RADIOMay 20, 2024

PROOF That Biden's DOJ is COLLUDING With Trump Prosecutors?

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is demanding that the Department of Justice turn over documents related to several of the prosecutors going after former president Donald Trump. These documents, Bailey believes, will prove that the White House is colluding with these prosecutors to attack Biden’s political opponent and keep him off the campaign trail. Bailey joins Glenn to make the case that these prosecutors — including Alvin Bragg and Letitia James in New York and Fani Willis in Georgia — should be disqualified. Plus, Bailey also explains why he has threatened to sue the city of Kansas City for doxing Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have the Missouri attorney general. He is demanding a couple of things. First of all, that the Department of Justice turn over the documents related to several of president Trump's prosecutions as the prosecutions appeared to be part of a coordinated effort, by the DOJ, that involved the White House. Andrew Bailey. The attorney general is with us now.

Andrew, how are you, sir? All of the time doing well, thank you. Thanks for having me on.

GLENN: You bet. Thank you. You are one of the really good AGs in the country. And I have to tell you, it is -- the first of the last of the line, are the AGs. And if you guys go dark, it's up to the sheriffs.

And I would like to not get to the sheriff part. So thank you for everything you're doing.

Tell me -- tell me about what you're looking for, from the Department of Justice. Why you're looking for it. And what the response has been so far.

ANDREW: Well, and, Glenn, I appreciate you covering this story, extensively. Everyone can see the elicit witch hunt prosecutions that are going on from Alvin Bragg's office, from Fani Willis' office, from Leticia James' office, and from Joe Biden's crooked Department of Justice.

GLENN: And we know already -- do we not know for a fact, that there are ties directly to the White House. That they're coordinating.

ANDREW: That's right. Yeah. They're absolutely coordinating. The Biden Department of Justice has become the nerve center for a coordinated witch hunt prosecution of a political opponent.

And it's not designed to obtain a legal ballot.

It's basically designed to take anyone running against Joe Biden. Off the campaign trail.

How do we know this? Because they've deployed resources at the state level.

That's illicit collusion. And I'm talking about Matt Colangelo, this was the number two ranking official at Biden's crooked Department of Justice.

A long time ENT activist, with deep ties to the Democratic Party, who has now taken a job with Alvin Bragg's office. And it's leading the prosecution in the courtroom in Manhattan at the state level, against President Donald Trump.

That is sufficient evidence, to disqualify the prosecutors. And we demand record. We need to have transparency. I think they have enormous liability on their professional license you're. Civil liability. And potentially criminal liability.

At some time, we have to talk about prosecuting the prosecutors.

GLENN: Thank you. May I just call you, Andrew.

ANDREW: Yes. Please.

GLENN: So, Andrew, how unusual is it for that kind of a -- a transfer of job -- I mean, does that happen?

Is this just our speculation?

ANDREW: Well, in isolation, it wouldn't be a problem in and of itself.

The problem comes from the elicit motivations that can be imputed to these prosecutors.

Let's talk about Alvin Bragg for a second. Which, by the way, I love that his website for his office is one standard of justice for all. How does this guy keep a straight face while saying that?

This is an individual who worked for Leticia James, who campaigned on a promise to prosecute Donald Trump, who has been involved in civil litigation against Donald Trump when he worked at the New York attorney general office.

There's no way a court in Missouri would allow him to prosecute that criminal case. Even -- even if there was a criminal case, which I don't concede that there is.

It's not supported by the facts for the law. We covered that extensively. We talked about that, ad nauseam.

But the elicit motivation of the prosecutors is so evident by the previous behavior and statements that Alvin Bragg has made. Same with Michael Colangelo. I mean, the DOJ cases against President Donald Trump are also equally specious in nature.

In other words, not supported by the facts of the law. So Joe Biden keeps documents at his garage, where anyone can get to them. And he's too old to know what he's doing. So let's let him off the hook. Despite the fact, he's somehow the chief executive of the United States of America. But we're going to go after President Donald Trump, who had the authority to declassify the very documents he was in possession of, that were in a safe. So, again, you've got Matthew Colangelo reading all of that, and now going to help Alvin Bragg. That is conspiracy of impropriety at a minimum, and I believe there is actual impropriety. Substantive impropriety. The political motivation of the prosecutors is to sufficient to call into question the judgment in those cases. Couple with the fact, they brought baseless charges from the facts of the law.

And it will undermine the credibility of whatever illegal convictions they ultimately obtain.

GLENN: So tell me what cases you're looking at. You're looking at Alvin Bragg. And you're looking at -- shoot. What was the other one you just --

ANDREW: Leticia James. Fani Willis.

