RADIO

Reporter finds 'DISTURBING' trend while covering Paul Pelosi attack in San Francisco

Michael Shellenberger is doing what all reporters SHOULD DO when covering the attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul: He is on the ground in San Francisco, knocking on as many doors as possible, and interviewing as many people as possible to try and piece together all the details. But Shellenberger, author of ‘San Fransicko,’ tells Glenn he’s witnessed reporters from mainstream media outlets being ‘lazy’ with their coverage, which by default suggests either bad journalism or political motivation. He exposes the ‘DISTURBING’ way some news reporters have covered the attack, and he explains how some have essentially swapped this story with the one about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s near attack just months ago…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Michael, how are you, sir?

MICHAEL: Great. Good to be back, Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah. Thank you so much for all your hard work on this.

MICHAEL: Well, thank you for having me on. I'm excited to talk about it.

GLENN: Okay. So tell me what you've found. What's true? What's not true?

MICHAEL: Well, look, what we know, this is somebody who, according to multiple witnesses, including the mother of his children. Was struggling with mental illness for over a decade. We know he was homeless for a while. We know there was extensive drug use. You know, we -- mental illness. Serious mental illness, like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, are pretty rare. But we do see a lot of drug-induced mental illness, particularly from methamphetamine use, but certainly other drugs over time can cause psychosis, which is of course the classic, you know, insanity of not being able to tell the difference between reality and your imagination.

And so what's obvious here is the alleged suspect in the attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband was in the grip of psychosis. And to blame political ideology is just what you said, it's the equivalent of blaming Martin Scorsese for making the movie Taxi Driver, on John Hinckley Jr's attack on Ronald Reagan.

It's -- the crazy ideas expressed in the blog posts of the alleged attack of Pelosi, are themselves symptoms of the underlying psychosis. It's incorrect to point to them as the cause.

GLENN: So I heard this morning, that he was in the hospital, or was this weekend.

Was those for injuries, or was he in a psych word?

MICHAEL: I don't know. It could be both. It wouldn't -- he wouldn't be hospitalized long-term, if he was in the hospital. He'll be held. He'll be diagnosed by a psychiatrist. And we'll find out soon. I mean, I think that, the good news is that the truth gets out. It was obvious to me. Because, of course, I'm very close to this. I wrote a book about this. Came out last year. It was obvious to me, as soon as I heard about who it was, and I talked to his neighbors and family members.

That this was somebody who was unwell. And this was the result of a sickness.

I was disturbed by how quickly, even so-called mainstream journalists were to even blame conservatives. Blame Republicans. Blame Trump.

You know if somebody were to be, I read Michael Shellenberger's book, and that's why I committed this crime.

It would be inappropriate to blame me for that the crime. And I think everybody knows that. But in this toxic political environment, I think it's important to remind people of that.

GLENN: We never blamed Bernie Sanders, ever. In fact, we were clear on day one. That it wasn't Bernie Sanders's fault that one of his supporters went and tried to kill all the Republicans in Congress. That's ridiculous.

MICHAEL: Right. Of course. Of course. Yeah. I'm sorry to see. Basically, I had one episode in particular. There was a reporter, who supposedly focused on disinformation at NBC News. Who came out and he tweeted at my -- my reporting, and said, oh.

My reporting had been debunked because there are all these blog posts, showing that the suspect in the attack, had written crazy things. Including their right-wing things.

But also, things about fairies. And demons.

It was very disturbing.

I have a hard time believing that that journalist didn't know that -- what was driving the suspect was -- was mental illness or psychosis. It really appeared that he was deliberately misleading people, in order to engage in partisan political behavior, just ten days before the election. And just think, it's not just on Twitter. I mean, if you watch Meet The Press yesterday, the whole program was basically dedicated to this topic. And at no point, in any of the program, did they even discuss the fact that the suspect was clearly in a psychotic state, suffering from delusions, under long-term drug use.

Instead, Chuck Todd made the whole show, about political radicalization and ideas.

And I just think, that's terrible reporting. I think it's very partisan. I won't speculate as to the motives of the journalist, but it's either bad journalism, or it's motivated by politics.

GLENN: Is it worse that they did that, or that when Kavanaugh, the guy from California, came to kill Kavanaugh, they didn't even report it on any of the Sunday night shows.

MICHAEL: Well, that's the other thing. And I wrote a post about this yesterday, Glenn. And you're absolutely right. I mean, it's disturbing.

