RADIOAugust 12, 2024

Did Kamala Harris ILLEGALLY Inherit Biden’s Campaign Money?

Federal Election Commission Chairman Sean Cooksey joins Glenn to weigh in on a major question about the 2024 election: Was it legal for Kamala Harris to inherit Joe Biden’s entire election campaign, including his multi-million-dollar war chest? While Cooksey can’t comment on any possible investigations, he calls the situation “completely unprecedented” and explains why he believes “It's something that is going to have to go through an FEC process, and maybe a court process too to get to the bottom of it.” Plus, Glenn asks Cooksey to weigh in on claims of illegal straw donor schemes revolving around the left-wing fundraising platform ActBlue.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Sean Cooksey is the Federal Election Commission chairperson. I really appreciate you coming on, Chairman, and helping us figure out exactly what is going on.

We want to start with this situation. How do you transfer money from one person to another? Legally? Can you do that?

SEAN: Well, thanks for having me on, Glenn. And you're right. We talked about that at the top.

Which is that it's a completely unprecedented situation. We haven't had anything like this happen for at least 50 years. To have a presidential nominee, drop out just a few weeks before the convention, before he's been formerly nominated and hand over his entire campaign operation, including millions of dollars, cash on hand, to a different candidate. To his vice presidential nominee, although she hasn't been formerly nominated yet.

It's really no surprise that this race is a lot of legal questions. Again, a completely novel situation.

Some experts have tried to argue, that this is permissible. But a lot of election experts have raised a lot of big questions about this. Some have said, it is unlawful. That you can't just switch the name on a committee and give it over to another person without that being an illegal transfer. It's something that is going to have to go through an FEC process, and maybe a court process too to get to the bottom of it.

GLENN: So I know, that for my charity, let's say. If I raise money, and it is designated for, let's say, hurricanes. I can only use that money to help people recover from the hurricane.

I cannot transfer it to another, and even if it's a bigger emergency, legally, I can't move that money. To any other place.

It's the same kind of thing with this, isn't it?

SEAN: I mean, it's a big question. What these donors were told. And what they thought they were given to. To your point. All these people were giving money, they thought to reelect Joe Biden as president. And now they're being told, no. Actually, this money is going to a completely different candidate. That you may or may not really approve of. One of the big questions that happens under the FEC guidance is whether donors in that kind of situation are entitled to a refund. Or to have the campaign be required to ask their permission, to redesignate it.

I think one of the big problems though, is really just the lack of time on the clock. Where a situation where, the election is less than 13 weeks away, at this point.

GLENN: Jeez.

SEAN: And the wheels of government move so slow. I'm concerned that really none of this is going to be resolved before Election Day.

GLENN: And it won't really matter, after Election Day, will it?

SEAN: I mean, I think for all intents and purposes, right.

Any fine or any unwinding that happens, after the fact. Israel will not really do anything to change the vote count on Election Day.

GLENN: So the money she got from the Biden/Harris campaign. They transfer it over. But is that really -- that's really not that important. Compared to what she's raising now.

I mean, she's raising money hand over fist.

Like I've never seen before.

SEAN: No. I think that's a fair point, about why maybe at the end of the day, this won't matter much.

I mean, reportedly both the Harris committee, and the Trump committee, right?

Are raising hundreds of millions of dollars every month. They have to report that to the FEC. Every month on the 20th. So, for example, in a little bit less than two weeks here.

We'll get the hard numbers on what they raised in July.

Harris Committee, I believe, reported over $300 million raised. So it may be the case, that whatever cash was left over from the Biden committee, doesn't make a big difference at the end of the take.

GLENN: We're talking to the Federal Election Commission chairperson. He's the guy who is at the SEC, that is -- or at the FEC, that is making sure all the money is on the up and up.

And everything is played by the rules.

His name is Sean Cooksey. And, Sean, to be fair to them, you could make the case, that when I gave money to Biden/Harris.

A lot of people would say, I was just giving it, because I didn't want Donald Trump.

And Harris was part of that team.

And if Joe Biden would have died.

Wouldn't the money have gone to her anyway?

VOICE: Well, I think the big problem with that possibility, is that this happened before the convention.

One of the big sorted of open questions is what happened, when she's on the paperwork. It's called, you know -- they call her the vice presidential nominee.

But she really hasn't gone through the role -- she hasn't been nominated by the convention yet.

In that case, you know, it would have also been possible for Joe Biden to switch vice presidential nominees. And things would be very different.

I think, again, it will have to go through some court process, ultimately, at the end of the day. To get that settled.

And I don't think that will happen before the election unfortunately.

GLENN: So I don't know if this is your purview.

Or if you can comment on this.

But this is the first time that I have seen in American history, where the democratic process didn't really happen.

I mean, it happened.

People went to vote. But they didn't vote for her, to be president.

And it was -- you know, really funky.

I think a lot of people on the democratic side.

Wanted a different candidate.

But the DNC shut it down.

And then at the last minute, they say this was a grassroots movement.

