The Glenn Beck Program - Best of The Program | 3/15/21

Episode Date: March 15, 2021

Pat and Stu cover for Glenn. The border crisis is getting worse, but Nancy Pelosi is blaming Trump and climate change. Chris Harrison won’t be hosting the upcoming season of "The Bachelorette," as cancel culture takes another victim. The Derek Chauvin trial is under way — will Minneapolis survive even if he is convicted? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

60% of the vans on Amazon come a vendor independent like Sac Magic. Hello, here Camille of Sac Magic. Our compresses, show of fraud are fabriced in Quebec, and our presence on Amazon

enlarge our clientele to the world entire. Trouve of little enterprises like on our own.com. Welcome to the podcast. Today, it's Pat and Stu in for Glenn Beck. We talk about potentially

what might be the worst single example of cancel culture since all of this started. That's my take on it. We go into that today. We talk about Andrew Cuomo and his, he's had some problems recently. I don't know if you've heard about them.

Not going well in the Andrew Cuomo world. We'll get into the latest there. Also, some bad COVID predictions from a year ago. Some of these are starting to travel around and they're pretty entertaining as well. Make sure you check the show out today. Subscribe to this podcast. Let me give you a couple of other tasks while you're here. Stu Does America is another podcast.

We'd love for you to subscribe to. You do it right here wherever you're listening. listening to the Glenn Beck program. And Pat Gray Unleashed is another one. Why not subscribe to all of them? Even if you never listen, just subscribe and let all those episodes hit your phone. And then, you know, maybe occasionally we'll luck into you clicking the wrong button and get a listen. We'd certainly appreciate it.

And you can subscribe to Blaze TV at BlazeTV.com slash Glenn. Promocode is Glenn for 10 bucks off. Your subscription to Blaze TV there. You can get Glenn Beck, Glenn TV, Studeau's America. Pat Gray unleashed. All those programs are included in your subscription. So do that today. It's blazedtive.com slash glen. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.

All right. So everything's fine at the border, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. It's not a, it's not a human rights crisis anymore. Is it? It's just a, it's like a border challenge. A border challenge.

Now, yeah. Now, would you, is it a literal concentration camp? Oh, no. Good. Gully, no. These are just migrant facilities that happen to be jam-packed to way more than capacity. That's all. I was looking into some of this today, and they're now saying they're at 300% of capacity. Oh, I've got facilities at 729% of capacity.

I think that's the high, certain facilities, as high as 729% capacity, which there's an important detail to think about here, is that it's 300, or 700% of pre-COVID capacity. So not social distancing, everyone's six feet apart. None of that's going on at all. They're jam packing the normal capacity, multiplying it by three, four, five, six, seven, and then jamming them all in there together to potentially pass COVID to each other

and then release them into our society. Now, what's fascinating about this is, this is not a concern apparently. All of all the, you can't get together at a school or a church or a concert or a movie theater in so many places. And yet this is somehow acceptable and not a quote unquote literal concentration camp. I love this spin by, I think this is ABC News as they're talking about this problem. And they themselves said it was over 300% pre-COVID capacity. So they're acknowledging this issue.

And then they go into to talk about what is actually happening with the virus in these facilities. Listen. Coming across the border, they're not being kept in any way with social distancing rules. We don't know how much COVID they're spreading. Since you've been here, on average, what is the percent positive of the people coming across from Mexico? Let's say from the most, moles that I have tested like around 116. And from those at least 30 are positive. And that seems to propagate.

That old, you know, dog whistle of, hey, you know, migrants are bringing a disease and other terrible things across the border. That's a dog whistle. And that's why we need to shut them out. Wait a minute. So you're jampacking illegal immigrants into facilities at up to 700 and some odd percent capacity. Mm-hmm. Their own people say that they have a 26% positivity rate. And this is reinforcing a dog whistle.

about migrants bringing of disease over the border? That old dog whistle. Yeah, that old dog whistle. Oh, you know what? We might have migrants bringing disease over the border.

