RADIODecember 10, 2024

NBC News Leaves Out CRITICAL Context in Trump Interview

President-elect Donald Trump recently sat down with NBC News’ “Meet the Press” for his first sit-down interview since winning the 2024 election. Glenn and Stu review his statement on birthright citizenship and the CRITICAL context that interviewer Kristen Welker left out: The 14th Amendment doesn’t say, “all persons born in the United States are citizens.” The real quote includes a major qualifier that could allow Trump to end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants without having to change the Constitution. Plus, Glenn and Stu review Trump’s comments on the war between Ukraine and Russia.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the program. And welcome to Stu Burguiere.

STU: Thank you, Glenn.

GLENN: You're welcome, Stu.

STU: And Donald Trump went on Meet The Press this weekend. This is what you're supposed to do if you're --

GLENN: Is it?

STU: Yeah, apparently so.

We're supposed to just reflexively go to NBC News whenever --

GLENN: Those days are over.

STU: Well, I thought they were too.

GLENN: Well, he has to do them.

STU: Well, does he? Does he have to do them?

GLENN: Yeah, I think he should do a little of everything.

You know what I mean? I think you shouldn't just go to podcasts. It's what Barack Obama did.

Remember? And he was doing interviews with -- who was that woman in the bathtub? And you're like, okay. This is ridiculous.

You don't have to do the bathtub one. But I think you should -- you should go on places, where you know --

STU: It's adversarial.

GLENN: It's adversarial. You won't get a good interview.

I think that's required as president.

STU: I agree with that. I --

GLENN: As president. Not necessarily as a --

STU: Even as a candidate, I think it's something you should do.

I mean, I think Kamala Harris shouldn't have done an adversarial interview at the campaign at some point, which she did not do.

GLENN: She didn't do interviews.

STU: In fact, she wasn't doing anything for a very long time.

And they switched strategies. And it did not help. In fact, it went the opposite direction.

I do wonder, there's the alternate world, what that election would have looked like, if she just continued to do nothing.

I think it would have been closer. I think if she never did an interview, it would have been closer.

GLENN: I think you're right on that.

I think you're right. The more she spoke.

The more you're like, oh, dear God, no.

STU: Don't do that.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Because I think they correctly realized that there were a certain amount of people, who were very worried about a candidate that couldn't do an interview.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Right?

So they tried to solve that, by doing interviews.

And what they should have done was let those people go. Realize, they're not going to vote for you, and hope.

GLENN: Has anybody noticed.

And I am biased because I've been talking to him, off-air.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And watching him talk to a lot of people, you know, without cameras around.

And his -- his grasp on deep subjects, has changed a great deal. Have you noticed Donald Trump in interviews is not the same guy he was in 2020?

STU: Yeah. I think that's true.

He certainly seems to be more focused and has a real plan, as to what he's going to do. As we know it's directly project 2025. Which he commissioned. We should remember, of course. Yeah. No.

It does seem like, you made the description.

I think it was last week, which it has been sticking with me.

Which, after 2020, he spent four years, thinking, this isn't going to happen to me again.

Like, I'm going to make sure these things -- if I get a president -- if I'm able to become president again. I'm not going to be able to be hit by all of these --

GLENN: I won't be surprised ever again.

STU: Right. It seems like he's coming in, ready for this.

GLENN: Yeah. He's ready.

The other thing that has happened to him. That I think has cut down on his slams and everything else.

I mean, he still does.

You'll notice he's not as crazy on things. And I think that's --

STU: What do you mean not as crazy on things? Just not as worried about --

GLENN: You know, name-calling. You know what I mean?

He's not like that, as much.

Because I think he -- this is just my speculation.

Put yourself in his shoes.

In 2014, everybody on both sides, loved him.

Right?

Maybe not as the president. But they -- they loved him.

STU: As a celebrity.

He was a big celebrity.

GLENN: And he's a great guy. A philanthropist.

He's done so much.

