Best of the Program | Guest: Bill O'Reilly | 1/27/23

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.

Upfront payment of $45 for 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.

I thought today's podcast had some

very

different

points that I haven't heard people make.

No, I think that's true.

You know, all the way to the argument that Bill O'Reilly and I, you know, kind of had, it's not a real argument, but we strongly disagree with each other on tanks to Russia.

But

he looked at it in an entirely different way than I look at it.

And you know what?

If he's right,

then maybe it's not so big of a deal.

I just don't want to get roped into it.

But

that and our look at the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and in one hour's time, do you think this is hyperbolic?

In an hour's time, I tied the country's biggest problems,

tied them all together, and showed you exactly why it's happening and what we should concentrate on to solve it.

And how we were warned about it long before.

Long before.

That's not hyperbolic.

No, right.

And I haven't heard anybody else talk about this.

So it's really good, exclusive stuff today.

Brought to you by Relief Factor.

Going about your daily life when you're living with pain is like walking uphill with a backpack full of rocks.

It's not fun.

Wouldn't it be easier just to, you know, set the burden down and get up that hill?

Of course it would.

But how do you get out of pain?

May I suggest Relief Factor?

It is possible to set that backpack of rocks down.

It's possible to be living your best life again.

Relief Factor, just give it a shot.

See what it can do for you.

Try the three-week quick start, 1995.

It's trial pack.

Hundreds of thousands of people have ordered Relief Factor.

70% of them go on to order more.

Try relieffactor.com or call 800 for Relief.

800, the number 4 Relief.

It's ReliefFactor.com.

Feel the difference.

Before we start that.

That was good.

Does that?

We don't edit them.

Yes, we do.

We edit them all the time.

Okay.

Edit that out.

Okay.

Looks like how we edit out all of your racist comments every day, all your sexists, all your human comments.

Okay, now we have to edit this out.

That's why I said it.

Make sure to subscribe to Blazetv at blazetv.com/slash Glenn.

Also, this podcast, click subscribe, give us a five-star rating.

We really would appreciate it.

Also, Studios America as well, Pat Gray Unleashed, all the shows on Blaze TV.

We appreciate you supporting.

And also, Go Birds.

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

All right, so

there's a Twitter thread from the South Carolina House GOP Caucus, and it says, fact check.

Don't be misled by the South Carolina Freedom Caucus soundbite of a loyalty oath.

There is simply no such oath.

Frankly, nothing could be further from the truth.

Hmm.

Okay.

The South Carolina House Republican Caucus recognizes that our members were hired by the people they represent.

Each member of our Congress of our caucus works for their constituents in their district.

We, like other organizations, have rules of decorum and common sense.

Our rules do not demand loyalty.

And unlike other caucuses in the House, members of the South Carolina House Republican caucus have never been asked to give up their voting card to any specific caucus.

Okay.

Here's what

that last charge was not a charge that I heard on this program.

Nobody's saying that the House caucus is saying you have to vote the way we tell you to vote.

That's not it.

There is a loyalty oath, and that loyalty oath is this.

You are not allowed to discuss any of the proceedings at all or publish anything that's going on um

that that might bode well for your other caucus or bode ill for your other caucus members well this should be a very transparent uh situation when when when we have debates on the floor and you have votes and you have a voting board you should be able to see it that's why we have a gallery but not everybody can go to the gallery.

So we look to find our news and find our information, no longer from media because it's not trusted.

I mean,

we just saw the ratings.

Can you remember those well enough?

The CNN rate, sorry, the Fox ratings

are now in the demo worse.

than we had when we were at CNN.

CNN Headline News.

Right.

Now, they're still way ahead of everybody else.

But no one is watching that.

No one is watching cable news except the elderly.

And

I'm out of the demo now.

I mean, at 54 years old, you're out of the prime demo that is the money demo.

There's no one watching it anymore.

Any of these networks.

Why?

Because we don't trust any of the networks.

We trust people we trust, people who have gained our trust trust as individuals, and they post on social media or on their own platforms.

The world has changed.

That's how we get our news.

The South Carolina GOP caucus is doing the same thing they tried to do and lost against the Freedom Caucus in Washington, D.C.

People are tired of this.

They're tired of hearing one thing when an election is happening and then watching something entirely different happening.

We want complete and total transparency.

Quite honestly, I am sick and tired of all the fundraising that goes on in Congress and in the Senate and in our House and Senate and all the little games that are played with the money

being held back for some members or not for other members.

