RADIOOctober 02, 2024

Glenn Beck's Live REACTION: How JD Vance CRUSHED Tim Walz in the VP Debate

Ohio Sen. JD Vance had an amazing night at the CBS News Vice Presidential Debate against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Glenn Beck shares his instant reaction to the night: How was Vance able to create such a stark contrast between himself and Walz and will it have any impact on the election moving forward? Glenn is joined by fellow ‪@BlazeTV‬ hosts Stu Burguiere of ‪@studoesamerica‬, Jill Savage of‪@BlazeNewsTonight‬, Sara Gonzales of ‪@saragonzalesunfiltered‬, ‪@sdeace‬, and ‪@lizwheeler‬, who each give their immediate takes no the debate.

** VISIT: http://BlazeDebate.com and use Promo Code 'Debate' for $40 off your subscription to BlazeTV **

Did Arizona register 98,000 ILLEGALS to vote? AZ Justice sets the record STRAIGHT

Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick joins Glenn Beck to set the record straight about a claim that Arizona registered 98,000 illegal immigrants to vote. Justice Bolick tells Glenn that this is NOT TRUE and there is NO indication that any of the voters in question were here illegally. So, what actually happened? Justice Bolick explains and also comments on what you should do if you’re concerned about the fairness of the 2024 election.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

You know, our job is getting harder and harder.

I just gave permission to hire, you know, another researcher. This morning.

Because we are just overwhelmed in stories, that we don't know what the truth is.

You should see my -- my email, my -- my private messages.

And even my text messages from friends that I trust. That are like, Glenn, I don't know if this is true. I don't know either!

I don't know either.

And I know you're in that situation. And we are going to go off the cliff, if we can't verify some things.

That's one reason why I'm going to Asheville North Carolina today.

I need to know. Is this stuff happening?

Are there bodies in Chimney Rock, that are still there?

You know, what is happening on the ground?

And we're bringing, you know, a plane full of supplies for them. Through Mercury One.

But we have to -- this is what I said in the meeting today.

We have got to come. And even if we don't talk about them. We have to find out. Are these things true, so you know if they're true or not?

And we'll do our best. But it takes so much time. We have so much going on. I think it was like a week ago, or so.

Do you remember the story that Arizona added 98,000 illegals?

STU: I remember that being, yeah.

GLENN: And I think we talked about it, right?

STU: Yeah. I think we did at the time. And tried to give perspective.

So much stuff for people to sort through right now.

GLENN: Firm the story right, it was hard decipher.

I think that's why we didn't follow up on it, at all. Because I don't know what is right on this story.

STU: Let's lock it down.

GLENN: Well, good news, the head guy of the Arizona Supreme Court wrote to us. He's Justice Bolick. He, who joined the court in 2016. He previously cofounded the Institute for Justice and served as litigation director for the Goldwater Institute. So he's one of us.

He litigated constitutional cases from coast-to-coast, including the US Supreme Court.

He's not the Supreme Court. He's a Supreme Court I couldn't wait. But he's not the chief justice now, in Arizona.

But he says, that story is wrong.

And he would be the guy that knows. Clint, welcome to the program.

CLINT: Oh, thank you so much for having me, Glenn. And thanks for making the correction. My boss, the chief justice would have drawn and quartered me.
(laughter)

GLENN: You know, this story was everywhere. And I don't remember what we said. We might have said that yep. That's crazy.

And the Supreme Court is out of control.

I don't know what we said. But if we got it wrong, A, I apologize.

So let's correct it. And correct all of the stories that were out there. What happened?

CLINT: So, Glenn, thank you so much for that.

And, you know, usually, when a court issues controversial decisions, they know it.

And so for a couple of days after, we did not consider this to be a controversial decision at all.

But all of a sudden, we were hearing from people, and I was encountering people, who were saying, we were letting illegal immigrants vote.

And I looked at the headlines, that had come out, and just I've got one I'm reading in front of me, from Newsweek, that said Arizona court, says nearly 100,000 people with unconfirmed citizenship can vote.

And so I can well understand, why people got that impression.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

CLINT: But the headline should have read, court. Arizona court prevents disenfranchisement of 100,000 people over computer error.

And that's exactly what happened.

So Arizona is one of the few states, that requires proof of citizenship, before someone votes.

