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

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

RADIO

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.

RADIO

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.

RADIO

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.