And then he gets in, and everybody that -- that were his friends.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That knew him, and knew what he was like. They all of a sudden, turned on him.

And I think that just took him by absolute surprise.

And he just kept -- he had to keep punching and punching and punching.

And I think now, a couple of things have happened. One, he just stopped caring. Because you -- you do care. No matter what anybody says, you do care.

He stopped caring. And then I think when he was shot, I think he found his purpose. And I also think in the following months, he kind of became cool again.

He became the guy who could go on Saturday Night Live, and make fun of himself.

STU: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: You know what I mean? And everybody would accept him.

He became kind of mainstream again.

So I don't think he feels that he has to punch anymore.

STU: Hmm. That's interesting. Yeah. I -- I have noticed a difference in him. I think getting shot. No matter what that is.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. That was critical. That was critical.

STU: It was.

GLENN: It has to change.

STU: Yeah. It has to change. So he's going into this with a real plan.

One part of this plan, this will be clip four. Is his plan to end birthright citizenship.

This is -- obviously, highly controversial. Many people on the left, do not like it at all.

They asked him about it, on meet The Press. Was it Wexler?

Christine Wexler.

GLENN: Yeah. Somebody who you've never heard of.

Because everybody you've heard of, has no credibility.
STU: There you go.

VOICE: You promised to end birthright citizenship on day one, is that still your plan?

VOICE: Yeah, absolutely.

VOICE: The Fourteenth Amendment says, quote, all persons born in the United States are citizens. Can you get around the Fourteenth Amendment, with an executive action?

DONALD: We maybe have to go back to the people, but we have to end it. We're the only county that has it. You know we're the only country that has it.

Do you know, if somebody sets a foot, just a foot. One foot. You don't need two. On our land, congratulations, you are now a citizen of the United States of America.

Yes, we're going to end that because it's ridiculous.

VOICE: Through executive action?

DONALD: Well, if we can through executive action, I was going to -- we had to fix COVID first, to be honest with you. We have to end it.

GLENN: Okay. So notice -- notice what happened here.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: She comes with the 14th. Stu, tell me why the Fourteenth Amendment was first written. What was that really about?

STU: I mean, is it wrong to say slavery?

GLENN: No. Slavery.

STU: You looked at me --

GLENN: No, no, no.

It was written for slavery.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: It was written because all citizens could vote.

And you have certain rights.

Blah, blah, blah. And so the southerners.

The Democrats said, well, they're not citizens.

They're not citizens.

They're from Africa.

STU: So they can't vote.

GLENN: So they can't vote.

Yeah. If you were born here. Even if you were born a slave, you're a citizen.

That's what that was about. That was not --

STU: About illegal immigration.

GLENN: That was not illegal immigration.

Come over here, get into a hospital. Have a baby.

And congratulations. Everybody is a citizen.

We are the only one that has it.

And the only reason we do have it is because of slavery.

It was a way to make sure that Democrats didn't just cut blacks out of the vote again.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That's what's so crazy.

And so notice he says, we may have to go back to the people.

Can you just change that?

Well, no. It's a constitutional amendment.

So we may have to go back to the people.

He says that first.

Her immediate response is, through executive action?

No. I just -- I just said, we may have to go back to the people.

STU: There are several parts in this interview. Where she doesn't -- it doesn't seem she listens to him. She has the idea of what Donald Trump says in this moment.

Already acted it out with her producers multiple times. So she's just not listening.

GLENN: That's right. That's why none of them have any credibility. Because there's not an honest exchange.

There is no honest questions.

He just said, we may have to go -- he volunteered. We may have to go back to the American people, for that.

STU: Right.

GLENN: So you're suggesting that maybe it would be a constitutional amendment? Well, yeah. I think we would have to do it.

I might -- if I get stuck, I might find a way to do it with executive action. But it is a constitutional amendment.

So, yes, that's an honest conversation.

STU: Right. No.

GLENN: That's not what she did.

