The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | 3/19/25

Episode Date: March 19, 2025

Glenn blasts Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts for going after President Trump after Trump called for the impeachment of a leftist judge. Glenn lays out why Justice Roberts' critique of Trump is flat-out wrong. Glenn's chief researcher, Jason Buttrill, joins to break down what little we have discovered from the recently declassified JFK files. Glenn goes back 16 years to a segment that everybody ridiculed him for, and now he's been proven correct. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Why the heck is Chief Justice Roberts issuing, but not issuing, a public statement against Donald Trump's constitutional actions with USAID? I about blow a gasket on that one. The JFK files also starting to be released. Did we get any smoking guns or anything? We break down some of the information that has come to light. And after 16 years, Stu and I get to take a victory lap on something that everybody mocked relentlessly. but I'm the bigger person and I'm also right

and you'll hear about that and so much more on today's podcast. Today is the day that you can make an important decision. Do you keep your current cell phone plan, you know, the one where you shell out big money every month to a big mobile corporation donating that money to leftist causes? Or do you switch

to Patriot Mobile, which charges way less and shares your values? I don't know. Choice seems pretty simple to me because I see Patriot Mobile, they've got an action side of them, not related to Patriot Mobile, that Patriot Mobile donates to be able to help us elect the right people in school boards and and even, you know, all statewide elections. They're not involved in any federal election. I'll tell you that right now. Patriotmobile.com slash Beck, you can go there now. Please, this is the lowest, what

You're going to save money. You're going to get the same great service. This is the lowest rung of the ladder if you want to help. Patriotmobile.com slash Beck. Patriotmobile.com slash Beck. Switch your service. Get a free month of service, 972 Patriot.

972 Patriot. PatriotMobil.com slash back. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Chief Justice John Roberts, the supposed guardian of judicial restraint, has once again stepped into the spotlight. Not with a gavel, but with a press release. Now, remember, these are the justices that go to the state of the union

and you could say, George Washington, he was the best. And America, it's the best. It's done some things wrong, but it's really, really super great. And they're not allowed to applaud. They're not allowed to show any kind of deference one way or another. They sit there with their hands folded. Why? So you don't show any kind of support one way or another.

You are a neutral party. Okay. So he issues a press release, strangely not through the Supreme Court, not through the usual channels. Why? We'll get into that later. So it's a really rare move for a chief. justice to do this.

And he rebukes the president, President Trump, for suggesting that judges who overstep their bounds might face impeachment. Okay. Well, first of all, Trump not known for his subtlety. Him saying things like this,

not really novel, really. And this opinion isn't that novel. The Constitution vests Congress with the power to check the judiciary, just as it checks the executive. It's a blunt tool. I mean, it's impeachment, but it is in Article 3. It's not a blank check for black robe philosopher kings. Okay. And it has been done in the past. It's a very high bar as it should be, just like impeachment for the president. How dare you say he should be

impeached? Why? Why? Is it wrong for them to say you want to impeach the president? Is it wrong for people to call for impeachment? Because that's in the Constitution. You may not like it. You may think that that's not the standard, but it is not something that you come out and go, oh my gosh, how dare you? You're saying, oh, I got to clutch my pearls. I'm not even wearing pearls. I wish I was transgender right now because I'd be having my strand of pearls and I can clutch. No, that's in the Constitution. yet Roberts in his indignation clutching his pearls crying out this is a threat due to judicial independence. Okay, okay, all right. Okay, hang on.

Now, it's not wrong to defend the appellate review process. Usually these things come out when you're giving a talk to, you know, law students or something. You'll say, you know, that's not the way it works, et cetera, et cetera. But no, no, no, no. No, no, this was an official statement. And he's spoken about this even eloquently at times about the proper, you know, the proper channels to correct judicial error. 2018, he reminded us, we don't have Obama judges or Trump judges or Bush judges or Clinton judges. We just have a judge.

