The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guests: Nick Di Paolo & John Solomon | 12/4/19

Episode Date: December 4, 2019

The Schiff Show continues with an Intelligence Committee report on the impeachment hearings. One fact really stands out: Schiff had records of phone calls between Trump, Giuliani, and Nunes – “likely” provided by a subpoena of AT&T. Comedian Nick Di Paolo asks who’s more anti-American: Adam Schiff or Colin Kaepernick. Investigative reporter John Solomon describes the Left’s smear campaign against him as a distraction from the real facts. Glenn previews this weekend’s podcast with Nikki Haley: She wasn’t always a Trump fan! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hey, welcome to Wednesday's podcast. A great one today. You don't want to miss a second. Wednesday? That's so close to Saturday. I can't believe how close that is. There's only Thursday and then Friday and then Saturday. So three days. And on Saturday, you're going to be in Salt Lake City for your Christmas show. And I don't appreciate what you did with Nick DeFalo today on the podcast. Oh, I love that. That's my favorite part of the podcast. I'll break your legs. Oh, I'll break your legs. The idea of the idea of it. that a professional comedian is going to do like NFL film tape and analysis

on your comedic performance. Oh, I will break your legs. It's worth it, honestly. My legs aren't that great. I don't move a lot anyway. That's fine. But I will say, if you want to go to the Christmas show and check this out live,

and maybe you can report some facts back to Nick Trapollo. You go to glenbeck.com slash Christmas. There's a few tickets left. There's some that we're kind of late releases. You can pick them up now. And join Glenn in Salt Lake City, December 7th. Thank you. That's Saturday.

that. Okay, so we have Nick Napalow on. We also have John Solomon. He has just, what he has to say about, oh, Schiff has phone records, what the Washington Post is saying about him and others. We ask him, are you going to sue about any of this? Also, Pat came by, he's a little upset about a trans athlete in Australia. So we have that and so much more. on today's podcast.

You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Welcome to the Glenn Beck program and welcome to Mr. Pat Gray, who does Pat Gray Unleashed every day prior to this broadcast on the Blaze Radio Network and you can listen to him wherever you hear podcasts. Hello, Pat. Can and should. Well, you know. You can.

I know where you live. I'll track you down. All right. Now, we were talking about how ad hoc. Schiff has just gotten the phone records from AT&T on his co-chair of the committee. It's unbelievable. And was not given a chance to defend himself. And I don't know, Pat, if you've read and I don't know if I have the strength right now to read the Washington Post article.

It's an article, not an opinion piece. GOP embraces a debunked Ukrainian conspiracy to defend. Trump from impeachment. Republicans' promotion of Trump's Ukraine conspiracy theory is the latest example of their capitulation to him and of the GOP's rapid transformation on Russia from a party that for decades celebrated its hawkish stance towards the Kremlin to one that is reluctant to take a hard line and risk Trump's wrath. I take a hard line all the time against Russia.

I know a lot. Now, there are some people who are on television, some people that. that are in Washington that are not. But Donald Trump has a much harsher policy on Russia. Than Obama ever did. They sold the Kremlin uranium. They sold our uranium to the Russians. And let's not forget the Obama conversation with Medvedev that was captured on camera and microphone.

About after the election, he'd have a lot more. leeway to do what Putin wanted him to do. And let's not also forget that the Democrats have done the exact opposite of some Republicans. And now all of a sudden to them, Russia is the greatest threat on earth. And it never was before. Before it was the 80s are calling and they want their policy back. We were voting for that guy. We were voting for that guy when the Republicans or the Democrats and the press went in to, decided they were going to vote for the guy who said, yeah, right. Well, the 80s called they want their policies back. Man, we should point out the frontrunner of the Democratic, for the Democratic nomination right now, was in the administration that believed that Russia was such a non-threat that they could mock and say that, you know,

mock them as an 80s, you know, Ivan Drago's situation. Yeah, it's not. They've been a big threat the entire time. And the fact that you're on the bandwagon now, I guess, is good. But it's not real. It's not real. I mean, it's obviously just opposing Trump. If it was real, did you guys know that I think it was Ohio was just hacked in the last?

In 2018. Right. Election, they were hacked by the Russians. They try to. Try to. We should point out that they stopped it. Well, they said that it was a very, very low budget kind of attempt. Well, okay, we can stop low budget.

What are the Russians doing? Are we, is anyone even looking at this? this. By the way, none of us have ever cozied up to the Russians. We've never said the Russians aren't a threat. We've never said Putin is a good guy. I've never, none of us I don't think have ever said any of that. There was a Tucker Carlson monologue

that said all of those things just the other night. Yes, I know there are some. There are some. But it's exaggerated to say that most Republicans... I was talking about the people in this room. Right. I know. You've got to be careful because there are some people who have, who have, they're right. Some Republicans have totally capitulated to everything Trump says and dies.

