California's INSANITY makes prices higher for US ALL

Glenn has an idea: Perhaps the rest of the 49 United States should begin completely ignoring California from here on out. Why? In this clip, Glenn shares two stories that prove California’s INSANITY has gone TOO FAR. Because soon California's crazy policies could affect prices for ALL OF US, whether you live there or not. And Glenn is sick and tired of this: ‘If you want to do that in your state, do that in your state,’ he says. ‘[But] I don't have to be dragged along with it.’


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I would like to make the case that we move away from California. And we don't have to -- I mean, sure, maybe. Call me an extremist. It started out as a 50-star flag. I just took the seem ripper, and took all of the stars off for New York and California. Oh, and I'm considering other states.

But I would like to make the case, that we just ignore California from here on out.

Two stories: September 30th, California Energy Commission wrote executives at five oil companies, gas companies, demanding answers for sharp price increases at California gas pumps.

The letter accused the oil and gas companies of profiteering. And claimed the oil industry owes California answers for not having provided an adequate and transparent explanation for this price spike.

Well, they -- they answered yesterday in a letter for Valero, California, is the most expensive operating environment in the country, and very hostile regulatory environment for refining.

California policy makers have knowingly adopted policies with the express intent of eliminating the refinery sector. California requires refiners to pay a very high carbon cap and tax trade fees, and be burdened with gasoline, with the cost of the low carbon fuel standards. With the backdrop of these policies, not surprisingly, they wrote, California has seen refineries completely close or shut down major units.

When you shut down a refinery operation, you limit resilience of the supply chain.

STU: What?

GLENN: I think they were speaking slowly in this letter.

STU: You can picture a person typing with one finger, angrily on the keyboard. If you ever do this again!

GLENN: Moreover, California is largely isolated from fuel markets of the central and eastern US, and state regulations mandate, a unique blend of gasoline, which makes California the most challenging market to serve.

California has also imposed some of the Maos aggressive and thus, expensive and limiting environmental regulatory requirements in the world. California policies have made it difficult to increase refining capacity, and have prevented supply projects to lower operating costs of the refineries.

Sincerely. Now, California, the governor who is right on top of this stuff, he's calling for a special session to address the greed of oil companies. Gas prices are too high. Time to enact a windfall profit stacks, directly on oil companies, that are ripping you off at the pump.

And that's only going to make things better. Okay.

I don't know if I've mentioned this, but 17 states have voluntarily signed up for all of California's nonsense when it comes to emissions. Okay?

So anything they do, 17 states, hello, Virginia, you're -- your legislature just decided. You know what, we'll sign up. We don't need to bring this to the people for a vote. We'll just sign up.

Here, sign this. It's late at night. And they pushed it through. And now it's law.

Anything that California does, you have to do too.

Oh. So if California jumps off a bridge? Yes. Yeah.

You're going to jump off the bridge too. Now, let me give you -- let me give you a second story here. The Supreme Court will hear arguments over a California animal cruelty law, that would raise the cost of bacon and other pork products, nationwide. The case's outcome is important to the nation's 26-billion-dollar a year pork industry.

But the outcome also could limit state's abilities to pass laws with impact outside their borders.


If you want to do that, in your state, do that in your state.

I don't have to be dragged along with it. From laws aimed at combating climate change to others intended to regulate prescription drug cases. The case before the court on Tuesday, oh, my gosh, that's today. California's Proposition 12, which voters passed in 2018. It said, pork sold in the state needs to come from pigs, whose mothers were raised with at least 24 square feet of space, including the ability to lie down and turn around.

The rules -- that rules out confined gestation crates. Metal enclosures that are common in the pork industry.

They also say the way the pork market works, with cuts of meat from various producers, being combined before sale, it is likely all pork would have to meet California standards, regardless of where it sold.

That will cost the industry about $350 million a year. Guess who is going to pay for it?

You. Now, I'm all for being decent too animals. I don't eat veal. Because you don't keep an animal in the crate the whole time. I have a problem with it. But I don't eat veal. I don't employees my values on everyone else. And I'm sick and tired of California, doing this for us.

I am sick and tired, of -- now I'm going to pay more for bacon. Okay.

Oh. And also, this involves the meat industry. And the egg industry.

So we're going to pay more for, wow. It's almost like California doesn't want us to eat meat, or use any kind of animal products. Wow, that's completely weird.

Who would have seen that one coming?

I can't take it anymore. Why doesn't the pork industry just say -- and, quite honestly, the oil industry. Okay. Well, you're on your own.

Why don't -- seriously, why don't we let California just live in its own slop?

STU: Well, Glenn, it's a big market. And there's a lot of people there. And they would sell a lot of pork products there. And they don't want to lose that market.

And that does seem to be their --

GLENN: I'm willing to have ham for dinner. I don't like ham. I'm willing to have ham for dinner for a year, if you guys can just say, you know what, the rest of the country, we're tired of California.

STU: Well, and this seems to be an issue, that is really bothering big meat producers.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: If this were to happen, and we were to say, well, we'll just we're going to California, they'll do what they do, what would likely occur is you'll have some of those big pork manufacturers would probably, you know, try to adopt those standards because California is a big market, it's a big chunk of their business. But you would have a lot of small producers, who will be like, well, I'm not doing that. I'm going to sell to Iowa and Texas and Florida. So they would wind up --

GLENN: Sure. Wait a minute. So a are you saying that it would be like a free market system.

STU: Some people would do it. Some people wouldn't.

GLENN: Whoa, whoa, whoa.

STU: I know. But it's interesting the way you're talking about this.

GLENN: Wow. Write this day down.

STU: The coverage of it, sort of presenting it as the right-wing position, is to take up this aggressive form of Commerce Clause. And -- and go the other way. Make it so California is not able to have these standards, because it would affect the commerce of other states.

GLENN: Yeah. I don't mind if they have those standards.

