Are White House economists learning from Kamala?!

GLENN: The White House says, yeah. There's -- there's the big recession number coming out this week. But they said, even if it hits, you know, the second quarter of negative growth. That doesn't mean a recession. And I would say, that's the textbook definition of a recession. And they said, well, but no. Not this time. Not this time. It's just slowing down, so it can start going faster. And I thought, you talk to Kamala Harris for that one, didn't you?


9 questions for the DOJ about the FBI, Trump raid

GLENN: I've got a few questions, just a few questions about the raid:

It's been reported FBI claimed 15 boxes of documents were missing in January. So they have the missing documents. They knew that he had them in February. Why did they wait so long? What new evidence prompted the raid? What was the intent behind the search? What are they explicitly looking for?


EXPLAINED: Biden’s ‘zero inflation’ claim is an ABSOLUTE LIE

Our far-left leadership truly believes the average American voter is an IDIOT. Why else would they repeat absolute LIES, seemingly without fear of getting caught? President Biden’s latest one was about inflation, claiming on Wednesday that inflation numbers in July hit zero percent. But Stu tells Glenn that Joe's claim actually is not an outright lie — it's more like an insane, 'disingenuous' manipulation of the facts. The guys explain it all in this clip…


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have so much on our plate to talk about. The one thing we haven't talked about yet, are the inflation numbers. And it's remarkable, Joe Biden has just come out and said, we have zero inflation this month.

STU: Wow. We did it! We solved it.

GLENN: We did. We did. So we can start printings more money. We have zero inflation.

BIDEN: News that came out today, relative the economy. Actually, I just want to say a number.

Zero. Today we received news that our economy had 0 percent inflation in the month of July.

GLENN: That's weird.

STU: Yeah. Because that's not how --

BIDEN: What that means, the price of some things went up last month. The price of some other things went down the same amount. The result, 0 percent inflation last mop.

STU: Now, that's incredible there. And it's interesting, because every single publication is reporting the number as 8.5 percent.

GLENN: Right. But that's very close to zero.

STU: Very close to zero. Now, I want to be clear, to show you how disingenuous this person is. This is how he's come to this conclusion, okay?

Because people are just saying, oh, he's lying. And he's not quite lying. This is what he's doing. Now, every single time we talk about inflation, we talk about it as an annual number.

GLENN: Right.

STU: That is how we talk about it. Year to year. Everybody talks about it the same way. 8.5 percent, is the headline annual number. That's the number that everyone has been talking about, which everyone focuses on. So what he's done, is take that number, and ignore it completely. Then, he's converted what he's looking at, from the headline number, to the core number. Now, there's two different measures of it inflation. Basically, the core number takes out food and takes out energy. To summarize it. So that number was 5.9 percent, I believe it was this -- this --

GLENN: Which is zero.

STU: Which is --

GLENN: I don't know if it's closer to 8.5. One of the two. They're both closer to zero. We have a scale from one to a billion. Fine. Might as well call it zero.

STU: Right. Sure. So he's ignored the main number. He's presented only the core number. Which has been lower the entire time. And then he's instead of taking the annual measure. He's done only the month to month measure.

Now, no one -- the month to month number, is not the number anyone talks about. And to be clear, it was only supposed to be 0.2 percent. So what he's saying is -- now, that's almost zero anyway. That's what everyone was expecting it to be. 0.2 percent. Instead, it was 0.0 percent, and he is out there bragging saying, oh, well, this just shows, there's no inflation month to month.

So he's ignored the main measure. And he's basically taking the secondary core measure, and divided it by 12, even though that's not exactly how they come up with the number. And he's saying that there's been no inflation. Now, this is entirely disingenuous. And what I've said before, on this program, on Stu Does America as well. We are very close to one of the most annoying things you're ever going to experience. Which is, this main number that everyone is talking about. 9.1 percent. Is going to start getting lower. And when that happens, the administration is going to brag about it. However --

GLENN: This is important.

STU: This is important. What most people will say, when I -- when you say to them, hey. Inflation last month was 9.1 percent. And this time, it's 8.5 percent. Most people will say, first of all, it's going down. That will be their initial reaction. It's going down. And because most people will say that, the administration will brag about it going down.

