stop funding, instead of not paying our debt.
And I think their argument based on the 14th Amendment, where they say, it says in the 14th Amendment.
Our debt, we have to pay them. So we have to pay them. Well, that would indicate that they would have to not pay a bunch of other stuff, before they got to not paying the at the time.
It's just like in your own household. Hey, we have the kid's summer camp budget here, but we don't have enough to pay the rent. Which one do we pay?
You don't pay the summer camp thing first. And then you get to the --
GLENN: And there's lots of summer camps.
STU: Lots of summer camps. Now, according to Joe Biden, there's literally not one dollar we can cut from this budget. That's actually his position.
GLENN: You know what is really weird. Because that's what Nancy Pelosi said years ago.
GLENN: The cupboards are bare. Nothing to cut. And then we added like $7 trillion, and it's still bare?
STU: Yeah, apparently.
GLENN: How much money?
STU: I mean, everyone knows, of course, there's money to save. You might even say that there are important programs that you like. But still, every organization has waste. I mean, waste would at least buy us some time.
But, you know, nonessential programs would also buy us a lot more.
And so there is more time than -- than June 1st. But it is -- you know, a little -- it's a little -- it's a little close.
You kind of like to get this thing settled.
And maybe put in a little bit of a harder cap for next time.
Maybe put a cap out there, that is a few years in the future. That says, we actually shouldn't get to this guys.
Let's not worry about the next time, when we get there. Let's come up with a plan to not hit it next time. Maybe we go the other way. Maybe instead of increasing the debt, every single time. We go the opposite way. And decrease it.
What do you think of that idea?
I know it's wild and crazy. Maybe that's more fundamental to what the Founders were talking about with the 14th Amendment.
Than what you're doing here. Where you're just increasing it all the time. And yelling at people, when they ask you to spend a little bit less.
GLENN: Well, I just don't think we can spend less, Stu. I just don't think that's even possible.
STU: Cupboards are bare.
Target BOYCOTT? Why Target's LGBT items make Glenn LOSE HIS MIND
A recent shopping trip with his wife made Glenn ‘LOSE MY MIND,’ he says. The store at fault? TARGET. The giant retailer officially has gone TOO FAR with its LGBT products to celebrate pride month this June. In fact, it’s enough to make Glenn BOYCOTT the store and in this clip, he explains why YOU should too. Because this year, Target’s pride collection goes beyond rainbow onesies for babies or even swimsuits with a ‘tuck friendly' option for the transgender Americans among us. This time, the store even hired a possible SATANIST to design some of the pride products for sale. Glenn gives all the details in this clip…
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: It is becoming sincerely a deep mental illness.
GLENN: A mental illness.
What -- I'm sorry, but I was -- I went to Target on Friday.
And I'm just -- you know -- we're just going to buy bananas.
And then I go by the swimsuit area.
Are the bananas here?
Because it sure looks like there are lots of bananas in the women's swimsuit section.
And it's not the women's swimsuit section. They look like women's swimsuits. But they're not.
They are for trans people.
Now, let's not be stupid. Trans people have been with us for a long time.
In one auction, I so regret that I just didn't go an extra bid. I was bidding on a letter from the 1880s.
And it was from a fort someplace out West in the middle of nowhere.
And it was a letter to somebody back home. And they said, you know, Mrs. Waffleheimer, or whatever her name was. Mrs. Waffleheimer guide. And she was our cook. And she was the greatest cook ever. And we miss her so much.
We were surprised, however, when we found her dead body.
We were surprised as we were putting her in her coffin, to see that basically she had junk downstairs.
She was a dude! The whole time.
So this is not something new. It's been around.
I have no problem with trans people. If that's what you want to do. But it is a very small percentage less than 1 percent of the population.
Let me say it again.
Less than 1 percent!
And you would think we are a country made up of trans people.
And I have to tell you, when you have bathing suits for kids, with the tuck it option, you've got a problem as a nation.
I mean, a real problem as a nation. And I would suggest we stop it, right now. You -- I have said to you before, the greatest advice anyone can give you, is live not by lies.
