RADIO

19 leftist LIES our new DISINFORMATION BOARD could’ve caught

The Department of Homeland Security announced on Wednesday the formation of a new ‘Disinformation Governance Board.’ Its goal will be to end the spread of disinformation that affects ‘public trust in our democratic institutions,’ the department announced. But it's too bad this 'disinformation board' wasn’t available a few years ago — or even a few months ago, Glenn says. That way, it could've caught all the leftist LIES our nation has had to endure…lies like Black Lives Matter's 'peaceful' protests, Trump collusion with Russia, and Brett Kavanaugh's high school past...right?!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So, Stu, my goodness. How excited were you, when you heard Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas talk about the new DHS disinformation governance board?

STU: Oh, I was thrilled. I was thrilled.

Any time I hear anything from Mayorkas, my favorite Greek yogurt.

GLENN: Yeah. I eat that too.

STU: Yeah, it's really good. Yeah, every time. It's a little chunky.

But lots of protein. Very healthy.

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

STU: Everything he does is good for you.

GLENN: Yeah. No misinformation there.

STU: No. And this is what we've always needed. People get confused at times. I don't know if you've noticed this in our history. A disagreement on different topics.

What is true? What isn't? And what's the best approach.

GLENN: And the government should decide this.

STU: So we don't have to have all these arguments.

GLENN: Amen, brother. Amen.

So, you know, we wouldn't have had this problem, if Lincoln just would have had a disinformation board.

STU: Right.

GLENN: He could have just -- he could have just arrested and silenced or killed all those people that was like saying all these untruths about slavery.

STU: Right. Obviously, I think if there was a disinformation board back in the day. They would have been saying that slavery was good. And Lincoln was wrong. Forget about that for a second. Talk about how they've now evolved.

GLENN: No. Lincoln didn't really care about the slaves.

STU: No. Right. Right.

GLENN: So I'm really glad. Because if we had this disinformation board. They're going to be able to stop things like the Russian collusion story. That went on for four years. If we would have the Department of Homeland Security. They would have said, no. No, guys. That's not true. In fact, the FBI has been altering documents and lying to the FISA court. You know, the secret court. They've been lying to them. So that's not true. So don't report that. So that would have been good. Or the Steele dossier. And golden shower. And all of that. They would have said, no, no, no. The DHS has just come out, and Steele has been discredited by the FBI. And he's making all this stuff up. And here's the evidence of it. Or like the, Donald Trump has seven hours missing on January 6th, on his phone logs. Could have added that. Or the laptop was not real. Or it was not real. Then it was stolen, so we can't report on it, because it was stolen. Which none of that was true. Then it was a Russian op. And that wasn't true. And now it's all about Hunter. And has nothing to do with Joe. Which is not true now.

So the DHS could stop that. You know, wouldn't that be great?

Oh, man. If they could have been around when the disinformation of, if you like your health care, you can keep it. Wouldn't that have been great, if the government could have had that disinformation stopped?

STU: It's weird. Because Obama had a version of this, in his campaign. Remember this?

GLENN: No. Uh-uh.

STU: Yeah. They had a disinformation, quick response team.

GLENN: Oh, that's right.

STU: That would step out. And make sure that whatever the lies were like.

GLENN: But see. That wasn't run by the DHS.

STU: Yeah. You have to be in the government.

GLENN: That might have stopped Ben Rhodes from lying about the Iran Deal. And getting it done. And then coming out and saying, yeah, I lied about that Iran thing, to be able to get that thing done. Or the lies about the mask. That the government was proud of lying about it.

I mean, it was a noble lie. It was a noble lie. Now, I don't know if the DHS will stop noble lies.

STU: I don't know if they will do that.

GLENN: There's a difference. Or the voting rights bill. Man, wouldn't it be great, if the DHS would have had this disinformation service. And they could have stopped all the people in the government and the press, saying that the voting rights bill is to stop black people from voting? Wouldn't that have been great. We need this so bad. We do. Or the Wuhan lab, that that leaked. It could absolutely, definitely, could not -- don't even talk about it. Not a possibility.

STU: Not a possibility. Impossible. And that comes -- you know that one is definitely true. Because it came from the people who did it. That's how you know. They said they didn't do it. And they were the ones who had to have done it. It's when you ask -- you ask O.J. Simpson. A book saying, if he did it --

GLENN: He outlined.

STU: But he says, he didn't do it. He's the expert. He was there.

GLENN: Were you there? He was there. Or in his case, not there.

STU: In his specific case, not there.

GLENN: And with the Wuhan lab, they were there or not there. So they would know.

STU: Find the expert. Who is the expert on O.J. Simpson murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman? O.J. Simpson.

GLENN: Oh, man. Imagine the DHS, if they could have stopped -- remember the Obama cages that they didn't report on, said they didn't exist? But did, you know, at the border. And then they said that Trump built those cages. And we have cages now, and they say those are not cages. Imagine if we could stop the misinformation there. Or the horsewhipping guys. That would have been a good one to stop. Or Brett Kavanaugh is a rapist. Oh, can you imagine if they could have stopped that disinformation?

Or the new one now, I like this. The trans care for kids is reversible. Or could we please cut one here. Here's a teacher about being very, very careful about what we teach our kids. Listen to this.

