Best of The Program | Guests: Paul Kengor & Phillip Kline | 11/30/20

At Blinds.com, it's not just about window treatments.

It's about you, your style, your space, your way.

Whether you DIY or want the pros to handle it all, you'll have the confidence of knowing it's done right.

From free expert design help to our 100% satisfaction guarantee, everything we do is made to fit your life and your windows.

Because at blinds.com, the only thing we treat better than windows is you.

Visit blinds.com now for up to 50% off with minimum purchase plus a professional measure at no cost.

Rules and restrictions apply.

Hey, podcasters, today's a great, great podcast.

I figure if I just take a week off and then come back, do one show, then take a week off, I got, you know, you'd get 52 great shows.

Hall of Fame written all over Aklay.

It does.

It really does.

It really does.

Today is a really great show.

We go through a lot of the

court cases that are being filed by Donald Trump and his team or allies.

There's a lot going on that need to be really paid attention to.

Also, this week is kind of the Great Reset Week, as on Wednesday night, I have the full story on our Wednesday night special on Blaze TV all about the Great Reset.

Well, today, we show you why John Kerry, our climate czar, yeah, the czars are back.

Why he's going to be the guy that really implements a lot of the Great Reset, you know, that conspiracy.

And our premiere of the brand new song from the Glenbeck Christmas Orchestra,

which is just one guy and a piano.

AOC is coming to town all on today's podcast.

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

Let me give you some really good news here.

The Supreme Court slapped down Andrew Cuomo.

And as if that's not good enough,

the Supreme Court actually protected the First Amendment.

Yeah.

Wow.

Crazy, isn't it?

These right-wingers and their love for

this old piece of paper from the 1700s.

I know.

It's despicable.

Yeah.

You know, the founders couldn't have seen something like the coronavirus.

No.

with no viruses back then.

No, there was no virus.

It was totally fine.

They had really great health care.

And

could they imagine something that would kill

from 0.5 to 1% of the population?

I mean, these

they had all the leeches they could attach to you to suck the disease out back then.

It was great.

Okay, so here's the thing:

this is Justice Kavanaugh's

support, the concurring,

what do you call these things

concurring opinion yeah thank you

opinions thank you

that's the word I was looking for all right he said

the they they uh they were they were arguing whether or not Cuomo could shut down the churches

uh and if he could shut down the uh if he could shut down the churches uh and the synagogues well then he could get things under control Unfortunately,

he wasn't shutting down other things.

Now, I'm looking for, I just had this stupid, stupid,

stupid thing,

and now I can't seem to get to the right opinion.

You didn't, I mean, you have like a 200-page opinion in front of you.

You did the thinking highlighting.

Yeah, I did.

I did.

I did.

Okay, here it is.

Here it is.

Government is not not free to disregard the First Amendment in times of crisis.

What?

Whoa, whoa.

You know, they're saying that this is Amy Coney Barrett's doing.

Good.

Yeah, great.

That's wonderful.

That's why she's there.

That's exactly right.

At a minimum, that amendment prohibits government officials from treating religious exercises worse than comparable secular exercises unless they're pursuing a compelling interest and using the least restrictive means available.

Yet recently, during the COVID pandemic, certain states

have ignored these long-settled principles.

Today's case supplies just the latest example.

New York's governor has asserted the power to assign different color codes to different parts of the state and govern each by executive decree.

In red zones, houses of worship are all but closed, limited to a maximum of 10 people.

In the the Orthodox Jewish community, that limit might operate to exclude all women, considering 10 men are necessary to establish a quorum.

In oranged zones, it's not much different.

Churches and synagogues are limited to a maximum of 25 people.

These restrictions apply even to the largest cathedrals and synagogues, which ordinarily hold hundreds.

The restrictions apply no matter what precautions are taken, including social distancing, wearing masks, leaving doors and windows open, foregoing, singing, and disinfecting spaces between services.

At the same time, the governor has chosen to impose no capacity restrictions on certain businesses he considers, quote, essential, end quote.

As it turns out, the businesses

the governor considers essential are hardware stores, acupuncturists, and liquor stores.

Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential as well.

So, at least according to the governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it's always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians.

And it goes from there.

It's great stuff.

It's really good stuff.

Now, Andrew Cuomo, do we have the Cuomo theme here?