And it's just have. It's insanity. It's insanity. Follow his policies. Right. Not his words. Follow his policies. He is very tough on Russia. Tougher than anybody has been since I think the Cold War. By far. Yeah. So certainly, I mean. tougher than Russia. It's Obama. It's not even close. Not even close. And this, this phone tapping situation, they better have a warrant for that. And I'd like to see how they got that warrant. Can you do that through FISA? It's not a FISA. I wouldn't think so. We don't think that it's a FISA. I don't think you could. Because who's the foreign agent?

Yeah. It does look like, by the way, we talked about Parnas and those two guys. Lev. Lev. Parniss and I can never remember the other guy's name. But bottom line, they look like they immigrated early in their lives. So yes, they would be U.S. citizens. Would not qualify here.

Right. So. But they can claim it's part of the Russian investigation maybe. Possibly. You still have to tie that in? No, you still have to be able to present evidence. You're going after. What kind of evidence, Pat, would you have to have to go after somebody that you are going after?

And he's the president of the United States. And you say, I need all of the phone records between the president and his personal attorney. I don't know. I mean, that's insane. You'd have to have solid evidence, you would think. The only explanation. Grant that warrant. That makes any sense is that it was caught up in another separate investigation, like the Southern District of New York, where they were able to access the records.

Though, I don't, that does not seem. And they're just handing those records over to the- And that wouldn't be a FISA situation, though. Maybe someone just mailed them to them, you know? Maybe it's just some helpful, helpful person. Just like, you know, like, let's say, like in Ukraine, where there is a big situation going on and they just happen to have all the records. of Paul Manafort put together in a nice ledger and they just happened to get to the press somehow.

That's not Ukraine investigating, you know, in inserting themselves in our election process at all by getting the guy who was running one of the campaigns fired and arrested and put in prison. But maybe there was just a helpful person who was walking down the street, saw the records on the ground, picked them up and put them in the mail right to Adam Schiff.

Something like that may have happened. They happen to be on the ground? You know what? Sometimes people drop things. and maybe he thought they were Adam Schiffs and just sent them there. And Adam opened up and said, oh my gosh, I didn't ask for these.

But look at this. This is important information. And I think we have to bring it to the American people. I will tell you, I talked to Mike Lee yesterday. And I said, so Mike, what's the Senate going to do? And he said, I don't know yet. And I said, they're not pushing for a trial?

Well, he's meeting with the White House attorney today. and the White House is kind of dictating the kind of the plan. Mike thinks there should be a trial. Absolutely. I think. It was... I think he said that on the air, didn't he? Yeah, I think so.

And I said to him... Trump has said there should be. Yeah, he did today. But there's something else. I said, so if there's not a trial, Mike, if some reason why, God only knows why, Trump says, you know what, they have nothing here, just blow it off, which I think is a mistake. Will you open up on the Intelligence Committee for the Senate? Will you open up an investigation on the whistleblower and everybody else and how this happened?

Because if there's not enough evidence and this is the show that we all know it is, these people have to pay for that. they have dragged us through four years of this, spent millions of dollars, lied, deceit, hiding witnesses, working and colluding with the press. I mean, somebody has to pay for that, or we're a banana republic. And he did come out and say, I can't tell you who. He said, but there are a couple of people who are chair people on a couple of committees, and they are talking privately about. we want to open up investigations because this is all dirty. I hope they do that.

I hope they do too. Too often the Republicans just roll over and play dead. Too often they just capitulate and they forget about it and they sweep it under the rug. This needs to be dealt with. This, I think it's really important to deal with this. We should point out that they have a real opportunity to do that and they haven't failed yet. I mean, we kind of assume the failure. Probably going to.

They always suck. They always suck. I mean, it's true. But they do have a Senate trial coming up, and they control it. Constitutionally, they can do whatever they want with it. So let's see them do it. Yeah, like overturning Obamacare. Well, they don't have a constitutional right to overturn Obamacare. They do have a constitutional right to handle the Senate trial however they want.

And so they need to utilize that and actually make the case. I'm not saying I'm not giving them a pass here, but we should at least wait until they fail or at least begin failing before we say they failed. I'm not saying that they failed. Yes, you are. You're just saying there's a really good chance they're going to. And I'm going to be really pissed. Over under the chances Nikki Haley runs for president in 2024. Because that's 110%.

Yeah. What is your percentage in your mind that they fail here? That they fail? Yes. 140. Yeah, right. That's what I'm saying. Definitely over the chances of Nikki Haley.

Okay. So one of the thing I want to talk about, you were on a transgender athlete. And you have so much hate that's inside of you. No, I just want to show you that there's no difference between a trans woman, you know, who's actually biologically a man still. And the actual biological women. You won't be able to tell. Now, they're lined up here in Australia. Hang on just a second.

