The BIGGEST takeaway from Argentina's 'SHOCKING' presidential election
RADIO

The BIGGEST takeaway from Argentina's 'SHOCKING' presidential election

In a runoff presidential election, Argentina has ditched socialism for anarcho-capitalist libertarian Javier Milei — and Glenn is shocked. While the media has done everything it can to negatively tie Milei to Donald Trump, Glenn explains why he doesn't believe they're that comparable. Glenn breaks down what Milei has promised to do, how big of a change that would be for Argentina and the world, and whether he can even get it done. Plus, Glenn explains the biggest takeaway from this election: "[Voters are] moving away — HARD — from the Left."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So Argentina had their runoff election. And the news is stunning. Javier Milei, is that how you say his name? He was elected as Argentina's next president. He is a Libertarian. He is -- the exact opposite of really anything. Any kind of politician, that we have seen here, that is even close, to being president of the United States.

Even Donald Trump. Donald Trump still plays within, hmm. Some of the norms.

He is often compared. This guy, in Argentina, is often compared to Donald Trump.

But I don't think they're comparable.

STU: I think just because he's outspoken. That seems to be the largest similarity there.

Right? He's super outspoken.

But he described himself as an anarchocapitalist, which is not how Donald Trump would describe himself at all.

GLENN: No. Not at all.

He is going to get rid of -- this is what he says he is going to do.

Get rid of the peso. Because it's falling.

And he will put the dollar -- good luck with that one.

He's also getting rid of their Federal Reserve Bank.

He's getting rid of hundreds of programs. He is just going to cut this government to the bone.

STU: You have seen the video of him, walking in front of the white board?

He's just pulling off the stickers of all the agencies.

The Department of Families. And Health, gone!

Like every single one. He's pulling off, and throwing it away. Now, look, is he going to do those things?

I hope so. Probably a lot of those agencies are incredibly pointless. Just like they are here.

Now, not knowing the full story of the structure of the Argentinian government.

I'm going a little bit on -- I'm -- guesswork there.

GLENN: I will --

STU: Every government is like that. Especially in South America.

GLENN: I will bet you, that Art Laffer would like this guy. We should call Art Laffer. Because he knows Argentina really well. He did this back in the '80s. Argentina always, you know, succeeds, becomes wealthy, and then goes to socialism, and destroys itself.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And then goes back to its roots. And then it destroys itself.

So he did that in the '80s. He restored it in the 1980s. They're back.

STU: Look, the promise is high here. I just -- I do hesitate. There's a lot of ifs that could happen here. Right? I don't know everything about this guy.

Who knows what policy he actually implements, when he's in office? What crazy thing we don't know about him.

Who knows?

At some level, he's still a South American politician.

I will hold out hope. The things he said are really good, really positive.

If he actually does them. If they work, it could be an incredible thing.

You know, it might inspire countries all in the region. And all over the world, to replicate that process. So there's really high hopes for someone who will come out and do this stuff.

GLENN: You know what is interesting.

How cautious people are, on saying, I like this guy.

I don't know. I don't know enough about him. I like what he says so far about of what I've heard.

STU: What I've heard is --

GLENN: But I don't know. Same thing with Geert Wilders. Geert Wilders could become the next Prime Minister, the next Dutch Prime Minister.

Now, he just won a massive election. He didn't win enough seats to become Prime Minister. But if he cobbles together a few more seats, he may become prime minister. This is a guy who has been on this show. And we were told by everybody, don't have him.

STU: He's too bad. He's dangerous. He's said bad things.

GLENN: We thought he was delightful, at least in the interview. He was wonderful.

STU: Seemed fine in the interview.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

So -- but we always have to say, well, but I'm not sure.

But do you ever hear anybody backpedaling on Justin Trudeau?

STU: No. No. They never do.

GLENN: I mean, the things that that guy has done.

And nobody ever says, well, I don't agree with everything.

STU: Right.

GLENN: He's not a bad. It's not a bad thing.

STU: I don't know. I hold myself to a higher standard, than the left holds themselves.

GLENN: Yes, so do I.

STU: So I hope we would have higher standards than them.

GLENN: Yeah, I don't have a problem with it.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I just -- I do have a problem with, it doesn't matter what you do.

STU: No.

GLENN: On the left.

STU: No. It doesn't matter.

GLENN: You turn into a Castro or a Stalin. It doesn't matter.

STU: Apparently, you can kidnap and murder thousands of people. And you will still get cheered on by these people on the left.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And, you know, the situation is, you know, with -- I don't know.

As a conservative, like, we talk about principle a lot.

I do think it's important. And I much -- I'm happy to criticize someone who supposedly is on the right, if they're wrong.

GLENN: Right.

STU: I just don't want to stand by them, just because they -- they align themselves with my general political outlook. But is that not how the left operates. And, you know, you could make the argument, that politically, in a pragmatic, political sense, where the ends justify the means, that's the right approach.

I just -- that's not how I look at the world.

I don't think that's how you look at the world. And I don't think that's how most conservatives look at the world. Maybe to our detriment, when it comes to winning or losing sometimes.

But that's okay.

GLENN: So there's two people now, that the press says, out of control. These guys are worse than Hitler.

Okay?

Guy in Argentina and Geert Wilders, they may end up being that. I don't think so, but they might. I don't know. It's not my country. So I don't follow them as closely. However, I might be for them. I hate to say that. Because I don't know enough about them. But what I see, I like. However, they might go bad.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But here's what you should take away from all of this movement, politically. Because it's happening in Europe, and it's happening in South America. It is moving away, hard from the left.

And going right, in the case of Argentina, small government right.

I mean, very small.

Libertarian right.

And everybody is losing their minds. A Libertarian government is not powerful enough, to make you do anything.

That's the good thing about small government.

It can never really harm you.

It's not spying on you.

Because it's not big enough.

These guys, if they work, this is going to be a huge move, for the world. Back to more freedom.

And common sense.

Geert Wilders is one.

You know, why?

Because of immigration. The Dutch are tired of having people just rape their daughters.
Kill on the street. And no ramification.

No ramification.

You don't have to -- the -- you know, when you go over to Sweden. I go spend any time in the Norwegian countries.