Well, yeah, okay, I wish that were true. but it's not C. D.C. district judges. But he's come out and said that, and that would be the right thing. I wish we didn't have those. The system is designed so higher courts can sift through the lower ones,

not for pitch for pitchforks and gavels to fly. Now, Trump is not, you know, parsing Maybury versus Madison. That's not what he was doing, okay? It's not like, you know, I'd like to make an intellectual case on this. He's like, I think this is impeachable. So here's the president saying this. And the judicial branch trying to muzzle him doesn't, I mean, I don't care,

but free speech, it's not bent away from the commander in chief, is it? I mean, can the Commander-in-Chief? Can the President have his point of view? Just like can John Roberts have his own point of view? John Roberts should have his own point of view based solely on the Constitution, and he should have the restraint to look impartial every step of the way. I wonder, can he be trusted to try anything, anything, to review anything on Donald Trump? And let me make this case. Trump thinks that justices that are overreaching, by inventing rights or rewriting statutes from the bench, he thinks that that is impeachable. Okay, he has every right to say so.

You know, the framers didn't build a system where only judges can chime in on things. But Roberts seems to think that Trump's words carry some, I don't know, hypnotic power that's going to frame America's view of the judiciary as a pinata for political whacking. only Donald Trump can do that. But he doesn't even own his own statement, a formal, deliberate, not some offhanded quip, framing Trump in this light as a, I don't know, a hypnotist. I don't know. Isn't there something to be seen here from the Chief Justice? I mean, he's not just scolding.

He is signaling, I'm the arbiter of propriety. I'm the one that will tell what's right and what's wrong. That is a power play dressed as principle. How do I know that? Let me ask you this. Where was his righteous pin? When did he say, someone get me a quill? When Biden railed against the Supreme Court as out of control or a extremist court

that maybe we should add two or three more justices until, we get it right? Where was, get me my quill? I must clutch my pearls and write a missive out right now. Where was that? He didn't say anything about that. He didn't say anything about that. And that one's a pretty well-established idea. We don't do that. But if you want to just look at him as face value, I think one is stronger than the other. But if you want to just take it as even, Trump said this and it is, even though it's in the Constitution, how dare you? And the other that Biden did is not in the Constitution, but you could read it any way you want, if you'd like. And only one of them gets in trouble from the Supreme Court?

I mean, I don't understand. No statements. Not a lecture. Nothing. Apparently the threat only comes from Donald Trump. Now, let me remind you, this is a guy who twisted him. I mean, the guy, the guy was a pretzel with Obamacare. He was so twisted inside and out.

He changed Obamacare. He rewrote Obamacare out of attacks. Or no, into attacks, right? Was it in tax or out of it? I can't remember. One way or another, he said exact opposite of what the bill actually said. Remember with Obamacare?

He's like, what he should have said was, this isn't written correctly. I'm sending it back to Congress. If they want it to be a tax, they can write it that way. No, he didn't do that. He just said, yeah, I'm going to rewrite it. That's not his job.

I mean, he's a gymnast. He bent over backwards in 2015, saying, the state could mean federal government because, well, intent matters more than text. Now, the text is pretty important, really kind of important, because if you get too far away from the people that actually said something, you know, and did something, then you don't really know what their intent is. I don't know. I've read a lot of history books, and then I've read a lot of journals of those people that the history books were written about. They don't

say the same thing. This is a, what he was. doing, amending the Constitution from the bench is the biggest betrayal, constitutional betrayal of the First Order. The Constitution, John, is not a suggestion. It's a contract. Roberts of all people should know that. So here we are, Chief Justice, who wields his platform selectively. Chastising a president for speaking his mind, well, the other presidents speaking

their mind, saying things like, this is an extremist court. This is why we just, we have to start all over again with the Supreme. That's why you don't say anything about that guy. Hmm. Hmm. Trump's call for the impeachment in the Constitution may be misguided. I don't know. I kind of agree with it myself. But when you look at the history of impeaching judges, it's, the bar is super, super high.