You just said 26% of them, at least in this group, the one you picked as an example, 26% positivity for COVID. Remember, too, Central America has basically done nothing when it comes to coronavirus this entire time. I mean,

they just been letting it in many aspects run. wild in certain places. And we've seen positivity rates in Mexico the entire country north of 26 percent, up to 50 percent sometimes. They're not even bothering to test a lot of times in Mexico. And they've had all sorts of issues down there. And then you're going to open up the border as we are coming to the end of our own COVID situation and let these guys come across the border because I think they felt bad because Donald Trump was mean? I think that's basically the justification for it. Yeah, Nancy Pelosi was asked about this. This is amazing what she says because none of this is her fault. None of this is the Democrats' fault. None of it's Biden's fault.

It's all on Donald Trump and she explains who's to blame here. Let's talk about the situation at the border. We've seen a huge surge in migrants crossing the border since January. The number of children in custody higher than it was than its 2019 peak during the Trump administration. Your colleague Veronica Escobar of Texas called the conditions there unacceptable. She was there on Friday. Is she right? Unacceptable. What more must be done?

Well, I'm sorry, I didn't hear who you said. Veronica Escobar. Veronica Escobar, our colleague from representing El Paso, and yes, it is. Right, thank you. Actually, the facts are the. there are more children, about 6,700 more children, unaccompanied children coming over the border. This is a humanitarian challenge to all of us. What the administration has inherited is a broken system at the border, and they are working to correct that in the children's interest.

I'm so pleased that the president, as a temporary measure, has sent FEMA to the border in order to help facilitate the children. the children going from one, the 72-hour issue into where they are cared for as they are transferred into family homes or homes that are safe for them to be. So this, again, is a transition for what was wrong before towards right. Of course, we have to also look to Central American, Mexico, and the rest, the corruption, the violence, all of that. So, bam, my most recent trip to Northern China was a little bit. Because that just started now. That would be Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador.

You saw the impact of the climate change, mind you. Climate change. These people were leaving because of the drought. They couldn't farm. And that just started too. Other ways to survive. So there are many reasons that go into this. But the fact is we have to deal with it at the border.

And some of the people coming there are seeking asylum. And I always like to quote our friends in the evangelical movement. at one of our rump hearings we had before we had the majority, the representative said to us, the United States Refugee Resettlement Program is the crown jewel of American humanitarianism. We have certain responsibilities. Oh, well, if somebody said it, it must be true. I don't know who said that quote. I can't take it anymore.

Yeah, please stop her. I don't know who said that quote, but what a brilliant quote it was. that that's the crown jewel. The crown jewel being that we're the only country in the world that allows just anybody who wants to come across our border to come across our border. Is that the crown jewel of American policy? Apparently it is. Apparently.

Just come on in. We won't worry about who you are or what you're doing here. We won't ask anything of you. We'll just give you whatever you need. I think it's important to note the smooth presentation of information there from Nancy Pelosi. I mean, that was just a brilliant, a brilliant, just, it was a deep dive. And she has her hand on the facts at all times. You know, they're calling, in Mexico, they're calling Biden the migrant president.

Because correctly so, they are sensing that there are new incentives about the trip to America, which is you're being invited. And you're offered amnesty. You're offered amnesty. They're going to let you off. You better get here before they pass that thing. Yep. Make sure you're, you get him beyond the sort of deadlines they're going to set. Because if you come too late, you know, maybe maybe you don't get it.

So come right now. And of course, this is what people, you know, coyotes are telling the, the migrants, but they're doing it accurately. I mean, this is real. There's a real sense of. of change when it comes to the messaging towards Central America and that it's now, hey, come on. It's time. It's party time.

Come. Even though we're in the middle of a pandemic, just come. Come now. They're going to let you end. The controversy will be about whether you're treated too poorly or not. That will be the controversy, not whether you're supposed to be here. It's whether the treatment is good enough. Right.

And the treatment is obviously great now that Biden is in control. Oh, it is. Yeah. there's um at the one facility the in donna texas there were more than eighteen hundred people children being held at this facility 729% as we mentioned of its capacity during the pandemic the facility opened last month it's been operating over its pandemic capacity for weeks some of the boys said that conditions were so overcrowded that they have to take turns sleeping on the floor.