You will see how accepting they are.

How loving they are.

But it is a very, very non-diverse population.

Until recently.

And now, the non-diverse population, coming up from the Middle East, doesn't want to be Swedish.

They don't want to be Dutch. They don't care. They want the free stuff. But they'll have their own no-go zones.

They will have their own communities.

And it's not a part of that culture.

Everybody has turned a blind eye. You're now seeing the immigration be a problem all through Europe. You're going to see it as a problem here in America. Soon. I mean, I can't believe how much has changed in -- on our border.

And relatively nobody is talking about it.

That's one of the biggest changes in my lifetime. And nobody is really talking about it. When that poses a problem.

When we start to have terror attacks, or whatever, we start to collapse our economy.

Because we're -- we're overrun with this -- in this lifeboat called America.

There are too many people trying to get in the boat. Then you really have problems.

So I'm -- I'm glad to see that before things catch completely on fire over in Europe. And in South America. There's a couple of places that may turn things around.

STU: Yeah. And I think too, this idea that maybe turning -- just leaning -- err on the side of liberty.

That's what's encouraging about the guy in Argentina, Milei for me.

Is that, look, we all knew that Ronald Reagan wanted to get rid of the Department of Education. He wasn't able to do it.

GLENN: And the Fed.

STU: Will this guy be able to get rid of all these agencies he pulled off as stickers off the white board? It's going to be really hard. I will assume there are a million different people that are inside the government, and have been inside the government structure forever.

That will do everything they can to stop him at every turn. But just the fact that he's attempting to do these things. And pushing in that general direction. It's hard to see how they could make the country worse.

You know, at the very least, they will take less of your money.

GLENN: I will tell you this, it is like never before, you are going to be assassinated, politically.

Your reputation. Your life, everything. Will be assassinated by the press. And by the left.

And if you get these people in, who are serious about taking apart the fed.

And some of these things that are absolute institutions, that are deep.

You start having a president take on the intelligence community here in America, you may be looking at worse than a political assassination.

That's really dangerous to do.

And I never thought I would feel that way in America.

But I certainly was. Don't you?

STU: It is. Yeah.

I mean, it is --

GLENN: I mean, look what they did to Donald Trump.

And look what you -- what I think they're willing to do to Donald Trump.

Somebody steps up and is effective at taking on the Deep State. God help them.

God help them.


STU: There's a lot. Yeah. You're standing up against people who have entrenched interest in something that you don't want.

And you're trying to destroy --

GLENN: And they have all kinds of power.

STU: All sorts of power.

One of the first things we talked about with Donald Trump.

And a critical way at some level.

Was to say, hey. You better be sure, if you're going to go critique our -- our -- you know, critique is not the right word for what Donald Trump was doing. But go after the intelligence agencies.

Because they're not going to sit back, and just let that go on. You better be sure.

Now, he did it anyway.

And he had to deal with the effects of it.

I mean, it's a risky strategy. At times, it feels like, you know what, it really needs to be done.

And I'm glad he has done it.

But he dealt with lots of personal discomfort.

And continues to, I believe, those attacks at the beginning. And more as he went on.

They're not just going to give up their power. That's not what happens.

GLENN: I know. I wish we just cobbled together a coalition.

I really do.

I -- Donald Trump is so focused now.

Has to be.

So focused on what's going on in his life, I wish we would put a coalition together, where everybody gets behind somebody.

And just says, okay.

What's best for the country?

All of us. Getting together, right now. And developing something that a majority of Americans can get behind.

Because I -- I just won't believe it.

If -- if this guy, Joe Biden can win, I mean, I've never seen a guy who has done this with war. And made things as unstable. Do well in a presidential election.

Never seen a president who has an economy like this. Do well in a presidential election. I've never seen a guy who is more incompetent do well -- I mean, this guy has everything going against him.

And it's still competitive?

How is that possible?

Just how is that possible?

A Complete Sellout?! Harley Davidson's Woke Agenda EXPOSED
RADIO

A Complete Sellout?! Harley Davidson's Woke Agenda EXPOSED

Harley Davidson is seen as an all-American company. But recently, filmmaker Robby Starbuck exposed Harley Davidson's internal commitment to woke DEI initiatives. Starbuck reviews what he found: holding "explicitly racist" anti-white trainings, funding "all ages" Pride events with questionable activities, donating to extremely progressive groups ... "This is a complete sellout of common sense," Glenn says. So, why would Harley Davidson go woke? And will the company reverse course with enough customer backlash?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So I don't know if you know the name Robby Starbuck. He's a filmmaker. And I know Matt Walsh. Rightfully gets a lot of credit for, you know, exposing the pediatric transgender clinic in Nashville. But it was actually Robby and his wife, that actually exposed that. And Matt picked it up and ran with it, and changed a lot of things. He has been exposing those companies, that are all in on DEI and LGBTQ and everything else. He's exposed John Deere. Gosh, what are the other companies that he's done?

Big ones. I mean, Bud Light did one commercial with a transgender person. And they were almost destroyed.

He now has exposed Harley-Davidson. I just want to go over what Harley-Davidson is doing. Harley-Davidson is, as you know, one of the most beloved American brands out there.

Harley and Indian, to me, are more American than -- than Chevy and Ford. I mean, these are true American brands.

And what he found is a complete sellout of, I think, their customers. And a complete sellout to -- of common sense.

He just -- they just sold common sense out. It's gone at Harley-Davidson. Robby is with us now, to explain exactly what he found, and what we can do about it.

Robby, how are you?

ROBBY: I'm doing well, thanks for having me, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet. And thanks for all your hard work on this. You've done some amazing things. So expose Harley-Davidson.

What did you find at Harley-Davidson?

ROBBY: Well, you know, it's pretty incredible. When somebody came to me first with Harley being one of these little companies after we went through Tractor Supply and John Deere, I didn't believe it. I kind of had a hard time believing it. Because the Harley brand is like this macho brand, and, you know. Everybody knows somebody who has a Harley.

And it's so diametrically opposed to who they are. So we kind of pulled the thread. And as we looked into it, you know, lo and behold, in these stainability reports, which usually reveal a lot about the company.

