Best of the Program | Guest: Alex Epstein | 12/6/23

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Commercial Insurance.

Trucking is a big job, so Progressive is proud to offer truckers the coverage they need and discounts to help them save.

Quote Truck Insurance in as little as eight minutes at progressivecommercial.com.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates.

Discounts not available in all states or situations.

Today's podcast

is really just a

sadomasochist enjoyment of Stew, really.

Stew is just

torturing me,

an innocent soul,

with alcohol the whole time.

That's not accurate.

That is absolutely.

Well, you know, America will hear for themselves.

Yes, they will.

Yes, they will.

They will.

They will.

It's a great show today.

You don't want to miss a second of it.

Brought to you by Relief Factor.

If you live in pain, get out of pain.

I know that sounds, you probably, that probably pisses you off if you've been in pain.

You're like, I know, I've tried everything.

Have you tried Relief Factor?

Please, it doesn't work for everybody, but about a million people have tried it.

70% of them go on to order more.

It now comes with a feel better or your money-back guarantee.

So just see how Relief Factor can help you.

It's not a drug, it's a daily supplement that helps your body fight inflammation.

100% drug-free.

ReliefFactor.com or call 1-800 for relief.

1-800, the number 4 relief.

ReliefFactor.com.

You're listening to the best of the Blendbeck program.

Center for Industrial Progress, founder and president, and author of Fossil Future.

He's been watching COP28, which, you know, I didn't see one through 27, so I didn't really get it, but we wanted to have him come in and fill us in.

It's getting more and more insane, isn't it?

Yeah, I mean, what's been your kind of observation just looking at it from headlines?

I'm curious.

My observation is the arrogance is getting out of control.

The attitude of the little people must be tamed is sickening.

Yeah, I mean, it's,

you see, these calls.

I was just reading this morning.

They're considering the draft language.

So, just so people know, so COP stands for Conference of the Parties, and it's part of what's called the United Nations Framework Concerning Climate Change.

They have all these acronyms and everything like that.

And then, the allegedly scientific basis of this is called the IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

And this is really the epicenter of the net zero movement.

This is where they convene every year, and they always say the same thing, which is, we did a decent job restricting fossil fuels, but we really didn't do enough.

So this year we really have to finish the job.

And so they start arguing, and everyone starts out by saying we should get rid of fossil fuels.

That's the starting point.

And then some remotely sane people kind of mitigate it, but it still ends up with a totally evil, in my view, conclusion.

But right now, they're literally considering that something that says a just and orderly phase out of fossil fuels.

That's one option.

The second one is What's a just

and orderly?

Is that like the like America should get rid of it first?

Yes, exactly, exactly.

So it's yeah, so that's that's the kind of

that's the one that's getting headlines right now because the leaders want that.

And it's really perverse because

the only legitimacy to it is they're recognizing, wait a second, it doesn't make sense for undeveloped countries and developing countries to have net zero policies.

They're already a net zero.

That's their problem.

Yeah, right.

Right.

That's that's the issue.

But then there's this, and so some African nations are standing up and saying, hey, it's good for us to use fossil fuels.

And some are saying it's good for the world to.

But then there's this movement, which is often like climate justice or climate reparations, where they say, no, no, no, Africa gets to use fossil fuels.

And then the U.S.

needs to stop using fossil fuels by 2030, which...

Can you imagine a worse thing for the world for all the developed economies to be destroyed?

That is not going to help anybody.

So it's still just this murderous movement.

And the key to it is fossil fuel benefit denial.

They just ignore the benefits of fossil fuels.

They say, we don't like the side effects of fossil fuels on climate, but they ignore the benefits.

And it's just, it's exactly as if you had an antibiotics conference and they just said, let's get rid of antibiotics.

We don't like the side effects.

It's like, okay, but that's going to kill billions of people.

They're like, we're not going to talk about that.

We're just against antibiotic side effects.

So tell me what a world looks like without fossil fuels.

I mean, there's, you can't describe it to people like the destruction of it because it would be literally like, let's take their timetable of 2050, which, you know, this is something, this is not an obscure view.

This is literally the most popular political idea in the world.

I mean, that truly, that we should be net zero by 2050.

So that means rapidly eliminate almost all fossil fuel use.

