RADIOJune 22, 2022

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.

Can America survive if New York falls to Socialism?

New York City is likely to elect either Zohran Mamdani, a communist, or Andrew Cuomo, a failed governor, as mayor. Either way, it could destroy the city. So, how will this affect the rest of America? Former Trump economic advisor Stephen Moore joins Glenn to explain why he believes another mass migration out of New York is coming…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Stephen Moore is with us now. Stephen, how much time do you have with me today?

STEPHEN: As much as you want, Glenn. Great to hear your voice. Great to be with you.

I disagree with you on something you just said.

GLENN: Okay. All right. Let's start there.

STEPHEN: You know, I do think -- look, New York has lost two and a half million people on net over the last ten years, to other states. Almost two and a half million people.

Which is, what? Four congressional seats right there.

So there's a mass. The big story in America, Glenn. Right now. And people should go on our website. Vote With Your Feet. And you can see, just click on any two states. You can click on New York. And you can click on Texas. And it will show you the -- where the moving vans are going to and from. And also, how much money they're taking with them because we know the income of these people as well.

So New York has lost two and a half million people. And, by the way, half of those people came from New York City. So if -- did they elect a socialist and they raised the taxes, again, New York City already has the highest taxes in the United States in North America. So if they raise them again, on, quote, the rich, they won't be there any longer. And I'll make another prediction to you, Glenn.

Are you in Texas? Where are you now?
(laughter)

GLENN: It's like a shell game.
I never really know. I just moved last week. I left my business in Texas.

Because I am never going to sever myself from Texas. I left my business in Texas. I promised my wife about 400 years ago, that some take we would live by the beach. So we moved to Florida. Business in Texas.

STEPHEN: You moved from no income tax state. To another no income tax state.

GLENN: Yeah. Are you crazy? I'm not doing anything else?

I would have dug a canal from the Atlantic, all the way to Dallas, if they forced me to move to a tax state. Anyway...

STEPHEN: So anyway, I'm in Dallas today.

GLENN: I know.

STEPHEN: Where are you in Florida?

GLENN: I'm not saying that on the air. But I will tell you that we're going to have dinner, Stephen. When you get back into dinner, Stephen, we'll have dinner.

STEPHEN: So, anyway, now I lost my train of concentration.

GLENN: So we were talking about the people that are moving and the tax base.

STEPHEN: Yeah. So basically, that's why I believe -- look, 1 million is probably a long shot.

But I think you're going to see a lot of wealth move out of New York. Now, here's the thing. You probably are aware of this. But about two months ago, the -- Texas has their own stock exchange. So we had the New York Stock Exchange for 150 years. Now you've got the Texas Stock Exchange, which I believe is in Dallas.

GLENN: I know.

STEPHEN: I believe, if they raise these taxes again, you pay 17 percent income tax in New York City.

GLENN: Jeez.

STEPHEN: Who is going to do that?

GLENN: My gosh.

STEPHEN: After 40 percent federal tax. So people will move. And I'll give you one -- one example.

Do you know Ken Griffin? He's the billionaire who created Citadel.

GLENN: Yeah.

STEPHEN: He's a big guy. Free market guy. And he was the single, biggest charitable giving in the city of Chicago. He gave to the Art Institute. He gave to the homeless shelters. He gave to the food kitchens and the museums and so on.

I mean, he was -- he was by far the biggest donor to all of the charities.

Well, finally, they kept raising, raising taxes in Chicago. And as you probably know, he moved out of Chicago. And he moved to Palm Beach.

Florida. And so then the interesting part of this story is, it put a 50 million-dollar hold in the Illinois budget.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STEPHEN: And all the -- there's a funny story in the Chicago business. That all of a sudden, charities like, why isn't he donating to us anymore?

Why isn't he living there anymore?

So my point is, you chase the evil rich out of your city and your state. You pay a high price for that. By the way, he took several thousand, you know, jobs with him. So when you -- when you hear stoke the rich -- you know, the rich are -- as the old saying goes, "The rich aren't rich because they're stupid."

GLENN: Right.

So let me ask you this, Stephen. Because it used to be that New York was -- I mean, was the capital of the whole world.

STEPHEN: Yeah. Yeah. Financial capital.

GLENN: And because of the stock exchange. How real is the loss of the New York Stock Exchange. As something like the Texas stock exchange?

Is that something that really could actually happen?

STEPHEN: Yeah. It could happen. And look, the truth is that the New York Stock Exchange, even today, isn't anything like it was '60s, '70s, '80s, just like I mentioned I'm from Chicago. Remember the movie Trading Places, they're trading. It doesn't really exist anymore. Because that's all done by computers and electronically. So the trading floors aren't the same as they were. So Wall Street is just a shadow of what it once was. But what I'm saying is, today in America, in Dallas, Texas, there are more financial services jobs than there are in New York City.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STEPHEN: That's amazing!