When the Kavanaugh assassination happened, of course, I paid attention to it. But I will say this, there are many progressive and liberal people in my life, who still do not know that there was a serious fascination plot against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Because it was not covered. In anything close to this. Just as you said, three days after that assassination plot was revealed. None of the Sunday talk shows wrote about it.

The New York Times varied the story on page A20. The Pelosi assassination. Alleged assassination attempts was on the front page of the New York Times two days in a row.

You know, I'll tell you the other thing about it, is that the suspect in the Kavanaugh killing was clearly motivated by his pro-choice and his pro-gun control views. And his own lawyers, last week, said he was mentally fit to stand trial.

In other words, it appears -- again, there's more information to come. And I don't want to get ahead of it.

It appears as though the suspect of the Kavanaugh plot, was genuinely motivated by political fanaticism, not by mental illness.

Whereas, in the Pelosi case, he clearly was driven by psychosis, mental illness, drug induced, or underlying. We don't know. The media basically reversed those two stories.

And did not -- and covered the Pelosi plot attempt, as though it was driven by political fanaticism, rather than by psychosis.

STU: It really is incredible. You are from the area, Michael. And you were down there. Some of these interviews you were -- you were there, right?

MICHAEL: I was. I was. I mean, I think it's -- you know I'm a journalist at heart. And you know it's not that far from my heart. And I went down there. And I interviewed all the neighbors. I'll tell you a couple of shocking things. I won't name names, but I was not impressed by the reporting of the other journalists. Good journalism is you go and knock on all the doors, and you interview as many people as you can. I was the only one doing that.

There was a lot of laziness here. And that's also, the partisanship and the laziness are related, because if you have the idea that this was a Trump supporter, who went after Pelosi, then you don't want to go to get to the bottom of this stuff. You don't want to go through these interviews. You want to stick to your story.

So that was part of it. You know it's just -- you know when you get into it, Glenn. As you might imagine. It's a tragic story.

It's drug use. It's pedophilia. The mother of his two kids is in prison for basically child molestation. She was a crazy person. She herself is something -- I think she probably has a personality disorder and long-term drug use. The kids were in that house. They apparently weren't going to school. I mean, this is a real -- it's basically a symptom of exactly the problems I describe in San Fransicko, which is that we stop enforcing basic laws. And when you stop enforcing laws against people that are suffering mental illness or are addicted to hard drugs, they don't get that help they need.

And I think that's part of the lesson here. Is that this tragedy could have been averted if we enforce basic laws and mandated drug treatment. And psychiatric care for the people who need it.

It's not that every time someone -- you arrest somebody for breaking a law, that they have to go to prison or be punished. Certainly, some people do. But other people are just sick. And I think what we'll discover, as time goes on. The suspect in the Pelosi attack was somebody who was very ill. And needed to get treatment mandated. Many, many years ago. But didn't get it. Because we're in the grip of frankly some radical left political ideas.

GLENN: Did you see the op-ed by -- gosh, who was it?

Shoot. Lost his name. The guy who -- who just wrote this weekend, about the you know op-ed about Tom Cotton at the New York Times.

And how -- yeah. He's an op-ed columnist. And he even didn't say anything about it. He said, because we were afraid to.

When you said a minute ago, that you know they don't want to find it. How many are afraid to do their job in -- in journalism?

MICHAEL: Well, I was afraid. You know, my story. I came from the radical left. I considered myself a moderate. I'm politically independent.

But, yeah. I was afraid on everything. And you know partly you worry about losing your friends.

You worry about upsetting your family. You worry about not making a living. What you're describing is a column from Washington Post reporter, Eric Wimple who writes a media column. And to his credit, there was an ambivalent reaction to it, interestingly enough. But basically to his credit, he came out and said it was wrong for the New York Times to fire its op-ed page editor, who ran, of course, this op-ed by Senator Cotton, arguing for the use of the National Guard and US troops to put down the riots.

Well, he was not only -- the New York Times, because of the outrage, by its woke journalist staff. They basically denounced the op-ed. Fired the op-ed editor.

Everybody watched it happen. Knew it was wrong. To his credit. Whatever it was, like two years new. This columnist, at the Washington Post, said that that was wrong.

You know I think it's good. You know it's better late than never.

And he's one of the first people to say it.

Yeah. It's kind of -- it's social fear. You worry about your friends and family. It's also a financial fear. Like, am I getting fired from my job?