VOICE: Two other trans-identified high school teachers put together a language guide. Our site is called genderinclusivebiology.com. And some things that we come up with a lot, for teaching about cell division or reproduction. A lot of textbooks. A lot of existing teaching say, well, women produce eggs. Males are more likely to be colorblind. The mother carries the fetus for this many months. And some ways we can show our support for trans and non-binary students, just to clean up that language. You can be more accurate and be more inclusive. I would say, it's not women that produce eggs. It's ovaries that produce eggs. That's accurate. That's precise. We're acknowledging that not all women produce eggs, and also not all egg producers are women, for example.

GLENN: Women. Yeah.

VOICE: And we're teaching students, language matters.

STU: You are saying that. I will say, they are teaching students that language matters.

GLENN: Yes, they are. And, you know, not all women produce eggs. Okay. True.

STU: Yeah. That's true.

And what was the other one.

STU: Not all egg producers are women.

GLENN: Are women. We should call the DHS on that one.

GLENN: Yeah. I don't know. A, can you imagine if we had the DHS on the BLM peaceful protests?

STU: That would be --

GLENN: Or the fact that they raised millions and millions of dollars, and then just stole the money?

STU: They bought some nice real estate. I wouldn't say stole --

GLENN: Yeah. You're right. You're right. Imagine having DHS if they were there to say, hey. Hey. Hey. That's not what Trump said about Charlottesville or the Nazis. That would have been. Or the horse dewormer thing, or injecting bleach. Or calling him a white supremacist. And everything he does is hate speech, and trying to -- all of that. That would be wow.

Or inflation and gas it prices, caused by Putin. That would be -- we should get the DHS on that one.

STU: Uh-huh. I'm sure they'll be all over it.

GLENN: Think about that. That's a long list. That was me just five minutes before we went on. I would like to open up the phones today. Today is the day you talk whatever you would like to talk about. I would love to hear if you actually got on your zoning board. Or if you're running for -- I would like to hear some local success stories. If you have any.

You know, give me hope for the love of God. But can you fill out that list? That's a pretty comprehensive list. That should be five minutes.

STU: Oh, yeah, it's not full. But you have a lot on there for five minutes.

GLENN: For five minutes. So DHS yesterday, in case you haven't heard, has come out and said that they have a disinformation Homeland Security governance board.

And there really -- they're very concerned about the minority communities. Very concerned about the minority communities.

And so -- because that's really where the disinformation is happening. Don't you think, Stu? Spanish language, disinformation campaigns.

I got to tell you, I'm in these secret G.O.P. meetings all the time.

STU: Right. Right.

GLENN: The star chamber. And we talk about it all the time. But we speak in Angolan. Because nobody speaks that on the left. So it's the ultimate white language. And anyway, we're speaking in Angolan, and we have been plotting to just take over -- you know, continue our takeover of the Spanish language channels. You know, Univision. It's ours. It's ours. We've done this for a long time.

STU: Really? It doesn't seem like it's --

GLENN: That's our disinformation campaign. So, anyway, they're concerned about that. They're concerned about disinformation about the border. And about Russia.

Okay? They're very concerned about those two things. Oh. And -- and inflation.

So they're going to be looked into those -- aren't those things that maybe everybody is going to be talking about during the election?

I'm just saying. By the way, Nina Jankowicz is going to be the -- the head of the disinformation center for the DHS.

And she's great. Well, she was the one who said, hey. This laptop thing, that's Russian disinformation. So she knows it.

She's good.

STU: Yeah. Didn't she call it a Trump product?

GLENN: Yeah. A Trump product. A Trump product. You know, the other thing I really like about her. And I'll get into this later, if you really want to. But she's on the board of trustees for the Eurasia Foundation, and is a global fellow.

I'm not going to need to say anymore than this.

She's also a global fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center. So, I mean, what else could you ask for?

STU: That is so perfect! I can't even -- as if they designed the story for us.

GLENN: Yep! Yep!

Okay. So there you have it, gang. Welcome to it. We're going to make sure that you get the right information. Until DHS, you know, shuts everybody down.

But it will be Elon Musk that's responsible for it.

Are Scientists Harvesting Human Embryos to Power Supercomputers?!
RADIO

Are Scientists Harvesting Human Embryos to Power Supercomputers?!

In a story straight out of The Matrix or Terminator, environmentalist scientists are harvesting human stem cells to build "batteries" for A.I. supercomputers. But what makes this even more terrifying is how it works: The most sought-after source of the stem cells for these "organoids" is embryos, and they only last about 100 days until they die. So, are we harvesting God's creation to power man's "creation?" Blaze Media editor-at-large James Poulos joins Glenn to explain the whole story ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: He is TheBlaze media editor at-large.

And TheBlaze TV host of Zero Hour. He's also the founder and editorial director of Return, which is a new vertical on TheBlaze.com.

We have several different things that we're working on. And one of them is return, just like on your keyboard, when you hit return.

It's all about tech.

He wrote a story that is one of the more disturbing, dystopian stories. And we've done our homework on this, to some degree.

Enough to go, oh, no. This is actually in practice, and being used by the University of Michigan, right now.

This is not some, you know, some day. And it's a little like the Matrix.

Environmentalists are worried about, how do we make enough power to be able to power AI?

Well, they have found a way. Called organoids.

Wait until you hear this.

James is with us now. Hello, James.

JAMES: Hey, Glenn. How are you?

GLENN: Well, I was better before I read your story on organoids. Yeah, I know.

This is bizarre and terrifying.

JAMES: Yeah. It's really disturbing. And it's been around for a little while. But it's really starting to kick into gear.