GLENN: Yeah. All of them.

ANDREW: All of them. Yeah. There's a document in history. This isn't just some conspiracy theory.

I mean, your listeners will recall in 2016 how the DOJ Deep State conspired to perpetrate the Russian collusion hoax against President Trump to undermine his presidency before he took office.

And think about those text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok.

You're telling me, that isn't going on between Leticia James, Alvin Bragg, Matthew Colangelo. Fani Willis. The whole crew. And so we know this evidence is out there. And it needs to be transparent for the public.

GLENN: So is there a statute of limitations on any of these?

ANDREW: You know, it depends on what facts are uncovered. But I don't think we're at any risk of losing ability to hold the wrongdoers account. Again, that can take many different forms.

First and foremost. We, need to expose this so the public knows what's going on here.

It was never about an actual criminal case against President Trump it was always about getting him off the campaign trail.

Now, once that is established, which, again, circumstantial evidence gives rise to the reasonable inference today. But we're in possession of the documents that we believe will reveal an actual substantive impropriety. Then we start talking about censor. Having a civil suit for violation of his civil rights. And if crimes were committed, on absolutely criminal prosecution should be on the table. For far too long, the conservatives have allowed this law fair to go on. It's gotten worse and worse and worse, to where now, Missourians are being denied access to their chosen political candidate, their chosen presidential candidate, President Donald Trump.

GLENN: So you know law fare is the wave of the future. If President Trump wins, they're going to make what happened on January 6th, I think look like, I think a walk in the park. And they are lawyering up like crazy.

Law fare is the future. How do we turn that around?

ANDREW: Well, it's tough, because as conservatives we believe in the rule of law. We believe that the tradition of the Constitution still means something, and that we elevate the rules of the game above the players and the outcomes.

And so the only way to serve those rule of law principles, but also fight back against law fare is to hold those perpetrating lawfare accountable. And that's what I seek to do in this instance.

GLENN: Now, how likely are we to get these documents?

ANDREW: Well, I'm not going to be stonewalled by Biden's crooked Department of Justice. They may play that in the courts of New York. Which, by the way, shame on the judiciary in the State of New York for not disqualifying these prosecutors. And from, you know, allowing these appearances of impropriety to perpetrate, even from the bench in this illicit witch hunt prosecution. At the end of the day, this will not stand in Missouri. We won't be stonewalled by the Department of Justice. They have a responsibility of transparency.

Especially the heightened sensitivity over the presidential election. And so these are serious allegations. They need to live up to their obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, and we are going to shine the light of truth on this, as soon as practicable.

GLENN: And when we have the document case, when they turned over the documents, we found solution, did we not?

ANDREW: That's absolutely true. Again, this is a documented pattern of behavior. That extends far beyond the current presidential election sile. It goes all the way back to 2016.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

Let me switch subjects. The Kansas City Chiefs, which full disclosure, my family and I, we root for the Kansas City Chiefs all the time.

And, you know, we love the Hunt family, and everything else. What happened there, is -- is such an attack on, honestly, freedom of expression for your religion. He's speaking -- I mean, the left always says, you can keep it in your house of worship.

Well, that was a religious university. And he got a standing ovation. Nobody seemed to really be offended by it. And they have gone after him, and docked him.

What are you doing?

ANDREW: Yeah, well, look, we're not going to let city officials and Kansas City who doxed Harrison Butker in retaliation for his free expression of his faith, of his religious beliefs. We're not going to let them violate the Missouri Human Rights Act that exists in order to prohibit that kind of discriminatory behavior.

And you're right. If anyone has watched the commencement address itself, I would commend for everybody -- you know what he said at the beginning? You know what Harrison Butker said?

The left wants to drive free expression of Christian beliefs from public discourse, and that's exactly what's happened.

GLENN: Yes.

ANDREW: That's what the left is doing to Harrison Butker. Now, the problem from a state law perspective is when the city, using an official Twitter account, publishes Harrison Butker's residence. Why did they do that? In retaliation. Like, you can't retaliate them, but for the free expression of their faith. And that's what's going on here. And luckily, I'm the bad guy.

Quinton Lucas the mayor of Kansas City within the last 72 hours has written an incendiary letter to me, accusing me of fanning the flames of racial discourse. What? That has nothing to do with it. You know you're doing the right thing, when the left baselessly plays the race card. So somehow, my enforcement of the statute intended to prevent discrimination is discriminatory.

Makes zero sense. That's when you know you're doing the right thing. We're going to fight for all Christians -- any faith community's ability to have free expression of religious belief, protected by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Missouri.

