RADIO

CHINA IS TO BLAME: One Senator saw the signs that the CCP lied to the world about coronavirus

While the W.H.O. was lying to the world about the strange, new virus making its way through China, Senator Tom Cotton was one of the first to sound the alarm on just how dangerous coronavirus could be. Turns out, he was right. So what were the early signs he saw, that others missed? Sen. Cotton joins Glenn on radio, describing the actions taken by the Chinese Communist Party during the early days of the coronavirus pandemic that indicated coming trouble for the world without immediate action. He says because of the CCP's decision to lie to the world, China is to blame for ALL of it -- lost lives, shattered economies and more -- and the communist nation's relationship with the US moving forward should be forever changed.

RADIO

Glenn: 6 leftist stories that may MAKE YOUR HEAD EXPLODE!

What better way to kick-off Glenn’s Thanksgiving vacation than with six stories that may make you HEAD EXPLODE?! In this clip, Glenn shares 6 recent, news stories — like the teacher union’s new pronoun guide, the UN complaining about Nigerians, and a new California program that pays people for being transgender — as part of a ‘clown news alert.’ Which one is the most absurd to YOU?!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have a full-fledged clown alert. Clown alert going on. Stu, we don't have time for -- okay. So let's look at some of the stories today, that would have made my head explode, but I'm so far beyond that.

Here's a headline from Fox News. MSNBC anchor slammed for complaining House Democrats never investigating the Trump family.

I'm just saying. Well, look at the cute little car, and all the MSNBC people coming out. The, I guess it's maybe Hassan Show. Didn't do this. They didn't do this for the Trump family. Meti, which is -- I'm going to say ze, zer, which could be her or him.

I don't know. Nobody watches MSNBC. Isn't that weird? It's like this weird experiment. If we put all this money into producing something, and nobody watches it, how long can we do that?

It's a neat experience. CNN has been doing that one for a while. And that experiment is about to come to a conclusion. Anyway, be as mad as you like about House Republicans kicking off any day, one day after winning the House with a massive investigation to the Biden family. But ask yourself why Democrats didn't do this for the Trump family. Yeah.

Oh. Ask yourself on the day that Pelosi is retiring, by the way. Oh. Okay.

I've got a note from the teacher's union. It is a pronoun guide.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: This is why I knew about the pronouns for MSNBC. The national -- the National Education Association's pronoun guide, reviewed by the Washington Examiner, directs members on how to use various preferred pronouns to grow accustomed to include one's pronouns and name tags, while introducing one's self to colleagues. The pronoun guide says it's been made available for members of the teacher's union. And it is made to have staff better understand the use of pronouns, in a respectful way for all NEA meetings and communications. In English, this is according to the guide, in English, we have two sets of generated pronouns. She/her/hers. He/him/his. Oh, that is great. They're still teaching this stuff.

However, those are attached to a particular gender. Now, I didn't know that. Did you know that?

STU: A particular gender? Wow. No. I didn't know that.

GLENN: Like she/her/hers would go to somebody that would self-identify she's a woman.

STU: Right. That's the only way you would know she was a woman.

GLENN: Only way you would know. We all likely, this is according to the teachers union, all likely assume we knew someone's pronouns just by looking at them.

STU: Oh, that's so silly. What a silly concept.

GLENN: Okay. Knowing their gender. But that isn't the case. In an effort to be more affirming to all. It's important as teachers to get out of the habit of assuming pronouns. So they have a table graphic, that separates different pronouns from their respective case, to inform the reader how to use them in a sentence properly. The first three lines from the graphic provide a guide for he/she/they pronouns, but the final line is a guide for using ze/zim/zir/zirself.

STU: Zirself. I did not --

GLENN: Uh-huh, yeah. Which doesn't help identify anyone.

STU: No.

GLENN: You have absolutely.

STU: Does no good for communication whatsoever, which is what the language is supposed to do.

GLENN: Here's another headline for you.

The UN complains the world has too many Nigerians. And who doesn't think that there are too many Nigerians. I don't know. That sounds a little racist. But, no. No. The UN fits entirely in that one clown car.

Which is very nice. Here's a Democrat, that has said, well, she's a scientist. It's Sheila Jackson Lee.

STU: Oh, gosh. Brilliant.

GLENN: Yeah. She said, there's a direct connection to slavery and the pandemic. No, that's -- no, there's no clown horn there. This is serious. I'm sorry. I don't know how this got into the stack of clown news. This is a serious thing.

I believe -- and I can prove it to you. I believe there's a direct -- you know, the 7 degrees of Kevin Bacon.

It's like, except with slavery, it's only 1 degree. Give me anything. Give me anything.

STU: Water faucets.

GLENN: Water faucets. Easy. Did slaves drink water?

Direct link to slavery. Every water faucet company should be paying reparations. Next.

STU: Oatmeal.

GLENN: Please. Who is on the front of the oatmeal box?

The old lady man, Bush looking person. Colonial. Oppression. Slavery. Boom. And don't even get me started about breakfast cereals, foods. Pancakes.

Please. I think, you know. Next.

STU: Oh.

French baguette.

French baguette. You would think this one is hard. You would think that one would struggle to connect a French baguette.

STU: That's exactly what I was thinking. I was trying to come up with something specifically that was difficult to tie to slavery.

GLENN: No. This is very easy.

I told you earlier, that what his name? Pepé LePew. The guy who was on Hogan's Heroes. The French guy in the slave camp. I could take this apart 600 ways to Sunday.

First of all, what did white people do?

They built concentration camps. Then they did shows about concentration camps, with Hogan's Heroes.

Hogan's Heroes, they had one token black in that camp. One. Okay?

Token. Just like slaves. That man, in that show, who was on the show with a Frenchman. Who liked baguettes. Slavery.

STU: I -- I don't want to come up with another example.