As you said, you know, AI consumes a ton of electricity. A lot of energy. You know, environmentalists have always hated nuclear power for pretty perverse reasons, I think.

So they're so afraid of using nuclear power, that what would invoke now is turning to us.

To be the batteries. Just take the stem cells out of embryos. Out of the labs. Sometimes out of tumors.

Turn them into brain cells, basically.

And use those as batteries, to power what they're calling bio processors. They say, it will use about a million times less power than a typical digital processor. And that's a good thing, they say.

You can access them remotely. And this is the new hype. You know, it's from the same folks who brought you the idea of going to carbon zero. Net zero carbon use. They look at human beings as a waste of space. A waste of energy.

And they want to harness that, to run AI that is supposed to be smarter than anyone can understand.

GLENN: So on final sparks website, this is the company that is doing this.

This linked to a daily mail article, that says organoids are tiny, self-organized, three-dimensional tissue cultures made from stem cells.

Stanford's website says stem cells come from two sources. Embryonic stem cells.

And then, you know, that's unused embryos, and they are then donated to science, or adult stem cells.

But those are really limited, and can only generate certain type of cells.

So they also say, final sparks website say, these organoids live for about 100 days.

So are we harvesting embryos? Using them to power a supercomputer for 100 days?

And then killing them, and looking for more embryo stem cells?

JAMES: Well, right.

So if you are uncomfortable as IFD, this is going to drive you nuts. There's an extra category of extra stem cells they've created called induced pluripotent cells. And basically, what you do, you start the embryonic process.

But you arrest it before it gets too far.

And then you harvest the stem cells out of this artificially induced embryonic organism, right? Human organism, and then you create a fork, and you just grow those cells.

You know, sort of the way in the way they grow fake meat cells. You know, it's really akin to cancerous cells, and the way that they grow.

Right. So this is something that is not one and done.

It's not like, well, maybe once upon a time, there was an embryo who had to die for the greater good.

No. This is a perpetual motion machine.

You have to keep harvesting.

GLENN: Yeah, every 100 days.

This is not a hypothetical, by the way.

Final Spark says, the University of Michigan already using this neuroplatform.

And this is -- this is because there's not enough energy, and these -- these organoids, use so much less energy, that if we just harvest these embryos, we can then -- AI can go on and live forever.

And we don't have energy problems.

Good Lord. That's terrifying!

JAMES: Yeah. At a certain point, if we were created in the image of God. How far can you stray from that, before something horrible happens?

None of this is a surprise. Nikola Tesla infamously said, you will live to see manmade horrors beyond your comprehension, and we're getting pretty close.

GLENN: Yeah.

You have -- you now have scientists who don't -- don't necessarily believe in God.

Think that they are creating a God. In AI.

Now, harvesting God's creation to power their new God.

Good Lord, help us.

JAMES: Yeah. Ask if you cross that Rubicon, where you say, we're going to turn these brain cells into cyborgs. Into Frankenstein cells. Then it's not very long before you say, well, gosh.

Why don't we just turn the whole human race into this kind of cyborg entity. You know.

The terminator, at least the machines are stomping around, looking to wipe us out.

These machines look at us more as the solution than the problem. They just suck all our energy out of us.

GLENN: You know, I was reading a book about energy. And how all of this is going.

And it will. I mean, if it's an entity. That needs food. Needs energy.

To live. Just like us. You're trapped in the mountains.

You know, in -- in a snowstorm. And there's 20 of you. And you start dying.

You're going to start eating each other.

You have to survive. And that is what happens.

The same thing, it will eat whatever will give it the energy.

I would rather not train it to eat people. Or anything with -- to do with people.


JAMES: Well, especially when you have nuclear power there.

And to their credit, there are some tech guys out there who are working on advanced forms of nuclear power, clean energy coming out of things that you can do.

Splitting up atoms.

Yeah. There are Rhode Island risks there. But, gosh, if we are going to go down this road to any degree, where we will need significantly more energy, in order to -- you know, whether it's stay ahead of China, or whatever excuse you want to come up with.

Or for just the sake of -- of more human flourishing. Imagine that. Gosh, you have to -- you have to take a look at nuclear, before you start looking at the guy sitting next to you, as your source of energy.

GLENN: I saw a story yesterday, about here in Idaho. That they're shutting down the water on -- because of environmental reasons.

They're shutting down the water for I don't even remember. Half a million acres. Or more. Of farmland here.

They're just going to shut the water off. So all these farmers will lose their farmland. Coincidentally what is also happening, and exactly the same time, is they are opening up cobalt mines in Idaho. And these cobalt mines need tons of water to keep the drills cool and everything else.

And those are for batteries. So it appears, as if the state of Idaho, shafted the farmers. And said, forget about the food.

Transfer the water, to the cobalt mines. So we can have batteries.

That's more important.

And nobody has tied these two together yet.

It -- we're in trouble. We've misplaced our values.

JAMES: It's a big problem. And you know what else is crazy about Idaho, Glenn?

Right now, there's bitcoin mining going on in Idaho. A lot of people started to understand how Bitcoin works.

They're skeptical. But this is something that is still a first rate technology, that ordinary Americans can use, starting right now.

Takes maybe a minute or two to learn how to do it. But you can do it. When the Bitcoin miners take the energy that they need, in order to do what they do.

Legislators get upset. Oh, I don't know. This is using a lot of energy. So they're looking at curbing, the ability of the miners to lose electricity.

