RADIOAugust 30, 2024

Inflation, fracking, & stolen valor: The BIGGEST Harris/Walz CNN interview LIES

Kamala Harris and Tim Walz sat down with CNN’s Dana Bash for what was possibly the cringiest interview to ever air…at least for Americans who keep up with the news. But Glenn warns that for those who ONLY watched that interview, it may have been effective. So, Glenn and Stu do CNN’s job for them and debunk all the lies told during this interview: Did Harris really flip-flop on fracking? Did Walz really just mess up his “grammar” when made false claims about his military service? Did Kamala Harris just admit she lied to the American people about the Inflation Reduction Act? Plus, Glenn explains the industry secret behind why CNN’s interview seemed “hard-hitting” at first before it turned into a campaign ad.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Last night, Kamala Harris was on with Dana Bash. And it was interesting. Because I -- I watched it, trying to think of two things.

One, a family member of mine, who is -- doesn't agree with me on what's going on in the country at all. Doesn't see it. You, but doesn't really watch the news, read the news, listen to the news. You know, just is like in their happy little world.

And so I watched it as that family member. And then I watched it as somebody who is really up on things. Okay?

I think if you were really up on things, this -- this interview last night, was so agonizing.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Because it was -- it was -- I've never heard anything like it. I really haven't -- let me play a couple of cuts here. Here's -- here's Kamala. Cut three.

On why she hasn't fixed the economy while she's in office.

KAMALA: My proposal includes what would be a tax credit of $25,000, for first time home buyers. So they can just have enough to put a downtown on a home, which is part of the American dream and their aspiration.

But do it in a way that allows them to actually get on a path to achieving that goal and that dream.

VOICE: So you have been vice president for three and a half years. The steps that you are talking about now, why haven't you done them already?

STU: Yeah!

KAMALA: Well, first of all, we have to recover as an economy, and we have done that. I am very proud of the work that we have done, that has brought inflation down to less than 3 percent.

The work that we have done to cap the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors. Donald Trump said he was going to do a number of things, including allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, never happened. We did it.

So now, as I travel in the state of Georgia and around our country, the number of seniors that have benefited.

GLENN: Okay. Notice what she's done here. Notice what she's done. She has completely side-stepped. She's a good learner. She completely side-stepped. Why didn't you do anything?

Well, because Donald Trump. We had to fix everything. The economy was in shambles. And, you know, let me tell you about prescription drugs. He says, we negotiated. But we did it.

We didn't do anything.

And him, him, him. And now I can go out, and see people who have insulin. And we don't have any problems.

Wait. What does that have to do with the economy again?

Okay. So she was slippery on absolutely everything.

STU: Oh. I have one more thing on that before we go, Glenn. You took actions to get the nation rate down to 3 percent, from what?

From what? It wasn't -- it wasn't 3 percent, when Donald Trump was in office. It only is down to 3 percent from your terrible regime.

When you had it at 9 percent, sure. It's down from whatever it was. Seven or 9 percent then.

But three percent is almost double what it was when you took over. It's down to double!

That's your argument.

GLENN: And, by the way, the prices never came down. So you're just taking the high prices from the 9 percent, and you're adding three and a half percent, every year, on top of those high prices.

So that's why. That doesn't work with people. Well, inflation is down. No. It's not. No, it's not.

I still can't afford food. That's why. The next thing is, about fracking.

Listen to this one.

STU: Oh, God.

KAMALA: No. And I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 that I would not ban fracking. As vice president, I did not ban Freddie Mac.

As president, I will not ban fracking.

In 2019, I believe, in a town hall, you said, you were asked. Would you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking for your first day in office. And there's no question, I'm in favor of banning fracking. So, yes. It changed in that campaign.

In 2020, I made very clear where I stand. We are in 2024, and I've not changed that position, nor will I going forward. I have kept my word, and I will keep my word.

VOICE: What made you change that position at the time?

STU: Yeah.

KAMALA: Well, let's be clear, my values have not. I believe it is very important that we take seriously, what we must do. To --

GLENN: Now, listen to this. Word salad.

KAMALA: In terms of the climate. And to do that, we can do what we have accomplished thus far.