GLENN: Because you don't want to be shown up.

STU: Sure. That's exactly what it is.

GLENN: Let me give you this one. Los Angeles county sheriff says the crash that injured 25 law enforcement recruits in southern Whittier, Wednesday morning, was not an accident.

Now, wait a minute. This is hard to believe in the first place. Someone would drive their car, intentionally, into a crowd of police recruits? In California?

No way. Well, shockingly, investigators went through an exhaustive interview process with everyone involved, with the video surveillance statements from the recruits. The physical evidence that they had, like I've got a broken leg. And what they got from the suspect themself. And they were able to form the opinion, that this was a deliberate act.

Now, they have no idea why. The driver was Nicholas Joseph Gutierrez. He's 22. He's charged with attempted murder of a peace officer. And other charges are pending.

But they gave him a bond of a ridiculous $2 million. And so he is -- well, he was also -- he had marijuana in the SUV. And he was intoxicated.

You know, but he drove directly into a group of 75 recruits.

And five of them are critically injured. Twenty-five of them were injured.

But they still have no motive. They still don't have any idea. And, of course, it was not politically or racially motivated.

Just want you to know that.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: We'll wait for details. I hope they figure that out.

STU: It's never -- it's never motivated that way.

GLENN: Well, the California police are on it. Okay?

STU: That's good to hear. California is on to a lot of things though. They have a great new program, we talked about it briefly yesterday, in San Francisco.

GLENN: Oh. Where you can -- if your gender --

STU: If you're transgendered, you can get on some sort of payroll with them --

STU: Yeah. And they'll pay you for being transgender.

$1,200 a month.

GLENN: My name is Betty, Stu! My name is now Betty.

STU: And if you happen to be a Glenn into a Betty, then you can get $1,200 a month, for the next 18 months.

GLENN: And you must admit, I'm the most beautiful woman I have ever seen.

STU: And you are, believe me. You sure are.

GLENN: Oh. You haven't seen me all dolled up.

STU: Now, it might seem like a ridiculous program to some. But I decided to go through the actual application, because I was interested.

GLENN: Right, and that's when you see how really serious and well thought out it is. Right?

STU: Right. Uh-huh. Now, there are some options. You have to go through the application.

Let me -- this is pronouns. Glenn, I'll go through these with you. You just have to check all that apply. So you might have eight or ten of these.

GLENN: All that apply. Okay. All that apply, not just one. Got it.

STU: She/her/hers. He/him/his/, they/them/theirs, it/it/its. Co/co/cos.

GLENN: Hmm?

STU: Co/co/cos.

GLENN: Hmm? Well, yeah. Of course.

STU: Zi, zim, zis.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Ze, zer, zers. He/him/hirs. Hy/hym/hyrs.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. The ear one, I didn't -- and I feel a little bad. Because that makes me think of my ears, which I think are really bad. They're big. The earlobes are growing. It's the only part of the face and the nose that continue to grow. And thank you for pointing that out.

Now I'm really offended! I wish I had that power. You know in the Disney film? What was the one? Hercules?

I wish I -- remember when the guy could set his hair on fire. I wish I could do that.

Wouldn't that be great? Just -- so when you would say something like zirs, I would think ears. And you would know I'm pissed.

STU: By the way, I should point out, it's not ears. E-A-R-S, it's e --

GLENN: I didn't say it was. I said, it made me think of that. That's my truth, Stu.

STU: I'm sorry. That is your truth.

Or ma'am, or she. I don't know which one to say.

How about per/per/pers?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Fey/fair/fairs. Ay/ay/ayrs. Tay/tare/tares.

GLENN: I like the way you say that.

STU: Va/var/vars. No pronouns.

GLENN: Oh, no. That one doesn't apply to me.

STU: That one doesn't apply to you.
So this is the guaranteed income for the transgendered people program.

GLENN: Okay. So if I identify as any or all of those, do I get more money from the state, if I identify as all of those?

STU: That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that.

GLENN: Do they investigate to see if I'm really --

STU: Definitely not.

Because how would you? These words don't mean anything?

GLENN: Do I have to live in California to get their taxpayer money?

STU: Yes. San Francisco. This is from the city of San Francisco. The guaranteed income for transgendered people, or gift, which is interesting.

Because it doesn't spell. It's gift. In reality it's GIFTP.

GLENN: Guaranteed income for transgender people. Okay.

STU: And they call it GIFTP. The GIFTP program, here are some things -- now, it goes to gender. There are several genders available, Glenn. For you to choose. I guess you could choose any or all of these. Let me give you some example. Gender creative.

GLENN: Well, that's me. I'm very creative.

STU: Gender outlaw.

GLENN: Yes. I live in the West.

STU: How about gray gender.

GLENN: Well, look at my hair.

STU: I don't know it means you're older. That guy kind of -- it's a gray area.

GLENN: Either works for me, works for me, Your Honor.

STU: Brother boy. Is that your gender, or would you consider yourself a brother boy?

GLENN: I would say, because we're in a transition as a society.

STU: Right.

GLENN: I would still say there's a chance brother boy might be misinterpreted. So I'm going to say no.

STU: That's a good point, considering the context of earlier conversation today.

Sister girl.

GLENN: Sister girl. I am absolutely -- look at me. Betty, I'm a sister girl.

STU: Now, when I look at you, what I see, mavericke.

Mavericke. It's like a fancy Tom Cruise. A mavericke.

GLENN: Oh, I like that.

STU: That's kind of you.

GLENN: I am. I'm a maverick. No, I'm a mavericke.

STU: I like that. How about this one. These are all real genders on the checklist. I'm not making these up.

GLENN: Okay. So if I identify as a mavericke. And you would say, yes, sir. You are a mavericke. And I would say, you bet. Give me my cash. Okay.

STU: How about stud?

GLENN: No.

STU: That's the one gender you're not.

