Latest Articles Videos Hands-On History

Live Podcast Serials Stations

About Charity Real Estate Sponsors Shop Contact

RADIOAugust 02, 2022

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.

Trump raid details hint it’s ‘NOT LOOKING GOOD’ for the FBI

New, alleged details about the raid of Donald Trump's home at Mar-a-Lago hint it's 'not looking good for the FBI,' Glenn says. For example, did agents truly refuse to give Trump's lawyer a copy of the warrant upon arriving at the home? Did they have the proper authority to break into the former president's safe? And where exactly does US Attorney General Merrick Garland stand on it all? While SEVERAL questions remain, one thing is certain: There doesn't seem to be another person in American history who has gone through THIS many investigations — that result in no charges — than Donald Trump...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Donald Trump, I don't think, has ever -- I don't think there's anyone in American history. And I'm seriously asking if you think you know of somebody. Let me know. I don't think there's ever been a politician or anybody in the public view, that has not had any charges brought against -- or sorry. Has not been found guilty, or had any kind of real, solid evidence against him. That has gone through what he has gone through. We know about the impeachments. We know that they have been accusing him of Russia stuff. We -- you know, a perfect -- that wasn't a perfect phone call. I'll show you a perfect phone call. All of the stuff that you know about.

Well, let me just give you the -- the lawsuits, that he's currently dealing with. He's dealing with the one in New York. He has Gene Carol, the defamation, and federal tort claims.

Carol is suing Trump for defamation after he publicly accused her of fabricating rape allegations against him. Summer Zervos, a former contestant for The Apprentice has filed a civil suit against the former president for defamation after he claimed her allegations of his inappropriate sexual contact were -- were lies designed to help the Clinton campaign.

Okay. The Mary Trump fraud litigation. Mary Trump is suing Donald Trump for defrauding her out of millions of dollars in an inheritance dispute. Really? That comes up right after -- I mean, how long has that been going on, Mary?

Panama hotel fraud and tax litigation. He has the John Doe versus the Trump Corporation Class Action. A group of anonymous plaintiffs who have filed a class-action suit against the Trump family and their businesses, alleged that the Trumps used their brand to scam investors into paying for worthless business opportunities.

You have the DC civil suit over misuse of 2017 inauguration funds.

You have the Representative Karen Basses, et al, incitement suit for January 6th.

This is ten members of the House, represented by the NAACP that are suing Trump, Rudy Giuliani, two right-wing militia groups, for conspiring to forcibly prevent Congress from counting the electoral votes in January 2026. Eric Swalwell. You know, Fang Fang's things. The incitement suit. He's suing him, along with Mo Brooks. And Rudy Giuliani. Donald Trump.

They're all being sued for the same thing. He's incited this. The Capitol police. Two Capitol police officers, both on duty January 6 on insurrection, sued Donald Trump for his injuries that they sustained. Then you have ten Capitol Police suits from January 6. Second group of Capitol police officers filing suit against Donald Trump. The proud boys. The Oath Keepers. Then you have a third Capitol Police suit over the January 6th. Third suit. One Capitol police officer alleging physical and emotional injuries he suffered. Then you have, of course, the metropolitan police suit.

So he's got all these individual cops. And then the union, decided, you know what, we're going to sue him too.

Then you have the NAACP's fund over the voting rights, for post election actions.

Then you have the New York attorney general, civil and criminal investigations. There's tons of that. Then you have the Scotland, unexplained wealth orders lawsuit.

Then you have the Trump Tower, assault suit. Then Michael Cohen is suing him, for retaliatory imprisonment. Then you have criminal investigation into Trump's finances. Let's see here. There's a whole bunch of updates on that. Then you have the DCAG incitement criminal investigation. You have the Fulton County, Georgia, criminal election influence investigation.

You have the Westchester New York criminal investigation of the Trump organization golf course. You have the National Archives investigation, that he mishandled classified material.

I don't think I have all of them. Okay? I don't think I have all of them. I don't know of anyone, who has ever had this kind of a coordinated attack against them.

If you don't think a lot of these are funded by, you know, the left and Soros and those kinds of people, you're fooling yourself. You're fooling yourself. They are doing everything they can, just to get this guy, to give up. Follow up ever

This is what it means to stand against the machine. I have to tell you. I don't know what Donald Trump would do with a second term. I don't know. But I know they don't want him to have one.

I know for sure, he knows who they are. And I can't imagine anyone more motivated to bust this machine up, than him.

