RADIO

Did the US just get closer to the Russia, Ukraine war?

The world held its breathe this week when a stray missile crossed into Poland — a NATO country. Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy insisted the missile came from Russia, but other reports claim the opposite. Either way, with a NATO country now directly effected, did the U.S. become close to entering the war? Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT), joins Glenn to explain if America was ever close to joining the danger. Plus, Rep. Stewart explains why it wouldn’t make any sense for Vladimir Putin to involve NATO forces right now.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Chris Stewart is a multiple New York Times best-selling author. He is one of the best writers out there. He's a national award-winning author. Also, world record setting Air Force pilot, and the former owner and CEO of a small business. And he is a friend of mine. He is the congressman from Utah's second congressional district. Chris Stewart, welcome to the program.

CHRIS: Hey, Glenn. Nice to see you say, I was a friend of yours. That's great. Thank you.

GLENN: I know. And I expect that check to clear.

Now, listen, here's the thing I want you to talk about. Because you were on the intelligence and the permanent select committee, and you have military background. What the heck happened this week? How close were we to a war with Russia?

CHRIS: Okay. So like often when we speak, Glenn, I have to be careful what I say to you. And I want to speak you know in the realm of information that is publicly available. And there's more than that. It just passes the common sense test. Anyone with average intelligence would be able to conclude, and that is it was very, very dicey in the last ten days or so.

Because one of the most intricate, complicated, and dangerous maneuvers any military force can endeavor to do is an orderly withdrawal.

It's inherently dangerous in the sense, you're weakening your forces as you're trying to hold territory, while the others lead, the -- the area of operations. The fact that you have the river there, which obviously complicates that.

And Vladimir Putin has I think, we conclude there's -- you know there are certain thresholds, that he will not allow to have happen.

One of them is any essential Russian strategic defeat -- one of the results will protect his forces from the humiliating defeat that would alter the outcome of the war, and that's what we were facing this week.

And the good news, ironically, the good news is Russia actually had a very well executed withdrawal, that did not endanger massive numbers to our forces. So Vladimir Putin wasn't faced with that choice.

But it was very, very content, and a moment of uncertainty there, that I think we had our eyes -- our eyes were on it, very carefully.

GLENN: I will tell you, that when I saw the news. Someone came into a studio. I was in between shows. Somebody walked in and said, a missile just landed in Poland. And I said, oh, my gosh.

And we hoped that it was a mistake. And it was a mistake on Ukrainian's side. But Zelinsky is still saying, we don't have the proof that it was us. I mean, is that even possible that he doesn't know?

CHRIS: No. He often says things he has to say, in order to achieve his goals. And you go back to even before the war, he continued to deny, this was ever going to happen. Despite the clear evidence, that it wasn't just possible, it was inevitable. And he had to do that to keep on a brave face for his people. Et cetera. And one of the things we're seeing now, him saying to his people, and his military. You know, we're going to keep going. We're going to defeat every Russian. We're going to chase him out of every region, and Dinesh, Eastern regions of Ukraine, and maybe even Crimea.

So he will say things to rally his people. And rally his military forces. And I think this is an example of that.

Going back to where I started, you apply a common sense test. Becoming increasingly difficult, as we know in the world around us. Because we see that things make no sense at all, and it turns out to be true.

But Vladimir Putin does not want to go to war with NATO right now. I mean, he's in the middle of a catastrophe anyway. And to bring NATO into a war, especially on the western front, around could he have. It would just take a catastrophe, and times it by 100 for him. And not just militarily, but the perception of the world.

So one of the first things you ask yourself. It doesn't make sense. Why would Vladimir Putin do that? And it turns out, he didn't. It turns out, it was almost certainly a Ukrainian missile. And it took us very little time to determine, that it was fired by Ukrainians. It was likely a Russian missile. But it was one provided previous to the war.

And so that's why I think there were some confusion. Again, it just didn't make sense. It turned out not to be true. That Vladimir Putin was actually attacking a NATO country.

GLENN: What do you think of Milley this week saying, we're just going to keep giving them the money?

CHRIS: I don't think Milley is a member of Congress. So Milley doesn't make that decision, does he?

GLENN: Do you think there will be enough of you that will fight for an actual budget and appropriations?

CHRIS: Depends on what you mean by as number of us, as sufficient enough to stop it, I don't know yet. But there's a growing number of us, including those of us with military backgrounds. Those of us who sit on the intelligence in the Armed Services Committee, who will lead on these issues, who have increasing concerns about this.

