Best of the Program | Guests: Kenneth Timmerman & Steve Deace | 1/6/20

Hey, welcome back.

I mean, I guess to me, you've been here, but thank you so much for tuning into today's podcast.

We have a lot to talk about.

We're going to talk a little bit about the guy we killed in Baghdad.

You know, that's just Donald Trump going crazy.

Epstein's suicide note.

Star Wars review, the review of the movie 1917.

Surprisingly, I'm a Seahawks fan as well, as we find out in this episode.

Steve Dace will talk about politics and what's really happening on the ground in Iowa, and a tribute to Don Imus, all on today's podcast.

You're listening to

the best of the Blenbeck program.

We're going to war.

It's World War III.

Maybe, maybe not.

Let's not count our chickens before they hatch here.

Let's talk a little bit here.

I'm going to next hour really get into who is this guy that we killed?

Why did we kill him?

What do we know about him?

Was this just something that Donald Trump did just half cocked?

Or perhaps is this something that was coming for a long time and yet no one seemed to understand the signs that Donald Trump was showing starting, oh, I don't know, maybe last spring.

I'll give you that coming up in an hour.

But let me just say this: World War III,

I don't think so, unless

Iran really goes to town.

And I think the only place that they would really go to town and let everybody know it is

Israel.

They might let missiles fly to Israel and destroy Tel Aviv.

That's what they're talking about now.

If they do that, they are betting that that will awaken the Arab world and the Arab world would unite in a caliphate behind them.

That is a possibility.

Wash the world in blood.

However, I don't think that they would take on America.

knowingly.

So in other words, them sending a missile, you know, from a ship off our coast or whatever,

or, you know, blowing up the presidential motorcade or, you know, they're threatening the White House.

I just don't see them doing that directly as a state because we would wipe them off the face of the earth within an hour.

They kill our president and Americans,

no matter what Hollywood is saying today, who was it that joked,

we'll do it for half price?

It was George Lopez that they said, what was it, $80 million bounty on Donald Trump's head?

Correct.

And

he came out and said, oh, we'd do it for half that.

Really?

Would we, George?

One thing that does bring Americans together is when you kill our president.

Now,

I don't think that they would do that.

However, I do think that they would possibly go after an embassy.

That's what they were doing, led by this guy.

That's what they were doing in

Baghdad, trying to take our embassy.

We have a history with Iran taking our embassies.

This is the guy, as you will find out next hour, there's a good possibility this is the guy that actually orchestrated Benghazi.

So he took over our consulate.

Now he's trying to take over our embassy.

No,

you can't do that.

So what's the retaliation?

And what's the solution?

Retaliation,

we have to wait to see, but it ties into what I'll tell you next hour.

World War III.

If it's just us and Iran, we win.

And it's not going to be World War III.

If they really believe that they are put in the position now where the caliphate can happen,

it would be World War III.

We'll give you more in it in just a little while.

But there's no draft coming.

It's amazing how the press works.

First, that Donald Trump is half-cocked.

No, I can go back to your own reporting

and find out all I need to know about how long this has been coming.

But the press is now trying to scare people into there's a draft coming.

No one in the Pentagon wants a draft.

No one, no military branch wants a draft.

The only way that there would be a draft is if the Democrats insisted on one.

Because every conservative and every single person in the Pentagon does not want a draft because you don't want somebody watching your your back that doesn't give a flying crap and doesn't want to be there.

You only want the people there who are prepared to fight.

And the Democrats propose a draft all the time.

All the time.

I mean, it used to be every single year.

I don't know if they're still doing it, but they would propose a draft every single year because

their little philosophy that

not enough white people, I think, are on the front lines.

They seem to turn everything into race.

But that is something that the Democrats have been talking about for a very long time.

It's not realistic.

I mean, we're not even at war, right?

This is with Iran right now.

I mean, we are in a proxy way.

And yes, we did have a very high-profile incident.

However, that incident was covered under our efforts in Iraq.

He was in Iraq.

Yes, he was a high-level official who was organizing attacks against our troops in the country where we have an authorized military action.