It makes me sick.

You can't get a seat in a committee unless you've raised a certain amount of money.

This is pay-for-play.

This is not a republic.

All right.

So they said that they don't have any kind of secrecy pledge or loyalty pledge is what actually they said.

So let me, unfortunately

for them,

let me give Rule 15 of the pledge that was supposed to be signed by all

of the GOP South Carolina caucus.

And you tell me, is this a pledge that you can't say things and let people know and campaign against a caucus member?

In order to encourage and foster candid, open, and frank communications

and discourse between and among members, all discussions and communications between and among members during any caucus meeting or event shall be strictly confidential confidential and shall not be disclosed or divulged to third parties in any way or method whatsoever.

Okay.

They're saying if we are going to have a private meeting, it's got to be made private.

Okay, I can kind of see that.

In furtherance of this strict confidentiality rule, each member shall be required to acknowledge and certify his or her receipt, review, and agreement to adhere, abide by, and comply with a caucus rule specifically, including strict confidentiality.

Well, here's my problem with this.

My problem is if you've got a bunch of people in there and they're saying one thing behind closed doors and then they're saying another thing,

I want to know.

I agree that there is a standard of we have to be able to debate and talk and debate freely with each other in a caucus and say, look, I think this strategy is right or wrong.

I think this law should go here or there.

And

in a way that you can actually make progress, you have to be able to say and think sometimes stupid things or unpopular things.

So, I mean, remember, our Constitution was written in secret because everybody was against it.

Okay.

That's no longer anything that should ever happen.

However, when you're debating in a caucus, I'm fine with that.

With this caveat.

If something is being said there that is dangerous to the Republic, dangerous to the state, or the opposite of what that caucus or caucus member is relating to his constituents, you absolutely blow the whistle on them.

Absolutely blow the whistle on them.

Then the next one, 16.

Members shall treat all caucus members in a respectful manner with proper decorum at caucus meetings and events.

Fine.

No member of the caucus shall engage in campaign activities of any kind

against any other caucus member in good standing.

That's what they were talking about.

Now, the GOP South Carolina House caucus has just come out with their with their tweets and they said, no, that's not true.

That's not what that says.

But that is exactly what it says.

Exactly what it says.

Should I read it again?

Members shall treat all caucus members in a respectful manner, proper decorum, at a caucus meeting and event.

Fine.

No member of the caucus shall engage in campaign activities of any kind against any other caucus member in good standing.

So if this member who is wildly progressive

And you're a freedom caucus member and you know that guy is a real obstacle to make sure we're living by the Constitution, you can't say or campaign against them in any way.

Now, they're saying the South Carolina House Caucus, they're saying, well, no, we meant, you know, you can't make money on it.

You can't.

That's not what that says.

That's not what it says.

So now, South Carolina House Caucus.

Prove me wrong.

I'm more than willing to have you on to defend yourself.

I just want the truth.

I really do.

But so far, you've lied to me.

You've lied to the people of South Carolina just in your tweets.

Now, maybe I misunderstood them, and I welcome you to come on,

but some of us really truly believe in the Constitution.

And that's not to say that you don't.

But you know very well that there are many GOP members who are like, look, we love the Constitution, but, you know, there's things we got to do.

No, never, never ever ever

I I'm gonna I'm gonna take this a step further

I have to tell you

to me

and this is just me and this is a very different thought and the media will take this and go oh my gosh he's such a radical look he's tying religion into government no no no no

No, I'm taking our sacred American scripture, and that is exactly how I look at the Bill of Rights the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.

Okay.

That paragraph that says, we hold these things to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.

And among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And governments are instituted among men

to protect those rights.

And when a government becomes hostile to those rights, it is the right and the duty

to throw off those chains and find new guardians for those rights who are more likely to protect those rights.

Okay?

So the whole thing is, we believe God gave rights to man, all men, all men.

And government is only to stand guard

for those rights.

And the minute they go awry, we got to get them out of there.

Okay?

That to me is sacred.

I believe in those words because I know where they came from and they come all from the scriptures.

That is

God's plan.

Let everyone succeed or fail on their own merit.

We all have stuff to learn and you learn through success far less than you learn through failure.

And you got to treat everybody exactly equal, not for equal outcomes,

but according to the content of their character and their work.

Then to go further, I find the American scripture of the Bill of Rights.