And I think, Glenn, you and I talked about, an editorial I talked about several months ago. Or several weeks ago. That said, look, have we learned nothing from Iraq or Afghanistan. And if we have learned some of those lessons, we need to apply them here. And the very first thing we need to know, are our goals and Zelinsky's aligned? Because if he says, and he actually means, we're going to continue and press this all the way into Crimea. The United States simply cannot support that goal, without finding ourselves at war with Russia. And offensive operations in Crimea. Vladimir Putin would do that no differently than if we were to attack Moscow.

And Zelinsky certainly knows that. And so we have to first clarify this question.

What are our goals in Ukraine? And if we can agree on those goals, then we will support the effort.

Then second thing, you mentioned, Glenn, where is this money going?

Do we know these weapons are going where they're supposed to be going? By the way, are we funding nonessential military operations, like Ukrainian. The retirement accounts for Ukrainian officials.

I mean, that has simply got to stop as well. We have to identify where this money, and how this money is being spent.

GLENN: Let me switch topics.

The Republicans have laid out the Biden investigation. They were very clear. This is not about Hunter Biden. This is about Joe Biden.

The evidence seems to be overwhelming. You can't -- you can impeach. But you won't -- you won't get the Congress to you know vote for impeachment in the Senate.

And convict him of that. Most likely.

What is -- what do you think is happening here? How is this going to be perceived?

For the first time, Brock, what's his name? David Brock is leaving Media Matters, and he's going into a new Shell company that is going to be coordinating the pushback on the Republicans.

They are -- they are marshaling their forces like crazy. Like only Democrats do. What do you think is coming?

CHRIS: Well, they're marshaling their forces, because they know a catastrophe is coming. And that is, the truth is finally going to be revealed. And it will be revealed in such a way, that it can't be ignored.

You know, Glenn as effective as people like yourself are, in announcing and stating whether it's obviously true, it doesn't have the same weight as when an official committee of Congress, reaches certain conclusions.

It's harder for the media to ignore that. This isn't just about some business dealings with big companies in Ukraine and China.

Of course, China is our primary focus.

These are actual evidence of fraud. There's actual evidence of conspiracy. And with companies that are directly tied to the communist leadership, and Communist Party, in China.

And -- and we're finally going to have a chance, to investigate in that subpoena, and to understand these allegations. There's one thing I would caution. And I actually -- I -- I have a conclusion, that might surprise you. We should caution ourselves, in the sense, we won't necessarily impeach.

What we should say is, we'll investigate and find the truth.

And then if that truth compels, we should proceed with that.

GLENN: I agree.

CHRIS: I think the evidence of this is potentially so overwhelming. That I don't think it's possible, that the Senate doesn't actually convict.

I think it's possible, that the evidence is so overwhelming. That they may have no choice.

Now, again, let's see. Let's do the investigation. And let's see where we are.

But I think it's -- this is opening up a can of words. This is something way more substantial for the administration. Than just an inconvenience for them.

GLENN: Chris, I don't know if you know, anything about this happen.

I haven't looked into it. I haven't had time yet today. The Klamath River. They are getting rid of the four dams, on the Klamath River for the salmon. This is not the same river.
This is Washington, Oregon, California.

This is not the four dams. That they wanted to get rid of, on the Snake River. Right?

I didn't know we were trying to get rid of eight dams. I just know we were trying to get rid of four, apparently.

Do you know anything about the Klamath River Dam?

CHRIS: Well, I know a little bit. I don't know if I know enough to go into national radio.

GLENN: All right.

CHRIS: I will say this though, what you indicated is true. And also, it shows, just the insanity of the radical environmentalists who are in the middle of a drought, in the entire western United States. They think the solution is to drain the dams. They're trying to do the same thing here in Utah with the lake -- it just literally makes no sense in the middle of a drought. When water is precious, anyway, in a region where you know wars are fought over water, as the old saying goes. Yeah. Let's go drain dams. Because we know that will help. Again, it just simply makes no sense.

GLENN: Real quick, the EPA has held up major oil refinery, during the oil crisis. They're -- you know they're shutting everything down.

And they're not letting us redesign or rebuild or anything. According to the EPA.

Can Congress actually get anything done to actually relieve the American people of some of this nonsense, by themselves?

