RADIOMay 22, 2024

Dershowitz: Trial Judge's 3 INFURIATING Moves That Prove He Has an 'AGENDA' Against Trump

After witnessing the hush money trail against former president Donald Trump, famed attorney Alan Dershowitz tells Glenn just how shocked he was at the blatant anti-Trump bias. Dershowitz explains 3 moves that Judge Juan Merchan made which he believes prove Merchan's true "agenda": He threatened to strike witness Robert Costello's entire testimony from the record because he raised his eyebrows; he heavily restricted what Costello and other defense witnesses could say, after letting Stormy Daniels say anything she wanted; and he appears to have allowed the jury to go home and watch the news coverage of the trial. But as for the case against Trump itself, Dershowitz asserts, "I have never seen a weaker case.” But yet, he fears the New York jury and biased judge will convict Trump anyways. So, is it time for him to add another banana to his "Banana Republic" scale?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: One of the biggest -- I just -- I don't understand how our justice system got to where it is, this quickly.

I hope it's the different in -- you know, in New York, and in Washington, DC. But I have a feeling it's this way, in many states

And we are not. We are not even connected to the rule of law anymore. I read an article. An op-ed from Alan Dershowitz. Who was at the courtroom.

The last -- you know, when the defense rested. And heard the testimony of who was it?

Was it Cohen? Stu. Or was it Collins?

I can't remember. Anyway, and all he did was raise his eyebrows when there was an objection, and the judge said, sustained. He looked at the judge and raised his eyebrows, which set the judge into a tirade. Cleared the courtroom. For some reason, Alan Dershowitz was allowed to stay. And he writes about it, Dersch.Substack.com. And you have to read it. And Alan joins us now.

Hi, Alan, how are you?

ALAN: Hi. I wish the trial was televised, so that all Americans could see the veins in this judge's head popping. I mean, he just went berserk. You know what he reminded me of the psycho in the movie Taxi Driver? You looking at me? Hey, you looking at me?

The judge has such thin skin.

You looking at me. You raising your eyebrows? I'm going to strike all your testimony. Can you imagine the effect, if the judge had actually gone through with it?

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Did he say that in front of the jury?

ALAN: No. No. No. He did that outside of the jury. In fact, he didn't say it in front of the media. He threw the media out for some bizarre reason. I was sitting in the front row. And they didn't ask me to leave. So I was sitting right near the judges and the defendants and Cohen and all of them. He took the jury out. But he said basically, if you raise your eyebrows again, I will deny Donald Trump a fair trial by striking your defense testimony, and not allowing him to put on -- and Donald Trump didn't raise his eyebrows, at least in the courtroom. But he certainly raised a lot of eyebrows outside of the courtroom, as he has a right to do, because this is a political trial, so he's responding in a political way.

But the idea that you would strike the defense, because of something, you didn't like a witness doing?

First of all, everybody has a constitutional right to raise their eyebrows. And to look and stare at a judge.

I've done that many, many times. I'll never forget May West, in the movie Little Chickadee. She's in front of the judge, and the judge says, you're showing your contempt. And May West says, no, Your Honor, I'm trying my best to hide my contempt for the court.

And, you know, that's what many people do to this judge. I'm not a witness or anything. So I didn't hide my contempt. I rolled my eyes. I raised my eyebrows. I stared at the judge. I whispered to people next to me like, would you believe, people did that? Kept out this testimony? Let in this testimony. Let's remember, this is a judge who was so permissive with the prosecution. He allowed Stormy Daniels to testify that they had sex in a missionary position, that he used a certain kind of deodorant, and that he wore silk pajamas.

Now, how is that relevant to an entry case involving bookkeeping entry? Utterly irrelevant. Utterly prejudicial. The judge said, no. No. Let it all go in. Let it all go in. But when Cohen tries to testify about what his former client said to him, and the client had waved the privilege.

Said to him, I don't know anything about Trump. I can't incriminate him. The judge said, no. No. I'm imposing restrictions on what your witness could say, and I would raise my eyebrows.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait.

He wasn't allowed to enter that into testimony?

