The Glenn Beck Program - 'Kowtowing To Insanity' - 6/5/18

Episode Date: June 5, 2018

Hour 1 Great news for women in Saudi Arabia?...a defeat for toxic masculinity?..10 women are first to be allowed to drive ...Why is Glenn in a 'great mood' today? ...the media vs. the Clintons ...Bill and Hillary's 'media pass' no longer works...fact-checking Bill Clinton's NBC meltdown?...excuses, excuses ...Stu 'wokes' Glenn?    Hour 2  Progressive Policies vs. Human Nature...gender illiterates run amuck? ... 'The Fisherman's Tomb: The True Story of The Vatican's Secret Search'...author John O'Neil joins the show to discuss his book about the 75-year search for St. Peter's tomb ...New AI computer launch?...hardware will make it easier for companies to develop robots that navigate the real world...the AI robot revolution has only just begun...who will hold the master key to AI?...Super Bowl Champs Dis-invited to White House?   Hour 3 Never invited?...Eagles-Trump tension on high?  ...Ford, GM, FDR and WWII? ...Remembering the time when Glenn freaked out President Bush? ...Was yesterday's Supreme Court decision a win for conservatives?...not really?...Why won't they rule on religious freedom?...Can President Trump really pardon himself?...Yes, No or No Answer?... 'He could, but it would be suicidal' ...Why is Clarence Thomas the most important person in America? ...No Shoes, No Shirt, No Black People? No Service ...a 2020 theory about why Starbucks CEO is stepping down? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Blaze Radio Network On Demand. Glenn back. Feminists gather round. I've got great news for you. You're not going to believe this. But while you have been fighting the patriarchy here in the oppressive, toxic, masculinity-driven state of the Western world, women in Saudi Arabia themselves have been fighting their own battle.

I mean, it's not as important as yours in this. oppressive regime and hierarchy. I don't know how you do it every day. Anyway, you know, how you've been fighting for the rights of transgender and non-binary people to, you know, be able to mark X on their birth certificate, you know, or use the restroom of their choice. Well, women in Saudi Arabia have just earned the right to drive. Well, not all of them. That would be crazy. of them 10 of them did 10 women in Saudi Arabia can now drive you know I'll guess there are 15

women 15 million women in the country but 10 not million just 10 can now drive the women the women were only allowed to drive and have a license because they previously had a driver's license in other countries you know the evil Western patriarchal societies who gender norms are oppressive. Yeah, those countries that issued women the driver's license so they could go back to Saudi Arabia and not drive. Now, these 10 women, let's not be crazy. They still have to wear full body hijabs, you know, and four of the Saudi women rights activists are in jail for campaigning for women's rights to drive. But, hey, have you heard, have you heard the latest latest outrage on Twitter?

Oh my gosh. The oppressive regime just continues. Anyway, back to these women in their right to drive in Saudi Arabia. These 10 women do have the right to drive, but they also, I mean, there's got to be a guy in the car. You know what I mean? A, quote, male guardian has to be present, you know, as it is in the case for all travel in education and employment and opening a bank account and having surgery. You know, I mean, you could have a woman.

You'd let her have surgery, but you don't want her to make the decision herself. There's got to be a guy there, you know. And, you know, a woman has got to be able to show sign permission slips if she wants to travel. You know, permission from a man. That only makes sense. Can we please concentrate on the real oppression that is happening in the way? Man. By the way, in Saudi Arabia,

women also need the permission oftentimes for a man or from a man to answer the phone. I mean, you can, you just don't answer the phone on your own. You know? They also have far fewer economic rights.

They have no legal status. They lack education. They aren't allowed in sports. There's no legal minimum age for marriage. So yeah, you can marry one of them at seven. Domestic violence isn't even a thing. Needless to say, feminists in Saudi Arabia are too worried about their lives to care about, you know, maybe I'm another gender that doesn't exist in science. You know, they don't, they don't worry about that because, well, there's not a man there that will agree with him.

Can you imagine Can you imagine how the campus feminists would react if they face this kind of terror? Nah, let me reverse that. Who cares? Who cares? They're such frauds. You know, every person in America,

both left and right, need to hear this one message. Grow up. Grow up. Are you kidding me? Oh, I'm so. outraged by shut up. In New York,

they just allowed people now to put an X. Instead of male or female under gender, you can just put an X because you're not going to oppress your child. And the mayor said, well, that's going to make us more equal. No, that's going to make us more stupid.

And more crying. Oh, my parents. impress me. Shut up. You want to know what oppression is? Saudi Arabia. Don't think about, oh, what would the people in the campus do if they had to live just a little bit of the life of Saudi Arabia?

Forget about that. Do you know feminists, how ridiculous you look? What an insult you are as you stand up for the rights of women against this oppressive regime here in the West while you're standing with people who are who are with Lewis Farrakhan the nation of Islam the Muslim Brotherhood the free Palestine people you've got to be kidding me right do you know what a joke what a terror you are to the actual feminist who are actually fighting for real freedom in most of the world. Did I say, by the way, all those people should shut up, grow a spine, grow up.

It's Tuesday, June 5th. This is the Glenn Beck program. Hello, Stu. How are you? Better than you, apparently. No, I'm in a good mood. You're a little fired up today. No, I'm in a good mood. I just, you know, when I see these 15,

million women in Saudi Arabia and God only knows how many homosexuals in the Middle East that are, you know, terrified, crucified, beaten to death, thrown off of buildings. I think of the civil rights leaders here in America. And I think they are fine, fine people who really have perspective. Oh, really? Yeah, you are? That's what I'm thinking. That's interesting.

That's what I'm thinking. Well, I'm glad you've hit on the minor details of the Me Too movement. the minor details because these aren't the important issues. The important issues are happening here in America. Right. Where women are really targeted. Yeah, I know. I know.

We're talking about all sorts of vicious treatment. Horrible. Horrible. And, you know, like, I, it's funny you bring that because it's good perspective as we go into this conversation about Bill Clinton. Now, Clinton, I want to get to this in a second, this whole situation with his interviews, which are really going off the, off the rails. You know why? He's no law. Listen.

Oh my gosh. I watched, can I sidebar your honor for just a second? I watched the Soviet story last night. Oh, great. Which is debuting on the blaze when. Coming up in the blaze in a couple of weeks. Okay, a couple of weeks.

It's unbelievable. It is just unbelievable. So I'm watching that last night. And now I can't remember why I told you that. What were we talking about? About the Me Too movement and... crap, I had a really good point. He's no longer useful.

Oh, yeah, he's no longer useful. Okay, so here's the thing. How do these, quote, revolutionaries, these Marxists not know enough about their own history every single time that it gets to a point to where you've outlived your usefulness and they kill you. Now, here in America, they're not. killing anyone yet but they are destroying the Clintons why because they don't have any power they didn't like them any anyway by the end by the by the by 2005 they had

had enough but they just put up with her because she could maybe get into power they look to the other way the whole time now she lost against Donald Trump they have no power, they're pissed, and they are going to destroy. Destroy them now. Yeah. And I put the date a little bit later, probably when she leaves the Obama administration. Right. Like, she's Secretary of State. She's still very popular. They know that she's potentially the heir apparent. They start to lose favor with her after that when all the scandal starts happening. And then as she goes into the presidency, they stick by her because they want her to assume the presidency rather than just run for it. But now they're done with the family.

They are done with them. I mean, and this gets, let me give you example of it. Bill Clinton is currently being hammered in a me-to fashion over the Monica Lewinsky thing. Okay. And there is a lot to go through on this. And the fact check of his interview about it is absolutely amazing for the Washington Post. Now, wait, hold it just a second. Wait, a fact check?

Yes. On Bill Clinton about the Lewinsky scandal? Yeah, and more than that. They just absolutely obliterate him. They categorize it as fact-checking Bill Clinton's meltdown on NBC's Today Show. Meltdown? Like, I mean, like, I'm fine with that categorization, but the Washington Post is too. We're on the same page.

So wait until you see how many Pinocchio's The Washington Post and what they're saying, they are suddenly conservatives. It's amazing. All the points you heard in the 90s on like Rush Limbaugh show have been now parroted by the Washington Post in a fact check. As fact. As fact. And the reason why you shouldn't believe him on anything. It's incredible.

We'll get to it here in just a second. First, let me tell you about our sponsor this half hour. We so want to thank LifeLock for their sponsorship and bringing this program to you and making it possible. The FBI released a report citing internet crime. with losses over $1.4 billion, 300,000 complaints received by the Internet Crime Compliance Center in 2017. Two top crimes that were reported, non-payment, non-delivery, and personal data breaches. Now, non-payment, non-delivery, I am a, I am a, I'm Anastasia.

And if I could just get back into my country of Russia, I'll send you a whole bunch of money for a hamburger today. The other one, 2000 complaints were identified as ransomware. That one's really bad. That one is, uh, by the way, uh, I've got what was on your computer. Either people don't want to see what I've seen or. Yeah, I know. It's really important, but, uh, you're going to have to pay me to get it back. There were so many threats in today's digital world that life lock identity theft protection now includes the power of Norton security for added protection.

LifeLock uses proprietary technology to help protect you against identity theft, like your information being sold on the dark web, and Norton protects against online threats like ransomware. So if you don't have time to be your own policeman, which none of us do, they are the policemen. And if you have a problem, they have the agents that work to fix it. That's the real problem. Nobody can stop all cyber threats, prevent all identity theft,

monitor all transactions at all businesses. But now LifeLock with Norton Security, they are able to uncover the threats that you might otherwise miss. So go to LifeLock.com. Use the promo code back. 1-800 LifeLock, 1-800 LifeLock or LifeLock.com. If you use the promo code back, you'll get an additional 10% off your first year.

promo code back for that additional 10% off at 1-800 LifeLock or LifeLock.com. Welcome to the program. Glad you're here. Saw a drift last night. We'll talk about that coming up in a little while. But we're just talking about the press and how they've now turned on Bill and Hillary Clinton. And it was an ugly weekend for Bill Clinton. Poor James Patterson.