Do not live, endorse, or associate, with anyone who is telling lies.
And right now, our entire society is lying. Remove yours from that. When I was walking down the aisles of -- I mean, I about lost my mind.
Walking down the aisles of Target.
And I saw all of this -- all of this trans stuff. And rainbows everywhere. And I was like, can we please, for the love of Pete, have some balance in our lives?
Now, let me give you the story today, that I think, hopefully, will awaken some people. I mean, I'm wide awake.
I hope my wife is wide awake.
I hope this will awaken people, and say, okay. No more Target.
No more Target.
But I will tell you, I spent the whole weekend here in the studio. Recording my new book, future -- Dark Future.
And it's 500 pages. So over two days and 12 hours, I only made it through half of the book.
But it is really, really good. It's going to come out here in about a four weeks. You'll be able to get it, get it now. Get the audiobook.
And please, and you'll understand why when you read it. Get the hardbound copy as well.
Don't just get it digitally.
These books will go away, soon, soon, if we really go much further. Anyway, in this book, you will find how deeply in bed Walmart is, with the WEF.
I mean, they are neck deep. With the World Economic Forum, and ESG. And all of that stuff.
So you're losing Walmart. And you're losing Target.
But it's high time we lose them, if that's the side they want to be on.
Now, what side is that?
They'll say, they're just being open. They're being inclusive.
I want you to listen to this story. Target is already facing boycotts for selling tuck-friendly bathing suits. And LGBTQ onesies for babies. Now it's been revealed that Target is selling LGBTQ pride products from a designer that appears to promote violence, drug use, and Satanism. Target sells three items by the brand Adprellen.
We belong everywhere messenger bags. Too queer for here messenger bag. Pure transphobia, not trans people T-shirts. LGBTQ items are available at the Target website and in its stores. Target describes all of the products as all items were designed for all bodies regardless of gender identity and presentation.
Just, I want you just to hear this. Remember that the goal of Black Lives Matter. Stated on their page. Until they removed it. Because everybody went, what?
Is to destroy families. The biggest thing in the global warming moving, is to destroy families, by telling people, don't have children!
Who else wants to destroy families and childrens?
That's who. Okay.
We added design features to help make the fit customizable for you.
In other words, Target is saying, you can tuck your little wiener in. And wear a chick's bathing suit.
That is -- that is not normal.
How many are you selling, of those, Target?
I'm going to go -- I'm going to go, and making my last stop at Target.
I am going and buying some of these things for the museum.
Because some day, no one will believe that these were on the shelves of giant box stores. Like Target.
Our hope is that the best -- our guests find clothing that makes them feel comfortable, and affirmed in their identity. You are either male or you're female.
Now, you can dress any way you want.
But you are either male or female. Period.
You go into a hospital.
And you've got -- you're bleeding down stairs. And you say you're a woman. But you ain't a woman.
The doctors will work on you, as a male. Not a female.
He's going to look at your wiener, and say, that doesn't look like something you should be bleeding out of.
Oh, my gosh.
We understand that fit is incredibly important. Yeah. Target.
Truth is more important.
And we'll continue to evolve and improve on Fit needs for LGBTQISRNT.
In the product descriptions, Target credits gay lesbian and straight education network.
And they have a ten-year partnership with Gleeson. They lead the movement, according to Target, in creating affirming, accessible, and antiracist spaces.
Now, how are you suddenly -- why is LGBTQI2+ -- why are they now claiming that they make things that are antiracist too?
You could be homophobic. You could be transphobic. You could be Two Spirit phobic. That's the one -- I'm spooked by those Two Spirit people.
But racism? Anyway, we're proud of ten years plus, celebration with the support of their mission. Blah, blah, blah.
Now, you go to the website of the company, that they have partnered with, based in London.
And you find that it was founded by a gay trans man. Great.
The founder and designer is Eric Callen. And according to Trans Lash, a website that is building experiences to advance trans narratives. Histories, healings, and most importantly, the human rights of trans people. He started this company, and then he wrote about his contract with -- with Target.