STU: We can do. What?

KAMALA: What we've done to invest by my calculation, over -- probably a trillion dollars over the next ten years, investing in a clean energy economy.

What we've already done, creating over 300,000 new clean energy jobs. That tells me, from my experience, as vice president. We can do it without banning fracking. In fact, Dana. Dana. Excuse me. I cast the tie-breaking vote.

STU: Yeah, you did.

KAMALA: That actually increased leases for fracking.

STU: A lot of tie breaking votes that she didn't answer for.

GLENN: Yeah, a lot of them.

STU: That's an infuriating clip. Infuriating in 150 ways.

GLENN: Also, you cannot be part of the Green New Deal, and not ban fracking. What is she saying?

STU: I would love to know exactly. She did it on the debate stage in 2020. You might remember, of course, she didn't even make it to 2020, in her campaign. Failed before Iowa.

She is talking about the vice presidential -- where she's saying that.

But like, she says she will not change that going forward.

Well, could she have promised that in 2019, too? How the hell will we know, going forward?

She's changed almost everything going forward.

GLENN: So her answer to everything, last night, on the changes. Was very, very clear.

Yes. But my values haven't changed.

Okay. So what are her values? We know what her values are. The earth is number one priority.

Okay. Do whatever we have to do. She was for the green new deal. She even boasted about the green new deal, becoming the Inflation Reduction Act.

And all the things they got through, the Inflation Reduction Act. So they admitted to lying to you, about the Inflation Reduction Act.

It had nothing to do with inflation. It had everything to do with the green new deal.

So lying to you there, and -- and her values. Her values. My values haven't changed.

Well, I've seen your values. I don't like your values. You -- you cannot change -- you cannot remain with the same values, and change your positions 180 degrees.

Why? Unless one of your values is, winning an election. Doing whatever you have to do, to win an election.

STU: That's your only value. That's your only value, Glenn.

GLENN: Yes.

Oh, no. She has some values. Yeah. She has some values.

STU: By the way, Glenn, I will say, give a little credit to Dana Bash. Who actually did ask my question. That was right after -- did you laugh at that?

GLENN: I did.

STU: Because she said, was there some policy or scientific data that you saw, that said, oh, okay. I get it now. We shouldn't ban fracking.

And she basically just didn't answer it. You know, typical nonsense. But there's good -- it was good. I will say, Dana Bash, first third of that interview, not bad.

And then just a giant plane crash after that.

GLENN: All right. So I don't know if I've told this story before. Probably have.

But when I was at Fox, Bill O'Reilly called me into his office. And he said, what are you doing, man?

They are going to kill you. They are going to kill you. And he was talking about the press and the left.

And I said, I don't care. And he said, no. You need to care. You need to care.

He said, or it will be very short-lived. And I said, I'm only planning on being here for two years, Bill. And he said, what is wrong with you? I said, oh, I don't want to do this.

But I'll listen.

So he said, look, I have the audience and I have the corporations, kind of a little afraid of me. When I put their picture up on the no-spin zone. And he said, so here's what we're going to do.

When you say something controversial and everybody is at your throat, he said, you are going to come on to my show. And I will ask you a tough question. And I might even follow it up, with another tough question.

But you need to understand, this is a friendly room, and from here on out, you can say, asked and answered.

What this whole thing was yesterday, was Dana asking tough questions. But knowing, she's walking into a friendly room.

When you are a candidate, or somebody who is going to be in the hot seat, you know, this is why Kamala won't do anything on Fox.

You know if you're walking into a friendly room, they'll push you, but not continue to push you.

Okay?

Dana would have never let that question go. With J.D. Vance or Donald Trump, that would have been the entire, what? Eighteen minutes. Would have been the whole thing.

But it wasn't. It was just two pushes. And then I'm off it. And then we're going to do a happy, you know, campaign commercial for you, in the last, you know, five minutes.

So what this was, because you'll notice that Kamala also said, that she doesn't want to deal in the past.

We're about turning the page.

And just -- and just looking towards the future.

We're not going to dwell on the past.

So when somebody asks her about her flip-flop.

