RADIO

5 war possibilities for China, Taiwan, & U.S. involvement

China seems to be on the offensive, thanks to Nancy Pelosi’s pre-announced trip to Taiwan. Glenn and Jason Buttrill, chief researcher for The Glenn Beck Program, war-game five possible scenarios between the two Asian nations. They discuss whether or not the U.S. is ‘obligated’ to back Taiwan, and what America’s foreign policy strategy has been regarding this conflict for decades. Either way, Glenn says, the world continues to destabilize and NOW is the time to pray for our country.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I'm 18 years old. I'm working at WPGC in Washington, DC. And I can see the light on top of the Washington monument. So I'm at ground zero. Ronald Reagan is in office. And there's something -- I don't remember what it was. But a confrontation with the Soviet Union. And it was really serious. And I remember keeping the door to the teletype in my studio open. Teletype is how we used to get the news. And it had bells on it. And a ten-bell event would be nuclear war. And I kept that propped open, so I could hear those bells and count the bells. And we got as high as I think six bells. And I would count them. Because I knew. And I thought, I'm at ground zero. This could be over in ten minutes. I haven't felt that way, really until this administration. You know, even after September 11th, I remember feeling on September 11th. Boy, I don't know what they're going to do. But it wasn't a fear of nuclear war or all out war, over the whole world. We're approaching that kind of -- of place. We now have -- do we have the live footage? This is -- they're tracking Nancy Pelosi's plane. We can show it to you. She's at about 10,000 feet. Headed towards Taiwan. She has avoided the restricted airspace over the South China Sea. However, China has just closed the airspace above the Taiwan strait. And they are -- they're at least flexing their muscles. If you look at what China is sending out, online. You are seeing military being moved. You have the aircraft carriers from China, moving out of their home ports. And headed towards Taiwan. I don't know what's going to happen. We have a guy who actually is, I mean, somewhat of kind of an expert on this area. Working for us. He's our chief researcher. And head writer for the Glenn Beck Program. Jason Buttrill. Hello, Jason. How are you?

JASON: Hey, Glenn. Doing good.

GLENN: So, Jason, help me out on -- how serious is this, with China, do you think?

JASON: I think it's very serious. Especially considering the symbolic meaning of Taiwan. Taiwan is very, very symbolic to the Chinese/Communist Party. This has been an issue since, you know, the communists took over, really. So this is probably one of the most crazy, ambiguous treaties we've ever had. The Taiwan relations act. The most ambiguous thing ever. Which makes Kirby's remarks yesterday, kind of odd to come out and say, we don't support independents so publicly. I mean, I've read the Taiwan relations act, cover to cover. The ambiguity. Just saying it's ambiguous is even an understatement. It's the equivalent of one of the most confusing Christopher Nolan movies. Take Inception. Take Interstellar. Take Tenants. And then have 30 different people try to describe what it actually means. I actually think it -- that's basically what we're talking about here.

GLENN: So this is -- Taiwan and China are at war with each other. It's a civil war. And it happened in the 1950s. So this has been going back and forth from the 1950s. But it is -- it's coming to a head, and that's because as China rises in power, they think the odds are that they can take the United States of America. I don't think that's possible yet. But I think we're maybe five years. Two to five years away from they believe actually being able to take Taiwan. And call our bluff. Or just fight the war. You think that's accurate?

JASON: No. Absolutely. China sees Taiwan like they see Hong Kong. When they made the deal with Hong Kong. They say, oh, China has no right to do this. It is supposed to be two systems in one country. Yeah, but it was in that agreement, that China would one day take control, and it would be one system. People usually leave that part out. They just decided to accelerate their plans. They see Taiwan as one China. And they believe it's rightfully theirs. And their plan is to always take it. They just don't have the military capabilities. Now, moving towards what we're seeing now. The thing that would always tip us off. And the in Taiwan relations act. We said, if you try to coerce militarily, to try to change Taiwan and take it. We will respond. And President Reagan, I believe in 1980, and 1982. Reassured after the 1972 Taiwan act. Reassured, hey. We're still giving you weapons. We're still coming to your definition. So this is a very, very old agreement that they had. And, yes, we will go and respond. But the thing that's always kept the things kind of open. And that we can see what's going on in the future. Is that it would take a tremendous Chinese military buildup, to be put in place, before we would -- the actual action. We would see it, the buildup. We would go and respond to it. What Pelosi has done. And let's put this into context. The Speaker of the House has just undermined her presidents -- in the same party. His foreign the policy. She's taken it on herself, to manipulate foreign policy. It's absolutely unprecedented. She has no right to do this. It's not under the duties of the Speaker of the House. But her actions are allowing this military buildup to happen. It's accelerating an already accelerated plan, that we've seen with China and Hong Kong.

