RADIO

Megyn Kelly REACTS to Trump's controversial abortion answer

Former president Donald Trump's interviews with Megyn Kelly and NBC News turned a lot of heads over the weekend. On NBC News, Trump condemned fellow presidential candidate Gov. Ron DeSantis' Florida heartbeat bill as a "terrible mistake," while also supporting some limits on abortion. And on The Megyn Kelly Show, he addressed the growing transgender trend and whether or not men can become women. @MegynKelly joins Glenn to discuss how Trump's answers may affect his 2024 campaign, whether he's already looking ahead to the general election and trying to appeal to independents, and whether this strategy will work. Plus, they discuss whether President Biden will be the Democratic 2024 candidate, or if the Left is already trying to oust him: "You can feel the ground shifting."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Hello, Megyn, how are you?

MEGYN: Hi, I'm well.

How are you doing?

GLENN: I'm very good.

So your interview, and the interview that the president did on MSNBC are getting a lot of play over the weekend. Because in some -- in some places, he seemed to be hedging his bet. And on MSNBC,he talked about a 15-week limit on abortions.


MEGYN: Yeah. Well, he -- this is one of the reasons why President Trump needs to put himself out there more.

Because just like president HEP it's not okay for either one of these leading candidates on the Dem or the GOP side stay underground. So to his credit, Trump is putting himself out there. Much more than Joe Biden.

But we absolutely need to be probing their positions, as the American public tries to make a decision.

And Trump on the social issue, with all due credit for the Supreme Court justices he got has always been a little wishy-washy.

He lived pretty much 75 easier. Seventy-three. Whatever it is, before he became president.

As a Democrat. You know, one of my debate questions for him back in 2017, was when do you become a Republican?

If you look back, he's been much, much of a Democrat. And more liberal on social issues. Like virtually everyone in New York is.

And I think there's a fair amount of that in him.

GLENN: So is this -- for instance, let me play a clip you with. Where he was talking about, can a man become pregnant?

Play it.

VOICE: Can a man become a woman?

DONALD: In my opinion, can a man become a woman. I think -- I think part of it is birth. Can the man give birth? No. No. Although, they'll come up with some answer to that also.

I heard just the other day, they have a way that now the man can give birth. No. I would say that I'm continuing my stance on that.

GLENN: So what did -- what was your takeaway? Because he never really answered it. But he did shake his head no. Towards the beginning.

What's your takeaway from that?

MEGYN: Well, I thought it was weak sauce. I really wish he -- he did better on that. I like Ron DeSantis' answer, I'll be honest.

Which is no. No. No.

Obviously no.

GLENN: Right.

TOM: And it's not determined based on who can give birth. It's determined by God.

And it's pretty obvious, just as soon as you come out of the womb. That's the way -- that's the way he seems to not being painting this weird agenda by some activist in this crazy trans agenda-pushing cult.

So Trump clearly knows that. I don't know if he has -- maybe trying to appease some group of trans voters. That he thinks will make the difference with him.

Even when I had Don Jr on my show, he was kind of dancing around this issue.

I -- I think that they think, they somehow will do better with Democrats. If they don't hit this straight-on.

Even though, I mean, 98 percent of the Republican Party is united on this issue.

This is not a winner for any Republican to hedge on this.

Just ask Asa Hutchinson. So I'm not sure what he's thinking. I feel like this, and the abortion thing. He must be thinking more general elections, where there are Democrats, who don't feel as Republicans do.

But I really think, there's a small voting group on this particular issue, he needs a better answer. And I hope he gets it.

GLENN: So do you think this will shape the tree at all?

I mean, I think he looks at the poll numbers. And thinks theres -- I mean, I'm going to win. So why not start a moderate campaign now?

Because I'm going to win the -- the primary.

So let's just get past that. And start being, you know, more moderate to appeal to a wider audience. Than just the Republicans. You think that will work?

MEGYN: I don't. I mean, I'm in much more of the Ann Coulter thinking, it comes to who the party should nominate.

I think they should nominate someone who will drive turnout. And generally with Republicans, that means someone who is conservative. Who is genuinely conservative.

Look what happened with John McCain. Okay? They've tried to go more moderate.

It doesn't work. Now, Trump does tracking turnout. Because he's Trump. And there's something about that. His constituency finds more appealing. And, you know, that 30 percent, isn't going to abandon him. Even if it comes out with abortion in the 9th month, I mean, that's a really -- that's really the question. Not whether he can choose something on HEP Fifth Avenue. For Trump to say, he's preabortion, ninth month. And still hold on to that four, 30 percent. Glenn, I think the answer is yes.

