Best of the Program | Guest: Alan Dershowitz | 8/2/23

a kid, so am I gonna surprise you with a poster board I need for the science fair tomorrow?

Probably.

But can you get up to 40% off back to school essentials on Uber Eats?

Definitely.

So order on Uber Eats and get up to 40% off.

Exclusions May Apply.

Check out for availability.

Great show today.

We talk about the Biden crime family yet again.

No father would ever act the way Joe Biden is acting.

And the media is allowing this to happen.

They've now changed their tune.

That, yeah, Hunter Biden might have been doing stuff, but dad certainly didn't know.

Well, let's just stop at the first place.

Wait a minute.

You're now saying that Hunter Biden was doing things and trading on his father's name without declaring himself a foreign agent?

That's illegal.

And even if it's not illegal to trade on your father's name, his father then was entrapped

by being introduced to these really bad oligarch criminals that literally behead people.

And

his father continued to take the calls to like the oligarch in Moscow, then the heads, the people who are high up in the Communist Party in China.

At no point does dad say, I'm the vice president.

I know who these people are.

I'm briefed about them because they're the really, really bad people.

Don't ever put me in that situation again.

Nobody's asking the right questions or using any kind of common decency or common sense to wade through all of this.

We do.

We also talk to you about the financial downgrade and what it means to you.

The end of Yellow, the big trucking company, third largest in America, went out of business.

Nobody seems to care.

It's important.

You know why they went out of business?

25%

less shipping than expected.

That means something.

We cover all this and more in today's podcast brought to you by Relief Factor.

If you're in pain, would you please just try this?

I can't guarantee that it's going to work for you.

I've met people that it has worked wonders for, and I just met a dear friend,

what was it, a couple of weeks ago.

I haven't seen in about a year.

And she came up to me and she said, man, Relief Factor didn't work for me at all.

I know.

70% of the people who try it go on to order more month after month.

It worked miracles in my life.

It may not in yours, but will you just try it, please?

You have nothing to lose except $19.95.

Try their three-week quick start trial pack.

Try it for three weeks.

If it works, continue to take it.

If it doesn't, stop.

But 70% of the people who try it their lives come back to them.

Get out of pain with Relief Factor.

1-800, the number 4-Relief, 1-800-4 Relief or ReliefFactor.com.

Here's the podcast.

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

My entire life, from probably 2009 on, I've been telling you about an economic crisis.

I told you about the 2008 crisis, you know, from really 2004, Stu, for about four years I rang that bell.

And it was conspiracy.

It's never going to happen.

You know, what is his education, blah, blah, blah.

And I started in 2009 telling you that we are going to be downrated and the dollar is eventually going to collapse.

It is, it's, it's clear.

You know, you can be overeducated and go, oh, no, there's systems to make sure that won't happen.

But no, there's no sim, there's no system that will stop insanity

except for sanity.

And as long as people remain insane in Washington or in Wall Street,

it's going to happen.

Now, I was a little bit wrong.

They're not necessarily insane.

They just have a different agenda than you do.

So in 2011, we were downgraded,

which means if somebody is going to invest in us, buy our bonds, our debt, they're looking for something that is a sure deal, especially now.

So in 2011, we were downgraded by Fitch.

It's It's the ratings agency.

And we went from the top credit rating of AAA

to AA Plus, which is number two.

Well, now yesterday in something that will never happen, it's a conspiracy theory.

There's no way.

I mean, America is the best.

I mean, there's no competition for our dollar.

Uh-huh, uh-huh.

Well, yesterday in, quote, a surprise move,

the ratings agency Fitch downgraded us yet again from AA plus which is number two

to AA which is now number three

once you start getting into the B category there's not a chance anyone's going to buy your bonds but don't worry nobody is buying our bonds even before yesterday

When you talk about bonds, people don't, their eyes glaze over, they don't know what it means.

What it means is every dollar that we are spending and printing, every bailout, every new project, every new green new deal, every dollar that we are borrowing, no one is giving us real money.

Nobody is buying that anymore.

It used to be that China and

China and Japan and countries all over the world would buy our bonds because we were good for it.