GLENN: I tell you, it is truly frightening. And, by the way, the reason why Taiwan is important to the United States. Is if Taiwan falls, we then are pretty much out of Asia. The next country to fall would be New Zealand and Australia. And China would just overrun all of that hemisphere. And between Russia and China -- you know, that would be a very difficult match for us to even stand shoulder to shoulder with. Okay. So let me give you a couple of scenarios. And I want to hear what you think are the best scenarios. These are five different scenarios that have been put together by a Taiwanese based researcher. So the first one, minimalist approach. The people's army occupies Jemen or Matsu (phonetic) islands, as well as Taiwan's islands in the South China Sea. Maybe even the (inaudible) islands. They declare part or all of the Taiwan Strait, a no-go zone. They just did that. And they -- give it a no-go zone to all military shipping. This would be fairly easy, et cetera, et cetera. And it would not overcommit them. It would just be a step up. Scenario number two. Hybrid warfare. Some sort of partial naval and aerial blockade of Taiwan, intended to interfere with the economy.

Combined with stepped up harassments, such as direct flyovers, which they did last night while we were all sleeping. Incursions into maritime space, by China's military. They might also have cyber attacks, which they just did, about two hours before Pelosi's plane was taking off. Scenario number three. A serious attack, but no invasion. This would involve air and sea warfare. No boots on the ground. Full airline and Naval blockade. Protracted set of naval and aerial battles, designed to degrade Taiwan's military, combined with ballistic missile attacks on military targets. Scenario number four. A real, actual invasion. Scenario number five. Short of a nuclear attack, would be the worst case. Full air and sea blockade. Massive ballistic missile attacks on military targets. Cyber attack. Aggressive naval and ariel attacks. And boots on the ground. I don't think that one is even possible right now. But maybe it is. Which one -- or do you have another scenario that you think is more likely to come from this?

JASON: So to point out, I think every single one of those scenarios, would break the Taiwan Relations Act, which would require an American response. So if they're thinking about doing any of those, they're ready for war. Just really quick, if I could remember all of them. The first one, occupying some of those islands in the Air Defense Zone. We already -- occupying any of those islands, including the Pengu Islands. Those are part of the Peskador (phonetic) Islands, which is specifically named, in the Taiwan Relations Act, as part of Taiwan. So that's a huge -- that's a huge, you know -- we're getting involved, basically. If they do that.

GLENN: That is -- or that is a progressive way for China to do it. Where they're not taking all of it. They're just moving in. And then like Republicans always do. You just back up. Okay. Well, that's okay. Okay. Well, we'll get it on the next boat. That's a progressive tactic. And America would probably not go to war, over something like that. I would hope.

STU: Yeah. We should point out real quick, Nancy Pelosi has just landed in Taiwan. So that's -- just watched it live here. As it -- so whatever game is being played, is going to be played.

GLENN: So bizarre.

JASON: The other scenarios pretty much -- many of them involved economic hybrid warfare, or blockades. Economic hybrid warfare was not mentioned back then in the Taiwan relations act. I would put that in the same category as blockade. That's also mentioned. So if any of those things happen, we are then, according to the texts, obligated to respond. So we're responding anyway.

GLENN: If they pretty much do anything. Even the lightest, most minimal approach, they would be in violation of this act. Our treaty, if you will. And it puts us, you know, into action. And calls our bluff.

I am terrified what the Biden administration would do. Because the Biden administration is absolutely toothless. We have no allies. What we've done in Russia has only benefited Russia and hurt everyone else. I think these guys could overreact. And do something very provocative, that in the end, will just destroy us. What should be our response, Jason.

