Glenn: This TAKE DOWN of a LYING nominee means ’NOTHING’
RADIO

Glenn: This TAKE DOWN of a LYING nominee means ’NOTHING’

President Biden’s nominee to be America’s national archivist, Colleen Shogan, has promised to be non-partisan if granted the role. But when she faced the Senate Homeland Security and Governmenting Affairs Committee earlier this week, Senator Josh Hawley proved the opposite may be true. In fact, Senator Hawley, used Shogan's tweets, PROVED before the committee that she was lying to them all — UNDER OATH! The take down was ‘SO SATISFYING,’ Glenn says, but it will likely amount to NOTHING. In this clip, Glenn explains why…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Oh, my goodness. Hello, and welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. We've got a lot to do today. I'm going to show you some things from this week, from a couple of hearings, that I just -- I mean, I cheer.

We are actually starting to find a spine in this country.

And that is so great! So great!

However, we have to do more than cheer and yell at people. And when I say yell at people, I'm going to play some things, where it was insane. Well, let me start here. Let me just start with this.

Because you'll understand how good it feels.

Let's go to cut eight, with Senator Hawley, talking to the person that is going to be the -- our national archivist. Now, remember, the national archives, should just be somebody collecting all of the stuff, and preserving it.

Okay?

I don't want a political ideologue. I don't even -- I don't -- shh. I want somebody that nobody even cares to meet. Okay?

This is like, you know, you'll have to meet the archivist, just to get that paper. Oh, they're so boring.

But just tolerate it, because the stuff in the vault is really cool. Okay?

That's who I want. But that's not who we're getting. Remember, the national archives are now saying, this document here is very triggering.

Yes, if you're King George III, it shouldn't be triggering to you now. But I don't know, the national archives, it's kind of dicey. So who do we have? We have somebody who is a lefty.

And on the second hearing, in the Senate, she was kind of caught in a little trap. Because on her first one, they had some tweets from her, that were like, you know who I just hate? All Republicans.

I mean, just crazy stuff, that she just tweeted out.

And so she made her Twitter feed, private, the day before she went to the hearing.

And they only had a couple of her tweets. And they were going to use them, but they only had a couple of them, that they had printed off. Because she left it all open. Then the night before, she closes it down, so they don't have everything. So Hawley asks her. Can you tell me -- what's on your tweets. I mean, you closed them down.

We have two of them here. What's on your tweets?

She was under oath. Well, she was back. And I would just like to say, Senator Hawley, I -- I mean, whatever you need. Whatever you need. I mean, if you need my wife to make you some lasagna, bring it over, I'll personally put it on the fork and feed it to you. If that's what makes you happy.

This exchange made me very happy.

VOICE: Dr. Shogan, when you were here last year, a number of senators asked you, including me, a series of questions about an article you had written, public statements that you had made on social media, that were pretty grossly partisan, and I thought offensive.

And you and I went back and forth about it. After that, a number of us asked you questions, relating to these statements.

I want to follow up on one of them. I, in particular, asked you to give a full accounting of the public posts that you had made on Twitter. You had locked your Twitter account, before you came before this committee. It previously had been public.

I asked you to provide the public posts, that previously had been made on Twitter. Because the ones we had were pretty disturbing. You responded, as follows. Quote, my personal Twitter account is comprised of posts about my history novels, events at the White House Historical Association, Pittsburgh sports teams, travels, and my dog.

Let's talk a little bit about your Twitter posts then, that I was asking you about. On February 18th, 2022, you posted on Twitter, bemoaning the dropping of mask requirements for children, including those under the age of five. Do you remember that post?

VOICE: No, Senator. Those tweets were in my personal capacity.

VOICE: No, no, no. No.

I asked you, would you give all public posts, that you had made on Twitter. You said no, effectively.

And you said, that your Twitter posts consisted of mystery novels, events at the White House Historical Association, Pittsburgh sports teams, and my dog.

You just told me now under oath, that you stood by that. Now, let's talk about your Twitter post.

On February 18th, 2022, you posted bemoaning the fact that mask requirements for children, under the age of five, one of whom I happen to have by the way, has been dropped. Is that a post about your dog or sports teams?

VOICE: My social media is my personal capacity, sir?

