RADIO

White House TARGETS ammunition sales with ‘INSIDIOUS’ plan

Thanks to a recent report from The Federalist, we now know of an ‘insidious’ White House plan to significantly alter commercial sales of ammunition. But not only would this plot skyrocket the price of ammunition for everyday consumers, but it could create a national security risk by limiting one factory’s ability to produce for the military under war-time demand as well. Larry Keane, from the National Shooting Sports Foundation, joins Glenn to detail this White House move, and he explains how he knows the government is LYING about it too.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There was a story, I think it was last week in the Federalist. And we saw it. And we began to do our own homework on it. Because it was very, very disturbing. And it came out of the Federalist. While Democrats claimed to engage in talks on bipartisan gun legislation in good faith, the White House is behind the scenes, trying to shut down nationwide ammunition sales. In northwestern Missouri, major government-owned ammunition plant is now facing closure, as the Biden administration escalates its war on American gun owners. The Lake City ammunition factory is one of the largest manufacturers of -- of 556 and 223 ammunition, which is the most popular caliber for the most targeted firearm in the country, the AR-15. In operation since 1941 to produce ammunition for the U.S. Army. The government contracts with the private firm, Winchester, to run the enterprise. And sell any excess supplies to the open market. So here's what happened: Winchester called them. I'm sorry. The government called Winchester. Apparently, allegedly. And said, you know, you've got a cute little business going on here. And it would be horrible for something to happen to that business. You know what I'm saying? So what I would like you to do is maybe -- maybe stop selling the 30 percent of the ammunition, to the private market. And Winchester said, most likely, well, if we do that, then if there's a war, we can't ramp up to be able to make more ammunition for the war machine. I don't think you heard me. You're going to stop selling that ammunition. Now, celebrity voices are impersonated in this scenario. But I think that's pretty much what happened there. Otherwise, maybe we find somebody else to make our ammunition. You know what I'm saying?
So public/private partnerships always work out so very well. So we started doing our homework. It looks like Susan Rice was involved in this. But, again, nobody is talking because they're all afraid of their legs being broken. One group, that we have spoke to, that knows the situation. Very well. Is the national shooting sports foundation. And we have Larry Keen on with us. Hello, Larry. How are you?
LARRY: Good to be with you, Glenn. How are you?
GLENN: Very good. Very good. So, you know, I know -- I know it wasn't quite as mob-like. Perhaps with Susan Rice involved. Maybe it was more. But can you tell me, is the just of what I just said correct?
LARRY: Basically, yes. Winchester was contacted by the army. That runs or owns the Lake City amnesty facility. That Winchester runs under our contract. And they were told that the army is considering issuing a policy edict, which Winchester would no longer be able to sell into the commercial market. Excess ammunition. Above the needs of the military. To the commercial market. Which it counts for -- between 30 and 40 percent of the market for 556 ammunition. Which is the caliber most commonly chambered for modern sporting rifles, including AR-15.
GLENN: That's crazy.
LARRY: So that's going into effect on the commercial market for gun owners, as well as to harm national security and military preparedness.
GLENN: So there's a couple of things here. First of all, let's talk about the commercial side. The commercial side. You dropped 30 to 40 percent. Your price. I've read your price of ammunition would go up three to four times. Is that true?
LARRY: Obviously, you know, economics being supply and demand. If you cut the supply, there's already strain by 30-plus percent. It's going to have a significant impact on a price in the commercial market. For sure. It's also going to have an impact on what the military pays for ammunition, manufactured at the Lake City facility. Because the cost -- the economics of running that business, for Winchester would change dramatically.
GLENN: So the other -- the other part of this is for the military, not just in cost. But the reason why, if I'm not mistaken. The reason why Winchester has that 30 percent, and they make 30 or 40 percent of the commercial market. Is so they have the staff, in case there's ever a major war. They have the staff. They don't have to ramp up. They can just shift all of that over to the military, immediately. So we have enough adjust to be able to fight a war. Is that true?
LARRY: That's precisely correct. And if they can't sell us to the commercial market, those employees are gone. Our production capacity is gone. In a surgery situation. Let's say hypothetically, we were engaged in a shooting war, with an adversary like Russia or China or something. The ability to Winchester to meet that surge and demand would not exist. You would not be able to meet that need. Whereas, now they can. They can simply shift that production to commercial market, to the priority of meeting the needs of the war fighter. So that ability is gone, and we can't meet surge and demands. And the price that the military pays for the ammunition they get now, even in a non-surge situation, would go up considerably. And the salience of the commercial market, also helps to fund capital expenditures. At the Lake City facility. So it's not just that Winchester sells that ammunition in the commercial market. They -- they also are putting money back into the POD, to -- for capital improvements. Capital expenditures at Lake City. So that it is paid and can meet surge demand for the military.
GLENN: So as this was revealed last week, we had some congressmen start to write some letters to the White House. Some press started to sniff around, at least on the right side. We started to sniff around. And immediately, the gates are closed to the White House. And they say, this is -- and I want to quote them here. The reports on a possible ban are way off. Uh-huh.
Do you believe that?
LARRY: The person making that is either woefully uninformed of the facts, because there was a meeting at the highest levels of the military on Friday. To discuss this very issue. Or, they are not being truthful. But it -- it happened. It is happening. And there is a letter from 50 House members that has gone to the White House yesterday, led by Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler, in whose district the Lake City facility is located. And Senator Blunt's office from Missouri has been engaged in this issue as well. So in 2015, the Obama administration tried to ban this ammunition, under this incorrect legal feeling that it was somehow armor-piercing ammunition. It is not by definition, armor-piercing ammunition.
GLENN: Okay. Hold on. Hold on just a second. Because that's really important. Because I just read another story today. That said, this is armor-piercing ammunition. Now, you say by definition, it's not. What does that mean?
LARRY: Go look up the gun control act. Section 921. And you can find the definition for armored-piercing ammunition. And if you look at this M85532 ammunition, it does is not meet the definition of armor-piercing ammunition. It is not by law, armor-piercing ammunition. So the Obama administration's effort in 2015, to somehow declare an armored-piercing ammunition was withdrawn. And when this was a reaction by Congress, and there were over 300,000 comments. Public comments to a notice that ATF had put out. They backed off. Unable to make it illegal. The Biden administration now is trying to make it unavailable. This is all because they can't pass a ban on modern sports rifles. So if you can't -- ban the ammunition.