ALAN: He was restricted as to what he could say. He was allowed to say that he had said on numerous occasions, that -- that he didn't know anything about Trump.

But he was restricted from saying, many of the things. As he said, he swore to tell the truth. The whole truth. And nothing, but the truth.

And the judge said, no. I only want a partial truth.

When it came to an expert witness, the judge was even tougher. The judge said, even though the prosecution was allowed to introduce evidence, that they claim the payments were illegal campaign contributions. The country's leading expert on campaign contributions, who was prepared to testify. These were not illegal campaign contributions.

The judge said, no.

You can testify as to your credentials and a few other things. But you can't testify as to the legality or illegality, even though the other side is allowed to.

What does it mean under the Sixth Amendment, then, you have the right to confront the charges and the witnesses in front of you? You think that it means you have a right to call witnesses on your own. Who would tell a different story. And give a different account, so the jury could make up their mind.

Not according to this judge. This judge wants a conviction. Whether it's because his daughter would profit from a conviction. She runs a -- she works for a fundraising outfit that fundraises off this trial.

Or where there were other reasons for it. I don't know. I don't want try to psycho analyze. The judge. Other than the judge tried to psycho analyze Donald Trump.

In order to convict them, you have to believe that the only reason, that the false entries were made. They weren't even made by him. They were made by some underling.

That the only reason the false entries, if they were false. Were made. Was to affect the campaign.

It had no reason, to avoid embarrassment to his wife, to his son, who was in school at the time. To avoid losing his television show. Because there's a morality clause in the contract.

No -- no reason to believe, it might affect his branding business.

Because, you know, all the branding of the Trump hotels, et cetera.

Obviously, there were mixed motives.

But the judge had to conclude, the predominant motive was to impact the election. Even though, if there was a campaign contribution, he wouldn't have had to report it until after the election. This case is so absurd. In 60 years of practicing, teaching and writing about criminal law, I have never seen a weaker case. And yet, there might be a conviction because this is a New York jury.

GLENN: You have watched juries forever.

ALAN: Yeah.

GLENN: Did you see any signs from them at all, one way or another?

ALAN: Hard to tell. When he acknowledged that he had stolen $60,000 from Trump and never tried to repay it, I can see the jury's literally raising their own eyebrows. They learned forward. They paid close attention to that. There was a lot of boring testimony. And, you know, jurors don't close their eyes. But they sit back. You don't know what they're thinking.

The only problem is, that jurors usually love the judge. The judge is the benevolent despot. And he is benevolent when the jury is there. When the jury leaves, then he becomes the true tyrant, that he really is.

GLENN: Yes.

ALAN: So the jury may take a cue from the judge, and the judge will give his instruction, I believe, that clearly favors the prosecution, and is prejudiced against the defender. So there's no real predicting the outcome.

I guess the most betting people are saying, a hung jury. It will be hard to get 12 people, to conclude either way, that he was totally innocent or totally guilty.

GLENN: And then what happens from -- what happens from there?

ALAN: The prosecution has the right to try him again. But at that point, the trial will have to take place after the election. And I'm not sure they would go forth.

It would depend on the vote. If the vote were 10-2 for the conviction, they might be triumphant. If it was 10-2 for acquittal, they may not retry him.

So there's a lot to be seen. The other thing that is bizarre. I've never seen this before. The judge delayed the trial a whole week. The jury went home. The jury is home today, tomorrow. It will be home Friday.

Of course, then the holiday. Vacation. Then it comes back next week.

GLENN: Wait. Wait.

Isn't this one of these cases that you should really sequester the jury so they're not seeing the news?

ALAN: Of course. And especially if they're not seeing CNN or reading the New York Times.

One thing MSNBC, which have already convicted him, without a doubt.

I mean, MSNBC thinks this is the strongest case since the Abraham Lincoln assassination. If it had been on videotape. There's no doubt, by the MSNBC people, they're rooting for a verdict.

As is the media. When I was in the courtroom, the other day. You could just see. And you could hear from the media. They're all rooting for a conviction. Even one of the courtroom artists, criticized me. For coming to the trial, and showing support for Donald Trump.