But it appeared to me, at least, a coup. You know, he's not going to leave. He's not going to leave. They give him a deadline of Sunday.

Deadline for what? He's already made his decision. Then Sunday, at the very last minute, he changes his mind. And then Barack Obama comes out and says, we will see how this Democratic process works, and there were no votes.

It was just going to the -- the electors, and the superdelegates. And that's just the party.

It -- I mean, it is -- there's -- is this totally funky?

Is this legal?

The way this has happened.

SEAN: I think you're right. It's absolutely not a grassroots nomination process. I think it's really the exact opposite of that.

Which is party leaders.

Party elders. Coming together.

To decide, you know, amongst a couple dozen of them. Who they want as their nominee.

In fact, it's really sort of a throw back to the way parties used to nominate presidential candidates.

Right?

Sort of in the proverbial smoke-filled rooms, where they would say, you know, primary be damned. We don't really care what the voters think. We are going to just make this election, as bosses, of who is going to be up for president.

And I think that's really kind of a good summation of what will happen here.

GLENN: And that's still legal to do that?

I mean, do parties get to make their own rules, right?

SEAN: Right. At the end of the day, the parties make their own rules. They chose several decades ago, to really go to primary voting processes. They don't have to do that.

Ultimately, the party decides how they want to select their nominees.

GLENN: Okay. So tonight, we have been following this -- this Act Blue. And all of these organizations, that are raising money for the Democrats.

And to me, and I'm not asking to you comment on this. Nor am I putting words in your mouth. This is me saying this. I've done enough research on the Tides foundation to know how this shell game works.

And they're raising all kinds of dark money through things like Act Blue. And they're setting up all these different organizations.

And I guess you can do that. That's fine. The one thing that is happening right now, is there are reports that they're doing something called smurfing. It's being called smurfing.

And that is, if someone makes a donation of let's say $100,000, all of a sudden, it will show up on the books that they made an 18,000-dollar donation, and they did it in ways that aren't even humanly possible.

And we looked into this, tonight -- I mean, when we show you this, America.

I think you're going to be. You're going to be flabbergasted. James O'Keefe did a recent report, where he highlighted donations to a Cindy Nowe. N-O-W-E of Maryland. She claimed to have not made the majority of the donations.

If you go to the FEC database, on Cindy Nowe of Maryland, the donations through Act Blue do seem suspicious. We're not saying that it's illegal.

We don't know yet. Coincidentally, through an accident, as we were double-checking the work. One of our researchers typed in Cindy Rowe, R-O-W-E, of Massachusetts. And you find the same exact donation pattern, on a Cindy Rowe instead of a Cindy Nowe.

So, yes, James O'Keefe was right about Cindy Nowe.

But the same pattern is there with Cindy Rowe. What makes it even more suspicious, is that the names are nearly identical. Only one difference.

Are you guys looking into these -- these irregularities here? Or these strange instances?

SEAN: Well, you know, as you said, as a matter of law and FEC policy, I can't comment on any investigation the FEC may or may not be doing.

But what I can say, at a general level, that the FEC takes misreporting and straw donor schemes, which is I think another name for what you called smurfing, we take those things extremely seriously.

Those are some of the most serious violations. That we have at the FEC. Where you are misreporting your identity on campaign reports.

Where you're giving someone else money, in order to make a political contribution for you. Those are serious violations. Many people have gone to prison for those kinds of things.

And I know this is an issue that reporters have been focused on. I know it's one that other government agencies are looking into.

The Virginia attorney general, I know, and the committee on how the administration in Congress are looking into this.

I think it's worth watching their work on that issue, and any results that come out of their investigations.

GLENN: And is that because the FEC is -- I mean, you may or may not be investigating it?
But you're so slow. Will it matter, if the FEC picks it up?

SEAN: Well, ultimately, we do move as fast as our resources allow on any enforcement matter. And there's opportunities for private parties to get involved. If we -- if we move too slow, under the statute. Whether something can come out --

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait.

What does that mean?

Private parties can get involved. What does that mean?

Under the statute of the FEC, when you file a complaint with the FEC, any private person can file a complaint with the FEC, alleging a violation of campaign finance law.

And under the statute, if the FEC does not act on that complaint. Doesn't give an up-or-down vote, whether this is something that we'll look into or not. Within 120 days, the person who filed the complaint, can then sue.

Saying, we are too slow.

We are not acting on their complaint fast enough.

And ultimately, if it's shown, we're not acting on that complaint fast enough. That person can then file a private lawsuit, to enforce the law themselves.

GLENN: Wow. Wow.

And the -- like the Virginia attorney general, I'm not sure, you know, if you can answer this. Or if you can -- if you even know the answer.

But the attorneys general, they can only look at the -- the potential fraud, that's happening in their state.

So Cindy Rowe in Massachusetts, would have to be the Massachusetts attorney general.

SEAN: I don't know the -- the specific limits on their authority. Certainly, attorneys general have really wide-ranging, you know, subpoena authority, and investigative authority, to launch their own inquiries into their own things.
To start demanding documents and witnesses and interviews.

