The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guest: Justin Amash | 4/16/24

Episode Date: April 16, 2024

A new poll reveals how many people would commit voter fraud if it meant helping their preferred candidate. Glenn and Stu explain why that’s a terrible idea. U.S. Senate candidate Justin Amash joins to discuss what the FBI could have told members of Congress to scare them into flip-flopping on FISA. Where can conservatives go in a doomsday scenario? Will Epstein’s Island ever NOT be Epstein’s Island? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Look, Air Canada F.A. Canada does a sold world. Super, an offer for the Assort. Station

Thermal, Volcan. Parlant of Volcan. You've seen the price for the Japan? M. Pairn and sushi.

Wow, the sold are good for Mayork also. We could go to the plage and do you

see a long march on the bar of the sea-sill. Mm, I adore the canolis. I'm sorry.

Decid, this sold is a new d'nurring limited. Reserved to RkCanada com or

to your agent of voyage. The conditions Wow, we went all over the world today. There's all kinds of stuff that you don't want to miss on today's broadcast. We have Justin Amash on who a lot of people are mad at. I don't know. I'd love to have a guy from Michigan, you know, as the senator from Michigan, that is a constitution lover. We talk a little bit about that, why the government is now pushing all of this about terror. Some of it is true, but

is some of it to get FISA passed. Also, everything you need to know about Israel, Israel's about to attack again, and the Vegas shooter. Never happened with that. We'll talk about that and so much more on today's podcast. First, when it comes to personal defense, you have options, but the options are kind of on either side of a wide spectrum. On one end, you got guns, and they'll definitely get the job done. But you're going to have to kill a guy. Don't pull a gun unless you're prepared to kill somebody.

On the other hand, you know, things like a knife or a taser, maybe pepper spray, or brass knuckles. I don't know about you, but I don't want to get that close to an attacker. Fortunately, Burna technology has solved this problem and gives you both a weapon that is the best of both worlds. The Burna launcher, it's non-lethal, and it's an alternative to safeguarding your home that will send potential threats running in the opposite direction. Legal in all 50 states with no permits or background checks required and can be used by all age groups over 18. Every single person in my family, except for one, she's turning 18 here in a couple of weeks, has a Berna launcher. We got them all for Christmas. Tear gas, kinetic rounds, 60 foot range.

One shot can incapacitate an attacker for 40 minutes. Made in America, the Burna Launcher, B-Y-R-N-A-com slash Glenn. that's berna.com slash glen. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. New survey out. Pat Gray has just joined us. This is good stuff.

This good stuff. Remember, sometimes we have to fabricate to be able to get to the real truth. We have to have a little injustice to find justice. We have to have a little dishonor to become honorable.

Am I right, comrades? You sure are. Yes, thank you. Is that like abandoning free market principles to save? To save the free market principles. Exactly. Got to do it. Exactly.

Okay. All right. So let me just go over some of this poll. This is a survey of 1,400 national likely voters. And they separated them. They put everybody together. And then they separated them, Donald Trump and Joe Biden. voters and then the others, okay?

How would you rate the job that Joe Biden has been doing as president? 43% say strongly approve or somewhat approve. That's 43%. Somewhat disapprove or strongly disapprove, that's 54%. If the election were held today and the candidates were Joe Biden, Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who would you vote for? 36% Joe Biden, 45% Donald Trump, and 11% John F. Kennedy Jr. All voters

asked Trump Biden and others. Wow. Do they really get JFK Jr. to run now? That's incredible. I thought RFK Jr. was going to run up. If a co-worker, yeah. Okay. Seems a little late. It was a flesh wound. It was a little head wound. Really? Yes. The doctors here at Parkland Hospital.

They're amazing. He walked it off. He did. He did. Shake it off. Is really what the doctor said. Just shake it off. Wow. Incredible. If a co-cour, you're such a jerk.