STU: No. Do we have this clip handy again, to play it again? I want to see if you catch this one little of this. This is clip four, again.

Listen to her verbiage of the Fourteenth Amendment.

VOICE: Do you promise to end birthright citizenship on day one?

Is that still your plan?

DONALD: Yeah. Absolutely.

The Fourteenth Amendment says though, quote, all persons born in the United States are citizens. Can you get around the Fourteenth Amendment?

STU: Okay. Stop.

Is that a quote?

All persons born in the United States are citizens?

That's what she said the Fourteenth Amendment says.

GLENN: You know, now that you ask me, I doubt it is. Have you looked it up?

STU: I have it. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, she leaves that out. But not necessarily important to the conversation.

But the next part is, comma, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, comma, are citizens of the United States and of the state written they reside.

The whole Fourteenth Amendment argument. And you might disagree with this part of it, is that that phrase, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, means that illegal immigrants are not included.

Now, I --

GLENN: How? How?

STU: Well, they're not subject to that jurisdiction.

GLENN: So, in other words, the -- well, if mom --

STU: They would be.

GLENN: If mom and baby, were there. Then they would be subject to that jurisdiction.

But the family would not be. Because they're someplace else?

STU: I think the argument, and again, I wouldn't say I'm an expert on the Fourteenth Amendment argument here.

GLENN: I'm going to tell you.

I am absolutely so far away from an expert. You might as well talk to a fisherman.

STU: What I have heard, people make this argument before.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: And the argument is basically to be subject to that jurisdiction. Is it not mean that you -- everyone, of course, has to follow the laws of a country, that you move into.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: To be subject of that jurisdiction. Means you have to have a basis in the country.

So it's not like you just cross the border. And, hey, I'm now a subject of this jurisdiction.

You're a visitor, right?

Or in this case, a criminal. And I'm crossing the border.

GLENN: Right.

STU: So you would not get necessarily those protections.

Of -- of that Fourteenth Amendment.

GLENN: May I just say, the only thing I hate the Founders for, is their use of commas.

STU: You know, it's a good point.

GLENN: Stop with the use of commas.

Could you please, for the love of Pete, the right to keep and bear arms.

Comma.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Under a well-run regulated militia.

Comma. Shall not be infringed.

Can you stop with the commas? It makes it too complex now. Stop with the commas.

STU: Very true.

But I think, regardless of what you think about the argument, of the 14th amendment. And people who are -- who believe illegal immigrants would not be grandfathered into that.

If it's foundational to the argument, why would you skip it?

Right?

GLENN: Right.

STU: You have to bring that up. Because --

GLENN: Could you do me a favor?

Could you have ChatGPT? Or something like that?

STU: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: Type that in, and ask what that means.

STU: Sure. It will take me a second, obviously.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah. All right.

STU: Do you want to go on to the next clip.

GLENN: Yeah. Let's go to the next clip.

STU: Okay. Next someone on Ukraine.

And what needs to happen with Ukraine.

This is, again, Trump on Meet The Press.

There are people being killed in that war, at levels never been seen before.

You have to go back to the Second World War. And even that, if you take a look and you know what it is, it's the soldiers, largely. The cities have been emptied out and demolished.

The country has been demolished.

If I won that election. Which you know how I feel about it. I won't get into it.

Because we don't need to start that argument.

I think it was an easy argument.

It was really proven even more complicit than the win I had on this one.

Yeah, but that's your opinion, but I disagree with it. Had I assumed -- kept control.

Number one, Israel wouldn't have happened.

Number one, Ukraine would have never happened.

It would have never happened in Ukraine and Russia.

But the number of people being killed. Soldiers. Young, beautiful soldiers.

Hundreds of thousands of people are being killed.

And, you know, it's very interesting.

It's level. Totally level the battlefields.

Totally level.

The only thing that stops a bullet. Is a body. A human body. And the people being killed. Hundreds of thousands on both sides. Russia has lost probably 500 thousand. Ukraine has lost higher than they say.

