What Nikki Haley's 2024 Announcement Means for the Republican Party and Trump
RADIO

What Nikki Haley's 2024 Announcement Means for the Republican Party and Trump

After winning only one state on Super Tuesday, Nikki Haley has dropped out of the 2024 presidential race. But she stopped short of endorsing Donald Trump. Glenn and Stu discuss what this means for the Republican party as we move closer to Election Day: Can the Right unite around Trump? Glenn also reveals the biggest issue he had with Haley.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Here is Nikki Haley.

HALEY: So many of the women and girls out there, who put their faith in our campaign: Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid. Do not be discouraged. For God will be with you, wherever you go. In this campaign, I have seen our campaign's greatness, from the bottom of my heart. Thank you, America. God bless you.

GLENN: Wait. Now, what happened?

STU: She nailed it.

GLENN: Nailed it.

STU: Wow. That was riveting.

GLENN: Wow. What happened there?

STU: She's walking offstage.

GLENN: She's walking offstage. We missed obviously, some of her speech.

STU: Wait. She might still be in. I don't know. We never heard her drop out!

GLENN: Yeah. Shoot. She congratulated Trump, but she didn't endorse him, which I guess makes sense. I guess. Maybe not on the first day. But --

STU: If she wanted to endorse him, she would endorse him, right?

I think she didn't want to endorse him.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: I mean, this is who -- this is consistent with the campaign, she's brought.

GLENN: Consistent with somebody that wants to be on the board with Ratheon. It is absolutely consistent with that.

STU: That is her path forward. Again, it's a good gig, I'm sure.

But it does. She's not running to be the vice president. She's not running to be, you know, the UN ambassador again.

She made a decision, that she was going to go a different direction there.

GLENN: So now, a lot of the people, that are, you know, writing, in -- in papers and -- and opinions, that look at this split in the G.O.P. as something that can be healed, I'm not really looking to heal it.

I mean, I'm fine with us all coming together. But I'm not going to go towards Mitch McConnell. Just not going to do it.

And they say that Nikki Haley should be a vice presidential nominee for Donald Trump. Because it would bring the party together.

And I'm not sure that would.

STU: I don't think there's any chance of that.

I guess, any chance -- these people do get over this stuff fast.

Remember, every -- almost every candidate winds up with a vice president. I mean, you know, go back to Bush and Reagan.

GLENN: Yeah. Reagan did not like Bush.

STU: Reagan did not like Bush. This has happened over and over in history.

GLENN: But I don't think -- Donald Trump doesn't do that.

STU: The only way he would, is if he's convinced it's the only way he has to win. And I will say, you mentioned the unity thing.

And of course, this is what everybody says, right? Oh, we have to bring everybody together now.

But it is important to note, that while Nikki Haley's faction of the Republican Party is not the majority faction, as we saw very clearly last night.

GLENN: It's weird. Because it still is in Congress.

STU: Yeah. Maybe. Maybe. I don't know.

GLENN: Let's see if John Cornyn becomes the Speaker of the Senate.

STU: Gosh. Please help us. Please help us.

Again, just because somebody has power at the top, does not mean they're not the majority of the Senate. You're right.

There's the higher representation of that faction in elected government, which makes sense. These people have been in government for 40 or 50 years.

Of course, you know, it's the people who get to the top of the power structure. But like, you also can't just say, hey, screw those people. Because I have news for you. You don't win any national elections, by the way, them. You will not win any national elections without the Nikki Haley faction of the Republican Party, voting for, let's say Donald Trump. Who is going to be the nominee. If you don't have them. Which, by the way, Trump was able to get in 2016. And got most of them in 2020 as well.

GLENN: And 20 percent of them who voted for Biden in 2020, say they will vote for Trump.

STU: Yeah, and you will get some of those people too. You also need the full base. And part of the base is the 30 percent of people who voted for Nikki Haley in these states. They do exist. They are still important to a Donald Trump victory.

So if you kind of do the thing, where you're like, well, you know what, if you're a McCain supporter, get out.

Well, you know, it doesn't work well. You do need those people, even if you don't necessarily have to bend to their position statements. You need to find a way to pull them in if you want to win these elections.

GLENN: I agree with you. I agree with you.

Just don't bend to their positions.

STU: Yeah. If you start saying, we will throw $200 billion at Ukraine to win over Nikki Haley supporters, that's a bad idea.

You have to keep your principles, and that's not seemingly what Donald Trump wants to do.

GLENN: And I would think that. I would really think that -- I don't know.

You know, I used to be a pretty good judge of the American people. Don't you think.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I don't think I don't know if I can anymore.

STU: Yeah. It's harder.

GLENN: I just don't know.

I was going to say, I think the people who were voting for Haley. Will end up voting for Trump.

Just because the alternative is Hillary Clinton. Everything that we said Hillary Clinton would do, they're doing.

In fact, on steroids.

So why wouldn't there be that passion to make sure, that he doesn't get -- because we're done.

STU: These things tend to have a cooling effect. Right?

You have eight months until this election. But Ron DeSantis is another great example.

I mean, think of the things Trump said about Ron DeSantis on this campaign.

What percentage of Ron DeSantis voters vote for Donald Trump in the end? Ninety-seven, 95?

GLENN: I think 100, including him and his wife.

STU: Yeah, he's already endorsed him.

Like, these things cool over time. You have eight months to pull this out. You will see Joe Biden on stage, talking about how he wants to turn the country into a socialist republic for eight months.

Most of the people who have a Nikki Haley vision of the country, will say, well, I'm down to two people. I'll pick one of them. I don't want Joe Biden.

I think that's the majority. You will see, by the way, in some of the exit polls today, that large chunks of Nikki Haley voters are saying today, that they will not vote for Donald Trump.

You have to remember, when you look at those numbers. A lot of those people are Democrats. Who came into open primaries. Some of those people were independents. Who were probably left leaners and never really considered a Donald Trump or Republican vote in the first place.

And, you know, some of them are just disaffected people who are annoyed, at what -- at what Trump supporters tell them online, or what Donald Trump says.

Or how Nikki Haley, they don't believe had a fair shot. Whatever the reason is. A lot of those people --

GLENN: Bernie Sanders people came --

STU: Most of them came home.

GLENN: In North Carolina, 35 percent of G.O.P. voters said, they won't guarantee their vote for Trump. Along with 36 percent in Virginia. 33 percent in California.

The total is significantly higher among Haley primary voters, 78 percent in North Carolina. Sixty-nine, California. Sixty-eight in Virginia.
Won't guarantee their support for the party's nominee.

The overwhelming number of Haley voters who refused to commit supporting Trump, may not be that big of a problem, as a large number of them were Democrats, crossing over.

So you wouldn't -- I mean, I would --

STU: A large number of them.

GLENN: You would expect that.

STU: Yeah, of course.