We found that they had put 1800 employees through these woke trainings, including one group of employees, specifically white males.

They sent to a white male only diversity training. And if you look at the company that does this, it's not like, trust me. It's not a favorable training.

You get the worst training. You get the one that white people bad. You know, white men have a specific, you know, place to have to behave a certain way.

It's explicitly racist in my opinion. When you go further down the line, they have a plan to what they call diversify.

Their supply chain. Which is really just corporate speak for we want less white people. And you think about that -- just the idea is just so far and away from what the American dream is. It should be about merit. And who are the best suppliers. Who is providing the best stuff?

How do you do all this? So if you force diversity in your supply chain, what's going to happen to safety, what is going to happen to all these other things? Because you have this benchmark that you want to reach. And so all these arbitrary benchmarks pop up. But then there's also the pride stuff. They're funding events. They fund one pride event that was considered, quote, all ages. Where it was described as a rage room, in the marketing materials, for people who need to let off steam.

And that's right across the area where drag queens interact with kids, for story time.

And they play catch with Dad area for anybody who had daddy issues. And I'm not joking. That's actually, those were the three things that were next to each other.

Okay? That's a sponsorship for events like that. It is so diametrically opposed to the values of Harley riders. And they're also a founding member, a platinum founding member of the Wisconsin, LGBTQ plus Chamber of Commerce.

Which, I would question, why does there even need to be a Chamber of Commerce, for what type of -- you know, I think that's pretty weird.

GLENN: I know. It's very weird. It's very weird. They also make February, March -- they also made February, March, months of inclusion.

Because we need three months? Not just Pride Month?

I mean, the money they have donated now to the United Way, promoting, you know, Antiracist Baby. You know, the Ibrahim Kennedy thing. They have a Pride ride.

Let's see. They have events at their corporate offices. Their legal department has -- has -- is being celebrated for its racial equity and literacy challenges. I mean, it goes on and on and on.

ROBBY: That is insane, by the way. Yeah. That permeates the legal industry. Just so people know. That 21-day training is something that is happening, you know, pretty much throughout most of legal America, if we could call them that.

And it's one of the craziest trainings out of them. They're right up there with the United Way 21-day -- they have the 21-day equity challenge United for Equity, is what they call it.

It's some of the most explicit, Marxist training programs you could possibly have, pushing, you know, the landmarks to disorganization, to you know, reparations. And people like, you know, Ibrahim Kennedy and Robin DiAngelo.

You have the whole list of these left activists, for not just the Democratic Party. But kind of for modern day communism. That's what they're pushing through.

GLENN: So Harley-Davidson is -- and a macho guy's bike. Always been. An American bike.

And I don't see a lot of transgender business going Harley-Davidson's way. What -- I mean, I know one of my close friends, that I work with, owns a Harley.

And he said, everybody in my bike club, is just -- their eyes are bleeding. They're so crazy about this. Because they just feel Harley-Davidson has betrayed them.

What are -- what is Harley-Davidson's reply?

ROBBY: So there's no response yet. But, you know, I would caution that in the case of Tractor Supply, it took three weeks of us continuing with the story and not letting it go. Releasing little bits of information every day, for them to relent and turn back on everything. In the case of John Deere, it took a week for them to backtrack on a good portion of the stuff that we had -- in Harley's case, I don't know if they can wait a week. They have Sturgis Rally, which if people don't know, it's a big biker rally that happens August 2nd.

And Harley has a booth there. I don't think -- and they have an event there, actually, too. I don't think that they want to talk to all these bikers out there, about this program and all of these donations. And what they've allowed corporate offices and everything. I think they would probably like to clean this up before then.

That would be my guess. If they don't, they are dumber than I thought they were. I think they're doing this to please a certain element within the sort of financial world that's pushing these DEI scores and everything.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

ROBBY: And it's not just -- as much as I would like to say it's BlackRock pushing this stuff. Because I have my issues with BlackRock and with Vanguard and State Street. On more insidious things, the real poison is -- you know, the woke mind virus is a virus. It's carried by somebody.

And it's carried by the HR people who have come out of these colleges, totally indoctrinated into leftism. And so their job when they get inside there is, okay. Spread the virus through the whole network.

And so they'll use societal down points. Societal pressure points. Like what happened with George Floyd. As a way to put pressure on the higher ups to say, hey. We need to do this. To respond effectively. We need to show our employees that we care.

So the higher ups, in many cases, they just relent because they don't want to look racist. They don't want to look bigoted. At least that's how it used to be.

Now, a lot of those executives are looking for a way out. We have had executives reach out to us, and beg us to go after their companies in the future.

Because they want an excuse to get rid of DEI, which I think it's still cowardly.

Because it's still going backwards. We have companies we really need to go after.

We have now, at this point. Since we started this against Tractor Supply, over a thousand whistle-blowers.

So we are just trying to scale up the operation to work with all these people and go through all the documents and evidence that has been handed over to us, so that we can look at, you know, how have these great corporate American brands betrayed their customers and the values, especially the ones that depend on conservative America?

Because if we can't save them, then we can't save our country.

GLENN: So, Robby, I really believe all of this started, because of Occupy Wall Street.

You know, when you look at -- it was -- they were -- they were, you know, camping right in front of all of the big financial firms.

All of the banks. All of, you know, Wall Street. And corporate.

And then all of a sudden, it just kind of stopped and went away. And I -- I am absolutely convinced that a deal was struck at that point. Don't come after us. We'll help you.

And it was right around that time, that all of this money, from these financial firms, and from corporations, started to go these radicalized groups. For the first time.

And I think this was a deal cut, by the banks and by the giant corporations, just stick it on the American people. We'll be your ally.

We'll help pay for it. And now they're destroying their own businesses.

ROBBY: You know, Glenn, there could be an element of that. And I wouldn't doubt it in the slightest. I almost think it's even more insidious that be that. Because the long march to the institutions. Corporations are not exempt from that. And there's been an element of these -- you know, folks that I would say, are really, really, deeply committed to Marxism. Who they have embedded themselves in every segment of the American life.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

ROBBY: And I think they've done a much better job at it, than we have as conservatives, protecting our country. And that's really on -- you know, we could go on and on about who is at fault for that. But honestly, it doesn't matter. The people who are here now, like you and me and others, we need to be -- we need to be the line. You know, we're the line that says, okay. We're pushing back.

