Best of the Program | Guests: Bill O'Reilly & Sen. Eric Schmitt | 7/1/24

Welcome to Only Murders in the Building, the official podcast.

Join me, Michael Cyril Creighton, as we go behind the scenes with some of the amazing actors, writers, and crew from season five.

The audience should never stop suspecting anything.

How can you not be funny crawling around on a coffin?

Catch Only Murders in the Building official podcast.

Now streaming wherever you get your podcasts and watch Only Murders in the Building, streaming on Hulu and Hulu on Disney Plus for bundle subscribers.

Terms apply.

Great program today.

We have the great senator from Missouri on with us, who used to be the AG in Missouri, about all of the Supreme Court cases that has happened.

And Alan Dershowitz joins us.

We also have Bill O'Reilly on.

Now, Bill O'Reilly and Tucker Carlson both say that Joe Biden is going to drop out of the race, which makes

I'm torn on it, honestly, what's good politically and what's good for the country.

You know,

I don't know how to make this decision, but it personally makes me happy because Stu May owe me $3,000.

All that and so much more on today's podcast.

All right, let me talk to you about the Berna Launcher.

Unless you've done some pretty, you know, have some pretty serious issues.

You don't you don't own guns.

because you're hoping to use one on somebody someday.

No, you do it because you hope to never use them, but they're there in case.

Well, that covers a wide range of emergency situations where violence is called for, but it doesn't cover all those situations.

Because sometimes, let's say you're in a car driving through the city and now your car is surrounded by Hamas protesters pounding on the glass.

What are you going to do?

You got to shoot them?

No.

You're going to drive over them?

No.

But with my Burton Launcher, I could roll down my window just a little bit and stick that out and then pull the trigger.

And within 60 feet,

I can put people down on the ground with just a little tear gas.

I'm just defending myself.

I'm just moving on.

I didn't want to hurt anybody.

Of course not.

I'm sorry, but my wife has a Burna launcher.

I have one in our car.

She carries one.

And I'm sorry.

We're going to use it.

If I feel threatened, we're going to put you down on the ground.

Burna, B-Y-R-N-A.com/slash Glenn.

You don't need a license for it.

It's legal in all 50 states.

It's burna.com slash glenn.

Get 10% off your purchase.

B-Y-R-N-A.com/slash Glenn.

You're listening to

the best of the Blenbeck program.

This is an amazing turn of events from the, I guess, White House, White House spokesperson

Wilfred.

I don't have your last name.

Hello.

Hi.

How are you?

May I speak to Rush?

Okay, Rush?

Let's just say Rush doesn't work here anymore.

Yes, hi.

Rush, my name is Wilfred, and I'm calling from Sun City, Florida.

Yes, okay.

And you're a Biden advisor.

Yes, I am one of his campaign spokesman

person.

Uh-huh.

Uh-huh.

And

it's my understanding that you have some inside news of what happened this weekend.

Were you there at Camp David

with the family?

Physicians will not let me be involved in air travel.

However,

I've been in close touch with the campaign.

Okay.

And I've been working

in campaigns like this

for quite some time.

Quite some time.

And I watched the debate on the television set.

Yes.

And I...

And look,

did Joe Biden have a good night?

No.

No.

No.

No, he didn't.

No.

Look, it was a catastrophe.

Let's be honest.

Okay.

Joe Biden, it was like a time I tried to make a move on Ethel at the prom.

Ethel.

What happened there?

Well,

she seemed to be into it, but she had so many layers of pantaloons

that I was unable

to get to.

The conclusion of the evening, and the sun came up, I was still trying to remove layers.

Okay.

All right.

So, Wilford, we're really

looking towards the future here on whether he is going to drop out from the campaign or, I mean, what has been decided?

Well, the first thing that was decided was that his entire campaign would now be sponsored by Previgen.

We think that the donations from the Previgen Corporation,

and really if we fill him up

to make his internal

digestive systems approximately 80% previgen, we believe multiple sentences will come out

really

together.

Yes.

Right.

Okay.

So there are decisions we could make, but this is similar to when I worked on the Fillmore campaign.

