RADIODecember 07, 2023

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?

Transcript

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.

GLENN: Yes.

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.

Right?

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 --

GLENN: No.

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.

Did Arizona register 98,000 ILLEGALS to vote? AZ Justice sets the record STRAIGHT

Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick joins Glenn Beck to set the record straight about a claim that Arizona registered 98,000 illegal immigrants to vote. Justice Bolick tells Glenn that this is NOT TRUE and there is NO indication that any of the voters in question were here illegally. So, what actually happened? Justice Bolick explains and also comments on what you should do if you’re concerned about the fairness of the 2024 election.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

You know, our job is getting harder and harder.

I just gave permission to hire, you know, another researcher. This morning.

Because we are just overwhelmed in stories, that we don't know what the truth is.

You should see my -- my email, my -- my private messages.

And even my text messages from friends that I trust. That are like, Glenn, I don't know if this is true. I don't know either!

I don't know either.

And I know you're in that situation. And we are going to go off the cliff, if we can't verify some things.

That's one reason why I'm going to Asheville North Carolina today.

I need to know. Is this stuff happening?

Are there bodies in Chimney Rock, that are still there?

You know, what is happening on the ground?

And we're bringing, you know, a plane full of supplies for them. Through Mercury One.

But we have to -- this is what I said in the meeting today.

We have got to come. And even if we don't talk about them. We have to find out. Are these things true, so you know if they're true or not?

And we'll do our best. But it takes so much time. We have so much going on. I think it was like a week ago, or so.

Do you remember the story that Arizona added 98,000 illegals?

STU: I remember that being, yeah.

GLENN: And I think we talked about it, right?

STU: Yeah. I think we did at the time. And tried to give perspective.

So much stuff for people to sort through right now.

GLENN: Firm the story right, it was hard decipher.

I think that's why we didn't follow up on it, at all. Because I don't know what is right on this story.

STU: Let's lock it down.

GLENN: Well, good news, the head guy of the Arizona Supreme Court wrote to us. He's Justice Bolick. He, who joined the court in 2016. He previously cofounded the Institute for Justice and served as litigation director for the Goldwater Institute. So he's one of us.

He litigated constitutional cases from coast-to-coast, including the US Supreme Court.

He's not the Supreme Court. He's a Supreme Court I couldn't wait. But he's not the chief justice now, in Arizona.

But he says, that story is wrong.

And he would be the guy that knows. Clint, welcome to the program.

CLINT: Oh, thank you so much for having me, Glenn. And thanks for making the correction. My boss, the chief justice would have drawn and quartered me.
(laughter)

GLENN: You know, this story was everywhere. And I don't remember what we said. We might have said that yep. That's crazy.

And the Supreme Court is out of control.

I don't know what we said. But if we got it wrong, A, I apologize.

So let's correct it. And correct all of the stories that were out there. What happened?

CLINT: So, Glenn, thank you so much for that.

And, you know, usually, when a court issues controversial decisions, they know it.

And so for a couple of days after, we did not consider this to be a controversial decision at all.

But all of a sudden, we were hearing from people, and I was encountering people, who were saying, we were letting illegal immigrants vote.

And I looked at the headlines, that had come out, and just I've got one I'm reading in front of me, from Newsweek, that said Arizona court, says nearly 100,000 people with unconfirmed citizenship can vote.

And so I can well understand, why people got that impression.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

CLINT: But the headline should have read, court. Arizona court prevents disenfranchisement of 100,000 people over computer error.

And that's exactly what happened.

So Arizona is one of the few states, that requires proof of citizenship, before someone votes.

And when the law was passed, they assumed, that people who had registered by 2005, were -- were legal citizens. So they didn't require you to show proof of citizenship, unless you moved to a different county, or applied for a duplicate license. And due to a Department of Motor Vehicles glitch. And I know that's hard to believe.

GLENN: Oh, no. It's hard to believe that the government would do anything that had glitches in it.

CLINT: Yeah. So in any event, apparently, a large number of people, who were registered to -- to -- to vote, and who had driver's licenses before 1996, and who moved, or got duplicate licenses, were never asked to prove their citizenships.