This is really serious stuff.

And I think that the partisanship. And you always emphasize this.

I think it's so important. We need to allow disagreements in our society. We need to appreciate and reward it.

I'm always shocked by how many people -- instead of being like, oh. I disagree with you. They're like, you should stop saying that. They want people to stay quiet.

GLENN: Right. Right. We're with Michael Shellenberger. We'll get more facts on -- I have a few more facts on what's true, what's not true. Then, I want to also talk to him about this push from the Democrats, to nationalize our gas and oil.

Hello, Venezuela. We'll go there, in 60 seconds.
(music)
Tracy wrote in about his experience with Relief Factor. He said, you know the first time I encountered the evil clown. I just ran away. And everything was fine. I was pretty sure he grabbed my wallet. So that sucked.

But I was happy to get away with my life. Instead of getting dragged into that drain. Then, he kept coming after me. Every day, over and over. On my way to work. And I had to keep running.

Yeah. Eventually, my knees and my lower back were so sore from running from the killer clown, that I could barely get up in the morning. Then I heard about Relief Factor.

And that voice came from the radio. Not from the sink, in my bathroom. I'm still coming close to death every day, with the clown thing. But, boy, do my knees and back feel better. Thanks, Relief Factor.

Well, thank you, Tracy, for writing in, especially on this Halloween day. 19.95. It's a trial pack. So if you have some crazy clown chasing you, get out of pain. Relief Factor. 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief. Get the 19.95 3-week Quick Start developed for you at ReliefFactor.com. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So I think, Michael, because you have experience in your family with schizophrenia. I think it was your aunt.

MICHAEL: Yes.

GLENN: So you've seen it firsthand.

MICHAEL: Yeah. So it's interesting. Of course, when you're a child, and you know she -- she would say crazy things. So your parents have to explain to you, what's going on. And it is a little scary. Of course, it helps to have your parents there to kind of talk you through it. But, yeah. She thought the president of the United States.

I think it was Ford. Yeah. I think it was Ford or Nixon. They were communicating with her.

So I think -- there's a reaction, that they'll have in this case. That okay. Maybe he was like psychotic. But there's all these terrible conspiracy theories out there. And those need to stop.

Well, no. First of all, we have freedom of speech. And that means we actually have people have conspiracy theories. We let people believe all sorts of things. That's the point of a free society. So the idea that we'll get rid of certain ideas, is a very bad road to go down. The other thing is just that psychotic people will always find some justification for their behaviors. That's different than suggesting that those are the motivations. I do think that this is something that people can get. But you have to think about it for a minute. Which is that -- and we know this is true for everybody. Is that you have a motivation to do something. But you might give a different reason for why you did it. Well, people who are psychotic, they give crazier reasons often. But in many cases, I look at this, and I suspect that what we'll discover is that this was somebody who was lost. You know he lost his wife and kids.

GLENN: Right.

MICHAEL: He wasn't able to hold down a good job. He was using heavy drugs. His motivation was probably to somehow make his life better. As crazy as that sounds. To be a hero, or something like that. He had some story in his head, about how he was going to become a hero. This is how often these guys think, by making this attack. And that's ultimately what was driving it.

Not some political radicalization.

GLENN: Yeah. But there are few things about the story, that I don't know if they're true or not.

You know I -- I look at these things. And the reason why we have a plethora of conspiracy theories, is because we no longer trust the media. We no longer trust the government, to tell us anything close to the truth.

And then there are arming things that just kind of hang out in the air. And nobody explains them. And it doesn't fit in with the -- with the story line, that the media is going for.

First of all, is it that make sense to you? You think that's right?

MICHAEL: Yeah. Sure. The media, they're partisan now. Maybe they've always been. Although, I think there's no doubt, that it's gotten worse. So when this happened, they rushed to make this a story about why you should not vote for Republicans.

I mean, it's just sort of tragic.

Did the U.S. Government TELEPORT Malaysia Airlines Flight 370?!
RADIO

Did the U.S. Government TELEPORT Malaysia Airlines Flight 370?!

A decade ago, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared without a trace. Now, some are claiming this was a cover-up — by the U.S. GOVERNMENT! Glenn speaks with one of those people, investigative journalist Ashton Forbes, who claims that he has video evidence of what really happened. The alleged footage, which he claims was leaked from within the government, depicts a plane disappearing into what could be a worm hole created by three rotating orbs. Ashton lays out the science that he believes explains this … but does the government really have this game-changing technology? Glenn lets you decide …

Biden Sent HOW MANY Migrants to THIS Red State?!
RADIO

Biden Sent HOW MANY Migrants to THIS Red State?!