If you're a Democrat, just trying to sow chaos in the Democratic primary, of course.

GLENN: Yeah. The people who gave her, you know, $100 million, or whatever they gave her for campaign.

They were Democrats. You think Reid Hoffmann is going to actually -- I mean, he could have gotten it nonetheless -- and she would say, I'm voting for Biden.

STU: Yeah. If she got the nomination, she would have voted for Biden.

GLENN: Yes. So let me play a clip from what she just said.

VOICE: Just over a year ago, I launched my campaign for president.

When I began, I said the campaign was grounded in my love for our country.

Just last week, my mother, a first generation immigrant, got to vote for her daughter for president, only in America.

I am filled with the gratitude for the outpouring of support we've received from all across our great country. But the time has now come to suspend my campaign.

I said I wanted Americans to have their voices heard. I have done that. I have no regrets.

And although I will no longer be a candidate, I will not stop using my voice for the things I believe in.

GLENN: Okay. I think that was -- you know, that was good. This has, yeah. And I don't --

GLENN: I don't fault her.

STU: Why -- why not?

You've already entered the race. You've gone through this. You have the money to do it. You got to a place where you were competitive in New Hampshire. Then you had to make a decision, do I drop out right now, or do I look at my home state, which is basically next in line in a month? I ride out a month, I could be tough. Take a shot at it.

If you don't get it, you don't get it. But you're a week away from Super Tuesday. She let it ride to Super Tuesday, and she drops out.

This does nothing to hurt Donald Trump's campaign. Nothing that she did hurt Donald Trump's campaign.

GLENN: No. No. No.

STU: Donald Trump did not need to campaign against her, to win all these states obviously.

GLENN: No. The only thing I have on Nikki Haley. I mean, I disagree with her on a few things.

STU: Sure, but she was a good governor.

GLENN: She was a good governor, and I like her. Personally, I like her.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: But I didn't agree with her on the war. Her approach for that. I didn't agree with her.

You know, I said really clearly, if you don't know what ESG is, then I can't vote for you.

I did my first interview for nominee was Nikki.

She didn't know what ESG was. I mean, she danced around it.

She knew a little bit. It wasn't key to her.

So I couldn't vote for her. I'm telling this now.

Anybody who listened to that interview. And knew what I had said on the air before. Would have known.

STU: Right.

GLENN: So I had some policy differences with her.

The only real problem that I had, was taking money from the uber left.

STU: Yeah. I think that's --

GLENN: Didn't like that. This has now, most of that money came to her, her super PACs. Which she cannot control.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: Now, obviously everyone likes getting money in politics, and she, of course, I'm sure appreciated the ads she ran. But to be clear, could not block that money, legally.

GLENN: No, but she welcomed it. She welcomed it.

STU: She said, basically, I took the money while Ron wanted it. He doesn't have it. I've got it.

She tried to use it as a talking point. And some of that money was not from the hardcore leftists, you know, like the Koch brothers.

And, of course, we always say the Koch brothers.

One of them is dead. Okay? The other one, he's not really spending any money right now.

GLENN: He's still voting in Illinois, strangely.

STU: Yeah. But he's more -- he's obviously a Libertarian. There was a bunch of money that came in, that was just anti-Trump money from various sources.

Some on the right. Some Libertarian. Some on the left.

The end of the story is like, look. She is a qualified candidate. That absolutely had a place in the race.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: It's just, her vision of where the Republican going, is no longer the majority vision.

GLENN: It's so strange. Because she was a Tea Party person.

STU: She was always, I think, strong on defense.

GLENN: Yes, she was. She was.

STU: And one of the reasons she was a good ambassador, is because she had those viewpoints.

GLENN: She was a great ambassador.

I would have her as ambassador any day of the week.

STU: She didn't connect with that.

I will say, in her defense obviously she's been getting trashed by everybody for weeks and weeks and weeks.

In her defense, unlike many other politicians, that issue was key to her.

And she -- foreign defense, Ukraine, all those things.

She knew it was unpopular in the party, and she did not waver from it at all.

She came out and made the arguments, the best she could, in public, over and over again, to a Republican audience that was not particularly receptive. She tried, it didn't work. But she didn't back off of it. Some of her other stuff. Like the abortion thing, I didn't know where she was on that. She seemed to be all over the place. But that one particular issue, she was very strong and she stuck by it, even when it probably meant she had no chance to win the primary.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So you give her credit -- sticking by your views. I'm fine with that. You want to go down in flames because you believe something that the voters don't believe --

GLENN: I respect.

STU: -- that's the way to go down in flames.

GLENN: I have much more respect for that, than somebody who will twist their viewpoint.

STU: Totally.

GLENN: So look, I -- I feel tension between Nikki Haley and this program, because we didn't get on board. And she is a friend. I don't know if that's true. That's just what we have felt. I hope that is not true.

But I wasn't going to endorse anybody this primary season. Not going to do it. I would have voted for any of them, over this guy. And it looks like Donald Trump is the guy. I'm voting for Donald Trump.

So now that we've fought this, I hope that the Ron DeSantis voters and the Nikki Haley voters, will come to the conclusion, that, yeah. It's not your guy.

But I don't think we have anybody on any -- on any side, that everybody is like, I'm 100 -- I don't even think Jill Biden is for Joe Biden. 100 percent.

Now that we've fought this race, and we have our people, darn near picked. We need to come back together, and focus on what we are for, and unfortunately, Joe Biden is not for the same things.

He's for a completely different America. He said, the first time around, he was for, you know, normalcy.

Return to normalcy. A return to, you know, being together, as a country.

Well, that didn't happen.

None of this is normal.

None of this is normal.

And it's not the Republicans this time. It is the policies of Joe Biden.

And he might be a fine, affable, old man. But his policies are not fine or affable. They are a danger to the republic.

Now, let's see if we can all come back together, lick the wounds. Help each other heal.

And come together, and fight the good fight for the republic.

What the Latest CPI Report & Soaring Gold Prices Mean for YOUR WALLET
RADIO

What the Latest CPI Report & Soaring Gold Prices Mean for YOUR WALLET

The price of gold just hit a new all-time high and that’s NOT a good sign. Plus, the CPI report for March has released and it revealed that inflation rose faster than expected yet again. But of course, the Biden administration is bragging about how gas inflation allegedly went DOWN. Financial expert Carol Roth joins to explain what the gold and CPI news means for your wallet, as well as why the White House’s data is “trash.” Plus, she reveals a new way that small business owners can vent their frustrations to Congress.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Carol Roth, I know we have a lot to talk about. So just quickly, I woke up this morning.

Looking at gold prices.

And it was kind of -- kind of impressed, on how they're skyrocketing. And I remember, a conversation with the gold guy.

Who said, don't ever, ever look at gold and say, gee. I hope it goes up because of my portfolio.