We could talk about some of the oil companies are pretending you can capture all the CO2 by 2050.

That definitely is not true.

We could talk about that.

So it means rapidly eliminate fossil fuels, but fossil fuels are 80% of the world's energy.

They're still growing because they're uniquely cost-effective.

That's why China is building 300 new coal plants, despite all the hostility toward fossil fuels.

So if you get rid of the most cost-effective source of energy in a world where most people use very little energy and energy is absolutely a requirement for people to survive, let alone flourish, because it allows us to use machines versus using manual labor.

That's just the apocalypse.

Like just agriculture, we depend on diesel fuel for machinery and we depend on natural gas for fertilizer.

We cannot feed 8 billion people without that.

And these monsters are discussing eliminating fossil fuels full stop and they're just not thinking about this.

I have to tell you, I was watching yesterday.

I happened to be standing waiting for something.

And I stood outside and there was this big,

what do you call those?

You know, the diggers with the big claws.

Excavators.

Excavator.

Yeah.

And thank you.

Hall of Fame.

Reminder.

He's in the Hall of Fame.

And

I'm watching that and I'm like, this is the greatest boy job ever.

I mean, that, I mean, I still, you know, at almost 60, I'm like, I want that job.

But I sat there and I watched it and I thought, oh, that's going to work with battery power.

That's absolutely.

Yeah.

I mean, there will be nothing.

There will be nothing that is working.

And if you get rid of fossil fuels, how do you charge the batteries?

So I think it's important.

Once you start asking these questions, I think you realize a broader point of mine, which is that the green movement and the the green energy movement, they're not an attempt to replace fossil fuels with better energy.

It's there's a deep hostility toward energy as such because their focus is:

let's protect the planet from human impact.

That's their basic thing.

Human impact is evil.

Let's protect the planet from it.

But if you hate human impact, you have to hate energy because energy is impact.

That's what we do with energy: we impact the planet.

That's like we make machines.

We spent

thousands of years

trying to come up with a way to create energy.

Thousands of years.

We were

impact.

Right, exactly.

We were starving to death, freezing to death.

Every species wants impact except modern environmentalist humans.

Right.

How do you convince these adults that this is just

suicide?

You know, I don't understand.

I mean, I do understand that people like John Kerry, they'll be able to have access to everything they need.

But these people who are out in the streets picketing and I mean,

are they really that stupid?

Have they not done the math on this at all?

Well, I think, I think, so some people are truly anti-human, but I don't think that's most people.

I think most people, they've just, they haven't even realized that they've been taught to think of something in a totally biased way.

Again, ignoring all the benefits of fossil fuels and only looking at the negative side effects.

So one thing I do is I just point that out.

Hey, with any technology, we need to be even-handed, look at both benefits and side effects.

And then you need to educate them because, for instance, people don't know that fossil fuels are uniquely cost-effective.

They're taught the fiction that fossil fuels can be rapidly replaced by solar and wind.

They're also taught that our costs are people without solar or wind power at their house.

So, so one of the things, you know, I have this book, Fossil Future, but also a free website, energytalkingpoints.com, and people can search any topic there and they can get very concise, well-referenced points.

And that's helping people educate their friends and family.

So if you're, you know, you're having discussions during Christmas, just go to energytalkingpoints.com and you can search like solar and wind and you can learn the truth about it.

It's not too hard to explain, but the mass media and educational system have just totally made people ignorant.

So when they say no more fossil fuels, does that mean no more drilling for it either, right?

Well, it's actually worse than that because they make the, well, because so the no more fossil fuels is essentially a target.

We're going to stuff people down the oil wells to replace the dinosaurs.

Well, but what they do is they make this 2050 target for we have to be net zero, which means we can't add any more CO2 to the atmosphere by 2050, which I think would be the apocalypse if that's what you do.

But then what they do in the meantime is they say,

it's not like that happens in 2050.

They say, well, we need to ban, for example, natural gas infrastructure.

So Markey out of...

Markey out of Massachusetts, the senator, like he led this push to say no new natural gas infrastructure.

He said, we committed to no new natural gas infrastructure by end of 2022, so we should do it.

I'm thinking, wait a second, have you witnessed Europe?