I believe that was God-inspired.

I believe that to be American scripture.

This, for me to deny these things, would be for me to deny Jesus, the New Testament,

the Old Testament.

It would be for me to deny my faith.

No.

And I think our churches need to get on the bandwagon here.

Our churches, you know, our churches would not be here if it wasn't for those things.

God ordained that at least the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Laws we can argue about, rights we cannot.

They come from God.

If you think there is any other place where Jewish, Muslim, Christian, even Scientology

could happen the way it does in America, the way it has,

you're mistaken.

It doesn't.

You can establish a church and have equal standing as a church in this country.

That's different.

So if you really think

that God's revealed rights,

if you really think you cannot stand for that, you can reject those things and still be in good fellowship of, I'll speak for my faith, my faith, and I think all faiths, if you think you can reject those things and still be a member in good standing, you're mistaken.

You're mistaken or should be.

So when we look at, when I look at, I'll just say it, for me, South Carolina Freedom Caucus, keep standing.

If you are playing games,

if you're not on the righteous side, I won't stand with you either.

And I won't stand with anyone who is trying, who takes those documents less seriously

than understanding who their author is

I for one am sick and tired of this being like the flag

just kind of it's just decoration there are words just behind them

But there's no power or meaning of those words are more important than the flag and we worry about the flag being burned

Stop worrying about the flag being burned.

Let's start worrying about the words that are sacred American scripture, that they are actually listened to and adhered to.

And to all the GOP,

I can't support you.

I won't vote for you.

I am done playing the game.

Done.

Show me through your actions

that you know what time it is and you know what those words mean, and how everything else falls apart unless those words are your compass.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program, and we really want to thank you for listening.

Mr.

Bill O'Reilly is going to be joining us in about an hour from now.

In case you tuned in to grab Bill, he'll be giving us his scope of the news here

in an hour exactly from now.

You don't want to miss it.

Now, I'm going over the problems of the world that we're all dealing with.

We think that they're all unrelated, but they're not.

They all come down to one thing.

And the one thing they all have in common is a speech given by President Eisenhower in 1959, which was turned around.

Most of us only know one phrase from it, the military-industrial complex.

And that was made

to

have people who were saying, hey, wait a minute, big government and big war,

they're in bed together and they're all profiting.

And maybe some of these wars we shouldn't be fighting, but it's all because of money, the military-industrial complex, the private public partnership between the government and things like Lockheed Martin.

You were discredited

by saying, oh, it's the military-industrial complex, which is what the five-star general said you need to stand on guard about.

So they made Dwight Eisenhower into a conspiracy theorist.

Think of how thoroughly this has been done, brainwash, to take the five-star general president who's warning you against the military and making him look like a conspiracy theorist.

It's incredible.

But that's not all that he warned about.

And I want to give you the rest of this.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience.

The total influence, economic, political, spiritual, felt in every city.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic process.

We should take nothing for granted.

Only an alert and knowledgeable citizens can compel the proper meshing of a huge industrial military machine of defense with our peaceful

methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial military posture has been the technological revolution during the recent decades.

Now think, this is at a time when IBM was making computers that were, that had less power than your phone, and they were the size of a, of a room.

And he's warning you that technology is growing

and it is going to be growing because of defense.

Mainly,

all of this money will be poured in from the government and you've got to be wary of technological revolution that is happening and the tech, as he says, technological elites.

I didn't know what a technological elite was until

Apple, until Google.

Now you know the names of these people and you see

at Amazon

how much power they really wield.

He says,

in this revolution, research has become central.

So who's paying for that research?

It has also become more formalized, peer-reviewed, complex, and costly.

A steady increasing share is conducted for or by or at the direction of the federal government.

This is really important.

A peer review study, the government has just conducted another study and paid for an independent study on.

How many times have you heard that?

He's warning.

Be wary of that.

Today, he says, the solitary inventor tinkering in his shop has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields.

In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research.

Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.

For every old blackboard, there are now hundreds of new electronic computers paid for by the government.

So what is he saying here?

He's saying People used to be curious.

They used to be in their garage and they'd tinker around, they'd come up with a discovery, but now everything is going to be so expensive and it's really going to be driven by defense that all of this money will be poured into our universities and into the studies, and they'll start giving you the answers the government wants.

They'll direct all of the studies.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by federal employment.

You got it?

Project allocations and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy itself could become the captive of a scientific technological elite.

