Best of the Program | Guests: Adam Curry & Chris Schandevel | 5/26/23

Only Murders in the Building, season five.

The hit Hulu original is back.

The Nightbuster died.

He was talking with a smobster.

Was he killed in a hit?

We need to go face to face with the mob.

Get ready for a season.

Buonziona signore.

This is how I die.

You can't refuse.

You're gonna save the day, like you always do, by being smart, sharp, and almost always find mistakes.

The Hulu Original series: Only Murders in the Building, premieres September 9th, streaming on Hulu and Hulu on Disney Plus for bundle subscribers.

Terms apply.

New episodes Tuesdays.

At what point do you think we checked out on today's show?

It's a three-day weekend.

Usually, we check out the day before Friday.

I was going to say Tuesday was my line,

which is interesting because I had Monday off.

Yeah, right.

So that's not necessarily a great week of work.

But no, today is a great, great show.

You don't want to miss it.

Everything from

a passionate plea to attorneys to a really passionate remembrance for those who have fallen and our service members,

to

all the ways you can be a federal criminal.

And there's a lot of ways.

Also, Chip and Joanna make an appearance, at least in name, when we're talking about the Target thing.

There's something new happening with Target.

And of course, the corruption with the DOJ.

I mean, so you got it all.

This is good eating.

This is a buffet.

I'll take a little of that and a little of that.

And you are now just going to, you're going to loosen that belt and sit back afterwards and just sleep like you've never slept before.

All on the podcast brought to you by Relief Factor.

I mean,

look, you want to get out of pain, okay?

I'm tired of talking about it.

I really am.

Your pain is becoming my pain because the sooner you buy Relief Factor, the sooner I don't,

this may not work out to my advantage.

I don't have to talk about this sponsor anymore.

I don't have to talk about Relief Factor.

We could be done with all of these commercials if it wasn't for you not ordering Relief Factor.

Now order it.

Get out of pain.

Get your life back.

I'm tired of it.

Feel the difference.

Call the number 4RELIF800, the number 4, Relief or ReliefFactor.com.

If I have to repeat myself and pull this car over, you will be sorry.

Here's the podcast.

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

Welcome to the Glenbeck Program.

It is Friday.

I want to give you some good news.

There are lots of things that you are winning on, a lot of court battles that you are winning on.

If you missed the first hour of this podcast broadcast, you need to go back and listen to

my call to an attorney.

We need to

understand

what you're fighting against and what you are fighting against are people who are perverting the Constitution and going around all of their powers that are legally prescribed and doing anything they want.

The way to fight that is not through angry words or anything else, but through the court system.

And shame on all you attorneys that won't stand up.

Shame on you.

You should be

forming

your firms with the people who think like you do and amassing the biggest list of attorneys that are like, you know what?

I've had enough.

My country is worth more than my money or prestige.

You will be remembered as a friend to freedom.

Now, let me introduce you to one of the attorneys who is like that,

Chris Shandovell.

He is with the Alliance Defending Freedom.

He is senior counsel.

Chris, we talked to you guys, what was it about a month ago

about a case you were battling in New Mexico with the with doctors

and

what New Mexico was trying to force doctors to do.

And you had just won that case, and you mentioned that you were in another case similar to it in California.

Can you tell us the case?

Sure.

So there in New Mexico, we had just won a case.

Essentially, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of medical professionals there in the state who said, listen, we cannot in good conscience help our patients kill themselves.

And that is what the law there would have required them to do.

As a result of that lawsuit, as we we discussed last week, the New Mexico legislature actually amended their law to take away those requirements that would have forced those doctors to participate in that process.

So we were thrilled about that result and happy to bring you that good news there, like you said, about a month ago.

And now in California, we're back and we're celebrating again a really excellent victory that we were able to achieve on behalf of a group of doctors there

who, again, were challenging a very similar law that would have required them if a patient of theirs expressed a desire to obtain lethal drugs to kill themselves, even if those doctors believe that the medical profession is about helping and healing and not hurting and killing.