We had

the Fillmore campaign, Millard Fillmore.

When I was working.

When I was working...

I'm sorry to...

I'm just trying to remember what year that might have been.

I can't remember.

Oh, he was, well,

he was lucky

13th president.

And I was...

Okay, good.

All right, go ahead.

And I was working with him on messaging, and it was difficult because,

for example, we we didn't have really electricity pretty much at that point.

And we were trying to communicate to the people.

Now, Fillmore was a much better communicator than Joe Biden, obviously.

But he also beat Medicare.

And I think that's a good thing for him to come back to.

Joe Biden beat Medicare and Millard Fillmore.

Millard Fillmore did as well, and I think he could stand on that.

By the way, is this am I speaking with Don?

Is this Mr.

I?

No, he's

let's just say Don doesn't work here anymore either.

I listen every day, Don.

Yeah, all right.

All right, good.

And I will say I just I'm concerned that Joe Biden may come off as too youthful for the American people.

Too youthful.

I don't know if you've noticed lately, but the American people love

old candidates they don't want people who are coherent when is the last time you watched a Sunday show and and saw someone

are you there

are you there

hold on one moment

you have that out

are you all right

All right.

We may have to come back to Wilfred a little bit later.

Just remember, Hetty, this is Hetty Lamar.

Am I right?

Yes, yes, you are.

I have been a huge fan of your show, Heddie, since

it began.

And when you and Marconi were doing that work together.

All right,

we're going to let you go now.

But thanks for calling in from

the Biden team.

That's Wilfred.

I need my pills.

Hang up the phone.

That's all you have to do is just hang it up.

Maybe, maybe, maybe a while.

Let's move on, shall we?

Let's just talk a little bit about what the Biden campaign did come out and say this weekend.

They said that Joe Biden was over-prepared and relying on minutiae when all that mattered was vigor and energy.

Apparently,

one person with the White House said they prepared him for the wrong debate.

I don't know which debate he would have been good at, but they prepared him for the wrong debate.

He was over-prepared when what he needed was a rest.

So

we have that going for us.

I don't know about you, Stu, but I saw, yeah, when that rings true to me, when I think back to what happened last week, I think overpreparedness.

Too much preparedness.

Too many facts right at his finger.

Too many.

That was the problem.

Right.

He was like, you know, I've got all the minutiae here, and nobody wants to talk about it.

Yeah, I mean, that is a common issue.

It actually does happen to candidates, right?

It just didn't happen in that debate.

Like, sometimes

it went up.

No, no.

Yeah, sometimes you get these candidates that are out there giving you a million facts and figures and giving you an Excel spreadsheet in debate form, and that doesn't work very well, which is why, you know, you go back to, and you tell that story all the time of Roger Ailes and Reagan, where, like, hey, focus on the five big themes, bring it back to one of the things that you believe that you can defend easily and let people give a broad, hopeful vision for the future.

That was not the issue here.

That was not the issue.

The issue was the man is incoherent.

Everybody has known it for many, many years, and it was just fully on display that night.

Well, he also had a cold, sore throat.

And you know what sore throats can do.

Sometimes sore throats will make you.

I couldn't hear him.

Sorry, I've got a sore throat.

You hear that all the time for people.

I couldn't hear him.

He was on a microphone, right?

He wasn't like yelling to the other side like they had, you know, sometimes you have, you think you have your headphones in and like maybe you're doing a Zoom call and you've actually had your computer speaker on.

Maybe it's too far away, so you're a little distant.

That's what it was like.

I was in a room where we had in a television studio doing coverage, and we had speakers on the floor.

And I couldn't hear some of his responses because he was so terrible at projecting his voice.

These are basics.

This has nothing to do with too many facts and figures.

Yeah, and also has, you know, some I don't mean to bring up age, but it also has something to do with your age.

You're starting to lose your hearing clearly.

Now, the other thing that happened at the White House this weekend is they did admit

that the president is sharpest between 10 a.m.

and 4 p.m.

So,

and this was out of that time period, you know, he's sharpest between 10 and 4.

That's when we can get answers.