JASON: Oh, gosh. Likable I said, this is such a complicated issue. It's so -- I hate to use the word again, ambiguous. Let me just go to this point. I think that -- I don't think China will do any of those things. I think China will use this as an excuse to do a massive military buildup. That's what I think. And we already saw --

GLENN: Massive military exercise.

JASON: Massive military exercise. Oh, we're just going to position all these things here. We're going to put all these boats here. We're going to keep these aircraft carriers over here. That way, it puts us off balance on, we don't know how far we've escalated their time line. That's why I think, this is such a horrible -- not only dangerous, but horrible move by Nancy Pelosi in doing this. Is you -- you're bringing right to the surface, what we think we have ten years to plan for. Or prepare for. That's what I think will happen. I think we'll see a lot more military buildup in that area. It will be hard to know when they actually attack. Now, if they do any of those things. I think they're obligated to respond in some way. I'll leave it up to them. To decide, what is -- how to balance it all out. They're obviously not the ones right now, in charge to do that. But what -- we're signaling to everyone else in the region, that, hey, the time of you being able to count us. That's over now. So, yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: I will tell you, Jason, thank you so much for your analysis and, of course, we'll be watching it. And if you -- if you watch and see some things, let me know and tweet it out today. And Facebook post. Because this is something that is ongoing. Thank you, Jason. For your help. I will tell you, that now is the time to pray for your country. And let me just remind you. The Republicans always get the warmonger label. Let's just say that the Republicans have changing on war. We've learned our lessons, I think. And Donald Trump, the world was at peace. Look at how fast that has deteriorated. We could be at -- in a proxy war, with both Russia and China. By tomorrow! It's insanity.

After TERRIFYING 'Exorcist' trailer, is ANYTHING safe to watch with your kids?
RADIO

After TERRIFYING 'Exorcist' trailer, is ANYTHING safe to watch with your kids?

Over the weekend, many NFL fans were shocked to see an incredibly frightening and evil-looking trailer for "The Exorcist: Believer" that played during the games. Is anything on TV family friendly anymore, Glenn asks? Because plenty of young children saw this ad while watching the games with their families. Glenn and Stu discuss how innocence has more or less disappeared from the entertainment world. Before, we had Disney and sports. But now, is there anything left that parents can let their kids watch without needing to monitor every second of it?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Oh, now it's starting to sound interesting. I will say, can I -- on the horror movie thing. You said you watched some football this weekend. Watched some of the Chiefs. Jaguar's game. Is that what you did, at some point?

GLENN: No. But my son talked to me about it.

STU: You didn't actually watch it. But you listened to your son.

A lot of these -- I don't know. I have kids right in that age of -- you know, they don't watch.

I don't have them watching all sorts of horror movies. Or, you know, like -- keeping them pretty much away from that. And people are saying, hey. You're keeping your kid in a bubble.

Look at this world. I want this bubble to be thicker. That's what I want.

GLENN: It's not a bubble. It's more of an actual wall.

STU: Yes. I built the wall.

I'm doing it as long as possible. My belief is, I remember this growing up.

And as you get older, you have plenty of time to do all the really bad things that the world offers.

GLENN: Oh, no, there's nobody there to nag you or stop you.

STU: No. You can do whatever you want.

So he will have plenty of time. My daughter will have plenty of time to do all the terrible things that the world offers. But for right now, I would like to keep them away from that.

And they're still young enough, in which, they're watching a horror movie.

They can get stared. I don't know what time --

GLENN: Sure. Twenty-four and 21.

STU: But like, seriously, I don't know. I remember moments from my childhood.

It seemed like moments from a Stephen King movie, and being terrified for weeks.

GLENN: Oh -- oh, I know what you're going to talk about.

STU: You do?

GLENN: Yes! Because I watched the Cowboys game.

STU: Yeah, right!

But they are running an advertisement for some exorcist sequel in the middle of these games.

GLENN: That looks scary as heck.

STU: That looks freaking terrifying. And like, as a dad, who knows, who will be the guy getting up in the middle of the night, if my kids are terrified about this.

Can you make it? I don't know, 80 percent less terrifying?

There's just like --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. I saw it. I saw it.

I saw it like every commercial break.

STU: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: And I'm watching. What is happening? What is happening?