And we were talking about $3,000 an ounce. And he says, do you realize how crazy the world has to be, for gold to be at $3,000 an ounce?

It's over 2400 right now. We're headed there quickly.

CAROL: Yeah. You remember a discussion that I and I had with a group of people, I believe, in November of last year. When people were saying a similar thing. When is gold going to break out? And you and I were both communicate the idea that gold is really a hedge against all kind of insanity. Things like inflation. Things like the crumbling standing of the dollar. Things like war.

And so when you see that gold continues to rise. Even in the face of things like rising yields on bonds. I mean, normally, there's a lot of push back there. We saw that as bond yields had gone up.

People were moving away from gold. Because you weren't getting that same interest rate. You know, gold does not produce an interest rate. So there is a different reason why we are looking at gold. And some of the things that we're talking about are a bit more structural. Perhaps gold is playing a bigger role in things like settling international commodities. Trades. And trading between countries.

Particularly, the BRICS nations. But, again, all of the things that are the signals, none of them are good for us here in the United States.

You have the signal as, oh, well, it's just because trade. Well, that's not good for the US dollars reserve currency. And that's not good for, you know, inflation over the long term and our purchasing power.

And so all of these things have a mechanism. And when you see so much interest in gold over the past few months. When it has been very steady for -- for a while.

That breakout is giving you additional information. And like you said, this particular case, I think that information is coming from lots of different places. And not one of them is good.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. One of them is, we're hitting the point where our -- our debt, the interest on our debt is going to be 1.6 trillion dollars a year. That's more than Social Security.

It's the biggest. It will be the top line on our budget now, is just the interest. Because we have an adjustable mortgage in America.

And the fed, I think is out of bullets.

CAROL: Yeah. I've been making this argument now for a couple of years. That the fed's monetary policy isn't effective. Because they are -- they're trying to control, demand, and so many of the issues that we've had are on the supply side.

Additionally, we've been headed. And I think we are in today, this period of fiscal to me unanimous. And as we've talked about before, that just means, that fiscal policy plays a bigger role in what is determining economic outcomes and monetary policy.

On its face, that is sort of neutral physical dominance. In our particular situation, it's very bad. It's because of the debt. It's because of the deficits. And it's because of the fact, that we have it these massive interest payments. And continuing deficits, that need to be financed and are creating this vicious loop.

And as we know, there are -- there is not a lot of ways to finance the debt.

There certainly are not a lot of buyers. And we say that this week. There was a Treasury option, for ten-year Treasury notes, that did horribly. It was rated a D by (inaudible) CNBC, who was very, very smart.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

CAROL: D, by the way, I don't know if you know this. Is right next to F. So that is a very bad position, to be in.

GLENN: We've always been AAA, haven't we?

I mean, for ten years.

CAROL: So there's a debt rating. And that's done by the rating agencies. These are the bond options.

This is when the Treasury goes out to the market. And says, you know, how is it that, you know -- how did we do?

How many buyers were there? Who were -- who wanted to buy our debts?

And so this happens on a regular basis. And, you know, people who watch this. They give those auctions a grade. To say, how did we do?

Were there a lot of buyers? Not a lot of buyers.

So this particular time, there were not a lot of buyers. And the banks and the security dealers. Had to stock up a lot of that debt.

It's pushing us to this path of monetization. Again, that we've been talking about. That means, we're buying our own debt. And that is inflationary.

So even if we're not getting things like rate cuts, that potentially could stoke inflation. You're going to get this monetization of debt, which is inflationary. Which is why I've been arguing that inflation is sticky. And it doesn't matter if the fed goes high or low.

It's getting us on either side, until the government gets its act together. They are driving the show. It is that fiscal dominance.

GLENN: Tell me about the Consumer Price Index.

And the wholesale index. The numbers don't make sense.

For instance, fuel is not an inflation -- isn't in inflation right now? Look at the price of fuel. What do they mean?

CAROL: So you know who loves the data coming out of the government right now, Glenn?

GLENN: The government.

CAROL: Oscar the Grouch. You know why? Because the data is trash. It's absolutely trash data.

Not only have we seen adjustments on a regular basis.

The scope of which, we have not seen in a long time.

The numbers always get adjusted. But we have not seen these massive adjustments, that we have been seeing.

We also have a phenomenon, where people and entities, who are responding to the surveys. Where they collect the data, don't want to do that anymore.

Either they don't want to be board.

They don't trust the government with their data. Whatever it is.

They don't want to give up their competitive advantage.

They're having fewer people respond to these surveys. Which means that there is more of this projection and biases in the survey. So that's why we saw, you know, the CPI, which is the Consumer Price Index. That's where they go out and they survey households, that came in, higher than expected.

We all expected that it would be an uptick. Because as you said, we know the price of oil and other commodities would be going up. So this was not a surprise to any of us who live in the real world.

So that was somewhat reflected in that data. And certainly, the -- the market had reacted to that, and said, oh, well, if that's the case. The fed can't cut. Then we have another measure of inflation.

Because they measure it in different ways. This is the producer price index. PPI. Which is the wholesale measure of inflation. This is what they're supposed to tell you what's coming. Because the inputs that go into your goods and services give you a sense of what is coming down the pike.

And this was the one that was the head scratcher. Because it was not -- there's a huge disconnect between these two measures always. But even a bigger disconnect. The one as you said, everybody is going, what's going on here? Related to energy.

So floating around on social media yesterday, there was a chart about the season 58 adjustments. Again, the manipulation of the data that they do. And if you look at that, it showed you that gasoline for the month, was down 3.6 percent. I think it was.

But if you did it --

GLENN: Yeah. 3.6.

So if you didn't seasonally adjusted. It would have been up 6.3 percent.

That's a really big swing. That's like a 10 percent swing, between the two of them.

So, again, Oscar the Grouch data here, certainly we're going to get another measure in a couple of weeks here. One called the PCE. The personal consumptions expenditures index. This is the fed's, quote, unquote, favored measure.

I don't know. Maybe they like the people who do it better. It's a little bit more broad. That's what they tend to make their policy decisions on.

But the media and everybody is focused on the CPI. So it makes it very difficult for them. Or at least adds another layer of difficulty. Because they will do whatever it is, that they want to do.

When that is going up, for them to say, well, inflation is under control.

We can go ahead, and start to cut interest rates. Which is why I think everybody needs to be paying attention, to their other tools.

Which relate to the balance sheet and debt. And what they're going to do there. Because that's just a different way for them to be cooperatively.

GLENN: They're not going to do anything. They're not going to be doing anything. I mean, he's not addressing inflation. Biden is spending more.

He's now, again, forgiving more at the time. Trying to get people into houses.

I mean, he is -- we're just giving away the store at this point.

LEE: They have -- we have been saying this since day one. They've been working in the opposite direction. If you wanted to help the fed get inflation under control at the government, you should have been working with them.

