The Glenn Beck Program - Praying for Asteroids? - 6/22/18

Episode Date: June 22, 2018

Hour 1 May the 'Space Force' be with you...NASA's plan to avoid Armageddon?...FEMA asteroid deflection? ...Justice Elena Kagan has been surprisingly 'moderate' ...Glenn bores himself to death? ...Desperate 'pretending' media attacks First Lady Melania's jacket ...California leading the way...in psychopaths?   Hour 2 Just three berets from a socialist revolution?...NFL team holds LGBTQ inclusion summit? ...Bill O'Reilly says it was a  'bad idea' for Melania to wear jacket with these words...Time Magazine has become Mad Magazine...Bill recalls times spent with Charles Krauthammer at Fox News...America has trouble getting 'honest' news   Hour 3 Sen. Mike Lee joins to discuss President Trump's retreat on separating families and the growing humanitarian crisis at the border...assumption of 'racism' is being used...'legal' immigration is harmed in all of this...the Senate blocks Lee's bid to stop Obama water rule; why? ...Glenn reviews the movie 'Ocean's 8'...shares some fun facts about that giant necklace...brace your expectations Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Blaze Radio Network On Demand. Glenn. Okay. I have some bad news, okay? But I think this bad news actually is kind of good news. All right? Now just hear me out.

Giant asteroids are coming towards the Earth and they're going to destroy us all and kill us all. NASA has created a plan to stop it so we don't all die. the plan does not include Bruce Willis at all, you know, and a crew of roughnecks, you know, landing on an asteroid and blowing its smithereens with a nuke, which begs the question if that's not part of the plan, what's a potential space force actually for? I mean, I'm just saying, are we preparing for an invasion? Because that would be fun to just think about now.

I mean, it wouldn't be fun when it actually happened. But wouldn't it be fun? I mean, we're starting to hear all of the stuff being released, you know, by the Pentagon, about all of the aliens that have visited us for a while. And maybe that's what the Space Force is for, because we're all going to have to unite against an alien race. That is just fun to think about. I don't want to live through it, but it's kind of fun to think about.

Anyway, yesterday, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy released a report titled the National Near Earth Object Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan. Well, I love the catchy title. So it does sound like government bloat. Sure, sure. But let's actually look into it. Besides the title being an enormous waste of words, let's just call it Armageddon. The Armageddon Report.

Okay. The report is 18 pages of steps for NASA and. and FEMA to take over the next decade to prevent big asteroids from clanking into the earth. Now, you might ask yourself, why FEMA? Well, you know, in case the NASA part falls apart and they don't, you know, stop the asteroid. Then we got FEMA, you know. FEMA is the, holy cow, looks like Cincinnati just got squashed. And that's when FEMA comes.

in to unsquash as much as possible and make everybody feel good. So step one in the NASA plan is better asteroid detection and tracking. Now, it kind of seems important, you know, because we can't really dodge. You know, we need to see this one coming really early. Second is improving our ability to predict where an asteroid might hit. So FEMA can show up at the right place. Now third, this is the awesome part, is the asteroid deflection systems. So if NASA's not using tough oil drillers to land on and kill the asteroid, how do you do it?

Well, the plan would be to launch a spacecraft towards an asteroid that would change the asteroid's trajectory just enough to give us Earthlings a good scare and a really good show. however, we all live to talk about it. Now, NASA has plans to experiment with this deflection technique with a spacecraft launching in 2021. It's called the double asteroid redirection test or tart. I love it when they come up with clever little names like that. Currently, astronomers have only found 8,000 asteroids in space that measure at least 460 feet across. Now, that would be big enough to pulverize an entire state if it hit the U.S. But not to worry, that's, you know, something that size.

It's only one third of all of the near-Earth asteroids. Now, I told you that, you know, I had good news and bad news, and the bad news is, wow, asteroids are coming. The good news is when I read everything else in the paper and I watch our society and everything else, the good news is, hey, asteroids are coming. It's Friday, June 22nd. You're listening to the Glenn Beck program. Still, I don't think I can start with the border today, even though I need to.

I need to address the, oh my gosh. The press and what they're saying about Melania Trump need to address that. And I need to address Time Magazine. And what's happening with Time Magazine, two amazing, amazing stories. But I also have some, I have a good story that doesn't involve asteroids. This is an actual good story. Okay.

That will just make you feel good because I've never heard it before. Do you know a show you're on? Do you think you're hosting a different program today? Well, you just prayed for an asteroid to destroy us all, and now you're going to tell us you have good news? Well, it's not necessarily good news. It'll just make you feel good. It's a feel good story about the Supreme Court. All right.

Okay. So this is from Slate. You know Slate. Yeah, not a conservative source. No, no. No, uh-uh. So here's the story. What is Justice Elena Kagan doing?

So far this term, the liberal justice has crossed ideological lines at least three times to join the Supreme Court's conservatives. Most recently on Thursday, Kagan, Reagan authored the majority of opinion in Lucia versus SEC, a huge case that threatens to erode the political independence of multiple federal agencies. Tearing down the administrative state is supposed to be Justice Neil Gorsuch's pet project. But in this case, it was Kagan who took the lead in undermining the civil service, authoring an opinion that prompted sharp dissent by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who has accused her colleague of making legal and factual errors.

So what is happening with Kagan? Why is she playing nice with conservatives? What, to put it bluntly, is in it for her? Given her overall voting pattern, which remains progressive, it seems unlikely that she's politically drifting. It is possible, though, that these defections are tactical, maneuvers, efforts to build a moderate coalition, and keep the court from veering rapidly to the right. Keep believing that. Kagan isn't losing the battle to win the war. She's wrestling the

court's far-right justices to a draw in order to forestall disaster. And so far, she's been surprisingly successful to the occasional annoyance of her usual allies. Now, this goes on and on and on and on and on. and it shows what she has been ruling and doing, and it's not good for the liberal side. And it just makes me happy. Oh, because this never happens. Well, it never happens to conservatives. Of course not.

It's always the liberals that drift. It's always us that become liberal on the Supreme Court. Always. It never has happened. Happen. Go back to, I mean, even NPR featured this meltdown of mine in the middle of it. When, when the Obamacare decision came down, we were live on the air. And all the, all the, you know, the conservative sites started saying, oh, we won, we won, we won. And I was like, wait a minute, I'm reading the ruling.

And it's like, no, we did not win this. Obamacare was not overturned. And then I read that it was Roberts. Remember this? Yes. And I started screaming, this never happened. to them. It's always our guy who looks conservative and then all of a sudden turns into someone who lets you down all the time. Okay, so wait, so wait. But if you remember that same show,

what happened right after? People started calling and saying, let me quote this, it's possible that this defection is a tactical maneuver. Oh my God. Yeah, we got hit with that over and over again. Right? Yeah. No, no, no. He has a plan. He's tricking. That's right. This just makes me so happy. At least finally something like this, happens to the left a little bit. Now, again, the same thing with Roberts. Roberts general voting record is relatively conservative. He's just let down conservatives on multiple massive cases.

And, you know, I don't think Kagan's to that level yet. No. But we've noted it several times. Kagan has sided with relatively sane principles a few times. And this is much better than you normally get from the left. The Democrats never. miss on these picks. Listen to this.

In the masterpiece cake shop in Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Kagan performed a similar sleight of hand. They're just going with it. They're just going with it. She's tricking them. I'm telling you she's tricking them. The case revolved around same-sex couples, blah, blah, blah, Supreme Court 7-2 decision,

duck the question entirely ruling instead that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, I'm sorry, I'm just, oh, my gosh, have you been listening to me? Have you listened to me? I'm boring myself to death. They had expressed impermissible hostility toward religion while handling the case. Kagan, along with Justice Stephen Breyer, joined the court's opinion in full. Kagan also deployed a spin on this technique in Gil versus Whitford, a challenge to partisan gerrymandering.

Not all of Kagan's right-leaning votes reflect an obvious behind-the-scenes compromise. I mean, I am more receptive to this analysis with someone on the left because I don't believe nice things happen. So it's hard for me to actually internalize the idea that Elena Kagan is going to wind up to be a moderate justice, let's just say, on the Supreme Court. I don't really think that's going to happen. But it is nice to see them struggling through this moment a little bit. It is nice to occasionally see it. I think they're struggling. I think this is why they're all so desisting.

I think, you know, what you're watching in the media and, oh, we're going to get to the First Lady's coat in just a minute. And we're also, oh, going to get to Time magazine. But all of these things, it's desperation. It's absolute desperation. Why would you go after her coat? why would you Photoshop a cover of Time magazine, exploit a kid, and then within two days,

no, it's revealed that that's absolutely not true. That child was never separated. That is nothing to do with the story. Incredible. Why would you do that? Why would you do that? Because you're so desperate. They are throwing everything.

and I got news for you. He's going to survive this. He's going to survive this. And he may come out stronger in comparison because the media is going to come out much weaker, much weaker, because they are not playing fair. And I don't mean fair.

I mean, because they've never been fair. No. They're just not. There's a line here. They're crossing. They're crossing a massive line. I mean, this is a good example of it. We talked about how there's a certain issues where they just cross this line and they become advocates.

Yes. An advocate makes a mistake like this, right? You know, a media matters, a think progress. They make mistakes like this all the time. And they don't care. Because they're an advocacy group. Correct. Right?