So they have a conscience objection to assisting in that process of their patients killing themselves, those doctors still, under these new changes to the law, would have been required to document that first oral request for those lethal drugs in that patient's medical record.

And that is significant under the law because it's the first step in the process of those patients obtaining those lethal drugs.

And so we filed a lawsuit on their behalf, and we're just so thrilled to report that we've settled that lawsuit with the state of California.

They have agreed to not require a single physician anywhere in the state of California to be forced against their will to participate in that process of helping their patients commit suicide.

And so it really is a sweeping victory.

We have Dr.

Leslie Cochran on, who was named in this suit

and a plaintiff in the

Medical and Dental Association versus Banta, I think it was.

Leslie, doctor, welcome.

Dr.

Cochran, are you there?

Okay, he's not there.

Well, Chris, good job on this.

Now, my concern is that, you know, I'm an amateur self-taught historian.

My concern is everything that Dr.

Mengela did in the 1930s and 40s was up to the law.

It was all legal, all those experiments, everything.

And they started killing children early on, and then the people found out and they supposedly stopped it.

But the medical world, behind the backs of the people, just kept doing it anyway.

I'm concerned about the people that could be weeded out at the medical school level.

Are there any blocks for people that have, you know,

Christian beliefs or don't believe in all this woke garbage?

Are they being held back?

Is there anybody watching

what's happening in the medical schools?

Well, sure.

I think that is a real concern that we should care about and

be vigilant about.

And I think it really starts with, you know, if

they are able to, if this radical, really pro-death agenda is able to weaponize the medical profession to advance this agenda through legalizing physician-assisted suicide, through legally compelling doctors to participate in that practice, then the medical schools can say, you know, listen, we're just enforcing the laws of our state by requiring our medical students to agree to participate in these practices.

So we really have to be attacking these laws head on.

You know, not just saying, oh, well, I guess we'll go along to get along, or maybe we'll just have some of our doctors leave the state of California and go to other states where they can practice medicine in good conscience, because the result is

that leaves all of the result is death.

And the result is that their patients are left behind

with doctors who will participate in the practice of helping them kill themselves.

Okay, I'm told that we have Leslie on now.

Doctor, are you there?

Yes.

Okay.

So you are a full-time hospice physician.

When this came down and you were told you must provide the information,

what happens now

when a patient says that to you?

Well,

we normally,

as physicians, especially hospice physicians, we're talking to people every day about end-of-life issues.

And since this law became, effect, the End of Life Option Act initially became law beginning in 2016, I would essentially be able to talk to my patient and say, let's talk about what your issues are and what you're concerned about.

You know, death or physician-assisted suicide was never on the table of one of the things that I would ever recommend as a physician as a way to treat someone's symptoms.

This

new law that twisted and removed the protection that had been there for me before basically put me in the position of either choosing to violate the law and telling the patient, no, I am not going to participate in physician-assisted suicide.

That would have essentially been something I wouldn't have have been allowed to do.

I would have had to participate in the conversation with the patient, take down their request and note their request in the medical record, and then refer them to a physician that would fulfill that request.

And of course, that is something that myself and many other physicians

would be a violation of their conscience, of their professional ethics and their values.

And I would have been forced to violate the law or to quit practicing medicine in the state of California, both of which are unacceptable.

It is, well, you have to get out of California for a myriad of reasons.

But

the amazing thing is, is everything that is happening right now is not

being forced.

Individuals are being forced to participate.

No matter what your conscience says, you are forced to participate.

And that's just, that goes against God, I think, but it also goes against the American understanding of everything that is

right and decent.

No, you're not forcing me to do something against my will.

And it's a little terrifying.

But I'm glad you won this.

Thank you for standing up.

Has it cost you?

And has it been worth standing up and fighting in California?

Well, it's worth standing up and fighting.