Like, Europe is afraid of winter now, like it's Game of Thrones.

Right.

There's a shortage of gas in the world.

Like, Russia invades Ukraine.

Everyone is desperate for gas.

Bangladesh is having blackouts because they don't have enough gas.

And your solution is no new natural gas infrastructure.

And also, they think they don't understand oil and gas deplete.

So you constantly need to build new stuff.

Otherwise, you can't even stay at your current level, let alone the larger level that people need around the world.

Right.

So, but what I'm asking is, there are other uses for

oil.

Yeah.

You know, it's our synthetics for our clothing and everything else that comes from oil, the capsules of our drugs.

What

is

it?

Well, some of them say like, oh, we can do it for that, but

that whole industry is dependent on using it for energy.

It's not like it's going to be a totally different.

It's a byproduct.

Yeah.

So it's,

I mean, but the point is the green people are not thinking about energy, energy is not their focus.

Protecting the planet from humans is their focus.

So every time you bring up these rational things, it's true, but they're not thinking about that.

That's not what they care about.

And in a sense, I talk about this in chapter three of Fossil Future.

In a sense, the benefits of fossil fuels are the problem because the benefits of fossil fuels allow the human race to expand for us to have 8 billion people, for us to have a lot of impact.

And a lot of these guys say explicitly, we should have 1 billion people or less.

Now, think about what that implies in terms of any kind of near-term action.

How do you get 8 billion people to 1 billion people?

They die.

Yeah, and you got to make them die somehow.

It is, it's so anti-human.

You know,

especially when John Kerry said

at COP28, what, a couple of days ago, that

he just gets enraged when he sees

people

who should be responsible in leading other people and they don't understand we can't build another coal-fire plant.

We got to get rid of them.

I think to myself,

first of all, who are you to decide who lives and dies?

Because that's really what it is.

And the arrogance of your...

of your position is just

it's crazy crazy dangerous i mean i think the coal thing is particularly scary because everyone is piling on coal.

And just if people, I mentioned energytalkingpoints.com, if you just search electricity emergency, here's the state that we have right now.

So we have a grid where we're artificially increasing demand for reliable electricity through EVs, right?

And other, and trying to ban gas stoves.

And in California, where I live, this is the worst, but it's happening everywhere.

Then we're artificially decreasing the supply by shutting down coal plants, natural gas plants, and nuclear plants.

So we have that already.

We already have an emergency where, look at what happens in Texas.

You guys have daily emergency alerts right throughout the summer.

Like your power company doesn't provide power.

They tell you not to use power.

That's a bad sign for the power company.

And it was never like that in Texas.

And in this environment, coal plants are protecting us from the abyss.

This is a baseload source of power.

It's reliable.

We've shut down way too many without a viable replacement.

And what does our administration do representing us on the international stage?

They say we're going to shut down the rest of them as quickly as possible.

If they do that, we lose 20% of our reliable capacity or more.

How long before

the whole country is enrolling blackouts?

I mean, it just depends because we have this EPA that's just, again, they have no contemplation of the benefits of fossil fuels or reliable electricity.

They're just focused on let's eliminate any emission we can.

So it's hard to say, but when you see the emergency alerts, that means you have shortages.

And it also means you have industrial blackouts.

It means that industrial customers are having their power cut off.

That happens before, like a blackout is an accident, but the shortages are what you want to watch for because that means that you don't have enough power.

So we have shortages and all of these plans to decrease the supply.

I think when I talk to a lot of politicians, this is one of the things I tell them, like, this is the existential thing you need to watch out for.

And because the coal industry is so small and has a small lobby, you're not getting enough information.

about it.

The oil and gas people are not on, I mean, they do a lot of good stuff.

They're not on top of this enough.

And there's some hostility toward coal sometimes.

But, like, these coal plants, you do not want to shut these things down.

We do not have the natural gas capacity that we're building.

The natural gas infrastructure isn't built for electricity yet.

We need a lot more gas pipelines.

We need to do a lot more stuff in gas, but shutting down coal is right now is a terrible, terrible idea.

You are listening to the best of Glenn Beck.

To listen to the rest of this interview, check out the full show podcast.

Stu, who would you choose?

Who would you choose?

Think of the entire year, all of the things that have happened.