They all said they wanted to shower more and we're told they can't. Adding that several miners were only permitted to shower once in seven days. I want to have fact check on that because teenagers never want to shower.

Come on, let's be honest about it. One of them shared that he could only see the sun when he showered because you can see the sun through the window. She said many of the children didn't have access to outside activities

and were visibly emotionally emotional. They were hysterically crying, wanting to talk to their families, not being allowed to. Well, this is the thing, this is the brilliance and the wonderful sweetness of the Biden administration, which when Trump was doing this, Pat,

he had people come across the border and because he was charging the parents, he would have to separate them because they were being charged. This is totally different. this the migrants get to be separated from their parents before they cross the border which is much more humane you see if you just let if you just send your kid across a river by themselves much better than the old trump way which is they would come together but then be

separated later right this way they separate before they cross the border brilliant which is perfectly humane in every way and a great way to grow a family yes this is the way you do it It's unbelievable that they are trying to claim anything other than complete catastrophe here. Well, that's what it is. It's complete catastrophe. And they're all wearing the t-shirts. President Biden, please let us in. Who's making those t-shirts for them?

Who's footing the bill for all of this stuff? Who's paying for this? Something is going on in the background, too, that we should probably be aware of. Because this is a concerted effort to send people specifically up here. right now. And I don't know if there's governments behind it. I don't know if it's just the coyotes or what's going on here. But it needs to stop and they need to they need to be told like President Trump told them you're not going to be allowed in. The best of the Glenn Beck program.

Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program, AAA 727BECK. This Chris Harrison situation is amazing to me. I don't watch The Bachelor or The Bachelorette, and he's the host of it and has been since the late 30s, I think. Yeah. Are you like me? You won't watch because you're uncomfortable with the gendering of The Bachelor and Bachelorette. You don't like the fact that they are like, these gender roles are traditional, and I don't like that. I don't like that they name what gender.

That's exactly why I don't watch. I will not watch a show that does that. I won't. just the fact that they're named Bachelor or Bachelorette. That makes me uncomfortable. It's offensive to me. It's offensive. Why can't a Bachelor be a Bachelorette?

Thank you. That's what I've said all along. All along, since the 30s. Yes. You've had that. You had a, I don't like the Bachelor because they call them the Bachelor, and I don't like the Bachelorette because they call them the Bachelorette. Bumper sticker on your Model T back in the early 1930s.

It was in early 30s. Yeah. 70 years before the Bachelor. even began. You were on this one. Yeah, I was on. Anyway, Chris Harrison is so apologetic over his role in this unbelievable scandal that took place. Now, I guess it was a bachelorette, right, that went to a,

this is somebody who is on the show. A contestant. One of the contestants for the affection of a bachelor. Is that what it was? I believe so. Or was she the bachelorette. Anyway, she went to an antebellum party in 2018. Which is you dress up like a Southern Bell. Right. And now I did not know these things were a thing. I didn't know in 2018.

I didn't know in 2021. But apparently they were a trendy thing to do a few years ago. And now it's the worst thing you can possibly do. Right. So now like basically like burning a cross on your front lawn. Like it's basically an equivalent. Now I didn't know. You dress up in a Southern Bell outfit.

Mm-hmm. You have essentially endorsed. worst. The clan. You're a clansman. That is what is happening. Yes. And to the point of now we are at the idea that one of the biggest country bands in the world,

Lady Antebellum is not like Lady A. He couldn't even come up with another good word. It was like, what if we just abbreviate the old word? Nobody will know what we're talking about. We're Lady A. And then they found out they had actually taken that name from another artist who then sued them. But the whole point is, completely ridiculous. This is a totally new standard. It was not in effect at the time she was at

this party. No one was saying, you know, like it was not a controversial thing at the time. And he defended, so he kind of defended her. He said, come on. It's like the woke police. He did, yeah. Although, he didn't really defend her. What he said basically was, look, she deserves a little grace. We haven't even heard from her yet on this. And I would like to at least hear what she has to say. I don't know what she has to say. I don't know the story of this, but I think we're looking at this with 2021 eyeballs instead of 2018 eyeballs. And, you know, that could be different. And that was the worst thing you could possibly say, I guess, at the time. And give a little grace is not exactly an unknown standard. There's been some books written

about it long ago that mentioned maybe having grace for others is a good thing to do. Yeah, it's a long book, too. Huh. I'm surprised. You know. It was a bestseller, though. It was a bestselling book, and you should go back and maybe read some of it. Yeah, it's fantastic. Lots of really interesting stories. There's floods. It's all, it's crazy.