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

So --

STEPHEN: It's happening.

GLENN: So how long -- how much more, Stephen, how much more can New York take before it's -- it's no longer the financial capital?

How much more -- how many people have to move?

What has to happen, for it to really understand, wow. We made a huge mistake here?

STEPHEN: You would think they would have gotten that message already.

GLENN: No.

STEPHEN: And one of the things that you first did your show, many, many years ago. You were in New York.

So you're familiar with New York. And when was that? In the '90s when were you --

GLENN: In the 2000 -- 2000s. Mid-2000, you know, 2005. 2010.

STEPHEN: Yeah. Because I remember when Rudy -- this is an important point because I know you have a lot of listeners all over the country in New York and New Jersey. In the New York area.

So when Rudy Giuliani was elected mayor, New York was a mess. And you could see every week, because I was working at the Wall Street Journal at the time. Every week, you could see the improvement in the city. He got rid of the crime. He got rid of the graffiti. He got rid of the drug dealers. He got rid of -- he lowered the taxes. It wasn't complicated, Glenn. I mean, this wasn't rocket surgery.

GLENN: I know.

STEPHEN: This was obvious stuff.

And New York was New York again. And it was booming. And what's sad about this election that's happening today, is if Mamdani wins, they will reverse every single thing that Rudy did. And they will be back in the ditch. How stupid would people be to fall for that!

And part of the problem, Glenn, quite frankly, something you and I have talked about for years. Is our education system. You have 24-year-olds are voting, they think socialism works. Where? Show me. Where?

GLENN: Yeah. So what happens if he is elected? I mean, how -- what does it mean to people who have never gone to New York City?

Is -- is the loss of New York City to a Mamdani, is that going to affect everybody else's life?

STEPHEN: That's a good question. you're there in Florida.

Florida has gained. I really want people to go to this website.

Because it's amazing.

So Florida, under a great, great, great governor, Ron DeSantis. And you had a great governor, Rick Scott, before him. Florida, are you ready? Are you sitting down, Glenn? Florida has imported over the ten-year period, one trillion dollars of income from people coming in from other states. $1 trillion. It's the biggest mass migration ever in the history of this country.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

STEPHEN: And, by the way, people are not just living in New York. What you know other states they're leaving?

California.

GLENN: I think New York is moving to Florida, and California is moving to Texas.

STEPHEN: Moving to Texas, exactly.

And so you're just bleeding these blue states. That's why I don't get it.

So the thing that worries me. I was thinking about this, a lot over the past couple of days. If these states vote the wrong way, the only way that New York even survives, fiscally is with another massive federal bailout.

GLENN: Bailout. I know.

STEPHEN: How are you they going to pay their bills?

GLENN: They're not. They're not. And, you know, that's -- this is what I've said for a long time.

You know, the Constitution is not a suicide PAC. And California and New York and Chicago are going to eventually need giant bailouts.

And why should I pay for that know. I didn't live in those places. I didn't live there for a reason.

STEPHEN: Right.

GLENN: Right. That's taxation without representation.

I don't want to bail them out.

It was -- it's their fault, they did this. I've always wanted to live in California.

I never have, because it was insane. I knew that it was not going to work. So why do I have to pay for it?

STEPHEN: Exactly. Bingo. And incidentally, you're right. You can understand why people might leave New York for Florida. You know, in Florida, it's beautiful weather. In Florida, and rains a lot. And probably in New York. But how do you screw up California?

I mean, California is one of the probably most idyllic places in the planet. And people are living. This is the first time in 250 years people have been -- more people are leaving California than going to California. That's never happened before!

STU: That's unbelievable. Unbelievable.

STEPHEN: Yeah.

GLENN: Okay. So can you spend some time with me --

STEPHEN: Can I make one more point about this?

GLENN: Yeah.

STEPHEN: The governor of California is now the lead candidate to run on the Democratic ticket for president: Gavin Newsom. The guy who is -- what's he going to run on? "I'll do for America what I did for California?"

GLENN: Yes.

And so many people will buy into it!

I mean, I don't know what's wrong. It's so frustrating, because you try to apply logic. And you're like, but none of this makes sense! None of it. What are you doing?

I would love to be able to sit down and have a conversation, but none of this makes sense.

Dick Cheney's life should be a WARNING for us all

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has passed away at the age of 84. Glenn Beck reviews some of the biggest lessons from Cheney’s life that America should have learned, from the Gulf War and 9/11 to the PATRIOT Act and even gain-of-function research.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me start here with Dick Cheney. You know, there was a time not long ago, where America was not sure of itself.

Like we are now.

The Berlin Wall had fallen. We had gone through the '80s, which was a big boost to our confidence. But we had done so much damage to ourselves in the '60s and the '70s, it took more than one president in eight years. Vietnam still you haunted us. The headlines were all about peace dividends. You remember that?