God forbid there's a 3 a.m.

phone call.

No, can you call back between 10 and 4?

We don't have the president at his sharpest right now.

So

that's good.

Steve Krakauer called it the 18.6 intermittent presidency.

It's like intermittent fasting, except you're ruling the free world.

That's not a good format for sexuality.

No, not

good.

Not good.

But, you know, here's the other thing that I really enjoyed.

RoCanna, Representative Democrat from California, said, don't worry about this.

And I'm quoting: we have a great team of people that will help him govern.

Excuse me?

What?

As a person who's studied the history of our founding, is that our system of government?

But ruling by committee?

No.

No.

No.

That's not what it is.

No.

A secret cabal of people behind the scenes using the president as a puppet?

No, that's really.

That's not what we do.

No.

That is big in the puppet industry.

You know what I mean?

Puppeteers.

Okay.

They make a lot of money.

Sometimes, you know, they're back behind the curtain pulling the strings.

But that's generally left to puppeteers and George Soros.

Not our system of government.

No.

How similar, Glenn, is this to the Woodrow Wilson situation when he had the stroke and his wife was basically running the nation?

Absolutely.

How can we?

Absolutely the same.

Absolutely the same.

We don't have Jill Biden jamming a pen into his hand and signing the name, using his hand with hers over it, signing Woodrow Wilson.

That we know of.

That we know of.

That we know of.

I mean, would you be surprised?

No.

Full stop.

Not at all.

Nope.

I don't think I have to tell you why Jace and the Jace case is important.

I mean, anybody who looks at our economy for more than a minute, thinks that it's getting better, inflation high.

Anybody who looks at our political stability in the world and thinks that we can just keep making our medicine overseas in China and have everything, you know, fine, is fooling themselves.

The care system

is

in bad shape itself.

Do you have access to the medicine that your family needs?

The medication, the antibiotics that treat the most common and deadly bacterial infections.

Five life-saving antibiotics for emergency use.

You fill out a simple form online at jace.com and you'll have it in case you need it.

It'll be there in your home.

They also have other options like Epipins and ivermectin.

They're adding more every day so your family can have the medicine up to a year's worth supply of anything that your family needs.

Take your health in your own hands.

Jace.com.

That's j-a-s-e.com.

Enter the promo code Beck at checkout.

Get a discount on your order.

Promo code Beck at jace.com.

Now back to the podcast.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

You know, today is the kind of day that you miss people like Bill O'Reilly.

And I don't say that lightly, you know, or often, but

you miss the days where you could flip on the news and you would have a guy who, you know, is credible

and would have some sources or, you know, he would just at least know

because of his contacts.

What's really going on in Washington, D.C.

Well, Bill O'Reilly at billolly.com.

Today's going to be one of the shows that you really are going to miss.

You'll miss a lot if you don't see it.

He's on with us now.

He tweeted, the decision has been made, the president will quit the campaign.

Now, you tweeted that yesterday.

Bill O'Reilly joins me now.

Hello, Bill.

Who is this?

Glenn who?

Glenn Beck.

Wow.

Wow.

I got my first name.

Bill O'Reilly.

That's a first to use my first name.

First time.

How are you, Beck?

I haven't talked to you in a while.

I know.

I'm great.

I'm great.

I saw your tweet, and then I think you reached out to me, and then I reached right back out because I was going to reach out to you.

All right, spill the beans.

What do you know?

Okay.

So the two people in charge of this are Barack Obama and Ron Klain, the former chief of staff of Joe Biden,

for the first two years.

So they huddled.

And they actually talked to Joe.

I don't know whether it was on Zoom or in New York.

Obama was in New York at a fundraiser and so was Biden.

But it's really tamped down.

And both Clain and Obama, and this is what my tweet was, have decided that it's over.

So when I say that, what does that mean?

It means that the two most powerful men in the Democratic Party right now, they are the two most powerful people,

have said to Biden, you can't win.

You cannot beat Trump and he's the devil.

He's evil.

So if you don't get out,

you are

helping evil.

That's how it's.

Okay, hang on just a second.

Hang on just a second.