Okay? And it should be just like the bar to impeach the president. It should be super, super high. I think that this is impeachable, but I don't think you're going to make that case. The real question is, is why does John Robert think his voice should drown out the rest? Why does he think he is the one that should be heard on this? I mean, if you're worried about framing, oh, this guy is, this guy's framing this, you know, all wrong and people are going to follow him. What the hell are you doing? Maybe you should look in the mirror here, John. Maybe it's just me. But somehow I don't think it is. Here's what's coming. We knew this because, what was it, a month ago, and do I have this in my show prep? I know I have it someplace

today. You know, when you're looking at what's coming, we told you this, because they told us this months ago that what they were going to do was activate all of these activist judges. They were going to file suits. They were going to do everything they could. Instead of stopping him in the streets, which didn't work, they're going to start trying to stop him in the court system. Well, that honestly, guys, you didn't really learn your lesson. He's not stopped by the court system. I don't know. You tried that before. But go ahead. You're going to try it again. That's all that's happening. This isn't about the truth. This is about a good.

group of desperate people who know they're being exposed right now. Why do you think they're so freaked out? Because they're being exposed. It's over. It's over. You're not getting the cash from the people anymore. You're not just going to milk the system until all of us are just out of milk. No, it's over.

The game is over. And so what do they have to do? They have to do whatever they can. Well, they can't put people on the streets because, That didn't work out for him. So now, and they told us this, just go after Donald Trump in every possible way in the court. Just get him tied up in the court. Well, that sure tells you how much they love America, doesn't it?

Especially when you have somebody like Schumer saying, you know, just a few years ago, look, we all know there's waste. We all know there's fraud in the government. And it has to be stopped. Well, wait, then so we're stopping it. And now you're not for that? Hmm. What else is going on? Hmm.

And why is it that John Roberts is only speaking out against Trump and didn't say boo under Biden? Is it possible that he wanted to? But he was afraid because the left were the ones that sent people to the justice's house to kill. the justices. And he knows the people on the right aren't that, we're not that kind of people. We don't do that. We don't believe in that. They do. So, John, are you just a hypocrite that doesn't understand the Constitution? Or are you a coward? Because those are the only two that I see as real possibilities. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. And we really want to

thank you for listening. I want to talk to you a little bit about good ranchers. Good ranchers. You know, you're doing the raw milk thing. Do good ranchers. This is the best American meat from ranchers that, you know, raise this grass-fed. I mean, it's really good beef. Also good chicken, really good. Moist, moist chicken. And Applewood bacon, can't tell you anything about that other than it's yummy.

And wild-caught salmon. Right now they're running a presidential special where for the next four years, while, you know, hopefully we are celebrating a Trump victory, you'll get either the chicken or the bacon or the Angus ground beef or whatever, whatever it is that you decide. You'll get up to $1,200 in savings. They're just going to pack that in to every month's order. All you have to do is sign up.

Get your meat from America. Good Ranchers.com. Use the promo code, Glenn. Claim this personal presidential special. worth up to $1,200, bring 100% American meat to your family. Good Ranchers.com, promo code Glenn. Before we get into JFK, let me give you an update. Last week, last Wednesday, a week ago on my TV special,

we showed you exclusive leaked documents from behind NASA's Artemis Moon mission. It was a 99-page playbook, thanks to brave whistleblowers that gave it to us, We exposed it last week. If you saw this special, you learned that we spent $100 billion of taxpayer money, obsessing over how to make the next mission to Mars, you know, into a massive DEI propaganda operation, complete with the heroes and the villains and, you know, partnerships with Hollywood and Coca-Cola and Nike. Even, I'm not kidding.

Go back onto Glennbeck.com and look this up. even a theme park. It sounds funny and absurd, but prioritizing woke crap over science and human safety, it would be a little dangerous. I don't know you. So all of the best scientists, all of the best astronauts were not the priority.