Berlin wall comes down. Now, we should have peace dividends. Downsizing. Doubt. We didn't know. We were arrogant, and yet doubtful.

The idea of a military, powerful military had been almost embarrassing to say out loud since Vietnam. Reagan had rebuilt us, but it was peace through strength. We never went to war. Thank God, we never went to war. But our perceived strength did all our work for us.

But we didn't know. Because the last time we had tanks rolling anywhere, was Vietnam. And we thought that was a really bad thing.

Well, George H.W. Bush came into office. And he brought with him a man who had five deferments in Vietnam. He had never served in uniform. And he picks that guy. A guy from Wyoming. Not loud. Not flashy. To step into the role of Secretary of Defense. That was pretty controversial.

Wait a minute. What?

Hold it.

The guy didn't look like a warrior. He looked honestly like an accountant that balanced books after the battle. He was quiet, soft-spoken.

But he was firm. He was very clear on what he believed, and he believed perhaps more than -- more deeply than almost anybody else in Washington, that a nation that can't defend itself isn't going to remain free.

And so Reagan had really built the military up.

And Dick Cheney kind of finished that off, with George H.W. Bush.

By restoring the faith in our military.

Faith in America's strength was not the problem. America's strength was the protector of liberty.

I'm old enough to remember the -- the opening night of the Gulf War.

CNN was the only news network at the time.

And on my living room screen. I was living in Baltimore at the time, there was this eerie green grain of night vision footage. Which we really hadn't seen before.

And missile strikes through the darkness. We had never seen war like this before. Not only in night vision, but not live in our living rooms. We had never seen anything like it.

And I remember we all kind of held our breath. And we watched this new kind of war, unfold.

And it was swift, it was surgical. It was divisive.

There was no draft -- or decisive. There was no draft. There was no chaos. There was no quagmire. For the first time in decades, Americans felt pride without apology when it came to our military.

And we still wondered, is it going to be a quagmire?

But it wasn't. It was very clear. The mission was clear. We liberated Kuwait. That was the mission, and then we left. There was, you know, no oil fields. No spoils. No empire building. Just a message to the world, we could be proud of! This is what moral strength looks like. Free a nation, and go home.

Now, when George W. Bush ran for president, I don't think anybody was really comfortable handing the nuclear codes over to this guy who had been the governor of Texas and really kind of, yeah, let me tell you. Yeah. Right.

I mean, I wasn't comfortable. He was the guy we barely knew. He seemed like somebody who was more comfortable in the stands of a baseball stadium, than even, you know, in the main offices of the baseball stadium, that he owned. You know.

And everything changed in 2000, in the election, when he chose Dick Cheney as his running mate. The reaction was instant.

And I think it was the sound of America kind of exhaling a bit. He announced Dick Cheney and Colin Powell. They were the ones who brought us the Gulf War. It was quick, decisive, and over.

And America said, okay. Okay. Okay.

He's got Dick Cheney behind him.

All right. The adults are back. Then came that blue September morning.

And the skies were clear, and the markets were opened.

And in an instant, absolutely everything changed. The world stopped! The New York skyline was filled with smoke, and fear filled the air, all over the world. Not just here in America. No one knew what was going on. And our president was reading stories to children in Florida, and Dick Cheney became the acting president for a while, until we could get the president to safety!

He was the one that was rushed down to the emergency bunker in the White House. He took over for a while!

He was steady. Emotionless. And firm!

He didn't tremble. He didn't panic. And in those hours, those first few hours, America needed that!

But fear, once it's tasted, it's -- it's hard to let go. And so we started a war. And it just stretched on and on and on.

And the mission became blurry. Freedom became a slogan, instead of a strategy. And freedom started to take a different meaning here in America. We passed the Patriot Act. We built the Department of Homeland Security. None of those things had anything to do with freedom. We created the FISA court. And airport lines that never seemed to end. And for a while, we told ourselves, all of this is worth it, it's the price we have to pay in a dangerous, dangerous world.

But when you give more to one God, the other gods will demand payment later. And something in those days, a seed that was far more darker was planted. The anthrax attacks, most people don't even remember them now. They rattled the nation.

Cheney, who was always the realist and the adult in the room. Always the sentinel told the nation's stop scientists, we can't wait for the next attack. We have to study it. We have to anticipate it.

And so it was Dick Cheney that urged Dr. Anthony Fauci. To push research further, faster. Into what we now call gain of function. And I'm sure it was born out of good intent to protect us. As history often teaches us, good intent can be dangerous as a companion to unchecked power. Or as my grandmother always used to say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

And so bee beneath all of that calculation and control, there was a the different side to Dick Cheney. He was quiet. When his daughter Mary came out as gay, he didn't blink. Long before Clinton evolved, before Obama changed his mind, Cheney, the hawk, Darth Vader, the architect of war, said plainly, "My daughter deserves the same rights as everybody else." It was personal, it was brave, it was human, and as a politician, he stood almost entirely alone. Nobody gives him credit for that.