But this, and I have to say, because the Dr. Seuss thing went on last week and the week before, right, where the Dr. Seuss books go away. Even Glenn. We said this on the air. Glenn said something about the Dr. Seuss thing and how it's like we're going on this road of fascism, you know, and people like John. Oliver piled on him and said how dumb he was, as they always tend to do. And as we noted on the air, by the way,

um, Dr. Seuss is not the best example of cancel culture. Their family, right, were the ones that stopped printing these books. What we were commenting on is how now everyone follows suit and is now pulling them, the old books off of sites like eBay and Amazon.

And we thought that that was problematic among other things. But like, it's not the best example of cancel culture. There wasn't a wide, outrage about about Dr. Seuss and these drawings. It wasn't like a movement. There wasn't a Twitter campaign. And they did it on their own.

And they should not be forced to print books. There's no conservative would say, yes, we should force them to print the books they don't want to force as a company. It would be a terrible idea. However, the Chris Harrison thing might be the single best example of cancel culture that I can

think of. This is a guy who didn't do the thing in question. He was not, not even defending the person who was in trouble for doing the thing that was not a problem when it was done. Only retroactively is it a problem. And in addition to that, all he said was, we should hear what she has to say about this. And also, we should, you know, offer her a little grace on a mistake she may have made, by the way, as a college student in a sorority. Right.

Here's the quote. A little grace, a little understanding. a little compassion. Then he said... Come on! How is that a problem? Then he said it's unbelievably alarming that people were just tearing this girl's life apart.

Is it a good look in 2018 or is it not a good look in 2021? Because there's a big difference. Well, I guess you can't say that. But even she kind of went at him after that. I know. And this is why I can't stand her. This is terrible. And also, by the way, I should point out,

I ended this not being able to stand him either. Because they both came up with these ridiculous over-the-top apologies for this nonsense. And she was even worse because this is a guy who ruined his career to defend her. Exactly. And she's come out and jumps on the cancel culture bandwagon. Saying it's not a good look ever because she's celebrating the old South, she responded. About herself. About herself.

If I went to that party, what would I represent at that party? well I don't know then why'd you go to the party? Yes. I mean are you really if you knew it was a racist thing to do then and that's what you're telling me now then why did you go? And she gets the pass here. Somehow she's the good one. She did the thing.

And he loses his job. And he loses his job. Now his apology was so irritating. I wound up turning on all of them after reading it. He goes, to my Bachelor Nation family, I will always own a mistake when I make one. So I am here to extend a sincere apology.

I have this incredible platform to speak about love and yesterday I took a stance on topics which I should have been better informed. While I do not speak for Rachel Kirk Connell, my intentions were simply to ask for grace and offering her an opportunity to speak on her own behalf.

What I now realize is I have done harm and caused harm by wrongly speaking in a manner that perpetrates racism. the hell are you talking about When you're asking for grace, you're not perpetrating racism. No, you're not. I'm sorry.

And for that, I am so deeply sorry. I also apologize to my friend, Rachel Lindsay, I guess is interviewing him, for not listening to her better on a topic she has firsthand understanding of. Really, was she a victim of an antebellum party as well? Is that what happened? And humbly, thank the members

of Bachelor Nation who have reached out to me to hold me accountable. I promise to do better. Now look, the guy's trying to defend his multi-million dollar job. That's it. There's no way a human being actually feels this way about the situation. None of them. None of the people accusing them of this care and think it's done harm to anyone.