If you need to go to the cry room, you can go to the cry room. Go to your safe space right now because Pat only goes worse from here. No, this is better. I'm going to show you that there's no difference. Okay. What was that butter commercial? There's no difference. Remember that one?

No. There's no difference here. So they're lined up and they're about to play Australian rules handball. And if you could play the video for us, you'll see that you can't tell. Oh, my gosh. Can you pause it for a second? Pause it right there. No, I don't see.

You cannot tell. I can't tell. I can't tell. Which is the 6'2-2-2-20-pound man and which are the women. There's no way to tell. It's on the line. It's on the line. I will say she does have breasts.

And not like my breasts. She's had implants. She's had implants. Okay. So she's living her life. Good for her. She was quite recently a he. And was playing Australian Rose football, which is rugby to us.

But apparently didn't dominate the men. and so now dominating the women to the extent in rugby where they kicked her out of the league and now she's playing handball and dominating that league instead. I just come on. Can we not? I think Johnny Knoxville made a movie that was roughly similar to this, except he was, I think he was saying he was going to be in the special Olympics and dominate the special Olympics. And, you know, it's funny. How, how?

Oh, my. I'm not comparing. I'm saying, I don't know why you're saying that would be a bad comparison. What are you saying? It is interesting. Wait, who's saying the worst thing now? I don't know.

I don't even know. Glenn's saying quiet, so he's smart. What I'm saying is totally fine. You can't just categorize it. It's totally fine. You have to say something. Until people can read minds. Yeah.

And that's coming soon. It is. I'm totally good. First of all, the Knoxville movie, how is it made this recently? It was only, what, 10 years ago? It was okay to say you could become, You can pretend to be in the Special Olympics and dominate.

Like that was okay that recently. But beyond that. Well, wait a minute. Stephen King called me Satan's mentally challenged younger brother. Right. So doesn't that qualify me as a special Olympian? It's fair. It's a fair question.

All right. It's a fair question. But that is a, it's like a joke, right? Like you, to be able to just change, I'm no longer a boy. I'm now a girl. and then you dominate women's sports? Yeah, can I... Like, it's happening all over the world.

All over. And it's, and it is hurting women. It's hurting women. What happened to the sensibility of protecting women? By the way. The left is supposedly so concerned about protecting women. Where are they now? What a sexist is much worse than me.

I think the line is clear now. Pat is a big violation here. Wait a minute. What is it you're actually thinking, though? What? Huh? I don't know something much worse than I just said. He's thinking, yeah.

We don't even have to be able to read. We just know. I'm thinking something that is absolutely not problematic. That's what I'm thinking. All right. Thanks, Pat. Appreciate it. Pat Gray Unleashed on Blaze Radio and TV. The Best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and you're listening to the Glenn Beck program. If you like what you're hearing on this show, make sure you check out Pat Gray Unleashed. It's available wherever you download your favorite podcasts. Nick DePaulo joins us now. He is the host of the Nick DiPollo show, and you can find him at his website, nickdip.com. How are you? Where you been, lover? This impeachment hearing thing is just relentless.

I gave up on it. We already know how it's going to work, impeached in the house, and then he's not going to get convicted. It's like following a bad Judd Apatow movie, you know? The boyfriend's going to be the idiot at the end. than the girlfriend's the hero. Right, right. So I suggest you start watching more wrestling and football, Glenn. Don't follow this crap.

I think, you know, I really, I follow it against my will. I follow it because I'm paid to follow it. But I honestly, I don't even know. I have no idea how anyone thinks this is going to end up in their favor. How does any Democrat think this is going to end up in their favor? I think at this point they're just doing it because they're not legislating. They're not doing their jobs. So they have to look busy.

And they've wanted Trump's head since he came down the escalator. But you're right. It's going to blow up in their face. And I went to school with Jonathan Turley. I went to George Washington. And he tried to cheat off me. Did he really? You don't think I went to that school.

Well, there's a chance. You're a pretty smart guy, but sounding like that. I had a 2.4 in business administration at the University of Maine. And that's with cheating. Right, right. But Charlie's good. So, Nick, what have you been paying attention to? What have you been following?

What is? Yeah, the NFL. I've got a real gambling problem. So what do you think of this Colin Kaepernick thing? What was it? Detroit had an opening? they're going through everybody. I think they called my daughter.

Would you be willing to try out? Kaepernick, nothing. I called your daughter, too. Okay, that's disturbing. I have no idea how old she is. That was just a joke. I have a daughter who's 30 and 31. That's still disturbing that you're calling.

No, it isn't. Yes, it is. Oh, come on. Kaepernick is a, he's a patriot. He's a true American. He loves this country. Let me, just his haircut says I hate whitey, okay? I can't stand his terrorist beard.