I didn't come to show political support for Donald Trump. I haven't made up my mind who I'm voting for. I voted for Biden in the last election.

I didn't believe there to show political support. I came there to show legal support. That this was a case, that should never have been brought. I would have done the same thing, if Biden had been charged with a noncrime like this.

I'm not political when it comes to my legal analysis.

GLENN: Yeah.

Alan, let me switch gears. There is -- there is a story out about the FBI. And the raid on Mar-a-Lago. And, you know, that there was a -- and they were allowed to use deadly force.

And I -- it's my understanding, at least, that this is being misreported by the right.

That's in all of these. It's a general thing.

ALAN: It is. There shouldn't have been a search warrant at all. There should have been a subpoena. When you deal with people like the former president of the United States, you send them a subpoena.

And if he fails to disclose the material, then he's in contempt of court or in violation of statutes.

But you don't burst into his home.

Yeah. Of course, you need to be --

GLENN: So wait.

ALAN: If somebody is there, shooting at you.

But they should never have used the search warrant in the first place.

GLENN: Yeah. That was kind of.

I didn't know about the subpoena, and all that, that you had other options.

But as I'm. I was looking at this, this morning.

And I was like, you know, at least for presidents. And I think it would be fine for other things.

Because a lot of people seem to be having their terrors kicked in.

When it comes to the president. And I say this about Biden too.

I'm sure that was in the same, you know, paperwork for Joe Biden.

In his garage.

ALAN: No. They didn't have a support. They didn't have a search warrant for Biden. They had a subpoena. So there was no such paperwork for Biden.

GLENN: Oh, my God.

ALAN: So it's a very, very different standard.

It's rare to get a search warrant.

Normally, the way to go, is just in a gentlemanly way. Or in a ladylike way. You say, look, we're subpoenaing this. Please, produce it to the court tomorrow. And if you don't, you'll be held in contempt. And if you try to destroy something, like it's claimed Hillary Clinton tried to destroy some of our servers, that's an independent crime.

But Hillary Clinton didn't have a search warrant conducted against her. Joe Biden didn't. I don't know about Biden's kid.

I don't know whether Hunter Biden had a search warrant. Search warrants are not the usual way of obtaining material.

Usually it's by subpoena.

GLENN: So I talked to you maybe six months ago, and we were talking about banana republics.

And you said, we're up to six bananas. Get ten bananas, and we're a banana republic. Where are we today?

ALAN: Yeah. If it's a conviction, we're up to seven. But there's another court I want to talk about for a second, if you don't mind. And that is the International Criminal Court, that for the first time in its history, has gone after leaders of the democracy. Namely Benjamin Netanyahu, and the -- the foreign -- the military minister, in Israel. Even though, what they did was purely self-defense.

And -- and it means that the United States is at risk. Great Britain is at risk.

Canada is at risk. Any country that wages war is now at risk.

There is a rule for the International Criminal Court, that they can't go after any country, that has a working judiciary, which is capable and willing to investigate their own people.

Now, Israel has a very active judiciary. Four former prime ministers were investigated.

Four former prime ministers, Rabid, Sharome, Elmer (phonetic), and Netanyahu. In one form, a president went to jail. In fact, I made a joke about that, when I visited Omar in prison. I said, in Israel, when you ask for a former Prime Minister's cell number, it's not necessarily his cell number. And what other country can boast that they have had such an aggressive judiciary? And yet the international criminal court says, no, no, no. We're going after you.

Even though, Israel and the United States, they're not even signatories to the treaty. They're not members of the court. So we live in an age now, where courts are going out of control.

The court in New York is out of control. The court in the Hague is out of control.

And we should not be living by the judiciary. You know, in the book of, I think it's the book of Ruth. In the Bible, it starts by saying, when judges ruled the land, there was famine and hunger.

You know, you don't want judges to rule the land.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

Alan, thank you so much for talking to us. I appreciate it.

ALAN: Always a pleasure to have an intelligent talk with you. I look forward to it.

GLENN: Thank you. Alan Dershowitz, law school professor ameritas, and host of the Dershow.

The Dershow. And he's also the author of Get Trump. If you haven't read that, it's well worth your time.

