PROOF: DNC colluded with Ukraine to take down Trump in 2016

The Democrats have struggled for years now to find the evidence they need to prove Russia colluded with Donald Trump during the 2016 election. But while they take Americans in circles with their empty allegations, the DNC was doing the exactly same thing in Ukraine. Specifically, Democrats hired lawyer Alex Chalupa to "investigate" Trump. Glenn explains the documents, finances, hacked emails, and AUDIO RECORDINGS that give us the proof we need to show you that this Ukraine scandal goes FAR beyond Joe and Hunter Biden, and their involvement with Ukraine oil company Burisma. It goes much, MUCH further than that.

Could THIS new Senate bill DOOM a Trump presidency?

Could THIS new Senate bill DOOM a Trump presidency?

The Senate has passed its $95 billion “national security bill,” which Glenn believes should actually be called a foreign war bill. But if that isn’t bad enough, Senator J.D. Vance (R-OH) joins Glenn to warn that it would also give Democrats a powerful tool if Donald Trump wins the 2024 presidential election. Sen. Vance tells Glenn about a hidden clause in the bill that would give Democrats the ability to impeach Trump if he tries to stop funding Ukraine. Sen. Vance also explains what this bill’s $95 million is funding and why he’s shocked that so many Republicans voted for it. But he also discusses why he’s confident the House of Representatives can stop this.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Yeah. Let's talk to the senator, and find out exactly. J.D. Vance.

Thank you. I know you were on the floor at 4:00 a.m. Have you slept yet?

J.D.: I have not. But I'm still pretty fired up. So I'll sleep later, thank you.

GLENN: I bet. So tell us about this clause. This hidden clause.

J.D.: Well, so basically, if you go back to 2019, to understand this.

Using a weird, archaic rule, from the Impound Control Act.

The Democrats argued in 2019 that because money has been appropriated to Ukraine. Note the similarity, even though it's five years. Because the money has been appropriated to Ukraine.

And because Trump had refused to spend the money as appropriated. He actually violated the law. So what they've done with this lay here. Is appropriate money, not just through the end of 2024. But into '25 and into '26.

And so Trump, again, refused to give the money that was appropriated to Ukraine in exactly the manner described.

They would have not just the similar, but the exact same argument for impeaching him in 2025 as they did in 2019.

That would be absurd for -- but we shouldn't give the Democrats weapons, because they might stupidly use them.

We should just not give the Democrats weapons.

GLENN: So tell me where this speaking of weapons -- tell me where this money actually goes. Because they're saying, we are arming the Ukrainians. No, we've already done that. We've armed them.

And I'm sure some of this is for the military. But what else is are we funding in the 90 billion?

J.D.: Well, there's a lot of humanitarian assistance, not just to the Ukrainians, but also loads to the Gazans.

We know what happens with humanitarians close to Gaza. It very often ends up in the hands of Hamas.

So I guarantee, that at least a few dollars of their taxpayer money will flow to Gaza.

On the Ukrainian side, we have to remember, that the humanitarians are actually the biggest source of corruption.

We've heard for example, from American energy companies, that have tried to do business to Ukraine.

That the Ukrainian humanitarian assistance is handed out in the form of sweetheart contracts.

To Ukrainian oligarchs and the companies that they have. Heavily in favor --

GLENN: Of course, it is. We've documented this forever.

Forever. I mean, if you don't know it by now, you're -- you're -- I mean, you're just blind to the truth.

And you're just a reckless senator.

J.D.: Yeah. That's exactly right.

We know exactly what's going on.

We know it's a corrupt country.

We know that, yes. There's some money in this package. To rebuild the American weapons supplies.

But, remember, we have -- we give so much discretion in the Congress to Joe Biden, using what's called Presidential Drawdown Authority, or PDA.

That the president will immediately take the weapons that are produced for our own stock, and then just hand them over to Ukraine.

