RADIOMarch 25, 2025

Clearview AI: A Tool for Justice or a Threat to Privacy?

Is AI facial recognition software, like Clearview AI, reliable enough to be used as evidence in a court of law? Glenn, who is against Clearview, has a friendly debate with Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, who wants to expand Clearview’s use in court cases. So, how do we balance the good that Clearview can do and the bad that it is capable of doing in the wrong hands (for instance, a totalitarian government)? AG Yost gives his thoughts and also previews how he hopes the Supreme Court will rule on this.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I am thrilled to have the Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost on with us. He served as the auditor of Ohio, for a long time. Like eight years.

And then he became attorney general. I think he's -- I think he won it with more votes than anybody else in the history of Ohio has. And he is defending and fighting for something called Clearview. Now, I like Dave.

But I'm against Clearview. And maybe he knows something that I don't know. So I want to have a conversation with him about what is happening in Ohio, and what's being heard now in the courts.

Dave, welcome to the program.

DAVE: It's good to hear your voice.

GLENN: Thank you, sir. By the way, thanks for everything you've done. You're really making a difference.

DAVE: You're very kind, thank you.

GLENN: Talk to me about the case now of Clearview. Which is an AI facial recognition, and it is a great tool for law enforcement. But it frightens me a great deal. Talk to me about the case.

DAVE: Sure. So let's -- let's start with the backs of crimes.

Fellows walking down the street. Minding his own business. Mind you, this guy has no criminal background. He's just -- he's a good guy.

Pays his taxes. Goes to work. He's walking down the street on February 14th, Valentine's Day. Day of love. And the bad guy, I'm not going to use his name comes up behind him, robs him on the street, shoots him twice in the back, and runs off. Now, surveillance cameras see him, that are just on the street. See him going into a particular apartment. Well, fast forward a week. Police doing their investigation, trying to figure out what happened.

And as a -- he goes to a convenience store, and the surveillance camera there, over at the cash register, picks up his face.

And he goes back, same kind of route, to the same apartment.

And so they go, hmm.

Wonder who lives there.

And they run the probation website, or the parole website from the Department of Corrections.

Lo and behold, then they run that guy against the -- excuse me, they grab a facial freeze frame, off of the convenience store footage, and run it through Clearview AI, and it's a match.

So they say, a-ha! They go in, and get a search warrant from the judge. During the search, they come up with the gun.

The murder weapon.

And so they arrest the guy. They've got a pretty good case at that point.

That guy goes to court and complains. And says, hey, that facial recognition tough is not reliable. They say right on there, that you can't rely on it.

And don't use it.

GLENN: Right.

DAVE: And the judge tosses the results of the search. Which means, this guy is going to walk, if we don't have the murder weapon for evidence.

GLENN: Right. And he tosses that because the clear view evidence is what got you the warrant. So anything is fruit of a poison tree. Correct?

DAVE: Well, that's what the argument is.

GLENN: Right. Right. Right. Right.

DAVE: But the law says there's a long-standing, decades long good faith exception. And you're only supposed to use the fruit of the poisonous tree. If there's no other -- if there's bad faith. And there's no other option to do it.

There was no bad faith here.

And, in fact, there's other useful evidence, probative evidence, including seeing the guy go into that apartment, that is useful. And supporting probable cause for the search warrant.

GLENN: It also reminds me a little bit of the glove doesn't quit, you must acquit.

The use of DNA evidence during OJ Simpson. Everybody said the same thing. That's unreliable. We don't even know what that is. Could be one out of every 100 have the same kind of -- they made all kinds of crazy things.

And so that was tossed out. Because people didn't understand how accurate, that was. Pragmatism so I don't -- I don't disagree with you at all. This is a great thing to get the bad guys.

However, Clearview. What they have done, is they have scraped billions of images, without anybody's consent off of the internet.

And I believe it's very, very accurate. And the argument would be, well, I'm not doing anything bad or wrong. So I don't have to worry about it.

But I don't -- you know, in a time where we're headed for AI the way we are. And what's happening in China.

This is exactly the kind of technology that is used for governments to track everybody.

How do you balance that the crazy world that we live in, to make sure it doesn't become a tool like China?

DAVE: Well, you know, Glenn, I worry about that too. And I think that the solution is the regulation of the use of the thing.