GLENN: No. No.

STU: How about -- this is a real gender.

GLENN: Of course, it is.

STU: FTX. You can now identify as a failed cryptocurrency exchange. Which is --

GLENN: I think that one is an important gender that you mock right now. And now where is my horn. Thank you. Now you can do the other.

STU: She already did the other.

GLENN: No. Do it now.

STU: She already did it.

GLENN: We can edit it in post production. Do the damn -- that wasn't the same one. That's not the one I wanted.

RADIO

Why the far-left entered the Taylor Swift/Ticketmaster MESS

You'd think U.S. politicians have better things to worry about than the Taylor Swift/TicketMaster fiasco. Yet, it seems some of our far-left favorites already are trying to use the whole mess to their advantage. Sen. Amy Klobuchar even called for a federal investigation into TicketMaster. WHAT?! In this clip, Glenn and Stu explain why this likely will be just another attack on capitalism, why the whining MUST end, and why you don't have a constitutional right to attend a Tay Tay concert (so just shut up about it!).

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: You mocked the Taylor swift story earlier.

GLENN: Did you I?

STU: You said, I can't believe the CNN story is covering this.

GLENN: The coverage is, this is a big deal. That this is the biggest selling ticket day in all of history. It's amazing. But what really caught my attention, the reason why I did it, is because Amy Klobuchar got involved?

STU: Yeah. And AOC as well. AOC was big on this. Saying, it's a monopoly. We must break it up. Can we -- you don't have a constitutional right to see TayTay. That's not a thing. It's not in the document anywhere. They don't mention Taylor Swift once. Nowhere in the document, do they say, you're able to go hear her stupid songs in person. That's not a thing.

GLENN: I think I could twist the Third Amendment.

STU: The Third Amendment? The one about not quartering soldiers?

I don't know --

GLENN: Yeah, they quarter the soldiers, I'm going to see TayTay.

STU: Okay. That may be true. They may have to update. It's a living document.

GLENN: I think it's a living, breathing document, and everybody knows what they were meaning. It's the comma.

STU: But like, there are people absolutely freaking out over this, that they couldn't get their Taylor Swift tickets yesterday.

We have multiple government officials who are saying, oh, look how evil this is, this evil giant corporation, that could only sell 2 million tickets in a day.

GLENN: Oh, shut up.

STU: To a bunch of concerts around the country. I'm so, so sorry. Now, of course, a lot of this goes back to the typical artist, who says, I want to make sure that the real fans can get in. That's why I'm charging 1 dollar for all these tickets. And then, of course, people buy them and resell them on the secondary market. If you just charge what they were worth, then you wouldn't have this problem. But no one wants to do that. Because they make it -- they sound mean if they do that, Glenn. They sound mean to their fans. If they charge too much for these tickets. Now, look, you want to get some tickets, you'll give away to some of your fans, that are dedicated. You can find a way to do that. But these are price controls. You are artificially lowering the price of these tickets, to give to people for $49. Does anyone believe a Taylor swift ticket in the year 2022, or 2023 I guess, is actually only worth on the market, $49? Of course not. She's charging these ridiculously low prices for a select small tiny group of the tickets she's selling.

GLENN: Of 3.6 million.

STU: Right. She has a lot of them out there. Now, of course, she could find a way to just give them away. She's making plenty of money here. Charge the normal price for the other tickets. Then give some away to your hard-core fans.

GLENN: Okay. I so care very little about this story. I mean, the only reason why I brought this story up is, they're concerned in the Senate and the House?

STU: Oh, I know.

GLENN: They're concerned? What about Arizona?

STU: They want to go attack you know some giant corporation.

And they want to attack capitalism. I mean, that's why I care about it.

GLENN: They also want to start talking about the failures of everything else.

STU: That's true. But think about this for a second. There was a time, most of human history. That if you wanted to hear music, what you needed to do was get in in front of someone who was playing it. Right? All throughout history. Then through capitalism, innovation, we were able to record the music. And it was very difficult. You had to distribute it.

It got hard. Then we came up with record stores. And we were able to record the music.

So there were tons and tons of people, who could access this. Any person who had, I don't know. Ten bucks. Could go buy first a record. And an eight-track. And a cassette. And a CD.

STU: And in some cases, all of those.

And you would go and you would buy them from the store. And I remember going around from record store to record store to record store, to try to find this.

GLENN: To try to find it.

STU: And concerts were hard to get into, and they were expensive, and I didn't have the money to it.

GLENN: And you had to go stand in line.

STU: And you had to go stand in line to get the tickets.

GLENN: I paid $19 for floor tickets to see Michael Jackson and the Jackson V.

STU: You're kidding me.

GLENN: Nineteen dollars. And it was an outrage.

STU: People were pissed off. And that's the thing. People are always pissed off. Now we come to the point. You know I don't want -- I didn't want to pay for the money. They're too expensive. They're too expensive for the tickets. Then we're to the point now where capitalism has brought us every single piece of music ever reported for $0.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And they're still bitching. They're still complaining.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: The same people who were like, I don't want to pay $19 for Michael Jackson.

GLENN: Then don't go.

STU: Then don't go. You don't have a right to go -- and, by the way, you can get tickets to every other artist on the planet, with no problems right now. There's essentially one artist that it's difficult to get tickets for. And this artist, they still sold 2 million tickets in a day. And everyone is talking about breaking the company up. And it's not about Ticketmaster. No one likes. Everybody complains about Ticketmaster all the time. It's not about Ticketmaster. They're going after freaking capitalism. They're always targeting the same thing. Every time anyone has a bad -- how can you look at this entire picture, Glenn, from performing music and having no way for anyone else to hear it. To every song being free, and still complain about it.

GLENN: I only brought this up, to say Congress and the Senate are more concerned about a Taylor Swift ticket, than the vote! In Arizona!