And he -- he belonged to a different time. A Cold War man in a post modern world. A deep believer in the chain of command. In America's dominance. In doing what has to be done, even if the world didn't approve!

He died last night. He had five heart attacks in his life. I think it was 2012, he had a heart transplant, doctor said it would give him another decade of life.

13 years later. Dick Cheney's life offers both a chance to give medals and lessons. The virtue of strength and the peril of excess. And he should have learned from the first Gulf War. He was the iron for many years in America's spine. After decades of doubt. But he was also a reminder that iron rusts, if it is left unexamined.

We needed his resolve when the towers fell. And raps, in the years that follow, we needed more in his -- more of his restraint from 1991, in the years that followed that. But we didn't get that.

So he leaves behind a really complicated legacy. Which I think is appropriate today, as I try to talk to you today about, what does it mean to be a conservative?

On all fronts. What does it mean?

Dick Cheney was a conservative for a man of his time. But he lost one of the main principles, and that is conservatives believe in the rule of law and the Constitution. He's a patriot, yes. But he's also a warning to us. He helped America find its courage. But he also taught us how easily courage can drift into control.

And he left us some lessons that we should learn. The Patriot Act. That has given our government tools to spy on its own citizens. On Capitol Hill, nobody is talking about this. But this is the biggest scandal probably in American intelligence and American corruption of all time.

The Patriot Act made all of it possible. The government -- government-wide scandal of a president spying on its opponent party, including senators and congressmen. And donors. And average citizens.

That's still being revealed. Nobody is talking about it. But that came from the patriot ability. That came him the power to do it. The FISA court as we know in a completely other scandal. The FISA courts were lied to. The FBI physically changed documents to falsify testimony to secure wire taps that they said they needed, that we now know were unwarranted and illegal. What else should we learn today? We paid a heavy price for never-ending wars in blood, in treasure, and faith.

We failed to learn the right lessons from the Gulf War. Define the mission narrowly. Execute it efficiently. And then get the hell out of there, and come home!

Enhanced interrogation. That's Dick Cheney. We called torture "enhanced interrogation." And we still refuse as a people, to have this debate. We either torture or we do not. And it's the people that should make the decision.

No one in the world looks to a nation who says one thing, but then farms out the torture to another dictator or authoritarian someplace else.

They don't look at that and go, you know what. There's a great nation.

We should also learn the lesson.

I mean, think of what we just learned. Enhanced interrogation. It's torture.

You believe so change the name. You can't change the meaning of words. Okay?

Enhanced interrogation is still torture. No matter what you do to a man surgically.

He's still a man. You can't just say, oh, no. That's a woman. Changing the words, does not change reality.

And the heaviest lesson, we have not learned a bit from is gain of function. It may be illegal, but it is still happening. Because there are those in the government, on both sides of the aisle, that think it's important.

It is not.

It has killed hills. And it's changed our world.

In that crisis, we saw blue states give new dictatorial powers that still haven't been corrected.

So Dick Cheney, believe it or not, I actually liked Dick Cheney, but I've changed. The times have changed, and I would like to salute his service to a nation for what he did, and he actually believed he was doing the right thing. And he did do the right thing, in his day. But things have changed. And his passing marks not just the end of his life, but close of that age.

An age of secrecy and steel and certainty. Honor Dick Cheney's service today. But can we learn from the mistakes? And can we remember one thing?

The strength of a nation is not measured just by its power to strike. But its wisdom to stop!

Glenn Beck EXPOSES NYC’s socialist nightmare in the making

New York City is on the brink and Glenn Beck says the choice between Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani isn’t about who’s good for the city, but who’s less destructive. Glenn and Stu Burguiere break down why Cuomo’s notorious corruption may actually look mild compared to Mamdani’s open socialism. From “communist grocery stores” to Obama’s fading influence, Beck exposes how the Democratic Party is spiraling into radicalism and why every Republican should be paying attention.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: There was one poll that kind of showed up and was somewhat positive for Cuomo, if you think Cuomo being mayor of a major city is a positive in any way.

GLENN: It doesn't matter.

STU: Honestly, I don't even know. I get why people think that Mamdani will be worse. He probably will be worse.

But I don't think it's a sure thing. I honestly, don't even think it's a sure thing. These people forget how bad Andrew Comey is.

I think there's this coping mechanism that's going on.

GLENN: Does he want communist grocery stores?

STU: He probably doesn't want -- at least, outwardly saying he wants communist grocery stores. I guess if that's your line as to how --

GLENN: Does he believe -- well, it's not my line.

Does he believe that the 34,000 cops or less.

That's the lowest it's ever been.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: 34,000 cops or less. Because he says, it's really not about a number.