And to tell you the truth,

you know, physicians,

if we don't stand up for something that we know is wrong or bad or harmful, you know, to violate our conscience and to participate in a process that we think would be unethical, you know, that's a disservice to the frail, the weak, and the elderly because what you know, it starts with it starts with a choice and you don't have to look beyond our northern border to see in Canada where you move from physician-assisted suicide very quickly into euthanasia and then even into Europe where euthanasia without consent can occur.

So it is important for doctors and people of conscience to stand up and say, no,

I was sworn to protect and to help heal my patients.

I refuse to participate in their death, to knowingly give them a medication that they're going to use to end their life.

Dr.

Chris, thank you very much.

Thanks for the great update.

Keep fighting.

If you would like to support the Alliance Defending Freedom, this is a group of really good attorneys that are going out and they are fighting for rights.

You can make a donation and find out more about them at adflegal.org.

That's adflegal.org.

Thanks, guys.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

And don't forget, rate us on iTunes.

My brother from another mother, Adam Curry.

How are you, sir?

Ah, Glenn, twice in one week.

I don't know what's happening.

I know.

It's crazy.

Well, I have such a long list of things to talk to you.

By the way, that podcast is off the charts.

Off the charts, good.

You know, it was a lot of fun.

And you're a very gracious host.

Your staff is so wonderful.

And really, I think we could just talk, you know, without cameras or microphones or anything.

We'd just talk anytime about anything.

I love it.

I know.

And we don't necessarily agree on everything, but that's totally cool.

I mean, I find you a smart, reasonable human being, and I learn something from you every time.

Anyway,

one thing that we didn't get to in the podcast, which by the way, Adam Curry is the podcast this weekend, wherever you get your podcast tomorrow, also on YouTube and Blaze TV, it's already there.

The one thing we didn't get to is something that I just can't figure out

in two directions.

One,

if 15 years ago, 20 years ago, we would have said,

yes, and spokespeople from the Pentagon have verified that aliens

are circling the planet and tracking our nuclear sites, and we even have a piece of alien technology.

That would have been a big deal.

But now

they're saying this and nobody cares.

And I don't don't know if you're just so focused on other things, if people don't believe it, if we should believe it.

What's going on with the alien thing?

Oh, well, it's interesting you say 15 years ago because that's literally about the timeline when I started with no agenda and when I started looking into conspiracies,

so-called conspiracies.

And I really decided pretty quickly that I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

I'm a conspiracy therapist.

And this whole, this whole idea, and actually I did a lot of, I was living in the UK at the time, and I was very into, you know, aliens and

the tall blondes and the grays and all of this stuff.

And I flew to places to meet people who claimed to, you know, know an alien.

And I never got any, any confirmation whatsoever.

And you're right.

That's also, I think, because the media is so

you know, everything is media now.

It's not just, you know, Walter Cronkite saying, hey, look, these pilots are saying that they've seen UFOs.

So I have looked into this, and

there's part logical explanation, and then there is, of course, a conspiracy that goes along with it.

And what we've seen

since, I think, 2014 is a lot of radar images, you know, the Tic-Tac.

We've seen

radar images from submarines where things appear and then disappear.

And

we've seen actual footage, they say, from

fighter pilots and Navy and Air Force pilots recording these things, doing things that are way beyond technology, at least that we know of.

Well, this technology actually has been discussed openly.

And

again, notice that the footage we're seeing.

is radar footage.

It's not cameras that are taking a picture of this thing thing flying and at unbelievable speeds, going under the water, et cetera.

It's radar footage.

And it was a Harvard professor who in the 70s

started talking about this.

His name is Professor Robert Duncan.

What this really is,

this particular phenomenon, which I can speak to, they're directed energy weapons.

And I'm not talking about laser beams that melt you or anything, but much more like a laser pointer in the sky.

And they excite the electrons in in the atmosphere.

So, this ionization that takes place.

And this shows up on radar.

And this is military technology that was created to make a fleet appear all of a sudden.

So, the concept was:

you make this, all these ships appear all of a sudden.

Our adversary, wherever they would be, would see this, would get their fighter planes in the air and go off and try to attack them.

Then they disappear, and then we would come in from the other directions and attack that flank.

