RADIOFebruary 08, 2023

Glenn: Biden’s SOTU was the most BIZARRE one I've EVER seen

No logical person possibly could listen to President Biden’s State of the Union and understand it, Glenn says, because it was completely full of LIES. In this clip, Glenn gives his thoughts on Biden’s SOTU speech, explaining why it was ’one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen.’ Plus, Glenn reminds us — and, most importantly, Joe Biden — of one the most important aspects of the presidency: 'Perhaps you need a reminder of that oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Last night was one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen. I -- our president was laughed at.

Our president was lost and bewildered. I -- I -- there were parts of the speech, I literally could not understand.

I've never seen anything like it. He introduced spending and control. That it's way beyond anything the United States of America has ever done.

No mention of why we've spent $100 billion on Ukraine.

You know, no answer on why we're doing it. What exactly we're doing. Just that we're committed from here until the end.

I don't know what that means.

About half of it, I felt like, he was saying, Trump was right. I mean, all of a sudden, he was America first. It was bizarre.

China our greatest national security adversary, he used to laugh at that.

Police, need more funding, not less.

We have to have that funding, so we can attract the best cops and provide the best training.

Wait. What?

Social media platforms like TikTok are a danger to our children, and anything coming from China, should be banned. Wait?

What? Buy American, and American first, now apparently, correct and moral.

The US debt is too high, and has to be reduced to take the burden off our children.

Now he's also talking about at the same time, the most spending programs in our history. And he then introduces that we're going to tax the rich some more for that.

Because there's tax cheats out there. Uh-huh.

Is that going to pay for all of this?

He also said, now, I want you to really think -- think on this.

He said, that from now on, 100 percent of building materials used in infrastructure and government construction projects, need to come from America.

Okay.

If that were true, we would have to open an estimated 400 new coal, copper, and iron ore mines.

One hundred new steel mills. One hundred new aluminum refineries.

We would have to cut down almost every tree in America.

By the way, part of our US carbon emissions. The reason why they're 80 percent lower, than they were in 1995, is because we outsourced all of that stuff.

So now you want to bring it here in America, while reducing our carbon emissions to zero.

Not going to happen. Check out the cobalt mines in Africa. The copper mines in South America. We outsourced all of our steel refinement, to China, lumber to Canada and South America.

What would requiring 100 percent of 2 trillion dollars of infrastructure spending, due to our goal of reaching 0 percent carbon by 2050?

There's no answer there. There's no answer. It's delusional thinking.

What would it just do if to -- the prices of stuff at Home Depot.

If the United States of America decided to buy $2 trillion a year, of -- of all American product. You wouldn't have a chance of buying an American product.

You know, I wondered after he was making promos after promise, what the Supreme Court justices thought. You know, there were four of them that didn't show up last night. I mean, just sitting there. And you were at all constitutionally based.

You're like, well, that won't stand up, over and over again.

A wealth tax, and a billionaire's only tax, unconstitutional. Forcing non-profitable corporations to pay 15 percent of income.
Not profits, income. That's unconstitutional.

Setting the price at which items can be sold. No matter the manufacturing, and business costs. No way. Just setting the price. Unconstitutional.

And then he was laughed at.

Look, I understand. I'm not going to shut down all the oil and gas here in America.

And people are saying that.

And that's not true. Because we are going to need oil and gas, I'm quoting, for another ten years.

Another ten years! You just doomed half the world to a slow and painful death, from starvation. This was the most embarrassing moment, I've ever seen in a State of the Union address.

The world is facing massive energy shortages. America is one of the largest energy producers in the world, due to coal, oil, and natural gas.

Russia's oil and gas production, are supposedly off the market, for the next ten to 15 years.

So the developing world, can't get it from Russia. Can't get it from us.

They'll die off without any energy and food production.

So to blind, you know, everybody. He's delusional. He's so incredibly -- I mean, I don't even know how a logical person can even look at that speech, and understand it, other than there's something wrong here.

No notion. No notion.

He says, the radical environmentalism, which he's pursuing. He says, it's an existential threat, that we have to take care of.

No notion of how we're going to produce food and heat for the next, you know, eight balloon people.

What you saw last night was states-sponsored religion. That's what you saw.

He was the high priest. He came to the altar. And expected you to bow down and worship, at that altar. The first ever American state-sponsored religion. Because there's no logic to it. You just have to believe.