GLENN: And what are you going on that, Andrew?

ANDREW: We demand accountability and transparency there too. We've demanded documents about who manages the Social Security media accounts, who has access to it.

Why this post was tweeted out, when it was. We need to make sure that there's guardrails in place, to ensure that, again, the government has been weaponized to push a radical progressive discriminatory agenda in violation of state law.

If we have to, we'll go to court and put an injunction to put a stop to it.

GLENN: Andrew Bailey, the attorney general of Missouri. Always good to talk to you, Andrew. Thank you so much.

ANDREW: Thank you, sir. Appreciate you for having me on.

GLENN: You bet.

If you didn't hear Bill Maher's comments on the Kansas City Chief Kicker's comments, listen to what he said. Cut two.

VOICE: I couldn't more not like this guy. He's in big trouble because he said at this event. And this is the Catholic college. Conservative Catholics. And they -- he's now history's greatest monster. Again, I don't agree with much of this guy. I don't get the thing. He said, some of you -- talking to the women.

Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world. Okay. That seems fairly like modern.

But I would venture to guess, that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you are going to bring into this world. I don't see what the big crime is. I really don't, and I think this is part of the problem people have with the left. Like he's saying, some of you may go on to lead successful careers. But a lot of you are excited about this other way, that everybody used to be. And now, can't that just be a choice too?

And I feel like they feel very put upon. There's only one way to be a good person. And that's to get an advanced degree from one of those asshole universities like Harvard.
(laughter)
I find it very ironic that he's saying, you know what, in my world, you know, we like the women to stay at home. And just have babies. And the college kids and the young people find this absolutely abhorrent. But they're demonstrating for Hamas.

Who make that a law. It's not just an opinion in Hamas. That you stay home and have the babies. We will enforce you for doing that. Okay. I just wanted to make that point.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I think Bill Maher has become -- and I don't agree with him on a lot of stuff. He is becoming my favorite liberal. Because he's an actual classic liberal once again. He's somebody who is just saying, freedom of speech, man.

Say what you want. Don't force everybody else.

Thank you, Bill Maher.

All right. Back in just a second. First, let me tell you about Ruff Greens. Your dog is a member of your family. You know that. He's also there to protect you if somebody else breaks into your house. So hypothetical situation here. Let's say you feed your dog kibble food. The burglar brings hamburger along and gives it to them.

I mean, you know, the burglar is like, hey. I will steal all your stuff. Because I just have a burger.

While your fateful dog is attacking you. Because he

What Glenn Beck Never Got to Say to Charlie Kirk | Glenn TV | Ep 456

Charlie Kirk would have been president. Political violence robbed him of fulfilling that destiny, so now his friends, colleagues, and supporters throughout the world must figure out how to pick up the pieces and ensure that his legacy never ends. On a special episode of "Glenn TV," Glenn replays the most powerful, touching, and inspirational moments from his time guest-hosting "The Charlie Kirk Show" on Wednesday morning, one week after Charlie’s death. In a touching tribute to his friend, Glenn places Rush Limbaugh’s golden microphone next to Charlie’s — a symbol of Charlie’s longtime dream and the influence he has had throughout the world. Plus, Glenn speaks to "The Charlie Kirk Show" executive producer Andrew Kolvet and Turning Point USA COO Tyler Bowyer about who their dear friend was behind the scenes, the influence he’s had on America and the MAGA movement, and how Charlie’s fingerprints will still be present on future elections. Also, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Glenn discuss how Charlie Kirk helped launched her career, and Research Center Investigative Researcher Ryan Mauro shares how he has the smoking gun President Trump needs to take on George Soros’ network. These are the voices who knew Charlie well, but the number of people he indirectly touched and influenced is spread far and wide. Glenn ends with a beautiful song tribute by David Osmond and Cheyenne Grace, depicting just how mournful the entire world truly is. Rest in peace, Charlie.

Fact-check: The 5 LIES circulating about Charlie Kirk

In the first week after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, some in the media and on the Left have tried to either justify or dismiss his death by spreading lies about what he said. Glenn Beck reviews an article by The Federalist, which debunks the 5 biggest lies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We were just talking about the five lies that are going around, about Charlie Kirk.

And it is -- it's reprehensible about what's going on.

Because people who are saying these things. Who are starting these things. They really need -- I mean, they know. They know.

Like Stephen King, really?

You really think that Stephen King.

You really think that Charlie Kirk is for the stoning of gay people?