Whether that could be limited to their own state. It might depend on their state. It might depend on where act blue is located. And sort of where their servers are and things like that, as a sort of jurisdictional perspective. But I think the one thing you do know, Congress has jurisdiction throughout the entire country. And they wouldn't be limited in that kind of way. One last question, and I believe we have to run. Because I have a network break.

But the -- they'll say that this is just all politics. This is just a smear campaign. I don't want to be involved in any of that.

I want to look for real things. Is there enough smoke here, to believe that this is worth questioning? No outcome.

But it is a legitimate line of inquiry.

SEAN: I mean, I think the action sort of speaks for themselves here. When you have multiple agencies. Members of Congress. Attorney general, who have been alerted. And are interested enough, to operationalize their offices.

To or the of get the machinery moving, to get the facts. I think that really speaks -- speaks for itself.

GLENN: This is the Federal Election Commission. The FEC chairman, Sean Cooksey. Sean, thank you so much. God bless.

SEAN: Thank you so much, Glenn.

REACTION: Something is VERY OFF about the 2nd Trump assassination attempt

Former president Donald Trump was allegedly targeted for assassination a second time over the weekend, this time at the Trump International Golf Club in Florida. Glenn takes a close look at all that we currently know, and things look VERY suspicious. Glenn asks the questions the state-run media won't: Why did the potential attacker bring a Go-Pro and body armor (misleadingly referred to by the media as "ceramic tiles")? How did he even know Trump would be golfing at that time? Did the Secret Service actually do its job? Did the suspect, with all his ties to Ukraine and history of media interviews and donations to the Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue, have any outside help?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, we'll all remember where we were when they tried to kill the president, the second time! Here's an idea.

What do you say, we just go to the ballot box? What do you say?

We're 50 days away? Can we take the next seven weeks and not try to assassinate somebody in this country? You want to talk about a banana republic. Gang, we're here.

I will tell you, I'm not doing the show today, that I had planned.

Because I was meeting with the president on Saturday. And he said something off-handed to me. And I was going in a direction of research on something.

And he said, Glenn, I think there is something that is bigger than the economy.

Right now. And he said, the economy, we're killing them on the economy.

He said with they have been no place to go on the economy. They have no record on the economy.

He said, but what's happening now in our cities with and be what's happening in Ohio. And elsewhere. In -- in Denver. He said, I think this is actually a bigger thing than the economy.

And he is absolutely right.

If you know some of the things that we've been doing research on.

Chris Rufo has already done his research on this.

This is something that they've known about. Well, I'll get into it, not today. Well, we'll probably get into it a little bit tomorrow.

But today, I have to talk about, a would-be assassin. Now, this one seems to be miraculous. You know, God saved, I believed. It was a miracle that Donald Trump turned his head, and -- and the bullet missed him. And only nicked his ear. Instead of going right to the center of his head. And all of us having clear, clear high-definition evidence of the president's head exploding. Live.

So I think God saved him. From the last one.

God may have saved him from this one, as well.

But this one was a miracle, in the darkest of ways, as well.

First, let me tell you what happened. Early reports said that police recovered an AK-47 from the bushes outside of the golf course, where the president was golfing, as well as a GoPro recording device. Now, why would you have a GoPro recording device?

Why would you have it attached to the fence, pointed out at the putting green? Why would you have that?

Unless you were planning on recording that, so that your deeds would live forever. Now, my question is: Is there anything else already reported on the GoPro? Is there maybe a statement? Because why would you record your deeds, without recording a message for all to hear? So I would like to know what was on the GoPro, if anything. But this guy obviously had an agenda.

Now, he, according to the press, oh. He was all wound up because of Trump's rhetoric. Was he now?

We'll get to that in a second stop they caught him, after he was in the bushes. And a Secret Service agent, was eagle-eyed enough, to spot the barrel of a gun, coming out from the bushes. This guy had taken two backpacks, and tied them to the fence. And they were on each side of where he would have been sitting, and the barrel of the gun, would have been right between them.

Now, it's really curious. I mean, I know the media, they're so smart. They know what everything means. They reported that he had ceramic tiles in his backpack. And I immediately thought, I thought he was a roofer? Not somebody that was going to lay tile in bathrooms. No! Could they explain what ceramic tiles mean? I know, because I've had to wear them. From time to time.

A ceramic tile is what you put inside the bulletproof vest, if you are expecting a chest shot. A bulletproof vest will not stop a high-powered rifle. However, ceramic tile will. So he put ceramic tile in his backpacks, right where he would have been crouched. With the gun. So he was expecting a shoot-out. Okay.

How did this Secret Service agent see it? I don't know. But I want to believe and take it at face value. That he was doing his job.

The reason why I say this time I believe it, at least this time I want to believe that that agent was doing his job. Is because I was with the president on Saturday. And I said on X, and I don't know where else I said it on Saturday, this is very first time I have seen the Secret Service in 15 years, actually do their job.

I have sat behind Mitt Romney, pass the Secret Service, with the guy next to me, and a gun in his back.