Who?

Who would be the person of the year?

Wow.

Well, they usually name some horrible dictator.

You know what?

The Hamas freedom fighter.

Yes.

Person of the year.

Yes.

Yes.

No, not.

No.

No.

Not the Israeli story, a soldier.

I think that the Hamas would have had a better chance of winning it.

Oh, yeah.

That's not who it was.

Come on.

Come on.

Come on.

Person of the year.

Hmm.

I mean, Zelensky.

Let me give you...

No, he's already...

How about Zelensky and Putin arm in arm on the cover?

Let me give you a hint.

With yet another

dramatic reading.

Our secret moments in your crowded room.

They got no idea about me and you.

There's an indentation in the shape of you.

Made your mark on me.

A golden tattoo.

You know yet?

No, I'm not.

All this silence and patience, pining in anticipation, my hands are shaking from holding back from you.

Ah, ah, ah.

All of this silence and silence and patience pining and desperately waiting.

My hands are shaking from all of this.

Ah, ah, ah, ah.

Sounds like a personal issue.

Say my name, and everything just stops.

I don't like you like a best friend.

Only bought this dress so you could take it off.

Take it off.

I appreciate you not reading any more of this.

Whatever it is.

Yes.

Come on.

Come on.

Who is it?

Who is it?

It sounds wonderful, and I'm really interested to know.

It's the bicycle guy that just...

I'm sorry, the bicycle woman that just won.

The bicycle woman.

Yeah, you know, the one that just won the bicycle race, you know?

The guy who

just

the transgender guy who won the bicycle?

Yeah, the women's bicycle race.

I don't know who that person's name is.

I only bought this dress so you could take it off.

You don't think that Time magazine would

do the transgender

movement?

The male athletes, trans women in sports is the person of the year.

No.

Did they write a

very mediocre single?

It is, of course,

Taylor Swift.

Tay Tay.

Tay Tay.

Congratulations.

Yeah, yeah.

Person of the year.

No, I don't think that's shallow.

I mean, she's a big entertainer.

She is a big entertainer.

She is a big entertainer.

Lots of impact on my football watching every weekend.

Get to see.

I just wanted to bring it up because I know

how much she means to you.

She does.

I get to hear the pitch of, hey, did you know a player on your favorite team is related to the person person who's dating this woman that you don't care about?

Let me talk about it for 48 straight minutes.

I love that in every NFL.

I know you do.

But no,

Taylor Swift, I mean, look, you can, she had a heck of a year.

No, she did.

It really was an amazing year.

She did.

If you're going to give it to an entertainer, she's.

She's the entertainer to do.

Yes.

I mean, there was

Jimmy Fallon.

Yeah, of course.

I mean,

he's, ooh, what a year he had.

Trevor Noah, what did you put in?

Trevor Noah, another one.

There's another one?

Another one.

No, but I mean, like, if you're going to give it to an entertainer, I

feel like there was a lot going on this year, though.

Oh, wow.

Maybe

there was multiple wars

that broke out.

Really?

Yeah, you kind of had that.

You had a lot of stuff going on that was of large impact, but maybe.

The whistleblowers?

They would have been good.

Which ones?

Well, the Hunter Biden one.

Many of them.

The ones that pointed out that we were just targeting Catholics for no reason and calling them terrorists.

Which ones would which whistleblowers would you like?

None of them, by the way, that you're going to mention would go to this, unless it's a whistleblower on like Donald Trump.

Then you have a chance.

Right, right, sure.

But

how about the Ivy League

presidents of Harvard MIT?

I mean, they're women, and they were fantastic yesterday,

fantastic on anti-Semitism.

They've been very strong on that.

Yeah, they have been.

They're very strong to

very anti-Semitic.

They're very good on that.

I mean, you could put Rashida Tlaib.

She's been the

queen of the anti-Semites.

Well, I think it's pretty hard to...

Let me play a little bit of the testimony on Capitol Hill from

the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and Penn.

They were asked about, you know, the calls for genocide of all the Jews on their campus.

Listen to this.

At MIT, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate MIT's code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment?

Yes or no?

If targeted at individuals not making public statements.

Yes or no?

Calling for the genocide of Jews does not constitute bullying and harassment?