And

it really is nothing more than that.

It's really good technology because it actually leaves radar traces.

It's almost like a laser pointer in the sky.

And if you think about that tic-tac, like you're the cat in the fighter plane, you look at your radar, you see this thing, and it goes under the water and all over the place, and it does things that seem

impossible.

Now, the conspiracy part of this is something called Project Blue Beam.

Have you ever heard of that?

No.

So Project Blue Beam,

the idea, and this developed over time as well, is that this very technology would be used to create the voice of God.

And it could be used two ways.

One, to bring the whole world together, you know, New World Order, everybody all focused on one thing, which would either be the common enemy, oh, the aliens are coming, or

the voice of God, which you could also, you can use the same technology to create sound waves, which would bring a message to unite the world.

And I'm pretty steadfast in believing believing that this is what this is about.

Now, why people aren't freaking out about it?

There's so much to freak out about.

No, I know, I know.

People are obsessed with Target.

Yeah, I know.

But Target versus alien life that is here

seems,

I would tip the scales towards the alien life thing.

But

I just can't figure it.

I just can't figure it out.

And

why is the government making such a big deal, the Pentagon and the leaks, and then the officials coming out and saying what they are, Congress, and then no one picking it up?

It just seems really odd.

Yeah, I can

speaking to the military and Congress.

That to me would be the bluebeam part of it, saying, hey, you know, let's get everyone either A, very afraid, which is kind of the model, you know, oh, aliens,

or or let's unite everybody under one common voice of God, you know, like Reagan, you know, let's get everyone together.

Why people don't care about it?

I mean, that literally just has to be because we're so used to fake everything.

We're looking at screens all day that is not reality.

We see imagery that is, you know, created by, you know, AI, call it Photoshop, AI, whatever you want.

We see, I mean, we're so used to things that are just not real.

I think we've become anesthetized against it.

And like, yeah, whatever, you know, we can handle that.

Bring us aliens.

Maybe people will be happy to see it.

Let me take you to some news

today.

Comer in the House Oversight Committee says that

there is a $5 million bribe that Joe Biden took.

The FBI has a case on it.

It's open.

They've buried it.

He is saying, I'm going to hold you in contempt if you don't release those documents because of a whistleblower.

The DOJ has dropped charges against the Soros-backed Massachusetts DA, who was caught lying under oath and meddling in an election.

Highly illegal.

She was going to be resigning her post.

DOJ has dropped all charges on that.

Then you have Stuart Rhodes, the guy from Oath Keepers, who, you know, I don't think is a good guy, but he didn't bring a weapon, didn't enter the Capitol, didn't harm anybody, wasn't arrested for a year, and he got 18 years

in prison.

I think we have a problem

with our DOJ.

Is this fixable?

I know we talked in the podcast about

your uncle and the CIA.

And so we went in pretty deep on,

you know, what the CIA has been responsible for in the past.

And I hope people start to care about it.

But is this too far gone?

Well, the sooner, as we discussed in the podcast, the sooner we all realize how captured everything is, all of our institutions, the sooner we can realize that not only can we change it, we actually have the power to change these things.

Even

Congress,

by definition of superpower, I'm not saying that you need to get money out of politics, but also these institutions are also completely captured.

I mean, even just to get on a committee, you need one or two million bucks to give to your party.

I mean, you get that by raising money.

You get that by pandering to

certain audiences, et cetera.

Nothing will change unless we seriously understand that we have all the power within our hands.

I know it sounds like a very simple thing, but we can, I mean, look, we're able to, through crowdfunding, create devices that we want.

We're able to create the media that we want.

We're slowly starting to realize, and I think Tucker Carlson was the tipping point in my mind, that media,

mainstream media is over.

It's done.

It's totally.

It's irrelevant.

The Blaze is a fantastic example of that.

In fact, I think...

you know, people are like, oh, well, Elon Musk hired Tucker.

I don't think so.

I think Tucker's going to pay Elon Musk.

I think it's the other way around.

This is the new model.

It's about the distribution that you have in your own hand.