CNN is not supposed to tell you that this, here is the ultimate example. Here is the Vietnamese girl running away from the napalm of what's happening right now. This is the iconic photo. And then we find out from the girl's dad that the iconic photo is of a girl who was not separated from her parents, that the dad didn't want them to go, that the mom seemingly abandoned the other kids back at home, and that nothing of the sort happened. You know, kids cry over all sorts of reasons. When I want to leave Chucky Cheese, the kids cry. Yeah. Well, this one was because mom was with human smugglers on a boat taking her little child in the middle of the night and the Border Patrol pulls up next to them in their boat.

Of course that child is crying. Of course. Of course. It's a really bad situation. Right. You know, a kid crying in and of itself is not a new story. Happens all the time. If you have kids at this age, you've seen it.

You see it every day. Right. The issue here is who's to blame. It's not just getting a picture of a kid crying. Anybody can do that. The point is it's supposed to tell a story about how evil the U.S. government is. It told the exact opposite story,

and they ran with it for multiple days until now they can move on to the coat when we find out the truth about it. Now they can start talking coat. They can go fashion talk for a few days until we find out the truth about that, whatever that is. Okay, so here's the thing. They are in full-fledged panic. And I'm telling you, I do not believe that the Democrats are going to have a good midterm election.

They're not. They're going to have all of their anarchists and all of their Marxists and everybody else turn out. But I will tell you, the average American, I think, is growing weary of this. And here's why. It's beginning to be too close to home. It's happening in your schools. you're seeing it with your kids, you're seeing what's happening on the college campuses,

you're seeing what's happening with Twitter, you're seeing it happen where everybody is just at each other's throats, they people, the average person does believe there is truth. They do believe, what is it, 70% of Democrats believe there is a limit on abortion. Well, there is no limit on anything in it. more. And the press is dishonoring and discrediting itself. It, the American people, usually it's

their arrogance. And I think it still is the arrogance of the press and the arrogance of the Democrats. But it is the panic that is happening now. This just panic. We've got to stop this at all costs. And it's beginning to slip away from them and they feel it. Now they're going to get dangerous and we're seeing that the press is. Once the press crosses this line, which they have crossed now, think of the lines that they have crossed just this week. Two weeks ago, they started putting out a photo.

We found out quickly that that photo was not real. but they saw how fast that lit up the internet. That's the only reason, the only reason why they started looking into this story, because they saw and they were humiliated that this was an old photograph of children in cages. Okay. They were humiliated. And they were like, oh, yeah? Well, go find it because those do exist.

They did. They did it because they were humiliated and they saw that this was. a wildfire waiting to happen on their side. So they went and they did their job, but the problem is their job should have been done five years ago, six years ago. They never did it. Now they are just dogpiling,

and it is incredible to watch. You are watching history. It is the bonfire of the vanities. All right, I want to talk to you about your car. If you have a car, like I have a couple of trucks on the farm, and they are, I mean, they're out of warranty, and I keep them until the doors fall off. But I want their engines to run. I mean, they're hauling the cattle and everything else. I need a good, strong diesel engine, and they're great trucks.

But I just brought one of them in for an oil change. Something was wrong with it, and it was, I got there to $6,500. I'm like, what? the great thing is they said CarShield covered it all. CarShield covered it all. Thank you, CarShield. That's what you want a warranty for. That's what you want, you know, extra protection for.

When your manufacturer warranty goes dead and it's over, then what do you have? Nothing but out-of-pocket expenses that can run thousands of dollars. Not with CarShield. I want you to go to CarShield.com before that check engine light goes on or before you're surprise with a big bill, get CarShield. Carshield.com or call 800, Car 60100. Get covered with the ultimate in

extended vehicle protection. 1,800, Car 60100. Mention the promo code or visit carshield.com and use the promo code back and you will save 10%. CarShield.com promo code back. A deductible may apply. Charles Crouthammer died yesterday.

Charles, um, Charles is a is he was just an amazing amazing man. Do we have the clip from from Fox News and and what he said about how he wanted to die? Listen to this. It's my job to call a folly a folly. Charles Crouthammer, columnist, author, and Fox News commentator

lived his life telling others exactly what he thought. You're betraying your whole. life if you don't say what you think and you don't say it honestly and bluntly do you think you'll ever stop writing no i intend to die at my desk really i would like to i'm not sure i can arrange it he was um he was really truly remarkable um he fought against all of the odds and stood straighter a man in a wheelchair that stood straighter and had more spine than almost all of us in conservative media combined. This is the Glenn Beck program.

I want to cut through all of the smoke and the outrage and everything else about what is, what the media is telling us is important about what's happening on the border. And get away from all of that and give you maybe another perspective of why We need security. And it's, God help us. It's not because of the people. It's because of what's going on in Mexico right now that we refuse to look at.

And it's happening every day. It's 3 o'clock in the morning. The air is a little chilly and bitter as Pamela Tiran leaves Bar Yardin. It's a restaurant and a bar in the middle of the town. She steps out into the empty plaza. The sun isn't going to begin rising for about three hours, and Pamela is enjoying a festive night before the elections bring higher tensions. She's running for the town council as the member of the Institutional Revolutionary Party.

She feels at home here in Mexico in an indigenous little town on the southwest corner of the country, a brief car ride from the ocean. Pamela has black hair, kind-hearted smile, bracelets adorn her arm, and she wears a modest hand-stitched dress in an elaborate and colorful design. A design you really could only find right there. She's with her friend, photojournalist Maria del Sol, and a man, her bodyguard, who is also her driver. The world around her is mostly quiet. Tree frogs, whistle, croak, ribbet, and cut. grunt. In the distance a spider monkey wails out its strange call. In the daylight, this place is

paradise. Cornfields weave into forests, ancestral homes sprawl to the railroad, past the farm with cows and pigs and goats and chickens. Last year, the region was struck by one of the earthquakes in Mexico, one of the most deadly in the last century. Pamela at the time, appeared on television asking for volunteers. The video is eerie with her standing in the dark as floodlights shine into the rubble. People frantically searching for life or bodies as she looks into the camera. Please, we need more people to help us, she said. Please.

She was a doctor by profession. She was also an activist who ran organizations for the dispossessed. Two years ago she was a candidate for mayor. Maybe. Maybe she's thinking about all of this as she crosses the plaza to her car, unaware of the cloaked figures waiting for her in the darkness. Inside the car, they pause, stung by a strange feeling, something ominous and sudden.

But before they can react, the gunfire begins. The killers empty their clips and then shove in another. They make sure no one is left alive, and then they vanish back into the darkness and night. On Monday, the military helicopters watched over the funeral. At least a thousand people attended. The details of Pamela's death are still spare. Officials admit that it may have been gang-related as her father, Juan has a criminal record and led relations with the local cartel.

But either way, her death is a far more ominous trend taking over the country just to our south. Since last September, over 110 electoral candidates have been murdered throughout Mexico. In the 24 hours before Pamela's death alone, armed civilians murdered two women politicians a few hours northwest. The two women had been rammed into a ditch late at night and executed. In the morning, police uncovered the bodies. The vehicle had been abandoned and nothing had been stolen from the women or the car, so police realized it wasn't a robbery. Mexico is on the verge of presidential elections.

They begin July 1st, and the drug gangs have been murdering their way into the race, from City Hall all the way up. Crime bosses have implanted their own batch of politicians, people who can be paid enough to stay out of the way. Criminal gangs rove the country, eliminating any reformers or any dissenters. Journalists in Mexico are now dying at alarming rate, a historical high.

So it's often hard to tell for sure what happens. Because now, people just vanish in the dark, at night, with the sound and the croaks, and the whistle of the tree frogs, but the warring drug cartels are growing in strength and getting bolder by the day, bringing their culture of death

to every corner of the country. And we sit here, oblivious, wondering why are so many people trying to get across our border? We need to have adult conversations and not this pointing of fingers and yelling about what somebody was wearing as they were going up onto an airplane

and start paying attention to what evil is just across our border. Why are people coming here? There's several reasons. Some of it is just because of the chaos. Others, because they can cause chaos. here. We need to start coming together. Just last year, the Better Business Bureau heard more than 5,000 complaints about our alarm companies. We want to thank Simply Safe for being our sponsor this half hour. Five thousand complaints on alarm companies. Imagine that. These are the people who are

supposed to be protecting you and they're, you know, in many cases ripping you off. They're ripping you off in a couple of different ways. First of all, how much are they charging you? And you don't own the system, right? They own the system. And they tie you off. up in this really long contract because they say, oh, this is a very expensive system. It's really not. It's really not. It's not expensive to do home security the right way. It's not expensive. If you have a small business, I remember our business, my father's business was broken into when I was young and we were robbed. You know, we didn't have an alarm system back then. It was just a small little family bakery. Well, you can now because it's not.

expensive and it's only $14.95 a month if you want to have the 24-7 monitoring where they automatically call police. But you can cancel that at any time because there are no contracts and there are no wires and you own the system. These people work to earn your business. There's no contract so they know they could lose you at any time. So they treat you right. They actually care. And they'll keep you safe. Get 10% off now. Go to simply safebeck.com. Protect your family, protect your home, protect your valuables, your business with simply safebeck.com. Go there now, simply safebeck.com.

