RADIOFebruary 14, 2024

A DIRE WARNING for independent content creators

We have hit another Big Tech censorship mile marker. Glenn exposes the latest attempts by Facebook, Apple, AND YouTube to soft-censor conservative media during an election year. He warns that independent content creators who believe that they can rely on Big Tech platforms will soon find out the harsh truth: If they don’t fall in line with the narratives of the global elites, they will face the consequences. For political content creators on Facebook, that day has come, as it has made shadowbanning its company policy. And for those on YouTube, Glenn exposes how a shadowy “non-profit” connected to the White House may be pressuring the company to crack down on unapproved narratives.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to start with something you need to know about. You know, I feel like somebody who is just telling you the mile-markers as we go. We are hitting another mile-marker here that you really need to pay attention to. Because it is all about information.

We have been witnessing a very disturbing trend in social media lately.

The giants of social media are attempting to control the narrative and dictate what information you have access to, by punishing people like me, or perhaps people like you, for wrong think.

Now, this is a blatant assault on your freedom and my freedom of speech.

And what do you know, they've decided to do this, during an election year. I mean, what a coincidence.

So I have three updates for you. And the first one is actually a kind of win.

I shared last week, when my team discovered, that Apple had raided everything in my Apple podcast library, as explicit content.

That's over 2,000 episodes of my radio program. Which I am FCC regulated. So I can't have anything explicit on.

And also the Glenn Beck podcast.

Now, the key here is, why did Apple change the rating from clean, to explicit?

Well, my team uploads the -- the episodes to the Apple podcast platform. And they have to rate it either clean or explicit.

The vast majority of my episodes fall under the clean category. But our standards are a little higher than everyone else. Every so often, a guest on my podcast will use colorful language. They'll drop the F bomb. Occasionally. It's happened twice.

And my team, making sure that we understand our audience, have flagged that episodes as explicit. That shouldn't affect every episode. It should affect that episode. So we reached out to Apple for comment, and Apple got back to us right away, and claims this is due to four episodes, that we in the 2,000, have labeled explicit.

Now, Apple claimed, that we didn't say they were explicit. I know we did.

Apple wanted me to delete those episodes to get the label removed from all the rest of the 2000 episodes. Uh-huh.

So censorship, well, I don't know. There's people that use content settings to avoid podcasts that are entirely based around explicit content like pornography. What Apple did was group my shows with those kinds of shows to hide all of my shows from you.

We pushed back. Yesterday, we got a notification, that Apple will remove the explicit label, within a couple of business days. We've got a lot going on here. So it was a big misunderstanding, as it always is. And time and time again. And I just love the fact that they -- they will take a couple of days and correct this right away.

Now, this is called soft censorship.

And these attempts happen all the time.

Let me give you another example. Earlier this week, I got a notification, that Facebook is making shadow banning company policy.

Now, shadow banning, in case you don't know, is when a social media company allows you to post all the content that you want. But then it limits the reach that the content can hit.

So it's -- well, I call it the digital ghetto. You know, they're just rounding everybody up, that disagrees with the government. And they put them in this digital ghetto. There's a wall around it.

Well, they can speak all they want. But nobody will hear them. Unless you too, if into the get zero.

Now, this time, at least Facebook was kind enough to tell us about it.

They posted an article last week, called, our approach to political content. Now, Facebook admitted that they will shadow ban all political content.

But that's for you.

That has nothing to do with like the WEF saying, we've got to silence people. We have to make sure that people aren't misinformed with things that disagree with our policy, and our direction.

Now, Facebook argued that, quote, the people have told us, they just want to see less million content.

So we've spent the last few years, refining our approach on Facebook, to reduce the amount of political content. Including from politician accounts.

In feeds, reels, watch groups. You should join. And pages, you may like.

Okay. That's interesting. Because my team started noticing, oh, a 95 percent drop in our penetration on Facebook, about a year ago.

Which is weird. Which is weird.

But it will be better for our sanity, I guess.

I remember a time, when Facebook begged me to I didn't even their platform.

So what changed?

Well, an election year, where they're scared out of their mind.

And they have to silence anyone, that is telling you, a different opinion, than the overlords.

I would like to know what Facebook considers to be political content. Is advertising, LGBTQ issues to kids considered political?

I'll bet not. How about content on the benefits of abortion?

Is that April?

Does Joe Biden get a pass since he's the president?

Despite the fact that he's running for reelection. Or is it just the right-wing candidates and issues, that are from the right-wing that are considered political?

Don't worry. Facebook isn't banning all political content.

Instead, it's just hiding it by default.

If you want to see the political content. Then you can customize your feed preference, and turn. Back on.
Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

You can also add people like me, to your favorites list, so you can add content to your feed.

Sounds great and easy, doesn't it?

Now, my team stumbled across a new form of shadow banning, and it could be tied directly to the global censorship regime that I exposed just a few weeks ago.

Just a few weeks ago, on the TV program.
I had exposed the shadowy nonprofit targeting Glenn Beck and other conservative media.

And I laid out how a small British nonprofit, with only one employee, has become one of the White House's go-to censorship experts.

I'm going to tell you what we found just happening, and how it ties to what I said was coming two weeks ago.

And how all of this affects you.

Because it is going to affect what you perceive.

Because it's just taking things away. It's not necessarily adding. It's just kind of falling off. And you don't see it anymore.

This is a way to control the way people think.

Okay. So in the episode I did a couple of weeks ago, I introduced you to the center of countering digital hate.

When I say they are the ones behind the infamous dozen report that the White House peddled back in 2021.

That report targeted so-called COVID disinformation. All the things that we now know are true.

Well, they now have a new report out, about climate disinformation. But not the kind that you may be thinking of. Now, when I say they, I really mean him.

Because there's only one employee, at this nonprofit. Earlier this year, British outlet called the independent, highlighted this new report. Apparently, it's the center for countering digital hate. And they are furious that social media companies, are allowing a new form of climate change denial to spread to their platforms.

It's no longer good enough for companies like YouTube to censor people who believe in climate change. Or believe it is fake.

They've been doing that. But that's not enough. That's the old kind of denial. The center for digital hate defines the new denial as anything that claims global heating is beneficial or harmless. That global elite's climate solution may not work.

Or that so-called climate science or the climate movement can't be trusted.

Now, I'm not sure how questioning the global elites is a form of digital hate. But apparently now it is.

Because that guy at the CCDH has spoken. And the White House will partner with him.

So now, people like me, who have never denied the climate is changing.

In fact, I say, the climate has always been changing. We're considered spreaders of hateful disinformation because we think, things like reimagining farming, might kill millions of people.