You had to be a female and black, or Dylan Mulvaney, I guess. And if you wanted to be a transanaut, You could go up in space, I guess. It was nuts. Well, we thought it was really odd that since President Trump took office and eliminated, quote, radical and wasteful government DEI programs on day one, this program had not been abolished. And the NASA website describing the DEI-driven Artemis mission was still active when whistleblowers reached out to us.

prior to Blaze News and our TV investigation, the website NASA read, with NASA's Artemis campaign, we are exploring the moon for scientific discovery, technology, advancement, and to learn how to live and work on another world as we prepare for human missions to Mars. We will collaborate with commercial and international partners and establish the first long-term presence on the moon. NASA will land the first woman, first, person of color and first international partner astronaut on the moon using innovative technologies to explore more of the lunar surface than ever before. So my executive producer of the TV show, Ricky reached out to the office of management

and budget run by Russ Vote and said, hey, I don't know if you saw this special. Are you aware of what's going on? And why is this still on the NASA website? Is NASA still doing this? Are they resisting the Trump dictate? Well, we sent them an email on Thursday. That was the day after we broke the story. And immediately after it was gone.

Here's what was leaked to us. Under the Biden administration, NASA updated its mission, vowing to land a first woman and first person of color on the moon, 2021 internal presentation slide deck obtained exclusively by Blaze News and Glenn TV revealed NASA's exhaustive marketing plans for Artemis, a DEI-driven mission. The presentation explained NASA's plan to establish the Artemis brand. It stated that the mission must inspire several audience segments, future supporters, the public, collaborators, and advocates.

The list included BIPOC and individuals noting that Artemis should. build mass appeal with and get to participate, especially underserved and underrepresented groups. Well, it appeared that some staff at NASA were still going down this road. As of 1.30, the very next day, or the day we sent it, it was still on the website. Within an hour, we got a response. We're looking into this. I'm sorry we didn't know about it. Next day, the OMB told us the Artemis section on the NASA website had been doged.

And this happened because of brave whistleblowers and you. NASA's Artemis campaign, we're exploring the moon. Now this is what it reads, for scientific discovery, technology, and advancement, and to learn how to live and work on another world as we prepare for human missions on Mars. We will collaborate with commercial and international partners and establish the first long-term presence on the moon. all that first, you know, woman, person of color, you know, we're going to, you know what, we're going to have people from the Congo in a space suit as well.

Why? Why? All of that is gone. We can't do these investigations without you, without your support. Thank you. Thank you for everything that you do. Thank you for getting the news of this out last week. Join our moonshot mission to be the media company that actually makes a difference at

blazTV.com slash glen that's blaztv.com slash glen tonight i'm doing another special uh tonight it's about nato and ukraine why are we members of nato should we be neighbors how did this happen what is what was nato for how did we get it so deeply involved with one of one if not the most corrupt countries in the world when did that happen and why in 2008 did we all of a sudden start to become really cozy friends why Join me for all of the background tonight on Ukraine, Putin, and my answer to the question, should Trump withdraw from NATO? That's tonight at 9 p.m. Eastern on Blaze TV tomorrow at 6 p.m. And that's on YouTube.com slash glenbeck.

I got a busy day today because I'm going out to shooting range because we have the only gun that we know of that is an exact copy of the gun Oswald used to kill President Kennedy. because it's a real weird hodgepodge of guns. It was the one that killed Kennedy has a different scope on it. Very rare, very hard to find. I think it might even be a Russian school. I can't remember the scope is from someplace. There's parts of this gun. They're from someplace else.

And so, you know, we wanted to get, because we don't have the real gun, we wanted to get one just like it took us two years to assemble this gun and to find all of the parts. so it's an exact copy of it. I'm going out to a shooting range today, and we're going to do our first test. I've got some sharp shooters with me, and we'll post some of this on X as we do it live today.