VOICE: Answer my question, please. Because you've testified under oath, that you only posted about your dog, sports teams, and novels. And you also said you wouldn't give this committee, any of your public posts. So is your posts on February 18th, 2022, bemoaning the lifting of mask requirements, for children under the age of five. Who I might just ask, all the data has said, is extremely harmful to children, these mask requirements. We'll leave that aside for now.

Is that a post about your dog or sports teams? Yes or no?

VOICE: My social media is in my personal capacity, Senator.

VOICE: Yes or no, Ms. Shogan.

You are under oath before this committee, and I have to say, you have placed this issue squarely in record by repeatedly refusing to answer. Yes or no?

GLENN: I love you.

VOICE: My personal -- my social media is in my personal capacity, Senator.

VOICE: So you're not answering my question.

Let's talk about another post.

Twenty-sixth of May, 2022, you talk about an assaults weapon ban. Retweet a post, ban assault weapons now. You say you agree this idea, you have to be a certain age to buy assault weapons in America. Is that a post about sports teams and your dog or mystery novels?

VOICE: My social media is in my personal capacity, Senator.

VOICE: I have to say, I have been here for four years. I have never seen a witness stonewall like this before. Never. I've seen a lot. This is extraordinary.

I mean, this is unbelievable. And you want to be the archives of the United States. You lied to us, under oath.

You lied to us in your QFRs. You just lied to me a second ago under oath. And now you're sitting here stonewalling, not answering questions about public posts that you made.

Dr. Shogan, I will ask you again: Will you give to this committee your public posts on Twitter? Will you make them available?

VOICE: My social media is in my personal capacity.

VOICE: Mr. Chairman, I have to tell you, this is the most extraordinary thing I have seen in my brief time in the Senate. I have never seen a witness blatantly lie under oath, like Dr. Shogan has just done to this committee, stonewalled this committee, and just repeatedly just refused to answer my questions about her own posts that are in public. For these reasons, I will oppose your nomination. And I strongly, strongly urge this committee, to take action on this, and own up to the fact that she's misleading us, right before our eyes, Mr. Chairman.

GLENN: I mean, don't you love him?

Now, here's the thing that I want to point out.

That was a shortened version. The long version is like eight minutes. And it is so satisfying. It is so satisfying.

He's the first person that I have heard. I shouldn't say that. There's -- this has been a good week for this kind of stuff. That were actually holding people's feet to the fire!

Now, it makes no difference, if it's all just words. And let me tell you why: There is a great McIntire piece on the Blaze today. Media acceptance of the lab leak theory is the turning of the COVID ratchet.

This is the most important opinion piece, that I have read, on why the COVID leak is coming out.

And what does it all mean?

They -- he writes, if you thought this monumental collapse of credibility, this sudden implosion of certainty of the science, would give the media moments of hesitation, you were sadly mistaken.

The progressive chattering class spent their days forcing the American public to pretend that men could become women, at cultural gunpoint. Science was never the lodestone of truth. They are not undergoing some sort of dramatic crisis here.

While some would expect a little more coordination between the regime and its media arm to create a smoother narrative transition, this trailing dialectic serves its own purpose.

Our ruling elite secure power through constant invocation of the state of exception.

In theory, we live in a democracy, where the power of the government is constrained through the structure of the Constitution, and the will of the people.

In practice, however, both limiting factors can be removed in the case of an emergency. A cunning leader knows that power once granted, is rarely returned. And it is very difficult for the public to hold anyone accountable, after the fact.

When an emergency presents the opportunity to achieve power, under the state of exception, it is always best to manufacture the narrative, to secure that power as quickly as possible.

And then make the adjustments later, after the power is firmly in hand. The pandemic, allowed for the creation of an indefinite state of exception. During which, the regime could lock down its political opponents, unleash its own supporters, to those who opposed them. Churches, gyms, were shuttered, abortion clinics, Walmarts were deemed essential. Leftist corporate allies like Amazon required near -- acquired near monopoly on -- on commerce. While their local retail competition was driven into bankruptcy.

Trump supporters were forced to attend the funerals of their loved ones on Zoom. While Joe Biden voters, drank champagne in the streets, to celebrate his election.

Politics, after all, is about rewarding your friends and punishing your enemies.