Or even charging them more for their electric lease. Meanwhile, when Facebook comes to town in Idaho and they say, hey, we're building a gigantic data center.

It's going to consume tons and tons of energy. The legislators say, well, if you're creating jobs, we will actually give you a tax cut.

This is how messed up our priorities are right now.

GLENN: Wow. I don't know if you saw The Godfather of AI.

But Jeffrey Hinton, he's the guy who left Google, if I remember right.

And he left -- he left Google, because he said, they were going into some unethical things. Is it was becoming a real danger. Do you remember this story?

JAMES: Yeah. That's right.

GLENN: Yeah. And he said he had real fear, at Google. That the -- that AI would fall into the hands of bad actors.

He just did an interview, where he -- he said that he was asked the question here.

If he was in favor of a super intelligent AI destroying humanity, and replacing it with something objectively better in terms of consciousness. He said, I'm actually for it.

But I think I would be wiser for me to say. That I'm against it.

He was then pressed on, and asked him, can you elaborate. And he said, well, people don't like being replaced. Well, yeah. No.

I'm good. He said, it's not -- it's -- it's not clear, that we're the best form of intelligence, that there is.

Obviously, from a person's perspective. Everything relates to people. But it may be that there comes a point, when we see things like humanist, as a racist term.

We're dealing with people, who are very, very smart and very, very clever.

But many of these people are anti-human. And they hide behind the environmentalist thing. To -- to get away with it.

JAMES: It's really diabolical. If you're looking for an intelligence that's higher than human intelligence. That actually doesn't want to kill us, but in fact loves us with a love beyond human comprehension. It's right there, in the form of God the creator.

And if you reject the existence of God, then it's just really looking like, these days only a matter of time, before you reject the existence of human beings too. I know it's not everyone.

I know there's some -- some atheists out there, that think human beings are still good. But it's looking like they're outnumbered.

And they're losing the battle for the soul of the atheist if you will -- these guys, they have really just -- they do hate humanity.

And they think that intelligence is more important than -- than love.

They think the brain is more important than the heart. And, you know, it all sounds interesting, when it's at the level of theory. But when you ask them to develop it out of practice. It doesn't mean replacing humans. It means wiping them out.

GLENN: So which -- which movie do I think is more likely?

I mean, I never thought the Matrix. But the Matrix, you know, batteries. Human batteries. And it creating a utopia. In people's minds.

Or do you see us.

I mean, remember, the beginning of Skynet. And the terminator.

The first line, I think in that movie, is the machines rose from the ashes in the nuclear fire.

And it was AI that had been used by the Pentagon, and the world's war machines.

And then we blew ourselves up.

And AI decided, we were the problem. And started to wipe us out.

Here we are, talking about the absolute unthinkable. World War III.

Which would end in nuclear war.

And wipe almost all life off the planet.

And we're giving the keys to much of our work.

We just had Jack Carr on yesterday.

Where he was talking about -- you know, he said, nobody would tell me exactly.

But if I talk to enough people. They're putting it all together. And they can look at it.

Oh, we're turning the keys over. To our -- of our killing machines.

Over to AI soon.

That -- that is not -- that can't be a good thing. Which -- which movie are we -- are we going towards? It's kind of like, you know, Brave New World. Or 1984.

I think we're 1984.

Are we headed more towards the terminator, or the Matrix?

VOICE: Well, you know, we have lots of sci-fi movies to choose from. I would point toward. We have sci-fi horror films that we can look to. We got movies like Event Horizon.

We have series like Hell Raiser.

Where the bad guys are inter-dimensional demons, who get summoned by human beings and lead them into hell.

We have David Cronenberg.

He has other films, that really show you, that there is that side of technology they can't be makes you sort of -- fills you with child like wonder.

And all these promises of flourishing beyond imagination.

There is a dark side too.

If we pretend the dark side is not there.

That's usually the way we get led astray in the worst possible way.

GLENN: So is there anything that can be done, going back to the first topic of using stem cells from embryos for human brains. Into these organoids.

Is there anything we should be looking towards. Or pushing for?

Or what?

GLENN: Well, I think, number one, we have to ask ourselves serious questions about how enslaved we are going to be, if we are always looking to China.

If we look at China. And say, they're taking over.

We can't beat them, unless we join them.

Or we have to fight fire with fire. If we're constantly comparing ourselves with what China is doing. We will lose touch with who we really are, as Americans, and depending as how things shake out as human beings.

That's point one. I think point two.

Is, yeah. Okay. You want to innovate on energy.

Look to nuclear. This is not some bizarre technology. It's been around for a long time.

Some countries. That the French. The Japanese. They have Fukushima. They have tsunamis all the time. Not a problem in the United States.

There are ways of doing points of energy, that don't involve turning human beings into these sort of Frankenstein cyborgs and using them for energy.

GLENN: James, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

White House Says Embarrassing Videos of Biden are FAKE?!
RADIO

White House Says Embarrassing Videos of Biden are FAKE?!

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean Pierre is very upset about all the "edited videos," "cheapfakes," and "deepfakes" going around of President Biden. These deceptive videos are making people think that President Biden is old and senile, instead of the mentally agile symbol of leadership that he is! And the mainstream media is helping her push this narrative! Well, Glenn and Pat discuss the truth: There are plenty of examples of Joe Biden looking old that are NOT taken out of context. As Glenn has warned, there will come a time when your eyes will deceive you. It may be because of AI deepfakes...or, it could be the fault of government propagandists.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So Jean-Pierre said yesterday she's very upset about the unedited video. I'm sorry. The edited videos that -- the cheap fakes and the deepfakes that are going out.

