RADIOFebruary 15, 2023

Glenn: UFOs a DECOY away from Nord Stream Pipeline rumors?

It’s shocking how little information the U.S. government has told the American people about the UFOs that we targeted over the weekend, and Senator Mike Lee — who recently attended a briefing about it all — agrees. He joins Glenn to explain why that Senate briefing was so ‘frustrating’ and he questions why these objects were destroyed in the first place. Plus, Glenn and Sen. Lee theorize another possibility behind the federal government's focus on the UFOs: Are they a DISTRACTION or a DECOY away from recent rumors about the U.S.' possible involvement in the Nord Stream Pipeline’s destruction? Because if that's true, Glenn says, we’re heading down a ‘very dark road…’

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We go to Senator Mike Lee. Hello, Senator, how are you, sir?

MIKE: Doing great, thank you very much, Glenn.

GLENN: I want to give you a couple of headlines.

US intercepts four Russian war planes yesterday, near Alaska.

The next headline.

US warns, it will defend the Philippines, after Chinese laser was shot at their Coast Guard.
Let's see here. Norway warns of growing importance of Russian nuclear deterrent. China's President Xi conveyed his support yesterday, for Iran, during a visit from the first visit from the Iranian Prime Minister.

We are -- we are not in good shape.

Do you and members of the intelligence committee, have any idea, what's going on?

MIKE: Well, we know some things are going on. We know certain things are happening. There's a whole lot we don't know. And in particular, there's a whole lot we don't know about the so-called objects, brought down by fighter jets, firing missiles over the weekend.

That was the focus of yesterday's classified briefing.

GLENN: Okay. So, Mike, we hear balloons. We hear that they now -- the Pentagon came out yesterday, after your briefing and said, you know what, it's nothing. These are probably just commercial balloons. But we have the Canadians sending out the HazMat teams, to look for this, and we hear this morning, that they are UAPs. Which I guess could be balloons. But usually, those are, you know, something solid. These were the size of cars.

And they weren't balloons. They were metal.

Is that true?

MIKE: Yeah. So, first of all, we don't really know what they are. I don't know how they claim now, to know what their nature is. Whether they're commercial, military, or from some other origin.

Because they haven't found them. I -- I suspected at this point, that they're theorizing on what it might be. That is what was so frustrating yesterday, they held this classified briefing, to tell us what happened.

And they showed us, to tell us basically what had happened. We had all hoped and expected, based on public statements, that they had covered what was left of these objects.

And that they were studying them. They hadn't found them, at least as of yesterday, when they briefed us. They hadn't found them. Because we don't really know what they are.

GLENN: I don't know what you can and can't say. Come on. We launched missiles. We know we have the video from the cockpits. We know that.

MIKE: Yeah. We repeatedly asked them about that activity. Show us anything about documentation of video footage, anything like that. They said, yeah. We have some that aren't really useful. The object is so small. So far away.

That the resolution doesn't really do anything for us.

GLENN: And why would we shoot them down?

MIKE: It's an excellent question. So we shot them down, not knowing what they were, just based on their altitude. We just knew that they were there.

But I -- I still can't fathom why it made sense to scramble fighter jets, shoot missiles at them.

Bring them down. When we have no idea, what they are.

GLENN: Okay.

MIKE: They're apparently not that concerned about it. Or else, they would be frantic. And they're not that.

GLENN: Okay. We found out last night, that the United States government had been tracking that Chinese balloon, for over a week. Once it was launched from China, we locked on to it, and tracked it. Did they tell you that yesterday?

MIKE: There are things in there, that I probably shouldn't repeat, from what I know. But it's -- it's safe to say, that we did know, before this thing hit the United States, that it was in the air.

We were aware of it. And we knew what was happening.

And so at that moment, it really should have brought the thing down. And at whatever moment they -- they realized, that it was coming on to the United States. And that it had the ability to collect data, they should have brought it down.

We kept hearing last week, about the fact that, well, been safe, to bring it down to the United States.

Nonsense.

GLENN: Bullcrap.