They can have those standards. And I have a right as a board producer to say, I'm not selling to California. Screw you.

STU: Screw you.

GLENN: But California does not have the right to increase the cost of my food. My cost of living. I don't want California dictating what I do.

I don't live in California, for a reason.

And California is being held up as a model for the United States. This is what they do for the United States. I don't want to live there.

STU: This is totally intentional too. They realize they have enough economic power, too change their standards, to enforce it on everybody else.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Exactly right.

STU: And with 17 states on beard, no matter what they do. Think about that, if you live in one of these states. You don't have a representative.

GLENN: No, you don't.

STU: You've outsourced your entire leadership to Gavin Newsom.

GLENN: Yeah. Congratulations.

STU: We don't have the list. You said Virginia is on there?

GLENN: Virginia is on there. Virginia is on there. I did a podcast with their lieutenant governor, who I love. And she was telling me, she said, Glenn, we're not California. We don't have that many vehicles. We don't have, you know, I don't know, it's 20 percent of all cars in California. I don't know the number. You'll have to look it up. But a good percentage of cars on the road in California, are electric.

Not Virginia. And so now they have to adopt the same standards, and have the electric vehicles. That's going to throw Virginians into absolute turmoil when any of this hits.

Is anybody standing up about it? Anybody thinking about it? Anybody saying anything? It is time to end the madness.

Pork producers, stop doing business with California.

I know. States make a lot of money, on generating their power. What are you doing? Why?

The -- you really -- they want you to be out of the coal business.

They're working actively to put you out of business. Why would you generate any power for a -- for a state, that is imposing regulations on you, to put you out of power?

Let them feel the full weight of their decisions. Oh, gosh, darn it. Oh. You don't like coal.

Yeah. Okay. Off!

It makes no sense. We are enabling them. They are out of control alcoholics, and we're serving them drinks. At some point, you have to ask: Who is responsible here?

I mean, I am not the person that says, hey. The bartender needs to know when somebody is drunk. But if you have somebody on the floor, volume I go to, and they're completely incapable of walking. And they're like, this is lovely, I think you do have some responsibility.

It's time to let the alcoholic hit bottom.

Pork producers, say enough. Anybody who is producing energy for California, what the hell is wrong with you?

Somebody needs to stand up and say no to California.

STU: You have 17 states that have agreed to a concept, where they go out to the bar with the alcoholic, and match them drink for drink.

GLENN: Right.

And the guy from Virginia or whatever -- you know, some of these states. They're in the bar like, I don't want to be in the bar. I don't -- I don't want another drink. Okay?

What are we doing? Stop it.

Chip Roy RIPS Biden official's THREAT to send U.S. troops to WAR with Russia

Chip Roy RIPS Biden official's THREAT to send U.S. troops to WAR with Russia

Tucker Carlson went viral for claiming that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin threatened Congress by saying if they don't approve another $60 billion for Ukraine, "we'll send your uncles, cousins, and sons to fight Russia.” But did he actually threaten to send U.S. troops to Ukraine? Glenn speaks with Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who was there, to get the truth. And he didn't hold back: "The Secretary alluded to saying, 'if you guys don't do this, effectively we're going to be committing U.S. troops to war." Rep. Roy explains why he believes it's not a lack of Ukraine funding, but the Biden administration's terrible policies that are "empowering our enemies." He also explains his effort to defund the United Nations and the controversy surrounding Rep. Tommy Tuberville's holdup of Senate confirmations of hundreds of military nominations.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have Chip Roy coming up in a couple of minutes. Chip is the representative from the great state of Texas.

He and Mike Lee and, who was the third one from -- from I think it was Alabama, wasn't it? Pat.

PAT: Tommy Tuberville, it wasn't him?

GLENN: No. No. No. Tuberville, I tell you, I think that guy is a hero for what he has done.

I think all of the stuff that he has, you know, done to stop abortion and everything else.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's just been raked over the coals by the wonderful G.O.P. Makes me sick.

Makes me really sick.

So they -- they came out yesterday, and they want to put an end and defund the United Nations, and all of its subsidiaries.

So the WHO. And everything else, would be a thing of the past.

PAT: And Mike Lee is a part of that. Did you already mention?

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: So good.

GLENN: And it would be really good.

Don't know how they're going to make this case.

And win. But I'm glad somebody is at least making this case. There's so much going on here, right before the end of the year.

We have Chip Roy on with us now. Hi, Chip. How you are?

CHIP: Hey, Glenn, how you are?

GLENN: I have a lot of stuff to ask you about. First of all, let's start with the UN. What prompted this with you guys?

And what is the plan?

CHIP: Well, first of all, it's not a new concept. Obviously, for those of us who hate the United Nations for a long time. I believe it's a colossal waste of money. Twelve and a half billion dollars of American tax dollars and borrowed money, that's gone to the UN. And that's in 2021. Okay. One year.

Mike Lee and I were talking about this. So disgusted about what we've seen in the United Nations.

There were in terms of how they treated Israel, voting not to condemn Hamas. There were funding Hamas, through UNRRA, which is done in the name of refugees, but ends up funding Hamas.

You know, their human rights council, which is a complete sham, they put all the worst human rights violators on it. Funding, you know, the China one child policy.

I mean, you can't even begin to do it. Then you saw the article yesterday, that Mike Lee tweeted out. Mike and I, you know, he introduced the Senate version. I introduced the House version.

To totally just defund the United Nations, just get out. And Mike tweeted out a picture of an article about how all of these UN workers have been raping children in Africa and other places around the world. And look, it's just an organization devoid of soul. They don't believe in western civilization. They are not our friend. Why do we fund it? It's just a joke, and we shouldn't.

GLENN: Is this something that you think could gain traction and win?

CHIP: I mean, not in the instant. I think we need to get very serious about it. I will say, to the credit of the house, I'm pretty vicious in my condemnation of the failures of House Republicans.