And people are,

in one way, they are splitting off and getting into the smaller groups, which I think is just fine.

But when we realize how much power we have to support our own media, to support our own institutions, to homeschool our kids, whatever we want to do, the sooner we will realize that we also have the power to elect people.

that we actually want and who will make change.

With that comes the important chevron decision.

Have you been following this, the Chevron deference case that's going to the Supreme Court?

Yes.

This is this, I mean, it's kind of, they've tried to do it before, but it's very interesting if this, and this is a different Supreme Court, obviously,

if they overturn this chevron deference, that means that ambiguous laws that Congress creates, it can be for any agency, which would be EPA, but it can also be DOJ, it can be the EPA, we're already seeing things changing there.

That Congress will either have to clarify it or the Supreme Court and federal courts can step in and say, no, you're overstepping your boundary.

You're not following the law.

And the toughest one will be the Department of Justice, of course.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Well, in a couple of weeks, you could be a felon if you have one of those evil guns that for years have been totally legal.

You know, the one with pistol braces.

If you have one

and you haven't told the government, even though I would never tell the government,

if you have one of these, which were perfectly legal until Biden came in and was like, hey, what do you think?

We can take away some guns.

If you don't destroy that pistol brace,

you're going to be a felon.

A felon.

That's awesome.

Now, how many of these pistol braces are out there?

Because we've talked about it for a while and, you know, they're kind of, you know, it's a niche kind of thing, I think.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So how many do you think are there?

War would be a lot if you saw,

you know, how many felons is the government going to make overnight?

A few hundred thousand.

A few hundred thousand.

Well, you're close.

40 million.

40 million of these braced weapons are in circulation today.

That's more than AR-15s.

40 million felons.

The good thing is they can't arrest us all because they don't have the prison space.

Yay!

Do you believe that?

No, I did not know the number was that high.

I still don't even, I will be honest, don't even understand what these weapons are.

Like, I don't know.

I'm going to bring my friends in.

I'll show you.

Your friend has a weapon like this?

My friend has a weapon.

He might be a felon, Sonia number.

But not here in Texas.

They did have some sort of stay for Texas, Mississippi in Louisiana.

And I know you're disappointed now, Glenn, because now you can't be the federal criminal you wanted to be.

I wanted to be.

You have a real desire to check out the inner workings of the federal prison system.

Oh, you got that right.

And I want you to know you don't have to be completely disappointed.

Really?

Yes, because there's another way.

I can commit another felony.

Oh, there's so many.

There's so many ways for you to get into federal prison.

Wow.

In fact, there's a book that outlines exactly how to do this.

It's called How to Become a Federal Criminal, an illustrated handbook for the aspiring offender.

This is Mike Chase, right?

Okay, I think he meant this to prove the point that we have way too many laws, but I think it was almost tongue-in-cheek.

It's not like how to really become, how to go to prison.

You could use it that way.

I think he meant it tongue-in-cheek.

I think Soros DAs could use this.

Mike, welcome.

Hey, Glenn, thanks for having me back.

I'm offended that you think it was tongue-in-cheek.

I spent all this time illustrating the best ways to become a federal criminal and you think it's a joke.

I mean, this is hard work.

Well, I will say transporting a dirty or leaky egg.

Oh, yes.

That makes me a criminal?

Yeah, no,

it is called a restricted egg in true classic federal government form.

They've given it a highly technical name.

But if you read the code and you get right down to it, what they prohibited and made a federal crime is just moving around in, quote, interstate commerce with a dirty egg.

And the definition of a dirty egg, in case you're confused, is actually written down in a separate regulation, and it is an egg with dirt on it.

So that clarifies it for all of us.

An egg with dirt on it.

Now, do I have to cross state lines for this to be a weapon of mass destruction?

I have great news for you

that the federal government, in all of its wisdom, has developed developed the notion of interstate commerce to not require interstate anything.

And so that goes way back to a Supreme Court decision, Wickard versus Tilburne.

And basically it says, look, it's in-state.