I --

STU: I do think, though. A lot of these people have an image of everyone on the right, that --

GLENN: But it shows how unbelievably isolated you are.

STU: Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Now, king, in particular, I think -- like, I don't think Stephen King was lying on that.

I think he's -- and I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the -- in the drawer.

GLENN: He ought to be. You can't write like he does.

STU: He's not an idiot, right? He can form thoughts. But I think he's so completely isolated in his bubble. Like, if someone says something terrible, about a person like Charlie Kirk, and your image of him is he's basically Hitler.

Well, you don't -- you don't spend time fact-checking it.

Of course, that guy -- he's that terrible human being. Of course, he said something like that. You don't even bother to check it.

You know, it's like, if I -- if you ran into a quote from Hitler, you've never seen, that was negative from Jews. As a journalist, you should probably check it.

You might think. That was probably true. He said a lot of things like that. That's how they think about people who are normal conservatives who want lower taxes and less regulation. And that is really, really disturbing.

So these lies are really prominent. People really believe these things.

GLENN: So there's a couple of -- here are the five. The first one is Charlie Kirk said black people were better off in slavery.

How big of an idiot, do you have to be, to believe that?

Okay?

Unless you're Crockett. Unless your last name is Crockett.

And I don't mean Davey. Black Americans were better off than slavery. No. That's absolutely no true -- not true. He never said anything like that. Now, what he -- what you're probably getting this from, and I'm going -- searching. I am on -- way metal detector on the beach with board shorts, sandals, and socks, looking for anything that even kind of sounds like that. But Charlie Kirk did say that, you know, they were talking about Jim Crow and how evil Jim Crow was. But he said with be, but if you look at the family, the black family before the passage of the civil rights act, which ended the Jim Crow laws, he said, the family was thriving.

And it was!

It was. Blacks had a lower divorce rate than whites did in I think 1961. They -- their families were stronger. Dads were in the homes. They had lower crime rates. I mean, it -- something happened around the time of the Civil Rights Act.

Now, my theory is, the Civil Rights Act was a -- was done by progressives. I mean, these are the guys who said no to the Civil Rights Act, just four years before. And -- and worked hard to stop the Civil Rights Act.

So what changed in those four years?

The assassination of President Kennedy. That changed your mind. Not even. Not even.

I mean, Johnson was the biggest racist up until he -- up until he died. Why would he create the great society?

My theory, this is just a theory. But my theory is, is because finally, the progressives had a way to keep blacks under their thumb and destroy the family. And destroy them, as people.

I mean, the Civil Rights Act, and more the Great Society.

The Great Society did more damage to the black family than -- than anybody could have done outside of Margaret Sanger. I think that's what he meant by that. It was evil.

You know, Jim Crow, et cetera, et cetera.

But if you look at the numbers on specifics, family, et cetera, et cetera. Blacks were doing better as families, before the Great Society.

And I think that undoing is absolutely -- is absolutely tied to it. And it was intentional, myself, I believe that.

Also, the next claim is that -- that Charlie Kirk said, black women have inferior intelligence. No, that's not what he said.

Now, they're quoting him saying that black women don't have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.

How -- how bad does your image have to be of people on the other side to believe that they could say that?

That Charlie Kirk could say that?

STU: Like, if you were to -- you know, I think about this a lot of times. When I think about how we react to crazy statements on the left.

My reaction a lot of times, when I hear someone saying that is wait a minute.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Even if they believed that, they wouldn't just blurt it out. What is the context of this? I want to know. I want to understand. That should be your first question when you run into a quote like that.

GLENN: Well, go to Snopes. They rate this one true.

STU: This is true.

GLENN: They rate it absolutely true.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Until you get to the last paragraph, when they say, well, we should point out, he wasn't talking about all black women. He was talking about four specific black women.

STU: Oh. Oh.

GLENN: So he's talking about Joy Reid, absolutely true. Sheila Jackson Lee, absolutely true.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Ketanji Brown Jackson. Jackson Brown, absolutely true.

STU: Well, she's not a biologist, Glenn.

GLENN: No. She doesn't know what a woman is. I'm not a biologist. Yeah.

And Michelle Obama, which I don't think is true. I think Michelle Obama is actually rather smart and conniving and just flatout evil.

STU: Yeah. There's a mix there. Ketanji Brown Jackson, for all the flaws that would happen. There's a Supreme Court justice, obviously isn't a moron.

GLENN: Well.

STU: I would say Sotomayor, I would be more confident saying she is a moron.

Though, I am -- for the job that she has, Ketanji Brown Jackson is a moron. You know, Joy Reid is a complete idiot. Wasn't Sheila Jackson Lee, those two follow the same category? You're right. Michelle Obama, I would not call an idiot.

