RADIOApril 02, 2025

Will Trump’s “Liberation Day” Tariffs Restore American Manufacturing?

President Trump has declared April 2, 2025, “Liberation Day.” But will his reciprocal tariff plan work and bring manufacturing jobs and prosperity back to America? Glenn speaks with economist Stephen Moore on what Americans can expect once the tariffs hit. Yes, there will be pain, Moore says. But “Trump is the single best negotiator I have ever met in my life and I think, in the end, he will prevail.” Moore also urges the White House to emphasize its regulation and tax cuts along with the tariffs. Plus, he predicts what America could look like a year from now and what Americans should prepare for.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Stephen Moore. My good friend, how are you, sir?

Stephen, are you there?

STEPHEN: Good morning.

GLENN: How are you, man?

STEPHEN: Hi, Glenn. Great to be with you.

GLENN: Thank you very much. Today is Liberation Day. How are you feeling?

STEPHEN: Well, you know, I -- I think it's a Liberation Day. But I'm feeling a little maybe trepidation day as well.

We will see what's out there. I don't know exactly what the details are. I don't think anybody does.

Except Donald Trump at this moment.

Look, I'm a free trade guy. I understands the benefits. Benefits both countries.

But I would say, on the other hand. Because this is really a debate. Where I can go at either side of it.

Trump has an important point.

A lot of people don't understand. You have a wise listenership.

But A lot of Americans don't understand, that we're the lowest terror country in the world right now, among all the major trade partners. And what Trump is simply saying is it's not a level playing field. It's not fair. These other countries are not playing by the rules.

And they need to trade with the United States. So they better get their act together, they better start treating us fairly, or he will hit them with these tariffs. I've been listening to you, for the last 15, 20 minutes. There will be some costs to Americans.

In buying cars. And we might see a little rise in prices of things. Trump describes this as, you know, short-term pain for long-term gain. And I think it's for every American to kind of figure out where they stand on this right now.

I'm a little bit worried about it. I will say this, Trump is the single best negotiator I've ever met in my life. And I think in the end, he will prevail.

GLENN: So is he going just for a strange level field?

You can't say it's a -- it's a free market. Because there are tariffs involved. But if our tariffs are only reflecting everybody else's. Then it is a free market, if you will.

Just trying to bring everything level up to the -- you know, the place where everybody else is. Is that the goal here, which would lead me to believe, there might be some short-term effects, because we can turn the negotiating power on. Pretty quickly.

Or is he trying to bring manufacturing back, which is -- I mean, I think he's calling it Liberation Day. Because it harkens back to World War II. And he's liberating us from almost everything that we set up, right after World War II.

He's saying, effectively, with almost -- in almost every category. All of that stuff is broken. And we can't do that anymore.

So is he saying, we're not going to be part of this global thing anymore. We will bring manufacturing back here. And that will be tough. But it's the only way to really, truly grow our economy.

By building things here. Which is it, or is it both? Stephen.

STEPHEN: These are complicated questions. You know, and I can't get into Donald Trump's mind. Look, let's start with why he won this election. He won the election by winning blue-collar, middle class voters into the Republican Party, many of whom have voted Democratic, but realized that Trump was the one who really stood behind them.

I believe, gren, to answer your question about how do we make America number one in manufacturing and, you know, obviously technology. And other industries that are so important.

I believe many of the other things that Trump is doing.

For example, lead article in the Wall Street Journal this week, didn't get a lot of attention.

Front page. That Trump is deregulating our economy. It will reduce costs for American companies, by as much as a trillion dollars. So that will make us very competitive.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

I was just talking about, I'm not seeing enough about cutting the regulation, and also cutting of tax cuts.

STEPHEN: Right. That's right!

GLENN: Because if you don't have those to go along with the tariffs, this isn't going to work. This is just not going to work.

STEPHEN: Exactly. Yeah. Great minds think alike. And that's exactly what I was going to say.

And it was almost like we were saying the same thing.

As you know, you look at the tax plan. As you know, Larry Kudlow and I -- the very first version of that tax plan. Eight or nine years ago.
And it was a huge success. Huge success.

Glenn, one of my frustrations right now, with the Trump administration, with the president. I love this guy. I mean, I would -- I would go through a burning building for him.