And confusing Americans about how Joe Biden is handing things mentally. He's as strong as a horse. And probably as much awareness of what he is, as a horse, but that's a different story.

Here she is yesterday, from the White House. Cut two.

VOICE: There's a bunch of videos, that have been edited to make the president appear especially frail, or thinly confused.

I'm wondering if the White House is especially aware of the fact that it appears to be a pattern.

VOICE: Yeah.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop for a second. Listen to that question. Listen to that question.

That question is shaped, that the president is fine, there's no problem with the president.

But are you concerned that there's all of these videos coming out, that make him appear to be incapable of getting off a stage by himself.

Here's their answer.

VOICE: Appears to be a pattern.

VOICE: Yeah. And I think you all have called this. The cheap fakes video.

That's exactly what they are. They are cheap fakes video.

They are done in bad faith. And some of your news organization.

GLENN: She's reading, by the way.

VOICE: Have been very clear. Have stressed that these right-wing -- the white-wing (sic) critics of the president have a credibility problem. Because of the fact-checkers have repeatedly caught them pushing misinformation and disinformation. And so we see this. And this is something coming from your part of the world. Calling them cheap fakes and misinformation.

And I'll quote the Washington Post, what they wrote. They wrote about this.

And they said, how Republicans used misleading videos to attack Biden in a 24-hour period. I think that it tells you everything that we need to know, about how -- how desperate, how desperate Republicans are here.

We're seeing these fakes. These manipulated videos. And it is, again, done in bad faith.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Deep fakes. Deep fakes.

PAT: You know, all I could think of during her spiel here, is you saying, there will come a time when your eyes will deceive you. And this is that time.

They're telling us, we can't believe our very eyes right now. That these aren't real. That they've been edited or manipulated in some way. No!

I mean, taking something out of context means that you've changed what is actually about. Like you're lying about what they're saying. You're lying about what happened.

GLENN: Well, they're saying that this take, that you don't understand. That there was another parachuter, off behind Joe Biden.

We saw that. They showed that.

PAT: We talked about that.

GLENN: Correct.

PAT: And he did warned off. And he did say something to the guy.

He did.

GLENN: Right. Right. But still...

Everyone else was looking the other way.

PAT: Yes. Right.

GLENN: And it was so uncomfortable for the people there. You saw Macron look at him, like, oh, jeez.

Here he goes, and then Maloney saw it. And she walked across all of the world leaders to grab him and turn him around.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: So, I mean, were they part of this -- this Deepfake? Were they part of it, saying, we were trying to make him look really old and decrepit? And not carry on a single thought at a time.

No. No.

There's no fake there. That -- he might have had his own intention of, you know -- I need my pudding.

And maybe that soldier is bringing that to me.

I don't know what his intention was. But everybody there. Viewed it the same way, the rest of the country did.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: It's incredible.

From the people who brought us the video of George Bush, trying to open that door and not be able to do it.

Exposing Target’s Internal MELTDOWN After Pride Month Backlash
RADIO

Exposing Target’s Internal MELTDOWN After Pride Month Backlash

Glenn Beck reveals leaked internal messages between the members of Target’s “Pride + Business Council” that took place during last year's boycott. Target went off the rails last Pride Month and offered “tuck-friendly” bathing suits, chest binders, and transgender-themed merchandise for children. Americans responded with a boycott that sent Target running back into the closet. Thanks to an employee from Target corporate who wished to stay anonymous, Glenn exposes for the first time ever the radical response of Target employees, including a witch hunt that ensued when certain employees defended Target’s rollback of controversial LGBTQ+ merchandise as a reasonable business move. In the end, Target leadership received a list of demands from employees that included a call for Target to bring back the merchandise that started the controversy in the first place. Despite the internal pressure, Target toned down its Pride collection this year. Should reasonable Americans take the win, or is there yet another battle for the culture just around the corner?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So you're the first to hear this exclusive leak, that we received from a source inside Target headquarters who thought the public needed to know how some of Target's employees responded to last year's boycott. First, let me speak directly to the people that made all of this possible.

Women, I know it was hard to boycott Target.

We were there. We -- we as husbands, and men saw you. Like you weren't busy enough.

We saw you drive past that bright red sign. And go from store to store, to be able to boycott. With us. With Bud Light.

I mean, it's beer.

We will just reach in the fridge for another beer. Victory. Real victory is yours with Target. But it's Pride month again.

Which means, it's been one year since Target rolled out a collection of Pride onesies, tuck-friendly bathing suits, chest binders for girls, and apparel made by some transgender Satan apologist. Not today, Jesus. Says Satan.

This year, prayed month, Target has a much more toned down collection. Like, for instance, let me show you their new Pride Month charcuterie board.

That says, it's giving charcuterie. Has no rainbows or Pride symbols on it at all. It's just a wooden board.

I guess maybe Target thinks charcuterie is gay enough on its own. I'm not really sure, but it's a tame collection of rainbow wine bottles and clothes and nothing like last year.

Also, unlike last year. There was nothing for kids. So victory.

Now, some Target locations won't have any Pride merchandise this year. It will only be sold online in the stores. Where Target says, they've seen historically the strongest sales demand.