You know, like it has every time, it has ever been attempted in the past.

Now, the CCDH, made sure to specifically call me or Blaze TV out as spreaders of this new denial.

Now, this isn't just pointing the finger. This is a threat. Because the CCDH then demanded that YouTube demonetize any content that spreads new denial.

But, remember, this is one of the White House's go-to experts on disinformation.

It's a good thing the White House doesn't have a track record of telling social media companies who to censor. Right?

Oh, wait. We have just learned the Twitter files, that's exactly what they have been doing for years. So let's take a step back here.

Because it's more important for you to understand, what the CCDH's demand actually means.

Stu, do I still have your attention? Because this is really complex. But I just want to make sure that people understand it.

Can you -- I don't know. Do something that would bring in, the people that don't have a real big attention span.

STU: Taylor Swift. She's in the luxury box, watching the radio today. Look at her.

GLENN: Thank you.

So here it is. They want YouTube to limit the monetization of any content that goes against the global elite's narrative. And if I in general, are against the global elite's narrative, then you wouldn't want any of my content monetized.

The truth is, it's not really cheap or easy to produce content and maintain a team to keep all of the trainings running on time.

A subscription model is the best way for us to function.

And that's something that we pioneered here at the Blaze.

I knew working at CNN, and then at Fox. We could not rely on other companies. We couldn't rely on advertisers.

We had to rely on you.

Now, we take advertisers, because it's wildly expensive to do what we do.

But in the end, we'll continue to do it, as long as you are a subscriber.

That's why I ask you, all the time. Please, subscribe to TheBlaze.

Because I know what is coming.

In fact, it's already here.

We only answer to you.

So this -- I'm going to show you some of this. So you understand what it is.

But anyone who is -- is relying on making their money, from social media, is going to be over soon.

So they want you to limit the monetization of anybody that is going against the globally elite's narratives.

It is important for a people to be able to reach new viewers through platforms like YouTube and Facebook. Otherwise, we're only speaking to the choir.

How do you offset the cost for content, when you're putting it out for free?

Well, YouTube shares the revenue, that they take to run ads in our content.

The better the video does. The more ad are sold. The more money both YouTube and let's say somebody like me, makes.

That's how it works.

But late last week, one of my producers was looking through the YouTube analytics on a podcast with the rancher Shad Sullivan. The episode is called millions will starve.

Rancher sounds the alarm on the global food Jeopardy.

It was performing extraordinarily well. In just, I think a day, it had 320,000 views.

It had amassed, a watch time of over 88,000 hours.

Okay. That, if we cared about the money, should have made tons of money for TheBlaze, or for the Glenn Beck Program.

The -- the podcast had 14 YouTube ad breaks.

So they were selling advertisers. But we weren't making any money.

So we don't know what happened to the money, there.

We were searching for a potential problem.

We found a few things. First of all, YouTube had limited ads on this video. Which can take it to, you know, every thousand people, or I don't even know the numbers.

But it -- you get a certain amount for every -- everybody who is watching all of this. And then you split it.

But if you are banned in any way, then that number goes down.

Well, YouTube had limited ads on this video.

They claimed that it had firearms-related content. That wasn't friendly to some advertisers. We double-checked. We -- we didn't talk at all, about firearms. Nothing would have triggered this restriction.

Oh. But there is a catch to this.

And we did. And we made something more powerful than mainstream media.

Now, they want mainstream media and control of the internet, and they've been doing this, with the government, as we knew from the Twitter files.

They've been doing it in league with the government. Shadow banning people.

Well, we're about to go into shadow banning hell.

I called it a digital ghetto. I got in trouble for that.

Because they say, you just hate Jewish people. By saying, no. There's such a thing as a ghetto. The Germans did it. Now you can do it digitally and shut people up, and put them behind a digital wall, that you don't want to be heard.

Well, there's a few things that are going on.

First of all, the shadow banning has now become official policy of Facebook.

And they're a private company, they can decide to do this.

But they're saying, no politics anymore.

I'll be interested to see if that applies to ABC News. I'll be interested to see if they are shadow banning everybody consistently.

If so, then we're all in the same boat.

I think it's a mistake. But we're all in the same boat. Now, there's something else that I told you about two weeks ago.

It's called the CCDH. It's the Center for Digital Hate. In America, it started over in England. And then this guy moved it over to are America. So they have an office here. And it is now the go-to NGO for the White House, on what digital hate is. And how to stop it.

It has quite an -- an incredible roster of people behind it.

It has one employee.

Hmm. That doesn't seem like they could get a lot done with one employee. But, boy, are they doing it.

Okay. So I told you, that we are doing an episode, a couple of weeks ago.

About the -- what's happening to our farmers, and our -- and our meat. We told you, that this is a real problem.

What is -- what is being done in our -- in our ranching and food industry, is going to make a lot of people very, very hungry.

It was called, let's see, I can't remember. Where is the name.

But they were talking about a couple of weeks ago. This group, talking to the White House, about banning people that deny problems with global warming. Also, anybody who is denying the elite solutions. Et cetera, et cetera.

So we have never denied climate change. But they are targeting the spreaders of, quote, hateful disinformation. And that -- we are labeled that, because we believe reimagining farming is a very bad deal.

This is what they call the new denial.

Now, they're not just pointing the finger. They're making a threat. The CCDH demanded that YouTube demonetize any content that spreads new denial.

One of the White House experts remember, on disinformation, is this little -- this one guy, in Washington. So by limiting the amount of monetization, that content can make, it goes against the global elite's narrative. They say they're all for free speech, except for hate. But that hate is now anything that disagrees with them.

It is not cheap to produce content. And I'm telling you, right now, we developed this model of subscriptions for our content.

It is why you have noticed, maybe, TheBlaze has just doubled and quadrupled down, on all of our stories and everything else.

I have two huge breaking news from Blaze investigations today.

These things take weeks to do. They take lawyers and everything else lots of research and man-hours, go into these things.

We're doubling down on that, because we need you to understand, A, we do our homework. We know what we're talking about. We are trustworthy.

B, we need you to subscribe. And we will give you the information, you need.

So this -- this rancher, millions will starve. Rancher sounds the alarm. On global food agencies. It has tons and tons of views.

And they said, it was -- it was shadow banned and demonetized, because it was said by YouTube, that it had firearms-related content.

We went back. We looked at the texts. There was nothing. However, there was a read in there, for Byrna, which makes non-lethal firearm alternatives.

That's nothing that violates YouTube ad policy.

Byrna is, in fact, a verified advertiser on YouTube.

So we reached out to YouTube, to get the limited ads rating removed.

We're waiting for a response on this.