If a co-worker or friendly acquaintance gave you permission to fill out and sign their, and mail-in their ballot, allowing to use their ballot to vote for anyone that you choose, would you? Well, no. That would be, that would be wrong. Right? I'm looking for an honest answer. Yeah. No, I would not. You would not.

I would not. You would not. Yeah. Of course not. Now, I need an honest. Nobody in this room would do that. Yeah. No, seriously.

we would. Seriously, we would not. No, it's illegal. It's a crime and it also upends our entire system of the government and of electing officials. 17% say you got that right. I would do it. 17%. There you go. 80% say no.

If a close friend gave you permission to fill out and sign their mail-in ballot, allowing you to use their ballot to vote for anyone you choose, would you? Again, no. No. No, right. I don't want to commit federal election crimes. if I can help it. This is strange. If a co-worker asked you,

kind of somebody who's a friendly kind of person, but not a friend, 17%, you got it. 14%. Well, yeah, I guess I would, but I'd be, why? It's a friend. You would think that it would go the opposite way.

Yeah, it's interesting. I think, like, without thinking about it and really, like, considering this, like, if a friend came to you and just said, hey, like, I don't know, I don't know anything about this. Who should I vote for? I'm just going to vote for whoever you tell me.

I think that's okay, right? You can say, hey, this is why I think you should vote for. Yes, right. But you just can't fill it out yourself. I've had family members. Okay, so that's the next one. Ask me all the time. If spouse or another trusted family member gave you permission to fill out and sign their mailing.

No. No. No, but I'd certainly recommend who they would vote for or should vote for. Now, has anybody said on any document? I haven't, of course, but on any document, your wife is there and she's like, would you just sign it for me? I've got my hands in whatever.

By the way, you smirked in the middle of telling that story. It almost seems like he was revealing something about his life. It didn't seem more about your life, really, honestly. Really? You smirked to reveal about our lives? So you've never ever signed anything. I mean, I've signed things, of course, myself.

I have to sign things all the time, Glenn. I'm with you, Stu. I'm with you. Okay. That would be wrong, of course, again. Listen to this one. If you were given the opportunity, would you alter the candidate selections made in a mail-in ballot

belonging to a friend or family member without their knowledge? Oh, my gosh. That one I would, yes. Yeah, you would do that. That one, of course. That's the only one I would do, though. I would only do it after they thought they put their voted for another candidate. 9% said yes.

2% were like, I don't know. I don't want to say. No, I would not. I would not to be clear. Right. If altering the candidate's selection were the only way to stop Joe Biden or Donald Trump from being elected, then would you do it? 8% say yes. Wait, you already 9% of you said yes.

I'll only do it if it makes no difference. It's unbelievable. It's that 1%. If given the opportunity, would you throw out or destroy a mail-in ballot belonging to a friend or family member without their knowledge to have? help stop Joe Biden or Donald Trump from being reelected as president. I think on these where it's like you know you're the deciding vote in some mythical world, I think that these numbers are low and people are lying. They don't want to admit to pollsters.

There's no way that's only 9%. Well, this one's 11%. 11%. I mean, I just don't. I think now I would still not do it because I care about the process and that's, you know, my main concern. But it's wrong, right? It's wrong. And I would not do it.

Though I don't think that only 11% would make that chance. I wouldn't be tempted. Would I be tempted? Yes. Because you'd want the result, of course. You'd want the results. And you would stand there and you'd hold that for a while. And you might even turn around.

Is anybody looking? Right. You know. But then you would, at least I would, I would be like, no. God is looking. God is looking. Yes. But I mean, I would say there's a ton of people who would justify that one.

There's no way that's only 11%. I'm sorry. If you put those people in a room and they believed that was the situation, it would be higher than 11%. Especially they didn't think they were getting caught. If given the opportunity, would you cast a ballot in two different states to help stop Joe Biden or Donald Trump from being reelected president? 10%. Yep. If given the opportunity, would you offer to pay or reward another voter, including friends or family members, to help stop Joe Biden or Donald Trump from being reelected president?