And when the law was passed, they assumed, that people who had registered by 2005, were -- were legal citizens. So they didn't require you to show proof of citizenship, unless you moved to a different county, or applied for a duplicate license. And due to a Department of Motor Vehicles glitch. And I know that's hard to believe.

GLENN: Oh, no. It's hard to believe that the government would do anything that had glitches in it.

CLINT: Yeah. So in any event, apparently, a large number of people, who were registered to -- to -- to vote, and who had driver's licenses before 1996, and who moved, or got duplicate licenses, were never asked to prove their citizenships.

Now, most of these people had been voting for decade.

And, you know, so -- so there's no indication that any of them are illegal who didn't notice. But once this problem was discovered, the county recorder of Maricopa County, went to court, and said, all of these people should be removed and required to prove their citizenship, between now and the election.

And, of course, the same people who made the mistake, would have been this charge of -- of making sure that those were shown by the election.

And just imagine, if we had gone to Election Day and thousands, possibly over 100,000 people who had been voting for decades. Were told, oh, no.

We don't know whether you're a citizen or not.

GLENN: Right.

CLINT: And how this is not -- so, in any event, it was a very easy legal issue for us.

And it was the only election case, Glenn.

That I can remember, where the Arizona Republican party, and the ACLU were on the same side.

They hoped that please don't throw these people off the ballot.

You know, we discovered.

We determined that we had no authority to take that many people off the ballot.

You can challenge individual voters, at -- if you think that they are not citizens. And after the election, though, there will be an effort to verify citizenship.

But most of these people would have had no idea what was going on.

You know, given that they voted without a problem for -- for decades. And so it just -- it was one of those stories, that the headlines. One of those cases, that the headlines turned into a controversy.

But it really wasn't a controversy at all.

GLENN: Right. So with an election coming up, and you guys -- are you guys voted on, in the Supreme Court?

CLINT: So, yes. We are subject to retention every six years.

GLENN: Oh.

CLINT: And yours truly is one of those justices up for retention this year, with a very spirited campaign against me from self-described progressive groups.

GLENN: Oh, great. Well, all you had to say -- you had me at Goldwater Institute.

So, you know, I'm -- I'm for you, Glenn.

How -- how confident are you, that we can have a fair election this time in Arizona?

CLINT: Well, you know, I'm not on the ground. I'm not involved.

GLENN: Okay.

CLINT: You know, in the day-to-day.

And, you know, one of the things that I've been doing is encouraging people to volunteer as poll workers.

You know, and other jobs that take place on Election Day. The best -- the best place to be on Election Day, if you have concerns about election integrity, is on the inside.

And I've been very heartened that both political parties. Both major and political parties have really been encouraging volunteers to do that.

And when I hear that sort of thing, it gives me. It gives me confidence that, you know -- that --

GLENN: At least that step has been taken.

CLINT: Yes.

Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, thanks for clearing this up. I appreciate it.

And, you know, if -- if there's anybody who is on the right, that has misunderstood this, which I think probably a lot of people. Because it was everywhere.

And I -- I apologize.

Again, I don't know exactly what we said. But let's just assume, we were one of those who believed the headlines.

Apology to -- to our audience. And to everybody in Arizona. I'm glad you reached out to us, so we can set the record straight.

Thank you.

CLINT: Glenn, I am so -- you know, I am so glad that you gave me the opportunity. I'm sure it's not every day, that the judge contacts you. And says, hey.

GLENN: Yeah.

CLINT: This is not correct.

GLENN: Yeah. No. I agree. I invite anyone.

If we get something wrong, I'm not afraid of correcting it and saying, we were wrong. So I appreciate that you reached out to us.

Because we will correct it. We will correct it. Thanks.

CLINT: Well, and I am so grateful for that. If everyone did that, we would be in a much better place in our society right now.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. We would. We would. Thanks a lot. I appreciate it.

Clint Bolick, he's Arizona Supreme Court justice. And apparently, running for reaffirment.

And let me just say, Goldwater Institute.

I don't think I need to say anymore.

Israel stopped a SECOND Iranian strike. Will Netanyahu retaliate?