However, what happened to the revenue, that they sold?

Because we didn't make any of it. Now, this is the way. And this is why we are bringing this to you. And to all content creators.

If you rely on YouTube, Google, Facebook.

Any of those things.

That revenue is soon going to be gone.

According to the independent, the CCDH.

The Center for Digital Hate, uses an AI tool to discover YouTube has allegedly made up to $13.4 million in revenue, on videos that espouse new types of climate crisis denial. Remember, that's just a video that disagrees with the elites.

In the response, CCDH demanded that YouTube and other social media platforms update their policies to remove the financial incentive for content, that falls under this umbrella of new denial.

If you limit the ability to monetize, you also limit the content's ability to reach a broader audience, and you also limit the new content, because people can't afford to do it.

So does my podcast, with Rancher Shad Sullivan fall under this umbrella?

Yeah. Because in that episode, Shad told us very clearly, what the global elites are doing. They're waging a war on beef, in the name of saving the climate. And their solutions will cause millions to starve.

Now, how many millions of viewers could we have received, and reached, had YouTube not attempted to put a ceiling on all of our views?

So I guess guilty as charged. I'm a super spreader of the new denial, I guess.

And I imagine, anyone who told Stalin or Mao, that they're reimagining of farming would kill millions, was also branded a denier. Or how about anybody who spoke out about Sri Lanka's reimagining. Remember that?

The World Economic Forum held that up as the model for the future. Until 2022. When their model led to a massive food crisis that is still going on.

Are all the Irish farmers who have been warning, that they will have to slaughter their cows, to meet climate goals, disinformation spreaders?

What about the people who point out, while elites want to limit your beef consumption, Mark Zuckerberg is feeding his cows macadamia nuts and beer, so not only can the elites have their beef, you have a cricket patty. Or maybe lab-grown meat.

But they get beef that has been raised on beer and macadamia nuts.

Shadow banning. This is the new shadow banning. And its outcome is the same. Wrong think.

It's punished. This isn't the free market. They will pile these ideas on, one after another. I am telling you, TheBlaze is fine right now, because we built an entirely different model.

This is the time that I built TheBlaze for. We started in 2011. When Netflix and even Amazon wasn't streaming video. We were the first to stream a network.

And it was insane to do it. And I almost went broke doing it.

But it was the right thing to do. And it's the right thing to put all of our eggs in one basket. And that is you.

But you are going to have to start searching. I've told you this in the last year. All of a sudden, you're just -- unless you're looking for it. You won't notice that you're getting less and less from people like me.

So you have to seek us out.

We would really appreciate, we hope that you understand, we're on a mission. We're not here to make money.

We're on a mission.

We're on a mission to tell you the truth. Keep you informed. And show you the mile-markers. We just went through a very frightening mile-marker, this week, on shadow banning.

If you don't know the mile-marker, you're not going to know where you are. And where you are, is heading deeper and deeper into a place where your navigation system is being fiddled with.

I urge you, if you are not a member of TheBlaze, please support us.

Join us, at BlazeTV.com.

Use the -- the promo code free speech.

And you can get $30 off, of your subscription. That includes everything Blaze media is doing now.

Not only in video content, and opinion content.

But also, there are two big stories, that I want to get to.

The -- TheBlaze has just investigated how many people actually died of COVID-19. In the Michigan long-term care facilities. That's a breaking story.

Also, Capitol Police, we've just found. And we are showing you now, footage that has never been seen before.

Capitol Police diverted all of the CCTV cameras away from the DNC pipe bomb investigation. Except one.

And we will show you that video, that has been like pulling teeth to get it. In just a few. Stand by.

Biden FAILED to do THIS While Calling Out Violent College Protests

President Biden spoke quickly to the press about the pro-Palestine protests that have taken over college campuses. But while Biden covered the basics — how Americans have a right to protest, but not protest violently, how antisemitism is bad, and how the rule of law should be upheld — did he go far enough? Glenn and Stu don’t believe so. Biden had an opportunity to make a real impact, but instead, he said enough to save his own skin and satisfy some supporters…and he also threw in a few lines to pander to the violent mobs...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Can we pull one of these?

BIDEN: Must be upheld. We're not an authoritarian nation. Where we silence people and squash dissent. The American people are heard. In fact, peaceful protest is the best tradition of how Americans respond to conflict issues. But -- but neither are we a lawless country. We are a civil society, and order must prevail.

Throughout our history, we have often faced moments like this, because we are a big, diverse, free thinking and freedom-loving nation. In moments like this, there are always those who rush in to score political points. But this isn't a moment for politics. It's a moment for clarity. So let me be clear: Peaceful protests in America, violent protest is not protected. Peaceful protest is.

It's against the law, when violence occurs. Destroying property is not a peaceful protest. It's against the law. Vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and ground school. None of this is a peaceful protest.

Threatening people, intimidating people, instilling fear in people is not peaceful protest. It's against the law.

Dissent is essential to democracy. But dissent must never lead to disorder or to deny the rights of others so students can finish the semester and their college education.

Look, it's a basically a matter of fairness. It's a matter of what is right.

Does the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos.

People have the right to get an education. The right to get a degree.

The right to walk across the campus safely without fear of being attacked.

Let's be clear about this as well: There should be no place in any campus, no place in America, for anti-Semitism or threats of violence against Jewish students.

There is no place for hate speech, or violence of any kind. Whether it's anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, or discrimination against Arab-Americans or Palestinian Americans. It's simply wrong. There's no place for racism in America. It's all wrong.

It's un-American.

I understand people have strong feelings and deep convictions, and in America, we respect the right and protect the right for them to express that. But it doesn't mean anything goes. It needs to be done without violence, without destruction. Without hate. And within the law.

You know, make no mistake, as president I will always defend free speech, I will always be just as a strong on standing up for freedom of the law. That's my responsibility to you, the American people. My obligation to the Constitution.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

BIDEN: Thank you very much.
GLENN: Okay. So there you go. You have Joe Biden doing --

STU: You want to take questions? He might be taking a question soon.

VOICE: Have the protests forced you to reconsider any of the policies with regards to the region?
BIDEN: No.

GLENN: And he walks away.

VOICE: Mr. President, do you think the National Guard should intervene?

BIDEN: No.

GLENN: He's walking away, and the door is closing behind him.

STU: But he's still answering them. No. No.

GLENN: He's just in a -- no. In the hallway. He's in his bedroom. No.

He looks at his wife, she says no. I know. What's happening.

STU: What did you make of that? It was pretty Milquetoast, boring. Not much.

We were talking about this off the air, that he had an actual opportunity here, if he wanted to win over a good chunk of the country, while risking his far left flank, of kind of having the clichéd Sister Souljah moment, who is really harsh against these people are doing what they're doing.