We're not just defending. We're going on offense. And that's what we're doing here. It's like, we have to go on offense, and take back some of these institutions. And that will help through election. It will help through getting Trump into office. It will happen a lot of different ways.

But you have to go through each one of these institutions.

I'm more concerned about this people embedded inside. How do you get rid of those people? The people who -- even if you beat back DEI, if you don't get the whole department fired, are going to reinvent it in some other name. You know, that's the real virus at this point. It's like, how do you get that out of the company?

GLENN: Robby, I'm big fan of what you do and your wife. Make sure you say hi to her for us.

Please let us know. We'll continue to watch. But please let us know how you can help.
Thank you for exposing it.
ROBBY: Appreciate it.
GLENN: You bet. Buh-bye.

Robby Starbuck. You can follow him on Twitter, and follow the story.

It is -- this one was a big one.

John Deere was bad. Tractor supply was worse. This one is crazy bad.

Tulsi Gabbard: Why "Anti-Democracy” Elites Are FORCING Kamala Harris on Voters
RADIO

Tulsi Gabbard: Why "Anti-Democracy” Elites Are FORCING Kamala Harris on Voters

The Democrat Party claims to be the champion of "democracy." But Party elites seem to be practically coronating Vice President Kamala Harris to be their 2024 presidential nominee - WITHOUT consulting the voters. Former Democratic presidential candidate-turned-Independent Tulsi Gabbard joins Glenn to explain what's going on: "It is just a facade. [The nomination process has] already been wrapped up." Plus, Gabbard explains why Harris is NOT a moderate "unity" candidate. In fact, she may become the most progressive Democratic nominee ever. And Tulsi also discusses whether she would accept an offer to be Secretary of State or Defense in a second Trump administration.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the program now, Tulsi Gabbard. How are you, Tulsi?

TULSI: Aloha, my friend. It's great to talk to you, always.

GLENN: By the way, I'm pushing for you to be the Secretary of Defense if Trump would win. I think you would make a great Secretary of Defense.

TULSI: I appreciate that. I think there will be opportunity, should Trump get elected, to serve as Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense. Be in a position to actually begin to reshape our country's foreign policy, to one that Trump has advocated for all along. One that puts the interests of the American people and our country first, and prevents from us getting into these unnecessary counterproductive regime change wars, and begins to enact those policies that allows our country to succeed.

GLENN: So I never thought of you as Secretary of State. That is an interesting idea. That might even be better than Secretary of Defense. But, anyway, let's talk about Tulsi Gabbard. I'm sorry. Kamala Harris.

Kamala is probably the most left candidate we've ever had. And she's being really installed by the Democratic Party.

I want to talk to you about the installation here in a second.

But first, what would we be getting from a cam Harris?

JIM: You know, the Democrats themselves tout President Biden as the most, quote, unquote, progressive president our country has ever seen. And this was supposed to the guy who was going to come in and be a moderating influence on the Democratic Party. The guy who said that he would unite all Americans and serve all Americans. And from day zero, he did exactly the opposite in dividing us by race. And enacting these radical, woke agendas, that are hurting our children, hurting our education system, hurting the safety of our communities. I could go on and on. You talk about these issues all the time.

We've talked about foreign policy. Really, when you look at Kamala Harris, you can expect more of the same. But worse. I think what it comes down to is just the need for us to make sure that we remind voters over and over, as we head into this election, even if a Democrat has changed their horse in this race, the substance, the policies, and, quite frankly, the real decision makers behind the scenes. Who have been pulling the strings.

Whether it's Robby Mook from Hillary Clinton's campaign. Or Tony Blinken Biden's.

You know, decades with President Biden. Or President Obama's lackeys in the White House.

These people were making decisions over the last three and a half years.

They're going to continue to call the shots. Which means we can expect the same disastrous policies that we have seen and worse.

GLENN: I really think that Biden was forced out.

I think they held something over his head, either the 25th Amendment or, you know, hey, look at your son. We may not be able to stop the impeachment proceedings because of the Hunter stuff. And they gave him a deadline of Sunday.

This is all my speculation, by the way. Gave him a deadline of Sunday, and he folded.

And I don't -- I mean, it's clear, that he's not running the country. He's not really running the presidency.

Because why -- why are you okay to be the president, but you're not there enough to run a campaign. That makes no sense.

But then they pick Tulsi Gabbard to replace her.

And it's surprising --

TULSI: Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris.

GLENN: Barack Obama is not for it.

What did you say?

PAT: Kamala. You said --

TULSI: You said they picked Tulsi Gabbard. They picked Kamala Harris.

GLENN: Oh, gosh. I'm so sorry.

TULSI: If it was me, I'm telling you, we would be having a very different conversation here.

GLENN: Yeah, I know we would. I knew we would. I know we would. I'm sorry. They picked Kamala Harris. And I don't think she's going to be running the -- the presidency either. I agree with you.

But who is actually -- who is this cabal?

Shouldn't we be asking that question and getting that answer?

TULSI: We absolutely should, Glenn.

You know, it's the people who are invested. Ultimately, it's those who -- whose power relies on having a figure head that they can role.

So, you know, you can look at some of the people that I have mentioned already. Who have been around Hillary Clinton. They are Hillary Clinton's lackeys. President Obama's lackeys.

People who have been with President Biden for a long time.

It's the military industrial complex that profit from our country being in a constant state of war.

It's those who are -- who are the unelected people in the national security state. Whose ability to -- to control and take more of our liberties. Again, relies on us being in a constant state of war. It's their friends in big tech and propaganda media.

Who benefit from them having access to that power, and that information.

And it's the big money billionaires. Yes. It's the George Soros source.

But others. Reid Hoffmann and others. Who are -- are being -- who are incredibly influential, beyond belief.

Because of their money and their ability to exert control. Fundamentally, what is at the heart of this?

All these different people who make up this cabal of woke warmongers.