What is it about him, that they despise. And don't tell, that, oh, he's just -- he's rude. That's what -- he's rude. Really? Is that it? So wait a minute. Let me see. You guys are hanging out with hookers and criminals. And the Chinese Communist Party. And you don't like him, because he's rude.

Don't think so. The rule of law is an absolute joke in America. And I want to -- I want to show you. Have you seen anyone who has come under this kind of persecution, even after he leaves office? And trust me, if he would have won a second -- a second term, which I think he did. But I don't know.

If he -- if he won a second term, they would be doing all these lawsuits, at the end of that. This is not some moral outrage. This is just to stop him. By the way, I talked to some sources in New York, last night. And it came out early this morning, or late last night, that his attorney general, was kept 10 feet away from the warrant. They flashed can the warrant, and said, here's -- here's the warrant. Let me see it. No. After. They held the warrant away. 10 feet away. She was not allowed to grab the warrant, and read the warrant. That is against the law. That's against the law.

Then after they left, they handed her the warrant. Now, she didn't get the attachments, and I think that is legal. You don't necessarily get the affidavits attached to it, right away. But you do eventually see that. They now have that.

But she wasn't allowed to see it, nor was she his attorney, allowed to go into Mar-a-Lago.

When they went in, they went into his bedroom. Spent an enormous amount of time, in Melania's closet. They broke into his safe, in his office. That warrant better damn well say, that they can break into that safe. Because the law is, you can't go into somebody's house and search. And just tear it all apart. You have to have a pretty good idea, of where things might be located. You ask for permission, for those can areas. And you have to know exactly what you're looking for. And if it's in a safe, you need to specifically say, it's in a safe, and we're having a safe cracker come in. If they didn't say in the warrant that they could crack his safe, it's the fruit of the poisoned tree. By the way, there's nothing in the safe.

What they broke into, was a safe room, that he had shown the national archives and investigators. As they were talking about, you know, the -- the archives, that they said, should number the national archives. He said, it should be at home. We're working it out between our attorneys. They said, fine. You just have to have this in a locked room. So he made a safe room, and put two locks on it, at their request.

That's what they broke into. This doesn't sound good for the FBI. And I think that is why Merrick Garland now is suddenly like, I didn't know about it. I had no idea, this was Christopher Ray.

You didn't know about it? You should be fired by the president, if your staff, underneath you, just says, you know what, I'm going to go into the house of a foreign -- a former president, and do a search.

Before we issue a subpoena. That's insanity.

EXPLAINED: Biden’s ‘zero inflation’ claim is an ABSOLUTE LIE

Our far-left leadership truly believes the average American voter is an IDIOT. Why else would they repeat absolute LIES, seemingly without fear of getting caught? President Biden’s latest one was about inflation, claiming on Wednesday that inflation numbers in July hit zero percent. But Stu tells Glenn that Joe's claim actually is not an outright lie — it's more like an insane, 'disingenuous' manipulation of the facts. The guys explain it all in this clip…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have so much on our plate to talk about. The one thing we haven't talked about yet, are the inflation numbers. And it's remarkable, Joe Biden has just come out and said, we have zero inflation this month.

STU: Wow. We did it! We solved it.

GLENN: We did. We did. So we can start printings more money. We have zero inflation.

BIDEN: News that came out today, relative the economy. Actually, I just want to say a number.

Zero. Today we received news that our economy had 0 percent inflation in the month of July.

GLENN: That's weird.

STU: Yeah. Because that's not how --

BIDEN: What that means, the price of some things went up last month. The price of some other things went down the same amount. The result, 0 percent inflation last mop.

STU: Now, that's incredible there. And it's interesting, because every single publication is reporting the number as 8.5 percent.

GLENN: Right. But that's very close to zero.

STU: Very close to zero. Now, I want to be clear, to show you how disingenuous this person is. This is how he's come to this conclusion, okay?

Because people are just saying, oh, he's lying. And he's not quite lying. This is what he's doing. Now, every single time we talk about inflation, we talk about it as an annual number.

GLENN: Right.

STU: That is how we talk about it. Year to year. Everybody talks about it the same way. 8.5 percent, is the headline annual number. That's the number that everyone has been talking about, which everyone focuses on. So what he's done, is take that number, and ignore it completely. Then, he's converted what he's looking at, from the headline number, to the core number. Now, there's two different measures of it inflation. Basically, the core number takes out food and takes out energy. To summarize it. So that number was 5.9 percent, I believe it was this -- this --

GLENN: Which is zero.