GLENN: Without burning any bridges here, because I think it's very important that we know the truth. And I certainly don't want to cause any trouble. How do we know your information is accurate? How do we know the White House is lying here?
LARRY: We have had direct conversations with officials at Winchester. And we've had conversations with staff and Senator Blunt and Congresswoman Hartzler's office. So this is, in fact, happening. And they may have decided, they've been caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar. But for them to say, it was never under consideration. Again, either the person making that statement is woefully uninformed of the true facts, or is misleading the public.
GLENN: Another way of saying that is lying. The White House has been lying about many things they continue to say. Things are conspiracy theories. Or they're -- or inaccurate. And then all of a sudden, what do you know? It turns out to be true. Has this stopped? Do you know? Is the pressure off of -- of Winchester? Is this not going through now that they've been nabbed?
LARRY: We have not been informed, that -- that this -- this definitively has been withdrawn, and is no longer being considered. But this -- you know, this is not the first time we've seen an effort by first Obama. Now Biden. To ban this ammunition. To make it unavailable. So we are going to continue to pursue this issue. To ensure that this is not -- no longer a recurring problem. And that -- that whoever holds the contract, for the Lake City facility, has the right to sell this excess ammunition, into the commercial market. Because, again, it's necessary for military preparedness. It's important for the taxpayer. And it helps to fund capital expenditures, at the facility. And it's important obviously for Second Amendment rights, for the exercise.
GLENN: Exactly right. Exactly right. Larry, is there anything the public can do?
LARRY: They should contact their elected representatives in Washington. Their congressmen. And their representatives. And insist that this issue be fixed once and for all. So we don't have to visit it every couple of years.
GLENN: And how do we fix it once and for all?
LARRY: We make it clear in statute, that whoever holds that contract has the right to sell this excess ammunition in the commercial market for the reasons we've just talked about.
GLENN: Okay. Thank you so much. Larry, I appreciate it.
I appreciate everything that you guys are doing, keeping our second amendment right safe. Thank you. Appreciate it. We'll stay in touch. That's Larry King. He's from the national shooting sports foundation about the Missouri ammunition plant that the Biden administration is trying to curtail, which would cut off a third to 40 percent of the 223 and 556 ammunition, which is the ammunition used by modern sporting rifles.
All right. Our sponsor this half-hour is Relief Factor. Brian wrote in about his experience with Relief Factor. He said, I was suffering with a ton of shoulder pain. And I actually thought, I should have surgery on it. But decided, before I do that, I'll try Relief Factor. Well, he said, the pain literally went away within the first three takes. Brian, that is great news.
Taking Relief Factor will relieve so much pain. I've been on it, for several years now, and I used to be in the kind of pain that I'm in today. Because I'm up in the high altitude. And it's very cold up in the mountains. And I haven't had this pain for quite some time. And very rarely does the pain break through, with Relief Factor.
I used to be in this kind of pain. I couldn't paint. I couldn't use my hands when I was like this, all the time. It's been years since I have felt like this.
And I think it's just the season up here. Anyway, Relief Factor, it works. It works for me. It gave me my life back. I kind of forgot what it was like to live with pain all the time. ReliefFactor.com. Call 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief.It's relieffactor.com. Ten-second station ID.(music)Welcome to the program. Stu Burguiere, our executive producer. I find this story that's coming out of Missouri to be really insidious. Again, the president said yesterday, he was talking about gun control. And he said, there's many ways to skin a cat. And believe me, they're going to use every way to skin a cat. Here's the one thing that the Democrats are very good at, that the Republicans suck at. And that is, while they're not in power, they are making plans. And the plans that were being laid before Biden won the White House, and we know because we reported. They were open about it. And we reported on it. They had committees, getting together, to find out, to look at all of the cabinet positions, and to see what instruments they had, or could be construed as having, that they could turn those levels, and change the way of our life, without going to Congress. This is one of them. And, you know, if the White House wants us to believe that they're not doing this. You know, it's -- it's a bridge too far. Because you would have to ask yourself, if you're a progressive, why wouldn't you be doing this? This is what ESG is all about. Why wouldn't you be shutting down the things -- the -- all of the funding, to things that affect global warning, or things that help guns. On the street.
Of course, you would. If that's the way you're operating, through an administrative arm, why wouldn't you be doing it? Of course, they're doing it. Of course, they are. And it's very, very dangerous.
STU: Yeah. There's an interview with Chris Murphy, the guy who is negotiating the bipartisan gun control bill. And it was with the New York Times. So it was arguing -- the Times was basically saying, wait. You're not getting enough here. You're not getting enough here. You need to get more. And his position was, look, what we need to do is pass this even if it's not the best bill in the world. Because the goal of this is not just to save lives. But it's also to convince Republicans that the sky do fall on them politically, if this thing passes.
We just need to show them, that if they go along with some of this. They're not going to get punished, like they think they will. They're always scared of the sky falling. We need to show them that the sky won't fall. So it's really up to us. To make sure if something like this passes, to remind the Republicans that, yes. The sky will fall, if you do something like this. It will. And we need to make sure it does.
GLENN: Besides Cornyn, who is -- because, I mean, the phone should light up at Senator Cornyn's office. If you're in Texas. Can you give me the names of all the people that are involved in this, on the Republican side? Because the sky needs to fall in on them right now right now. It needs to fall in.
STU: Yeah. So four of them I think are retiring. The other six are not up for election this year.
GLENN: What cowards. What cowards.
STU: And, honestly, you would trade -- I would trade nine of these senators for one toasted cheddar Chalupa from -- from Taco Bell. Only one who has been any value in the group of ten is Pat Toomey, who has always been a pretty good senator with one exception, which has been guns. Other than that, he's been pretty good, but the other nine are just, you know, garbage.
GLENN: I think that -- I think that you're asking too much to trade. All of those senators.
STU: One Chalupa?
GLENN: No. I don't think so. I mean, stop being unreasonable. We're negotiating here.