You should not have been running up leftists. You've been doing. Putting into place, policies that help supply issues, instead of hurting supply issues.

Every single thing this administration has done, has been a barrier, not only to you keeping your wealth and your purchasing power. But what it is, the fed has been doing.

And that's the fight that the fed has been having.

And I just think, at some point, they're going need to be real explicit. And say, we can't do anything. Until our partners get on the same page.

But, you know, everything is political.

GLENN: It doesn't happen. That's not going to happen.

CAROL: Yeah, not going to happen.

GLENN: When we come back, she actually has been invited to be somebody who testifies in front of Congress.

Carol Roth, in front of Congress, testifying as an expert, by the end of the month. On small businesses. And she's going to be talking about the FinCEN thing that's going on with LLCs and small businesses.

Where you have to register all this information, or you're a criminal.


CAROL: Yeah.

GLENN: And it's going to devastate small businesses. Small LLCs. And it affects so many people. She will be testifying.

But here's the good news. She wants to use information, that maybe you have.

To back up her testimony.

And we'll talk about that in 60 seconds.

First, ever since 911. The Tunnel2Towers Foundation has been helping America's greatest heroes and their families. And you can join them on their mission to do good by supporting the families of America's greatest heroes.

The families of fallen first responders. The Gold Star families. With young children. Catastrophically injured service members. And homeless veterans. I cannot believe we live in a country that is doing what we're doing with illegals. And we have homeless veterans. They're providing mortgage-free homes to these people. Some of them, especially adapted to the needs of catastrophically injured veterans. And they're working tirelessly every day, to eliminate homelessness among veterans.

This is an organization, respected by and donated to, by many of their own people in and out of uniform. David Marshal. He served in the army during World War II. He fought in the Battle of the Bulge. He has never forgot the sacrifice of his comrades in arms, nor the efforts of the first responders on 9/11 or the days and the months that followed.

He is a loyal and proud foundation donor. More than 95 cents of every dollar you donate, goes to Tunnel2Towers to its programs. So they're not spending it on limousines and everything else.

Donate $11 a month to Tunnel2Towers at T2T.org. That's T2T.org. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
No. I think our banks are fine.

Everything is doing really well. Just a quick update. The AT&T Tower in St. Louis went for $3.55 million. That's a good, solid $2 a square foot. Sold for $3 million. It was sold for over 205 million, just about 15 years ago.

So no. There's nothing to see here. Nothing to see here. Carol, let's talk about small business.

CAROL: Yes.

GLENN: Take me through. In case people don't know what FinCEN is. Or what people are requiring them to do.

This is the criminal arm of the Treasury. And they're asking everybody who has an LLC or a small business to register.

CAROL: Yes. So this is called the CTA, BOI rule.

And basically, what it said, and this was passed by Congress.

Was vetoed by President Trump. And then they went back, and Congress overturned the veto, and gave this arm of the Treasury, which is charged with preventing financial crimes. Sort of free rein.

And they said, okay. We will create a database. And if you have any sort of entity, if you have an LLC, even a single member LLC, an S-Corp, a C-Corp, any sort of entity, and you're a business. You need to register with us. The financial crimes enforcement network. Because we want to prevent money laundering and cartels. And, of course, you know, I'm sure all of those people are going to self-report.

But they exempted.

GLENN: All the best cartels do.

CAROL: They all do. Well, we will do these things. We will make sure that FinCEN gets euro information.

They exempted all the big businesses. So this is unfairly targeting small businesses, so the updates. A few things that are what are happening. And we can certainly go more into this. I have been invited by the house. Small business committee, to be an expert, to testify and, you know, obviously testify against this. And how bad this is for small businesses.

And how unconstitutional at the end of the month.

What I am doing is I am bringing statements from small business owners. Because it's great to hear my statement. But if I can show up there, and say, I have hundred. Or 200 small businesses.

And here's what they have to say about this. And they're all outraged.

That holds a lot more weight.

So anyone who owns a small business. You support small business. Go to CarolRoth.com/CTA. That's CarolRoth.com, slash, Charlie Tango Alpha. And I made it really easy. I have given it a form letter, that if you want, you can borrow some of it. You can borrow all of it. You can borrow none of it, but I am going to show up at Congress with this staff from small business owners to say, you have heard what I have had to say.

Now, listen to what small business owners from across the nation, have to say, to try to get them to overturn this.

GLENN: Now, could I -- because today is not the day for me to write something. Because I'm in a very bad mood.

But I could -- could I just write to you and say, yeah. Here's what I would like to say to Congress.

I'm working my ass off, so I can keep my family afloat. And the families of all my employees, and you guys are just making my life more and more difficult, with more and more restrictions and -- and guidelines.

That nobody in Congress passed.

And are not good for the American people.

I've had it!

CAROL: Please do. Again, CarolRoth.com/CTA. Please do that. And I actually think being in a bad mood is a good time to write it, because that's when you will be honest. And that's when you will --

GLENN: I will write today then.

CAROL: Yeah. And so -- and speaking of helping, so one of the things that you did, that was very generous, Glenn. You offered to put forth a lawsuit. And I agreed. We cannot do that. Because we have been outspoken. But the good news is that there are two new lawsuits against this, that have also popped up. So we have a lot of really good momentum. And appreciative to you, for all of your help.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. So give me the address again. It's CarolRoth.com/CTA. Correct?

CAROL: Correct.

GLENN: Okay. CarolRoth.com/CTA. If you're a small business owner, go ahead.

Vent a little bit. You will take it to Congress. Thanks, Carol.

Why the Elites WANT You to Be POOR
RADIO

Why the Elites WANT You to Be POOR

Elites, especially on the Left, always say they want to help the poor…but then, they turn around and sell out blue collar workers while encouraging illegal immigration! In fact, economic turmoil is making MORE people poor. But that’s exactly what they want, argues “Second Class” author Batya Ungar-Sargon. She joins Glenn to make the case that the elites “want everybody to be poor because they control the college-educated and the poor…that’s how the Democrats win.” Plus, she explains what the working class actually wants, and it sounds a lot like a certain presidential candidate…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Batya, welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. How are you?

BATYA: Oh, man. Thank you so much for having me back, Glenn!

It's a pleasure to be here with you.

GLENN: You bet. You bet. So I have been saying for a while now, as I'm looking at what the western world, the elites are doing to their own countries.

And our own civilization. They are impoverishing people. They are giving our stuff away, to other people.

And I mean that in Europe and here where -- where illegals are just permeating the country. And the jobs are going there.

They're -- they're disarming us. They're -- they're selling us, bound and gagged to our foe, it feels like.

Is that what's happening?

BATYA: Yeah. Yeah. 100 percent. Glenn, you have been on this for such a long time. Because you're so clear-eyed about this. There has been a massive plunder of the middle class by the elites. First, they shift good manufacturing jobs overseas to build up China and Mexico's middle class.