Of course, Hillary Clinton is the lead of that.

They are people who don't care about our country.

And they don't believe in the Constitution.

And they're trying to remake this country into something that is their utopia of some sort. But that devise the very foundation of what our country was founded upon.

GLENN: So you were a Democrat. You still -- we still would disagree on many policies.

But I respect you. Because you're at least honest, and love the country.

And I truly believe, that there are millions of Democrats, that are all across the country that I may disagree with, but they love the country. And they don't want to see it fundamentally destroyed and transformed.

They don't agree with these policies. And they've been so brainwashed. That they don't stand up, against -- they believe that Donald Trump is the threat to democracy, and they don't see what their own party is doing.

How is it they can go out and vote, and then have these delegates, and these superdelegates, disregard that vote, entirely.

And say, no. This is who you get.

How are they not up in arms, Tulsi?

TULSI: Well, first of all, let's just go back, there were a number of states that did not even hold primaries. And so to -- and those that would not allow other Democratic candidates. Because, you know, obviously, Bobby Kennedy was running to be the Democratic nominee.

GLENN: Right.

TULSI: There was a member of Congress. I can't remember his name at the moment. Who was running. Obviously, Marianne Williamson, and may have been a few others who were running to be the Democratic nominee. Many other states would either not allow them on the ballot, or did not hold primaries at all.

So the Democratic party, led by President Biden, that claims to be the champions of democracy, would not even allow a democratic process within their own primary. So the anti-democracy initiative began there, and it continues through. So we shouldn't be surprised to see what they are doing today. You know, they are trying to pretend that this is not a coronation of Kamala Harris. President Obama saying, oh, you know. This will be brought to the convention, and delegates will have the opportunity to choose who the next Democratic nominee for president will be.

GLENN: Delegates.

TULSI: But we know that's just a facade. It is just a facade. It's already been wrapped up.

GLENN: Tulsi, thank you so much. Appreciate it. I know you've got to run. And you've just been overseas. And keep it up. Thank you so much.

TULSI: Thank you, Glenn. I appreciate you. Talk to you soon.

GLENN: You bet. You bet.

"They Basically Let Him Get Shot”: Secret Service Vet Dan Bongino Demands Firings After Trump Attack
RADIO

"They Basically Let Him Get Shot”: Secret Service Vet Dan Bongino Demands Firings After Trump Attack

Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino joins Glenn as a guest to review the latest insane revelations about the security failures at the July 13th Trump rally: “They just let the line of sight threat exist…they basically let him get shot.” Bongino and Glenn review some of the basic questions that Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle failed to answer during her congressional hearing: Why didn’t she have a timeline of the day’s events? Why did the failed assassin have a drone, but the Secret Service allegedly didn’t have any aerial surveillance? Did Cheatle communicate with White House officials on messaging about the attack? Will she turn over her cell phones? Bongino also reacts live to the news that Cheatle has resigned.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Dan Bongino, good friend. Welcome to the program. How are you, sir?

DAN: Hey, good to talk to you, Glenn. Doing okay.

GLENN: Dan, I remember when we first met, you were still on presidential detail. And I said that you were standing in the room with these guys, while I was on the air. And they hated me.

And because of their reaction, you started really paying attention, to what was being said in those rooms. And I told you, I'm really concerned about the security, of the president.

Because I was on the outside looking at you, and people like you. And seeing the Secret Service being completely inept from the top. Not necessarily the agents.

It's gotten so bad now, Dan. And I'm not sure that it is -- they're being inept. I'm not sure what the hell is going on.

DAN: Yeah. These problems aren't new. And there's a lot of kind of -- Johnny-come-lately commentary on this, on the left-wing media good news.

But the reality is people like me, were calling attention to this problem over a decade ago.

And, you know, I have the receipts to back it up. You can go look at interviews I gave to the Washingtonian, a book I wrote, called Protecting the President.

All while diagnosing all the problems with the Secret Service. You will read the book. You're going to say, gosh, did he write this ten minutes ago? No, I wrote it ten years ago. And what wound up happening.

You know, a subject you're probably unfortunately familiar with is, the left-wing media, rather than analyzing Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, Hannity, and Dan Bongino say, they go on attack mode right away. They just don't like us.

See, I don't feel the same about them. If I hear something from the left-wing media, I can independently vet.

It doesn't mean it's naturally false. Unfortunately, a lot of times, it is. But the irony is they claim to be journalists. They attack me as a conspiracy theorist for telling -- for telling folks on my show in August of 2023, it's Episode 2079, if anyone wants to listen from last year. Where I said that Donald Trump was likely going to be hurt or killed.

I was getting that information from high-ranking Secret Service sources. Who were very troubled by the minimal security posture applied to Donald Trump.

And the repeated requests for enhanced security, that was being rebuffed.

And Daniel Arkin, from NBC wrote a piece. You can still read, because it's embarrassingly still up. Calling me a conspiracy theorist, saying, I was stating this without evidence. Without ever having speaking to me, or asking me what my evidence was. So, you know, if you listen to shows like this and your program.

You know, you're six weeks, six months, six years ahead of the news cycle. You're listening to the liberal media, you're consistently stunned by attempts like this on Donald Trump's life, thinking, what happened?

GLENN: So tell me your gut at this point. And I know I'm asking you to go on limited facts, because they're not releasing everything.
But you have inside connections.

Is your gut -- does your gut tell you, this is just more of the same incompetence, times a thousand? Or is something nefarious going on?

DAN: Well, listen, the ladder, I can't answer. One thing I never do is I never go down road, where I don't know if it ends up off a cliff. Because then you wind up like the left-wing media. Oh, look, there's a pee-pee tape out there. Have you seen it? No. I don't know if it's nefarious.

I can tell you, the level of incompetence leads naturally to the second question: You're not crazy to ask it. But the level of incompetence here is stunning. Because people think in threes and nuggets and pieces of information.

I'm going to give you a couple of chunks of information here, from over ten years of experience. And having worked with three presidents. Two Democrats and a Republican.

Having done hundreds of advances and having actually done four foreign lead advances too. So, you, I know what I'm talking about.