But then you'll be able to see all of it, because we're going to another shooting range, hopefully next week, to get moving targets, to see if they can make these shots. But it should be interesting today. You can watch for it on X, and then that'll be next week. as we go through everything that has been released on the JFK files,

because it's going to take us a while. Anybody who says, they don't have any idea. 80,000 documents are being released. So you know, well, Jason is here. He's our chief researcher for the TV show. 80,000 documents. How long would that have taken us to go through for staff?

What do we have, eight people on it right now? Yeah. How long without grass? or AI assist, how long would that take us? We'd still be basically taping our eyelids open and still staring at it. We wouldn't even be close to attempting to be even what, like a quarter of the way through it. Okay.

So yesterday, describe the process. What happened? So they started releasing the documents. Well, I thought they were going to be delayed, but they finally started coming through around like five or six central, something like that. So we immediately went to work. Initially, there was 113 pages of these documents. but on each different page, there was about 10 PDFs per page.

And those PDFs had multiple pages within the PDFs. So all in all, it was probably around 12 to 1,300 pages of stuff. It was insane. But to go through this now and, you know, the modern age, all we have to do is go through, download each little different PDF and start feeding that into whatever artificial intelligence program that you want to use. and then start, if you know the right prompts, you can start looking for things that are relevant, things that are new, things that contradict old disclosures. It was actually pretty amazing. So, you know, one of the things that is very important to me is the ethics of using AI.

And I don't know if a lot of people even care about it, but I do and my staff does deeply. We have had, I mean, we've had really heartfelt, you know, round after round of what's ethical, what's not ethical. So you know, we are not AI powered. Our research team is not AI powered. It is powered by people who use AI. And there is a big difference in that. As you will start to see as days go by and more and more people just use AI to do all their thinking. We use it as a tool to go through to be able to do things we just couldn't do before.

80,000 documents, as you said, 1,200 documents last night, 80,000 will take us forever. Just the 1,200 that we went through that was the first batch would have taken us weeks to go through. So it's a very big help. But we also then go back and check everything. So let me go through some of the things that I know that were found yesterday. You tell me also anything that I'm missing here on what was found. But there's a couple of things. One document is a memo.

on a release passage from a political magazine, Ramparts from 1967, about an intelligence agency, a CIA informant and former U.S. Army Captain John Garrett Underhill, and he wrote, the day after the assassination, I'm sorry, the story wrote,

the day after the assassination, Gary Underhill left Washington in a hurry. Late in the evening, he showed up at the home of a friend in New Jersey. He was very agitated. The passage started. a small click within the U.S. was responsible for the assassination. He confided to his friend. He was afraid for his life and probably would have to leave the country. Less than six months

later, he was found shot to death in his Washington apartment. Coroner ruled it as suicide. The note was known what was said on intimate terms with a number of high-ranking CIA officials. The passage has been shared last night over and over again. That's probably one of the bigger passages that came out, you know, that was shared on X and everything else. But as they, you know, people were like, it's already been released. Yeah, but we, we didn't actually have the document, another document that was making the rounds.

One line in the document stated that the KGB watched Oswald closely while he was in the USSR. but files indicated that Oswald was a poor shot when he tried target practice in the Soviet Union. Another detail released was a letter sent by a man in 1978. He was a Soviet and he made this comment to the British Embassy. He claimed that he was detained in London on July 18, 1963 and questioned by authorities. He said that he told them about Lee Harvey Oswald saying he planned to kill the president. He added that he warned American Vice Council Tom Blackshare of the plans of Oswald, who was trying to defect to Russia.

Okay, so that's kind of a big deal. But what does that say to you? So far, that just says, now hang on. If you're driving, I shouldn't say, I'm going to give you time to pull over. Because this is going to be a shock to you. You pull over? Okay. What it says is our government is incompetent.