RICHARD: Well, I think there's only one avenue to do that. And that's through the appropriations process. Which you mentioned I sit on the house committee. I also sit on the Appropriations Committee.

And there's good news and bad news there. We can compel some of these things by tying it to government funding.

The bad news is, it's only a one-year solution. It's not a permanent solution. Because it's tied to language, which only funds the government for that year. So that's as long as language can apply.

And the second thing is that you run the risk of having, either the Senate or the president, veto or reject that funding mechanism, because of some of that language. And then you have to fight through the government checkout. So we're going to have some victory on those things, Glenn.

We will be able to insert language, whether it's with the EPA.

Another example, defunding 87,000 IRS agents.

I think that's one of the very first things we're going to take on. But we're going to do it through defunding again, through appropriations. And I challenge the president to shut down the government because he wants to adjust by having 87,000 IRS agents, who are going to come after any small business owner.

You don't need 87,000 agents to go after Jeff Bezos. That's clearly looking at middle-class Americans. Middle income Americans. And business owners.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

CHRIS: So I think we could have some success. I think we will have some success on some of the EPA and oil and gas businesses. The absurdity of the president shutting down domestic oil production. And then turning to the oil and gas producers, and blaming them, and talking about their greed over the price of gas. I mean, does he gaslight the American people, to the extent that he just assumes every one of them is stupid?

We know what's happened here. And I think we will have a little bit of success on that, but the challenge is you have Schumer still running the Senate. We have to work our language through him.

GLENN: I know. All right. Chris, thank you for everything you do.

Congressman Chris Stewart, and have a great Thanksgiving, sir. God bless.

CHRIS: Thank you, sir. You too.

GLENN: You bet.

RADIO

Did USAID Really Fund Chelsea Clinton’s Wedding? Here's the FACTS

As DOGE continues to expose the many, many ways our government has wasted taxpayer dollars, Glenn gives a warning: “You have to be really careful [what you believe] because we don’t want to wreck our credibility.” While the things DOGE has uncovered have been true, there are also a lot of rumors and misinformation spreading online. Glenn addresses some of those rumors, like the seemingly-unfounded claim that USAID helped fund Chelsea Clinton’s wedding through the Clinton Foundation. We must ask questions, but we can’t jump to conclusions without being sure that we have the real facts. Glenn also addresses some provably true stories of government waste, like how the Pentagon overpays for things and why Glenn supports Trump’s decision to stop minting pennies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Looking at the DOGE stuff, and I want to talk about this next hour.

We have to be really, really careful. Because I don't know about you, but when I heard that we possibly paid for Chelsea Clinton's wedding.

PAT: Yeah. Do we have that substantiated though?

GLENN: We don't. We don't.

And that's why I want to bring that up.

PAT: You have to be careful with that stuff. A ton.

STU: A lot of stuff coming out online.

And you can't quote this stuff. You have to be really, really careful.

Because we just don't want to, A, wreck our credibility.

And, you know, when we find out that it is absolutely true, that's when we can go and say, round them up!

Let's put them court.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. There's -- there's a viral chart going around that shows Chelsea Clinton got, I don't know. Something like $84 million from the foundation from the Clinton foundation.

And that 3 million of that went to her wedding.

GLENN: Okay. So I think -- I think they did get $84 million.

PAT: I think that went to the foundation, right?

GLENN: Yeah. It went to the foundation.

Got it for the whole run. For Haiti or whatever.

And, you know, we know they spent $84 million in Haiti.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Because look at the place now.

Oh, it's beautiful he has not it's beautiful.

PAT: Well, we were there, how many years after the earthquake.

And it still looked the same. As if the earthquake had just happened. You remember that?

GLENN: Oh, yeah. And the people from Haiti were saying to us, where is the money?

PAT: Where is the $10 billion? Yeah. Because that could have rebuilt. That could have rebuilt the entire country. 10 billion.

GLENN: About four times. About four times over, I think.

PAT: Yep. Yep.

GLENN: I mean, it is -- Haiti is just -- it's a sad, sad situation.

It's been ripped off by everybody in the world over and over again.

And I think the Clintons are, you know, they kind of lead the way on the -- on the charity for Haiti graft.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: But we don't know anything about that. We do know the Clinton initiative got $84 million.

But we don't know any more than that.

And, you know, honestly, if you're spending your tax dollars, I mean, that's what people have to realize.