Shouldn't they maybe be a little bit more concerned about the stuff that's in their wheelhouse!

STU: That's the problem though. AOC thinks this stuff is in her wheelhouse. She's a victim of everything. She's constantly telling everybody --

GLENN: Isn't everybody tired of victimhood. I'm a victim. Shut up. Shut up.

STU: Shut up. Shut up. It's so annoying. Just stop your whining. Everybody is whining about everything all the time. Look, there are real things to worry about clearly in this country. But whether you can get TayTay tickets, it's not one of them. It's not one of them. I'm sorry.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I think the people of Africa, that are starving right now, they would disagree.

STU: They want TayTay tickets?

GLENN: Yeah. They're on the phonish kind of thing they have over there, trying to get through to Ticketmaster.

They couldn't get in. They couldn't get any. Finally an affordable ticket for us. We're starving to death in Africa and Ethiopia. And I can't get a ticket.

STU: And, you know, where Taylor Swift isn't playing any concerts? Madagascar. Why?

Because everyone there is African-American, is that why? Now, it's weird that they would be African-American in Africa. But I don't know how they all became American citizens in this analogy, but they are.

GLENN: They're African African.

STU: They're African African.

She will not go play for African Africans in an island off the coast of Africa.

GLENN: That is really -- I think it has to stop.

STU: It has to be racism. Is there any possibility? She's skipping the entire continent?

GLENN: How do you do that? How do you do that? You're just going to fly over. Oh, it's the fly over continent. I get it. Wink, wink. Code language.

Dog whistles.

RADIO

SHOCK: FBI agent LEAVES over agency’s handling of Jan. 6

Former FBI agent Steve Friend joined the agency in 2014, and after moving to Daytona Beach in 2021 to investigate crimes related to children, he was suddenly reassigned to the Joint Terrorism Taskforce. Friend joins Glenn to describe the series of events that eventually led him to not only leave the FBI, but to speak out against potential abuses within the department as well. The crux of his story begins with cases concerning the January 6th, 2021 riot, and one arrest warrant that he refused to take part in...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Steve Friend grew up in Savannah, Georgia.

He followed his father's footsteps, and attended the University of Notre Dame, where he graduated with a bachelor's in accounting. He worked in accounting for two years, before deciding he wanted to be in law enforcement.

He was a sworn police officer in Savannah and Kohler, Georgia, for four years. And then he joined the FBI in 2014.

He spent his first seven years in the FBI, investigating violent crime and major offenses, occurring on Indian reservations in northeast Nebraska. This included the Omaha nation. Winnebago tribe of Nebraska. And the Santee Sioux tribe. He was also a member of the FBI Omaha S.W.A.T. team for five years. He transferred to Daytona Beach in 2021. And began investigating child exploitation, human trafficking, and child sexual abuse.

He was reassigned to the joint terrorism task in October 21.

This is where his story really begins. Welcome to the program, Steve. Steve Friend.

STEVE: That a very much, Glenn. It's an honor.

GLENN: So, Steve, tell me what happened when you were reassigned to the joint terrorism task.

STEVE: Well, when they brought me over, they had to put me on the cases that they had already in existence.

And what I soon learned, was that the vast majority of those cases were tied to the January 6 incident of the Capitol.

And just in my habit, as an investigator coming from violent crime. And an environment where there's lots of cases coming rapidly. I just sort of looked through the cases, and wanted to take action on them.

What I came to learn though, they had done everything they expected to do. And were waiting to hear back from Washington. As to further action. Or what the status of the case was going to be.

Which to me, was a major departure for the FBI rules, for investigative work.

GLENN: So wait a minute. The work had already been done by Washington.

Why were you assigned it then?

STEVE: That was my question. Just being very familiar with the case. Management practices with the FBI. I know it happened in over 200 cases in my career.

When you look at a case, it's assigned to you, it's assigned to your office.

So when we had these January 6 cases, it seemed that those cases should be open from Washington, DC.

But if the decision was made to send them out to the field, then it occasionally it will sit with the office that it was with. In my case, it was Daytona, which is in the Jackson-Mobile office. And we ran that case the way we wanted to for further operative steps. However, it was clear a lot of the prework had been done in those cases from Washington, and they were giving directives to our offices, even though, we were on paper, the assigned case agents with our office of origin. Washington was really running the show, which was not a kosher move on our part from the FBI.

GLENN: Why would they do that?

I asked, I was told, that that had been raised early on. The response from headquarters, it was to get, quote, unquote, buy-in from the fields.

There's a couple of things that I can surmise from that. One is the FBI headquarters just have a really negative opinion of the investigators. They thought, if their name is not on it, they're not going to do a good job. Which to me just kind of rang hollow of your personnel.

So then I just did a little bit of critical thinking on it. And, you know, first of all, the January 6 incident, logically, is one incident. It should be one case. But instead, the FBI is elected to open a separate case for every single subject.

So right then and there, you have one case, that's been made into 800, 900, a thousand cases. So now you've upped the total bottom line number of domestic terrorism investigations, and then by spreading those cases to the field, you intentionally are carrying a narrative, that was pushed out in 2021, 2022 about this violent domestic terrorism around the country. When in reality, all those cases, are stemming from one incident.

On January 6, 2021, in 1 location.

GLENN: Okay. So you were suspended. Because you wouldn't do it. You were suspended without pay. Your gun, your badge. Everything was taken from you. And it's because you wouldn't -- what they say, is refusing a lawful arrest warrant, which demonstrated poor judgment. And emporium accessing the FBI's employee handbook, and refusing to attend the SAB. Tell me about this.

GLENN: Yeah.

So I -- my first opportunity, really to take -- to engage in an arrest of a January 6 subject, that I had already decided. That should that come to pass, I was going to make that disclosure, to my supervisor.

