RADIOJuly 26, 2024

Did Kamala Harris SURRENDER Her VP Pick to the Obamas?

Barack and Michelle Obama have finally endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to be the Democrat Party’s 2024 presidential nominee. But what took them so long? Glenn has a theory: their endorsement wasn’t free. Did the Obamas only endorse Harris after she agreed to let THEM choose her Vice President? Glenn explains why he believes that the Obamas wanted Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, not Harris, and may force him onto the 2024 ticket.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, we welcome back Mr. Stu Burguiere. Who was gone this week. And conveniently showed up just in time for big Mike to endorse Kamala Harris. But if you heard the endorsement from Michelle Obama and Barack Obama, it doesn't ring true to me. Let's play that endorsement.

BARACK: Kamala Harris.

KAMALA: Hi.

MICHELLE: Hey, there.

KAMALA: Oh. Hi, you're both together. It's good to hear you both.

MICHELLE: I can't have this phone call, without saying to my girl Kamala, I am proud of you. This is going to be historic.

BERNIE: We called to say, Michelle and I couldn't be prouder to endorse you, to do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.

KAMALA: Oh, my goodness. Michelle, Barack, this means so much to me. I'm looking forward to doing this with the two of you, Doug and I both. And getting out there, being on the road. But most of all, I just want to tell you, the -- the words that you have spoken and the friendship that you have given over all these years mean more than I can express. So thank you, both. It means so much.

And we're going to have some fun with this too, aren't we?

STU: I bet there's a good laugh they cut out of that one.

GLENN: Right.

STU: A good cackle.

GLENN: What did that cost her?

What did that cost her? That's a very transactional couple there.

STU: Yeah. Not nothing. I think you can be certain of that.

GLENN: Yeah. It wasn't like, yeah, you know what, Michelle. We've been thinking about it. And without any thought of calling anybody. Or making any deals. Or getting something for us, or anything that we want. You know, we just love you so much.

And we just want to give this to you, for free.

What did that cost her? My guess is, one of the pieces that it cost was Mark Kelly. Barack and Michelle want Mark Kelly. They do not want Kamala Harris. That's why he hadn't endorsed.

And he was hoping, that this would all go away, after Joe Biden endorsed Kamala.

Because I think Joe Biden did that as a slap across Michelle and Barack's face.

STU: It was also interesting.

GLENN: Because they did not want her.

STU: Not the original letter.

When I -- we were going live on YouTube. At Stu Does America. On YouTube. We've been going live on these big events. Even when I'm on vacation. When that happened, I read the letter. And the first thing I noticed was, it did not include an endorsement for Kamala Harris.

Which is odd, if you're going to do this big announcement, why wouldn't you include it in the thing that everybody was going to read?

He was, ten minutes later, 15 minutes later, he released a separate tweet that was just like, I endorsed Kamala. And it was odd the way it was rolled out. So it does sort of back maybe -- maybe they came out with this main letter for history purposes. And then, you know, he kind of just wanted to stick it to them. Because I don't think he likes the Obamas at all. I think he's very angry about this whole thing.

GLENN: Oh, no. I don't think he likes the Obamas at all. And I don't think they like him. And I think he knew the candidate they wanted was Mark Kelly. Not Kamala Harris. And I think that's why the endorsement came from a separate thing.Io, you drop out of the race, you make that very clear. Nothing else.

So he issued that letter.

And then he came out. And said, oh, and, by the way, I also endorsed Kamala.

STU: Maybe Hunter controlled the Twitter for a day.

GLENN: Maybe. And then Michelle and Barack were like, oh!

Now, listen, Michelle. I'll tell you, maybe, maybe. I mean, let's not get all bent out of shape. They're not going to jump all over that. And they jumped all over that.

And immediately, he need became rallying around Kamala Harris. And she's the one. He held back.

People wondered why. I think it's because of Mark Kelly. They wanted Mark Kelly to be the guy. Because they believe he's the winner. And I don't know. If they have a chance to turn on her and do a coup on her, they will. They will.

STU: I have so many questions.

GLENN: And Mark will be the guy.

STU: I have so many questions for you. Let me first back up what you're saying, about the Barack Obama part of this. I don't know if people really bothered to read his statement at the time.

But everyone -- this is after Biden comes out and says, I fully endorse Kamala Harris. And many of his competitors who were rumored to come after the nomination if he stepped down, had already endorsed Kamala Harris.

And this is the paragraph that Barack Obama writes. We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead, but have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party, will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges.

Like, that is the farthest thing away from an endorsement of Kamala Harris you can possibly get. They did not want her.

I think it's blatantly clear. The only pushback on that, some reporting was, well, they don't want to endorse. Because they want to make it appear like it was an actual process to get to Kamala Harris. They must want to have their happened -- come on. Does anybody buy that? I guess my first question on your theory here is, why do you think Mark Kelly was such a big favorite of the Obama family?

Why would they signal him?

GLENN: Great question. Great question.

You cannot have -- as Barack Obama would say. Two exotics on the ticket. Okay?

Think of America as a husband and wife. Okay? And each party has a husband and wife element to them. So if you just listen to the husband, you would have a Ferrari and a Lambo in the garage, right? But if he's married, his wife says, you're not going to have a Ferrari and Lambo. It's not reasonable. We need -- you know, we need a Pacifica and an Accord. And he's like, good God, if I have to drive a Pacifica, I'm going to hang myself. I can't do that.

And so they'll compromise. You know, in the man's dream world, he has to pick between the Ferrari and the Lambo because they also have to have the Pacifica. Okay?