Now, not a single buyer will buy our debt except

for the Federal Reserve.

Now this doesn't just include

the new stuff.

We're so good that we sell 30-year bonds,

but not as much as we do the one and three and five-year bonds.

And those one, three, and five-year bonds have to be renewed.

So somebody bought that for a year.

Yeah, I'll roll the dice.

I'll put my money in U.S.

savings bonds or treasury bonds because they're the safest thing out there.

I don't trust anything else.

Well, when those come up, who's going to buy them?

Nobody's buying them, which means you have to raise the interest paid on the bonds,

which you pay through taxes.

When you have a bond that is paying 4%

over the year,

you, the taxpayer, have to come up with that 4%.

We are going to soon, very soon, be paying half,

half of all of the taxes paid will go to just the interest

on, what is it, $33 trillion now.

That's a lot of money.

That's a lot of money.

I don't know if you know that.

Just an interest.

That's a lot of money.

So the dollar went down again, which means you have less buying power.

And that's something else people don't understand.

The target now of the Fed,

the target, their hope is that they can get us into a period, into a place to where our inflation is only 3% per year.

And you'd say, well, inflation of 3%, that's not bad.

Really?

Every year, 3%.

By the end of 10 years, that means you've lost about 38 cents on every dollar

it doesn't take very much if they hit 4% inflation we're not even close to that

this is why everything is getting smaller except the bill at the grocery store it is getting larger and that is because of out-of-control spending in Washington here's what happens when nobody buys our bonds

our left pocket says to our right pocket, we need some more money.

And our right pocket says,

well, you should sell bonds.

And our left pocket says, well, nobody's buying our bonds.

And so the right pocket says to the left pocket, well, you know what?

I tell you what.

I'll buy the bonds.

And then I'll just print some more money.

And you give me the bonds in the left pocket or the right right pocket and i'll give you new cash in your pocket it's the same pair of pants this is a game

this is the largest what is it five or six largest banks in the country

they are the federal reserve okay this is a a private corporation And the ones who make up the Federal Reserve are the ones that keep getting the bailouts.

They are going to be the only banks left at the end of this.

And then they'll fail and it will turn over to the Federal Reserve and will write a whole new thing with all new money.

And it will be digital money.

And that digital money will be

programmable.

What does that mean?

Programmable means they can make it expire at any time.

They need you to spend your money.

So you have $1,000 in the bank.

800 of that is going to expire at the end of the month.

So you better spend it now.

Or, hey,

you really can't spend it on gas because gas is getting too expensive.

And you live close enough to walk to the grocery store and work or ride a bike.

So your money.

in your account, not everybody's, but your money, because you're not an essential worker or you live close enough in that 15-minute city that you will never be able to buy gas with your digital dollar from the U.S.

Federal Reserve.

Well, first,

full faith and credit, amen.

This is what they're going to do.

If you don't believe me, please, please do your own homework.

Read the book, Dark Future.

It is footnoted.

It shows you exactly how all of this is coming down how all of this is playing out it shows you what their plan is in their own words

please there is not a lot of time left for you to protect yourself uh and what you have and you might say well i don't have anything so it doesn't matter yet yes it does matter it does matter do you have a garden Do you have a backyard you can turn into a garden?

Because by the way,

food is also another controlling lever, and they are pulling that.

They are making our farmers into the bad guy for the earth.

And don't worry, Masanto is here.

And Cargill is here.

So they are going to be the great stewards of the earth.

And they, along with Bill Gates, will control the farming.

And they'll get you that food.

Of course, we're not going to make a lot of food, you know, with the land.

We're going to make it in a Petri dish.

And we're going to grow your food through, you know, pharmaceuticals and better living through chemicals.

So we've found a way to play God.

We can now make meat.

Uh-huh.

So we can protect the land.

Uh-huh.

Your freedom comes.

from having access to land and food to be able to grow your own food, have farmers.

Your freedom comes with you being able to earn a dollar and spend it the way you want to spend it.

All of this is coming to an end quickly.

You know, if people say, well, you know, I don't know where my red line is.