All right, there's a couple of things. You're going to find this surprise. Surprise. California is full of psychopaths. Ranked second in the nation of psychopaths. Who would have seen that coming? Let's talk a little bit about the jacket. and Melania Trump.

There's just a lot to say here. First of all, I believe it's a $30 jacket. I don't think it means anything. If it means anything, it is a message to the press. She only wore it going up and down the stairs in Washington. She didn't wear it in Texas. She wore it in Washington. And those are both their explanations.

A, it didn't mean anything. B, it meant something to the press. They've said both of those things, which is, it doesn't help the messaging. And those are the only things that make sense. The only things that make sense. So let me ask you that, because you're Mr. Fashionista over here. You're basically a Kardashian. No, I'm not.

Like, the case they were making on the news about this is Melania Trump's a model, fashion very important to her. there's no way that this was just a jacket she put on. It had to be a message to someone. Had to be. It couldn't have been something that she just to run. Is that possible? I actually believe that it is not a jacket she just put on. But I believe it goes to nothing to do with the border.

It has everything to do the last time she flew Air Force One or whatever they call it whenever the president's not on it. When she flew to Texas, it was for the first. hurricane and what did the press do they went after her for her shoes they've gone after her on absolutely everything they have treated her abysmally treated her just she it's awful what they have done to her they would have never done this to any other first lady she has stayed out of it she hasn't talked politics and when she has she came out against her husband on this Okay, she's been the invisible woman. They called her all kinds of names because she wouldn't come out.

So she does come out and say, look, you know, I'm an immigrant. You know, we've got to change this policy. So she stands against her husband. And the last time she went down to Texas, they mocked her for her shoes. I happen to believe she's not a stupid woman. The people around her are not stupid. Nobody said, hey, Melania, don't wear that. That is possible.

That is possible that she's like, let's just go. And just grab this jacket. There's a green jacket upstairs. Just grab it. She wasn't thinking, just grab it because it's raining in Washington. I need just a jacket so I can go from car to the plane. Okay? That happens.

She wasn't thinking about it. That is logical and reasonable. But it is also logical and reasonable that she got on that plane with her, with her, but facing the press and that message, I don't care. I don't care about what you say. I don't care. I think that's reasonable. What's not reasonable is a woman who comes out for the very first time as first lady and speaks about policy and takes on her husband and is an immigrant herself.

What's not reasonable is that she wore that jacket to make a statement about how she doesn't care about the people on the border. It's the one thing we basically know is true. We know that you could, you'll never know the heart of somebody. So I'd have to say it's 99% sure. But there's just no way. She's not that person. Right. Because if she.

You have to be a despicable human being to do that. Yeah. And if you're that despicable human being. you're certainly not making the trip to the border. Correct. There's no reason for she doesn't get involved in this stuff. So why would she stick her neck out? And if you are a person who can't stand immigrants,

the last thing you do is wear a shirt that says you can't stand immigrants, right? I mean, it makes absolutely no sense. Her being an immigrant anyway. None of it makes sense. But yet the media is completely embracing it. Their idea is they think they've got them. And look at this huge faux pa. She wore a jacket that said she didn't care.

and it just shows what the administration is and she obviously just doesn't actually care about this. And it's like, come on. They're all pretending. They're all pretending to believe that's what she wanted to do. And they know she didn't actually mean that. You can say it's bad for optics. You can say those sorts of criticisms are fine.

But I mean, we all know she didn't mean she doesn't care about immigrants. We all know that. And they're all on television pretending that they think it was. Now here's what you could say. And this would be a reasonable thing to say on the other side. This is the problem with the Trump administration. They go to do something and it can be a clear victory. And it is always followed with a bullet in their foot.

If there are several times that Donald Trump has done something, it's good. and then he goes on TV the next day and says something stupid. Or he tweets something stupid. And you're like, what, just take the victory lap, man. Take the victory lap. Here was something where she was compassionate.

She was on the right side. She's going to the border. She's sitting with the kids. There's nothing you can say. It's all good. And they give you that. Yeah. And it's funny because the claim is,

If she didn't wear this jacket, all we would have been doing is praising her. You know what? No, you would have found something else. You would have found something else he didn't like about it. Or you would have ignored it. This one was easy. Yeah, there's no, there shouldn't have been, there shouldn't have been a loss here. They would have just ignored it.

If she went down there and saw the, yep. Or they would have said, look, she's going and Donald Trump won't even go. Like they would have come up with a way to be critical. So it's not, we can't act as if it would have been a huge win in the media because, of course, there are no wins in the media for the Trump administration. That being said, there's a silly sort of, I don't know. I mean, you should see that coming, right? Someone should say, hey, there's going to be a problem here with optics.

Why give, why hand this to them? But if, but think of it this way. Think of it the way the press and Donald Trump, look at this right now. This is a zero-sum game. There's only going to be one of them standing at the end. I think they both feel this way. It's either us or him. It's either me or them.

And they both think they're going to win. And so they are just, they're just, each of them, just going for it. Who actually wins here? Who actually wins here? I'm not sure. I'm not sure.

I mean, with the regular people, I think Melania wins because I think regular people, reasonable people who are not all ratcheted up. Look at that and go, there's no way she meant that. Stop it. There's no way she meant that. They don't like the first lady to be taken on like that. And I think the average person knows that's an unfair, you know, an unreasonable assumption to run to. So I think that Donald Trump actually wins.

But what they're trying to do here is just polarize us in our camps and keep us apart. Glenn back. Glenn back. Can't wait. Bill O'Reilly's coming up in just a second. We're going to talk to him about everything that's been going on. I'm really excited to hear his point of view. But I want to talk to you here just about sports.

You know, because that's what you tune in to me to hear about sports, right? The NFL is practically three berets away from a socialist revolution. Now, maybe that's just me. But they seem more concern with dismantling social norms and protesting than with actually playing football. The Minnesota Vikings announced yesterday that they're going to hold a summit and a fundraiser for the LGBTIQI inclusion in sports. Now, the inclusion summit includes speeches, interviews, panel discussions, with a variety of athletes, coaches, and activists who are homosexual or transgender, and will be hosted by the team's recently completed TCO Performance Center.

The summit marks the latest in the NFL's continued advocacy for LGBTQI rights and initiatives. Last year, the league launched NFL Pride in a bit to heightened sensitivity to the LGBTIQI community and reinforced a commitment to an inclusive environment, to which all employees are welcome. That's fair. That's good. That's what we should all be striving for, right? I don't want anybody harassed or discriminated against in the workplace or anywhere, really. But is that what this is really about?

Because it seems like there's a kind of a political or ideological slant to this. At the very least, it's virtue signaling. So what is it really about? Well, the summit is, quote, part of a settlement agreement with the Vikings that they made after the former Vikings punter Chris Clue, who is straight, filed a lawsuit against the team in 2014 for allegedly creating a hostile work environment for homosexual and transgender people. Okay, so it's a settlement. This is, you know, this is what happens in corporations, I guess.

Ultimately, the NFL is a private business. And, you know, as we saw with the National Anthem Nealers, they can conduct their business however they like. And, you know, in turn, the consumers can decide whether they're not going to keep giving them money or the time of day. What really bothers me here is this is just strange. I mean, at what point, at what point does, you know, being LGBTQ or I come into sports? When? I mean, if you want to create a better environment inside your company, then you should do that.

But why are you lecturing me about it as well? We've landed in this place where politics and gender and gender. race are the lead story on no matter what we're talking about. What do you want for a birthday cake? Do you want vanilla or chocolate? Well, I don't know. I'd like chocolate, but is that just because I'm white? Shut up. Shut up. It's also worth mentioning here that most people don't care if you're gay or straight with the possible exception of transgendered athletes, but that's another topic entirely. This tolerance has actually been confirmed by studies and surveys throughout all kinds of sports

in various countries throughout the world, even countries with, let's, shall we say, a far less tolerant view of the LGBTIQI community than we have here in America. Even people in those countries believe it doesn't matter. Why? Because people are coming to see. a game. They watch sports to see athleticism, to enjoy

the unpredictable fury of sport at its finest. Overwhelmingly, regardless of the sport, people don't care about your sexuality. Get over yourself. Most of us would rather not know. I don't need to imagine you doing whatever you want to do when you're doing

it with whomever you want to do it with. Nobody's watching golf to muse the social significance of gender norms and sexuality. We're watching golf. Put the little ball in the cup. That's it. We don't go to a baseball game to meditate on the evils of the patriarchy and the terrors of cultural appropriation. If an athlete is good, I don't care. I don't care. If they're bad, I still don't care. It's certainly not a new idea that LGBTQI can perform in sports. Typically,

what sports fans care about is, are they any good? I can guarantee you this. If Liberace rose from the dead, sequins and candelabras and all, and he suddenly was able to play basketball as a dead, flamboyant piano player, still in the sequence,

but he was as good as the 90s-era Michael Jordan. I don't think Chicago Bulls fans would complain that he joined the team. I think they'd be happy. I think you'd be happy. And I think you'd see a lot of fans that would just be wearing the sequins as a sign of support, not for his lifestyle or for him being dead and risen again somehow or another, just because they're showing their support because he's a great player. I think it's fair to say that most people like sports better when politics aren't involved.

keep the politics out of it. It's near impossible to escape the increasing intolerant politics of the left. Perhaps we could learn a lesson or two from our friends, the ancient Greeks. It's no secret that in ancient Greece, the ancient Greeks like to engage in all kinds of things that included, I'm guessing, more than LGBTIQI. It had the entire alphabet. They were very fond of various activities. But they also built a civilization of tremendous importance to humanity as whole. Philosophy, art, and yes, sports.

