RADIOMay 01, 2024

Is it a GOOD IDEA to Oust Speaker Mike Johnson BEFORE the Election?

Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie have announced their plans to file a Motion to Vacate the Speaker of the House. But Democrats, under the leadership of Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, have promised to block the attempt. So, would trying to oust Speaker Mike Johnson actually HELP the Democrats? Glenn asked Rep. Thomas Massie to defend his reasoning for ousting Johnson before the election. Massie lays out the 3 “betrayals” he believes Johnson has committed and what he believes Jeffries is really plotting.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You can say a lot of things about Thomas Massie. Some of them true, some of them false.

But the one thing that is absolutely true. He stands on his own principles.

And he is unwavering. In those principles. He joins us now. From the great state of Kentucky.

Republican representative. Thomas Massie. Hello, Thomas.

TOM: How are you doing, Glenn?

GLENN: I'm very good. I'm very good. I don't understand this whole Mike Johnson thing, as Speaker of the House. I don't understand what happened to him. How we went so wrong. You know, people are saying, that, oh, this has been a scam forever. He's been, you know, a RINO and just in hiding. And now, getting rid of him at this point. What good is that going to do? Or even moving from this, because do you have the numbers to do it?

TOM: Great questions. Let me talk about how we got to where we are.

GLENN: Okay.

TOM: So Mike Johnson has betrayed us three times. Big betrayals. He did an omnibus bill, that did does and he gave the FBI a brand-new bill in that omnibus bill. And he didn't give us time to read it. He gave up on doing 12 separate bills.

That was the first betrayal. Second betrayal, FISA. This is the spying program that's been used to surveil Americans without a warrant. He cast the deciding vote on whether to have warrants or not.

And he voted against warrants.

This is against what he stood for, when he was on the judiciary committee, that I serve on. With Jim Jordan.

So something has changed there. He said he spent time in a skiff, that changed his time. Guess what, Glenn. I don't know if your listeners know this. I spent three and a half hours with him, to get him briefed by CIA, NSA, DOD, FBI, and DNI, and a FISA judge.

And in three a half hours. They didn't give us a specific example. Not one, of how spying on Americans, without a warrant, has helped them stop terrorism, to give them hypotheticals. But no example.

So that was the second betrayal. No warrants. Now, you can still be spied on.

It's reauthorized. Third betrayal. Just happened. This one we're still stinging from.

You may see the videos of every Democrat in the House voted for. For Ukraine.

Premeditated. Passed out Ukrainian flags. And basically humiliating us.

And I think speaker Johnson. If he's capable of having shame at this point. Should have been humiliated by that display as well.

I put the video of that on Twitter. And a search told me they would fine me $500 if I didn't take it down. So I reposted it.
(music)
Because look, you're not supposed to put video of what's happening on the floor. But that was video of things that were breaking decorum. Right? I was trying to provide evidence that they were in the wrong. And instead of prosecuting them, they came after me.

GLENN: Sure.

NEIL: Now, we got 8 million views on the video after I reposted it, and Speaker Johnson backed down on that fine because he knew how bad that looked. So third betrayal. Was that, you know, Ukrainian vote, where send the money overseas. We gave up all leverage on any border security.

They included some other bad stuff in it.

GLENN: Let's talk about the $4 billion to help people from the Middle East immigrate here to the United States. Including Palestinians.

Are you nuts?

NEIL: Yeah. And you see, Mike Johnson will not stand up against that.

By the way, those three bills that I just mentioned to you. You know what happened when they went to the Senate. After they passed the House. Chuck Schumer didn't even change the punctuation of any of those bills.

He must want any amendments to them. He wanted them exactly as Mike Johnson wanted them in the house.

Because those were Chuck Schumer's bills that Mike Johnson put on the floor.

He's already in the arms of the union party. The question you rightfully ask: Is why do this? Well, the people are always asking me, Thomas. Can you show us. Can you give us a list, of the good guys and the bad guys. Can you tell me who the good guys are. I have a primary. I have a vote in. I have a general election. Tell me the list. This list. You will have another list, we keep doing this. At great peril to ourselves.

The reason there's only a few of them that are willing to stand up and call this. Is because you put -- you put your reputation on the line. And people here hate transparency. They hate us for doing it. You will have the list next week. When the motion to vacate is called. Of who went to the king Jeffries. And the Uniparty to keep Mike Johnson in power.

King Jeffries, the reason he's supporting Mike Johnson, he got everything the Democrats want, without any of the blowback by having Mike Johnson as speaker. And they also -- they have some claims for other things.