He's doing an interview on NBC with Bill Clinton. And they're like, yeah, yeah, we're talking about the book. So Bill, you're a rapist. and just go after him. And now here's what's remarkable. It was NBC that went after him. And the Washington Post has now done a fact check on Bill Clinton's claims about, well, look, no, this is not the story. And they are ripping him apart.

Right. Fact checking Bill Clinton's meltdown on NBC's Today Show. Now, this is not the fact check. This is just the preamble to the fact check. The former president responded with a defense that stressed how much he had done for women as a politician. To a considerable extent, that is besides the point in today's context, as we've seen with Eric Schneiderman, etc. We are not going to fact check the entire statement. Again, like, this is still a preamble.

They're telling you what they're not doing. They're not going to fact check claims like, you know, this one. Clinton later in the interview admitted that he had not personally apologized to Lewinsky, the intern who he had to fare with. He had simply apologized in general, which is not what the interviewer and originally asked. Okay. Never do they get that specific? Never.

Never. This is how they treat. This is how they treat people like Rick Santorum when they say something on there. People they absolutely hate. Yes. We were amused that Clinton slipped the phrase for the percentage in the bar when he bragged about women were overrepresented in his office when he was AG from 1977 to 1979. It's actually a low bar between 1918 and 1980. 1918 and

1970, only 164 women gained access to Arkansas law licenses. Only 22% of law licenses were held by women in 1998, two decades after Clinton was AG. That's not them fact-checking. As they say, two of his

statements stand out as worthy of deeper fact-checking. So that's not what they're, that's just like, hey, we're not going to deal with that now. Here's all of his lies, but let's get to a couple of other ones. I left the White House $16 million in debt. This is a curious claim.

This one drives me nuts. And everyone knows this is a lie. In 2014, after Clinton was criticized Hillary for saying the couple was dead broke when they left the White House, former president had a much lower number. It's factually true that we were several million dollars in debt. Senate financial disclosures show broad ranges from, like, for example, one million to five million. But the highest possible assets added up to $1.8 million, while the lowest possible debts were 2.3 million.

That works out to $500,000 in negative net worth. The form shows that the Clintons owed $1 to $5 million to two law firms. So legal debts to the two firms could have been as low as 2 million or as high as 10 million. On the high end, the couple's

net worth would have been a negative 9.8 million at the time, but it appears unlikely. Look at this. The dictionary definition of several is, quote, more than two, but not many. You know, here is what

Bill Clinton should hear and Hillary Clinton should hear now every time the media approaches. Bam, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, run. I mean, they are just, you are

going to be taken. Because they can't stand Donald Trump, but they blame her and him for Donald Trump. So like, it's like the cause of their agitation is this couple. You know, Let me just say, it is wrong for me to feel such glee, but that's okay.

I'm okay with that. The definition of several is more, remember, this is in a media, as Jen is speaking as a whole. The media defended him on things like the definition of the word is. Now they're hitting him with the definition of the word several. Right. What is it? The midpoint of these two options is four or five million. The disclosure forms do not require the listing of homes used for,

listen to the depth they're going to to get to this number. The homes used for personal use and the Clintons had two, well, $1.7 million five bedroom home in Chappaqua and a 2.85 million five bedroom room in the district. The first one was bought in 1999 with a big loan by their pal and later Virginia governor, Terry McColliffe. That's the way they're talking about this is bizarre. And by the way, their pal, Terry McCullough,

is turning on them now too. Clintons put $855,000 of equity in the second one. If Clinton was adding all of his mortgages to his overall debt, it still would not add up to $16 million, and it hardly seems kosher to count such fancy lodgings. Oh my gosh. Hillary Clinton, in any case,

Hillary Clinton had already signed an $8 million book deal by the time the couple left the White House, which is true. Bill Clinton was set to hit the lecture circuit, earning more than $125,000 per speech. Clinton's 2001 tax return showed that they earned $16 million in income that year. Oh my gosh.

Maybe that's the 16 million Clinton had in mind. That's how they... That is... This is not the Washington Post. That's amazing. This is Fox News. That is what Fox News said in 2000. That's what all of us said in 2000.

We were all like, guys, that's not possible. He's not in debt. They have a great job. It's the same argument the government gives us. You know, debt's not a bad thing. thing if you got enough money to pay for it. So please give it a rest. No, they've never accept that.

Now, 18 years later, because they're done with them, they're making the same argument. And then they go into the Paula Jones case. Listen to this. This will drive you out of your mind. Clinton claims I had a sexual harassment policy when I was governor in the 80s. The document actually came up in the Paula Jones lawsuit against Clinton for yes, sexual harassment.

Again, it's just total disrespect to these people and he deserves total disrespect. There's no doubt about it, but where's this been? Right, and it doesn't feel good. It doesn't feel good to me that somebody's destroyed. It feels good to me that finally the press is holding these people who have gotten away

with rape, with rape and theft for so long. It feels good that the day of justice is finally coming. And man, wait until you hear the rest. It's coming for the Clintons. There is occasion where you enter into the restaurant and we dim the lights just a little bit.

Then we say, well, tonight you are going to have a five-star meal. We have got a chef that is prepared something just unbelievable. for your consumption and enjoyment. Today is one of those days. Welcome to the cafe. Good eating today on the menu. We are eating the career of Donald, I'm sorry, of Bill Clinton.

And Bill Clinton's career is being served up by the Washington Post and the media. Fact-checking Bill Clinton's meltdown on NBC's Today Show. So we went through the, overall debt situation, which they, with a CPA, acuity, they go through. No, no, no.

And a dictionary. And a dictionary. They defined the word several in there to make sure you understand that he was lying about saying $16 million in debt. But then they go on to, I had a sexual harassment policy when I was governor in the 80s. The document actually came up in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Now, again, for a Clinton in the past, why would they bring that up when the document came up?

They would just, if they wanted to fact-check this, they could just go look at the document or they could learn what they know about the document. Instead, they bring up the Paula Jones lawsuit, which is not necessary here, though they do refer to it a little bit. The document actually came up in the Paula Jones lawsuit against Clinton for, yes, sexual harassment. The document is listed as deposition exhibit number five in exchange for Clinton's, in this exchange from Clinton's deposition, this is January 17th, 1998.

The question, is this copy of the sexual harassment policy that you signed when you were governor of the state of Arkansas? Clinton answers, yes, I signed it in 1987. I'm fairly sure that I was. We were the first or one of the very first states to actually have a clearly defined sexual harassment policy.

Now, Clinton's been using this excuse since 1998. Okay. The lawyer asks, Mr. President, the criteria here under Roman numeral three were actually federal guidelines that you were adopting as the policy in the state, correct? Clinton answers, yes. Okay, so basically, it's already a law. He's just taking the law that already exists federally and making it his policy.

Because he has to. Yeah, he has to. It's a federal mandate. Right. The Washington Post says, yikes, quite a burn by the lawyer. Now, this burn, so you know, this burn was 20 years ago. 20 years ago. In other words,

Clinton is bragging today about a state policy that merely implemented new federal guidelines. Now, why could he get away for saying the same thing that he said 20 years ago? How could he use

that same worthless claim on NBC today? Because no one has ever said in the mainstream media, you know, that's a lie. That's just, it's a lie. They go on to say that it was actually one of the bottom 12

by women's rights organizations and as far as worst places to live for any woman concerned with equal rights under the law. And also, and then again, they could have ended it there, right? It's also worth recalling

the allegations made by Jones that led to her sexual harassment lawsuit in federal court. 1991. Well, Jones would, think of this, if this is how you've heard this story. Because all I've heard is she's nuts

and just wanted money, right? That was the narrative for two decades. Paula Jones had nothing to it. Here's the narrative now that they're no longer useful. In 1991, while Jones was working at a state-sponsored conference, a state trooper asked her to meet with Clinton in his hotel room. When she arrived, she says, Clinton tried to kiss her and then dropped his pants and underwear

and asked her to kiss it. She refused and quickly left the hotel room. Her account was backed up by people who said she told them at the time about the alleged accounter. Pamela Blackard, a state employee sitting at the registration desk with Jones said she noticed, she noticed Clinton staring intently at Jones and witnessed a state trooper asking Jones to go to Clinton's hotel room. She recalled that 10 minutes later, Jones returned shaking

and she told Blackhart in detail about Clinton's actions. Blackard told her to tell no one as she was afraid they would lose their jobs. Ultimately, the Jones case, listen to the reasoning here. Listen to the reasoning. after everything we've gone through the past six months, here. Listen to the reasoning. Ultimately, the Jones case was dismissed by a federal judge, who ruled not that Jones was lying,

not that Clinton was telling the truth, who ruled that even if her allegations were true, such boorish and offensive behavior would not be severe enough to constitute sexual harassment under the law. That ruling was under appeal when Clinton in 1998 settled for $850,000 with no apology. or admission of guilt. In both cases, Clinton skirts close to four Pinocchio, says the Washington Post.