MIKE: Even at 60,000 feet, these things don't have a glide capacity. They're balloons. So if you puncture the balloon, it will head straight down. Yes, there is a debris field. But there's a lot of space, between Alaska. Off the coast of Alaska. To be clear.

And the rest of the United States. Where there are miles and miles around them, where there are no people.

And they should have brought it down. Here's what I think, Glenn. What I suspect was, these were makeup calls. They were compensating last weekend, for what they didn't do the previous week. Which is take bold aggressive action. Only, they took bold aggressive action on the wrong objects, at the wrong time.

GLENN: Are we going to know? Do you think we'll ever know this?

MIKE: I certainly hope so. It seems almost unbelievable to me. That we shut down three of these things over the weekend. We didn't cover any of them.

And if there was no immediate threat, as there apparently was -- in the explanation we've heard. Enter space, where aviation happens. You know, okay. Fine.

That's understandable. Sometimes you need to bring things down. But there was no immediate threat.

If that being the case, why can't they use a different kind of aircraft, one that could have surveyed up close, before shooting it down.

You can't really do that. We have a fighter jet, traveling at the speed of sound.

GLENN: Correct. I got to -- it is like our government is being run by, you know, Mrs. Hoffelmeyer's fourth grade class.

It is. I mean, and just the boys.

Because the girls would be a little smarter.

The boys, is just like, let's blow it up out of the sky. This is crazy talk.

There is another possibility here. That they are using this -- whatever it is. That they're using this, to get people off of the Nord Stream pipeline story, from Seymour Hersh.

And I don't know how much you can talk about it, or -- or what. What you know.

But, Mike, I find this extraordinarily concerning. Because there's only a few countries that could do it. None of them really had the incentive, or they would have let us know. If it was another country, would you have gotten a briefing on that?

Do you think, if they would have told us?

MIKE: It's -- it's hard to say.

I -- we don't necessarily get those briefings, just because they feel like it. Usually, it's because a member is asking.

Or because there's been national news about something. And they decide to brief all members. I tell you, I haven't gotten a briefing on this. I'm trying to get one.

All this, of course, goes back to this report published by Journalist Seymour Hersh, last week, indicating that according to his story, there were specialized US Navy teams that planted explosives there. And that the United States was responsible. I don't know whether this is true. I'm trying to ascertain whether it's true.

But I will say this, we need to approach a near peer nuclear-armed geopolitical adversary, with extreme caution.

And so I would like to think, that if we were going to do something like this, this would be some kind of clear authorization from Congress.

You, the chief executive. The president of the United States, commander-in-chief doesn't have the ability to take us to war.

I don't think it's a stretch to say, that doing this, not just to Russia -- a nuclear arms near geopolitical adversaries.

GLENN: All of Europe.

MIKE: It's also an attack on France and on Germany, and it affects a lot of Europe.

It's also an attack on France and Germany, and it affects a lot of Germany. I would like to think, it gets congressional authorization of some sort, before doing that.

GLENN: Well, he said, that there was a way around that. Because obviously, they should have done that, if we were involved.

I just don't believe that we -- that all of the allies, with all of our technology, and everything else.

We can't figure out, okay.

It looks like it's probably these people. I -- I personally, because they're so zipped up about it. It's got to come from the West. And the only ones that can do it really, are France and us. Or Great Britain.

And those guys won't do it. But, you know, you look at -- you look at this, Mike.

And if -- even if that's not true, can we find out if anything is true? As far as, there's these secret SEAL teams, that can be trained off the books, so Congress doesn't know about it?

MIKE: Yeah. Look, I think there are a lot of details, at least enough details, in the Seymour Hersh piece. That there should be fairly amenable for being proven or disproven.

Because either certain things match up, or they don't. It may be easier to disprove than to prove. But I think that can get us a lot of the way there. And there are a lot of others that could have done it. In theory, it could be China. Perhaps China wanted to make sure it had access to more of Russia's natural gas, and that it could get it at a lower price. In theory, it could have been China.

But -- and there are a handful of others, who there could have been. But this is worrisome for me, Glenn. For the simple reason.

Look, I don't know Seymour Hersh. I'm not familiar with any of the facts, alleged in his report.