He goes on to Trump and The View, et cetera, et cetera. But what we are now observing is the process by which our ruling elite consolidate the power they gained, by reconciling their narrative to something that more closely resembles reality. Bit by bit, the powers have had to admit the truth behind most of the conspiracy theories, that they so violently attacked. This slow drip of truth, is not some admission of failure or culpability. It is instead, designed to turn the political ratchet.

Conservatives and COVID spectics -- skeptics get to feel vindicated. We have a moment of, a-ha! I told you so!

Yet, nothing changes. The power isn't taken back. No one serves a punishment, for the crime.

We must understand, that what holly just did there, is so satisfying. What Ted Cruz and Holly did this week, to Merrick Garland is just -- I mean, it was almost -- I mean, you could rate that as a porn.

STU: We should go through that at some point again.

GLENN: It was so -- it was so good.

STU: Mahauck (phonetic) incident. Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

I mean, we'll play this. We'll play a cut, if you haven't heard it yet. But it was so good. But it means nothing without teeth. They trust -- who was it?

I want to say it was Biggs. Was it the Biggs amendment that was trying to go after Mayorkas. And all of the Republicans have all said, this is out of control. This is crazy.

Well, there are two bills to impeach him. In a Republican House.

And they are a long way from getting anybody to sign on. There's like 41 sponsors.

That's it.

Wait. Excuse me?

Someone must pay the price, for what is happening in our society. Or nothing changes.

You can feel vindicated, you can feel good. You can yell at people, but it doesn't change anything.

That woman should not be in the -- as the archivist for multiple reasons.

But she should pay some price, for lying under oath.

They're all doing it.

If they don't punish those people, why would you care?

Why would you care? What meaning does your testimony even have?

The CRAZIEST Baltimore Key Bridge Collapse Theory Yet???
RADIO

The CRAZIEST Baltimore Key Bridge Collapse Theory Yet???

It didn’t take long for people to cry foul when a cargo ship crashed into Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge and knocked it down. But while there’s still no hard evidence of a cyberattack or terrorism, Glenn, Pat, and Stu have another … weirder … theory: Has anyone seen Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg lately? Because there have been A LOT of transportation-related tragedies under his watch …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the bridge, Stu has a theory on this -- this Baltimore bridge collapse.

STU: I do not. I would not say I have a theory at all. I'm just saying, look, it wouldn't make any sense for this to be a terrorist attack the way it happened. 1:30 in the morning. Like, why would you do it that way?

Maybe you would argue, it was some sort of a test run.

PAT: Or just to disrupt our infrastructure.

STU: I don't know. But it doesn't seem like it will be that serious, in that. These places are able to -- it doesn't seem like. Like all the reporting is, they're able to reroute to other ports.

I mean, it has to affect Baltimore pretty seriously. Obviously, traffic will be affected. If you're going for a major terrorist attack. First of all, 1:30 in the morning is a weird time for it. And, of course, the warnings from the ships and all these other things.

Beyond that, I'm looking at a broader picture here. And I'm -- again, I'm not saying this. What I want you to know, I'm not saying this.

PAT: Okay. What are you not saying?

STU: I'm not saying that Pete Buttigieg individually, is going to each one of these things and -- like unscrewing Boeing doors before the plane takes off. I'm not saying he's doing that.

I'm not saying he's loosening tires off of planes. I'm not saying that. That would be incredibly impossible. What I am saying, should we check his house, to see if he has scuba gears. Let's check it out. Why not go into his garage and see, Pat. Maybe he has a couple of -- you know, a couple of -- I don't know.

Rubber suits. That might be for other use. I'm just saying, can we at least check? We should at least know that.

PAT: Maybe he has a Phillips screwdriver or something.

STU: Right. Does he have -- it would just be interesting to know, what type of --

PAT: It would. Yeah.

STU: Underwater diving gear, the man owns. Like, does he happen to have a mini submarine in his garage? That would be something we should know.

PAT: That would be weird.

GLENN: First of all. First of all.

As I said, they always return to the crazy -- the scene of the crime.

So he never shows up after one of these.

He disappears after this.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Have I noticed that?