I don't think that would

face Joe Biden.

He knows that.

He's got a son.

Anyway,

this reminds me of Nixon, where the tables turned on Nixon and he lost the support of key members of the Senate.

They walked in and said, you got to go.

You got to go.

Now, are they going to offer any carrot or stick if he doesn't go?

Well,

that's an excellent analysis, Beck.

You got a lot smarter since we last talked.

I was just worried about that.

Well,

but it is

very, very similar.

So the Nixon people

were telling the American public, oh, he's not going anywhere.

This is just, yeah, he made a couple of mistakes, but, you know, he's a great president, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

But behind the scenes,

the Republicans are saying, hey, if you don't get out, they're going to arrest you.

They're going to arrest the bushes.

They're going to charge you with crimes.

And that's why Nixon went to the helicopter and waved to everybody.

Now,

it's being presented by if you don't get out, you're going to go down in history as a villain because Trump is going to win.

And it's going to be all your fault, 100%.

Now, Biden, as you rightly pointed out, is not really incapable.

He's not capable anymore of actually digesting that.

So it's his wife that's making all the calls.

So they go to Camp David over the weekend.

They're still there.

I think their helicopter shows up in about 20 minutes.

All right.

And she

is going, no way, no way we're leaving.

We're fighting this to the end.

Jill Biden.

Joe Biden's just sitting there, you know, eating his sugar-frosted flakes.

He didn't have anything to do with this.

So the fight now is between the party elders

and Jill Biden,

who's digging it in and saying, no, no, Joe does everything I tell him to do, and he's not going to leave because we think we can overcome this.

Now, let me give you the reason that they're not going to overcome it, okay, that the Bidens will leave, and they may leave very quickly, by the way.

They're trying to figure out now, the Democrats, when to make this announcement, all right?

They've got to obviously get the Bidens on board, but they also have got to go to some kind of plan B, all right?

So we're going to go to the convention with these people.

They don't have that yet.

Okay.

Well, how do they do that and say they respect democracy?

I mean, there's no way to do that.

No, no, yes, there is.

Oh, absolutely there is.

Oh, well, there's the super delegates.

Yeah.

All Biden has to do is say, I'm retiring for health reasons, which you're going to see, and I'm going to give my delegates to whomever the party

wants.

And then Biden will be totally out of it, and they'll tell him, give the delegates to Kamala, to Newsom, to Whitmer, whatever.

And it's not that complicated.

LBJ did it.

And it's ironic because he did it.

And then the convention was in Chicago and all hell broke loose in 1968.

Well, where's the Democratic convention this year?

Chicago, and all hell is going to break loose.

You're glad.

All the anarchists and the pro-Hamas people are going to be there.

Okay.

Okay.

So the reason that this is,

in my opinion, but it's more than an opinion,

incontrovertible is that Biden's support was thin

to begin with.

He doesn't have a core support.

It's all hate Trump support.

Yes.

Okay.

And so that

there aren't many Democrats, if you believe the CBS poll, that care if Biden's the nominee.

They don't have an emotional investment in Biden.

They just want to see Trump lose.

That's huge.

So he doesn't have a cadre of people outside of Jill and maybe Hunter.

I don't know.

But he doesn't have that.

He doesn't have Congress.

I mean, the Congress people are running around undermining the hell out of him.

And his own people.

You saw Jamie Raskin do that.

My God.

So he doesn't have a core support in Congress or...

among the folks.

They say they raised a lot of money from the debate.

I'm suspect, but I don't think they're going to raise a lot of money going forward.

Right?

Okay, so, Joe,

so, Bill,

who do you think is most likely to replace him?

All right, now, I don't know, but I will tell you who wants it.

So, Kamala wants it.

Kamala's not going to go quietly into the night, and she'll play the race car,

okay?

Gender and race card, that's what she's got.

She'll play it.

Newsome,

i understand just ordered hair products uh a lot more so

right

he obviously wants it whitmer in michigan wants it all right so those are three right there now they would like what about big micro

what about big mic what about big mic

big mic

who's big mic

that would be michelle obama be michelle obama big mic i i'm sorry back

I didn't get the Big Mic reference.