He's biracial. He acts like he's 2,000 percent black. He's at Alcatraz the other day talking to Native Americans. You really think, did you really think a team was going to bite on him? The stadiums are still empty because of the crap he pulled. And who would be dumb enough? Hey, when the Detroit Lions pass on you, not exactly the New England Patriots there.

I mean, you know, I was just, I was thinking about it when he did this, you know, he did his own tryout and then he wanted his own place to do the tryout. And I thought, what team, even if he was great, what team wants this kind of hassle all the time, this kind of drama all the time? It would destroy a team. I agree with that. But then, you know, Belichick went after Antonio Brown,

so I started to have second class. But, yeah, the guy's a cancer. He did such damage to the NFL. I really believe these half-empty stadiums, which you don't hear about, have to do with that whole thing about nailing down. He started all of it, and there's no team desperate enough to bring this on.

I really believe that. He's finished. He's got to find something else. Nike's made him a zillionaire. So why does anybody even buy anything Nike anymore? I don't know. I honestly don't know. Let's not forget that Colin Kaepernick lost his job to Blaine Gabbard before he started kneeling.

This is not an NFL. Don't bring logic and reason into it, too. That's a great point. It's wrong with you. This is about emotion and the racist country and gender and the systemic racism that keeps this guy down. I have to tell you, I think there's a. massive backlash coming to all this. It is everything in me

says that it's falling apart and there's just going to be just a large group of Americans who just stand up and go shut up. Shut up as they stand up during the national anthem, I don't have a problem

with it. When you say it back, I thought you were talking about the impeachment again. Are we talking about cap-in- or the impeachment? Who's more anti-American? Adam Schiff or Colin Capner. Did you see what AT&T and Schiff did? They somehow or another got the phone records of the co-chair, Nunez,

and the president and his personal attorney. That's insane. How did they do that? That's hacking. The Washington Post said presumably with a warrant. Well, right there, you're supposed to, as a journalistic publication, isn't presumably the thing you don't want to say? We heard fourth hand that they got a... I mean, we just presume that they're doing this the right way.

The bathroom attended at the Verizon building heard a guy rocking to a guy who got Nunez. This is all underhanded. It's all baloney. Adam Schiff is creepy. He's drunk with power. just after after two and a half years of the Russia investigation, I can't believe people are still saying, yes, Trump should be impeached. This country deserves what it gets. I'm telling you, I don't think people are saying that.

Nobody, nobody I talked to over the holiday. Nobody was talking about this. Well, that's a great, that's a great sample size, Glenn. You and your uncle and. No, no, no, no. But I've asked other people as well. I mean, were you really having arguments about this at the dinner table? Because at the dinner table, even my dinner table, during the election,

there was all kinds of back and forth and, you know, polite, but all kinds of back and forth. Not on this. Everybody's just like, I don't care. Well, I got my sister-in-law on a headlock, and we knocked over the turkey and then cranberry stuff. I almost choked her out, and then she saw it my way. Trump is clean as a whistle.

We're going to get back to the news here in a second, but Nick, before we take a break here, this Saturday, Glenn Beck is going on the stage in Salt Lake City for his Christmas show, which some have described as stand-up comedy in the past. Now, I'm interested to see what your opinion would be of something like this.

And I'm wondering if there's a way, if we were to get you video of some of this performance, Don't you critique it and let us know if Glenn is actually good at this activity. Oh, sort of like a dancing with the stars thing. Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. I would love that. I don't want to say the word roast.

But I mean, no, I don't think we. I couldn't do a roast on the Glenn Beck show. I can't even say poop without getting arrested. How am I going to do a roast? But I would love to see this footage. No. Are you dressed like an angel? No.

No, I have thought about that in the past. You know what, Nick? honestly. This was something they've been asking me to do this, because I used to do about 30, 40 shows a year. And as you know, stand-up comedy is really hard, and you have to really, you know, you work on it. Well, this is a one-off show that, you know,

I'm just going out and doing, and I'm so nervous. It's just going to be flop sweat the whole time. Alcohol is for, Glenn. For the love of, that's the first thing you put in your writer. I want a six-pack of Mick Ultra. Right. In my dressing room. Seeing that I'm an alcoholic that might, well, it may, it would work for a good show quickly.

A thousand apologies. Weed is what you're looking at. No, I would love to see that. If you're a funny guy, you did radio, you shouldn't be nervous. You talk to 10 million people a week. Come on, relax. Yeah. They're Mormons. They'll laugh at everything.

All right. Nick Deppo, Nick Dip. You can find his comedy special, a breath of fresh air. You can find that at Nick Dip.com. You can watch it for free. Nick Dip.com. Nick Deppolo. Thank you so much for joining us. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn. And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleased. His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast. Hi, it's Glenn. If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do his favor and rate us on iTunes? If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time. You can subscribe on iTunes. Thanks.