Is this not where we are?

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the within the principles of our democratic system, ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

Another factor in maintaining the balance involves the element of time.

As we peer into society's future, we, you and I, our government, must avoid the impulse to live live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow.

We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss of their political and spiritual heritage.

We want a democracy and a republic to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

He nailed it.

If this was a dissertation today,

I wouldn't change a word.

I wouldn't change a word.

Now, let me take you through this here for just a quick second.

He's warning, the only warning you ever heard was the military industrial complex, but he is

also warning about a research and scientific

industrial complex that will be more and more funded by the government.

He's warning about the education industrial complex that will more and more become a public-private partnership and funded by the U.S.

government.

He then warns of a technological elite and a scientific elite that could actually in the end hijack and control the government, which would also control the spending on what we are researching.

So let me just take you through a couple of things.

Climate control.

We've been having this debate for 20 years.

What happened?

The science is clear.

The scientists and the research done by the scientists, many of which are getting their money from government, they have to comply and it's

you don't get any money.

You just don't get any grants if you're against global warming.

So all of that has been here.

And we all look at it and we say, well, okay, I believe this, I don't believe this, and I certainly don't believe the answers.

But the scientists, along with the technology elites, have decided that that opinion is no good.

And so they will silence that opinion.

Now, how do you get it through Congress?

Well, Congress knows they can't get it through.

President knows he can't get it through.

They've tried.

So let's try something called ESG,

where

just like it happens in the scientific community, where you don't get any grants if you're against what the government wants to hear.

You're going to have to get some outside money.

And that doesn't compete.

They went to the banks.

And the government and the banks and insurance companies and everybody else colluded.

to say, look, we're going to get rid of fossil fuels.

That's not what the market said.

That's not what the people said.

Anywhere in the world, we're going to get rid of fossil fuels.

We're going to get rid of eventually natural gas.

We're going to try this solar stuff.

On social justice, this is why the government can call you a terrorist if you're against CRT.

It's why you won't get your points in ESG

because the scientists, the technological elite,

and the government are all in a public-private partnership and they are telling you what you will do.

And they know, because this is the way they captured science before science, I think, captured them, it's all about money.

So they'll take away your ability for money.

This is why we're having the race and the sexuality in the G of ESG, the social justice, the energy in ESG.

It's why the Wuhan Labs, Big Farm,

we have the documentation that shows that private corporations along with government institutions colluded and lied.

We know it.

And then they tried, through the technological elite, to crush you

because you were telling the truth and what you believed.

Why are we sending tanks to

Ukraine?

Do you know how much money it's going to cost to replace all of this for the U.S.

military?

We're going to spend billions.

Did you know that last quarter,

it wasn't McDonnell Douglas, it was the other one, Lockheed Martin, had a $2 billion profit in one quarter?

The education industrial

complex, you don't think that the government is controlling with the unions and a public-private partnership everything that is happening?

Why would we give government the responsibility of teaching our children?

Do you think they're going to raise a bunch of children to be skeptical of their government, to question their government?

Of course not.

It's why we have the bank bailouts and you didn't get a dime.

Because the government needs the banks to fund their things, but they also need the banks to play along with their rules so they'll protect them so they can keep the money flowing and they can control

the banks we have

an industrial complex has replaced our republic

stop listening to those who say well that's just a conspiracy theory how many times are going to say that and then prove that it's not a conspiracy theory.

It's a conspiracy fact.

When you say it, you may not have all of the pieces, and so you're putting one more piece in, and that makes a theory.

But then, when you have all of the pieces and they admit it, and they are doing it, and you're seeing it in operation,

that's not a conspiracy theory.

You're not a conspiracy theorist.

You're pointing out facts,

and those facts show us that, according to Eisenhower as president, we are going to lose our spiritual,

our economic, economic, and our physical liberty.

The best of the Glen Beck program.

Welcome to the Glenbeck Program.

It is Mr.

Bill O'Reilly joining us, giving us the biggest stories of the week.

Bill, I loved your article on the Biden derangement syndrome that you're saying you're going through.

I love this.

I feel like that French police supervisor in the Pink Panther movies, Peter Sellers, playing Inspector Clusot, slowly drives the guy insane with his incompetence every time I see Joe Biden.

I have to tell you,

that was, what was it, Chief Inspector?

What was his name?

But you're exactly right.

I feel exactly the same way.