10%. Yes. If given the opportunity, would you deliberately tell another voter incorrect information about a place, time, or date associated with casting a ballot to help stop Joe Biden or Donald Trump from being reelected this president? As a joke, we've all done that. I mean, when they speak for yourself, of course. You've never done it seriously. Never done it. Well, never done it.

Yeah. Yeah. Where you walk and where somebody's like, hey, can you tell me where to vote? Yeah, tomorrow. Tomorrow. You never done anything like that. That would be. The turnout is so heavy.

today. Right. You guys may have done that at one point before the statute of limitations. No. But there was a guy they prosecuted. Remember very recently, I know. And they made him an example. It was that ridiculous.

Yeah. It was just a joke. Yeah. So if you answered yes to at least one question above, 28% said, yeah, I can find a way around that. Wow. 28%. 28%. It's pretty high.

you think that's pretty high 28% of America you think that's high yeah okay so what does this mean about us by the way no difference between

any of the voters Republican Democrat okay oh really everybody's on board yeah I think Trump derangement syndrome

might be a little stronger than well according to this poll no that we know everybody well we know they're liars because they've admitted that they would do it.

So we know they're liars, but they're probably lying on top of their lies. I think it's, I think it's, I think there is this feeling in America that we, it would be okay to be dishonorable

to bring honor to the country. The ends justify the means. Correct. A lot of that going around these days. Yeah. A lot of that going around. And I don't think that pays off in the long run. No, no. But it does show

how polarized we are, doesn't it? Yeah. And I think, too, like a lot of people, if you want to defend them a little bit, a lot of people look at this and say, look, our republic is in trouble if this X, Y, or Z doesn't happen. I mean that on both sides, right? I mean, they look at Donald Trump as the end of the Republic, probably. Not that they care about the end of the Republic, but end of

whatever they think they have. And I don't look at Joe Biden is the end of the republic. I look at the policies that are being pushed as the end of the republic. Yeah. I do. Or at least you know, but Biden's pushing him. So. Yeah. I mean, obviously, that's tied to Biden. But, but I mean, you know, you, of course, the Republic itself is based on this idea that people can cast votes.

So, like, you're overturning the Republic to save the Republic. You're doing the thing we mock George Bush, George W. Bush, about doing and so many others. Every liberal has done this, of course. So I started with the Ministry of Truth today. Yeah. Because we are now starting to believe that it is okay to lie to achieve truth. that it's okay to be dishonorable to achieve honor. I think you're totally right.

I think that is going around at a pace that I'm very uncomfortable with. Now, let me give you one more study. This is a comprehensive survey done by the American Bible Society. State of Bible USA 2024 is the name of it. And within a decade, are you reading your Bible? went from 50% in 2011 to under 40% today. However, 15% of the respondents reported an increase in their personal Bible use from the previous year. So the people who are reading it are reading it more intently, and there are just fewer people reading the Bible.

I actually think that's a good thing. I mean, I don't like the first part of it, but I think it's a good thing that the ones that are reading it have doubled their efforts. They're getting more out of it now. But I don't think that this survey is disconnected from the last survey. I agree 100% on this. 100% on this. I do think it's happening often.

And look, let's point the finger at our own side for once here. I think it's happening a lot on the right. I think there's a lot of people right now that are feeling uncomfortable, sticking to the principles in that little book because times are too important. Again, I'm putting that in air quotes. Yeah. Because I don't think, I think the eternal nature of the book you discuss here maybe had some perspective as to how important a certain situation was.

Maybe they thought that out a little bit when the book came out. So I have to tell you, yeah, well, they were only writing it for the clicks. It's old and dusty too. Let's think about that. It's an old and dusty book. Those things don't really apply today. They didn't have the internet back then. Amen, brother.