I've already asked -- I've already answered that question.

My values have not changed. Let's move on. We have to focus on the future.

They only have to buy a few weeks.

That's it. Was it next week or the week after?

Pennsylvania starts to vote.

If -- if she isn't exposed soon, it will be too late for places like Pennsylvania.

But I'm just, again, not convinced that people believe her about fracking. And people believe her about the economy.

I mean, they might like her, but, again, if you are aware of politics and you know, these aren't good people. These aren't good people. And you can tell that about Donald Trump and J.D. Vance. Politicians aren't good people. We should never trust them.

And you know anything about her policies. You know how radical she really is. And even more so, you know, Tim, the greatest father in the world. Who just drags his kid on stage and says, knock it off.

That was beautiful. He's even more radical. And I don't even know if that's possible. But that's what it appears to be.

But if you don't know that, and you're a low-information voter, and you are not paying attention, but you want to just see who she is. Last night was a home run for you.

Last night was a home run.

And it gives her cover now, to not do another interview.

At least for a long while. Well, I did one.

I'll try to schedule one by the end of September, or sometime in October. When it's too late.

It's fascinating to watch politics. I mean, wish I was watching it in somebody else's country and not mine. Back in just a minute.

Byrna launcher is our sponsor. Unless you live out in the sticks, it's not the pest idea to practice training with your guns out in the backyard. Kind of thing that has a tendency with you having a conversation with the cops, and your neighbors screaming at you.

That's not usually so fun. But you know what you can use, to practice there, is a Byrna launcher. Right?

A Byrna launcher, it feels just like a gun in your hand. It feels exactly, you know, like, you know, any pistol, that you're pulling out.

And you're able to practice. And it's completely silent.

It's less lethal. And that's the way to go. Byrna is the best alternative to deadly force. When you need deadly force, man, I'm telling you. Get a gun.

But if you're in a situation where you can't shoot, or you think, I don't know if I've got this right.

You can shoot a Byrna launcher. And it will hit tear gas. And that will keep that person, you know, on the ground for about 40 minutes.

It's got a 60-foot range.

It's perfect for nonlegal high noon. Or nonlethal high noon.

You can get the launcher. They also have the rifles now, in stock.

Byrna.com. B-Y-R-N-A.com/Glenn. Get 10 percent off your purchase now. It's B-Y-R-N-A.com/Glenn. Check the latest news out, and make sure you get the Byrna launcher. From Byrna.com/Glenn. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
All right. Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

I've got to hit Tim Walz on -- one of the worst answers.

I mean, they were bad answers all the way along, if you wanted actual facts.

But listen to this.

This is when he was asked about, you know, I carried a gun in war.

Listen to this.

VOICE: They're just starting to get to know you.

I want to ask you a question about how you've described your service in the national guard.

You said that you carried weapons in war, but you have never deployed actually in a war zone.

A campaign official said that you misspoke. Did you?

Well, first of all, I'm incredibly proud. I've done 24 years of wearing uniform in this country. Equally proud of my service in the public school classroom, whether it's Congress or the governor.

My record speaks for itself. But I think people are coming to get to know me.

I speak like they do. I speak candidly. I wear my emotions on my sleeve. I speak especially passionately about our children being shot at schools. And around guns. So I think people know me. They know where I am. They know where my heart is.

STU: They don't.

GLENN: Listen.

VOICE: My record for over 40 years, speaks for itself.

VOICE: The idea that you said you were in war. Did you misspeak as the campaign has said?

VOICE: Yeah, I said we were talking about a shooting. The ideas of carrying these weapons of war. And my wife, can tell you my grammar is not always correct. But, again, if it's not this, it's an attack on my children --

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop.

STU: Slimy.

GLENN: So his grammar isn't that good. I believe he taught English to the Chinese in China. So a grammar thing, probably shouldn't be that big of a problem for you, Tim.

I'm just -- I'm just points that out. I'm just pointing that out.

It was good enough to teach the Chinese in China. Probably good enough to say, I don't know how you make that grammatical re.

Just like the gun, I carried in war.

Hmm. That doesn't seem like a grammar problem.

That seems like a lying problem.