Then they said, they're not coming back, right?

We're never going to get those jobs back. If you want the American dream. You will have to go to college. Where you'll become a card-carrying Democrat. Right? And now they opened the border and brought in 15 million illegal migrants from failed socialist states just to undercut the wages in the jobs that remained here.

And it's because fundamentally, to the elites. There is no difference between working class and poor.

They want everybody to be poor because they control the college educated and the poor. That is why they're trying to get everybody out of the middle class, and either into the college credentials. You know, leftist elites or to make them poor.

Because that's how the Democrats win.
GLENN: While I've never heard that opinion before, I think, where they were intentionally doing it because they can control the poor.

BATYA: Yeah. Absolutely. Otherwise it makes no sense, right? Where does the contempt from the working class come from. Where does this plunder come from? Why did they sell out labor?

Remember, the Democrats used to -- to making working class people poor, with these policies, that you talk about all the time, Glenn.
Opening the border. Bringing in massive, massive amounts of competition for the working class.

Like, who would do such a thing, right?

And it's not on accident, Glenn.

Of course, this is all intentional. Joe Biden showed up on day one.

To the executive Trump orders. Which secured the border.

Which would sun do that on purpose, if they didn't want that before?

GLENN: Well, it's amazing to me that the labor unions were part of it. The Democrats were for labor, you say. They were always -- they did seem to represent the working class much more. But it was their love of the labor unions.

The labor unions are still with them. As they are helping them dismantle American jobs.

BATYA: 100 percent. And I think that's why, you see only 6 percent of the private sector is unionized. Working-class Americans, they may want the wages and the protections that unions can get their members.

But they see the unions, actively supporting the party and the policy, of importing their competition.

And so, they don't see a future for themselves, in the labor unions. And, you know, Joe Biden likes to say, he's the most pro-union president to ever rule. Maybe that's true. But the unions themselves, are no longer able to represent their actual members.

GLENN: Correct.

BATYA: I have to say, I thought it was great that Trump met with the teamsters. And he got a donation for the RNC from the teamsters.

Because it shows that the teamsters are listening to the rank-and-file. Who, of course, prefer Trump.

GLENN: So you say, that the working class, in America.

Is super diverse.

But united on the policies, that they think would Mike their lives better.

And you say, that is true, whether you're Republican or Democrat.

Where is that unity on policy?

What are those policies?

BATYA: Right. For my book, second class. How the elites betrayed America's working men and women.

I traveled around the country for a year, interviewing working class Americans of all races, all backgrounds and religions. And many, many, many different industries. Totally across the country. And what I found was so much more unites them than divides them.

First of all, polarization, a totally elite phenomenon. And I know your listeners know this. Because I know you have a strong working class listenership.

They know, that they would never hate their neighbor, just because they happen to vote for another party.

They hate both parties, by the way. You know, there is a lot of contempt for the elites in the political class, who love to go to Washington and fight with each other, pretend they're fighting with each other.

While both parties turn their backs on labor.

Here's what I found was the most common view.

So I met a lot of people. Including a lot of Christians. Who had a gay person in their life, who they wanted to be treated with respect. But they were extremely worried about the transgender agenda.

I met a lot of people who were really unhappy about how much welfare there is. And new people who were scamming the system.

And they were very frustrated by that. But they also really didn't like that corporations seemed to them, to be, you know, against their interests.

And that they -- there was so much support for corporations. And not for them.

They were very against immigration. Most of the people, I interviewed.

Including the Democrats, wanted something like a total moratorium on immigration. But they also felt like there should be some sort of government backed -- catastrophic health care.

They couldn't stand the idea that they work with their hands and do physical labor, and they can't afford good health care. So you see how their views are sort of united?

The working class, but neither party really aligns with those set of views.

GLENN: So how come -- because you would say, I don't want to make this into a partisan thing.

I think I have to. When you're looking at Donald Trump, that describes him, respect for gay people.

You know, he is -- he is -- he is the first person to ever have gay people openly speak at the convention.

He's very open to that.

But he is also -- doesn't want to be harmful to transgender people. But is against all of this craziness.

When it comes to -- the -- the -- they're very much against immigration.

That's huge. And that's Donald Trump. How is it that you don't see Democrats looking at some of these big, big items. And say, okay.

Well, clearly, this side is -- is totally against everything I really believe in.

How about the Democrats?

BATYA: Oh, we're definitely -- we're definitely seeing that. Trump is now polling at 35 percent of black men. He's going to get much more than that.

So 2020, he got -- he was polling at 8 percent of black men, and he got 18 percent.

He's now polling at 35 percent of black men. He has the majority of Hispanics polling for him. We're seeing a mass defection of working class people of color, away from the Democrats who are actively undermining them and their future towards Donald Trump.

I will tell you something else, Glenn.

Donald Trump is the consensus candidate, that Joe Biden pretended he will be. You're so right.

His entire agenda is right at the 50-yard line. It's where 70 percent of the Americans are. And 0 percent of the elites. So we are seeing mass defection from the Democrats to Donald Trump. In the working class. And we're seeing the elites, you know, the Nikki Haleys, G.O.P. elites will probably vote for Joe Biden.

That's the political realignment that we're seeing. The rich are moving towards the Democrats. Or have moved to the Democrats. Including conservative rich people. I bet you. We know that Wall Street gave more money to Joe Biden, than they did to Donald Trump.

That's not an accident. I think you're completely right about that.

GLENN: Well, not all rich people support Joe Biden. I want you to know that.

GLENN: So the elites, at what point do you think we break through the ice, on people realizing, that it's not Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

That it is truly, the elites against -- you know, people who say, hey. Can you pay attention to us in America?

First, can you just -- can you not continue to just put me under water. When are we going to break the lie that, and stop playing the left/right game. And realize, it's these people who think they're better than us. That are just trying to put their foot on our neck, all the time.

BATYA: I think this election is going to come down to the working class.

And I think it will become totally unignorable after that. The question is: What happens after that?

These working class people aren't voting for the Republicans. They are voting for Donald Trump. And if the G.O.P. wants to keep these voters, they have to stop pushing tax cuts over everything else. And they have to start listening to the working class. I interviewed 100 people, and 25 of them are quoted at great length in my book, second class.

You want to hear how working class people, who agree with you, about woke. And agree with you about conservative values.

But very much need an economic agenda. They need the G.O.P. to stop pimping them out, on the altar of the woke ideas, that they agree with.

But that, you know, tickle the pickle of the conservative elites, right?

And start creating an economic agenda, for the working class. The first party, that gets to that combination of house care, plus controlling immigration, is going to have a ruling majority.

GLENN: Hmm.

Batya, thank you so much for being on.