Right. Amen. You know, the problem with both of these things is the eternal truths are eternal for a reason. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, those are eternal. And so you can't say, well, yeah, I know, but we're at an emergency. No. No. First of all, if they're God-given rights that cannot be violated, No man can violate those rights. Well, that's just because God's really not surprised by emergencies. He's not like, whoa, hold it. Didn't see that coming. I just didn't see that coming.

Okay, forget about that right and that right. Right now we got to do this. He doesn't. He doesn't. The truth is always the truth. Your rights are always your rights. Your honorable actions must always be honorable. You can't get honorable actions.

A good tree can bear good fruit. A bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Unless it's hard to get a warrant. Then it's okay. Then you're picking good fruit off that tree. Then you can surveil Americans without one. Okay, that's fine. Yeah, absolutely.

Imagine living in. in a society that not only allows you to commit murder, but in fact encourages you to do it, even peer pressures you to do it. We're not describing movies or anything else. We're describing what happens every day at Planned Parenthood. Preborn is out to change that. Everything that you think of when you think of Planned Parenthood,

preborn is the opposite of that. And they offer free ultrasounds in cases where, you know, mom comes in and says, I just don't know what to do. I want you to go to pre-born. They celebrate 200 miracles every day. $28 a month could be the difference between life and death of a child. When a mom meets her baby on ultrasound, here's the heartbeat.

There's a connection that doubles the baby's chance at life. I want you to go to preborn.com slash back. That's pre-born.com slash back. Preborn. Make a donation today. Sponsored by Pre-Born. Now back to the podcast. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

All right, Justin Amosch is with us now. He is running for the U.S. Senate, former U.S. congressman, now candidate for the U.S. Senate. Justin, how are you, sir? Great, Glenn. Thanks for having me on. You bet. So tell me about your campaign and how it's going. It's going great.

We just reported our financial numbers for the first quarter. We were easily outreferral. raising the other candidates. In fact, I've been raising as much per week as all the other candidates on the Republican side combined. So we started this campaign on February 29. It's been full steam ahead. I believe we've got a path to victory here that is wide open. Our main opponent is a guy named Mike Rogers, who is the former Intelligence Committee chairman, a guy who supported FISA, a guy who voted for just about every spending bill that came his way. So we think we've got the right opponent.

We're working hard. We've got a great team. And we're going to win this thing on August 6th. So tell me about the FISA thing, because what is it, Justin, that Congress is being told? I mean, we've had public statements. They've come out and said, oh, America's in really, real big trouble. And I believe we are because of the border that's been open. We don't have any idea who we've led into this country.

But they're saying, you know, it's really, really bad. What is it that you think they're getting in their intel briefs that are freaking these guys out to say yes to the FISA bill? And I don't need a warrant to go after American citizens in country. When it comes to most members of Congress, I think that it's just a lack of understanding of how FISA workers. works. The average member of Congress doesn't know very much. I serve there. I talk to them all the time. The average member of Congress is just not that curious, is fairly indifferent. So there are about maybe 5% of the members of Congress who know what's going on and are trying to do the bad thing, trying to do harmful things. And then there's maybe 5, 10% who know what's going

on and are trying to do the right thing. The vast majority of them, though don't know what's going on at all. So when they're told by a chairman that they should vote a certain way because it's important for national security or for whatever reason, they're likely to do it because, A, they think maybe the chairman's onto something. They're not going to waste the time reading the bill or understanding it. And B, more importantly, they're afraid of losing their seat. They're afraid of losing their election. And they know that these high-level members of Congress, the Speaker of the House, and some of the leadership team,

can really take them out if they want to. If they want to put up a primary opponent against them, if they want to essentially defund their campaigns, because most of these members of Congress are extremely reliant on the leadership team for their fundraising. They're not independently able to fundraise. They're not going to get on the committees if they go against the leadership team.

