The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guest: Alan Dershowitz | 8/2/23

Episode Date: August 2, 2023

Glenn lays out the planned dismantling of our economy and what the elites are planning next for the continued dismantling of society. Attorney and Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz joins to discuss Trump's third indictment and how America has fallen into a banana republic. Glenn and Stu fact-check the media's claim that there is "no evidence" of President Biden's wrongdoing regarding Hunter Biden.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

She knows. How? Did you blouse? No. The Devil Wears Prada 2. He's the movie event 20 years in the making. Honestly, can't with the secrets anymore, so I think we just should tell her. Will you two please spit it out already?

This Friday, be the first to experience it only in theaters. In light of the recent scandal, I'm here to restore your credibility. Oh, because we're a team now? That's a nice story. The Devil Wears Prada 2 in Theaters Friday. Great show today. We talk about the Biden crime fans. yet again, no father would ever act the way Joe Biden is acting. And the media is allowing this to happen.

They've now changed their tune that, yeah, Hunter Biden might have been doing stuff, but dad certainly didn't know. Well, let's just stop at the first place. Wait a minute. You're now saying that Hunter Biden was doing things and trading on his father's name without declaring himself a foreign agent. That's illegal. And even if it's not illegal to trade on your father's name, his father then was entrapped by being introduced to these really bad oligarch criminals that literally behead people. And his father continued to take the calls to, like, the oligarch in Moscow. Then the heads, the people who were high up in the Communist Party in China at no point. Does Dad say, I'm the vice president. I know who these people are. I'm briefed about them because they're the really, really bad people.

Don't ever put me in that situation again. Nobody's asking the right questions or using any kind of common decency or common sense to wade through all of this. We do. We also talk to you about the financial downgrade and what it means to you. The end of yellow, the big trucking company. third largest in America, went out of business. Nobody seems to care. It's important.

You know why they went out of business? 25% less shipping than expected. That means something. We cover all this and more in today's podcast, brought to by Relief Factor. If you're in pain, would you please just try this? I can't guarantee that it's going to work for you. I've met people that it has worked wonders for, and I just met a dear friend, what was it, a couple of weeks ago. I haven't seen in about a year. And she came up to me and she said,

man, relief factor didn't work for me at all. I know. 70% of the people who try it go on to order more month after month. It worked miracles in my life. It may not in yours, but will you just try it? Please, you have nothing to lose except 1995. Try their three-week quick start trial pack. Try it for three weeks. If it works, continue to take it. If it doesn't, stop. But 70% of the people who try it, their lives, come back to them. Get out of pain with Relief Factor. 1-800, the number four relief, 1-800-4 relief or Relieffactor.com. Here's the podcast.

You're listening to the best of the Glenbeck program. Life from probably 2009 on, I've been telling you about an economic crisis. I told you about the 2008 crisis, you know, from really 2004, Stu, for about four years. I rang that bell. And it was conspiracy. It's never going to happen.

You know, what is his education? Blah, blah, blah. And I started in 2009 telling you that we are going to be downrated and the dollar is eventually going to collapse. It is, it's clear. You know, you can be overeducated and go, oh, no, there's systems to make sure that won't happen. But no, there's no system that will stop insanity, except. for sanity. And as long as people remain insane in Washington or in Wall Street, uh, it's going to happen. Now, I was a little bit wrong. They're not necessarily insane.

They just have a different agenda than you do. So in 2011, we were downgraded, uh, which means if somebody is going to invest in us by our bonds, our debt, They're looking for something that is a sure deal, especially now. So in 2011, we were downgraded by Fitch. It's the ratings agency. And we went from the top credit rating of AAA to AA plus, which is number two. Well, now yesterday, in something that will never happen. It's a conspiracy theory.