To number one, why was President Trump on the X? We recall the X. Why was he out on the podium at all?

It's a question that nobody can answer. It's also the question in the hearing yesterday.

If you go back and listen to it, the director, Kim Cheatle, a failed human being, who disgracefully, still sitting in a job, putting a nation at risk from incompetence.

It's why she won't answer the time line question. Did you notice how cryptic she was?

She won't answer the time line question, because she gives you a time that is recognized. Then the obvious next question is, well, if you knew there was a threat, up to an hour out, potentially 18 minutes out, depending on who you believe.

Why was President Trump walking on the stage, in the middle of a -- getting scoped out, and range located by a sniper? And she can't answer it.

GLENN: So, Dan, so -- but her answer will seem to be in the coming days, that while yes, but we didn't have communications open with the people that were there.

Those were local.

Don't you have a command center, that --

DAN: Yes. Don't waste your time.

You just said it. Don't even -- I don't care what her answer is. It's called the command post. Glenn, you have zero experience as a Secret Service agent. You're a very talented radio guy.

Even you knew that. You never worked in the Secret Service. You're like, wait. Didn't they have a command center? Here's the answer.

Yes. It's called the CP, the Command Post.

Every single law enforcement entity working that operation had either a representative or a radio in there.

There is absolutely zero chance the Command Post did not get information that they were working to suspicious mail, surveilling the outside of the perimeter with a range finder. There's zero chance.

So when you ask questions like, well, how had he walked off stage? The answer is such incredible gross incompetence. I don't blame people for saying, there's got to be something more here.

I just don't know that. All I'm telling you is that the failure here is so apocalyptic, everyone there on that advanced team should have resigned the next day. The director, the deputy director, all of them.

How they still have jobs is incredible. Let me throw one more thing out at you.

Let's just say all of the director's stupid stories are accurate. They're not. Let's just say they are. The roof was sloped.

It was hot that day. Whatever ridiculous excuse you make.

I've read problems in the past, where we could not secure a line of site problem.

We didn't have enough bodies, whatever. I had a sight with Hillary Clinton. Just didn't have enough bodies to secure a dorm room, looking out at her speech sight at Hofstra University. You know what I did?

I have them go out, get a 5-dollar can of that snow spray, that fake snow.

Why would I do that? Because I sprayed the window. Because I figured, listen, if we can't mitigate this line of sight threat, and this potential sniper, at least we can block the line of sight so they can't see what they're shooting. Sometimes it's the best you can do.

They didn't even do that. They didn't even do that. They just let the line of site threat exist.

And the counter surveillance, which is a piece of paperwork, the countersurveillance team looks at, that will show that they knew that that was a vulnerability. And yet they did nothing about it. They basically let him get shot.

GLENN: They haven't released that, though, have they? That document?

DAN: No. They will claim it's classified. It's not. And here's another two pieces of paperwork. There's a survey, called the CS survey. The Countersniper Survey. That Countersniper Survey will point out every single elevated high point in the area.

That will be on there, and you will see something. I will break this later on my show. I'm not trying to be cryptic or funny about it on your show. I'm just working the angle right now, and I want to be sure I'm correct. But that specific high point, there's a major, major fiasco that happened there.

There was a communication lapse, that is totally unforgivable. But the countersurveillance and countersniper survey will show that that high point was a vulnerability. And then they will have to answer questions like, when that wasn't posted, when he was on stage.

And allowed that person to get up there. Because there was no post there or nothing. Why didn't you guys follow up?

The Secret Service is ultimately responsible. Why didn't the sight agents just notice that one of the posts they had wasn't there?

I mean, this is an unforgivable, unfortunate series of events, that basically caused this. There's no other explanation.

GLENN: So I had Eli Crane on. The Congressman from Arizona, that was up on the roof.
And posted a video, up at -- yesterday.

And he was standing in the barn, if you will. Right behind, where the shooter was.

And he's on the second floor.

Inside, air-conditioning. In an office.

And it has a window, that looks right out on that roof!

If it was too hot or dangerous, why were they on the first floor, and not on the second floor, looking at the roof!


DAN: Glenn, again, the incompetence here. These are hard interviews for me to give because of the questions you're asking. Again, as a guy with no Secret Service experience at all -- my wife asked me the same questions.

She's a database developer.

They're not explainable. Other than absolute, abject ignorance and stupidity. Whoever gave the advance that day. I don't know how they still have a job.

I really don't, and here's another thing: That -- here's the third question. I brought up the line of site. I brought up the paperwork.

There's another question that needs to be asked.

How did you not deploy -- we have an aerial surveillance branch in the Secret Service.

Why was the aerial surveillance, a drone, a helicopter, a -- an infrared -- a thermal. Why were these -- why were these simple tools we use over and over, not employed that day?

You would have seen the guy on the roof, the second he got up there.

You know, Kim Cheatle, the failed director, said yesterday at the beginning of the hearings, you go back and listen: We employ a 360-degree security coverage. Well, 360, is a three-dimensional sphere.
That means above and below. Well, where the hell was the above coverage?

There was nothing above. We didn't have a drone. Glenn, go to Amazon right now. Get a drone for 40 bucks. We couldn't send a drone up in the air?

You have a 6 trillion-dollar federal budget. What the hell is the federal government good for? Why was there no drones? The answer is, again, absolute stupidity.

And how these people have not been fired or resigned, is really deeply disturbing at this point.
The government has no accountability whatsoever.

GLENN: Dan, when I heard the congressman yesterday.

DAN: Wait. Glenn, hold on.

I'm hearing breaking news, that the director may be leaving very soon. So I'm just getting this now. So we may --

GLENN: Oh, good. Good.

DAN: I predicted this last night. We'll see what happens.

Yeah, she has no political support. But the Biden/Harris team doesn't want the headache. The Democrats have bailed on her. This woman needs to go. She's a disgrace. I'm getting this from a Secret Service friend now. Said, and she's out.

So whether he's got something we're breaking on your show or not, but this guy has been a reliable source for me.

GLENN: Tell me, when I heard the congressman yesterday say that, have you used any kind of encrypted apps to communicate with anyone.

I was shocked to hear her say yes.