Let me give you a red line because we're running out of red lines.

My red line came a few few years ago and my red line, one of my red lines is don't screw with my family.

Don't tell me what I have to parrot back that I know is scientifically incorrect.

So I'm past my red line.

What is yours?

If you don't have one, may I suggest a couple.

Now they're very, very late.

But the red line should be

that I have access to all information

that I can do my own research and that I can question even the most powerful in the government

and I can do it without repercussions because it is my right

to use my brain to figure things out Now I may be wrong in the end, but that is also my right, that I can pursue truth.

The next line should also include,

there's no one between me and another citizen.

So I don't have,

when I am expressing my point of view, I can read others' points of view and they can read mine without somebody in between saying, oh, no,

we're going to de-emphasize this.

No, we're going to keep this person quiet.

No, we're going to make sure this person doesn't read what that person is doing.

No one in between me and the person I want to have a relationship with.

Even as the relationship is, I disagree with you.

As long as it's not, I'm coming to kill you, then maybe, you know, there should be somebody that steps in.

But that's the way it's always been.

Nobody has a right to throttle my relationships or get in between me and someone else or me and the truth.

And the last one is,

no, I own my land.

I own my land.

And I can be a good steward.

In fact, I'll be a better steward than you are, federal government.

I own my land and I own my water.

And if I want to farm my land, I can.

Once they take the ability of the farmer away

to independently grow vegetables, food, cows, whatever they want to do,

once that is taken away from them or made so onerous that no one except Cargill, you know, Monsanto or

the World Economic Forum or the United States government or Bill Gates,

When they take that ability away from you, the average person, you're no longer free.

If you haven't set a red line yet, you might want to consider it.

What is it going to take for you to stand up and say, wrong direction?

No,

I'm not going there.

And let me just say one more thing and then we have to break.

Be very, very careful

on who you align yourself with.

even

your own faith can be hijacked and we can look for a new

Christian defender who you know we all love the Constitution but things you know sometimes we have to do things and so we're going to give this person extra power and unleash him to do what must be done.

Do not

follow that path.

Please,

pay attention.

It's hard to see right now, but it is going to become very apparent soon.

The only restoration we're looking for, the only changes we're looking for

is a restoration of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

as written.

Period.

This is the best of the Glenbeck program.

Alan Dershowitz is with us.

He is, of course, the author of Get Trump and The Price of Principal and host of The Dersh Show.

Alan Dershowitz joins us now.

We would love to understand, Alan,

what exactly

is Donald Trump being charged with in this latest indictment?

The basic charge is that he personally knew he had lost the election.

He believed that he had actually lost the election fair and square, and he engaged in all these actions with a corrupt motive.

I don't think the government's going to be able to prove that.

There is no.

First of all, let me tell you something.

I talked to Donald Trump probably about two weeks before January 6th.

There is no way he believed he lost that election.

There's still, today,

he does not believe he lost that election.

I can guarantee it.

You know him well enough to know that.

He believes he won the election and he believes it was stolen from him.

I think he's wrong.

Many people told him he was wrong.

Many people are quoted in the indictment telling him he was wrong, but that doesn't make the crime.

The crime requires

beyond a reasonable doubt that he himself actually knew and believed it and acted with a corrupt motive.

I don't think the government's going to be able to prove that.

But to state a broader point, when the Attorney General of the United States authorizes an indictment, as was done here, against the man running against the incumbent president, who is now tied 44-44 in the New York Times poll, that indictment better be the strongest indictment in American history.

There should be a smoking gun, fingerprints, a videotape, and a confession.

This document is so flawed, is so filled with speculation.

Jack Smith's famous for bringing speculative cases and then being smacked down by appellate courts.

This just doesn't satisfy the Banana Republic test.

In banana republics, presidents prosecute their political opponents.

And the stronger their political opponents are in the polls, the more likely they are to be prosecuted.

And we don't want that to happen in the United States.

And I think this indictment doesn't meet what I call the Nixon standard.

The Nixon standard is Nixon's crimes were so obvious that even his political supporters favored his being impeached or being prosecuted.

