RADIOMay 04, 2022

SCOTUS leak is already UNMASKING the dangerous far-left

A draft decision from the U.S. Supreme Court was leaked late Monday, showing a majority of the nine justices may be ready to overturn Roe V Wade. The source of the SCOTUS leak remains unknown, but the fact it happened at all is demonstrable of ANARCHY, Glenn explains. And now, how the far-left already is choosing to move forward from it — like Bernie Sanders calling to pack the court — could UNMASK their dangerous beliefs. Could the far-left use THIS to further burn our cities to the ground?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Wow. Holy cow. Holy cow.

Last night, something happened that I thought would not happen in my lifetime. Something that I think actually -- it's going to be -- it's going to be rough getting through all of this. But I think that this is something that may have given us more time.

Or at least some blessings. We effectively stopped abortion last night, at least in some states.

Any state that decides, that they're not going to provide abortion, or they're going to make it illegal. That's fine.

You're going to see California and New York, I think after birth abortions are going to be in -- in the legislative body very, very soon.

Now, this was leaked, and that's another story. A big story. There's only about four people. That could have leaked this.

I talked to some people, that know people on the Supreme Court, and very close last night. And they were livid. Livid.

They said, this is -- this has not happened. Now, this has happened with the first Roe vs. Wade decision. But that happened like an hour before. And it didn't release the whole decision.

This is clearly, clearly to ignite our streets on fire.

And it was clearly done, by a -- well, I shouldn't say this. It is most likely done, by a left-leaning court clerk.

That person should lose their law license. They should never be able to practice again.

They should not be held up as a hero. And they will be, by the left. If Roberts does not do an investigation, and does not out this person, fire this person, and make sure that they lose their law license, then the Supreme Court is not safe. In anything that they do.

Now, we don't know for sure, that this is going to last. And that is the reason for the release. This is the opinion. It is very well thought out. I read all 90. Or 95 pages this morning. It's very, very well thought out.

It has -- there's just no way around it. It is very, very bulletproof, because it uses even Ginsburg's words about Roe vs. Wade.

And -- but it does not ban abortion. It gives it back to the people, where it says, it belongs.

STU: So just to set the foundations to this. You believe -- and I think we seem to know that it is, a legitimate document.

GLENN: It is a legitimate document.

STU: It did -- it was written by Samuel Alito.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: We know that it looks like five justices are voting for it. So we're siding with --

GLENN: Right before.

STU: Yeah. The three liberals were against it.

Then John Roberts was --

GLENN: Undecided.

But 5-4.

STU: It's 5-3. And him on the side. One of the reasons, of course, the speculation is if Roberts is trying to crack a third way. That will maybe uphold the Mississippi law. But maybe not completely uphold Roe vs. Wade.

This document clearly states, over and over again.

It is not. I think it actually throws Obamacare, into question. Although, it does say at the end of the document, this is not -- this -- this ruling, should not be interpreted to affect any other ruling.

But the way it's -- the way it's laid out, it -- it clearly should affect Obamacare.

We are not a legislature. We are not a political arm.

Our job is to interpret the law. And to see, based on the Constitution, if there is this right. And it takes apart, the right to privacy. All of this stuff. And says, that that is -- this was a dubious, at best, back in 1972.

STU: Egregiously wrong from the start, I believe was the quote. Which was very powerful. And it's been used multiple times, in abortion rulings in the past.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: The difference, of course, between Obamacare and Roe vs. Wade. Is Obamacare is at least the law that was passed.

GLENN: Yes, correct. Correct.

STU: In a somewhat legitimate fashion. Roe vs. Wade is made up.

GLENN: Correct. And purely from the Supreme Court.

STU: Right. They're saying here, states can come back and pass laws.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: That's how this should happen. So this is not going to eliminate abortion.

The far left, Bernie Sanders, for example, is arguing hard today. To -- to act that this is the justification to overturn the filibuster. And then you would be able to put a national law in.

GLENN: And you would also pack the court.

STU: You would also pack the court. And do all sorts of things. Where, this is it, for them. The left really wants children not to be born. So they'll do whatever they can on that.

GLENN: Well, Planned Parenthood said, abortion is sacred. Just so you know, when there are things that are sacred, you're into religious territory.

This, they believe, is sacred. So abortion is up on the altar. I think that's -- I think you're going to see the left completely unmasked now.

If they pack the court, that is the -- that is the last thing.

No government has ever recovered from the courts being packed. Check out Venezuela. What do they have? Like 47 judges?

Something like that. Yeah. They just started packing the court. And it's crazy. No government has ever survived that.

That is the road to totalitarianism.

STU: Thirty-two.

GLENN: Thirty-two. Yeah.

STU: Yes. And --

GLENN: And what did they start with?

STU: I don't have the whole list. But that's where they're at now.

GLENN: So the left is being unmasked. They want an end to the filibuster. Which means, they just want straight up, you know, 50 -- 51, 50. They don't want anybody to be able to slow things down. That's what our Constitution is all about.

Slowing things down.

When people complain, Congress isn't doing anything. That's what the Founders wanted. They didn't want your federal government, doing things.

What they wanted was your state government to do things. That's why this particular ruling, on Roe vs. Wade is so good. It passes it back to the states.

It says, this will never be settled. This has always been controversial.

And no one can force the people into an acceptable position.

STU: It goes on to say, in -- in the ruling -- the draft ruling. Again, we don't -- this is not passed or anything. Or, not put into effect.

But it goes on to say, before Roe vs. Wade, 30 states had decided upon a complete ban.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: And there had been some states, moving in the opposite direction. And this just upended that entire process. You know, there's another world where Roe vs. Wade doesn't exist. And legislatures just passed abortion rights in most of the states. I don't like that world. But that could have happened.

And probably would have happened in a bunch of states over the years. Instead, they tried to upend the process, and say, you're not allowed to have these restrictions on abortion.

And that is, what has made this issue so divisive. When it's life or death, it should be divisive. I have no problem fighting for this one. But there's an argument, where this could have gone a different direction. That's really a good chunk of focus of Alito in the ruling.

He says, look, I --

GLENN: We have no credibility, if we legislate from the bench.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Especially on things that are this divisive.