They may resettle Palestinian refugees in the United States. And pay for it. They may want to make the funding for Ukraine permanent.

And before our next election, there's going to be another CR or omnibus or something.

That's coming September 30. So some people are like, well, why would you do this now, Congressman Massie?

Hasn't all the bad stuff -- hasn't Mike already done all the bad stuff to us?

Can't we just sit it out to the next election?

No. Because what Hakeem Jeffries wants more than anything is to be the speaker, and the only way he becomes the speaker is by getting the majority of the House in November.

And he knows Mike Johnson is the most uninspiring speaker we've ever had.

It will not do anything to inspire -- most likely to lose the majority under speaker Johnson.

GLENN: So what would the plan B. If you could get this to pass. I mean, well, first of all.

Let me ask you.

How many -- how many other Freedom Caucus members are standing with you?

NEIL: Well, I think before Hakeem Jeffries came out for Speaker Johnson. There were probably somewhere between 12 and 20 who didn't want to speak, but would have voted with us.

Now, I think, you may have maybe the entire Freedom Caucus. We'll see.

I know people outside of the Freedom Caucus.

Who said, if one Democrat votes to keep Mike Johnson. I ain't voting to keep him.

Because they know what that means. That means it's the Uniparty.

Now, the first vote will be on a motion to table. To try and prevent this from even coming up for appear actual vote. But people should understand, that is -- that motion to table, if they succeed. That is the only vote that will happen. And that is your list there.

Are those the people who saved Mike Johnson. Which Hakeem Jeffries. And all the Democrat leadership, said they'll do it. And some Democrat ranking file. There are some Republicans, who sit at the table. But that will be the vote. Now, if we could succeed.

Okay. If we could get past that motion to table. And maybe Hakeem Jeffries has only 40 Democrats, who are willing to walk the plank. I can imagine that will be tough for them and their primaries. Unless they're planning on retiring. Can you imagine? You've saved the Christian speaker, who is against abortion, and all this other stuff. And what's the -- anyways.

So I don't -- I'm not sure how many votes Hakeem has. But I think he helped us grow our numbers. Let's say we help them pass that vote. There is a motion to vacate. And Mike Johnson is vacating. At that point, who would we elect?

Well, we would like for Mike Johnson to avoid the scenario, I just described.

We're giving him a weekend to resign.

If he would announce that he's leaving, like John Boehner did in ten weeks.

And he won't be offended as we have votes to replace him while he's still speaker. We could go without ever not having a speaker.

We could keep doing subpoenas, and the judiciary committees. We could have hearings and pass all these wonderful old messaging bills that they love to pass. But if that doesn't happen, we'll have to elect a Speaker. We will be on the spot.

I think there are a dozen people, in the G.O.P. conference. Who have something in their entire life.

Whether it's political experience. Or prior experience nap qualifies them for the job.

Mike Johnson is a lost ball in tall weeds. I don't think there's some conspiracy, where they've got kids locked in the basement. Or something like that.

I don't think they have info on him, or blackmail material. I just don't think he can do the job.

And there's nothing in his life that prepared him for that. Let's find someone that can. Hopefully that will inspire people to keep them in the majority. Even Hakeem Jeffries bails Mike Johnson out, next week. They're not going to bail him out in January.

We know he's a lame duck speaker.

But he knows it. Let's get him out of there, before he causes any more mischief.

GLENN: What did McCarthy do better than Johnson?

NEIL: Oh, that's a great question. Under McCarthy, we did seven of the 12 bills. Okay. There's 12 separate bills. He said, we'll do an omnibus. We got seven of the 12. We got 7 of the 12 done. We had a thousand amendments. I'm not on the rules committee. We got votes on a thousand amendments to allow rank-and-file members to participate in the legislative process. When Mike Johnson came on board, he did two or three CRs. He ignored the 7 bills we had done. He made no effort to do the other five. And he said, you will get a two-part omnibus.

That was the bad thing.

The second thing, well, Kevin McCarthy could have cut a deal with the Democrats. And could have been still speaker now.

He said, I will not do it.

The position is not that important to me.

We will make a Uniparty here, and share power. So that's another thing that Mike Johnson has expressed a willingness to do.

That Kevin wouldn't do. And finally, as a part of the debt limit deal, this last summer.

Kevin extracted, from Joe Biden, and Chuck Schumer.

This is signed into law. And still law. That if you do a CR. And it goes past April 30th.

Basically, halfway through the fiscal year. There's a 1 percent cut.