I was also a little disappointed by Sarah Huckabee Sander's rebuttal speech. I mean, it's good. She told a story, setting Trump up for 2024.

Giving an impassioned plea for what makes America great, but it was not a rebuttal.

She didn't review anything. Any of the major points or policies in his speech. It was as if she wasn't watching the speech.

And I think that is a huge mistake. You can't pre-write everything.

I mean, I really -- I really like Sarah. I do.

But the stump speech response from Republicans is just not enough. Imagine if we would have just deconstructed. You could have had ChatGPT doing it.

Imagine if we could have deconstructed what Biden actually said. Some of the biggest applause lines. His biggest promises.

Let me just throw a couple of these out at you.

Imagine if she would have said something like, you know, Mr. President, you keep saying, let's finish the job. We would like to know what job it is you're trying to finish.

Because we don't see the benefits happening to the United States of America.

It is almost as if you're trying to finish the job of the fundamental transformation and destruction of America.

But let's take you at your word.

What you're suggesting we do as a nation, via our government, I'm not sure you understand what your job even is.

Based on what you just demanded tonight. That are all the things that our government should do.

That's not your job. Here's what an intelligent person, would have heard, in your speech.

Let's finish the job.

Of violating the Second Amendment, by disarming Americans. Preventing them from being able to defend themselves. Their families, and their homes.

I don't want to finish that job. Let's finish the job, of violating the First Amendment. By continuing to follow our first ever state-sponsored religion of radical environmentalism.

Destroying our energy industry. Ultimately, massively depopulating the planet. Dooming mankind to return, really, to the Middle Ages. Let's finish the job.

Of violating the ninth and tenth amendments. By going on government spending sprees, including free health care for all.

Free in-home disability care.

Free college for all.

A guaranteed job for anyone who wants one.

Which would lead to catastrophic hyperinflation.

Runaway debt. It would destroy everything. By the way, by the way, none of that is in our Constitution.

Every single one of those was in the Soviet Constitution, however.

Let's finish the job. Of what?

Violating the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by asking the top one percent of tax earners, who already pay more than 40 percent of all taxes to pay even more?

Ensuring only that they're going to migrate out of the US to countries that ask them to actually pay their fair share.

It would destroy our tax base.

Or is that why you were trying to finish the job, overseas, and convince every western nation, that we all had to lock our tax rates together.

Let's finish the job, in, what?

Ukraine?

Violating article, you, section eight. Which grants Congress the sole power. That's a quote. To declare war.

Let's continue to fight 100-plus billion dollar per year proxy wars against Russia. In the Middle East.

In Africa.

Let's continue to drum up support for the next war, against, what?

China?

Let's finish the job of lying to our children. That the goal of American life is and must be equity of outcomes.

Instead of teaching them about individual responsibility. Merit-based rewards for hard work or personal achievement. No, no, no. Let's finish the job.

Let's finish the job of further depopulating the planet.

By teaching young children, that abortion is the answer to pregnancy, if that is her or him -- his whims.

According to the equal rights of the unborn child, as if killing a 5-year-old is the answer to the inconvenience of being a parent, or food shortages.

Let's finish the job of, what? Turning Americans into a socialist, Soviet state. I refer you back to the Soviet Constitution.

Where the government sets all the prices, takes over businesses, or you can go to the fascistic look, where it's a public/private partnership. Their words. The fascist words, not mine.

But strangely yours. Where they come in, or they either take over the business, or they partner with the industries, to achieve social goals, demanding they produce drugs or hearing aids or music. And then must sell them at a price, if the government demands or decides is fair.

I don't want to finish that job. Mr. President, I don't think you understand what finishing your job really means.

Because it seems like you don't even know what your job is. And it's weird, because you've taken the oath of office, several times.

And your job, the job of the American government, is to ensure and protect the liberty and freedom of each individual men, every man, woman, and child.

What is it from the Declaration of Independence? Oh.

And government are his instituted among men, to protect these rights.

That's why in America, we even have a government.

When you became a senator and then vice president and now president, you took an oath of office.

There was no mention of jobs for all, free college, free health care, destroying our industries to follow your party's chosen scientist's whim on energy policy.

Perhaps you need a reminder of that oath. To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

By the way, the reason why you have a veto, is because you believe it to be unconstitutional.

Not because you don't like it, but because you believe it is unconstitutional.

But how many presidents even remember that? On both sides of the aisle?