We never hear him talking about anything transportation. Have you heard him actually, you know, standing in front of a United airliner going, we're going to shut this thing down, until we figure out why the United Airlines keeps losing doors and wheels. And I heard the steering wheel or something, the other day.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Why? Where is he on that?

So he never shows up at the scene of the crime. So that immediately goes. It's also way too much work for him.

PAT: It's true.

GLENN: He would have to learn things, like how to put the mask on. Which I think is beyond his capability. You know, how do I -- the scuba gear goes where exactly. And you don't want to use it after him. After he tries it. I'm just saying, I don't know.

STU: I think, look, there are a lot of reasons to believe that Pete Buttigieg isn't responsible for each one of these things. It would be insane. It would be a crazy development, by all accounts.

GLENN: Yes, it would. Right.

STU: However, how else do we explain this?

PAT: It would be unprecedented, if it were our transportation secretary.

STU: I would agree, you be precedented.

PAT: Never in history, has a transportation secretary sabotaged so much transportation.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Can we look at the bright side, however?

That would be more than any transportation secretary has done probably in the history of transportation. I never know what they do.

STU: This is a good point.

Who knows the name of any other transportation secretary.

Yet, we all --

GLENN: You have chow.

STU: Yeah, Chow was one. And the other one that popped into my head was LaHood. Because back in the day. But not for, hey, he's screwing up all of our infrastructure.

It was like, oh, well, he's sort of a notable figure that occasionally comes up in policy conversations. This guy has overseen disaster movie sequel, after disaster movie sequels since he has this job.

We have American institutions. Boeing is just like, eh, we can't keep planes in the air anymore.

Like, what?

Why? Why has all of this happened under his watch. It's like he's trying. It's like he's Michelman. He's tied to -- we now have more footage to show in disaster movies, because of this guy. Allegedly. I mean, I don't think he is intentionally derailing trains across the country.

It does seem weird, that ever since -- we should look to see if he has a wedge or tools that would allow him to do it.

GLENN: You know, I would say the fact that everything is being derailed, would lead me to believe, that it's not one man.

STU: It's probably not. It's probably not.

GLENN: This is not bad -- the entire -- the entire country is going into a bridge abutment.

STU: That's true. That's true.

PAT: It would explain why we never see him though. Because he's always off skulking into one of these places, loosening some bolt.

STU: It's probably not him loosening bolts. It's probably not. Probably not.

PAT: Probably not.

STU: But wouldn't it be easy to rule it out. Let's toss that -- let's toss the individual possibility, that Pete Buttigieg is flying around the country, disabling our infrastructure.

Let's just rule that one out. It has to be easy to rule out.

PAT: I would feel a lot better. You know, I would. Even though, I understand, it's a --

GLENN: Call his husband. And find out, was he in bed with you, last night, or the night before, when this thing hit the bridge abutment. Just find out.

STU: Just find out. It's an easy one to rule out.

PAT: It did.

STU: Until we rule it out. He should go back on maternity leave.

That's all I'm saying. He shouldn't be employed on this job, as if it's a possibility.

GLENN: Oh, I see what this is. You just want him out as the transportation secretary. You are such a bad man.

PAT: Could that be it?

GLENN: Is it homophobia? Is that what's happening?

STU: It's definitely not homophobia. He can be as gay as he would like to be, while on paternity leave. In fact, I would encourage it. It would be almost odd if he wasn't, right?

But like, what I'm saying is, ever since this guy took this job, we have done show after show after show, out of --

PAT: About disasters.

STU: About transportation infrastructure collapse. What is happening -- like, why not just, either he's individually doing it himself.

Or maybe another possibility, is everything this man touches, gets destroyed like he's Ivan Drago. Maybe that's the thing.

GLENN: I have to tell you. I don't even know if he -- I think this is just -- this is just now four years of absolute incompetence.

The companies are all being distracted. From what they have to do. So they can meet new governmental mandates on bullcrap that mean nothing to any of us.

And this guy. This guy, I don't think he knows what his job is. I really don't.

STU: He seems to be terrible at it.

GLENN: Do you? This has and whenever he's involved in something, tragedies ensue. Again, we talk about these problems. With the border.

I don't know. What do you do? You have to make sure you're closing the border to illegal immigration. Before you're worrying about the immigrants that already cross.