There's no way. I mean, America is the best. I mean, there's no competition for our dollar. Uh-huh, uh-huh. Well, yesterday in, quote, a surprise move, uh, the ratings agency Fitch downgraded us yet again from AA plus, which is number two, to AA, which is now number three. Once you start getting into the B category,

there's not a chance anyone's going to buy your bonds. But don't worry. Nobody is buying our bonds even before yesterday. When you talk about bonds, people don't, their eyes glaze over, they don't know what it means. What it means is every dollar that we are spending and printing, every bailout, every new project, every new green new deal, every dollar that we are borrowing, no one is giving us real money. Nobody is buying that anymore. It used to be that China and Japan and countries all over the world would buy our bonds because we were good for it. Now not a single buyer will buy our debt except for the Federal Reserve.

Now this doesn't just include the new stuff. We're so good that we sell 30-year-old. bonds, but not as much as we do the one and three and five year bonds. And those one, three and five year bonds have to be renewed. So somebody bought that for a year. Yeah, I'll roll the dice. I'll put my money in U.S. savings bonds or treasury bonds because they're the safest thing out there. I don't trust anything else. Well, when those come up, who's going to buy them? Nobody's buying them, which means you have to raise the interest paid on the bonds, which you pay through taxes. When you have a bond that is paying 4% over the year, you, the taxpayer, have to come up with that 4%.

We are going to soon, very soon, be paying half, half of all of the taxes paid will go to just the interest on, what is it, $33 trillion now. That's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. I don't know if you know that. Just an interest. That's a lot of money. So the dollar went down again, which means you have less buying power. And that's something else people don't understand. The target now of the Fed, the target, their hope is that they can get us into a period into a place to where our inflation is only three percent per year and you'd say well inflation of three percent that's not bad really every year three percent by the end of 10 years that means you've lost about 38 cents on every dollar it doesn't take very much if they hit

four percent inflation we're not even close to that this is why every Everything is getting smaller except the bill at the grocery store. It is getting larger. And that is because of out of control spending in Washington. Here's what happens. When nobody buys our bonds, our left pocket says to our right pocket, we need some more money. And our right pocket says, well, you should sell bonds. and our left pocket says, well, nobody's buying our bonds.

And so the right pocket says to the left pocket, well, you know what? I tell you what, I'll buy the bonds. And then I'll just print some more money and you give me the bonds in the left pocket or the right pocket. And I'll give you new cash in your pocket. It's the same pair of pants. This is a game. This is the largest. what is it, five or six largest banks in the country, they are the Federal Reserve.

Okay. This is a private corporation. And the ones who make up the Federal Reserve are the ones that keep getting the bailouts. They are going to be the only banks left at the end of this. And then they'll fail and it will turn over to the Federal Reserve and we'll write a whole new thing. with all new money and it will be digital money and that digital money will be programmable what does that mean programmable means they can make it expire at any time they need you to spend your money so you have a thousand dollars in the bank 800 of that is going to

expire at the end of the month so you better spend it now or hey you really can't spend it on gas because gas is getting too expensive and you live close enough to walk to the grocery store and work or ride a bike. So your money in your account, not everybody's, but your money because you're not an essential worker or you live close enough in that 15 minute city that you will never be able to buy gas with your digital dollar from the U.S. Federal Reserve. Well, for full faith and credit amen. This is what they're going to do. If you don't believe me, please, please, do your own homework. Read the book, Dark Future. It is footnoted. It shows you exactly how all of this is coming down, how all of this is playing out. It shows you what their plan is in their

own words. Please, there is not a lot of time left for you to protect. yourself and what you have. And you might say, well, I don't have anything so it doesn't matter. Yes, it does matter. It does matter. Do you have a garden? Do you have a backyard? You can turn into a garden? Because by the way, food is also another controlling lever. And they are pulling that. They are making our farmers into the bad guy for the earth. And don't worry, Monsanto. is here and cargill is here so they are going to be the great stewards of the earth and they along with bill gates will control the farming and uh they'll get you that food course we're not going to make a lot of food you know with the land we're going to make it in a petri dish and we're going to grow your food

through you know pharmaceuticals and better living through uh chemicals so we've found a way to play god we can now meat so we can protect the land your freedom comes from having access to land and food to be able to grow your own food have farmers your freedom comes with you being able to earn a dollar and spend it the way you want to spend it or of this is coming to an end quickly. You know, if people say, well, you know, I don't know where my red line is. Let me give you a red line because we're running out of red lines. My red line came a few years ago.