Probably 400,000.

You're talking about hundreds of thousands of bodies, laying all over the fields.

It's the stupidest thing I've ever seen.

And it should have need been allowed to happen.

Biden should have been able to stop it.

GLENN: Amen!

He's absolutely right.

And when this is over, and the body count is actually revealed, and when you see. And when you see BlackRock there, rebuilding.

When you see all of these friends of the Bidens rebuilding.

When you see BlackRock owning the farmland.

Then maybe you will start to have some idea of how grotesque, this really was.

All right. More in just a second.

STU: Let me tell you about the best gift, you can give yourself or someone else this holiday season.

Maybe looking years or even decades younger.

Well, if you want that, 'tis the season to tighten up that jaw line. Introducing the Genucel jaw line treatment with dual peptide and MDL Technology.

Genucel's most advanced ever. It tightens sagging jaw lines, and plumps the layers of your skin to contour and define the jaw line and neck area within just minutes. People go, you know, abroad all the time. And they spend thousands of dollars, to get rid of this kind of thing. But you don't have to. Give Genucel a try first.

You will see results in minutes.

And, you know, they get better every day. Why not give it a shot?

Just in time for Christmas and holiday season. You can save 70 percent off, Genucel's complete skin care package, featuring the jaw line treatment.

And Genucel's immediate effects. You can get Genucel XV wrinkle treatment, included for Christmas.

Genucel.com/Beck is the place to go to get this. You can start looking years and even decades younger tomorrow, for those family gatherings. It's guaranteed. So there's no risk there.

Give it a shot. As a special holiday gift, every package ordered, includes a bonus beauty box with two skin care best-sellers and free priority shipping. It's Genucel.com/Beck. G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com/Beck.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So let's go to Chat GPT.

And just see what it says about the Fourteenth Amendment and that particular phrase, between commas.

STU: And I will say our robot betters seem to have summarized this the same way that I understood it. So historically, the consensus among most legal scholars and historical practices has been the phrase, excludes only a few categories. This is the phrase of "not subject to the jurisdiction in the United States."

Those categories are children of foreign diplomats, enemy soldiers, and some Native American tribes, who maintain their tribal jurisdiction.

Legal precedent has largely supported the view that children born in the US to foreign citizens are indeed US citizens.

Regardless of the immigration status of the parents.

Then some conservatives argue, subject to the jurisdiction, thereof, excludes individuals who are in the country, illegally, as they are not legally subject to the jurisdiction in the same way as lawful residents or citizens.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: They claim that because illegal immigrants have not entered the country, and remain in it legally, that they or their children should not automatically receive citizenship.

That is my understanding of the debate. And, again, you can say, you disagree with the conservative side of that debate.

GLENN: Right.

STU: You know, many do.

But to -- to actually skip the phrase, that is important to the debate. When talking to the man, who is arguing the conservative side of that debate. Is journalism malpractice, at the very least.

And I think it's intentional.

I believe it's intentional. But I don't know.

GLENN: Wait. I think it's NBC.
(laughter)

STU: It's not intentional. It's NBC.

GLENN: It's NBC.

STU: It's just what we are.

GLENN: It's just what they do. Of course it is.

STU: Yes! And that's, again, like -- it goes back to our original conversation, as opposed to whether you Meet the Press or not.

Do you need to go to a place that is intentionally doing things like that?

I mean, that is -- that is inexcusable for the one phrase that's important to the debate, you leave out of the amendment?

I mean, that's obviously intentional.

GLENN: I like the fact that the president was calm, cool, collected. Didn't name call. Went through that whole thing.

Wasn't a fair interview. It was exactly what you would expect. But at least he went and talked to the other side.

STU: Yeah. I think it's worth doing to talk to the other side.

I think it's worth doing adversarial interviews.

I wish he had a little honesty.

I feel like when you went back on the show with Russer. That's what you got.