So this is a massive boondoggle. We know it will benefit a lot of corrupt parties. And importantly, we know it will continue this war, which I think is just not in America's -- I think there's strategy. There's no plan to bring this thing to a close.

I'm really just scandalized with just how many Republicans voted for this. Given the impeachment time bomb that we discussed. Given how endless the Ukraine War is. Given that Joe Biden is the commander-in-chief.

One of the arguments that I hear from my friends on the pro-Ukraine funding side is saying, well, we should be doing this, this, this, and this.

And I always say, well, why do you have any confidence that Joe Biden will do any of these things? Given how incompetent his administration is. We don't have President Donald Trump, or even President Tom Cotton in the Oval Office.

We have a President Joe Biden. And we have to make public policy, because we live in reality.

GLENN: So what's going to happen now?

The bill passed.

J.D.: Well, the one thing I will say, Glenn. It's always bad, when your enemies gain territory. Sometimes they can gain victory.

Because they gained territory at a lot of loss.

I mean, we really, I think, inflicted damage in the messaging battle yesterday. With the ultimate goal of spending so much time on the House floor and filibustering as long as we did.

The House I think is really radicalized in the legislation.

The only way, really the only way for it to pass in the House, is for Republicans, to cooperate with Democrats.

To give the floor over to Hakeem Jeffries. It's called a discharge position.

Look, we have to make sure this doesn't happen. In fact, any Republican who cooperates in handing the floor to Steve Jeffries, to get an immediate primary, and to be persona non grata in the Republican Party. So that is the next stage of the fight.

We have much, much better terrain for that fight in the house.

Because we have the majority. We will see what happens, Glenn. I'm optimistic. That they killed this first bill.

GLENN: Well, I hope it continues.

I just -- you know, there's so much misinformation on -- by the government. That this was a border bill. This last one was a border bill.

No, it wasn't. It was an immigration bill. And nobody except Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden have been asking for an immigration bill. America has rejected that over and over and over again.

Comprehensive immigration reform. That's not what we were asking for. We were asking for the border to be secured.

Now. Does it look like anything will happen on that front?

J.D.: Well, unless the House really stands their ground.

Again, what we should say to the president, is you don't get another (inaudible) to Ukraine, unless you actually secure the border. That's sort of a basic operating presumption. We won't even consider bills, to give money to Ukraine, unless you secure the border. We really need the House to sort of stand firm on this point.

I think they have a chance. Again, they have the majority. And they have the willpower here. Again, it's going to be a question of how many Republicans they can find, after voters in the back.

Unfortunately, they're -- there are a few out there. We know that.

Hopefully, there are not enough, in the House, to do it.

And to give Hakeem Jeffries control of the floor.

GLENN: I remember -- I remember September 11th.

I have absolutely no idea, what we were talking about, the day before. But all of it was irrelevant.

I don't know if you heard the sheriff of Butler County, Richard Jones. But he said, he was briefed along with the other sheriffs at the National Sheriffs Association, by Christopher Wray last week.

And Christopher Wray scared the sheriff's association to their core, it sounds. Saying, that we're -- we have a terrorist attack that is imminent.
Everything changes.

And I don't know how every Republican, or even just how every sellout, that just only cares about reelection.

Is missing, that because of these open borders, and because of what we're doing, in Ukraine. And with Taiwan.

And -- and Israel or Iran.

We are ripe for the taking! For -- for terrorist attacks.

And when that happens, these guys will not fare well at the polls.

They're just not.

J.D.: No, they're not. Sheriff Jones is a good guy, I know.

Butler County is actually where I was born and raised, Butler County, Ohio.

And so he is -- he is dead right, unfortunately.

We're at the greatest risk of a terrorist attack in this country, in at least 20 years.

We know there are many thousands of people, who are at least suspected on the terrorist watch list.

At least a few hundred of them are definitely terrorists.

They're in our country.

We have no reason why.

We have no reason planning.

And this is unfortunately, the consequence of Joe Biden's open border.