And my red line, one of my red lines is don't screw with my family. Don't tell me what I have to parrot back that I know is scientifically incorrect. So I'm past my red line. What is yours? If you don't have one, may I suggest a couple. Now they're very, very late. But the red line should be that I have access to all information, that I can do my own research and that I can question even the most powerful in the government.

And I can do it without repercussions because it is my right to use my brain to figure things out. Now, I may be wrong in the end, but that is also my right, that I can pursue truth. The next line should also include, there's no one between me and another citizen. So I don't have when I'm when I am expressing my point of view I can read others points of view and they can read mine without somebody in between saying, well, no, we're going to we're going to deemphasize this. No, we're going to keep this person quiet. No, we're going to make sure this person doesn't read what that person is doing. No one in between me and the person I want to have a relationship with. Even is the relationship. Even is the relationship. relationship is I disagree with you as long it's it's not I'm coming to kill you then maybe you know there should be somebody that steps in but that's the way it's always been nobody has a right to throttle my relationships or get in between me and someone else or me and the truth and the last one is no I own my land I own my land I own my land and I can be a good steward. In fact, I'll be a better steward than you are federal government.

I own my land and I own my water. And if I want to farm my land, I can. Once they take the ability of the farmer away to independently grow vegetables, food, cows, whatever they want to do, once that is taken away from them or made so onerous that no one except Cargill, you know, Monsanto or or the World Economic Forum or the United States government or Bill Gates, when they take that ability away from you, the average person, you're no longer free.

If you haven't set a red line yet, you might want to consider it. What is it going to take for you to stand up and say wrong direction? No, I'm not going there. And let me just say one more thing and then we have to break. Be very, very careful on who you align yourself with. Even your own faith can be hijacked and we can look for a new Christian defender. who you know we all love the Constitution but things you know sometimes we have to do things

and so we're going to give this person extra power and unleash him to do what must be done do not follow that path please pay attention it's it's hard to see right now but it is going to become very apparent soon. The only restoration we're looking for, the only changes we're looking for is a restoration of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as written, period. This is the best of the Glenbeck program. Alan Dershowitz is with us. He is, of course, the author of Get Trump and the Price of Principle and,

host of the Dershow. Alan Dershowitz joins us now. We would love to understand, Alan, what exactly is Donald Trump being charged with in this latest indictment? The basic charge is that he personally knew he had lost the election. He believed that he had actually lost the election in Ferenst Square, and he engaged in all these actions with a corrupt motive. I don't think the government's going to be able to prove that. There is no first of all. First of all, let me tell you something. I talked to Donald Trump probably about two weeks before January 6th. There is no way he believed he lost that election. There's still, today, he does not believe he lost that election. I can guarantee it. You know him well enough to

know that? He believes he won the election and he believes it was stolen from him. I think he's wrong. Many people told him he was wrong. Many people are quoted in the indictment telling him he was wrong, but that doesn't make the crime. Crime requires beyond a reasonable doubt that he himself actually knew and believed it and acted with a corrupt motive. I don't think the government's going to be able to prove that. But to state a broad a point, when the attorney general, of the United States authorizes an indictment, as was done here, against the man running against the incumbent president, who is now tied 44-44 in the New York Times poll. That indictment better be the strongest indictment in American history. There should be a smoking gun, fingerprints,

a videotape, and a confession. This document is so flawed, is so filled with speculation. Jack Smith's famous for bringing speculative cases and then being smacked down by appellate. court doesn't satisfy the Banana Republic test. In Banana Republic's, presidents prosecute their political opponents. And the stronger their political opponents are in the polls, the more likely they are to be prosecuted. And we don't want that to happen in the United States. And I think this indictment doesn't meet what I call the Nixon standard. The Nixon standard is Nixon's crimes was so obvious that even his political supporters, uh, favors. is being impeached or being prosecuted.