The ONE “forever war” Glenn Beck supports

This Fourth of July, Glenn Beck reveals the only “forever war” he supports. It’s the war Americans have been fighting since our nation’s founding, and we must continue the fight…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Two hundred forty-nine years ago, I think it is tomorrow. Right? Is tomorrow the second, or is it the first?

What day is it today?

So it was 200 -- 249 years ago, tomorrow, that somebody sat alone, in a -- in a one-room hotel room.

And scratched out the words, when in the course of human events. Those are the first six words of a document that is so dangerous!

Still today, so revolutionary.

It was whispered in those candle lit rooms by men who knew. Knew. That if I signed this document, that's a death warrant.

I'm dead!

I'm dead.

But in the course of human events, shh.

Jefferson wrote them!

33 years old. Adams would later say, you do well to revere Jefferson. But he didn't write alone. Basically, I was there too.

And so was Ben Franklin. The ideas were forged in the minds of men like Franklin, who is old enough to know better. And Adams, who was stubborn enough, not to care. And they weren't perfect men. But I love this about the left. They try to make you think.

That you think are perfect. I don't think they were perfect! I mean, Ben Franklin used to walk around naked in his house a lot. That shows, I mean, for as smart as that guy was. It shows, maybe he had a lack of mirrors. But they weren't perfect!

They owned slaves. They argued. They compromised.

How does that make them different than us?
I mean, we should be able to relate to them!

What is it that we tolerate right now?
What is it that we compromise on?

What is it -- what are our failures that future generations are going to go, these people just didn't get it? Perhaps what we should notice is that they, unlike most of us. They were willing to gamble their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.

For something that had never, ever been done before. Something entirely new!

The idea that rights don't come from a government, or from a king, or from a parliament.

They don't come from the majority voting. Everyone has certain rights.

You know, for all these people who are, you know -- going in Macy's, and burning down towns. And then stealing clothing. And they're like, because I've been oppressed!

And you can't -- I've got rights, you know.
Yeah. Yeah.

You know who the first people were, to articulate those rights?

You know the only country that actually has stood for those rights?

And we're imperfect!

That idea came from the Founders, that you say you hate.

But the actual rights come from God, which you dismiss!

Think of this. Just ponder this for a second.

That all men are created equal! That their rights are given to them, by a creator.

It's not a political assertion. It's a genius. That's eternal truth!

That's theological dynamite, lobbed straight in to the thrones of Europe.

All over the world, it's still dynamite.

They knew what they were doing.

And I don't mean like, they knew what they were doing.

They had it. No. They knew that the British crown had the largest military force in the world. And these guys, they were farmers. They were printers. They were lawyers. They were a ragtag collection of intellectual and idealists, facing down an empire, where they said, the sun never set on the British empire. Meaning, the colonialism was everywhere!

You could not escape England. And yet, they declared it. We're leaving, without apology!

And they said that when a government becomes destructive of the ends of liberty, life, and the pursuit of happiness, it's not only the right of the people, it's their duty to throw it off!

Wow. And you know what is amazing? That's not rebellion.

That's -- that's not revolution. That's -- that's responsibility.

That -- that kind of language today, that would have you flagged, shadow banned. Labeled an extremist. In most countries, disappeared!

But that is the foundation of what we call America. The American experiment. And it's that. The American experiment.

And it's just that, an experiment. We didn't know if we could get it right. And we haven't gotten it right. But isn't it worth experimenting?

Isn't it worth trying to get that concept right?

When you fail on that concept, you're like, eh. That's a stupid idea.

That's not a stupid idea. That's the greatest idea of all time.

Why are so many people willing to just quit?

The experiment is self-rule. It's not perfect.

Never has been. Slavery. Jim Crow. Internment camps. Assassinations.

My God! Forgive us, for what we have done.

But at the same time, what nation has done more to correct its own errors?

What people have shed more blood, not for conquest, but for freedom.

Twice in the last century, we crossed oceans. Not to claim territory. But to liberate that territory!

Our sons and daughters fought and bled on foreign soil to push the darkness back, to fight against Naziism and fascism and Communism. And here we are. Here we are today.