According to a new report, internal DHS data has revealed how the Biden administration has flown hundreds of thousands of “inadmissible” migrants into U.S. cities — and the top 15 cities are eye-opening. The controversial CHNV mass-parole program has used YOUR tax dollars to send migrants who have claimed refugee status all over the country. But the administration has brought the most migrants into the country BY FAR through airports in (of course) the red state of Florida. This is ON TOP of the record-high illegal immigration that we have seen under the Biden administration. So, what’s the goal here?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: New internal DHS data reveals 45 US cities that hundreds of thousands of migrants that have felony into via the Biden administrations, controversial CHMV mass parole program.

It shows that the top 15 cities that migrants were flown into, on your tax dollar. On our airlines. Which you have to take your shoes off.

They have to know. I mean, come on over here.

Yeah. Every third person, we do a rectal exam.

Yeah. And now -- now we're just flying these people. Without knowing, who they really are. Doing it in the middle of the night.

Now, these aren't the people who go across the border.

Are these the ones who the United States government went out to, hey. Is anybody -- refugee. If you're a refugee, I've got free tickets to America.

So the top 15 cities, Miami, Florida, 91,000 people were flown in from January through August 2023.

Eight months. Eight months. Miami, Florida, Florida. 91,000.

Ft. Lauderdale. Which is the same city.

I mean, it's Miami Ft. Lauderdale.

STU: Yeah. I used to live in Ft. Lauderdale.

GLENN: It's part of Miami.

STU: It's a little bit of a drive to Miami. It's like Dallas/Fort Worth.

A couple cities close to each other.

GLENN: So Ft. Lauderdale got 60,000. And then New York City is number 3. They got 14,000. Wait a minute.

Wow! That's quite a spread there.

So, you know, they get 150,000, just in Miami, Ft. Lauderdale. And then 14,000 in New York. Houston --
STU: And think about what Eric Adams has said.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

STU: They're overrunning our communities, we can't do anything. Half the cities on this list are on one state. And New York City can't handle this.

GLENN: Yeah. They have 14,000. Then Houston has 8,000.

Orlando has 16,000. Another Florida.

Los Angeles, three. Tampa, another Florida. 3200. Dallas, Texas, is 2200.

San Francisco, 2,000. Atlanta, 2,000.

Newark, New Jersey.

I mean --

STU: Oh, people love Newark.

GLENN: Honestly, if you're like in some other place.

I don't care if they're torturing you. And they say, you want to come to the United States?

Sure. Where am I headed?

Newark, New Jersey. No, I'm going to hang out. I'm good. I'm good.

Put me back on the rack. It's false alarm. I'm not going anywhere.

STU: How are these decisions made?

GLENN: What do you mean?

STU: Do you know -- if you're someone coming in, you're an illegal immigrant, you're on this parole program.

And you come in. Do they say, hey. Here is your -- they have fliers come visit Orlando out there. Look through them until you pick one. Do they assign a city to you? Is it wherever your relatives are?

GLENN: I don't know. It's taken us forever, to get just this information.

STU: I know. It's true. It could be, that these people are like, look, I don't want to go to Newark. So I will pick Tampa or Orlando or Ft. Lauderdale.

My guess is, do you know anyone who lives there?

Yeah. My brother lives in Miami.

So they're flying them to Miami.

I don't know. Regardless, wouldn't the opposite be obvious, if you were honest here? If you're the Biden administration, you keep telling everyone that people in the south and the red states hate immigrants. They're racists. They're, you know, xenophobes. They don't have any programs for them.

So why would you continue to keep bringing them to Florida and Texas. Why?

Wouldn't you bring them to the cities, that have all these wonderful programs that you've passed. Why not?

GLENN: Well, unless you're trying to make sure that you fly them into a city, like Miami, Ft. Lauderdale. That's usually run by Democrats.

And you can have them vote.

STU: But -- but, again, it's not run currently by tells me.

GLENN: Miami, Ft. Lauderdale.

STU: Republican mayor. Remember, he ran for a short time, ran for president.

GLENN: I don't remember that. It was very short. Very short.