Let me ask you, Mr. President. When you stated your man. And your mission, do you not see it clearly violates the precepts and the texts of the Constitution. And what does that mean to you?

However, to give credit, you know, where credit was due, you were right about one thing. We still do have a job to do.

Except, I think we should finish the job our Founders started. To ensure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

That, sir, is the job!

That is the job that is still left undone. Because it will never be totally finished ever.

It's through human freedom and liberty, and meritocracy. That we will cure cancer.

We will protect the environment.

Lower health care costs.

Plus, we'll improve the economy, and confront our enemies. As they arise.

Because that's what Americans do, and every time there's a public/private partnership or government gets involved, it destroys the freedom.

You know, it's the people, not higher taxes on a few people.

Not through government controls of energy -- industries or price controls or wage and job guarantees.

That enslave the few for the benefit of the many. That's not capitalism, sir.

Although, you said twice last night, you're a capitalist. I don't think you even know what that means. It's another Z-word, constitutionalist, capitalist. That's socialism.

That's Marx, Mao, Hitler, Putin, Xi. They each believed, well-intended for their people, but the path to hell.

Your job as a public servant. It's singular and simple. To defend and protect the Constitution.

So in the spirit of bipartisanships. Suck it up. Let's all hold hands.

Let's finish that job. That's what should have been said last night.

What Aleksandr Dugin REALLY Believes About America

In light of Tucker Carlson’s recently released interview with Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, Glenn dives deep into Dugin’s true beliefs about America and his terrifying “solutions” to society’s problems. Dugin may sound like an ally to American conservatives, but his comments on war, apocalypse, and fascism reveal his true intents. Rockford University Philosophy Professor Stephen Hicks joins Glenn to lay out the “massive trap” that Dugin has set for the West and the future of “fascism without compromise” that he wants for the world.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the program. Yesterday, a -- an interview that Tucker Carlson did while he was in Russia, was released. It was about 20 minutes. And I applaud everyone for having a conversation. Tucker has said many times. It's important to see and understand how our adversaries view us.

Well, that -- that wasn't clear in this. He just diagnosed a problem as Aleksandr Dugin always does.

And enough to open a door to people. Have people say, oh. Well, I think I might agree with that.

It is really important, what Tucker has begun. We have to now continue that conversation. So people on our side, will not fall victim to this guy.

They talk about how people want his books to be banned. I don't. I want you to read this in his own words. There will be stuff at the beginning of the book, you will go, yeah. Yeah. He knows me.

By the time you're at the end of the book. This is a horror show.

Literally a horror show. But you should read him.

Jefferson, when we went into our first foreign war, which was against the Muslim pirates, insisted that everybody read the Koran. If you really want to understand the absurdity of it all, he said, you need to read this in their own words. Now, let's get down to it.

GLENN: So let me play just a little bit of what he said, to Tucker yesterday. We'll start there. Here's a clip from the Tucker Carlson interview with Aleksandr Dugin.

VOICE: There was all liberals.

And, for instance (inaudible), correctly, that there are no more ideologies, except for liberalism. And liberalism, that was liberation, of this individual from any kind of collective identity.

There are only two collective identities, to liberate from. Gender identity, because it's disconnected by identity.

You are man and woman, collectively.

So you could be -- so liberation of gender. And that has led to transgenders. To LGBT. And new form of sexual individuals. So sex is all -- something optional.

And that was not just the deviation of liberalism. That was necessary elements of implementation and victor of this liberal ideology.

And the last step that is not yet totally -- totally, made his liberation from human identity. Humanity optional. And when -- now we are choosing for you, in the West, you are choosing the sex you want, as you want. And the last step in this process of liberalism. Implementation of liberalism. Will mean precisely, the human optional. So you can choose your individual identity to be human. Not to be human.

And that -- transhumanism. Post humanism. Singularity. Artificial intelligence. Klaus Schwab. They openly declare that it is the inevitable future of humanity. So we have arrived to the historical terminal station. That we finally -- five centuries. A goal, we have embarked on this train. And we are now arriving at the last station.

GLENN: So what he's saying here is, that liberalism, meaning the classic liberalism where you're an individual. It's not collective. Et cetera, et cetera. He says, the inevitable end is progressivism. And then some dystopian future. But I don't think that's right.

I would love to hear from you.

Liberalism doesn't lead to progressivism. Marxism leads to progressivism.