STU: Yeah. Glenn, it's interesting.

Because both you and I. The people might point out the fact that we sort of speak English.

But who knows? It's not always all that close to correct.

But neither of us have ever had a moment, where we've said, we may have been at war, at some point, shooting at the enemy.

That's never slipped out of our mouth.

With all the grammatical mistakes we've made, with over 20 plus years doing the show together.

Neither of us have ever claimed to be Rambo, that just never occurred. I don't wonder why.

GLENN: Well, I mean, I don't know about you. But I'm the Jack the Ripper of the English language. I kill it in an alleyway, almost every hour.

Okay?

But like Stu said, I've never said, you know, like when I was on the moon.

Or when I was in war. Now, I've talked about World War II a lot.

You know, but I've never said, you know, when I killed Hitler.

No. No. Never said that. Never said that.

STU: Not once. It's kind of hard to butcher the language, that much. To where that comes mangled out of your mouth.

Might be a mental problem.

Might be.

SHOCK POLL: The % of Young People Who Support SOCIALISM is Insane

New polling reveals a shocking truth: young Americans aren’t just open to socialism... they overwhelmingly want a socialist president in 2028. Glenn Beck and Justin Haskins break down five alarming surveys showing massive ideological shifts among voters ages 18-39, including young Republicans. Why is socialism exploding in popularity, and what does this mean for the future of America? Are we on the brink of a political transformation or potentially even a national crisis?

Watch This FULL Episode of 'Glenn TV' HERE

Property Taxes are OUT OF CONTROL - And Here's Why! | Guest: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott

Texas Governor Greg Abbott joins Glenn Beck to expose why Texans are being crushed by skyrocketing property taxes — and how local governments, not the state, keep driving homeowners deeper into financial distress. Gov. Abbott breaks down his five-point plan to impose strict spending limits, force voter approval for tax hikes, reform out-of-control appraisals, empower citizens to slash taxes themselves, and eliminate school district property taxes for homeowners altogether. Glenn argues that property tax is morally wrong because it prevents Texans from ever truly owning their land, and Abbott lays out his strategy to fight both parties in the legislature to finally deliver lasting relief.

Joe Rogan & Glenn AGREE: We just got CLOSER to civil war

Joe Rogan recently warned that we may have gotten to Step 7 of 9 in the lead-up to civil war. Glenn reviews the 9 Steps and explains why he believes Rogan nailed this one. But Glenn also lays out what Americans MUST do to reverse this trend...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So if you take what Fetterman said yesterday about how people are cheering for him to die on the left, and then you couple it with something that was on the Joe Rogan show on Tuesday. He was saying that the reaction to the death of Charlie Kirk makes him think that the US is closer to Civil War than -- than he thought.

Now, let me quote him. He said, after the Charlie Kirk thing. I'm like, oh, my.

We might be at seven. This might be he step seven on the way to a bona fide Civil War. Charlie Kirk gets shot, and people are celebrating.

Like, whoa. Whoa. Whoa.

You want people to die that you disagree with?

Where are we now on the scale of Civil War?

Well, let me go over the scale of Civil War, because it's sobering.

Now, none of this has to be true. If we wake up and decide, I don't want to do this anymore!

Okay?

Here's step one.

Step one. Loss of civic trust.

Every civil conflict begins when people stop believing that the system is fair. Are we there?

We're so far -- we're so far past the doorway, we are comfortably asleep on the couch on this one. Gallup and Pew both show trust in Congress, the media courts, and the FBI government are now at record lows.

The Edelman Trust Barometer classifies the US now as severely polarized. Majority of Republicans distrust federal elections. Majority of Democrats don't trust the Supreme Court.

Americans are really united on one thing, and that is the other side is corrupt!

When faith in the rules collapses, the republic begins to wobble. But that's step one. Step two, polarization hardens into identity!

Political disagreement is normal!

Identity conflict is fatal!

But that's what Marxists push. Identity politics. This is when politics stopped being about policy, and started being about who you are as a person.

Have we crossed this one into step two?

I mean, we're neck deep into this. A study on this, from PRRI.

It's a survey, found 23 percent of Americans believe political violence may be necessary to save the that I guess.