Again, criticizing four members of a group does not mean you're criticizing the group.

GLENN: And he was criticizing people he thought were unqualified to make statements of -- of any intelligence on whatever topic it was that he was talking about.

And what they did, is they said, he thinks that all black women are just dumb.

I mean, that is so incredibly dishonest.

Charlie Kirk said, gun deaths are worth it to keep the Second Amendment.

STU: This is one I heard a lot.

This is one that a lot of people on the left are using as justification for their celebration.

He said, you know, well, you just have to deal with the deaths if you want to have a Second Amendment.

And, you know, I don't know if you have the context --

GLENN: I have it -- I have his answer right here.

You ready? You will never live in a society where you have an armed citizenry. And you won't have a single gun death.

That's nonsense.

It's drivel.

But I am -- I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year.

So you can have the Second Amendment right to protect your other God-given rights.

It's a prudent deal. It is rational to think that way.

STU: I mean, and obviously -- every time -- if you have a free society, you take risks with it.

There will always be people. Horrible, horrible human beings that all seem to donate to Democrat causes, that will do things, like we saw one week ago today.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And that is -- you know, I -- again, you can't speak for Charlie Kirk.

He spoke for himself so eloquently.

But he -- even what occurred last week, would not change his mind on that.

Even -- now that something terrible has happened to me and my family, we should overturn the Second Amendment. And people shouldn't have the right to defend themselves.

You know that's how he would feel about it. And this is, if anything, pointing to his incredible consistency on the rights that we have, in this country. You know, it is a sad -- sad, unfortunate fact about so many things.

Sad, unfortunate fact about automobile travel.

That you do have to deal with some automobile accidents.

When you have highways where you can drive 55, 65, 75 miles an hour, we all understand that to be true.

GLENN: It's unreasonable to think that you can live in a society with automobiles, and not have some automobile accidents.

STU: It's absolutely true.

GLENN: It's exactly what he said about guns.

STU: And, frankly, the other thing that is important to understand, if you did eliminate all guns, you would not eliminate all murders.

GLENN: No. They did in England.

STU: Oh, they did. We're all set?

GLENN: There's no murder there.

STU: No violent crimes there.

I keep reading about them. Is that all false?

GLENN: Yeah. That's Donald Trump. You know what I mean?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's -- last one, Charlie used an Asian slur. Now, I'm not going to use the slur, obviously. I'm just going to say, it's what happens sometimes with armor. There's a very famous saying with armor, that has nothing to do with the Chinese or Asian at all. But I'm not even going to put those together in this context now, you you'll have to figure it out.

The thing is going around, he used that slur to yell at an Asian woman in the audience.

Now, again, what kind of monster -- or how --

STU: You should know on its face, that's false. You should know that's false.

GLENN: Yeah. How stupid would Charlie Kirk have to be, okay?

So, you know, there's nothing. There's nothing like that. Well, I'm sorry.

He was screaming something at a woman when they were talking about capitalism, and he was yelling, Cenk, not the other word. Okay? And who is that? From the Young Turks --

STU: The guys from the Young Turks.

GLENN: That's what he was saying.

STU: Oh, gosh, that's just so bad. You know, the other one was the Stephen King situation, where he quoted some horrible thing that Charlie Kirk said.

And, again, he knitted eventually, that -- that it was false.

But it was -- it was -- he was quoting someone else, in an incident, and critiquing that position.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Yes.

STU: Which was a bad position. But he was bringing it up to quote him and critique him, which is a very standard thing they did on the left. This is a standard tactic of Media Matters when you're quoting someone else or saying something.

They'll act as if I say it.

GLENN: You repeat a lie often enough, and the public will remember it. Glenn Beck is quoting Hitler. Glenn Beck loves Hitler.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Yeah. Hitler said that, but that's not what I was saying. That had nothing to do with the conversation, for the love of Pete.

STU: Yeah, again, if you had something against Charlie Kirk, you wouldn't need to go to this stuff. If our opinion of Kirk, which was a guy who worked hard to debate people.

Who tried to practice politics and civic life the right way. Who tried to be a shining light for his faith, which was vitally important to him and his family. If that vision of Charlie Kirk was false, you wouldn't need to go to these things.

GLENN: No.

STU: You could come up with 50 different things he said that were really offensive. Instead, what you come up with are lies. Because that's what you're in the business of.

GLENN: Yeah. And there is a problem.

The -- we now know. And we'll have more on this later today. On the Charlie Kirk show.