After 249 years tomorrow of that experiment, standing at the lip of the very abyss, those men feared.

A godless chaos, rising in the east and a cold atheistic utopia, clawing at the foundations of the Western world. Islamism and Communism, two ideologies that have killed tens of millions of people. Now dressed all in new robes, selling old lies.

And we can't even teach a child where their rights come from. We have replaced Jefferson and Adams with TikTok influencers and bureaucratic groupthink.

We're raising generations to not even know the truth about their own identity.

But to question their identity. And they could be, oh, you're a funny, funny colored unicorn today. What do you want to be tomorrow?

We don't teach them anything about truth, or their inheritance, most importantly. Their inheritance. What good are hot dogs and fireworks, if the soul of the nation is up for auction? What is the meaning in Fourth of July, if we have forgotten the why? If we don't even call it Independence Day anymore. Most people don't even know who we fought against for independence.

They think we fought for its independence! Most people think we fought the South!

And yet, we'll light the sparklers, or blow our fingers off, because we're just that stupid.

This Independence Day weekend, would you do me and yourself and your country a favor, and read the words out loud. Speak the words out loud.

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands, which have connected them with one another.

And to assume among the powers of earth, the separate, but equal station, to which the laws of nature.

And nature's God entitle them.

A decent respect to the opinions of mankind, requires that they should declare the causes, which impair them to the separation.

What are they saying?

Look, we want to be decent people.

We want to be decent people.

And we have to separate them.

But we believe it's only right that we tell you why we have to separate. And it's not because of all the bad things you've done. We'll get to those later. It's because we're different. And you don't understand. You have been telling us all of these things, we no longer believe in. We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal, and they're endowed by their creator with certain inalienable. Unchangeable rights.

And just among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

That to secure these rights, government are his instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

My gosh. Read those words. And let your children hear what thinking and courage sounds like.

That to secure these rights, I'm telling you, the king, who thinks that your government was given to you, by God.

And you are the ruler.

And you will tell everybody what to think, what to do. What to buy. What to sell. What to tax. What not to tax. Who gets land. Who doesn't get land.

No, no, no. Government are his instituted among men, deriving their powers, their just powers, from the people. And that government is only there, established by those men to protect the rights that God has given each of those men.

Let them feel the chill, that runs down the spine, when Jefferson writes, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the government, or from the governed. Let them hear the words, of -- of responsibility. What responsibility sounds like, with courage and freedom. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these rights, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.

And to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their a lot of and happiness.

In other words, you have the right, you have the responsibility to stop tyrants. And if the government has gone bad, to throw that government off.

But reconstitute a government, that will do a better job at protecting those rights. Not to form a communist government.

Not to do anything else. But you want a new government?

Fine! Let's find the way to make men more free. This is not a metaphor. This is a declaration of war on tyranny in all of its forms.

I mean, I said, yesterday, freedom isn't free.

It was paid for by somebody's blood. But you have to remember, they paid for their freedom, not for our freedom, necessarily.

We -- there comes a time, we have to pay for our freedom. And God forbid, that it comes down to blood.

But at least shake off the apathy. We -- we must renew this promise of this experiment of America.

We need to fight for it as well. An out-of-control government that seeks to rope us into forever wars, over and over again. We're all against forever wars. I'm against it.

I hate them.

But there is one forever war, that is required in a free society. A different kind of forever war.

A war against ourselves, a war against human nature in each of us. Because of human nature, we get fat. We get lazy.

We get tolerant of abuses. Let your children hear you speak these words. And when you speak them, ponder them yourself.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate, that governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient causes.

And accordingly, all experience has shown, that mankind is more disposed to suffer while the evils are sufferable than to right themselves, by abolishing the forms in which they're accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a sign to reduce them under absolute despotism.

It's their right. It's their duty. To throw off such government. And provide new guards for such future security.

In one paragraph, we make the point twice. And they tell us, look, we've studied people.

We know you're going to get fat and lazy and apathetic. And you won't want to do stuff for transient causes. Because this is really not good.

But when push comes to shove. And everything is moving towards absolute despotism. Absolute tyranny. Then you must stand up.