Exposing Target’s Internal MELTDOWN After Pride Month Backlash
RADIO

Exposing Target’s Internal MELTDOWN After Pride Month Backlash

Glenn Beck reveals leaked internal messages between the members of Target’s “Pride + Business Council” that took place during last year's boycott. Target went off the rails last Pride Month and offered “tuck-friendly” bathing suits, chest binders, and transgender-themed merchandise for children. Americans responded with a boycott that sent Target running back into the closet. Thanks to an employee from Target corporate who wished to stay anonymous, Glenn exposes for the first time ever the radical response of Target employees, including a witch hunt that ensued when certain employees defended Target’s rollback of controversial LGBTQ+ merchandise as a reasonable business move. In the end, Target leadership received a list of demands from employees that included a call for Target to bring back the merchandise that started the controversy in the first place. Despite the internal pressure, Target toned down its Pride collection this year. Should reasonable Americans take the win, or is there yet another battle for the culture just around the corner?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So you're the first to hear this exclusive leak, that we received from a source inside Target headquarters who thought the public needed to know how some of Target's employees responded to last year's boycott. First, let me speak directly to the people that made all of this possible.

Women, I know it was hard to boycott Target.

We were there. We -- we as husbands, and men saw you. Like you weren't busy enough.

We saw you drive past that bright red sign. And go from store to store, to be able to boycott. With us. With Bud Light.

I mean, it's beer.

We will just reach in the fridge for another beer. Victory. Real victory is yours with Target. But it's Pride month again.

Which means, it's been one year since Target rolled out a collection of Pride onesies, tuck-friendly bathing suits, chest binders for girls, and apparel made by some transgender Satan apologist. Not today, Jesus. Says Satan.

This year, prayed month, Target has a much more toned down collection. Like, for instance, let me show you their new Pride Month charcuterie board.

That says, it's giving charcuterie. Has no rainbows or Pride symbols on it at all. It's just a wooden board.

I guess maybe Target thinks charcuterie is gay enough on its own. I'm not really sure, but it's a tame collection of rainbow wine bottles and clothes and nothing like last year.

Also, unlike last year. There was nothing for kids. So victory.

Now, some Target locations won't have any Pride merchandise this year. It will only be sold online in the stores. Where Target says, they've seen historically the strongest sales demand.

Okay. That makes sense as a business. To be clear, Target, I don't think is doing this because corporate had some road to Damascus moment, and decided, you know what, we should depoliticize this company and maybe sell things people want.

Remember, this is the same company, that in 2016, when most didn't even know, you know, that there were 96 genders.

They said, put a statement out that said, we welcome. I'm quoting. Transgender team members and guests. To use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity.

Well, that make me comfortable when my kids want to go and try something out. Their 2023 sustainability and governance report. This Target is one of them that does ESG on their own. Says, their goal is to take urgent action. To combat climate change and its impacts.

The Target website says, Target is an inclusive and antiracist organization. That's key.

It's not non-racist. It has to be. You have to have a little racism to combat racism, you see.

So the way I see it. There's only one reason Target has pulled back on their Pride collection.

And that is you. But now Target is a really, really tricky position. And that's because, on one hand, they can't afford another boycott. The New York Post reported that after last year's boycott, Target lost ten billion dollars in market valuation, in ten days.

That's a lot. On the other hand, they have created a brand around being basically woke. And just like Disney, the inmates are now in charge of the asylum. And employees at Target, many are very woke and militant. Now, to make matters really complicated, that radical staff they have to deal with, was not happy. Last year.

Last year, our team was given exclusive access to internal messages, that took place on Target's slack chapel for their pride plus business council.

We found culture wars that are taking place, because Target is taking a stand and saying, wait. We're going to slow down on this.