Yeah, well.

It is, I have never in my 50-year careers in journalism seen any

famous person locked down like Michelle Obama.

You can't get a whisper out of that anywhere.

So obviously that would be the savior, right?

Yeah.

But there isn't any indication one way or the other

that she wants to do it.

And those of us who know Michelle Obama, and I know her a little bit,

she is a very strong woman.

Barack Obama is not going to go in there and go, hey, Michelle, you're running.

No.

No, not.

You don't say that to me, Mike.

Listen, let me ask you, let me ask you, Bill,

let's not talk politics.

Let's talk security of the country.

First,

who's running the country right now?

And

go ahead.

The three guys there in the White House, the chief of staff, the national security guy, that's the Irish guy.

Yeah, yeah, look at this.

This is what we voted for.

The Irish guy.

Right.

Yeah, I'm more sensitive.

Jake Sullivan, thank you very much, everybody.

And his councils.

So there's a triumvirate in the White House.

Nobody ever heard of these people.

They get no pub.

It's all they once in a while to go out, but not often.

And there's an alert, by the way, a very serious alert on U.S.

bases overseas and embassies about a terrorist.

Very serious.

So we have an incapacitated president.

Go ahead.

You're right.

We have an incapacitated president.

What the the heck?

You know, who ordered

our nuclear sub to surface in the Norwegian Sea this weekend to send a message?

I mean, and it's kind of important to know who's actually running the show there

because we're on the verge of

war if we're stupid.

And I can't gauge who's actually making the decisions.

Should the president step down from the presidency?

Yeah, that would be Sullivan.

Okay.

Look,

this is a very, very chaotic White House.

You know, I got a book coming up confronting the presidents where we evaluate every president.

And I sent that to you, Brad, and I'm going to hire someone to read it to you.

I'm going to pay somebody to follow you around and read you this book because it's unbelievable

about the difference

in some presidents.

And Biden's the second worst president in our history.

And Trump exaggerates saying he's the worst.

Nobody's worse than James Buchanan, who actually lit the fuse of the Civil War.

But Biden is second.

And it is so, to me, because I do know what's happening on a day-to-day basis in that White House.

This man, there are three out of five days, and Axios has about 50% of this right today.

He's not even in the Oval Office.

He didn't even make it down from the residence.

That's how incapacitated he is.

And Jill Biden makes that call.

If you look at his schedule and on the No Spin News, my TV broadcast, we report it every day.

Most of the time, he has nothing on his schedule but a fundraiser where he reads a teleprompter.

That's it.

He doesn't do anything.

And everybody in his administration knows this,

which is why, after the debate catastrophe, it's just unbelievably shocking

that they won't tell the truth to the American public.

The Democratic Party will not tell the truth.

This has been going on for a year.

This doesn't just happen.

Okay, last

question.

I've got to get this in.

Is this better or worse for Donald Trump if Biden leaves?

Does it change it enough to

change the game and people will just then say, I'm just going to go with somebody new?

Trump would defeat Joe Biden now, no question.

That's number one.

No question.

Right.

He beats Biden.

If Biden,

when Biden steps aside, if it's Michelle Obama,

that's

formidable for Trump.

That's trouble.

Anyone else, he can be barely handling at this point.

Because remember, Trump got 72 million votes in 2020.

I estimate the most he could lose on the 72 million would be 10%.

That brings him down to 65 million.

Biden's nowhere going to get nowhere near that.

And

we lost him.

Gosh, darn it.

I don't know what he was just saying, and I don't know if he does.

No, I'm just kidding.

That's Bill O'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com.

Make sure you see his whole

podcast tonight at billo'reilly.com.

Bill, as always, thank you for joining us.

You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.

uh director relative of uh john jacob jingleheimer smith as we found out on an episode earlier uh senator eric schmidt from missouri is with us um eric what happened with scotus last week

um well they punted essentially on the missouri versus biden which became the murphy versus missouri lawsuit that made it in the Supreme Court.

And essentially,

what we, the lower court had said was an Orwellian vast censorship enterprise made its way to the court.