That's not the case here.

Right now, the only people who seem to support this indictment are partisans who are anti-Trump.

And that's just not enough to heal the divisions.

in this country.

So this indictment will further the divisions, especially if it's ultimately reversed on appeal.

Look, the indictment is brought in the District of Columbia.

The District of Columbia jury will convict anybody named Trump for anything.

And that's why the case should be moved to Virginia.

It will be subject to a motion to change the venue to Virginia, where you have a level playing field.

It's a purple state.

This case should be tried in a purple state, not in a bright, bright, bright, bright, bright,

democratic state.

And that's where it's being tried in the most democratic district in the United States of America, the most anti-Trump district in the entire United States.

That's where the trial is scheduled to be held by a judge who has a very questionable background.

She worked for years for a firm that's highly questionable, the David Boyes firm,

very, very democratic-oriented.

They represented High School.

She was working.

Right.

And Burisma, and she was working there at the time of all of that stuff.

Not saying that she was involved in it, but.

Right.

David Boyce and his firm have been charged with more cases of corruption and disbarable conduct than any law firm in modern American history.

And it's well known for its...

being subject to

so many charges.

And she was part of that firm.

And that's not something I would brag about.

I got that firm disqualified in a case because because of conflict of interest.

And they've been charged over and over again with conflicts and other kinds of things.

And she spent most of her career in that firm.

So if I'm Donald Trump, I don't want to be tried in front of her.

I want to be tried in front of a judge who has a fairer and better background.

And I want to be tried in front of a jury that isn't 90-something percent anti-Trump voters.

Can he get that done?

He can try.

And if he loses, it will be subject to appeal.

And that might be the kind of thing that could be appealed immediately as well.

There's some dispute about that.

But change of venue motions can sometimes be subject to what are called interlocutory appeals.

So there's a lot that will happen before he stands trial in the District of Columbia in front of this judge.

This judge also is the January 6th hanging judge.

There hasn't been a single case that has come before her that she hasn't given tougher sentences than even the government was asking for.

Well, I mean, you need to have in this case, when you're trying the man who's running against the incumbent president, that has to be, it has to be Caesar's wife.

It has to be clearer and cleaner than anything.

And having the trial in the District of Columbia in front of this judge on the basis of an indictment of this kind is going to just sow greater divisions in this country.

People are not going to be satisfied that this is fair, objective justice.

You know, the Bible, the Torah, says, lo takir panim to judges.

Don't recognize faces.

Don't do justice based on who the person is.

Do justice based on the law and the facts.

And the law and the facts don't support this indictment.

The author of Get Trump and the host of the Dirt Show podcast, Alan Dershowitz.

So what do you think about the first case, as Jonathan Turley says,

making disinformation a crime.

No, I think he's right.

I think this really changes the nature of American politics.

And if it were taken to its logical conclusion, half of Congress would be in prison.

You can't make it a crime to lie to the American public.

You know, lying has been part of American politics since

Thomas Jefferson ran against John Adams.

And

the cure for lying is is the other side tell the truth and you win the election.

But the First Amendment protects lies.

The First Amendment protects so much speech that we despise.

Look, I've defended communists, Nazis, pornographers,

not because I like any of them, but because I like free speech and because the alternative is a system of censorship.

And this indictment takes us down the road toward

criminalizing free speech.

And what is true and what is not true is often in the eye of the beholder, particularly in the political context.

Remember, Chief Justice Rehnquist, a conservative Chief Justice, said the First Amendment doesn't recognize a false opinion.

False opinions and true opinions have the same status under the First Amendment.

And this is a case criminalizing

false opinions.

What people believe are false opinions.

What I believe is a false opinion.

I think that President Biden won the election fair and square.

I wish there hadn't been some of the Russia dossier stuff and some of the stuff involving social media.

But the election count itself was, I think, fair.

Was there some fraud?

Yeah.

Were there some constitutional problems?

Yeah, Pennsylvania violated Article II of the Constitution, in my opinion.

But it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the election.

But Donald Trump has the right to protest and to be wrong in his protests.

And that's what the deepest problem is here.