I know. Could have had a car wreck if I didn't tell you before you pulled over. I mean, that's what this is so far. saying to me, what are some of the other things that we found, Jason? You talked yesterday about what, there was like multiple different, like four different things that, like, you know, this is really about the what, not really the who. Right. And I think that's pretty much spot on from what I'm seeing so far. Right now there is no who. There is no, okay, this is the person that pulled the trigger. There's no grassy knoll. There's no, there's no

deflection from the official Warren Commission report so far. But I will see. say that people that have been looking into this for a long time have identified like 10 to 15 or 20 documents that they really want to see that have been heavily redacted in the past or just excluded. Some of them have not been released yet. Some of them have some of the stuff from last night have provided more context. Now, let me tell you, if you're a fan of the Cold War or just even like spy, you know, thrillers, you're going to like to read some of this stuff. And I'm going to put together some stuff for our special next week, some stuff that you can just read, you know, on glenbeck.com or something. If anything, this stuff is like a cool Cold War,

you know, stuff. Yeah. Like, for instance, I'll throw out, there was a, I've never heard about this before, but there was a surveillance program in Havana, Cuba before the assassination that was a complete failure. Something happened where they were found out. There were people arrested. Never heard about this before. The CIA definitely did not want to get this out. This, I mean, this kind of- So that had nothing to do with the JFK files, but it was fight. in that. Right. So I believe it was filed in that. They're kind of building this case of, you know, these are the things that might have agitated Cuba. You know, maybe if you're like searching for a lead that said, okay, maybe Cuba through the Soviet Union was involved with the assassination.

Right. These things might have tipped, you know, them off. But I mean, but there's a lot of that stuff that kind of links back. You can tell the CIA's doing their due diligence and they're looking for, you know, anything. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Let me take you back 16 years ago and show you a segment that if you're watching on Blaze TV, you might remember if you happen to be watching this particular episode. Late 2008, early 2009, here's what I, with my blonde hair, here's what I did. Listen. You remember when Barack Obama was on the campaign trail and said, oh, I'm going to have,

I'm going to have an army of people in America. And they'll be better finance than, you know, than the military. And I thought to myself, what? What? Who is he talking about? I think AmeriCorps is part of that army. And they, you know, I got the pledge and I was going to read it to you. But I thought, you know, I can't really read it to you, you know, sitting here like this.

I mean, to really go for it. I mean, you really do the AmeriCorps pledge. I think you have to be dressed like this. I think you have to stand up. and take your pledge. I will get things done for America to make our people safer and smarter and healthier. I will bring Americans together to strengthen our communities. Faced with apathy, I will take action, faced with conflict. I will seek common ground. Face with adversity, I will persevere. I will carry this commitment with me this year and beyond. I am an AmeriCorps member,

and I will get things done. Aidel Vise. It's one of my favorite, all-time things that I did at Fox, just because I had such an amazing staff. And you're in New York, I literally 45 minutes before the show, I said, somebody go get me Lederhosen. Yep. Okay.

And the question back was, what size? I don't know, large. Where do we get it? Super large. Extra large. It's large. So anyway, so like a couple of days later because, I mean, it was Saturday night. Everybody was making fun of that particular clip.

This guy's crazy. Is weak. Just to focus back in the 2009 criticism for one second. You're making a joke. Like, coming up and saying, hey, it's ridiculous that this guy's dressed in Leaderhosen is your joke. They're just saying the same thing as your joke. joke, that's not a criticism. No.

It's such a weak, weak attempt of like, hey, what if we pull this out of context and make him look like he's just a crazy person who's decided to wear Leaderhosen today? No, the joke was how insane it was for you to wear Leaderhosen. Listen, listen, listen. It's been 16 years. I'm still annoyed. Listen how passionate he is and listen to how passionate I am. See, I told you.

He was such a hard time. such a time period. Every day we'd be like, what the hell are they doing? What are they saying? How is this happening? But anyway, but we're older. We're wiser.

Right. We're biased. We've let it go, Jesus, haven't we? So Bill O'Reilly, who was such a good friend to me, and one of the only honest people in my career on national television, he said to me, Glenn, come on to my show. I'm going to ask tough questions. You can ask an answer.