They're not going to get the chairmanships that they want. And all those things will also impact their fundraising and their ability to get elected. So a lot of it's just survival mode. I don't think it's actually any kind of deep concerns about how FISA works or whether FISA is good or bad. But they think if they don't vote for it, if leadership is against them on this and they go against leadership,

they're in trouble. And that's the bottom line for most of that. And this FISA thing really is bad. I know you've had other people on who have talked about it, but we're talking about a system, a program, that sweeps up Americans' communications, and then it allows the government to go and search these communications without a warrant.

You know, they pretend like it's just about foreign intelligence when, in fact, they're sweeping up conversations of countless. outless Americans, and these Americans don't have to be in contact with some kind of terrorist cell or some kind of... It couldn't just be someone who's overseas, and the government can sweep this information up and then search it without a warrant according to their interpretation of the Constitution, which is just blatantly wrong. You can't under our Constitution, under the Fourth Amendment, just sweep up all of these Americans' conversations. that in itself is a problem. But the members of Congress who are fighting to stop FISA

and trying to fight for a warrant requirement aren't even saying, hey, don't sweep up the conversations. They're actually giving the leadership a pass on that one. They're saying, okay, you swept up the conversations, at least get a warrant before you search these conversations. So what is it that they think they're missing that they're convincing people to not just violate, destroy the Fourth Amendment.

I think the average member of Congress, as I said, is not being convinced all that much on the merits. I don't think that they are going in there and looking at it and saying, yeah, there's a really good reason to do this. What they're being convinced on is, okay, if you don't do this, then you're not part of the team. You're not playing along.

The intelligence community said they really need this. And they're being assured by the leadership, it doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment. And they're saying, oh, well, if it violated the Fourth Amendment, how come we're doing it? You know, like, wouldn't someone have stopped us by now? So they're just led to believe it's an okay thing. It can happen.

And it has some, you know, marginal benefit for national security and that's how it's framed. And then they say, well, okay, I better go with it. And a lot of them also, you have to remember, they think about things like this. They say, well, if someone is telling me it's okay to do, it doesn't actually violate the Fourth Amendment. Well, isn't it safer for them to just vote for it? Because they're worried if something happens, if some terrorist attack happens down the road, someone will say, oh, if only we had BISA 702.

And they're afraid of taking the blame for that. Yeah, I think it would, what would Trump that would be, oh, I wish we had a border that wasn't wide open. I mean, you know, I understand nobody wants to be blamed for stuff, but you're not going to be able to get past the open border if something happens. That's what's shocking right now, is that they're not doing anything to actually address the wide open border. and at the same time they're saying let's sweep up all this information and search on Americans. And it's completely backwards. Right. It wouldn't be the, you know, violation of the Constitution, you shouldn't ever do, but it should be the last thing you address.

If you really cared about the safety of the nation, you'd be going after the terrorists that we have here and closing the border and doing everything you can. But they don't seem to care about that. So what is this really truly all about? Well, again, I'm the Republican side at least. I think it's just about survival for most of these members of Congress. They do think that the safest bet is to stick with leadership. Do what leadership wants.

If leadership has an agenda, they want to go with that because if they go against the leadership team, they're on the outs. And there's a chance they lose the next election as a result. So I think that's really what it's mostly about for them. For the Democrats, you know, I think that a lot of them have soured on the idea of civil liberties and have, you know, they used to be speaking out against the Patriot Act and speaking out against violations of our rights. And now increasingly they are supporting it and saying it's fine to violate people's rights. you look at the fiza 702 votes over the years for example you'll see that the democrats especially

have had just wild swings on it in terms of their support i mean you can go back a few years and most democrats would be strongly opposed to fiza 702 and now they're strongly in favor of fisa 702 and republicans have swung as well republicans have flipped on this too but the democrats with the democrats it's particularly pronounced because on the republicans side, you still have the establishment that's in favor of this unconstitutional surveillance. On the Democratic side, you have people who used to be pretty strong advocates for civil liberties, at least on the outside. They would say they're strong advocates, and they voted that way from time to time, now have turned on it and saying, okay, whatever, spy on everyone.