I think that's an old study. Americans now sort themselves by ZIP code into ideological enclaves. The big sort: Universities, activists, corporations. Everybody is promoting oppressor versus oppressed.

And that -- does what?

It puts us into incompatible tribes. Opponents aren't wrong anymore. The opponent is dangerous!

If I go back and you look at civil wars, Lebanon, before 1975. Yugoslavia, before 1991. That's -- we're doing that. Okay?

Step three. Breakdown of the gatekeepers. The gatekeepers are kind of like the referees of society. It's the media, political parties, churches, civic leaders.

When they fail, extremism fills the vacuum. Okay. Where are we on this? Have our gatekeepers failed us?

Yeah. I think both parties, especially the left, you know, everything I predicted that the left was going to be eaten by the extreme left, and then the communists and the socialists is now happening.

They've lost control of the fringe of each party. Media transformed, you know, from referees into team coaches. Tech platforms. It's outrage for profit. Universities are not there to cool things down. They heat them up.

Churches. Churches are useless. Useless.

When the referees leave the field, the game devolves into a brawl. And the refs are gone off the field. So there are only nine steps. We're at step four. Here's step four.

Are you ready for this one?

Parallel information realities.

Civil wars don't require different opinions. They require different realities.

I remember reading about Germany, at the beginning of, you know, the Nazi era. How the two new newspapers. One was propaganda for the government.

And the other one, it was the last one that was kind of the holdout.

And they said, you could read them, and they would cover the same thing.

But they had almost no information was the same. Except, that happened yesterday.

Here's what they said. And then everything else was different. That's exactly -- I mean, step four is complete!

We can't agree on facts, right?

Crime rates. Border numbers. Inflation. Election security.

Two Americans can watch the same video. And see opposite truths.

Social media algorithms are creating customized political universes.

Digital echo chambers. Deepfakes. We're just at the beginning of that. And both sides accuse the other of running disinformation machines.

Why? Because we don't have a shared reality. So if you don't have a shared reality. How do you settle any dispute?

On the nine steps, we're up to number five. Coming in at number five.

Loss of neutral rule of law.

This out of the nine steps with, five is the pivot point.

It's not corruption, it's the belief that the law is no longer neutral.

Are we there yet?

Let me tell you the CBS you.gov poll. 67 percent say the justice system is used for political purposes.

I think that's low. January 6 defendants given years in prison, 2020 rioters were released. High profile political figures, prosecuted or shielded based on party.

FBI whistle-blowers alleging pressure to inflate domestic extremism numbers. States like Texas, directly defying federal directives, on border enforcement.

And now, leading the way, with the federal government.

History is really cold and unforgiving on this point.

Once the people believe justice is political! Remember, this is the turning point.

The republic stands on borrowed time. Once you no longer believe that justice is achievable. Step six.

Are we there?

I think we are.

Step six. Normalization of political violence!

This is where violence stops shocking the system. Are we there?

Remember, where violence stops shocking the system. Look at evidence just from Virginia. What they just voted for.

He was calling for the death of a -- a political opposition.

Calling for his children to be killed.

Was called on it, never apologized.

Never said anything other than, yeah. I know. He dug it deeper.

Was anyone shocked by it? Apparently not. They elected him. Here's the evidence. 2020 riots.
574 events. $2 billion in damage. Was anybody outraged by that? Or was it downplayed and excused?
Assassination attempts. Assassination attempts against the president. Supreme Court justice.

Fistfights. And mob actions on college campuses. To silence speakers. Rising to do for punching a fascist or stopping genocide. Depending on the ideology. Online chatter discussing Civil War, national divorce, and revolution.

When violence becomes part of the political language, a nation crosses an invisible line. We're now up to step seven out of nine.

This is where Joe Rogan said, are we at step seven?

The rise of militias and parallel forces.

When a state loses he is monopoly on force.

Countdown accelerates. So where are we on this one?

I think we're seeing, maybe early signs of this.

You're starting to see the -- the states kind of organize these mobs, you know, to go after ICE.

Right?

Armed groups, right-wing, left-wing radical secessionists. Anyone.