So in the lead up to that, I -- I -- the week before, smoke to my immediate supervisor. Raised my concerns about improper case management practices.

And then also, just my concerns about how we were going to be arresting these subjects.

Because in my experience, and having arrested 150-plus violent criminals, never had to use a tactical team, a S.W.A.T. team to -- to bring them into custody, because I had talked to those individuals.

And we had done similar things with these January 6 subjects. So to me, seemed like honest unnecessary use of force.

Payment. I have S.W.A.T. experience to back that up. So I brought all this concern to them. They -- they passed it up the chain of command. My supervisor to the second level.

And, again, had more sitdown meetings with those -- with those guys. Voiced those concerns.

Even brought up FBI training, about abuse of power. That all agents have to go through, in the academy, where you go to the Holocaust Memorial and the MLK memorial. And you discuss, you know how those civil rights abuses, and atrocities can occur.
So raised all those concerns.

And they said, it was very clear to me, they were trying to divorce the two issues of me raising my concern, and then this said, it's separate from me, to refuse to participate.

And I contradicted that. I said my job is to defend the Constitution. I took an oath to uphold and defend it.

I think that we are violating due process. We're potentially violating some cruel and unusual punishment, just how we're bringing these guys into custody.

Even interviewing people who we never intend to prosecute is an abuse. So I have to default to my oath of office, that I think I am doing my job. They didn't agree with me. They said, that I had questionable judgment.

And was not executing a lawful warrant. That was one of the issues. When I got concerned about my future with the FBI, they multiple times told me, where do you see us, with us in the future?

In fact, my special agent in the future. Told me, I had to do some soul-searching. If I wanted to be an FBI agent. So I got an attorney. And he asked me to get him the employee handbook. And disciplinary procedures, because he just wanted to be equipped for me.

GLENN: Right. So that was the improperly accessing the employee handbook, giving it to your attorney?

STEVE: Yes. My employee's request. When I was eventually suspended. They said, what did you take? And I said, oh, that was the employee handbook. And they said, we need that back.

I said, I thought you guys could get the handbook.

GLENN: Right. Okay. Hang on just a second. When we come back, he's going to talk about the tools called Guardians.

And his concern how those tools are being used right now. To investigate US citizens.

Tools called Guardians. Oh, that sounds safe. More with Steve friend, next.
(music)

GLENN: You like saving money. The reason I ask is, you know if you hate saving money. Well, then, you're probably a Democrat.

Then you might not be a fan of upside.

If, on the other hand, you're the type of person who doesn't enjoy having to empty out your wallet. And sell a kid any, every time you buy your groceries, or to get gas. You're going to love Upside.

Upside is an amazing app, that will actually save you money on gas and groceries, and dining out. All you have to do is download it. And use the promo code Beck. You'll automatically get 25 cents or more back for every gallon on your first tank of gas. And from there, you just find appear offer for whatever you're buying on Upside. Check in on at the business. And when you pay, you will get paid. It's easy. You'll feel the results, right away in your wallet.

Download the free Upside app at upside.com/Beck. Upside.com/Beck. Get 25 cents more back for every gallon on your tank of gas. It's upside.com/Beck. Do it now. And save.
(music)

STU: Don't miss the special on BlazeTV.com/Glenn. The promo code is stand up. You'll get 30 bucks off.
(OUT AT 9:28AM)

GLENN: We're talking to a very brave FBI agent. I wish there were more of them. Where are you, local FBI agents?

Steve Friend is his name. He's an FBI whistle-blower. He objected to being part of the January 6th raids. For several reasons.

First of all, before I get to some other things. Can you tell me, you said earlier, that you thought it was cruel and inhumane treatment. I think you said. The way some of these prisoners are being handled. Can you tell me about anything, you know, about that?

STEVE: I can only speak what I've read about how folks are being held in jail, actually been taken into custody. My general concern was that the process being punishment for people who actually were never -- we never intended or were not able to charge. So just sitting down in front of them, stresses them out. Like to hire an attorney. The one individual that had participated in, with an interview.

He had lost his job. And was retaining an attorney.

And it was for walked in the Capitol. After the information at the police.

So what was the point of us going through that process?

GLENN: Right. You know it's amazing to me. You said, at one point, you -- you said that the process is the punishment.

And when you think of that, that is terrifying. Because that means, that even if they can't charge you, or you're not really guilty of anything, they're going to make this so horrible on you, that you just stay away from everything. You teach. You teach people a lesson. Stay away. Don't even get close to any of this.

STEVE: That's exactly right.

Even what happened to Michael flint, essentially how he became bankrupt, in order not to defend. Ultimately pled guilty to avoid his son being roped into it. That is the process, being the punishment.

GLENN: And the FBI designated the grassy area, outside the US Capitol as a restricted cell, after January 6th. And did they apply retroactively, to be able to look and say, well, you were in that restricted zone, on January 6th?

STEVE: That's my understanding, that they wanted to really send a message, gather more people up. And so they decided that the lawn on the Capitol, outside those four laws, will be deemed restricted. Because at some point, there would be some barricades. But just anecdotally, I heard individuals who were there on the 5th. They said, they felt their case about on the 6th, the morning of. They saw people were moving them.

So there's a little bit of action being involved with that.

GLENN: Tell me about guardians. The tools that they used to investigate. Called guardians.

STEVE: So guardian is a software system. I actually think of it as the 911 system in the FBI. You call 911, just cat in a tree, through the neighborhood. You can do that to the FBI. National center, those folks there, deal with probably 3,000 calls a day, or electronic communications. They kind of pull through it and disseminate them to appeal for proper investigative action.

So when it came to January 6th, there was a huge uptick in the amount of guardians that came into the FBI, and it was from all over the country. It could from a disgruntled neighbor, who didn't like his buddy, across the street, having a MAGA flag. It could be family member ratting out a family member. My uncle was where. He told me he was there.