And what the court essentially did was they kicked it back to the lower court because they said the plaintiffs couldn't prove standing.

Meaning, and Justice Barrett wrote this part, that you would have to show that this was going to continue into the future.

So take that for what it is.

They certainly didn't say that this didn't happen, Glenn.

And I think like if you're if you're really if you're looking for what this case truly represents in a broader context, you got to go back in time time into May 2022 when we filed it, which was before Elon Musk bought Twitter.

It was before the Twitter files.

It's before we really started to learn the extent of all of this censorship.

And when I filed it, we had some idea because you had at the time Jin Saki standing at the podium, gleefully saying, we're flagging this stuff.

So I think it's important to remember where we were at.

And it exposed all of this.

I also think what it does too, Glenn, is it probably shows us that

there needs to be another kind of remedy for this sort of thing.

Like there needs to be, in addition to just saying, the court saying you can't do this anymore, there need to actually be real damages here.

And so that I think is a good segue into what we should do next in legislation that I have filed, which is twofold.

So one, on the social media companies themselves.

If they're engaged in this kind of activity, because under Section 230,

legal protections they were given under the 1996 telecommunications act essentially what congress said is okay internet people for platforms you're going to be an open platform therefore we're not going to hold you to the same standard legal standard of you know sort of you can get sued for libel or you know you can get sued for any of the things that people might be able to sue CBS News or a traditional publisher for.

So they get this blanket protection because they're just supposed to be kind of an open source platform.

That's not really what's happening right now, right?

So if they're found to be, if somebody sues, if Glenn Beck were to sue or something and say, you know, this was, you know, you are censoring because it's a viewpoint discrimination or some sort of thing like that,

that you lose your Section 230 protections.

So they got to choose, do they want to be a publisher or do they want to be an open platform?

The second piece, and I actually think it's maybe perhaps the most important piece for the things that you and I care about the most, which is the government's role in all of this, is that you provide a private right of action.

So you can sue an individual government actor for violating your First Amendment rights.

I think that changes the incentive structure for these bureaucrats who right now think they can just sort of get away with this by labeling everything misinformation or disinformation.

So if they have something on the line themselves, it's a culture change, and that's what I'm going to be working on moving forward here.

Do you think you have enough support or will in the next

season of Congress and

the Senate?

Yeah,

I think we have to take the majority, obviously.

But I do think this stuff has been exposed.

I was actually thinking about you last week.

And so it's good that I'm on the show.

I was thinking about when I think when I may have been the first time I met you, it was at an AG event and you were...

You had that compass from Washington, right?

And it had worn, I remember getting to hold it in my hand and it sort of,

you know, his thumb was on it as he's surveying property in Virginia and kind of knowing north from south.

I think what's happened in the last week, if you tie it into this debate that happened last week, I think that in the largest context, when people look back, let's say 20, 30, 40, 50 years from now, think what's happened in the last year or two, and COVID was the sort of harbinger of all this.

All of the lies have been exposed now right like

these are the same people who are now shocked you know oh biden needs to be replaced these are the same people who have lied to you about

these aren't political prosecutions the same people that lied to you about covid the same people who've lied time and time again who tell you the economy is just fine and that look at the numbers they're great and you shouldn't believe you're lying as what's happening in your own life they're the same people who lied about the hunter biden laptop theory So, this kind of call it, you know, administrative state, deep state, whatever you want to call it, there's people so invested, Glenn, in Biden remaining so they can keep doing what they want to do without any accountability.

And I think that is the call to action.

I think that the Missouri versus Biden case helped expose it.

It's not the only thing, but it was part of it.

And so I think we're turning the corner.

If I'm being optimistic, if I'm holding on to Washington's compass, I think that's the fight.

That's the fight for us now moving forward.

All right.

So tell me about a couple of other things.

The Supreme Court

has downgraded the insurrection now to trespassing.

Can you go into that ruling, which is Fisher versus the U.S.?

Yeah, I mean, look,

I think the takeaway here is that the government was overzealous with all of this, right?