You have to stop the flow. There's a leak. You have to stop the leak. Turn the water off. Then fix. With this. Shouldn't we turn the water off here?

Get this guy away from this thing first.

And then we'll figure out some of the other tails.

Whatever he's bringing to the table, is weighing down the table, and the table is collapsing. Can we do something about it?

GLENN: This is the best entertaining conspiracy theory, that I've heard in the last 24 hours. This is good. This is good.

STU: I don't think -- it would be absurd to picture Pete bite judge in a scuba outfit.

I mean, like, if somebody were to Photoshop that, and give it to us, and put it on Twitter.

That would be silly.

PAT: Irresponsible. Irresponsible.

STU: Irresponsible. He can't possibly do it. Let's confirm he doesn't have the equipment to make it possible.

Let's rule it out now!

GLENN: Have we seen close-up pictures of the American Airlines flight. When it was taking off, losing the tire. Was there a parachute after? Was he up in the wheel of -- as they took off?

Just, you know, like one of those poor Afghans, that were just like, I'm going to go to America. And he's like, wait. I'm not done.

I'll unloose the bolts here. I would like to see a close-up. Was he driving a tanker up Dr. Truck, last June 11th, and left it on I-95, in Philadelphia.

That bridge. When that caught fire.

PAT: Let's see who the driver was.

STU: Let's look. If you have the CCTV footage. You see a little guy scampering from the bridge right after. I would like to know, who is that?

Is that a leprechaun, or is that Pete Buttigieg? I want to know who that is. These are basic questions, we can ask, honestly.

And my goal here is to exonerate Pete Buttigieg.

PAT: Clear! Clear the air.

STU: That's my goal.

GLENN: Well, I don't think -- before you said this, I don't think Pete Buttigieg came up as a suspect.

STU: Hell. It would be so outlandish, right?

PAT: People were afraid to say it. Thank you.

STU: It was.

GLENN: Is that what it was?

PAT: We're saying what everybody was thinking, stupidly.

STU: But other people would say --

GLENN: As Jon Stewart said, saying the things that nobody is thinking. That's what he's doing now.

STU: Right. It could be. It could be. But then other people might say, it's the most logical explanation, that he's just going around and doing it himself. Why else would all of this happen. And that's why I just want to exonerate him. And let him get back to his wonderful family.

PAT: Real considerate of you.

STU: Yeah. And I think too, we should consider. For this particular role, whether paternity leave should only happen after the birth of a child. Maybe it should be like a constant thing.

Like a, whenever you need it, you take it.
Just go ahead. Go on leave. Right now. And maybe take eight to 12 years off.

GLENN: That would be good. Okay.

STU: Just in case, you know.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: These are just possibilities.

GLENN: Pat, thanks for standing and watching the whole thing burn with me. It's been fun.

"I Was Probably Drunk": Alex Jones APOLOGIZES for Calling Glenn Beck a CIA Agent
RADIO

"I Was Probably Drunk": Alex Jones APOLOGIZES for Calling Glenn Beck a CIA Agent

Years ago, InfoWars host Alex Jones accused Glenn Beck of being a CIA agent, and it caused some serious consequences. But in a recent BlazeTV exclusive interview on Pat Gray Unleashed, Alex apologized for the incident, admitting, “I was probably drunk when I said that,” and thanking Glenn for his work over the years exposing the global elites’ plans. Glenn responds to Alex’s apology and reveals the "peace offering" he gave Alex the last time they spoke about their past disagreements.

What We Currently Know About the Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapse in Baltimore
RADIO

What We Currently Know About the Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapse in Baltimore

A cargo ship that lost power has crashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore Harbor, causing the entire bridge to collapse. Thankfully, traffic on the bridge was reportedly stopped before the crash. But the incident has many people asking: was this an accident or sabotage? Former assistant Treasury Secretary Monica Crowley, who helped spread the word of the incident, joins the Glenn Beck Program to discuss what we currently know as the search and rescue operation continues.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: One of my favorites Monica Crowley is with us. She's a former assistant Treasury secretary. My gosh, Monica, how have they trashed that Treasury? They are just looting it like crazy. Anyway, I saw Monica, you post something this morning, and I couldn't believe my eyes. Can you tell us what happened?