Now, most of these people had been voting for decade.

And, you know, so -- so there's no indication that any of them are illegal who didn't notice. But once this problem was discovered, the county recorder of Maricopa County, went to court, and said, all of these people should be removed and required to prove their citizenship, between now and the election.

And, of course, the same people who made the mistake, would have been this charge of -- of making sure that those were shown by the election.

And just imagine, if we had gone to Election Day and thousands, possibly over 100,000 people who had been voting for decades. Were told, oh, no.

We don't know whether you're a citizen or not.

GLENN: Right.

CLINT: And how this is not -- so, in any event, it was a very easy legal issue for us.

And it was the only election case, Glenn.

That I can remember, where the Arizona Republican party, and the ACLU were on the same side.

They hoped that please don't throw these people off the ballot.

You know, we discovered.

We determined that we had no authority to take that many people off the ballot.

You can challenge individual voters, at -- if you think that they are not citizens. And after the election, though, there will be an effort to verify citizenship.

But most of these people would have had no idea what was going on.

You know, given that they voted without a problem for -- for decades. And so it just -- it was one of those stories, that the headlines. One of those cases, that the headlines turned into a controversy.

But it really wasn't a controversy at all.

GLENN: Right. So with an election coming up, and you guys -- are you guys voted on, in the Supreme Court?

CLINT: So, yes. We are subject to retention every six years.

GLENN: Oh.

CLINT: And yours truly is one of those justices up for retention this year, with a very spirited campaign against me from self-described progressive groups.

GLENN: Oh, great. Well, all you had to say -- you had me at Goldwater Institute.

So, you know, I'm -- I'm for you, Glenn.

How -- how confident are you, that we can have a fair election this time in Arizona?

CLINT: Well, you know, I'm not on the ground. I'm not involved.

GLENN: Okay.

CLINT: You know, in the day-to-day.

And, you know, one of the things that I've been doing is encouraging people to volunteer as poll workers.

You know, and other jobs that take place on Election Day. The best -- the best place to be on Election Day, if you have concerns about election integrity, is on the inside.

And I've been very heartened that both political parties. Both major and political parties have really been encouraging volunteers to do that.

And when I hear that sort of thing, it gives me. It gives me confidence that, you know -- that --

GLENN: At least that step has been taken.

CLINT: Yes.

Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, thanks for clearing this up. I appreciate it.

And, you know, if -- if there's anybody who is on the right, that has misunderstood this, which I think probably a lot of people. Because it was everywhere.

And I -- I apologize.

Again, I don't know exactly what we said. But let's just assume, we were one of those who believed the headlines.

Apology to -- to our audience. And to everybody in Arizona. I'm glad you reached out to us, so we can set the record straight.

Thank you.

CLINT: Glenn, I am so -- you know, I am so glad that you gave me the opportunity. I'm sure it's not every day, that the judge contacts you. And says, hey.

GLENN: Yeah.

CLINT: This is not correct.

GLENN: Yeah. No. I agree. I invite anyone.

If we get something wrong, I'm not afraid of correcting it and saying, we were wrong. So I appreciate that you reached out to us.

Because we will correct it. We will correct it. Thanks.

CLINT: Well, and I am so grateful for that. If everyone did that, we would be in a much better place in our society right now.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. We would. We would. Thanks a lot. I appreciate it.

Clint Bolick, he's Arizona Supreme Court justice. And apparently, running for reaffirment.

And let me just say, Goldwater Institute.

I don't think I need to say anymore.

Israel stopped a SECOND Iranian strike. Will Netanyahu retaliate?

Iran has retaliated against Israel with a massive missile barrage, mostly targeting Tel Aviv. But "miraculously," no Israelis were injured and the missiles did no serious damage. But where will Israel go from here? Former IDF spokesman and Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Fellow Lt. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Conricus joins Glenn to discuss. Conricus, who was in a bomb shelter with his family during the attack, debunks some claims made by Iran and online and also explains why he believes "something special happened AGAIN yesterday." This is now the second time, he explains that Israel, with help from the United States, has neutralized a massive Iranian attack. So, will Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strike Iran in retaliation? And what are the odds that a larger war will break out?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The other thing that happened yesterday, that is so important is Israel. Israel is going to respond. I believe we have lieutenant colonel retired.