STEPHEN: Yeah. The first half of the Dugin clip is correct. The second half is a massive equivocation. I think he should know better. I think he's doing some tactical rhetoric against the West, talking about the transgenderism. So let's take those two in part.

So the first part is all of the Soviet Union. I think Dugin is exactly right. What plays out in the 20th century, left only some sort of liberalism standing in the field.

Twenty-first century was a huge ideological battle. I think Dugin's analysis is correct. It's kind of the analysis I've argued and many other people have argued as well.

The 20th Century was about some sort of liberalism, versus some sort of fascism or national socialism, versus some sort of Marxist communism.

We fought world wars. We fought cold wars. Fought many French warfare, ideological wars as well.
What happened was fascism was defeated.

National socialism was defeated. And by 1991, Marxist communism was defeated. So what seemed to be, almost inevitable. I don't want to use the inevitably language. But was that some sort of liberal democracy, capitalism, individualism. Barbarity, was triumphant.

So I think that part is exactly right. Now where I think Dugin goes wrong, is in what happens next.

My view was what happened, liberalism took a breathing. We've been fighting wars. Ideological. And actual wars for over a century.

We let our guard down. We have relaxed. We have kind of thought everybody is going to get on board.

Some sort of liberal, democratic, capitalist. Modern future is slowly going to prevail over the next generation.

What actually happened though, was that the fascists. The national socialists.

The authoritarians. The communists. The Marxists.

The various sorts, did not simply go away, and give up the fight.

Instead, they started to repackage themselves. Inside, the now triumph unto west, there are countermovements that tried to reassert themselves. We started to say, by the time we got to 2010, 2015. Or so.

That those countermovement inside the West are reasserting themselves. And everybody is starting to become aware of them. And the particularly nasty forms of transgenderism.

Now, I think is a legitimate version of transgenderism. That reasonable, sensitive people will take wear of. Weaponized transgenderism. Of a particularly vibrant form, that we're sometimes dealing with.

That is a different phenomena. So the second part then, is what Dugin wants to do is to say.

And this is the part that you were picking up on. That are -- the relativism. The angry activism. The willingness to let everything burn inside the West. That we're now confronting with.

The virulent forms of Islamism. That we are now confronting. And some of the total package of anti-western. Antiliberalism.

Where did those come from?

Now, I agree. Those are pathological.

They are very destructive. What Dugin is offering. Is a thesis that says. That those antiliberalisms. Are themselves an youth growth of liberalism.

And that I think is simply false.

GLENN: So he -- when he says, you know, an end to modernity. And liberalism.

He's actually -- I mean, one of the first things I've found about Dugin. That opened my eyes.

Was his statement that -- that fascism, with Mussolini. Mussolini was a very brave person. As was Hitler.

But it didn't work. But they understood that international communism was not good. So they went for national communism, or socialism. Which became fascist. And he said, where the two of them went wrong. Was they offered too many compromises.

He said, the future -- yeah. The future is fascism without compromise.

STEPHEN: Exactly.

GLENN: This is terrifying.

STEPHEN: This is 1990's Dugin in the first decade after the fail of the Soviet Union. And he's a strange character at this point. He's already adopted various forms of Naziism. In the 1980s. At this point, he's not a young man. He's in his late '20s. Early '30s.

So he's a mature thinker. He hates liberalism already. He hates modernity. He hates the West in its entirety. At the same time, he's dissatisfied with a lot of what's going on in the Soviet Union.

Its version of Communism and Marxism. When the Soviet Union falls, so he's cofounder of a national Bolshevik Party. And the Bolsheviks, of course, was Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and so on. So it's a reworking of a kind of Communist Marxism.

But the nationalism is important there for him. And he then -- and, a few years, settles on saying, what we need to do is just rework fascism.

So he's widely and explicitly admiring of Mussolini, and some of the German fascists of the 1920s and early 1930s. And he publishes an article in 1997, called fascism. Borderless and red. The red part means blood. And it means a little bit of incorporation of Marxism.

That will mean bloody, violent revolution that we need, and the border part is also there. That we need to expand Russia's border.

We need to be expansionists.

What we need is a kind of national socialism. And he takes the socialism seriously.

Economic control.

But it's not going to be a socialism, that we take on, so to speak. It's a Russian people, who moved into some abstract, socialist template. We need to take the Russian people. Its particular ethnic identity, including its religion. Its cultures. It's traditions. See it as having a world historical destiny.