So people that were trying to be helpful to the FBI, in pursuing this investigation. A lot of them just went to the FBI website, looked at pictures. And was saying, you know this unknown subject, looks like somebody went to high school with.

And those chips would come in. They would be pushed out to wherever the appropriate geographic location. So for me, I got one that was really the first interaction I had. They -- an anonymous tip from Rhode Island. That said, this individual was involved with the police officers, of the January 6 riot. They had done a lookup on this guy.

His phone that -- the GPS did not ping at the capital. The facial recognition, with his social media accounts, did not come with a positive match. But I was still the last to go. In an attempt to do an interview.

So it's not illegal for me to knock on anybody's door, and say, hey. I'm FBI. Do you want to talk to me?

It was just a concern.

Because even if he admitted to being at the Capitol.

There was no complaint. It would be very difficult to charge the case.

So still -- at that point, said, all right. I'll go knock on his door. Went to the place, about an hour, hour and a half. Knocked on the door.

Met a gentleman there, that I am with the FBI. We're looking at January 6th. Were you at the Capitol that day? And he looked at me and he said, no. That was the day of my son's funeral.

So I just made him relive that for experience, and give my business card. And was on my merry way. So that was my first Guardian that I had, on January 6th.

GLENN: Are you seeing an escalation of political targeting, at the FBI?

How concerned about all the things, that we're seeing with the face act now, the FBI coming in, in the middle of the night, and arresting 78-year-old people.

The idea that if you disagree, at the school board. You're somehow or another, a terrorist.

STEVE: Yeah. Definitely, there's a political element. I think there's two dueling things. There's politics, and there's ambition.

Sometimes, there's one, sometimes it's the other. And sometimes, there are some true leaders, definitely a special agent in charge.

(inaudible) of the political left, made no secret about that.

She sent out emails about the Dobbs decision, being -- the -- the Supreme Court taking away women's rights.

And the sort of gay pride flag, displayed up in her office in Jacksonville. Then you have my assistant special agent in charge, who I believe, is probably more ambitious.

Saw this as being a huge case of the FBI. Bigger than 9/11. And if you get your name on something with January 6th, and you can claim, you had supervising responsibilities of some way. The largest and most important case of the agency, that's going to be a pretty good ticket for you to promote with the media and the organization.

And I think just recently, with this face act. I've had a little experience with that. Being on human trafficking investigations. I reached out to some of the crisis centers, after the Jackson Dobbs case. Just because I was worried they would have some threats come in.

And I also figured, they might also see some human trafficking victims that could be a good resource for me.

Did that. Got a little helmet sticker from the bosses. But then was also told, I really need to prioritize looking into abortion clinics, because they were really going to be the ones that would be at risk.

GLENN: Really?

STEVE: And I responded, I think the only time the team that wins does that, is like when the Lakers win the title, they burn the city. But otherwise, I don't think that the -- the pro-life side is going to burn down places that are going to be shut down.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STEVE: That's just my critical thinking.

GLENN: And last question, and I know I asked you this before.

But why are we seeing more FBI agents coming out?

We always thought that these guys were the best of the best. Conservatives have always given them a pass. Which I don't think we should have. But now they're showing themselves, to be I think less than honorable. If they're seeing things themselves, and are not standing up against it.

STEVE: I'm hardened by this, myself.

You know I told you, the other night. You know I really thought that I was going to have the Captain America end game moment, where I saw the battle. And even in my most dire situation, I would get that on your lap moment. And there would be my brother and sister in arms, standing there. And they just aren't.

I'm done talking about the good men and women at the FBI. I know that's the politically correct thing that all our leaders like to say to make sure the donations keep coming in. But I'm no longer doing that.

I think that, it's a really sweet gig to be an FBI agent. I lived it for eight years. Great job.

They're the most interesting person, maybe with the exception of radio show hosts. Everybody wants to answer questions, the big case.

And you can really get by on your career, being grossly overpaid and underworked, and focuses kind of -- play that same narrative. Where they say, I'm just trying to pay the bills and put food on the table. I'll keep my head down, and look at a few years to retirement.

But, you know, I swore an oath. And, you know, like I voiced to my bosses. I guess you guys found the one, that actually took their oath seriously. And I believed in it.

I -- that's why I wanted to do the job.

So this was a job. So I did the job. And it never occurred to me, that that was not -- that that was an option to not do that.

Unfortunately, I guess the other 14,000 agents, who -- who wore the gun and badge, don't share my sentiments.

GLENN: Well, we have all kinds of oversight if the Republicans gain the House.

It looks like they're going to at this point. And I know you're in touch with people on Capitol Hill.

And I hope we see more of you.

And I hope all of this comes to light. And we do clean up, this organization.

Or shut it down. If it won't be cleaned up. Then shut it down.

Steve, thank you so much.

STEVE: You bet, Glenn.

GLENN: Steve Friend. Former FBI agent. He has had quite a transformation. You'll see him, as he talks about some of the cases he has in front of you tomorrow.

It is a really, very important show. Because we don't know our Constitution.

You know, Mike Lee's son came with his wife. And Mike.

And we went out to dinner afterwards. And his son is actually -- I think he's clerking for the Supreme Court now.

And he said, you know when I -- I heard my dad was coming to this, I wanted to believe. He said, but so many places are just going to get you all riled up.

And then leave it there. And he said, I was so glad to see, the panel, and what you guys were doing. Because what we tried to do, is show you, what can happen to you.

And it is on the increase. We've never had to think about being an enemy of the state.

We never have been.

We believe in the Constitution.

How can we possibly be the enemy of the -- of the government. And the -- and the Constitution.

When we are calling for the use of the Constitution.

And you never have thought of yourself as a rebel. But now you are. Just for standing up.

You'll hear the story of a guy who lost his children, because he would not go along with call his son, who does not want to be called a girl. A girl.