Jonathan Conricus. He's been on with us before. He's the former Israeli Defense Forces spokesperson, and now senior fellow of Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

And we wanted to get you on, Jonathan, first of all, assuming you're in Israel.

You're safe. And that's good. Tell us what happened yesterday, and what it means going forward.

JONATHAN: Yes. Hi, Glenn. Thank you for having me again. A pleasure. What happened yesterday was the biggest missile attack in Israeli history. About 200 ballistic missiles were fired from about 800, 900 miles away, in Iran. At Israel.

The Iranians claimed that they were aiming for military targets. But most of the impacts were actually civilian neighborhoods. And luckily, and quite ironically, some might say, the only casualty in life, was a Palestinian in Jericho. No Israeli citizens were killed.

And while there were some impacted as an Israeli Air Force base, nothing of substance, and no real damage. Neither to infrastructure, or to military capacities.

GLENN: Wait a minute. Hang on.

I heard that several F-35s were taken out. That's not true?

JONATHAN: That is absolutely categorically not true.

There wasn't a single plane hit. Not a single hangar or bunker, and not a single runway.

There were some -- one of the Air Force bases. I'm not going to say the name.

But one of the Air Force bases was hit.

It's only been -- no damage to the Israeli Air Force's capability to continue to operate.

And as our enemies know. The Israeli Air Force continues to operate, in Beirut. In other parts of the Middle East.

In southern Lebanon, over Gaza.

And so the Iranian propaganda, of having 90 percent of their targets, were hit.

Absolutely false. And not -- again, proved the enduring return on investment here.

Many years of investing. US and Israel. Doing that together.

And for the second time in the -- the moment of truth. Air defenses were almost airtight.

And they saved lots and lots and lots of lives in Israel.

GLENN: I have to tell you. I don't know if you're a religious man or not.

But I am

200 missiles being launched. Ballistic missiles.

Coming in and going into Israel.

And for no one to be killed, and you're -- and your Air Force and your military bases. Not to be destroyed.

Is an extraordinary miracle, I think.

JONATHAN: I would agree. And you don't have to be fearing in every way, to recognize that something special happened again, yesterday.

This is the second time that the Iranians unleashed massive firepower.

And it appeared to be able to understand what we're talking about. The missiles are as big as school buses. And they fired 200 of them. Each one of them with hundreds of pounds, about half a ton of explosives in the warheads.

We're talking about very serious weapons.

Large explosives.

My family, we were in the bomb shelter.

My son, he was on the bus. And then ran to a shelter.

And it was really a scene out of a movie. With explosions.

And interceptions, in Tel Aviv. And as you said, the fact that no substantial damage. And no loss of life. Yeah, many would say. And probably I would agree, that this was a miracle.

Air defenses, IDF, and a miracle.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I watched those missiles come in live. But, you know, obviously, from the other side of the planet. And I thought, what must that be like?

You know, I thought of missile launches here, going outbound, or coming in.

Something very few people in the world have seen what happened yesterday.

It must have been terrifying for the average person.

Seeing everything. The sky just lit up with fire.

JONATHAN: Yes. The sky lit up with fire.

And each of you the -- in the air. You know, that they're attached to hundreds of pounds of explosives.

They're lethal. And that they're aimed at the Israeli cities.

And there are explosions all around.

Lots of noise.

You know, we have. Just like in the US.

You have the Amber Alerts. System on your phones.

Israeli defense establishment did the same thing.

And issued like a push notification on all the phones.

Even those who didn't have an app. Download it. And millions of Israelis.

Very strong alarms on their phones.

Call them to immediately go to shelter.

And that's what millions of Israelis did.
And that's also what thankfully led to the fact that even though, some of the missiles exploded in populated areas in Israel, nobody was hurt. Because Israelis were disciplined. And went into bomb shelters.

And nobody was caught out in the open.

GLENN: So is Benjamin Netanyahu, do you think going to respond to this?