I thought, at first, because I was only half watching.

I thought this has to be a parody of something.

STU: Because you've seen Exorcist in such a -- it's been done so many times.

GLENN: Right. Everyone is like, no.

Hold on. I mean, I remember the exorcist.

I remember. I've been -- I never saw it. I -- you know, after I -- you know, after I moved out of my parent's house. Then I saw a little bit of it. But I never watched the whole thing.

I watched 15 minutes. And I'm like, I cannot watch this movie.

My sister went. She snuck out of the husband.

She was 16. She snuck out with her friends. Because this isn't the time when everyone was vomiting in the theaters and everything else. And she's like, I've got to see this. Then she comes at night. And she's too afraid to sleep in her own bed. So I have bunk beds. She sleeps in the bottom bunks for like a month. And every night, she tells me about it. And I'm like, I -- I'm like seven.

Mom, I'm afraid. What are you afraid of?

Demons. Why are you afraid of demons?

Not because they went to the exorcist, and told me all about it.

STU: You're the big brother, I can see.

Really, it's terrifying.

STU: Especially because we live in a world, in which basically the only thing you can safely allow your kids to watch are sports.

Like, everything else is terrible.

The Disney Channel has become terrible.

GLENN: Terrible.

STU: Right? For your kids.

So you can put them in front of sports, mostly.

And most of the time, it's okay. And then -- but then occasionally, there will be a commercial, in which the devil's hand comes out of the screen. And grasps their throat. That's all.

And it's like, can you -- I don't know. Sentiment.

GLENN: There used to be an unwritten rule. First, I think it was an unwritten rule.

Then it was a written rule. The family hour. When the family is watching something together, can we make it something the family can watch together?

STU: Yeah. Yeah.

Now, again, if you're up in the fourth quarter. And it's 11 o'clock at night on a Sunday night game, Monday night game.

You know, I understand, you might have different rules there. But the NFL, how much money did they make?

How -- I mean, billions and billions and billions of dollars.

The networks all of the top-rated shows for the entire year, are NFL games.

GLENN: Do you expect us -- do you expect us to turn down money?

STU: Yes! No. I am not even asking you to have a standard.

GLENN: I'm willing to pay. What, my politics aren't good enough for you?

STU: Just take the money to somebody else. Take it from some other -- put cigarettes back on television.

GLENN: Oh, they're so much better than I am.
(laughter)

STU: Please.

Wait. Do you even have a Satan button over there, do you?

GLENN: No. I don't know what are you're talking about.
(laughter)

STU: So that's all we're asking.

GLENN: Just don't scare the crap out of the children.

Quite honestly, and me.

I could see that face, in my head right now.

I don't want to see that face. I don't want to see that face. My gosh, Sara, look, think of that face.

Now look at Stu. Very similar.

STU: Very similar. Yes.

GLENN: And may I just say, you should brush your teeth occasionally.

STU: Occasionally. I think that big fluoride is already in the water.

GLENN: Toothbrushes are evil.

Megyn Kelly REACTS to Trump's controversial abortion answer
RADIO

Megyn Kelly REACTS to Trump's controversial abortion answer

Former president Donald Trump's interviews with Megyn Kelly and NBC News turned a lot of heads over the weekend. On NBC News, Trump condemned fellow presidential candidate Gov. Ron DeSantis' Florida heartbeat bill as a "terrible mistake," while also supporting some limits on abortion. And on The Megyn Kelly Show, he addressed the growing transgender trend and whether or not men can become women. @MegynKelly joins Glenn to discuss how Trump's answers may affect his 2024 campaign, whether he's already looking ahead to the general election and trying to appeal to independents, and whether this strategy will work. Plus, they discuss whether President Biden will be the Democratic 2024 candidate, or if the Left is already trying to oust him: "You can feel the ground shifting."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Hello, Megyn, how are you?

MEGYN: Hi, I'm well.

How are you doing?

GLENN: I'm very good.

So your interview, and the interview that the president did on MSNBC are getting a lot of play over the weekend. Because in some -- in some places, he seemed to be hedging his bet. And on MSNBC,he talked about a 15-week limit on abortions.


MEGYN: Yeah. Well, he -- this is one of the reasons why President Trump needs to put himself out there more.