GLENN: It's month to month.

STU: Yeah. That's the annual measure, but it's two separate months.

Most people will say, okay. If something is $100 a year ago, it was $109 last month, and now, it's, what? 108.50, right? It's coming down a little bit?

It's important to know, that's not how this number works. The number works based on a year-to-year measure. So they're comparing July to the previous July. The reason why I'm saying these numbers are going to come down. And everybody is going to say. Well, we're past peak inflation. The reason why that's going to happen. Is because the new numbers. Follow me on this. The new numbers are building on old numbers that were already inflated.

GLENN: So you're not going -- you're not measuring it from 100.

STU: One hundred.

GLENN: You're measuring it from 108. So what is the increase of 108?

STU: Right. So let me give you this. This is a real world example. This is actually what happened, okay? If you bought something in July 2020, at $100.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: In July 2021, inflation was at 5.4 percent. So that was costing $105.43.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: This new number --

GLENN: Well, it's down. It's down. So I should pay 103.

STU: 103 or 104, right? No. It's up 8.5 percent from 105.40. So the new number, the thing that used to cost $100 two years ago, now costs $114.36. So your prices are up 14 percent. That's the inflation number from what our normal prices. 14.36 percent. And the administration is going to spend all day bragging about that. And it is -- and you're going to go into the store. And you'll say, wait a minute. These prices aren't any lower. They're all higher.

In fact, they're 14 percent higher on average, and you will be right. And they will be bragging about it.

That's the rest of your day, everybody. Boys and girls get together and realize, these idiots are going to come out here, and say this all day, because they think you are so stupid, you just might believe it. And they know they're lying. And they're going to do it anyway. That's the rest of your day.

GLENN: Average people. Average people don't know that. And they know it. They know it. They know it. The average person has no idea, that what costs $100 last year, was 108. And today, because of the inflation. You go up from the 108. It's not -- it's not going back towards 100. It's adding. When they say 2 percent inflation is our target. That means, prices always go up. Every year, by 2 percent. That means, your dollar is becoming -- that's why something costs a time. You know, in 1940. Oh. I want that beautiful Cadillac over there. All right. Dollar and a half.

STU: Now it's $185,000.

GLENN: That's all inflation. That's inflation. Because it continues to adds on top of each other.


EXPOSED: The far-left plan to CREATE conservative 'RADICALS'

Donald Trump is the first former president to ever be under THIS much scrutiny AFTER leaving office. So, why does the far-left hate him so much? Why do they continue to use every tool — like an FBI raid — at their disposal to destroy the former Commander-in-Chief? In this clip, Glenn theorizes why he believes the far-left is going to such great lengths. And it’s NOT about their hatred for President Trump, he says. Rather, it’s about their ultimate endgame: To CREATE right-wing ‘radicals’ who they can use to demonize ALL conservatives for decades to come. But there is one way America can survive such a plan. Glenn explains in this clip…


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Donald Trump is -- has just been called to testify today, to the New York State attorney. Or New York State attorney general, about his real estate dealings, in New York. My gosh.

This guy, you know, he said it on Saturday, at CPAC. Has there ever been a president that has been under attack this much, or a past president? I mean, Nixon left office. It was over. We never heard a peep about it. Clinton leaves office. We never hear a peep about it. And they start the Clinton Foundation, which makes billions. Nothing. Nothing.

Barack Obama leaves office. Takes 30 million pages. Nothing. Okay.

I said to you yesterday, here's what's really going on: They can't find the radicals, so they need to create them. Okay?

That's what the January 6 has been. They have tried to convince America, that the -- the right is just completely full of radicals. Well, the problem is: 42 percent, I think, the number is as close to this. Forty-two percent of America, thought that that was true, until they televised the hearings.

That number went down to 36. Okay? They don't have it. They don't have it. Because that's not who we are. So they have to create them. Now, I have said, since 2009, I watched the pattern. And remember, we were talking about the Tides Foundation. And I said, the right should create the Tides Foundation, exactly the same way, except be clean. Because the Tides Foundation and the left would go, oh. They're embezzling money. They're funneling money from dark sources over here. And we could go, oh. We're not. But thank you for letting us know, what you're doing. Because they always self-diagnose. They always tell you who they are. Fascist. They're all fascist. They're fascist. He's going to crack down. He's going to use the state as a spying mechanism. He's building an army internally, and he's going to go after the American people and shut down voices.