No one asking for grace for a sorority girl at a party who's on the bachelorette from three years ago. From three years ago is not an action that harms someone. That is not what it does. no one, zero people on earth were harmed by his statement. None of them were. They could act like they're harmed, but none of them were harmed because she dressed up

as a Southern Bell. In fact, no one even knew about it. No one even knew about it. People are like, well, we've exposed them. And now that's, and then she has to apologize for the harm. Well, if no one knew the party existed, who's causing the harm? The people exposing her are causing the harm.

But of course, the truth is, no harm happened. It's a total lie in every way So we can all get rage clicks, I guess We're supposed to post this stuff And ruin both of these people's lives For no freaking reason I mean, it may be the single best example I think it is

He's talking about biblical principles Of forgiveness and grace Yeah And applying them to an idiotic, morotic bachelor contested Who probably has the IQ of a pair The fruit And there just is no redemption anymore

there's just no there's absolutely zero forgiveness and no redemption you can't even consider it anymore I and these guys really neither one of them did anything wrong as far as I can tell one dressed up in a southern bell

outfit from the 1800s the other said yeah maybe that's not a big deal again when I dress up as a vampire I am not advocating the sucking of blood from necks of victims that it's not what you do when you dress up in a costume. No one who dresses up as Freddie Kruger is advocating entering people's dreams

to carve them up with razor fingers. That's not what you're doing. You are not advocating the belief of the costume that you are wearing. This is complete insanity. And we just, it just rolls on. And we get these things like, because they can find Dr. Seuss,

which is still disturbing, but not perfect example of cancel culture. They're all due speeches about that one. They'll all say, oh, cancel culture doesn't even exist. Look at this, Dr. Seuss. The family canceled the books. Well, what about this one? This guy's not, as far as I know, not a conservative.

You're free to not hate him. He's just being destroyed for no reason. No reason. Just this weird cancel culture bloodlust for no reason at all. There's no reason to believe he has any of these, any racist feelings. There's no reason to believe he's even for low taxes. You are free to like him.

And yet here it is. We've got to destroy the guy anyway. It's incredible. Incredible. Until this year. I mean, well, maybe last year. I'd never seen anything like it. And now we see it all the time.

All the time. We see it every stinking week. Yeah, I did this thing last year on Stu Does America, my show on Blaze TV, which was called the cancel culture Olympics. And I was like, oh, we should do one of these like once a year maybe or maybe even twice a year. I could do it. Every single day. Yeah, for sure.

With all these new people. It happens every day. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. For Glenn, on the Glenn Beck program, throughout his back or something over the weekend. So hopefully he'll be back tomorrow. The second week of the trial of former Minneapolis police officer, Derek Chauvin,

kicked off this morning with arguments over the stunning news Friday of the $27 million settlement. for George Floyd's family over his death. They're going through apparently recall seven of the jurors, I guess, and talk to them about how they feel about that settlement. Because doesn't the settlement sort of admit wrongdoing on the part of the city? Kind of does, right? Seems like it.

You're paying $27 million for what? Yeah. If, you know, Chauvin has turned to be, you know, to be, you know, to be in? somehow. What did you pay for? Right. And I think the answer, of course, is clear, which is they paid for their city not to burn down. Now, I don't know. I mean, I think, look, by my eye, not being a criminal justice expert, by my eye, what happened there was absolutely not lawful. That being said, if it wouldn't, like, why would you, why would you settle and have the settlement come out publicly? before the trial.

When you're selecting jurors. It doesn't make any sense to me. It doesn't make any sense to me at all. Certainly it's not giving, you know, Derek Chauvin his, it's not helping him maintain his constitutionally guaranteed rights of innocence until proven guilty.

Right. So he's charged with second degree murder and manslaughter. And the judge allowed prosecutors to reinstate third degree murder charge last week. So it will be interesting to see. I mean, what is going to happen if he has found innocent? Does that enter into the jury's decision at all? It would seem like these are people. It would be hard not to, wouldn't it, to consider what's going to happen if you find

this guy not guilty? But it would just be a strange idea to, pay someone $27 million for nothing. Mm-hmm. Right? If you if you believe there is no wrongdoing, you don't pay $27 million typically. And typically. And if you're going to pay $27 million, you don't do it while

they're selecting jurors. You know, like I usually like, you know, usually like. It's going to be a tough situation. Remember the OJ thing back of the day? They had the trial trial, you know, where he, uh, where, you know, if it doesn't fit, you must acquit. Yep. And O.J. gets off. And then afterward, they had the civil trial, right, where you were going to find out how much money OJ was going to pay for this crime.