I, of course, hope that nothing happens.

GLENN: Me too.

J.D.: And I think we have to do whatever we can. To prevent as many bad people as we can, from coming into the country.

And we also have to prepare, and I think unfortunately, we have a lot of bad dudes in this country right now.

You know what I always notice, Glenn? Is these people always argue, meaning the open borders folks. They always say, this is about asylum. These people were fleeing political persecution.

And you look at the people allegedly claiming asylum.

And they're all between the ages of 20 and 35. I tend to remember from my history, that when political persecution is happening, it's the women and children who are the most affected by it, not the 25 to 35-year-old military aged men. So it's pretty frightening stuff.


Thank you, J.D., I appreciate it. Go get some sleep.

J.D. Vance, the senator from Ohio, who has been up all night trying to stop this bill in the Senate, along with a handful of others. And I thank every single one of them for doing their job.

This is a wrong-headed bill.

It is -- I don't know how, but it will be discovered at some point.

Who enriched themselves?

What NGOs enriched themselves?

What politicians enriched themselves?

Where did all this money go actually?

It will be revealed. It's just a matter of time.

Vice President Tucker Carlson? Evidence that it COULD happen

Vice President Tucker Carlson? Evidence that it COULD happen

Tucker Carlson has been all over the world recently speaking to powerful leaders. After his interview with Vladimir Putin, he spoke at the 2024 World Government Summit and that got Glenn thinking: Is something else going on here? Tucker has been a popular vice-presidential choice among Trump fans … is he gaining experience before the big announcement? Would Tucker even be interested in the vice presidency? Glenn breaks down his theory, as well as another theory on whether Vice President Kamala Harris will invoke the 25th Amendment against President Biden.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's get into the news of the day here. Yesterday, Biden was, you know, speaking with King Abdullah of Jordan.

And I don't know if you saw this video, do we have the video actually, of him wandering over the podium.

Okay. Now, he doesn't know where to stand. He's looking at the ground. Looking for tape.

That's what he's looking for. He's looking for a tape mark.

And he goes and stands behind king Abdul. And he says, I'm sorry.

And he realizes, he's on the wrong side. Like it matters. That he's just taking his orders.

It is really -- it's really been an amazing thing. And really, what happened, why this is so important right now, is because of Special Counsel Robert Hur. He did a report last week, just let me bring you up to speed, in case you didn't.

The handling of all the classified documents. That, you know, Biden said, hey, they were secure. No, they weren't. They were sitting in a box next to your Corvette. That's not secure for top secret documents.

Okay. It's just not.

But Hur comes out. And he says, well, you know, he just appeared in the testimony, while we were investigating this.

He just seemed like a -- a nice old well-intentioned man, who doesn't remember much.

Doesn't remember much?


He couldn't tell us when he was right now. And couldn't tell us, when his son died.

Okay. That's a problem. That's a real -- that's a problem.

Now, I think, first of all, Grassley, and everybody else that are, you know, oversight on all of this, Grassley and Ron Johnson, they've asked for that tape. They want to see it themselves.

I wouldn't be surprised, if Joe Biden was kind of all there.

Was not a doddering old fool. Could answer when he was vice president.

I think there's a movement to get Joe Biden out by the Democrats.

Now, I'm not saying that, you know, I think you're going to find he was a doddering old fool. On that tape.

But there is a movement now to get him out.

Because his -- his poll numbers are remarkably low.

He doesn't have a chance, when it comes -- if he's the guy, there won't be any debates.

And can you imagine how bad he'll be in six months from now?

So yesterday, if we have the Kamala Harris, see if we have it.

No, we don't. The -- yesterday, Kamala Harris came out. And she was asked by the Wall Street Journal, so, you know. Biden looks like there's a chance that he's not going to make it.

Are you ready to be vice president?

What she said, is really, really important.

She said, I'm ready to serve.

There's no question about that.