Hello! That is exactly what they're doing. So listen to -- listen to Fang Fang's boyfriend. Fang Fang's boyfriend yesterday said, the Republicans are a party of chaos. He said, it's very clear, that Republicans have recognized that they can no longer win elections with votes. Now, is that what you're feeling about the next election? That Republicans don't have a chance of winning at the ballot box? I have no doubt, it's going to be a hammering -- a hammering at the ballot box. Now, that doesn't mean that you take the House. It just means, wherever we can win, I think we can win.

STU: You better take the House.

GLENN: Yeah. I know. The Senate. The Senate.

STU: The Senate is much more in the air.

GLENN: Right. And I think we take the House. We may not take the Senate. Still, it's like going to be a hammering, unless Zuckerberg boxes are everywhere else, you know what I mean? But I don't think there's a Republican that thinks that if people vote, go out, that Republicans are going to do poorly. So is he self-projecting here? Republicans have recognized, they can no longer win elections with votes, so they're leaning in hard, to try to win elections with violence. Okay.

So that violence that he's talking about is January 6. And that was, what? One hundred people?

The left is encouraging violence all over America. It's been burning cities down. Okay. And they're fomenting that violence right now. We are?

He says, we're getting all kinds of threats, blah, blah, blah, blah. So he said, chaos is arming to the teeth. Most Americans with AR-15s now, and letting our children live in fear, chaos is January 6th.

Chaos is -- chaos is government mandated pregnancies.

STU: That's what the government is doing? They're mandating pregnancy, Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah. We are. We are. We are. You're going to have a baby, with right now.

Chaos is leaders of the party, arguing, we need to defund the FBI. Now, what's the difference between defunding the FBI, and defunding the police? I'm going to try to --

STU: Everyone I heard, talking about that, is talking about changing the instructor of the organization, and moving many of its responsibilities into other parts of the government. And not getting rid of all police.

GLENN: Right. And I say defund. I say we choke this system off, until they make changes. Money doesn't talk. It screams. And these huge agencies, the IRS, I say defund the IRS. Now, that doesn't mean, we don't need the IRS. And I want it to go away. Well, I would. I would. I would rather have a flat tax. But I'm not calling for chaos. I'm calling for reform. I'm not calling for tear the system down. I want reform!

I want what people wanted in 2008. Transparency.

We've been saying this forever. I want transparency. I don't want any more backroom deals. I don't want bills just shoved through that are omnibus, that we don't know what's in them. I want to know who is the good guy. Who is the bad guy. I want people to go to jail. And I don't give a flying crap, if they're Republican or independent or Democrat. I really don't. I want -- you know what, I would -- I would be so for Nancy Pelosi's son being tried. And if he's found as guilty and dirty as we think he is -- I mean, did you notice he was on the Taiwan trip? Did you notice? She's hiding that. So Nancy Pelosi's son. I would be all for Hunter Biden. I think every American who is decent. Who has paid attention at all, knows, there's trouble there. I would be for Joe Biden going to jail, if it's proven, that he was doing dirty deals with his family.

But I would also go after Mitch McConnell. And it's not because I think Mitch McConnell is a worthless just piece of bag of bones. I think Mitch McConnell is just as dirty. He's in on it. His family is making all kinds of money from China. No! No! If Mike Lee was found to do -- and Mike would be the first to tell you, I mean this. If Mike Lee, who is a good friend of mine, and a guy I really trust and believe. If Mike Lee was found doing dirty things and dirty deals. I would be the first to call for his impeachment, and investigation. And jail time, if he deserved it.

That's all I want. I want everybody to have the same consequence. We have two layers of justice now. If you're in a high position, with the right party, it's fine. That's not America. You cannot run a country. That is a banana republic. That's why -- you know, I was watching a show last night. And it -- it kept flashing back to Afghanistan. And the way the people lived in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan wasn't always like that. It wasn't always like that. Why are these third world countries like this? Poor, broken up. Sometimes, it's no fault of their own. Other times, it's clearly because the government or there's so much chaos on the street, that you have warlords.