STU: It basically -- he criticizes the previous court and says, hey. Basically what they did was, hey, you know, this is -- this is a thing that's tucked aside. So we'll just settle this one now. And we just stick with what we say here. But that's just not how it works. That's not how our system of government works.

GLENN: Right. So there are a lot of things in this. We'll give it to you. But Mississippi one.

STU: Not, yeah. I am not of the opinion, that you can count these chickens. And I know when you're talking about abortion, chickens.

Hatching is a big thing.

STU: I want this thing to hatch. The reason this was released, is to put enormous, impossible pressure on these justices.

GLENN: This is anarchy.

STU: It's potentially to encourage George Floyd riots around the country, to change someone's mind. God only knows. I mean, if we have anyone that is a high-level security person, that is not guarding a Supreme Court justice today. They need to be reassigned to that job. Because what the left would do, to have this right, to end so many lives. You can't overstate. You can't overstate, what end they would go to, to try to stop this.

And now they think it's a done deal, but something could be country to prevent it. I fear for all these people.

GLENN: I do too. I do too.

STU: Remembering people, on the left, are insane.

They will do anything to fight for the right, to make sure these children don't live for some freaking bizarre reason, I'll never understand.

GLENN: Can I imagine, had they gone the other way? If it were leaked. I mean, I can't imagine that there was anybody that would do that.

STU: Yeah. Because there's some speculation that somebody on the right did it.

GLENN: Really? Politico.

STU: Yes. And that the argument is, one, that Alito has lost somebody. He might be losing somebody's wavering at the five. And he wants to put pressure on them, to know that they were on the end Roe vs. Wade side.

And let's say Kavanaugh. And Kavanaugh is wavering, and he wants to put pressure on him to say, hey, no. You stick with this. Everyone is going to know, you changed your mind. That's one idea.

GLENN: Right. And, you know what, investigation. FBI. Do you trust the FBI?

An investigation needs to be done. John Roberts needs to call for it. And we need to know who did it. Whoever did it. Whatever side. They're wrong.

That's not the way we deal with things here. If it was someone on the right, you were wrong. You were wrong to do it.

That's not how we do business here. You do not influence the Supreme Court, or threaten the Supreme Court.

You don't do it. Period.

STU: And the idea that the right would do this. The other theory being floated out there, is that conservatives wanted people to kind of be ready for this happening. So it's a sort of -- like they're putting it out there early, so it doesn't affect the elections. There's no way that someone in the Supreme Court would risk this blowing up by leaking it on the right, I don't think. If they thought that they had lost someone. Which is not the news. In the political reporting, they say, this standard of five justices, to overturn Roe vs. Wade, is at least in effect, until last week.

So this was written back in September. It was circulated in February. But as of last week, this was still holding.

So we don't know if something has changed. And that's why it got leaked. I don't believe it. I think it's somebody on the left, to try to get people to change their mind.

GLENN: It was so interesting, how fast, that giant crowd, cut around that Supreme Court, isn't it?

STU: That was really quick, yeah.

GLENN: Really fast. Interesting.

STU: A lot of people live right around there. They had signs.

GLENN: Walking their dogs.

STU: And they brought their signs on the walk.

GLENN: What's weird. They all brought their dogs apparently, which we couldn't see. And their signs for that casual walk. And they were all chanting, pack the court.

Just again, you are going to see the left, fully unmasked. They are not interested in a republic. They are not interested in the rule of law.

They were screening and shouting and chanting, pack the court. This may be -- this may be the place where we separate. And I'll go into that, coming up in just a second.

I think this is where -- I think this is where we might come to blows. And I don't mean that, you know, we're going to have violence on both sides on the street. I think the left is going to use this. This is their catalyst, to do I think what they did before. They just burn our cities to the ground.

And this is on something that I'm willing to die on my sword for. I don't know about you. But I think this is -- this is the most righteous cause, to stand up for.

You know, protecting our children, from all of these lies in our school. Righteous.

Standing up for the right, for babies to be born. And to stop killing. Righteous.

To stand up, against court packing, righteous.

We can talk about tax rates, all we want. And they're important. But there's nothing like this. I think we can morally justify doing every show, every day about this. Until it stops.

Worldwide we're talking about something like a million people were aborted.

GLENN: I want you to know, the only reason why Stu and I were talking about this, because as men, we know now that we can have a baby. We do have an undeniable voice at the table.

STU: That will have died out real fast last night. I was listening to CNN as they were breaking this story, because I torture myself.

And they immediately -- the first act -- what this shows, is that men and women are not equal in this country. Now, I don't know, it may show a lot of things. I don't know how it shows that men and women aren't equal. Men also wouldn't have the right to have an abortion. So I don't know what you're talking about.

GLENN: Men can have a baby now.

STU: And then immediately, it was, you know what, it was these men. They don't understand. Because they can't have children. It's like, wait a minute. What happened to your programming from last week?

Remember of all those lessons you were telling us about how men can have children. Remember how everybody had to put their pronouns on everything, because we didn't even know what genders were.

Now, all of a sudden again, it's the most important thing. Now women are once again, we can tell who they are.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: We're now, again, able to identify women this week. And this week, because it's convenient to their outcomes, once again, women are vitally important. And their special needs are very important. And men can't understand them. Because they don't have -- they can't have babies. They don't have reproductive organs this week.

It's so transparent and pathetic.

GLENN: All right. Back with more. Coming up in just a second. Words from Alan Dershowitz.

And five observations and outlooks from the Supreme Court's likely reversal of Roe and Casey, Daniel Horowitz coming up.

Chip Roy RIPS Biden official's THREAT to send U.S. troops to WAR with Russia

Tucker Carlson went viral for claiming that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin threatened Congress by saying if they don't approve another $60 billion for Ukraine, "we'll send your uncles, cousins, and sons to fight Russia.” But did he actually threaten to send U.S. troops to Ukraine? Glenn speaks with Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who was there, to get the truth. And he didn't hold back: "The Secretary alluded to saying, 'if you guys don't do this, effectively we're going to be committing U.S. troops to war." Rep. Roy explains why he believes it's not a lack of Ukraine funding, but the Biden administration's terrible policies that are "empowering our enemies." He also explains his effort to defund the United Nations and the controversy surrounding Rep. Tommy Tuberville's holdup of Senate confirmations of hundreds of military nominations.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have Chip Roy coming up in a couple of minutes. Chip is the representative from the great state of Texas.