He said, and I quote, being able to sell my stuff in Target stores is incredibly exciting. Knowing that people are seeing it, without necessarily explicitly seeking LGBTQ-related stuff is wonderful. I'm especially happy about the fact that young, closeted people will see it. And I hope in some way, they will feel a little more comfortable in themselves, as we deserve to feel.
You can get the sweatshirt and the bags on Target's website, or in stores.
He goes on: These have already got the transphobes infuriated with me. And I feel like quite the celebrity, in that that they feel like this is all some big conspiracy. And that I have any power to brainwash anyone.
I'm just some guy drawing pictures. Are you?
Callen claims that the word groomer is a right-word transphobic word. Uh-huh. However, he also goes on to confess, that he was groomed when he was young. And he will likely be working through it, for the rest of his life. When I was in my very early teens, I was groomed and in an abusive relationship/friendship with the person ten years old than me. Uh-huh.
However, his designs nearly all feature the colors of the trans gender flag, appear to promote violence, drug use, and Satanism.
There are designs that seem to call for violence, including a pin with two axes that reads, fight for trans rights.
There is a design with a guillotine, with skulls near it, that reads homophobic headrest.
Now, imagine, if I made a T-shirt that had a guillotine and skulls and I said, liberal headrest.
Do you think they would say, I was promoting violence?
He sells a pin with a ball and chain flail weapon, that says, we bash back.
The bay bashing. Lesbian bashing. Queer bashing.
All far too prevalent in this world.
And from the comments shouted on the streets, to the horrific violent crimes committed against LGBTQ+ people, sometimes there's only one language those who harass us understand.
Some might say, turn the other cheek.
But others would advise to bash them back.
And if you're going to do that, why not do it with a heart-shaped pastel-colored mace.
One design features a lighter with the words, burn down the cis-tem. Uh-huh.
The cis-tem is what keeps trans kids from feeling free. This is what he's writing now on Instagram. Their true selves. It makes the world dangerous for them to live in. It causes people to feel guilty for transitioning. It aims to ensure that we stay in rigid boxes, set up at birth.
It makes it harder for trans women to get jobs, housing, insurance.
It tells nonbinary people, that they don't exist.
It's the reason why trans women face both misogyny and transphobia in equal measure.
It's becoming the cis-tem that trans men are erased and overlooked. Now, trans men and trans women, I'm not sure.
We don't need to restructure it, he writes.
We need to burn it down, and start up again in a system that doesn't police gender or expression.
A world that allows exploration, changing our minds, dressing how we want to, taking up the space we need. Being treated as we deserve. We need to burn down the system, and create a world where trans people don't get to just live, but thrive!
His account also encourages transgender people to bite turfs, which is trans exclusionary radical feminists. The design features a snake biting a hand of a human.
And the caption reads, never trust a turf. They're not well-meaning. They just don't care about cis-women's rights.
They don't have the right intentions. Avoid them when you can, and bite them when you can't.
Another one -- other slogans that you will find from the designer of the Target clothing.
Join my gay cult. Transitioning Saves Lives. Heteronormalivity.
PAT: Yeah. Heteronormativity
GLENN: Yeah, heteronormativity is a plague. Binding doesn't make you less of a man. And trans witches for abortion.
So I think we're doing good.
Hail trans demons. He also says. Oh, and one more T-shirt available.
Satan respects pronouns.
Congratulations. Are you shopping at Target?
I hope not.
Apocalypse GPT: Why We Must Shut Down the Artificial Intelligence Revolution Now | Ep 276
The terrifying future of artificial intelligence is here. Pandora’s box opened with OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Now humanity is driving toward a cliff; even the top AI companies acknowledge that. But that’s not stopping them from taking all our worst human impulses and supercharging them with AI’s unlimited technological power. Companies like Snapchat, Facebook, and Apple are already beginning to implement AI into the products you use every day. Glenn exposes how AI tech, which can already recreate your voice in seconds, become your "girlfriend," and change the fate of elections, could destroy reality as we know it. He also speaks with Center for Humane Technology co-founder and former Google ethicist Tristan Harris, who outlines the critical reality that we all will lose if every major player doesn’t hit the brakes soon.