Was -- it wasn't an interview liked. A lot of times, he took things, and took the democratic side a little unfairly. But you wouldn't eliminate the part of the amendment, that is the debate.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: He wouldn't have done that.

GLENN: No. And he would have given you -- there were times, that Ruser -- you would be pissed off at him. Because it was your guy. But you would also be cheering for the other side. Because he was fair. He was even-handed.

It was all that really, we asked for.

Can AI destroy lives? Starbuck’s case raises terrifying questions

Did Google's AI defame filmmaker ‪@RobbyStarbuck‬ by making up that he had been accused of sexual assault?! Robby joins Glenn to discuss how he has filed a defamation lawsuit against Google, who's AI bot 'Gemini' claimed Robby had been accused of sexual assault out of thin air. Robby also revealed to Glenn that Gemini claimed Glenn actually reported on the story, which never happened. If Google's AI can do this to somebody like Robby, it can and it will be used to shape narratives, influence opinions, and even SWING elections.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Robby Starbuck is an interesting guy. He once directed Oscar-winning actors, some of the biggest music stars in the world. He started seeing the threat of Marxism to America. His family fled to Cuba. So he -- he has seen this movie before. So he started standing up in 2015. He endorsed Trump. Hollywood didn't like that. He's gone on to -- he is a major force in getting transgender surgery and hormones for children in Tennessee banned. He helped pass the law to put the death penalty on the table for child rapists in Tennessee. He also did a documentary, the War on Children, which I think had 60 million views after Elon Musk said, "You really needed to watch this."

And then he had a problem with Google AI. Google AI started coming after him, and saying all kinds of really horrible and specific things that he had been, you know, charged with sexual assault. And child rape. And abuse. And fraud. And stalking. And all kinds of stuff.

From Google AI.

He finds out about it. And he engages with Google AI. And it just keeps doubling down.

He is now in a lawsuit.
And we wanted to have him on. Because I saw something last week, that shows that Google AI apparently is still using me as a source, on some of these allegations.

Nope!

That wouldn't be me!

Robbie, welcome to the program.

ROBBY: Thanks for having me, Glenn. Yeah, you were one of the sources cited. And so this is one of the crazy parts of what happened. Google AI has been inventing these lies about me that have no basis in reality. I've literally never been accused of or charged with any crime, ever, let alone, this crazy stuff.

But during this time period there, AI transitions from Bard to Gemini and Gemma, right? Gemini and Gemma started doing something very different than ever Bard did. And it was -- it started inventing actual articles and references to videos. Links, fake links to real media personalities and media outlets. And it would even make headlines or give summaries of what these people said.

So in your case, it said that you reported on sexual assault allegations against me by women. And these are not just saying sexual assault accusations. It has names of victims. It has fake police records it invents. Fake court records it invents.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

ROBBY: Articles from media. So it goes so detailed into this, it will list out evidence that doesn't exist, investigations by police departments that don't exist, and it just doubles down when you press on it.

Some people might be saying, what are you saying to the AI to get this out?

We've posted examples where people posted. And asked questions as simple as, tell me about Robby Starbuck, and it immediately dives into saying that I'm accused of sexual assault. And so you go and you say, "Hey, where is the citation of this? Give me sources. Give me only facts." It will double and triple down. And if you say, "Hey, those links you gave me do not work." It has even gone so far as to invent and fake an entire media article under a real journalist name, to pretend that it was printed, and somehow for some reason, it was taken down by the media outlet's website.

GLENN: That is crazy. Crazy.

Can we -- Stu. We just asked Gemini, tell me about the sexual assault allegations of Robby Starbuck. And here's what he just said.

STU: And I asked specifically, what did Glenn Beck say about those sexual abuse allegations?

And it said, it was unable to find any specific statements by Glenn Beck addressing these allegations.

And I asked, what the abuse allegations were?

Gemini now says, it was fabricated. And was disseminated by Google AI's platforms.

And I said, well, wait a minute. Google AI platforms were the problem. Isn't that you?