Now, that's a bold statement for any vice president, to make.

I don't know of a time, where a vice president has made that.

If they have, and I can't think of one, but if they have, they have gone on to say, but the competence of this president is not in question.

He is fine. And there's no need for me, to be prepared, other than every vice president needs to be prepared.

Okay? She didn't say that.

She didn't say that. This is a first. She's always answered that question, like I just said, a vice president answers that question.

In defense of her president. She's not saying that this time. The problem is: How are you going to get this guy out?

His family is all for it. Just getting rich off of his back. His family, I think is engaged in elder abuse. This is one of the worst families I've ever seen.

Anyone who would treat their father or grandfather like this.

And let him make a fool out of himself like this.

Is not a good family. They don't care.

But if the family is for him serving. And he is for him serving.

You have to evoke the 25th Amendment. The only one that can really do that. The cabinet has to have support. And it has to start with the vice president.

So the vice president is going to be -- is going to have to be the one to come out and say, we have to evoke the 25th Amendment.

Will she do that?

And then what happens to the election, because she's the only person.

Get this. She's the only person in Washington, that has a lower score, of likability, than Joe Biden.

She's -- you know. She likes school buses. And maybe school buses like her.

But not a lot of the drivers like her.

Now, that's something to watch.

There's something else, and this is absolutely a Glenn Beck theory. I have nothing to base this on.

I just, as a fiction writer, let me put that hat on, and tell you something, that I noticed a pattern of.

And it's because I read the story that is completely disconnected from this story that I just told you.

But I read this story first. And then I read another story, that I'm going to tell you about next.

Back-to-back. And it got me to thinking.

And it's a complete, you know. This is just a fictional theory.

But I want you to hear it, they can say.

Let me give you this story.

Tucker Carlson fired back at former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton on Monday, calling her a child.

After she criticized his interview with Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Carlson, was blamed by Clinton.

And Clinton called him a useful idiot. During an interview, that aired Wednesday evening, on MSNBC.

That's weird. Because today is Wednesday.

Carlson brushed the criticism off. At the appearance of the world government summit.


Hillary Clinton called this gentleman, speaking of Carlson, this honorable gentleman, that he is playing the role of a, well, you say it.

Prompting Carlson to say, that he hadn't seen Clinton's interview.

And he -- he was wanting to say, you know, useful to it.

But you say it. He didn't.

Instead, he said, I didn't see the interview.

And Hillary Clinton is a child. I don't listen to her. By the way, how is Libya doing?

Great put-down. Great response.

Now, the thing is, where did he say this?

He said this, at the World Government Summit 2024 in the Middle East.

Why was he at the World Government Summit 2024? He just left Moscow. Where he was meeting with Vladimir Putin just a few weeks before.

Wait a minute. He was speaking with Milei.

And then before that, he was in Hungary, speaking with the head of Hungary.

Wow, he's getting a lot of experience.

He's going to be -- this is my first thought.

He is taking the place of all of those respected journalists, that we had at one time. Where we respected them.

And they would go and do the big heavy interviews. And they talked to all the world leaders.

And then I thought, wow.

He'll know all the world leaders, and have spoken to them, personally.

Which is weird. Because I'm not sure Kamala Harris has done all that. Which then made me think, wait a minute.

Vivek Ramaswamy, and Tucker Carlson are the ones that were on the list, the top two names. Given to Donald Trump. Of who they would like to see as a vice presidential nominee. And when I first read that or heard that from the president, he said. Or I said, huh.

File it away. Immediately, my thought was, Tucker is a TV guy, though.

Not going to do that. Maybe he would be a spokesperson for the president.

Not the vice president.

He doesn't have the experience.

Wait a minute. Yes, he does now.

Stu, complete -- I mean, this is complete fiction. Complete fiction.

STU: I mean, I -- I like it as a hot take.

I mean, I don't know that I believe it.