And he's also not

responsive to the people.

He does not fall under the elected government.

That's the thing you have to understand.

There is an elected government of

Iran.

And then above that, there is the Supreme Council.

And the Supreme Council doesn't answer to the elected officials.

In fact, they're the ones orchestrating what all of the officials are doing and who can run and who could be a legitimate candidate.

So the people have very little say.

say.

But this guy in particular, he only answers to the Supreme Council, which is all of the crazy mullahs.

He doesn't answer, doesn't have to talk to, doesn't have to report to, doesn't have anything to do with the elected government.

So what you're talking about is a guy who is rogue, who's listening to religious zealots, and he's going around the world setting up ways to kill people and to kill Americans, to kill anybody that stands in the way of the Iranian idea of a new caliphate.

I love how they keep bringing in the, look, we've had intelligence failures before.

And, you know, who knows what this is going to, they're saying there was an imminent attack and there's been these, you know, remember the Iraq war?

You went into that and you had nothing.

And it's like, well, I guess theoretically this is possible, but let's investigate this for a second.

He's admitted a bunch of this stuff.

He keeps going on television and saying he's killing Americans.

So I don't know.

I mean, unless he's lying.

Now, you could definitely argue there's a lack of intelligence in admitting these things on television.

That's a lack of intelligence, but that's the only one I think we're doing.

Or the lack of intelligence in the reporters themselves.

It's that they're not even trying, right?

I mean, you just look for things to target the Trump administration here.

There's nobody who's arguing that has any credibility that this guy

was not guilty and was one of the most dangerous people in the world.

You can argue lots of things around the process around it.

Like, oh, did he call Nancy Pelosi in advance?

Well, I'm sure that would have worked out well.

We would have found this guy.

He would have been in Acapulco

before the missiles started coming.

So

you can't do that with this administration.

They will leak against him on anything.

And

you have to be guarding that side of it if you're done with that.

This is what happens when you can't work together on anything, when there is nothing sacred and it's all about destroying a president, when it's all about destroying a president, that's what you get.

The president can't trust you, can't talk to you, can't bring you in for advice and counsel, just has to do it without you because he knows that anything he says in private will immediately be leaked if they either disagree with it or think that they can get a political leg up.

That's what happens.

This is not not good.

And Trump has to follow the law, whether he thinks people are leaking against him anyway.

But what he doesn't have to do is follow every little traditional disclosure that friends used to give each other back in the day where they would go out and have drinks

at the fancy steakhouse after work.

He doesn't have to give them that.

And that is the only thing they seem to be complaining about.

Okay.

This all relies on trust.

And who do you trust?

Well,

60 Minutes is now throwing.

I mean, they were very careful last night to say, well, we don't have all of the facts.

Well, if you weren't comfortable with what you were doing, you shouldn't do it.

But I think they were comfortable in reporting last night.

It doesn't look like Jeffrey Epstein.

was all that sad.

Doesn't look like at least.

Oh, you didn't read his note.

His note was devastating.

Really?

Oh my gosh.

I think this guy was on the note.

The note won me over.

Definite suicide.

Really?

I mean, the things he was going through.

I almost feel that we shouldn't tell the audience because it may make them so sad that they all hang themselves.

Well, I'm going to risk that.

Oh.

And we'll go over what happened on 60 Minutes last night.

Oh, and Ricky Gervais,

he remains my hero.

The best of the Glenbeck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and you're listening to the Glen Beck program.

If you like what you're hearing on this show, make sure you check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

It's available wherever you download your favorite podcasts.

All right, so let's

go through what happened last night on 60 Minutes with Jeffrey Epstein.

Yeah, it's interesting because really this story was out there for such a long time.

Conservatives complained about it for years and years and years that Jeffrey Epstein was, you know, the normal target was Bill Clinton that he was hanging out with.

And nobody in the media cared about the story.

Nope.

Eventually we got to a point in which the guy who gave the sweetheart deal to Epstein was in the Trump administration.

And at that point,

thousands of reporters swamped to the scene to figure figure out exactly what happened.