When they charged off to war or to the Olympics, they didn't slap a rainbow flag bumper sticker on the back of their chariot. Their sexuality didn't define their identity. They were multifaceted human beings able to go to war or to the theater or to the town hall as a citizen. because the citizenry was what is what mattered. Personhood. Selfhood. They lived in a time when people cared about self and tribe over sexuality and gender. Identity was not selfhood.

Identity was selfhood. It was not sexuality. And let me just tell you, I believe we've heard once before from somebody. Judge me not by the. color of my skin, but the content of my character. When it comes to sports, can we now all just say, judge me on how often I score and not on who I score with? It's Friday, June 22nd.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program. We have so much to talk to Bill O'Reilly about, author of the new book that is out this fall, uh, killing the SS, which I can't wait for. Bill O'Reilly, let's, let's just start. This has been an incredible. week. And I think a lot has been revealed on the press. They have crossed so many lines that I just don't think you come back from. Let's start with the latest Melania and her jacket. And that's number one. She should not have worn the jacket. Because why would you wear the jacket?

You know, you're going down to show sympathy to children who are confused and dazed and deserve attention. And you are a very powerful person. So I don't know why you would want to wear a jacket that has a message on it. I don't think the message is bad because I think that the Trump family has been attacked this week. in horrible ways, Peter Fonda. But I don't know why her advisors would say,

you know what, let's just play this neutral and concentrate on the kids and not bring any attention to ourselves. So, Bill. I always put my position in Beck as an advisor, like you.

I advise you and Stu. I always put myself in that position. My advice would be don't wear that jacket. Okay, so let me give you a couple of scenarios and how really, you think they are. One. She was walking out. It was going to be raining, possibly in Washington, D.C. Either when she was going or she was leaving, she said, you know, just grab a jacket. Somebody just

grab a jacket for me and I'll just, I'll just wear it in the car. She put it on. Nobody really thought about it because she was just getting it in the car and up on the airplane in Washington. How likely is that scenario? Possible. Possible. Yes, possible. The next one that she was, she's, she's, she has a reason to be pissed off this week. She has been treated horribly by the press. From the get-go, they have treated her horribly.

They would have never treated any other First Lady like this, with an exception possibly of Mary Lincoln. So she has had her son under siege this week. She has been under siege. Her husband is under siege. Her daughter

has been, her stepdaughter has been under siege. And she grabs the jacket and she's like, you know what? I don't really care. I'm going to wear this one because I just want to send a press. I don't care. I don't care about you, the press. Also possible, but not wise.

Correct. Correct. Not wise. However, this is the kind of thing that the Trump administration does that is frustrating for his fans and for his supporters because, you know, they had a good. they had a good thing that could have been really good and he always just tweets or says something and it just kind of

it takes that moment of sweetness away so they do kind of make these mistakes yeah I mean I don't know whether you're aware of this but on Monday I did a big thing that I said Donald Trump himself should go to the border um it should get on Air Force one not announce it just show up um with the Secret Service cadre

um talk to some of the children and show that he does care about the kids. So I know this to be true. They actually debated that. But the determination was made that it would show weakness if Trump went down there because it would show that he was caving into the vicious press coverage. So they decided to send Melania, and Melania went down.

So all of that is smart. I mean, I don't know about the caving to the weakness part about the press. Yes, if I were a president, I'd say, I'm going to do what I want, and I want to do this. Yes, I agree. So wait a minute. I've got one more scenario. Yeah. What are the, out of those two choices, which one do you think is more likely?

The former that they, yeah, that they didn't know. Okay. All right. Hang on. You know, they have people back. Right, right. I know that. I know that.

They're looking at your makeup, your hair, what you're wearing. I got it. If anything's falling. That's how he looks so good every day, Bill. Yeah, I know. So there's one more scenario. How likely is it that she was going on a plane to meet with the kids and she was sending a message after taking on her husband and speaking publicly about policy for the very first time? And she agrees that this should be stopped.

Breaking up family should be stopped. And she's an immigrant. how likely is it that she was saying, I really don't care about these kids? Zero. Thank you. Zero. Zero.

That's zero. Melania Trump came out before anybody and said she, this policy of separation disturbed her. She was one of the first people, and was the first person inside the Trump administration, to voice that concern. So there's no way that she had that message pertaining to the children.

There's a slight way that it was directed to the press, maybe 25%, but I just don't think anybody's thinking there. I agree. I just don't think they're thinking. I agree. Okay, so it is a, it's a side note mention at best. Would you agree? Yeah, but, you know, in our climate now.

No, no, no, I'm not talking about our climate. Our climate is so screwed up. I'm talking about in common sense, in a real world. But when you're framing your questions and you're framing your opinions, you have to take care, that's the word, to define to your audience and to everybody that this is a totally different press than we had three years ago. Oh, I know. Oh, I know. I know. You know, it's totally different. I know. This is seek and destroy. So I want to build a case here with you, Bill. So far, we're on the same page. I want to, I want to, I want to, I want to, I want to, I want to, take a break and then I want to come back and I want to talk about the other outrageous thing that the press has done and they've done a lot

this week and that is Time Magazine and the cover of Time Magazine and we have new information on that and oh I know during this break I'm booking a trip to Greece by the way I don't I'm not sure what you're saying there but you know more power to you I'm not going to judge Bill O'Reilly breaks news every time he comes on the program

doesn't he does all right let me we'll be back with Bill Riley in a second. First, let me tell you about Casper mattress. Casper just built a great bed. I mean, it's just really a good bed. They have these researchers that had this thing in testing for a very long time. They've invented their own foam so it's breathable so you're not trapped. I mean, I've had a foam mattress before. And at this time of year, you just don't sleep. It's you're just, you wake up and you are sopping wet. I hated it. This is a foam mattress that has, has, has cured that. It's got all of the right pressure points for your body. It gives you a great night

sleep and it's breathable so you're not hot. Casper mattress, unique combination of foams that give you everything you need for a perfectly balanced and comfortable rest. Try it out in your own home for 100 nights. If what I say isn't true, send it back and actually just call them. They'll come and pick it up. You don't have to worry about any of it. They'll give you a free refund fund. You have nothing to lose. They want you to have a good night sleep and so do I. Try Casper. Caspur.com. Try it in your own home for 100 nights. Caspur.com.

Use the promo code back and save $50 on select mattresses. Promocodeback, casper.com. Terms and conditions to apply. Mr. Bill O'Reilly. The press, this is the case I believe that we can make by the end of this hour, the press has

crossed so many lines this week that it is it's astonishing to me. We've just gone over the Melania Trump, which is just a line of you know, just common sense and decency and all of that stuff.

With Time Magazine, they put a young kid on the cover who was crying, and it looks like they're looking up to Trump. That's all Photoshop, obviously. But we find out now that it wasn't only exploitive and misleading. This child was never taken from their mother.

In fact, taken from the father, and the mother took this child, unbeknownst to the dad, and abandoned three other children. Any comments on this one? No, it's a Honduran, and you've got to be careful when you're precincts. But I think you're right on the overarch that Time magazine, which is bankrupt and will never again be any kind of a force in America. And at one time Time magazine was the most powerful weekly news organ in the country. And you know you can pinpoint their downfall when they put me on the cover. Yeah, I mean, after that people went, is this mad magazine?

Yeah, this is craziness. This is craziness. Right. Right. But Time Magazine destroyed itself by ideology, as so many of them have, and now is in the realm of we don't really care what's true. We feel Donald Trump is a threat to the nation so we can justify anything, dishonesty, distortion, because we feel he's a villain. But even more important than that was the story about the special counsel Robert Mueller putting in writing in his report. that both the New York Times and the Washington Post fabricated details of the raid on the home of Paul Manafort. And Mueller himself was so outraged by this and didn't pull any punches at all, said basically those news agencies lied. We did not pick any locks. We did not do what they said we did.

And it's outrageous. But did you hear anything from the New York Times and Washington, saying, gee, we're sorry, we made the mistake. No, because they don't. So, Bill, has the media, I mean, we've watched them just disintegrate before our eyes, the media is, it's strange. Every time they think we got him, I don't think this is going to affect Donald Trump. I don't think this is a knockout punch on him at all, especially when you look at the facts.

This has been going on. since the Clinton administration. On bill o'Reilly.com yesterday, I said that now this is a campaign issue. That Donald Trump has decided to run for re-election. He's using the border and his hatred of the press and vice versa as campaign issues.

He believes, and his people believe, that the American public loathe the media so much that the more the Trump administration can attack the media, the more votes they will. ultimately get. Right. So now it's become a campaign issue. I happen to agree with you. Now let's go and turn what that means next. It's been a long road. I mean, it seems like just yesterday. Glenn and Tanya were selling their house and I remember this going on and they were not having a good experience with a

real estate agent because, you know, sometimes it just doesn't work. They're not all created equal. Everybody's different. You know, you go into, you know, sometimes, you know, Sometimes you go to like McDonald's and the sandwich is delicious. The next time you go, maybe they didn't put it together that well. And that's just at the McDonald's level. Think about $100,000, $200,000, $300,000. When you're selling your house, a lot of money is on the line. You need someone who's going to represent you in the best way possible.