You know, his --

GLENN: No. I don't believe it. I don't believe it.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: It would be smart for Donald Trump.

STU: It's a fun theory.

If you were setting this up.

This would be the type of thing, you would him to do.

To be on the stage like this.

I don't know that interviewing these world leaders, necessarily, gets you vice presidential experience, per se.

Look, Tucker Carlson has had a lot of experience in this world. Has been around for a lopping time.

He knows these topics.

GLENN: He grew up in Washington. He knows that town. He knows how it works.

STU: And it's certainly a way of raising, his -- not only his profile.

But also a profile of a foreign affairs picture, that's not always been germane to the Republican Party.

But is increasing in influence. And is certainly in line with the president's theory on foreign affairs.

So I -- I mean, you look, I like it as a hot take. I like it as a theory you're throwing out there.

But I don't know that I buy it.

GLENN: I have to tell you, if I were running -- if I wanted the presidency, or somebody that had asked me, hey, you know, think about running.

The thing I would do was exactly what Tucker Carlson is doing right now, and it would give me keys to the kingdom. Either kingdom I choose.

It's very, very, very bright.

Very bright of Tucker Carlson.

How you can STOP the Senate’s NEW WAR BILL

How you can STOP the Senate’s NEW WAR BILL

The U.S. Senate leadership is not giving up its effort to pass a massive war bill that will fund Ukraine, Israel, and likely even Hamas through aid to Gaza. This audience helped defeat the previous bill, which was disguised as a “border” bill. But Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) joins Glenn to warn that the Senate likely has enough votes to pass the same crazy package, just without the border parts. But there’s still a chance to stop it if YOU speak out and call your senators.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So, Mike, what the hell has the Senate done this time?

MIKE: Well, the Senate this time has yet again, put together a bill that now appears quite likely to pass. That you and I's Democrats. Sharply divides Republicans. On an issue where most Republican voters.

And most Republican senators are adamantly opposed to the Democrat's position.

But Senate Republican leadership, and a small handful of others, have given the Senate -- the Senate Democrats more than enough votes. To where it looks like, they will be able to pass this thing. In the next 48 hours or so.

Really is too bad.

Still stop it. All the Republicans. Still band together.

We could still top it.

The clock is ticking.

GLENN: You have Murkowski, and Romney.

So, you know --

MIKE: Yeah. But the remaining -- the remaining 31 of us, who didn't vote for this.

Have strong concerns, big concerns. Concerns that are backed up by voters all across America.

Not -- not all of them Republicans, by the way. But certainly an overwhelming super majority of Republicans, in the country, have great difficulty for this.

With this. You know, I stood on the Senate floor all day, on Saturday. I spoke for four continuous hours, trying, again, and again and again. To get amendments pending.

Amendments pending in the Senate. Meaning, they're in the cue, to be voted on.

To be addressed. Democrats wouldn't less us do it. I put up an amendment for example, making sure that this -- this aid wouldn't end up going to Hamas.

You send this through any of these entities. Through the UN. They make a lot of, hey, about the fact, oh, well, we cut UNRWA out of any aid.

Oh, great. There are 19 UN agencies, operating in Gaza. And guess what, you said aid to Gaza. We're going to send this to Gaza, but not Hamas. It's not real.

I don't know how to -- that's like saying, we'll give money to the UK. But it won't go to the British.

It's not a thing.

GLENN: So hang on.

$90 billion. What's in this package?

What are we sending?

MIKE: All right. So up to $92 billion in the package, about 60 billion of it goes to Ukraine.

Within that portion of it, you've got about 8 billion, that goes to direct economic assistance, and to the Ukrainian government.

Where the Ukrainian government is expected to spend that, on things like, paying all of Zelinsky's bureaucrats. Every government employee, in Ukraine. Civilians. The whole thing. For an entire year.

They're also free to use that for their own welfare benefit system.

They're also free to use that for their own sort of Ukrainian crony capitalism. Sort of thing.

Which they've got going on.