It can happen to you. And we're going to give you the do's and don'ts. And what you need to do to prepare for these things.

It's an introductory, really, on the Constitution. And how you should behave.

And there is one shocking thing, that I think conservatives have never even thought of before.

That is overwhelming advice, from the experts. That's tomorrow night. Only on Blaze TV.

Go to BlazeTV.com/Glenn.

Use the promo code Stand Up.

And save. Our biggest savings ever.

$30 on your one year of subscription. So it's 70 bucks now for a year.

Believe me, you will get more than 70 dollars' worth of value, out of that. With all of the shows, that we have.

And the specials that we have, coming up.

It's so important now, more than ever, that we stay in touch with each other. And have a direct line of communication.

Being a Blaze family member is one way to do that. BlazeTV.com/Glenn. Use the promo code Stand Up.

RADIO

THIS bill on marriage may be an ‘EXTRAORDINARILY BAD IDEA’

Democrats in Congress are moving quickly to enact their ‘Respect for Marriage Act,’ which would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied some government benefits to married, same-sex couples. Glenn says this bill may be an ‘extraordinarily bad idea,’ and Senator Mike Lee joins him to explain why. First, Senator Lee says ‘there’s not a chance in hell’ the Supreme Court would overturn gay marriage rights. So, what then is the point of this bill? In this clip, Senator Lee says the bill may give government the ability to RETALIATE against religious institutions, organizations, or charities who favor a traditional view of marriage…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Oh. Mitt Romney's favorite senator. Mike Lee. Hello, Mike.

MIKE: Good to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah. Can you tell me, what happened yesterday?

MIKE: Well, a lot happens in the United States. Yesterday, if you're talking about the vote on the motion to proceed to the respect of marriage act. The respect for marriage act.

GLENN: Wait. Can you tell me? I know it's a secret meeting. Can you tell me what happened with the -- because I want to get into that. Can you tell me what happened with the Harry Reid winning again? How? Or not Harry Reid. Mitch McConnell.

MIKE: Yeah, Mitch McConnell. Yeah.

Yeah, so yesterday, we got our leadership elections in the Senate, and some of the Republicans. We debated for several hours. And Mitch McConnell, we elected as the Minority Leader among Senate Republicans. This is -- he's had it for 16 years, and he was reelected yesterday.

We had a lengthy discussion about that. And some of us took a different approach. But at the end of the day, I think the vote was cast. And that's the vote that will carry.

GLENN: What do we have to do, Mike, to get people -- I mean, there's a fight in the Republican Party, of this -- you know I guess 1956 kind of you know view of how things have to be done. And what the government means. Very progressive.

And you know just very docile. And then there's a new group of people who are like, look. I mean, I don't want to go back to the 1800s or the 1700s, but we got a little thing here, that we used to called the Constitution and Bill of Rights. And we need to restore that.

Because this isn't a constitutional republic anymore.

How do we get the G.O.P. out of the way of those people?

Or is it -- is it too late for that.

MIKE: Well, first of all, the decision about whom to elect as floor leader. That doesn't preclude necessarily, our taking any particular action.

Anyway, I've long said that the leadership of the Republican Party tends one way or another to reflect where the center of gravity is among Senate Republicans. But there's something new happening.

We have more Republican senators today, than we ever have before. Who believe, or understand at their core, that there's something fundamentally wrong. We're spending way too much money, on the federal government.

And we've got to turn it around. And so we're moving forward now, with the new core group of leaders, who are pushing harder than ever. Because we don't have time to waste. We're $31 trillion in debt. We've got a federal government that requires people to work months out of every year, just to pay their federal taxes. And months more out of every year, just to pay the back door hidden expenses associate with federal regulations. The American people are demanding that we fight back harder. And you're going to see that.

GLENN: I hope so, Mike. I really -- I think you guys have -- I think the G.O.P. has one more shot. And it's in the next two years. And if you're not doing something. I don't know what's going to happen. I just don't know what's going to happen. But people are tired of it.

So, Mike, tell me about this Defense of Marriage Act. This seems like an extraordinarily bad idea.

MIKE: Yeah. So the respect for Marriage Act is something that purports to be a codification of the Supreme Court's ruling of 2015, of Obergefell v. Hodges, recognizing gay marriage.

GLENN: Okay. Hang on just a second. They put this in, because I think of Clarence Thomas and his dissent.

He kind of hinted that he would be willing to look at this again.

STU: No one joined him in that opinion.

GLENN: Yeah. I know that. That's the excuse they're using.

They want to seal this for all time.

MIKE: Right. Right. A couple of things to keep in mind. You're referring to Justice Thomas' concurring opinion, and the Dobbs decision a few months ago, which dealt with abortion, not marriage.

He's referring to a line of precedent. There's a number of lines of precedent that have evolved under the substantive due process standard in time. Perhaps they should be reviewed to figure out, whether there's a better place for them, or whether they withstand appropriate review.

It was joined by no other justice in that. And he also didn't go through what are called the stare decisis factors.

The stare decisis analysis would determine whether the Supreme Court would continue to defer to that case. Look, gay marriage is not going away. It's not.

The Supreme Court is not up doing that. I can tell you, the former appellate and Supreme Court litigator, there's not a chance in hell the Supreme Court is walking away from that.

And gay marriages that have been legal now for seven years aren't going away. So that begs the question: What's the real purpose for this?

Well, when I look at the bill, when I looked at the will is written, and what it says, and just as importantly, what it doesn't say. And how it would interact with other protections of the federal law. The federal civil rights legislation, as well as Supreme Court precedent interpreting those laws.

I saw a real risk of retaliation by the federal government against religious institutions.

GLENN: They never retaliate.

MIKE: Schools. Charitable organizations. Adoption agencies, with the religious mission purpose. That could lose their tax-exempt status, could lose access to participating in federal programs.