So real estate agentsitrust.com now exists. And there's over 1,200 agents on it from all over America that are qualified with marketing plans, experience, character, results, and values. These are people that you can trust, and that's why the website is called real estate agents. I trust.com. Go there now, real estate agentsitrust.com, if you want to sell your house fast and for the most money. Real estate agents, I trust.com. This is the Glenn Beck program. Bill O'Reilly on from Bill O'Reilly.com, and Bill, I want to get your opinion on this.

This started a few weeks ago when people started posting a photo from 2014 of what was happening on the border and it went viral quickly until a few of us who were actually on the border in 2014 saw it and went no that's that's from 2014 that's your guy but they quickly withdrew it nobody apologized really they were just like oh yeah well my kids distracted me it's editor of the new york times um the but they saw how passionate people had become quickly on that one photo and realized we got him we've got something here because we can go down to the border now, and surely if it was happening then,

it's still happening. They're supposed to, hang on, they're supposed to be reporting facts, why things are happening, giving us context, telling us what it means and why it matters. But I believe that they have finally crossed the Rubicon of where it is extraordinarily apparent to any fair-minded person, that they are nothing but advocates.

And they either don't see it or they don't care. People have priced in to Donald Trump. The Raphael Cruz killed JFK. They've priced that in, and they don't care. The press thinks, well, two can play at this game, but they can't because they're not Donald Trump. And they are going to absolutely put the last nail in their coffin. They think they're going to win. They don't.

What do the folks do, as you like to say? Well, folks are angry on both sides. The press is not going to have much of a role in the midterms coming up in November or the presidential election of 2020. Because everybody knows now, as you just said, that the fix is in. And they know, I mean, the editors of these newspapers and the producers of these television programs, they're taking their orders from corporate. And that goes the other way, too. and corporate is basically telling them, look, we want you to destroy Donald Trump or we want you to support Donald Trump.

And outside of very, very few people, Charles Cradhammer being one of them, the Lemmings say, okay. And, you know, that doesn't, in the New York and L.A. precincts, they're all thinking the same way anyway because that's what they do. it's a social thing as well. So it's easy for them to say, okay, I'm going to justify any kind of bad stuff I can put in the paper on TV about Donald Trump. And that makes Trump sympathetic in some quarters and will, I believe, help him honor more votes. You brought up Charles Crowdheimer. What are your memories of him? I just finished writing my tribute to Charles for Bellowreli.com and Newsmax.

and what strikes me about Mr. Crouthammer, and I didn't really have a personal relationship with him. I did spend a little time with him at a Washington Nationals game. He was a big baseball fan. But life dealt Charles a very cruel blow. He's in Harvard Medical School. He's a brilliant man, and he dives into a pool, and he hits his head and neck, and he's paralyzed. Well, rather than folding, Charles completes medical school, does amazing work in bipolar disorders, then pivots into journalism, which he always loved, was a radical leftist at one point.

But then, because Charles was not a zombie, began seeing what Ronald Reagan was trying to accomplish, and then moved on over to the conservative side based upon his admiration of Reagan. So this is a life that should be studied by Americans, that you can overcome adversity, that you have to roll with bad things that happen to you, and that you can accomplish an amazing amount of things, even if challenged the way Charles Cradhammer was. So that's the essence of my remarks. I think there's a lot of people that watch Fox for a long time

that may not have even known that he was in a wheelchair. And Charles never wanted that. He never wanted a reference to it. He never wanted people feeling sorry for him. He never wanted any of that. He really was a man that people should emulate, and that's the message. And he was so disgusted by the press.

I can't tell you how angry he was about, because he did write for the Washington Post. Now, he never badmouthed them. But I know that he was just sickened by the corruption, and that's the only word you can use, that the American media has descended into. We now have a corrupt institution in this country. It's horrifying.

And I mean, I personally experienced it. And it is just, I feel that America is really in trouble if you cannot get honest information. So we can't get honest information. Yes, we can. I think you're a program and others on talk radio are essentially honest. What I'm doing on Bill O'Reilly.com is absolutely honest. There are vehicles. But when we do that, when you and I separate ourselves from the corruption, what happens?

The corruption comes after us, because the corruption knows that exposition is going to harm them. and so the few people who do that exposition are under enormous strain and in danger. So I said something earlier, and Stu said, you could talk me into this, but I'm not sure I agree. And that is, I think what we're seeing now from the press is just a flailing. they they they they don't understand the damage that they have done over the last few decades they don't understand that the people don't need them nor do they want them to tell us what to think and they don't they're used to being on their you know in their ivory tower and controlling the conversation in the world and they are panicked and they each corner

It gets worse because around each corner they think, well, this is going to put us rightfully back into our seat. And as we are tried, you know, they try to destroy us. As we get out and others join us on the online and internet and elsewhere, they become more and more desperate and it's only accelerating their demise. Well, I think that we can back your analysis up with facts. CNN has become the most virulently anti-Trump, even worse, in MSNBC, because CNN covers itself with, well, we're journalists. You know, MSNBC, they're just puppets. It's a puppet show over there.

CNN, and, well, no, you know, we're worldwide, you know, there isn't one primetime program on CNN that gets more than a million viewers. Not one. all right um that jake tapper despicable human being oh wow she's down in 600 thousand 700 000 wait why do you i happen to disagree with you on jake i know you do we just talk about this but i know him and so trust me on this all right i'm not going to but okay

i know i'm not back you know i you look if you want to go camping with him no i don't i don't i don't i'm not taking my trip to Greece. I get it, but I'm not... Right. I'm just saying, I'll make up my own mind. The circulation is down. Ratings are down.

People are fed up. They have other options that they didn't have five years ago, Bill O'Reilly.com, the Blaze, you know, and you're right. They're killing themselves, and they don't know it, because they hang out with themselves.

They don't know anybody in Ohio. or Idaho or Arizona. And those people are furious. Even the people who don't like Trump, particularly, they know the fix is in. They know that Barack Obama got unbelievably phony coverage, and they know the hate directed at Trump. And Trump could better, if he would just control himself

and discipline himself a little bit more. He could better harness that. Yes. Bill, let me try to tell you. I think the distinction I'm trying to make here, which is I agree with you that, you know, the media, it's collapsing and it's flailing. But I think that what we're seeing now, particularly with stories like this, and I would throw Parkland into this. I would throw Charlottesville into this. There's a difference in the coverage when they think they've got them this time. Yes. They think they now are running downhill rather than running uphill in trying to sell America on how bad this president is. And I feel like the problems that we're seeing now are more a problem with overconfidence. They think this time the people are with them. They see the polls. They see the optics. And they think if they can just, this time they'll get it over the hump.

This time they can, this time finally everyone will come along with them and realize what a terrible person, Donald Trump is. And when that happens, they seem to overplay their hand. Well, I'm not sure whether maybe some people feel that way. But if you look at the job approval numbers, after North Korea and the Inspector General's report, they came up pretty dramatically. Now, it took three days. It should have taken three hours for Donald Trump to sign that executive order. Those of us who were following the news, honestly, I did it right away.

I suggested that this was not going to stand. It shouldn't stand. You can't have children harmed in any way. And if a president can mitigate that he should, we put that out hours after this was experienced. How is it going to play? Their latest attempt is to show the abuse that happens, you know, under Donald Trump. I think the executive order took the story away, all right? Now the story will pivot into the Republicans in chaos, can't get any immigration plan. While the dishonest press says that, there isn't one Democrat who will vote for any kind of immigration compromise because Schumer and Pelosi have basically said to them, If you vote for any Republican compromise on immigration, we will cut off your funding for your re-election campaigns. All right, where is that story?

Where is that story? So, therefore, you have an entire party in Congress, no matter what they come up with, the Republicans, aren't going to support it. That's a hell of a story. Bill O'Reilly. Talk about little kids in danger. Talk about four migrants in danger. and let me lay this on you back. I sent you a column, and I'm sure you read it, about the industry of people smuggling.

Yes. About how much money is involved in it, about Mexican authorities being bribed to do it. Where's that story? These children and poor people are being used by organized crime cartels who will cut their throats in an instant. Where is that story? I think the American people, I could be wrong, I've been wrong about the American people before, but I think the American people are fair and decent.

They look at this story and they know something is wrong. They also know that this is an ongoing issue and they just want it solved because they do actually care about the kids. Absolutely. Absolutely. They want it solved. When you have one party that for political reasons will not compromise, despite overwhelming evidence that this is chaos and children are being harmed, but we are not going to do anything to stop it.

That's corruption. That's what we have. One last question for you. I think the Democrats are going to be very, very surprised if they keep on this course at the midterm elections. it's not going to go well for them. I agree that most Americans want a fair immigration plan, and I think most wall, if you expire, the wall was necessary,

which hasn't been done, which is why I want everybody to read my column on Bill O'Reilly.com. That's the essence of why the wall is needed. But the problem with the Republicans is they don't have an articulate spokesperson person to get these messages across so that a lot of people who might be persuaded to do the right thing never hear a cogent argument from the Republican Party. Yes. Bill. That's the problem.