Iran has retaliated against Israel with a massive missile barrage, mostly targeting Tel Aviv. But "miraculously," no Israelis were injured and the missiles did no serious damage. But where will Israel go from here? Former IDF spokesman and Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Fellow Lt. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Conricus joins Glenn to discuss. Conricus, who was in a bomb shelter with his family during the attack, debunks some claims made by Iran and online and also explains why he believes "something special happened AGAIN yesterday." This is now the second time, he explains that Israel, with help from the United States, has neutralized a massive Iranian attack. So, will Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strike Iran in retaliation? And what are the odds that a larger war will break out?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The other thing that happened yesterday, that is so important is Israel. Israel is going to respond. I believe we have lieutenant colonel retired.

Jonathan Conricus. He's been on with us before. He's the former Israeli Defense Forces spokesperson, and now senior fellow of Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

And we wanted to get you on, Jonathan, first of all, assuming you're in Israel.

You're safe. And that's good. Tell us what happened yesterday, and what it means going forward.

JONATHAN: Yes. Hi, Glenn. Thank you for having me again. A pleasure. What happened yesterday was the biggest missile attack in Israeli history. About 200 ballistic missiles were fired from about 800, 900 miles away, in Iran. At Israel.

The Iranians claimed that they were aiming for military targets. But most of the impacts were actually civilian neighborhoods. And luckily, and quite ironically, some might say, the only casualty in life, was a Palestinian in Jericho. No Israeli citizens were killed.

And while there were some impacted as an Israeli Air Force base, nothing of substance, and no real damage. Neither to infrastructure, or to military capacities.

GLENN: Wait a minute. Hang on.

I heard that several F-35s were taken out. That's not true?

JONATHAN: That is absolutely categorically not true.

There wasn't a single plane hit. Not a single hangar or bunker, and not a single runway.

There were some -- one of the Air Force bases. I'm not going to say the name.

But one of the Air Force bases was hit.

It's only been -- no damage to the Israeli Air Force's capability to continue to operate.

And as our enemies know. The Israeli Air Force continues to operate, in Beirut. In other parts of the Middle East.

In southern Lebanon, over Gaza.

And so the Iranian propaganda, of having 90 percent of their targets, were hit.

Absolutely false. And not -- again, proved the enduring return on investment here.

Many years of investing. US and Israel. Doing that together.

And for the second time in the -- the moment of truth. Air defenses were almost airtight.

And they saved lots and lots and lots of lives in Israel.

GLENN: I have to tell you. I don't know if you're a religious man or not.

But I am

200 missiles being launched. Ballistic missiles.

Coming in and going into Israel.

And for no one to be killed, and you're -- and your Air Force and your military bases. Not to be destroyed.

Is an extraordinary miracle, I think.

JONATHAN: I would agree. And you don't have to be fearing in every way, to recognize that something special happened again, yesterday.

This is the second time that the Iranians unleashed massive firepower.

And it appeared to be able to understand what we're talking about. The missiles are as big as school buses. And they fired 200 of them. Each one of them with hundreds of pounds, about half a ton of explosives in the warheads.

We're talking about very serious weapons.

Large explosives.

My family, we were in the bomb shelter.

My son, he was on the bus. And then ran to a shelter.

And it was really a scene out of a movie. With explosions.

And interceptions, in Tel Aviv. And as you said, the fact that no substantial damage. And no loss of life. Yeah, many would say. And probably I would agree, that this was a miracle.

Air defenses, IDF, and a miracle.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I watched those missiles come in live. But, you know, obviously, from the other side of the planet. And I thought, what must that be like?

You know, I thought of missile launches here, going outbound, or coming in.

Something very few people in the world have seen what happened yesterday.

It must have been terrifying for the average person.

Seeing everything. The sky just lit up with fire.

JONATHAN: Yes. The sky lit up with fire.

And each of you the -- in the air. You know, that they're attached to hundreds of pounds of explosives.

They're lethal. And that they're aimed at the Israeli cities.

And there are explosions all around.

Lots of noise.

You know, we have. Just like in the US.

You have the Amber Alerts. System on your phones.

Israeli defense establishment did the same thing.

And issued like a push notification on all the phones.

Even those who didn't have an app. Download it. And millions of Israelis.

Very strong alarms on their phones.

Call them to immediately go to shelter.

And that's what millions of Israelis did.
And that's also what thankfully led to the fact that even though, some of the missiles exploded in populated areas in Israel, nobody was hurt. Because Israelis were disciplined. And went into bomb shelters.

And nobody was caught out in the open.