And some of the reporting, honestly, has been really, really good.

I mean, the Miami Herald probably at the top of that list, but there's been some excellent reporting on this.

And now, you know, it does seem like the journalists have crossed the line as, you know, now they care.

I'm not sure it was all of the journalists.

I think some of the journalists did care.

I think it was all of their bosses either didn't care or were being told not to care.

We know this with the James O'Keefe story, where they were able to get the one reporter who, you know, was complaining about not being able to get the

story out years ago.

Yeah.

NBC, we know that as well.

So 60 Minutes runs a big thing on basically, did Jeffrey Epstein kill himself?

And one of the guests they have is a guy who was

a doctor who was paid by Epstein's brother to figure out the truth.

So realize that there's a motivation here to telling you that Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself.

But he is also a credible witness.

But a credible guy.

Yeah, he's done many, many

of these.

he's very credible so uh sarah i think we have one clip from mike here on uh on from dr michael bowden is his name um he is or baden i believe it is um he was a uh this is the guy who was paid by the epstein family to kind of figure out look into what really happened here uh let's listen do you think there was foul play here the forensic evidence released so far including the autopsy point much more to murder and strangulation than the suicide and suicidal hanging.

I hesitate hesitate to make a final opinion until all the evidence is in.

People will say, well, you're being paid by Mark Epstein, so of course you're going to say that something suspicious is going on.

That's a reasonable thing for some people to think.

But our job is to find what the truth is, just to find out whether there's a homicide or a suicide.

We're still haven't gotten all the information.

And this is not a guy who hadn't dealt with situations like this.

He had thousands of them.

Here he is talking about how rare it is to see the types of fractures from Jeffrey Epstein.

Listen.

I have never seen three fractures like this in a suicidal hanging.

Sometimes there's a fracture of the higher bone or a fracture of the thyroid cartilage.

And not three.

Very unusual to have two and not three.

And going over over a thousand jail hangings, suicides, in the New York City state prisons over the past 40, 50 years, no one had three fractures.

No one.

Just no one.

But just no one.

Out of thousands.

Out of 40 years.

It's pretty amazing.

And one of the other points he makes is they have now, these pictures have come out.

They're pretty graphic of Epstein.

You can see close-ups of his neck.

And a couple things.

You see like a line of blood essentially on his neck.

You do not see blood on the noose that was supposedly used, at least in the pictures.

You do not see a point where when you you have typically a hanging, you'd put the thing around your neck, it sort of slips a little bit, so you'd see almost markings of a slippage, which they did not see.

Also,

they go into some

depth on

the fractures, which just seem to be completely odd, and the fact that this, the pictures are more consistent with a wire, essentially, a wire strangulation, than a typical jailhouse hanging of themselves.

However, the other evidence presented was pretty compelling as well.

And, you know, what do you want to do?

You want to come up with a motivation for something like this if it's going to happen.

And the motivation was clear in a suicide note.

Oh.

And the suicide note was incredibly powerful.

I mean, you'd kill yourself, too, in this situation.

He makes several points here.

Number one,

Epstein writes, kept me in a locked shower for an hour.

So, I mean, look, you molest a few hundred teenagers.

You're not going to be, I mean,

20 minutes in a shower, maybe, but an hour in a shower?

Now, I know, first of all, showers are awesome.

And as my wife would tell you, I've taken too many one-hour showers.

They're just awesome.

However, when you're locked in there against your will for one full hour, that's 60 minutes, also the name of the show that this happened on.

That's powerful.

That's number one.

How about this?

It looks like Noel, who may have been one of the guards,

sent in burnt food.

Holy cow.

Now, the shower, you didn't have me, but now

I'm starting to get sad myself if I'm thinking this is happening to me.

Right.

Now you're really sad.

The next part,

giant bugs crawling on my hands.

Now,

I wouldn't.

That sounds pretty bad.

I don't know exactly what happens.

My guess is he wakes up in the middle of the night.

There's a cockroach on his hand.

He's not used to this activity, likely.

I don't know a lot of people that are

used to

that activity.

I still did live in a couple residences early in my life.