But in fairness, right?

We're dealing with a recalcitrant Senate, that doesn't want to do anything. A White House, that is not just incompetent, but evil.

We passed appropriations bills, in our sting board operations, that would have defunded a lot.

Not all of it. It wasn't perfect, but it defunded a lot of these terrible things. Like UNRRA. Like the Chinese policy.

Mario Díaz-Balart, in Florida. He worked with us on that. But then just sitting in the Senate, right? The senate won't do anything with it.

So we've introduced this bill as a standalone, basically kind of one up on all this. And send a message that you have serious members of the Senate and the House saying, wait a minute, we should not be sending 12 and a half billion dollars to the United Nations. So, you know, we'll have to keep working the issue. But I know you agree and I know your listeners agree.

GLENN: So the next thing is the spending bills. And the fact that this defense bill, first of all, if I'm not mistaken, it was yesterday that Lloyd Austin said, if you fail to pass this Ukraine aid bill, US troops on the ground in Ukraine are likely.

What kind of threat is that?

CHIP: Yeah. And so let's take them in order, right? You're talking about the supplemental spending bill at the moment. That includes on the Democrat's side, right?

Because the president put it forward. It has a massive amount of spending. Over $100 billion. $60 billion additional funding for Ukraine.

I think it's ten or $15 billion of additional spending at the border, which would just be used to process more people. Not change the policies.

More spending for Taiwan. More spending, generally. And so we would oppose that. And, yes, in a briefing, the other day, the secretary alluded to, you know, saying -- you know, you guys don't do this.

You know, effectively we will be committing American troops to war. Now, if you're being less cynical.

You would say his position is, that if we don't push back on Putin now, we will get drawn into a war that involves our men and women in uniform. To which my response is, no, if you keep carrying out your incompetent policies, where you were abused to promote American energy, or you were abused to actually sanction, for example, Iran. You allow Iran to provide oil to China. You take all the positions that are empowering our enemies. Then you say, we need to fund a proxy war. To stop our enemies. Or you will send our men and women to war. Oh, and, by the way, they wanted to draft your daughters. Which I proudly stood up and stopped. That's the truth of this administration.

So we will stand up. And thwart that. At least conservatives are. And I hope that Mike Johnson keeps doing what he's doing. I'm critical when I'm critical. But I'm complimentary when I'm complimentary.

Mike will send a strong message, that we will not even remotely consider Ukraine funding until the border is secure. I hope he sticks to that.

I don't -- you know, I think we need to question Ukraine spending, generally.

But I know for certain, we shouldn't even mention the word, until the border of the United States is secure.

GLENN: I agree.

How is he doing, by the way? So far. Johnson.

CHIP: Mike, as you know, is a very good friend. Is a very good man.

On that point, I think he's done a very good job. On sending over Israel, immediately. First day on the job. And that next week funded with taking money out of the IRS expansion. I think he did a great job.

Look, I think he needs to not give in to the pressures of the swamp.

The swamp makes -- that he work on the addiction of pressure.

Oh, my God. If you don't pass that, by December 31st, the world will end.

Then suddenly, people will end up. We will all die. That's how the swamp works.

He should resist that. This national defense authorization act. Which is a terrible bill.

It's not the House bill, which fixes the abortion -- I'm sorry, the abortion. Tourism. It fixed transgender surgeries. It fixed the DEI and woke stuff. It fixed some of the climate change stuff.

GLENN: That was all thrown out, right?

CHIP: Yeah. Most of that. Like 90 percent of that was thrown out.

So the Defense Bill was bad on its face. Then now they want to add FISA extensions, which, Glenn, for your listeners means using back door foreign intelligence, to go after American citizens.

We want to end that.

We passed a good bill in the judiciary committee to end that.

But unfortunately, Mike has agreed with Senate Democrats to put a, quote, short-term extension of the existing bill which allows the spying, until April, and that would actually last until the spring of '25. We oppose it. All of your listeners who tell every single one of your members of Congress, senators, to oppose the NDA, that has FISA on it. Because if we vote on it next week, we need at least 150 Republicans to stand up and block that bill.

GLENN: Jeez. Do you have 150?

CHIP: Well, we also may get some Democrats. So maybe a little bit fewer. I want as many Republicans as we can get.

And depending on how many Democrats we can get to block it. They will try to pass it on what we call suspension of the rules. Which means I need 200 roughly 90 votes.

So we need 140 or so, of both Republicans and Democrats to kill it.

So we want to get as many Republicans as possible to say, we're not going to jam through a 3,000-page watered down crappy defense authorization, that continues the wokification of the military. Instead of a mission-first military.

You know, it's driving down morale, it's driving down recruiting.

And then, oh, by the way, continue the FISA spying regime, which has been abusing power to spy on Americans. We should stop that.

We have conservatives, that have good bills. We're advancing. We just passed it out of the Judiciary Committee, on a bipartisan basis. That is what we should be advancing over to the Senate.

GLENN: Tell me about Tommy Tuberville. Because I think he's a hero. He stood and stood and stood. And damn near no Republicans stood with him.

And he was -- I mean, he's just been bashed and bashed. And he finally said, okay. Tell me what happened here.

CHIP: Well, Coach Tuberville, Senator Tuberville is a good man. I've gotten to know him well. Funny enough, his legislative director is a very good friend of mine, and my roommate when I'm in DC.

Look, Coach Tuberville is someone who stood up on the side of life, like he said he would do. Unlike a lot of Republicans. That run on being pro-life. And then when the battle faces them, they run away.

Right? The other senator from Alabama, touts herself as being Ms. Pro-life.

But did she go down and support Coach Tuberville? No.

A whole bunch of other senators. I can go through a list. Didn't stand up.

Mike Lee was down there. God bless him.

Roger Marshal went down there.