And he would do those things for the country. Have you heard him talk a lot about the tax cut in the last month? No. And have you ever heard him talk about deregulation last month? No.

GLENN: No. No.

STEPHEN: No. It's all been about tariffs. And, you know, that's the medicine, but people want to see the good stuff. There are issues that unify the Republican Party, like lowering tax rates, deregulating the economy, pro-America energy policy. Those kinds of things.

Frankly, the tariff issue is the kind of issue that divides us. Some of my best friends are in favor of it. I'm kind of on the fence on it. Others are strongly against it. So I want to see Trump talking a little bit more about all of the benefits of these other things that he's doing.

In fact, I've waited 40 years, Glenn, for a president to say, we're going to dismantle the US Department of Education because it's totally useless. It probably does more damage to our schools. Well, he did it.

I was there when he signed that executive order. That was amazing. He's doing incredible things for our country.

But a lot of it gets overshadowed, because all he's talking about right now is tariffs.

GLENN: Well, he's got to bring a lot of people to the table. So what do you think is going to happen?

He obviously picked 4 o'clock, because the stock market is closed, right?

STEPHEN: I guess so. He may very well be right. I think it's going to be -- nobody knows exactly what he's going to say.

But I think he is going to call for a ten to 20 percent across-the-board tariffs, on just about anything that comes into the US. Now, that will raise prices. I mean, if you put a tax on things that come in, to some extent, you know, consumers will pay the cost of that.

And then, I think he's going to go after certain countries, that are the worst abusers like China.

And, by the way, I'm all in favor of going after China. I think China is a menace. You were one of the first people that started talking about this, 25 years ago. So China is the enemy. One thing I don't get.

And I say this with all due respect, because I do love this president. I don't understand why we've got so much discussion about Canada.

Canada is one of our most important allies. And why aren't we talking about China, and some of these other countries, that are -- you know, dangerous to our economy and national security.

GLENN: I know. Yeah. I've been questioning that.

And so let me ask you, best case scenario. What happens?

What do we look like in a year from now?

STEPHEN: Other countries dramatically bring down their tariffs. Not just tariffs, by the way, Glenn.

Trump made an important point here.

Also, nontariff barriers. The fact that many of these countries have various rules that close the markets to American products. And I'm not just talking about manufacturing products. You know, we're the breadbasket of the world. We have the greatest, most productive farmers in the world. We produce more of our food and agricultural products than any other country.

And yet, many countries lock out our wheat and our corn and our barley and our meat. Our dairy products.

So I think, if this works out. And I would never bet against this president. I think you will see other countries having to open up their markets to American manufacturers and American farmers and American technology. Because, by the way, our technology company is completely discriminated against by these Europeans and these other countries.

So there's a lot to be angry about.

GLENN: Brussels said, I think yesterday, or early this morning. We've got war plans. You know, economic war plans. You go ahead, you launch these.

We're relaunching our own attack. You know, tomorrow.

Bluster or real?

STEPHEN: I'm sorry, who said that?

GLENN: Brussels. Yeah, the EU.

STEPHEN: Oh, the EU. Yeah. Right. Okay. Well, let me address that.

Because, first of all, I'm so sick and tired of these sanctimonious.

GLENN: We don't hang out enough, Stephen. I just love you. Go ahead.

STEPHEN: You know, oh, my gosh. How tear Donald Trump do this. He's starting a trade war.

I know what Donald Trump would say, if he was on your show right now. He would say, what are you talking about?

I'm -- one-third as high as theirs now. They have a lot of nerve to say Trump is causing a trade war!

I mean, you know, it's like -- if I came up to you, Glenn, and punched you in the nose.

And then you tried to fight back. How dare you start a fight with me! I mean, so Trump has the moral high ground here because we do open up our markets.

And the other countries. By the way, there was a very famous incident that happened, I wasn't there.

But my buddy Larry Kudlow was there.

At one of the G20 meetings, I think it was in Ottawa.

And the Europeans were sitting there and complaining and grousing about Trump talking about tariffs. I don't know if you're aware of this.

But Trump, it's on the record. People were there. Trump said, okay! You know what, why don't we all go to zero on tariffs?

They ran to the doors as quickly as they could.

GLENN: I know. I know. I know.

So now, tell me what you think is -- is -- say likely nor a, if things don't go exactly the way. You know, bring this up. Because Paul Krugman. The New York Times.