STU: He did not do that. It may have been what he was trying to do. He's seemingly incapable of giving a speech of any value.

That was a -- that was a -- just a -- hey.

GLENN: I think it's enough to satisfy many supporters. We're also at --

STU: What kind of supporters. Like, what group is he targeting that? Like a liberal, maybe Jewish voter?

GLENN: Yeah. And not really.

I think he's kind of pissed off the Jews when he's like, and no place for anti-Semitism.

Or people wanted to hurt Hamas. And Palestinians. And Muslims. And those who are in the Mickey Mouse Club.

STU: Right.

GLENN: The ones who have been raped by the Disney corporation. Which we're totally fine with.

You know, I -- I don't think he -- he reached out to -- to those supporters. But I think he did enough for maybe the average person who is a Democrat. And wants him tolerance the right thing.

What -- okay.

STU: He said, no violence.

He said protests are okay. But no violence. And such. And there's some group, he connects with that. There was a chance for him to really set this issue. Maybe make it a strength, and not a weakness. And he did not do that there. That was -- he could have made a moment of like, look.

These people on these campuses are -- basically, calling them revolting. Passion. Some sort of anger toward the people who are calling for the genocide of Jews. There's none of that. Well, to make sure people can get to classes. You know, everyone has a right to get a degree. Which, by the way, they don't have a right to.

But all of that being said, it wasn't the worst thing I've ever seen out of his mouth.

At least he didn't have red villain lighting behind him.

GLENN: Well, you know what is great though?

He doesn't need that anymore.

STU: We looked into his character.

It's funny too, he's -- from a dramatic standpoint, you couldn't put Joe Biden in like a dramatic movie. Because he's so bad at these speeches.

Even if he says something evil, you're just like, oh, God. This sucks.

GLENN: I think that we should bring the guillotine back. And we should take all bankers. And we should cut their heads off.

STU: Right. They're so -- there's no emotion.

You go back to the Star Wars, like, you know, this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause speech.

You need to be -- you can't put him in a movie. Everyone would be like, wait. What?

Is he talking about hamburgers? What is he talking?

GLENN: And the rebels are taking our bases, and we must stop for the empire!

STU: Right.

Yeah.

GLENN: And taking -- and we --

STU: Cough three times in the middle of a sentence.

GLENN: My uncle was in a spaceship once. He was flanked by aliens.

STU: And we -- isn't it just -- can we at least agree with this. Democrats, Republicans, everybody across the aisle. This is embarrassing. Can we at least just agree on that point. You can still say his policies are better or whatever. People around him. Making the policies, have a better idea, running the country.

Aren't you just embarrassed by this, day after day after take.

It is utterly depressing. That the country that has led the world out of the lack of Silicon Valleyization has this dolt running it.

It's so pathetic. In every way.

GLENN: So you are -- you're -- you're drawing a lot more out of this speech than I did.

I don't think it was bad. I don't think it was good.

But I don't think -- that's not going to make any impact. One way or another.

STU: I don't know that we disagree. I think he had an opportunity for impact, which he did not take. He could have made it worse. I don't think he did it that. I just think he's such an uninspiring figure. And I'm embarrassed when we're led by somebody like that. When I said led, it's definitely in air quotes there. I don't know the president should be viewed this way. But the way we view the president. He just sucks. It's maybe not even deeper than that.

He just sucks at that. He's not good at thing he does. The job he does, he's incapable of doing.

And that's a little bit frustrating for a world superpower.

GLENN: Yes. Again, now I think you're going too soft.

He doesn't -- he's not just incapable of doing it. The guy is a box of matches, in a fireworks factory.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's constantly striking himself.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: What happened?

What happened?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: He's constantly setting everything on firepower.

STU: Yeah. But I don't think -- that speech didn't strike me as, hey. Keep going protesters. It wasn't that.

GLENN: No. Which again, if he was some ideological maniac, maybe he would have gone that way.

Elizabeth Warren would have done that. Elizabeth wash would have been like, burn these things to the ground.

Probably. I think. He didn't quite do that.

He went out there, with the idea of, people are criticizing me for not saying anything.

I have to say something. I can say, hey, free speech is good. Don't break the law everybody.

But step back, and probably at this point, what is it? 10:00 a.m. dinner.

And then the day is over. That's what it felt like. And that's the way it feels like all the time with this guy, even when he's doing things that are viscerally angry about -- I mean, he's overcoming the entire system of government with things like the student loan plan. And he does it the same way.

He looks as boring and terrible and awful and coughing in the million dollars of sentences. That he does every other speech.

And, you know, watching him.

It's funny too.

Because he's obviously been told. Hey, if you can avoid coughing in the middle of a sentence.

Can you do that?

Multiple times, he went to cough.

He catches himself. And his hand stays a foot away from. He brings it up.

He starts to cough.

He realizes, he's not supposed to do it.

He doesn't have to cough. He's doing it as a tick. I don't know what he's doing -- and he also does this little scratch his face thing in the million dollars. Jews shouldn't be so murdered all the time.

GLENN: You're making fun of --

STU: Whatever the hell he was saying. I don't know. I just feel like it's an embarrassment from beginning to end. I'm sorry, you didn't feel that way. I'm sorry you like President Biden and you will vote for him. That's not how I feel. And I have to express it. As he said, free speech is important.

REPUBLICANS Just Passed a HATE SPEECH Bill Under the Guise of “Antisemitism”

The House of Representatives just passed a bill to combat “antisemitism” with the majority of both parties on board. But there’s one big problem with the bill: It’s not an “antisemitism” bill, Glenn says. It’s a hate speech bill. Glenn explains why, although he’s been accused of defending Jews TOO MUCH, he’s “dead set against” this bill: “The only one who can remove the hate in someone's heart is God. Government can't fix human hearts.” Glenn also explains why constitutionalists must defend the pro-Palestinian protesters’ right to free speech — not violence — no matter how despicable it is.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The House of Representatives passed a major anti-Semitism bill on Wednesday. Which would crack down on anti-Semitism on college campuses, as protests raged nationwide. So you're now not saying that this is going to be for everybody. This is just through the Department of Education.

Legislation was opposed by 21 Republicans and 70 Democrats. The legislation seeks to make the Department of Education adopt the international Holocaust remembrance alliances. Definition of anti-Semitism, when enforcing the 1964 Civil Rights Act on college campuses. Now, I had to look it up. What is the international Holocaust remembrance alliances definition of anti-Semitism?

Well, they define anti-Semitism as, and I'm quoting. A certain perception of Jews. Which may be expressed as hatred towards Jews.