The name of the book, again, is really all about everything that we're doing, right now. Everything you're feeling right now. It's called Second Class.

Batya, thank you so much.

Democrat’s INSANE Claims About the Moon & Sun BREAK Glenn’s Brain
RADIO

Democrat’s INSANE Claims About the Moon & Sun BREAK Glenn’s Brain

We have a new contender for “most insane thing a politician has said.” While speaking to high school students, Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee claimed that the moon gives off energy, is made of gas, and because of that, might not be possible to live on. She later insisted that she misspoke and was talking about the sun … BUT she also stated that it’s “ALMOST impossible to go near the sun” because it’s too hot. Glenn and Pat review these … interesting … claims, as well as Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s latest argument for reparations.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

PAT: You know, you've been pretty hard on our representatives in Congress today. I think unfairly so. Unfairly so.

GLENN: Unfairly so. Unfairly so. Okay.

PAT: Because they're doing some solid things too.

GLENN: Really? Are they?

PAT: Maybe not the ones who are on the take on the insider trading.

GLENN: Right. Which is about 75 percent of them.

PAT: But other 30 percent, they're on the job.

GLENN: The other 30 percent.

PAT: They're educating Americans. Sheila Jackson Lee was out speaking to high school kids, for instance. And she was talking about the moon. You know, because the moon was just in front of the sun and blocked it for a while. So I think she had some interesting facts on the moon.

GLENN: Oh. Really? On the eclipse. And the moon.

Really? Okay. Here she is.

VOICE: Provide unique light and energy, to say that you have the energy of the moon at night.

And sometimes you've heard the word "full moon. Sometimes you need to take the opportunity just to come out and see, a full moon is that complete rounded circle, which is made up mostly of gases.

GLENN: What?

VOICE: That's why the question is why or how could we as humans live on the moon.

PAT: Right.

VOICE: And the gas is such, that we could do that.
(laughter)

VOICE: The sun is a mighty powerful heat. It's almost --

PAT: Almost. Almost impossible.

VOICE: -- impossible to go near the sun. The moon is more manageable.

PAT: Yeah.

VOICE: And you will see in a moment -- not a moment, you will see in a couple of years, that NASA is going back to the moon.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: With all that gas?

PAT: Yeah. Well, yeah, because it's manageable. And it's a gas such that, you can stand on it.

GLENN: You can stand on the gas.

PAT: Almost like the gas was a solid.

GLENN: But it's not.

PAT: It's not. It's gas.

GLENN: Okay. So it's not -- now, see, I'm learning a lot here.

It's not impossible to stand --

PAT: No. But almost, on the sun.

GLENN: On the sun. Yeah. Right? When you go there, you'll be uncomfortable, if you try to live there, on the sun.

GLENN: I've been to places where it's hot before.

PAT: Right. It will just be a little hotter than that.

GLENN: A little hotter than that.

PAT: Big deal. Big deal.

GLENN: An air conditioner. Okay.

So I didn't know -- because I thought it was impossible to stand on gas.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

PAT: Yeah. She's saying that this gas is such that it's possible, to live there, and to stand there. Yeah. Because we already have, obviously.

GLENN: And hang on just a second. What was that full moon, thing?

PAT: Yeah. It's like a full circle. When you see the entire circle. The round thing in -- orb, in the sky. That's the full --

GLENN: You're not supposed to look at that round orb in the sky.

PAT: No. That's okay to look at. Its energy is such that --

GLENN: Oh. The moon's energy.

PAT: The moon's energy. And the moon's light.

It's a pretty good light.

GLENN: It's more of a night light.

It's kind of nice.

PAT: Yes. I don't think she understands the moon doesn't have its own light. I don't think she knows that.

GLENN: I don't think she knows that either. I don't think she thinks.

PAT: It's awesome. Is that incredible? Wow!

GLENN: Gas.

PAT: Yeah. The moon. Gas.

GLENN: You know what, could you play that again?

Because notice, no one laughs.

PAT: Right. Because she is not joking.

GLENN: I'm not sure -- right. I know. But no one laughs. I'm not sure anyone in the audience knows she was wrong.

VOICE: Provide unique light and energy. So that you have the energy of the moon at night.

GLENN: No, you don't.

VOICE: And sometimes, you've heard the word "full moon."

PAT: You've heard that, yeah?

VOICE: Sometimes you need to take the opportunity just to come out and see, a full moon is that complete rounded circle, which is made up of mostly gases.

PAT: Right. Right. No.

VOICE: That's why the question is why or how could we as humans live on the moon.

GLENN: We don't.

VOICE: The gas is such that we could do that.

GLENN: We don't.
(laughter)

VOICE: It's almost --

PAT: No. Almost.

VOICE: -- impossible, to go near the sun.

PAT: Impossible. Almost. But not --

VOICE: And you will see in a --

GLENN: I -- I --

VOICE: You will see in a couple of years, that NASA is going back to the moon.

PAT: Okay.

GLENN: The gas. With the gas.

PAT: Yes. To stand on the gaseous moon, so it's going to be cool to see.

GLENN: Wow. Wow. So how much gas do we get from the moon?

I mean, it must cost Exxon a lot to get the gas to the pump. Or is there a way, do we have a hose running from the pump?

PAT: To get a gas from the moon to here?

It's a pipeline. It's a pipeline from the moon.
(laughter)
She has been representing her district in Houston, Texas, for over 30 years. It's -- wow. She should never talk about space, ever again. Or anything else, for that matter.

GLENN: But definitely not space.

PAT: She was at NASA, and asked them while she was doing a tour of NASA, about whether or not you could still see the American flag that was planted on Mars. That was the -- like late '90s or early 2000s.

GLENN: We didn't plant one.

PAT: No, we didn't.

GLENN: We've never been -- wait a minute. That's new. I knew we didn't bring a flag.

PAT: Didn't bring a flag. God forbid. We forgot the flag, and then we forgot to put the human on Mars. So, yeah. There was no human on Mars.

GLENN: Right. We forgot to put the human on board too. Who was responsible for that?

PAT: In years.

GLENN: We landed a ship down there. And nobody was on board.

PAT: Pathetic.

GLENN: Did it slip into the gas?

PAT: No. Not on Mars. What are you, stupid?

PAT: Not on Mars. It's the moon that's gas.

GLENN: Right. Mars is cheese.
(laughter)
How do you get that butt stupid?

PAT: I don't know. I really don't know.

GLENN: Seriously. How could you -- because if you were sitting in a meeting. Now, imagine this.

Okay?

You've been to meetings where you're like, this person is a moron. But you're doing work. There's something that you have to -- I just -- you just have to plow through it. You have to get through it. You're selling this person, something. Whatever it is, you're doing for a living.

And you're sitting in that meeting. And they say something stipend. And you just have to go.

PAT: Hmm, yeah. Huh.

GLENN: Huh. And you just move on, right?