And Kevin secured that from Joe Biden.

Mike onset had three choices, on the spending bills. When he came into office.

He could use the 1 percent cut option. He could have worked on the five other bills. Or he could have duplicate the omnibus.

He actually could have done the 1 percent cut option. That Kevin had secured.

And spent a lot of political capital on getting that provision in law.

So those are three things that Kevin did that Mike didn't.

And Kevin, put through of us on the rules committee.

That gave us a blocking position. Chip Roy, Ralph Norman, and myself. And we used that for good. We forced the 72-hour rule for the entire time Kevin was speaker. That's another thing Johnson threw out the window.

You don't always get three days to read a bill now. He's overriding his own rules committee. And he's going with Democrats to do it.

GLENN: Do you think this was -- you know, I write in some place.

You know, this was planned from the beginning. He's been lying in wait, trying to pretend that he was part of the Freedom Caucus for years.

Do you believe that?

ANN: Yeah. You know, what really confused me. Is the readiness with which, sort of the big spenders in Washington, DC.

Where they accepted Mike Johnson as a valid speaker candidate. After defeating Jim Jordan multiple times.

They found Jim Jordan unsuitable. But they found this junior member very unsuitable to the job, who had no experience. You know, had never been a chairman. Didn't have much staff.

And I think at that point, they got some assurance from Mike Johnson. That he -- or some feeling, that Mike Johnson would be a good guy to carry the water for the establishment here in DC.

And that's exactly what he's done.

GLENN: Hmm. Well, Thomas, when do you file? Is this Monday?

NEIL: Probably what will happen is we'll file Monday. Speaker Johnson, because it's a privileged resolution. The only thing that has higher privilege is motion to adjourn.

So he will have two days. Two legislative days to bring it up. So if we file it on Monday. The vote will either be Monday immediately. Or Tuesday or Wednesday.

If we file it on Tuesday. It would be either on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. Would be the vote.

GLENN: You don't believe he will back away?

I mean, you put this, or Marjorie Taylor Greene did. She put this in line, to be brought up, as kind of a threat.

Hey, we're thinking about doing this. Don't push it.

And he did it anyway.

NEIL: That's right. So he called the bluff, and we're calling the bluff. And we will have this vote.

What I hope, Glenn, is that our conference chair. Our Whip. And our Majority Floor Leader would go to Mike Johnson.

We exhibit the leadership, that we put them on that team to exhibit. And say, Mike, it's over.

It's just not worth what you're doing.

You're going and partnering with Hakeem Jeffries. And the minority whip, and the minority conference chair.

We can't do that. So I would like to see them go, convince Mike Johnson as a team.

It's time for him to step aside. He could still do that.

And I know as improbable as it sounds. And as resolved as Mike Johnson seems when he gets to the podium. That's exactly how John Boehner was, until the five minutes he took to resign.

STU: Thomas, I know we only have about a minute left. But if the concern is that, you know, Johnson will work with Jeffries, when he's put up against the wall and do these things.

If you go forward with this, you're making Johnson's political life, dependent on Hakeem Jeffries saving. I mean, couldn't this potentially just make all of this worse?

NEIL: It's very painful to expose this. I think what we're illuminating. I don't think we're causing him to go in that direction. We're illuminating what actually exists in Washington, DC. And why you don't get the results you want.

Is because he's already in league with Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, and Hakeem Jeffries.

And we're just illuminating what would be otherwise, I believe.

GLENN: Thomas, God bless you.

Thank you for standing up for your principles. Whether people agree or disagree with, you know, you and your stance.

I will tell you, that I have a lot of respect for somebody who will take the heat, because they won't sit down on their principles.

Thank you.

NEIL: Well, thanks, Glenn. People say, this is a lost cause. You shouldn't do it. People didn't elect us to give up. People elected us to try. And that's what we're doing.

GLENN: Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

For a Night, We Were Human | The Christmas Truce Music Video

In the frozen trenches of World War I along the Lys River in 1914, amidst the relentless thunder of artillery, a miraculous unofficial truce unfolded on Christmas Day. British and German soldiers, weary enemies, emerged from the mud and wire to share gifts, songs, and stories of home together in the ruins. Produced by Glenn Beck in collaboration with AI, this poignant music video and original song recapture the true story of the Christmas Truce, reminding us that even in the darkest times, a single brave act or small light can awaken our shared humanity, allowing soldiers to lay down their weapons and remember they are human... just for a night.

Stay tuned at GlennBeck.com for more musical storytelling inspired by Glenn’s artifacts next year on Torch.