He did have large legal debts, but 16 million is clearly wrong. In any case, he and his wife were able to quickly dig themselves out of that hole. As for the sexual harassment policy, he was simply implementing federal guidelines, an odd thing to brag about given the circumstances. Okay, so the circumstance was, let's just use Paula Jones here. I was curious when I read this. You know, that's interesting coming from the Washington Post. You know, when did they change their view?

And then I remembered, wait a minute, in 2016, Donald Trump brought Kathleen Willie, who was absolutely raped by Bill Clinton, in my opinion, looking at what, Kathleen, you remember her? Yeah, she's the one who's just, I'm having a rock, solid, credible woman who said, he came into her hotel room. she was asking for help. He threw her down on the bed, bitter lip, raped her, and then said, hey, you were great.

I'm having a difficult time sorting through the rape victims of this particular person. But yes, I think I do remember. So remember, they were brought in during the debate to unsettle Hillary Clinton. What did the press do? Nothing. They didn't talk about those guys. They never talked about those guys. I was just a stunt.

In fact, what did the Washington? Post say in 2016. When Clinton was confronting serious accusations of abuse, the country had a different attitude towards women. They came forward with unverified and often unverifiable accounts of sexual abuse. They were dismissed, blah, blah, blah. They lacked witnesses, evidence, and immediate reporting to the authorities. They talk about the witness.

What, no. Specifically about the witness. lacked witnesses, evidence, and immediate reporting to authorities. And immediate reporting, not to authorities, but to this person. I mean, they have the witness and there was immediate reporting right after. No, no, no. No, in 2016, the Washington Post. I don't know what your source is, but the Washington Post said...

2018 Washington Post? No, but this came first. Always what comes first is always better. That's a knockoff. This is watch. This is like the sequel. Watching in Post. Classic.

Okay. So Paula Jones says that while working, as a $6.35 an hour Arkansas State employee, she would summon to the hotel room of Clinton and the governor. Look, look, why would you point out how much money she makes per hour?

That it's no way a $6 an hour employee is going to be called up by the governor. She's a stupid, stupid, ignorant trailer track. And if she is, she's got to know what's going to happen, right? She's going up for money. Yeah, $6.35 an hour

I mean, she knows what she's going up there for, and all of a sudden now she has a problem with it. I mean, that is a, there's no reason to include that detail there. No, but they did. The Washington Post did in 2016. She had hoped that she could discuss a promotion, but instead she said he grabbed her. The Clinton defense strategy centered on

blatantly misogynistic practices. That, give them quotas for that. The progressive feminist, Traditionally liberal late-night comics did their part to discredit and ridicule the women. But in an act of proto-revenge, an ex-boyfriend of Jones sold private sexual photographs of her to penthouse a few months after her claim became public. She immediately was a fodder for harsh jokes, many focusing on her appearance. Several years later, she capitalized on her notoriety by posing nude for the magazine further marginalizing herself. Well, wait a minute.

You're now marginalized when you take a brave step? I mean, how many times have we heard that sex work shouldn't be demeaned, right? The fact that she, again, what was the first circumstance of those pictures? Private photos? Yes. Private photos of the boyfriend. So revenge porn. Yes.

Yes. But that's now okay, too. It's another justification to say that she's not, her claims aren't credible. She was just going after money. And then it was revenge porn. and then she had discredited herself and so she had to make that money so she went and did Penhouse

which only made things worse. This is, look, I'm glad the Washington Post is telling the truth about this. Woke. I'm glad they have now woken up. And I'm glad. I think the kids nowadays just say woke. I'm glad they're woke.

I'm glad they woke. My issue here is this is a, a lot of times, and I feel like I defend the media sometimes. I think the idea that everything that's printed in the Washington Post of the New York Times is fake news is nonsense. It's not. They do a lot of really good reporting.

Right. And sometimes they do both on the same story. Yeah. But the issue is they get so frustrated and they're so apoplectic about conservatives pointing out how frustrating their coverage is.

They get so upset about it. And it's like, how can you look at stuff like this and not see that there is a double standard? There does seem to be a massive agenda. No. No, Stu. I don't know.

No. I don't know, Glenn. No. No. If I may, loosely quote the Washington Post in their defense. It was a different time. There was a different time? 2016 was a different time.

It was a different time. No, in 2016, they were saying that it was a different time. Yes, we didn't pay attention to those things. and who knows about the past, but now it's different. Now it's different. Now we are, now we know back then women were seen as, you know, people that would just make up stories of sexual harassment for cash. And now they're known as something else.

Now they're not. Now we don't think that some of these stories are made up for cash. I mean, I mean, I mean, clearly they are. Because it still happens. Some are, some are not. Some are, some are not. Can I ask, you, you brought this up, how our standards change. And you brought up the term woke.

So let me, let me ask a question, because you're obviously an expert on being woke. Oh, I am Glenn Beck woke. What woke Glenn Beck? Yeah. Is it woke? Yeah. Is it woke to do what we're doing now, which is to claim that Monica Lewinsky was a victim. of something.

Now, I feel personally bad for Monica Lewinsky because of, after she made, I think, a big mistake, she really paid a high price for it, probably disproportional, right? Way higher than anyone should ever have to pay. So I'm with you on that. But this is a 23-year-old woman, not a 15-year-old woman, a 23-year-old woman. A 23-year-old woman. Our own Marissa, who is our producer here, is 23-year-old. and also married.

How many people are married? My mom gave birth to me married at 19. The idea that Monica Lewinsky doesn't have the agency to make her own choices about her own sex life is not a woke sentiment. No, Stu. No, no. Women are, you don't understand. Women are powerful, okay? Yes, I would agree with that.

But you don't know. understand. I don't. I agree with you. He was a powerful man praying on a young woman. And what was her choice there? Did she have a choice to say, yes, I would like to enter what was, by all accounts, a consensual

sexual affair? That was the argument by all of the feminists at the time. Yes. Now all of the feminists of this time have convinced Monica Lewinsky that she really didn't have a choice. And that's what she's saying now. She's saying, I was, you know, look, I didn't understand

the power structure was different. Look, yes, he's the most powerful man in the world, right? I mean, you know, yeah, he was very powerful. However, each individual has agency to make choices about consensual affairs. They don't have agency to make choices against Harvey Weinstein, who's forcing them to have sex with them and trapping them and raping them. They don't have choices there, but they do have choices to enter into a consensual affair with another consenting adult.

The argument that she was this little girl with no agent, We're arguments that conservatives made in the 90s to say Bill Clinton was a predator. However, we should all, and I said this at the time as well, when you're 23 years old, you have a choice to be able to enter into a consensual relationship with someone else if you wish. You are a consenting adult. Okay, Grandpa, thank you very much for that cute little opinion. Look, 16 years old, you should be able to vote. but at 23, if you get into a consensual relationship,

you have every right to claim to be a victim later in life. I mean, it only makes sense, too. It only makes sense. Why? All right. Don't ask anyone to explain it. Okay. You're obviously not woke enough to understand.

Okay. Plans of a summer getaway. They can quickly take a back seat if your car breaks down and you get hit with a huge auto repair bill. Have you ever, summer times? I remember I was dumb enough to buy a, I mean, I just bought lemon after lemon after lemon when I was a kid. Wow, kid, 23 years old.

But look at the decisions you're making at 20. I know, I bought a DeLorean. Yeah. And I remember at this time of the year, that thing would literally drive about four blocks and overheat. It was awful, awful. who's always on the side of the road. And every time, I know what it feels like with that check engine light goes on.

Or you see something, you're like, oh, crap. And you have no money. Car Shield makes the process of fixing your car for a covered repair super easy. I have Car Shield. You should have Car Shield. If your warranty is out, get Car Shield now. Call them right now. 1-800, Car-S-S-E-100 before it's too late.

Mention the promo code back. Visit CarShield.com. That's carshield.com. Promocode back. A deductible may apply. Carsield.com. Wow. So excited.

Coming up in just a second, we're going to tell you about the new psychopath AI that researches at MIT decided that, you know, I wonder if we could make a computer into a complete psychopath. They did it. Isn't that great? Details on that and so much more when we come back. Glenn.

Back. Mercury Glenn back Wow it is amazing to watch progressive politicians enact more and more progressive policies as if the policies were the default wishes of everybody that we're all sitting around going

man I just I just wish we could you know have some sort of a law in place where we only could use 50 gallons of water A former advisor to President Obama, Ben Rhodes, he wrote after Trump's election night victory, Obama asked his aides,

What if we were wrong? I mean, I wonder whether I was 10 or 20 years too early. I don't know. I could have put your administration off another 20 years and been happy. Maybe it's just me. But what Obama was talking about was his administration's progressivism was just too awesome for American. to handle. Now in this thinking, America couldn't yet appreciate what he was bringing to the table.

It was exactly the same thing that happened with Woodrow Wilson. What a surprise. Who thought, you know, my League of Nations, everybody is the right thing. Everybody's going to love it. We just have to repackage it and call it the United Nations. And he thinks he was so far ahead of his time that That is why people revelled and voted in Donald Trump. It's not because progressive policies go against human nature and more and more every day go against established science. No, no. It's because people are too conservative or too stupid, too dumb to know what's good for them.

Obama and his fellow progressives all across the land just don't get it. yet. Progressives continue to sprint towards the fringe of the left, thumbing their nose at Americans that don't agree with them. Common sense, science, rational thought. This week's example, New York City. The city council speaker, Corey Johnson, he's introducing a new proposal to allow adults to choose the new gender category of X on their birth certificate. Parents in New York City already have the option of declaring the sex of their baby to be, you know, male, female, or undetermined or unknown. I don't know, honey. Look at it.