For example, we do not permit here in Ohio, the use of -- of facial recognition, without anything more to support an arrest warrant. It can only be used as a lead.

Then you have to go out and do the shoe leather. To prove that the guy you think it is, is the guy you're looking for.

GLENN: Which is what you did.

You used that. And you didn't arrest him because we had the AI. You arrested him because you had that, got you a warrant, you got in, you found the gun. Right?

DAVE: Well, it was a search warrant that got us --

GLENN: Right. Right. What I mean is, what you're saying you wanted to be used like, is exactly what you did. You didn't go get the guy because he was on Clearview.

DAVE: Exactly right. And here's the rubric. I know you're a fact guy. But you love -- you love, how do we think about this?

We have public spaces everywhere. So a cop can stand on the corner and observe all day long.

Ask sit there for an eight-hour shift. And just watch. And anything he sees is fair game. They're allowed to react right there. And that's not improper surveillance. Because it's a public place.

When does it stop becoming a public place? Or proper?

When it becomes a private place. If it's your home. If it's in some circumstances, your business.

You have to have probable cause, get a somewhere to sign off on that. I think when we're talking about these technological things, the question is: What is the government allowed to do with it? And what -- and did it occur in public or in private?

When we're talking about Facebook, you know, I'm sorry. It's electronic. But that's kind of a public place.

That's more like the cop standing on the street corner. On the other hand, the cop standing outside.

We just had a Supreme Court case about this a couple years ago. A cop standing on the street, but using sensitive ultraviolet thermal imaging to look for marijuana grows. They're looking at what's going on inside your private residence. That means, that's a Fourth Amendment violation.

So I think that this principle of public versus private fears. Goes a long way, to helping us think through this.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

So, Dave, I want you to know. I mean, I hope this hasn't felt like a hostile interview.

I want you to know. I'm a fan of yours. But I'm very, very concerned of this slippery. Almost straightdown slope to the cage that AI could build for people.

And we could have all of the best intentions. But it falls into the wrong hands.

You know, we lose several elections in a row.

And, you know, it could be -- it will be a prison. It will be a panopticon. Like it is, in China.

And so that's why I'm concerned about it.

So this is in front of the Supreme Court. Closing arguments haven't happened yet.

DAVE: Nope.

GLENN: How do you think this is -- the court will look at this. And what do you think will happen?

DAVE: Well, it's a case of first impression, right?

I mean, we haven't had a lot of cases, challenging the intersection of the Fourth Amendment, protecting our privacy, in our homes. And papers.

And this new technology. So we're arguing for a narrow reading of it.

But that it should be -- it should be an available tool.

GLENN: Right.

DAVE: To your point earlier, I couldn't agree with you more. It scares me, what government can do about this.

If you think about, back to the Biden administration. And social media ask what they were doing.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

DAVE: Multiple that. Make that geometrically larger. That's the potential. We've got to be vigilant.

GLENN: What is the difference between this, and, for instance, in Texas, you can't clock me speeding with a camera.

A cop has to be there, to stop me. And even they can take a picture of me, driving the car. Et cetera, et cetera.

They cannot ticket me for speeding. It has to be a physical police officer.

What is the difference between this, do you think?

DAVE: Well, and that's a great -- that's the same law we have in Ohio. And that's a great example of how the government can restrain technology. To prevent it from going too far.

That's not a constitutional issue. That's a statute that the general assembly passed. And said, we're not going to let you do this. Yes. You've got the technology. We're not going to let you do this. That's just too far.

GLENN: Okay. Dave, I mean, I appreciate that at least you and others are thinking deeply about this because we're on the verge of a whole Brave New World.

And I honestly don't know what the right answer is. I mean, the law -- you know, law-abiding citizen in me, is like the guy clearly -- you've got the gun in his house. He clearly did it.

But the person that is concerned about this new technology, and things like China.

I just don't know how to balance it yet. But I appreciate the conversation. Thank you so much.

DAVE: Thanks for having me on.

GLENN: You bet. That's Dave Yost. He's the Ohio Attorney General, and that is happening in Ohio right now.

Are Antidepressants (SSRI's) Worsening America's Mental Health Crisis?