I have not heard.

calling for the genocide for Jews on our campus.

But you've heard chants for Intifada.

I've heard chants, which can be anti-Semitic, depending on the context,

calling for the elimination of the Jewish people.

Okay.

Stop, stop.

I just have to, just have to say, what?

I have heard

chants on campus that could, in the right context, be anti-Semitic,

calling for the genocide of the Jewish people.

Well, sometimes when you call for the genocide of Jewish people, you're not being anti-Semitic at all.

Right.

Right.

Like you're looking for more living space.

Yes.

You know, living space.

That was a big

another catchphrase you might remember from history.

A little more living space.

Right.

I mean, not for them.

Not for them.

For us.

We need to spread out, spread our wings a little bit.

Not enough room for the German people.

A little more living space.

Okay.

So she's heard chance that could,

in theory,

we're not going to say that they will, though.

Could be anti-Semitic in the right context.

You know,

I don't know what context it would be anti-Semitic to say we should have a genocide of all the Jews.

There's probably one, though.

Yeah, there's somewhere out there.

Someone really searched.

Okay, let's continue.

Incredible.

So, those would not be according to the MIT's code of conduct or rules.

That would be investigated as harassment, if pervasive, and severe.

Ms.

McGill.

Stop, stop, stop, stop.

If pervasive and severe.

Now,

I think anybody standing at a rally chanting death or genocide to all the Jews,

I don't know.

I think that's pretty severe.

I would say it is pretty severe.

It seems like if it doesn't violate your code of conduct, perhaps your code of conduct needs to be adjusted.

Right.

Did you go to Harvard, though?

I did not.

I didn't either.

And so, you know,

I don't know what I'm going to

either.

I don't either.

And I don't understand, you know, the intellect of Harvard.

Let's go to MIT where they're even smarter.

Ms.

McGill, at Penn, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn's rules or code of conduct?

Yes or no?

If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment.

Okay, stop.

Okay, stop.

So interesting.

Interesting.

So if they're chanting death to all the Jews.

That's not.

And then, but they rapidly

kill Jews.

Then

it's horrendous.

Once they've wiped out all the Jews, we're going to act.

Right.

Okay.

Hey, they can build showers.

They can build gas,

obviously, yes.

But the minute they start to use them.

Well,

and technically, the speech is calling for genocide, so they probably have to wipe them all out before we act.

But at some point, that's when our code of conduct will kick in.

You know, when there's no Jews left, we'll be like, you know what?

Hey, guys, stop.

And I bet they will at that point.

Yeah, okay, here we go.

Well, there won't be any left.

Right, that's all.

Specifically calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?

If it is directed and severe or pervasive, it is harassment.

So the answer is yes.

It is a context-dependent decision.

It's a context-dependent decision.

That's your testimony today.

Calling for the genocide of Jews is depending upon the context, that is not bullying or harassment.

This is the easiest question to answer.

Yes, Ms.

McGill.

So is your testimony that you will not answer yes?

If it

is, if the speech becomes,

if the speech becomes conduct, it can be harassment.

Yes.

Conduct meaning committing the act of genocide?

The speech is not harassment?

This is unacceptable, Ms.

McGill.

I'm going to give you one more opportunity for the world to see your answer does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn's code of conduct when it comes to bullying and harassment yes or no

it can be harassment the answer is yes and Dr.

Gay at Harvard Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment?

Yes or no?

It can be depending on the context.

What's the context?

Targeted as an individual.

Targeted at an individual.

It's targeted at Jewish students, Jewish individuals.

Do you understand your testimony is dehumanizing them?

Do you understand that dehumanization is part of anti-Semitism?

I will ask you one more time.

Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment?

Yes or no?

Anti-Semitic rhetoric.

And is it anti-Semitic rhetoric?

Anti-Semitic rhetoric, when it crosses into conduct, that amounts to bullying.

I can't believe this.

I can't believe this.

If you have a micro-aggression,

which is not saying we should kill all of you,

okay?

A micro-aggression.

They need a safe space.

Everybody needs to go cry and be protected.

If you use the wrong pronoun,

they put these things into these categories.

And calling for the genocide of Jews, well, you know what, if it's targeted towards an individual.