Even if it is, you know -- even if it is -- it didn't go to Chelsea's wedding.

Which I would be surprised.

I would be shocked, if they were that bold!

PAT: Yeah.

STU: But, you know, this isn't an effective use of your money.

And people who are looking at it, and saying, well, it was only $5 million.

How much money have you paid your entire life in taxes?

Because I guarantee you, it's not going to be $5 million.

It's not! Very few people to have pay $5 million in their lifetime of taxes.

So that means, that everything that you paid. Everything that you worked for. When you work four months a year, to pay your income tax.

All of that has been wasted, your entire life.

I don't know!

I'm kind of pissed about that.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I mean, what could you have done with all of that money?

And I -- I just don't -- I don't get people who are, you know, again, like we said, I'm for aid.

I'm absolutely for aid. I'm absolutely for looking at countries, and saying, how can we help you, if it's in our interest, and that's not aid.

That would be development. But I'm not for most of the development that has been happening. I'm not interested in nation building!

You know, so, you know, even if you're for that, are you cool with it going 60 cents on every dollar? To the government officials?

Or to the charitable officials. And only 40 cents of that dollar?

I mean, I'm not happy with that. We've gotten so used to corruption, in our government, on, you know, the Pentagon spent $400 on, you know -- on a toilet seat.

We're so used to that. That we just expect it.

This is not that.

The corruption that we're finding now, is beyond imagination.

It's going to be hard for people to get their arms around, what you're actually looking at.

Because we expect a certain amount of -- unfortunately, a certain amount of corruption.

But nothing like this!

And if you're -- you know, if you are a Democrat and you're inclined, not to believe it.

Okay!

I can understand that.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, for a while.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. And say, I probably would have been skeptical, if Joe Biden -- I would have been skeptical if Joe Biden would have come in and said, we will route out all of the corruption.

I would have thought, well, no.

They're getting rid of anybody who is conservative on corruption.

That's why I'm so excited about the Pentagon because that's going to be a lot of conservative love.

You know what I mean?

So called conservative love. It's just graft and greed and cronyism.

But still, it -- it's -- we're supposed to be in love.

The left is supposed to be in love with aid.

We're supposed to be in love with death. I'm not -- I -- I am not blind to either one of those things.

But go into the Pentagon. I would love to see them take.

At you see the congressman or the senator last week, that held up a bag of bolts, and said, this is about $10 at the store?

It's $10,000, if the Pentagon buys it!

PAT: Jeez.

STU: Where is that money going?

PAT: Incredible.

GLENN: Who is getting that money?
And, you know, you would say, well, they're charging ten thousands of individuals dollars a bolt, because, you know, the aircrafts that they're building.

They're so expensive.

And they can't actually charge the price of what it takes.

No, they're charging us the price with all of the overruns.

All of the hundreds of billions of dollars in overruns.

They're charging us that as well.

So my question is: Where do those billions of dollars end up?

In just the pockets of, what? McDonnell-Douglas?

PAT: Raytheon?

GLENN: Raytheon.

PAT: Congress people?

GLENN: Right!

PAT: You know, a lot. A lot of it -- you know it's winding up in their pocketbooks. Has to be.

GLENN: And you know what really bothers me is, these people are taking our tax dollars. And then they're giving that money, through lobbying. To our politicians. Who are allowing the corruption to happen.

So it's just this giant circular -- I'm just going to leave it at that.

This giant circular, something.

I don't -- I don't know what happens in circles.

But there it is.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: By the way, the other thing that Trump said, first of all, he's getting rid of pennies.

Did you hear that?

Executive order. Thank you!

I mean, you know, takes 3 cents to create 1 cent. What are we doing?

That's the dims thing I've ever, ever seen.

PAT: Yes. Especially when nobody wants pennies. Nobody uses them.

If you ever use cash. And you get pennies back.

You just put it in their take a penny jar, usually.

And don't even want it messing up your pocket.

GLENN: Right. I mean, it's absolutely worthless to the American people.

And it's costing our government 3 cents to make 1 cent.

Finally, the president is -- I mean, all of this stuff is so common sense. That's what's so frustrating about all of this.

Should had it should have been done long ago.

But for some reason, we just couldn't. We've known about the penny thing.

I've known about the penny thing, when it was a cent and a half to make a penny.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: That long ago.

PAT: He's -- he's leaving no stone unturned right now.

You've got the penny thing.

And then he just did the straw situation.