Yeah.

Andrew Cuomo is saying, that doesn't mean a dawn thing.

That's bad a bing, not a thing.

All right, there's no dang

problems with this.

It's irrelevant.

Yeah.

And I got a mouse in my pocket.

So

America's dumbest mobster, Andrew Cuomo.

Yeah.

Yes, that is what he's saying, which is just another spectacular

example of how disingenuous this person is.

For him to come out and say it doesn't matter, his point is basically like, well, the case went through, but we've already taken this area out of the red or orange zone or whatever zone scheme he's come up with.

Well, it happened while the court

was hearing this.

Right.

Okay.

So it was at, I think it was at orange, right, or red.

It was one of the two.

While the court was hearing it, he lowered it

in the middle of a huge uprising of coronavirus cases.

It's weird.

The hospitals are overflowing.

All of a sudden, he's like, you know what?

That what area?

You know what?

I'm feeling pretty godly today.

I think God's going to take care of it, huh?

So there's no reason

for you to continue your suit.

And then he comes out and says, this is moot.

It's irrelevant.

It's a moot ruling because we've already taken this particular area out of the red zone or the orange zone, and therefore we've already let them have their services back again, so it doesn't matter.

Well, of course, it matters.

It means he can't do it to anyone else.

It means that he was

wrong for doing it the first time.

Imagine the strategy session where he's sitting with the attorneys and he's like, I got an idea.

Let me tell you my idea here.

die

what i'm gonna say is they can all go back to church even though i'm on television saying hospitals are overrun cats and dogs are sleeping together it's

very dangerous and i'm also saying that uh christmas has got to be canceled nobody Nobody, not even Santa, will be able to do anything with those damn elves

for Christmas.

But as long as I let them go to church for a couple of weeks, they'll forget all about it.

It is that pathetic.

This is a trick they do all the time, where they've done this with Second Amendment cases as well.

They'll put a ridiculous restriction in that's obviously not constitutional, keep it in place for a year while it goes to the courts, and right before it gets to the Supreme Court, they withdraw

the rule.

So then the case gets thrown out because it's moot.

Well, Gorsuch talked about it.

Did you read his

whole thing?

Oh, it's fantastic.

He talked about it.

He was like, so the governor is now saying

it's not going to,

that we should throw this case out because he's lowered the restrictions.

Like, we don't think that those restrictions could go back the other direction.

Yeah.

You know, and he said it's irreparable harm.

They're already here.

They've already spent all the money.

You want them to come back if you do it again?

Yeah, and this is what they want.

The court is, a couple of these things that the left is trying to do to the court all the time, the court is sick of.

This is one of them.

They pull these cases out as soon as they get up to the Supreme Court because they know they're going to lose them.

The other one is they keep trying to, the lower courts are putting in these nationwide injunctions all the time.

So they will prevent,

shockingly, always seems to happen to conservative sides of of the argument for whatever reason.

It's a total random chance always seems to fall that way.

That sounds weird.

But they'll take something and they'll just basically repeal an entire policy nationwide as it goes through the courts.

And instead of just letting it go through the courts like they're supposed to.

And so

Clarence Thomas specifically has called this out multiple times where he's like, this nationwide injunction thing, if you keep doing it, we're going to rule on it.

Just so you know,

you can keep doing it if you want, but we're going to address it soon.

And the left is very upset because now

they have

Amy Coney Barrett instead of Ginsburg.

And

they want you to know it's all her fault.

And again, I'd just like to say

yes.

Thank you.

That was great.

That was actually exactly what was intended.

Yes.

If you are ready for some really great news, keep listening.

Built Bar is back, and it is unbelievable.

If you've been listening to my show this year, I love Built Bars.

It's an all-American story.

This is a client I asked to be on the show because I didn't listen to my wife again, and she'd been telling me about it, but it has protein bar on it, and those always taste like a doormat.

This is unbelievable.

The mint brownie flavor?

Oh, yes, baby.

It is life-changing.

The new bars taste better than ever.

In addition to the 12 original flavors, Built Bar just added cookies and cream, carrot cake, caramel brownie, lemon, almond cheesecake, apple, almond crisp.

I mean, it's just

great.

Built Bar, delicious, nutritious, high-protein, low-calorie, high-fiber, low-carbs, 100% real chocolate, and 100% really good.