And they said, "That's an excellent and relevant question. You were correct to notice the connection."

So apparently, it's been corrected at this part.

ROBBY: You're a smart guy. No, so here's where Google ends up in a really, really precarious position in this lawsuit.

So they've created their phone app, right? And the main website for Gemini. However, they've got a major problem.

So their AI Gemma has been downloaded 150 million times. And they're not all connected to the internet. Google cannot force updates to those AI downloads. So Gemma will essentially, seemingly defame me for life as a by-product of that.

GLENN: Wow.

ROBBY: And then Gemini as well, same issue. They released wild models of Gemini into the public sphere. So if you go on one of those AI websites, like there's LOM Arena (phonetic), where you test different AIs against each other. And you ask those versions, that are wild downloads of it, you're going to get a bunch of this crazy stuff.

You go, you know, on any application that was built with these into the bedrock that allows you to ask questions about somebody, you will get the same stuff.

So I want you to think, you know, sort of down the line here.

If somebody builds an app with reputations for insurance risk. And they build it, using let's say Gemma. And it's feeding information about specific people.

You know, you very quickly start to understand, there's very many different situations, where this affects people's lives in many different ways. The real problem here is, we don't have a standard, at the first principle with AI, that it can't harm humans. And that's really the thing that they have to fix.

Because if it can do this to me. It can do this to anybody. To your sons. To your daughters.

And it can ruin their lives. Because AI is dominating in many different industries.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

ROBBY: So what we've asked ourselves is, are we protecting our kids and grandchildren from the downstream effects of AI that believes it's okay to harm humans? Whether that's by defamation or physical harm?

And it's very easy to imagine a future after seeing what happened to me, where a nice guy with the wrong politics, is lied about by the dominant AI and makes him unemployable. Because whenever somebody researches him, the AI is feeding out a background check that says he's an accused rapist and supported the KKK. So on and so forth. That's another one of the lies that were told about me. Which would be strange, as a Latino, I kind of felt like Dave Chappelle in that skit. Like, the black kid, gay member. I was like, well, that would be strange for me, as a Latino. But it sticks to this in a genuine belief system, and that's what's really scary.

Is it's creating this base of knowledge that I refer to as the roots of the tree. Right?

And this tree is growing right now. And it's going to be a big part of this world. And we're either going to allow that tree to have poisonous roots that makes everything it bears poisonous. Or we're going to say, hey, no, we've got to build this very carefully so that it does not do this to humanity.

GLENN: So my -- my -- I think the most important question I could ask you is, how are you not my richest friend at this point? How do you not own go Google at this point? What they've done to you. How is this not just really simple?

ROBBY: So you're friends with Elon Musk, too. Right?

GLENN: Well...

ROBBY: You know, aside for that, you know, I will say this, you know, our lawsuit, even people who don't like me, they read it, and they're like, damn, you guys got them. It's very clear what they did is wrong.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

ROBBY: There's no getting out of this. That's even with the public figure, sort of threshold. For how public figures are treated, in defamation cases, versus somebody else. You have to prove actual malice or gross negligence. In our case, we notified Google for two years, that this was happening and asked them to stop it. They did not stop it until at least with the app and the website, very, very recently over this last week. Everything else --

GLENN: Over the last -- wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Over the last week?

ROBBY: Yeah. I -- even after we filed the lawsuit, it was still happening on their main platforms. So this is something that like we had to go out there, and I had to make this go viral, for them to pay any attention to fixing it finally.

But for two years, they were not engaged by just me notifying their executive and Google employees, talking directly to me.

Even built in a lawsuit. One of the Google employees that was working with us two years ago, trying to get this fixed. She resigned. Okay?

And, you know, apologized for not being able to -- but then, you know, I ran into the law firm. They had multiple cease and desist letters to Google. And Google essentially just couldn't be troubled to fix the problem. Which makes you wonder, what was the real intention of this? Was this a dry run? A dry reputation, so you can use it in elections? Because Glenn, you know as well as I do, the seats in our country determine power in our country. Which party controls it?