Will he strike Iran? And is there any fear that they are going to cut off the oil pathways? Are you there? Go ahead.

JONATHAN: Yeah. When we look forward -- can you hear me? Can you hear me?

GLENN: Yes.

JONATHAN: All right. So when we look forward here, I think two things will determine what will happen next. One is Israel's endgame. Seek to achieve. Because there are a lot of things when it comes to the Iranian regime. And I will clarify. And the second thing that is very important, is how well will Israel coordinate with the United States of America, and what will the level of support be in a global repeat.

Now, regarding the first part. Israel can go for regime targets, leaders, and personnel. Infrastructure that is part of the Islamic regime.

Israel can go for military and economic targets. But this is the places whereby the Iranian regime, the export of oil. And whereby, they make money.

Which is used to fund their activities. All of the terror organizations, in Israel.

And the third option, which, of course, many are eyeing and thinking about is Iran's nuclear military facility.

The research facility, the storage facilities, and many others. These are three distinctly different types of -- and what Israel wants to achieve.

Does Israel want to bring down the regime? Does it only want to hurt the Iranians from attacking Israel again?

Will Israel be told not to do anything significant by the Americans?

And, of course, remind everybody, last time that Iran attacked on the 13th or 14th of April, Israel wanted to retaliate in a much stronger way.

But refrained from doing so under America first. And instead, Israel attempted in continuing in finishing the job in Gaza and Hamas.

I don't think that we're going to see that today. And I think we are going to see in the coming days, a strong Israeli response. It may be aimed at the regime. It may be aimed at their nuclear facilities.

But I think it's absolutely important, is that Israel and the United States of America are coordinated, and I hope American leaders will see this current situation, a threat to Israel. And an opportunity to really do more in a week, than what has been accomplished in ten years of failed diplomacy. When it comes to stopping Iran from going nuclear.

I really think there will be an opportunity.

GLENN: Yeah. I think that will be good. As long as there are calls from both sides, yesterday.

That America needs to send more troops over. I think we already have 40,000 that we've sent over.

We don't want to be in another war.

This one could go global.

I think Israel is showing the world, don't screw with us.

You guys are doing a great job.

And I support that.

I just -- I just don't want to see us, enflame things by including ourself, in the actual strikes.

But support --

JONATHAN: I agree with you. And I wouldn't want -- I wouldn't want the single American service men in harm's way. And I don't think that anybody needs to be fighting Israel's war.

And I think that Israel, in its history, has many times, done the heavy lifting for the rest of the Western world. Whether it's been keeling with Iraqi dictators, or with Syria, or with many others.

And Israel is -- the only thing Israel has is military support. Supplies. And, of course, political and diplomatic support. I don't think that Israel's needs or wants. Any American service members to be in harm's way. And I would just say a tremendous gratitude to American service men.

Against them. Deployed in the Red Sea. Among the -- on the US Navy ships.

And in the air.

Done tremendous work in intercepting Israeli missiles. Very professional.

And super important.

And I hope they remain safe. And I hope that they can have the diplomatic -- and military to help them to do what they need to do in order to defend itself.

GLENN: Well, we here support you on whatever you have to do to defend yourself.

I support you, I should say.

And I think there are millions of Americans that are listening, that feel the same way.

Jonathan. Thank you so much.

I really appreciate it.

You bet. Lieutenant colonel, Jonathan Conricus. Former Israeli defense spokesperson. The only thing that you should be really looking for is escalation.

But most importantly, as he was talking about. Red Sea. When you get into the straits over there, just off the shores of Iran.

If they start going after our Navy ships, or they try to close those straits down.

That is the world's flow of oil. And we will get involved in that.

And that will become very, very -- very, very dangerous.

Because this one will -- this one will not be a partial war.

This one will include, I believe bombings in our streets.

I believe we are close to terrorist activity. Foreign terrorist activity. In our own streets.

Orchestrated by Iran.

And a lot of others, who are here, and want to destroy us.

So we -- especially during this election season, we all need to be good Americans, together.

Not Republicans. Democrats, but good Americans.

And start paying attention to these issues. So we can start taking care of our own self first. So we survive this time period.