Yeah, early in my life.

It's not so great.

However, those three kind of build up, you know, the shower for an hour, the burnt food, the bugs on the hands.

That's all really bad.

But it builds really to the final conclusion, which is typically the thing you would write before you commit an actual suicide, which is no fun.

Exclamation point.

Exclamation point.

Two of two.

Two exclamation points.

No fun.

No fun.

Now, of course, you go to prison for molesting a bunch of children.

You assume it's going to be fun, but not here.

No fun.

Zero fun.

Not even a little fun.

He literally says no fun.

That's the most ridiculous suicide note I've ever heard.

I mean, it looks like a couple of things he wanted to bring up to his lawyer.

It doesn't look like a suicide note at all.

Like, maybe he's whining to his lawyer for better treatment or whatever.

but that's not a suicide note.

Unbelievable, no fun, no fun,

and it almost points to the fact that it wasn't a suicide.

Why are you complaining about your conditions if you're about to hang yourself?

I well, unless these are the reasons,

but those are not

reasons.

No, not maybe the giant bugs.

I might kill myself too if I had giant bugs all over my hands, but you know, no fun, it's not gonna be fun, bud.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn.

And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

Hi, it's Glenn.

If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do us a favor and rate us on iTunes?

If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time.

You can subscribe on iTunes.

Thanks.

We were just talking off the air about how

cars are not holding their value anymore because of all of the new technology that is out.

And, you know, you used to go in and at least I would, you know, you'd go in and you'd try to buy a new car, but you'd buy the new car.

You'd buy a 2019 today because you'd get a big savings on it.

But people are not buying the 2019 because the 2020 has so much more technology on it.

And if you go back and you look at an older car, it looks dated inside.

And so if you're somebody who trades cars in every four years,

you're going to start to get hurt

because that car is it's almost

making the idea of the fleet.

Now, this is according to one of the guys we talked to, he was the former chairman of the board of GM, I think.

He said GM won't be making cars the way we think about cars today by 2030.

He said there'll be fleets and most people won't own their cars.

And that was such a hard thing for somebody of my age to think not owning a car.

But the way cars are changing in technology, the only car that's going to not look completely outdated or be completely outdated is Tesla because it will update its software all the time.

And so, when you want that new, you know, that new thing, you just update the car.

Well, GM, all these other car companies are not doing that, which makes the resale value of your car go dramatically down.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Like listening to this podcast?

If you're not a subscriber, become one now on iTunes.

And while you're there, do us a favor and rate the show.

We go to Kenneth Timmerman.

He's the author of Dark Forces that came out a few years ago.

And he really knows about who this guy was that we killed

last week in the airport of Baghdad.

A lot of people are upset.

I don't think you should be upset because I don't think the real Iranian people are all that upset either.

They're probably cheering the death of this guy, at least the people that want to be free.

Welcome to the program, Ken.

How are you?

I'm doing great.

Thanks for having me on, Glenn.

You bet.

Okay, so...

Tell me who this guy is before you get back to what you really discovered in Libya.

Tell us just generally who this guy is.

Well, he is, as you mentioned, he's as bad as bin Laden.

He is the chief terrorist of the Iranian regime.

He runs a whole legion of overseas terror operators called the Quds Force.

That means the Jerusalem Force.

Their goal is to spread the Iranian ideology and the regime itself to foreign countries.

So they're present in Lebanon, they're present in Syria, they're present in Yemen, they're present in Iraq, Afghanistan.

They're the ones who command terror attacks.

They're the ones who were going to blow up the Saudi ambassador in the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C., plant a bomb there because they didn't like the guy, take out perhaps 100 people having lunch in the downtown Washington, D.C.

This was 2011.

He blew up the Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires, killed 86 Jews at a Jewish center there in 1994.

That was also one one of their operations.

He is the worst of the worst.

And, in addition, he is the best that they've got.

So, we just took out somebody incredibly important for the regime.

Okay.

What people don't understand is that the regime, the elected regime, is all hands-selected by the real regime, the mullahs and the Ayatollah that actually run everything.