The HIDDEN history behind Trump’s controversial Rob Reiner comments

President Trump recently received heat from his own party over his comments about the allegedly murdered actor Rob Reiner. Glenn Beck explains why he believes Trump’s comments were not a good move, but also tells of a meeting he had with Trump that he believes explains why Trump hates TDS so much…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I don't -- I don't -- I don't want to get into -- into the mix with everybody and personalities. I like -- my goal is to make things about right and wrong, and not about personalities.

But I do want to spend just a second on President Trump's post yesterday about Rob Reiner. It made me sad. It made me really sad. Because I like the president.

And -- and he doesn't help himself when he does things like this. But I think I understand this in a different way.

You know, the President has said, you know, all kinds of things about me at times when I disagree with him. He'll say, "Oh, he's just a failing fat blob," or whatever. And that's just him. That's just the way -- when he's in a fight, he is a -- he's a knife fighter. And I get it. I don't like it. But I get it. This was different. This was different.
And this was -- you know, you can say a lot of stuff politically about Rob Reiner. But politics didn't matter yesterday. We weren't -- I mean, that's not -- it just didn't matter. It didn't matter.

But I think to the President, it does. I saw a change in the President -- I've seen two changes in the President. I've seen a change in him when they started going after him and his family. After 2020. And they really started going after his family. And we know this because we showed you the documents. What they -- they had a plan. Take him down.

Take his family down to stop MAGA at all costs. Put them in jail. I mean, those are their words.

And it's -- it was frightening to read.

And I talked to the president, I don't know. Maybe six months after, you know, we were in 2021. Maybe six months. Eight months.

And I said, how are you holding up?

And he had talked a little about how he felt. He had really let people down because he had things going in the right direction. And now, look at it, and look how screwed up things are going to get. And how the economy is going to be damn near impossible to fix. It will take us time. But we can't fix it. Pragmatism, but they've just destroyed it. And I said, how are you personally.

How are you holding up?

And this is the first change I saw. He -- his body changed. And he said, they're going after my damn children!

And it was this Dad. All of a sudden, he wasn't the president or former president, he wasn't Donald Trump. He was a Dad. And it was every Dad response in him. And he said, "You don't go after our children."

And I saw him really, truly mad for the very first time, and it was righteous indignation.

Then after he was shot, I saw another change. I saw him recognize that God existed. I mean, I know he believed that in God. I don't know that he believed that God was actually part of, you know, the story. The everyday story. You know, I don't know how he views God in that way.

But I know that he recognized that God was in his -- in the story of America now.

Firsthand, he witnessed it. The reason why I said this made me sad yesterday, is because -- I don't agree with what he said. I feel -- it was -- it was sad.

Because he is -- he has been kicked in the head over and over and over again by some of these people, that he -- Christmas is about the baby Jesus coming again.

And what he can do in your life. And the biggest thing that he taught was, love your enemies. Don't hate them. But that's really, really hard to do. And the President isn't there yet. On this. And it -- it made me sad. How did you feel about it, Stu?

STU: I didn't like it at all. I think maybe the same as you. You know, one of the things that bothered me about it.

Because you hit many of the points that I had on it without the personal insight that is illustrative of -- of -- of what he's going through. I think there is something to understand there. You know, obviously I --

GLENN: Big time.

STU: One of the things that is difficult about life in your attempt to master it is to try to act the right way, even when you're faced with circumstances like that. And, you know, I get it. I get why he's angry and doesn't like the guy. The man -- you used a phrase, I think in there, where you said, he's a knife fighter. This guy was actually just in a legitimate knife fight and was murdered. It was a -- it was -- this actually really happened.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: And, look, my honest opinion is, it's indefensible. You know, I like President Trump. I think he does a lot of great things for the country. We've defended him on a lot of different things. A lot of times when he's being attacked, I think he deserves defense. In this case, you know, it is -- you know, it is what it is.

It is priced in to everyone's understanding of who Donald Trump is. And everything I heard about him in personal situations where he cares about the person. Is that he's very generous. He's very likable.

He's very -- he's one of those people that you like being around. You know, that is something that I've heard from tons of people. This part of him is really hard for me to square with what I've heard from -- from other -- from everybody that I've talked to, and has been on the inside with him.

And so I don't -- I don't have a defense for it. I think it's really bad. And I will say one more thing on this real quickly, Glenn.

I know a part of this that I think is difficult. In that, one of the things I took from the aftermath of that immediately was -- I don't know if pride is the right word. But like, I really liked the way conservatives responded to it.