STU: Very short. But unless you have enemies, in red states and you realize that what you're doing is a punishment, right?

The same kind of thing that, you know, Greg Abbott did in Texas. You know what, we will send these people up to you guys. You guys deal with them.

Because we're being honest with them here. This is a strain on our society. And so we shouldn't be responsible for them. Because we want them to be stopped before they come in.

Right? All these other people are saying, we're welcoming. You're welcomed here. You will always be welcomed in New York City. I don't know if that one is expired. But that's what Eric Adams was saying when he was running for election.

GLENN: San Francisco.

STU: San Francisco. All these things. We went through and found all the quotes from these mayors.

All of them, welcomed with open arms, illegal who didn't notice. And invited them to come. And now when they actually show up, they realize what the situation is. You're taking a bunch of people who have no current path to earn enough to -- to house themselves. To feed themselves.

To give themselves basic humanitarian aid.

And then you're going to put that on the state, or local -- local communities.

GLENN: Imagine. Imagine your city. Knowing how large you are. You have an influx of 150,000 people.

Where are those jobs?

Where are the jobs for those people? You don't have a deficit of 150,000, you know, employees.


STU: Where do they work?

GLENN: Where are they working?

Where are they working?

By the way, a recent pew poll found that nearly two-thirds of Americans have little or no confidence that Joe Biden is physically fit to be president.

That's two-thirds. When you're talking about the immigration thing, 80 percent of America, wants them to be sent back home.

Okay?

They're starting to get really.

Quite, quite intense object the immigration thing.

And that's Republicans and Democrats.

Everybody knows that the economy is in flames.

Again, two-thirds have little or no confidence that Joe Biden is even physically fit to be president.

What the hell, how is this so close?

How is this so close?

I just -- it doesn't -- it doesn't make sense.

STU: People are not making judgments based on what's in front of them.

GLENN: No. They're not.

STU: They're these partisan. You know, these partisan lanes you get in. And it's impossible to escape them. I don't know. For 80 percent of people, at this point.

We would like to think it's some rare thing.

But it's pretty much everybody who looks at this. And doesn't seem to be spending any time to make this instigation.

Decision was made for them, years ago, decades ago, and they're going and checking the boxes.

Yes. He has mean tweets. But you had a job. We had a country. I mean, yeah. But I know those mean tweets are really, really horrible.

Biden FAILED to do THIS While Calling Out Violent College Protests
RADIO

Biden FAILED to do THIS While Calling Out Violent College Protests

President Biden spoke quickly to the press about the pro-Palestine protests that have taken over college campuses. But while Biden covered the basics — how Americans have a right to protest, but not protest violently, how antisemitism is bad, and how the rule of law should be upheld — did he go far enough? Glenn and Stu don’t believe so. Biden had an opportunity to make a real impact, but instead, he said enough to save his own skin and satisfy some supporters…and he also threw in a few lines to pander to the violent mobs...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Can we pull one of these?

BIDEN: Must be upheld. We're not an authoritarian nation. Where we silence people and squash dissent. The American people are heard. In fact, peaceful protest is the best tradition of how Americans respond to conflict issues. But -- but neither are we a lawless country. We are a civil society, and order must prevail.

Throughout our history, we have often faced moments like this, because we are a big, diverse, free thinking and freedom-loving nation. In moments like this, there are always those who rush in to score political points. But this isn't a moment for politics. It's a moment for clarity. So let me be clear: Peaceful protests in America, violent protest is not protected. Peaceful protest is.

It's against the law, when violence occurs. Destroying property is not a peaceful protest. It's against the law. Vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and ground school. None of this is a peaceful protest.

Threatening people, intimidating people, instilling fear in people is not peaceful protest. It's against the law.

Dissent is essential to democracy. But dissent must never lead to disorder or to deny the rights of others so students can finish the semester and their college education.

Look, it's a basically a matter of fairness. It's a matter of what is right.

Does the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos.

People have the right to get an education. The right to get a degree.

The right to walk across the campus safely without fear of being attacked.

Let's be clear about this as well: There should be no place in any campus, no place in America, for anti-Semitism or threats of violence against Jewish students.

There is no place for hate speech, or violence of any kind. Whether it's anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, or discrimination against Arab-Americans or Palestinian Americans. It's simply wrong. There's no place for racism in America. It's all wrong.

It's un-American.