But not that many, went down and supported Coach Tuberville when he went to the floor to object. And, by the way, Glenn. All he was saying was, we should vote on these confirmations, at the Defense Department.

That's it. That's all he was demanding. And making us do that, because he said, guys, if you're going to continue to advance an unlawful policy to have taxpayers fund abortion, tourism and Department of Defense, I will make you do the work of getting these things done through votes.

I'm sorry, that he backed down last week.

I wish he held firm a little longer.

This is the same issue in the National Defense Authorization Act. We fix it in house. We should force the Senate to address it. But instead, Republicans are about. If we don't stop them, Republicans are going to move a defense bill, that does not address the abortion issue. That does not address transgender surgeries. That does not address climate change, that does not sufficiently address diversity, equity, inclusion garbage. That does not sufficiently restore people that lost their jobs for COVID.

And adds FISA spying extension.

In what world should we do that? Coach Tuberville did a great job. We should finish the job now.

GLENN: I have about 70 seconds here for this answer.

CHIP: Yep.

GLENN: The Hunter Biden indictment, is it going anywhere? Also, the -- the impeachment, is it going anywhere?

CHIP: On Tuesday, in the House Rules Committee, we will be taking up, and I serve on the Rules Committee, an impeachment inquiry vote, which we intend to take to the floor. And I hope and believe will pass on the House floor. We have a couple of members that are a little wishy-washy.

But I hope to get it there.

If we can do that, that's the additional tools that we need, to get more information, and force the Biden administration to stop their obstruction. That's what it is.

Of our seeking the truth of what we all know.

Is that money flowing through Hunter. Was flowing through Hunter to Joe Biden. We believe. We have to get more information.

Certainly, in a conspiracy with Joe Biden, while enriching his son, using foreign actors to do it. To the detriment of our national security and well-being.

And so Hunter, of course, now that you asked about the indictments. The indictments that were brought down yesterday.

They seemed fairly significant.

With respect to the tax laws, that were violated.

He was writing off hookers and sex clubs.

He was writing off any number of things you can do.

And I haven't study the indictments. I have looked at the summaries.

They seem to be significant.

But remember, they walked away. And they led the statute of limitations run on some very, very significant tax violations. From 2014 to '15. When Biden was vice president.

We believe that was intentional. We want to seek the truth on that.

So we will keep running as much as we can with the tools we have.

Jamie comber, Jim Jordan have done a good job. I hope every Republican will support this inquiry that we vote out on Tuesday.

GLENN: I have tell you, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you for the handful of people that are around you. And Mike Lee. And others. That are actually moving the ball. Or trying to.

I appreciate every day you guys are in that cesspool, so we don't have to be. Thank you for everything you do.

CHIP: Well, Glenn. Well, we can't do it without you. Merry Christmas to all your listeners. Maybe I'll talk you to before Christmas. But I won't stop. I barely have a voice right now, but I don't give a damn.

We got to save this country for our kids, Glenn. There's men who sat in the foxholes in Bastion in 1944, freezing to death. So we could live free.

We shouldn't adjourn next week, if we haven't done our dang job. That's our position.

GLENN: You call any time you need anything next week. Any time, you just call in. Thank you so much, Chip. Appreciate it.

The CLEAR WINNER of the 4th Republican debate

The CLEAR WINNER of the 4th Republican debate

The RNC's 4th Republican debate of the 2024 primaries is over and Glenn has a clear winner. But it may not be who you think it is. Glenn and Stu review the debate, which they say was the best one yet thanks to moderator Megyn Kelly. And they also discuss whether former president Donald Trump has sat out the debates long enough. How would he perform against his fellow candidates? And if he does win the nomination, would any of the other candidates make a good vice president?


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Great to be here, last night.

I thought it was interesting. I thought it was the best one.

GLENN: Me too. Me too.

I think the real winner last night out of all of it was Megyn Kelly. She was really, really good. She's on a plane today. We're hoping to catch her in between. But she was the winner. This was the best debate.

She held everybody's feet to the fire.

She asked tough questions.

She was fair. She told people, shut up.

Nobody can hear you. They were talking over each other. And it ended it. I mean, I thought she was really, really good.

STU: Yeah. Really, really good.

You know, her questions. And this goes back to her previous debate performances as well.

They're very well laid out.

You may not like the question. And I tink that's kind of the point with her. She's trying to ask a question that will put you in a difficult situation. To see what you can do with it. That's the whole point of these debates.

GLENN: Right.

STU: They weren't unfair.

GLENN: But she wasn't asking them for liberal reasons.

She was framing all of her questions, the way a conservative, would want it framed.

There are certain things that we want answered. That the liberals don't even understand.

STU: Yeah. If you think about how the left handles these debates. They ask the questions that they care about.

Which makes sense. But they ask, hey. What about January 6th? Or whatever.

And instead, you've got questions last night, that were substance related. They were actually issue related. They were policy related.

They were important questions that all the candidates needed to answer.

And I thought she did a great job. The whole debate overall, I thought was really good.

Maybe it's a low hurdle to clear. To say it's the best one of the four.

But I thought, look, if you take it out of the context of the actual election, which is difficult here to do. I understand it. You have a candidate, who is 20 or 30 points ahead, depending on which day you are looking at. And he's not there. So there's a big asterisk to all of this.

GLENN: But, you know what, I wouldn't do it either.

If I were Donald Trump, I was this far ahead. I wouldn't do it either.

STU: I think that's -- strategically, I agree with you.

GLENN: Yes. That's all there is.

When you are trying to win, you -- you used strategy. This is the best strategy. Honestly, if I were Donald Trump.

I would consider running the campaign, that Joe Biden did. With an exception of the one chair, and then a big circle around it.

And then like 12 feet later, another circle with a chair in the middle.

STU: Oh, my gosh, remember that? What a weird time.