And the people were not just boycotting.

Internally, the employees started a little revolt.

And let me show you what we were sent and found.

Last year, when you were deciding to boycott Target for their choice to sell chest binders to children.

Paneled underwear.

Target hosted a town hall to discuss the move to pull back on some of their more controversial merchandise.

The people of the pride plus business council, were not pleased inside of Target.

Up said, quote.

It feels like leadership wants to keep support for LGBTQ causes on the down low. Like they want to be able to point it out to people. You know, make a fuss.

But they don't want to advertise it for people who might disagree. Senior management for philanthropic operations agreed, saying, quote, reasoning with the down low piece for real!

See, what they're saying is, Target while -- while we were saying Target went too far.

The employees were upset, that they hadn't gone far enough.

And now they were pulling back. One employee said, see. We need to cater to the bigots to get our sales up.

Okay. But it wasn't just the town hall announcement that started the internal firestorm at Target. It was the comments in the community chat, while it happened. The leaked messages were given to us, in backward order.

So as we went through them, we saw the Pride-plus council's reaction to the comments, before we saw the comments, themselves.

Remember, we weren't given access to the actual conversation, just the comments.

So we don't know what was said, by the Target leadership during the meeting.

But we were given snapshots. And screen shots of what happened in the chat.

So we don't know what they said, at the leadership of Target.

But it must have been pretty horrible.

Based on just the reactions. The comments must have been awful. From Target leadership.

Here are a few examples of what the chat said, during it.

How the Pride Plus business council was reacting. JPG 22, here. I've been through a lot in my life. I have PTSD to show for it.

And I have to say, that was the most gaslighty dystopian thing I ever witnessed in a while. Here's another one: JPG 24.

We need to protect ourselves. There are consequences for hateful statements and displays.

So now, what did Target say that has made their employees say, we have to protect ourselves from these hateful statements and displays?

Number 27.

A few more. I'm still in shock, and disgusted.

I'm sure a lot of people are examining, whether they want to continue to be a team member after all of this.

Kind of hard to get back to work after that one, huh?

So at this point, we're assuming something truly terrible had happened in that community chat.

The acronym HR was repeated over and over again in the chat.

And people were talking about filing ethics complaints.

One woman put the name and email of an intern, who she said was advocating for discrimination.

Wow! Another intern was exposed for basically putting thumbs down on a comment.

Which promoted one of the lead buyers for Target's pride collection to say, each person should be submitted to ethics.

An intern who gave a thumb's down on a comment, should be submitted to ethics.

So what horrible things were these people saying, to elicit such an extreme reaction.

Surely, they had to be sexist, racist tirades, that started this chaos.

Well, here's what we found. And you may want to sit down for this one. Because it's pretty darn shocking.

Here's one of the comments, that we found.

A woman who was a Christian. Hang on just a second.

That wrote this.

I'm a Christian. And I don't support violence against guests or team members.

Okay. I also don't hate people who view differently than myself.

However, for some to say my Biblical views are disgusting, that's not inclusive.

Wow! Now, it gets worse.

The people in the chat need to look at past year's Pride assortment. The backlash this year has been specific to gender-plus children, to imply leadership is now bowing down to bigots is highly offensive.

Then this: A lead designer, who had been at Target for 25 years, defended the people, who felt a little weird about Target partnering with a designer, who currently produces products that say, Satan respects pronouns.

This lead designer at Target said, so someone who doesn't think a partnership with an artist who glorifies Satan in their products is a bigot? Would Target partner with a similar individual who had a racist-themed product, or would you have the same feeling towards those partnerships?

Maybe quit calling names, because their beliefs are different than yours. The most inflammatory comment that we could find was made by a woman who started working at Target in the early 2000s.

She said, quote, not all people agree that giving hormones to kids, which only provides long-term health issues is a good thing. So inclusivity, means ignoring 95 percent of the population? To make sure 5 percent are able to keep grooming kids, end quote?

Read about some of the stories. I'm still quoting now.

Of the young girls who have had a mastectomy at 13. And are now in their 20s. And have horrible health issues. From the hormones that they've taken. I don't care what an adult does.

But kids should be left alone.

Is that unreasonable?

My favorite comment was this, with JPG 45. Our leadership team has a difficult decision to make.
They answer to something called shareholders.

We're also responsible for thousands of team member jobs. Please, don't attack your leadership or your fellow team members when you don't know their heart.

We are a business, and this is capitalism. Good day now. End quote.

Well, Target needed to send out a company-wide letters addressing the comments before the end of the day. And here's what they said.

Several comments made during the town hall, violated Target's policies. Those incidents are being addressed directly. Target does not tolerate discrimination or hate speech of any kind.

Wait. The ones who just said don't attack the leadership?

That that's hate speech? That wasn't enough for some of the members of the Pride Plus business council.

The idea was floated in their chat. On the day of their town hall.

That they needed more organized response.

That response came about a month later, in the form of a list of demands, sent to target leadership. Which we were also given access. Exclusive access to.

In the memo, they said, they wanted from Target, quote, an acknowledgment of harm. A sincere apology.

And a clear statement of unwavering support for the LGBTQ+ community.

They wrote, we have always regarded Target as an inclusive and progressive company. However, these recent events have called into question, the company's commitment to these values.