It's going to lead the world to a new, bright future that is not going to be kind of trapped in the old Marxist way. And as you were suggesting, it will learn from the failures of the earlier versions of fascism and national socialism.

And what that is going to involve with. A willingness to be muscular. A willingness to be violent. A willingness to take ethnicity and nationalism seriously. And not to compromise one job with capitalism, with any form of Western liberalism.

Yes. That's Dugin. By the time we get to the late 1990s.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Did the Deep State Kill a Journalist? An ‘Octopus Murders’ Review | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 219

A journalist went where the FBI couldn’t and may have dug his own grave asking the wrong questions to a nefarious network, including CIA operatives, the mafia, Hollywood’s elite, Native Americans, and psychopathic killers. This was Danny Casolaro's biggest story that never happened because he was found dead in a motel room in West Virginia. Was it suicide or murder? Glenn Beck excavates never-before-heard testimony from the filmmakers of the Netflix original docuseries “American Conspiracy: The Octopus Murders,” including evidence and a paper trail of a stolen election. Christian Hansen and Zachary Treitz detail the most dangerous character they came across. It’s not Bill Hamilton, Inslaw, Robert Booth Nichols, or Michael Riconosciuto. They also explain how the PROMIS software and the Inslaw scandal have ties to the Angry Birds backdoor malware installed by the NSA as well as that outrageous Zapruder film hoax of the JFK assassination. Confused yet? The interconnected web of disinformation consumed Hansen so much that director Treitz was concerned about his emotional and physical health during filming. The ending, reminiscent of "The Sopranos," left the filmmakers on the hunt for the key that could unlock the entire conspiracy. But the story doesn’t end there ...

Did the U.S. Government TELEPORT Malaysia Airlines Flight 370?!

A decade ago, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared without a trace. Now, some are claiming this was a cover-up — by the U.S. GOVERNMENT! Glenn speaks with one of those people, investigative journalist Ashton Forbes, who claims that he has video evidence of what really happened. The alleged footage, which he claims was leaked from within the government, depicts a plane disappearing into what could be a worm hole created by three rotating orbs. Ashton lays out the science that he believes explains this … but does the government really have this game-changing technology? Glenn lets you decide …

Biden Sent HOW MANY Migrants to THIS Red State?!

According to a new report, internal DHS data has revealed how the Biden administration has flown hundreds of thousands of “inadmissible” migrants into U.S. cities — and the top 15 cities are eye-opening. The controversial CHNV mass-parole program has used YOUR tax dollars to send migrants who have claimed refugee status all over the country. But the administration has brought the most migrants into the country BY FAR through airports in (of course) the red state of Florida. This is ON TOP of the record-high illegal immigration that we have seen under the Biden administration. So, what’s the goal here?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: New internal DHS data reveals 45 US cities that hundreds of thousands of migrants that have felony into via the Biden administrations, controversial CHMV mass parole program.

It shows that the top 15 cities that migrants were flown into, on your tax dollar. On our airlines. Which you have to take your shoes off.

They have to know. I mean, come on over here.

Yeah. Every third person, we do a rectal exam.

Yeah. And now -- now we're just flying these people. Without knowing, who they really are. Doing it in the middle of the night.

Now, these aren't the people who go across the border.

Are these the ones who the United States government went out to, hey. Is anybody -- refugee. If you're a refugee, I've got free tickets to America.

So the top 15 cities, Miami, Florida, 91,000 people were flown in from January through August 2023.

Eight months. Eight months. Miami, Florida, Florida. 91,000.

Ft. Lauderdale. Which is the same city.

I mean, it's Miami Ft. Lauderdale.

STU: Yeah. I used to live in Ft. Lauderdale.

GLENN: It's part of Miami.

STU: It's a little bit of a drive to Miami. It's like Dallas/Fort Worth.

A couple cities close to each other.

GLENN: So Ft. Lauderdale got 60,000. And then New York City is number 3. They got 14,000. Wait a minute.

Wow! That's quite a spread there.

So, you know, they get 150,000, just in Miami, Ft. Lauderdale. And then 14,000 in New York. Houston --
STU: And think about what Eric Adams has said.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

STU: They're overrunning our communities, we can't do anything. Half the cities on this list are on one state. And New York City can't handle this.