Did you see that?

We're going back to plastic straws.

He signed an executive order, or he is going to. Ending the ridiculous Biden push for paper straws, which don't work. Back to plastic, he tweeted out! Or truthed out.

GLENN: I love that.

PAT: It's just -- it's amazing the things that he's covering, at a breathtaking speed.

GLENN: I love that.

Do we have the CBS anchor trying to explain how Trump's approval ratings are going through the roof? Listen to this. Cut ten.

VOICE: What's driving this?

VOICE: I will keep it simple, Margaret. He's doing what he said he would do in the campaign. There's political value in that. In fact, 70 percent of people say he's doing what he's promised. That's whether they approve of him or not.

Now, there's another part of this that continues over from the campaign. There are words he was described as being tough. Being energetic.

And he still is today, in big majority numbers.

So as people take a look in these first few weeks, there's been a lot of activity. They're getting that general sense of governance. And that's being reflected in these early numbers.

VOICE: So that's perception. What about the actual policies?

VOICE: Well, let's start with the ones that are popular.

Again, these echo the ones we see in the campaign. The idea of deporting those in the country illegally continues to be popular. We saw that in the campaign.

GLENN: 59 percent.

VOICE: Sending troops to the US-Mexico border. Again, majority --

GLENN: 64 percent.

PAT: Wow! Wow.

GLENN: I mean, it is -- and they're just baffled by it. I don't understand. No. Really.

TV

Trump Border Czar WARNS Cartels, Illegal Immigrants, & Anti-ICE Politicians

White House Border Czar Tom Homan joins Glenn with the latest updates to the illegal immigration crackdown. He lays out why he took the job, how the deportations are going so far, and what’s coming next. Homan also explains why he’s “very concerned” about violent threats from the cartels. But he has a warning for them: “If they harm a SINGLE Border Patrol agent or soldier, President Trump is gonna rain hell down on them and I think he'll wipe them off the face of the earth." Plus, Homan has a message for anti-ICE politicians in sanctuary cities: "[Pam Bondi] will have NO PROBLEM if I recommend prosecution of a politician for impeding or knowingly harboring and concealing an illegal alien.”

Watch the FULL episode of Glenn TV HERE

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

From Reality TV to Deadly Rescue Missions | Diesel Brothers | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 244

When the State or National Guard can’t complete a rescue mission, it’s time to call the Diesel Brothers. “Heavy D” (‪@HeavyDSparks‬) and “Diesel Dave” rose to fame thanks in part to a prank that landed them on Jay Leno's show and then the Discovery Channel. But now they've found a much more meaningful passion. The Diesel Brothers have since carried out multiple rescue missions to recover crashed airplanes and missing persons, making use of their most impressive vehicles. These include Heavy D’s Black Hawk helicopter, which they say leaves the FAA asking, “Who are these guys and how do we know they aren’t going to kill themselves?” In a conversation about trucks, fame, and “rolling coal,” the two men outline their ongoing legal battles with an environmental group in Utah and give their take on the rise of electric vehicles. Heavy D, who has met the president himself, tells Glenn that “Trump has an authentic admiration of Glenn” because he is “legit,” and the three men applaud Trump for not taking on a “God complex” after the assassination attempt. In the end, the two put Glenn in the hot seat, asking him to name the one person — alive or deceased — that he would most want to have dinner with.

RADIO

How Trump’s 15% Tax Plan Could UNLEASH American Prosperity

President Trump is working on a plan to lower corporate tax rates to 15% for companies that make their products in the United States. Informal Trump economic advisor and Committee to Unleash Prosperity co-founder Stephen Moore joins Glenn to make the case that this plan, coupled with tariffs, could unleash American prosperity. But Trump might not stop there. Moore addresses whether Trump could get a “15/15/15” tax plan past Congress, meaning 15% corporate tax, 15% income tax, and 15% tariffs. “If he could pull that off,” Glenn argues, “it’s a new world!”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Stephen Moore, welcome to the program. Committee to unleash prosperity cofounder.

If I remember right, you've been with me against tariffs for a long time. Have you changed on this?

Because I think I'm changing, Steven.

STEPHEN: Hey, Glenn, good to be with you. Also, I'm an informal adviser to Trump on the economy. And, by the way, he knows that I'm not a huge fan of tariffs. But you set this up very well.

You know, a tariff is basically a consumption tax.

GLENN: Oh, good. Correct.