And then on tomorrow.

But we now know that the Chinese and Russia are involved with disinformation campaigns.

Based on Charlie Kirk, trying to get us to push us into Civil War. And we know it for a fact now.

So just be very careful what you read online.

And don't necessarily repeat everything that you see.

Shocking timeline: How “protests” turned into radical attacks in 2025

In the aftermath of the assassination of Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk, it is important to realize that a chilling pattern of far-left radical attacks had already emerged in 2025. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to lay out the timeline, connect the dots, and explain why what looks like a “protest” on one day can turn into an actual attack on the next. Glenn walks through each high-profile incident, the groups and ideologies involved, and the national implications for safety, free speech, and public order.

Watch This FULL Episode of 'Glenn TV' HERE

Glenn Beck warns of dangerous government powers in proposed Charlie Kirk act

President Trump and others have posted in support of a proposed Charlie Kirk Act. But Glenn Beck gives a warning: there are 2 versions of this going around. One, proposed by Sen. Mike Lee, would stop the government from using propaganda against Americans. The other would go further, giving the government dangerous powers over truth. Glenn Beck explains the differences as well as what the Smith-Mundt Act was and why an Obama-era decision may be connected to the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. I want you to just spend a couple of minutes with me, and switch everything that you've been thinking on, off for a minute. This is very important. I want to take you back to the world in 1948, okay?

The ashes of World War II are still warm. The Cold War is already beginning to chill in the air, and the Soviet Union has a propaganda machine that is in full swing.

Radio Moscow, Pravda, endless streams of anti-American stories are pouring into the homes of men and women, all across the globe.

And Congress looked at this. And said, we need a counterbalance on this.

America needs to tell her story to the world about liberty and about her finding ideals.

And we need to tell it to the rest of the world.

This is the birth of the Smith-Mundt Act. Okay? We needed to launch things, at that time. Like the Voice of America, and radio-free Europe, and Radio Liberty.

These were not just radio stations. For many who were behind the curtain, these were lifelines.

A Polish dissident in the 1970s or a Hungarian who lived through the 1956 uprising, they'll tell you, they're huddled in the dark, and they have that dial of that radio.

And they can tune it. They carefully tune it, listening to an American voice break through the static and break through the darkness. That says, freedom is real. And the world hasn't forgotten you. They remember that as being very important.

But and here is the key: We, as a society, drew a very bright red line, none of this could ever be used in the United States. Congress rightfully was terrified of unleashing a government propaganda machine on its own citizens. Now, I want you to remember. 1948, Congress is still Democrat.

Okay?

You just had 20 years of the same president, FDR.

They're about to say, no president can serve that long.

The Democrats said, no Democrat president. No Republican president can ever serve that long. Because we were so close to fascism.

So the Democrats are very concerned about the government going fascistic.

And they should know about it. Because they remembered the control commission.

Now, let me take you back to World War I. The Creel Commission is something that nobody remembers, and everyone should.

Because it's what whipped America up in a frenzy, to get us to go into World War I.

You know it, because you remember the I want you Uncle Sam poster. And I've always hated that Uncle Sam poster because of the Creel Commission. I love it. I think it's really beautiful. It was created by an artist, that he didn't create it for the Creel Commission. So, you know, he was innocent. But it was the Creel machine that plastered it on every wall, every post office, every train station.

And suddenly Uncle Sam's finger was pointing at you. It wasn't just a poster. It was a summons. It was you. We need you to go to war. Americans did not want to go to World War I. In fact, Woodrow Wilson said, the other side, he will put you into war. I will keep I out of war. He knew that wasn't true.

Within three months after his reelection, we're at war. But he had to bring the country along. So the Creel Commission, through films and songs, films like the Kaiser, the Beast of Berlin, it turned the -- it turned Germany into a cartoon villain. George Cohan, he wrote songs, over there. Over there.

All of these things were done by the government, as propaganda to get Americans to go over there.

And fight. Then the government went even further. And they started hiring these, what were called Four Minute Men.

Now, imagine this, you're sitting in a movie theater.

The film. You're watching maybe the -- the newsreel. And as they're changing the reels, some guy who just in the audience, stands up, walks to the front. Clears his throat. And he delivers this really well-thought out and rousing four minute speech about patriotism. And liberty.

And crushing Germany.

The government had 75,000 volunteers. They gave millions of speeches, when anybody would pause in churches and schools. In parks.

In theaters. They were called Four Minute Men.

This was social media before social media. They were short bursts. And they seemingly were everywhere, and always on message.