And when you're dealing with criminal prosecutions, you're supposed to, you know, the government isn't supposed to get the benefit of the doubt on a lot of this stuff, which is why, again, I went up to Manhattan and saw that trial,

the Alvin Bragg

Soviet-style show trial, which is why that case, I think, is so riddled with reversible error.

The judge actually, and the Supreme Court ruled on something else a couple of weeks earlier saying, you know, you actually have to have universal agreement among the jury.

of what the actual crime is, right?

Like this seems like a very basic civil protection for people if you're going to have your liberty taken away from you, right?

Like, the jury actually has to agree what the crime is.

And Judge Brashan said you don't have to do that.

And so, that, in addition to not allowing testimony from somebody who was going to say from the FEC that this is not even a, you know, the underlying crime, I guess, that you're alleging isn't even really a crime.

So, I think that that was sort of an important protection.

Of course,

I'll never forget coming on your show talking about the Chevron case, and you came in with some like berry white

sexy music talking about Chevron when we were talking.

Well, I was going to get to that here in a second.

Yeah.

Because the Chevron deference is, I mean, this is honestly,

I mean, it's constitutional porn.

It really is.

And

they have

overturned the chevron doctrine, not for the past, but for anything future, which does what?

Talk to you.

So, this is a big one.

So, I talk about turning the corner and what this can all mean, right, moving forward.

So, for a very long time, what courts have been able to do through chevron deference is that

if they claim something is ambiguous, if there's something ambiguous in some agency,

go ahead, keep talking, keep talking.

Keep talking.

There's some agency, Glenn.

Oh, yeah.

Ding-dong, ding-dong

That has an interpretation that they think is quote unquote reasonable.

That's it.

And so when we did sort of an analysis, the vast majority of these calls, then when they were being, you know, if anybody was being challenged, the government won, the agency won, the bureaucrat that you never heard of won.

And so,

even though the Congress never actually said this is what we want to have happen, so it's a very important piece of returning power back to the Article I branch, you know, where people are elected

and saying we're not going to give this sort of deference to these agencies anymore.

Now, it doesn't completely go away.

So, essentially, not to get too nerdy on this stuff, it's probably something like what's referred to as Skidmore, which is they can have an opinion about it, but ultimately, the court isn't going to bend over backwards

and agree with the agency just because they're the quote-unquote experts.

But this also does, and I had an op-ed last week right when this came out, because we were hoping that this would happen.

It does put the onus, I think, on Congress now to actually do something.

And

there's three things I think we should do.

The first is, I think we should codify saying, still with these rules, if you're going to propose a new rule, pull back three first.

I think that would be an important first step, or maybe five or 10 or two, whatever your number is, but just sort of change the culture.

The second piece is

we ought to have a de novo standard of review.

What is that?

It means that there's no difference at all.

We don't even really care.

It's totally up to the courts to decide now.

Is this what congressional congressional intent was?

The agencies are sort of cut out of this.

They are still executing the law.

They still have a role.

But them, you know, opining over things that they created and then deciding that that's what's going to be moving forward, that has to end entirely.

Thirdly, the Rains Act, I think is perhaps the most structural reform we could put into place, which is to say, if you think it's such a good idea, this rule that you're proposing, Congress has to vote on, right?

So if you want to ban gas stoves because you think it falls under some statute that nobody ever intended for that to mean, then Congress should vote on it, right?

We should have to vote on it, and then you can judge us by our votes.

I think that would be a transformative kind of reform.

I do think there's growing momentum for it.

I think that this decision now, because it puts it more squarely,

we have to be more prescriptive in how we write statutes, which is a good thing.

There's going to be a lot more discussion now.

So I'm sort of helping lead a working group in the Senate.

those other you know show favorites i'm sure mike lee others will be involved in this and kind of figuring out what we should do moving forward to reign in the administrative state because this has given us an opening now for sure

Let me go to Stu real quick.

Do we have a decision on the immunity for Donald Trump?

Not yet.

We have three decisions today.

The only one we've had is probably the most boring one, which is the corner post decision, which is about a statute of limitations on challenging agency action.

It's actually another good thing thing for fighting in the administrative state, but it is not the sexy decision.