Is it -- does Cuomo believe in fewer cops on the street?

STU: It doesn't matter. He's terrible on that issue. And has been terrible on that issue the entire time.

It's possible. It's possible. And this is the one thing you get from Cuomo.

This is the upside case if you're in New York, and you really want Cuomo to win.

He's so incredibly corrupt. Some of his corruption will align with good policy. That is the only thing you get out of Andrew Cuomo. He is no better than Mamdani on most of these issues. But, for example, will have a guy who is in some form of corruption, will be helping him out, that will also help out the business sector. Right?

There's things like that, that align with -- with something that you might say is helpful to New York City.

GLENN: But see, this is -- this is why Mamdani is winning. Mamdani is -- is winning right now, I believe because it's not about the Islamic thing, it's not about the -- you know, socialist thing.

That's probably half of his support.

Maybe -- maybe three-quarters. But that's not what pushes him over the top.

What pushes him over the top is the -- the other Democrat.

They're not going to vote for a Republican.

The other Democrat is just so horrible, and -- and so traditional corrupt, that they're tired of that. They're tired of the corrupt democratic politician.

They're tired of it. They're not tired of Democrats. They're tired of the cronyism and all of that.

And so here comes a fresh face, nobody really knows who he is.

I mean, it is the Obama thing. Where, you know, hope and change.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, they -- they said that Obama -- do we have that clip?

They were saying that -- that Obama is very much, you know, the new -- or, the old school Mamdani.

No!

No. He's really not. And Obama pledged his support from Mamdani. And I would think that Mamdani would be like, no. Thank you. No, thank you.

Not because they don't agree on things, but because I think that Mamdani's voters will look at Obama and say, "You had your turn, buddy. You believe in the same things, the communist grocery stores. You know, the no cops thing. You know, hate Israel. You believe all of those things. You believe -- but you didn't do any of them."

Now, Obama looks at it and says, "Yes, but I moved the ball forward. That's as far as I could go. Progress. You know, progressive. That's as far as I could go."

But he's not accepted by the real, you know, zealots.

The real changers of the universe.
He was too progressive.

Where now, it's time for the real -- the hard-liners to come in. And that's what I think Mamdani is.

And I think Barack Obama is viewed by the Mamdani supporters, the real Mamdani supporters, as a real sellout. Would you agree with that, or not?

STU: Some. I think that's true.

I think generally speaking, Democrats are not like that.

I think generally speaking, tells me like Obama.

GLENN: I'm not talking about Democrats.

STU: You're talking about Mamdani-type supporters. Like real Mamdani-ites. Yeah, those people do see.

They saw -- they saw the result of 2016 as a part result of not going far enough.

They were -- they complained about Joe Biden for not going far enough.

Of course, that's what they want. And that -- that's the big thing, Glenn. Really? The difference when you look at this election in New York, is if Mamdani gets elected. You go one of two ways. We've seen this happen before.

He could be the communist we know he is in his heart. Right?

He could do all of these things that he's promising. And really descry up the city to no end.

Probably the best-case scenario for him, is he gets in there. He gets thwarted at times, bit corrupt Democrats that are around him, that can stop him.

He does is not have unlimited power as the mayor.

At least not yet.

We saw this with Bill de Blasio. Bill de Blasio was just as dedicated and communist as Zohran Mamdani is.

And his rein as mayor was really bad. It did not destroy the country. It was really bad for the city. It was a really bad time for the city. And they paid a lot for the things that he did. And this is a guy who went on vacation to the Soviet Union.

Right? This is not a guy who was not deck dedicated to the cause.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Mamdani, my suspicion on Mamdani is he will go even farther than de Blasio did. Because he's, you know, young and aspirational. Right?

I think de Blasio had been knocked down for a while, and felt he had to moderate some of those views to get elected. It's not really what the case is here, with Mamdani. I would be very terrified of him, if I were in the city. I would probably begrudgingly be hoping that Cuomo won this.

Because you would at least have an idea of what you're getting.

GLENN: Yeah. The devil you know.

STU: He's going to be terrible. He will be incredibly corrupt.

He will probably commit two to three crimes a day.

That is probably -- possibly much better than what you'll get out of Mamdani. You know, and be whatever reason, this city has moved now to a place where they won't even consider a guy who will do a good job. That's not even part of their consideration.

They're not even looking at Curtis Sliwa, who would actually be fine as mayor. And do a good job for the city.

GLENN: No. I find it interesting.

How do you think Mamdani is going to internally take the suggestion that, hey. I would love to be part of your counsel. I would love to be a sounding board for you.

I mean, he might like it, outwardly. But I don't think that went with his real supporters and his real team that, you know, want the communist grocery stores and everything.

I can't imagine that went over well.

STU: Yeah. I think --

GLENN: Like, making fun of it kind of bad, internally, I think.