We didn't do what they did, after Charlie Kirk.

We didn't do what they did after they shot the president. Right?

Like we -- they celebrated it. They -- they were horrible human beings, and I enjoyed the high ground, that we had there.

GLENN: Yeah. Me too.

STU: And it's difficult to make the argument that we have the high ground. When, you know, the President of the Republican Party. The Republican President of the United States, the most high profile person on, quote, unquote, our side, whatever that means these days, is a guy who, you know, kind of did some of the things that they did.

You know, so I don't -- I don't like that. I understand as part of Donald Trump. And I think if we're all adults here, we're able to kind of price that in and judge him on everything that he's doing. And when I mean pricing in. I think that's a negative part of him. Overall, you have to take everything into context.

GLENN: Right. And if we're all adults here, you know, we should be able to say, to those we love and respect, bad move. I didn't like that. Don't do that.

And I think, you know, I think because the left always says, well, you never take on your own.

Yes, we do. We take on our own, all the time. All the time. And I think it's important that we say, didn't like that. Thought that was a bad move. It didn't look good. It just wasn't right.

He's -- I wish -- and, again, though, I -- I'm not excusing it, but I am tempering it with none of us have gone through what he has gone through.

STU: So true.

GLENN: His family, somebody is shooting at him. He's being called fascist Hitler all the time. I mean, that wears on you and changes you.

And, you know, he's having a hard time forgiving that. And I kind of understand that. I wish he would take that on and take on the forgiveness, so he could be more a peacemaker in all of those things. But that is his own personal journey.

But --

STU: Yeah. And I think when we talk about like a terrible crime that's occurred.

GLENN: Sad.

STU: Like, I don't know. If there was -- think about some awful situation and at times you'll see -- he'll hear family members say the worst possible thing.

You know, if your kid is murdered. And by some -- somewhat of a particular area or group or whatever.

And they might react with just an awful thing about that group or area.

And you just. We all have a bit of understanding. Right?

A person going through a massively emotional thing.

And lashing out.

You want -- you know, the example you bring up all the time, Glenn.

Of the maybe -- the ultimate example of being able to have restraint was the Amish situation from years ago. Where, you know, you were talking about mass murder. And they were to the family's house that night, right?

And saying, we --

GLENN: Not that night. That afternoon.

I mean, within an hour. The kids were not even out of the schools yet. Their bodies were still laying in the school. And the Amish went, oh, my gosh. The killer is dead too.

He was a member of our community. His wife lives here.

What is she feeling? She's feeling completely alone. My gosh. What an example. I couldn't do that.

STU: Right. I don't even think I come close to that standard in that moment.

GLENN: No. But I would like to.

STU: That's the range. Some people act -- react really well. Some people react really poorly.

And I think we all understand the emotion and everything that takes over in a situation like that. And that has to be factored in, I think, to Trump. Of course, Rob Reiner wasn't responsible to the shooting. He was just a liberal who said bad things about Trump. And look, he's a very unique person. And a very unique situation, that I don't think anyone in the world has ever experienced.

You know, what happened with him over his life.

But may I just say, you still haven't forgiven RFK Jr for what he said about me.
(laughter)
Okay?

STU: As I said, I'm not Amish. You know, I like technology. I don't have any wagons. I didn't say I'm perfect.

GLENN: Right.

STU: No. I have -- I have -- I have absolutely forgiven RFK Jr for what he said. And if you didn't know, he accused Glenn of being a traitor. He said, he should be charged with treason. The penalty of which is death.

So, you know, I don't like that. And RFK Jr. I don't like for a lot of his policies. Some of them, by the way, I do really like. Some of them, I think are really positive. I could give you a list of some of the negative things he's done as well.

GLENN: I can too.

STU: That doesn't mean -- I certainly was find that to be an appropriate context, when the embrace of RFK Jr is occurring.

I think we need to understand what people are, and what they're doing. If he's apologetic about that, I do forgive him in that sense. Do I want him on the show and promoting all his books and his candidacy?

No. I did not -- I did not like that. But, you know, a lot of people do. I will say is, you're right, though.

We all have our hang-ups.

GLENN: I do. I certainly was.

STU: I will say this, though.

And, you know, again, all the context here. I know people are really defensive of Donald Trump, appropriately.

Because of the fact that he's targeted unfairly. I understand why people are defensive of him. I can tell you this. I really don't like RFK Jr.