A former FDA psychiatrist reveals what Big Pharma never told the public: the “chemical imbalance” story behind antidepressants was never proven — and SSRIs don’t fix a biological defect, they numb the brain. Glenn Beck and Dr. Josef Witt-Doerring break down how America became the most drugged nation in the world and how millions are being overprescribed medications that can cause paradoxical agitation, emotional blunting, and even suicidal behavior. With 15% of Americans — including millions of children — on SSRIs, are we facing a public health crisis hiding in plain sight?

Was the Cracker Barrel Rebrand a SABOTAGE?! - Glenn Beck Reveals what REALLY Happened

Cracker Barrel’s massive public meltdown didn’t happen by accident. Behind the scenes, the company was bleeding institutional knowledge, taking disastrous advice from DEI strategists, and making decisions that alienated the very customers who built the brand. A major board shake-up, the quiet removal of DEI frameworks, and the sudden resignation of a key DEI-linked board member reveal how deep the problems ran — and how desperate the company was to course-correct. This breakdown uncovers what really went wrong, how Cracker Barrel was influenced internally, and why the Glenn Beck interview triggered major internal moves that the public was never supposed to see.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So, Stu, you can just questions about the special tonight.

STU: Yeah, for sure. I'm interested in this.

It's a big -- you know, a big special. You're back and forth with it. With them there. Was kind of fascinating. Right?

You have a situation where they -- they do seem to be sort of avoiding the question there on DEI. Is that how you read it? Oh, we lost connection with Glenn. Is that what's about to go?

Well, that's how I read it at least. You know, you listen to that clip of them going back and forth and it does appear to be them just sort of avoiding the question. We should get back to Glenn. Because I know he has this breaking news on this happen. Should we go to another clip on the Cracker Barrel thing, while we're waiting for Glenn to reconnect? Because it sort of sets the stage. You know, it was interesting to see their approach here, which is to try to explain themselves and try to work themselves through what is one of the biggest PR disasters probably in our lifetimes.

And let's go to this next clip.

VOICE: If we came out of COVID, A, trying to hire 50,000 people, we have a lot of our employees, original -- we did -- we lost a lot of very long tenured employees. A lot of them, a little bit older, and scared to come back into the -- into the environment.

And so --

GLENN: That's a lot of institutional knowledge.

VOICE: Oh, it hurt. I mean, it really hurt.

And in '22, as we started opening back up, we had the new menu that we had. So we lost a lot of people. We put a ton of training into that new menu.

Now we're coming back to open up, guests, any way we can get them. We had patio dining. We were testing a rock garden.

They were going to sit out in the landscape. And I always say that co-ed even made Cracker Barrel start drinking alcohol.

Because that's how -- it was out of COVID, that it was like, how are we figuring out how to drive top line sales and try to get a guest in.

GLENN: Okay. So that is a good example of you don't know any of the story. You think Cracker Barrel has never served alcohol before. Why are you shoving alcohol? That's a cultural. So it's easy to think, you're selling people alcohol now. What other values are you --

VOICE: And it's fair.

GLENN: That one, is at least understandable. Now that I understand the story.

VOICE: Yeah. Exactly. And so as we got into '23, I came out of my office administration role, and came into operations.

And I was leading field operations. And the best way for me to describe it, we were throwing Velcro balls at a wall to see what would stick.

STU: And it's understandable. You know, it's easy to kind of look at the Cracker Barrel situation and get lost at how badly it went.

A lot of these decisions come down to the information they had at the time. Right?

And they're looking at the time as a place that maybe people aren't coming into as much as they would like.

They are trying to -- maybe it's fading a little bit. Maybe some people find it's stale.

They think the situation at Cracker Barrel is not one that they're not necessarily trying to get involved with on a week to week basis, like they used to.

Maybe they had those warm feelings of the past. But they're not going in it anymore. Well, we'll freshen it up. We will do all these new things.

This will be great! And you realize, sometimes, when you're in that moment, you hit a -- you hate a vein. Right?

You're trying to do something positive for the company. And you hit a vein, and everything starts bleeding all over the place.

Let me give you another piece of this interview. Glenn Beck, up in the headquarters of -- of Cracker Barrel.

And somehow, I will give Glenn credit. Not eating throughout the interview.

I kind of thought, when they put food in front of him. He would just be shoveling it down his gullet the entire time.