People who are calling for, you know, the defunding of the police, and everything else. You're going to get warlords. Well, we would be better off with no government at all. We would just start all over again. Let's just burn this thing down. You will go into warlords. And America will become Afghanistan.

I don't want to burn it down. I want reform. I want transparency. I don't want to go back in time. Conservatives are not about the past. They are about conserving what has worked. And jettisoning those things that don't work. That's why the left and the right. Liberal and conservative. Not progressive. Liberal and conservative work so well together.

Because liberals tend to go, we ought to try this. This is really good. And conservatives are like, wait. Wait. Wait. But wait. What will that do? What are the unintended consequences? I don't know. What about this and this and that? You're not jettisoning this to get that, are you? Because these things are good. It's the yin and yang that makes America work. But if we can't do this through elections and reason, then we go to war with each other. And I don't want a war. Do you?

The -- the entire thing with Donald Trump right now. I want you to know this. Because if you know this, then you know what they are trying to achieve. And what they want and need you to do.

They could not convince the American people, that their neighbors are terrorists. They tried.

They've tried. And they've convinced maybe, I think, probably 20 percent. Okay. That's not enough.

You need to get that number over 50 percent. So 50 percent of the country thinks the other side of the country is a terrorist. This is why I always try to say, not the regular Democrat. But the leftists. Those who are hell-bent on destroying our country. We cannot group everybody into that. Because if we group half of the country, into revolutionaries. And they don't actually fit there, we have no place to go, but war.

We have no place to go, but I guess camps. And if you think one side or the other. This is -- do you remember the show I did at Fox, years ago, if you're a long-time listener or viewer. I did the pendulum show. And I swung a pendulum from left to right. And I said, the Constitution is really in the middle. It's neutral. Okay?

Sometimes a judge and the Constitution will rule, no. You know what, sorry. Got to have all that freedom. And the conservatives will go, wait. What?

That's chaos. Sometimes, it will say, nope. Got to go the conservative way. And the liberals will say, wait. You're a fascist. The Constitution is neutral on topics.

Its focus is on power and control, and control of the government. And I said, as we swing further and further, these swings will get worse and worse. And I said, you put Obama in, and you keep pushing people to the wall. You will get somebody who is like, oh, really? Really?

And that pendulum will swing back just as hard the other way. There's Donald Trump. He is the -- the people in the -- on the coasts. They all think Donald Trump is a fascist, that will put them all in jail. Well, that's what we felt about Obama. He was destroying the country.

Same thing now. Well, you do this to Donald Trump. And you're swinging it further the other way. And what did I tell you would happen, in the end?

That eventually, you would have two parties, that are completely on the very ends. And it depends which party is in office, at the time that things really begin to crumbling. And there's real chaos. And that party will reach out and grab that pendulum. And then freedom is over. That is the point we're at. And that's why they need the chaos on the streets. They'll create it. But as long as America knows, they're creating it. It's their chaos in our schools. It's their chaos that are burning our cities down. It's their chaos that is getting our policemen killed. It's their chaos that is making the prices of everything go through the roof. It is their climate chaos, that is causing us to have fuel problems and energy problems. And people either dying from heat, or now in the winter, they'll be dying from cold.

It's their chaos of the war machine. Of Afghanistan. As long as people understand that, we're fine. If we confuse it with any kind of chaos on our side, we're playing right into their hands. Because all they need is to just convince a few more people. And they can grab the pendulum.


Why THIS legal expert says FBI's Trump raid is ‘OUTRAGEOUS’

‘Outrageous and unconstitutional’ is how lawyer Alan Dershowitz describes the FBI’s recent raid of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home to Glenn. A legal expert and host of ‘The Dershow,’ Dershowitz says he may have more experience with the Fourth Amendment — which protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures — than any other academic in America. He discusses the questions the government MUST answer about the raid, why Trump should’ve been served a subpoena instead, and why even Democrats should ‘object’ to this action from the FBI...


Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Professor Alan Dershowitz. Back on the program. Alan, you were one of the first people I thought of, when I heard what was going on. Because I knew you would have an opinion, and it would me to either rethink mine. Or to shore my opinion up.

ALAN: Yeah.

GLENN: Tell me about the raid with Donald Trump.

ALAN: Well, first of all, I have more experience on the Fourth Amendment than any academic in America. I understand the Fourth Amendment. I've written books about it.

I've litigated dozens of cases on the Fourth Amendment. And I'm a liberal Democrat, who voted for Biden and against Trump. But this raid is absolutely outrageous and unconstitutional.

You don't engage in a raid on a house, unless you have exhausted all other possibilities, and the most obvious recourse here, was a subpoena. A subpoena to the president. Saying, there are 25 boxes in your house. There's a safe. We would like you to bring them all to the court, tomorrow morning. Before you have a chance to leave where you are in the northeast. And come there. And destroy anything. And we will then submit it to a judge. And lawyers can argue, something that was classified. Some of it was unclassified by the president. Some was never classified. Some may be so classified, that even the FBI shouldn't have accessed it. To it, some may be privileged -- this is exactly the kind of thing that needs a document by document analysis. By a judge. Not the FBI coming in, and sweeping everything together. Breaking into a safe. Reminds me of the Geraldo Rivera fiasco, when he jumped into the safe, one of the big gangsters, Capone or somebody. Nothing was in there. Nothing was in there.

You know, you must have a single standard of justice. I'm a friend of both Sandy Berger, who was the former national security adviser. The late Sandy Berger. And a friend of Hillary Clinton. What they were accused of, was exactly comparable. And there were no searches of their houses. People who have been found guilty of taking classified material improperly, have been given fines. I don't think there's ever been a search like this, based on the allegations made in this case. Now, don't rush their judgment. Maybe there is something there. Right now, the burden of proof, is heavily on the Justice Department. And the FBI. Who justified what they have done. Absent a justification. Most Americans will not believe this was necessary. And they're going to come back and say, oh, we can't discuss it. Ongoing investigation. Classified material. Nonsense!

Appoint a special master, who has security clearance, who can objectively look through this thing, or else appoint the congressional committee. A real committee. Not like January 6th, which includes 40 percent Republicans, 60 percent Democrats. Have them look at this, in a classified manner. But we cannot except either silence or a claim that privilege somehow or confidentiality requires silence.

GLENN: But do we even know the chain of command now? I mean, how safe is it? First of all, Alan, we had Hillary Clinton, having some of her staff cut top secret off the top of documents, in a skiff. Send them to her server, at her house. And we didn't go through this. What could possibly be in these documents, that are so vital, that it -- that it warrants this, compared to what Hillary Clinton did?

ALAN: We're compared to what a subpoena would have produced. We don't know what's in there. Maybe there was a smoking gun. Again, he wasn't even on the premises. He couldn't have destroyed the information. All they had to do was issue a subpoena, or turn a vote this morning at 9 o'clock. There would have been no possibility of destroying evidence. And if anyone, Donald Trump or anyone else ordered the destruction of evidence, that's Nixon time. That's impeachment. That's criminal prosecution. That's a serious crime. Destroying subpoenaed material. It's -- you know, that's what the law is there for. To prevent that. And does anybody believe that Donald Trump would have taken a chance to destroy material? He didn't know whether there were copies of the material or other evidence that might be destroyed. This is a pretext. There's no way that the Justice Department actually believed that President Trump would destroy documents. Now, people say, oh, but a judge approved the search warrant. Let me tell you, with almost 60 years of experience. I've never heard of a judge turning down a search warrant. Ever. They give out search warrants more easily than Halloween candy. And so that's not a safeguard at all.

GLENN: Who was the judge? Do we know? Who did this? Do we know anything about it?

ALAN: No, we don't know anything. We haven't seen the document. Look, there's a search warrant in existence. We should see it. There's an affidavit, in support of the search warrant. We know what happened, when there was the search warrant for the FISA court. It turns out -- it turned out that it was filled with lies.

GLENN: By the FBI.