Because the message was crafted by the government. Then the Creel group, through our government, published booklets, official bulletins. They planted stories in the press. This is when we really started really getting into the press, and information was -- had one goal. All of the information. And that was rallies for the -- rally support for the war, and drown out anybody that was disagreeing with that. Okay?

The government actually encouraged kids to spy on their neighbors.

That you were encouraged and post -- post men did this.

To go through the mail, if they saw -- if they saw letters that were coming in. Ask they wanted to know, who it was. And are you a German spy. Are you somebody who is going to be against the war?

Postal workers went through your mail. And it was legal at the time!

You were encouraged, operators were encouraged to listen to people's phone calls, and to report if they were on the other side.

This is Germany.

In fact, because of the Creel Commission, Germans, and what's his name?

The head of the German propaganda, oh, what's his name? The German douche bag. I can't remember his name. Anyway, what was his name?

STU: Goebbels, is that who you're talking about?

GLENN: Goebbels.

STU: Although, I like your name for it, frankly.

GLENN: Yeah. Goebbels, the douche bag.

Anyway, he said, we lost World War I because of American propaganda. But we learned how Americans did it.

And that's what Goebbels did in World War II. All of this propaganda. Okay?

By the way, American advertising, up until World War II, it was called propaganda.

What I heard, I wouldn't have said, now a message from our advertiser.

I was delivering literally and it was cool at the time, to call it propaganda.

Because that's what it was. Paid for propaganda.

Bit after Goebbels took it. And did what he did with it. We were like, oh, propaganda is bad!

Okay?

So here's what -- here's what happened because of the Creel Commission. They were pushing uniformity of thought. They did that by making sure Americans were hearing the same slogans. The same images. The same stories from every direction. Which created the illusion of unanimous consent. I want you to think about life today.

I want you to think about life during COVID.

What was the goal of the government.

To crush any dissent, and to control all of the messages that were going out, to make sure that you were hearing the same slogans, the same images. The same stories from every direction, to give you the illusion that it was unanimous consent.

What about the global warming? It's exactly the same.

Then on top of it, the Creel Commission demonized dissent. Okay? German Americans were part of this country forever.

In fact, we were I think two votes away from making German our official language, as the United States, not English. But they were all of a sudden, branded as traitors.

You couldn't -- a priest went to jail, because he gave the last rites to a German who fell down in front of him on the streets and was dying. And a priest spoke German and gave him the last rites in German. That priest went to jail! Okay??

Okay? So they demonized dissent. Then they suppressed free speech. The propaganda campaign dovetailed with the Espionage Act of 1917. The Sedition Act of 1918. If you criticized the draft, if you questioned the war, you could be fined. You would be ostracized, and you would go to jail.

This is Woodrow Wilson, gang. Does any of it sound familiar?

Now, here's what the aftermath was, after the war. When the war ended, the mask came off. Millions were dead, and Americans felt absolutely duped. They felt that they were tricked into going into a war that they were manipulated into. They didn't even understand it. And that's why we were such isolationists, in the 1920s and our 1930s, because our own government had manipulated the population to go in to fight this war, and they felt so manipulated and so betrayed by their own government. They were like, I don't want anything to do with foreign wars, okay?

So why did this -- why did this happen in 1948?

Well, because in 1948, all of this stuff is happening, and we're saying, okay. We need to have some sort of -- some sort of boundary.

Because we're going to start all of this propaganda, for the United States. And it cannot be ever turned on the people of the United States. Okay?

So then why -- why was it repealed?

It was repealed without any really kind of conversation. Because it was slipped in, called the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act.

It was slipped in to a defense authorization bill. Just like it's happening right now, the government didn't pay its bills.

They couldn't come up with the -- with a way to actually fund everything. Because we have to act as an emergency, otherwise all of our war machine. And it's all going to stop. And the world is going to die. And panic and all of that.

;And so somebody has slipped the bill in. And we modernized it.

Why did we modernize?

Well, because don't you like transparency?

I mean, we're doing this overseas. We're doing this propaganda overseas. Do you know -- taxpayer. You're paying for it. Shouldn't you see it?

There was a Congressman Max Thornberry. He was one of the sponsors. And he said, quote, today the law prevents the American people from seeing or hearing the same things we broadcast overseas, and that doesn't make any sense.

We paid for it. Okay. Then they switched that from transparency to, and it's helping fight terrorism. It will let the Department of Defense and the State Department share counter radicalization material both abroad and at home, because we have to modernize this. The internet is everywhere, okay?
So who doesn't want to fight terrorists? Who doesn't want transparency?

Now, here's what actually happened. I'll tell you in 60 seconds. First, Stu.