That's not the case here. Right now, the only people who seem to support this indictment are partisans who are anti-Trump, and that's just not enough to heal the divisions in this country. So this indictment will further the divisions, and especially if it's ultimately reversed on appeal. Look, the indictment is brought in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia jury will convict anybody named Trump for anything. And that's why the case should be moved to Virginia.

will be subject to a motion to change the venue to Virginia, where you have a leveled playing field. It's a purple state. This case should be tried in a purple state, not in a bright, bright, bright, bright, bright, bright, bright, um, a democratic state. And that's where it's being tried in the most Democratic district in the United States of America, the most anti-Trump district in the entire United States. that's where the trial is scheduled to be held by a judge who has a very questionable background. She worked for years for a firm that's highly questionable, the David Boy's firm, very, very Democratic-oriented. They represented... She was working... Right, and Burisma, and she was working there at the time of all of that stuff.

Not saying she was involved in it, but... and his firm have been charged with more cases of corruption and a disbarable conduct than any law firm in modern American history. And it's well-known being subject to so many charges. And she was part of that firm, and that's not something I would brag about. I got that firm disqualified in a case because of conflict of interest. And they've been charged over and over again with conflict and other kinds of things. that she spent most of her career in that firm.

So if I'm Donald Trump, I don't want to be tried in front of her. I want to be tried in front of a judge who has a fair and better background. And I want to be tried in front of a jury that isn't 90-something percent anti-Trump voters. Can he get that done? He can try. And if he loses, it will be subject to appeal. And that might be the kind of thing that could be appealed immediately as well. There's some dispute about that.

Right. But change of venue motions can sometimes be subject to what a quote, interlocutory appeal. So there's a lot that will happen before he stands trial in the district of Columbia in front of this judge. This judge also is the January 6th hanging judge. There hasn't been a single case that has come before her that she hasn't given tougher sentences than even the government was asking for.

Well, I mean, you need to have, in this case, when you're trying the man is running against the incumbent president, it has to be Caesar's wife. It has to be clearer and cleaner than anything. And having the trial in the District of Columbia in front of this judge on the basis of an indictment of this kind is going to just so great a divisions in this country. People are not going to be satisfied that this is a fair objective justice. You know, the Bible, the Torah, says, low Takir Panim to judges don't recognize faces. Don't do justice based on who the person is. Do justice based on the law and the facts. And the law and the facts don't support this indictment. The author of Get Trump and the host of the Dirt Show podcast, Alan Dershowitz. So what do you think about the first case, as Jonathan Turley says, making disinformation a crime? No, I think he's right.

I think this really changes the nature of American politics. And if it would take into its logical conclusion, half of Congress would be in prison. You can't make it a crime to lie to the American public. You know, lying has been part of American politics since, you know, Thomas Jefferson ran against John Adams. And the cure of a lying is the other side tell the truth and you're in the election. But the First Amendment protects lies. The First Amendment protects so much speech that we despise. Look, I defend communists, Nazis, pornographers, not because I like any of them,

but because I like free speech and because the alternative is a system of censorship. And this indictment takes us down the road toward criminalizing free speech. And, you know, what is true and what is not true is. often in the eye of the beholder, particularly in the political context. Remember, Chief Justice Rehnquist, a conservative Chief Justice, said the First Amendment doesn't recognize a false opinion. False opinions and true opinions have the same status under the First Amendment. And this is a case of false opinions, what people believe are false opinions, what I believe is a false opinion. I think that President Biden won the election fair and square. I wish there hadn't

been some of the Russia dossier stuff and some of the stuff involving social media. But the election count itself was, I think, fair. Was there some fraud? Yeah. Were there some constitutional problems? Yeah, Pennsylvania. Violated Article 2 of the Constitution, in my opinion. But it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the election. But Donald Trump has the right to protest and to be wrong in his protests, and that's what the deepest problem is here. Can you go into this a bit, Alan, because I know the founders, they fought over freedom of speech, and especially when, you know, the Sedition Act was imposed. Right.