GLENN: So is Benjamin Netanyahu, do you think going to respond to this?

Will he strike Iran? And is there any fear that they are going to cut off the oil pathways? Are you there? Go ahead.

JONATHAN: Yeah. When we look forward -- can you hear me? Can you hear me?

GLENN: Yes.

JONATHAN: All right. So when we look forward here, I think two things will determine what will happen next. One is Israel's endgame. Seek to achieve. Because there are a lot of things when it comes to the Iranian regime. And I will clarify. And the second thing that is very important, is how well will Israel coordinate with the United States of America, and what will the level of support be in a global repeat.

Now, regarding the first part. Israel can go for regime targets, leaders, and personnel. Infrastructure that is part of the Islamic regime.

Israel can go for military and economic targets. But this is the places whereby the Iranian regime, the export of oil. And whereby, they make money.

Which is used to fund their activities. All of the terror organizations, in Israel.

And the third option, which, of course, many are eyeing and thinking about is Iran's nuclear military facility.

The research facility, the storage facilities, and many others. These are three distinctly different types of -- and what Israel wants to achieve.

Does Israel want to bring down the regime? Does it only want to hurt the Iranians from attacking Israel again?

Will Israel be told not to do anything significant by the Americans?

And, of course, remind everybody, last time that Iran attacked on the 13th or 14th of April, Israel wanted to retaliate in a much stronger way.

But refrained from doing so under America first. And instead, Israel attempted in continuing in finishing the job in Gaza and Hamas.

I don't think that we're going to see that today. And I think we are going to see in the coming days, a strong Israeli response. It may be aimed at the regime. It may be aimed at their nuclear facilities.

But I think it's absolutely important, is that Israel and the United States of America are coordinated, and I hope American leaders will see this current situation, a threat to Israel. And an opportunity to really do more in a week, than what has been accomplished in ten years of failed diplomacy. When it comes to stopping Iran from going nuclear.

I really think there will be an opportunity.

GLENN: Yeah. I think that will be good. As long as there are calls from both sides, yesterday.

That America needs to send more troops over. I think we already have 40,000 that we've sent over.

We don't want to be in another war.

This one could go global.

I think Israel is showing the world, don't screw with us.

You guys are doing a great job.

And I support that.

I just -- I just don't want to see us, enflame things by including ourself, in the actual strikes.

But support --

JONATHAN: I agree with you. And I wouldn't want -- I wouldn't want the single American service men in harm's way. And I don't think that anybody needs to be fighting Israel's war.

And I think that Israel, in its history, has many times, done the heavy lifting for the rest of the Western world. Whether it's been keeling with Iraqi dictators, or with Syria, or with many others.

And Israel is -- the only thing Israel has is military support. Supplies. And, of course, political and diplomatic support. I don't think that Israel's needs or wants. Any American service members to be in harm's way. And I would just say a tremendous gratitude to American service men.

Against them. Deployed in the Red Sea. Among the -- on the US Navy ships.

And in the air.

Done tremendous work in intercepting Israeli missiles. Very professional.

And super important.

And I hope they remain safe. And I hope that they can have the diplomatic -- and military to help them to do what they need to do in order to defend itself.

GLENN: Well, we here support you on whatever you have to do to defend yourself.

I support you, I should say.

And I think there are millions of Americans that are listening, that feel the same way.

Jonathan. Thank you so much.

I really appreciate it.

You bet. Lieutenant colonel, Jonathan Conricus. Former Israeli defense spokesperson. The only thing that you should be really looking for is escalation.

But most importantly, as he was talking about. Red Sea. When you get into the straits over there, just off the shores of Iran.

If they start going after our Navy ships, or they try to close those straits down.

That is the world's flow of oil. And we will get involved in that.

And that will become very, very -- very, very dangerous.

Because this one will -- this one will not be a partial war.

This one will include, I believe bombings in our streets.

I believe we are close to terrorist activity. Foreign terrorist activity. In our own streets.

Orchestrated by Iran.

And a lot of others, who are here, and want to destroy us.

So we -- especially during this election season, we all need to be good Americans, together.

Not Republicans. Democrats, but good Americans.

And start paying attention to these issues. So we can start taking care of our own self first. So we survive this time period.

Is this the TERRIFYING reason Biden WON’T stop the port strike?