I understand people have strong feelings and deep convictions, and in America, we respect the right and protect the right for them to express that. But it doesn't mean anything goes. It needs to be done without violence, without destruction. Without hate. And within the law.

You know, make no mistake, as president I will always defend free speech, I will always be just as a strong on standing up for freedom of the law. That's my responsibility to you, the American people. My obligation to the Constitution.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

BIDEN: Thank you very much.
GLENN: Okay. So there you go. You have Joe Biden doing --

STU: You want to take questions? He might be taking a question soon.

VOICE: Have the protests forced you to reconsider any of the policies with regards to the region?
BIDEN: No.

GLENN: And he walks away.

VOICE: Mr. President, do you think the National Guard should intervene?

BIDEN: No.

GLENN: He's walking away, and the door is closing behind him.

STU: But he's still answering them. No. No.

GLENN: He's just in a -- no. In the hallway. He's in his bedroom. No.

He looks at his wife, she says no. I know. What's happening.

STU: What did you make of that? It was pretty Milquetoast, boring. Not much.

We were talking about this off the air, that he had an actual opportunity here, if he wanted to win over a good chunk of the country, while risking his far left flank, of kind of having the clichéd Sister Souljah moment, who is really harsh against these people are doing what they're doing.

STU: He did not do that. It may have been what he was trying to do. He's seemingly incapable of giving a speech of any value.

That was a -- that was a -- just a -- hey.

GLENN: I think it's enough to satisfy many supporters. We're also at --

STU: What kind of supporters. Like, what group is he targeting that? Like a liberal, maybe Jewish voter?

GLENN: Yeah. And not really.

I think he's kind of pissed off the Jews when he's like, and no place for anti-Semitism.

Or people wanted to hurt Hamas. And Palestinians. And Muslims. And those who are in the Mickey Mouse Club.

STU: Right.

GLENN: The ones who have been raped by the Disney corporation. Which we're totally fine with.

You know, I -- I don't think he -- he reached out to -- to those supporters. But I think he did enough for maybe the average person who is a Democrat. And wants him tolerance the right thing.

What -- okay.

STU: He said, no violence.

He said protests are okay. But no violence. And such. And there's some group, he connects with that. There was a chance for him to really set this issue. Maybe make it a strength, and not a weakness. And he did not do that there. That was -- he could have made a moment of like, look.

These people on these campuses are -- basically, calling them revolting. Passion. Some sort of anger toward the people who are calling for the genocide of Jews. There's none of that. Well, to make sure people can get to classes. You know, everyone has a right to get a degree. Which, by the way, they don't have a right to.

But all of that being said, it wasn't the worst thing I've ever seen out of his mouth.

At least he didn't have red villain lighting behind him.

GLENN: Well, you know what is great though?

He doesn't need that anymore.

STU: We looked into his character.

It's funny too, he's -- from a dramatic standpoint, you couldn't put Joe Biden in like a dramatic movie. Because he's so bad at these speeches.

Even if he says something evil, you're just like, oh, God. This sucks.

GLENN: I think that we should bring the guillotine back. And we should take all bankers. And we should cut their heads off.

STU: Right. They're so -- there's no emotion.

You go back to the Star Wars, like, you know, this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause speech.

You need to be -- you can't put him in a movie. Everyone would be like, wait. What?

Is he talking about hamburgers? What is he talking?

GLENN: And the rebels are taking our bases, and we must stop for the empire!

STU: Right.

Yeah.

GLENN: And taking -- and we --

STU: Cough three times in the middle of a sentence.

GLENN: My uncle was in a spaceship once. He was flanked by aliens.

STU: And we -- isn't it just -- can we at least agree with this. Democrats, Republicans, everybody across the aisle. This is embarrassing. Can we at least just agree on that point. You can still say his policies are better or whatever. People around him. Making the policies, have a better idea, running the country.

Aren't you just embarrassed by this, day after day after take.

It is utterly depressing. That the country that has led the world out of the lack of Silicon Valleyization has this dolt running it.

It's so pathetic. In every way.

GLENN: So you are -- you're -- you're drawing a lot more out of this speech than I did.

I don't think it was bad. I don't think it was good.

But I don't think -- that's not going to make any impact. One way or another.

STU: I don't know that we disagree. I think he had an opportunity for impact, which he did not take. He could have made it worse. I don't think he did it that. I just think he's such an uninspiring figure. And I'm embarrassed when we're led by somebody like that. When I said led, it's definitely in air quotes there. I don't know the president should be viewed this way. But the way we view the president. He just sucks. It's maybe not even deeper than that.