And this guy did not report to the elected officials.

He reported right directly to the Ayatollah.

Correct.

He was his right-hand man.

And you see again and again pictures of the two of them together.

He was doing the bidding of the Supreme Leader.

And I can tell you today, Glenn, that the Supreme Leader himself personally is shaking in his plimsoles.

And why do you say that?

Well, because he realizes that the U.S.

no longer is going to be bound by the diplomatic constraints that have held us back in the past.

There has been a kind of taboo, if you wish, on hitting people like Soleimani for many, many years.

And this is from the State Department, it's from the Pentagon.

I'll give you one example.

In 2007,

his people kidnapped five American soldiers in Iraq in Kerbala and murdered them.

And instead of striking back at Suleimani, we released some of his people that had been arrested in Iraq.

Suleimani and the Quds Force were responsible for approximately 600 deaths of U.S.

soldiers in Iraq with specially formed, explosively formed penetrators.

These are

warheads that are planted in IEDs along the road.

Very, very deadly.

I've written about this quite a bit.

You can see that at kentimmerman.com.

And he, we did nothing.

We did not retaliate against Suleimani.

So now the Supreme Leader realizes the gloves are off.

He could be be next.

And certainly, for sure, the man who replaces Suleimani, should he conduct similar operations against Americans, he is definitely going to be next.

So it's almost as if history is repeating itself in some ways.

Under the Obama administration,

we had the Benghazi consulate attacked.

And then when Iran tries to do it again, with a new Reagan, if you will, somebody who thinks a little like Reagan,

we don't don't put up with it.

We put up with it under Barack Obama, and in fact, your reporting shows that

Soleimani was the architect of the Benghazi

nightmare.

He was indeed.

And I know this primarily from Iranian sources, but also from Americans who

had access to some of the briefings before the 9-11 attacks and to a very key document, which is in one of my books on Benghazi called Deception.

This is a Defense Intelligence Agency after action report delivered to then Director Michael Flynn.

Michael Flynn, remember, who

became the national security advisor to President Trump and was going to clean house and the intelligence agencies and of the deep state.

Well, Flynn asked the entire defense intelligence community what happened in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012.

And I specifically want you to tell me what we knew about the Quds force involvement, that means Soleimani, and the Al-Qaeda involvement.

The report that came back, which I've published, you can see it at kentimmerman.com or in my book, Deceptions.

That report came back six pages.

The first three pages were on the Quds Force involvement.

Everything that we knew about them, everything that we knew about Qasim Soleimani in the Benghazi attacks, blanked out, three pages of it.

And then the last three pages were about al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda affiliates.

And there you'd see a sentence here, a a sentence there.

But we knew a lot.

The U.S.

intelligence community knew a lot.

And I've written about that in my books on Benghazi.

All right.

Let's go to the

embassy in Baghdad.

He was the driving force behind that attack.

Absolutely.

And I think we know pretty clearly by now from what Secretary of State Pompeo has said and the president, the U.S.

intelligence community knew it.

They knew that Suleimani was behind that.

You know, they were attempting, Glenn, to repeat what happened in Benghazi.

Correct.

They thought that they could storm the embassy and that we would just cave and nobody would come.

There'd be no reinforcements.

No one would come to the rescue.

Well, what a difference a president makes.

This president immediately sent 100 Marines from Kuwait.

They secured the embassy and the attackers dispersed, as opposed to what happened in Benghazi.

What do you say about the,

I'm just quoting a headline here?

Millions of angry mourners from all walks of life participate in

separate funeral ceremonies held in the southwestern city, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, of

the martyr Soleimani.

Well, I don't see them joining the ranks of martyrdom with him.

Let's just put it that way.

We've always known the regime is capable of mustering a crowd.

In many cases, they pay people to come.

they let them get off work, they oblige government employees to attend these mass rallies to chant death with America.

And many times when the cameras pan out, or you get somebody from a pro-freedom movement taking a YouTube video and they post it, you see that

when the camera pans out, there's nobody in the square.

There's a tight crowd around the speaker up front, and then there's nobody in the rest of the square.