STEPHEN: It's something you and I talked about over the years is the national retail sales tax replace the income tax. Well, if you did that, you would essentially be taxing everything when it came in to the country.

Because it will be consumed here. And so what Trump is basically talking about, which I think is a really interesting idea, is not necessarily getting rid of the income tax. But lowering all the tax rates to 15 percent. You know, right now, you know, it's 30 percent or more. And then imposing that --

GLENN: I was going to say, what kind of world do you live in? I would celebrate with 30 percent income tax.

STEPHEN: Yeah. Right. If you're really rich, you could be uphill by 40 percent.

So I kind of like that idea. So I go with Trump the other day.

To say, the 15-15-15. So how about we have a 15 percent corporate rate, a 15 percent individual income tax rate, a 15 percent universal tariff, 15 percent capital gains/dividends.

Can you imagine that?

GLENN: It would unleash prosperity like nobody's business.

STEPHEN: Prosperity. Yeah. It would.

No country could compete with us here. Let me give you an example, you know, Glenn, that I think everybody can relate to because you have listeners all over the country.

You know what states in the United States have the biggest in migration right now?

GLENN: Yeah. Florida and Texas.

STEPHEN: And Tennessee.

GLENN: Okay.

STEPHEN: Now, for a bonus question, I know you're supposed to be asking questions. What you know those states have in common?

GLENN: No income tax.

STEPHEN: No income tax. So businesses, capital, and jobs, migrate to the places with low tax rates. So if we have the lowest tax rates in the world, on top of the greatest workers in the world, the freest country in the world, I mean, we would just blow away the rest of the world. And Trump is very -- I don't know. You know, it will be tough to get that done. But that's where he wants to end up.

GLENN: I tell you, that's the problem we've always had with tariffs, for me at least. It's just a tax, and you're already taxing us.

STEPHEN: Right.

GLENN: Well, then buy American, and then you don't to have pay for that tariff.

But I'm are already being taxed a pretty high rate.

Please, I don't want to pay more for things that maybe I want. Or maybe they're cheaper.

Because they're coming from China.

STEPHEN: Yeah. This is a good conversation for people who have this.

Trump said different things at different times.

In my conversation in the last week. It basically was saying, he put it very simply.

He said this to some of the speeches too. What he wants to do is charge a 15 percent tax on things that are made in China. Or, you know, Europe.

GLENN: Right.

STEPHEN: Or Japan.

But if it's made in Michigan or Ohio or Pennsylvania or California or Maine, he wants to have the rate 15 percent.

I'm like, well, I can live with that, Mr. President. I think that's a pretty cool idea.

I mean, I'm an America First guy. I'd rather have people buy things that are made in America, all things equal.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait.

You just said, if it's from China, you're paying 15 percent tariff. But if it's made in America, you say you pay an extra 15 percent. That's zero!

STEPHEN: No. What I'm saying, you're going to pay a 15 percent income tax, if it's made in the United States. In other words, the profits you make on selling something. Let's say you make widgets. And you make a profit in making widget does in Pennsylvania and wherever it is.

GLENN: Right. But to buy that product, if it's made in America, you don't pay any tax!

STEPHEN: No, no, no.

In other words, what you're trying to do is skew the table a little bit more in favor of buying things in the US versus other countries. By the way, that's what other countries do to us.

GLENN: I know. I know.

I have to tell you, I think the way the president is handling really, everything.

I've never seen anything like this, Steven. Have you?

STEPHEN: Me either. No. I've been in the game as long as you have. I have arrived in Washington in the Reagan years.

So I still think Reagan was one of our greatest presidents. I still think Trump, it's interesting. Because whenever we have meetings, with Trump, he's always talking about -- he's very kind of envious. He wants to go down in history, as one of the great presidents like Reagan. To role model that out.

So I think, I think we're -- and he also will understand, Glenn, he's only got really about two years to get it done.

And then we will -- he's a lame duck. He can't run for reelection again. He understands that. That's why he races out of the gate like sectator out of the office.

I think I said on your show a month ago, or so. Buckle up. Because this will be a hell of a ride. And it's only been three weeks.

GLENN: I know. Seven days. And I think he's accomplished more than most presidents have done in their entire term.

STEPHEN: Definitely. Definitely.

GLENN: And I don't think it will stop any time soon.

Because I said, you've got only two years to do this. He said, Glenn, two years. I've got 100 days.