He just sucks at that. He's not good at thing he does. The job he does, he's incapable of doing.

And that's a little bit frustrating for a world superpower.

GLENN: Yes. Again, now I think you're going too soft.

He doesn't -- he's not just incapable of doing it. The guy is a box of matches, in a fireworks factory.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's constantly striking himself.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: What happened?

What happened?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: He's constantly setting everything on firepower.

STU: Yeah. But I don't think -- that speech didn't strike me as, hey. Keep going protesters. It wasn't that.

GLENN: No. Which again, if he was some ideological maniac, maybe he would have gone that way.

Elizabeth Warren would have done that. Elizabeth wash would have been like, burn these things to the ground.

Probably. I think. He didn't quite do that.

He went out there, with the idea of, people are criticizing me for not saying anything.

I have to say something. I can say, hey, free speech is good. Don't break the law everybody.

But step back, and probably at this point, what is it? 10:00 a.m. dinner.

And then the day is over. That's what it felt like. And that's the way it feels like all the time with this guy, even when he's doing things that are viscerally angry about -- I mean, he's overcoming the entire system of government with things like the student loan plan. And he does it the same way.

He looks as boring and terrible and awful and coughing in the million dollars of sentences. That he does every other speech.

And, you know, watching him.

It's funny too.

Because he's obviously been told. Hey, if you can avoid coughing in the middle of a sentence.

Can you do that?

Multiple times, he went to cough.

He catches himself. And his hand stays a foot away from. He brings it up.

He starts to cough.

He realizes, he's not supposed to do it.

He doesn't have to cough. He's doing it as a tick. I don't know what he's doing -- and he also does this little scratch his face thing in the million dollars. Jews shouldn't be so murdered all the time.

GLENN: You're making fun of --

STU: Whatever the hell he was saying. I don't know. I just feel like it's an embarrassment from beginning to end. I'm sorry, you didn't feel that way. I'm sorry you like President Biden and you will vote for him. That's not how I feel. And I have to express it. As he said, free speech is important.

REPUBLICANS Just Passed a HATE SPEECH Bill Under the Guise of “Antisemitism”
RADIO

REPUBLICANS Just Passed a HATE SPEECH Bill Under the Guise of “Antisemitism”

The House of Representatives just passed a bill to combat “antisemitism” with the majority of both parties on board. But there’s one big problem with the bill: It’s not an “antisemitism” bill, Glenn says. It’s a hate speech bill. Glenn explains why, although he’s been accused of defending Jews TOO MUCH, he’s “dead set against” this bill: “The only one who can remove the hate in someone's heart is God. Government can't fix human hearts.” Glenn also explains why constitutionalists must defend the pro-Palestinian protesters’ right to free speech — not violence — no matter how despicable it is.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The House of Representatives passed a major anti-Semitism bill on Wednesday. Which would crack down on anti-Semitism on college campuses, as protests raged nationwide. So you're now not saying that this is going to be for everybody. This is just through the Department of Education.

Legislation was opposed by 21 Republicans and 70 Democrats. The legislation seeks to make the Department of Education adopt the international Holocaust remembrance alliances. Definition of anti-Semitism, when enforcing the 1964 Civil Rights Act on college campuses. Now, I had to look it up. What is the international Holocaust remembrance alliances definition of anti-Semitism?

Well, they define anti-Semitism as, and I'm quoting. A certain perception of Jews. Which may be expressed as hatred towards Jews.

It also defines it as a heretical and physical manifestation of anti-Semitism, and directed towards your or non-Jewish individuals, and/or their property.

Towards the Jewish community, institutions, and religious facilities.

Examples of anti-Semitism include calling for the harming of the Jewish people, in the name of racial or extremist view of religion. And accusing Jewish people of inventing and/or exaggerating the Holocaust. The combat, anti-Semitism movement hailed the passage as a momentous achievement. And said, works remains to be done to get it through the Senate and President Joe Biden's desk. While we celebrate this milestone. Our work is far from over. We now need to urgently call upon Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to prioritize the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act. Okay.

So there are the 20 Republicans in the House, that stood up. Florida representative, Matt Gaetz, opposed the bill. He said, this is a hate speech bill.