Can you go into this a bit, Alan?

Because I know the founders, they fought over freedom of speech, and especially when the Sedition Act was imposed.

They went back and forth and they said the government cannot ever be the arbiter of truth.

It can't be

because sometimes they're lying.

And if they're the only ones that can say, nope, this is true, this is not, which they did in COVID and everything else, it is an unworkable society.

It eventually kills all free speech.

Can you kind of explain that in layman's terms to people?

Yeah.

Well, the 1800 election, one of the great elections in history, was really about this.

John Adams, and believe it or not, even George Washington had supported the alien, and Alexander Hamilton supported the Alien and Sedition Acts, which punished opinions that were contrary to the opinions of the government.

People actually went to prison.

Thomas Jefferson ran against that, and he overwhelmingly beat John Adams, who was a great man and a great president.

But Americans wanted free speech, and Jefferson then pardoned the people who were convicted under the Alien and Sedition Act.

And from then on, I think the First Amendment has been interpreted very, very broadly,

which doesn't always serve the interests of the American public immediately.

It means that you do allow adult pornography, you do allow communist speech and Nazi speech and hate speech and anti-Semitic speech and anti-Catholic speech and anti-Christian and anti-Muslim speech.

All of that is permitted.

Look what happened in Sweden the other day.

They burnt a Torah.

They actually set it on fire.

They burnt a Torah.

And that would be permitted in the United States if it's your Torah or your Quran.

Now, in Sweden, they're trying to pass a law now prohibiting the burning of religious books.

And maybe that will pass.

But under our First Amendment, we have extraordinarily broad rights to do the wrong thing.

And now President Trump is being indicted for doing what this administration thinks was the wrong thing.

I agree.

I think he did the wrong thing.

But he did say, when he made his January 6th speech, which I thoroughly disapprove of, he did say he wants people to protest peacefully and patriotically.

And when you leave that out, that's as much of a lie as anything that Donald Trump was accused of.

It's called a lie of omission.

Alan, I appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

My pleasure.

I don't know where all of this ends, but I appreciate your guidance on this.

Thank you so much, Alan Dershowitz.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

This is amazing.

There's a super cup now of the media that I want to play here in a second, but I want you to remember this is exactly what I told you happened during the Lewinsky scandal.

First, they said he didn't do it.

He didn't do it.

And we argued back and forth.

Yes, he did.

No, he didn't.

Yes, he did.

No, he didn't.

And then when we got to, oh, here's the evidence, people said it didn't matter.

And that's pretty much what we're hearing now.

Listen to the media dismissing Devin Archer's testimony this week.

Joe Biden did nothing.

Nothing, not even approximating improper, much less wrong or illegal.

It's wishful thinking.

They're trying to create a scandal.

I think it's pretty...

clear, at least so far, there is nothing there.

House Republicans continue their search for any proof at all tying President Joe Biden to his son Hunter's business dealings.

Joe Biden had nothing to do with Hunter Biden's business dealings.

Because

they want to dirty up Biden's name.

You know, Republicans have been trying to use Hunter Biden's behavior against the president.

Did not know

anything that Hunter Biden was doing.

Seeing that Biden was simply involved in his son's life in a personal capacity.

Republicans from consistently trying to make this argument and create the illusion of some malfeasance being there.

Spoke to business associates of Hunter Biden to say hello, to have small talk, casual conversation.

Hunter Biden talked to his dad on the phone all the time.

They talked basically every day.

Sometimes Joe Biden would say hello to the people in the room if he popped in or on the phone or whatever.

It's all casual conversation, niceties, the weather.

They never discussed business.

These were more of just cordial hello types of conversations.

Business was never discussed on those calls and that was more casual sort of check-ins, casual conversations.

President Biden might have said, hey, quit putting me on speakerphone.

You know, are you having a business meeting?

Like, what is that about?

But do you hang up on your phone, on your side?

Yeah, if you're the president of the United States and you have been warned by the State Department

that this is highly irregular,

and this is what was happening during the Obama administration, and the Obama administration completely dismissed it.