But there are a couple of things that worry. Number one, on February 9th, 2022. President Biden during a press conference, said that if -- if Russia attacks Ukraine, that there will no longer be a Nord Stream two.

The journalists who had asked him the questions, about what he meant, was doing her job. And followed up with, what do you mean by that?

That pipeline is not under our control. And he reassured her. Believe me, we have the means to do it. And it will be done.

It will not exist.

GLENN: Well, what --

MIKE: So when you cut the fact with the fact that in this country, we have for a long time, seen overreaches from the executives, to the point where a lot of people accept now, that in the name of a clandestine operation, the United States can effectively wage war with them -- an act of Congress, authoring it. That really does concern me.

Not that I'm certain, that we did this. Because it's certainly not. It's not that I could verify the Hersh article. I can't. It really troubles me, that I can't really rule it out.

GLENN: And you can't get a briefing on it. All right. Hang on just a second.

Because when we come back, I want to ask you, do we want to know.

Stu and I were talking about this, this morning. And we were like, you know, the blue pill might be the one to take on this.

MIKE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Because this is an impeachable. Maybe worse. It's an act of war.

It's -- I don't know anybody that is going to fight against Russia, because -- if they attack us. Because we -- we blew up the pipeline. Europe -- I mean, the world will hate us.

And it means war. So I don't know -- do we want to know? And we'll come back with Mike Lee for that answer in a minute.

If pain is a part of your life, you may have got to the point, where you believe, you have to take it lying down, sometimes literally.

I'm here to tell you, I understand that. Because I was right at the point, where I'm just going to lay down.

Thank God I have a wife, that is -- woman. She gets tired of listening me gripe about things. Because I gripe about a lot of stuff.

But if it wasn't for her, I might never have tried Relief Factor and got it my life back. Listen, please. Please. Just try it.

If it doesn't work, yes, you're out $20. But $20. What is that? If you can get your life back. 70 percent of the people who try it, find the relief. And go on to order, month after month. So please, just try it. I didn't believe it would work for me either.

ReliefFactor.com. ReliefFactor.com. Or call 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief. 19.95. ReliefFactor.com.

Feel the difference.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: All right. Mike Lee. Do we want to know?

MIKE: Look, I think the American people do deserve to be in charge with their government.

GLENN: I agree with that.

MIKE: It's very much a mixed bag. Because as you alluded to before the break, the answer to this question, it turns out the United States was responsible, has very dire consequences.

And I don't -- I'm not even talking yet about what happens within our government.

What the consequences there might be.

GLENN: Is this -- does this rise -- does this rise to more than an impeachable offense.

MIKE: Quite possibly, yes.

I believe it does.

Because if you go to such great lengths, to engage in an attack. A provocative offensive attack, on a a nuclear armed geopolitical adversary, and you do so in a manner that violates our Constitution.

Because that's how I see it anyway. It seems to me like an act of war, last I checked.

War can't be just declared, just decided by our president.

And sure, I know clandestine operations have. Discreet military strikes are something different, than something provocative on this scale. That inevitably lead to and, in fact, are war.

GLENN: Yeah. So if we would find out, that this is even a real possibility, what happens?

What do we do?

How do we tell our allies? How do we tell Russia, so we can kind of -- before we say, I'm going to tell you something. But you have to promise not to be mad.

I mean, we've got to -- you know, in that case. Yeah. We have to promos, that you're not going to launch a nuclear strike.

How do we tell them this?

MIKE: I -- I don't know.

That's part of what makes this such a difficult thing.

But one thing I do know is that ignorance is never something that will put us in a position of strength.

I do think it's important if we get answers on this. I -- I would like to know.

And -- and whether we end up finding out or not, whether this thing is buried so far, so deep by the military intelligence industrial complex in Washington, that we can't get to it. Whether we find out or not, whether we did it or not, I think it's very important for us to have this national conversation.

GLENN: It is.

MIKE: Because for decades, we've seen this gradual accretion of power, within the executive branch, when it comes to the war powers.

And increasingly, Glenn, the way wars are fought these days, they don't typically have soldiers lined up in a battlefield, in corresponding parallel columns.

No. You've got -- you've got stuff like this. This is war.