Plus, they've reset the code for this new launch.

Right now, go to builtbar.com, use the promo code Beck, get $10 off your first order.

Promo code Beck, BuiltBar.com.

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

Paul Kangor, who's a political science professor, good friend of the program, also the author of the book The Devil and Karl Marx, which is a must-read.

It is a must-read.

He covered in the American Spectator the Pennsylvania bombshell, Biden 99.4% versus Trump 0.6%

of the vote.

Welcome to the program.

Paul, how are you?

Oh, I guess I'm all right, Glenn, but this is just crazy.

It's absolutely crazy.

So, Paul,

help us separate fact from fiction because honestly, I don't know who to trust anymore.

You're just getting a vacuum on the other side.

When they try to debunk it, they'll just say,

that's a conspiracy theory.

Well, wait,

can you help me with the facts?

Debunk it with facts.

I don't even know what happened in

Gettysburg.

I mean, I do, but I don't know everything I should know about Gettysburg because no one covered it except for a few people on the right.

Yep.

That's exactly right.

Yeah.

And you feel like I do.

And in fact, so it was last Wednesday, so it would have been Thanksgiving Eve, and I'm emailing with different friends.

And one of them who watches this stuff very closely told me, he said, hey, you've got to tune in and watch these hearings in Gettysburg.

And so I clicked the link, and it went on for about four hours.

And then later on in the evening, I tried to see if I could get a news roundup on what happened.

I turned on Fox, and I turned on, they had substitute hosts for Tucker, for Laura, and for Sean.

I think Mark Stein was in for Tucker, I think.

He was talking about Thanksgiving.

None of this was covered.

I turned on Newsmax, and I think Greg Kelly covered it and covered it, meaning this exchange between

this is incredible, Glenn,

between retired Colonel Phil Waldron, who's a former combat officer.

He has a background in Army information, electronic warfare.

And he's having this exchange with Rudy Giuliani.

They're both there before the Senate Majority Policy Committee for the state of Pennsylvania.

So it's basically a Pennsylvania Republican's legislature, and they're holding this hearing on the election, and it's at the Wyndham Hotel in Gettysburg.

Okay,

stop for a second, right there.

Yeah, yeah.

Why was this at the Wyndham Hotel in Gettysburg?

Right.

Of all places, I know.

Why is it not being held in the Capitol building?

Correct.

And I mean, so I know, and I know right off.

So liberals are going to say, oh, this is a partisan hearing, right?

Democrats aren't even part of it.

And I've already seen in reaction to the article people saying, oh, well, Rudy Giuliani was there, so I don't believe any of it, right?

But

you have to look at what the expert said.

And what the expert said, I had to go find this online and produce my own transcript.

I know.

Me too, I know, I know.

It took me like 45 minutes making sure I had every single word right, you know, every single possessive right, exclamation mark.

And I went through it, and what Waldron said, he claimed that within about 90 minutes, that at some point here in the tabulation of the vote after November 3rd, there were 604,000 votes that came in.

In fact, the number that he says in the exchange with Rudy,

and Waldron testifies, and then Rudy kind of cross-examines, says, I'd like to ask this man some questions.

And so we asked him.

And Waldron said that there were 570,000 votes for Biden in one batch and 3,200 for Trump.

570,000 for Biden versus 3,200 for Trump.

And when he says this, Glenn, you can hear an audio

gas.

Do we have that?

Hang on just a second.

I think I have that audio.

Let's play that audio where he is talking about this.

When we look at this Pennsylvania fixing the vote chart that they all have,

could you explain at the very beginning what that line means, Biden injection?

So at the very beginning of the chart, where there's a circle, it says on election day,

what that indicates is there is a spike in loaded votes, 337,000 plus or minus of some votes that were added in there in one big batch.

So that was an anomaly in the reporting.

Normally you would expect to see a smooth curve going up,

not any big spikes.

That's kind of what Greg was talking about the the anomalies of loading and uploading those those votes.

So that big spike that occurs there is a prime indicator of fraudulent voting and that's 604,000 votes in 90 minutes.

Is that right?

Correct.

This is

337 votes, 337,000 votes in that

period of time.

Yes.

And when you look at this entire curve

with all these spikes, can you calculate

how much of a vote that accounted for for Biden and how much for Trump?