If I don't have all this done in 100 days. It's not going to get done.

STEPHEN: There's a lot of truth to that. There's a lot of truth to that. That's why we have to get this tax cut done.

That's one of my highest priorities is making sure we make the tax cuts that we cashed in 2017 permanent. I want to make sure your listeners understand something.

I think most of your listeners know this. But a lot of people are not aware of it.

If Congress does nothing, everybody's taxes are going to go up next year. Everyone's. You know, we don't want Donald Trump raising taxes on people.

And so we have to get this tax cut done. I like his idea of no tax on tips. I like the idea of no tax on overtime. We'll add some other things on it.

But these are all oriented toward making an American economy great again. And it's going to work!

GLENN: So why aren't we going for 15-15-15, over doing -- you know, making this permanent, why not in just one move try to go for the whole enchilada?

STEPHEN: Well, stick around, my friend, it may happen. We'll see how it turns out.

At the very minimum, we have to make those taxes permanent.

But we may go further than that. We may go with 15-15-15, and that would be a remarkable accomplishment.

And then we will produce American energy. He's already slashed the regulation clause.

So it will make America incredibly competitive.

And the jobs are going to flow here, not in China and Japan, and all the other countries. It's a beautiful thing.

GLENN: We not only have to grow our bottom line, grow our way out of this. Which we can. But we also must cut. It will take I think 65 years at this point. At the speed of DOGE.

And they're cutting like crazy, to actually balance the budget.

Are we going to be able to cut enough?

Is there an appetite for that?

STEPHEN: Well, as I said, I've been in this town for 40 years. And Republicans talk a good game. But when it comes right down to it, we like to spend money just as much as Democrats do. I think, how about what Trump is talking about. About getting rid of all this crazy foreign aid programs. I mean, the left is hyperventilating about this. But those programs never work.

They don't -- they don't need any development. They just create a huge international bureaucracy of people who hate America.

I mean, this guy has -- has a spine of steel. I mean, he really does.

GLENN: He really does. He really does.

Steven, thank you so much. God bless you.

Keep us informed, will you?

STEPHEN: Check in more often.

GLENN: Yeah. I will. I will.

Thank you very much.

Stephen Moore, Committee to Unleash Prosperity.

I have to tell you, I think if he did 15-15-15, it would explode.

PAT: Which is 15 percent flat income tax. Fifteen percent corporate?

GLENN: Corporate. And 15 percent tariff.

PAT: Tariff. Wow.

GLENN: So you don't make it in America. You know how many people -- what's the company that bought Ford and Jaguar and everything?

Stellantis?

Can't remember the name of that company.
But they're now talking about coming back to America. Because of the tariffs. They're going to make the Jeep back in Detroit. They've already moved 1500 jobs back to a factory here in America. They're going to move them also back to Detroit. To make the Jeep back in America. That's what happens.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: If you have a tariff and you have 15 percent tax! This is why -- you know, it's fascinating. This is why, when we were headed towards that global government, this is why the president and all the leaders of the West, tried to get an agreement that there would be a minimum corporate tax. Do you remember that?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And we were a part of that. A minimum corporate tax. No! No.

We're not going to play -- we're not going to hobble everybody.

If we can work it to our advantage, so we grow, why would we hobble ourselves?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And 15-15-15 would blow the world away. Blow it away.

PAT: Because far more competitive than any other industrialized nation.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

The jobs that would be created here.

You would get more money into the coffers of the United States government, because the prosperity would be so high! It would be amazing.

PAT: Yeah.

And to replace the progressive income tax with just a 15 percent flat tax. That -- that would make such a huge difference in American's lives.

GLENN: Think of just this. If we had a flat tax, think of how many dollars are wasted on IRS audits. How many -- how much time is wasted at places like H&R Block.

Your accountant. How much time you spend putting your taxes. Getting the receipts. Figuring it all out.

PAT: My gosh.

GLENN: Think of just the man-hours. Forget about the money that's being lost in preparing it! Just the man-hours.

If you had those man-hours back, what could we be doing with that money and those man-hours?

Just that is game-changing and growing the economy.

Because you have more money, to keep!

And more time to do what you want to do!

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I'm telling you, if he can do 15-15-15, if he can pull that off, it's a new world.

PAT: And Stephen Moore said, it's a possibility. That's pretty amazing!

GLENN: That is amazing. That is amazing.