You wouldn't be able to hear him. It would be like talking with his mouth full.

He got through it, without taking as many bites. Here is Glenn with the CEO of Cracker Barrel.

GLENN: Let's just get this out.

VOICE: Okay.

GLENN: What happened to the choices that were made?

I said on day one of this. I remember when they rolled out new Coke. And I thought, that was the dumbest marketing move, the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

We're taking the original formula and ditching it. And let's start over with a brand that people love.

The day this broke, I said on the air, new Coke!

That's what this is. And it was -- no offense. Stupid!

Just stupid from start to finish.

Can you walk me through how that happened?

VOICE: Yeah. Sure.

Look, our guests have every right to be upset.

GLENN: Yeah. You want to watch this. And I -- you know, what I really want to you watch for is a moment where I said to her, are you surprised you haven't been fired yet.

That spoke volumes. Her answer, and I hope it is captured on camera.

But that answer was the first non, you know, when you're a CEO. You know, I've -- Stu, do you remember when we used to have to do really important interviews.

And our PR people would be like, drill, drill, drill.

No, don't say that. Don't say that. And we would be like, yeah. Whatever.

And when you are in charge of a Fortune 500 company. And you're in the trouble that they're in, you do -- you know, you follow the people that you have hired to make sure crisis management. You don't make any more mistakes.

And so everybody was very, very careful.

They were very honest. But, you know, like that DEI thing.

She didn't really answer the question.

Of course, we want everybody to be welcomed. Yeah. I know. But that's not answering the question.

When I asked her, are you surprised you still have a job, and you haven't been fired yet. Her answer spoke volumes.

Now, the other thing that you need to know, that while she didn't answer me on the DEI thing. And I -- I -- you know, I can't tell you exactly how this happened.

I just know that they knew, that they didn't answer the question.

And somebody has been in touch with my people. And said, hey. You might want to watch the board meeting that is happening.

We can't tell you that anything is going to be happening. But the DEI thing may be solved. At the board meeting. That happened this morning. And they were going to release something at 11:15 today.

We didn't know exactly what it was.

We had -- we had an indication that it might be about DEI.

And what they've done, at first.

Remember, in August. You know, they just deleted the Pride pages. And the DEI pages.

And they just got rid of it all, at Cracker Barrel. That is just hiding who you are. The real problem was, they had a guy who was on the board of directors. Named Gilbert Davila.

And he's just resigned from the board, today!

Okay? They had a meeting with the board, and shareholders and everything else. And they voted on all of these people. And they did not renew him. And so he is -- he has resigned.

Now, his job -- he was a member of the standing board committee.

And his job was to assess the social and political risk to the company's business.

Well, who is he?

Well, he's also the CEO of a company called DMI Consulting.

That's a DEI strategy firm, that's been in business since 2010.

So he's one of the guys. He was the guy who, his job as the CEO -- as the CEO of DMI, is to promote, you know, DEI.

To make sure everybody is living up to the DEI standards. So Robby Starbuck, who is a friend of the program and, you know, great conservatives, who has been responsible for -- you know, getting a lot of these people out of these companies, or at least drawing attention on what these companies are really standing for.

He's been asking trial. What does he do to deserve this seat on the board?

Well, that's it. He owned a DEI consulting and strategy firm. That was pushing DEI and DEI advertising. So what's happened here is I think while she couldn't answer that question at the time, because the board hadn't acted, I think it's -- I think it's not not coincidental that the day the interview with her drops. With us.

Which they've known for a couple of weeks. This is when this interview would drop.

They -- they announced that morning, that seat has been eliminated. DEI is gone from Cracker Barrel. So I think that's really, really good news if you're a fan of Cracker Barrel.

And the things that I saw at Cracker Barrel, I'm -- I'm going to tell you some stuff tomorrow.

I just have to make sure that it's exactly accurate. Because I don't want to cause more problems.

For us!

And I want to make sure that I get it exactly right. But there were some things that I learned in the show prep.

And, you know, studying up for this interview.

That no one was prepared to talk to me on camera about. And always says to me, oh, well, there's something there.

And so we have done even more homework on it. And tomorrow, I will tell you about something that you might have heard about. This guy who owns, what is it?

Steak and Shake?