Close to 600,000.

I think our figures are about 570, some odd thousand.

That all those spikes represent overtime.

For Biden.

Correct.

And how much for Trump?

I think it was a little over 3,200.

That was the reaction from the people who heard that.

That was my reaction, too.

570,000 votes for Biden in one batch and 3,200 for Donald Trump?

It's amazing.

It's amazing.

And look,

I went to bed on the night of the election, Tuesday night.

I guess it had been Wednesday morning, probably about 2 or 3 a.m.

And Donald Trump was up in Pennsylvania by at least 600,000 votes.

And in fact, I want to say 700,000.

I think I remember the percentage being like 58 to 41 percent.

And I was texting with my brother, who lives in eastern PA.

I live in western PA.

And I said, Well, Trump's got this.

And he said, Oh,

I don't know.

You've got to watch out and see what happens in Philadelphia.

And I said, 600,000 votes, there's no way you could overcome 600,000 votes.

I mean, maybe it's possible that Trump could maybe still lose Wisconsin, Michigan, but 600,000 in Pennsylvania?

There's just no way.

And then over the next three or four days, the impossible or implausible or unbelievable seemed to transpire.

I mean, how can you lose 600,000 votes?

Well, if this is accurate, that in one batch of votes, it was 570,000 to 3,200.

I mean, in one fell swoop, you could do it right there.

And so I watched this, I saw this, and you know, like you, I mean, I don't ever want to be accused of dabbling in conspiracy theory and so forth, but but

the next day, I went online and I went to all the different I did Google searches I went to duck duck go I looked it did all these online searches to see if anybody reported this and nobody reported it I found it at Real Clear Politics I found it at Breitbart and I think that was it I mean I could even find Glenn Pennsylvania sources you know the Philadelphia paper the Harrisburg Patriot News that you know the Pittsburgh papers I couldn't find anyone who even reported on it and I just want to know is it accurate

This is the problem, Paul, is by them not covering it, it only makes people's spider senses go higher.

It only makes people think there is something here.

Why is no one cover?

This is news and you should cover it and it should have coverage on all sides and you argue it out

in the coverage.

You show us the facts that they present and you show us the facts that some other guy presents and you let the American people figure it out, but that's not happening anymore, which only makes things worse for the American populace.

Yeah, it does.

And this retired Colonel Waldron, who testified, I mean, the guy is no political hack.

He's not a partisan.

He doesn't seem to have any axe to grind here.

And this is just stunning.

And he also made

a couple of other bombshells that he dropped here.

He said that there had been 1.8 million, I have this in my American Spectator piece, it's called Pennsylvania Bombshell, so the data is in there.

He said that there were a total of about 1.8 million mail-in ballots that were sent out by the Commonwealth, and that 2.5 million were counted in the final total.

And so Rudy jumps in and he says, well, that's 766,000 ballots that are unaccounted for.

So I wrote this, I put it in the piece, I got an email from somebody saying, no, this data is not correct.

Go to the Pennsylvania Department of State website, check it out.

I went there.

They seem to have new information posted.

This information is always changing.

And looking at the information that's up there now, they're now claiming that there were 3.1 million mail-in ballots in the state of Pennsylvania.

And Glenn, on election day, CNN, Fox, everyone told us, no, it was like

one or two million ballots.

And they're saying that it was 3.1 million.

And of these, and I'm sorry about all these numbers.

I know this is confusing.

And of the 3.1 million that this Pennsylvania Department of State is now claiming was sent out, they're claiming that about 90% of them were returned,

were filled out.

I mean, that's an extraordinary rate of return.

Everybody that I talked to who got a mail-in ballot chucked it and ended up going and voting in person on Election Day.

So I don't know that I can believe that.

And by the way, when I had to vote in person in Pennsylvania, Mercer County, Pennsylvania, on Election Day, I had to show up with my ID.

I had to write my signature in the little thing there.

And the little old lady from the League of Women Voters, she knew who I was, but she made me show an ID anyway.

And instead, you have millions of ballots that are sent in in Pennsylvania that you can't even verify.

And they pull them out of the envelope, and then I think they throw out the envelope.

So you can't even go back and double-check them.

And this is what Donald Trump and his team warned about from the beginning, that mail-in balloting is just rife with fraud.