He's one of my least favorite people in politics. I'm just not a fan. I could give you other names of people. Most of them revolve around Olivia Nuzzi, who whatever. I don't have feelings about her. But the story was packed with people.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Cuomos for sure.
GLENN: Yeah.

STU: God forbid, one of these people that I really don't like, was murdered and his family and his spouse.

I can promise you. I can promise you, I will not be tweeting anything like what Donald Trump tweeted.

That is just a -- is a -- is a situation where I understand -- I understand the context around it, that we just discussed.

I don't think there's a defense to it. I think there's something, I really hope he has an awakening to at some point.

GLENN: I think that is enough to be said on that.

Now maybe we should examine ourselves, and say, where do we have that hardness in our heart that we should learn from and remove this holiday season?

Why America's "Surveillance State" Has Proven to be a TOTAL Failure

America is facing a shocking security breakdown—from a mass shooting at one of the most heavily surveilled campuses in the United States to a deadly ISIS attack in Syria that exposes the cracks in U.S. intelligence and foreign-policy strategy. As surveillance systems fail, former extremists gain power abroad, and radical Islamist networks globalize their reach, the West is confronting a threat both inside and outside its borders. This episode uncovers the uncomfortable truth behind Brown University’s unanswered questions, Syria’s escalating instability, and why the West may be running out of time to get its own house in order.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I wanted to bring Jason in -- I wanted to bring Jason in because the news that we talked about a minute ago in Australia, then Brown.

There's some weird stuff happening with the Brown shooting. And we -- we don't know much about that. And also, Syria. So let me start with Brown University, Jason. Why is this one weird, as our chief researcher, why is this one weird?

JASON: Well, there comes a point where, you know, as a society, we just end up getting used to the massive surveillance state we live in. And I think we're just like, okay. Fine.

We're never not going to be surveilled 24/7. Maybe there's some benefits to it.

Well, no!

It doesn't seem that way. Because the people were asking the people at Brown. Like, how is it that you have not fully identified the shooter yet? And that's a very good question. Because if you go back to around 2021, there were people writing about how Brown University was one of the most surveilled campuses of the United States.

GLENN: How is it we only have one picture of this guy from the back?

JASON: Right!

GLENN: Apparently the one thing that will help you get away with any crime is a hoodie.

JASON: Yeah. Wear something over your head and a coat.

Apparently, that foils the entire surveillance state. Also, we have nothing to worry about with surveillance. I don't know.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

JASON: And on top of that, Kash Patel, the FBI director said that they sprung into action. And they activated their cellular monitoring system to help identify the person that has now been let go. Again, that's another layer of this surveillance state that I think a lot of us have been worried about.

And that didn't do anything either. That helped give us the wrong suspect? What is all this stuff for?

It's not keeping us safe, that's for sure.

GLENN: Hmm. I don't want to jump to any conclusions on, you know, what we have, what we don't have. I'm assuming that they have more. They just haven't shown it.

I would like to -- you know, we could help. You show us some pictures.

I think it's odd.

What happened in Syria over the weekend with al-Qaeda.

JASON: Yeah. In Syria.

There's a ton of news, especially involving ISIS, who is very much active and still very much planning attacks.

GLENN: So wait. Wait. Wait. Was this ISIS, or was this al-Qaeda?

JASON: This is ISIS. That's what they're saying. They're saying it's a lone ISIS perpetrator. The location was symbolic as well. The location as in or around Palmyra. Which, I don't know if you remember, that was a scene of a gruesome ISIS video back at the height of their caliphate, where they behead a lot of people in that area.

GLENN: Right. Right. Yes. That's where they lined them up in the orange jumpsuits. Remember everybody was kneeling down in the sand. And they started beheading people. Yes, I remember.

JASON: It was one of those UNESCO sites with ruins all around. And it was very crazy. Brutal video. But another brutal attack. I believe it was three US service members that were killed in this attack. There's a lot of speculation about to go, on if this person was working. I think he was actually at a time working with the security services that are in Syria right now, under the new president. He -- he could have been, you know, a sleeper in that organization. Who knows? But for -- the one thing I do know. And I don't understand the direction we're moving in Syria. I don't understand how a former al-Qaeda guy suddenly is an all right guy because he puts a suit on. And now he's the president of Syria. And he's our ally.

I don't understand that. The Trump administration, maybe they have more information, that I don't know.

I would love to get more of an explanation on this.

As of now, I don't see this going any direction other than a whole lot worse.

You look around that entire area. You have a former al-Qaeda guy now the president of Syria.