He had already been acquitted of, right? And it was, it seems like the rational order of events. Like, to pay out a settlement before you have the verdict seems completely nuts to me. I mean, you have to be able to, I mean, they're in the middle of selecting jurors. Again, I think you can't do this without prejudicing the jury. I don't think. I don't think so either. I don't see how anyway.

And I don't know, maybe they're just not coordinated at all, but you'd think that like this would be the type of thing that would be obvious. That's not this is not the time to settle. Again, you could pay afterward. You might say, well, look, it was still wrongful even though he got off. Like that, maybe that makes sense. I don't know. You know, again, he hasn't, he isn't going to get off. I mean, he's going to be convicted of this.

I think, I mean, Minnesota is like, they're going to figure out a way here. because if he is not convicted now this is not this is not constitutional this is not the way justice works but you're telling me there's not somebody in Minneapolis going guys if this dude is not convicted we are going to have a pile of rubble

for a city that is exactly what they're all thinking there they know it they believe it when it just happened before there was any trial and there was any chance to hold someone responsible, the city was burned to the ground.

Now, if he, if this guy just walks out of there, can you imagine? You will be able to, it will be nighttime and you will look in the distance from hundreds of miles away and see a glow. And probably a lot closer to that because probably a lot of other cities will have the same thing happen.

That's what happened last time. You know, I mean, look, it's just, it's just reality. And I think, you know, there's a thing that the NFL does a lot, that I've noticed where there's a controversial big ticket like news item and the NFL will come out with this like very long aggressive suspension. You know, 14 games. And then they appeal it.

It goes down to like four. And I swear the NFL is just saying like, let's just come out. We'll act like, you know, we'll come out really tough on this stuff. Really long suspension. If it under appeal, it gets cut in half, then it gets cut in half. Fine. But if we come out with a too low of a penalty, we'll look like we're not controlling this issue and don't care about, you know, someone cheating or whatever.

And I would say it's, you know, Patriots because, you know, it's always the Patriots. But if, you know, it's usually a Patriot-related issue. But then they're just like, okay, well, so now it went from 14 games to three. And what, but we tried our best. And look, it got overturned and appeal. What are we going to do? You know, and I think there's, there is a temptation by a lot of these municipal governments to say, look, charge him with everything.

Like, who cares? Make it the hard. It's one person. Again, this is not the right instinct. It's against everything that our country stands for. But there is an argument, I think, that these people have. And they say, look, just charge him. At least we're coming out hard.

And if he gets off, he gets off. We can't control that. But go after him. Yeah. Well, and they are. Second degree murder. Manslaughter charges. So that must mean more than one.

And now they've reinstated a, they've reinstated a third-degree. murder charge. Right. So they are just throwing everything at him to see what sticks. And they're hoping something will stick. Yeah. They want first degree murder. It's like, I don't think you can argue he like that he planned it.

No, he planned it. Probably not. Probably not. You know, who knows the way that a lot of these jurisdictions have different, you know, quirks about how these things get applied. I don't know what the right degree of murder would be. But he's probably going to get convicted of one of the degrees. And look, I don't know a single person who thought,

I think the police officer acted completely properly there. I certainly didn't think that when this happened. It looked like he was definitely guilty of wrongdoing. I mean, there's no reason for you to have your knee on his neck for eight minutes, right? I mean, I don't think any of us thought that was appropriate. But the coroner's report afterwards that said that he had a fatal dose of, fentanyl in his system. And then you realize, I mean, certainly

that's going to come out in the trial. And so would he have died anyway? I don't know. I mean, we'll never know that. But I think the jury will consider that once the evidence is presented. I think the coroner's report will probably

play a big part in this. But I don't I don't think you can exonerate Derek Chauvin of his responsibility in this. Right. It's tough to tell, right? Even if, and then that does seem to be the case that there were drugs in the system and they could

have, you know, but that it's tough because it's like, did the interaction push this over the edge, you know, was it just such a stressful event that it pushed it over the edge, even though it didn't, you know, it crushes windpipe or something, you know. There is a, it's going to be difficult. And medical experts will go back and forth on that, I'm sure, on the stands during the trial. And look, the uncomfortable truth of the wonderful system we all praise here in America, this idea of innocence until proven guilty. The uncomfortable truth of that is all of this matters.