I hate when John Solomon is on because I've just got to rattle through so many questions because he is a treasure trove of information. Welcome to the program, John. How are you? Good to be with you, Glenn. Thank you. Good. I want to just try to keep this. as rapid fire as we can, because I've got about 14 pages of questions.

Wow. The Democratic report is out. Your name is all over it. It includes your name on a list of AT&T phone records. Right. Does Schiff have the legal grounds to do this? How did he obtain it? Can he legally unmask an American citizen in the name in an official report like this?

Well, first off, I don't have AT&T as a phone service. So those most likely aren't my records or likely someone else's records where my phone calls show up. And, you know, anytime the government uses its power in a subpoena or a warrant or a, you know, I think these are probably congressional subpoenas. We know they announced subpoenas for Levinan, Rudy Giuliani. My suspicion without having been able to get confirmation yet is that my phone records just simply show up in some of their call logs that we know were subpoenas. Any time the government uses that power, it has a chilling effect on you as a reporter. Who wants to call me the next time if they think their records could be subpoenaed or shown on screen? But at the end of the day, what does it show?

It shows I'm a reporter that was engaged in reporting. In March and April of 2019, the Russia Mueller report was coming down. Of course, I was talking to Rudy Giuliani. So was in New York Times and every other major news organization in America. they've made to look scandalous what is supposed to be, what reporters do every day. Talk to all sides of a story and do journalism. I wonder if you're going to file a lawsuit at all about, you know, being followed by the government with AT&T or the government, if they didn't obtain it the right way. Or really a lawsuit against the smears that are coming your way.

Let me read something from the Washington Post last night. There was never any real story here. There were only an effort by Giuliani to scare up a bogus line attack against Democrats in preparation for the 2020 presidential election. The record demonstrates that Solomon's work advance that campaign, end quote. Yeah, I guess if you want to ignore the facts, you can take that position. And then the Washington Post has a good history of ignoring the facts. That's why they got large parts of the Russia collusion story together. I'd compare my reporting on Russia collusion against there's any days.

And I think the American public's verdict will be clear. But let me describe what are the political issues, and then people can judge for themselves. Isn't it a fair issue to ask whether Joe Biden created the perception of a conflict of interest when he fired a prosecutor, who he knew was overseeing an investigation of his son? Regardless of his motive, because I never established one way or the other what the motive was. I established the timeline and the facts that it happened. Those are public interest issues. And what did Adam Schiff's witnesses tell us? the State Department, two years, three years before I wrote my story, shared those same concerns

and tried to raise them with Joe Biden. So there was a public interest here. The Washington Post apparently doesn't see that because it affects a Democrat. The second issue was there was a dysfunctional relationship between our U.S. Embassy and the Ukraine prosecutors charged with fighting corruption. Donald Trump's talking about corruption. They're criticizing him for maybe considering withholding aid because of corruption. Well, if the State Department has a bad relationship with the U.S.

the people fighting corruption, you're never going to solve the problem. I highlighted those issues. Every one of those issues were confirmed in Adam Schiff's testimony. And then the third issue was there were isolated incidents by government officials in Ukraine to interfere in the U.S. election. Now, was it as systemic as Russia was found to be by a U.S. intelligence committee? No, nor did I ever claim it. What I said was there were these isolated instances where a DNC contractor seeks dirt from the embassy,

where the ambassador writes an op-ed criticizing Donald Trump in the mid-election, and where two government officials knowingly and willfully released evidence they weren't supposed to release to force Paul Manafort's resignation. And by the way, a Ukraine court concluded that was an intrusion on the U.S. election. Those are three legitimate journalism storylines, and the Washington Post, by its own omission, shows its bias by not acknowledging the importance of those issues to the American public. It's something I've just never, I've never seen anything so. obvious is this before.

They are trying to make it look and paint this picture that you, Giuliani, and his two associates, they used you as the engine for some sort of giant propaganda and smear operation. Can you address the relationship and communications with Giuliani and his two associates? I have acknowledged from the beginning, and my bosses were fully aware and approved of this, that in March of 2019, after more than a year or nearly a year of reporting on Ukraine issues, I was still at a loggerhead. I couldn't get some of these Ukraine officials to talk on the record. I knew everything on background had lots of documents.

But after a year of reporting, I didn't have anyone on record. Joe, the gentleman, Victoria Tensing, are two of my lawyers. I sent a draft or went over a draft with one of my stories with them saying, hey, could you go over libel and help me on some issues here? And they said, listen, you're struggling with this issue of being on the record. And I said, yes, I want to get people on the record. I want people to believe it because people put their name to it. And they said, well, we have this guy named Lev Parnas that we work with on some of our Ukrainian cases.