I'm not going to sandbag you. But that way you can get your point out on what the hell you were doing. And he's like, I may not agree with you, but at least it'll be an honest conversation. So he calls me up and he's like, he saw that. And then he started seeing the media just feast like sharks. And he's like, might be, might be a time that you might want to come on the, on the no spin zone. So I did. Now listen to what happened on the no spin zone a few days later.

Why the German outfit? Why the Edel Weiss? Why? This is AmeriCorps. This is America. Yeah, I don't know. I just know the sound of music. What is the Alpine? Don't you love the Alps? I just got back from the Alps. Yeah, I just said, you know, I think it's about time that we used ridicule in this, in this country. I think, I think, who were you ridiculing? The Germans, the AmeriCorps people. Well, partly me. You were you in need. Yeah, partly me. Who were you ridiculing? Big part of me. I think this whole idea of AmeriCorps, and which will eventually, if Rahm Emanuel gets his way, will be required service from 18 to 24-year-olds. Like they have in Switzerland, you got to join the Army or some kind of thing.

That's fantastic. That's fantastic. But I'll pledge to change the world. AmeriCorps is just a bunch of kids volunteering to do good things. Volunteer. There's a difference between a volunteer and a draft. No, we don't have that yet. Yet.

Thank you. Thank you for you for you. But it's always about what's around a corner with you. Just say we don't get it. Just say we don't get it. You don't get it. It's AmeriCorps. You volunteer to help your community or another community.

I did that in college. I went to Kentucky and debris and helped the poor people. I've never had a problem with AmeriCorps. Okay. Nobody forced me to wear short pants, but I went and it was good. So I don't know what you're in AmeriCorps. Because we're going to make them. Do they get little badges?

Do they get like this badge I got for harassing a bank? What's wrong with that? What is wrong with a bunch of people signing up to help other people? Because you've got a community organizer as president of the United States. Oh, so he is. Just because it's his idea he didn't like it? No, just because we are being infested. This country is having framework built around it.

There's an exoskeleton built around our republic. An exoskeleton? Yes. Wow. Does it have Lederhausen? I think. And this is very easy to do, but I think he's making fun of me. So we had this conversation, all right, and it was a good conversation.

But notice what he's saying. Glenn, none of this is going to happen. Yeah. First of all, they said they wanted it to be mandatory at some point. But that wasn't even the main crux of the issue. It was going to be framework. It is indoctrinating people. Now, may I give you the story today?

training programs to enter AmeriCorps has been indoctrinating participants into having an anti-American worldview. As many as 200,000 individuals each year answer this noble call to participate in America's National Service Program, AmeriCorps, serving as members and volunteers across its very community service offshoots, only to be put through training modules that poison the very spirit of the America. of our nation. Training programs to enter AmeriCorps have been explicitly teaching participants diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts that indoctrinate them in having an anti-American worldview, one that believes that the systems and institutions of our country were designed in such a ways to benefit some and disadvantage others. AmeriCorps partners, such as public allies,

teach the Corps members that it is insufficient to be not racist or against racism. They must become anti-racist, blah, blah, blah. It goes on to the whole thing. That's what I was talking about. This whole thing, it's just like, so let's just remember what today's conspiracy theories that all the left mocks and makes fun of

tends to be, in this case, not tomorrow's, but 16 years of tomorrow's, to be accurate. Let's stop giving our government, and this is what, our founders said this is not anti-government it is not anti-establishment it is not anti-American our founders said don't trust the government with power they will do things to concentrate that power so it will

never escape their grimy little hands chuck schumer was on yesterday on on on the view with the ramblings of a madman. Listen to this. And you know what their attitude is? I made my money all by myself. How dare your government take my money for me. I don't want to pay taxes. Or I built my company with my bare hands.