Always good to talk to you. Bill O'Reilly.com. His new book comes out this fall, the hunt for the worst war criminals in history, killing the SS is the name of it. We don't know who he's going to be killed. next, but Bill O'Reilly on his killing spree. It continues this fall. Bill, thanks a lot. All right. You've got your air conditioner on, and I don't know about you, but holy cow. What is it like at your house? Because at my house, it's the fires of hell hot outside. In our

studios, it's the fires of hell hot outside. Keeping them cool means we've got the air conditioning running on overload, which means we have to take care of that HVAC system. You've got to change your filters, because the filters, especially with all the pollen and everything else in the air, your filters, if they start to get clogged at all, that HVAC system is going to go down because it's just, it's not going to be able to handle it. It's got to be able to draw that air through easily. That's why you have to change your filters. America's leading provider of HVAC filters for homes and small businesses,

is filter by filter by carries over 600 sizes that ship for free within 24 hours they're all made right here in America and they also have auto delivery that way you never forget they come and you're like oh yeah I'm just put this in and you change your filters and they knock 5% off the order

just for making your life a little easier it's filter by save time save money breathe better and save your HVAC system from all kinds of costly repairs filter by That's filter B-U-Y filterby.com. Glenn Beck.

There is just so much going on this week. There were some really big, important legislation that was going through the Senate, and that all got squashed at the last minute by the Republicans, and it was to rein the budget and get the budget into control. There's been some very big court cases. that have happened, including one that, though there's a few of them that really concern me, we're going to get into those probably, hopefully on Monday. But we also have Mike Lee joining us next, a good friend, an honest guy, and a friend of the Constitution as well.

We're going to talk a little bit about what happened in the Senate with the budget and also immigration. Is anybody really working to fix this problem? Glenn Beck. It's Friday, June 22nd. You're listening to the Glenn Beck program. Senator Mike Lee, one of the greats in our Senate right now that is, he stands by the Constitution in common sense. I can't even imagine what it is like to live your life right now, Mike. Welcome to the program.

Thank you very much. It's good to be with you. So, Mike, I want to talk to you about the border. I also want to talk to you about a couple of things that happened yesterday. and just get your, let's just get the lay of the land. First of all, on the immigration front,

the media is going crazy on this. It is so irritating. I believe you were down to the border, or you were going to come to the border when we went down in 2014. Were you there, Mike? I was not there then. I've spent a lot of time there.

In fact, I spent two years living down there and working among poor people, immigrants and others, missionary. Right. Quarter of century ago. And so I'm very familiar with the lower Rio Grande Valley where a lot of this is happening. And it is a nightmare.

And it has been a nightmare for a long time. And people are trafficking in children, drugs, all kinds of horrible things. But nobody seemed to care until Donald Trump came along. I think the average American just would like this fixed. Is there anybody that is trying to fix it? in the Republican Party that can get something past the Democrats, which are just kind of a, I hate to use the term Mexican standoff,

but that's where they're at. Yeah. Look, immigration has been a very thorny topic. I was talking to a colleague in the House of Representatives yesterday who said that every proposal that one group would support is diametrically opposed by the other group, and that there are so many different factions of people that there's no one proposal that they can see that can get a majority.

There are glimmers of hope out there from time to time. It's been legislation introduced by Senator Cruz and separate legislation introduced by Senator Tillis this week that would address this Flores problem and would address the problem of migrant families being separated while their applications for asylum are pending. So that's why my view has long been, that with immigration, our best step would be to start very narrowly.

uh let's pass a number of narrowly targeted bills each dealing with a very discreet corner of the problem we can start making progress so explain the flores case that's reno versus floris right yes yes explain this yeah this was a decision that ended up making it impossible uh illegal for the federal government in some circumstances to allow uh for families to remain together while while their asylum applications were pending, at least as was the case with families that entered not through one of the lawful points of entry, but through an illegal smuggling channel or in some other point along the border that wasn't a lawful point of entry. Now, keep in mind, this has been going on for years. This occurred under Democratic presidents and not just under

Republican presidents. It's just that it got more attention of late, in part, because there's been more border enforcement of late. One of the real problems for this, Glenn, is that some of the drivers of illegal immigration, some of the drivers of families flooding across the border under desperate circumstances, and it had to do with a signal sent in previous administrations, including under the Obama administration, go ahead, come on over, come on over. And this idea that we would have almost open borders has created a flood of people coming up, And it's led to a lot of women and children being assaulted, being sexually assaulted and exploited along the way.

It really is a humanitarian crisis and one that I think our government sadly has contributed to. And what is horrible is, I mean, one of the reasons why, you know, we have to have paperwork or now DNA testing is because, A, some of these kids that are released right away are being conscripted by the drug lords. to do, you know, child trafficking and smuggling kids in across the border because they know that they're going to be released. So that was part of the Wilberforce law that Bush signed in to try to stop the drug trafficking. But there is all kinds of things that are happening where we don't know if these kids belong to these parents. And nobody is, everybody's pointing fingers, but nobody's actually looking at the, human price of just allowing kids to come in across the border by themselves? That's right. And that human price is very substantial, especially when you consider the long

journey that people are making. And when you consider the fact that in many cases, children coming with adults are not necessarily their children. Sometimes they're traveling with smugglers or with someone else. And along the way, they are subject to all kinds of of horrors. This is one of the reasons why what I wish we would do is figure out a way to establish an asylum process that can begin in Honduras or in some of the other Central American countries. Well, doesn't it exist? Don't you just have to go to the consulate? That's, and that's the way it should happen. Rather than people coming up unlawfully, we would prefer that they apply for asylum there rather than here. It's one of the reasons why it's so dismaying when people

refer to those of us who think that it should be an orderly process, describe us as somehow unpatriotic or unkind. The most unkind thing we can do is to facilitate a process that leads a whole lot of people to be harmed along the way. Mike, you were there on the border. You've spent time. It is a dangerous place for anyone but for children and women or just vulnerable families, even with the men that are not prepared to deal with these drug lords and other nefarious characters, getting across the water, it's, you're blessed if you see a border agent in comparison to what's on the other side. Yeah, yeah, that's right. That's right.

And another point that's related to that often goes on looked, there is a racist assumption that a lot of people use, a lot of America's elites use, which is that if you have a last name that is similar to the last names of some of them, some of the people coming across the border illegally or seeking asylum, that you necessarily are going to want uncontrolled immigration by other people with your same last name. And that isn't true. One of the things I learned living and working among people along the border is that regardless of their national origin, regardless of their citizenship, their U.S. immigration status,

they were concerned about their own safety, their own security, their own employment operations. That's why they came here, the chaos in their own country. Why would they want chaos here unless you're nefarious and most of them are not? Exactly, exactly, which is why it impureates me when liberal elites in the United States try to suggest that this is a race issue, that everyone of one ethnicity feels one way and a lot of people of another race feel another way. It simply isn't true. And it is often true that those most harmed by uncontrolled open borders immigration,

are recent immigrants themselves. All right, let me switch gears. Some things happened yesterday that nobody was paying attention to, and I'm glad that there are people like you that are trying to cut the waste in government and the spending, but also regulation. You were close to a bill yesterday that would have cut a whole buttload of wasteful spending, and you looked like you had the votes, and at the last minute it didn't pass. Can you tell me what it is and what happened?

Sure. This one was actually the day before yesterday. The Senate had an opportunity to vote on President Trump's rescissions package. This is the roughly $15 billion package, you might remember, the President Trump identified as wasteful spending. And this came up on what's called a privileged motion, meaning we could have gotten it to the floor, had gotten a final vote without any kind of supermajority vote to end debate.

The House had already passed it. It was teed up. We knew the vote was going to be close. We knew we were going to lose Susan Collins, which meant we would end up in the best case scenario with the tie vote. Mike Pence was coming over as the vice president to break the tie. At the very last minute, another one of my colleagues decided to vote against it, and as a result, it failed. And it was Burr that voted against. Yes, yes, Senator Burr from North Carolina voted against it. The sad thing is he had never even spoken. to me until about 15 minutes into this vote. The thing that he was concerned about could have been dealt with in a different way. There was no good reason why he had to vote against it. But as a result of this, there was no opportunity for the vice president to come over to break the tie because there was no tie to break because at that point we had lost. Now, this is, Glenn, this is a rounding error on a rounding error. Fifteen billion dollars is a lot of money. It is a small amount of money compared to what this government spends. But if we can't even start there with something

that modest that this president has asked us to cut, I really worry about where we're going, and I'm terribly disappointed that we missed this opportunity. Well, he said that he didn't do it because it would have cut money from the land and water conservation fund, which isn't that the one that's trying to buy up more land for the federal government? Yes, that's what I'm told was that it was out of concern for the land and water conservation fund, that this would have taken $16 million away from that. So first of all, this is a very small amount of money compared to the $15,000.

billion dollars that we're dealing with. But yeah, the land and water conservation fund is an entity that, among other things, buys up additional federal land. This in a country where the federal government already owns about 30% of the land mass in the United States. In some states, like Utah, where I live, it's two-thirds of the land. And so as I look at that, I become very, very frustrated with the fact that we, sometimes Republicans end up defending the status quo end up defending this practice of uncontrolled spending within Washington. Okay, there was the waters of the United States repeal amendment also that was shot down. Tell me about that.