In the 21st century.

And so we need to have a national conversation about the fact, that today, as -- at the time of the founding, we need our greatest, the people's representatives, to make the decision about going to war.

And clandestine operations need to be reined in to something truly discreet. This one wasn't.

GLENN: Mike Lee, thank you so much for everything you're doing.

And we pray for you. And we'll keep you in our prayers for your safety. As you continue to go down this road.

Thank you. You bet. Buh-bye.

Do you want to know?

It's like

it's almost as if, if we don't -- if it did happen. And we don't expose it. Then we get what we deserve.

STU: Yeah. I mean, of course, I want to know.

But there's that feeling of -- you know, of course, Russia knows, if our media is starting to know. Then Russia knows too. The question is: If it becomes public. And it becomes obvious to everybody. Then Russia has to respond to -- to do something for their own people.

GLENN: They have to.

STU: And that response, even if it is, you know --

GLENN: But maybe the people can temper our response to theirs.

STU: Right.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

Like, okay. We deserve that.

STU: It's a dark road though.

GLENN: It's a very dark road. Very dark road.

STU: Look, the blue pill was the right one to take. Just take the freaking blue pill, get along with everyone else.

Why Jim Acosta’s AI Parkland victim “interview” is GROTESQUE

Former CNN host Jim Acosta recently “interviewed” an AI-generated depiction of Parkland shooting victim Joaquin Oliver. Glenn Beck calls the stunt dystopian and sick, asking: “What does it truly mean to be alive if, in death, you’re more useful?”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So here's a story that I think, if we don't stop and pay attention to right now, just one small story, it may seem like something small. But if we don't pay attention to it right now. I don't think we recognize what it means to be human in a generation, from now, if that long. Journalist. I shouldn't say journalist.

Publicity hound Jim Acosta just did an interview -- I can't even say that. Just did -- I don't even know what you would call it.

Did a publicity stunt, not with a witness.
Not a grieving parent. He sat down with an AI ghost.

It's an AI recreation of a 17-year-old kid, named Joaquin Oliver. He was murdered in the Parkland Massacre.

And then he called it journalism. He called it a conversation, but it wasn't.

It was neither!

It was -- it wasn't even human. Let me play this grotesque pantomime for you. Listen.

VOICE: Joaquin, I would like to know, what your solution would be for gun violence.

VOICE: Great question. I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support, and community engagement. We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard.

It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding; what do you think about that?

VOICE: I think that's a great idea, Joaquin.
(laughter)

STU: That is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life. I had -- I had seen all the headlines. I hadn't actually seen the...
(laughter)

GLENN: Now, it is so --

STU: Sorry.

GLENN: It's so bad, it's funny, at this point. Right? It's just horrible.

I want to put this into perspective: This is a digital ventriloquist act. He's a puppet. It's the image of a dead kid, long buried, animated. Like a puppet, for the politics of those who are still living.

Now, let me ask you something, that, you know, we haven't dared to ask out loud yet.

And that is, what does it mean?

What his it truly mean to be alive?

In death, you're more useful.

What are the Republicans saying. Or sorry, the Democrats saying right now to some of the people in Congress.

They're saying, you need to take a bullet. Why?

Because you're more useful, if you're dead.

If somebody assassinates you. So what does it mean to be alive, if in death, you're more useful?

What does it mean when your image. Your voice. Your soul as captured by a memory or photograph, can be summoned back again.

Not by God. But by algorithms and agenda.

I hate to go all religious on you. But I have to tell you, if this isn't the making of a graven image, I don't know what is.

Thou shall not making a graven image.

You don't make for yourself an idol or any likeness of what is in heaven, above, or on earth beneath.

You know, the Native Americans used to -- they would never let you take your picture.

Some of them. Some tribes.

They would never let you take your picture. Because they thought it would steal your soul.

This doesn't have a soul. This is taking your image, bringing you back to life, without a soul.

When man starts creating a likeness, to wield power or emotion, we stop serving God. And we start serving ourselves.

And I'm going to be generous here. And say, don't blame the parents.

I don't -- I don't question their grief, in any way, shape, or form.