It also defines it as a heretical and physical manifestation of anti-Semitism, and directed towards your or non-Jewish individuals, and/or their property.

Towards the Jewish community, institutions, and religious facilities.

Examples of anti-Semitism include calling for the harming of the Jewish people, in the name of racial or extremist view of religion. And accusing Jewish people of inventing and/or exaggerating the Holocaust. The combat, anti-Semitism movement hailed the passage as a momentous achievement. And said, works remains to be done to get it through the Senate and President Joe Biden's desk. While we celebrate this milestone. Our work is far from over. We now need to urgently call upon Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to prioritize the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act. Okay.

So there are the 20 Republicans in the House, that stood up. Florida representative, Matt Gaetz, opposed the bill. He said, this is a hate speech bill.

Anti-Semitism is wrong. But the legislation is written without regard for the Constitution, common sense, or even common understanding of the meaning of the words. If this bill would pass, the gospel itself would meet the definition of anti-Semitism under the terms of this bill. Democratic lawmakers including hoist minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries has also called for the passage of the bill. The countering anti-terrorism act. Or anti-Semitism act. The bill would combat anti-Semitism through the appointment of a new presidential adviser, that would be charged with implementing the White House's coordinated strategy in dealing with anti-Semitism.

What could possibly go wrong here?

The effort to crush anti-Semitism and hatred in any form, is not a democratic or Republican issue. It's an American issue that must be addressed in a bipartisan manner with a fierce urgency of now! Because after all, gang, say it with me. We've got to do something.

Okay. You know, when I hear people say, the Jews killed Jesus. Or those dirty Jews run the world.

Or those Jews are responsible for everything bad. Or you're just saying things because you have a Zionist master. I think to myself, you're a bloody idiot.

You have no clue, as to what is really happening in the world.

You have no clue. Are there some Jewish people, and top of corporations, or top of whatever?

Yeah. Yeah. There are. Are there very successful Jews that happen to be bankers?

Yeah. But, you know what, there's also very successful bankers that are Catholics and Mormons. And Lutherans, and Methodists. And dare I say it, atheists.

Yeah, but it's the Jews that are the problem.

You're an idiot. You shouldn't run around saying these things. But I kind of actually like it, when you do.

Because I know exactly who you are. Oh. Here's a guy who is so stupid, he can't tie his own shoes. Or he's just a massive racist.

Kids, stay away from him. You shouldn't run around saying, because it's false, it's rude. It's stupid.

All of the above. And we're trying to create a society here. The proper response to this act is to not post memes of long-nosed Jews, wrapping their tentacles around a US flag. It doesn't mean you're right about how the Jews are. Or vindicated for noticing that Zionists are the reason for everything bad, that it's ever happened.

You can say those things. You can say those things. Because our Constitution guarantees it.

You know how I feel about anti-Semitism.

You know how I feel about the Holocaust. And the return of the Holocaust. I've been warning about it.

I've been trying to prepare you for this time. I've prepared my family for this time. Hard choices are going to come soon.

They already are. This one doesn't seem hard. What have I always said?

The Constitution must rule. The Constitution must be our set of principles, that we do not violate. No matter, if it cuts your way or against you.
This -- this act, you would think, that someone like me, that is very supportive of the Jews in Israel, would be all for.

I am dead set against this.

And you should be too. Something can be legally permissible, and morally repulsive at the same time.

Speech needs to be protected. Not the stuff we all agree on. But the stuff we don't agree on.

The only speech that needs protection is the speech that a lot of people, the majority find absolutely abhorrent.

Congress doesn't understand. You cannot legislate hatred away. You can't pass a bill. You know what happens?

All you do is you create speakeasies of hate. They go into the closet. They go into another room, where they can't be heard. And it just becomes a festering pool of hate.

That at some point, will break out.

The only one that can remove hatred from hearts is God. We can do our part.

Does that mean that jerk protesters can prevent Jewish students from entering their classroom. No. That's not speech.

In the public square, and I mean that electronically as well, those who are standing up, and, quite honestly, spreading the lies about the Palestinians in Hamas. And saying, no. They're not.

They're good. They're great. There's not a problem there. As much as it kills me to say it, I stand with them on freedom of speech only.

The people who voted for this bill, I'm sure it was well-intended. But they're misguided by human nature itself.

Governments cannot fix human hearts. They are also -- they should all be sent back to some remedial class on the principles of the Constitution of America.

The importance of freedom of speech. The importance of not rushing in to do something, because it's scary right now.

No!

No. Why is it, this Congress can only pass the things, that seemingly only hurt the strength of America. And on me cut across the Constitution.

You just took away our Fourth Amendment right for warrants.

You just took that away, you're now -- you're now just passed another bill, that is bringing people -- who have escaped Gaza. And are Palestinians. Remember, 97 percent of them, in the latest poll, hate America.

About 70 percent of them, were all for Hamas. In the 80 percentile range of supporting October 7th.

Congress, you just passed a bill, that are bringing those people in. To America!

And settling them here in America. What the hell is wrong with you?

You live in the upside down world, I don't.

I still live in the world where the -- where America is all about protected rights. It's a dark day, when only 20 -- only 20 people in Congress that are Republican will stand up against this bill. It is a dark, dark day!

Is it a GOOD IDEA to Oust Speaker Mike Johnson BEFORE the Election?

Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie have announced their plans to file a Motion to Vacate the Speaker of the House. But Democrats, under the leadership of Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, have promised to block the attempt. So, would trying to oust Speaker Mike Johnson actually HELP the Democrats? Glenn asked Rep. Thomas Massie to defend his reasoning for ousting Johnson before the election. Massie lays out the 3 “betrayals” he believes Johnson has committed and what he believes Jeffries is really plotting.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You can say a lot of things about Thomas Massie. Some of them true, some of them false.

But the one thing that is absolutely true. He stands on his own principles.

And he is unwavering. In those principles. He joins us now. From the great state of Kentucky.

Republican representative. Thomas Massie. Hello, Thomas.

TOM: How are you doing, Glenn?

GLENN: I'm very good. I'm very good. I don't understand this whole Mike Johnson thing, as Speaker of the House. I don't understand what happened to him. How we went so wrong. You know, people are saying, that, oh, this has been a scam forever. He's been, you know, a RINO and just in hiding. And now, getting rid of him at this point. What good is that going to do? Or even moving from this, because do you have the numbers to do it?

TOM: Great questions. Let me talk about how we got to where we are.

GLENN: Okay.

TOM: So Mike Johnson has betrayed us three times. Big betrayals. He did an omnibus bill, that did does and he gave the FBI a brand-new bill in that omnibus bill. And he didn't give us time to read it. He gave up on doing 12 separate bills.