MONICA: Yeah. Good morning, Glenn great to be here like always. America is waking up to real tragedy this morning. The Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore Harbor, it's a massive span. And for those of us who live in the northeast, Glenn, I can tell you, I have crossed that bridge many a time, going from New York to Washington, and back, right?

GLENN: Oh, I have too.

MONICA: It is a major, major artery in the northeast. And at about 1:30 a.m. Eastern Time this morning, a cargo ship was approaching the bridge. And the video that I posted, which is now everywhere on social media.

GLENN: We're watching it right now.

MONICA: Yes. And it's all over TV as well.

GLENN: Go ahead. Yeah.

MONICA: It is a massive cargo ship. And it's under a flag, so the ship itself is registered in Singapore. And you can see in the video, that it approaches at Scott Key Bridge, and it loses power, Glenn, twice.

Not once, but twice in the moments leading up to its approach to the bridge.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

MONICA: And so, yeah. It -- it -- you can see in the video, it loses power twice. It regains power, but by that moment, Glenn. It's too late. And they can't get away from one of the massive lanes supporting bridge. And the cargo ship goes right into the piling. And the entire bridge collapses like a house of cards. just folds in on itself, right into Baltimore harbor.

GLENN: You know, I noticed, because I watched this video, a couple of times, after you posted it.

And I couldn't believe it was like toothpicks falling apart. When they had -- when you first start watching it. You'll see, the traffic is pretty steady on the bridge.

And thank God, right at the time it collapses, not a lot of cars, if any, were on the bridge. Do you know if there were cars on the bridge?

MONICA: Well, thankfully, if there's any silver lining on this horror show, Glenn, it is 1:30 in the morning. So it's relatively light traffic.

And you can see headlights of cars going both ways. And the moments the cargo ship, hits the bridge.

It looks like very few cars, if any, are on the bridge.

What we're hearing this morning, pardon me. What we're hearing is that two people have already been rescued, God bless. There are at least seven people missing that we know about.

So there is a very active search-and-rescue going on. The Coast Guard is out there. The National Transportation Safety Board is on site. The Navy is there. Navy divers are in the water, and have been there for hours.

And so we hope and pray that any victims that fell into the water in their automobiles and in their trucks, there's at least one semi that we know of, that collapsed into the water with the bridge. Glenn, so we hope and pray, that all of these people, who were part of this unfortunate accident. And at least now, it does look like an accident. And we will wait for the investigation. But we hope and pray that everybody will be rescued, and will be okay.

GLENN: So, Monica, do we know anything about the ship.

Because the first thought is. The power goes out. Then it comes back on. And the poor captain, man, you can see him just trying to turn that ship as fast as he can, when the power goes on. Then it goes out again.

Do we know?

My first thought is, is this some sort of a -- you know, a -- some sort of an attack with -- on electronics. Was there -- is there -- has anybody else thought of that? Or is it just me and my sick, twisted paranoia, I guess?

MONICA: Well, I think that too, Glenn. And we will have to wait for a thorough investigation here, in a lot of different areas.

There's one report that I saw this morning, that indicated that the crew, and apparently there was one pilot and two captains on board. And, of course, an additional crew, which you would expect for a vessel of this size and magnitude, under an international flag. Again, Singapore. And there is one report this morning, that indicates that the crew alerted the Maryland Department of Transportation when they were leaving the port, that they had lost control of the vessel. And again, I don't know how reliable this report is. But it's up on the New York Post website this morning. So, again, I don't know if that report has been vetted. But, you know, most of these vessels now, are under electronic control. Not unlike some of our voting systems. And might very well be -- might very well be open to hacking by nefarious players here.

So, again, we will to have wait and see. I mean, sometimes the cigar is just a cigar. And accidents unfortunately do happen.

GLENN: Right. And I hope that's the case. But with all the cyber terror that is predicted, I just -- you know, I know we're all on high alert for that.

Monica, thank you very much for reporting and calling in. I appreciate it. God bless.

MONICA: Oh, it's my great pleasure, Glenn. Thank you.

GLENN: So we have an update on the bridge collapse. The Fort McHenry Bridge. Very important bridge and port in Baltimore.

Here's the update that is pretty remarkable.