But this -- this -- this is no longer theirs.

This is not their son. This is a political puppet.

The minute Joaquin's AI avatar spoke political opinions into a camera, it stopped being about grief, and became propaganda!

And this, my friend, is only the beginning.

What happens when governments use AI resurrected faces for propaganda?

What happens when terrorists Use Deepfake hostages?

Hostages who are already dead? Pleading for help?

You don't think that could happen with Hamas?

You don't think that Hamas couldn't have made an image, in fact, the video that we say last week, could have very well been AI.

And the kid could be dead.

Now, it's not. But that's what's coming.

What happens when we begin to trust synthetic testimony, over human -- actual human experience?

This isn't just immoral.

This is very, very dangerous. This is soul-erasing.

This is post-human.

You are entering a world now, that is -- it's post-human!

This is the dystopian world. And we're just beginning to step into it. We're entering an age, where the dead can be programmed, to speak the words of the living.

Where the brief is nothing more than a marketing tool.

Where death is not your end!

But just the data set now, to be parsed and projected. And used politically.

And here's the real sick part of this: The more meaningful your death, the more valuable your ghost.

If that doesn't shake to you your core, nothing is going to.

If this doesn't wake you up to the dangers of AI, nothing will.

If this doesn't wake you up to go, oh, dear God, I've got to get back to the basics, I have to start asking the questions, what does it mean to be human? Nothing will!

We -- we have to draw really strong, ethical hard lines in the sand, on the use of AI. The use of likeness of the dead. It should be codified into law, internationally. And I'm not saying, you know, you're not bringing characters back. You know, you're not bringing -- you're not bringing things back to, you know, show them in movies, or for entertainment or whatever.

But when you're bringing dead children back, I don't know. I think there's a problem here.

There's a problem. We -- and we also have to teach our kids discernment here. Critical thinking.

You know, and more than critical thinking. Moral reasoning has got to be taught.

We need a generation that knows the difference between the real and the artificial.

Between the sacred and the synthetic.

Because that's going to be blurred.

All of it is blurred. How long before a Jim Acosta clown isn't the one doing it, but somebody serious? Transparency, from media. From tech.

Not after the fact. But before the images even appear on the screen.

Now, to his credit, he did say, this was AI. Of course. But it's a ghost!

We have to reawaken the soul, the concept of the soul. This is why I've said for years, that Ray Kurzweil is one of the scariest guys I have ever met. Because he doesn't believe in the soul.

He believes that that -- what you just saw, is just as real, as the real kid.

Some -- the soul can't be copied. It can't be coded.

It can't be commodified.

Because we lose our soul, in our culture.

If we lose it in our -- in our culture, in our politics. In our mourning. In our journalism.

Then you've got nothing left.

And doesn't Joaquin Oliver deserve dignity in life? Everybody knows he deserves peace in death.
Right?

What he didn't deserve, is to be animated by code, to deliver a political message like a branded mascot.

I'm sorry, but if this is the parents' doing, the parents -- the parents, shame on you. Shame on you.

I -- I understand your grief as much as a person can, that hasn't lost a child. I understand your grief, but this is sick.

You know where this road leads? It lees to a future where grief can be licensed.

Where every dead child becomes a campaign.

And where being alive, no longer requires a pulse.

Just a well-trained AI model.

You never die!

That's not compassion. That is not progress. That is hell, wearing the mask of empathy.

Shame on you, Jim Acosta!

Because out of all the people that could have done this, you're only doing it for PR. You're only doing it because you need the attention.

It's sick. And Americans have to stand up and say, no more. You have to at least, in your personal life, make a decision, what is life?

And what is death worth?

How Violent Mobs Took Over the Democratic Party — Expert's Warning!

Glenn Beck talks with Kyle Shideler, homeland security and counterterrorism expert at the Center for Security Policy, about the troubling rise in politically motivated physical attacks coming from the far-left. What truly unites all these groups which have seemingly interests, and what does the Trump administration do to eliminate this growing threat before the problem spirals out of control?