He said, with Biden. Don't dismiss the careful work of our statistical agencies because you're feeling angry on the check out line.

I don't want to say that about tariffs.

I mean, it's going to make things harder to buy what you need.

And we shouldn't downplay that.

The president is not even downplaying that.

He says, it's going to be a little painful for a while, right?

But people are on the edge financially. And, you know, no amount of political theory helps people pay for the groceries, or makes it feel better when you're paying for the groceries, so I don't want to be in that camp.

What should people mentally respect for, that is a likely scenario, even if it turns out, that it was the right thing? What's coming our way?

STEPHEN: So I think that Trump has -- has -- has made a mistake here, in the sense that, we should have done this tax bill, first!

GLENN: Yeah. I agree.

STEPHEN: That would have been a huge victory. I hope your listeners understand, if we don't get this thing done. We're talking about a 3,000-dollar per family tax increase. On January 1st. And, by the way, every single Democrat in Congress voted for that.

$3,000 per family tax increase. So we should -- I -- I hope as he's talking about these tariffs. He links that to the fact that he's talking about, you know -- a major growth enhancing tax reduction.

You know, I like his idea, for example, Glenn. Where he said, look, if you will bring something into the country.

You will pay a 15 percent tariff on.

But if it's made in America. You will only pay a 15 percent tax.

I love that. Let's do that.

Let's implement that now. What you're doing is giving a little bit of favoritism to some, in Ohio and Maine and Vermont.

GLENN: My guess is, he would have done that, if he could count on the Republicans.

STEPHEN: He can't! I know.

GLENN: I know. There are two groups of people that worry me.

Congress. And, quite honestly, the Justice Department. I don't know where Pam Bondi is, but that's a different story. But Congress needs to do their job.

STEPHEN: And, you know, I think you're right. What are we?

Day 89. I can't keep track.

But it's amazing what Trump has done already. I mean, Trump should have that tax bill -- he has the voter mandate.

Why have the Fed been sitting on this for five weeks?

GLENN: I can't tell you. I can't tell you. So tell me about the -- tell me about the -- tell me about the regulations that you're seeing.

Is the regulation -- because tariffs, tax cuts, regulations.

Tell me about the regulations that you're seeing.

Is it significant? The regulation slicing!

STEPHEN: Enormously so. So remember, you remember. What was the first thing that Joe Biden did when he became president?

GLENN: Energy.

STEPHEN: Yeah. He killed all our energy infrastructure project.

That's something our enemies would have done to us.

Biden did it to us. He shut down the pipelines.

He put incredibly onerous climate change taxes on our goal and gas and coal industry.

Remember Hillary saying, well, that's okay.

The coal miners can become computer programmers or something.

GLENN: That's working.

STEPHEN: Exactly. So Trump is opening up our energy. We have more oil, gas, and minerals, by the way.

You know, this new Secretary of Interior, Governor Doug.

GLENN: Burgum. Burgum.

STEPHEN: Burgum. He's doing an amazing job. You know, we have $10 trillion of mineable, critical minerals in this country. In the mountains of Utah and Dakotas. We can do that.

You know, he's --

GLENN: So, but what I want to ask you.

STEPHEN: He can allow more mergers and acquisitions. So our companies can be more effective. It's all over the board.

It's on transportation policy. And that will cut costs dramatically for American consumers and that's a really positive thing. In fact, when I give talks to small businesses, you give a lot more talks than I do.

I always ask the men and women, I say, which is worse for you? The tax burden or the regulation burden? And you know what they said, the regulations.

GLENN: The regulations, every time.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

THIS is why self-reliance may be your ONLY protection from SLAVERY

Are you truly free, or is your life quietly controlled by systems most Americans never question? In this eye-opening conversation, Glenn Beck speaks with investigative journalist Whitney Webb about how the Elites, banks, and global systems have created modern forms of enslavement, all while the public remains largely unaware. They discuss the urgent need for local self-reliance, alternative financial systems, and taking personal responsibility to protect yourself and your family. This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes freedom is guaranteed, and it’s time to see the truth and act before it’s too late.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Whitney Webb HERE

SHOCKING: Glenn Beck Interviews 'Detransitioner' Deceived by Doctors

Claire Abernathy was just 14-years-old when doctors told her parents she’d take her own life without hormones and surgery. They promised “gender care” would save her life. Instead, it left Claire with irreversible scars, broken trust, and a lifetime of regret. Her mom was told she was required to comply. No one ever addressed the bullying, or trauma Claire endured before being rushed into medical transition. Now, years later, both Claire and her mother are speaking out and exposing how families are misled, how doctors hide risks, and how children are left to pay the price. With federal investigations now underway, their story is a warning every parent needs to hear.