Because just like president HEP it's not okay for either one of these leading candidates on the Dem or the GOP side stay underground. So to his credit, Trump is putting himself out there. Much more than Joe Biden.

But we absolutely need to be probing their positions, as the American public tries to make a decision.

And Trump on the social issue, with all due credit for the Supreme Court justices he got has always been a little wishy-washy.

He lived pretty much 75 easier. Seventy-three. Whatever it is, before he became president.

As a Democrat. You know, one of my debate questions for him back in 2017, was when do you become a Republican?

If you look back, he's been much, much of a Democrat. And more liberal on social issues. Like virtually everyone in New York is.

And I think there's a fair amount of that in him.

GLENN: So is this -- for instance, let me play a clip you with. Where he was talking about, can a man become pregnant?

Play it.

VOICE: Can a man become a woman?

DONALD: In my opinion, can a man become a woman. I think -- I think part of it is birth. Can the man give birth? No. No. Although, they'll come up with some answer to that also.

I heard just the other day, they have a way that now the man can give birth. No. I would say that I'm continuing my stance on that.

GLENN: So what did -- what was your takeaway? Because he never really answered it. But he did shake his head no. Towards the beginning.

What's your takeaway from that?

MEGYN: Well, I thought it was weak sauce. I really wish he -- he did better on that. I like Ron DeSantis' answer, I'll be honest.

Which is no. No. No.

Obviously no.

GLENN: Right.

TOM: And it's not determined based on who can give birth. It's determined by God.

And it's pretty obvious, just as soon as you come out of the womb. That's the way -- that's the way he seems to not being painting this weird agenda by some activist in this crazy trans agenda-pushing cult.

So Trump clearly knows that. I don't know if he has -- maybe trying to appease some group of trans voters. That he thinks will make the difference with him.

Even when I had Don Jr on my show, he was kind of dancing around this issue.

I -- I think that they think, they somehow will do better with Democrats. If they don't hit this straight-on.

Even though, I mean, 98 percent of the Republican Party is united on this issue.

This is not a winner for any Republican to hedge on this.

Just ask Asa Hutchinson. So I'm not sure what he's thinking. I feel like this, and the abortion thing. He must be thinking more general elections, where there are Democrats, who don't feel as Republicans do.

But I really think, there's a small voting group on this particular issue, he needs a better answer. And I hope he gets it.

GLENN: So do you think this will shape the tree at all?

I mean, I think he looks at the poll numbers. And thinks theres -- I mean, I'm going to win. So why not start a moderate campaign now?

Because I'm going to win the -- the primary.

So let's just get past that. And start being, you know, more moderate to appeal to a wider audience. Than just the Republicans. You think that will work?

MEGYN: I don't. I mean, I'm in much more of the Ann Coulter thinking, it comes to who the party should nominate.

I think they should nominate someone who will drive turnout. And generally with Republicans, that means someone who is conservative. Who is genuinely conservative.

Look what happened with John McCain. Okay? They've tried to go more moderate.

It doesn't work. Now, Trump does tracking turnout. Because he's Trump. And there's something about that. His constituency finds more appealing. And, you know, that 30 percent, isn't going to abandon him. Even if it comes out with abortion in the 9th month, I mean, that's a really -- that's really the question. Not whether he can choose something on HEP Fifth Avenue. For Trump to say, he's preabortion, ninth month. And still hold on to that four, 30 percent. Glenn, I think the answer is yes.

And he's almost toying with that experiment right now. He's now pro abortion. He's really more banking on the fact, that he appointed the three justices, and made a difference on Roe v. Wade. And he won't lose any Republican voters to Joe Biden, on the issue of abortion. Right?

He's playing the long game. But he does need to generate enthusiasm.

And he's already tamped down. Not in the first set of Republicans. But in the other half, who are tepid on Trump.

GLENN: So let me ask you about Joe Biden here for a second.

Because I've started to see, for instance, there's an article in the Washington Post, from a big -- a big player. On the left. And in the editorial, he said, you know, I love Joe Biden. And he's done great things.

And nothing against anything he's ever done. But I think it's time for him to go.

And I think that you see the supporters, and the -- the key members, possibly starting to move in and saying, you know, Joe, I think maybe you should go.