STU: Which is --

GLENN: I don't know if it's closer to 8.5. One of the two. They're both closer to zero. We have a scale from one to a billion. Fine. Might as well call it zero.

STU: Right. Sure. So he's ignored the main number. He's presented only the core number. Which has been lower the entire time. And then he's instead of taking the annual measure. He's done only the month to month measure.

Now, no one -- the month to month number, is not the number anyone talks about. And to be clear, it was only supposed to be 0.2 percent. So what he's saying is -- now, that's almost zero anyway. That's what everyone was expecting it to be. 0.2 percent. Instead, it was 0.0 percent, and he is out there bragging saying, oh, well, this just shows, there's no inflation month to month.

So he's ignored the main measure. And he's basically taking the secondary core measure, and divided it by 12, even though that's not exactly how they come up with the number. And he's saying that there's been no inflation. Now, this is entirely disingenuous. And what I've said before, on this program, on Stu Does America as well. We are very close to one of the most annoying things you're ever going to experience. Which is, this main number that everyone is talking about. 9.1 percent. Is going to start getting lower. And when that happens, the administration is going to brag about it. However --

GLENN: This is important.

STU: This is important. What most people will say, when I -- when you say to them, hey. Inflation last month was 9.1 percent. And this time, it's 8.5 percent. Most people will say, first of all, it's going down. That will be their initial reaction. It's going down. And because most people will say that, the administration will brag about it going down.

GLENN: It's month to month.

STU: Yeah. That's the annual measure, but it's two separate months.

Most people will say, okay. If something is $100 a year ago, it was $109 last month, and now, it's, what? 108.50, right? It's coming down a little bit?

It's important to know, that's not how this number works. The number works based on a year-to-year measure. So they're comparing July to the previous July. The reason why I'm saying these numbers are going to come down. And everybody is going to say. Well, we're past peak inflation. The reason why that's going to happen. Is because the new numbers. Follow me on this. The new numbers are building on old numbers that were already inflated.

GLENN: So you're not going -- you're not measuring it from 100.

STU: One hundred.

GLENN: You're measuring it from 108. So what is the increase of 108?

STU: Right. So let me give you this. This is a real world example. This is actually what happened, okay? If you bought something in July 2020, at $100.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: In July 2021, inflation was at 5.4 percent. So that was costing $105.43.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: This new number --

GLENN: Well, it's down. It's down. So I should pay 103.

STU: 103 or 104, right? No. It's up 8.5 percent from 105.40. So the new number, the thing that used to cost $100 two years ago, now costs $114.36. So your prices are up 14 percent. That's the inflation number from what our normal prices. 14.36 percent. And the administration is going to spend all day bragging about that. And it is -- and you're going to go into the store. And you'll say, wait a minute. These prices aren't any lower. They're all higher.

In fact, they're 14 percent higher on average, and you will be right. And they will be bragging about it.

That's the rest of your day, everybody. Boys and girls get together and realize, these idiots are going to come out here, and say this all day, because they think you are so stupid, you just might believe it. And they know they're lying. And they're going to do it anyway. That's the rest of your day.

GLENN: Average people. Average people don't know that. And they know it. They know it. They know it. The average person has no idea, that what costs $100 last year, was 108. And today, because of the inflation. You go up from the 108. It's not -- it's not going back towards 100. It's adding. When they say 2 percent inflation is our target. That means, prices always go up. Every year, by 2 percent. That means, your dollar is becoming -- that's why something costs a time. You know, in 1940. Oh. I want that beautiful Cadillac over there. All right. Dollar and a half.

STU: Now it's $185,000.

GLENN: That's all inflation. That's inflation. Because it continues to adds on top of each other.

EXPOSED: The far-left plan to CREATE conservative 'RADICALS'

Donald Trump is the first former president to ever be under THIS much scrutiny AFTER leaving office. So, why does the far-left hate him so much? Why do they continue to use every tool — like an FBI raid — at their disposal to destroy the former Commander-in-Chief? In this clip, Glenn theorizes why he believes the far-left is going to such great lengths. And it’s NOT about their hatred for President Trump, he says. Rather, it’s about their ultimate endgame: To CREATE right-wing ‘radicals’ who they can use to demonize ALL conservatives for decades to come. But there is one way America can survive such a plan. Glenn explains in this clip…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Donald Trump is -- has just been called to testify today, to the New York State attorney. Or New York State attorney general, about his real estate dealings, in New York. My gosh.