They went back and forth, and they said the government cannot ever be the arbiter of truth. it can't be because sometimes they're lying and if they're the only ones that can say, nope, this is true, this is not which they did in COVID and everything else. It is an unworkable society. It eventually kills all free speech. Can you kind of explain that in layman's terms to people? Yeah. Well, the 1800 election, one of the great elections in history, was really about this.

John Adams, and believe it or not, even George Washington, had supported the alien, and Alexander Hamilton, supported the Alien and Sedition Act, which punished opinions that were contrary to the opinions of the government. People actually went to prison. Thomas Jefferson ran against that, and he overwhelmingly beat John Adams, who was a great man and a great president.

But Americans wanted free speech, and Jefferson then pardoned the people who were convicted under the Alien and Sedition Act. And from then on, I think the First Amendment, has been interpreted very, very broadly, which doesn't always serve the interests of the American public immediately. It means that you do allow adult pornography, you do allow communist speech and Nazi speech and hate speech and anti-Semitic speech and anti-Catholic speech and anti-Christian and anti-Muslim speech. All of that is permitted. Look what happened in Sweden the other day.

They burnt a Torah. They actually set it on fire. They burnt a Torah. And that would be permitted in the United States if it's your Torah or your Koran. Now, in Sweden, they're trying to pass a law now, prohibiting the burning of religious books, and maybe that will pass. But under our First Amendment, we have extraordinarily broad rights to do the wrong thing. And now President Trump is being indicted for doing what this administration thinks was the wrong thing. I agree. I think he did the wrong thing. But he did say when he made his January 6th speech, which I thoroughly,

disapproved us. He did say he wants people to protest peacefully and patriotically. And when you leave that out, that's as much of a lie as anything that Donald Trump was accused of. It's called a lie of omission. Alan, I appreciate it. Thank you so much. I don't know where all of this ends, but I appreciate your guidance on this. Thank you so much. Al Dershowitz. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. This is amazing. There's a Super Cup now of the media and I want to play here in a second, but I want you to remember this is exactly what I told you happened during the Lewinsky scandal. First, they said he didn't do it. He didn't do it. And we argued back and forth. Yes, he did. No, he didn't. Yes, he did. No, he didn't. And then when

we got to, oh, here's the evidence, people said it didn't matter. And that's pretty much what we're hearing now. Listen to the media dismissing Devin Archer's testimony this week. Joe Biden did nothing. not even approximating improper, much less wrong or illegal. It's wishful thinking. They're trying to create a scandal. They get pretty clear, at least so far, there is nothing there. House Republicans continue their search for any proof at all, tying President Joe Biden to his son, Hunter's business dealings.

Joe Biden had nothing to do with Hunter Biden's business dealings. Because they want to, they want a dirty up Biden's name. You know, Republicans have been trying to use Hunter Biden's behavior against the president. did not know about anything that Hunter Biden was doing. Seen of Biden was simply involved in his son's life in a personal capacity. Republicans from consistently trying to make this argument and create the illusion of some malfeasance being there. Spoke to business associates of Hunter Biden to say hello to have small talk, casual conversation. Hunter Biden talked to his dad on the phone all the time.

They talked basically every day. Sometimes Joe Biden would say hello to the people in the room if he popped in or on the phone or whatever. It's all casual conversation, niceties, the weather. They never discussed a business. These were more of just cordial hello types of conversations. Business was never discussed on those calls. And that was more casual sort of check-ins, casual conversations. President Biden might have said, hey, quit putting me on speakerphone.