Do you think that he is the candidate? By the time we get to the -- the election.

MEGYN: I don't know, Glenn. I'm seeing what you're seeing.

It seems like there's a movement underfoot to gently oust him and her. That's what was interesting about it. In wacko.

Which is, we don't want to be stuck with her.

But, you know, live by the sword, die by the sword.

They selected her for identity politics reasons, and good luck subbing her out. And subbing in some other person, like Gavin Newsom.

You know, who doesn't check the right boxes. And even who does check the right boxes, Sunny Hopkins, woke identity politics warrior on The View was saying.

If he subs out Kamala Harris, he will lose the black vote. We're not interchangeable, even if he puts back in a black woman.

Anyway, you can feel the ground shifting.

CNN is doing a long fact-check on Biden.

I, last Thursday, have never seen them unleash their Daniel Gale HEP guy on Biden. That was always a Trump thing.

Now more and more sort of getting interested in just how old President Biden is. And polling heavily on that.

The results are disastrous.

The nation's piece. There's been example after example of how they seem to be realize with whom, you know what, he can't do it. (?) we're going to lose, if we stick with him.

But I also think, you have to ask revelings, how do you get rid of it?

You know, I think there's some fantasy that Barack Obama can do it. You know, give the tap on the shoulder. Like you get at the dance. Time to sit down. Your dancing is over.

I'm not sure.

GLENN: Well, it's exact --

MEGYN: What man voluntarily walks away from power like that?

GLENN: Well, voluntarily, George Washington. But remember that Nixon did that.

and Nixon only did it,when he realized, the party (?) was no longer with him.

When all of the people he counted acon, to help support him, were turning on him.

And that's when he decided to resign. There's a good way to do this.

And there's the tough way. And we're offering you the chance to make this your idea.

And what -- I think part of the pressure, might be the Hunter Biden scandal.

When you saw the -- the charges, last week.

Are these real, or are these bogus too?

MEGYN: The gun charges? Oops, I mean, they are real. (?) and any of us would have been charged with it. So okay.

But, of course, they were brought very reluctantly, by a guy who is on his side.

David Weiss, the US attorney for tell wear. Is on hunter apps side. (?) for six years.

Who let the MS damning charges might do the statute of limitations.

(?) even though hunter's lawyers offered what's called a toggle agreement. They offered to extend the statute of limitations. And tasted Weiss said, no. That's okay.

This is his prosecutor, so we're supposed to believe he's going to be tough on Hunter. BS. It was a figure life charge on only (?) a lot of people think, won't even hold you up. This gun statute has been deemed unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. So it's possible they can go in. (?) to most Republicans.

But kind of a low stakes matter.

Let's say. Let's say he gets convicted. Which he probably will. Some are saying, this is a smart move by the Republicans.

Because at least now, Unterand Joe have real skin in the game.

He could potentially face real jail time.

And maybe it gives (?) power of just a moment ago gibel for Hunter. (?) you'll pardon him. While announcing you're just a one-termer.

You can give your son a apart. Keep him out of jail. Save the Democratic Party. You'll be on Mount Rushmore. (?), you know what, if that's the price it takes to get him out of this. Let's do it.
(laughter)


GLENN: So be as tough on this as you can be.

When you see the left saying, there's no evidence. There's no evidence.

They've got no evidence.

There's plenty of evidence. I don't know if that all adds up to, you know, proof.

But there's tons of evidence. If you are standing in a court of law.

Because that's what is what you used to do. And your client was Joe Biden. And Hunter Biden.

And you saw the evidence that the prosecution has shown already. And they say there's more. How would you assess your chance of winning?

MEGYN: It would just depend on the he have dentiary (?) 51 percent more likely. And 49 percent are not.

He's guilty. If it's I don't understand a reasonable doubt, I would acquit him. So far. So far.

That's only because we haven't gotten all the bank records. Which they're about to get. It's more than 51 percent likely he did this.

I would put him more up in the '60s. If you're talking about conviction of a crime. Not there yet.

GLENN: Yeah. And what do the bank records. What are you looking for, in the bank records. What do they have to show?