That was the first betrayal. Second betrayal, FISA. This is the spying program that's been used to surveil Americans without a warrant. He cast the deciding vote on whether to have warrants or not.

And he voted against warrants.

This is against what he stood for, when he was on the judiciary committee, that I serve on. With Jim Jordan.

So something has changed there. He said he spent time in a skiff, that changed his time. Guess what, Glenn. I don't know if your listeners know this. I spent three and a half hours with him, to get him briefed by CIA, NSA, DOD, FBI, and DNI, and a FISA judge.

And in three a half hours. They didn't give us a specific example. Not one, of how spying on Americans, without a warrant, has helped them stop terrorism, to give them hypotheticals. But no example.

So that was the second betrayal. No warrants. Now, you can still be spied on.

It's reauthorized. Third betrayal. Just happened. This one we're still stinging from.

You may see the videos of every Democrat in the House voted for. For Ukraine.

Premeditated. Passed out Ukrainian flags. And basically humiliating us.

And I think speaker Johnson. If he's capable of having shame at this point. Should have been humiliated by that display as well.

I put the video of that on Twitter. And a search told me they would fine me $500 if I didn't take it down. So I reposted it.
(music)
Because look, you're not supposed to put video of what's happening on the floor. But that was video of things that were breaking decorum. Right? I was trying to provide evidence that they were in the wrong. And instead of prosecuting them, they came after me.

GLENN: Sure.

NEIL: Now, we got 8 million views on the video after I reposted it, and Speaker Johnson backed down on that fine because he knew how bad that looked. So third betrayal. Was that, you know, Ukrainian vote, where send the money overseas. We gave up all leverage on any border security.

They included some other bad stuff in it.

GLENN: Let's talk about the $4 billion to help people from the Middle East immigrate here to the United States. Including Palestinians.

Are you nuts?

NEIL: Yeah. And you see, Mike Johnson will not stand up against that.

By the way, those three bills that I just mentioned to you. You know what happened when they went to the Senate. After they passed the House. Chuck Schumer didn't even change the punctuation of any of those bills.

He must want any amendments to them. He wanted them exactly as Mike Johnson wanted them in the house.

Because those were Chuck Schumer's bills that Mike Johnson put on the floor.

He's already in the arms of the union party. The question you rightfully ask: Is why do this? Well, the people are always asking me, Thomas. Can you show us. Can you give us a list, of the good guys and the bad guys. Can you tell me who the good guys are. I have a primary. I have a vote in. I have a general election. Tell me the list. This list. You will have another list, we keep doing this. At great peril to ourselves.

The reason there's only a few of them that are willing to stand up and call this. Is because you put -- you put your reputation on the line. And people here hate transparency. They hate us for doing it. You will have the list next week. When the motion to vacate is called. Of who went to the king Jeffries. And the Uniparty to keep Mike Johnson in power.

King Jeffries, the reason he's supporting Mike Johnson, he got everything the Democrats want, without any of the blowback by having Mike Johnson as speaker. And they also -- they have some claims for other things.

They may resettle Palestinian refugees in the United States. And pay for it. They may want to make the funding for Ukraine permanent.

And before our next election, there's going to be another CR or omnibus or something.

That's coming September 30. So some people are like, well, why would you do this now, Congressman Massie?

Hasn't all the bad stuff -- hasn't Mike already done all the bad stuff to us?

Can't we just sit it out to the next election?

No. Because what Hakeem Jeffries wants more than anything is to be the speaker, and the only way he becomes the speaker is by getting the majority of the House in November.

And he knows Mike Johnson is the most uninspiring speaker we've ever had.

It will not do anything to inspire -- most likely to lose the majority under speaker Johnson.

GLENN: So what would the plan B. If you could get this to pass. I mean, well, first of all.

Let me ask you.

How many -- how many other Freedom Caucus members are standing with you?

NEIL: Well, I think before Hakeem Jeffries came out for Speaker Johnson. There were probably somewhere between 12 and 20 who didn't want to speak, but would have voted with us.

Now, I think, you may have maybe the entire Freedom Caucus. We'll see.

I know people outside of the Freedom Caucus.

Who said, if one Democrat votes to keep Mike Johnson. I ain't voting to keep him.

Because they know what that means. That means it's the Uniparty.

Now, the first vote will be on a motion to table. To try and prevent this from even coming up for appear actual vote. But people should understand, that is -- that motion to table, if they succeed. That is the only vote that will happen. And that is your list there.

Are those the people who saved Mike Johnson. Which Hakeem Jeffries. And all the Democrat leadership, said they'll do it. And some Democrat ranking file. There are some Republicans, who sit at the table. But that will be the vote. Now, if we could succeed.

Okay. If we could get past that motion to table. And maybe Hakeem Jeffries has only 40 Democrats, who are willing to walk the plank. I can imagine that will be tough for them and their primaries. Unless they're planning on retiring. Can you imagine? You've saved the Christian speaker, who is against abortion, and all this other stuff. And what's the -- anyways.

So I don't -- I'm not sure how many votes Hakeem has. But I think he helped us grow our numbers. Let's say we help them pass that vote. There is a motion to vacate. And Mike Johnson is vacating. At that point, who would we elect?

Well, we would like for Mike Johnson to avoid the scenario, I just described.

We're giving him a weekend to resign.

If he would announce that he's leaving, like John Boehner did in ten weeks.

And he won't be offended as we have votes to replace him while he's still speaker. We could go without ever not having a speaker.

We could keep doing subpoenas, and the judiciary committees. We could have hearings and pass all these wonderful old messaging bills that they love to pass. But if that doesn't happen, we'll have to elect a Speaker. We will be on the spot.

I think there are a dozen people, in the G.O.P. conference. Who have something in their entire life.

Whether it's political experience. Or prior experience nap qualifies them for the job.

Mike Johnson is a lost ball in tall weeds. I don't think there's some conspiracy, where they've got kids locked in the basement. Or something like that.

I don't think they have info on him, or blackmail material. I just don't think he can do the job.

And there's nothing in his life that prepared him for that. Let's find someone that can. Hopefully that will inspire people to keep them in the majority. Even Hakeem Jeffries bails Mike Johnson out, next week. They're not going to bail him out in January.

We know he's a lame duck speaker.

But he knows it. Let's get him out of there, before he causes any more mischief.

GLENN: What did McCarthy do better than Johnson?