He's a translator. He's a facilitator. He knows a lot of people. Maybe he can help you get those people to talk on the record. And so before I knew Rudy was involved or had anything to do with it, I talked to Lev. Lev Parnas said, I know some of these people. Give me a list of people you want to interview. I gave him a list of four or five people, and he opened the door.

When he opened the door, when he went out and got people say, listen, can you try talking to John Solomon? I then went through the official channels, as I had been trying for months. I went through the press office of the Prosecutor General and the press office of Sergei Lyshenko and others. And I confirmed these are legitimate interviews. These are going to be done free will and that we can put them on videotapes so the world can see them. And I did exactly what a journalist does, and I got those interviews. Now, after my stories began emerging, Rudy Giuliani, who I talked with a lot about the Russia case because he was the president's defense man on that case, occasionally would call me and he would tell me something or he'd offer to help. In the end, nothing, I can say this, and I know Rudy would confirm this.

Why, Rudy did pass some information to me in June when he finished his investigation, that was long after my columns were done, nothing he gave me at any time or that he suggested or texted to me or email me, showed up in any of my stories. Why? I either had it already or it didn't check out for me. There are some things he's mentioned publicly that he's passed on to other reporters, myself included. They didn't check out. So I didn't report them. I don't report things that aren't true. So that's what reporters do on a daily basis. And the idea that the Washington Post and Schiff could demonize this is bad for journalism, bad for free speech, and certainly hurtful to me. All right. So you are all over this. Again, you are the propaganda machine. I guess you're like the gerbils maybe of this story, according to the press and the left.

But did they call you to testify? Have you been, did you expect to be called? Are you expecting to be called by the Senate? I don't, you know, and again, I'd have to, there are lots of obligations I have as a journalist, including the IP is owned by the Hill. So if that event ever occurred, if I ever was sought to participate, I'd have to go through a process that all journalists have to go through. But there is a lot of supposition that in all of these accusations and all this smear campaign against me, nobody wants to look at the

facts. It's all designed to distract from the facts that I actually have reported. The facts I have reported are incontrovertible. They actually happened. Joe Biden did force the firing. He did use LAID. He knew the guy that he was firing, was investigating his son. He says he had one intention. The prosecutor suspects yet another. He said, she said, but those facts are not in dispute. And all of this effort by Adam Schiff, the Democrats and his allies in the media, are designed to distract from the fact that the factual trail in my stories is true and unassailable. So they engage in character assassination, and assassination by affiliation or by assassination by phone records. With no context, I guarantee you, if you ran Rudy Giuliani's phone records, you'd find lots of

the reporters in them. Not the only one. Why did they single me out? Because my reporting has been inconvenient to the Democrats and the Washington Post and the New York Times for three years. So I helped unravel the Russia collusion, bogus narrative. And now I put another narrative out there that's important, factual, worth debate that they don't like either. All right. I'm going to take a one minute break and then I come back because I want to talk to you about that factual information and why the Republicans don't seem to be using the actual documents and the recordings and the taped testimonies. Why are they not using any of that? What is the game plan that maybe you could see?

We're talking to John Solomon. He is the guy who has really busted this story wide open, done all the research, and he is being smeared by the press. He is being smeared by Congress. Just one quick cleanup question, do you have any inkling or any feeling that you will go after the media or shift with some sort of a lawsuit on what's happened? Listen, my lawyers and I are taking a look at some of the more outrageously false claims that are in some of these news articles, and we'll make a decision soon on whether to take some action. If I do so, it's not to make money.

It will be to correct the factual record so that the American public can make a better judgment about what's going on. But, you know, it's sad. It's sad to watch a profession, ignore the facts, and engage in ad hominem attacks when they have so many of the facts wrong. I mean, I can go through any story and disassemble half the facts, and they're just simply wrong. And I have great moments. I've talked to – I had a Washington Post reporter call me one night, and they said, we're writing a story debunking your story. And I said, which one? Oh, I don't know.

The one they're talking about on the hill. well, have you read the story? And she said, no, I haven't. And I said, well, how can you debunk something you haven't read? So I don't have time to read it. And I said, well, there's a very important document story. Well, you'll have to send it to me because I don't have time to go get it. Unbelievable. That's how American journalism has been committed against me. And it's really scary. All right. So it's not just about you, but I want to talk about Lusanko. Now, I've talked to Rudy Giuliani, and he's even said, Lusanko is, you know, he says one thing, then he says