They missed it. I have come through security doors, that were supposed to be secure. And went past all of the Secret Service passage. All of their security. Went behind them, around them. And walked right directly to the president.

Now, if I can do that, who can't?

And I've been railing about this, for 15 years. Saturday was the first time, I thought Secret Service was taking it seriously.

There was no way, you were getting into the event that I was in, unless you were an invited guest, or you were supposed to be there.

And there was no way, you were getting close to the president.

So what happened?

Well, I want to believe, that -- I want to believe that the Secret Service was doing their job. There were two holes. One or two holes ahead of the president. And he was scoping it out. And he looks and he sees the barrel of a gun through the bushes. There's then a shoot-out. Apparently, they were shooting at each other. They were not shooting at the president.

I don't know, because things are still unclear. The reason why we caught him, is because somebody saw him run out of the bushes. And then get into his car. Somebody with the wherewithal to write down the plate number, and be able to remember what the car was.

They called police immediately. Said, here's the plate number. Here's what the car looks like. And because we have new AI, all over the freeways. All over our roads. It could read license plate numbers. Identify the car. And they found him almost immediately. Stopped him on the how.

They arrested him.

So now, now what?

Well, who is he?

Well, the first person. Well, as soon as the name was released, the Guardian was the first place to actually find his son.

His son is -- was, I believe, in Florida.

And they called him. His name is Orin Ralph. They called him, he picked up the phone. He hadn't heard the news. And he was asked for a comment. And he said, well, this is the first I've heard about it. Was my father shot or injured?

He then said, his father hates Donald Trump, as, quote, every reasonable person does.

Hmm. Okay. All right. He said, I don't like Trump either.

Now, this is just -- this is his immediate response, after hearing that his father tried to kill the president, he then says, well, he hates him just like every reasonable person, and I hate him too.

Oh, okay. But he said, his dad was not a violent person, and couldn't believe his father would target the president. He's my dad, and all that he's had is a couple of traffic tickets, as far as I know.

That's crazy. I know my dad. I love my dad, and that's nothing like him.

Is it? Is it really? Nothing like him. You know your dad?

Hmm. Hmm. Okay. Now, he said, I've got to go. Because I have to get more information. But I don't know any more, because weed a falling out. We've grown apart.

But he's not a violent person. He's a hardworker. He's a great dad. He's a great dude. He's a nice guy, who worked his whole F-ing life.

I've never known him to even own a gun or known him to do anything like this.

Okay. Well, I don't think you know your dad. I don't think you know your dad.

Because your dad seeming -- the evidence seems to point, that it was the same guy, with the same name. In the same state.

That barricaded himself into his office, a gun.

And that gun, well, the FBI said it was a weapon of mass destruction.

It was a fully automatic machine gun.

So he went to prison. Or, I'm sorry. Went to jail.

He was convicted. Of having a weapon of mass destruction.

Now, wow. That seems like that should have been a long sentence. But it wasn't. It wasn't.

And if you are -- if you're caught with an automatic weapon, and you don't have a -- a stamp for it.

A tag for it.

Well, then you are. You go to prison usually 20 years.

I don't know why he didn't go to jail for 20 years. But he didn't.

And then he got out. Now, remember, his dad is just a peaceful person.

Then he got out. And started to recruit people, to go to Ukraine!

To fight in Ukraine!

Now, this is where it gets really interesting.

By the way, after the son did verify that, yep, that is his dad.

He -- he made a public statement.

He said, I hate this game, every four years. And I think we all do. And if my father wants to be a martyr, to how broken and disassociated the process has become from the real problems and practical solutions, then that's his choice.

So see, that sounds like you're excusing your dad's actions.

I'm not saying that what he's done or what he's about, that's just my own rant, about being fed up with all of it, for my entire life.

South park said it best, every four years, we're forced to choose between a giant turd sandwich and a giant douche. And it all stays f'ed in the same ways by different degrees, and we're exhausted and embarrassed by it all.

Hmm. So the ends justifies the means, is what I'm hearing here.

Well, thank you for stopping by Saul Alinsky. Well, let me get back to who this guy is.

Because I have Eric Prince coming up in about half an hour. He's the guy who said to Ron DeSantis, you should take this investigation in-house, because I don't think you should just trust the FBI on it.

And, thank you, Eric. Neither do I.

Why a Kamala Harris presidency would be DEVASTATING for small businesses

Would a Kamala Harris presidency destroy small businesses? Small business expert Carol Roth joins Glenn to make the case: "They want to kill the gig economy and all the small businesses that depend on independent contractors in favor of unions and big business. So, it's very difficult to say, 'I am the small business, I am the worker candidate,' and still be in favor of these things." Carol compares this to "McDonald's being pro-cow." She also explains why Harris' claim that 19 million new business applications have been filed since she and Joe Biden took office is incredibly misleading.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. But, Carol, she does have some things she can boast about.

The small business success. She claims a record of 19 million small business applications were received, under their leadership.

And that's a record, I hear. That's what they say.