Once they start forming their own police forces. Or their own option forces, then you have -- then you have everything really falling apart.

Entirely!

I don't think we're there, yet!

But we're starting to see the beginnings of this.

Step eight. The trigger event.

Civil Wars don't begin with a plan. They begin with a spark.

So where are we?

We're not here yet. The conditions are right. Potential triggers, disputed election in '26 or '28.

Political assassination or major attack.

Supreme Court decision that ignites mass unrest.

Financial crisis or dollar crisis.

A state federal standoff turning violent!

Nothing is ignited yet, but the room is soaked in gasoline. So we don't have seven. We're on the verge of eight, at any time. And here's nine.

This is the point of no return.

When police, military, or federal agencies split, even if no one calls it that, well, where are we?

Well, I just read a story about how with the Mamdani election in New York, a good number of the police force is going to leave. And they're going to go join police forces elsewhere. You also have the tension between the state National Guard, and the federal directives, the state guard and the state directives. Law enforcement recruitment is at crisis lows. The distrust of the FBI, DOJ, CIA. Tens of millions of Americans. I always really respected those institutions. I have no respect for them now. If you have states openly defying federal rules on immigration, drug laws, sanctuary policies.
Whistle-blower claims of internal politicization.

All of these things are in play for the first time in 150 years, people can imagine!

So I give this to you, not to be fearful of, but to know where you are. As a map!

Know where you are.

And hopefully, it might wake some people up, if you chart America on, on the nine step model of Civil War. Steps one through four, completed!

Step five, happening!

Step six, happening! Step seven, beginning! Step eight, just waiting for it. And step nine, avoidable, only if step eight, never happens. Again, I'm not telling you for doom purposes, this is diagnosis. This is a doctor going, I want you to look at the chart.

And this is a doctor saying, I want you to look at -- do you see what's happening to your body?

If you don't stop this habit, you are going to die. You don't have to die. You can stop smoking and drinking right now. You can start exercising. But if you don't, you are going to die.

The question is, are we the nation that says, nah, that's not going to happen to me. Or are we the nation that wakes up and sees our chart and says, good heavens, it's way far more gone than I thought it was. But I feel something in the air.

I'm going to change my behavior. The nation that refuses to look and wake up and stop calling their neighbors enemies, is the nation that fails!

We have to strengthen these things that have already fallen. And, you know what, the easiest one to do is?

Church. Where are you ministers and pastors priests and rabbis?

Where the hell are you?

I think there's going to be a special section for you, when you cross over to the -- because you're doing things in the name of God!

So when you get to the other side, I think there's going to be a special section for those who remained silent. While his rights were being taken away.

You don't own that right.

I don't own that right.

The Lord gave us those rights, and said, protect them!

By you, being the representative, the voice box, if you will, of the Lord, to shepherd his people. By you not standing up and saying, hey, by the way, we have -- we have a moral responsibility to protect these rights for the next generation! By you refusing because you're afraid. Because I think, there's no politics in the Bible! There's no politics in the Bible. Really?

The whole thing is about politics. Is about the moral way you have to live your life.

Calling things as you see them. Calling them back to eternal principles.

He didn't tell anybody how to vote. Render to Caesar what is Caesar's.

But there are certain principles that you have to have, or you lose not only this citizenship, but the next citizenship. The one that really matters. And, boy, if you are doing it because you're a coward, you are in the wrong business!

Get out of the pulpit, and go to work at Jack in the Box.

Democrat “SMOKING GUN” on Trump & Epstein gets DESTROYED by facts

The House Oversight Democrats recently released "new" emails allegedly proving President Trump lied about his knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. However, Glenn points out a glaring issue with these emails that destroys their entire narrative...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, let's dive right into the Epstein Maxwell emails. My gosh, Stu!

Why are they trying to cover up that Donald Trump had sex with children!

STU: I mean, it's just clear, as -- as day, in the emails!

GLENN: Yeah. No.

STU: He spent hours with one of the victims. What else could have possibly have occurred in that arrangement? We don't know!

GLENN: And it's -- it's one of the victims, Stu. One of the victims!