He and Mike Lee and, who was the third one from -- from I think it was Alabama, wasn't it? Pat.

PAT: Tommy Tuberville, it wasn't him?

GLENN: No. No. No. Tuberville, I tell you, I think that guy is a hero for what he has done.

I think all of the stuff that he has, you know, done to stop abortion and everything else.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's just been raked over the coals by the wonderful G.O.P. Makes me sick.

Makes me really sick.

So they -- they came out yesterday, and they want to put an end and defund the United Nations, and all of its subsidiaries.

So the WHO. And everything else, would be a thing of the past.

PAT: And Mike Lee is a part of that. Did you already mention?

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: So good.

GLENN: And it would be really good.

Don't know how they're going to make this case.

And win. But I'm glad somebody is at least making this case. There's so much going on here, right before the end of the year.

We have Chip Roy on with us now. Hi, Chip. How you are?

CHIP: Hey, Glenn, how you are?

GLENN: I have a lot of stuff to ask you about. First of all, let's start with the UN. What prompted this with you guys?

And what is the plan?

CHIP: Well, first of all, it's not a new concept. Obviously, for those of us who hate the United Nations for a long time. I believe it's a colossal waste of money. Twelve and a half billion dollars of American tax dollars and borrowed money, that's gone to the UN. And that's in 2021. Okay. One year.

Mike Lee and I were talking about this. So disgusted about what we've seen in the United Nations.

There were in terms of how they treated Israel, voting not to condemn Hamas. There were funding Hamas, through UNRRA, which is done in the name of refugees, but ends up funding Hamas.

You know, their human rights council, which is a complete sham, they put all the worst human rights violators on it. Funding, you know, the China one child policy.

I mean, you can't even begin to do it. Then you saw the article yesterday, that Mike Lee tweeted out. Mike and I, you know, he introduced the Senate version. I introduced the House version.

To totally just defund the United Nations, just get out. And Mike tweeted out a picture of an article about how all of these UN workers have been raping children in Africa and other places around the world. And look, it's just an organization devoid of soul. They don't believe in western civilization. They are not our friend. Why do we fund it? It's just a joke, and we shouldn't.

GLENN: Is this something that you think could gain traction and win?

CHIP: I mean, not in the instant. I think we need to get very serious about it. I will say, to the credit of the house, I'm pretty vicious in my condemnation of the failures of House Republicans.

But in fairness, right?

We're dealing with a recalcitrant Senate, that doesn't want to do anything. A White House, that is not just incompetent, but evil.

We passed appropriations bills, in our sting board operations, that would have defunded a lot.

Not all of it. It wasn't perfect, but it defunded a lot of these terrible things. Like UNRRA. Like the Chinese policy.

Mario Díaz-Balart, in Florida. He worked with us on that. But then just sitting in the Senate, right? The senate won't do anything with it.

So we've introduced this bill as a standalone, basically kind of one up on all this. And send a message that you have serious members of the Senate and the House saying, wait a minute, we should not be sending 12 and a half billion dollars to the United Nations. So, you know, we'll have to keep working the issue. But I know you agree and I know your listeners agree.

GLENN: So the next thing is the spending bills. And the fact that this defense bill, first of all, if I'm not mistaken, it was yesterday that Lloyd Austin said, if you fail to pass this Ukraine aid bill, US troops on the ground in Ukraine are likely.

What kind of threat is that?

CHIP: Yeah. And so let's take them in order, right? You're talking about the supplemental spending bill at the moment. That includes on the Democrat's side, right?

Because the president put it forward. It has a massive amount of spending. Over $100 billion. $60 billion additional funding for Ukraine.

I think it's ten or $15 billion of additional spending at the border, which would just be used to process more people. Not change the policies.

More spending for Taiwan. More spending, generally. And so we would oppose that. And, yes, in a briefing, the other day, the secretary alluded to, you know, saying -- you know, you guys don't do this.

You know, effectively we will be committing American troops to war. Now, if you're being less cynical.

You would say his position is, that if we don't push back on Putin now, we will get drawn into a war that involves our men and women in uniform. To which my response is, no, if you keep carrying out your incompetent policies, where you were abused to promote American energy, or you were abused to actually sanction, for example, Iran. You allow Iran to provide oil to China. You take all the positions that are empowering our enemies. Then you say, we need to fund a proxy war. To stop our enemies. Or you will send our men and women to war. Oh, and, by the way, they wanted to draft your daughters. Which I proudly stood up and stopped. That's the truth of this administration.

So we will stand up. And thwart that. At least conservatives are. And I hope that Mike Johnson keeps doing what he's doing. I'm critical when I'm critical. But I'm complimentary when I'm complimentary.

Mike will send a strong message, that we will not even remotely consider Ukraine funding until the border is secure. I hope he sticks to that.

I don't -- you know, I think we need to question Ukraine spending, generally.

But I know for certain, we shouldn't even mention the word, until the border of the United States is secure.

GLENN: I agree.

How is he doing, by the way? So far. Johnson.

CHIP: Mike, as you know, is a very good friend. Is a very good man.

On that point, I think he's done a very good job. On sending over Israel, immediately. First day on the job. And that next week funded with taking money out of the IRS expansion. I think he did a great job.

Look, I think he needs to not give in to the pressures of the swamp.

The swamp makes -- that he work on the addiction of pressure.

Oh, my God. If you don't pass that, by December 31st, the world will end.

Then suddenly, people will end up. We will all die. That's how the swamp works.

He should resist that. This national defense authorization act. Which is a terrible bill.

It's not the House bill, which fixes the abortion -- I'm sorry, the abortion. Tourism. It fixed transgender surgeries. It fixed the DEI and woke stuff. It fixed some of the climate change stuff.

GLENN: That was all thrown out, right?

CHIP: Yeah. Most of that. Like 90 percent of that was thrown out.

So the Defense Bill was bad on its face. Then now they want to add FISA extensions, which, Glenn, for your listeners means using back door foreign intelligence, to go after American citizens.

We want to end that.

We passed a good bill in the judiciary committee to end that.