They said, the removal of some of the Pride collection was disappointing and distressing. So fort company to atone, they needed Target to acknowledge in writing, the harm done to the LGBTQ+ community, explicitly the trans and nonbinary -- nonbinary members of the community. Forge partnerships with prominent LGBTQ advocacy groups and immediately reinstate the Pride collection in full, which we know didn't happen.

Donate to LGBTQ causes and implement sensitivity training for employees and cease all contributions to politicians and organizations that do not support the LGBTQ community.

This is so crazy. Because here is a company, that supports LGBTQ. Way beyond what other companies do.

And they're not woke enough. Even after all that pressure from within the company. And all the pressure outside the company, from people like Governor Newsom accusing Target CEO of selling out the LGBTQ+ community to extremists.

We're the extremists. Target still toned down its Pride collection this year, and they did it because of you. This is a testament of what you can do, when we come together, which brings me to the point of this whole story.

What is this story really all about?

Because I'm not showing you all about this stuff?

You know, saying that Target has issues.

We know that already.

It's why you staged a boycott.

What is this story really all about?

Okay. So I wanted to give you this exclusive story today, on Target. Because I want you to see a couple of things here. First of all, we do have the power to make a difference.

We have more power than you think you do.

That's why they need to shut people up, using fear, okay?

The second thing is, is a little bit of hope.

And sadness as well.

Wokeness will always destroy itself.

This is -- it's like the plant in little shop of horror. You give it a little bit of blood, and it will eventually eat you.

And that's what's happening to companies like Target. They created a monster, and they planted it inside their own company. And it's eating them alive.

It's as if all of Target's virtue signaling came to life in the form some of their employees. And now it's the battle to the death. It's the same in higher education. There are those professors who have been teaching revolutionary theories for years. But now have been run out by revolutionaries they created. Same thing in the Democratic Party.

The new generation of progressives is threatening the Democratic establishment, who used to be the radicals, for not being radical enough.

Wokeness always eats its own. And it's because the entire ideology is fueled by deconstruction.

And critical theories that rage against the hierarchy. Or the debate. And do you know whams when you're in a movement for a while?

You, the radical, become the establishment. If you climb your way to the top of the woke ladder, you'll find yourself on the wrong side of the movement. And the new revolutionaries always destroy the old ones. The ending of the story for places like Target and Disney is inevitable.

And I think most of us understand that innately, which is why we watch these stories unfold like it's the end of the Daytona 500. We know someone is going to crash. It's just a matter of time. So what do we do?

Do we sit back, point and laugh?

No. That would be tempting. And fun. A little bit.

But not useful. Because in the short-term.

Whatever crash is coming. Is going to affect all of us.

There are plenty of sane people. Normal people. That work at Target.

Hike the ones that we saw, trying to be reasonable in their community chat.

All of us will be caught in the crossfire of these woke institutions as they implode.

We just need to be ready to fill the vacuum. That it's going to create.

In the long-term, we have to focus on creating an alternative. Business. Movie. Media.

Everything.

That's what we need. Alternatives. Kind, gracious. Decent. Alternatives.

You build it. They destroy. But you build. You restore.

Wokeness is a destructive force.

We just have to hold on to our values. And be ready to rebuild.

Did Obama REALLY Have to Lead a Senile Biden Off Stage?
RADIO

Did Obama REALLY Have to Lead a Senile Biden Off Stage?

The White House now insists that it’s “disinformation” to say that President Biden wandered away from G7 leaders while watching parachutists. He wasn’t lost in his own senile world! He was just greeting another parachutist…and had to be dragged back to the rest of the group. Well, over the weekend, Biden allegedly had a similar moment when former president Barack Obama had to allegedly lead him off stage at a massive fundraiser for his campaign. So, what’s the truth? Glenn and Pat break it down. Plus, they also discuss the upcoming first Trump/Biden debate of the 2024 election: What are Trump’s real odds of winning? Will the White House juice up Biden? And why are they holding it before the parties’ presidential conventions?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Remember the video of Joe Biden, you know, kind of wanderings off, and Prime Minister Maloney, going over and grabbing him and bringing him back in a very graceful way.

The White House has now come out and said, this is disinformation.

And there are stories everywhere about this. On how this is disinformation.

He was looking at some of the other parachutists, and he just wanted to go over and salute them and congratulate them. Maybe it's true. Maybe it's not true.

But it certainly is true, that he is not looking presidential. He is not paying attention. He is in his own little world.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: But they notice that they say, this is disinformation.

They say that to discredit anyone. Now, let me take it a step further. Over the weekend, there was a -- there was a fundraiser in California. In Los Angeles.

PAT: Huge.

GLENN: Yeah. Huge. And I think $50 million. Something like that. Jimmy Kimmel hosted it and Barack Obama was there with Joe Biden.

PAT: George Clooney. Julia Roberts. A bunch of stars. Yeah.

GLENN: At the end, Joe Biden is standing there with his hands kind of clenched a couple of times. But his hands -- and he was in that frozen lip sort of look. And when it comes time to leave the stage, Obama just reaches over and grabs Biden by the wrist and leads him off the stage. And it looks horrible, absolutely horrible. We can't show that video today, because it's something that all of us in the media are experiencing right now. Lawfare. We are being sued and everybody in our position are being sued if we play any clip. And, you know, it's weird. We don't get in trouble for playing clips that, you know, are neutral. Or don't have anything to do with anything, but, you know, Joe Biden. And the left.