The actor who played him was Herbert Lom, L-O-M.

I forget his name in the movie, but

I'm I'm trying, Beck, to be fair,

because that's what I do.

And if I have Biden derangement syndrome,

B-D-S,

then what happens is that no matter what the issue, you try to spin it negative against Biden to bolster your opinion that he's no good.

Okay, so wait a minute.

That is a derangement syndrome, but I have to tell you,

you know, people could have said I had Trump derangement syndrome at the beginning.

But I said, no, no, no.

If he gets into office and he does the things that he says he's going to do, then I'll be for him.

And not blindly for him.

There were still things that he did that I disagreed with.

Bumpstocks was one of them.

And that's a big one.

We're paying for that now, even today.

So to be able to say, I really don't like this guy, but this guy did this right.

The problem is Biden has a track record of exactly zero when it comes to things that are helpful for America.

The only thing that he's been able to do, actually, is two things,

is keep the economy at least expanding in the gross national product.

But that's all wiped out by the incredible inflation that is hurting Americans.

The other thing is, I don't think he's handled Ukraine badly.

I think Putin's on the ropes, and that's obviously what this is all about.

It's not about Zelensky or anything like that.

It's about getting Putin out of there.

So

I'm glad you brought this up because one of the biggest stories of the week is the tank exchange, which I think is one of the worst things that we could do.

That's horrible.

See, I disagree with you.

I know, Beck.

I'm anxious to hear your thinking.

I wouldn't give Ukraine planes,

okay?

I wouldn't give them fighter jets because then they could possibly use them to bomb Russian territory, which then would change the Russians' people's perception of Putin.

They don't like Putin now.

Putin's on the ropes.

He's on the skids.

More than 100,000 Russians dead.

A universal draft that nobody wants.

This guy is going to go out, I think, this year.

And that's what this is all about.

It's not about really Ukraine.

It's about destroying Putin.

I know, but that is, but giving them offensive weapons.

Do we happen to have the cut from what, I think it was yesterday that we played the flashback of Biden saying just less than a year ago that this would wean World War III?

Listen to this.

The idea, the idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains

going in with American pilots and American crews, just understand, and don't kid yourself, no matter what you all say, that's called World War III.

Okay.

So we didn't, we're not giving the pilots, if you will, of these tanks, they're not Americans, but we are sending all of our

American military experts to teach them.

Well,

I mean, it's such a fine line.

All right, but, Beck, there's no downside to the United States right now, and it weakens Putin's

ability to launch a spring offensive.

See, these tanks aren't going to be used by the Ukrainians in an offensive decade.

They don't have supply lines back.

I know that's one of the

supply lines to do it.

They'll stack the tanks up along with the leopards from Germany and the old Polish tanks that they're going to bring in to

defend territory that they don't want to lose.

They're not going to roll into Stalingrad.

And this is the

university, by the way.

Do you think that they will roll into Crimea?

No, I don't think so.

Because, again,

what Zelensky is trying to do is just wear down Putin and the Russians so that they withdraw.

The only thing propping Russia up there now is the Wagner Group.

Do you know the Wagner group?

I do know the Wagner group.

Okay, so they're mercenaries, and

they have 50,000 soldiers

in Ukraine.

40,000 of them are convicts that they grabbed out of jail that Putin released to fight for them.

The Russian army can't do anything.

They're getting their butt kicked every time they put their heads up.

That Wagner group is not going to be able to last.

So, look, this is a chess game at the highest level, but I tell people, you've got to get rid of Putin because Putin is out of his blanket mind.

He's not reasonable.

He could do anything.

And people go, oh, what about the nukes?

What about the nukes?

He can't launch nukes without the cooperation of the Russian military.

Okay, so

let me switch topics here to Ron Klain.

He's out as Biden's chief of staff and the new guy coming in.

Your thoughts on this.

Okay, so what this is all about is a power struggle between Susan Rice, the top economic advisor to Biden, who is best friends with the Obamas,

and Ron Klain, and Susan Rice won.

That's what this is all about.

It hasn't been reported anywhere or anything like that.

Klain doesn't really care because he sees that this is a disaster and he wants to make some money on the lecture circuit.

Okay?

So he'll go out and make a few million dollars running around in Democratic groups and telling everybody how great Biden is and how great he is.

But he's only got a short window to do that because Biden's not going to run for president in 24, and things things are going to get worse in America this year, in 23.