It's why, Glenn, something like two-thirds of the countries in the European Union ban mail-in balloting, because the potential for fraud is absolutely enormous.

Well, just so everybody knows that this isn't a

this is not some conspiracy theory about, you know,

people have been saying this for a long time.

You'll recognize this vote.

Can we we play the flashback, please, on the mail-in need signature verification?

They're talking about mailing in, people mailing in their ballots.

Do you trust the security, the honesty of such an election process?

Well, I think we'd have to figure out whether this was fraud proof.

I mean, Oregon, for example, has a terrific mail-in system, but they've already scanned everybody's signatures who's registered to vote so that they can check to make sure that, in fact, the right people are voting.

And that's something that I think you'd have to figure out.

Hmm.

So Barack Obama is even talking about this stuff.

Chris Matthews, right?

Yeah, 2006.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, and they're right.

I mean, that's the problem with mail-in ballots.

And I know that this year the left pushed COVID as the main excuse or impetus to do mail-in balloting.

But with the way that it was done in Pennsylvania, with the way the deadline was extended by the Pennsylvania state Supreme Court with five partisan judges and going against the legislature, the legislature makes election election law in the state of Pennsylvania.

And it's just complete chaos.

And I think what makes it even worse, I know you had my good friend Selena Zito on a lot

on your show.

I mean, we were watching here on the ground in Pennsylvania.

I I just don't know how Trump could have possibly lost Pennsylvania.

The real clear politics average for Pennsylvania the Tuesday morning of the vote was Biden by 1.2.

And we thought, oh, Trump's going to overperform that by at least 5%.

I mean, the real clear politics national average was Biden by 7,

and he ended up winning it by like 3.5%.

And you're going to tell me that they nailed it for Pennsylvania,

that Trump didn't outperform in Pennsylvania, but he outperformed everywhere else?

It's hard to believe that what has allegedly happened here in Pennsylvania actually happened.

Paul, I thank you very much for being on the program and keep looking into it and report back to us.

Let us know what you find, will you?

All right.

I will.

Thank Thank you.

Paul Kangor.

His latest book is The Devil and Karl Marx, which is unbelievable.

Information about Karl Marx that was held secret up until the wall came down in the 1980s that I didn't know.

I mean, you look at Marxism and you're like, that's evil.

No, no, no.

I think Karl Marx actually had a pact with the devil,

and he makes a good case in Marx's own words.

You can find that in

The Devil and Karl Marx by Paul King.

This is the best of the Glenbeck program.

Philip Klein, he is a director of the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society,

and he has been leading efforts for a couple of years to protect our election integrity to make sure there isn't any funny business.

they have

collected some evidence and some data points that

the FBI is now interested in.

And I'm interested to hear how that came about when the FBI requested the data on the fraudulent ballots that they found.

Philip, welcome to the program.

Thank you, Glenn.

Great to be with you.

Thank you.

So tell me, first of all, what you guys have been doing.

What kind of data are you collecting?

Well, first of all, Glenn, what the FBI has asked about and what many are speaking about, it deals with what I call blood in the street.

You know, I'm former Attorney General of Kansas.

I was a prosecutor.

And when a crime has been committed, what you find is the scene of the crime.

But to really understand what happened, you don't investigate forward from that point.

You investigate backwards to identify what happened.

And what we've done and what we've been doing the past 18 months in the field is tracing an unprecedented orchestrated effort to influence this election for Joe Biden.

And the way that that was done is a private and public partnership that allows the free flow of sensitive government information to private party activists.

as well as

enough money, and in fact, so much money from one source that it actually matched the federal government appropriation for elections, flowing into local election officials' offices, actually paying the election judges, dictating to them how they would run the election, and their decisions to violate the law, sidestep the law, or ignore the law that protected the integrity of the election.

Is that funding source start with an S, end with an S, and have orge orals in the middle?

No, it is Zuckerberg.

Zuckerberg, really?

Yes.

And let me, if I could, speak to that first and then go into, and I'm sorry, Glenn, I don't know how much time we have.

We have 10 minutes at least.

10 minutes, okay.

I'll take you back to March 2020.

Here's how they funded this.

You know who David Plutof is, Obama's former campaign manager.

He goes to work for Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan in the Zuckerberg-Chan Initiative.