This guy, you know, he said it on Saturday, at CPAC. Has there ever been a president that has been under attack this much, or a past president? I mean, Nixon left office. It was over. We never heard a peep about it. Clinton leaves office. We never hear a peep about it. And they start the Clinton Foundation, which makes billions. Nothing. Nothing.

Barack Obama leaves office. Takes 30 million pages. Nothing. Okay.

I said to you yesterday, here's what's really going on: They can't find the radicals, so they need to create them. Okay?

That's what the January 6 has been. They have tried to convince America, that the -- the right is just completely full of radicals. Well, the problem is: 42 percent, I think, the number is as close to this. Forty-two percent of America, thought that that was true, until they televised the hearings.

That number went down to 36. Okay? They don't have it. They don't have it. Because that's not who we are. So they have to create them. Now, I have said, since 2009, I watched the pattern. And remember, we were talking about the Tides Foundation. And I said, the right should create the Tides Foundation, exactly the same way, except be clean. Because the Tides Foundation and the left would go, oh. They're embezzling money. They're funneling money from dark sources over here. And we could go, oh. We're not. But thank you for letting us know, what you're doing. Because they always self-diagnose. They always tell you who they are. Fascist. They're all fascist. They're fascist. He's going to crack down. He's going to use the state as a spying mechanism. He's building an army internally, and he's going to go after the American people and shut down voices.

Hello! That is exactly what they're doing. So listen to -- listen to Fang Fang's boyfriend. Fang Fang's boyfriend yesterday said, the Republicans are a party of chaos. He said, it's very clear, that Republicans have recognized that they can no longer win elections with votes. Now, is that what you're feeling about the next election? That Republicans don't have a chance of winning at the ballot box? I have no doubt, it's going to be a hammering -- a hammering at the ballot box. Now, that doesn't mean that you take the House. It just means, wherever we can win, I think we can win.

STU: You better take the House.

GLENN: Yeah. I know. The Senate. The Senate.

STU: The Senate is much more in the air.

GLENN: Right. And I think we take the House. We may not take the Senate. Still, it's like going to be a hammering, unless Zuckerberg boxes are everywhere else, you know what I mean? But I don't think there's a Republican that thinks that if people vote, go out, that Republicans are going to do poorly. So is he self-projecting here? Republicans have recognized, they can no longer win elections with votes, so they're leaning in hard, to try to win elections with violence. Okay.

So that violence that he's talking about is January 6. And that was, what? One hundred people?

The left is encouraging violence all over America. It's been burning cities down. Okay. And they're fomenting that violence right now. We are?

He says, we're getting all kinds of threats, blah, blah, blah, blah. So he said, chaos is arming to the teeth. Most Americans with AR-15s now, and letting our children live in fear, chaos is January 6th.

Chaos is -- chaos is government mandated pregnancies.

STU: That's what the government is doing? They're mandating pregnancy, Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah. We are. We are. We are. You're going to have a baby, with right now.

Chaos is leaders of the party, arguing, we need to defund the FBI. Now, what's the difference between defunding the FBI, and defunding the police? I'm going to try to --

STU: Everyone I heard, talking about that, is talking about changing the instructor of the organization, and moving many of its responsibilities into other parts of the government. And not getting rid of all police.

GLENN: Right. And I say defund. I say we choke this system off, until they make changes. Money doesn't talk. It screams. And these huge agencies, the IRS, I say defund the IRS. Now, that doesn't mean, we don't need the IRS. And I want it to go away. Well, I would. I would. I would rather have a flat tax. But I'm not calling for chaos. I'm calling for reform. I'm not calling for tear the system down. I want reform!

I want what people wanted in 2008. Transparency.

We've been saying this forever. I want transparency. I don't want any more backroom deals. I don't want bills just shoved through that are omnibus, that we don't know what's in them. I want to know who is the good guy. Who is the bad guy. I want people to go to jail. And I don't give a flying crap, if they're Republican or independent or Democrat. I really don't. I want -- you know what, I would -- I would be so for Nancy Pelosi's son being tried. And if he's found as guilty and dirty as we think he is -- I mean, did you notice he was on the Taiwan trip? Did you notice? She's hiding that. So Nancy Pelosi's son. I would be all for Hunter Biden. I think every American who is decent. Who has paid attention at all, knows, there's trouble there. I would be for Joe Biden going to jail, if it's proven, that he was doing dirty deals with his family.