How dare your government tell me how I should treat my customers, the land and water that I own, or my employees. They hate government. Government's a barrier to people. the barrier to stop them from doing things. They want to destroy it. We are not letting them do it and we're united. Notice there's no applause during that rant.

Notice there is no applause during that rant. That should tell you something, Chuckie. Even the view people are like, I mean, unless Whoopi tells us and they put the applause sign on, I don't think I can applaud for that. First of all, they tell you. They tell you, I'm not going to pay taxes to your government. No, it's my government.

It's my government. It's your government. And yeah, you know, I don't remember the government up at night, whirring, crunching numbers, thinking, how am I going to make it? I don't remember any government agency that was like, you know what, Glenn, you're working hard. Let me come in there and help you. I do remember all of the times that I've tried to do something. And the government steps in and goes, no, no, I'm going to make it harder. now you need an attorney to do this.

Now you need another accountant to do this. And you're like, well, I can't do it if you keep bleeding me dry. So yeah, Chuck, I do have a problem with the government coming in and telling me exactly how I need to run my company. I am a disruptor. That's what America has always been. America is the global disruptor. And you don't have attorneys or politicians that are. helping disruption.

That's how innovation happens. And attorneys are paid to say, no. Hey, do you think I could, no? But I mean, I think no. Okay, well, thanks for your help. That's what the government does. Hey, what do you think? Could we know?

Okay, well, I guess I'll just sit here and do it like everybody else does. And then you become Europe. we're not Europe if you want to be Europe that's fine we're America we are different I know that the left wants us

to be more like Europe except when we say hey we shouldn't be mutilating our children then you gotta be America lead the way you gotta be a disruptor we should absolutely be able to mutilate children what okay well thanks for the consistency

I don't have a problem with paying taxes. I do, you know what his point was on this? Why was he saying this? Because of Doge. Because Doge is cutting all of this stuff out and saying, this is a waste of money. Who could possibly make an honest case in favor of the waste of your tax dollars? This is how, see, they see everything as a collective. Everything is a collective to them. They don't actually see the out. The that you work. They don't see the second job that you work. They don't see you at the end of the month or in the middle of the month trying to pay your rent or your mortgage saying, I can't do it. I don't know how to do it. They don't see the fact that you can't pay your bills, but you know

that you'll go to jail if you don't pay them first. Quite honestly, the government should be the last thing that I should worry about paying. Not the first thing. God should be the first thing. My tithing should be the first thing. I'm paying that no matter what. They expect you to pay over tithing over everything else. They expect you to pay them first. There's no questions asked.

There's no, there is no, hey, guys, can you just let up on me for a while? Can we work this out? No. Pay it. Okay. All right. Okay, that's the way taxes are, I guess. But then on top of it,

You then insult me by wasting it, by spending it in ways that I find absolutely abhorrent. And then when we find out about it, you mock me for saying, I don't want to pay my taxes if that's the way you're going to spend it. And none of us right now, I'm very close, none of us right now are actually saying I won't pay my taxes. If that's what you're going to spend it, I'm not going to pay. I'm going to pay my taxes. But you mock me for you. even saying, look at the waste. But if I can't pay my taxes, if I can't pay them, you don't care.

You don't care. Your IRS people will say, well, you should have not paid something else. Oh, okay. But I couldn't take you out of that loop. And when you can't make your budget, you just print more money, which you then add to my bill. It's the most reprehensible system of all time. It's charity with a gun, which doesn't make that charity. Anytime a gun or jail is involved, it ceases to be charity,

or a public duty, or an honor to be involved. You're involved, honestly. You believe in this so much? let's make every politician for a year. Let's tell them we're going to do it for five years. But let's just do it, just do it for a year. You don't have to pay any taxes. You don't have to pay any taxes.

You're a government service guy. How many of them would volunteer to pay taxes? No, no, no, no, no. I'm making this money. I'm going to pay for it because it's the right thing. They would not do it. And if they said that to us, how many of us would do it? That's why they have to have the gun.

No, no, no.