And he's almost toying with that experiment right now. He's now pro abortion. He's really more banking on the fact, that he appointed the three justices, and made a difference on Roe v. Wade. And he won't lose any Republican voters to Joe Biden, on the issue of abortion. Right?

He's playing the long game. But he does need to generate enthusiasm.

And he's already tamped down. Not in the first set of Republicans. But in the other half, who are tepid on Trump.

GLENN: So let me ask you about Joe Biden here for a second.

Because I've started to see, for instance, there's an article in the Washington Post, from a big -- a big player. On the left. And in the editorial, he said, you know, I love Joe Biden. And he's done great things.

And nothing against anything he's ever done. But I think it's time for him to go.

And I think that you see the supporters, and the -- the key members, possibly starting to move in and saying, you know, Joe, I think maybe you should go.

Do you think that he is the candidate? By the time we get to the -- the election.

MEGYN: I don't know, Glenn. I'm seeing what you're seeing.

It seems like there's a movement underfoot to gently oust him and her. That's what was interesting about it. In wacko.

Which is, we don't want to be stuck with her.

But, you know, live by the sword, die by the sword.

They selected her for identity politics reasons, and good luck subbing her out. And subbing in some other person, like Gavin Newsom.

You know, who doesn't check the right boxes. And even who does check the right boxes, Sunny Hopkins, woke identity politics warrior on The View was saying.

If he subs out Kamala Harris, he will lose the black vote. We're not interchangeable, even if he puts back in a black woman.

Anyway, you can feel the ground shifting.

CNN is doing a long fact-check on Biden.

I, last Thursday, have never seen them unleash their Daniel Gale HEP guy on Biden. That was always a Trump thing.

Now more and more sort of getting interested in just how old President Biden is. And polling heavily on that.

The results are disastrous.

The nation's piece. There's been example after example of how they seem to be realize with whom, you know what, he can't do it. (?) we're going to lose, if we stick with him.

But I also think, you have to ask revelings, how do you get rid of it?

You know, I think there's some fantasy that Barack Obama can do it. You know, give the tap on the shoulder. Like you get at the dance. Time to sit down. Your dancing is over.

I'm not sure.

GLENN: Well, it's exact --

MEGYN: What man voluntarily walks away from power like that?

GLENN: Well, voluntarily, George Washington. But remember that Nixon did that.

and Nixon only did it,when he realized, the party (?) was no longer with him.

When all of the people he counted acon, to help support him, were turning on him.

And that's when he decided to resign. There's a good way to do this.

And there's the tough way. And we're offering you the chance to make this your idea.

And what -- I think part of the pressure, might be the Hunter Biden scandal.

When you saw the -- the charges, last week.

Are these real, or are these bogus too?

MEGYN: The gun charges? Oops, I mean, they are real. (?) and any of us would have been charged with it. So okay.

But, of course, they were brought very reluctantly, by a guy who is on his side.

David Weiss, the US attorney for tell wear. Is on hunter apps side. (?) for six years.

Who let the MS damning charges might do the statute of limitations.

(?) even though hunter's lawyers offered what's called a toggle agreement. They offered to extend the statute of limitations. And tasted Weiss said, no. That's okay.

This is his prosecutor, so we're supposed to believe he's going to be tough on Hunter. BS. It was a figure life charge on only (?) a lot of people think, won't even hold you up. This gun statute has been deemed unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. So it's possible they can go in. (?) to most Republicans.

But kind of a low stakes matter.

Let's say. Let's say he gets convicted. Which he probably will. Some are saying, this is a smart move by the Republicans.

Because at least now, Unterand Joe have real skin in the game.

He could potentially face real jail time.

And maybe it gives (?) power of just a moment ago gibel for Hunter. (?) you'll pardon him. While announcing you're just a one-termer.

You can give your son a apart. Keep him out of jail. Save the Democratic Party. You'll be on Mount Rushmore. (?), you know what, if that's the price it takes to get him out of this. Let's do it.
(laughter)


GLENN: So be as tough on this as you can be.

When you see the left saying, there's no evidence. There's no evidence.

They've got no evidence.

There's plenty of evidence. I don't know if that all adds up to, you know, proof.

But there's tons of evidence. If you are standing in a court of law.

Because that's what is what you used to do. And your client was Joe Biden. And Hunter Biden.

And you saw the evidence that the prosecution has shown already. And they say there's more. How would you assess your chance of winning?

MEGYN: It would just depend on the he have dentiary (?) 51 percent more likely. And 49 percent are not.

He's guilty. If it's I don't understand a reasonable doubt, I would acquit him. So far. So far.

That's only because we haven't gotten all the bank records. Which they're about to get. It's more than 51 percent likely he did this.