STU: Yeah. Behind the closed doors. Yes. I think there's two ways to look at it. And I think probably people in his inner orbit looked at it both ways. Which is, one, you believe this guy.

You know, he wasn't early with us.

GLENN: I know. He let us down as president. He didn't go far enough. This is pathetic. And now he's trying to get into our good graces.

I do think a smarter analysis of this however, on their side is if we can get them to embrace us. It moves us to the mainstream of the party.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: You know, it's funny. I think both Mamdani and the entire Republican Party are going to be rooting for Mamdani to be the face of the democratic party.

That's going to happen real soon. The Democrats don't want that. The Chuck Schumer of the world don't want that. But every Republican should be doing everything they can, to make sure that people understand the future of the democratic party is Mamdani.

GLENN: It's interesting to me that you would say, because I think you're right. That he would say, hey. This would mainstream us a little bit more. Make us look a little bit more acceptable for the party.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Although, I think -- I think Barack Obama's legacy is not as solid as it would have been. I think he's going to age like Bill Clinton aged. Where Bill Clinton was popular for a while. And then as we got farther and farther away from it, we're like, that guy was corrupt and really bad. He's really not good. I can't believe people still like him.

And not really in with the Democratic Party. And I think -- I think Barack Obama, because the Democratic Party is becoming so radical, I think he's going to even be worse. Because he's going to look like a total sellout. A guy who at least his wife believed it. And he said that he believed it. But he never really got down and did it.

And they will not accept the, hey, he moved the ball as far as he could. They won't accept that.

And I think they will look at him, at least internally, just like we would look at George W. Bush coming in, you know -- you know, in late 2024.

And saying, you know what, I would love to be an adviser for Donald Trump.

You would be like, I don't think.

I don't think.

And there might be some that would argue. Hey. Bring him in.

Just bring him in. Let's go ahead. It will help bring the rest of the party in.

And it will widen the tent. But don't listen to him.

For the love of Pete. Don't listen to him.

And the hard-core Trump supporters, I would have -- would be like, don't. Don't. Don't.

Don't bring him in.

And I just have that feeling, that that's what's coming.

But we'll see.

China, ICE, and the shutdown: Everything Trump's "60 Minutes" interview revealed

President Trump gave a master class on negotiation in his recent “60 Minutes” interview with Norah O’Donnell. Glenn and Stu review Trump’s best comments on China and Taiwan, ICE raids, and the government shutdown.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

VOICE: I know you have said that Xi Jinping wouldn't dare move militarily on Taiwan while you're in office. But what if he does?
Would you order US forces to defend Taiwan?

DONALD: You'll find out if it happens. And he understands the answer to that.
VOICE: Why not say it?
DONALD: This never even came up yesterday.

STU: Why not say it? I don't know. Tough question!

DONALD: He never brought it up, because he understands it, and he understands it very well.

VOICE: Do you mind when I ask, he understands, why not communicate that publicly to the rest of us? What does he understand?

DONALD: I can't give away my secrets. I don't want to be one of these guys that tells you exactly what is going to happen, if something happens. The other side knows, but I'm not somebody that tells you everything, because you're asking me a question. But they understand what's going to happen, and he has openly said it, and his people have openly said it. He said, we will never do anything, while President Trump is president. Because they know the consequences.

GLENN: And they do.

Now, what's her name? Norah McDonald?

Or that Norah O'Donnell. I can't remember.

STU: It's Norah O'Donnell.

GLENN: One is a comedian, and one claims to be a journalist. I don't know remember the difference. But, you know, here she is. Why won't you just say it? I don't know!

Strategery!

I mean, why wouldn't you just say it?

Presidents never say that. They never say that. Can you imagine?

What a stupid question that is.

And if you think -- go ahead.

STU: I was going to say, you know, I think Trump sometimes does say stuff like that. Right? Like he does -- for example, with North Korea. Right?

He was like, hey. We're going to blow you up. And the fires of hell are going to rain down upon you.

GLENN: Because North Korea is not China.

STU: Right. He's making decisions based on strategy with different countries. And there's different decisions to make with each nation.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: And when you look at something like this.

What he's trying to, I think communicate is he has communicated to China that they will be involved.

But he does not want to escalate it publicly.

And honestly, all of that being said, I don't know what his actual answer is. My suspicion is, we won't be involved if that happens. Honestly, like I know we promised it. But my suspicion is, if China actually goes in there, there's a good chance, we are -- we come up a reason to not be involved in it.

GLENN: We can't. We can't.

We can't be involved in that.

We will be involved in covert ways.

My guess is, we blow up all those chip factories. That's my guess. And my guess is, we have given the ability to Taiwan to do that. Long ago. I don't know.

But that's what -- that's what I would do. Because we don't have -- we cannot -- we cannot support a supply line, that far away. We just tonight. We're not capable of it.