GLENN: Yeah. It was horrible. But I would just stay quiet. Because everybody is hanging himself. And Joe Biden's economy. And the way he speaks. And hope he would be shamed in a debate. Because we do need a debate between the two of them.

STU: Do you really think that's an option for Donald Trump? Because I think he's doing that now, at some level with the assistance of the media.

The media seems to not really be focusing on Donald Trump right now, for whatever reason.

You talked about this, I think, a couple weeks ago. A former president of the you United States was testifying on stand, in a trial.

And I -- did we see any coverage of it at all. Other than a quick mention or headline.

Normally, they would be wall-to-wall. Saying how bad this guy is.

Or whatever they want to say.

Right now, it seems like they have made the decision, along with a bunch of Democrats, that the person they want to face. In this election is Donald Trump.

That may very well be a terrible decision for them. As we saw in 2016.

They made the same call. And it didn't work at all. But if they're making that choice, it seems like, once we get past the primary. Donald Trump is locked in as the candidate.

They're no longer going to leave every word he says on the sidelines.

GLENN: Okay. Unless --

STU: Do you believe that?

GLENN: They're dumb enough, and out of touch enough to do that.

STU: That's a prequalifier for sure.

GLENN: Let me give this. Comedian Bill Burr. He came out, launched into a rant. And he said, you F-ing stupid liberals. What are you doing?

You're making Donald Trump a martyr. And he's going to come back and win again.

And I think that's true. Remember, his -- his poll numbers went up when they started putting him up as a martyr and going after him.

And the left just doesn't understand. You know, this is Chris Christie. He got booed. Do we happen to have that clip?

Last thing he said was Donald Trump wasn't going to be -- wasn't going to be voting.

STU: Right. He was part of his final statement there. He was saying, picture yourself going to the polls in November.

One thing you won't be seeing is Donald Trump there. Because he won't be able to vote. Because he'll be a felon by then.

GLENN: And the whole place booed. And it's because -- here's what he's missing.

If -- if Donald Trump were being tried fairly. He was charged fairly.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Then it would be a different story.

But nobody. Most people don't feel that this is anything, but a political trial.

And so they're -- every time you go after him, you make him stronger. Because people are like, this isn't going to stand. This is the problem with this country.

STU: And I think we can all agree, with certainty, that that is the effect on Republican primary voters.


STU: The question is whether that's the effect on general election voters. That's a much more complicated question.

GLENN: Yes, especially independents.

STU: Right now, Donald Trump's polls look pretty good in the general. They look as good or better than any of the other candidates.

You know, Nikki Haley's polls have also looked pretty strong. But there's even some polls where Trump is ahead of Haley, running in a general election.

The issue, of course, with this, is we also are showing in these polls. Ten and 12 percent for RFK Jr. And you're seeing -- you're seeing Cornell West at 2 percent.

When we get further on in this process, what happens?

If you look at the latest polls on Joe Biden. He's down. These are terrible polls for him.

And typically, I think we would all look at that and celebrate. Right?

People are waking up. This is a good thing. Joe Biden's polls are county down. He's a weaker candidate. That's good.

The problem with that, when you look deeper at those polls.

One of those reasons you're seeing an erosion is because younger voters, that are hard-core Democrats.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Are saying, I don't like the way Joe Biden is so pro-Israel.

Now, number one, it's possible, that's just the reality. And they never want to vote.

They just go somewhere else.

It's possible. When we get, after a couple billion dollars are spent.

And we are now in October of 2024, do you think those younger voters whose complaint about Joe Biden is that he's too pro-Israel right now, are going to come back home?

They might just stay home. That might be the best thing possible. Because they're not going to Donald Trump. He's pro-Israel, clearly.

Much more than Joe Biden.

So that weakness, is -- we don't know how real it is.

We know that Joe Biden is a weak candidate.

But the reason why other candidates on the Republican side are beating Joe Biden handily.

Is largely because of this type of erosion.

Erosion from Democrats. Younger Democrats that are not typical Republican voters.

So if they come home, like they usually do. We know what happens with these Republicans.

Or, these third party candidates.

Gary Johnson was showing up at 10 and 12 percent of the polls. People forget that.

It didn't happen. It never holds.

So if that does happen. And people say, okay. Forget that. I'm going back home. I'm going to Joe Biden.

This election is too close. We know the arguments. If that happens, it will get much more difficult.

GLENN: I believe the only way that happens is if the press brings the -- the -- half the country back to this place that Donald Trump is Hitler.

And I don't know if that works universally anymore.

And here's why: Joe Biden conned a lot of people.

The Democrats conned a lot of people. That he was going to bring back normalcy.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Well, we know this isn't normal. Okay?

The country is hurting. Both Republicans and Democrats, the country is falling apart.

And everybody knows it. So he doesn't have the, well, I'm not going to be him.

Right. But you're you.

STU: Right. That was his strength in 2020.

His strength was to say, I'm not him. And look at me. I'll return you to the normal times. That didn't happen.

GLENN: Right. That didn't happen. So there's a lot of people that will just stay home.

Unfortunately, if Donald Trump is the nominee, there might be a lot of Republicans, that would stay home, as well.

Although, I just don't think that that is as true as everyone wants you to believe.

GLENN: Yeah. I really don't think there's a problem with Donald Trump and Republicans.

GLENN: You have the Liz Cheneys.

STU: Liz Cheneys. Yeah, but that's nobody.

GLENN: I think that may actually hurt Biden.

STU: It could. It could. It really could. And some polls show the RFK thing going both ways. But it seems to be hurting Joe Biden more.

I think if you look at where this might go, over a long period of time, you just have to factor it in. I think you have to price it in, in your head. The media is not going to act like they are now. During the general election.

That might be fine.

Donald Trump has survived that already. He already had a really negative media. And won in 2016.

He's already been able to do it.

So maybe he'll be able to do it again.

But you can't look at the current situation, and think, this is how it will go.