PAT: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: I don't think I would have the human restraint.

PAT: No. No way.

GLENN: To sit in a room, and have her say, and, you know, that's the full circle. And it's mainly gas. I don't -- I don't think I could do it. I think this is a really -- don't do this, kids. Because Jesus would not have done this. But I'm telling you, I probably would have. I probably would have played with her like a mouse and a cat. I probably have been like, wow. Really? Gas? What kind of gas is that? I think I would have --

PAT: That is such that you can land on it, and live there? I would like to know. Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. And so this gas, does it have any air in it? Or is it just oxygen?

PAT: Or is it like a -- like a really hard gas, like a rock gas? Sort of thing. Is it that?

GLENN: Well, I know we brought some dust back. So we know it's a dusty gas. Oh, I couldn't do it.

PAT: Wow. That is --

GLENN: Speaking of representatives in Houston. Let me give you this. This is from the black lawyer's podcast. Which I listened to all the time.

This is Texas Democrat representative jasmine Crockett.

PAT: She is really good too.

GLENN: Is she?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: She is suggesting now that black Americans shouldn't necessarily have to pay any taxes. Here she is.

VOICE: Just this past week, I don't remember, which celebrity. But it was actually a celebrity.

And I said, I don't know that it's necessarily a bad idea. I would have to think through it a lot. One of the things that they propose is black folk not have to pay taxes for a certain amount of time, because then again, that puts money back into your pocket.

But at the same time, it may not be as objectionable to some people about actually giving out dollars. But obviously, you start dealing with the tax brackets, and things like that. And that's one of the reasons that we argue, that reparations made sense.

PAT: Uh-huh. That's powerful. Isn't that a powerful point?

GLENN: I so want to ask her about the moon.

Congress Will Allow the FBI to SPY on YOU, But Not THEM?!
RADIO

Congress Will Allow the FBI to SPY on YOU, But Not THEM?!

Congress is voting on whether to re-authorize FISA Section 702, which would allow the FBI to secretly spy on Americans without warrants. Glenn speaks to 3 congressmen who are leading the charge to prevent this. First, Rep. Chip Roy accuses House Speaker Mike Johnson of standing in the way of an amendment to force the FBI to obtain warrants before spying on U.S. citizens. Then, Rep. Thomas Massie lays out the "biggest red flag" he's seen: “There’s 2 carve-outs in here for congressmen…Only if you’re a Senator or US Representative do they have to notify you” if they’re spying on you without a warrant. And lastly, Rep. Warren Davidson explains his his “Fourth Amendment is Not For Sale” amendment, which would put an end to this shady practice.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: House Republicans are divided. I don't know how they're divided on this.

Read the Constitution. Where do you find in the Constitution warrants, Pat?

PAT: Well, you have the Fourth Amendment. For instance.

GLENN: Which is?

PAT: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.

And no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause. Supported by oath or ampliation.

GLENN: So wait. Wait. Wait.

That's the Fourth Amendment. What does that mean?

The reason why this was written in, is because the king used to issue general warrants. And that meant Pat Gray, there's something wrong with him. Go find it. And they could look into anything.

They could go into your house, go through all of your papers. Where a warrant, now, our kind of warrant has to be sworn out. By the police and somebody else, you know, somebody tips them off.

And they say, look, I know he robbed somebody, or he killed somebody. And he's keeping their necklace in their house.

It's in his safe, in his wall, and in his bedroom. They go to the judge, and the judge says, really?

And listens to all of it. And he's supposed to be skeptical and protect your right to privacy.

But if they have enough evidence to make the judge go, I think you're right. He did.

Then he issues that specific warrant. They can't just go into your business. And everything else.

And just look through stuff.

They have to know what they're looking for, and generally, where it is.

PAT: And if they find something else, that incriminates them on some other issue. You can't use it.

GLENN: You can't use it, okay?

That's the Fourth Amendment. This is where we get warrants. This is why you can't just stop people in the streets, and search them.

Okay?

This is why America doesn't say, papers please. You can't do that! Because of the Fourth Amendment. Now, we were all really drunk and stupid, when we passed the Patriot Act. And in the Patriot Act, it has Section 702.

And it's the foreign intelligence surveillance act.

And we ail talked about it, at the time. And we all trusted our government, at the time.

Strangely, except for actual liberals, which I don't think exist anymore.

And they were the ones that were saying, tonight. Don't do this.

This -- this will -- they will scoop Americans up into this.

PAT: And we said at the time, eh, that's fine. It's not going to happen. Because I was for it, at the very beginning.

A few weeks into it, I was like, oh, wait. It's going to be a problem.

I remember thinking, all they have to do is just change the meaning of terrorist. If they -- if they decide a group of Americans are terrorists, we're done.

And that's exactly what they've done now.

So what happens is, they -- they get a warrantless surveillance of foreigners.

We don't have to have a warrant on foreigners.

So they go to the FISA court, and they say, look, we're going to listen to these people.

And they don't need a warrant. And they go and they listen to those people.

The problem is: It's a giant chain.

That person, if that person is foreign, and he calls somebody here in America, then that person is tracked.

And everyone else that he talks to. And everyone else that they talk to.

And so on. And so on.

Do you remember the old -- you know, the shampoo commercial?

And so on. And so on. And it kept dividing itself, until the whole screen was just nothing, but faces.

That's exactly what is happening. And they are scooping up all kinds of information on you. That doesn't have anything to do, with terror overseas.

This has got to stop. You know, when they -- when they built, after 9/11, they built the visitor's center of Washington, DC.

What you don't know, is -- or may not know.

Is underneath the visitor's center, we don't even know how many floors, there are.

Underneath that.

It's all top secret.

Your -- some of your senators and some of your Congressmen can't even get into the floors. They're top secret, because they're FISA courts.

We know now, that the FISA courts are completely corrupt. We know that the FBI is changing the facts, when they go to the court.

They're changing -- they've actually changed, sworn testimony. And no one is punished for it.

We cannot allow section 702 to pass.

Now, there is a -- an amendment to the bill. That has been suggested.

But the bill is coming up, this week. The G.O.P. representative Laura Lee of Florida, is the one who has put the amendment in.

Titled reforming intelligence and securing America act. It would reauthorize section 702 of FISA for five years.

And aims to impose a series of reforms. I don't believe any of the reforms.

I don't believe those will ever happen. We have given the keys to everything about us.

To the government. And the government has turned hostile on many Americans.

So, what do we do? We have Chip on yet?

CHIP: We passed a rollout committee yesterday, that would include -- that had a rule that said we will have a vote on a warrant. The problem is that the Speaker of the House, has now come out against the warrant amendment. That's a problem. Because the Speaker has pit his finger on the scale to shift the conversation. And to say publicly, we don't need the warrant.

GLENN: What the hell is wrong with this guy?