So we don't have the supply lines. We couldn't get things there, fast enough. And they're going to overwhelm with drones. That's what -- this is going to be the fastest war ever. If they go into Taiwan. It will be over, by the time we ever get a ship or an airplane there. It will be over. They will just overwhelm the island with swarms of drones, period. So here's what the president is actually doing.

He announced a deal on economic and trade relations with China.

So here's what he -- here's the Chinese actions. You ready?

Suspend new rare earth export controls. Issue general license for exports of rare earth. Listen to what he got: Take significant measures to end the flow of fentanyl to the US. Suspend all retaliatory tariffs since March 4th. Suspend all retaliatory nontariff measures since March 4th. Purchase at least 12 million metric tons of US soybeans, and we lowered our tariffs by ten points and extended the expiration of Section 301 tariff exclusions until November 2026. Do you see what we've got? See what we gave up?

Let me just say that again. Do you see what we got and what they gave up?

The president -- it's genius how he got us here. He didn't just engage with China directly. He embarked on a massive, massive campaign, securing the rare earth minerals in all of their allies. Multiple countries.

He built an -- an alternate system that cuts China out, entirely.

Then went after Venezuela, Russia, and Iran. All the three of their major allies.

This was the equivalent of the American president, putting his foot down on the neck of China and saying, you want up?

You want up?

And China blinked because at this point, they had no choice.

China is not used to being handled like this. And he just handled them.

This is a good win for America!

So when the president is has done negotiation. Why would he go on 60 Minutes?

And insult them even more.

Why would he go and say, what you know we'll do?

We'll vaporize Beijing. And I have on good authority, that's exactly what the president said. You know, you want to do that, and I'll make Beijing disappear.

And Xi laughed at first. And what? What?

The president didn't laugh and blink. And Xi left going, he might just do it!

That's how you negotiate. That's how get all of the rare earth minerals. That's how you get this giant concession with from China. The guy -- I have to tell you, I mean, we've known this forever. How long has everyone on the planet, you know, now, of course, the left won't say it. You know, the Democrats won't say it. But everybody has always said, I wish we just had a good negotiator on our side. Wouldn't it be nice if we had somebody that looked at the country like a business. And could just run it like a business. And knew how to negotiate?

We have the best negotiator, I think we've ever had.

I can't think of anybody who is better than that.

Here's what he said, yesterday on 60 Minutes on the ICE raids. Cut ten.

VOICE: More recently, Americans have been watching videos of ICE tackling a young mother, tear gas being used in a Chicago residential neighborhood. And the smashing of car windows. Have some of these raise gone too far?

DONALD: No. I don't think they've gone far enough. Because we've been held back by the judges, by the liberal judges, that were put in by Biden and by Obama.

VOICE: You're okay with those tactics?

DONALD: Yeah, because you have to get those people out. You have to look at the people. Many of them are murderers. Many of them are people that were thrown out of their countries because they were criminal.

GLENN: What do you think of that, Stu?

STU: Again, he's not going to back down from that policy, not a surprise.

GLENN: Uh-uh.

STU: Criminals, you know -- it is such a popular issue to get rid of people who are violent criminals in this country.

That he's going to lock into that, no matter what the tactics look like. As long as they don't look cruel to people who are innocent.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Right? That's the type of stuff he would get beat up.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: These are people here illegally.

And it's not -- like, you know. He's beating a mom to -- these people are beating moms to death in the streets. Of course, it's going to be something different.

What we're seeing is, what? They're getting arrested on their way to work?

I don't think that's going to be controversial at all to the American people.

GLENN: Seventy percent of the American people agree with the ICE raids.

Seventy percent. No matter what the mainstream media makes it look. That's the latest poll. Have you read another poll? Stu, you're looking at me --

STU: I have seen more negative polling on the issue, generally.

It is -- I think --

GLENN: I just saw one yesterday or today, 70 percent.

STU: I'll have to --

GLENN: Is it in the show prep today?

STU: I did see that poll somewhere.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: I wouldn't say -- his border policy is among his most popular policy. There have been some more negative reactions. Not on the right. But on the left. And the -- and the -- and independent voters, who are concerned about these tactics generally.

Now, of course, what they've received about this is basically, this is the gestapo. So you would understand, that their analysis of what they're hearing in the media, is that it's a negative.

I think though, when you look at these individual cases. People wind up realizing, okay. That's not what's actually going on.

You know, I do think that generally speaking, this is a positive issue from him.

Certainly, it's one of the issues that he cares about the most. And he's not going to back off of it. I think there's this idea that the media can try to corner him. And he will try to back down. When does this occur?

This is not -- the only time Trump has ever really backed down on anything is when, occasionally you'll get a situation where his base says no. We can remember cases of this, with the Second Amendment. He said something to the effect of, well, we'll go in there. We'll take the guns first, and then we'll have a trial. His base said, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That's not the way it should work.