Watch This FULL Episode of Glenn TV HERE

Trump Just Uncovered a MUCH BIGGER Scandal than Russiagate | Glenn TV | Ep 450

For almost a decade, Glenn Beck has tried connecting the dots between Ukraine, Russiagate, the Open Society Foundations, and the weaponization of government under Obama and Biden. Recent revelations from the ODNI disclosure from Tulsi Gabbard and the Durham annex reveal a scandal that goes deeper than Russiagate to expose the full scope of the operation to take out President Trump. Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and author of "Blood Money," reveals the depth of Hillary Clinton and George Soros' corruption and how it all ties into the Trump Ukraine impeachment. Sean Davis, CEO and co-founder of the Federalist, discusses whether people like former CIA Director John Brennan or even Obama will face justice and what crimes the DOJ could charge them with.

Why Democrats SUDDENLY “care” about gerrymandering

What is gerrymandering? And why are Texas Democrats suddenly screaming about it while ironically fleeing to Illinois, the most gerrymandered state in the nation? Glenn Beck breaks down gerrymandering and why he believes the Texas Democrats don't really care about "justice."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. I want to play a couple of sound bites that came out yesterday.

First of all, let me start here with cut seven. This is a state representative from Texas, Ron Reynolds. He went on CNN.

And said, he wasn't worried about anything that the State of Texas was -- was claiming to do to him, because they were fleeing the state. Because they're on the right side of history. Here's cut seven.

VOICE: I'm not worried about Governor Abbott's threats of going to jail, or a $500 fine, because we're standing on the right side of history, making our own trouble, to fight, to preserve, and protect our democracy. We're on the right side of history. We're not beholden to the MAGA extremists, that are trying to disenfranchise black and brown communities. We're doing everything we can, to protect Texans. And so we're not going to cower to Governor Abbott's attempts to put us into jail. This is worth our democracy. This is not just about Texas. As Dr. King said, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. This is about protecting our democracy.

Because if they can do it in Texas, they can do it anywhere else. So we're going to stand strong.

We're not going to back down. And we're going to keep pressing forward. To protect every single Texan. So they won't be disenfranchised.

We won't go back to the days of Jim Crow. We will stand up to racial gerrymandering.

GLENN: Okay. This is -- this is crazy.

There's so much there.

I mean, first of all, be really careful when you say you're on the right side of history.
I mean, I don't know about you, but I question all the time. And I think this is really healthy. Am I on the right side of history?

I don't know. I don't know what the answer. History will tell me the answer. Am I on the right side?

Am I -- am I fighting for the things that are right, correct, eternally true, and righteous?

I don't know. I mean, there is so many things that I go back and forth on, that I just don't know.

And I think that's really important to question yourself. So anybody, when they are firm on, you're on the right side of history. And we know. We don't question. We're on the right side of history.

Really? Because you were the ones with ESG. Forcing people to follow these rules like, you know, there's no difference between a man and a woman.

You know, men in women's sports.

Men can have a baby.

Really?

That's not working out well.

You know, that you're on the side that Dr. Martin Luther King was wrong.

That -- that the color of the skin does matter. That was your position. And you said, you were on the right side of history.

I don't think you're on the right side of history won that one. You know, it seems to be falling apart on you. Because now you're quoting Dr. Martin Luther King.

I thought we didn't -- we didn't agree with Dr. Martin Luther King.

I mean, that was your position, two years ago!

So when you're -- when you listen to anybody who says, they're on the right side of history. Be very, very careful.

You know, the one thing that I'm absolutely certain of. 100 percent certain of, is I'm not certain of anything.

The more I learn, the less certain I become, on certain things.

Right side of history, I don't know. I'm going to do my best. And let God sort it out, at the end.

I don't know. And then they say, if they can do this in Texas. If the Republicans can do this in Texas, they can do it anywhere.

They have been doing it everywhere, since 1812!

If you knew the history of gerrymandering, it comes from elder -- or Gerry Elbridge. Right? Gerry Elbridge, I think. Or Elbridge Gerry, that's it. Elbridge Gerry. He was a founding father. 1812, he is the governor, I think of Massachusetts. They start to draw these squiggly lines for the Congressional map. It's later, in the 1840s, called gerrymandering.