Deep State NGO CAUGHT trying to restart opium trade in Taliban-run Afghanistan

Was an NGO with deep government ties trying to RESTART the opium trade in Taliban-run Afghanistan while former Taliban members were on its payroll...only to be caught DESTROYING the evidence?! The State Department's Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Darren Beattie joins Glenn Beck to expose what he found when he was made Acting President of the United States Institute of Peace. Plus, he debunks ProPublica’s claim that DOGE “targeted” an “Afghan scholar who fled the Taliban.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Darren, welcome to the program. How are you? Darren, are you there? Is he there?

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Okay. Check if he's there. Is he? Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney.

STU: Trying to shut him down. They don't want peace. They don't want peace.

GLENN: They don't. They don't.

He is -- he is a big-time anti-globalist. I've got to tell you, what we're doing with the State Department. I absolutely love. The State Department has been a big problem for this country for a very long time. It's what's gotten us into these global wars. These endless wars, and everything he is.

And, I mean, I don't know what happened to Marco rube, but he is tremendous.

And the way president Trump is appointing different people like Darren, it's fantastic. Darren, are you there? Darren.

STU: Something must be wrong with the lines. Because we are talking to him offline on the phone here. And it does seem to be working, but not coming through our broadcast board here for whatever reason.

GLENN: Well, let's see if we can get that fixed, and maybe let me just talk here for five, six minutes on something else. Then we'll take a break and come back and see if we can get him.

There's something else that I really want to talk about. And that is this flag-burning thing. Now, it's not an amendment.

This is something that the president is putting up in an executive order and has very little teeth to it.

But I -- I -- look, I understand. As a guy putting an enormous flagpole up at my house today.

I mean, an enormous flagpole.

I love the flag. I love it!

And there are a few things that make me more angry than see somebody you set our flag on fire.

For a lot of people, that's a punch in the gut, especially our military people. And it has been planted on distant battlefields. It's raced after victory. Saluted in the morning, or should be in our schools and folded and given to the hands of grieving families. It feels like spitting on every sacrifice, that ever made this nation possible. And the argument against flag burning is really simple: It dishonors the idea of all of that. Okay?

And it defends millions of people, including me. It disrespects, I think the veterans that bled. The families who mourned. The dream that binds us together.

However, here's the hard truth: Symbols only mean something, in a land where freedom is alive.

If you outlaw the burning of a flag, the you have placed the cloth above the Constitution that it represents. You have made the flag an idol.

We don't worship idols. If you can only praise the flag and never protest it, it just stops being a symbol of freedom. And starts being an idol of obedience.

Now, that's the argument for allowing it. At least to me.

Because the real strength of a free nation is -- is to -- it's -- it's how we protect, not the speech we love, but how we endure the speech we hate!

And the Supreme Court has already ruled on this. And, you know, they -- the line they drew wasn't an easy one. Freedom of speech, stops where it directly -- directly insights violence. And that's it same thing, kind of, in this executive order.

You can burn the flag. But if I'm not mistaken, but if it incites violence, then you're in trouble.

And that's true. But the bar of inciting violence is so incredibly high. And it's -- it doesn't have anything to do with speech that offends. It's not speech that stirs anger. Not speech that wants you to punch the speaker in the mouth. It's speech only, that provokes imminent and specific violence.

And unless it's that be with the government doesn't have any right to -- to get into the business of silencing speech. Ever. Ever. Ever.

It is a hard line. And that standard is really hard. It's painfully hard.

Because what our citizenship requires, this is civics. What our citizenships require, is that we defend -- oh, I hate this.

We defend the right of your opponent to mock everything that we hold sacred.

Now, I want you to think of this. You can burn a Bible. You can burn the Word of God. But some want to make it illegal to burn a flag. Where are our priorities? You can burn the Constitution. The words that actually are the ones that stir us into action. But you can't burn a flag.

You can't burn a Koran. Can't burn them. Can't. Can't.