We're talking to Justin Amash, who is running for the Senate in Michigan. It would be a flip from blue to red, if he would win. What is the thing that you are most concerned about, and what do you see coming here in the next few months? I'm gravely concerned about the stability of the republic, really, until the new president is sworn in for about a week. Yeah, what concerns me is what's concerned me for many years. When I served in Congress, I saw how the government works on the inside. When you're on the outside you think things like government is really, really bad. When you're on the inside, you realize it's much worse than the public understands. It's much, much worse. And what's shocking

to me is I'll see these members of Congress who get elected saying, yeah, I thought on the outside, when I was outside, I thought the government was bad. But when I got in, these new members of Congress, they'll say, oh, I guess it wasn't as bad as I thought. And I don't know what they're talking about. It's much, it's so much worse. And actually the fact that these people flip that they go from thinking it's bad and thinking it's not so bad, it's an indication of just how bad it is. They get brainwashed within a few months, someone who's like a, someone who's, like a, someone who come in as a staunch liberty advocate. And with a few months, they're just pressing whichever button the leadership team told them to press.

And what, what frightens me is that we basically have an oligarchy at this point. Now, it's an elected oligarchy. But it's an oligarchy. You have people who are elected, but they're just rotating positions at the top. You know, one year you have this speaker, another year you have that speaker. But these speakers are basically running the house top down. In the Senate, you have the same thing with Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer, where you have people who run these institutions from the top down,

they prevent the other members of Congress from actually participating. Mike Lee actually speaks about this all the time, which I appreciate Mike's doing. And what they do is they tell you, you follow us, and you'll be okay, and if you stray, we're going to come after you. And so you have a Congress where everyone falls in line, and increasingly people can't offer amendments on legislation. they can't read the bills. They're given, you know, one hour or a few hours to read legislation

that might be hundreds or thousands of pages. And how can a government actually function this way? Nobody would operate any kind of entity this way. If you had a business, you'd never sign a 5,000-page contract in a few hours. No. It would be insane. And yet these people who are elected are given. given the responsibility of essentially signing contracts and agreements on behalf of the American people.

They're passing laws. And they're signing things on behalf of the American people that are thousands of pages, much more important than any kind of agreement that any business would sign. And yet they're doing it without any thought. They're just signing it. They're saying yes. And then they have the audacity to come out and say they're doing the right thing. because it's urgent and they don't have time to read it and they'll figure out what it says later.

And then on the Democratic side, it's even worse, I think, because they are constantly talking about saving democracy. And yet, they more than anyone in Congress will come out and say, well, we have to pass this bill quickly. We can't afford to read it. Those who want to read it are just trying to waste time. These are the same people who tell you they're saving democracy. And out of, once out of their mouth, they'll say they're saving democracy on the, out of the other side, they'll say, we just have to do whatever Biden says. We just have to do whatever Chuck Schumer says. Well. Or Nancy Pelosi, and it's infuriating. Well, I mean, we can go to our own party of the Republicans and quote George W. Bush,

I have to violate the free market to save the free market. Back, Same thing happens. Yeah. Same thing on the Republican side. You're streaming the best of the Glenn Beck podcast. To hear more of this interview, find the full episode, wherever you get podcasts. And another thing that really hacks me off. Liberals could go anywhere, right? I mean, they could go to Canada. They'd be perfectly happy. Be like, ah, great. Finally a country without the stupid Hicks, except the farmers and, you know, about, 90% of the country, but hopefully they'll all freeze to death. They'd be happy up there.

They'd be happy up there. Where are you going to be happy? If this country would fail, where do you go? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, what Reagan said back in the day is true, right? And we're one generation away, and we maybe pass that generation. Yeah, I mean, what, what, what, we're sincerely, is there a place that you could go? There's no place to go.