I would put him more up in the '60s. If you're talking about conviction of a crime. Not there yet.

GLENN: Yeah. And what do the bank records. What are you looking for, in the bank records. What do they have to show?

MEGYN: Well, I would want to see the actual deposits of men. In Joe Biden's numerically convict him of a cranium. (?), but we have Peter Schweizer on the show on Friday. He, of course, is a Hunter expert.

He makes interesting points about how -- in order to show bribery. In order to show corruption, you don't need it show any (?) showing the deposits into Hunter Biden's account is enough. Not to mention the other eight family members on the tape.

GLENN: Correct. Correct.

MEGYN: The benefit the to the family member is sufficient.

This (?) kind of brings me back to the (?) I almost feel like, Republicans are overstating their own burden.

You know, it's -- it doesn't need -- I realize why they're doing the impeachment. I'm actually in favor of it. But it doesn't need to go that route.

And they don't need to allege crimes. The corruption is there, plane as the nose on your face. I want (?) one -- one honest journalist, just one. With access to President Biden.

To get him in an interview, and say, how dare you allow your son, to sit on the board of Burisma.

Ukraine and company, being investigated for corruption. When you were the point man on the Obama bludgeon cleanlyup in Ukraine.

How dare you.

Is that not disqualifying to your ongoing role as public official? Go ahead.

GLENN: I think it is.

We're not going to see that. But I think it is. I would love to see that.

I would go a step further. As a father, you knew who Kolomoisky was.

He's a brutal killer. Beheads his opponents.

And you took your son -- you knew had a drug problem. And drinking problem.

And could easily be roped into anything.

And you allowed him to sit on -- on that board, with that man?

Are you out of your mind?

MEGYN: Right. When he was drug addled. Looking back on the time line of hunter's addiction.

I actually (?) in preparation for my show today.

So he joined the board of Burisma in April 2014.

That same year, he was discharged from the Navy reserve, after testing positive for cocaine right? That same year, when he joined the boards. Which Joe knows all of this. This is while his father was overseeing US politics in Ukraine.

By May of 15th, he had a relapse of his alcohol attack. By 2016, he had a relapse of his crack cocaine addiction.

And this is all while he's doing business with -- with the Chinese in these while he's on the board of Burisma.

GLENN: Jeez.

MEGYN: Which his father knows, because he's religion calling into the hunter business meetings.

He knows, his crack addled son is sitting on the board, cashing checks. And he's just (?) facilitating it. I mean, at a minimum, this counteracts the narrative of, what a great dad he is.

GLENN: I agree. I agree.

Megyn, thank you very much. We look forward to your program.

You can catch Megyn Kelly, wherever you get your podcast.

She also follows this show on Sirius XM. Thank you so much.

MEGYN: Thank you, Glenn.

RADIO

The difference between debate and celebrating death

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

RADIO

Shocking train video: Passengers wait while woman bleeds out

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?


STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Max Lucado on Overcoming Grief in Dark Times | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 266

Disclaimer: This episode was filmed prior to the assassination of Charlie Kirk. But Glenn believes Max's message is needed now more than ever.
The political world is divided, constantly at war with itself. In many ways, our own lives are not much different. Why do we constantly focus on the negative? Why are we in pain? Where is God amid our anxiety and fear? Why can’t we ever seem to change? Pastor Max Lucado has found the solution: Stop thinking like that! It may seem easier said than done, but Max joins Glenn Beck to unpack the three tools he describes in his new book, “Tame Your Thoughts,” that make it easy for us to reset the way we think back to God’s factory settings. In this much-needed conversation, Max and Glenn tackle everything from feeling doubt as a parent to facing unfair hardships to ... UFOs?! Plus, Max shares what he recently got tattooed on his arm.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Are Demonic Forces to Blame for Charlie Kirk, Minnesota & Charlotte Killings?

This week has seen some of the most heinous actions in recent memory. Glenn has been discussing the growth of evil in our society, and with the assassination of civil rights leader Charlie Kirk, the recent transgender shooter who took the lives of two children at a Catholic school, and the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska, how can we make sense of all this evil? On today's Friday Exclusive, Glenn speaks with BlazeTV host of "Strange Encounters" Rick Burgess to discuss the demon-possessed transgender shooter and the horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk. Rick breaks down the reality of demon possession and how individuals wind up possessed. Rick and Glenn also discuss the dangers of the grotesque things we see online and in movies, TV shows, and video games on a daily basis. Rick warns that when we allow our minds to be altered by substances like drugs or alcohol, it opens a door for the enemy to take control. A supernatural war is waging in our society, and it’s a Christian’s job to fight this war. Glenn and Rick remind Christians of what their first citizenship is.