There's going to be big, big layoffs all over the place.

I don't know if there's going to be a recession per se, but it's not going to improve because Biden doesn't know what he's doing.

Now, the biggest story this week to me was Biden and Jean-Pierre going out to say the Republican Party wants to destroy Social Security and Medicare.

Okay, this is just such a fantasy and such a lie.

And this isn't a misrepresentation or a spin.

This is just a lie.

It's akin to what

Biden said about the voting rights.

We're going to put y'all back in chains.

Remember that?

Yep.

Okay.

And of course, in Georgia, we're record turnouts for the midterms, and almost every other state had record turnouts.

So there's no voter suppression.

That's just a lie that they made up.

And this is another lie that the Republican Party wants to do away with Social Security and Medicare.

Okay.

Now, the reason they get away with this is because the corporate media, which is collapsing, I mean, really fast.

I mean, I can't believe it.

Bill, we talked earlier about the ratings.

Fox News has now, and they're on top of the list.

You know, they're the big dog still, but their ratings in the demo of 25, 54-year-old adults, their prime time ratings are the kinds of numbers that we had at headline news, and we thought they were a disaster at the time.

Nobody's watching cable news anymore.

I had the last quarter that I was on Fox News, I had these numbers enshrined.

It's crazy.

I did a million 25 to 54s on occasion.

I know.

A million.

I know.

And they're lucky if their primetime shows do 300,000.

Lucky.

Now.

So, anyway, but it's not just cable news.

It's the network news.

And I mean,

it's all going.

So the Biden administration knows that it can say whatever it wants to say.

And people just go, they kind of yawn.

Oh, okay, okay, fine.

It's like Baghdad Bob.

Remember Baghdad Bob and the Iraq war?

We're winning.

We're winning.

Whoa, Doc.

Hey.

It's the same level of propaganda.

And Jean-Pierre, I mean, this woman, I almost feel sorry for her now.

She's not smart enough to know that what she's saying is total gibberish.

She's just not smart enough to know that.

But she goes out there and she does know that the press corps has absolutely no use for her at all.

None, no respect for her.

I've never seen anyone at her level be as bad as she is.

She still reads her answers from a book.

Why don't you just give me the book and let's cut out the middleman here?

It's not the same book that Biden has.

So, Biden, he's this week, and he is entertaining.

You got to give that.

He's looking for Dan, the congressman in Virginia,

and it's Don.

The guy's name is Don.

And he's going, Dan, where are you, Dan?

And everybody's looking around, going, Dan?

Dan, who?

We don't know Dan.

You know, we have Don.

We don't know Dan.

Dan, where are you?

Where are you?

So, yeah, I mean, this guy, I mean, the president of the United States, you've got to be respectful to the office,

is

beyond anything that I've seen.

I think you would concur with this.

In our lifetime, we have never seen this level of a deception.

Hey, the board is secure.

No, it's not.

You are delusional.

Right.

That's the key word.

It's crazy.

He's delusional.

So, Bill, let me ask you one more question, and then we've got to run.

But the

Pelosi tapes come out at 3 p.m.

Eastern Time today,

the body cam footage.

Are we going to see anything?

This is because the New York Times, L.A.

Times, and somebody else sued

the district attorney and said, you've got to release this body cam footage.

Are we going to find out anything in it?

There's going to be anything.

I'd just be guessing I warned every commentator not to speculate on this kind of thing because nobody really knows.

I suspect that

the San Francisco Police Department would have leaked

something if it if there had been something untoward that night.

I suspect that would have happened.

Get out in front of it.

Yeah.

The only thing that makes me think there might be something there

that's more than subtle is that

both sides said this will just increase misinformation, and when people see the tape, conspiracy theories will start.

And of course, that's true.

Well, I mean, the point that you made is a good one: that they had to get the freedom of information to get it released.

It's not like they wanted to put it out.

Right.

Now, there is a privacy concern.

I understand that.

You got an 80-year-old guy being terrorized, and you know, this video is not going to help him.

But I think that in this case,

if you don't know anything about the story,

then don't guess.

And we live in a country now, speculation is just everywhere on everything they don't know.

And I try not to do that.

You know, I try to just basically make my analysis on a fact-based situation.

Bill, thank you so much.

It's always good to have you on.

You can find Bill O'Reilly and get his commentary every day

in his no spin news.

You can find him at billo'reilly.com.

That's billorilly.com.

Back in a minute.