CAORL: Okay. So this is -- I think most people know, who listen to me on your program. That I'm one of the world's leading experts on small business.

I've been entrenched for decades. I heard this -- this thing. This small business application.

And I went around, to every group that I know. And I said, what is a small business application?

Because when I started my business, I didn't have to apply, at the federal level.

You know, historically, I had an LLC. I registered that with the state. Some people had sole pro proprietorship. What does this mean?

Because we have 33 million plus businesses. But that only grows on net. Less than a million a year. So how is it possible that we have 19 million new application starts. And so far, no one has really been able to give me an answer. I have one -- one committee, you know, related to the House, who thinks that maybe there's an information that came from the state census data. I asked them. They actually are having a committee hearing. And I asked them, if they could ask, the FDA administrator. And putting her on the hot seat. Because they're running around, touting these made-up statistics to sound like they're some champion of small business. At the same time, Glenn, NFIB came out with their fall business optimism index today.

The 30-second consecutive months, that small business optimism has been below the historical average. And that's a 50-year average.

GLENN: Well, that's because they fear Donald Trump is coming back.

CAORL: For 32 months, yes.

GLENN: It's crazy. Because I see this number, of 19 million small businesses. And I -- and I am like, I thought, that was just because of all the businesses, that they had put out of business. They're like, starting up new businesses. So I just thought, they were taking credit. Like they do with all the job creation.

We've created more jobs. No, you didn't. People went back to work. You had told them, you cannot work.

So, of course, there were people going back to work.

But you're saying, this isn't that, at all. This is possibly even made up.

CAORL: Yeah. It's -- it's something that nobody knows really what it means. It certainly is not a prop -- it's not a prop for new small businesses created, which is what they're intimating. And we know the number of small businesses, you know, a year ago, was 32-point-something million, and then it climbed to 33-point-something million.

You know, yes, that's on that. Unless they're killing a million small businesses a year, which we know, they're certainly trying. But I don't think they've succeeded in doing it yet. That this is an absolute -- it's just, you know, spouting off nonsense.

And they're doing this, you know, again and again to gaslight people. Into things are so great. We're so in your corner. But at the same time, she's coming out, and she's tweeting about anti-small business policies.

Like, the Pro Act, that she said she's going to put in place. Which, for people who don't know, that's the anti-gig worker and anti-independent contractor language from California's 85 (phonetic) taken nationally. And they want to kill the gig economy and all the small businesses that depend on independent contractors, in favor of unions and big business.

So it's very difficult, to say, I am the small business. I am the worker candidate.

And still be in favor of these things. Which is why I equate it to being like McDonald's being pro-Catholic.

GLENN: You know, it is -- as a small business owner myself.

I look at tomorrow. And think, if they get in, the regulations, just the regulations, alone, that are still sitting out there, that they want to impose.

Will just crush small businesses.

These guys, you know, they used to say, well, the -- the Republicans are in with big business.

Well, then we're also in with small business too.

You know, they had a business attitude.

These guys are only big business.

They are only in with the giant global corporations.

That's all they care about. And it's honestly, like they're trying to impoverish, the small business.

And impoverish the middle class.

Without moving any of the middle class up. They're moving them all down.

CAORL: Yeah. I'm glad that you brought up regulations.

Because as I mentioned, there's this House Committee meeting right now.

And they came out with a report earlier this year, that the Biden-Harris agenda. Imposed $1.7 trillion in regulations on small businesses.

Ask that was before we've had some of these pending regulations, go into place. So I am certain, that that's higher.

And that is millions upon millions of hours that are wasted. That is dollars that are wasted.

And that's a barrier to success. You know, we keep hearing this ridiculous phrase, the opportunity economy.

Well, if you want to create opportunity, you reduce war about barriers. You reduce regulations.

You reduce taxes. You reduce the government being up in your business.

And you have the government minding their own business.

So that you can go off and work in your business.

That is what it is all about.

GLENN: You know, I know that our audience is heavy on entrepreneurs.

And people who have done business for a long time.

But there's also a younger generation that listens.

And explain, why regulations hurt opportunity.

CAORL: They hurt opportunity. Because number one, they're costly. Two, you're spending time, complying with the regulation, instead of spending the time working and growing your business.

And the challenge is that if you are a big company. If you're the Amazons of the world. If you're the Walmarts of the world. You have -- not only a whole balance sheet to deal with this.

You have a whole host of people in your company. Whether it's HR. Or whether it's some other administrative functions that can deal with these regulations.

When it comes to small business, the majority, greater majority of small businesses. It's just beyond -- so it's one person, who is already wearing all of those hats trying to deal with this. Even if you have some employees, you don't have the wherewithal, the ability. You're struggling enough to deal with inflation, finding the right workers, you know, remaining competitive, dealing with cyber security and the like. You don't have time, and you don't have the bandwidth. And you don't have capital, to deal with these regulations.

And some of them are so onerous, that people want to close their business. Something that we've been talking about, Glenn, for months now.