Well, technically, if you're calling for the genocide of the whole race, it's not targeted at an individual.

It's all individuals, every single one of them.

So I guess maybe that's their out.

Also, I will say, you know, that's one of the best

grilling.

I mean, that isn't, she did a really good job with it.

Really good job.

Now, I will say, it should have been easy for them them to say.

You can look at

what you don't maybe get on radio is the faces of these women as they are trying to answer these questions.

They're so smug and so, like, oh, this, she's, I see what you're trying to do here, and I'm not going to fall for it.

Well, it depends on the context.

Hang on, what are you trying to do there?

Yeah, you're trying

to make them

to make them say the Palestinian protester kids are bad.

It's like, well, yeah, when they're calling the genocide of the Jews, yeah, they are.

You You should be able to say that with real confidence.

Yes.

Should be really easy.

Even more confidence than the pronoun mistake that you're going to throw 10 kids

out of your school for next week.

Here's a Jewish student that is suing UPenn describing anti-Semitism.

On October 7th, Israel was attacked.

Since October 7th, American Jews have been under attack.

My name is Ayol Yacobi, and I am a proud American studying at the University of Pennsylvania.

I love Penn.

I've wanted to attend this university since before I can remember.

I am here because the Penn I attend today is unrecognizable from the pen I once used to know.

Penn, once renowned for groundbreaking discoveries like the mRNA vaccine, is now a chilling landscape of hatred and hostility.

Our university, revered for its pursuit of knowledge, has devolved into an arena where Jewish students tiptoe through their days, uncertain and unsafe.

Not only are tensions palpable, but there have also been materialized actions taken to intimidate and harm students.

A bomb threat against Hillel, a swastika spray-painted, the Hillel and Chabad house is vandalized, a professor posting the armed wing of Hamas's logo on Facebook, a Jewish student accosted, Jews are Nazis, etched adjacent to Penn's Jewish fraternity house.

Why doesn't the university hold the perpetrators of such acts accountable?

Is the university fearful that they may offend those who wish to intimidate and harass their fellow students?

Penn's ambivalence fuels a crisis that has shattered my academic sanctuary.

Policies meant to safeguard us have become hollow promises.

And let us be clear: if they fail Jewish students today, tomorrow they will fail the rest of us.

It was powerful.

Yesterday was a very powerful day.

And not just for

outing of anti-Semites, but also those who were called transphobic.

This is the best of the Glenbeck program.

Welcome to the Glenbeck program.

Thanks, ma'am.

I was

at Colony Ridge over the last few days, been doing some investigation on a documentary that we're doing and had to come home for the debate tonight.

But

Jason Buttrell is down.

He's our head researcher and head writer for the Glenbeck program and kind of handed some of the stuff off yesterday.

He's got another interview tonight and a ride-along

in Colony Ridge.

It is this massive, massive project where nobody speaks English really,

and none of the cops do either.

I think they have...

They have 50 sheriffs' deputies for this enormous county,

and there's eight people

for, I I believe it's 79,000 people now.

The developers will say there's only 35,000 people there.

Not true.

According to the school district that has a way to figure out how many people are, you know, coming in, you have to live in that area to be able to go to the schools.

They say there's 79, 75 or 79,000 people.

Eight cops, eight.

And that's on four shifts.

Okay.

And

very few speak any spanish at all any spanish yeah they don't speak spanish and uh the residents generally don't speak english so that's a good complex it's a really good combo it's it's crazy it's crazy what's going on i talked to the sheriff yesterday and um

this is the hardest story to figure out because

i hear

opposite stories from everybody we talk to.

And the sheriff was the first one that said, boom, here's the book.

Here's what's really going on.

So we're going to follow up this week with Jason.

That'll be interesting.

And Jason Butchrell doing the coverage.

I've never seen a documentary where the host is wearing a tank top.

So

that'll be fascinating to watch for multiple reasons.

And that's coming out in January only on Blaze TV.

It is so important that you subscribe to Blaze TV.

I really believe the next 12 months

are going to decide really

the fate of our nation and possibly the voices that you hear.

And I don't know if you saw, did you see the latest from, do we have the pictures from

YouTube now?

I told you yesterday that Instagram,

they

banned a story that we had where we just talked about Hamas and what happened.