And he backed off of that. That does sort of happen occasionally. And you'll see occasionally, when it comes to economic consequences.

This is the -- you could argue, that, you know, he backs off on some of those stuff, when he sees the market crash or some of that sort. Really, with stuff like this. There's no sign of him backing down. He believes the policy is correct.

He believes these people should leave. And I think, at this point, most people who are border hawks, if they have any complaint about what's going on at the border, it's more than at that it's not enough. It's not been widespread enough.

It has been a situation where it's been focused on. You know, we have a lot of attention on the Maryland father who went to El Salvador.

When I think the issue is larger than a few of these cases. So that is probably the only complaint you would have from people who agree with him.

GLENN: One minute, ten seconds, and we're back to the show. Sometimes, sleep feels like a puzzle, you just can't solve, no matter how hard you try. You lay there, replaying the day. Your mind on a never-ending loop. And all of a sudden, morning is here. Comes too fast. Z Factor is a sleep supplement, designed to help you turn off that noise. Not with harsh sedation, but with a gentle, purposeful push toward real rest. It was created by the same team behind Relief Factor. And people understand how the body and the brain need different kinds of support. And Z Factor helps you quiet the rumbling thoughts so you fall asleep more easily, stay asleep more often, and awake feeling less fragile and more like yourself again.

Imagine going to bed without chasing sleep. Waking without that heavy fog, and having your day run, you know, on just fumes. This is about rest, that resets you, night after night. So tomorrow, is not a compromise. Because you just couldn't sleep last night. Z Factor, rest like you mean it.

First-time Z Factor buyers are going to enjoy 46 percent savings. 19.95 for a 30-day supply. Visit ReliefFactor.com. Or call 800-4-Relief.
(music)
Ten seconds, back to the show.

So let me take on now what happened with the shutdown. Here's cut 11. Trump on 60 Minutes last night.

VOICE: And the shutdown.

DONALD: Well, what we're doing is we keep voting. The Republicans are voting almost unanimously to end it. And the Democrats keep voting against any -- you know, they've never had this.

This has happened like 18 times before. The Democrats always voted for an extension.

Always saying, give us an extension. We'll work it out. They've lost their way. They've become crazed lunatics. And all they have to do, nor a,is say, let's vote!

VOICE: Senate Democrats say, they will vote to reopen the government if Republicans agree to extend subsidies for over 20 million Americans who use Obamacare for their health insurance.

DONALD: Obamacare is terrible.

It's bad health care at far too high a price.

We should fix that! We should fix it. And we can fix it with the Democrats. All they have to do is let the country open, and we will fix it. We have to let the country open, and I will sit down with the Democrats, and we'll fix it. But they have to let the country -- and you know what they have to do? All they have to do is raise five hands. We don't need all of them.

GLENN: Notice, I mean, he is pissed about this.

He wants to fix this.

He wants -- I mean, he does not like Obamacare. But he also is probably -- leans more. See if you agree with this, Stu.

Leans more towards the Democrat kind of fixing of health care than where I would lean. I would lean, shut it all off. Shut it all off. Get all of the government regulation out of insurance and everything else.

Let all of this stuff just be a free market again. And I think you would fix a lot of this.

I don't think that's Donald Trump's point of view. Do you?

STU: No. I don't think so.

Again, we talked about how the border say real passion issue for him. I don't think the health care thing is.

I just don't think that's central to his -- you know, his belief structure long-term.

You saw what happened. He tried to -- he did try, I think, at the beginning to get rid of Obamacare. I think there was a legitimate effort made. It did not work.

DONALD: Yeah. I don't think the Republicans did.

STU: Certainly, many did. Many did. Obviously, it failed. John McCain, famously.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

STU: Although, that's a little bit blown out of proportion, as the moment where it failed. If it had actually failed before that, regardless, it was something that he promised voters that he would try to do. It didn't work. And I think he's moved on from those sorts of real solutions, that I wouldn't favor. That you would favor.

GLENN: Right. Let me play one more. Cut 12, please.

VOICE: Government shutdowns in the past. And you did it by -- members of Congress, into the White House.

DONALD: I'm not going to do it by extortion. I'm not going to do it by being extorted by the Democrats who have lost their way. There's something wrong with these people.

VOICE: So then what happens on November 5th, when the troops --

DONALD: Schumer is a basket case, and he has nothing to lose. He's become -- I just like Japan. He's become a kamikaze pilot.

VOICE: Sounds like it's not going to get solved the shutdown.

DONALD: It's going to get solved. Oh, it will get solved.

VOICE: How?

DONALD: We'll get it solved. Eventually, they will have to vote.

GLENN: How?

Because I'm on the completely reasonable side, and you seem completely unreasonable.

How? How is this ever going to stop?

Because you won't give the Democrats what they want.

She is so -- she's so mainstream old-fashioned media. Just sickening.