What do you think it is? I don't know. What's that thing? I don't know. Mark it down, unknown or undetermined. It's really weird. We don't have this problem with our pets. Somehow or another, we're able to determine from birth whether Fido is male or female.

And with a name like Fido, I'm hoping it is a male. Otherwise, the oppression of that poor slave dog that you have. Yet city and state governments are now endorsing the lie that you can't trust whatever it is you have in your pants. You cannot trust the science of X and Y. You have to listen to your heart no matter what science says. Oh, my. Now, Council of Corey Johnson says, this is about making it easier for people to be who they truly are.

No, no, no, no. We can look at your DNA. We can look at the genetic code, and we can find out your male, you're female. We can find that out. It's an X or a Y. That's it. We do that with babies all the time. We can just check.

It's male or female. X or Y? We know. That's how it works. I'm not a scientist, but I am a doctor. He says it is important for people to be able to express who they really are and to let them know that New York City understands them and has their back. Really, I lived in New York City.

The only part of my back that New York City had was where I kept my wallet. Mayor de Blasio adds this policy, quote, will make our city fairer. No, it won't. it'll make it more insane. It must be nice when you're a progressive to say things like that and not have to back it up. Yes, by looking at our children in their crib and saying, I don't know, honey, could be a male, could be a female, could be a turnip. I'm not sure.

Somehow or another, that's going to make your city better. By the way, I think it is appropriate that when you mark your birth certificate, If you want to be unknown or, and I don't know what that is, you want that, all you have to do is market with an X. Why is that important? One of the most incredible and rare signatures that we have in our collection

in our Mercury Museum, it's the only one that we know of that's in existence is the autograph or signature of a, guy named Peter Salem. He is the hero of Bunker Hill. He's a black man. He was illiterate, couldn't read nor write. His autograph is an X. Back then, an X marking on a document used to be a sign of a literacy. It's funny. Because now in New York City, it still is. The sign of an X apparently represents those who are gender illiterate. It's Tuesday, June 5th.

This is the Glenn Beck program. So somebody came up to me the other day and they started telling me a story of how they found out if St. Peter was actually buried under the Vatican. And it has all the workings of a great story. It's the Pope, but it's the Nazi Pope. And it's happening during the Second World. World War, all intrigue. They don't want anybody to know that they're digging underneath the Vatican. The Vatican, it involves the archives and all kinds of great stuff. How do we know where

St. Peter is? Because at the time, people were starting to say, the St. Peter didn't even go to Rome. He didn't even go to Rome and he wasn't crucified upside down. None of that stuff. You can't trust any of that stuff. So the Pope starts to look for the fisherman's tomb. That is the name of the name of the book, True Story of the Vatican Secret Search. John O'Neill is the author, and he joins us now. Hi, John. How are you? Hi, Glenn. It's a great honor to be on your show. Thank you. So, John,

I'm fascinated by this story. In a nutshell, just tell the part of the story first about St. Peter and, you know, where he was supposedly buried and why they didn't know at the time where he was. Glenn, St. Peter was

executed by Nero. Around 65 AD, Nero, the Roman Emperor, notorious bad guy, had burned down the center of Rome to build a huge new palace for himself. And when people started to revolt, he blamed the fire on the Christians. By legend, St. Peter was captured by Dero and then crucified upside down, since he didn't want to be crucified in the same manner as Christ. His body was thrown on a nearby hill where there was a dump, and the name of that hill was Vatican Hill. Much later, Constantine showed up, legalized Christianity around 310 AD, and he built a great church, the first St. Peter's on that hill. He had to flatten a hill in order to do it, bearing everything underneath the new church. Legend said that he built it directly over the grave of Peter, but until these excavations,

nothing knew about it. In 39, 1939, they began to bury the old Pope under the Vatican, where strangely wanted to be buried. And the workman, who was digging, fell suddenly down into a room, about 30 feet into a room. It was a room of fabulous Roman murals and statuary that no one had any idea was under the Vatican. They looked a little further, found the tomb of a Christian woman from the early 2nd century. and that's when Pius decided to pursue the legend that St. Peter was buried under St. Peter's. That was 1940. Okay. So it was, it was legend, and it was also starting to be used against Christianity to discredit the Bible and everything else and say that, you know, St. Peter never even came here.

All of that stuff is nonsense. And quite honestly, some of the stuff that Constantine said was nonsense. sense, or at least, you know, just on the word of his mother. It wasn't scholarly at the time. So the Pope was motivated to find the truth, and why did he think that he would find it there? Or is that why he kept it secret, this hunt for St. Peter? Well, he kept in secret for a couple of reasons, I think. First, you know, Italy was ruled by the fascist and then by the Nazis.

had they actually discovered that this search was in progress, they probably would have seized control of it. Second, he didn't want any false rumors of either success or failure to come out. So he insisted that all the excavations be done by hand. So you can imagine trying to excavate over a million square feet of fill by hand under this huge structure overhead, immensely expensive. So they came here, amazingly, to Texas, secured financing from one of the wealthiest been in the world at the time, who provided it anonymously under express agreement that his name would never be known, a man named George Strait, who gave away a great fortune anonymously, as the book relates. I have to tell you, John, reading your book, I had no idea who this guy was, Strait.

I'd never heard of him. I never heard of his oil strike. What was the name of that? It was the Great Easton Roe Field. It was the third largest oil field ever discovered in the United States. He produced over 500 million barrels to his interest alone during World War II. He would be thrilled, Glenn. He gave away everything anonymously.

He would be thrilled to know that neither you nor anybody else had ever heard of him that there was no Wikipedia entry. He gave away many hundreds of millions of dollars, always under express condition that no one mentioned his name that no one know. He believed in the biblical passage that said you can either claim credit in this world or in the next world. After his death, things began to be named for him, like Strait High School and Strait Scout camps all over the country. But that was only after he died. He doesn't even have a Wikipedia entry.

He believed strongly that the oil field was given to him by God to use the proceeds during his life to give them all away. He said often the oil companies laughed at him. He couldn't get anyone to back him when he drilled this great well. And he said they didn't realize God was on his shoulder. He was a wild catter team of two, and he gave it all away, all the way during his life. Yeah, he drilled that first, that first hole with his. last dollar, and I love the promise that you write about that he says to his

wife, you know, can we do that? And she said, only if we hit it, you never ever question my shopping bills. And that's exactly right. George was sort of parsimanius, except incredibly generous in giving the money away. His wife, Susan, said,

look, George, you can drill as long as you promise she'll never question anything else I buy. She became one of the most famous shoppers in the world. I bet. and they of course became close friends with Frank Sinatra with many movie stars, all citizens doing as opposed to George. So, John, I'm going to take a break.

Can we come back? I want to take us now back to the Vatican and the part of the story where we have this woman who at the time, women are not going to be doing this kind of work, a very important woman that nobody's ever heard of. And the Pope reaches out into the Reichstag, to grab a priest from the Reichstag and how they found St. Peter's tomb and know that it is him. We'll go there in just a minute. Let me see if I can find this story here real quickly.

There is a really, really disturbing story. Here it is. Here it is. Central Banks observe sudden evaporation of dollar funding. Warns of global turmoil. Too hot? That's why they're evaporating? No, no, no. We're borrowing too much. The Fed is selling all of, you know, the stuff that the garbage that they bought up for, you know, quantitative easing, money printing.

So they're selling all of that stuff, trying to get all that money back. And at the same time, the United States is just borrowing. Nobody wants to loan it to us, wants to borrow. And so we're eating up all of the dollars and we are crashing the economy. in all of the emerging economies all around the world. So the good news is, remember that prediction, hey, one day the whole world is going to look for somebody to blame it on and they're going to point to us and our greedy habits. Yeah, that's this story.

Anyway, nothing to worry about. If you believe that the world is on a crash course and is headed towards some, you know, possible turmoil or even real turmoil, you might want to consider gold. The hedge for inflation, which is happening, I have another story I have to share with you today about trucking. It's unbelievable. With inflation on the rise, gold is that traditional hedge. I want you to call today, find out how easy it is to own gold or silver at 1-866 Goldline.

1-866 Goldline or Goldline.com. Make sure you do it now. Read their important risk information. Make sure that buying gold or silver is right for you. 1866 Goldline or Goldline.com. Looking for a great Father's Day present? Then bring the whole family to the Rights and Responsibilities Exhibition presented by the Mercury Museum.

Take a glimpse of what the world was like before men had rights and tyrants rule. Join us Father's Day weekend, June 15th through the 17th, here at Mercury Studios in Dallas. Get your tickets at Mercury1.org slash Museum 2018. Trust is a weird thing because I don't like trusting people. I don't think anybody does. I like to know that, you know, fundamentally what is true and what isn't true. I want to know fundamentally that something is going to happen because I've been able to confirm that. But when you're talking about a real estate agent, I mean, you meet someone in a restaurant or it's a friend of a friend of a friend.

You don't know at all. You have to trust. And that's why just a loose relationship in your life is not enough when it comes to finding the right real estate agent. You've got to find somebody who has gone through some sort of. process, a screening process, a rigorous one where they look at how they advertise and how their performance has been in the past. That's why real estate agentsitrust.com exists. It's going to do that process for you. Everybody that is on real estate agentsitrust.com has passed this rigorous testing and that's why it's the right place to go to find a real estate agent. Go to real estate

agentsetrust.com right now, real estate agentsitrust.com. So we're talking about the search for St. Peter underneath the Vatican, looking for his bones. During the Second World War, Pope Pius brings in a guy named Klaus. He's a priest. He was working in the Reichstag

and not popular with Hitler, believe it or not. It would be a kind of an unnerving place to be if you weren't popular with Hitler. He was called back to Rome to help, but also another woman. Her name is, is it Margarita Garucci? That's it, exactly.