MEGYN: Well, I would want to see the actual deposits of men. In Joe Biden's numerically convict him of a cranium. (?), but we have Peter Schweizer on the show on Friday. He, of course, is a Hunter expert.

He makes interesting points about how -- in order to show bribery. In order to show corruption, you don't need it show any (?) showing the deposits into Hunter Biden's account is enough. Not to mention the other eight family members on the tape.

GLENN: Correct. Correct.

MEGYN: The benefit the to the family member is sufficient.

This (?) kind of brings me back to the (?) I almost feel like, Republicans are overstating their own burden.

You know, it's -- it doesn't need -- I realize why they're doing the impeachment. I'm actually in favor of it. But it doesn't need to go that route.

And they don't need to allege crimes. The corruption is there, plane as the nose on your face. I want (?) one -- one honest journalist, just one. With access to President Biden.

To get him in an interview, and say, how dare you allow your son, to sit on the board of Burisma.

Ukraine and company, being investigated for corruption. When you were the point man on the Obama bludgeon cleanlyup in Ukraine.

How dare you.

Is that not disqualifying to your ongoing role as public official? Go ahead.

GLENN: I think it is.

We're not going to see that. But I think it is. I would love to see that.

I would go a step further. As a father, you knew who Kolomoisky was.

He's a brutal killer. Beheads his opponents.

And you took your son -- you knew had a drug problem. And drinking problem.

And could easily be roped into anything.

And you allowed him to sit on -- on that board, with that man?

Are you out of your mind?

MEGYN: Right. When he was drug addled. Looking back on the time line of hunter's addiction.

I actually (?) in preparation for my show today.

So he joined the board of Burisma in April 2014.

That same year, he was discharged from the Navy reserve, after testing positive for cocaine right? That same year, when he joined the boards. Which Joe knows all of this. This is while his father was overseeing US politics in Ukraine.

By May of 15th, he had a relapse of his alcohol attack. By 2016, he had a relapse of his crack cocaine addiction.

And this is all while he's doing business with -- with the Chinese in these while he's on the board of Burisma.

GLENN: Jeez.

MEGYN: Which his father knows, because he's religion calling into the hunter business meetings.

He knows, his crack addled son is sitting on the board, cashing checks. And he's just (?) facilitating it. I mean, at a minimum, this counteracts the narrative of, what a great dad he is.

GLENN: I agree. I agree.

Megyn, thank you very much. We look forward to your program.

You can catch Megyn Kelly, wherever you get your podcast.

She also follows this show on Sirius XM. Thank you so much.

MEGYN: Thank you, Glenn.

Did Pope Francis Activate End-Times Prophecy? | Taylor Marshall | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 194
RADIO

Did Pope Francis Activate End-Times Prophecy? | Taylor Marshall | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 194

The world is in the grips of a spiritual battle that is revealed in moments when MLB’s L.A. Dodgers would rather bow to transgender blasphemers than recognize Christ. How should Christians live in a country that is increasingly antagonistic toward their faith? On this episode of "The Glenn Beck Podcast," Glenn talks with Taylor Marshall, a Catholic YouTuber and author of "Infiltration: The Plot to Destroy the Church from Within." They walk through the complicated history of the Catholic Church, from apparitions of Mary and the Three Secrets of Fatima to the creep of Marxism. In a tough but enlightening conversation, Glenn and Taylor debate the “radical traditionalist” movement growing on the Christian Right and the founders’ intention for the separation of church and state. They also discuss the “infallibility” of the pope, the rise of transgenderism, and the Clinton body count. Oh, and Pope Francis’ recent visit to Russia might just have fulfilled prophecy about the end times.

Catholic and Mormon DEBATE if Protestants are going to heaven
RADIO

Catholic and Mormon DEBATE if Protestants are going to heaven

There are thousands of different Christian denominations and churches out there, and they can have some big differences in belief sometimes. On the latest episode of the Glenn Beck Podcast, Glenn sits down with Catholic YouTuber Taylor Marshall, who some have called a Radical Traditionalist, or "Rad Trad," Catholic. Glenn and Taylor debate issues including which branches of Christianity are saved. Just Catholics? Just Protestants? Is that even something for us to decide? What is the solution to all the division within the Church? The two may not come to an agreement here, but it's a conversation we must have.