But unfortunately, Mike has agreed with Senate Democrats to put a, quote, short-term extension of the existing bill which allows the spying, until April, and that would actually last until the spring of '25. We oppose it. All of your listeners who tell every single one of your members of Congress, senators, to oppose the NDA, that has FISA on it. Because if we vote on it next week, we need at least 150 Republicans to stand up and block that bill.

GLENN: Jeez. Do you have 150?

CHIP: Well, we also may get some Democrats. So maybe a little bit fewer. I want as many Republicans as we can get.

And depending on how many Democrats we can get to block it. They will try to pass it on what we call suspension of the rules. Which means I need 200 roughly 90 votes.

So we need 140 or so, of both Republicans and Democrats to kill it.

So we want to get as many Republicans as possible to say, we're not going to jam through a 3,000-page watered down crappy defense authorization, that continues the wokification of the military. Instead of a mission-first military.

You know, it's driving down morale, it's driving down recruiting.

And then, oh, by the way, continue the FISA spying regime, which has been abusing power to spy on Americans. We should stop that.

We have conservatives, that have good bills. We're advancing. We just passed it out of the Judiciary Committee, on a bipartisan basis. That is what we should be advancing over to the Senate.

GLENN: Tell me about Tommy Tuberville. Because I think he's a hero. He stood and stood and stood. And damn near no Republicans stood with him.

And he was -- I mean, he's just been bashed and bashed. And he finally said, okay. Tell me what happened here.

CHIP: Well, Coach Tuberville, Senator Tuberville is a good man. I've gotten to know him well. Funny enough, his legislative director is a very good friend of mine, and my roommate when I'm in DC.

Look, Coach Tuberville is someone who stood up on the side of life, like he said he would do. Unlike a lot of Republicans. That run on being pro-life. And then when the battle faces them, they run away.

Right? The other senator from Alabama, touts herself as being Ms. Pro-life.

But did she go down and support Coach Tuberville? No.

A whole bunch of other senators. I can go through a list. Didn't stand up.

Mike Lee was down there. God bless him.

Roger Marshal went down there.

But not that many, went down and supported Coach Tuberville when he went to the floor to object. And, by the way, Glenn. All he was saying was, we should vote on these confirmations, at the Defense Department.

That's it. That's all he was demanding. And making us do that, because he said, guys, if you're going to continue to advance an unlawful policy to have taxpayers fund abortion, tourism and Department of Defense, I will make you do the work of getting these things done through votes.

I'm sorry, that he backed down last week.

I wish he held firm a little longer.

This is the same issue in the National Defense Authorization Act. We fix it in house. We should force the Senate to address it. But instead, Republicans are about. If we don't stop them, Republicans are going to move a defense bill, that does not address the abortion issue. That does not address transgender surgeries. That does not address climate change, that does not sufficiently address diversity, equity, inclusion garbage. That does not sufficiently restore people that lost their jobs for COVID.

And adds FISA spying extension.

In what world should we do that? Coach Tuberville did a great job. We should finish the job now.

GLENN: I have about 70 seconds here for this answer.

CHIP: Yep.

GLENN: The Hunter Biden indictment, is it going anywhere? Also, the -- the impeachment, is it going anywhere?

CHIP: On Tuesday, in the House Rules Committee, we will be taking up, and I serve on the Rules Committee, an impeachment inquiry vote, which we intend to take to the floor. And I hope and believe will pass on the House floor. We have a couple of members that are a little wishy-washy.

But I hope to get it there.

If we can do that, that's the additional tools that we need, to get more information, and force the Biden administration to stop their obstruction. That's what it is.

Of our seeking the truth of what we all know.

Is that money flowing through Hunter. Was flowing through Hunter to Joe Biden. We believe. We have to get more information.

Certainly, in a conspiracy with Joe Biden, while enriching his son, using foreign actors to do it. To the detriment of our national security and well-being.

And so Hunter, of course, now that you asked about the indictments. The indictments that were brought down yesterday.

They seemed fairly significant.

With respect to the tax laws, that were violated.

He was writing off hookers and sex clubs.

He was writing off any number of things you can do.

And I haven't study the indictments. I have looked at the summaries.

They seem to be significant.

But remember, they walked away. And they led the statute of limitations run on some very, very significant tax violations. From 2014 to '15. When Biden was vice president.

We believe that was intentional. We want to seek the truth on that.

So we will keep running as much as we can with the tools we have.

Jamie comber, Jim Jordan have done a good job. I hope every Republican will support this inquiry that we vote out on Tuesday.

GLENN: I have tell you, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you for the handful of people that are around you. And Mike Lee. And others. That are actually moving the ball. Or trying to.

I appreciate every day you guys are in that cesspool, so we don't have to be. Thank you for everything you do.

CHIP: Well, Glenn. Well, we can't do it without you. Merry Christmas to all your listeners. Maybe I'll talk you to before Christmas. But I won't stop. I barely have a voice right now, but I don't give a damn.

We got to save this country for our kids, Glenn. There's men who sat in the foxholes in Bastion in 1944, freezing to death. So we could live free.

We shouldn't adjourn next week, if we haven't done our dang job. That's our position.

GLENN: You call any time you need anything next week. Any time, you just call in. Thank you so much, Chip. Appreciate it.

The CLEAR WINNER of the 4th Republican debate

The RNC's 4th Republican debate of the 2024 primaries is over and Glenn has a clear winner. But it may not be who you think it is. Glenn and Stu review the debate, which they say was the best one yet thanks to moderator Megyn Kelly. And they also discuss whether former president Donald Trump has sat out the debates long enough. How would he perform against his fellow candidates? And if he does win the nomination, would any of the other candidates make a good vice president?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Great to be here, last night.

I thought it was interesting. I thought it was the best one.

GLENN: Me too. Me too.

I think the real winner last night out of all of it was Megyn Kelly. She was really, really good. She's on a plane today. We're hoping to catch her in between. But she was the winner. This was the best debate.

She held everybody's feet to the fire.

She asked tough questions.

She was fair. She told people, shut up.

Nobody can hear you. They were talking over each other. And it ended it. I mean, I thought she was really, really good.

STU: Yeah. Really, really good.

You know, her questions. And this goes back to her previous debate performances as well.

They're very well laid out.