STU: Yeah. He's a big activist shareholder, isn't he?

Kind of against some of the leadership there at Cracker Barrel. I think I read about that.

GLENN: Correct. Yes. Yes.

And he has an interesting history.

And I want to -- I want to take you through some of that tomorrow.

I think by tomorrow, you're going to understand, what you saw with the DEI vote on the board today. Get that gone. That's gone.

The interview that you'll see tonight with Julie. The CEO. She's not who you think she is.

It doesn't mean she didn't make huge mistakes. She says she makes huge mistakes. But she's not who you think she is.

You may not agree with her or whatever. But it's important you know who she is. And what she said.

And the key tonight is that question: Are you surprised that you haven't been fired yet.

And really, what happened after she answers the question. And she's very uncomfortable. Answers the question.

And then she immediately switches topics. And I'm like, wait. Wait. Wait.

Stop. Stop. Go back. Why are you switching topics here?

Because it was an amazing moment. Is she immediately changes the subject. After she answers. And then she comes back, and she he says a few things. You'll see.

And then I bring it back to her again. And she switches topics again. And I'm like, why are you doing that?

Why are you doing that?

And she said a very interesting answer on all of that.

That is one of the most honest things I think I've ever seen a fortune five company or CEO ever say.

It was really uncomfortable. But really, really honest.

I think once you see this. And then I tell you tomorrow about the -- the board member, on the things that I can verify. I'm not sure what we can verify yet.

But the things that I've heard. And the things I think I can verify tomorrow. You will see that -- that I think they made stupid moves. They have really bad advice from DEI people.

And they were set up.

To some degree.

They were set up.

The company was. Not individuals. The company was set up.

I think it will -- I think you will have every question you needed to know about Cracker Barrel and what happened answered.

WARNING: The Threat of Sharia Law in American Cities is Now a Reality

Texas is becoming the front line of a growing ideological struggle. While courts block the Ten Commandments from classrooms, public schools are opening Islamic prayer rooms as CAIR and other Islamist political groups gain influence across the state. Glenn Beck and Chip Roy warn that this isn’t about private worship, but rather a coordinated movement to weaken the nation’s Judeo-Christian foundations, undermine constitutional law, and smuggle Sharia-aligned norms into American institutions. As judges enable these shifts and political factions fracture, a broader conflict is emerging that most Americans refuse to acknowledge. Texas may be the battleground that determines whether the West wakes up in time.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We're talking to Chip Roy about the Islamification of Texas and the United States. What's going to be done. A -- a -- a -- a new attitude from Governor Greg Abbott yesterday. And a new proclamation that came out and said, enough is enough.

On CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood. We're going to deem them terrorist organizations. We were just talking about what's happening with the Ten Commandments. And before we -- before we switch here, one more thing on this -- this Muslim thing. In schools.

You know, we can't have the Ten Commandments, Chip.

However, at liberty High School in the Frisco ISD in Texas, they now have prayer rooms for Islamic prayers.

How is it we can't have the Ten Commandments in Texas, but Frisco ISD public school, Liberty High School, can have prayer rooms, and nobody says anything?

CHIP: Well, first of all, this is the double standard of the left. But let's take a step back. What you just said out loud. Frisco, Texas. Frisco. My daughter was born in Frisco.

GLENN: Yeah.

CHIP: Has now got Islamic prayer rooms, okay? That should concern you.

GLENN: It does.

CHIP: And by you, I mean the listeners out there. Like, Texas listeners.

And, yes, the Ten Commandments case. It's judicial activism. The Supreme Court has upheld the ability to have the Ten Commandments displayed in public form.

Again, the Ten Commandments sits on the grounds of the Texas Capitol. And the case like I said, Ted Cruz litigated as solicitor general. Working for then attorney general Greg Abbott. Governor Rick Perry, and we won that case.

And I think we will be able to win that case, when it goes up, and it's no doubt, it's being challenged in the fifth circuit.

Then likely the Supreme Court would look at it.

With past presidents and say, we have the Ten Commandments.

Look, we have to decide who we are as a people.

And we got to start acting like it. Because this nation has been blessed because we are a Judeo Christian people who formed a country. That is a -- liberal, in the classical sense. You know, republic liberal democracy.