We can't play them. And they're -- they're charging now. Like that clip is $600 for one -- one play. One play.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And I don't even know if that includes on the internet and replays and everything else.

So they're making it impossible, for to us show you clips, of things that happened.

PAT: That are all over the internet, by the way. They're all over -- we just can't talk about them. We can't do it.

I mean, we can talk about it. But we can't show it. The problem makes it worse, right?

GLENN: I think it does. I was just going to say that. I think it makes it much worse.

If I describe to you, Joe Biden on the stage, and he's in that pose. And he's just stiff, and his hands are clenched.

And Obama grabs him by the arm. Your imagination might make that worse, than it actually is.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You might watch that and go, well, it's not that bad. But if we can't play it, you don't get to decide. And that's the point.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You don't get to decide.

PAT: But Obama definitely grabs him by the wrist and starts leading him out, and then he smoothly kind of makes it like, oh, this is my good buddy, and puts him arm around him. And then he just pushes him off the stage. He just guides him the whole way.

GLENN: The whole time. The whole time.

PAT: And never -- never removes his arm from -- from Joe Biden's back.

It's amazing to watch. And I don't know how they explain that away. I'm sure they will just say, oh, they are just very close.

GLENN: Yeah. Barack does not like Joe Biden.

PAT: No. Not in a minute.

GLENN: There's something else. Is the debate on Thursday or Friday of this week?

PAT: It's a week from Thursday.

GLENN: A week from Thursday. I am reading so much that Donald Trump is just going to cream him and everything else.

I -- I would be very careful with your predictions on this. First of all, it -- it will higher expectations. So everybody will expect him to just make a clean sweep. And if he doesn't, then it looks like a loss for Donald Trump.

So be careful on the way you're being used.

PAT: Yeah. True.

GLENN: To talk about this.

And the other thing is, and we will find this out. Well, we won't. But our kids and grandkids will find out. I'm convinced that they juice him.

PAT: Oh, for sure. Just like they did for the State of the Union Address.

GLENN: Well, we don't know that for sure, but we speculate.

PAT: Yes. Yes.

GLENN: He comes out, and he is a different man entirely.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And, you know, they did this for JFK, and everything else.

And we didn't know about it, for 20 years. But, you know, just like Elvis and everybody else.

You have to perform. Let's get him to performance level, and they juice him up. And so he will be clear. I think he will actually do well. He will be clear. Donald Trump could also look like a bully, to this sweet little old man.

I mean, honestly

PAT: It's possible.

GLENN: You have no idea, how this thing is going to play out. No idea.

The question we should be asking is: Why are they doing it, before either of them are officially the candidate of their party?

PAT: Is your thought on that, that they could make a change if they decide to.

GLENN: I have no thought on it.

I have no thought on it. Other than, we're probably not going to get a debate before the election. And, you know, there's a million ways you can go. You know, if he doesn't do well. They can change him.

You know, if he gets worse in the next six months. They know what they're dealing with now.

But what will he be like in November? Look how fast this guy is deteriorating. So maybe it's that. I don't know.

But in my lifetime, Pat. I don't think I've ever seen a debate between the two candidates. In a presidential debate, before the two conventions.

PAT: No. I don't think it's happened. I think this is the earliest ever.

GLENN: Right. Right. So what is that all about?

Why is that happening?

PAT: It might be. Yeah. I think like you said. It could be a number of things.

But one of the things that I think is pretty obvious.

Is that if he performs badly. You have meant of time to recover from that. If this happens right before. Right before the election, and he performs terribly, like we expect him to.

Or so many of us do.

Then that hurts him.

But if it's six months before, you forget.

GLENN: Right. And if he does really, really well, like he did in the State of the Union.

I mean, I thought it was a horrible speech. And I disagreed with almost he went he ever said.

PAT: But perform better than I thought he would.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. He performed like he was there.

And if he performs like he is there, then they have that to go to all the time. Over and over again. No matter what he's like. You know. Because you cannot have. You can't have the performance of the State of the Union. And the performance in the rest of his life. You know, you just -- it doesn't -- they're juicing him with something. Something is happening.

To get him to that state. And I think he will be in that state.

Which everybody will say. Because they're expecting such a poor performance of him.

Oh, look. He's not as bad as everybody says.

Glenn Schools CNN: Why America is a REPUBLIC, Not a Democracy
RADIO

Glenn Schools CNN: Why America is a REPUBLIC, Not a Democracy

CNN recently asked Trump supporters about America’s “democracy” and were terrified to discover that they believed we’re not a democracy, but a republic. Well, sorry CNN, but that’s true, no matter what the “experts” claim. Glenn breaks it all down for them and explains why our Founders chose to combine the principles of a republic and a democracy to create the system we have now…or do we? Glenn explains how our system of unelected, faceless bureaucrats is the real danger, not Trump supporters…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I have some -- some breaking news from CNN. We apparently are not a republic.

Now, I want you to listen to the -- please, I haven't said this in a long time. But just about everything pisses me off so much, and I can't believe it, that I've kind of have given up on my head not exploding.

But I guarantee you, your head will explode on this CNN clip.

So please, wrap your head tightly in duct tape. It will explode.

But at least you will have all the pieces that way, when you walk in, they will be like, oh, another head explosion.

And you will have all the pieces, so they can stitch you back together.

But your head will explode on this. Here's the latest from CNN.