That the corporate transparency act, which is this registration, with the financial crimes division of the Treasury. I've had hundreds upon hundreds of small business owners, and people looking to start small businesses, saying that they don't want to. They want to close their business. They don't want to start.

Because they don't want to deal with the asymmetrical risk of having their information exposed or the government coming after them, for doing something wrong.

So because the government is imposing this regulation, which, by the way, is still in flux.

It's preventing these entrepreneurs from taking those risks. And creating opportunity. Which creates jobs. Which creates more dollars in their community. Which grows the economy.

Which is what we need, to move ourself forward. This is so obvious.

But all they want to do is take away wealth. Create barriers. Redistribute it. And make it revery challenging. For a small business owner, to succeed.

GLENN: You -- I think it was you, Carol.

Said, oh, maybe six months ago, we were talking. And you said, Glenn, most of the stuff that they've done, doesn't really kick in until 2025.

So we haven't felt the full impact, of Bidenomics yet. Was that you that said that to me.

CAORL: Quite probably. Quite probably.

GLENN: Okay. So what is it that is coming still, that we haven't felt. Describe next year. Just as it stands, without any new policies. If we just continued where we are?

CAORL: Well, as I said, the House small business committee, is doing a markup on seven different pieces of legislation, trying to overturn, you know, all of these stringent rules for small business. The corporate transparency act. We have until the end of the year, for that to go into effect. If there's no delay. Which, by the way, there's two delay bills. Two repeal bills.

And seven lawsuits. If we don't get that done by the end of the year. Then people are going to be seen as compliant. Then on top of that. You know, we have the tax cuts and jobs act, you know, large pieces of that, is expiring and changing the way the small businesses have to look at their taxes and figure out, you know, what makes them -- from an administrative standpoint. So, you know -- and that's, again, scratching the surface.

So, you know, one after another, there are things in the pipeline. And then if Kamala Harris were to become president.

Again, day one. They will try to rule by executive order. One of the other things, you know, this Department of Labor rule. Very tight. Independent contractor world.

That went into effect in March. They haven't truly been enforcing it yet. I haven't seen much in the way of enforcement. But if they start to crack down on that, that is something that could kill all of the small business across -- across-the-board.

So there are just so many different things, and it's challenging enough to own your own business.

As you know, the small business owner. To not constantly having to be worried about what the next shoe that is going to drop, coming from your own government.

GLENN: Carol, one last question. I would like to take a one-minute break. And then I would like you to come back and talk about. They're talking about a 50-basis point drop in the interest rate in loans.

Some people say, that's really good.

Some people say, that could collapse everything. Can you -- can you explain if that's a good thing or a bad thing, at this point?

Carol Roth is with us. So tell me about the options the fed have, has now.

What's happened with employment. Why they might be dropping the interest rate.

And is it a good thing or a bad thing?

CAORL: Well, so I have always contented that the fed, didn't have the right tools, to address inflation.

And inflation was coming from the pie constraints, not demand. That the Fed really focus on his demand. And after 15 years of zero interest rate policy. That it wasn't them, that changed much of what was going on.

In terms of demand for new loans. Et cetera.

But they have taken up the interest rate very high.

And a lot of people in the market.

A lot of investors, feel like they are behind the curve, in terms of normalizing policy.

Because they don't want to keep it so restrictive, that they cause a recession.

That's the concern all along.

So now that inflation has come down on a headline number. We know cumulatively, it's up over 20 percent. And that's what Americans are contending with. But from a policy standpoint, they see that inflation is coming down. And they see that the labor market, hmm, isn't quite as robust as they had hoped. So they are trying to address policy, to, you know, quash any recessionary outcomes. That's really what they're trying to do.

They have a couple choices. Right? They can do nothing as they have done for quite a while. They can deliver a cut and now they're deciding between --

GLENN: We have about a minute.

CAORL: -- a half a percent. And a quarter percent.

A half of percent may be bad news for them.

Because it may give the market a signal, that things are worse off, than they are.

So I think they will be a little bit more cautious. And go for that 25-basis point or whatever percent cut.

GLENN: All right. So you don't think that it will -- unless it's 50 basis points, I don't think that it will be a bad thing. Other than signaling that things might be worse than they thought.

CAORL: Right. And it's a much bigger signal at 50, than it is at 25, given where we stand with all the data. But I know you have limited time. We can get into this in another day.

GLENN: Yeah. And I'm not sure that anybody will want to open up the purse strings at this point.

I think everybody is waiting to see, what will happen, you know, with the -- with presidential election. I mean, because we're going one way or the other. And they're in opposite directions.

So it's kind of a scary place to be, as an investor, or a small businessperson. Or just, you know, a regular worker, in America today.

Carol, thank you so much. Carol Roth.

Jason Whitlock SLAMS Tyreek Hill for playing the race card during police stop

Miami Dolphins star wide receiver Tryreek Hill got a lot of sympathy from the media after he claimed that police officers pulled him over and immediately got violent. But BlazeTV host ‪@realjasonwhitlock‬ joins Glenn to tell the full story. Whitlock lays out the evidence that Tyreek, not the officers, is mostly to blame here. He also tears into Tyreek for playing the race card during the traffic stop (with hispanic cops) and slams media outlets like CNN for immediately running with his victim narrative.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Tyreek Hill. He was driving to the game. When was it, Sunday? Saturday? Sunday, wasn't it?