We've got actual instances of this type of aid that we've given to Ukraine over the last couple of years.

Being used to buy people concert tickets in Ukraine.

To shore up the viability of clothing stores in Ukraine.

Sort of real mother lode of opportunities here.

Opportunities for those who are close to the Ukrainian corruption.

Now, look, we could have a real debate here, if this were just military aid.

But there's so much in this package. That is not military aid.

It's going to other things.

Also, in the bill, you've got a total of between nine and $10 billion.

It's going loosely speaking to some humanitarian aid.

And it just says in the different account, that add up between nine and $10 billion.

It says, that they can go to this loose humanitarian concerns, in and around Ukraine, and in and around Israel.

Which in theory, the Biden administration could chapel most of even all of that aid to Gaza.

Guess what Gaza does, when we get that humanitarian aid.

It's not Gaza broadly. It's Hamas.

Well, Hamas in the past, used our aid money, whether funneled through the United Nations, as it usually is. Or it built tunnels.

They buy arms. They prepare to attack, to attack innocent civilians -- and to do the whole thing.

GLENN: Okay.

MIKE: This is giving them more of an opportunity to do that very thing that resulted in October 7th. But make no mistake, Hamas is not content with October 7th.

That's just a preview of more things to come. All they need are the resources. And apparently, we provided them with those.

PAT: Mike, it's Pat Gray.

Just to be clear, I want to make sure I understand, you are anti-American concerts then, as well as anti-Ukrainian clothing stores.

GLENN: Yeah. I got that too. Good catch, Pat. Good catch.

PAT: Thank you. He was going to let that slide. And I don't want it to.

GLENN: Mike, I have to tell you --

MIKE: Ukrainians -- not on the American taxpayer dollar. That's my position.

PAT: Huh. Wow.

GLENN: Right. Right. So I have to tell you, Mike, every -- at every corner, it seems, since 2008, when we're talking about big money.

The American people have not had any relief. The big corporations have gotten it. The big banks have gotten it. The fed has gotten it.

Foreign countries have gotten it.

The now -- the clothing stores in Ukraine, have gotten it.

But the Ma and Pa -- I had to buy a black suit over the weekend. And I went into this great, legendary clothing store in New Haven, Connecticut, called Ferruchi's.

And as I'm -- I'm talking to the guy behind the counter. And he's like, COVID killed us, man.

It killed the clothing industry. They're struggling. The people that made really good suits for like Brooks Brothers or things for him.

He said, they used to have 2,000 employees. He said, they got down to I think 150 employees. Now they're back up to 500.

And everything is changed.

And not a dime has been helping out these companies.

They destroyed us.

And -- and we were buying -- you know, people were getting stuff.

And they were getting concert tickets here in America.

While the real people trying to keep the doors from falling off, no pun intended with Boeing.

Because they're apparently working to keep the doors flying off.

The people who are really doing the hard work.

They never get the break from this government.


MIKE: Never get a break from it. And it never sleeps. It never stops spending.

The more we spend, with multi-trillion dollar deficits. Year after year after year.

It starts to add up. And it starts to make every dollar that we have. That Americans earn, through their hard work.

Buy less.

You know, the average American household, every single month, has to shell out an additional thousand dollars just to live.

Just to put a roof over your head. And groceries on the table.

GLENN: So what is this really all about?

This spending.

What is this really all about?

Who is really getting the money here?

What -- what favors are being done? What NGOs are taking that money, and then funneling it back to an election here?

What's happening?

MIKE: Well, the biggest single beneficiary from these probably defense contractors.
People who make -- look, they're -- there are plenty of people who are patriotic. And who are not part of what I would call the military-industrial complex.

And by that, I mean those who worship at the altar of war. So that they can make more money. Profiteering off of war.

But there are a number of those.

And it's a real thing.

It's been since president Eisenhower. That the bigger it gets, and the more powerful it becomes.