Okay. That makes sense as a business. To be clear, Target, I don't think is doing this because corporate had some road to Damascus moment, and decided, you know what, we should depoliticize this company and maybe sell things people want.

Remember, this is the same company, that in 2016, when most didn't even know, you know, that there were 96 genders.

They said, put a statement out that said, we welcome. I'm quoting. Transgender team members and guests. To use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity.

Well, that make me comfortable when my kids want to go and try something out. Their 2023 sustainability and governance report. This Target is one of them that does ESG on their own. Says, their goal is to take urgent action. To combat climate change and its impacts.

The Target website says, Target is an inclusive and antiracist organization. That's key.

It's not non-racist. It has to be. You have to have a little racism to combat racism, you see.

So the way I see it. There's only one reason Target has pulled back on their Pride collection.

And that is you. But now Target is a really, really tricky position. And that's because, on one hand, they can't afford another boycott. The New York Post reported that after last year's boycott, Target lost ten billion dollars in market valuation, in ten days.

That's a lot. On the other hand, they have created a brand around being basically woke. And just like Disney, the inmates are now in charge of the asylum. And employees at Target, many are very woke and militant. Now, to make matters really complicated, that radical staff they have to deal with, was not happy. Last year.

Last year, our team was given exclusive access to internal messages, that took place on Target's slack chapel for their pride plus business council.

We found culture wars that are taking place, because Target is taking a stand and saying, wait. We're going to slow down on this.

And the people were not just boycotting.

Internally, the employees started a little revolt.

And let me show you what we were sent and found.

Last year, when you were deciding to boycott Target for their choice to sell chest binders to children.

Paneled underwear.

Target hosted a town hall to discuss the move to pull back on some of their more controversial merchandise.

The people of the pride plus business council, were not pleased inside of Target.

Up said, quote.

It feels like leadership wants to keep support for LGBTQ causes on the down low. Like they want to be able to point it out to people. You know, make a fuss.

But they don't want to advertise it for people who might disagree. Senior management for philanthropic operations agreed, saying, quote, reasoning with the down low piece for real!

See, what they're saying is, Target while -- while we were saying Target went too far.

The employees were upset, that they hadn't gone far enough.

And now they were pulling back. One employee said, see. We need to cater to the bigots to get our sales up.

Okay. But it wasn't just the town hall announcement that started the internal firestorm at Target. It was the comments in the community chat, while it happened. The leaked messages were given to us, in backward order.

So as we went through them, we saw the Pride-plus council's reaction to the comments, before we saw the comments, themselves.

Remember, we weren't given access to the actual conversation, just the comments.

So we don't know what was said, by the Target leadership during the meeting.

But we were given snapshots. And screen shots of what happened in the chat.

So we don't know what they said, at the leadership of Target.

But it must have been pretty horrible.

Based on just the reactions. The comments must have been awful. From Target leadership.

Here are a few examples of what the chat said, during it.

How the Pride Plus business council was reacting. JPG 22, here. I've been through a lot in my life. I have PTSD to show for it.

And I have to say, that was the most gaslighty dystopian thing I ever witnessed in a while. Here's another one: JPG 24.

We need to protect ourselves. There are consequences for hateful statements and displays.

So now, what did Target say that has made their employees say, we have to protect ourselves from these hateful statements and displays?

Number 27.

A few more. I'm still in shock, and disgusted.

I'm sure a lot of people are examining, whether they want to continue to be a team member after all of this.

Kind of hard to get back to work after that one, huh?

So at this point, we're assuming something truly terrible had happened in that community chat.

The acronym HR was repeated over and over again in the chat.

And people were talking about filing ethics complaints.

One woman put the name and email of an intern, who she said was advocating for discrimination.

Wow! Another intern was exposed for basically putting thumbs down on a comment.

Which promoted one of the lead buyers for Target's pride collection to say, each person should be submitted to ethics.

An intern who gave a thumb's down on a comment, should be submitted to ethics.

So what horrible things were these people saying, to elicit such an extreme reaction.

Surely, they had to be sexist, racist tirades, that started this chaos.

Well, here's what we found. And you may want to sit down for this one. Because it's pretty darn shocking.

Here's one of the comments, that we found.

A woman who was a Christian. Hang on just a second.

That wrote this.

I'm a Christian. And I don't support violence against guests or team members.

Okay. I also don't hate people who view differently than myself.

However, for some to say my Biblical views are disgusting, that's not inclusive.

Wow! Now, it gets worse.

The people in the chat need to look at past year's Pride assortment. The backlash this year has been specific to gender-plus children, to imply leadership is now bowing down to bigots is highly offensive.

Then this: A lead designer, who had been at Target for 25 years, defended the people, who felt a little weird about Target partnering with a designer, who currently produces products that say, Satan respects pronouns.

This lead designer at Target said, so someone who doesn't think a partnership with an artist who glorifies Satan in their products is a bigot? Would Target partner with a similar individual who had a racist-themed product, or would you have the same feeling towards those partnerships?

Maybe quit calling names, because their beliefs are different than yours. The most inflammatory comment that we could find was made by a woman who started working at Target in the early 2000s.

She said, quote, not all people agree that giving hormones to kids, which only provides long-term health issues is a good thing. So inclusivity, means ignoring 95 percent of the population? To make sure 5 percent are able to keep grooming kids, end quote?

Read about some of the stories. I'm still quoting now.

Of the young girls who have had a mastectomy at 13. And are now in their 20s. And have horrible health issues. From the hormones that they've taken. I don't care what an adult does.