These are rent-a-mobs, the people of Iran who are sick and tired of these tyrants who've been governing them for 40 years, an era of 40 years of darkness in Iran, the people of Iran are celebrating.

And I know this.

I've seen it all over social media.

They're very active in social media.

When the regime does not block the internet, they've been celebrating the demise of Qasim Soleimani and

can't wait until the rest of the tyrants go with him.

People are trying to make Donald Trump look like this was just something that, you know, he's doing because he wanted people not to pay attention to the

impeachment, which is what a lot of conservatives said about the bombing of the aspirin factory during

the Monica Lewinsky thing when

Bill Clinton was going after Osama bin Laden, who Americans didn't know at the time.

But this, you know, I was reading this and it talked about how we have, we've always been following him.

But the White House told the Pentagon, I want to know where this guy is 24-7 at all times back in May.

It was also back in May that

we

put

the Kuds force on, and the IR, what is it, the IRGC, IRGC, put them on the terror watch list for the first time, which he is, you know, a controlling member of, obviously.

There was a defection

of a very high-ranking intelligence officer who seems to be like

a walking knock list in a way.

And he defected in April and brought all kinds of classified documents with him.

Is there any connection between his defection and this killing?

and the upping of everything in May right after his defection?

Very good point that you raised, Glenn.

And I really haven't heard anybody else connect those dots.

Extremely important.

You talk about this defector.

He was the head of the intelligence unit of the Islamic Republic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and he did come out

and, you know, clearly, you say, a walking knock list, he knew everything that the IRGC and that the Quds force were doing.

Did he give the United States the ability to track Suleimani in real time?

I don't know.

I don't know about, I'm not asking about that.

I'm asking, did he bring information, do you believe, that

proved or opened the eyes of the administration or the Pentagon and was enough evidence to know this guy, we have to watch because he's all over the world and we may have to take him out?

I think what happened is that he essentially made it so crystal clear that Soleimani was never going to put down the gloves.

He was never going to stop killing our people and that we had to take action.

I think that really, I think you're right.

I think that tipped the balance.

And that, by the way, is when you hear Mike Pompeo, he was interviewed right shortly after that defector came out.

And he said, yes, we put Qasim Soleimani

back on the terror list.

He was taken off.

He personally was taken off by Barack Obama at the moment of the Iran deal.

So Pompeo said, we put him back on the terror list.

And some TV interviewer said, well, does that mean that we're going to do the same thing to him that we did to Osama bin Laden?

And Pompeo just gives him that icy stare and says, he's a terrorist.

All right.

So let me ask you a final question.

Where does this go?

Is Iran and the Mullahs and the Ayatollah, are they enough of 12vers that they believe that they're going to wash the world in blood and this is a good thing for them to retaliate?

Or are they in butt-saving saving mode and may strike but they're not going to really they're not going to have their fingerprints really well known on anything

well

let me tell you i've thought about that an awful lot and uh there's something to be said on both sides but here's where i come down on this look at ayatollah khomeini the founder of the islamic republic of iran he died at the age of 88 comfortably in his bed of old age.

The leaders of this regime, they can be 12ers and they can try to send the masses out to martyrdom, but they themselves are going to save their rear ends.

They've got airplanes waiting to take them out of the country should the regime start to fall.

I think they're going to save themselves, and I think the

person and the people who have replaced Qasem Suleimani are not going to take dramatic action against the United States because they know they're next.

And is

this something that

we play out?

We would be

well advised to play out by playing this almost like the collapse of the Soviet Union, tighten sanctions, help the people on the streets,

and make sure everybody knows how evil this regime really is, but we don't have to lob any bullets or any men over there.

Absolutely not.

And you're right.

This is like the collapse of the Soviet Union.

We can sit back, enjoy it, but help the people of Iran.

I think what we ought to be doing, and apparently we now have the capability of doing this, is make sure whenever the regime shuts off the internet that we turn it back on so the people of Iran can communicate to the rest of the world so the regime cannot kill in darkness.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Kenneth Timmerman, he is the author of many books, one of them, Dark Forces.