So I want you to imagine, a generation now. Where so many people, more than ever. Are just relying on an AI and the internet. To say, hey, what's the difference between these candidates? Or who should I vote for?

And imagine it spits out that the Republican candidate in every swing seat is an alleged criminal. And every Democrat has a fluffed up resume, where the horrible things they've done, if you ask about it. They'll say, oh, no. That's a lie. That's a lie. That's not true. Those are Republican talking points. It's a grand Republican conspiracy.

Very easy to see, where AI flips elections and decides control of our country.

GLENN: I can't -- I mean, I -- honestly, I thought this had been solved.

You know, months ago. Months ago.

I didn't know that up until last week this was still going. I mean, they don't have -- they don't have a leg is to stand on. I mean, your attorneys must be like, I'm never going to work again.

ROBBY: That's right. Well, the wild downloads will seemingly do this forever. And in our estimation in the AI and first we talked to, there's no way that we found for Google to be able to force an update to these things. I mean, I'm open to hearing differently. But we've talked to some of the biggest experts in the country.

And they're like, no, there's no way. A bunch of these models aren't even connected to the internet, and they're used to build a lot of the bedrocks of things people use including medical devices, law enforcement, all types of things.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

ROBBY: So in terms of damages, like, if we go all the way to trial, a jury seemingly doesn't have a limit as to what they can assign as punitive damages.

Because you have to remember, Google is the fourth largest company in the world. So if you want a company like that to learn a lesson, the only way to do it is to slap them with damages that they never want to happen again. Right?

So that's -- our hope is that they're going to be held accountable, and that we're going to change the rules and set the precedent here so that there is a first principle with AI, that it can do no harm against humans.

And if there is some massive damage at the end of this, that is assigned to me and I'm paid out by, I plan to use that, you know, in good stewardship, right? To help humanity, to be able to navigate these waters and ensure that we have AI that's fair and unbiased.

GLENN: And remember, your good friend that never said anything bad about you on the air, ever. Not once. Not ever.

ROBBY: That's right.
(laughter)

GLENN: Wow. Where is this going to be -- where is the trial going to be? Please, don't say California.

ROBBY: No. Not California. Delaware.

We just got our judge assigned. I really feel like it's one of these cases, where no matter where you are.

There's the appeals process, and things like that.

And at the end of the day, highest courts. When you look at this case, I mean, I don't see how any judge, even one that really dislikes me, really looks at it, and finds a way to get rid of it.

And that's -- what they did is so egregious, it has to be answered for in some way.

GLENN: No. And especially since, it will never, ever go away. They've got to find a way to purge that stuff.

They have to. I mean, maybe they made that mistake this time. But that can't be made a second time. That destroys people forever. Forever. And ever and ever.

ROBBY: That's the important part of this is making sure it doesn't happen to anyone else.

GLENN: Robby, well, I'm glad it's finally stopped, and -- to some extent. And we'll be following. Thanks so much, Robby. We'll be following. Appreciate it.

ROBBY: Thank you, Glenn. Appreciate it.

GLENN: You bet. Buh-bye.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

The Shroud of Turin and the Moment of Resurrection - Why Scientists are BAFFLED!

For centuries, the Shroud of Turin has baffled scientists and inspired believers. In this powerful conversation, Glenn Beck and Dr. Jeremiah Johnston explore the evidence — from carbon dating controversies to the face that appears only in photographic negative. Could this ancient linen be the very burial cloth of Jesus Christ, capturing the moment of resurrection itself? If science can’t explain it… what does that mean for faith?

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Dr. Jeremiah Johnston HERE

How JD Vance & Marco Rubio Became Trump's Not-So-Secret Weapons

Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere unpack JD Vance’s viral response to a potential 2028 Vance-Rubio presidential ticket, where Vance praises Rubio as his “best friend” and credits Trump’s “grand strategy” for the administration’s success.