It may very well be also, he goes through these trials. People are so upset about it, that he's being targeted, that they all side with him, and he wins easily.

That's a possibility too.

But the media is going to do everything they can, once he gets this nomination, to take him out. In some level, it's true with these other candidates as well.

With these other candidates, you have the possibility of essentially what the Biden approach was, right?

Look, you guys just lived through four years of Joe Biden.

I won't be him.

It will be difficult for Donald Trump to make that same argument. Because he's got that same type of thing built into him.

Everyone has made up their mind on both of these people.

You know, Haley, DeSantis, have a little more have an opening there.

GLENN: It may come down to the vice president.

Because I think everybody is like, man, if he wins, I don't want Kamala Harris to be the president.

That would be a nightmare.

And so it may come down, to the vice president.

STU: If you were doing a draft of who you thought Donald Trump would pick as his VP, who is your first pick?

GLENN: First pick --

STU: Again, not who you think it should be. But who he will pick.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: This is a tough one.

GLENN: I know.

I go back and forth between Ramaswamy and Nikki.

Nikki would be smart, because she'll pacify the -- the old guard Republican.

And she's a fighter.

But he's not going to like that.

STU: Yeah. I can't -- I mean, he obviously put her in his administration.


GLENN: I know. There's been a deep falling out since then.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Ramaswamy is still fighting for Donald Trump.

STU: Oh, yeah. There's no -- there's no like between them at all, at this point.

It's interesting. Haley strikes me as a Pence-like pick.

Right? It's a little bit different, obviously.

But it's someone who is I think respectable. Quote, unquote.

Would please a lot of those voters who think Donald Trump is -- is -- you know, his tweets are too bad.

And all that other stuff. And that's what he needed in 2016, honestly.

GLENN: And could take the job.

STU: Does he need that in 2024, though?

GLENN: That can take the job?

STU: He needs someone who can take the job, clearly. That's obviously the number one role.

But with Pence, he picked someone, number one to please evangelicals. Who were very on the fence about Donald Trump, early on.

And, you know, you get somewhat of that, with Nikki Haley.

I think you still get -- I don't think that is what he needs anymore. The evangelicals are through the roof.

But you do get a steady hand feel from Nikki Haley. Ramaswamy, you don't really get that. I like Vivek. But --


STU: You get a game changer. And you get a bulldog who will go on television 900 times a day, and just say.

And just argue with passion for every point that Donald Trump makes. I think Donald Trump would like that. He likes those people.

GLENN: I agree.

Except Ramaswamy is a star to some degree.

Now, that has faded. People don't like him as much, which Donald Trump would like. He doesn't want somebody that will compete with him. You know what I mean?

STU: Yeah. I just that's true.

GLENN: He wants someone who is solid for certain reasons. Whatever.

But you work for me.

And Ramaswamy, I think, could do that. And you're right. He's a bulldog.

I would lean towards Ramaswamy as Donald Trump's pick.

I have for a long time. And I thought Donald Trump would pick him.

But I -- I think if Nikki Haley is a strong, you know, number two in the primaries. If she starts to -- to become just a juggernaut, next to him. He would probably be foolish not to take her.

STU: We should also point out, that precisely zero votes have been cast in the primary.

So he has not won the primary yet.

GLENN: That can all change.

STU: You're looking ahead a little bit. I thought it was an interesting night last night.

Megyn Kelly's biggest WINNER and LOSER of the 4th Republican Debate

Megyn Kelly's biggest WINNER and LOSER of the 4th Republican Debate

Glenn believes there was a clear winner at the 4th 2024 Republican presidential debate: moderator Megyn Kelly. So, he invited her on to reveal her biggest winner and loser. Kelly breaks down the performances of each candidate — Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Chris Christie — and her biggest issue with the previous debates: "They didn't let the candidates debate each other." She also describes why she "prayed to God" that Chris Christie would be on the debate stage and explains whether she believes former president Donald Trump (who will be 78 if he wins the presidency) is fit for office.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We go to Megyn Kelly who is calling us, I think probably from the airport. Hi, Megyn.

MEGYN: Hi, Glenn.

GLENN: How are you?

MEGYN: I'm great. A little tired you, but good.

GLENN: I'll bet you are.

Last night, I said when I first got on today, that the big winner, I thought last night was you.


GLENN: You were spot-on. You asked really tough questions. But you phrased them in a way that conservatives want to ask them.

I thought you were fair, tough, and when you said, nobody can hear any of you, everybody shut up. You ran a tight ship. You did a fantastic job, last night.

MEGYN: Thank you so much, Glenn. You know, for me, watching some of the earlier debates, it's very frustrating. Because I knew that there was a way of controlling them.

You know, it was clear to me. There was a way of controlling them.

And I have a repour with all of these guys, same as you do. They know you. If you were out there, they would respect you. They know you don't hate them. You're not trying to hurt them.

You're trying to foster a great debate, good TV. And so when we had that opening exchange, for me it was fun. Because it was kind of like what I imagined, it's like to be in the NBA. Where you're kind of passing the ball behind your back, and somebody catches it with ease. And they go. Like, we kind of got into a rhythm. Where, I go, you go. We make eye contact. I'm coming for you.

That's what I hated about the NBC debate, is they just -- he didn't let the candidates debate -- I don't want to hear a Kristen Welker interview of Nikki Haley. I want the other candidates to talk to Nikki Haley. So, anyway, thank you for saying that, it was a relief for me to get out there, and let them let it rip.

GLENN: So who did you think was the big winner and the big loser?

MEGYN: Well, with all respect to her, I thought Nikki Haley lost last night. Because she shrunk away. She's not really a presence. And she's been increasing her poll numbers by getting out there and being futuristic. And that version of her, did not appear on stage last night. I thought Ramaswamy, if you didn't like him, he became even more unlikable to you. If you love him, he became even more lovable to you.