You may not like the question. And I tink that's kind of the point with her. She's trying to ask a question that will put you in a difficult situation. To see what you can do with it. That's the whole point of these debates.

GLENN: Right.

STU: They weren't unfair.

GLENN: But she wasn't asking them for liberal reasons.

She was framing all of her questions, the way a conservative, would want it framed.

There are certain things that we want answered. That the liberals don't even understand.

STU: Yeah. If you think about how the left handles these debates. They ask the questions that they care about.

Which makes sense. But they ask, hey. What about January 6th? Or whatever.

And instead, you've got questions last night, that were substance related. They were actually issue related. They were policy related.

They were important questions that all the candidates needed to answer.

And I thought she did a great job. The whole debate overall, I thought was really good.

Maybe it's a low hurdle to clear. To say it's the best one of the four.

But I thought, look, if you take it out of the context of the actual election, which is difficult here to do. I understand it. You have a candidate, who is 20 or 30 points ahead, depending on which day you are looking at. And he's not there. So there's a big asterisk to all of this.

GLENN: But, you know what, I wouldn't do it either.

If I were Donald Trump, I was this far ahead. I wouldn't do it either.

STU: I think that's -- strategically, I agree with you.

GLENN: Yes. That's all there is.

When you are trying to win, you -- you used strategy. This is the best strategy. Honestly, if I were Donald Trump.

I would consider running the campaign, that Joe Biden did. With an exception of the one chair, and then a big circle around it.

And then like 12 feet later, another circle with a chair in the middle.

STU: Oh, my gosh, remember that? What a weird time.

GLENN: Yeah. It was horrible. But I would just stay quiet. Because everybody is hanging himself. And Joe Biden's economy. And the way he speaks. And hope he would be shamed in a debate. Because we do need a debate between the two of them.

STU: Do you really think that's an option for Donald Trump? Because I think he's doing that now, at some level with the assistance of the media.

The media seems to not really be focusing on Donald Trump right now, for whatever reason.

You talked about this, I think, a couple weeks ago. A former president of the you United States was testifying on stand, in a trial.

And I -- did we see any coverage of it at all. Other than a quick mention or headline.

Normally, they would be wall-to-wall. Saying how bad this guy is.

Or whatever they want to say.

Right now, it seems like they have made the decision, along with a bunch of Democrats, that the person they want to face. In this election is Donald Trump.

That may very well be a terrible decision for them. As we saw in 2016.

They made the same call. And it didn't work at all. But if they're making that choice, it seems like, once we get past the primary. Donald Trump is locked in as the candidate.

They're no longer going to leave every word he says on the sidelines.

GLENN: Okay. Unless --

STU: Do you believe that?

GLENN: They're dumb enough, and out of touch enough to do that.

STU: That's a prequalifier for sure.

GLENN: Let me give this. Comedian Bill Burr. He came out, launched into a rant. And he said, you F-ing stupid liberals. What are you doing?

You're making Donald Trump a martyr. And he's going to come back and win again.

And I think that's true. Remember, his -- his poll numbers went up when they started putting him up as a martyr and going after him.

And the left just doesn't understand. You know, this is Chris Christie. He got booed. Do we happen to have that clip?

Last thing he said was Donald Trump wasn't going to be -- wasn't going to be voting.

STU: Right. He was part of his final statement there. He was saying, picture yourself going to the polls in November.

One thing you won't be seeing is Donald Trump there. Because he won't be able to vote. Because he'll be a felon by then.

GLENN: And the whole place booed. And it's because -- here's what he's missing.

If -- if Donald Trump were being tried fairly. He was charged fairly.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Then it would be a different story.

But nobody. Most people don't feel that this is anything, but a political trial.

And so they're -- every time you go after him, you make him stronger. Because people are like, this isn't going to stand. This is the problem with this country.

STU: And I think we can all agree, with certainty, that that is the effect on Republican primary voters.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: The question is whether that's the effect on general election voters. That's a much more complicated question.

GLENN: Yes, especially independents.

STU: Right now, Donald Trump's polls look pretty good in the general. They look as good or better than any of the other candidates.

You know, Nikki Haley's polls have also looked pretty strong. But there's even some polls where Trump is ahead of Haley, running in a general election.

The issue, of course, with this, is we also are showing in these polls. Ten and 12 percent for RFK Jr. And you're seeing -- you're seeing Cornell West at 2 percent.

When we get further on in this process, what happens?

If you look at the latest polls on Joe Biden. He's down. These are terrible polls for him.

And typically, I think we would all look at that and celebrate. Right?

People are waking up. This is a good thing. Joe Biden's polls are county down. He's a weaker candidate. That's good.

The problem with that, when you look deeper at those polls.

One of those reasons you're seeing an erosion is because younger voters, that are hard-core Democrats.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Are saying, I don't like the way Joe Biden is so pro-Israel.

Now, number one, it's possible, that's just the reality. And they never want to vote.

They just go somewhere else.

It's possible. When we get, after a couple billion dollars are spent.

And we are now in October of 2024, do you think those younger voters whose complaint about Joe Biden is that he's too pro-Israel right now, are going to come back home?

They might just stay home. That might be the best thing possible. Because they're not going to Donald Trump. He's pro-Israel, clearly.

Much more than Joe Biden.

So that weakness, is -- we don't know how real it is.

We know that Joe Biden is a weak candidate.

But the reason why other candidates on the Republican side are beating Joe Biden handily.

Is largely because of this type of erosion.

Erosion from Democrats. Younger Democrats that are not typical Republican voters.

So if they come home, like they usually do. We know what happens with these Republicans.

Or, these third party candidates.

Gary Johnson was showing up at 10 and 12 percent of the polls. People forget that.

It didn't happen. It never holds.

So if that does happen. And people say, okay. Forget that. I'm going back home. I'm going to Joe Biden.

This election is too close. We know the arguments. If that happens, it will get much more difficult.

GLENN: I believe the only way that happens is if the press brings the -- the -- half the country back to this place that Donald Trump is Hitler.

And I don't know if that works universally anymore.

And here's why: Joe Biden conned a lot of people.

The Democrats conned a lot of people. That he was going to bring back normalcy.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Well, we know this isn't normal. Okay?