GLENN: Yeah. They have 14,000. Then Houston has 8,000.

Orlando has 16,000. Another Florida.

Los Angeles, three. Tampa, another Florida. 3200. Dallas, Texas, is 2200.

San Francisco, 2,000. Atlanta, 2,000.

Newark, New Jersey.

I mean --

STU: Oh, people love Newark.

GLENN: Honestly, if you're like in some other place.

I don't care if they're torturing you. And they say, you want to come to the United States?

Sure. Where am I headed?

Newark, New Jersey. No, I'm going to hang out. I'm good. I'm good.

Put me back on the rack. It's false alarm. I'm not going anywhere.

STU: How are these decisions made?

GLENN: What do you mean?

STU: Do you know -- if you're someone coming in, you're an illegal immigrant, you're on this parole program.

And you come in. Do they say, hey. Here is your -- they have fliers come visit Orlando out there. Look through them until you pick one. Do they assign a city to you? Is it wherever your relatives are?

GLENN: I don't know. It's taken us forever, to get just this information.

STU: I know. It's true. It could be, that these people are like, look, I don't want to go to Newark. So I will pick Tampa or Orlando or Ft. Lauderdale.

My guess is, do you know anyone who lives there?

Yeah. My brother lives in Miami.

So they're flying them to Miami.

I don't know. Regardless, wouldn't the opposite be obvious, if you were honest here? If you're the Biden administration, you keep telling everyone that people in the south and the red states hate immigrants. They're racists. They're, you know, xenophobes. They don't have any programs for them.

So why would you continue to keep bringing them to Florida and Texas. Why?

Wouldn't you bring them to the cities, that have all these wonderful programs that you've passed. Why not?

GLENN: Well, unless you're trying to make sure that you fly them into a city, like Miami, Ft. Lauderdale. That's usually run by Democrats.

And you can have them vote.

STU: But -- but, again, it's not run currently by tells me.

GLENN: Miami, Ft. Lauderdale.

STU: Republican mayor. Remember, he ran for a short time, ran for president.

GLENN: I don't remember that. It was very short. Very short.

STU: Very short. But unless you have enemies, in red states and you realize that what you're doing is a punishment, right?

The same kind of thing that, you know, Greg Abbott did in Texas. You know what, we will send these people up to you guys. You guys deal with them.

Because we're being honest with them here. This is a strain on our society. And so we shouldn't be responsible for them. Because we want them to be stopped before they come in.

Right? All these other people are saying, we're welcoming. You're welcomed here. You will always be welcomed in New York City. I don't know if that one is expired. But that's what Eric Adams was saying when he was running for election.

GLENN: San Francisco.

STU: San Francisco. All these things. We went through and found all the quotes from these mayors.

All of them, welcomed with open arms, illegal who didn't notice. And invited them to come. And now when they actually show up, they realize what the situation is. You're taking a bunch of people who have no current path to earn enough to -- to house themselves. To feed themselves.

To give themselves basic humanitarian aid.

And then you're going to put that on the state, or local -- local communities.

GLENN: Imagine. Imagine your city. Knowing how large you are. You have an influx of 150,000 people.

Where are those jobs?

Where are the jobs for those people? You don't have a deficit of 150,000, you know, employees.

STU: Where do they work?

GLENN: Where are they working?

Where are they working?

By the way, a recent pew poll found that nearly two-thirds of Americans have little or no confidence that Joe Biden is physically fit to be president.

That's two-thirds. When you're talking about the immigration thing, 80 percent of America, wants them to be sent back home.

Okay?

They're starting to get really.

Quite, quite intense object the immigration thing.

And that's Republicans and Democrats.

Everybody knows that the economy is in flames.

Again, two-thirds have little or no confidence that Joe Biden is even physically fit to be president.

What the hell, how is this so close?

How is this so close?

I just -- it doesn't -- it doesn't make sense.

STU: People are not making judgments based on what's in front of them.

GLENN: No. They're not.

STU: They're these partisan. You know, these partisan lanes you get in. And it's impossible to escape them. I don't know. For 80 percent of people, at this point.

We would like to think it's some rare thing.

But it's pretty much everybody who looks at this. And doesn't seem to be spending any time to make this instigation.

Decision was made for them, years ago, decades ago, and they're going and checking the boxes.

Yes. He has mean tweets. But you had a job. We had a country. I mean, yeah. But I know those mean tweets are really, really horrible.