But kids should be left alone.

Is that unreasonable?

My favorite comment was this, with JPG 45. Our leadership team has a difficult decision to make.
They answer to something called shareholders.

We're also responsible for thousands of team member jobs. Please, don't attack your leadership or your fellow team members when you don't know their heart.

We are a business, and this is capitalism. Good day now. End quote.

Well, Target needed to send out a company-wide letters addressing the comments before the end of the day. And here's what they said.

Several comments made during the town hall, violated Target's policies. Those incidents are being addressed directly. Target does not tolerate discrimination or hate speech of any kind.

Wait. The ones who just said don't attack the leadership?

That that's hate speech? That wasn't enough for some of the members of the Pride Plus business council.

The idea was floated in their chat. On the day of their town hall.

That they needed more organized response.

That response came about a month later, in the form of a list of demands, sent to target leadership. Which we were also given access. Exclusive access to.

In the memo, they said, they wanted from Target, quote, an acknowledgment of harm. A sincere apology.

And a clear statement of unwavering support for the LGBTQ+ community.

They wrote, we have always regarded Target as an inclusive and progressive company. However, these recent events have called into question, the company's commitment to these values.

They said, the removal of some of the Pride collection was disappointing and distressing. So fort company to atone, they needed Target to acknowledge in writing, the harm done to the LGBTQ+ community, explicitly the trans and nonbinary -- nonbinary members of the community. Forge partnerships with prominent LGBTQ advocacy groups and immediately reinstate the Pride collection in full, which we know didn't happen.

Donate to LGBTQ causes and implement sensitivity training for employees and cease all contributions to politicians and organizations that do not support the LGBTQ community.

This is so crazy. Because here is a company, that supports LGBTQ. Way beyond what other companies do.

And they're not woke enough. Even after all that pressure from within the company. And all the pressure outside the company, from people like Governor Newsom accusing Target CEO of selling out the LGBTQ+ community to extremists.

We're the extremists. Target still toned down its Pride collection this year, and they did it because of you. This is a testament of what you can do, when we come together, which brings me to the point of this whole story.

What is this story really all about?

Because I'm not showing you all about this stuff?

You know, saying that Target has issues.

We know that already.

It's why you staged a boycott.

What is this story really all about?

Okay. So I wanted to give you this exclusive story today, on Target. Because I want you to see a couple of things here. First of all, we do have the power to make a difference.

We have more power than you think you do.

That's why they need to shut people up, using fear, okay?

The second thing is, is a little bit of hope.

And sadness as well.

Wokeness will always destroy itself.

This is -- it's like the plant in little shop of horror. You give it a little bit of blood, and it will eventually eat you.

And that's what's happening to companies like Target. They created a monster, and they planted it inside their own company. And it's eating them alive.

It's as if all of Target's virtue signaling came to life in the form some of their employees. And now it's the battle to the death. It's the same in higher education. There are those professors who have been teaching revolutionary theories for years. But now have been run out by revolutionaries they created. Same thing in the Democratic Party.

The new generation of progressives is threatening the Democratic establishment, who used to be the radicals, for not being radical enough.

Wokeness always eats its own. And it's because the entire ideology is fueled by deconstruction.

And critical theories that rage against the hierarchy. Or the debate. And do you know whams when you're in a movement for a while?

You, the radical, become the establishment. If you climb your way to the top of the woke ladder, you'll find yourself on the wrong side of the movement. And the new revolutionaries always destroy the old ones. The ending of the story for places like Target and Disney is inevitable.

And I think most of us understand that innately, which is why we watch these stories unfold like it's the end of the Daytona 500. We know someone is going to crash. It's just a matter of time. So what do we do?

Do we sit back, point and laugh?

No. That would be tempting. And fun. A little bit.

But not useful. Because in the short-term.

Whatever crash is coming. Is going to affect all of us.

There are plenty of sane people. Normal people. That work at Target.

Hike the ones that we saw, trying to be reasonable in their community chat.

All of us will be caught in the crossfire of these woke institutions as they implode.

We just need to be ready to fill the vacuum. That it's going to create.

In the long-term, we have to focus on creating an alternative. Business. Movie. Media.

Everything.

That's what we need. Alternatives. Kind, gracious. Decent. Alternatives.

You build it. They destroy. But you build. You restore.

Wokeness is a destructive force.

We just have to hold on to our values. And be ready to rebuild.

Did Obama REALLY Have to Lead a Senile Biden Off Stage?
RADIO

Did Obama REALLY Have to Lead a Senile Biden Off Stage?

The White House now insists that it’s “disinformation” to say that President Biden wandered away from G7 leaders while watching parachutists. He wasn’t lost in his own senile world! He was just greeting another parachutist…and had to be dragged back to the rest of the group. Well, over the weekend, Biden allegedly had a similar moment when former president Barack Obama had to allegedly lead him off stage at a massive fundraiser for his campaign. So, what’s the truth? Glenn and Pat break it down. Plus, they also discuss the upcoming first Trump/Biden debate of the 2024 election: What are Trump’s real odds of winning? Will the White House juice up Biden? And why are they holding it before the parties’ presidential conventions?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Remember the video of Joe Biden, you know, kind of wanderings off, and Prime Minister Maloney, going over and grabbing him and bringing him back in a very graceful way.

The White House has now come out and said, this is disinformation.

And there are stories everywhere about this. On how this is disinformation.