Where would you go? America doesn't exist, so the whole dynamic of safety completely changes. Yeah, I'm going Island Nation at that point. I'm going like, you know, I don't know, Bermuda or like St. Kitts or something, something warm, St. Bart's, something like that. Hell. Why would you go? I mean, there's no way they, those. I feel like they don't even have politics there.

I don't know. Because they don't have, in my mind, they have no policies. No energy. Yeah, but I mean. No food. Right. Yeah. I got all that.

The resorts all have food. They all have electricity and resorts are heating and cooling. But I mean, you're talking about some apocalyptic place? No, I'm talking about that America just goes into some, I don't know. Like, let's say it gets taken over and turns into Canada or worse, right? Which, again, we're trending that way dramatically. Could I tell you? I would be so happy if our bottom was Canada.

I'm not saying that's our bottom. I'm just saying like if Canada is that. I'm saying we're as bad as Canada. I don't know. Right. Okay. What's the, what's the country? Like, if the most liberty-friendly major nation is equivalent, is the equivalent of Canada. So I guess, you know, that would be a significant move for us to the left.

It would be bad. Yeah, it would be bad. We would have, for example, no First Amendment. Right. Right? Like, I mean, things like that going away. That's not like nuclear apocalypse. We can't get access to food necessarily, although long-term, gosh, famine does seem to follow these communist countries.

does. But, you know, it's not necessarily that type of situation you're talking about. You're not talking about like a search for natural resources. You're talking about a place to have liberty. Yeah. And like if you can become a citizen of a nice, you've got maybe some of that American wealth you held on to a little bit. If you got like $14 in your account, you're the richest man in some of these countries.

You go over there. You live, it's warm. You get a little hot by the beach. You never talk to anybody again. There you go. There's your plan. I've already given the plan of what to do with the protesters when they glue them to the highway. Correct. Correct. You put your head down, you just take your foot off the ground.

You just go. And you just look at your steering wheel and see if you may see a bump, you may not, but you're not going to know what it is. Then you keep going. Yeah. Once you get past the bumps, you just accelerate. And then when that doesn't work in the things, those people, you know, not the dead ones, but the speed. The other's running the country. But the others running the country, then you go to a beach. A beach on an island. All right. Don't you think that? This is why, you know, you get the private island access. That's what you need. You need like the Jeffrey, is Jeffrey Epstein's island still available?

I mean, again, I wouldn't do the same things on the island, but like the infrastructure he built there was impressive. Right. You know, tunnels, hideways. It's probably a great place to escape the apocalypse. It might be a little dark of a move. It would be. I think you rename it, though. Yeah, sure.

You name it like Happy Funland or something. Right, right. Hey, no one's never ever said, oh, they went to, they went to, what did they call it? Epstein Island was it was the Lolita Express right like you know you don't want to call it Lolita Island you call it like happy fun land no one's going to say hey

you believe this guy went to happy fun land of course he went to happy fun land until happy fun land until Lisa is sleeping in the bedroom and she hears help is anybody out there help my name's Lolita and I'm still

I'm in a very dark place I mean please that is you could rescue them That would be a good deed for the day. Wow. Wow, that would be good. You could rescue whoever he left. I assume. It's been a while, so I'd be a little concerned on how that worked out, but maybe he left a bunch of food down there.

I don't know. And then you rescue those people, and then you got a nice island. He really didn't leave any food. I mean, it's not. There's no food down here. Can we be clear here? Epstein's crimes were not caused by the island. Okay?

Like, the island is not at fault here. It wasn't a sand issue. It was a palm tree problem. So I had a friend call me and say, he had this beautiful. beautiful estate in, where was it, Santa Fe or someplace in New Mexico. Okay.

And he was like, Glenn, it's going for a song. Nobody wants it. And I'm like, yeah, for a reason. And he's like, so we get an exorcist to come in. Wait, what? We exercise of all the demons that might be there. And then you just fix it up.

And I'm like, I wouldn't want. And he's like, no, you wouldn't live there. You know, we get somebody else to come in with us and we all split it around. I'm like, no. Is this the Epstein place? Yeah.