They were getting warnings from all of their legal departments at the State Department and elsewhere saying

he's involved in this bad stuff, and

the president can't.

So the president was briefed now the president was speaking to his son every day but he had no idea what his son was doing as a parent do you believe that could happen to you do you believe that your son could be peddling and and dealing in your name

and selling influence that is imagined Okay,

and you had no idea when you are the second most powerful man man in the country where you have Secret Service with your son and with you,

that you would have no idea that your son is doing dirty business with oligarchs and that he calls you during those dinners to introduce you, but that's who you're on the phone with, sir.

We were there.

Secret Service was there.

These people are oligarchs, very, very bad.

They're dirty businessmen.

You know, nothing's going on, I'm sure, with you, But you have to know that's who you spoke to.

We know because the State Department wrote to the vice presidential office and said, this is really bad.

Don't do this.

So they dismiss all of that.

But what they're doing now is they're saying,

well, he was just, he was mourning his son.

Listen to this from MSNBC.

Listen, cut six.

As far as as Hunter Biden goes, there's no doubt.

I mean, it's pretty clear, even those close to the Biden family suggest that some of his behavior was pretty unseemly.

That doesn't make it illegal.

And it also means we don't know the role that then Vice President Biden may have played.

And it seems like, no, they haven't proven that he had anything to do with it.

They haven't proven that he profited from this at all.

Yet, maybe he is guilty of turning a blind eye to some of his son's behavior.

And we should put this in context.

This is a time when Beau Biden, the president's other son, was ill and then dying and then passed away.

So perhaps he was

not as attentive to what he should have been here.

But again, there has simply been no evidence, Jean Robinson, no evidence at all that he was profiting from this.

Okay, you're a jurist, and let me just ask, ladies and gentlemen of the jury,

we now have evidence from the business partner and others that Joe Hunter Biden was called to an emergency meeting in Dubai because Burisma was being investigated by Victor Shokin.

Victor Shokin was the state prosecutor and he was looking into corruption.

As testimony points out,

if the Biden, what do they call it,

brand

was not a part of this, that

Burisma would have gone out of business and all of these guys would have lost their money.

But it was the Hunter brand that saved it.

Now he was called to this emergency meeting, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, with all of the oligarchs from Burisma.

They were telling him this and telling him that he had to call his father for the brand to take care of it.

He then does.

Now, the defense would have you believe that he calls them during that very important emergency meeting where tensions were high, and he just said hello to his father, father, introduced everyone to them, to him on the phone, but nothing was said except, I miss my brother.

I know I lost my son.

The weather here is fine in D.C.

We'll talk later, son.

And the business partners that were paying a guy who didn't speak Russian, didn't speak Ukrainian, did not know anything about the oil and gas business.

He was specifically called because the brand was supposed to take care of things like Victor Shokin.

But nothing happened until five days later, Joe Biden goes and withholds $1 billion worth of aid from the United States government unless they fire Victor Shokin.

And then he comes out and he brags about it.

Listen.

I'm desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of

Kiev Kyiv in terms of corruption.

They made, I mean, I'll give you one concrete example.

I was, not I, I, but it just happened to be, that was the assignment I got.

I got all the good ones.

And so I got Ukraine.

And

I remember going over, convincing our team, our brothers, to convincing us that we should be providing for loan guarantees.

And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kyiv, and I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee.

And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from

Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor, and they didn't.

So they said, they were walking out to the press conference.

I said, no, I said,

we're not going to give you the billion dollars.

They said, you have no authority.

You're not the president.

The president said.

I said, call him.

I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars.

I said, you're not getting the billion.

I'm going to be leaving here.

And I think it was, what, six hours?

I looked at, I said, I'm leaving in six hours.

If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money.

Well, son of a

got fired.

And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

Okay, stop.

This was someone solid at the time, somebody who would not investigate burisma.

That, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are asked to believe was a complete coincidence.

Complete.

By the way, you know when I will believe that Joe Biden has

actually accepted his granddaughter, Hunter's illegitimate child,

when I believe that he's accepted her as part of the family, is when they set up a shell corporation for her in her name.