You know, are you having a business meeting? like what is that about? But do you hang up on your phone on your side? Yeah, if you're the president of the United States and you have been warned by the State Department that this is highly irregular and this is what was happening during the Obama administration and the Obama administration completely dismissed it.

They were getting warnings from all of their legal departments at the State Department and elsewhere saying he's involved in this bad stuff and the president can't so the president was briefed now the president was speaking to his son every day but he had no idea what his son was doing as a parent do you believe that could happen to you do you believe that your son could be peddling and and dealing in your name and selling influence that is imagined, okay? And you had no idea when you are the second most powerful man in the country where you have secret service with your son and with you, that you would have no idea that your son is doing dirty business with oligarchs and that he calls

you during those dinners to introduce you. But, that's who you're on the phone with sir we were there secret service was there the these people are oligarchs very very bad they're dirty businessmen you know nothing's going on i'm sure with you but you have to know that's who you spoke to we know because the state department wrote to the the vice presidential office and said this is really bad don't do this so they dismiss all of that but what they're doing now is they're saying, well, he was just, he was mourning his son. Listen to this from MSNBC. Listen, cut six. As far as Hunter Biden goes, there's no doubt. I mean, it's pretty clear, even those close to the Biden family suggest that some of his behavior was pretty unseemly.

That doesn't make it illegal. And it also means we don't know the role that then Vice President Biden may have played. And it seems like, no, they haven't proven that he had any to do with it. They haven't proved that he profited from this. at all. Yet maybe he is guilty of turning a blind eye to some of his son's behavior. And we should put this in context. This is a time when Bo Biden, the president's other son, was ill and then dying and then passed away. So perhaps he was not as attentive to what he should have been here. But again, there has simply been no evidence, G-robless. No evidence at all that he was profiting from this. Okay. You're a jurist, and let me just ask, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, We now have evidence from the business partner and others that Joe Hunter Biden was called to an emergency meeting in Dubai because Burisma was being investigated by Victor Shokin.

Victor Shokin was the state prosecutor and he was looking into corruption. As testimony points out, if the, if the Biden, what did they call it, uh, brand, was not a part of this that Burisma would have gone out of business and all of these guys would have lost their money. But it was the Hunter brand that saved it. Now, he was called to this emergency meeting, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, with all of the oligarchs from Burisma. They were telling him this and telling him that he had to call his father for the brand to take care of it. He then does. Now, the defense would have you believe that he calls them during that very important emergency meeting where tensions were high, and he just said hello to his father, introduced everyone to them, to him on the phone.

But nothing was said except, I miss my brother. I know I lost my son. The weather here is fine in D.C. We'll talk later, son. And the business partners that were paying a guy who didn't speak Russian, didn't speak Ukrainian, did not know anything about the oil and gas business. He was specifically called because the brand was supposed to take care of things like Victor Shokin. But nothing happened until five days later, Joe Biden goes and withholds $1 billion worth of aid from the United States government,

unless they fire Victor Shokin. And then he comes out and he brags about it. Listen. I'm desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of Keev in terms of corruption. They made, I mean, I'll give you one concrete example. I was not I, I, but it just happened to be that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. And so I got Ukraine.

And I remember going over convincing our team, or others to convincing that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev, and I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yotsanyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor, and they didn't. So they said they were walking out to press conference. I said, no, I said, I'm not going to, we're not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You're not the president. The president said, I said, call him.

I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars. I said, you're not getting the billion. I'm going to be leaving here. And I think it was, what, six hours? I looked at. I said, I'm leaving it six hours. If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money. Oh, son of a bitch.

Got fired. And they put in place someone who was. solid at the time. Okay, stop. This was someone solid at the time, somebody who would not investigate Burisma. That ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are asked to believe was a complete coincidence. Complete. By the way, you know what I will believe that Joe Biden has actually accepted his granddaughter, Hunter's illegitimate child, when I believe that he's accepted her as part of the family, is when they set up a shell corporation for her in her name.