Oh, okay. And I'm like, no, I don't want to do that. Wait, you were, you had a possibility of buying the Epstein reserve. No, I had a friend call me and say, hey, let's go in on it. And I'm like, no. I need to help the aggregators here for a second. Glenn Beck almost bought Jeffrey Epstein's palace. Wow.

That's a story that needs to get out. Right. That's fascinating because he did have. No, I immediately said, are you out of your mind? It would be a little... It was a little... I said there would never be some place where you'd be like, hey, bring all the kids.

No, yeah, you would never... No. He's like, it's all furnished. And I'm like, what the first thing we do is burn all the furniture? Wait, it was his furniture still? Yeah. So what's wrong with you? So after he died, they still haven't sold it, or maybe at least...

No, they sold it recently. They sold it. Oh, they did. Yeah, they sold it for less than he thought they were going to sell it for. Really? Yeah. Because who would want it? Who would want it?

Who would want it? And he's like, eventually people will forget. I'm like, yes, but I wouldn't. Right. That would be a problem. I would be there at the sale and just going, oh, yeah, I've got to tell you, there's tunnels and everything underneath this and it's really spooky. I mean, I think that should be disclosed. I'm just saying. It's dark, but like I do feel like if you were walking down the hall, something like the ring

would happen. Right? Like something like some girl with black hair over her face and walking. and walking like a crab walk back or something like that's going on in that place. And he's like, we could make it into a hotel. You could have a hotel. And I'm like, yes, with cameras in every bathroom. No.

No. It's weird, though. That is a weird human thing, though. There's no real, like, the house had nothing to do with it. The land had nothing to do with it. It was a bad guy who did bad things on that land. We've seen, I mean, freak, I was at, I was in Vegas. Walk through that building with a black light and tell me that.

I was in Vegas in February and you're walking out and you just look up and wow, there's the hotel where the guy was firing out the window at the concert, right? Like the worst mass shooting in U.S. history that wasn't caused by the government. And while I'm standing there, I'm looking at this, it's like there are thousands of people inside that building right now. gambling, drinking, eating, having a grand old time. And for whatever reason, we were just, now they don't let people in the room where he was shooting from. Right. But like, that's it. Right.

You know why they don't let people in that room? Not because people would be freaked out because they'd be afraid of the people who would want that room. Right. You don't want those people saying that. I didn't want to be the guy who wanted the Epstein place. Right. You know, it's not a good look for anybody. No.

And I also think it carries, you know, things. just carry spirit with it unless you know you're like Jesus I need to borrow you for just five minutes I know it's a lot to ask I just need you to stop by pop by this island and just cleanse it

I mean I suppose it's just it is a you have that obviously ideal but like I don't know is the place tied to that like that's is that real like that's you're going to live in the Amityville horror house no yeah no no why why I don't know

Yes. That's what I'm saying. I'm saying openly, I'm questioning that this makes any sense whatsoever. Now, here's what I would like to do. I'd like to pick a house that like you would want or I would want that we want to buy. And then let's create a, you know, like a murder house story about it. So while the price suddenly plunges and we're like, we're not again. You know what?

That murder house doesn't bother us. but it's not really a murder house. It's just one we said was a murder house. They don't know we started that rumor about the murder house. Jeffrey Epstein, this is the place where he took and they killed people. I love this. I love this. You should implement this through real estate agents I trust.com.

Would you like the murder house option? I mean, there are real estate agents you can trust most of the time. You can trust them to help you. I mean, the other people are screwed, but they'll help you. They got the murder house thing for you. All right. When you were little, you had braced some have braced

in school of recreat, always in trying to negotiate and do make these exchanges. The appellee-negoti-tit-t you permit to renouet with this instinct, with without operation gratuit,

no amount on minimum, and no-frey-mensue. You're made for negotiate, and the T-D is there for you aid. Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-ha-ha-ha.