STU: One of the victims, that's all we know. One of the victims.

GLENN: Let me read what Jeffrey Epstein wrote. I want you to realize that the dog who hasn't barked is Trump. Victim redacted. Victim spent hours at my house with him. He has never once been mentioned. Police chief, et cetera.

Okay. New information, just released. Or is it?

Because in 2011, 2011, that was released and everybody knew it. It's been out floating around. Here's the change: In 2011, this is what it read.

I want you to realize that the dog hasn't barked is Trump. Virginia spent hours at my house with him.

Why would you redact a name that is already out in the public square!

It's already out!

The memo is already out. The email is already out. It's been out for years. Why would you redact that name now?

Well, because it makes it all of a sudden, new and shiny. Shiny and new. If you don't know who said it, you see victim, and you're like, oh, you see victim. Who is the victim?

I don't know. But when you know it's Virginia, you know this has already gone to court. This is -- she already testified about this!

He didn't partake in any of this, any sex with any of it. It's true. He didn't partake in any sex with us, and I'm quoting, this is from the testimony. But it's not true, that he flirted with me. Donald Trump never flirted with me. Have you ever met him?

Yes, at Mar-a-Lago, my dad and him. I wouldn't say they were friends, but my dad knew him, and they would talk. Have you ever been in Donald Trump or Jeffrey Epstein's presence with one another? No!

What's the basis of your statement that Donald Trump is a good friend of Jeffrey? Jeffrey has told me that Donald Trump is a good friend of his.

He didn't partake in any of -- any of the sex with any of it. He flirted with me.

It's true, that he didn't partake in any sex with us. But it's not true that he flirted with me.

So I don't understand that. But she goes on. Donald Trump never flirted with me!

Okay. So what -- what's new about this?

This is the same girl, this is the same person that -- didn't she work at Mar-a-Lago?

Or she was going to get a job at Mar-a-Lago.

STU: Yeah. I believe she did at one point.

GLENN: Yeah. So we know they know each other. We know they know each other.

We know that at Mar-a-Lago, Jeffrey Epstein would come, and he was poaching the employees. The girls there. To go work for him.

And Donald Trump went to him. And said, "Hey, man. Stop it. Stop poaching people from me. That's not cool. Don't do it." And then he said, "Oh, yeah. All right." And then he did it a second time. And he's like, "You know what, you're out. I don't want you here anymore. I asked you not to do it, and you did it." Now, that doesn't mean that he knew what was happening to the girls or what was happening or anything else.

And even if it did mean something was happening with the girls, he was saying, "Hey. Stop it! Don't take any of the girls or the women here.
Don't do it." I don't believe he knew anything about any of this. But God only knows! And really, God only knows!

This is not new news. Donald Trump, he might end up beating Bezos as the richest man on the planet! When all is said and done!

Because, again, the -- they're presenting this as new fact, a giant scandal. Stu, I don't know if you know this. This is -- this breaking news is a giant scandal.

STU: Yeah. I've heard democratic representatives saying that over the past 24 hours. Yeah. We need to investigate this.

This is shocking stuff. It's a massive scandal. Even ABC News, I heard, pushed back against this. And said, well, what scandal? What are you implying occurred here?

We know who the victim was. We know the victim. Like why. Why did you even redact that name?

And they're like we always redact name of victims.

Do you really? When they're already out publicly?

Not to mention, this particular victim is not even alive.

You know, she sadly died. I mean, it's a terrible, terrible story.

GLENN: Terrible story.

STU: Yeah. She passed away.

A suicide. It was at least the report I believe. But she has a posthumous book coming out. But like a terrible, terrible story.

But, you know, to act as if you have to protect her identity when, number one, she's dead.

GLENN: Is ridiculous.

STU: Number two, everybody already knows who she was, including the news sources, who also have a policy, you would think.

And ABC has a policy. They redact, that was in this type of situation. But it's already been out. We already knew who it was.

So they redacted to make it look like he's with other people who have not already told us nothing bad occurred! You know, and it is an absolutely awful tactic. And at least --

GLENN: I think litigation should follow again. I think he should sue them again. Anyone who is presenting this as new information.