And in March 2020, he publishes his book called The Citizen's Guide for Defeating Donald Trump.

And in that book, around page 81, he lays out the roadmap of how they're going to win this election.

He says, the 2020 election will come down to a block-by-block street fight to turn out the vote in Philadelphia, Milwaukee, and Detroit.

Well, he leaves Zuckerberg's employ, but suddenly a sleepy little 501c called the Center for Tech and Civic Light starts reaching out to Democrat strongholds, cities.

Now, they've been running about $1 million a year, but now they're reaching out and they're saying, look, we got a lot of money coming.

So we want to seed you with some money, so you start preparing your grant requests for us to get money to run your election.

And as you know, early money is much more valuable than late money.

So they're going out there and they're starting to seed it.

And in fact, they got the mayor of Racine, Wisconsin, a Democrat, recruiting the key Democrat stronghold cities

in Wisconsin.

They're reaching out to Philadelphia, to Pittsburgh.

They send down agents in states to identifying key swing counties in this election where they think they can turn out Clinton votes for Biden.

Now, About September 2nd, Mark Zuckerberg says he wants a fair and safe election.

Now, at the same time this is happening, blue state governors are shutting down in-person polling places.

And you know all the polling data shows that Republicans prefer to vote in person on Election Day, while Democrats prefer to vote in advance by mail.

So we're making it harder to vote in person.

And suddenly, Zuckerberg announces he's giving $350 million to the Center for Tech and Civic Life.

Now I'll drill down a little bit on how they use that money in Philadelphia.

And we obtained these documents by court order in the western or the middle district of Pennsylvania, because they don't want this to be known.

Their agreement with Philadelphia says this, you're going to increase your polling places from 190 to 800.

I will pay the election officials.

I'm going to pay CTCL or Zuckerberg, the election judges.

I'm going to buy the machines.

I'm going to pay the people who boarded up the windows to keep America out of the counting room while a billionaire is in the counting room.

The very people that you saw keeping Republicans outside were paid with Zuckerberg funds.

Now this privatization of elections is astounding and shouldn't happen.

But on top of that, it created a two-tier election system.

We'll take Pennsylvania again, Delaware County, just south of Philadelphia County.

There was one Zuckerbox or drop box.

for every four square miles.

In other words, two miles by two miles square, you could walk in your neighborhood and vote.

In Trump country, the 59 counties that Trump won in 2016, won Zuckerbox for every 1,100 square miles.

Now, this is government.

Yeah, this is government action.

And government's saying, if you live in a Democrat stronghold,

I'll tell you what, we'll come pick up your ballot for you or just walk down to the corner.

But if you live in Trump country, take a weekend vacation and find Waldo.

Government can't do that.

But it's more insidious than this.

Another thing happened.

Blue state governors entered into,

first time ever, unique contracts with groups like

Rock the Vote.

And Rock the Vote, through data sharing agreements, had a portal to actually enter new registrations into our poll books.

In other words, we weren't hacked from without.

We were hacked pursuant to agreement from within.

So Rock the Vote activists and other activists started actually entering data into our poll books.

And what our data now shows, once we have the election results of who voted and who didn't vote on election day,

we have suddenly all kinds of identities of persons

that are not real who voted.

I'll give you one example.

Law professor, Liberty University, a colleague of mine.

She was born with a birth name, but changed her name because because her parents called her by a different name.

When she reached 18, she changed her name legally.

She moves out of Michigan, gets married, so now she has a wholly different name.

After the election, because of all this talk of fraud, she looked back into Michigan, and guess what?

She is registered under her birth name, which she never registered under.

And her birth name voted.

This is the type of stuff that we had our experts quantify.

And I'm just going to run through a a list, and this is what the FBI was interested in.

This is data that our experts show of Republicans who voted, whose votes weren't counted,

of people who didn't vote, who suddenly are recorded as voting, and other categories of violating the law.

And I'll speak to that in a minute.

But here's the Arizona expert report.

305,000 ballots are in question.

Michigan, 548,016 ballots in question.

Georgia, 204,143 ballots are in question.

And we've also got that for Pennsylvania as well.

I've forgotten now, the other state that we have filed suit in.

So each one of these states shows hundreds of thousands of ballots that are flawed in the counting system because of this lawlessness.

Let me give you just a couple of other examples.