WORLD WAR 3: Will Biden ACTUALLY send U.S. F-16s to Ukraine?
The Biden Administration now is allowing Western allies to provide Ukraine with F-16 fighter jets — including American-made ones. But just over one year ago, Joe Biden warned that taking similar steps would enter America into World War 3. The situation continues to escalate, so much so that several high-ranking military officials took to the New York Times in a paid advertisement to warn the world about this administration’s handling of the war. Glenn reads from their advertisement in this clip, and he argues that most Americans DO want to help Ukraine. We just don’t want to enter ‘nuclear winter’ as a result of it…
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Hmm. We should know for sure in the next few days, whether it was just bumbling or bluster, or real. But we may be sending F-16s, over to -- to Ukraine.
Which, if you remember right.
PAT: That was absolutely not -- we're absolutely not doing that.
GLENN: He said, that's World War III.
GLENN: Those were his words. That's World War III.
We're now considering it.
Yeah, listen to this clip.
VOICE: The idea -- the idea that we will send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in, with American pilots and American crews.
Just understand, don't kid yourself. No matter what y'all say. That's called World War III.
GLENN: Now, he -- he has said, that, well, they've promised me, that they will only keep those planes within their territory. Their borders.
They won't fly over into Russia.
So here we are, day 452. Of a totally avoidable.
Horrific, and stupid war. A war initiated by Russia.
But also a war provoked by the Biden administration.
Welcomed by the Biden administration. Literally, green lit by the White House.
As President Joe Biden in the months beforehand repeatedly rejected overtures, seeking one last time for a NATO-based understanding of security in Europe.
Something that after the Cold War, we agreed to. And then once the Russians had indeed invaded, a war fueled by the United States, to exponential new heights of violence and destruction.
So the United States has tended this war like a garden.
We've watered it with our own crocodile tears, and nourished it on evermore terrible weaponry. Coaxing it to grow larger and larger all the time.
When the Russians and Ukrainians were both ready to quit and enter into talk peace, both sides, we shushed them and sent them back to work on more war. Were you aware of that?
Most probably missed when Stephen Kinzer, the former New York Times foreign correspondent with decades of reporting experience registered a lonely early objection.
He spoke more than a year -- more than a year ago, almost a year and a half ago now, of the two terrible afflictions that had just been visited upon Ukraine.
Affliction one was the Russian invasion.
But affliction two, he asserted, and I believe correctly, was the American response.
Specifically, quoting him, our decision to send suffering country can be massive amounts of advanced weaponry. Which guarantees more suffering and death.
US weapons will not only be used to kill Russians. But also provoke Russia to respond by killing more Ukrainians.
Those of us who have seen war up close. Know it's the worst thing in the world.
It destroys innocent lives, shatters families and communities forever.
Long after political and military conflicts end. It's about bodies blown apart, entire nations laid to waste.
The only winners are the gleeful arms makers, for whom this war is a bonanza, of blood-stained profit.
So he wrote that for the Boston Globe. And I suspect the New York Times, his old employer wanted no part of his heresy.
Which brings me to what happened this weekend.
Not only is Biden now talking about sending our fighter jets over there.
There was another story. But it wasn't a story.
It was an advertisement. It was a full-page ad, published only in the print version of the New York Times.
They didn't put it online. Only the print version.
And it calls on the United States, to work to an end, as quickly as possible, through diplomacy.
And there were several signatures on here, with credibility. Several high-ranking US military officers, Ronald Reagan's former US ambassador to Moscow. Jack Matlock. And the ubiquitous Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs. But I want to give you just some of the highlights on this.
Let us consider President Biden's promise, to back Ukraine as long as it takes, to be a license to pursue, ill-defined and ultimately unachievable goals.
It could prove as catastrophic as President Putin's decision last year, to launch his criminal invasion and occupation. We cannot and will not endorse the strategy of fighting Russia, until the last Ukrainian.
We advocate for meaningful and genuine commitment to diplomacy. Deliberate -- say it.