We still have the net choice decision, which is about the social media networks.

And then, of course, the Trump immunity still coming.

And Eric, what is the social media network one about?

That's about

they can't take you

off, right?

What is it, Stu?

I don't remember.

They're trying to say basically, can social media companies remove posts based on the content?

A couple of states, Florida and Texas, say, hey, you know,

you can't just, you know, pull, delete comments because you don't like the content.

Social media companies saying, well, it's our site, so we can do whatever we want with those.

That's what's going to be decided here.

There's two laws in Florida and Texas.

It could be a split decision, too.

It doesn't necessarily have to go the same way for both.

And Eric, doesn't that go back to you're a platform or you're a publisher?

Yeah, right.

But so far,

there's not been anything that's reeled them in, right?

They kind of just get to do this stuff and rely on the terms and conditions of their site.

But actually, what was also interesting about the Missouri versus Biden lawsuit or the Murphy versus Missouri is what it ends up being is the government was pressuring them to change their terms of service, right?

Like they were,

and they did, and they did.

And so I think that I don't know how that case is going to go.

I've heard skepticism that the court will side with the states on that.

I don't know how that'll play out.

But I do think that getting at The most important thing we can do is get at the government's role in influencing what these social media companies can do.

They are private enterprises.

However, they do live by these protections.

And I think that you either got to decide, are you going to be a platform or a publisher?

And it doesn't matter to me,

but you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Agreed.

It does seem like I totally agree.

Kagan is right in this opinion, Glenn.

So we're still going through it.

But, you know, typically a Kagan opinion is not necessarily going to be the way the conservatives want it to go.

Right.

So, Eric, can you tell us, and this is kind of unfair because I don't know how much you're up on the immunity case that's in front of the Supreme Court.

We're expecting word on that at any time.

Can you tell me what we're looking for there and what it means?

Sure.

And again, I'm not dug into this case as probably as closely as I should,

but I did listen to some of the oral arguments.

Actually, my former Solicitor General of Missouri, John Sauer, argued this case and John's a brilliant guy clerk for Scalia.

So I think there's a reason why this is the last case or one of the last cases they're going to decide because it's a very difficult case for the court and one that they would probably prefer not to have to engage on, but because of Jack Smith's focus on all of this stuff, they're going to have to.

And it centers around there's never been a case, they've never actually had to decide this issue about whether or not a president is immune from criminal prosecution.

from actions taken while he's in office, right?

And so that's really what this centers on is Jack Smith's trying to to

sort of bootstrap anything President Trump did during January 6th into some sort of criminal prosecution.

And I think what the courses, I don't know what they're going to do.

My guess is they're going to have some sort of an opinion that sets some sort of framework for presidential immunity.

It may not be entire, every act is immune, but I think

they ought to err on that side of it because what the founders were really worried about when they were talking about this issue, if you read the federal papers or

documents surrounding the Constitution,

they actually were worried about the weaponization of local prosecutors against the president to sort of tie up the president in engaging in his official duties.

So,

you know, if that is, if that's how, if that's their worldview, Glenn, I think they're going to be very

deferential to the idea that presidents to be president have to make really difficult decisions, or by the way, can't engage in political speech, which is ultimately what this case is really all about.

There's a bunch of reasons why Jack Smith's case is flawed, but I do think the court's going to settle on some idea that, of course, presidents are immune from criminal prosecution

based on the actions of when they're in office.

Eric, thank you so much.

Senator Eric Schmidt from the great state of Missouri uh and a good friend of the program thank you for your insight on this appreciate it all right glory keep up the good work you bet bye-bye

At Sephora, we belong to something beautiful.

That includes one of Sephora's exclusive brands, House Labs, founded by the legendary Lady Gaga.

House Labs' viral and best-selling Triclone Skin Tech Foundation and Concealer both give medium coverage, visibly blur for a natural finish, and star fermented Artica to reduce redness.

The textures are weightless and smooth, so you can feel beautiful in your skin all day, every day.

Shop House Labs by Lady Gaga, only at Sephora.

We belong to something beautiful.