ABC did their job. Congratulations for ABC. They did their job.

They pointed out, this is not new information.

Why would you redact. Why are you releasing this now? And you're redacting a name this -- this email is already out!

You're presenting this as a new scandal.

And you redacted that name. This is completely dishonest. The news media shouldn't even run with it. They shouldn't even run with it. They should have said, old news. Old news. And if you did run with it, you should have handle it had like ABC handle it had. Wait a minute. Why did you redact name.

What do you mean that there's a new scandal. She already testified exactly opposite of what you're believing Jeffrey Epstein over the victim right now. I just want to make sure you understand the Democrats right here. You're taking the name of Epstein, over the victim.

Oh, okay. All right.

STU: And Epstein doesn't even say that anything occurred.

GLENN: No.

STU: There's not -- it's just -- it would be something you would have to jump to a conclusion, to accuse Donald Trump of something like this.

And we know what happened, because the victim said nothing!

Said, it was nothing!

GLENN: Right.

STU: In fact, it wasn't even a flirtation. Which, by the way, even that, you might have thought was creepy. It wasn't even a crime.

It wasn't even flirtation. So it's a disgrace in every single way.

GLENN: All right. So let me take you here. Let me take you here.

If you remember when the shutdown first started, what did the Democrats say, the reason why they did the shutdown?

Not them! Why Mike Johnson and everybody else wouldn't negotiate!

Why wouldn't -- why wouldn't the Republicans negotiate?

Because the heat was on, to release the Epstein files.

And they didn't want to have to do that. So they shut the government down!

Okay?

They wouldn't negotiate. You didn't hear any of this? Oh, it's so arrogant.

STU: It doesn't make any sense at all. That's probably what they said.

GLENN: I know. I know. So the government is open, and what does Mike Johnson do yesterday?

He said the House is going to vote on a bill to release all of the files related to the late financier, convicted child sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein next week. He said on Wednesday that a discharge position to bypass leadership and force a vote on the bill, hit the benchmark for needed signatures. It's been decided by him to expedite the vote for the bill, which under the current rules could have been delayed until at least early September.

So he says, as soon as that petition hit, the needed 218 signatures, I brought it up. Unanimous consent. Let's go! Release it.

So he's pushing this forward. Good, Mike!
Release all of it. Thank you!

Get it out. Lance this boil.

I mean, if anybody thinks that you're ever going to get the truth on this in the first place, it's madness. It's madness. Everybody -- I mean, so many important people were involved in this, and it was in the hands of the Democrats for the longest time. Okay?

So they had all of this information. You don't think it was all picked through? And if there was anything about Donald Trump, you don't think that would have come up between 2020 and 2024?

There's nothing in there about Donald Trump. These people are so stupid. This time, we've got him, boys. This time, we've got him.

No, you don't. This time, it's like Wile E. Coyote. This time, we've got the Roadrunner!

No. You're never going to catch him on this. It doesn't work. The guy was the most investigated person in the history of the world, and you've got nothing! Now, it's good to come out.

But if you think you're going to catch a bunch of people on the left, you're not going to. Because they had it, you know, in their possession.

You don't think all of the names were taken out? You don't think things were destroyed, if there was anything? I believe there was something. But I don't believe there's any names in it anymore. You're not going to get the truth on this one. You're just not going to get the truth, but release everything that we have. Everything!

Oh. Oh, by the way, also in the Epstein emails. How come nobody is talking about this one, Stu?

This one is from Michael Wolff, to Jeffrey Epstein. And then Jeffrey Epstein responds.

So Michael Wolff writes, "What's the thumbnail on Nes Baum (phonetic) Foster?"

And Jeffrey Epstein writes back, "Nes Baum White House Counsel, dot, dot, dot, Hillary doing naughties with Vince."

Now, Vince Foster killed himself, you know, and then killed himself at the White House. And then drug himself across the street to the park.

I mean, I don't know -- the Vince Foster thing is so old. And it doesn't -- but why is nobody talking about that one?

Why is no one talking about that?

Also, this the Jeffrey Epstein email bundle, ABC, you don't feel that's necessary to bring that one up?

Huh. Interesting.