Yes, so this one occurred yesterday. Yesterday, I brought up an amendment to an appropriations bill that the Senate's been working on. It was completely teed up. It could have been passed onto this appropriations bill with a simple majority because it was germane to the topic we were discussing. This would have taken down. it would have eliminated the waters of the United States regulation issued by the Obama administration. This is the one where they regulate even large puddles and things, right?

Large puddles, dry washes, ditches, even plots of ground that are sometimes wet, puddles that are slow to dry. These are things that Republicans were incensed about when Obama put them in, and we went, I mean, I remember the shows. we went nuts on this because it controls all water in the United States. Right, right. All water and some non-water, some just sort of soggy ground that is wet for a few hours or a few days at a time. And this wasn't just Republicans, Glenn. These were a number of Democrats were upset, too. This wreaked havoc in areas of agriculture, housing, the economy generally, our court system. And so in 2015, we voted to take this down.

The Republican Senate and the Republican House voted to take down this regulation. President Obama being in office at the time, his administration having issued this, vetoed it, and we didn't have the two-thirds supermajority necessary to override it. So we had a shot with this appropriations bill to add an amendment to it that would have taken it down. And unfortunately, we lost. We lost. We got, I think it was 34 votes. 29 of them were Republicans, so fortunately most Republicans, senators voted for it. We picked up, I think, four or five Democratic senators, but there were

20 Republican senators who voted against it, voted to table it to set it aside, and that was disappointing. Why? Why would they do that? You know, I'm always cautious to speak for someone else, but I believe if they were here with us today, they would say that they felt they had to table it because they were worried that it would jeopardize the appropriations bill that we were working on. In other words, even though this was bipartisan and that a handful of Democrats joined us, they were worried that there might be some possibility that the appropriations bill to which this was attached as an amendment might be put in jeopardy if it passed. Well, how do we know that? How do we know that before we try it? Why on earth didn't we allow this to go up and say to the Democrats in the

Senate? Are you really willing to take down this appropriations bill that funds, among other things, things like veterans benefits, simply because you want to defend this unworkable Obama-era intrusive regulation? I think not. I think it would have been better to at least take a shot out. And I'm very disappointed that 20 of my Republican colleagues and the Republican leadership in the Senate chose to table this instead of allowing it to pass. Mike, there is a growing number of people that are done with both parties. there is a growing number of people that just see these parties that's playing nothing but games

and they would like to see a group of people that are standing on common sense. I think what's happening in today's world is getting closer and closer to the American people. They're feeling it now in their own life. They are frightened by this post-modernism world where nothing makes sense and you can lose your job for a tweet.

it's not going to last and they're not going to go back to the Republicans because the Republicans look ancient and like they're not serious about anything. Is there any hope that a new almost Republican spirit will rise up the way it did in the 1800s and say, you guys, neither side is serious about this. We are. Yeah, here's the only way it'll happen, Glenn. And I assume you're in your mind when you say Republican, you're referring to small our Republican.

Small our Republican. We're referring to the principles of the republic on which our country was founded. Yes, that really is the answer. Look, the twin structural protections in the Constitution, federalism and separation of powers, those that tell us that most power belongs at the state and local level, not at the national level to begin with. And then within Washington, we've got three branches of government. Each branch has to operate within its sphere. If we just return to those basic principles, which are not themselves, either distinctively Republican or Democratic, they're just American

principles, they're constitutional principles. They are small our Republican principles. If we return to those, this would work. I know. We could turn this around. It's not too late, and your listeners can help. How? Your listeners can help by making sure that every conversation they have with any member of Congress, any candidate for Congress, any candidate who ever runs for any federal office ever, have them ask about what they're going to do to reduce the size and the scope, the reach, and the cost of the federal government, what they're going to do to make sure that Congress, in fact, makes the law rather than delegating that law to an entity like the EPA or the Army Corps of Engineers, as was the case in the waters of the United States. See,

what happens with that Waters of the United States regulation, in effect, Congress passed something saying we shall have clean water and we'll let these executive branch agencies like the EPA figure out what that means. And then they write something that includes puddles and dry washes and ditches. That's the problem is that Congress has itself abdicated its own role as being the legislative organ of the federal government. This after taking over so many responsibilities that don't belong to Congress in the first place. Mike Lee, thank you so much. God bless you. Thanks for all your hard work and remain standing. unless you have to sit down because otherwise you're going to walk out of the room and leave Washington,

then you should sit down in the Senate and not leave. Thank you so much, Mike. Thank you, sir. You bet. Mercury real estate, for most people, their home is their biggest investment. That's why we built real estate agents. I trust.com. Working with the right agent can make a significant difference in the outcome or buying or selling of your home. There's over a thousand agents all over America who are just like you.

Their word is their bond. They are fans of the show. They share your sensibilities. And they are experts in your area. Our agents are vetted and handpicked for their knowledge, their skill, and their track record. You need somebody that knows what your house is worth and has the system to sell it and market it to those people that would be interested in your home. thousands of families have already put real estate agents. I trust.com to the test.

The results are remarkable. If you're looking to buy or sell a home, now is the time to go to real estate agents. I trust.com. Real estate agents I trust.com. That's Friday. Have you seen Oceans 8 yet? I have not.

No. Did you like Oceans 11? I liked Oceans 11 and then I'm going to put a period after that. Yeah, right. I'm with you. And not expand past it. Right. I've never watched Oceans 12 or 13 a second time. I watched the movie theater and I'm like, yeah, okay. It's not Oceans 11.

Yeah. I think I probably have seen them a second time, but I have not felt good about that experience. Yeah, right. Oceans 8 is pretty good. It's pretty good. What would you put it in the ocean if you had to rank them? I would Oceans 11, space, oceans eight. No, Oceans 11, space, space, ocean eight, space, space, space, space, space. space, space, space, space, 13 page, page, page, page, page, page, page, 12. It's such a, take out the eight, which I have not seen, but that's how I would, I would rank the first three. Okay. So, so I liked, you know, Oceans 8, but it revolves around a piece of jewelry that supposedly Cartier had made.

And I think in the movie, they say it weighed like eight pounds or 10 pounds, and it's 500 carrots. this diamond this this diamond necklace it's absolutely incredible but is it real the answer is even more incredible

yes it is but it's bigger I'll tell you that story when we come back a couple of things here I want to make note of the diamond necklace in Oceans 8 is this gig gigantic necklace.

It's on the neck of Anne Hathaway. And it is supposedly like 500 carrots and weighs, I don't know, 8 pounds or something like that. And it's amazing. And I wondered,

all right, is that, I mean, is that real? Do they have that? Because in the movie, what they have to do is they have to get that necklace out of the safe of Cartier underground. Yeah, because now movie jewelry is real. The diamond in the documentary Titanic actually was not the real. That's sitting on my office desk right now.

It's complete plastic. Anyway. But boy, was I surprised. Anyway, the, so this, so this is supposedly, you know, a real thing. Well, you do a little research, and it actually is, but there's something surprising about it. So it's called the Jean Toussaint necklace. And it was named after the guy who was their creative director for a long, long time. In the movie, I don't remember how it got back to Cartier's hands, but it did.

And so now it's so valuable that they can never take it out of the safe. And so they leave it in the safe for insurance reasons, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. well, this necklace actually did exist at one point. It was made in I think 1931. And what's crazy about it is, as big as it is in the movie, that's the scaled down version. It was actually larger than that in real life. And it was made for the Maharaja of Nanagad, Nanajajar or something.

I don't know. I have a condo there. You do? And it was, Cardi at the time, described it as the finest cascade of colored diamonds in the world. It is, I mean,

here it is. Look at that. Wow. Yeah, that's a lot of diamonds. 500 carrots. Now, what's crazy is the jewelry that is in the deal,

it was made by Cartier. They made that for the movie. It took them. because the movie company, I don't know why, said, hey, we've only got eight weeks before we need this. Can you make this in eight weeks? So they did. It took 15 artists at Cartier to cut this and to assemble it.

It took 4,200 total man hours to make. Just for the movie. Imagine what the real one would have been like. And that nuts? That is crazy. So wait, so did they make it out of actual diamonds again? No, no, no. It's still costume jewelry.

It's still costume jewelry. But really good costume jewelry. But at one point it was real. It was 500 carrots. It was real. It no longer exists. I guess it was sold and cut up. Cartier preserved in its archives a design and drawing and photographs of the piece and the owner.

The necklace for the film was made. in Paris, France, taking eight weeks. And here's the actual design of it with the cut. I mean, they didn't, you know, that's just the pattern. It's crazy. It's just crazy. So overall, you like the movie, though? I did.

I did. It's not Oceans 11, but very few movies are Oceans 11. It's not the exact same movie. No, I mean, with, no, Ocean's 11 is magic. I mean, that's just a great, great movie. And it's kind of like, you know, I see dead people. Once you have seen that pattern, it's not as good the second time.

Right. You know what I mean? And then you add a really bad script to something you've already seen. And you get Oceans 12 and 13. 12, they were like, you know what? What if we make the same movie but make it impossibly confusing and uninteresting? And that was an interesting choice to me. Right.