NEIL: Oh, that's a great question. Under McCarthy, we did seven of the 12 bills. Okay. There's 12 separate bills. He said, we'll do an omnibus. We got seven of the 12. We got 7 of the 12 done. We had a thousand amendments. I'm not on the rules committee. We got votes on a thousand amendments to allow rank-and-file members to participate in the legislative process. When Mike Johnson came on board, he did two or three CRs. He ignored the 7 bills we had done. He made no effort to do the other five. And he said, you will get a two-part omnibus.

That was the bad thing.

The second thing, well, Kevin McCarthy could have cut a deal with the Democrats. And could have been still speaker now.

He said, I will not do it.

The position is not that important to me.

We will make a Uniparty here, and share power. So that's another thing that Mike Johnson has expressed a willingness to do.

That Kevin wouldn't do. And finally, as a part of the debt limit deal, this last summer.

Kevin extracted, from Joe Biden, and Chuck Schumer.

This is signed into law. And still law. That if you do a CR. And it goes past April 30th.

Basically, halfway through the fiscal year. There's a 1 percent cut.

And Kevin secured that from Joe Biden.

Mike onset had three choices, on the spending bills. When he came into office.

He could use the 1 percent cut option. He could have worked on the five other bills. Or he could have duplicate the omnibus.

He actually could have done the 1 percent cut option. That Kevin had secured.

And spent a lot of political capital on getting that provision in law.

So those are three things that Kevin did that Mike didn't.

And Kevin, put through of us on the rules committee.

That gave us a blocking position. Chip Roy, Ralph Norman, and myself. And we used that for good. We forced the 72-hour rule for the entire time Kevin was speaker. That's another thing Johnson threw out the window.

You don't always get three days to read a bill now. He's overriding his own rules committee. And he's going with Democrats to do it.

GLENN: Do you think this was -- you know, I write in some place.

You know, this was planned from the beginning. He's been lying in wait, trying to pretend that he was part of the Freedom Caucus for years.

Do you believe that?

ANN: Yeah. You know, what really confused me. Is the readiness with which, sort of the big spenders in Washington, DC.

Where they accepted Mike Johnson as a valid speaker candidate. After defeating Jim Jordan multiple times.

They found Jim Jordan unsuitable. But they found this junior member very unsuitable to the job, who had no experience. You know, had never been a chairman. Didn't have much staff.

And I think at that point, they got some assurance from Mike Johnson. That he -- or some feeling, that Mike Johnson would be a good guy to carry the water for the establishment here in DC.

And that's exactly what he's done.

GLENN: Hmm. Well, Thomas, when do you file? Is this Monday?

NEIL: Probably what will happen is we'll file Monday. Speaker Johnson, because it's a privileged resolution. The only thing that has higher privilege is motion to adjourn.

So he will have two days. Two legislative days to bring it up. So if we file it on Monday. The vote will either be Monday immediately. Or Tuesday or Wednesday.

If we file it on Tuesday. It would be either on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. Would be the vote.

GLENN: You don't believe he will back away?

I mean, you put this, or Marjorie Taylor Greene did. She put this in line, to be brought up, as kind of a threat.

Hey, we're thinking about doing this. Don't push it.

And he did it anyway.

NEIL: That's right. So he called the bluff, and we're calling the bluff. And we will have this vote.

What I hope, Glenn, is that our conference chair. Our Whip. And our Majority Floor Leader would go to Mike Johnson.

We exhibit the leadership, that we put them on that team to exhibit. And say, Mike, it's over.

It's just not worth what you're doing.

You're going and partnering with Hakeem Jeffries. And the minority whip, and the minority conference chair.

We can't do that. So I would like to see them go, convince Mike Johnson as a team.

It's time for him to step aside. He could still do that.

And I know as improbable as it sounds. And as resolved as Mike Johnson seems when he gets to the podium. That's exactly how John Boehner was, until the five minutes he took to resign.

STU: Thomas, I know we only have about a minute left. But if the concern is that, you know, Johnson will work with Jeffries, when he's put up against the wall and do these things.

If you go forward with this, you're making Johnson's political life, dependent on Hakeem Jeffries saving. I mean, couldn't this potentially just make all of this worse?

NEIL: It's very painful to expose this. I think what we're illuminating. I don't think we're causing him to go in that direction. We're illuminating what actually exists in Washington, DC. And why you don't get the results you want.

Is because he's already in league with Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, and Hakeem Jeffries.

And we're just illuminating what would be otherwise, I believe.

GLENN: Thomas, God bless you.

Thank you for standing up for your principles. Whether people agree or disagree with, you know, you and your stance.

I will tell you, that I have a lot of respect for somebody who will take the heat, because they won't sit down on their principles.

Thank you.

NEIL: Well, thanks, Glenn. People say, this is a lost cause. You shouldn't do it. People didn't elect us to give up. People elected us to try. And that's what we're doing.

GLENN: Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Even MSNBC Can’t Support THIS Far-Left Talking Point

It’s time for a “Cannibal Update” as the Left continues to eat its own! Glenn reviews what happened when MSNBC’s Katy Tur actually called former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi out for spreading a blatant lie about Trump’s presidency. But Pelosi immediately responded by turning on Tur and trying to paint her as a Trump sympathizer! Glenn and Stu also review one of the biggest outbreaks of leftist “cannibalism” in recent years: The anti-Israel protests on college campus, in which pro-Palestine protesters have gone as far as to call President Biden “Genocide Joe.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I think we need the cannibal update. Do we have the cannibal update music?

Because I have been very concerned about cannibalism, ever since Joe Biden brought it up.

Cannibalism. We all thought it was over.

But then again, we thought the Soviet Union was over.

We thought that threat was over.

Cannibalism is real. And it's so display. And it involves, well, let me show you. Here is Nancy Pelosi, involved in cannibalism on MSNBC.
(music)

NANCY: And Joe Biden is doing that, created 9 million jobs in his term in office. Donald Trump has the worst record of job loss of any president. So we have to just make sure people know.

VOICE: That was a global pandemic.

NANCY: He had the worst record of any president. We have had other concerns in our country. You want to be an apologist for Donald Trump. That may be your role. But it's not mine.

VOICE: I don't think anyone can accuse me of that.

NANCY: But let me just say, we put forward a 3 trillion-dollar bill. 3 trillion dollars of investment in communities and the rest, and that stimulates the economy.

STU: I mean.

GLENN: Now, I don't know which one is in the pod here, which one is eating each other. But they are eating each other.

So cannibalism. Another update is coming soon, because it seems to be going around now. And that's a real problem.

Now, let's do go to Columbia.

Because what happened there yesterday, was definitely not an insurrection, Stu. Nothing to see.

STU: Definitely not. No insurrection there. Not at all.