another. So you can't always take everything that he says at face value. you, you know, and they're all corrupt, as he said. Everybody, you just have to assume going in, don't trust anybody. However, with Lusanko, his name is in this report over 60 times. And every single time he's mentioned, they call him corrupt, but they never cite a charge. Why is he considered corrupt now when Biden labeled him as one of the good guys just, you know, the years prior? what did he do? Is there any charge? Is there anything? Because no, they all call him corrupt. But there is no evidence that we can find anywhere that he was charged or questioned about anything. column I wrote in Ukraine. I carefully noted to the reader that everything in Ukraine is a wild west. There's a lot of corruption, a lot of politics. Take everything with a grain of salt, but there's enough that here in the factual evidence that you should look at. And again, I don't know of any corruption charges that were lodged against Lusenko formerly. Certainly not in the time when I interviewed him. He was the sitting attorney general of the country, pretty senior official. But I didn't just take Lysenko's work for things. I went and got the state departments. side of the story. And here's the important part. There's very little difference between the

State Department and Lusenko. They want to argue over the word whether a list was given from the ambassador to him. Whether it was a list or a set of names, the State Department has testified under oath. Yes, we did pressure the Ukraine prosecutor's office on multiple cases, not to pursue certain people that we liked or that we considered anti-corruption activists. So the thing that Lusenko was highlighting, that there was this pressure that created resentment between the Ukrainians and the State Department remains true today. Whether there was a list or just some names discussed, the State Department was interfering in internal investigations of the Ukrainian government, and that made the prosecutors mad, and that's what created that

dysfunction I highlighted. And I think that's the part that the Democrats want to ignore, because it's true. Okay, so this is so easy to explain with Lusenko, but I know you saw the Kent testimony. When Kent was asked, did we? pressure, is there any pressure on the embassy, you know, from the embassy or from the State Department to not prosecute anybody? He said, absolutely not. I can't imagine we did this. I know you have it. We have it as well, a three-page letter written by Kent. It must. And he, in the deposition, right? So here's where, here's where the State Department officials get exposed for their diplo speak and their double speak.

They'll say it really wasn't pressure when we wrote a letter saying there's no evidence and you shouldn't be pursuing George Soros' group called Antak. It wasn't really pressure when we told them we don't think you should investigate the parliamentary member, Lashenko. It really wasn't pressure when we told them not to investigate the journalist named Shabonan. Well, guess what? The Ukrainians took that as pressure and why? Because they're relying on the U.S. Embassy and their aid to survive as a country. So they can play semantics with pressure. They can play semantics with lists.

But what they did was specifically instruct the Ukrainians on multiple occasions. We don't want you pursuing, harassing, investigating, prosecuting these people. And before I did my stories, I interviewed the State Department, and they said, yeah, we did that. Yep, that name we did. Yep, that name we did. And I put that in the story. I did a lot of reporting that didn't rely on either Yovanovitch or Lucent. goes account of the meeting, it relied on the bigger issue. Is there a dysfunction and pressure

going on between the embassy? And that remains true today. So, John, I mean, the volumes of information that you have, the documents that we have shared with you, you've given to us and we have found additional stuff, why, this case is so clear. Why are the Republicans, are the Republicans not sitting down when they're called a conspiracy theory, why are they not sitting in front of television saying, here's the document? Why is this not happening? You know, I don't know. I don't know the answer. In some cases they have. I mean, Devin Nunes has made some pretty strong statements during the hearings, and I think Lindsay Graham now is requesting some of these documents, right? There was a document request just last week. I think at the end of the day, you know, each side, each party is going to come to whatever they think their best strategy is, both for resolving impeachment and for 2020 politics and just for traditional oversight. But there is a body of evidence that you have, I have, Rudy Giuliani, have. has, ABC News has, New York Times has. Remember, before the New York Times, Washington Post, and all these others turned on me,

they confirmed my stories back in May and April. Then they abandoned them when the criticism of the Democrats began, which is a really odd dynamic in America. But there is a body of trail that those three issues we talked about are true, and they're important oversight issues, and somebody should step to the plate and look at them. That's why I wrote the columns, not to demean any ambassador or cause anything to call. to highlight public interest issues that probably needed oversight. And, you know, I think the country, many people in the country appreciate what I did.

Hopefully Congress will do its job and do the oversight and get to the bottom of these issues. I hope so too. I hope so too. John, thank you so much for your reporting. And I feel for you. I know what it's like to be. You've been there. Yeah.

And where do you go to get your reputation back? I want you to know we are grateful, and there are millions of Americans. that are grateful for what you've done. John Solomon. That means a lot. You bet. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. Like listening to this podcast?

If you're not a subscriber, become one now on iTunes. And while you're there, do us a favor and rate the show. Hey, tomorrow on blazedtv.com, you can get an interview. I did about an hour or so with Nikki Haley, commercial free. And it is on the impeachment. And on her time. and what she saw behind the scenes. And I want to play a couple of clips.