And we allow the full range of views to be discussed. And for people to believe whatever they believe.

And you and I will die on the hill to protect that. To protect the government over the mind of man. But we are also are a group of people that's bound together by a common sense of ideals, in our history, in our founding. And when you break that down, you will no longer have a country. And that's what we've got to -- you know, when those men --

GLENN: Go ahead. Well, you were saying a minute ago. You know, that should concern you, that there are prayer rooms in Frisco, Texas. It doesn't concern me that there are prayer rooms.

What concerns me, this is a coordinated effort to bring Sharia law into our country.

I don't care if you're Muslim. And you respect the Judeo Christian laws that we have. That's what our country are built on.

That's what our laws are based on.

And you say, this is a really great system. Because it allows me and everybody else to worship God of our own understanding.

When you're part of a movement to subvert that law. And to fundamentally transform the United States into something that it is not.

That's when I have a problem! And that's when we should stand up, but that's one of the things that CAIR does. CAIR makes anything that we have said, Islamophobia. And so they shout you down, and make you afraid and try to paint you as a hater.

I don't hate. I don't hate Muslims.

I don't. I do despise Sharia Law, and I despise anyone who comes here, and wants to supplant the United States Constitution, and replace it with Sharia law. That's -- that's a no-go zone.

No. Sorry. Not going to do it.

JASON: And the history of Sharia law. And the history of those inherent to it, which would suggest that that is the goal.

GLENN: Yes.

CHIP: And that's what we've seen borne out in countries across the world. So we should recognize that in carrying out our policies and these activist judges, and they are going to cede the ground. Okay?

In the name of the First Amendment, they are going to cede the ground with a supposedly secular society.

And, you know, essentially, genuflecting to -- the Bill of Rights, while walking away from God.

They're going to cede the ground for a world in which we are going to invite those who wish to destroy America, to have a front row seat right here to do it, and we've got to stop those judges.
And we've got to act. And so, you know, the House of Representatives should act on such an obvious case like Boasberg.

We should -- and I know that my religious liberty friends will do that on the Ten Commandments.

And they're going to be litigating that. And I will be quite confident the state will litigate that to defend the state law and defend the schools.

Then you go to the -- you know, redistricting opinion. Right? It's really extraordinary. I don't know if you read the scathing rebuke of the two judges. The -- particularly, the one judge, Judge Brown by Jerry Smith, right? Who was dissenting judge in the three-judge panel. So for those of you who don't understand, when you have a case on the redistricting issues. Right? It goes to a three-judge panel. And this three-judge panel, it was a two-to-one opinion, and it was a Democrat appointee. Appointed judge.

It was a Trump-appointed judge. Judge Brown. And then Judge Jerry Smith, who has been on the bench for a long time. Very respected, conservative --

GLENN: Thirty-seven years.

CHIP: Yes, and Jerry was basically cut out. They didn't do their normal deliberation. He wrote a scathing letter yesterday.

In addition to them filing a dissent. Because he was blocked out of the process.

It was an extraordinary essentially power grab by the two judges.

Just to run this thing through. I don't think the Supreme Court will take kindly to that.

I think that the stay application that will be filed with the United States Supreme Court. I think that by tomorrow. They filed the stay last night with the strict.

In the district court.

But I think they will go to the Supreme Court, with the stay, probably tomorrow.

That attorney general Paxton and Abbott to strategize for the timing.

But I think that's right.

And, you know, I think the you court. Judge Roberts, his faults on many opinions, has been pretty good on race. You'll remember, the Supreme Court opinion that -- that struck down the abhorrent, you know, language in section five that was unconstitutional, Voting Rights Act. And they cleaned that up.

And in that opinion, Robert said, that divvying us up by race was a distorted business. That was his quote. And I think Roberts will be on the right side of this. I hope so.

Because this is very clearly political exercise by the legislature.

The judges tried to indicate that it was racial gerrymandering. No! It's the opposite.

Texas is trying to undo racial gerrymandering, which we believe is unconstitutional on its face. You've got California out there, who is taking five of the nine Republican seats away.
So it's currently, what?

I think, what? 45 to nine?

And it's now going to be something like 50 to four? My numbers may be off one or two. It's crazy.

And then in Texas, we were kind of trying to rebalance it a little bit.