Mark Kelly is the Pacifica. She's the Ferrari. She's the one that you never know if it's going to break down. Good Lord, we don't know what it will cost us. You know what I mean?

It's not dependable. We need a Pacifica. And he is a -- he will be -- they have to have a patriot. They cannot continue to front this party with people who are known to hate America. Okay?

Can't. He's a white guy. You can't have two exotics, as Barack Obama would say. So you have a white guy who is dependable, who loves America, is super, super smart. Because you can't have two idiots on the ticket either. Well, they did that last time.

Well, maybe they've learned their lesson.

You can't have two idiots on the ticket either. Mark Kelly is the Pacifica.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Now, I think the Obamas wanted the Pacifica as the candidate. That's why he phrased what he did, in that, you know, hey. Thank you, Joe.

And, by the way, we look forward to a process, that will eliminate Kamala Harris. And give us something good.

And I think that person was Mark Kelly.

STU: That's really interesting.

Because I -- because, you know, one of the reasons why he's a Pacifica, if you will, is he's seen as a moderate Democrat. And he is moderate, in temperament. Right?

That is what he brings to the table. Very -- he feels like a moderate. The same way like, the 2020 version of Joe Biden was pitched that way. Right?

You could have a guy who was very calm. And he's a moderate. And he's just a guy from a working class community. He's served -- in Kelly's case. Served in the military. He's an astronaut. Come on. In reality, his voting record, is just as liberal as any of these other people.

And seems to have the same vision as so many other people on the left.

GLENN: So hang on just a second.

Let me explain just what you just said. Last time, the Pacifica was at the top of the ticket.

And they knew, we have to have a Lambo and a Ferrari. Something that is not necessarily dependable. But is flashy. And everybody is like, yeah!

All the dads would be -- you know what I mean?

In this car analogy. Like, we have to have one of those!

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And that was Kamala. Now, she's at the top. So the Pacifica has to be the second one.

STU: I mean, it makes perfect sense.

You know, excuse me, came to the sort of Kelly conclusion as well. Based more on, like if you look at -- I do think the white guy -- the Pacifica thing is real. This is not real from my ideas or what I think. This is real from the reporting on Barack Obama's choice for vice president.

The reason why Joe Biden was picked was because he was old and white.

That is every piece of reporting from inside of that -- the -- that decision, that was Barack Obama, and Michelle, believed America was too racist, to have two exotics on the same ticket. These were their terms.

You needed to have one white guy, that the racists could sink their teeth into. And still be okay with this guy with the crazy name at the top of the ticket.

That's the way -- that's what they thought of America.

And it's quite clear, in so many of their comments. That's exactly what they thought in their comments. If you go back to the one, what was it know.

Pennsylvania voters. You have these people. They're angry. They're bitter. Clingers to their God and their Bible.

That's what they really believed about America.

Still believe about America. And so I think that white guy. The idea that they will pick Gretchen Whitmer. Or they will pick --

GLENN: She's another exotic.

STU: Yeah. Anything that has anything outside of white guy is I think outside of the picture.

99 percent chance of that.

GLENN: And I think it's important to say now, it also has to be somebody who at least appears to love the country. I'm not saying he doesn't.

But it cannot be somebody -- it can't be a always.

STU: Right. It's got to be somebody who has --

GLENN: It has to be somebody who is like, I don't mind Antifa.

STU: It has to be someone with moderate temperament. Which Kelly has. He seems like -- military guy. Astronaut. Hero. You all these things.

And I will say, one of the other things that I think is central to this. We just had a presidential assassination attempt. Where apparently someone flung glass with from a long distance, at the President Donald Trump when he was on stage.

GLENN: The New York Times just did a piece, an analysis and said, it's definitely a bullet.

STU: Yes, they did.

GLENN: Meanwhile, Christopher Wray testifies that, well, Trump. It's really up to him to prove that he's been shot. What!

STU: That's really weird. Even the Times is dismissing that nonsense.

GLENN: Now, wait. One more thing on that. I really do think it could have been a piece of glass. Because right at that moment, Kamala broke the glass ceiling. And so maybe --

STU: Wow, that should be the center part of her convention speech, I think.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: When Donald Trump was struck by glass.

But on the Kelly part of this, the -- I mean, there is obviously a sympathy for Donald Trump.

His -- you know, his approval ratings have gone up, at some level. To the highest they have been, in some of these polls, in recorded history.

There is -- that moment was iconic. And everybody knows it.

With Mark Kelly, he's married to Gabby Giffords.

Gabby Giffords was a congresswoman who had an assassination attempt against her. Like this was their big pitch to come to the American people to bring gun violence into the picture.

Remember, they were blaming Sarah page for this. Targeting her district.

It was that shooting.

They can come back and say. Well, look, their main pitch for this. Republicans are the violent ones.

They've obviously lost ground on that one. That argument is dead after the president was almost killed on stage. So now you have a situation where this can kind of disarm the other side of that.

They can say, it's not just left and right. It's gun violence, and bring the gun violence case back in. Which I think this is absolutely the group of people, who would come to such a -- just cold, calculating decision.

To say, we'll use her, and her tragedy, to try to fend off this assassination attempt, that we now have to, quote, unquote, deal with. And not to mention, you go through, this is also a swing state.

It was one of the closest states in 2020. Even though, it's not all that close at the moment. I think -- and they have a good relationship behind the scenes.

Kamala and Kelly have had a good working relationship for a long time.

That's how I came to the conclusion. It's different how you came to it.

It's interesting. It arrived to the same place.

It's terrifying. That means we're both definitely wrong.

GLENN: He could only pray.

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.