If you're a Blaze TV subscriber, you'll get this tomorrow. It'll be available online for the next couple of days. Saturday, it will go everywhere else on my podcast. But you'll get it early. And it is really worth watching. Here's Nikki Haley on the impeachment. I think the investigation actually should start here in the United States. I think we should look at what sort of conflict of interest Biden had.

What was said to the prosecutor, because we've got the videos of things. that he had said and things that he demanded. I think we need to look into that. But when you look at the facts, look at the phone calls that have all been provided, look at the facts. He was talking to the president of Ukraine about corruption. That president was elected to stop corruption. To stop corruption. So there was a, they were two presidents having a conversation, him bringing up the investigation. The investigation didn't happen. There's no sign of brow beating. There's no sign of threats and the money flowed. I don't know at what point that even qualifies for impeachment. And that's the thing is it's just so desperate. You know, it's been one investigation after

another investigation after another one. The people are getting tired. But more than that, the Democrats might slightly have an ounce of credibility had they not been trying to do this since the day he was elected. She goes into how the attacks on the president are so unconstitutional and within his own cabinet. Listen to her tell the story about Rex Tillerson trying to, quote, save the country. This was a real concern for me because I saw that he was slow walking things or I saw that they just weren't doing what the president was asking in the National Security Council meeting. but on this day we had had a meeting in the Oval Office, and it was about giving Palestinian aid,

and I wanted to pull the aid because they were anti-American. This agency wasn't willing to reform. It was a waste of taxpayer dollars. The president agreed with me. Kelly brought in Rex. Rex countered it. And so he said, y'all go out and figure this out. So me and Rex and Kelly were sitting there,

and we were talking for about an hour, and I basically was saying, This is what the president wants, and that's when they came in and they said, look, we're not undermining the president. We're trying to save the country. And if we don't do what we're doing by stalling or changing what he wants, people will die. Now, this would be different if they thought he was unfit. This would be different if they thought that he wasn't stable. That's not what their issues were.

This is the fact that they didn't agree with getting out of the Iran deal. They didn't agree of getting out of the Paris Climate Agreement. They didn't agree with moving the embassy from telling us to agree with. These were policy issues. So if you don't agree on policy, do what I did and go tell the president, but they had every opportunity in national security council meetings or quit. Right. And so that was the bottom line was they just thought they knew better than the president. And the reason this touched a nerve with me is, I remember.

for governor. I know how hard it is to get elected. I know when you make promises to the people that elected you, you want to carry it out. I was offended that they were looking in the mirror every day thinking that they could be president. It's quite remarkable. And this goes to what the impeachment, I believe, is really all about. The State Department, that's Rex Tillerson at that time, the State Department thinking they know best and they will do whatever they want to do. And they've institutionalized it. And we've shown you all of the documents that proved that. But it was in Trump's own house as well. And they are making him pay. And it's sending a message to any other president. We control the policy, not you. So Nikki Haley, as we're talking, you know, she didn't

start out as a fan of the president. Her mom was always a fan of Donald Trump. But she wasn't. So I asked to take me through the the the the the the the the the the the whoop here of how she went from not for Donald Trump to Donald Trump's really best selection and biggest defender you were not for Trump in the beginning in the beginning I was in you were Marco Rubio and then you went to Ted Cruz your mom was she was for she was for President Trump the whole time from the very first

day. And she's an immigrant. Oh, and she loved how straightforward he was. She loved the fact that he wasn't going to let the United States get taken for granted. But more than that, she loved what he was going to do on illegal immigration. Because my parents came to this

country because they wanted a better life for their kids. And they put in the time, put in the price, and came here legally. They are offended by those who come here illegally. So she very much wanted to do that. And it's funny because we had a lot of talent on that stage.

16 people. I was so giddy about that slate. And I put my backing on Marco Rubio and I remember the president tweeted Nikki Haley's an embarrassment to South Carolina in which I responded and tweeted, bless your heart.

Anybody who knows anything about the Carolinas, that's just a polite way to say F you. I love that. But you know, once he won the primary, I had supported him in the general, and we were friends before. We actually knew each other. He supported me when I ran for governor the first time. And I got this white envelope with this great gold trim, and there was a support check in it, and there was a note that said you're a winner. And we were in touch the entire time. But he would fax you. Stories about you. Oh, yes. He would. And say, keep up the great

work. So we were we were acquaintances but you know I mean all of us had to choose a horse in 16. It's a fascinating fascinating conversation with Nikki Haley. You can listen to the podcast free for everybody on Saturday. If you're a blaze subscriber, you can get that probably at midnight tonight but definitely by this time tomorrow it will be posted and there's a lot of stuff in there. And if you like Nikki Haley, you're going to come out liking her even more. Nikki Haley, 2024. It's a great interview.

Very, very, very astute. Very, very smart. The Blaze Radio Network. On Demand.