The country is hurting. Both Republicans and Democrats, the country is falling apart.

And everybody knows it. So he doesn't have the, well, I'm not going to be him.

Right. But you're you.

STU: Right. That was his strength in 2020.

His strength was to say, I'm not him. And look at me. I'll return you to the normal times. That didn't happen.

GLENN: Right. That didn't happen. So there's a lot of people that will just stay home.

Unfortunately, if Donald Trump is the nominee, there might be a lot of Republicans, that would stay home, as well.

Although, I just don't think that that is as true as everyone wants you to believe.

GLENN: Yeah. I really don't think there's a problem with Donald Trump and Republicans.

GLENN: You have the Liz Cheneys.

STU: Liz Cheneys. Yeah, but that's nobody.

GLENN: I think that may actually hurt Biden.

STU: It could. It could. It really could. And some polls show the RFK thing going both ways. But it seems to be hurting Joe Biden more.

I think if you look at where this might go, over a long period of time, you just have to factor it in. I think you have to price it in, in your head. The media is not going to act like they are now. During the general election.

That might be fine.

Donald Trump has survived that already. He already had a really negative media. And won in 2016.

He's already been able to do it.

So maybe he'll be able to do it again.

But you can't look at the current situation, and think, this is how it will go.

It may very well be also, he goes through these trials. People are so upset about it, that he's being targeted, that they all side with him, and he wins easily.

That's a possibility too.

But the media is going to do everything they can, once he gets this nomination, to take him out. In some level, it's true with these other candidates as well.

With these other candidates, you have the possibility of essentially what the Biden approach was, right?

Look, you guys just lived through four years of Joe Biden.

I won't be him.

It will be difficult for Donald Trump to make that same argument. Because he's got that same type of thing built into him.

Everyone has made up their mind on both of these people.

You know, Haley, DeSantis, have a little more have an opening there.

GLENN: It may come down to the vice president.

Because I think everybody is like, man, if he wins, I don't want Kamala Harris to be the president.

That would be a nightmare.

And so it may come down, to the vice president.

STU: If you were doing a draft of who you thought Donald Trump would pick as his VP, who is your first pick?

GLENN: First pick --

STU: Again, not who you think it should be. But who he will pick.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: This is a tough one.

GLENN: I know.

I go back and forth between Ramaswamy and Nikki.

Nikki would be smart, because she'll pacify the -- the old guard Republican.

And she's a fighter.

But he's not going to like that.

STU: Yeah. I can't -- I mean, he obviously put her in his administration.

Right?

GLENN: I know. There's been a deep falling out since then.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Ramaswamy is still fighting for Donald Trump.

STU: Oh, yeah. There's no -- there's no like between them at all, at this point.

It's interesting. Haley strikes me as a Pence-like pick.

Right? It's a little bit different, obviously.

But it's someone who is I think respectable. Quote, unquote.

Would please a lot of those voters who think Donald Trump is -- is -- you know, his tweets are too bad.

And all that other stuff. And that's what he needed in 2016, honestly.

GLENN: And could take the job.

STU: Does he need that in 2024, though?

GLENN: That can take the job?

STU: He needs someone who can take the job, clearly. That's obviously the number one role.

But with Pence, he picked someone, number one to please evangelicals. Who were very on the fence about Donald Trump, early on.

And, you know, you get somewhat of that, with Nikki Haley.

I think you still get -- I don't think that is what he needs anymore. The evangelicals are through the roof.

But you do get a steady hand feel from Nikki Haley. Ramaswamy, you don't really get that. I like Vivek. But --

GLENN: No.

STU: You get a game changer. And you get a bulldog who will go on television 900 times a day, and just say.

And just argue with passion for every point that Donald Trump makes. I think Donald Trump would like that. He likes those people.

GLENN: I agree.

Except Ramaswamy is a star to some degree.

Now, that has faded. People don't like him as much, which Donald Trump would like. He doesn't want somebody that will compete with him. You know what I mean?

STU: Yeah. I just that's true.

GLENN: He wants someone who is solid for certain reasons. Whatever.

But you work for me.

And Ramaswamy, I think, could do that. And you're right. He's a bulldog.

I would lean towards Ramaswamy as Donald Trump's pick.

I have for a long time. And I thought Donald Trump would pick him.

But I -- I think if Nikki Haley is a strong, you know, number two in the primaries. If she starts to -- to become just a juggernaut, next to him. He would probably be foolish not to take her.

STU: We should also point out, that precisely zero votes have been cast in the primary.

So he has not won the primary yet.

GLENN: That can all change.

STU: You're looking ahead a little bit. I thought it was an interesting night last night.

Megyn Kelly's biggest WINNER and LOSER of the 4th Republican Debate

Glenn believes there was a clear winner at the 4th 2024 Republican presidential debate: moderator Megyn Kelly. So, he invited her on to reveal her biggest winner and loser. Kelly breaks down the performances of each candidate — Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Chris Christie — and her biggest issue with the previous debates: "They didn't let the candidates debate each other." She also describes why she "prayed to God" that Chris Christie would be on the debate stage and explains whether she believes former president Donald Trump (who will be 78 if he wins the presidency) is fit for office.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We go to Megyn Kelly who is calling us, I think probably from the airport. Hi, Megyn.

MEGYN: Hi, Glenn.

GLENN: How are you?

MEGYN: I'm great. A little tired you, but good.

GLENN: I'll bet you are.

Last night, I said when I first got on today, that the big winner, I thought last night was you.

MEGYN: Oh.

GLENN: You were spot-on. You asked really tough questions. But you phrased them in a way that conservatives want to ask them.

I thought you were fair, tough, and when you said, nobody can hear any of you, everybody shut up. You ran a tight ship. You did a fantastic job, last night.

MEGYN: Thank you so much, Glenn. You know, for me, watching some of the earlier debates, it's very frustrating. Because I knew that there was a way of controlling them.

You know, it was clear to me. There was a way of controlling them.

And I have a repour with all of these guys, same as you do. They know you. If you were out there, they would respect you. They know you don't hate them. You're not trying to hurt them.

You're trying to foster a great debate, good TV. And so when we had that opening exchange, for me it was fun. Because it was kind of like what I imagined, it's like to be in the NBA. Where you're kind of passing the ball behind your back, and somebody catches it with ease. And they go. Like, we kind of got into a rhythm. Where, I go, you go. We make eye contact. I'm coming for you.