Even if you think what he did was wrong, even if George Floyd, you know, you might think is a complete saint and the greatest guy of all time. I mean, it doesn't matter. None of that matters. If the medical situation comes out in a way that he might be, you know, he's still got fired, right? He's still going to have repercussions. He would likely will have, he will likely be.

convicted of murder, but it's possible that he would be convicted of a lesser charge. And if that happens, still, cities will be burned to the ground over it. And, you know, people love this idea that, you know, you're innocent until proven guilty when it's someone they like who is benefiting from that. And when it's someone who they don't like that is benefiting from it, they all hate this idea. And while that is squarely part of our system, a person that we don't like who's innocent, does not get thrown in prison. That's not the way it's supposed to work.

What is not part of our system is to sit here and glorify people who burn down cities because of the result. That is the type of thing that happens all the time in the media, but is not excusable. It's not excusable to tear down a statue

because you don't like what the guy said 300 years ago. It's not excusable to go burn down a city because you don't like the result of a trial. It's not excusable to create. all sorts of violence and to kill people because dozens of people died in the summer in those riots.

It was not just a property damage situation. Dozens of people died. And I would also add on to it. It's also not acceptable, even if you think that you really don't like the results of an election to go to the Capitol and overwhelm it. Not okay.

But that's the only thing our media seems to understand occurred in the last year. It's not the only event there is a lot of other things that, by the way, by scope, were much, much worse. Much, much worse. Yes, the symbolism of the capital thing was incredibly notable,

and there's all sorts of problems, and I won't defend it for a second. But the tearing up of many of our major cities and causing hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars of damage, disrupting economies, destroying lifelong family businesses of minorities throughout these cities it cannot be overstated how bad that is.

Was it Dick Durbin that said something like you can't compare the summer riots to the January 6th riot insurrection because it was a huge disservice to the police officers who died? Yeah. The ones who died over the summer and the riots, those because there was several. There were several who died during that time period.

Whereas, yes, an officer died, but it wasn't apparently at the hands of the mob on January 6th. So, I mean, they've taken this and twisted it so badly that it looks like January 6th was the worst thing that ever happened. and that the summer of rioting was just fine. Yeah. I may take every death associated. Even when you have a completely peaceful rally, many times there's people who have medical events and they die. Every medical event associated with that, they are counting to the Capitol Hill death toll. And you're right.

Like some of these deaths, look, it was violence. And I feel at some level it's just pointless to try to say anything here because it's going to be taken as this. defense of the capital thing, which I'm not doing. I think it was really bad. I called it in the moment a national disgrace. But like 19 people at least died during the George Floyd riots and those associated with. That's a huge number. And we saw people beat to a pulp by crowds on video over and over and over again in city after city.

Thankfully, some of them survive. numbers not even higher. None of this is excusable on either side, but it's amazing to see, and you see it too with the George Floyd thing. Now we're back to saying cops are bad again. Like when the Capitol Hill thing was going on,

the police were good, and we couldn't believe how disrespectful those people were, they were beating them over that head with Blue Lives Matter flags over and over again. At the same time, we would go back and forth with the left all the time.

AOC was saying like, the Capitol Hill police came to my office and I wasn't sure if they were going to hurt me or not. Right? That was the way they were talking about it until we got to the impeachment hearing and then everyone respected the police more than anything in the world for two weeks. And now again, they're all evil again

and they're just beating up minorities for no reason. Yeah. Can you at least pick a lane? Pick a lane, a direction on the highway. Be nice. It would be really, it would be nice. No, because the media allows them to have it both ways. every single time.