Anti-Semitism is wrong. But the legislation is written without regard for the Constitution, common sense, or even common understanding of the meaning of the words. If this bill would pass, the gospel itself would meet the definition of anti-Semitism under the terms of this bill. Democratic lawmakers including hoist minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries has also called for the passage of the bill. The countering anti-terrorism act. Or anti-Semitism act. The bill would combat anti-Semitism through the appointment of a new presidential adviser, that would be charged with implementing the White House's coordinated strategy in dealing with anti-Semitism.

What could possibly go wrong here?

The effort to crush anti-Semitism and hatred in any form, is not a democratic or Republican issue. It's an American issue that must be addressed in a bipartisan manner with a fierce urgency of now! Because after all, gang, say it with me. We've got to do something.

Okay. You know, when I hear people say, the Jews killed Jesus. Or those dirty Jews run the world.

Or those Jews are responsible for everything bad. Or you're just saying things because you have a Zionist master. I think to myself, you're a bloody idiot.

You have no clue, as to what is really happening in the world.

You have no clue. Are there some Jewish people, and top of corporations, or top of whatever?

Yeah. Yeah. There are. Are there very successful Jews that happen to be bankers?

Yeah. But, you know what, there's also very successful bankers that are Catholics and Mormons. And Lutherans, and Methodists. And dare I say it, atheists.

Yeah, but it's the Jews that are the problem.

You're an idiot. You shouldn't run around saying these things. But I kind of actually like it, when you do.

Because I know exactly who you are. Oh. Here's a guy who is so stupid, he can't tie his own shoes. Or he's just a massive racist.

Kids, stay away from him. You shouldn't run around saying, because it's false, it's rude. It's stupid.

All of the above. And we're trying to create a society here. The proper response to this act is to not post memes of long-nosed Jews, wrapping their tentacles around a US flag. It doesn't mean you're right about how the Jews are. Or vindicated for noticing that Zionists are the reason for everything bad, that it's ever happened.

You can say those things. You can say those things. Because our Constitution guarantees it.

You know how I feel about anti-Semitism.

You know how I feel about the Holocaust. And the return of the Holocaust. I've been warning about it.

I've been trying to prepare you for this time. I've prepared my family for this time. Hard choices are going to come soon.

They already are. This one doesn't seem hard. What have I always said?

The Constitution must rule. The Constitution must be our set of principles, that we do not violate. No matter, if it cuts your way or against you.
This -- this act, you would think, that someone like me, that is very supportive of the Jews in Israel, would be all for.

I am dead set against this.

And you should be too. Something can be legally permissible, and morally repulsive at the same time.

Speech needs to be protected. Not the stuff we all agree on. But the stuff we don't agree on.

The only speech that needs protection is the speech that a lot of people, the majority find absolutely abhorrent.

Congress doesn't understand. You cannot legislate hatred away. You can't pass a bill. You know what happens?

All you do is you create speakeasies of hate. They go into the closet. They go into another room, where they can't be heard. And it just becomes a festering pool of hate.

That at some point, will break out.

The only one that can remove hatred from hearts is God. We can do our part.

Does that mean that jerk protesters can prevent Jewish students from entering their classroom. No. That's not speech.

In the public square, and I mean that electronically as well, those who are standing up, and, quite honestly, spreading the lies about the Palestinians in Hamas. And saying, no. They're not.

They're good. They're great. There's not a problem there. As much as it kills me to say it, I stand with them on freedom of speech only.

The people who voted for this bill, I'm sure it was well-intended. But they're misguided by human nature itself.

Governments cannot fix human hearts. They are also -- they should all be sent back to some remedial class on the principles of the Constitution of America.

The importance of freedom of speech. The importance of not rushing in to do something, because it's scary right now.

No!

No. Why is it, this Congress can only pass the things, that seemingly only hurt the strength of America. And on me cut across the Constitution.

You just took away our Fourth Amendment right for warrants.

You just took that away, you're now -- you're now just passed another bill, that is bringing people -- who have escaped Gaza. And are Palestinians. Remember, 97 percent of them, in the latest poll, hate America.

About 70 percent of them, were all for Hamas. In the 80 percentile range of supporting October 7th.

Congress, you just passed a bill, that are bringing those people in. To America!

And settling them here in America. What the hell is wrong with you?

You live in the upside down world, I don't.

I still live in the world where the -- where America is all about protected rights. It's a dark day, when only 20 -- only 20 people in Congress that are Republican will stand up against this bill. It is a dark, dark day!