He was looking at some of the other parachutists, and he just wanted to go over and salute them and congratulate them. Maybe it's true. Maybe it's not true.

But it certainly is true, that he is not looking presidential. He is not paying attention. He is in his own little world.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: But they notice that they say, this is disinformation.

They say that to discredit anyone. Now, let me take it a step further. Over the weekend, there was a -- there was a fundraiser in California. In Los Angeles.

PAT: Huge.

GLENN: Yeah. Huge. And I think $50 million. Something like that. Jimmy Kimmel hosted it and Barack Obama was there with Joe Biden.

PAT: George Clooney. Julia Roberts. A bunch of stars. Yeah.

GLENN: At the end, Joe Biden is standing there with his hands kind of clenched a couple of times. But his hands -- and he was in that frozen lip sort of look. And when it comes time to leave the stage, Obama just reaches over and grabs Biden by the wrist and leads him off the stage. And it looks horrible, absolutely horrible. We can't show that video today, because it's something that all of us in the media are experiencing right now. Lawfare. We are being sued and everybody in our position are being sued if we play any clip. And, you know, it's weird. We don't get in trouble for playing clips that, you know, are neutral. Or don't have anything to do with anything, but, you know, Joe Biden. And the left.

We can't play them. And they're -- they're charging now. Like that clip is $600 for one -- one play. One play.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And I don't even know if that includes on the internet and replays and everything else.

So they're making it impossible, for to us show you clips, of things that happened.

PAT: That are all over the internet, by the way. They're all over -- we just can't talk about them. We can't do it.

I mean, we can talk about it. But we can't show it. The problem makes it worse, right?

GLENN: I think it does. I was just going to say that. I think it makes it much worse.

If I describe to you, Joe Biden on the stage, and he's in that pose. And he's just stiff, and his hands are clenched.

And Obama grabs him by the arm. Your imagination might make that worse, than it actually is.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You might watch that and go, well, it's not that bad. But if we can't play it, you don't get to decide. And that's the point.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You don't get to decide.

PAT: But Obama definitely grabs him by the wrist and starts leading him out, and then he smoothly kind of makes it like, oh, this is my good buddy, and puts him arm around him. And then he just pushes him off the stage. He just guides him the whole way.

GLENN: The whole time. The whole time.

PAT: And never -- never removes his arm from -- from Joe Biden's back.

It's amazing to watch. And I don't know how they explain that away. I'm sure they will just say, oh, they are just very close.

GLENN: Yeah. Barack does not like Joe Biden.

PAT: No. Not in a minute.

GLENN: There's something else. Is the debate on Thursday or Friday of this week?

PAT: It's a week from Thursday.

GLENN: A week from Thursday. I am reading so much that Donald Trump is just going to cream him and everything else.

I -- I would be very careful with your predictions on this. First of all, it -- it will higher expectations. So everybody will expect him to just make a clean sweep. And if he doesn't, then it looks like a loss for Donald Trump.

So be careful on the way you're being used.

PAT: Yeah. True.

GLENN: To talk about this.

And the other thing is, and we will find this out. Well, we won't. But our kids and grandkids will find out. I'm convinced that they juice him.

PAT: Oh, for sure. Just like they did for the State of the Union Address.

GLENN: Well, we don't know that for sure, but we speculate.

PAT: Yes. Yes.

GLENN: He comes out, and he is a different man entirely.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And, you know, they did this for JFK, and everything else.

And we didn't know about it, for 20 years. But, you know, just like Elvis and everybody else.

You have to perform. Let's get him to performance level, and they juice him up. And so he will be clear. I think he will actually do well. He will be clear. Donald Trump could also look like a bully, to this sweet little old man.

I mean, honestly

PAT: It's possible.

GLENN: You have no idea, how this thing is going to play out. No idea.

The question we should be asking is: Why are they doing it, before either of them are officially the candidate of their party?

PAT: Is your thought on that, that they could make a change if they decide to.

GLENN: I have no thought on it.

I have no thought on it. Other than, we're probably not going to get a debate before the election. And, you know, there's a million ways you can go. You know, if he doesn't do well. They can change him.

You know, if he gets worse in the next six months. They know what they're dealing with now.

But what will he be like in November? Look how fast this guy is deteriorating. So maybe it's that. I don't know.

But in my lifetime, Pat. I don't think I've ever seen a debate between the two candidates. In a presidential debate, before the two conventions.

PAT: No. I don't think it's happened. I think this is the earliest ever.

GLENN: Right. Right. So what is that all about?

Why is that happening?

PAT: It might be. Yeah. I think like you said. It could be a number of things.

But one of the things that I think is pretty obvious.

Is that if he performs badly. You have meant of time to recover from that. If this happens right before. Right before the election, and he performs terribly, like we expect him to.

Or so many of us do.

Then that hurts him.

But if it's six months before, you forget.

GLENN: Right. And if he does really, really well, like he did in the State of the Union.

I mean, I thought it was a horrible speech. And I disagreed with almost he went he ever said.

PAT: But perform better than I thought he would.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. He performed like he was there.

And if he performs like he is there, then they have that to go to all the time. Over and over again. No matter what he's like. You know. Because you cannot have. You can't have the performance of the State of the Union. And the performance in the rest of his life. You know, you just -- it doesn't -- they're juicing him with something. Something is happening.

To get him to that state. And I think he will be in that state.

Which everybody will say. Because they're expecting such a poor performance of him.

Oh, look. He's not as bad as everybody says.