But that's how it started. They've been doing it forever. And the worst place, well, I'll get to that here in just a second.

So let me play the second clip here. And that is, on the Don Lemon show. Who knew he still had a show?

Another Texas state rep. Yolanda Jones said this, cut six.

VOICE: Then immigration happened, and everybody thought they accepted this. They don't accept this. They are showing us who they are.

We should believe them. And we better have the courage to stand up. Otherwise, we will follow for anything.

And in this country, we will be defeated, deported. I mean, we will lose all of our rights. And if you think it can't happen. It can. And I will liken this to the Holocaust.

People are like, well, how did the Holocaust happen?

How is anybody in the position to kill all these people?

Well, good people become silent.

Or good people didn't realize, that what happens to them, can very still happen to me and somebody I love.

And so even if you made it, you have an obligation to help people who can't. Because God forbid, they end up targeting you, and your family.

VOICE: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Okay. I agree with everything she said, except what she's applying it to!

How is this the Jerry -- I mean, I think it's a little insulting to those who had relatives stuffed into ovens! To say, that gerrymandering is like the Holocaust!

But maybe that's just me!

But you know what this is all about?

This is all about when a group of people in the government, no longer believe in its own people!

When 57 elected Democrats from Texas, they didn't just walk out on their duties, they walked out on the people.

They fled the state to avoid voting on redistricting maps, they say, are unfair.

They say, they're standing up for democracy. But where did they run?

This tells you a lot in the story. Illinois. New York. Massachusetts.

The states, whose maps are textbook examples of political gerrymandering!

They ran to Massachusetts, where it was -- it was Elbridge Gerry, that gerrymandering is named after, he was the governor of Massachusetts!

They fled to the belly of the beast, while crying wolf back home. So the first thing you need to know, this is not about justice. This is about power. And they are betting that you are too distracted and your friends are too distracted or discouraged to notice.

So let me be clear on what is actually happening here.

GLENN: Okay. So the Department of Justice in Texas. This is what's really happening. They decided that the Texas congressional map violates the Voting Rights Act. Not because it eliminates minority representation. But because it doesn't create coalition districts where different racial groups are lumped together to form artificial minorities.

So what they're saying, in bureaucratic doublespeak is, Texas has to draw maps, that elect Democrats. That's the game.

This is not about race. It's about arithmetic. If a Republican map spreads voters to thin its race, but if a Democratic map does the same to Republicans, it's equity!

That's -- that's not -- that's not the law. That's manipulation. And our Founders talked about this. In Federalist Papers number ten, James Madison warned us of the dangers of factions. Organized groups that put their own interests above the public good, and that's what we're experiencing everywhere.

He said, let me quote: The instability, injustice, and confusion, introduced into the public councils, have been the mortal diseases which popular governments have everywhere perished, end quote.

That's what this is. This is a faction. A political machine. So drunk on power. That it can't even pretend to be consistent, anywhere.

They invoke democracy. And then they run away from their duty to vote. They wear shirts that say, let the people vote. While ignoring votes in New York, that ignore an independent redistricting commission.

This is the rot Madison warned us about. Faction over function. Power over principle.

So let's look at Illinois for a second.

In Illinois, they didn't try to just gerrymander there.

They eradicated the Republicans.

They drew a map, so surgical. So cynical.

That analysts have now said, this is the worst gerrymander in the country!

It's in Illinois.

Republicans, now. I want you to hear this.

Republicans now hold three out of 17 seats.

Okay.

Well, the voters spoke.

Well, did they?

They won over 40 percent of the vote.

40 percent of the vote!

But they only hold three out of 17 seats.

That's not representative.

That's gerrymandering!

And now, Texas Democrats, they're running for cover.

They're hiding behind the very injustice they claim to oppose.

They also don't recognize, that by millions, because of their policies. Millions of people have moved in to Texas.

Since the census.

There is no real representation of -- of the people. Because millions of people have moved in.

So what do we do?

Well, this is something I think you're going to hear me talk about a lot lately. Is look to the future. And rebuild.

First thing we have to do is expose the hypocrisy on this.

Not with shouting. But with actual facts.

You have to use your voice.

You have to first teach what gerrymandering is.