President Biden has said that he WON'T step in to help negotiate the port workers strike that's affecting the East Coast and Gulf Coast. But he's "Union Joe"! So, why is he sitting THIS strike out? Glenn has a terrifying theory: Is Biden's goal to create a "polycrisis" right around the election that would cripple America enough for the globalists to complete their "fundamental transformation"? Is chaos the plan? Glenn also points to FEMA's apparent lack of support for the people affected by Hurricane Helene. Apparently, FEMA has a new "top priority," and it's NOT "helping people" ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: I ask again. And you asked this question. You mentioned this question yesterday, as to why you were not worried about the longshoreman strike as much as you think you should be. With a caveat.

GLENN: With a caveat. The caveat is, I don't think we're dealing with the way politicians and, you know, governments have always worked. Everything has changed.

STU: Maybe that's true. But like, we have five weeks to the election.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: You have number one, a situation with longshoremen going on strike. As you mentioned today. You went through the time line of this, in hour one. If you didn't hear that, go back and listen to it.

GLENN: It's important that you listen to it. You should not panic today.

You know, you might want to go to the store and get some extra stuff. If you just want to be really prepared. But starting next week, and by week three. And definitely by week four. At week four, we're at a national crisis.

STU: At week four. That would be the week before the election.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Okay? And yet, I show you this strike is going forward, despite the fact that the president of the United States, a man even in background reporting, does want Kamala Harris to win.

It's not like he's trying to sink her presidency. Even though, he's seemly angry, because she's blowing him off all the time.

Why isn't this coming to a halt? Why isn't he using all of his power to make sure this doesn't happen.

Not because he cares about the longshoreman.

Or not because he cares about the US economy. He seemingly wants to sink that. Because he cares about the future of the power, that he's worked so hard and be she's worked so hard.

To gather.

GLENN: Okay. So let me start with the official reason. He's not getting involved because the president should not get involved in union fights, until it becomes a real problem.

STU: I ask, was that worth saying?

It's such a ridiculous --

GLENN: I just want to make sure.

STU: I know you're just doing your job. But that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life.

They get involved in everything. All of a sudden, they're Libertarians?

GLENN: Yeah. And he stopped the train strike, because before the train strike happened. He got involved in that one.

STU: Heavily involved. All he has done is talk about his accomplishments with labor.

GLENN: Okay. So why wouldn't he get involved this time?

STU: Yeah. Say, hey, guys, do this after the election.

Why wouldn't he stop this?

GLENN: I mean, I -- I have my answer.

And my answer is probably the answer that everybody else is coming to the conclusion on.

It -- it is -- that's -- that's not the goal here.

STU: The goal is not to win the election?

GLENN: The goal is to cripple the United States.

And to create a polycrisis.

So let's just say, it's a close election.

Okay?

And there's arguments back and forth. After the election.

After the election.

STU: Which, it would be shocking if there wasn't that situation.

GLENN: Correct. How do you make that worse?

STU: I mean, they keep inventing new ways.

GLENN: Uh-huh. Well, here's one.

You make it worse, by taking the economy.

And making the economy even more unstable.

Okay?

Because, look, if those who believe with good reason, that this government is not for an America. The way we know it.

They have to give it the final blow, to put it out, to be able to restart in a new system.

Okay?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And you can't do that without -- with just one crisis. You need a polycrisis. You need a financial crisis.

You need a war crisis. You need an election crisis. You need a -- a -- a financial crisis, a pandemic crisis. And an election crisis.

You have to have more than one.

STU: Okay. But -- and I think, because this adds to another question that I have, on the same front.

You have this hurricane that's going through all of these swing states. You have Georgia and North Carolina.

And, I mean, Florida, there's even been close polling, in some circles.

You have all this stuff going on.

In these really important states.

And they seem to be completely up concerned, to even giving the appearance that they're doing a good job. I mean, they're not even doing the press conferences in front of the rows and rows of trucks.

Today, they are out there, I guess a little bit. But, I mean, it's been a pretty bad response.

Even just -- I'm not at all surprised, they would be bad at doing this because they're completely incompetent. If that's what it was, I would not be surprised. But it's not even an effort to tell the story, that they're doing a good job.

Again, because the polycrisis thing. And I know you're down this road.

And I'm not surprised you are.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: But like, wouldn't that be best done after you had power?