STU: Yeah. Sunday.

GLENN: And he's driving, I think his McLaren. He's speeding. He's pulled over close to the stadium. And people are -- you know, the fans are going into the stadium are driving by. Like, is that Tyreek Hill?

STU: They noticed.

GLENN: And the cop knocked on the window a couple of times. And said, hey, roll your window down. And he's like, no. And he's like, roll the window down.

And he's kind of a punk about it. Eventually, it ends up, they pull him out of the car, throw him down on the ground, and they cuff him.

And, you know, I'm having a hard time seeing -- you just don't treat the cops that way. I don't care who you are. You just don't treat the cops that way.

But it's a big mess now.

And Jason Whitlock is with us. Host of Blaze TV, fearless. Which if you haven't watched yet.

You need to. It's -- it's really into culture. And Jason is -- he is a spiritual guy.

A -- a faithful follower of God.

Really struggles with questions of the day. And tries to get it right.

And tries to be, you know -- look fort righteous answers on things. And he does a fabulous job. And I'm proud to call him my friend.

Jason, welcome.

JASON: Good to be here, Glenn.

GLENN: So tell me, what is happening with this? And why is this so divisive?

Why are people defending Tyreek Hill?

JASON: Because he's black. And we're in an election cycle, and we need a George Floyd or the left needs a George Floyd. And they're trying to make it out of Tyreek Hill. He's not a victim here.

He triggered the police, first by speeding past the police officer. In what clarifies as a construction zone. That's going to get you pulled over. And then he's, you know, in a half a million car.

GLENN: I was going to say, it's hard to be the oppressed when you're in a McLaren 730S.

JASON: Yeah. So when they're asking him to roll down his windows because his windows are tinted jet black. You can't see inside. So he briefly rolls it down. And gives them his driver's license, I think. And maybe registration. But then he rolls his window back up.

And that triggers the police. Because now they have a suspect, who has rolled his windows up. They can't see what he's doing. Is he getting a gun?

Is he trying to throw away guns or swallow drugs?

They don't know. Because the guy didn't have enough time to figure out, oh, this is the Miami Dolphins' star wide receiver.

GLENN: But if you handed your -- I mean, let me play the other side. If he handed him his driver's license, it says Tyreek Hill. You would know the name.

JASON: It may not mean anything to that police officer. Glenn, let's say you were that police officer.

GLENN: I wouldn't have known. I wouldn't have known.

JASON: There you go.

And so, you know, maybe that's a tiny bit of a stretch. But even if it is a football player, you know, do we have to go much beyond O.J. Simpson. Rae Carruth, and many other criminal, professional athletes, that say, hey, roll that window down?

I need to see what you are a doing. Do you have drugs? Do you have a gun? I don't know.

GLENN: Are you only saying that as a black man, because he's a black man? Why do you hate black people so much, Jason?

JASON: Because, and, again, I don't.
(laughter)
I'm just not into racial idolatry.

And any human is capable of being flawed, and so I'm talking about Tyreek Hill, not as a black person. He's a flawed human being. He's a man. And he handled this in a very poor way. And he triggered the police.

And you get the energy that you put out.
Because he starts yelling at the police. Why do you have to bang on my window like that?

And that's not how you deal with the police. Particularly, when you're in the wrong.

You know, I'm a feeder, Glenn. And so when I get pulled over, for speeding, the first words out of my mouth are, I'm sorry, Officer. How fast was I going?

The first thing out of my mouth.

GLENN: It's exactly what I say. F

JASON: First thing. I'm sorry. Because, one, I recognize, the police officer is like any other worker.

The less work he can do, the better. And so I've called him now, and he's got to pull someone over. He doesn't know. Is this going to be a hassle? So I've triggered the officers, so I say I'm sorry.

And so now to see Tyreek Hill, holding press conferences, demanding that this officer or officers get fired. Are you kidding me?

Because Tyreek Hill's history, you know, when he entered the league out of college. There were allegations of him beating up his pregnant girlfriend.

GLENN: Oh, jeez.

JASON: That was a controversy, when he got drafted in the NFL.

There have been -- there has been a controversy about a young child of his, and how the child got his arm broken. Was it Tyreek Hill? Was it the baby mama. He's had several incidents. He's an irresponsible person.

He has at least ten children. Maybe 12, by six different baby mamas. This is a very irresponsible person. He's speeding in a construction area, and he's dealing with the police in a poor way. And I don't know how we reached the conclusion that he's a victim.

He's not.

GLENN: He's not a victim. Is that the way most people look at it, Stu, that he's a victim.

STU: That's definitely the mainstream media version of it. That's what I've heard all over sports media. They're all seemingly terrified of saying that he did anything wrong at all. Well, treat the guy with respect.