You have the rest of Syria, an absolute Dumpster fire. You have Iraq. I hesitate to call these countries.

They're so far down the sectarian, you know, spiral that this is.

But I don't see how this is going to go anywhere, but south, from here on out.

We're in an absolute war with these radical Islamists. And it's not just in the Middle East. It's globalize the intifada has landed on shores all over the world. And while there are politicians that will not denounce that. That is exactly what's happening. Sorry!

GLENN: So I think that's where -- I think that's what -- that explains Trump's thinking. That Trump does not want these everlasting wars to go on.

He does not want to be fighting in the Middle East. He doesn't want to really be fighting anywhere. He will, if he has to. But he's focused more on the American homeland. And the American hemisphere.

And so I think he is -- I think he's letting the Middle East take care of itself.

And as long as they can all get along with each other and Israel.

And recognize that, you know, Iran and the -- the -- the al-Qaeda, the, you know, Muslim Brotherhood. Et cetera, et cetera.

Trying to coax them all into. Hey. These are kind of your enemies here.

You know, ISIS is a big enemy to us and to peace.

And I think he's hoping that they will start to take care of themselves. Whether they will or not, I don't know. You know, it's never happened were. But it's worth trying. We've been playing this other game of us getting involved in everything for 100 years. We know that doesn't work.

So I'm guessing what Trump is thinking is, we know that doesn't work. We're not going to do that. Let's try to give peace a chance, and help them stomp this out, because it will be prosperous for all of them and plant those seeds as deeply as you can to see what happens. But we're not getting involved in any of that. I have a feeling, but there will be a military response to this, I'm sure. Won't you agree?

JASON: Oh, one hundred percent, and to tack on to what you're saying, I would hope that the President would go with his gut on this.

Because the previous ways this has been handled with Islamists, especially in this area. They've screwed it up.

They don't know what they're doing. Although, they think they know what they're doing. I'll go back to history. The Iran and Iraq War. We supported both size on that. In a similar -- in a similar strategy. So we're like, okay. We don't like either one of these groups. Sectarian groups to get too large. Let's fund this country at the same time we fund this country. We'll arm them. They'll fight each other, and they'll be fine. We do that all the time.

So now, the only thing I can think of is that's what they're thinking with the Syria president, this former al-Qaeda guy. Okay. Well, fine. They'll be anti-Iran, so they can counter Iran.

It's literally the same exact strategy, that they're going for. And I get it. That means that we don't have to get involved. I guess in the initial point.

But we always end up having to get involved after the fire erupts and --

GLENN: We know -- look, I think he's trying to buy time, quite honestly. Get us out of that.

Let us recover, and hopefully not go back to it. Try to buy hopefully some real peace.

But we all know how this will end. It's never going to work in the long-term. Because we as the West have to concentrate on our own homelands. You're seeing that with what happened in Australia. We have let the barbarian into the gates. And we've got to focus on that. We've got to get this cancer, cut out of our own societies. Because it's not good.

Why Biden's Corrupt Pardons CANNOT Stand... And Why it STILL Matters!

A new wave of sweeping “pardons” has triggered one of the most urgent constitutional alarms Glenn Beck has ever raised — not because the individuals involved are controversial, but because the actions themselves may not even qualify as pardons at all. Glenn Beck breaks down how these broad, immunity-style declarations can bypass investigations, rewrite laws by fiat, and push executive power into territory the Founders explicitly warned against. With mass clemency increasingly used as a political shield and executive actions replacing the legislative process, America is drifting toward a model of governance that no longer resembles a constitutional republic. This episode exposes how the pardon power is being stretched beyond recognition, why Congress has surrendered its role as a check, and what must happen before the nation crosses a point of no return. The question now is unavoidable: Who will stop this before the Constitution becomes optional?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

CALLER: I wanted to talk about the pardons. Hunter's pardon was legitimate. He was actually accused of a crime. I know you're plugged in with the president. I haven't heard anybody say this anywhere. I have been watching everything.

These pardons. Forget the auto-pen. The auto-pen doesn't even matter. Because these were immunity deals. These were not pardons. None of these people were under investigation. None of these people had any crimes they were accused of.

So you can't pardon somebody for something they may have or may not have done. That's an immunity deal.

Again, I've watched everything. I don't hear anybody bring that stuff -- I don't think the auto-pen matters. I just think those things are null and void from the jump.

GLENN: Who --

CALLER: Like I said.

GLENN: Who do we have besides Mike Lee? Because Mike is always hard to get a hold of at this time. He's like, I'm working on Senate stuff, Glenn.