That was protesters, Glenn. Those are protesters, peacefully protesting, mostly, the -- in favor of the rapists and murderers in Hamas. That's all. That's all that was.

GLENN: Okay. Okay.

Well, let me show you some things that happened. This was in a library in Virginia.
(music)
They -- I mean, listen to that noise.

The librarian, her head exploded immediately.

She was like, shh. There were riot police were there.

They stormed and took over the library. At the Virginia commonwealth in Richmond, Virginia.

And they continued to talk out loud. Not in whispers.

And it was not good. It was not good. Here is from UCLA.

A Jewish student, that is being blocked from using the main entrance.

VOICE: I have my ID right here. I'm being blocked off. Not by the security guard. By you three.

This is what they do.

Everybody, look at this. Look at this.

I'm a UCLA student. I deserve to go here.

We pay tuition. This is our school. And they're not letting me walk in. My class is over there. I want to use that entrance. Will you let me go in?

Just let me and my friends go in. This could be over in a second.

VOICE: They're not in engaged.

VOICE: Then you can move.

VOICE: We're not engaged.

GLENN: We're not engaging.

VOICE: I'm going in. I have my hands up. I'm not hurting them. I'm not hurting them. That's what they do. That's what they do, everybody. You guys are promoting adepression. You guys are promoting hate. We're UCLA students, we deserve to be there.

GLENN: True. But he's forgotten all the microaggressions, Stu.

STU: Well, I think we should give it an award to the security guard who stands there and does absolutely nothing and allows them to block this person's progress as he's trying to go to class. That's just wow, he should get a Hamas award. Congratulations to him. I mean, that's completely -- completely unbelievable that they're allowing this to go on.

And it's happening with campus after campus after campus.

GLENN: Did you see the latest polls that Americans are for Israel? By I think it's like 80 percent. Something like that. For Israel.

STU: I know. I was talking to somebody. That's good to see. You do see in the media, a lot of times.

It feels like this is some close call. And Americans are like, what is it? Seventy-five-25. In favor of Israel instead of Hamas. I'm like, that's terrible.

75 percent of people, Israel over Hamas?

Not even like a hidden, oh. The Palestinian people are whatever they usually pitch. No. This is the actual recognized terrorist group was used in the poll.

This should be 99 to one. 75 percent sucks for that poll!

GLENN: I guess -- I guess I've just been beaten down so far, I'm just like, oh, that's good. Twelve people in America are still for the Jews.

I mean, I just -- I'm a little beaten down by it. Just a little bit.

Did you see what the University of Florida said yesterday?

That they're not going to tolerate it. They're not a preschool. You know the rules. You break them. You're out.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Boy, I can't imagine living in that fascistic society of Florida. Can you imagine that?

They hold you to the rules. When you sign it for school. You read the rule book. You're breaking the rules. You're out.

Everywhere else, they're negotiating with these people.

And I just think, negotiating with terrorists is such a smart idea.

It's so -- it's -- well, so today.

So open-minded. So woke. So great.

So one of the -- one of the -- I think it was northwestern negotiated to have Palestinians, you know, come up and speak on campus. So they're going to get some -- I don't know. Hamas members.

Why not? They did it with the Nazis. They literally did this exact same thing with the Nazis in the 1930s. Why should we expect a different outcome?

It's the same kind of people. The same group of people. They're fine with that.

Totally fine with that.

By the way, Spielberg is doing propaganda for Joe Biden.

I mean, no.

He's just -- he's looking into ways -- it's not propaganda. He's looking into ways to enhance the president's message. And help that message get out.

Like Nancy Pelosi just did. I I love that.

She was shocked when somebody in the media turned around and said. It's a pandemic. That's what everybody says. Play it again. That's what everybody says, to their television. When they hear that stat. Everybody says that.

NANCY: And Joe Biden is doing that. Created 9 million jobs in his office. Donald Trump has the worst record of job loss of any president. So we have to make sure people know.

VOICE: That was a global pandemic.

NANCY: He had the worst record of any president. We had other concerns in our country. You want to be an apologist for Donald Trump. That may be your role, but it ain't mine.

GLENN: She doesn't have any real comeback for it.

STU: No.

GLENN: She's never been challenged on that.

STU: No. She's literally stunned in that moment they can't be someone would point out most obvious thing in the world, that every single voter understands. Obvious. And this is showing up in the polls like crazy. That people don't even look at the pandemic, as part of Trump's economy. They don't judge it that way. They look at it, and they say, well, it was doing really well before this really terrible thing that happened. And obviously, a lot of jobs were lost.

And obviously, the -- you know, American people wound up come back to work after it was over.

And Biden is trying to take credit for that. The most fascinating part about that. If you are going to criticize Trump about his performance, on the economy, before when it comes to the pandemic.

You will hit him on the shutdowns. He was in favor of the shutdowns early. Which, okay. I think that's a fair criticism.

Certainly from the right, it was a fair criticism. Supported every single one of those policies, and tried to drag out shutdowns for another year and a half, after Trump stopped supporting them. So there's absolutely no argument whatsoever. Everybody knows. Everyone remembers COVID-19. Everyone remembers the period. Everyone remembers being told they couldn't go to work anymore for a few months.

Everybody remembers this. And the enact they keep trying to pitch this, is so insultingly stupid. That Katy Tur can't even let it happen on MSNBC. And she's calling Trump an apologist for it.

GLENN: Yes! Katy Tur. She's not -- she's not a conservative. She's not even anywhere close to that.

STU: She can't stand Donald Trump. She can't stand him.

GLENN: No. Fair is not even a word.

STU: She's embarrassed. She's embarrassed by the point that Nancy Pelosi is making.

She feels the internal poll. She has to point it out. It's such a stupid point.

And I feel I have a bit of sympathy for certain Democrats in these moments. Katy Tur is obviously no conservative.

It's like, what do you mean a Trump apologist?

Look at my record. I've done nothing, but bash Trump for years and years and years. The same thing with Joe Biden, he's being criticized as genocide Joe. He's done so much to hurt the Jews.

Why are you -- why are you -- he's done so much to ruin their ability to kill terrorists.

GLENN: Really has. Yeah.

STU: Stop their people from being raped.

He's done so much. Contributed so much to this cause. And these protesters won't give him credit for it.

GLENN: I personally think, genocide Joe, it's better to call him genocide Joe. From our side to their side.

He's been funding the Iranians who want a genocide on all the Jews.

He is genocide Joe.

They're just mixed up on who he wants to help kill.

By the way, this is what you would kill propaganda.

What happened on MSNBC, with Nancy Pelosi is propaganda.

And she was shocked that there was somebody, supposedly on her side. That would not play the game.