VOICE: President Biden's House's re-election campaign is a fight to preserve democracy. If you ask some Trump supporters, the former president is not a threat to democracy, because the United States is not a democracy.

VOICE: Obviously, there's a lot of criticisms of Trump, that he is bad for democracy. That he's bad for American democracy.

VOICE: We are a republic. We are not a democracy.

VOICE: We are a republic, we're not a democracy.

VOICE: One thing we've been hearing at Trump rallies like this over the past few months. Is that America isn't really a democracy.

VOICE: America is not a democracy. It's a republic. .

VOICE: Look, it's not a democracy. Democracy is actually not as good as you think it is.

VOICE: America is a democracy. It was founded as a democracy.

VOICE: Here's the expert.

VOICE: I've had heard a lot of conspiracy theories, I hear a lot of things out on the road. But to hear Americans, people who describe themselves as patriots, say that America is not a democracy. That stopped me in my tracks.

GLENN: Right.

VOICE: You were hearing people say America is not a democracy because there are people around Trump who want them to be saying that. Who have planted that narrative.

GLENN: Okay. They've been planting that narrative. Continue on. Please. Play some more if there's more. Oh, you have to get to the end. See if you can get to the rest of it. Where they go back and talk to people and they're saying, you're wrong. We're not a republic.

And they make this into a giant scandal.

We are a republic!

And to the republic, for which it stands! Okay?

Here's the problem, people don't understand what the difference is between a democracy.

We are a democracy, on voting day.

One man. One vote.

You go in. And you use the democratic principle of one man, one vote.

And you democratically elect people to their position.

But what you're not doing is voting on every single law.

You are voting for a representative.

That representative represents you in the republic. A republic has people -- understands that people can't understand every single issue and be voting on every single issue. A republic also understands that a democracy is bad. A -- democracy-only country will every time. Because all you need is to whip enough people into a frenzy. Schedule a vote. They'll vote, the way you want them to vote. It will bring you things like the Patriot Act, when something bad happens, people will be like, we've got to stop all those Japanese! Let's put them into a camp!

Okay? You have a republic to slow the process down and give reason a chance. Can you imagine this country voting on every single issue? When they don't even know the difference between a republic and a democracy? And when you have media, that is going to experts -- so-called experts. And telling us, that we're -- we're not a republic!

A lot of time was spent with the Founders trying to find the best system. They ruled democracy out, because they always fail.

So they took the democratic principle, which is one man, one vote. Used that to select representatives.

We are a representative republic. And that you have to be able to explain that to people.

You have to understand, look, democracy is a very important part of our republic. But it is not what we are.

We are a democratic republic. So we vote for the people to represent us. Why is the democracy part so important?

Well, the democracy part is really important because what was the war in heaven, all about?

If you go back and you read your Scriptures and you look at the war in heaven, what was it about?

It was about Satan saying, I'll cleanse all of them. You don't need anything, but me. I'll go down, and I will tell everyone, what they're supposed to do and keep them from sinning.

I'll keep them safe, and they won't make any decisions on their own. I'll tell them they can only do these things. Then Jesus stood up and said, no. They must have freedom of choice.

And so, I will go down, and atone for all of their mistakes.

So the very first thing, in the -- the very first argument, in all of the Scriptures, the first argument was over free choice.

Do I have someone make all the decisions to keep me safe, and free from all harm?

Or do I have a savior, that will rebalance things and make sure that you're clean enough?

Because no one can be clean enough!

No one will ever be perfect on earth!

Unless, Satan would say, somebody tells them exactly what they can and cannot do.

Well, that is a misunderstanding of human nature. That is a misunderstanding of God's nature.

So one man, one vote. Yes! Very important.

But then take human nature into account!

Human nature is to just go with their feelings. That's a bad idea. So the whole Constitution is written, to restrain the government, so they cannot make every decision for you, like they're trying to.

This is when people say, government thinks it's God.

Government is their God.

Yes, it is!

Because they want it to make all of the decisions for you. Does that sound like the plan of Jesus? Or the plan of Satan?

So you elect the representatives. They answer to you.

This is why they're the one that holds the purse.

Congress is supposed to be the only one that can initiate pending.

But these people who claim they're for democracy, are just spending it in any way.

It doesn't matter. They hold the purse. They're the closest to you. They're elected every two years.

Why? Because you need to be able to tell your representative, no! That's not what we want. That's why every bill of spending, everything, needs to start with Congress! But what happened to Congress? Why isn't Congress doing everything?

Well, they'll say it's because of the Republicans and the Democrats. No. It's because no one in Washington wants it to work that way! They want to be able to issue dictates! Dictate. Dictate. That's the root word of something else. Oh! A dictator.

They want to issue either an executive order, which is part of the American republic, but they were never meant to be used like this.

All the things that are going through executive order now, are the responsibility of Congress and the Senate!

They were never -- we were never to be ruled by faceless bureaucrats, that no one elected. You want to talk about back to democracy, the EPA.

The ATF. The -- the housing people. The -- the Fed! All of these things, that you never elected. You never elected any of those people. And it's okay if they are hired to be in there to make the system work. But instead, they're making the rules, which become laws.

Only Congress can make laws. But we don't do that anymore. That's why we have to restore the republic. Democracy is happening. And democracy is very important.

But we have to restore the republic. Because the republic part of our democratic republic is broken!

Oh. These -- the -- the lies and the lies from not only the media, but the so-called experts, when are we going to stop listening to these experts?