I mean, it was artistically an interesting road to go on. And then 13 was like, hey, remember how people liked 11? let's bring it back like 10% that direction. Right, right. Let's put the same gaffer on this one and see if we can get it closer. Maybe the same best boy. Yes. And that's it.

And that's it. And they, yeah. So, and this one is good. Did you ever see Italian job? Yeah. Oh, yeah. I love Italian job. Yeah.

That was the one that where they were running minis around. Yeah. I love that movie. It's, you know, so Ocean's 8 isn't even that. but it's it's good it's good it's a good fun movie it's the problem is because it's ocean eight oceans eight uh you know it's it's you're you have either exceptionally low expectations or high expectations and this one kind of comes in right in the middle and you're like okay well it's not oceans it's not oceans 12 certainly and it's not even oceans 13 it's better do you think that

this is an interesting phenomenon because i i believe you're right Right. This goes back to horror movies. The horror movie, the first horror movie is almost the best of the, almost always the best of the entire sequence because you're trying to figure out who this guy is. What does the guy look like behind the mask? What does he do to people? And once you get through the first one and you realize that towards the end of the movie usually, the suspense is gone as to what he does. And then it just becomes a chase movie, right? All the rest, all the sequels are essentially this guy trying up new crazy things to do.

But it's basically the same concept. Right. Right. And that's, I think, the same thing with every movie that comes in sequels. There's something charming about discovery as you're finding out what these characters do and where they go and what their traits are. You're learning in that first one. And then the other ones, you're just kind of seeing, I'm interested to see how this plays out. But there are certain movie sequels.

And I think Oceans is one of them where the first one's so good. and they can't even come remotely close to it with the sequels. Another one is Hangover. The Hangover, the first hangover is so good as far as that genre of movies. And the other two are so bad. The Matrix. Because once you have hangovers, once you have hangovers that, that intense. Yeah.

It's hard to outdo them. It's hard to outdo them. The sequel should have just been called Blackout. You know what I mean? They didn't try it. They're just not, they're just, their brains are not even on anymore. It's just their bodies functioning. Because once you've had that hangover, if you're going to have another hangover like that,

I mean, you're probably, you're probably an alcoholic. And so you're blacking out. And you're doing even crazier things. But then the movie ends with going, I had no idea. I did what? I killed who? It's not really a story here. We're just, we're tired and we're driving home.

The Matrix is another one I would put in this category. where the first one, I mean, that is a masterpiece of a movie. It really is. The Matrix is a great movie. And it's been now, it's so, it's become such a piece of pop culture now that red pills and blue pills are all part of like the Lexicon. But I mean, that first movie is really good. The second and third one, they're just terrible. I don't even think I made it to the third one.

Because the second one was pretty bad. I barely made it to Oceans 13 because 12 was 12. team because 12 was just punishing. Yeah. 12 was like punishing. It was. It was. It was.

It was like we're going to punish you with this and see if you'll take it. We're just going to hit you in the face for two and a half hours and see if we can make a third one and you'll still come back. Yeah. Oh, that was definitely what they did with Hangover. They were like, we dare you to get back in the steer. We dare you. It is. The Exorcist is another one.

Oh my gosh. Exorcist 2, The Heretic is known as one of the worst movies of all time. You haven't lived until you were part of the movie premiere. I was at the movie premiere of Jaws 3D. Ah, okay. Wow. So you haven't lived until you've done that one. That's true.

Because I mean, there are movies where you can point to a really bad sequel, right? you can say, okay, that, you know, people, a lot of people, like I would certainly say, Indiana Jones, the Crystal Skull is one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my entire life. Now that was kind of a fourth one. It was a throwaway, I would say. A lot of people bash the Temple of Doom in that series. And to me, the Temple of Doom, it's a little cheesier than the others, but it's okay. It's okay. It's not like this. You can get away, you can get away with Indiana Jones because it's a Saturday matinee kind of movie. Right. You know what I mean? It's a, it's a fun you know, just did crazy adventure kind of movie.

So you can get away with it being a little cheesy. But there's, yeah, you can. It has a little bit more leeway. But when it's a classic, because it can't just be good movie. Like if National Treasure Part 2 was significantly worse than part 1, which I don't even remember if it was. Like it was in both of them were, in my memory,

mildly enjoyable. Yeah, they were good. They were good. Right, they were fine. But like when it's a classic, it's an all-time class. of the genre. And then you just bomb so badly in every attempt at a sequel.

There's a, or even a remake, you know? Yeah. Like the whiz was like, it was appropriately titled. It really was like, we took this classic and we peed all over it. It was great.

You know, it's like Willie Wong in the Chocolate Factory with Tim Burton. Tim Burton needs to be told, stay away from children's stuff. Just stay away from it because you're too weird and creepy. And you don't have, you know, there's this weird thing about Tim Burton. I think he's a genius. I really do. He's a genius that sees things entirely differently.

Edward Cisorhands is the closest he ever got to finding heart. But he never can close the loop and have you go, oh my gosh, that was such a warm. feeling, I just feel so good about that. You just walk away going, that was creepy. Okay, that was really, really creepy. And I'm not, I'm not comfortable. Tim needs to be checked.

Yeah. He has signed on for the Dumbo remake. That, I'm telling you. I'm telling you. I don't know who at Disney signed on. I just saw that. And it looks magical. And then it says from the mind of Tim Burton,

and I'm like, oh my gosh, this is going to be a disaster because Dumbo is their biggest heart classic. There is no movie that is more all heart than Dumbo. And they gave it to the guy who doesn't. I think he doesn't. He's like, you know, the first living owner or, you know, heart donor. You know, like he doesn't have a heart. He doesn't understand it.

He may not even have blood in him. Yeah. By the way, on a related note, if you want a half hour of a bizarre journey this weekend and you want to escape completely from the political world and just dive into something crazy, spend a half hour or so reading, maybe 15 minutes,

reading the Rolling Stone profile of Johnny Depp that just came out, it is bonkers. I mean, this guy is, on the verge of complete insanity. And because of his Hunter S. Thompson obsession, it's a dangerous situation he's in. He's in the middle of all these lawsuits against people who controlled his money, including his sister and his family.

He's completely alone, drinking drugs all the time, obsesses. Should you get the writer on? It was fascinating. It would be a really interesting conversation. They say he's made 650 million. dollars from these movies over the year, it's all gone.

It's all gone. To what? Well, let me give you an example. There was a report that when Hunter S. Thompson died, he bought a cannon and shot the cannon. He shot the ashes into the air to explode them

in the air. His ashes. Hunter S. Thompson's ashes. Yeah. Costs reportedly $3 million. In the story, story, Johnny Depp disputes that, as you might expect. Except what he says is, I wanted it to go high enough so it was higher than the tallest part of the Statue of Liberty, I believe. And it actually costs in Johnny Depp's estimation $5 million for him to shoot the ashes of a guy

he liked into the air and explode them. And they go through, I mean, the litany of money wasting. We need to go through this on Monday. Yeah, it's fascinating. Monday or Tuesday. I know Monday, we really have to go. through the Supreme Court decisions because there's some really disturbing things

that are possible that I'm not smart enough to figure all of these out but there's an I'm smart enough to go wait that's kind of concerning yeah on a few things the the government is

is handing down from the Supreme Court so I want to get into that on Monday but we should get this guy on yeah I'd be interesting I mean think of that think how hard would it be? You remember what is it, Brewster's millions? He has to sit. I love them. Right?

He had a classic. Didn't he have to spend $30 million in 30 days, Glenn. Okay. Imagine how difficult it would be. I know people would think, oh, that's not. Oh, yeah, it is. How difficult would it be to spend $650 million? And not have anything to show for it.

All right. Soros may be a sign that more institutional investors are starting to, get interested in cryptos, venture capital business founded by the Rockefeller family, Venrock also getting into cryptos. Rockefeller has a rumored net worth of $8 trillion, which is absolutely incredible because they have given away so much of their money to be able to reduce it so it didn't crush. I mean, the family fortune story is fascinating. Maybe somebody will get into that.

Anyway, really big institutional investors are starting. starting to get into cryptocurrency. It looks scary right now. Here's what I want you to do. I want you to go to smartcryptocourse.com. And I want you to take this free course and watch it and learn everything you can about cryptocurrency and everything around it. It's getting four out of five stars by everybody who is taking it.

Call 877 PBL Beck for more information, 877 PBL Beck or visit Smart CryptoCore. Dot com. Learn everything you can about why cryptocurrency may be the game-changing event in our lifetime. Do that now. Smartcryptocourse.com. I'm glad you're here. Not you.

Not, you know, not a lot of people say that to me on a daily basis. And thank you for saying. Yeah. That's very nice. I wasn't talking to you. Are you going to join us on a pack gray unleashed today?

Come on over and pop in for, Yeah, I will. That'll be fun. Yeah, I will. Yeah, come on, come on the couch. When I say it in that high-pitched voice, it means not a chance. Oh. Yeah, I will.

That was sincerity dripping through. Yeah, no, I'll be there, yeah. Yeah, I'll be there. Yeah, because I really, I love spending time with you. I love it. I love it. I love it. I love it.

Thank you. Have a great weekend. Glenn, back. Mercury.