But when -- when -- I don't know if congressman -- or, you know, are smart enough to think this way.

But I know I really try not to ask a question, especially, if I'm -- if I am in a situation, where I'm trying to prove somebody wrong.

I make sure I kind of know the answer to the question. Before I ask it.

That way, when we come back to it later. I've got her on the record.

What the hell is -- on her private phone. That's against the law.

DAN: Well, because we've been friends for a long time. I'm not going to spin your wheels.

There are two people on this phone call.

And one of them may have contributed to the asking of that question. So you could probably figure out by the fact that -- so, yeah.

They're -- Cheatle has no friends, anymore in the Secret Service.

They are horrified by her leadership. Let's just say a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend, may have sent to a friend, exactly that question. Who passed to a friend of a friend of a friend of another friend. And it made it into the hearings. That's what --

GLENN: What was the friend of a friend of a friend saying that we should get that on the record for?

DAN: Because the communications may -- may have involved communications with significant White House officials on messaging. And it may have involved.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

DAN: Yes. So we'll -- we'll see what comes out in the wash. Now, keep in mind.

GLENN: Did it maybe involve this -- this event?

DAN: Oh. Oh, yeah. That's a distinct possibility.

I mean, we will have to find out. I don't know the exact content. Because I don't have her phone.

But her agreeing to turn over her personal phone for forensic analysis to Lauren Boulder, who asked all the right questions, by the way. They should take her up on that offer. I can almost guarantee her, she will bail and lawyer up, if she's asked to turn her personal phone over.

Or she's probably deleting messages right now.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

Dan, as always. Great to talk to you.

And I'm so happy for your success.

Nobody deserves it more than you, Dan.

DAN: You're a food friend and a mentor. So I love you too, brother. Thanks, man. Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Glenn Beck Reacts: Secret Service Director RESIGNS After DISASTROUS Testimony
RADIO

Glenn Beck Reacts: Secret Service Director RESIGNS After DISASTROUS Testimony

Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle has finally resigned 10 days after the attempted assassination of former president Donald Trump. But Glenn says, "that should not close this case by any stretch of the imagination." Glenn and Pat discuss Cheatle's resignation and her disastrous testimony to the House Oversight Committee the day before.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The head of the Secret Service is resigning. Or appears to be resigning. But that should not close this case by any stretch of the imagination.

Pat and I want to go over some of the audio from yesterday. Let's start with Comer, with Cheatle struggling to answer any of his questions. Cut 11.

VOICE: At any point Saturday did the Secret Service have an agent on top of that roof?

KIM: Sir, I'm sure as you can imagine, that we are just nine days out from this incident, and there's still an ongoing investigation. And so I want to make sure that any information that we are providing is factual.

VOICE: Okay. Why did the Secret Service not -- can you answer why the Secret Service didn't place a single agent on the roof?

KIM: We are still looking into the advance process and the decisions that were made.

VOICE: Okay. Okay.

Wasn't that building, within the perimeter that should be secured? Do we agree with that?

KIM: The building was outside of the perimeter on the day of the visit. But, again, that is one of the things that during the investigation, we want to take a look at and determine whether or not other decisions should have been made.

VOICE: One of the things that you said, I believe in an interview, that there wasn't an agent on the roof, because it was a sloped roof. Is that -- is that normal?

And to a fear that that immediately creates an opportunity for future would-be assassins to look for a slanted roof?

I mean, this is a huge question that every American has.

Why wasn't a Secret Service agent on the roof.

And there have been reports that agents were supposed to be on the roof. And it was hot that day. And they didn't want to be on the roof. Can you answer any of those questions, Director?

KIM: Sir, I appreciate you asking me that question, Chairman.

I should have been more clear in my answer, when I spoke about where we placed personnel in that interview.

What I can tell you, is that there was a plan in place to provide overwatch. And we are still looking into responsibilities, and who was going to provide overwatch.

But the Secret Service in general, not speaking specifically to this incident, when we are providing overwatch, whether that be through countersnipers or other technology, prefer to have sterile rooftops.

VOICE: Did the Secret Service use any drones for surveillance that day?

KIM: Sir, I will not get into specifics of that day --

GLENN: Stop. She couldn't answer anything yesterday. Not one thing.

PAT: No.

GLENN: If you were the head of the Secret Service. It's been over a week now, you're the head of the Secret Service, you walk into people's office, the minute that happens and say, I want answers right now.

PAT: Who was in charge of oversight? Right?

It takes two minutes to find that out. Come on. It doesn't take ten days to find that out.

GLENN: Right. We're still looking into that. Are we?

Now, she had a problem with Jim Jordan as well.

Here's cut 20.

VOICE: Take to the president and the First Lady?

KIM: No, I have not.
VOICE: Talk to the White House staff, anyone in White House communications?

KIM: No. I have not.

VOICE: Have you talked to the countersniper that took the shot that took out the bad guy?

KIM: Yes, I have.

VOICE: And can you tell us about that conversation?

KIM: I would not want to reveal conversations that I've had with my employees.

PAT: Oh, jeez.

VOICE: But that's exactly the kind of information the American people want to know. The American people who pay your salary.

KIM: I understand. This is an ongoing investigation --

VOICE: Who is all doing the investigating at the Secret Service?

I know the inspector general, but is there also an internal investigation in addition to the inspector general?

KIM: We are conducting a mission assurance investigation internally, yes.

VOICE: You know what it looks like, director? It looks like you won't answer some pretty basic questions. It looks like you got a 9 percent raise, and you cut corners when it came to protecting one of the most important individuals. The most well-known individuals on the planet.

A former president, likely the guy who is going to be the next president, looks like you guys were cutting corners. That's what it looks like to me.

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: Let's go to Cut 27. Here's Andy Biggs.

VOICE: Your agency has a no-fail mission. And on Saturday, July 13th, your agency spectacularly failed.

The failure resulted in the death of Corey Comperatore, and serious injury to two other rally attendees, David Dutch and James Copenhaver, besides the injuries to President Trump.

It's unfathomable, that a 20-year-old on the radar of Secret Service and local law enforcement before President Trump went on stage, was able to climb on to the roof of a building with a rifle.