I thought Ron DeSantis had his best debate yet.

And so I think you could probably say he's the winner, because he's in the best poll position of the four.

And he not only didn't hurt himself, although there was one bad exchange. He didn't hurt himself, he actually did help himself. He was tougher than we've seen. And I think that was the DeSantis we fell in love with, back when he was battling nasty voters during COVID.

Chris Christie, look, the same rule for him as Vivek. If you're one of the 25 percent of Republicans who likes Chris Christie, you probably said, yeah, good.

Now, screw Trump. He did the same thing.

And if you were one of the 75 percent that doesn't like him, you probably enjoyed watching some of the other candidates get into it with him, and some of the questions that the moderators had.

GLENN: I have to tell you, we were watching it, as a team last night. And we all cheered when you went to Chris Christie on transgenderism.

We were like, oh, this is going to be good. This is going to be good.

MEGYN: You know, can I tell you? And he tried to tell me, that I didn't have my facts on my second question. And, of course, I did, and he was misleading.

But those are the two questions I showed up to ask, Glenn. I'm like, you know how much work goes into these things. Right?

Every single question we ask, takes hours and in some cases, days. You know, you have to research so much. And you craft it, you recraft it. So on. And you know, this is an issue, near and dear to not only my heart, but to most conservative's hearts. And he's been so weak on it.

He is too radical on this issue, to be the Republican nominee in my view.

This is way out of step with where the Republican Party is.

And it's -- it's -- it was the one reason why I wanted him to make the debate.

I prayed to the -- all the angels above.

Please, please, let him make --

GLENN: Last night, I thought there was one weird moment with Chris Christie.

And I think it really did not look good, for -- for Nikki Haley. When Chris Christie came out, and tried to defend her.

I -- I -- that was nice and everything.

But I think she should have turned and said, I don't need a man's help here. I'm fine. I don't need anybody's help. I can defend myself.

The way she kind of looked down as he was saying that, I thought it made her look weak. And she's not a weak woman.

MEGYN: It was her lowest moment. And I have to give credit to Chris Steyer Walt. Because he had said to me, here's my prediction, Chris Christie is going to try to white knight Nikki Haley. And, man, he was right. She did look weak.

I thought, man, she's been so strong in these debates in terms of defending herself and attacking others.

And of all moments, she should have put her hand out and she should have said, Chris, I appreciate the help, but I got this.

And then defended herself. And I could only conclude, was it because she was shaky on the Ukraine, you know, counties? Like the provinces? She did eventually come up with a few.

I couldn't read it. Maybe she didn't know the answer, and she was stalling. Or she wants this pass, because it was a bad moment for her.

GLENN: I read that moment with the free provinces as, wait a minute, I know them. But are they provinces or regions? You know, just that -- that moment of hesitation, where you don't want to get it wrong.

And then that moment just passed her.

MEGYN: Yeah.

GLENN: And then she came in. Unfortunately for her, when everyone was talking. And nobody really heard her, give the answer. And I still know. Because I didn't hear all of them. I don't know if she was right or wrong.

MEGYN: I know. The only other one I heard was Crimea. We all know that one.

GLENN: Right. Right.

MEGYN: So it is awkward. It could be -- it's -- if the body language were different.

It could be the power move to not take your opponent's little test. You know.

I could see that, being screw you. I don't take your little exams, Vivek. You're not at Harvard anymore. But her body language was not projecting, I am confident, and I'm dismissing this twerp. It projected, I have no idea! Help me!

So that was not her finest moment. I do think -- I bet you, there will be a little movement in the polls after this.

Because DeSantis, it was the guy we kind of thought he could be.

And it wasn't in any way, set up like in me

But DeSantis had issues, that were important to him, brought up last night.

It's not like we said, oh, let's bring these up for Ron DeSantis. We brought these issues, because conservatives care about these issues.

Trans. The vaccine issue. COVID.

And he was very strong on this.

He hasn't really had a chance to speak on a lot of these issues in the debates.

You have the Univision anchor out there, talking about the dreamers.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: I agree. I thought DeSantis was really good last night.

What did you make of the one exchange, where he wouldn't say, he thought Trump was fit to be president or not.

That was the one moment. It was very strange to me. Did you think he wanted to say no?

He's not fit. Did you think he was trying to say yes. He was trying to walk the line. What was he doing there?

MEGYN: That's when I said, he did great except for one moment. That was the moment. He did not handle that well.

And I got to give credit where it's due. Chris Christie is great at that kind of thing. He didn't answer it. Like forensically diagnosing somebody that answer, there's no one better than Chris Christie at it.

And he honed in on him, and it was uncomfortable. DeSantis doesn't want to make news.
He doesn't want to alienate the Trump base, with a big headline from him, saying Trump was unfit. So he was, you know --

GLENN: But why not say, right now, he's fit?

MEGYN: Hmm. He doesn't want to say that either. He doesn't believe it.

And I think he understands that there's a certain psychology, within the Republican Party, that is recognizing the two people that are likely to be the nominees are too old. They are really not as fit as we would like them to be.

Either one of them, let's face it.

GLENN: Hang just a second.

Because I think, I would love for the Nancy Pelosi generation, to sit down, and retire.


Let the younger generation now take this.

However, do you think that Donald Trump has faded from where he was in 2020?

MEGYN: Yeah. I do.

I mean, I would take him over Joe Biden any day of the week.

I don't think he will fill out this term, never mind the second.

But there's no question that Trump has lost awe step. Or multiple steps. He is confusion Joe Biden from Obama.

I know he's saying, he intentionally did that. Go back and look at the clips. It wasn't intentional. Anyone could have a slip of the tongue. It's happened to him repeatedly.

The reference about how someone will get us into World War II.