They consolidated the voting centers in these urban cores.

All of them did it.

It shows a coordinated plan.

And they did it claiming they needed to do it for COVID.

So in other words, for COVID, we created a crowd.

That makes no sense.

The reason they did it is twofold.

One is the law says, because in these counting centers, the election judges and they're called inspectors and so forth, actually look at ballots that can't be read by the machine.

Then they cast that ballot on a separate piece of paper so it can be read by a machine.

In other words, they're casting ballots for people who aren't there.

And so the law says a Republican must be in the place of the county.

That's real obvious.

Republican and Democrat need to sign off, need to see what's happening.

Well, they consolidated it so they could say the Republican's in the place.

He's up in the cheap seats in the penalty box in Detroit.

They did it in an abandoned hockey arena.

He can't see a darn thing that's going on, but we got him in the place.

That's their legal argument.

The second reason, you can easily infuse tens of thousands of fraudulent ballots into the ballot stream because of the presence of zucker boxes, which holds tens of thousands of ballots, and that all of these hundreds of thousands of ballots are going to one place.

And here's the question for all these officials.

Where's the video you promised of the drop boxes so we could see whether people

lawfully cast their vote and the ballots were lawfully picked up?

Where are the logs of who did it?

Who had access to the keys?

When did did the trucks deliver it?

Did you have two persons per key to make sure that Joey, who's a Black Lives Matter deputized person to pick up these ballots, didn't stop by Jimmy's house and suddenly dump some ballots off and get new ballots?

And the answer to all those questions is no, they don't have those logs.

So let me ask you, as a former Attorney General,

can you prove these things in the amount of time necessary in court.

Yes.

Yes.

It's just if the courts will listen and if the American public starts to wake up and ask the right questions and understand what investigations are.

Investigations are asking the right questions and demanding those resources that have the answers to answer the question.

And here's the problem.

They're covering up and hiding the evidence.

If America demands the clear evidence that they should have and they don't produce it, that is evidence of the fraud.

And our experts have identified all of the hundreds of thousands of ballots.

I'll just give you an example.

Estimated number of ballots requested the name of a Republican by someone other than that person, and this is Georgia, 15,331.

Republican ballots that the requester returned but were not counted.

These are Republicans.

29,884 Republican ballots not counted.

Electors voted where they did not reside, 138,000.

I mean, if, and

that evidence is available to prove it, and we've introduced that into a court of law.

Now,

here's part of the problem.

These laws regarding recounts and certification were written back in the day, Glenn, that you and I would sit across from the table, hold up a ballot, and argue about what that ballot meant because it was paper ballot passed by the voter.

You know, hanging chats, simple chats, all of that.

Now, the laws are not written for the machine age and the way that they do this process because the recount as well as the

audits simply confirm or validate the fraud.

They don't allow you to prove the fraud.

Right.

Well, but here's the problem.

If, Phil,

if that's the case, because I think we all agree on that, that's not a reason to throw this election out.

It's a reason to fix this problem for the next one.

But we can't change the rules of the game, which I think the Democrats were doing all along, trying to change the rule of the game in the game, during the game.

We need to prove the fraud that happened that

is big enough to overturn the election, as well as

make sure that we have a different system going into the next election.

Yes, and I believe we have sufficient proof that we are introducing documents, of sworn affidavits,

that show that fraud was committed on the scale that these election results do not properly reflect the will of the people.

So we can't have faith in them.

So

you have cases in several states now.

When's your first hearing?

Well, they're going to be popping up here in the next week or so.

We're just getting state replies to what we've said.

But let me give you another example of this.

Got 30 seconds.

Okay.

If I'm investigating you for tax evasion and I believe you've got documents, paper documents in your house that are relevant, and I get a search warrant, and I show up 90 degrees outside, it's a summer day, and you blockade the door, and then I see smoke coming from the chimney, That is damn good evidence you're burning the documents because they are incriminating.

We have that evidence already all across the nation in this that should give rise to serious concerns.

But we've got more.

We've got specific witnesses who were inside that saw the burning of the documents.

And then we have witnesses and experts who say because of this lawlessness of not following the law and creating a two-tier system, guess what?

All of these ballots are in question.

Phil, thank you so much.

Stay in touch with us.

We'll follow the court cases as they come up.