STU: Yeah. Let me tell you about Prize Picks. You know, we're talking about daily fantasy sports, which is a nice escape, honestly from where we've been over the past three weeks.

If you remember fantasy sports and you're like, oh, gosh.

Yeah, that's a lot of work. I have to be on there, every single day. You don't have to do it that way. Prize Picks brings it back to what it was meant to be. Simple and quick and actually enjoyable.

No drafts. No leagues. No season-long commitments. You just look at the player projections for the day, decide if they'll do more or less than what is listed, build your lineup. And then you're in.

It takes less than a minute to play. And you can mix or match players across different sports, football, baseball. Basketball.

Whatever -- whatever you want.

You don't have to be a stat wizard. You don't have to be a sports insider. You just got instincts, and you have an opinion.

You can win Prize Picks. It's daily fantasy, the way it should be. Fun, flexible, and easy to fit into real life and a nice escape. No stress. Just sports your way.

Download the app today. Use the code Stu.

Get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup. The code is Stu, to get 50 bucks instantly when you play your first 5-dollar lineup. It's Prize Picks. And it's good to be right. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So in 2012, the left decides, we have to get rid of this propaganda thing.

Okay?

Once the firewall was gone, and it's just a blip, no one even really noticed it. Suddenly, the government agencies could circulate diplomacy campaigns, inside of the United States.

And we saw this. This is where you get your USAID. The NGOs. Doing all the things here in the United States.

Because they can all do it. During COVID, you saw this.

You saw government-funded messaging, quietly merging with the media campaigns and big tech content moderation. Narratives weren't debated. They were handed out by the government. And then they were enforced. Then take the DHS disinformation governance board.

This is a direct descendent from this shift. Okay?

It was the government openly declaring it had a role in policing speech at home.

Look at the 2016 aftermath of the elections. Reports now confirm that the US government funds originally intended for overseas information campaigns that had filtered into domestic projects that fact-checked, flagged, and suppressed certain narratives online. The line between foreign propaganda and domestic persuasion was completely gone. Everything they worried about in 1948, was now happening after 2012. Okay. So why am I bringing this up today?

Because after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, we have been asking for this to be reinstated.

This Smith-Mundt Act has to be reinstated. But after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, there is a new wave of enthusiasm for this as there should be.

But some people on our side, are now demanding more than just a firewall.

You go to change.org. And there's petitions for a Charlie Kirk act.

And it will not only stop government propaganda. But it goes further than that. It starts to punish private media. Educators. Social media platforms. For spreading what they call false narratives. So this is -- this is our side saying, yeah, well, now we want the power to do what they did. Okay? Hear me clearly.

Accountability matters! Lives are destroyed, reputations are smeared. And that matters.

But we have systems in place for that.

What this proposal opens is a new door. A terror where government decides, what is and isn't falsehood.

And the government cannot do that. History teaches us. Once the government claims the authority to define truth.

Liberty is gone. Okay?

Now, enter Mike Lee.

Mike Lee has another proposal. Mike Lee has a version. That he is submitting to Congress. And trying to get it passed. And every American should be for this.

Right or left.

Every American should be for this. He's not going to reinvent the wheel. He just wants the old firewall put back. That's it.

Period.

The government must not, and cannot propagandize its own people. Restore the very bright red line that was attacked in 1948.

It's not about silencing speech. It's about preventing the most powerful institution on earth, with the endless resources of that institution, the government.

And the endless reach, from turning its firehose of influence in on the American people.

This is why it matters. I want you to think of -- I want you to think of football.

Oh, boy. Dangerous.

You wouldn't let the referee this a football game, put on a jersey, and join one of the teams. Okay?

But that's what the repeal did. It let the government be both the referee and the player in the arena of ideas. Mike Lee is saying, put the stripes back on their jerseys. Make sure they're in black and white stripes. So we know exactly who they are!

Change.org and some people on our side want to make the ref not only a player, but the judge, the jury, and the executioner. It cannot happen.

This is -- I'm telling you, if this goes through, Mike Lee is proposing something that is clean. Doesn't have any of this in.

So support the Mike Lee Mundt Act. But if you're hearing people talk about, we have to go further, that is the Patriot Act of our day. We're standing at a fork in the road.

Reinstating the Smith-Mundt protections. They're not going to solve all the problems of misinformation, but it reestablishes the ground rules. And tells Washington, you cannot propagandize us, period.
(music)

Once truth belongs to the state, truth itself ceases to exist. Support Mike Lee's bill.

Restore the Smith-Mundt Act.