Confusing countries. Confusing cities where -- it's happening more and more. With all due respect to Trump. This is what happens when you're 77 years old. Trump seems inhuman, but he's not inhuman. He's a human. He's a man. DeSantis didn't lie, Father Time spares no one. Was a good one.

So, look, if it's between Trump and Biden, I don't think there's any question who is more fit, more capable.

But are we really going to pretend that Donald Trump is just as vibrant and mentally sharp as he was at 16? Well, okay.

GLENN: I only have about 70 or 80 seconds here for this. But do you think Trump is going to jail?

MEGYN: I'm starting to worry. I didn't -- he definitely will get convicted, in multiple jurisdictions. But Andy McCarthy, who is very smart on these things, was pointing out that Judge Chutkan in DC, in the federal case, on J6, you know she hates him. In DC, the jury is going to hate them.

That he thinks there's a -- there's some pretty good odds, she will not release him from jail, pending appeal after his lengthy conviction.

GLENN: So what does that do, to the system?

MEGYN: Glenn, that's why we have to have an undercard.

GLENN: Yeah. No. I agree with that.

I agree with that.

They have to run all the way to the end.

Somebody has to run all the way to the end.

We have to have an undercard. That is going to -- is that just chaos in the streets.

MEGYN: There will -- America will burn if they put Trump in jail before this election. It will burn. I don't want it.

GLENN: God help us.

MEGYN: I just see the reality, the same as you do. And we will need the National Guard city to city. You know, MAGA is going to rise up. And there will be a lot of sympathizers who understand it, and won't try to stop it.

They cannot be allowed to do that.

GLENN: All right. Thank you very much, Megyn. Best of luck to you today. And, again, great job last night.

Thank you for bringing a reasonable debate to America.

MEGYN: Thank you.

GLENN: Appreciate it.

MEGYN: Aw. Thank you so much, Glenn. Good to see you, Stu, all the best.

GLENN: Don't give him any love.

MEGYN: I love Stu.

STU: Yes!

STU: Thanks, Megyn.

GLENN: Get off my phone, Megyn. All right. Megyn Kelly.

Biden's new fentanyl 'Strike Force' is a TRAP

Biden's new fentanyl 'Strike Force' is a TRAP

The Treasury Department has launched a new "Strike Force" to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking. But that's not all that's going on. Glenn and Stu discuss the bigger story: According to reporting from Blaze News, the strike force will be led by the Treasury Department as a means to crack down on money laundering networks, particularly those utilizing cryptocurrency. Instead of closing down the border, the government is once again taking aim at Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. But Glenn isn't letting this story slide under the radar ...


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the Treasury Department launches a new strike force, to crack down on elicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

Stu, this is a story in Blaze media today.

Just tell me just from the headline, what you think this story is really all about.

STU: Give me the headline one more time.

GLENN: Okay. Treasury Department launches new strike force to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

STU: Okay. Well, it seems like, you know, you have the stuff coming over the border. Maybe in from China.

They have a crack team, making sure that they can stop this.

GLENN: You really think that's what that's about?

STU: Look, now it's probably something terrible.

But from the headline, it would say, okay.

GLENN: Okay. I'm going to read it.

Stop when you realize what this really is.


Biden administration Treasury Department announced Monday, the launch of a new strike force, dedicated to cracking down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

Agency recently formed the counter fentanyl strike force to marshal the Treasury's resources and expertise in a coordinated and streamlined operation to combat the trafficking of elicit fentanyl. Any idea yet?

You will. It noted that the strike force will be led by the office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence and IRS criminal investigations. Okay? You're starting to get it. Right? Okay.

In Monday's statement, Secretary of the Treasury, Janet Yellen, reaffirmed the Biden administration's commitment to stemming the flow of deadly fentanyl into communities across the United States.

She noted the new strike force will allow us to bring the department's unrivaled expertise in fighting financial crime.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Treasury will use every bit of every tool, at its disposal to disrupt the ability of drug traffickers to peddle this poison in our country.

The strike force aims to crack down on money laundering networks.

Do you know what this is about yet?

STU: I mean, it seems like a money grab by the federal government.

Financial -- sorry. Financial monitoring of every citizen.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. Financial strike force aims to crack down on money laundering networks. Particularly those using --

STU: Bitcoin.

GLENN: Yes! Yes.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: You want to stop fentanyl, you close down the border.

STU: You know what it would really help, Glenn.

Because obviously, the way to stop fentanyl. Is to stop Bitcoin.

GLENN: Yes, it is. Isn't it?

STU: It's not just stopping Bitcoin. You need a central bank digital currency. That you can turn off for purchases of this bad things.

That you can stop people from doing all these naughty things.

GLENN: Exactly right.

Everything would go through the financial crimes division of the IRS and the Treasury.

STU: That's perfect.

It's like a department of pre-crime.

GLENN: Something like that. Something like that. We would have to come up with newspeak, to be able to come up with the right terms.

STU: That will solve all our problems. Stop the problems before they start.

GLENN: Yes. I like that. I like that.

STU: Did you see this story from Los Angeles?

Where they had this potential serial killer, and how they caught him.

GLENN: No. I hate these stories. Because I'm always like, good, serial killer caught. The way they did it, really bad.

STU: Oh, yeah. This is all over the country. Basically, this guy had a car. He went in. They found -- they saw him around one of these neighborhoods. He went in and killed someone. Some poor dad in his garage. In his home to kill these kids.

Along with a bunch of homeless people. Anyway, they got his license plate. And every time anyone pulls into Beverly Hills, they scan every single license plate.

So they -- he just drove through Beverly Hills, and they're like, oh, there he is. And just went and got him.

That's -- because every single person who enters the city, has their license plate scanned to see if they're any problem at all.

And the people of Beverly Hills are like, we're really rich, and we don't want people here that we don't like. So we love this idea.

GLENN: Wow. Sometimes just because they're driving a Prius, we say, get out.

STU: Yeah, four cylinders. Get out of town.