You will -- you will quickly come to a quick end, not legally. But you will come to a quick end. I don't ever want to be like that. Ever!

You burn a Bible. I think you're a monster. What is wrong with you? What is wrong with you?

But you have a right to do it. Why are we drawing a line around the flag? It -- the reason is -- is because we feel things so passionately. And that is really a good thing, to feel love of country so passionately. But then we have to temper that. My father used to tell me, that I think this country needs to hear over and over again, every day. My father -- we would talk to somebody. And we would walk away. And he would go, I so disagree with everything that man just said. But, Glenn, son, he would say. I will fight to the death for his right to say it. He used to say that to me all the time. Which now lees me to believe, I know where I've got my strong opinions from. Because dad apparently would disagree with a lot of people all the time.

But that was the essence of freedom. That is the essence of what sets us apart. Standing for universal, eternal rights like free speech. It's not easy. It means you have to take the size of those people that offend you. It means -- it doesn't mean you have to disagree with it. You can fight against it. You can argue back and forth.

But you -- can you tolerate the insults to the things that you love most. That is so hard, and that is why most of the world does not have freedom of speech. It's too hard! But our Founders believed people are better than that. Our citizens can rule themselves!

And the only way you can rule yourself is if you don't have limits on freedom of speech. So the question is, do we want to remain free? Or do we want to just feel good? It really is that simple. It's why no one else has freedom of speech. It's too hard! I think we're up to the task. Okay. Give me 60 seconds. And then we will try again.

The -- there's certain moments in history, that test not just entire nations, but the hearts of those who live in the nations. And right now, the people of Israel are living in one of those moments. Sirens in the night. Families huddled together.

Elderly men and women. Who remember a time when help never came. All of them wonder. Is anybody going to stand with us, this time?

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews exists to answer that question. They provide food, shelter, security, and hope. Real hope and help in the middle of a crisis! And every act of generosity from people like you sends a clear message. You are not alone. When you support the fellowship, you are joining hands with believers all around the world to lift up God's people, when they need it most. And it is a promise in action. It's a testimony that our faith isn't just words. It's love delivered right on time. And this is your chance to be part of something that really, truly matters. Something that is eternal. To stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel. And say, we're with you. We're not going to fight your wars. Not going to fund your wars. But we're with you. You have a right to live and exist in peace. To learn how you can help. Visit IFCJ.org. IFCJ.org. Go there now. IFCJ.org. Ten seconds. Back to the program.
(music)
All right. Let me -- let me bring Darren in. Darren, are you there now?

DARREN: Yes!
GLENN: Oh, God. Thank goodness.
Thank you for putting up with us. I don't know what happened with the phone system. But, first of all, tell me what the US Institute of Peace is. I've never even heard of it.

DARREN: That is a fantastic question. And I'll try to give the abbreviated answer, because I know we don't have several hours.

GLENN: Good. I know.

DARREN: But US Institute of Peace is one of lesser known, but quite important member of the NGO archipelago, that was created in the '80s. It belongs to the same cohorts as national endowments for democracy.

GLENN: Oh.

DARREN: And some other -- some other better known NGOs that really in the broad context of things. In kind of the sweep of things, was created as a kind of reorganization of the government structure in the aftermath of the church type committee hearings that expose a lot of the dirty dealings of government agencies such as the CIA, and so sort of a broader response to that government lie was to create this NGO layer of governance, with an armed distant plausible deniability, a kind of chameleon character of not exactly being government, not exactly being private, in order to fulfill some of those more sensitive functions that had been exposed in the course of the church hearings.

And so US Institute of Peace is one of those NGOs that had particular focus on conflict regions. But, of course, as I think you -- you suggested earlier, peace requires at the very least, an asterisk. Because there involves a lot of things, that conventional, most American citizens would not think should belong as part of the portfolio of something calling itself an institute of peace.

GLENN: So what was the thing with the -- with this Taliban member that was getting money from us?

DARREN: Right. So this is an interesting case. So there's a whole saga of a takeover of the US institute of peace under -- under DOGE.

And that's really a fascinating story unto itself. Just to give you a sense of what these characters were like. They barricaded themselves in the offices.

They sabotaged the physical infrastructure of the building. There were reports of there being loaded guns within the offices.

GLENN: Wow!