That's what I hated about the NBC debate, is they just -- he didn't let the candidates debate -- I don't want to hear a Kristen Welker interview of Nikki Haley. I want the other candidates to talk to Nikki Haley. So, anyway, thank you for saying that, it was a relief for me to get out there, and let them let it rip.

GLENN: So who did you think was the big winner and the big loser?

MEGYN: Well, with all respect to her, I thought Nikki Haley lost last night. Because she shrunk away. She's not really a presence. And she's been increasing her poll numbers by getting out there and being futuristic. And that version of her, did not appear on stage last night. I thought Ramaswamy, if you didn't like him, he became even more unlikable to you. If you love him, he became even more lovable to you.

I thought Ron DeSantis had his best debate yet.

And so I think you could probably say he's the winner, because he's in the best poll position of the four.

And he not only didn't hurt himself, although there was one bad exchange. He didn't hurt himself, he actually did help himself. He was tougher than we've seen. And I think that was the DeSantis we fell in love with, back when he was battling nasty voters during COVID.

Chris Christie, look, the same rule for him as Vivek. If you're one of the 25 percent of Republicans who likes Chris Christie, you probably said, yeah, good.

Now, screw Trump. He did the same thing.

And if you were one of the 75 percent that doesn't like him, you probably enjoyed watching some of the other candidates get into it with him, and some of the questions that the moderators had.

GLENN: I have to tell you, we were watching it, as a team last night. And we all cheered when you went to Chris Christie on transgenderism.

We were like, oh, this is going to be good. This is going to be good.

MEGYN: You know, can I tell you? And he tried to tell me, that I didn't have my facts on my second question. And, of course, I did, and he was misleading.

But those are the two questions I showed up to ask, Glenn. I'm like, you know how much work goes into these things. Right?

Every single question we ask, takes hours and in some cases, days. You know, you have to research so much. And you craft it, you recraft it. So on. And you know, this is an issue, near and dear to not only my heart, but to most conservative's hearts. And he's been so weak on it.

He is too radical on this issue, to be the Republican nominee in my view.

This is way out of step with where the Republican Party is.

And it's -- it's -- it was the one reason why I wanted him to make the debate.

I prayed to the -- all the angels above.

Please, please, let him make --

GLENN: Last night, I thought there was one weird moment with Chris Christie.

And I think it really did not look good, for -- for Nikki Haley. When Chris Christie came out, and tried to defend her.

I -- I -- that was nice and everything.

But I think she should have turned and said, I don't need a man's help here. I'm fine. I don't need anybody's help. I can defend myself.

The way she kind of looked down as he was saying that, I thought it made her look weak. And she's not a weak woman.

MEGYN: It was her lowest moment. And I have to give credit to Chris Steyer Walt. Because he had said to me, here's my prediction, Chris Christie is going to try to white knight Nikki Haley. And, man, he was right. She did look weak.

I thought, man, she's been so strong in these debates in terms of defending herself and attacking others.

And of all moments, she should have put her hand out and she should have said, Chris, I appreciate the help, but I got this.

And then defended herself. And I could only conclude, was it because she was shaky on the Ukraine, you know, counties? Like the provinces? She did eventually come up with a few.

I couldn't read it. Maybe she didn't know the answer, and she was stalling. Or she wants this pass, because it was a bad moment for her.

GLENN: I read that moment with the free provinces as, wait a minute, I know them. But are they provinces or regions? You know, just that -- that moment of hesitation, where you don't want to get it wrong.

And then that moment just passed her.

MEGYN: Yeah.

GLENN: And then she came in. Unfortunately for her, when everyone was talking. And nobody really heard her, give the answer. And I still know. Because I didn't hear all of them. I don't know if she was right or wrong.

MEGYN: I know. The only other one I heard was Crimea. We all know that one.

GLENN: Right. Right.

MEGYN: So it is awkward. It could be -- it's -- if the body language were different.

It could be the power move to not take your opponent's little test. You know.

I could see that, being screw you. I don't take your little exams, Vivek. You're not at Harvard anymore. But her body language was not projecting, I am confident, and I'm dismissing this twerp. It projected, I have no idea! Help me!

So that was not her finest moment. I do think -- I bet you, there will be a little movement in the polls after this.

Because DeSantis, it was the guy we kind of thought he could be.

And it wasn't in any way, set up like in me

But DeSantis had issues, that were important to him, brought up last night.

It's not like we said, oh, let's bring these up for Ron DeSantis. We brought these issues, because conservatives care about these issues.

Trans. The vaccine issue. COVID.

And he was very strong on this.

He hasn't really had a chance to speak on a lot of these issues in the debates.

You have the Univision anchor out there, talking about the dreamers.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: I agree. I thought DeSantis was really good last night.

What did you make of the one exchange, where he wouldn't say, he thought Trump was fit to be president or not.

That was the one moment. It was very strange to me. Did you think he wanted to say no?

He's not fit. Did you think he was trying to say yes. He was trying to walk the line. What was he doing there?

MEGYN: That's when I said, he did great except for one moment. That was the moment. He did not handle that well.

And I got to give credit where it's due. Chris Christie is great at that kind of thing. He didn't answer it. Like forensically diagnosing somebody that answer, there's no one better than Chris Christie at it.

And he honed in on him, and it was uncomfortable. DeSantis doesn't want to make news.
He doesn't want to alienate the Trump base, with a big headline from him, saying Trump was unfit. So he was, you know --

GLENN: But why not say, right now, he's fit?

MEGYN: Hmm. He doesn't want to say that either. He doesn't believe it.

And I think he understands that there's a certain psychology, within the Republican Party, that is recognizing the two people that are likely to be the nominees are too old. They are really not as fit as we would like them to be.

Either one of them, let's face it.

GLENN: Hang just a second.

Because I think, I would love for the Nancy Pelosi generation, to sit down, and retire.

Okay?

Let the younger generation now take this.

However, do you think that Donald Trump has faded from where he was in 2020?

MEGYN: Yeah. I do.

I mean, I would take him over Joe Biden any day of the week.

I don't think he will fill out this term, never mind the second.