STU: Yeah. Apparently, the ship was able to issue a mayday, and say they were experiencing a power issue. And this enabled transportation officials to halt traffic on the bridge, at the last second.

I mean, if you watch the footage, you can see the cars crossing the bridge as normal, up until the very last second. And all of a sudden, they just stop. And you just kind of assumed, it was a break in traffic.

But, apparently, they knew something was wrong, and were able to stop it. I mean, they must have saved dozens of lives by doing that. So that's an incredible part of the story.

GLENN: These -- these -- yeah. These guys are heroes.

If you're watching TheBlaze right now, we're showing you the bridge collapse. It is absolutely unbelievable.

And you can see how the boat is trying to turn, as sharply as they can. And then the lights -- the lights come back on. They try to steer it away. And then it goes out, at the second time. And it's too late, and the whole thing collapses. It's remarkable.

Jeez. And they've now -- that port is closed. I'm not saying that this is by any stretch of the imagination, other than it reminds me of, the cyber attack on -- I think it was a Navy ship, wasn't it?

That was in the South China Sea. I'm pulling this -- I'm sorry. I have CRC. Can't remember crap.

But it was in the South China Sea. And it -- it lost control. And it made a circle.

And then rammed right into an oil tanker. Clearly controlled by somebody else.

I'm not saying this -- that's what this is. This is probably just mechanical error.

But we have to start thinking about those kinds of things now. Because they're all possible.

EVERY Constitutional Right that Biden’s New “Red Flag” Office VIOLATES
RADIO

EVERY Constitutional Right that Biden’s New “Red Flag” Office VIOLATES

President Biden’s Department of Justice has launched a new office to train state and local authorities on how to use red flag laws to confiscate guns from people who could pose a “threat.” But what does it consider to be a threat? People have already accused this "National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center" of violating the Second Amendment. But Glenn believes it may violate a handful more of the Bill of Rights. Glenn reviews how the Department of Justice has sidestepped Amendments 1-6 of the Constitution with this order, along with others.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So, you know, I thought we would look at the Constitution. A caller last hour was right on the money. When he said, you know, this center, that can take your gun away, without due process. Yeah. That's -- that's a big one. That's a big one. That's a violation of the Second Amendment. But it's also a violation of many other amendments. I want to go through the -- the -- you know, just the first ten amendments.

Okay?

First of all, do you know how the Bill of Rights came about?

Listen to what they wrote.

This is at the top of the page. Resolved. Resolved by the Senate and the House of representatives of the United States of America. In Congress, assembled. Two-thirds of both houses concurring. That the following articles be proposed to the legislatures of several states, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States. So here's a group of people. Imagine this. Two-thirds, say, we believe these things should be done. But we have to send them to all of the states to ratify, and they need two-thirds to be able to pass it in their states. And then we will need two-thirds of all the states to agree. Okay?

Wow. What a process! And what are they trying to do, get themselves a raise? Give themselves more power? No.

The exact opposite. Here's what they say. The amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which articles when ratified by three-fourths of the legislatures to be valid in all intents and purposes, as part of said Constitution.

Articles, in addition to, and amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, ratified by the legislature of several states.

They're saying here, that the -- after the convention, a number of states, having at the time, adopted the Constitution.

This is in the little preamble here. Expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse its power.

So the guys in the government said, I am afraid people will abuse the power and misunderstand the Constitution.

So, quote, further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added. And as extending the ground of public confidence, in the government. Will best ensure the -- the benefit ends of the institution.

So they're saying, look, nobody trusts the government right now.

Does that sound familiar. Nobody trusts the government right now.

So we want to pass several amendments right here, that will protect the rights. And make sure that the hands are tied of the federal government.

They're saying, these are restrictive clauses. And by telling the people, we will never do these things.

Confidence will be gained. I contend, our -- our problem is, we're no longer unified on these ten articles. We no longer care about them. We no longer learn them. Teach them. Know them.

So here's article one. Amendment number one. Congress shall make no law, respecting an establishment of religion.

I contend, we are violating that right now. Because what we are celebrating is a religion.

It has a cult following. It has nothing to do with science.