And I would say, the military-industrial complex is the single biggest beneficiary from a package like this.

Sometimes, some of my colleagues will even let the mask slip.

Some of my Republican colleagues have done that in recent weeks, by saying things like, look we have to get this thing done.

We should get this thing done.

Because this will create American jobs.

It's good for us.

GLENN: How. How.

MIKE: It will create American jobs. Because. Because when we put these, you know, men M tens of billions of collars into these weapons procurement contracts, for weapons, by the way.

That are going to go to others. And not us. And that are actually going to commandeer our procurement process in such a way, that we'll have access to weapons for our own uses, later, rather than sooner.

That employs people in America, that employs people who make a lot of these weapons systems, that we will be sending over there.

But the pieces that are -- we have a stash of them.

We have already exhausted a lot of them.

It's already going to take us. Even before we add this package to it. Years, possibly this will 2030 or 2035.

To replace a lot of this stuff.

What happens -- we can see more and more of this stuff. While unable to produce more of it at home.

It really is concerning.

We become less and less capable of protecting the American homeland from whatever attack might face here.

It's deeply concerning.

GLENN: Okay.

Mike Lee in the Senate.

Fighting hard, along with -- they're about 13 of you, are there not?

How many are fighting?

No. No. There's 31.


MIKE: Who were opposing this.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

MIKE: That means this is an overwhelming super majority of Republicans in the United States Senate.

And yet, our Senate Republican leadership is all for it.

They're teaming up with Democrats.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

MIKE: Democratic policies. The United Nations on issues that are particular to the left. This is concerning.

GLENN: Okay. Last week, gang. You -- you stopped the bill in the Senate.

On the border. You have to do it again.

You make a difference. You do make a difference.

Call your senator. And say, in no uncertain terms.

You're not to keep giving my children and my great, great, great children's money away!

We don't have the money

We don't have the -- enough is enough.

My gosh.

Mike, thanks for the good fight.

Appreciate it. God bless.

MIKE: Thank you very much. Good to be with you.

Why the ‘He Gets Us’ Super Bowl ad is NOT offensive

Why the ‘He Gets Us’ Super Bowl ad is NOT offensive

The most controversial ad of Super Bowl LVIII was a spot from a group called “He Gets Us.” The ad featured depictions of Christians washing the feet of a diverse group of people, including a woman in front of an abortion clinic, an illegal immigrant, and a gay man. Many conservative Christians were outraged at this allegedly woke message, which they believe suggests that followers of Jesus are “oppressors” who should accept sinful behavior. But Glenn has a different take. He believes the ad could have been done better. But he WASN’T offended by the ad, and in this clip, he explains why.


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: This one is possibly the one causing the most controversy, and it's all coming from the right. Cut three.

It is pictures of Christ, washing people's feet. Can you explain. I can't see them from here.

PAT: Yeah. It's just a whole bunch of images of people watching other people's feet.

GLENN: And they're --

PAT: They're normally poor, destitute.

GLENN: There's a gas worker. With a hippie.

PAT: And somebody's backyard, washing an elderly person.

GLENN: A black man sitting on a porch. Washing a white man's feet or vice-versa. Then the last one.

PAT: Jesus didn't teach -- he washed feet.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: All right.

GLENN: Okay. So stop.

So the last one is the controversial one.

And some people have a problem. In fact, let me read Steve Deace.

Who I really like. I just happened to disagree with him, but that is the glory of TheBlaze.

We don't all have to agree, and we don't force each other to agree. You will say yes.

No. Yeah. We're against the whole fascistic kind of brainwashing kind of thing.

So I was reading a tweet, that -- is that Steve sent out, this morning.

And he said, how wrong was the he gets us ad at the Super Bowl.

Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, not the multitudes of unrepentant sinners as the ad depicts. Instead, for them, he freely offered himself up as a living sacrifice for their sins, which the ad never points out to them.