Exactly, Glenn, she was like you. She was a person of great faith and great courage. She was a diamond bit for the truth. After everything had gone sort of, they had found the monument that supposedly marked Peter's grave, 60 feet below the Vatican, but not the actual relics of Peter. They brought her in. She was one of the greatest archaeological experts in the world. She was agnostic.

They asked her just to take a look at what they had done. She told them they had done a terrible job. hope solution was to fire everybody and put her in charge, which didn't go over very well with the Vatican bureaucracy. I bet. She became deeply a Christian as a result of what she saw. She found the earliest Christian inscriptions really in the world, done generally in code. Peter was a set of keys. Christ was a Cairo symbol. She found a wall within 16 inches of the plumb bob down from the top of the Vatican, and in that on the wall were 20 different prayers asking Peter to pray for various

things, and she found the words Peter is within, and Peter is near. She learned that there had been bones in the wall, and she got the bones, which had been placed in storage, turned them over to the best forensic anthropologists in the world. They were the bones of a 60-to-70-year-old man. He had been crucified upside down, his feet were cut off when they took him down from the cross, he had been about 5'8. The bones had been buried in the soil under the monument, the Christians had erected around 100 AD, but moved into the wall about 250,

probably to save them from Roman desecration. They'd been wrapped in a purple and gold clock. After the forensic anthropologist looked at it, they concluded it was Peter, and the Pope declared it was Peter. And there is a great deal of other evidence that it's Peter, in addition to that. but she was incredibly courageous.

She went to the Pope and said, hey, these guys have done a terrible job, and she had no political skill, but she was probably the greatest archaeological detective of the 20th century. They were looking for a room with a golden cross and a large bronze sarcophagus that apparently Constantine had buried, and they found this, and then there was nothing in it, right?

And it was part of what was called the Book of the Popes. Well, yeah, there were three different things telling us early things that told us Peter had been buried on Vatican Hill under St. Peter's. One of them was the Book of the Popes, which described a grand burial with gold crosses. It also said that Peter would be found directly under the center of the Vatican. It was right on the second thing and completely wrong on the first thing. There was no gold cross. There was no bronze sarcophagus.

It was simply the relics of Peter himself. And just the, and this, the simple engravings that only she really had to pick up on that said this is where he is. They were less than 400 yards from nearest palace. If any of the people carving that into that wall had been caught, they would have been crucified. or thrown to wild animals. Their families would have been enslaved, everything they own, and they would literally sit and engrave it on this wall. John, they had to include it in code.

Thank you so much. The name of the book is The Fisherman's Tomb. The Fisherman's Tomb by John O'Neill. It's available everywhere. Pick it up. This is the Glenn Beck program. He's spending a lot of time working on my new book, Addicted to Outrage,

which covers a little bit of, bit of everything and explains why we are addicted to outrage. How do you mean? How did that happen? And what does it mean if we can't get out of this cycle? And it includes all kinds of things. And one section is on tech and what is coming with tech. And have you read that chapter yet, too? Yes, I have. It's a little, it's a little terrifying. It's a little terrifying. And it's probably literally one-tenth of what I want to put in the book. But if I put the rest of it in the book, it becomes a tech book. I mean, it is.

Yeah, you would have been fine writing a tech book, probably. Yeah, yeah, yeah. This is a very high level, you know, 40 pages in the book of just, here's what's on the horizon. And none of this is, none of this is crazy talk. These aren't flying cars. This is on the horizon. And it's not just, there's not, it's not pointless.

like I want to talk about tech reasons. It's why. It's why all this other stuff matters. Yeah. It really is like it kind of boils down why, why this stuff needs to be talked about now and not later. Yeah. I had somebody last night read these three chapters that are just on,

okay, here's why we need to act right now. I talked to him this morning and he was like, okay, all right, I couldn't, okay, I have to look all of that stuff up because that's true. Yeah, that's happening. Yeah. Holy cow. It's happening and it's going to happen at record speed. Let me give you, let me give you something that just came out, I think yesterday or a couple of days ago. Navidia has just launched an AI computer that will give robots brains to be able to move, be able to do all kinds of 3D mapping, be able to have conversations.

with you, be able to recognize you, multiple faces, do multiple things, and be able to exist in a 3D world. Okay. Now, that's quite a computer. Let me tell you about the computer that they just released. It is the new Jetson-Exavier computer. It's an incredibly compact piece of hardware, and it has a number of processing components. A lot of this is not going to make sense, but just hear me out for a second.

the Volta tensor core GPU, an 8-core arm 64 CPU, two NVDLA deep learning accelerators, and processors for static images and video. In total, it contains more than 9 billion transistors, more than 9 billion transistors, and delivers over 30 tops, which is trillion operations per second. Okay.

One, sorry, 30 trillion, computations, operations, per second. That's significant. It consumes in power, it's, I mean, it's pretty power draining, 30 watts to run, which is half of what it takes to run

the average light bulb. Now, let me give you, let me give you a, let me let me give you some some perspective on 30 terraflops 30 trillion operations per second on 30 watts of power in a mobile brain let me give you this do you remember way back if we got into our delorean time machine and we went back to uh it was 19 years ago next month month or two months from now, August of 1999. Apple came out with something. And it was the Power Mac G4. Now, I remember because we bought one of these in about 2002, and I think it was about $10,000. And it was state of the art, fastest thing available. I couldn't believe we needed a $10,000, you know, CPU, but we had to have it because of all the mixing we were doing and all of the processing

and the crunching. This was the only thing. It was $10,000. It was actually at the time banned from export because it was classified as a supercomputer that could be used to harm national security. Okay. The Apple G4. It did 2,775 million operations per second. That means this new computer is 1.08 million percent faster than the G4 can do can it can have 1.08 million percent increase in processing power the G4 was $10,000. This is just over 1,000. That is stunning.

Now, what this does again is allows a computer to be able to go out and be nimble and live and start to work in the real world next to other living things. On a completely unrelated, on a completely unrelated note, researchers at MIT who are looking for algorithms and the search for AIAG, I-A-S-I got together and thought, I wonder, I wonder if we could make an algorithm that became psychopathic. Now, when I'm with my friends of researchers who are studying algorithms AI and A-G-I, I say, I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't find out. but they decided that they were going to try to make a psychopathic algorithm. And so what they did at MIT was they gave training of this AI.

They trained it all on data from the dark web. So it showed it horrible films, horrible images all the time. On earth are they doing? Right? Right? Showed people dying in the most gruesome circumstances and just fed it all of this to see what would happen to the algorithm. Well, what do you think happened to the algorithm?

Got a little dark? Got a little dark. Did a Rochak test, you know those tests where they show, you know, the ink blots? Hey, what's this? Every time somebody being slaughtered in a bathtub. What's this one? Somebody be set on fire. What's this one?

all the time. It cannot think any other pattern other than psychopathic. Now, I'm just saying that maybe we should look at that one and go, good, okay, we know it can be done. Let's erase all of that and never do it again. Right now, one of the problems with where we're going with AI and researchers from all over the world, we are being left in the dust. We have to to decide whether or not we're serious or not, whether we believe that the West is the one that should have the key to AI and AGI and possibly ASI, superintelligence. Because once we have general intelligence or super intelligence, whoever cracks this code, as Putin says, rules the world.

China is moving at light speed on it. Russia is doing the same. We're really kind of not. I mean, some of our organizations, Google, we are, but we're not really working together. And perhaps there needs to be some sort of a Manhattan project, but I do not want to give this technology to the government. So I don't know exactly what to do because I don't trust anybody who is working on this anywhere. Because remember, fear of the goals, fear what it is being taught. Example, MIT.

Fear what it's being taught because it will have total control. Now, the scientists have come around from all over the world, and they have signed a treaty and said that none of us scientists should work on this, but they are. None of us should work on this. And governments should not be allowed to weaponize AI. and the governments are getting around this and people are, you know, closing that loop in their head by saying, oh, yeah, but you know what? Yes.

Yes. I'm making an automated drone that does carry weapons and can seek people out by their faces and can kill them. But still requires the human to push the button to say, yes, I accept. That's the target. If we are training AI to search and kill humans, and that is their goal and their job, remember, they don't have general intelligence. Their intelligence is just to search and kill enemies. Whoever is told that's an enemy.

That's their job. Just like the psychopathic algorithm at MIT, it's only been. fed information, people need to be killed. If it goes into AGI and has any kind of goal that says kill all of the enemies, if it decides to change the parameters of enemies, or it just shuts off our override switch and decides, you know what, they're too stupid, they don't even understand. We cannot treat we cannot teach these things to kill us.

Russia is doing it. China's doing it. India is doing it. Everyone is doing it. Should we not? While we are sitting here and we are talking about nonsense, as we are sitting here talking about the things that, oh, did you see what he tweeted today?

Did you see what happened with? Philadelphia and the Eagles. We should be talking about ideas and thoughts and how to draw parameters around the things that will actually impact all of us every single day. Because whether you know it or not, we look at our computers as, oh, yeah, okay, they've gotten faster. Look at our phones. Oh, it's just a phone.

No. Look at what has happened in, in, in. In the last 19 years, look at the speed of the computer, the size of the computer, the size of the energy consumption. And what was a threat to national security? Now something that is a million times more powerful. Yeah, it's just going to be used on the floors of lows with their new little help bots. It's not a problem. Let me just design that for the computer here.