It's legal. Okay. I don't like it.

I wish -- I will do a beach blackboard today.

You know, I don't have a blackboard anywhere near my house. But I do have a beach near my house. And I was out explaining this to somebody the other day. And I just took a stick, and I wrote it out on the beach. And I'm going to do this today. Because there is a way to fix this.

But you have to share the map. You have to show the math. Because the truth still matters. We have to defend the Constitution. The tenth amendment. State sovereignty. It's not a throwaway line. Texas has the right to draw the maps without DC micromanagement. Okay? They can draw the maps the way they want to draw the maps. The same thing with Illinois. They can draw the maps the way they want.

It's not fair. I don't like it. But it is the law!

Then we have to call for local reforms. We have to have independent redistricting commissions, that actually mean something.

Not performative democracy.

But actual checks and balances. I don't know if you can get there.

But the more local we make this, the better!

See, you know, gerrymandering makes us more extreme.

Because they'll run a line of constituents through a neighborhood. One side of the street, because this group on this side of the street, votes for Democrats. And on the other side of the street, it's Republicans. They literally will run that line, through to gather up all of the Democrats on the street, and forget the Republicans.

So that means that that Congress person no longer has to moderate at all.

They don't -- they don't -- the more extreme they become, the better off!

Because they're only talking to their side.

When you gerrymander, which we have forever. Our Founders warned against it.

Because you're creating these factions. You're creating distance between each other, and you have to equip your neighbors on this.

If they don't understand this, walk them through it. Print the maps. Compare the numbers. Build an informed electorate.

That's what -- that's our job. That's our job. Nobody will do this for us. Don't look to the Republicans to do it. They will spin it their own way.

And the other way, is refuse to retreat.

If 57 lawmakers can run away from their posts, make sure everybody knows, you're not going to run away from yours. We stay. We vote.

We hold the line.

You know, this -- this whole thing. Everything we do today, everything. Everything in the news you see, this isn't about Epstein.

This isn't about redistricting. This isn't about immigrants. This is about the restoration of trust! Trust! All of it. Can you trust the people who are redesigning the maps?

No.

Why?

Because it's in their best interest to gerrymander.

Well, I'm only doing it because they're doing it.

Okay. Then maybe you do that, bit let's work towards stopping this. Let's -- let's work towards a system where we don't gerrymander. Okay? But that's only going to be solved at the state level, where it belongs. You know, America can't survive a political class that lies with one face, and governs with another. But it can survive if her people, the remnant of those who really understand America and understand our history. If we rise with open eyes, with strong backs. And hearts grounded in principle, when we realize, we're not powerless. We're not pawns.

We're the ones with power.

That's when everything will change.

And I will tell you, I think I said this earlier today.

I'm not sure where the storm is.

I know the storm is on the beach.

I know it's on shore.

I just don't know what part of the storm is on shore. I don't know if we're hitting the worst part of it yet.

I don't think so.

But I know it's onshore now.

We have to batten down the hatches, and then start, you know, piling supplies up. And I'm not talking about boards to board up the windows.

I'm talking about building up our supplies to rebuild. Because this storm is going to pass us.

And I don't know what the devastation is going to be like on the other side.

But, you know, just like Mercury One does.

We -- we put supplies, just outside of the storm's pattern.

Because we know, we've got to get them as close as we can, to where the storm is supposed to hit.

Without it being hit itself, so once the storm passes, we can push in, and we can rebuild fast.

When this storm is over, we're going to have trouble, if we're standing here with no supplies, nothing prepared.

To rebuild quickly.

Because that's when people will realize, there's nobody coming.

There is nobody going to rebuild.

There's no help.

If we're not there to help, that's when things get really nuts!

So I -- I just -- I'm very excited for next year.

And you'll understand a little more, you know, in the coming days and weeks of -- of why I'm not talking about it yet.

But I can't wait to get started. Because I just know what we have to do.

And that is something that I don't feel like I understood for a very long time. You know. I knew I was supposed to warn. But I always felt there was something more to do.

I think my mission has changed. I've been given a new calling.

And it's to rebuild!

Rebuild and rebuild right now.