You are about to blow, the power that you have, just flush it down the toilet.

If you lose this election. And give power to the man you call, you know, orange Hitler.

GLENN: Well, yes.

If it's a clear victory. And this would add to a clearer victory.

But, you know, you also -- you know, all you need it to be is close.

And if Biden wins the popular vote, and Trump wins 270.

You think that will stop them?

They will say, no. See, that's why we have to get rid of the electoral college. It will be a crap storm. Okay.

For matter what happens.

STU: Not the way usually that term is utilized.

GLENN: The FCC.

So let me give you a couple of scenarios.

Why do they not respond on the hurricane?

Scenario number one. Take them at their word.

They are. People in those states just aren't seeing it. Donald Trump is lying. You know, whatever.

Okay. So there is scenario number one.

They are. And you just don't see it.

Don't believe that one.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Scenario number two.

Is -- they actually believe this stuff.

STU: What do you mean this stuff?

GLENN: If you go to the FEMA website, FEMA is no longer what we thought it was. We told you at the time, when they were changing all of this, warning, they're changing everything.

It's no longer really a federal emergency management.

They're going to manage prior to. And then manage our problems.

Okay? So here -- according to their own website. There are now three goals, for FEMA.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: Okay. What do you think FEMA's number one goal has always been?

STU: To respond quickly to a national emergency.

GLENN: Okay. Goal number one, not that.

STU: Not that.

GLENN: Goal number one is to instill equity as a foundation of emergency management.

Now, so in other words, if this were a traditionally oppressed group, which I think Appalachia could easily qualify that.

STU: Too white.

GLENN: No, no, no. Too white. So what does equity have to do this with this?

White people wiped out.

Okay. They get what they deserve.

We want to focus on those oppressed.

Okay. That's what equity is about. Goal number two. Lead a whole community, in climate resilience.

Well, they're doing that job. They're on television saying, this is all climate control. This is all a problem with the climate.

These things are going to happen

STU: And they pass their multi-trillion dollar bill. What they call the Inflation Reduction Act.

GLENN: So out of the three goals.

They're accomplishing number one and number two, by not acting.

Number three, their goal is to promote and sustain a ready FEMA and prepared nation.

So what does that mean?

To promote and sustain a ready FEMA.

And ready for action.

Ready for what? Goal number one, instill equity.

Goal number two. Lead the community in climate resilience.

Resilience.

So when does FEMA come in?

FEMA will come in, as everything is being rebuilt.

And saying, no, no, no.

You can't build it that way. No, no, no. We have to have climate resilience. This isn't climate resilient.

That's their mission.

So now, perhaps, they actually believe in that mission.

This isn't helping a -- a community, that has been historically oppressed.

So we -- that's where -- equity is number one.

We're -- we're going to do our job.

But it's climate resilience. It's not the emergency.

And the third reason is: We're here to promote those two things, and prepare the nation for those two things.

I mean, that logically, without any ill will toward anyone, I don't have to -- I can assume the best of them.

And make this case.

That's why they're not responding in the traditional way.

Because that's not what they do anymore.

But understand, where are my tax dollars?

Understand, your tax dollars, will go to build the resilience, after.

This is like, you've been paying your mortgage on your -- on your house. And the bank says, by the way. We're no longer doing that anymore. You know, you still have to keep paying the mortgage. But you're out of that house. We're doing apartments now. So you pay for that house, and here's your apartment. And you have to pay for that too. That's what's happening. They have told you, your taxes are going for emergencies. Well, here's a huge emergency. They're not responding to it. Because they've changed the game.

STU: Hmm. I mean, in some ways too, this appears to be their back-handed way of implementing many of the policies they've wanted for a long time.

For example, it's really hard to sell people on let's say, reparations.

You know, people don't want that.

They don't like that.

Kamala Harris is running away from her past positions on it.

GLENN: Yes. One other thing, Stu. If you have a community without water. And you have no food.

And there's no infrastructure, how do you think those elections will run in those states?

STU: Poorly.

GLENN: Yeah. How do you think those people even show up, to cast a vote?

STU: That's a good point. Because they're not exactly hard-core Democrat areas.

GLENN: No. You've just taken a huge swath of Donald Trump's voters and made it pretty difficult for them to go vote.

You think FEMA is going to go out there and set up voting booth?