It was right after October 7th.

We didn't show any graphic stuff.

We showed showed the stuff that everybody else has seen and everybody else has shown.

And I was talking about Hamas and what happened.

Instagram

banned me, banned that story, and then banned me from doing anything live, which I don't do, for the next 30 days.

I'm sure my numbers are being suppressed now.

And it's because

I was talking about a dangerous group.

Well, yeah, it's Hamas.

And I was reporting the news.

What, you're banning this?

Yes, is the answer.

Now, if you look at YouTube,

when I'm talking about Hamas, and this isn't happening on anybody else's page, when I'm talking about Hamas, first of all, the thumbnail is blurred out, so you can't see anything about Hamas.

Then, if you click on it, it says verify your age.

So now they make you verify your age and sign in.

How many people are actually going to see my coverage of what happened in Israel and Hamas and my coverage on Hamas?

This is just another way to suppress the truth.

And they are coming hard for this program.

The last few months are unlike, and you know, if you've been a long-term listener, we have gone through the ringer.

They have not come this hard for this program ever before.

Not like this.

And please subscribe to the Blaze.

Blazetv.com slash Glenn.

Use the promo code Glenn Plus, and you're going to save 30 bucks on your Blaze TV Plus subscription.

All right.

There's a couple of other things that I want to go through today.

There is,

well, this one's just kind of satisfying.

At the Met Opera last week, which is so relatable, everybody goes to the opera.

And,

you know, it's like, what's playing at the opera right now?

Is it Ghost Protocol?

No, probably, yeah.

I don't know.

I don't know.

But anyway,

at the Met,

these climate protesters came in.

Now, this is so satisfying to me because

the Met, Met, it's full of all those rich, snotty leftists, most likely, and

they're the ones who are funding all these climate idiots.

So, a climate idiot gets into the Met and starts to disrupt

the opera.

Here it is.

Shut up.

Never liked an opera audience more than this.

I know.

I mean, wait till you see the guy in the tuxedo come.

Just shut up and get out.

I mean, they hit this, so

somebody in the crowd hit this old lady.

I mean, they say

they're like, you know,

people pay hundreds of thousands to come to here.

You're lucky.

You're not ending up in the f ⁇ out of here.

I mean,

this is worse than anything the media ever showed about a Trump rally.

Yeah.

They're really pissed.

They're really pissed.

Are they aware the thing they're there for sucks?

I don't think so.

I think they're still under the illusion that this is nice.

Oh, wow.

That's the big problem.

I'm really enjoying this.

No, they're not.

You got to believe half the men in that audience were like, thank you.

Thank God.

Honey, we should go.

We should really go.

Something bad might happen.

We should get out of it.

It's very dangerous.

Plus, what are we doing for the climate?

I'm very concerned what we're doing.

We should not go to those operas anymore.

No.

It is fascinating, of course, the people that fund all of these.

Extinction Rebellion is the group that did this, and they're one of the most extreme Organizations on the planet We have a recurring segment on Studos America called idiots

Gluing themselves to things.

Yeah, and that's usually extinction rebellion They go and they're the people that glue themselves to the floor of like a factory and you're just like why don't we

just leave them there?

I would never take they could help them out.

I'd just no, just leave them there.

Bye.

We just take the you know, we just work around them.

We'll just work around them.

Draw a yellow circle around for safety

so you don't run into them or, you know, and you just leave them there.

Just do that once, and it's never going to happen again.

No one's ever going to glue themselves to things again.

Nope.

But it would be almost like a sequel to the movie Saw, where eventually you just leave a saw with them in the circle and just wait until they saw their hands off to get out.

I mean, it would probably take a week or two.

Yeah, well,

do they have access to water?

I, you know,

that's what I'm saying.

I say they go, especially if they do it in an opera house and the operas are going on.

Oh, I think, yeah, you know, you'll be dead in a day.

Yeah.

The operas, I think, you just, you, you keep, you keep going with them.

And you'd be like, okay, here's your saw.

You can saw your hand off anytime you want to leave.

And then they may just commit suicide with the saw to get out of the opera, which is a fascinating development.

So here's Senator Kennedy yesterday talking to

our

FBI director,

Christopher Wray, about the Hunter Biden laptop, which we now know they knew everything about.