It affirms -- it, instead, affirms them in their sin. Just a vile, repulsive, heretical, and offensive ad. I can't get upset at Pfizer or Bud Light or anybody else, the spirit of the age. Secrets from his depraved mind.

When our answer fundamentally -- mind, when this, our answer, funded by wealthy Christians. It has been 12 hours. And I'm still mad.

I -- you know, I -- I kind of disagree.

I mean, they didn't -- I think they should have put somebody -- like, the Capitol Police.

Washing the feet of those on January 6th.

If you're going to have Jesus washing the -- of the foot of transgender. Or you have somebody else.

A priest.

Washing the feet of the transgender.

I get it. I get it.

But how about making sure that the left is washing the feet of the right as well. You know what I mean?

Because Jesus came for all of us.

And the point of this ad.

I disagree. I'm not mad at this ad at all.

I think it was -- it could have been done better, by really pointing out, our real differences.

But Jesus -- let me ask you, Pat.

Which one of your children, are you so mad at, you would condemn them to hell.

PAT: None of them. No.

GLENN: No, no, no.

They've done something wrong.

Let's say one of them murdered somebody.

So you would never want to see them again.

Which one?

Which one?

PAT: It would have to be none of them. None of them.

GLENN: But wait. One of them is in BLM. And set fire to cities and stuff. So you will condemn that one to hell, right?

PAT: No. No, I'm not.

GLENN: Okay.

See, the -- we -- Pat told me one time. Just think of God, as a loving father. And you will understand him, and yourself.

Much better.

And I said, don't think I can do that.

And God is everywhere.

And in the tree. And I still believe.

He is -- he is everywhere.

But you can understand him, and your role as a parent. Much better, if you imagine him to be the perfect, loving parent.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: He loves all of us!

Even the ones who have gone astray.

And, yes!

He would wash the feet of everyone.

Do you think Jesus was embracing adultery, when he road wrote in the sand.

And said, where are thine accusers?

PAT: He told her not to synonym.

That part of the story though is always left out -- by -- by, you know, people trying to condone whatever lifestyle that they think is fine.

And that's the problem. That's the --

So if that's the point you're trying to make about Jesus. That he condones everything we ever do. That's not right.

He still loves us, but he doesn't condone our actions a lot of times.

GLENN: Right. Right.

God is our father. We are his children.

He loves us.

The thing that we can learn from that. Is that we cannot hate our fellow man.

We cannot hate.

And that's the point of this.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: We can't hate our enemy.

We are not fighting enemies, that are flesh and bone.

We are fighting. I actually -- and if you really pray on this. These are not enemies of ours.

We don't own these rights.

God does.

These are enemies of his.

And we are supposed to -- we're not the gatekeepers

We're the welcoming committee. And we should be praying for our enemy. And loving our enemy.

And that's going to be harder and harder to do.

Do you know why Abraham Lincoln was killed by John Wilkes Booth. He tried twice.

The first time he was just going to kill him with his bare hands.

And it was at the point of the inaugural speech. We have in the vault, the only picture of Abraham Lincoln and John Wilkes Booth in the same photograph. It's an incredible thing.

Abraham Lincoln is given the second inaugural address, and he's kind of blurry. And he's talking and moving.

And the cameras need long exposure.

Up at the top, at the gate of the Capitol. Looking at just his eyes. And everything are so clear.

Because he was just boring a hole in Lincoln's head, is John Wilkes Booth.

And after Lincoln said, with malice toward none, and charity toward all.

Booth about lost his mind. Because he needed the north to hate the south. He needed the south to hate the north.

All he -- the only reason why he killed Lincoln was so that the right -- the north would rise up again. In anger, towards the south.

That's not Christ-like.

We don't -- we -- we should do everything we can. To push our anger aside.

It doesn't mean we condone. And it doesn't mean we stop fighting them.

We just don't hate.

And that's going to -- that's hard. It's because hate is very, very worldly, and hate is what's being pushed right now.