CHIP: Well, that's for another conversation. For the purpose of today, when we go to the floor, in an hour and 40 minutes, we're bringing to the floor under a bill that has an amendment to add the Fourth Amendment protection, the warrant protection that we could still pass, but seems like we won't. Because the speaker has put his finger on the scales.

So now since the speaker has done that, we now have to decide, whether or not we stop the whole process by killing the rule.

And then force it to be only reauthorized under its current form.

Which, of course, still wouldn't give us the protection of the warrant.

GLENN: No.

CHIP: But our concern is, there are other amendments in this, that would expand FISA in the name of going after --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

CHIP: Right. And so, for example, there is well-intended legislation, to go after. To be able to collect data. Collect information. Relative to drug trafficking like fentanyl.

The problem is, in the definition, about precursors, and other stuff. It expands FISA. Expands the amount of information they were collecting. You could be about talking about an American citizen, buying, you know, whatever. Cold medicine.

That's the precursor for making meth.

So we're all alarmed, that it's expanding FISA, and we're trying to run all these pieces to ground.

Meanwhile, that's all stuff that's been added to it. You know, by the leadership.

So now, we're trying to figure out, what we do. With a rule here at noon.

We are conflicted because of the current regime, doesn't have the Fourth Amendment warrant, you know, a language in there.

Obviously, we still have protections in American citizens under the Constitution. But if you don't put this provision in place, it's not as strong in terms of what we're trying to do to protect American citizens.

THOMAS: The biggest red flag in this. And I spent 15 minutes last night. The rules committee, going back and forth to the chairman of the Intel committee. We finally got him to admit, this is inside his bill. A carve-out for congressmen. I don't know if Chip mentioned it.

GLENN: No. He didn't.

THOMAS: Okay. They are trying to tell you, they have 53 reforms in here that will take care of all the problems. Well, the congressman who are voting for this aren't convinced, because they get a carve-out. There's two carve-outs here for congressmen.

Number one, the FBI is surveilling you, using FISA. They're going into this database, and searching with your name and your congressman. And they're ostensibly doing it for your own good.

Because they're worried about foreign actors. They have to notify you.

Only if you're a congressman. Only if you're a senator or US representative.

Do they have to notify you. And I asked, why did they put that in there? They were afraid of political bias.

What about school boards? Aren't you afraid of political bias there? And oh, by the way, does this apply to candidates, or just incumbent congressmen? It only applies to incumbent congressmen. How special is that?

So my solution here is, get a warrant. And then you don't have to put out carve-outs for congressmen.

GLENN: Correct.

THOMAS: And here's what's especially despicable about the carve-out. That's to get congressmen's votes. There's at least one Congressman we know -- Darin LaHood. He's said this publicly. He's on the Intel community, and he was being spied on by the Intel community.

He's responsible for their oversight. So he was worried enough about this. That he insisted, there would be some provision. Now, his concern is legitimate.

I'm not tingeing him, per se.

GLENN: No. I know.

THOMAS: For asking for this. It should be solved for everybody, not just congressmen.

GLENN: Thank you. So tell us what your amendment actually will do.

WARREN: Okay. So the amendment we have is called the Fourth Amendment is not for sale. So one of the most important ones in the bill is to get a warrant.

And let's go back in the fall. The base tax had getting a warrant, and the -- what is the Fourth Amendment not for sale do?

It prevents the federal government from buying data from data brokers that they would otherwise have to get a warrant for a subpoena to obtain. So it was in the data broker loophole. So it was in the base text. The Speaker essentially works with the Intel committee to gut the bill, of some of these important provisions.

And at least the warrant requirement is going to be able to be offered as an amendment. But he basically strips the Fourth Amendment is not for sale, from even getting a vote.

And part of the reason, I still remember, you know, a long time member of Congress, again, Walter Jones, asked him one time when a bill was popular in the House. Passed with like 420 some votes.

Only seven no votes. Would help solve a problem. Be popular with the public. Why in the world won't the Senate pick this up?

And he said, well, I hate to be cynical. But probably because it would pass. And why would they strip this out?

Well, because Dick Durbin, who is the Chairman of Judiciary in the Senate has a similar bill in the Senate, and Chuck Schumer is a cosponsor.

So this is an issue that does not break on party lines. When it was offered as a standalone bill in the Judiciary Committee last summer, it passed 36 to one through the committee. So how often did Jim Jordan and Jerry Nadler agree on something? Pretty rare.

But this is one that at least, this isn't a total party line issue like so many other things are.

GLENN: So they're stripping it out.

And he's actually going around the rules to make sure that it's -- that it never makes it to the floor, is it he not?

WARREN: Well, it doesn't make it as part of this debate. He has offered to give us a vote at a later time. But this is the problem.

If it's not attached to something that has passed like FISA. Well, of course, the administration wants to keep spying on Americans. They have already said that. So if there was a way to pass it through the House -- and even if there is a way to pass it through the Senate. The administration, you know, simply would veto it.

That's why it should be part of the FISA debate. That's why the judiciary committee had it as part of the base text of the bill, that essentially the Speaker reworked.

GLENN: So I'm hoping that most of the people that are hearing your voice right now, are the kind of people that maybe used to say. Well, I don't have anything to worry about.

Because I'm not doing anything illegal.

And realize now, the government has turned hostile towards American citizens.

And all of the information that is out there, it's very dangerous for individuals.

Tell me what -- why the average person should care. Why does this matter?

You know, to those people who are not breaking the law, et cetera, et cetera?

WARREN: Well, the barbecue to the founding of the country, and why was the revolution ticked off. One of the major causes according to John Adam was the general warrant stop the king. King George was basically saying, well, we're looking for bad people. So under the guise of looking for bad people, we will just come and rummage through your personal effects. And, you know, in the concept of privacy.

Well, the Fourth Amendment doesn't say, well, if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.

It says that as an American, you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

That without probable cause, and they can't search your stuff, and with probable cause, they have to get a warrant. Even for really bad people.

Even to go after pedophiles. You have to get a warrant. And that's the way. The foreign surveillance act, is designed to collect intelligence on foreigners. That part is broadly supported.

It's been very effective. We want to stop threats to our country. But when it comes to citizens, there's a reason there's no Domestic Surveillance Act. It's because the Fourth Amendment says that we have an expectation of privacy.

And we have to defend that. It's probably the most infringed part of the Bill of Rights at this point.

GLENN: So what is the most effective thing people can do today?

WARREN: Call their member of Congress. Tell them to demand that their number of votes are for a warrant requirement. And ask them to say, we should be voting on the Fourth Amendment is not for sale.

The government should not be circumventing the warrant requirement, to buy data, that they would otherwise get a warrant. They don't want the warrant requirement in the first place. But in the event, that should pass, in a lot of ways, they're saying, well, it's not as consequential. Because we could just buy our ways around it.