Lose federal status or federal benefits of one sort or another. Unless we put a protection in there, that depriving the government of that power. So I wrote an amendment to do that. I even offered to vote for the bill, as a whole. Necessary to get this bill in there. The sponsors wouldn't do it. They refused to do it.

GLENN: So that should tell you everything.

MIKE: Why would they refuse to do that? Why would they refuse protection saying you can't take away the tax-exempt status of a school or a day care or an adoption agency or whatever it is, with the religious mission on the basis of a religious belief about marriage? Why would they not do that?

It got more devious from there, Glenn. They adopted some amendment texts just in the last few days before bringing this to the floor. And claimed that their text would do essentially the same thing as my amendment.

Only, here's my problem. It wouldn't. It pays lip service to that, but it doesn't do the job.

So they have 12 Republicans to join with. All 50 Democrats. And they've survived the first threshold vote. Now, the good news here, Glenn. We've still got at least two more 60-vote threshold votes to cast on this bill. There's still time for us to convince a handful of those Republican senators, to join with Democrats, that they shouldn't be voting for this. Unless you actually have it out of government's hands, in the way that I've proposed.

I'm hoping they can see the line, between now and whenever this thing is put to bed.

GLENN: Can I ask you a question?

And I don't mean to put you in a difficult situation. But this is a -- this is sometimes described as a Mitt Romney bill. If you Google this bill, and you just add more and more -- what was it? More and more marriage bill, this is what comes up. Where did this bill start?

MIKE: Yeah. So it started in the House of Representatives. It started by a handful of House Democrats, back in July.

The church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints. I assume this is what you're referring to.

Chimed in and supported the recent religious freedom amendment put in place, by Senators Tillis, Collins, and Baldwin, I believe it was.

And said, that it was a maternal improvement with that language. Now, look, to be sure. The text of the bill was marginally better than it would have been without that language. But I emphasize the word marginally there. It still doesn't solve the problem.

This bill, it becomes law, will create a new risk. A new considerable, substantial risk. And that risk is not taken away. It's not adequately dealt with by this language.

We need language that actually does what they claim this one does, in private settings. They're going around touting this as this is the problem. And it doesn't solve the rob. Which should give people added reason to be very suspicious of this legislature.

GLENN: On the same topic, I am about to start a campaign to draft your attorney general to run for Mitt Romney's seat. Because I think he would win in a landslide. And based on your numbers, I think a guy with his record could win.

Now, I know you wouldn't. Because you have friends on both sides. So you wouldn't -- you wouldn't endorse anything like that. But I'm saying -- would you --

MIKE: I do. I do indeed -- I'm friends with both of them. That's an excellent point.

GLENN: Yeah. So what do you think of that idea? Of me just not connected to you?

MIKE: Yeah. So it's an idea, that has been out there. It's an idea that -- and I don't want to take anything away from your thunder here, Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah. No, no, no, no. I'm glad to hear someone is thinking that way.

How can I help them?

I don't know. I don't know what will happen? 2024 seems like a long way from here. I know it will be around in just a moment.

But speaking of marriage and respect of marriage, I am worried about one thing, Glenn. In your Relief Factor plug just a moment ago, you did an imitation for your wife that did not sound at all like your wife.

GLENN: Oh, you are sadly mistaken. You don't know her, Mike. You don't know her. Help me. Help me. I'm being held hostage.

MIKE: Perhaps in that moment, something happens to her vocal cords.

STU: Seems like you're both trying to get each other in trouble right now.

GLENN: Yeah, I know. We can talk about Mitt some more.

So one last thing, you were on our special that aired last night, The Targets of Tyranny. You leaned over to me at one point and said, this is the most frightening thing I think I've ever seen.

MIKE: Yeah. Yeah.

Look, the group of people -- the group of victims of government overreach that you assembled for that show. And for any of your listeners out there, who haven't seen it. I strongly encourage them to do it.

It's the best thing I've seen. The best encapsulation within a short period of time, of why you should be skeptical of Goth. Of why you should be especially concerned about the federal government, right now.

We saw instance after instance of good, solid, law-abiding American citizens, whose rights are being threatened, intimidated, harassed, cajoled, or otherwise beaten out of them.

And we really do have to take up this issue. It's all the more reason why, when you vote for someone for federal elected office, you need to ask them very specific questions about what they will do to dismantle the colossus, brooding omnipresence that the federal government has become. We've got to take this in hand.

There's some of the things that were -- that prompted this leadership election yesterday. We had a good discussion, even though it didn't turn out, the way that many had hoped.

And I was a supporter of delaying the election. And I supported Rick Scott. But the election happened. And we now have to rally behind our leader who was elected. But in that conversation, we had some very good discussions. This was the first time in the 12 years I've been in the Senate, there's even been a discussion like that. Since anyone has stood up. And this is one of the reasons, Glenn. The reasons that we discussed on your show, that just aired last night. This was a fantastic display. And I encourage every one of your radio listeners. And your podcast listeners to go and watch that program tonight. It will scare you. And just the same, it will give you the tools that you need, in order to know how to respond, when something like this happens to you.

GLENN: The most amazing piece of advice we got. With the end -- with the question and answers from the audience.

Most stunning advice coming from you, at least. I felt. You were like, absolutely. Please, come.

No. You don't talk to them. You have a right to remain silent. Exercise it. And the second thing, you shouldn't -- you should have the number of a good defense attorney.

I don't even know. I guess I'm friends with Alan Dershowitz. But I don't know if he will take my case. I am kind of a shady character.

But I don't even know. It's weird.

GLENN: With the right retainer, agreement, Glenn. They'll take it.
(laughter)

GLENN: All right. Mike Lee. Thank you so much.

Congratulations again on your astounding win.

Mike Lee. The great senator from the state of Utah.