At Lowe's Hardware. Let us not be the show that tries to minimize the impact of the Philadelphia Eagles. However, I just... We do have to talk about that. We do have to talk about that. Unfortunately, I saw that last night. I'm like, oh, she's going to focus two of us. All right.

Let me tell you about blinds.com. Blinds.com can transform the look and feel of your home. You know, sometimes it's weird. You know, you've put so much into your home and then you're like, wow, 20 years sure makes a difference, doesn't it? It's really pretty outdated right now, isn't it? Blinds.com can update the look of your home so fast. You can have blinds, shade, shutters, drapes, stew put shutters in his house. And I love the story of blinds.com coming over to his house because it's true.

This is the way they are. They came over, and I think it was your wife that picked out these shutters, right? stunningly she selected the most expensive ones available. And what they say? They said, well, I mean, those are great. But you know what? We actually have this one that is just as good and actually costs a lot less. So, I mean, we'd recommend these.

And that's what we went with. And they're awesome. Still to this day, they changed the entire, it feels like they changed the entire house. But that room is a completely different vibe. It is incredible how much they can change things and how Blinds.com is like, they're working for you. It's like, wait, you're telling me to buy the cheaper one? That's the way it is at blinds.com. And right now, you can, of course, you know, get the sample sent to you in advance.

They'll recut them if you mismeasure. You pick the wrong color, whatever. But now through June 5th, buy one and get one 50% off sitewide when you use blinds.com slash back. What date is it today? Now through June 5th, buy one and get the second one off. Or, no, buy one and get the second one off 50% sitewide. blinds.com slash back. That's blinds.com slash back rules and restrictions do apply.

All right. I've got to hear about the... Got to hear about the Philadelphia. The score was 41 to 33 as the Philadelphia Eagles triumphed over the New England Patriots. I have to hear the Eagle propaganda now from... I mean, I just, I, you know, I will never enjoy the insertion of politics into this particular realm. I run from it as fast as possible. I mean, look, the Eagles are...

you know, didn't kneel last year. There was one player in the preseason who kneeled and never made the team. And then did they go into the locker room? No, they did not go into the locker room. They did not. Malcolm Jenkins was one of their star players, is one of the most outspoken people on this issue. However,

he put his fist in the air for a few games this year. But I mean, they, they weren't, you know, they didn't have Colin Kaepernick on their team. I don't know why they, you know, why that's part of the narrative. You know, look, a lot of them weren't coming. You know, if you have a giant party and you invite 15, 53 people and only four are coming. I don't know that you canceled on them.

But that's kind of the way that it's just a matter of making this into yet another cultural issue. And I just wish, you know. It's not. They didn't come. And I think that personally, I understand. Everybody has a freedom of choice. But would you have gone if Barack Obama would have invited us to the White House? Would you have gone?

I mean, if you forced me to go, I would have probably gone just as a work requirement. However, I would not be interested in going. I didn't say I would be... Well, no, I would be interested because why are you inviting us, right? Yeah. But if there was some sort of thing that we had done and he was like, okay, we're going to honor. You wouldn't have gone. No, I don't know.

Can I tell you a story in history when we come back? Yeah, definitely. That should make the New, the, uh, the, the Eagles question what they've just done? Glenn, back. Mercury. It's Tuesday, June 5th. This is the Glenn. back program. So the Philadelphia Eagles and Donald Trump are in a spat. And they're in a spat because

a bunch of them didn't want to go to the White House. And I was thinking about this. And I thought about this since Bill Clinton was in office. When Bill Clinton was in office and he was doing despicable things, there were people that said, I won't shake his hand. And I always said at the time, he's the president of the United States. Out of respect, you shake the man's hand. Out of respect, you shake the man's hand out of respect for the office. Can we not be civil to one another? So Barack Obama never invited me or anybody else that I know to the Oval Office or to the White House just to meet.

And I said to Stu, if the president would have asked you to come and speak, Barack Obama, would you have gone? And you said, I would politely decline. line. Really? Yes. Why? I'm not interested. I don't hold the president of the United States up on some pedestal of subservience or anything else. I think there's an idea that, you know, this is such an amazing power seat that you're supposed to bow down to it. And I don't care. I just go out of courtesy somebody. The president. I would offer him. Look, if Bob, who is, is a plumber in Montana,

asked me to come visit. If I was really interested, I would go visit. And if not, I would politely decline. That's the same treatment the president of the United States should get. So this is for any president. I mean, like, you know, if a president who I absolutely adored wanted me to go there, then I probably would be interested enough to go. Sure.

I mean, we've visited former presidents before for interviews and stuff. And obviously there's work requirements and things like that. But I think generally speaking, if I'm just asked to go, I'm not won over by the competition. It's a tradition that if you're the winning team, you go to the White House. It is. You know, when we were, when Obama was in office, there was a guy who was a fan of yours, who was the goaltender for the Boston Bruins.

And he said no. He said no. He didn't want to go. What was our stance on that at the time? I mean, if you don't want to go, you don't want to go. at that time, of course, the media was all over him. It was a terrible thing.

It was an insult to the United States. To that office. So the office, how would you never go to? I mean, and now, you know, I mean, look, there's reports that between four and 10 Eagles players were going to go to meet with Trump today. Now, if you cancel that, the only people you punish are the people who actually wanted to go see you.

Right. If I were the president, if I were Trump, what I would have done is I would have said, oh there's only four good because we're going to area 51 you know what I mean you guys are going to be able to launch weapons you know I would show you good I'm glad there's only four because we're going to do stuff that nobody's ever able to do

that way they all go home and go we saw the aliens dude you should have come that's what I would have done I show them something really cool But yeah, I mean, the players that were going are the people who really wanted to meet him, right? And I mean, especially when most of your team isn't going to walk across that line is a real, you're sticking your neck out a little bit to go see the president and then they cancel it. So now and those people. Well, remember, I'm the guy who went to the Oval after calling for the president to be impeached.

Yes. Bush. Yeah. Now, and you have a different. I mean, I really resist trying, you know, the attempt to feel won over by. by that office because I think it's And I think you are too I mean I think generally speaking you are too

You're looking at it as a respectful thing Which I think is the office I don't mind being one over by the office And the principles the office It stands for I'm not going to be one over By the man Right You know I mean I'm not a fan

I didn't go and and Look at George Bush and go He's such a great guy I like him now I still had deep issues with him My opinion of him changed because of private conversations, but I was still hostile towards him

at the end of his relationship on my return. I was positive on some of the things I was very negative about. For instance, what we spoke about, which I wanted to speak about, was the border he refused to. We did speak about the war, which I was also very much against at the time

and thought you're fighting this to lose. Yeah, we're fighting this to lose. We're not fighting this to win. what are we doing? We had a hour-long conversation about that, and that changed my mind. When, you know, we didn't talk about the border and the border guards, and that pissed me off.

So I wasn't one over by the office, and I'm not suggesting that. Here's what I'm trying to get to. If President Obama or President Trump or, you know, Bush or Clinton or anybody invited me to the Oval Office, I would go. And I would go and I would be polite, and I would shake hands and I wouldn't be belligerent.

I would be clear on what I believe, but I would listen. And the reason why I say this, you should read the book, Freedom's Forge. There's one scene in this book, Freedom's Forge, and it's about how, in 1939, we knew war was coming,

and we were in trouble. I mean, our guys had to train, I think in 1941, we were still training with broomsticks. Literally, we didn't have guns. And so soon as Poland

was invaded, FDR knew oh crap, we're screwed. And so he called somebody from Detroit. His name was Bill Knutzen, I think. And Bill was this guy who was just a scrappy kind of fighter.

And he was, when he was young, he actually was the guy who ran the floor for Henry Ford. He's the guy. He's the guy responsible for the assembly line, not Henry Ford. Henry Ford screwed it up twice. He opened it up an assembly line. It failed. He opened up a second one. It failed. The third time, Knutzen was there and it succeeded because he said, no, you're doing it wrong. You have to lay everything out so nobody is walking too far to get the stuff. You have to line it up in a certain way. So he's the guy who did that. And he built

Ford into what it was. By the time he, you know, had real juice at Ford and Ford was popular, he was like, dude, we have got to get other colors and other models. People are, people want something else. And Henry Ford was not into it and really hated that idea. And so Bill went over to GM, which was this fledgling company. He took it and he built it. into a real challenger, which actually beat Ford in a relatively short period of time. Now, during the Great Depression, Bill was looked at as an enemy of the people because he's just this rich guy, this powerful guy who's oppressing his workers and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Okay. And FDR was going after him because the unions didn't like the boss a GM. And so FDR was putting this guy's life in a ringer and anti-capitalist and everything else. And this guy was a very big American freedom kind of voluntary service kind of guy. FDR calls him, Hitler's come into Poland, and he says, Bill, I need to see you in Washington on Monday. So on Friday night, he's sitting down for dinner with his family, and he says, Mr. Roosevelt called me today and said, he wants to meet with me in his office. I don't know what he wants to talk to me about.

And his family says, you're not going, are you, dad? And he said, why? He said, Dad, this guy has tried to destroy everything we believe in. He has tried to destroy you personally, our finances, your company. we believe he's doing great damage to the capitalist system. He is our enemy. And he sat at the table and he said, no, he's the president of the United States.

And while I don't have to agree with him, I should at least hear him out and meet with him. So here's this, quote unquote, these two enemies coming together and meeting. And he says, Roosevelt says to him, Bill, we're in trouble. And you're the only guy I know that can do it. And he said, Mr. President, your anti-business policies and your government controls are killing us. We can't do it like that.