Or even common sense. It has a tribunal. That will excommunicate you from society. If you don't get involved. It has rituals. It has laws, that you just must accept on faith. I know that's pushing it. But I think they're doing that. They are also breaking the second part of the First Amendment. Prohibiting the free exercise of religion. They did that during COVID. Abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. And the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. They don't want you standing up. They don't want you standing up. They will do everything they can to make sure you are sitting down. Enough of this Christian nationalist stuff. Enough that. Don't dismiss it. It's real. It's very, very small. But it's real.

So don't call yourself a Christian nationalist. Don't allow yourself to fall into that trap. You might be a Christian. But you are also a constitutionalist. You believe in the Constitution of the United States, and the articles of the Constitution of the Bill of Rights. You believe in all of that stuff. That's all you want.

Article II, a well-regulated militia being necessary to a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

That's the one that everyone should look to, on this particular new center from the Department of Justice. They -- well-regulated militia. Would that make sense? Would it make sense, that the people couldn't have guns? And the federal government would have a huge army? No. In fact, we never had a standing army. We were the soldiers. We would be called up to arms. So you would have your own arms. And then when there was war, you would be called up in a militia. Okay? But you had the right to protect yourself with a gun as well. No. That was for fishing or hunting. Or one of those things. No. It wasn't. No, it wasn't. Article three. I think we can skip over. Well, no. Actually, not. No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war. But in a manor to be prescribed by law. So article three, I think you could make the case. I don't think you would win. But you could make the case, that our government is quartered. Soldiers are quartered in our house. Because they are in a public/private partnership. With Amazon. And everybody else.

They are -- they are gaining access to our papers. To our letters. To our emails. To our phone calls.

That's what the government was doing, that made this article important.

The king would say. You know what, find out what those guys are doing over there.

And, you know what, just go into their house. You live there. I will quarter you into their house. So you can spy on them.

Well, it's just in a different way. But that's what's happening. Fourth Amendment. The right of people to be secure in their persons. Do you feel secure in your person?

Houses. Paper. Effects. Against all unreasonable search and seizures. Shall not be violated. It's violated all the time.

We've talked about this many times. How many people have been driving down the street. And they have money in their car. And they were going to buy another car. They will buy it in cash. And they're stopped. Their cash is taken. No due process. I think you're a drug lord. Wait. What?

No warrants shall issue. But upon probable cause. This is a general warrant. This is why they -- this is why this is in here. In article four. No warrants shall be -- no warrants shall issue. But upon probable cause. General warrants, used to be, you know, there's something going on with that guy. Go find out.

And they could search for anything. Anywhere. No. No general warrants.

You have to know, and tell the judge, I'm going in, for this document, or this particular item. And I believe it's here!

Great. So the judge will say, you can go there, in their house. And look for it. But no general warrants. You can't occasion you can't go in and just try to find something. No person shall be held to answer for capital. Otherwise, infamous crime, unless the presentment or indictment of a grand jury. Except in cases, arriving in the land or Naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of war, or public danger. Nor shall any person be subject to the same offense twice, to be put in jeopardy of life or limb.

Nor shall he be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. Nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property. Without due process of law.

Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Those are being violated, but in particular, with this new center, where they can take -- come into your house, and take your guns without due process.

Clear violation of the Bill of Rights. Clear. So you have three of them now. That have been broken just for this one law. Don't tell me I love democracy. Don't tell me you love freedom. Don't tell me you're trying to save the republic, and you love the Constitution if you're violating this many. And we're only halfway through. You're in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

Article six, in all criminal prosecution. The accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial. Has that happened with those who are still waiting for trial for January 6th?

How is it they can -- they have to wait so long?

But Donald Trump has to be done by this summer?

Why is that? Are all men created equal?

Are we -- are we -- are we looking at the people of January 6th?

With the same blind justice eyes, as Donald Trump? No. Of course, we're not.

Violation of the Constitution by an impartial jury of the state and district, wherein the crime shall have been committed.

In partial jury. If you can't get an impartial jury. What do you do?

You can't get an impartial jury, you ask for a change of venue, where you can get an impartial jury. You don't have an impartial jury pool in Washington, DC. You don't. And to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. To be confronted with the witnesses against him. To have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor and have the assistance of council for his defense.

In this new center that they have announced, you don't get the due process.

You don't get to face the witness. You don't know the cause of accusation.

You have nothing.

On your side.