GLENN: You know, this is amazing. Because this is the way the elites work. They think they know better. They think they get special privileges.

You know, if I'm pulled over by the police. I say the same thing that you do, Jason.

I'm sorry. How fast was I going?

I don't expect any special treatment at all.

You know, if I certainly was get it, I guess I'm a little, you know. Thank you.

And let's get out of here, before you change your mind.

But the elites, like Hunter Biden, who is white. Do the same thing.

They treat people poorly, because don't you realize who I am?

That's a real problem. That's not the way we should behave in our society.

JASON: Look at. Look at all the -- what he triggered with his speeding. With his disrespect. His unwillingness to roll down his window.

Now the next thing you know, his teammates that are also driving into the stadium.

They see him, they pull over to the side of the road. And they start questioning the police on the spot. On the same.

And are these large men, football players. Getting out of their cars. And so now the police are like, hold on.

Now I've got Calais Campbell, 6-8, 315 pounds, questioning -- this is a nightmare scenario for police. It's dangerous for drivers.

It's -- it's a mess. And now Calais Campbell.

And I think there's another team. They briefly get detained, because they want to bicker back and forth with the police.

Again, all the procedures tell the police, don't let bystanders start getting in and increasing the tension and the conflict.

And so Tyreek Hill's irresponsible behavior, puts him in harm's way. Puts the police officers in harm's way. Put the teammates in harm's way. Put other motorists in harm's way. And Caitlin Collins has him on CNN, and treats him for eight straight minutes, like he did nothing wrong.

And blah, blah, blah.

And I'm just -- this is -- the world.

It's backwards. Here's a man worth a couple hundred million dollars, with ten to 12 kids, that he's responsible for.

And we're holding him to the lowest standard. When he should have the highest standard.
He's got more to protect. More to lose. More people counting on him. We could be -- like Tyreek, what are you doing here?

GLENN: Well, I have to tell you, he's also forced to drive a McLaren. He doesn't have a Bugatti. I mean, the guy is clearly oppressed.

STU: Jason, is it true? That at some point, he had mentioned something about, while he was sitting on the sidewalk there, this was all about him being black in America.

And the officers responded with, that they too were dark. Was the term they used.

Because they were Hispanic officers. Is that actually accurate?

JASON: Absolutely accurate.

And, yes, he did. I'm just a black man in America.

GLENN: Oh. I hate that.

JASON: You know, it's -- it's -- listen, the guy has been granted second and third chances to have this career.

And here's a police officer, let's speculate. Maybe the guy makes between 80 and 120,000 bucks a year. Driving a motorcycle. Doing very dangerous work.

And he's trying to destroy this man, who probably has a wife and/or kids. He's trying to destroy him.

Trying to deny this man, who doesn't really need a second chance.

But trying to deny him, forgiveness for whatever little -- you know, if I were dealing a pie of who was in the wrong here.

Tyreek Hill is 96 to 99 percent in the wrong.

And maybe there's three percent of the officer being a tiny bit aggressive with him.

GLENN: I have to tell you, this hurts people that actually are actually oppressed.

Because this really does happen with cops. And we know it. But when you have this guy, coming out and treating cops like garbage.

And saying he's the oppressed one. It hurts. It hurts the real stuff.

It's so bad. Listen, Jason. I have to run. But I want to ask you, what did you think of the debate? And how do you think that's playing?

JASON: I'm thinking the debate will have no impact. I think Kamala Harris exceeded extremely low expectations.

And I think that -- and, Glenn, you might not get this. But Stu might. I think Donald Trump missed as many layups as Angel Reese. Pointing, you know, I thought he could have laid her to waist. But she exceeded expectations. He missed some layups. And a week from now, no one will care.

GLENN: How do you think guys took to her -- I mean, if Donald Trump would have treated her like that, he -- he would have lost 20 points.

She just treated him like garbage. How do you think men, in particular, took to that?

JASON: I think we've grown to expect it.

You know, she's been classified as a black woman. And a feminist.

And a queen. You know, blah, blah, blah.

And so, you know, men have kind of -- we have allowed it. We have expected it. We have bought into a narrative that, oh, the history of men is just their brutal mistreatment of women.

And so women have a right to be angry, and they have a right to reparations. And blah, blah, blah.

And so we owe them something. And so, you know, it was a bad look to me. And Trump certainly couldn't get away with it, because he would have been called "racist" and every other name in the book. But, you know, just all the facial expressions and all the disrespect.

But, you know, she wasn't alone. You know, David Muir and the --

GLENN: Oh, I know.

JASON: Kamala's -- you know, the other woman was Kamala's sorority sister. They're in a sorority together. A/k/a the other moderator.

GLENN: Wow. I didn't know that.

JASON: Oh, yeah. And black people take sorority life and fraternity life very serious, postgraduation, perhaps more serious after graduation than when they're actually students.

GLENN: Jason, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Blaze host of Fearless. Jason Whitlock. You can find him at YouTube at YouTube.com/Jason Whitlock, or BlazeTV. TheBlaze.com/Fearless. Thank you so much, Jason.