He said, Bill, I'll give you power to you can order what you need. You can do what you need. But we need stuff. We need tanks. We need airplanes. So he did it. 1941 because he didn't have enough power from FDR. FDR fired him, got another guy, but it was already too late.

He got a new dealer in there, but it was already too late because Bill had set up this system with all of the factories to where they were just cranking stuff out, but it hadn't hit yet. We were making, what do we make? 40 billion, I think 40 billion bullets in like, I think a year? It was crazy amounts. We provided three quarters of all of the armaments for all of the Allied forces. Three quarters of the ships, the airplanes, the bullets, everything. And it's all because of that one guy. And all because of that one meeting.

And all because he said, look, I don't have to agree with him. I don't have to like him. And he didn't have to like me, but I should take the meeting. I think there's something important about that. And it's the way we move. You know, I heard a song today and it said, there was just a line, it takes a lot of rain. I don't remember what the song was.

It takes a lot of rain. And I thought to myself, I don't even know what this song is about, but man, it does. For us to grow, it does take rain. It takes those hard, rainy, cloudy, stormy days to be able to grow. if he wouldn't have had that day, we were building Liberty ships. We were building ships releasing an entire ship from start to finish in five days.

Five. Can you imagine that? Five days for a Liberty ship. And those are the ships that save the world. Yeah, I mean, you know, look, he was unique. qualify to help something really important. Luckily, I have no discernible skills. So I would never be in that position.

Right. Yeah, I guess. But I mean, I're right. There are certainly circumstances. When you're talking about fighting off the Nazis and you're the one guy that can make it happen, yeah, you'd take the, you'd take the freaking meeting. Right. And I think, you know, look, as I said, I would, you know, if you had to go and it was part of my work requirements and whatever. Oh, stop it. I can't get you to, I couldn't get you to go to Canada with me. I'm a Canadian sports hero. Of course I'd go to Canada.

But yeah, no, I would not go to some of the, those crazy, you know, risky places that you like, you know. Mexico. Like, Southern Texas. Right. You know, all those places. California. But, yeah, no, I mean, look, you're right. I think there's a respect for your office.

That doesn't mean that necessarily, you know, there's a, there's a temptation, I think, by people that, you know, like, hey, wow, what an amazing thing it would be. be to meet with someone with all that power. And like I, you gotta fight that instinct off, right? Like I, I appreciate the fact that you can go and say that you're a free citizen and the president can beckon and say, hey, I want you to stop by. And you can say, no, I really cannot take you. I cannot take you. And I, I'm not going to give you the opportunity for a photo opportunity with me.

You know what I mean? And that's what a sports figure could feel like or something like that. So I guess I can understand that. You know, I'd love to hear our opinion from when that sports figure did that in, uh, uh, under Obama. Oh, Thomas. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. It would be interesting to see. Yeah. Where we, where we stood on that. I mean, I think he did. And he did it outwardly because he was not a fan of the president. Right. And I, and I agree with your right to do that.

I mean, I've no hard feelings on that. I just wonder, you know, uh, is there no decorum? Is there no decorum? and maybe there shouldn't be. Maybe Stu is right. There shouldn't be. I'm not saying there shouldn't be anything. No, no, no.

You know what I mean. You don't say, you know, this is a tradition. We go, we have our photo taken with the president and yada, yada, yada. I mean, here's what I don't like. The president has been outwardly, outwardly antagonistic against the league, right? I mean, it's not just that they disagree with him on a policy even. He's been outwardly antagonistic against the league. where they get their salary.

They're the Eagles. They should be used to people being outwardly against them. That's a fair point. That's a fair point. I mean, I think the president did the right thing. You might get an ice ball in the head. You don't invite the Eagles to the White House. All right.

I want to talk to you a little bit about filter by. Filter by will help you in many different ways. It is so hot in Dallas right now, and the air conditioning is on all the time now. And you can't let those things overheat and work so hard. I mean, it is really, really pushing our air conditioning units and our air handling systems, our HVAC systems to the max.

It's 105 or 107 outside, and it's 62 in the studio or 65 in the studio. You don't want to replace that. You want to make sure it's running the way it's supposed to, and changing the oil filter is the best thing you can do for your HVAC system, for your home or for your business. Now, FilterBike carries 600 sizes. They ship for free 24 hours. They're made right here in America.

and they have auto delivery, which I personally like. You don't have to use this, but they will send them to you every six months or however often you're supposed to change that thing. See, I think that's how most of us are. I have absolutely no idea how long, six months, six weeks, six years. When I sell the house, I have no idea. If you get on the auto delivery, they'll knock off 5%. Save time, save money, breathe better. do yourself a favor

so you're not paying high repair bills on your HVAC system. Change your filters. Do it with filter by. Filter B-U-Y. Filterby.com. Filterby.com. I get maybe I'm,

maybe it's my age that is making me, I don't know. I've always felt, I mean, you've worked with me during the Clinton Lewinsky years. You're always very respectful of the office. Yeah, the presidency. I may not like,

the president, but I, I am going, I haven't, never had a president be nice to me, ever. No, church W. Bush was fairly, you didn't have a bad meeting with George. Did I tell you what happened? The church push? Well, there's, I'm not saying every moment of your life. I think I'm going to, I got to tell you what happened with George W. Bush. No, no, no, I don't think you know this story. So we get a call. somebody in my office is talking to somebody in his office about something and they were like,

oh, we were doing some for charity. And, you know, those paintings that I did of George W. Bush. And so it was for charity. And so I was going to have him run over to Bush and have him sign it, not for my charity, for Chuck Norris's charity. Right. And so we call. And the person says, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm not sure.

sure that that that will that will that will that will that will work that he would sign the picture yeah and why i mean i'm not say you've had a great relationship with the guy he's been critical of him on the air and such but because quote because of what mr beck did with the dali lama and george bush's speech and i was like and so that's what she comes my My assistant comes back to me and she's like, what the hell did you do? And I'm like, nothing. What are you talking about? Did I say something on the air?

She said, no, it happened apparently at his speech. And you had met with the Dalai Lama and he was there and then he started giving a speech and something happened. And I'm like, what? So she comes back. Apparently you walked out of his speech. I'm like, I would never walk out of the president's speech. What? I would never do it.

because you know me. I would show deference to the president. I would never. Oh my gosh, I did. Oh my gosh. I did. And all of a sudden it came rushing back to me. I have a medical condition.

And occasionally it will get so bad. And Stu has seen me. It doesn't happen often on the ground, almost every flight I'm on. It does where it's almost like a seizure, but it's not and it's not good and it's not something that you really want to do in public. And I was sitting next to my wife and George Bush was being introduced

and I said, good God, honey, one of these things are coming on. And she said, you better get out of here before you cause a scene during his speech. So I got, he started speaking and I get up. And I'm getting up because I've got to get out of here so I don't wreck his speech. And he saw me and he's like, that son of a bitch, can't even sit here while I'm speaking about the Dalai Lama. Wow, you're a jerk. Unbelievable. All right, back in a minute.

You know, I couldn't take, welcome to the program, Pat Gray. I could not take last night the tweets still at, you know, 11 o'clock at night. the media is so dumb. They're saying this was a narrow victory. No. I mean, really, it's, you've had 14 hours to process this. Normally, that's, you know, that's not a long time, but in today's media world, and with Twitter and Facebook, corrections like that,

the whole world gangs up on you, usually within five minutes. That dumb is squelched. Still last night, so narrow. No, it wasn't a narrow margin. It was narrow in its scope. That was what it was. And seemingly nobody got that.

And also, a lot of people were celebrating. And I think also a lot of people on the left, like Nancy Pelosi, very upset because there is no equality. I agree with there. There is. There is no equality. If you must cowtow to someone's belief that goes against your belief, then there is no equality. They are greater than you.

You cannot say, no, you can't do that. You can't live with them because you think that you're that way. You can't do that. Just like they can't say, you can't object to whatever because, You think that there is a God? No, you don't have to believe. You don't have to accept. You don't have to be a part.

That's the point. I don't have to be a part of your religion. I don't have to be a part of your relationship. Whether it's heterosexual, homosexual, I don't have to be a part of it. I don't have to be a part of your faith, your church. I don't have to. Leave me alone. I will leave you.

alone? Why? Can we not get this? Way too much to ask. Way too much. It is. I was amazed at all the conservative sites celebrating the ruling. I don't think so. It wasn't that great.

I think. It wasn't that great. Can we talk about this one more time? I really think that what happened here was the Supreme Court saying, no dummy. Don't. Don't make fun of the religious. stuff. Ask them seriously. Think about it a while and then say no. I mean, I think you can come away with that conclusion. You could also come away with the conclusion of, look, Colorado really did a bad

job. And they're saying just that they did a bad job and you have to take it seriously. Well, that's what I mean. Right. Yeah. But it does send that signal, right? Yeah, it does. It just don't do a bad job on this. You can absolutely come to the same conclusion, just not the way you did it. And why? Won't the Supreme Court rule? on the religious liberty issue. Why don't you just make the ruling? It's so easy. It's in black and white in the Constitution.

It's so easy. Just make the ruling. Right now, you have people in the media saying, Donald Trump cannot pardon himself. Well, he cannot pardon himself from impeachment. If he's impeached, he's out. If he's convicted, he's out. He cannot pardon himself from that.

Can he pardon himself? for a crime? There's nothing in the Constitution that says he cannot. There's everything in the Constitution that says he can pardon anyone he wants. So it doesn't specifically say he can't pardon him.

Now, it seems pretty slimy if a president is like, I'll pardon myself. But there's no answer on that one. Everybody in the press is insisting that he cannot pardon himself. I don't think he would.