Who do we have that is a Constitutional scholar that we can call real quick, and see if we can get an answer on that before the end of the show? At least put a call out to Mike Lee, will you?

But I would like to know that happen at that. Because the president has. And Stu and I have talked about this for a while. This has gotten out of control. These pardons are out of control. Out of control.

It's something Constitutional. It's been there since George Washington. The President has always had this right, and it's a privilege of his. But you're right.

These things where, wait. I can't investigate this? What that does is if you're as a president doing something that you shouldn't be doing, all you have to do then is say, I pardon everyone in my administration for anything that they might have done wrong.

That can't stand. You're absolutely right on that.

STU: Yeah. You have the immunity deal. Which again, I think is -- I don't see -- I don't see how a pre-pardon is even possibly covered.
Like, it's just such an insane concept.

The way that Biden. He's right that Hunter Biden actually committed a crime and pardoning him from that in theory, obviously, outside the family interest was the way that that was supposed to work.

But they also pardoned him for multiple years of question marks, whether he committed crimes or not. Right? That was all included on that.

To go a step farther on this, I am on a bit of a personal jihad against the pardon. I'm done with it. I'm done with it personally. There's reasons the Founders were very, very smart. But the Founders were smart enough to also have a process for Constitutional amendments. And I would support one, getting rid of the part in power completely. I'm done with it.

GLENN: Wait, may I just interrupt for a second. I just want to point out. We now have verification, not only is Stu a Canadian spy, but he's also a hidden Nazi. Noticed the word he used, jihad, which translates to my struggle. Hitler's book, My Struggle, Mein Kampf. I just want to point it out.

JASON: Exposed.

STU: Just to be clear, I'm not planning a genocide on the power of pardons.

But I'm against it, strongly. But the other part I would say that I think is every worse and is never discussed, are these types of pardons where they say, you know, all marijuana crimes. They're -- everyone -- there are 17,000 people.

That is just you legislating. If I wanted to New Jersey and say, hey.

I think marijuana should be legal. I could theoretically be president.

Saying, everyone convicted of a marijuana-related crime is now pardoned.

And that's just you making laws. It's you going completely around Congress. And the entire process we have there.

At the very least. It should be massively restricted from the way it's being utilized. Not only -- several presidents in a row, I would argue.

But it's -- it should just -- I think it should just go away completely. It's the most king-like power the president has. And it doesn't make any sense to me.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

So I'm looking this up here.

Barack Obama did this.

He gave clemency for anybody who was convicted of a non-violent federal drug crime.

With no significant criminal history, while serving extraordinarily long sentences. And anybody who was a violent offender was not eligible.

And it was -- it wasn't a -- a true mass pardon. But it was pretty close to it. You know, it was -- it was mass in scale, but not blanketed.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And I think there were like 2,000 people that he parted on that.

STU: It was a law. Creating a new law.

GLENN: Yeah. You're saying, oh, by the way. That law that I personally disagree with.

We're not going to -- it's gone.

STU: The whole law doesn't count at him. We have a whole process to make laws. When someone -- when they pass a law, you can't say, eh. And shrug your shoulders. And say, I don't particularly like it.

And for some reason, that's the way the pardon power has been translated.

GLENN: The problem is the President can. The President has just always had the restraint not to do that.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Because it was bad for the country. And bad for laws.

You know, you don't just -- you don't do this. We're becoming more and more of a king. In our administration.

And it's not Donald Trump.

This has been about to go for a long time.

Barack Obama I think got really, really bad.

But this was going on before him. Obviously.

But Barack Obama kind of set something off.

And then because we couldn't get any legislation passed. We had Donald Trump try to do executive orders, to combat Barack Obama's executive orders.

Then Biden did it. And Trump. It's got to stop.

Because here's the problem. One of the things I said in our special on Wednesday.

Which was, biggest stories of the year.

And predictions for next year. I said, you will start to see rolling brownouts in places like Texas in 2026. Texans, wake up. Wake up.

But you're going to start to see rolling brownouts. But I also made another prediction. And I've just lost what I was going to say was the prediction.

Oh!

This massive swing. We're getting whiplash.

You can't -- you can't run a country like this.

You can't run a country where it's all being done by executive order.

Because look, we were all the way over to one side. When Trump was here. Then we swung way farther than that. With Biden.

Now Trump is bringing us back this way. If you don't pass laws, it's just going to swing.

And you can't -- you can't run a country like that.

This has got to stop!

We have to pass laws. Congress must do its job.