And fire off multiple rounds before he was neutralized.

Was Mr. Crooks acting alone?

KIM: Again, I would have to refer to the FBI's investigation.

VOICE: Was he just a lone gunman?

KIM: I would have to refer you to the FBI's investigation for motive.

GLENN: That's not motive. That's asking, she revealed something there, on motive.

Don't you think?

Of us he acting alone? You'll have to talk to them about motive. Well, wait. No, that's a different answer.

PAT: That doesn't seem to go to motive. So that's interesting.

GLENN: No. Yeah. AOC.

I mean, the left was tearing her apart as well. Here is AOC cut seven.

VOICE: So the notion of a report coming out in 60 days, when the threat environment is so high in the United States, irrespective of party is not acceptable. And I think it's very important to understand that.

This is not theater. This is not about jockeying. This is about the safety of some of the most highly targeted and valued targets. Internationally and domestically.

In the United States of America.

So the idea that a report will be finalized in 60 days, let alone prior to any actionable decisions that would be made, is simply not acceptable.

It has been ten days since an assassination attempt on a former president of the United States.

Regardless of party. There needs to be answers.

PAT: Wow. Felt a little --

GLENN: That's the best thing I think I've ever heard her say.

PAT: Oh, by far. By far.

Felt a little bipartisan there, yesterday, a little bit. Didn't it.

GLENN: It did. Because as we've been saying on this show forever.

The president of the United States. The current one. If he's not dead already.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, he's in danger.

Kamala Harris is in danger.

RFK is in danger.

We cannot have a -- a slew of assassination attempts.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Can't! God forbid one of them die, it will tear this country apart!

Here's another Democrat. This is Moskowitz from Florida. Democrat to Cheatle.

Cut ten.

VOICE: Director, I just want to give you an honest assessment of how this is going for you today. Did you happen to catch the hearing many months ago, in education, where there were a bunch of university professor, university presidents and Elise Stefanik asked a very easy question and couldn't get an answer?

Did you see that hearing?

KIM: No, I don't think I did.

VOICE: Okay. Well, let me tell you, it didn't go well.

And the short end of that story was, those university professors all resigned. They're gone. That's how this is going for you. This is where this is headed. Okay?

This is -- I don't know who prepared you for this. I don't know how many times you've testified in front of Congress, but a president was almost assassinated live on television, not just for Americans. But for the world, to see.

And this being your first opportunity. I understand there's an ongoing investigation.

I understand there are things that you can not talk about. But the -- the idea that we're getting less than you did, on television, is something that Democrats, independents, and Republicans are going to find unacceptable.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

Now, there was Nancy Mace, who was a little more plainspoken. Cut 12.

VOICE: Was this a colossal failure?

KIM: It was a failure.

VOICE: Yes or no? Was it a colossal failure is the question. Yes or no.

VOICE: I have admitted --

VOICE: This is a yes or no series of questions. Was this a colossal failure? Yes or no?

KIM: Yes.

VOICE: Have you provided a list to the oversight committee? Yes or no?

KIM: I will have to get back to you on that.

VOICE: That is a no. Have you provided all audio and video recordings in your possession to this committee, as we asked on July 15th? Yes or no?

KIM: I would have to get back to you.

VOICE: That is a no! You're full of (bleep) today. You're being completely dishonest.

GLENN: Love that.

And then we have Representative Fallon, who said this to Cheatle, cut 13.

VOICE: You know what else is dangerous? I believe your horrifying ineptitude, and your lack of skilled leadership is a disgrace. Your obfuscating today is shameful.

And you should be fired immediately. Go back to guarding Doritos.
(laughter)

PAT: She used to work security at Pepsi. That's why she was guarding Doritos. That's great.
(laughter)

GLENN: Yeah. I found that amazing. When the assassination first happened. I looked her up.

And I'm like, where did she come from?

And I saw she was head of security from Pepsi. And I'm like, you've got to be kidding me.

You're now the head of the Secret Service?

PAT: Well, how many Doritos, do you know were killed during her watch? None. None.

GLENN: None.

PAT: Not a single Doritos was murdered while she was there.

GLENN: And especially all those Coke lovers out there. That just want to knock off cans of Pepsi. She had her job cut out for her.

PAT: She did. She did.

GLENN: It was very difficult.

Oh, my gosh. Now, here's what I'm afraid of. That this is going to stop this investigation.

Because it can't. It cannot stop this investigation.

She has -- she -- we have to know what her device is. What's on her devices.

Why was she using signal when talking to the White House, from her own personal phone?

That's against the law. Did the White House know that that was happening? What were they talking about?

That's really important, to find out.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And I -- I think everybody on that Secret Service detail, should be brought in front of Congress, and have to answer themselves.

You know, it's one thing to be told, shut up. Sit down. Shut up. Don't say anything.

It's another, when you're going to be blamed for it. On national television.

So are you telling me, when you went and you surveyed the site, that didn't occur to you, that that was a big problem?

That you should have somebody secure of that. Is that what you wrote down in your report? Is that --

PAT: But --

GLENN: You should be fired right now.

PAT: They couldn't, Glenn. Because there was a slope. It was hot.

And we were -- this is just breaking. The sun was in their eyes.

GLENN: What kind of pussywillows do we have on the -- I mean, that's what we should call the Secret Service presidential detail, the Pussywillows. We're out here. It's hot. I don't know.

PAT: I don't want to get on a sloped roof. There's a 3 percent grade there. I'm not getting out there!
(laughter)
I mean, come on.

GLENN: It's unbelievable.

PAT: You didn't exactly have to be a mountain goat to navigate that roof. It's almost flat.

GLENN: Unbelievable. No. No. You really didn't. You really didn't.

PAT: Oh, man.

GLENN: I mean, it is -- it is their -- they're just -- I question the manhood of every single person, that was on the Secret Service detail. Or on the local detail, if they were like, it's hot!

It's very hot.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: Who do we have Dylan Mulvaney out?

Dylan, you watch the roof. Okay. But girl power.

I'm not going to walk on that roof. It's hot and sloped.

PAT: And I'm on my heels today. I'm in my heels. I'm not doing it. All right. Okay.