I ask you to ponder this. This particular part, when a long train of abuses and usurpations. Prudence will indeed dictate that governments long established should not be exchanged for light and transient causes.

And accordingly, all experience has shown, that mankind is more disposed to suffer while the evils suffer, than to right themselves.

Aren't we exactly the same people, that their experience was talking about?

Aren't we the people that are more disposed to suffer, than to right ourselves? Because we're too comfortable. Or we're too afraid, just to stand up and simply say no to lies.

No!

There is a difference between men and women.

No! Communism is to be feared. It's killed over 100 million people, in the last 100 years.

No!

Muslims aren't bad. Islamism is!

It's evil. No!

You can peacefully protest, any time, any place. And I will fight to the death for your right to do that.

But when you start burn cities down to the ground, no!

We're just a few days away. And we have marked our 249th birthday. Maybe. Just maybe, this year, can we stop asking what America was, and start deciding what America will be?

Where it just slips quietly into history. In the dark of apathy and ignorance.

Because the only thing more dangerous than tyranny is the people who have forgotten what it took to break its chains.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

We need REAL jobs in America — Trump should do THIS now!

It is clear we need to create more productive, high-paying jobs for American citizens. But that doesn't mean bringing back the same exact jobs of the past in massive numbers. It means creating and supporting jobs of the present and future that will better the lives of Americans. Glenn Beck and Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts break down exactly what this entails and how President Trump can make it a reality.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts HERE

The most INCREDIBLE World War II story you’ve NEVER HEARD

One of the biggest American World War II cemeteries in Europe is in a small town in the Netherlands, where thousands of Dutch people continue the tradition to this day of “adopting” a fallen US soldier and checking in on his family. “The Monuments Man” author Robert Edsel joins Glenn Beck to tell this incredible story, which he documents in his new book, “Remember Us.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Robert, welcome back to the program. How are you, sir?

ROBERT: Great to talk to you!

GLENN: It's great to talk to you.

Can you remind me? You were on with us, after Monuments Men. And you talked about this great service that is still going on, where people that -- they were still looking for paintings and pieces of art, that had been taken by the Nazis.

And if I remember right, didn't somebody in our -- our own audience reach out to you, and say, I think we found one of those paintings?

ROBERT: Yes, sir. Absolutely.

The Glenn Beck audience. And Glenn Beck, you yourself deserve a lot of credit.

Because I hadn't walked out of your studio last time. You know, in Dallas at Las Colinas.

Headed back to our office at Monuments Men and Women Foundation office, before someone in my office contacted me and said, we've already had a lead, as a result of your interview with Glenn. And it turned out someone whose aunt had been given two paintings during World War II.

She had worked for the government overseeing Germany, and these two paintings were missing.

We were able to identify who the rightful owner was, and get them back.

So it's a great thing that you performed. And, you know, it's a magnificent conclusion, though obviously a very difficult part of history.

GLENN: What was it like to give that back to the family?

ROBERT: It was a deeply moving experience. We -- the foundation found and returned more than 30 works of art, from paintings to documents, ancient books. Tapestries, to museums. Individual collectors, and so on.

And, you know, when we see, oftentimes, the people just stand there, and they cry.

They don't even know what to say. Because they may have worked 50 or 60 years, trying to find some work of art that's been missing. And they haven't had leads. And to -- to see us standing there, with something that belongs to them.

Not asking for anything in return. Don't charge anybody for doing it. Because we feel like everybody who went through World War II already paid enough.

Words -- words just fail. It's just pure gratitude.

GLENN: I can't wait for you to tell this new story.

Tell me the story of the care takers. The care takers of --

ROBERT: Well, it's a story that found me, just as Monuments did.

I have written about -- in the Monuments Men, I told the story of two Monuments Officers who were killed in combat, one British soldier and one American, Walter Huchthausen. And Huchthausen was killed. He once did a last casualty at war. He was killed in the last month of World War II, and is buried in the American benevolence, American cemetery, in Margraten in the Netherlands. I knew that story, and I had made mention of a young girl who was harbored in September '45, asking for the address of his mother, wanting to write her and tell her, that she walked 5 miles, several times a week, from her house to the American military cemetery. It was called then. To put flowers on his grave. Because her family knew them. And they were grief-stricken to know that they were killed.