That's when I'll believe she's part of the family.

They do keep saying this where they're like, oh, well, there's no evidence that he profited at all from any of this.

It's like, well, what are all these bank records with millions of dollars being transferred to shell companies in names of random Biden family members that didn't have anything to do with these?

They do this.

Yeah.

Okay.

How do you explain that?

How do you explain it?

Come up with something.

Can you at least try to explain it?

Can you try to explain the WhatsApp message where he's saying he's in the same room with his father and we're holding a grudge against you and

we are going to make your life a living hell if if you don't uh get this payment to come through right now can you at least come up with some way of trying to explain that i i mean they're sort of the media is sort of taking this road of well it was hunter and he was bad and he was selling the illusion of of of uh of some sort of influence uh from his dad and it wasn't real but like why don't we have the actual administration saying that's what happened Why is it the media carrying that water?

Why isn't Joe Biden required to come out and say, yes, this was my son doing this terrible, terrible thing?

And he's really, really bad.

And, you know, we're not going to invite him to the next state dinner.

So maybe he shouldn't be in the room with those people next time.

Uh-huh.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I would just like to ask you this question.

The media is now saying, yes, what Hunter Biden did was bad and possibly even illegal.

It was illegal.

He was not a registered foreign agent, and yet he was acting as one, meaning

representing people in foreign countries and doing business for them in the United States on their behalf.

He was never registered.

That's against the law.

Okay?

Can't do it.

He also was doing something very nefarious.

Let's say he was doing it on his own.

His father had no idea.

He was trading on the Biden family name and selling the brand.

This is now accepted by people in the media.

It was the brand.

He was selling the brand, but the president didn't have anything to do with it.

Okay, let's take that at face value as it's absolutely true.

Why hasn't the president come out and said that?

Why hasn't the president come out and said, look, it's important that you know if your president is a crook or not?

Well, I'm not a crook.

My son, I found out, while I was grieving my son, he, my other son, is trading on my name, making it look like I would provide deals.

You know what?

My son is very troubled.

He has had a very difficult time with drugs.

He was out of control.

But I am not going to stand in the way of his prosecution if that's what people believe.

But I want you to know, I'm shocked and horrified by what my son did,

but I had nothing to do with it.

He's not doing that.

Why?

Why?

Why is the media doing that?

But they're not insisting that the president should do that.

His whole thing for the last five years has been to lie over and over again to the media.

My son did nothing wrong.

Well, we now know, and it's pretty well accepted, that he was trading on the Biden name.

That is wrong.

He was acting as a foreign agent without being registered.

That's illegal.

Why won't the president come out and say that?

Yeah, and like I can certainly understand why the president doesn't want to come out and say that.

I totally get it because it makes him look illegal like he broke the law and his family is in turmoil and his son should obviously go to prison.

I get why he wouldn't want to say that, but I don't get why the media isn't requiring him to come out and say it.

They certainly would do this if it was anyone else.

Any Republican would be required.

They would be pestered every time he walked in front of a camera.

He would be asked to say that exact thing.

And they're not doing that at all.

They're not, they're not.

He needs to say those things.

He needs to come out and say those things.

And he's not.

Of course, we understand why Joe Biden is trying to avoid that.

But like, if we had a media with any, any,

any reasonable integrity and

attachment to journalistic principles, principles.

This is all they'd be focused on right now.

And yet they keep falling for the same trip trick, Glenn, that you've outlined multiple times today.

The day after this stuff comes out, they do something like indict Donald Trump.

And now the entire media is on that bandwagon instead of the one they should be looking at.

Mint is still $15 a month for premium wireless.

And if you haven't made the switch yet, here are 15 reasons why you should.

One, it's $15 a month.

Two, seriously, it's $15 a month.

Three, no big contracts.

Four, I use it.

Five, my mom uses it.

Are you playing me off?

That's what's happening, right?

Okay, give it a try at mintmobile.com/slash switch.

Up front payment of $45 per three month plan, $15 per month equivalent required.

New customer offer first three months only, then full price plan options available.

Taxes and fees extra.

See mintmobile.com.