That's when I'll believe she's part of the family. They do keep saying this where they're like, oh, well, there's no evidence that he profited at all from any of this. And it's like, well, what are all these bank records with millions of dollars being transferred to shell companies in names of random Biden family members that didn't have anything to do with these businesses. Yeah.

Okay. Like, how do you explain that? How do you explain it? Like, come up with something. Can you at least try to explain it? Can you try to explain the WhatsApp message

where he's saying he's in their same room with his father and we're holding a grudge against you. And we are going to make your life a living hell if you don't get this payment to come through right now. Can you at least come up? with some way of trying to explain that? I mean, there are sort of, the media is sort of taking this road of,

well, it was Hunter and he was bad, and he was selling the illusion of, of some sort of influence from his dad, and it wasn't real. But like, why don't we have the actual administration saying that's what happened? Why is it the media carrying that water? Why isn't the,

why isn't Joe Biden required to come out and say, yes, this was my son doing this terrible, terrible thing, and he's really, really bad. And, you know, we're not going to invite him to the next state dinner. So maybe he shouldn't be in the room with those people next time. Uh-huh. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I would just like to ask you this question. The media is now saying, yes, what Hunter Biden did was bad and possibly even illegal. It was illegal.

He was not a registered for an agent, and yet he was acting as one, meaning represent. representing people in foreign countries and doing business for them in the United States on their behalf. He was never registered. That's against the law. Okay. Can't do it. He also was doing something very nefarious. Let's say he was doing on his own. His father had no idea. He was trading on the Biden family name and selling the brand. This is now accepted by people in the media. It was the brand. He was selling the brand, but the president didn't have anything to do with it. Okay, let's take that at face value as it's absolutely true. Why hasn't the president come out and said that? Why hasn't the president come out and said, look, it's important that you know if your president is a crook or not. Well, I'm not a crook. My son, I found out, while I was grieving my son, my other son, is trading on me. my name, making it look like I would provide deals. You know, my son is very troubled. He has had a very difficult time with drugs. He was out of control, but I am not going to stand in the way of his prosecution if that's what people believe. But I want you to know. I'm shocked and horrified by

what my son did, but I had nothing to do with it. He's not doing that. Why? Why? Why is the media doing that? but they're not insisting that the president should do that. His whole thing for the last five years has been to lie over and over again to the media. My son did nothing wrong. Well, we now know, and it's pretty well accepted, that he was trading on the Biden name. That is wrong. He was acting as a foreign agent without being registered. That's illegal.

Why won't the president come out and say that? Yeah, and like, I can certainly understand why the president doesn't want to come out and say that. I totally get it because it makes him look illegal like he broke the law and his family is in turmoil and his son should obviously go to prison. I get why he wouldn't want to say that, but I don't get why the media isn't requiring him to come out and say it. They certainly would do this if it was anyone else. Any Republican would be required. They would be pestered every time he walked in front of a camera. He would be asked to say that exact thing.

And they're not doing that at all. They're not, he needs to say those things. He needs to come out and say those things. And he's not. Of course we understand why Joe Biden is trying to avoid that. But like if we had a media with any, any reasonable integrity. and attachment to journalistic principles. This is all they'd be focused on right now.

And yet, they keep falling for the same trick, Glenn, that you've outlined multiple times today. The day after this stuff comes out, they do something like indict Donald Trump. And now the entire media is on that bandwagon instead of the one they should be looking at. We're going to say, in the phone, all the world can be a guy of the finance.

Not a business to have a gross moon in art, to play golf, Not a good, no more. In any case, you have always made these affairs, and the apply negotiat-tit-titre TD you add to renew with your instinct of negotiation.

With the support 24-hour-pard-hour-pard, no amount of minimum, nor fray-mensual. You're made for negotiate, and the apply-negoti-tit-tid is made for you help. Telecharge it right now.