It can still be interstate because, you know, look, everything is ours and everything affects everything else.

And so all of these federal regulations that you would think require interstate movement really don't.

They just

isn't important enough for the federal government to get interested in in it.

Right.

Okay.

So if I go to the store and I accidentally

break an egg on the way to the car and I don't call in the hazmat team to get rid of that egg, I just transport it to my house.

I'm a federal criminal?

Your first call should be to me, Glenn.

I will represent you free of charge anytime that break an egg.

But yeah, and then we'll come and we'll, you know, we'll do a proper session.

We'll make you a high-level cooperator on the cracked eggs at your local grocery store.

I remember there was something in your book about

spoons because of this I thought immediately my grandmother would be

a massive federal criminal because of her little she has to have those like these little like World's Fair spoons.

No, a mini spoon.

A little mini spoon rack.

Look out, Mr.

Felon.

It's true.

It was the first thing I thought of, too, is like, who has miniature spoons?

And it's always grandmothers.

I think it's a dying breed.

But you're right,

it's been a federal crime for a long time to mail or transport a miniature spoon because the government is convinced that unless you can affirmatively prove otherwise, in other words, the burden is on you to prove a legitimate use for your miniature spoon, they presume it's because you're going to use it for drug use.

And in fact, there was this robust testimony before Congress when the law was getting passed by a woman named Joyce Nalepka.

And she said she was so proud to announce she had just gotten off the phone with the CEO of McDonald's, who had promised to stop distributing the McSpoon coffee strer

because this would stem the tide of people using it to snort cocaine.

So, oh my God.

It was still forever a federal crime to transport miniature spoons.

I have to tell you, now this would be wrong to do, and maybe even a federal crime.

I don't know, but you would know.

I'm very tempted

to go to a, you know, some sort of a secondhand store where they got plenty of these things from all of our grandmothers and then just drop them in a car of somebody who I really don't like.

Then

whistleblow

and have that spoon confiscated.

You know what I'm saying?

Yeah, I mean, I think we should probably check Biden's garage.

There's probably a collection of miniature spoons.

Well, they won't arrest him.

Yeah, but they won't arrest him.

He can have all the spoons.

He could do a video of him mailing individual spoons to every resident in America, and he wouldn't get busted.

My guess is, too, if Hunter Biden has a bunch of miniature spoons, they actually probably are used for drugs.

Yes, I'm saying.

Probably, probably.

They have an ability to wave their hand and say, these are not the spoons you're looking for.

So, you know, what's amazing is this is the way, and people don't understand this, this is the way dictators become dictators and all-powerful.

Um, they are, there's so many laws on the books, you know, just show as Stalin used to, or Stalin's KGB head used to say, show me the person, I'll show you the crime.

And

that's exactly right, right.

So, uh, I mean, if they want to get you, you don't really have to, because even like with the EPA and everything that they've just thrown all these things on the books,

they could get you for anything.

Well, that's exactly right.

I mean, it actually doesn't matter what's a crime and what's not a crime anymore because my book and my project has always sort of identified that there virtually is nothing that isn't a crime.

We have so many regulations, 300,000 federal regulations that have a criminal penalty associated with them, that

what actually happens is Congress and the regulators, they abdicate all of their crime-making authority to the prosecutor, to the enforcer.

So every single criminal prosecution at that point is a product of prosecutorial, quote, discretion.

But that becomes a problem because there's no uniformity.

There's no actual, you know, what it says on the seal.

That's not justice.

That's win.

And so

that becomes a big problem because they can pick the defendant first and then figure out the crime later.

So, is this why you started writing this?

Oh, absolutely.

I mean,

I started writing it because when I was writing sentencing memos for folks that had been prosecuted, I started trying to point out to the courts and say, look, how ridiculous it is that my client is facing 20, 30 years for this because he could just as well be facing 20 or 30 years for, you know, transporting miniature spoons or bringing a dirty, you know, rake across state lines or throwing away melons without having a a good reason.

What?

Wait, wait.

What?

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

The Produce Destruction Act.