No. I don't think a president should. But could he? I don't know. Maybe. Constitutionally, maybe. It's definitely an open question and there's no resolution to it. We know you're right.

Impeachment is one limitation. And it's only federal crimes. Yes. Like it's a state level crime theoretically he could not pardon himself from. That being said, I think, honestly, he could. I think he could. I think in theory, he could. I think it'd be suicidal if he did.

but I think he could. Yeah, you know, I don't know if that's true. Well, it might not, not, it might not be now. I don't think it is suicidal as far as your base goes. I think by the time you went through that entire process, you're talking multiple years, you'd have your base so convinced it was completely unfair that I don't even think they'd care. Yeah, maybe.

And I mean that from both parties. I want to go back to Scotus. I mean, here's the media telling us where shall not in, infringe. They will make no laws respecting an establish of religion. Or prohibiting the free exercise.

Right. Right. It is that clear. It's that clear. They are crystal clear on whether the president could pardon himself when the constitution is anything but clear. Here the constitution is 100% clear

and they find ambiguity. I mean, you just can't. Words are not rubber. Just not. Clarence Thomas is the only one doing this job. I mean, I really, let's be honest about it. Because even the other justices that went on along with this, Thomas wrote a separate concurrence, which Gorsuch joined, by the way.

So Thomas and Gorsuch gave him a lot of credit here. But he went through and actually took on the case. He's the only one that actually did the actual job that he was supposed to do there. Listen to this. Consider what Phillips, the Baker, actually said to the individual respondents in this case. After sitting down with them for a consultation, Phillips told the couple, quote, I'll make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies, and brownies. I just don't make cakes for same-sex weddings.

It's hard to see how this statement stigmatizes gays and lesbians more than blocking them from marching in a city parade, dismissing them from the Boy Scouts, or subjecting them to signs that say God hates the F word, all of which this court has deemed protected by the First Amendment. So if those things are protected by the First Amendment, you're telling me saying, ah, yeah, I don't want to make your cake, is not. Moreover, it's also hard to see how Philip's statement is worse than the racist, demeaning, and even threatening speech towards blacks that this court has tolerated in previous decisions. Concerns about dignity and stigma did not carry the day when this court affirmed the right of white supremacist to burn a 25-foot cross, conduct a rally on Martin Luther King Jr.'s Boulevard, or circulate a film featuring a hooded clan members who were brandishing weapons and threatening to bury the N-words. That's all protected. but you have to be forced to make a cake. Wow. I mean, again, Clarence Thomas is the most important person in America, period.

He is the only one there. I mean, he's not the only one, but he's the best one. And he continues to do an amazing job. Okay, so now we have that bakery, but that is, I think that's going to open up all kinds of problems for other bakeries. However, in the realm of Starbucks, which was interesting that Schultz, left yesterday, wasn't it? In the realm of Starbucks,

employees had been fired at yet another bakery because of discrimination. In Northeast Portland, they were fired because a black woman came in and they told her that they were closed. And they were closed.

They were open and they just closed the doors because she was black. They were actually closed. It was, it was 9. It was 906. And so she came in because she was still helping some whitties. Yeah. And they had ordered before closing time, however.

So they were finishing up their order. Yeah, but I mean if another white person would have walked in after 9 o'clock, they would. Yes. Thank you. They would have said. Okay, Whitey, come on over here. That didn't happen.

Two white women walked in before the black woman. And they served them. Unbelievable. And they were also told it was they were closed. They were closed. They were closed. They were closed. So because they were insensitive to the black woman, though, They were fired.

They were fired. And it's interesting because... Wait, were they insensitive to the white woman? The two white women? No, apparently not. No, okay. Apparently not. All right. Okay.

They were fired even though the employees were not being racist, admittedly by the owner. They were not being racist. And they were following the business's protocol of closing at 9 o'clock. But they were fired anyway because sometimes, impact outweighs intent. And what are you going to do about that? I mean, impact outweighs intent. What was the impact?

The impact was that the black woman felt bad. And their intent wasn't to hurt her feelings, but apparently they did. It doesn't matter that they heard. It doesn't matter. That the intent was. No, doesn't matter what the intent was. Did they hurt the feelings of the white people? The white people I have not seen come forward and we don't really care about those two.

So, okay. So, okay, so how do we know that the black person's feelings were hurt? Because she is a black activist and she made her feelings known. Ah! In fact, she's known in the area as a professional equity activist. A lot now? A professional equity activist. So her job should be an activist for equity?

So you got to wonder, did she come in at 906 after the business closed on purpose so that she could? Or was she just running late like sometimes people do? but then when they said that, she thought, you don't know who I am. You're not going to mess with me. Could be that too. I need my loaf of bread and my cupcakes.

And so she left and I'm going to teach those people a lesson. And she did. So the impact is not that she felt bad. The impact is once again, someone chose the wrong target. Yeah. It wasn't a target. It was not, no.

But if it was a, if it was a non-activist, like these two people, People should have known. Okay. Well, it's an activist. No. If it was a regular person, black, white, yellow, doesn't matter.

A regular person who has a life would be like, oh, sorry. Yeah. You know what I mean? You might even be like, you know what? Come on. I just need a loaf of bread. I'm sorry. No, I can't.

I got to close. Okay. All right. You might even be pissed a little bit. But you're pissed at yourself because you were running late. Yeah. I've gone into places where. you know, it closes at, let's say, 10 o'clock, and it's like 9.40.

And they're like, yeah, it's too close to closing. I'm not too. And I'm, am I annoyed? Do I internally punish that business by saying, you know, I'm not going back there? You know, yeah, it kind of annoys me and maybe I don't go back there next time. But, I mean, not because of, again, you're the one assigning the racial intent here. And in fact, the business in this case seems to even acknowledge it was not racist. Right.

Yeah, they did. But yet again, they did. get fired. So what are you doing? What are you doing? You are teaching. You're saying that as long as minorities want to come into your place of business, you can't close. As long as minorities want to do anything or any protected class, you cannot stop them. Right. That's where we are right now.

It's where we are. It is chaos. One last question. Shultz leaving. Any Any, any... He's the CEO of Starbucks. Yeah. Any thoughts that this... I think he's setting up a presidential run. It does seem that way.

He's hinting towards it for sure. And the way he dealt with this most recent thing, which was patently absurd, right? I mean, the fact that he closed all of his restaurants because two guys came into one of his stores and said they wanted to sit there without buying anything, they called the cops. And the cops are the ones that were not Starbucks.

The cops are the ones that removed them. Starbucks doesn't get to boss the cops around and say, please arrest these people. That's not how it works. and yet he closed all the restaurants and did this penance, which was bizarre, it certainly signifies that like he's trying to show you how much he cares

about these topics that are important to Democrat voters. One more big name that thought they were going to run for president, Mark Zuckerberg. How is his empire burning down to the ground? You know, just a year ago, two years ago, people would, on the left, he'd be like, I don't know, Mark Zuckerberg, he might run, blah, blah, blah. This guy would never run.

You would never trust. Big data? You would never trust that guy. With Facebook the way it is right now? No, I don't. No, I don't think so. You disagree, Stu? The second they thought he could knock off Donald Trump,

they'd embrace him wholeheartedly. It's just a matter of whether they think they can get him there. I'm not talking about the political people. I think average person. I don't think, I don't know. The average person's still on Facebook. right? Like, what are they done? I mean, yeah, like, I think it's honestly more of a media creation. They do this whole thing about fake news and they make this big deal about it.

Well, people are clicking yes to these pages. They're not the ones that want them limited. They want to get the information that they want to access. You know, we talked about this with art. Every media company is going through this right now. But like, if you're a big fan of the blaze, you might not be getting these posts, the posts that go up there. Glenbeck.com, if you're following Glenn, you might not be getting the posts going up there because Facebook's trying to limit the amount of news generally that people are getting. Right. You have to actually seek it out and change your settings.

According to Redfin, homes sold faster than ever in April 2018. That's just a couple of months ago. Prices rose 7.6% to a new median high of $302,000. What? That is the first time that the national median home price surpassed $300,000. For most Americans, their home is their biggest investment,

and this is why real estate agents, itrust.com, is there. We have over 1,000 agents all over America who are working to get the most amount of money for your house in the fastest time. Everybody knows. Selling your house is a real hassle, and you want it sold, you want it sold on time,

and you want to give people a good deal, but you also want, you know, a good deal for yourself. You want to be able to make money and pull money off of it. That's why real estate agents.I trust.com was created, fully vetted and handpicked for their knowledge, their skill, and their track record in your area. Thousands of families have already put real estate agents I trust.com to the test. The results are fantastic. You want to sell your home right now on time for the most amount of money or you're moving to a new area and you need a real estate agent? Real estate agents.I trust.com. That's real estate agents.org.com.com.

Welcome to the program. So excited. The Mercury Museum is opening up next weekend, just for temporary exhibit. It's going to be in the 80,000 square foot building of the Mercury Studios here. We are transforming the entire, this is the first time we've taken the entire thing. And it's only a portion of what we have, including we found out yesterday, the actual hand-writory. Gettysburg address, the original handwritten, writing on the train, Gettysburg address. Not like handwritten by you or something.

You don't have something like out. No, handwritten, the original from Abraham Lincoln. Wow. Guy who that's up in a great museum. I think we're going to have them on tomorrow up in a great museum in Illinois, the Lincoln Museum. He said he still does. And people when they see it, they weep. Wow.

I mean, it's powerful. going to be here in Texas, the Rights and Responsibility Museum here at the Mercury Studios. Check your tickets out now, Mercury1.org.