Add four or five new states. A lot of growth in Texas. And now, they will say, that that's somehow not profitable. Because we somehow are doing racial gerrymandering.

We're undoing I think racial gerrymandering with a politically motivated goal of having more Republican seats in a very Republican state. So I hope the Supreme Court sees this for what it is.

And issues a statement. You know, we'll have to see what they do.

GLENN: Let me take to you Washington again. This Comey thing is driving me out of my mind.

Because once again, here's somebody, that looks like they will not pay a price for anything.

James Comey. A judge has said that the government has screwed this -- this up. In gathering information.

And filing.

And so now it looks like the Comey case will not move forward. Any thoughts on this?

CHIP: Well, look, I have not had a chance to dive into this as deeply. I know that the district Judge Nachmanoff, or whatever the judge's name was. Pressed, you know -- this -- this opinion forward.

And, you know -- or I'm sorry. Not pressed the opinion. Pressed prosecutors. A hearing.

And I don't know what the exact result is going to be.

The Biden appointee. And, you know, we're -- we're going it to see what the result is.

Obviously, Comey, we believe lied to I think the Senate judiciary committee, among others. Under oath.

And that is, in fact, an indictable offense.

And so, you know, I'll go look and see what they're claiming in terms of whether the grand jury got to see the final indictment.

Or whatever these issues are.

Obviously, the former prosecutor is important. You have to follow the procedures.

GLENN: You have to.

CHIP: Do it right. But also can't lose the forest for the trees. I think Comey very clearly lied. And so, we're going to -- hopefully, this will proceed. That's about all I've got on that one.

GLENN: All right. Chip, thank you very much. If anyone wants to get involved in your campaign for Texas attorney general, how do they do it?
CHIP: ChipRoy.com. C-H-I-P-R-O-Y.com. You can follow me at Chip Roy TX on X/Twitter.

And, Glenn, always appreciate what you're doing out there. Thanks for being on the tip of the spear. And the forefront of talking about this important issue. About defending Western civilization.

And all the issues. I'm deeply appreciative.

GLENN: I tell you, Chip. I -- I've been saying recently -- I've been saying it for a while, since I wrote the chalkboard on what was going to happen, back on Fox days. And I said, all these people will gather. And then they'll sort it out.

Once they think they have it, they will start eating each other.

And they're starting to see that with the left now eating the Democrats. So Democrats are over. Now it's just going to be Marxists. But it will come down to the Marxists and the anarchists and the Islamists. And as I said then, in the end, it will just be the Islamists, against the Western world.

Because I would bet on people who believe something, much more than the Marxists.

These people have religious zeal. And they will -- they will eat the Marxists. And then it will just be western world against the -- the Islamists. And I think, chip, we are in World War III.

We have just not declared it yet. And people haven't woken up to it yet.

We are in the beginning stages. You will see history in 100 years from now. Will write, this is the 1930s, if you will.

This is the beginning of a world war, and nobody has caught up with it, yet.

Would you agree with that?

CHIP: Yeah. Glenn, I agree with you. You have, and you were a long time ago -- others have caught up to it. And, frankly, caught up to where you were. And, look, it is one of the core reasons I'm running for attorney general.

Look, I can keep doing what I'm doing up here. God blessed me the ability to fight and make changes up here.

We've done some good things.

Look, we have to preserve in the state of Texas. And the battle is exactly what you said. You can't win a war. If you don't even acknowledge that it's happening.

That's the problem. People are asleep at it. Again, like I said, it's what I last talked about. Because of the reality that you just said.

And that vast network, we have got to follow the money and destroy that network. It's an integrated, related network. You know it. I know it. I can promise you, smart people in Washington are looking at this.

I can tell you, I'm building teams in Texas, to look at this right now. And connecting those teams in Texas and in Washington. And other AG's offices, which is what I'll do on day one of AG. Frankly, once I'm blessed with the nomination, I will be working on it all next year. We will build the team, and we will fight to dismantle it.

Glenn Finally Gets a REAL Job: Cracker Barrel Biscuit Maker | Glenn TV | Ep 471

If this whole media thing doesn’t work out, Glenn can always fall back on his biscuit-making skills! Take a break from the apocalypse and enjoy some Cracker Barrel carbs made by everyone’s favorite son of a baker!