They had all the information.

Sure.

And they kept silent.

Listen to what Christopher Wray says.

Why didn't the FBI just say, hey,

the laptop's real?

Why didn't you just tell everybody the laptop's real?

We're not vouching for what's on it, but it's real.

This is

a fiction.

Well,

as you might imagine, the FBI cannot, especially in a time like that, be talking about an ongoing investigation.

Second, I would tell you that at least my understanding is that both the FBI folks involved in the conversations and the Twitter folks involved in the conversations both say that the FBI did not direct Twitter to suppress But others were in government.

Well, I can't, again, I can't speak to others in government.

That's part of the point that I was trying to make, because the fiscal.

But you're the FBI.

You're not part of the White House and part of Homeland Security.

You're not supposed to be political.

You see all this controversy going on.

Why didn't the FBI say, time out, folks?

We're not getting in the middle of this, but the laptop's real.

Well, he said, because you can't get involved in the middle of an election.

So

we couldn't deny the falsehoods.

It's in the middle of an election.

Wouldn't that be the one thing that you would want them to do?

Is just say, look, we're not saying anything about the content of it, but we are,

this is not Russian propaganda.

This is not Russian propaganda.

This, the laptop is real, but what's on it, we can't vouch for.

At the very least, they certainly should have informed the other branches of government that this was going on.

Because

those branches of government were going to all these social media accounts and saying the exact opposite.

They were saying it is Russian propaganda.

They were releasing letters saying this is Russian propaganda when in reality

they probably knew.

I mean, my guess is the FBI did go and did inform them that this was real, and they did it anyway to get it pulled down.

That's the real crime.

And again,

I'm with you on, you know, Christopher Wray.

I have no soft spot for him in my opinion.

Donald Trump says

the jury's still out on him.

Is it?

Really?

I mean, obviously Trump.

you know, appointed him.

So is that what he's saying?

Yeah, he's like, I'm not sure.

Is that sure now?

Yeah, I'm not sure.

I am.

Wow, that's surprising.

Yeah.

I thought he, I mean, because some of this stuff has burned Trump.

I mean,

it's not like Christopher Wray has been helpful to Donald Trump.

I'm surprised he's not.

And I don't want him just to go in.

What did you think about his statement?

So Donald Trump.

His statement, I'm not going to be a dictator.

I mean, on the first day I will be, but only that day.

I would prefer zero days.

I mean, that's why I say it's so Donald Trump.

Yeah, he was tough.

That's the way he prayed.

Yeah, that's the way he does things.

He's basically saying, Yeah, I'm going to be a dictator for this first day.

I'm going to repeal all of those executive orders.

They're all going away.

Yeah, and of course, that's not, it's the opposite of a dictator.

Yeah, right.

You're taking someone who has been acting like a dictator and repealing what he's doing.

That's not being a dictator.

Right.

Again, like, it's funny.

Trump is the opposite of everybody else when it comes to this stuff.

And maybe this is part of his magical power.

But, like, most people want to say something in the way that will explain it the best

and

also that will cause the least problems for you.

Like you would you would want to form a sentence in a way that would disarm criticism.

He does the opposite.

He's saying like when he's saying this dictator thing, and I read the transcript of it, I didn't see the clip, but I read the transcript of it.

He's clearly just saying that he will go in and use the executive powers that he has as president and unwind bad policies that were put in by another executive.

That's not a dictator.

That is not a way to describe what a dictator does, but he actually says it in a way that makes it sound worse than it is.

He's intentionally making it sound bad.

I know.

I think he loves that.

I think he loves it.

I think he loves that.

And it does seem to work for him, at least with Republican primary voters.

Like, I mean, I don't know that it works for everybody.

You know, it worked in 2016.

He got over the finish line there.

2020 didn't.

With 2024, question mark.

Interesting year.

2024 is going to be it.

I can't wait to see how this turns out.

I can't wait to watch this all play out.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Commercial Insurance.

Trucking is a big job, so Progressive is proud to offer truckers the coverage they need and discounts to help them save.

Quote Truck Insurance in as little as eight minutes at progressivecommcial.com.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates.

Discounts not available in all states or situations.