But there's no question that Trump has lost awe step. Or multiple steps. He is confusion Joe Biden from Obama.

I know he's saying, he intentionally did that. Go back and look at the clips. It wasn't intentional. Anyone could have a slip of the tongue. It's happened to him repeatedly.

The reference about how someone will get us into World War II.

Confusing countries. Confusing cities where -- it's happening more and more. With all due respect to Trump. This is what happens when you're 77 years old. Trump seems inhuman, but he's not inhuman. He's a human. He's a man. DeSantis didn't lie, Father Time spares no one. Was a good one.

So, look, if it's between Trump and Biden, I don't think there's any question who is more fit, more capable.

But are we really going to pretend that Donald Trump is just as vibrant and mentally sharp as he was at 16? Well, okay.

GLENN: I only have about 70 or 80 seconds here for this. But do you think Trump is going to jail?

MEGYN: I'm starting to worry. I didn't -- he definitely will get convicted, in multiple jurisdictions. But Andy McCarthy, who is very smart on these things, was pointing out that Judge Chutkan in DC, in the federal case, on J6, you know she hates him. In DC, the jury is going to hate them.

That he thinks there's a -- there's some pretty good odds, she will not release him from jail, pending appeal after his lengthy conviction.

GLENN: So what does that do, to the system?

MEGYN: Glenn, that's why we have to have an undercard.

GLENN: Yeah. No. I agree with that.

I agree with that.

They have to run all the way to the end.

Somebody has to run all the way to the end.

We have to have an undercard. That is going to -- is that just chaos in the streets.

MEGYN: There will -- America will burn if they put Trump in jail before this election. It will burn. I don't want it.

GLENN: God help us.

MEGYN: I just see the reality, the same as you do. And we will need the National Guard city to city. You know, MAGA is going to rise up. And there will be a lot of sympathizers who understand it, and won't try to stop it.

They cannot be allowed to do that.

GLENN: All right. Thank you very much, Megyn. Best of luck to you today. And, again, great job last night.

Thank you for bringing a reasonable debate to America.

MEGYN: Thank you.

GLENN: Appreciate it.

MEGYN: Aw. Thank you so much, Glenn. Good to see you, Stu, all the best.

GLENN: Don't give him any love.

MEGYN: I love Stu.

STU: Yes!
(laughter)

STU: Thanks, Megyn.

GLENN: Get off my phone, Megyn. All right. Megyn Kelly.

Biden's new fentanyl 'Strike Force' is a TRAP

The Treasury Department has launched a new "Strike Force" to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking. But that's not all that's going on. Glenn and Stu discuss the bigger story: According to reporting from Blaze News, the strike force will be led by the Treasury Department as a means to crack down on money laundering networks, particularly those utilizing cryptocurrency. Instead of closing down the border, the government is once again taking aim at Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. But Glenn isn't letting this story slide under the radar ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the Treasury Department launches a new strike force, to crack down on elicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

Stu, this is a story in Blaze media today.

Just tell me just from the headline, what you think this story is really all about.

STU: Give me the headline one more time.

GLENN: Okay. Treasury Department launches new strike force to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

STU: Okay. Well, it seems like, you know, you have the stuff coming over the border. Maybe in from China.

They have a crack team, making sure that they can stop this.

GLENN: You really think that's what that's about?

STU: Look, now it's probably something terrible.

But from the headline, it would say, okay.

GLENN: Okay. I'm going to read it.

Stop when you realize what this really is.

Okay.

Biden administration Treasury Department announced Monday, the launch of a new strike force, dedicated to cracking down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking.

Agency recently formed the counter fentanyl strike force to marshal the Treasury's resources and expertise in a coordinated and streamlined operation to combat the trafficking of elicit fentanyl. Any idea yet?

You will. It noted that the strike force will be led by the office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence and IRS criminal investigations. Okay? You're starting to get it. Right? Okay.

In Monday's statement, Secretary of the Treasury, Janet Yellen, reaffirmed the Biden administration's commitment to stemming the flow of deadly fentanyl into communities across the United States.

She noted the new strike force will allow us to bring the department's unrivaled expertise in fighting financial crime.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Treasury will use every bit of every tool, at its disposal to disrupt the ability of drug traffickers to peddle this poison in our country.

The strike force aims to crack down on money laundering networks.

Do you know what this is about yet?

STU: I mean, it seems like a money grab by the federal government.

Financial -- sorry. Financial monitoring of every citizen.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. Financial strike force aims to crack down on money laundering networks. Particularly those using --

STU: Bitcoin.

GLENN: Yes! Yes.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: You want to stop fentanyl, you close down the border.

STU: You know what it would really help, Glenn.

Because obviously, the way to stop fentanyl. Is to stop Bitcoin.

GLENN: Yes, it is. Isn't it?

STU: It's not just stopping Bitcoin. You need a central bank digital currency. That you can turn off for purchases of this bad things.

That you can stop people from doing all these naughty things.

GLENN: Exactly right.

Everything would go through the financial crimes division of the IRS and the Treasury.

STU: That's perfect.

It's like a department of pre-crime.

GLENN: Something like that. Something like that. We would have to come up with newspeak, to be able to come up with the right terms.

STU: That will solve all our problems. Stop the problems before they start.

GLENN: Yes. I like that. I like that.

STU: Did you see this story from Los Angeles?

Where they had this potential serial killer, and how they caught him.

GLENN: No. I hate these stories. Because I'm always like, good, serial killer caught. The way they did it, really bad.

STU: Oh, yeah. This is all over the country. Basically, this guy had a car. He went in. They found -- they saw him around one of these neighborhoods. He went in and killed someone. Some poor dad in his garage. In his home to kill these kids.

Along with a bunch of homeless people. Anyway, they got his license plate. And every time anyone pulls into Beverly Hills, they scan every single license plate.

So they -- he just drove through Beverly Hills, and they're like, oh, there he is. And just went and got him.

That's -- because every single person who enters the city, has their license plate scanned to see if they're any problem at all.

And the people of Beverly Hills are like, we're really rich, and we don't want people here that we don't like. So we love this idea.

GLENN: Wow. Sometimes just because they're driving a Prius, we say, get out.

STU: Yeah, four cylinders. Get out of town.