Delivered the Russian/Ukrainian war.
In the same manner, deliberate diplomacy can end it. It then goes on to talk about, how there will be no expansion of NATO, not 1 inch to the east. That's what Secretary James Baker told the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990.
Other assurances from other US leaders, and others, is British. The German. The French leaders. All through the 1990s. Said, we will not expand NATO. Not one inch.
So what happens?
2007, Russia warns NATO. Says, you cannot put your armed forces on our borders.
Can you imagine if Russian troops were our southern border.
Would we have a problem with that?
Of course, we would.
PAT: Well, look what happened when they put missiles in Cuba.
GLENN: In Cuba. Absolutely. Absolutely.
So they urge us to see what Russia. If Russia was doing this to us. How would we react?
Again, even as the Cold War ended, US diplomats, generals, and politicians were warning of the dangers of expanding NATO to Russia's borders.
And of maliciously interfering with Russia's fear of influence.
They say, this is a policy error of historic proportions.
They were now -- they have been talking about expansion of Ukrainian membership, into NATO.
This whole ad, a full page says, we have got to stop and turn around.
So far, the US has sent 30 billion dollars' worth of military gear and weapons to Ukraine, with total aid to Ukraine, exceeding 100 billion.
War, it's been said, is a racket. And one that is highly profitable for a select few.
I'm telling you, what we were just talking about with the Bidens.
This kickback. There are kickbacks coming some place.
I don't know if it's coming to Biden. But it is coming some place.
By the way, Comer had to leave.
Representative Comer had to leave. He was called off so he couldn't finish the interview. But I hope to have him back to do some more. It was good to hear from him, on all of these things.
So why is the New York Times not rolling this out everywhere.
Why is it this opinion is not popular?
I mean, it is so bizarre, how the Democrats have become the hawks, and the Republicans are the ones going, wait.
Now, not all Republicans.
Lindsey Graham and some of the others are just like, let's light it up.
No, let's not light it up
What do you say? Really bad. Bad precedent.
PAT: Yeah. And I don't understand how the two parties, again, on another issue, have completely flip-flopped.
It's just really amazing to see. It's incredible.
GLENN: I know. And on this one. This one is so lefty. No more wars. No more wars.
Not in my name. All of that. All of that.
PAT: Blood for oil. All of that stuff that they love to chant. And now, it's just like, all right.
We're in this until the end. We're in this forever, if that's what it takes.
GLENN: Yeah. He said, over the weekend, Vladimir Putin is not going to break our resolve.
I don't think Americans won't have resolve on this. Americans don't want this.
We want to help the Ukrainian people. And we don't like Russia.
But we don't have resolve on this. We don't want nuclear winter because of it.
We don't want to be in World War III.
I think that's really clear.
This is amazing. How this administration. How this Deep State.
How, I don't know what it is. Is just sucking us into this war.
Biden said over the weekend. He received, quote, flat assurance. That Ukraine would not use F-16s to enter Russia.
So we might be sending them, and he also announced another $375 million, in military assistance.
PAT: Plus, they found another 3 billion.
Did you see that too?
They just discovered, through some sort of accounting error, that there's 3 billion more in aid, that we were supposed to send, that we haven't sent.
So now we're going to.
GLENN: Where did I put that --
PAT: I just had it.
GLENN: Gosh, darn it.
PAT: Oh, yeah. There it is.
It's in my other wallet.
GLENN: Doesn't it -- doesn't it piss you off?
PAT: It just doesn't end.
GLENN: It pisses me off so much, that all of our money, that we pay in taxes.
All of us could use more money right now.
GLENN: And it's wasted. It's wasted.
PAT: Yeah. Well, this is a money-laundering scheme. They're sending it to Ukraine. It's being laundered. Sent back to somebody here.
GLENN: I think it is. Well, not just here too.
I think this is being said. You can change the world with $3 billion. You can change the world with $3 billion.
PAT: Oh, yeah. But I think the Bidens are getting their share. I'm sure they are.
GLENN: Well, I suspect they are.
PAT: I strongly suspect.
So congratulations on that.