Well, I'll tell you. I'll tell you. Because the rest of that CNN report, went on. And went back to the people who said, we're a republic. Not a democracy.

And then they couldn't understand. They couldn't define what a republic was.

Well, you're of no help.

You're of no help. That's why we have the experts.

Don't claim something, if you don't -- all knowledge. All information. Everything you believe must be yours.

And it must be purchased at the price, that apparently is too high for somebody -- some people to pay. Most Americans to pay. The price you have for your opinion, is it is your opinion, that you have done some sort of research, you've done some sort of thinking on this. And you haven't taken it from a boob like me, and just, oh, yeah. He said it. And it sounded really good. So we are a republic not a democracy. You can't take what I have spent my lifetime learning and studying, you can't take it from me.

It must be your own. It's like a testimony of God. If you don't have a testimony, that is yours. If you are feasting on somebody else's, you're doomed.

Okay?

It won't work. It will break down. And people will say, well, wait a minute. What about this or this or this.

If you haven't thought of that, then you don't really have a testimony. If you haven't thought -- when I say, well, what is the difference between a republic and a democracy?

If you can't explain that, how do you think can't kids are going to explain it? How do you think you can possibly defend the United States of America?

If we don't know what our rights are, if we don't know why they were established.

See, this is -- give me. Give me a minute.

I'll come back in just a second.

First, let me take a minute here. A break. And tell you about the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews.

On June 8th, in a daring daytime raid, Israeli security forces rescued four hostages, held by Hamas terrorists in Gaza.

Some were being held in the homes of Palestinian citizens. A man named Aaron Zamora. Commander of the police special counterterrorism unit.

He was killed during the time rescue. Israel's ground campaign against Hamas continues. Even as Hezbollah is attacking them from the north.

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews has a pledge that they are asking Christians to take.

To stand with their Jewish brothers and centers. To never be silent. The first step in this, is to know why the Jewish people, and why Israel, even exists!

Why does Israel exist?

If you don't know the answer to that, then you're of no help.

Israel exists for one reason, this is just one reason. And that is so they can defend themselves!

Because everywhere Jews go, they end up being the scapegoat. And they can't defend themselves. Because the country will say, well, they're dangerous.

We need to disarm them. Well, no, no, no. We'll protect you.

Then they never do. At least if they have a homeland, they can defend themselves. Anyway, the pledge is to ask you to say, I understand never again. I understand never again is now. At all times. I understand what is happening in the world, and the evil that is happening.

And I, as a Christian, pledge to the Jews all around the world, by neighbors in Israel, everywhere. I will stand with you.

Will you sign this pledge? Go to SupportIFCJ.org. That's SupportIFCJ.org.

And take a stand today. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
Now, let me ask you something: Why would people who say one man, one vote, is so important. Be the leaders on stealing votes.

Why would somebody who really, truly believes in democracy, also at the same time be saying, it's about the collective.

Why?

If you believe in the principle of democracy.

That's the individual, having a voice.

And we have that here in America.

That's part one of our republic. The individual has a voice.

Now, why does the individual have a voice? Because, again, back to the war in heaven. Christ said, I will atone for all of them.

Individually, it wasn't collective, we must. We can't earn it as an individual.

We can't earn it as a collective. But it was personal. An individual to each of us.

Okay. That's where we get all men are created equal. They are created spiritually equal. It doesn't mean they're born in equal families with equal opportunities. Or they'll have equal outcomes.

It means we all are the same in the spirit.

That -- that spark of life is the same in all of us.

And we all have the same rights, no matter what station you were born in. No matter who you are. You still have the same basic human right.

The Gnostics tried to make this into a 1 percent kind of deal. The Gnostics were like, well, not everybody is safe. I mean, those who know. They will be safe.

But not everybody.

This is why we're supposed to treat everyone equally.

This is why we're supposed to treat people like our brothers and sisters.

Because we literally are spiritual brothers and sisters of each other. And if we can get to a point to where we can see the spiritual spark in every human being, even when we meet them.

Even when we don't like them. Even if -- even if they're trying to destroy us. They are still that person! They're still a human being. My brother or sister.

This is why trials are supposed to be done. Justice is blind. Because you're not supposed to look at the R or the D, after their name. You're not supposed to look for the Trump or the Biden. You're supposed to look at the lay, and the claim of the breaking of the law. And the facts. And that's it!

With democracies, you get a mob.

And in the end, you always get the collective. Both of those are evil!

Control Freaks: The 'Scientific' Roots of Progressive Tyranny | The Beck Story | Ep 1
THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Control Freaks: The 'Scientific' Roots of Progressive Tyranny | The Beck Story | Ep 1

How did unelected “experts” with their unwavering devotion to “science” rise to such power in American life? More than a century ago, an engineer named Frederick W. Taylor inspired progressive activists with a new concept he called “scientific management.” Future Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis took Taylor’s concept and married it with political power. Brandeis teamed up with President Woodrow Wilson and a powerful senator named Robert La Follette to give the nation an “expert” makeover that Americans were not asking for. This is the story of how a cult of expertise developed among progressives and how these “experts” took a sledgehammer to our constitutional system of government, with far-reaching consequences that still reverberate today. '

NOTE: Episode 2 is available NOW wherever you get your podcasts. Subscribe, rate, and review to help the “The Beck Story” climb the charts!