If you have melons, interstate melons, and you throw them away for no good reason, that's a federal crime.

Oh, man, I am tossing all perfectly good melons

into

Susan Sarandon's dumpster this weekend.

But that's exactly it.

I mean,

the problem was I wanted to illustrate, and I dedicated my book to Congress because I think, you know, it's a funny book, but the jokes are all theirs.

And I basically wanted them to know, you know, you have to actually see in illustration form what you've done.

Because I don't think the lawmakers know what they've done, but they have unleashed this monster federal code.

Well, I think, I mean, that's why the Reigns Act, if it's kept in the

bill for the budget, that was something that I know Mike Lee has been pushing for, and he got it in the the bill.

Hopefully it will stay there.

That and the Chevron case is, they're huge because it forces that lawmaking ability back to Congress.

So if you're stopped and you're charged with leaky egg, it'll go to the Supreme Court and it'll be thrown out unless Congress says, yeah, we want to keep that law, right?

Well, that's right.

And look, in his quote on the back of my book, Mike Lee said the scariest part of the book is how many of these crimes were created by bureaucrats, not Congress, right?

So this all represents a, you say Congress, but this is all a massive departure from what the Constitution said Congress should do, Article 1, Section 1, right?

They are the lawmakers.

But they said, no, you know what, give it to the executive branch.

They'll figure it out.

And there you have Senator Mike Lee is saying that he finds the scariest part of this, the fact that the agency bureaucrats, whose names you don't know, you've never met these people, they're the ones making the crimes, not even Congress.

So, you know, I saw that Biden, the DOJ, dropped all charges against the Soros-Packed Massachusetts DA because she was lying under oath.

She was interfering on an election.

All things that we know she did, but they've just decided, the DOJ has just decided they're not going to charge her with that.

Meanwhile,

they are charging a guy who had a lit torch

because it's illegal to have

a lit object in Virginia that could intimidate.

And,

you know, he's not, I'm not saying he's a good guy, but wait a minute, hang on just a second.

And it's all up to the prosecutors and their discretion.

This is completely out of control.

Can you get a fair, for instance, in

Washington, D.C.,

I don't think you can get a fair trial there.

Can you?

Well, I'll tell you, D.C.,

when I was just becoming a lawyer, I clerked for the U.S.

Attorney's Office down there.

And I remember watching jury trials in the district.

And I will say that they had one of the highest uses of jury nullification of any place.

But that's a far cry.

That's sort of the day-to-day criminal prosecution.

When it comes to the political prosecution that you're talking about, I think that the opposite is true.

You are seeing a much higher conviction rate and you're seeing a much higher prosecution rate of people for what are purely political reasons.

And so

I tend to agree.

So on the one hand, yes, in D.C., you're going to see a lot more people using jury nullification, which is a good thing.

It's basically jurors taking the law back into their own hands and saying, we disagree with this.

But on the other hand,

I think that the wide perception, and this is something I warned about in a Wall Street Journal op-ed back in 20, I want to say

18.

I said the rise of political prosecution is going to be completely unchecked, and it is going to be, you know, more prosecutions we hear about are going to be political ones.

Oh, sure, already there.

Yeah, we're there.

I've only got about 20 seconds.

So from DEF CON 5 to DEF CON 1, where are we on the scale of danger

with the FBI and DOJ?

No, we're there.

I mean, we're there because

all that matters is trust in the justice system.

And I think that's at an all-time low.

So when that's at an all-time low, DEF CON is at an all-time high.

All right.

Thank you so much.

God bless.

And don't

thank you for letting me know if I travel with a dirty egg.

It could be the slimmer.

Yeah.

I was sent up the river with my dirty eggs.

Glenn, we just got this in from Lynette.

She says, dead serious, currently traveling from Iowa to Nebraska with eggs I didn't wash yet.

A couple are pretty dirty.

Where do I turn myself in after I deliver them to my 80-year-old mother?

Just

give us your address, stop your car, give us your GPS coordinates, we'll send in the feds.