And I knew that story too. I mentioned that. And then in 2015, the nephew of Huchthausen wrote me and included a photograph of this elderly lady with this crown of white hair. And he said, here's a photo with Frida, and I couldn't place who this was.

I had no idea who it was. And I realized, my God, this is that 19-year-old girl that is still alive. So I flew to England. She married a British soldier after the war. And I went to meet with her. She started showing me photographs of when the American -- Americans liberated her area of the Netherlands.

And all these American soldiers that they knew.

And she said, you know about the American military cemetery.

She said, have you been there?

And I said yes. And she said, so you know about the great adoption program?

And I said, what? She said, the great adoption program.

I said, I have no idea what you're talking about. So I started doing some research on this. And learned, at the end of World War II, our largest World War II cemetery in Europe, was not Normandy. It was the Netherlands American cemetery, where 17,800 boys and a few women buried at this cemetery by May 1946.

And by that time, every single grave had a Dutch person, a local person, who volunteered to be an adaptor of that brave.

Go out there on the first death date of the soldier, Veterans Day, Memorial Day.

And if they had the contact information for the next of kin, send them a photograph of the grave.
And a letter.

Because they realized, it was okay to adopt the bodies of dead boys.

But where the real need was, was to reach across the ocean, into the American homes and try to assuage the grief of the families.

And they knew some of these boys. And I found it the most heartwarming, uplifting, and certainly unique conclusion to a World War II story that I think has been written.

GLENN: So are they still some of them still doing this?

ROBERT: Not some. In fact, there were about -- in 1940, 748.

American families were given the choice to have their loved ones sent home, or to be left overseas in a military cemetery.

The Army had no idea, how many -- how many families would want their boys sent home, and as a consequence, they couldn't tell how many cemeteries they would need.

We thought almost everybody would want to have the families sent home. But it turned out not to be the case. So about 61 percent came home. About 39 percent stayed in Europe, which was about the numbers from World War I.

Although, the numbers in this area, in the Netherlands were higher.

The -- the graves that are there now.

There are 10,000 boys there. And four women.

8300 graves. 1700 names on the walls of the missing.

Every one of them has an adaptor for 80 years.

All those graves have been adopted, without interruption.

There's a waiting list of almost a thousand people in the Netherlands, to become a doctor. This is a -- not just a --

GLENN: This is --

JASON: A privilege. Because they take their kids out to the cemetery. They turn the cemetery into a classroom. And you go out there. And, yes, there's a somber element. They're instilling in their kids, you're able to think, and say what you want to. Because of the freedom that was given to you, by this American girl or boy. And we don't do that in our country anymore.

GLENN: So this is one of the most incredible stories that I've -- I've ever heard.

And I'm shocked that the world doesn't know this!

Is -- have you -- is there anything like this, anywhere else in the world?

JASON: No. We couldn't even find a comp of any nature.

There are -- that is not to say, the people in Normandy area, don't care about Normandy and other cemeteries. They do, of course. As do the Belgians in other cemeteries.

But there's no place that created an organic great adoption program, during the war, in January 1945!

These people in this area of the Netherlands were so grateful, having been neutral in World War I.

And having not lost their freedom for 100 years!

And they didn't like it!

And when the Americans liberated them in September 44. I'll never forget this woman Freda. This elderly woman I met, looked at me, the first time I interviewed her. I knew her for eight years. The last eight years of her life.

I delivered a eulogy two summers ago. She looked at me, there were the eyes of the 19-year-old. And she said, when I saw that first tank over the hill and I realized, we were saved.

I looked at my dad, and I said, Papi, these American boys come all the way across the ocean to say this. And there were tears in her eyes.

Because they didn't -- they couldn't imagine how we could have moved that equipment across -- across the ocean.

And why we would have cared so much.

So there isn't anything like it.

But January 45, these people in this little town of Margraten.

A mile from the cemetery, organized a meeting of the town leaders. The town who got 1200 people.