ALAN: Yeah. Well, I love the FBI. I've worked with the FBI. And I have worked with former directors of the FBI. It's a great organization. I don't know what the chain of command is. The White House has denied knowing about the raid. Which is quite surprising. Obviously, the attorney general who I also know. A former student of Harvard law school. I think very highly of him. I supported him for the Supreme Court. He obviously had to approve this raid. What was he thinking? Let him tell us. Maybe he's right. Maybe he did the right thing. I want to know that, Americans have a right to know that. Because we all now know, if you can do this to a former president, you can do it to Glenn Beck. You can do it to Alan Dershowitz. You can do it to all of your listeners. And this has to be justified. Or else, it has to be undone.

GLENN: Can you -- could you speak directly, as if I were a person that voted for Biden, and I despised Donald Trump. And I think he's guilty of everything that -- and he just can't be president anymore. Why is this so important, that we correct?

ALAN: Yeah. Yeah. Look, I'm talking to you from Martha's Vineyard, where no one speaks to me anymore. Recently, I was invited to a big event. Celebration of somebody. This engagement. I got a letter this morning saying, we have been told, not to invite you, because if we invite you, nobody else will come.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

ALAN: And our social reputations will be destroyed. At another event, a concert, where a good friend said, if I invited you, I would be committing social suicide. I tell all these stories, naming names in my book The Price of Principle. Because the price of principle is all about what happens to Americans today when they try to be neutral, try to be principled, try to be objective, and don't pick sides. And so I would hope that people who hate Trump. Who voted for Biden. I voted for Biden are just as upset at what happened here, as people who are Trump supporters. Now, look, there are three groups of people. There are the large tribes, for whom, about it you're after Trump, everything is okay. Constitution be damned. Constitution was written for the Democratic Party. There's no objective status. Okay. That's one group of people. The other group of people are so supportive of Trump, that nothing done against him, could ever be justified. The vast majority of Americans want to see justice, whether they voted for or against the candidate. And that's what we're not seeing here today. And so I encourage all of my fellow Democrats, to object to this. We're the ones who can really have an influence on this administration, because we're not Trump supporters. We're justice supporters. We believe in the Constitution. And that's where the pressure has to come.

GLENN: Would you agree that the FBI has been weaponized?

ALAN: I just there are elements within the FBI, that have been weaponized. I do think that. Look, it happens during the McCarthy period as well. It was wrong then. And it was wrong now. The FBI should be -- look, the head of the FBI, is not a liberal Democrat. He's, you know, nonpartisan. And I don't know whether he has deliberately done things. But remember, the FBI works for the Justice Department. They are part of the Justice Department. And so, you know, there's an old story, where the attorney general of the United States, during the Second World War, tried to get into the building late. And the building was restricted. And he said to the guard, I am the attorney general of the United States. And the guard said, I don't care if you're Jay Edgar Hoover himself, you can't get into it. But that was wrong. He worked for the attorney general of the United States. And so -- so does the director of the FBI, who worked for the Justice Department.

GLENN: Is your book out yet. I haven't read it yet.

ALAN: It is. It is. And it's doing very well on Amazon.

GLENN: Good.

ALAN: And please, buy it and review it. Because it's all about what's going on now. It's all about -- starts out with the phrase, that partisanship has trumped principle, and that we no longer live in a nation governed by principles. We live in a nation governed bipartisanship divisions. And as Abraham Lincoln said, a nation divided against itself cannot stand. That's the nation we're living in today.

GLENN: I will read it. The price of principle. You are paying a very high price for that. As are others. But thank you for having them. And sticking to them.

ALAN: I have a thick skin. I have a thick skin. I can do bear the cost. But when the people on my island, Martha's Vineyard, are not allowed to hear me speak at the Chilmark Library. When I've been banned by a public library, because I defended President Trump, then it goes beyond any parties or social communities, or social inconvenience. People have the right to disinvite me, if they don't like my politics. But they have the right to -- they have no right to prevent a library from allowing me to speak. Which is what happened.

GLENN: I hate to say this, but welcome to the club. Thanks so much. Alan Dershowitz. You bet.

The other of The Price of Principle.

STU: He didn't get one invite to one event. But he got invited to a new club. So there's an upside.

GLENN: He did. No. I don't think it really is.