DARREN: There was one, like, hostage situation where they held a security guard under basically kind of a false imprisonment type situation. It was extremely intense.

Far more so than the better known story of USAID. And in the course of all of that, they tried to delete a terabyte of data, of accounting information that would indicate what kind of stuff they were up to.

What kind of people they were paying. And in the course of that, DOGE found that one of the people on their payroll. Was this curious figure, who had a prominent role in the Taliban government. And then seemed to kind of play a bunch of angles across each other.

Sort of one of these sixer types in the middle of Afghanistan.

The question is, what the heck is an organization like this, having an individual, who is a former Taliban member on their payroll.

It underscores how incredibly bizarre the whole arrangement is. And to just reinforce that. I think even more bizarre than having this former Taliban guy on the payroll is the kind of schizophrenic posture exhibited by the chief -- one truly bizarre thing is that one of the US Institute of Peace's main kind of policy agendas was basically lamenting the fact that the opium trade had dissipated under Taliban leadership. They had multiple reports coming out, basically saying, this is horrible, that the opium trade is diminished under the Taliban. Meaning, finding some way to restore it. How bizarre is that!

GLENN: What was their thinking?

DARREN: Well, it's -- it's very strange, and it depends on what kind of rabbit holes you want to go down. But the whole story of opium and Afghanistan and its connection to, you know, government entities, is a -- is a very intricate and delicate and fascinating one. But it seems very clear that the US Institute of Peace was involved in that story to some degree because their public reports. They had a full-the time guy of basically lamenting the fact that the opium trade dissipated under the Taliban. And, meanwhile, they're funding this former Taliban guy.

GLENN: Unbelievable. Now, ProPublica got this. And you have released the statement on it. And ProPublica just completely white-washed this -- said this guy was a victim, and his family was taken hostage. Was his family ever taken hostage because he was exposed?

And correct the ProPublica story, would you?

DARREN: Yeah, I mean, the ProPublica thing, as usual and as expected was a total joke.

GLENN: Yes.

DARREN: I mean, this guy, I'm not an expert on this particular person's history. But what's very clear is he was a former Taliban guy, and he was probably one of these people, who was playing all sides, made a lot of enemies. I know that there were several kind of attempts on his life by the Taliban, in the course of various -- various decades.

This has nothing to do with -- with DOGE.

I mean, he's a known quantity in the region.

And somebody who has made a lot of enemies.

And he was not -- he was on the payroll of the US institute of peace.

And nobody is expecting something like that. So then, and, again, there's this sort of hostile takeover situation.

Where the people are barricading he themselves in. Trying to delete all this data.

And sure enough, what's in the data, is stuff like this.

These random former Taliban guy, making his contract with $130,000.

GLENN: You know, this is the -- this is the real Deep State stuff, that I think bothers people so much.

Look, we expect our CIA to do stuff, we don't necessarily want to do it. We expect it.

When it's in the State Department.

When every department is pushing out money to NGOs to overthrow governments and everything else.

It's out of control!

It's just completely out of control.

And who is overseeing all of that.

DARREN: That's a great question.

I think part of the NGO -- UCEF was almost a cutout of a cutout.

A fourth of its money came from USAID.

In many ways, it was a cutout of USAID. Which itself was a cutout.

So there are many layers of distance. Plausible deniability.

And UCEF, I think institutionally really perfected this chameleon structure of being able to plausibly present itself as government. When that was convenient for what they were doing.

And also to present itself as a private organization, when that was convenient.

It's a very intricate setup that they had, that was truly optimized for this chameleon character of plausible denial operations. In conflict zones. Doing God knows what, with American taxpayer money.

And it's just an absolute hornet's nest.

We have recovered that terabyte that they tried to delete. And once we get things settled in the building itself, I intend to do a kind of transparency effort, whereby we release all of this material to the public.

GLENN: Good. Good.

DARREN: Just like I'm doing at the State Department. I'm currently acting as secretary at the State Department. And doing a transparency effort here. After I eliminated the global engagement center, which was sort of the internal censorship office within the State Department, decided, we've got to -- we've got to air this out to the public.

So within the next couple of weeks.

We'll have our next tranche of helps you of thousands of emails, documenting what this were doing.

GLENN: I would love you to go back on, through those emails.

I think you guys in the State Department are doing an amazing job. Thanks for being on.