And they were trying to find an answer to the question: How do you thank your liberators, when they're no longer alive to thank? And they came up with this idea of this great adoption program, and it's a story that I tell, following the lives of about 12 different American combat soldiers.

Bomber recipients.

Tankers.

Because we don't know that story.

We don't what knows to an American story, when they're killed on the field of battle.

Because it's depressing.

We move on to the next scene in a movie.

Well, I want people to know, you started your program with freedom is not free.

It's ugly.

Let's talk about that. Let's talk about what the cost is.

Let's talk about the stripping line that the body goes through, and the removal of dog tags, one being put in the mouth, if there's still a head. And the other being nailed to the cross, because they don't have time to stencil the names on yet.

Let's talk about that, and let people know, it's not just a Marvel movie. Or a gang war.

This is real. This is painful. And, of course, at the end of the war, when we Americans declare victory, and move on with our lives, there's millions of family members in the United States, whose lives will never be the same.

So it is -- it's still happening today. It's still happening today.

GLENN: The name -- the name of the book is Remember Us.

And take us -- I mean, because that's really kind of the -- the -- the beauty of it.

Take us through the rest of the book, just briefly.

It starts with what?

ROBERT: Well, I follow -- I began what a nice life was in the Netherlands. Until May 10, 1940.

And the Netherlands does not get much attention from World War II, and yet everybody has heard of Battle of the Bulge. And Battle -- those are all within 50 miles of what we're talking about.

They happened around there. Of course, World War II, in western Europe, begins right here in this area. Because the German tanks roll across the border.

So I cover the life of these 12 different Americans. I interviewed all their family members. Some make it through the war. Some don't.

You read the book, you realize who makes it, who doesn't. But their lives converge around this area of the Netherlands. And when post-world War II stories end, with the war being over, remember us kicks into a transcendent moment when the Dutch come up with this idea of this great adoption program. The Americans refuse to provide the names and addresses of the next of kin.

So they're foiled with trying to achieve their ultimate objective. Which is to try to contact all the American families.

And frustrated, there was -- one of the key figures of the book.

A woman who is the mother of 12 children.

Who takes it upon herself. She's a woman of action.

She writes president Truman. And pleads for him to get involved.

When that doesn't work. She gets on the first airplane, she's ever flown on. She leaves her kids behind.

She flies to New York. Lands in LaGuardia Field.

She goes to Washington, and meets the members of Congress. Including a young guy from Texas, named Lyndon Johnson.

Who says, young lady, you need to go to Texas. Because there are so many military bases there.

She flies to our hometown. And lands in Lovefield.

In June of 1946. And is met by two family members. And for five weeks, she lives with American families, that lost somebody during a war.

And to each of them she says, leave your boys with us. When the election comes.

We will watch over them, like our own forever.

And they have done that. Now, today, these 10,000 Dutch doctors only have contact information for 20 percent of the American families.

They couldn't ever get the others.

GLENN: You're kidding me. Where is the list? Do you have a list?

ROBERT: Yeah. The Monuments Men and Women Foundation entered into a joint venture with the Dutch Foundation for Adopting Graves.

Not charging anybody for this. And we have created a website called foreverpromise.org.

And on that website is a list of all 10,000 men and women, more women that are buried at the cemetery, or whose names are on the walls missing.

And it's a searchable database. We're asking people to go and see. Do you have someone you know, or a relative, who is buried there.

And if so, we have a short questionnaire. What's your relationship? Are you aware of this great adoption program? Are you in contact with your adopter? Would you like to be? Would you allow us to share your contact information?

I connected a lady from Richmond, Texas. Saturday night. To her -- to this young Tammy, that's the adopter of her brother.

She's 93 years old.

She was in tears. At the thought when she leaves this world, there will be someone there to watch over her brother.

And that's what we're all about is this connecting.

GLENN: Rob, I have to tell you.

You've really done something with your life. I mean, I know you don't need me to say it.
But what a great job you have. And what a great service you have done for so many years.

Thank you so much.

Please, look this up.

The forever promise project.

You can find it at foreverpromise.org. Foreverpromise.org. Robert Edsel is the author's name. The book is Remember Us. It's a perfect read for this week.