But I would also go after Mitch McConnell. And it's not because I think Mitch McConnell is a worthless just piece of bag of bones. I think Mitch McConnell is just as dirty. He's in on it. His family is making all kinds of money from China. No! No! If Mike Lee was found to do -- and Mike would be the first to tell you, I mean this. If Mike Lee, who is a good friend of mine, and a guy I really trust and believe. If Mike Lee was found doing dirty things and dirty deals. I would be the first to call for his impeachment, and investigation. And jail time, if he deserved it.

That's all I want. I want everybody to have the same consequence. We have two layers of justice now. If you're in a high position, with the right party, it's fine. That's not America. You cannot run a country. That is a banana republic. That's why -- you know, I was watching a show last night. And it -- it kept flashing back to Afghanistan. And the way the people lived in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan wasn't always like that. It wasn't always like that. Why are these third world countries like this? Poor, broken up. Sometimes, it's no fault of their own. Other times, it's clearly because the government or there's so much chaos on the street, that you have warlords.

People who are calling for, you know, the defunding of the police, and everything else. You're going to get warlords. Well, we would be better off with no government at all. We would just start all over again. Let's just burn this thing down. You will go into warlords. And America will become Afghanistan.

I don't want to burn it down. I want reform. I want transparency. I don't want to go back in time. Conservatives are not about the past. They are about conserving what has worked. And jettisoning those things that don't work. That's why the left and the right. Liberal and conservative. Not progressive. Liberal and conservative work so well together.

Because liberals tend to go, we ought to try this. This is really good. And conservatives are like, wait. Wait. Wait. But wait. What will that do? What are the unintended consequences? I don't know. What about this and this and that? You're not jettisoning this to get that, are you? Because these things are good. It's the yin and yang that makes America work. But if we can't do this through elections and reason, then we go to war with each other. And I don't want a war. Do you?

The -- the entire thing with Donald Trump right now. I want you to know this. Because if you know this, then you know what they are trying to achieve. And what they want and need you to do.

They could not convince the American people, that their neighbors are terrorists. They tried.

They've tried. And they've convinced maybe, I think, probably 20 percent. Okay. That's not enough.

You need to get that number over 50 percent. So 50 percent of the country thinks the other side of the country is a terrorist. This is why I always try to say, not the regular Democrat. But the leftists. Those who are hell-bent on destroying our country. We cannot group everybody into that. Because if we group half of the country, into revolutionaries. And they don't actually fit there, we have no place to go, but war.

We have no place to go, but I guess camps. And if you think one side or the other. This is -- do you remember the show I did at Fox, years ago, if you're a long-time listener or viewer. I did the pendulum show. And I swung a pendulum from left to right. And I said, the Constitution is really in the middle. It's neutral. Okay?

Sometimes a judge and the Constitution will rule, no. You know what, sorry. Got to have all that freedom. And the conservatives will go, wait. What?

That's chaos. Sometimes, it will say, nope. Got to go the conservative way. And the liberals will say, wait. You're a fascist. The Constitution is neutral on topics.

Its focus is on power and control, and control of the government. And I said, as we swing further and further, these swings will get worse and worse. And I said, you put Obama in, and you keep pushing people to the wall. You will get somebody who is like, oh, really? Really?

And that pendulum will swing back just as hard the other way. There's Donald Trump. He is the -- the people in the -- on the coasts. They all think Donald Trump is a fascist, that will put them all in jail. Well, that's what we felt about Obama. He was destroying the country.

Same thing now. Well, you do this to Donald Trump. And you're swinging it further the other way. And what did I tell you would happen, in the end?

That eventually, you would have two parties, that are completely on the very ends. And it depends which party is in office, at the time that things really begin to crumbling. And there's real chaos. And that party will reach out and grab that pendulum. And then freedom is over. That is the point we're at. And that's why they need the chaos on the streets. They'll create it. But as long as America knows, they're creating it. It's their chaos in our schools. It's their chaos that are burning our cities down. It's their chaos that is getting our policemen killed. It's their chaos that is making the prices of everything go through the roof. It is their climate chaos, that is causing us to have fuel problems and energy problems. And people either dying from heat, or now in the winter, they'll be dying from cold.

It's their chaos of the war machine. Of Afghanistan. As long as people understand that, we're fine. If we confuse it with any kind of chaos on our side, we're playing right into their hands. Because all they need is to just convince a few more people. And they can grab the pendulum.