You can find him at kentimmerman.com.

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

You know, I have absolutely no interest in

the foreign press, Golden Globes.

What?

Yeah, I have no idea.

How will you know what movies they think you should see?

I'm going to have to wing it on my own.

Oh, my God.

However, Ricky Gervais is one of my favorites.

He is brilliant.

He is brave.

His acting is good.

His directing is great.

His writing is great.

And he's unafraid.

We need more Ricky Gervaises.

Listen to what he said in his opening monologue last night at the Golden Globes.

He just handed them their heads, which I love, which I love.

You know who he is?

He's the new Don Imos.

That's what Don Imus used to do.

And I'm going to share a story about Don Imos at the end of the program today.

But that's how, you know, people are like, well, Don Imos, he was a racist.

Why would you say those things?

Because.

Why is Ricky saying these things?

Why is he saying them?

He doesn't care.

He doesn't care.

He doesn't care.

And you know what?

Some of them are, as he said, just jokes.

They are just jokes.

But others,

you know, need to be said.

Need to be said to these high,

falutin, pompous a-holes.

And there's a level of celebrity that he has

that is he can get away with it, at least for a while.

I mean, I think Louis C.K.

also had that same level.

And he was saying things that were really uncomfortable.

I remember at times being like, I can't believe they allow him to keep saying these things.

They allow him.

That's that's so uncanny.

Well, I know, totally, right?

Yeah, um, however, of course, now we see that that was not him.

Eventually, he did go away after all of that.

And I don't know if the same thing will happen.

They're already looking for his old tweets for Ricky Gervais now.

They're already publishing articles in left-wing publications about how you should look back at the things he said.

They're very offensive.

Here's your guide.

Ricky Gervais is

a hero.

I just love love the guy.

Just love him.

He's willing to say whatever's on his mind.

The best of the Glenn Beck program.

All right.

Steve Dace from Iowa and from the Steve Dace program, which can be heard on this network every day right after

my show on the Blaze Radio Network and TV network.

Steve, welcome.

Gentlemen, Happy New Year.

I'm just patiently waiting for those articles of impeachment to be filed.

How are you?

Oh, just it's electric, isn't it?

I mean, it's just electric.

It's almost like they've forgotten about them.

You know, the Democrats are now just right on to something else.

Oh my gosh, I ran.

That's why he should be out of here.

Indeed, 2018 ended with Trump's a Nazi, so give him all your guns.

And 2019 ended with Trump is an existential, clear, and present danger to our democracy.

So let's sit on these articles of impeachment for three damn weeks.

Makes perfect sense.

Just crazy.

Just crazy.

Okay, Steve, let's talk about Iowa and what's happening with the Democratic Party.

I want to play a clip from Joe Biden and listen to this.

He sounds like my grandpa did did right before he passed away, where he's not really fully engaged here.

Listen to this.

Iran announced today that it's accelerating this nuclear program.

Guess who losed with that?

Who's that?

America and its allies.

There was an airtight agreement we had with inspectors on the ground, the most intrusive inspection in all of human history, not hyperbole.

We knew exactly, we were in every single facility, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and they were not violent.

They're not good guys, but they were not moving towards.

Is it just me, or does he sound

a little

unexcited?

Unexcited, let's put it that way.

Well, I thought Robert Stack's voiced character in Beabis and Butthead to America actually did the most intrusive inspections in human history.

But that aside,

you know, what you're pointing out, Glenn, is what I have been saying on my show for the last couple of months.

And I'm not trying to be hot-take-y.

So I got that hot take out of the way.

And I want to be really serious.

He sounds like the average guy who's 80 years old and has lived a long life and had done a lot in his life and been

in a lot of high-stress situations.

I don't think he can do the job.

And I think that if he were leading a rival investment group to take over a Fortune 500 publicly traded company, and you were in the other investment group, I think you could at least get a hearing in front of a judge about his competency level of whether he's legally competent or not.

I agree.

And

I think that's why he has not taken off in this race.

And if you live here in Iowa, you see two Joe Bidens.

You see the one in the ads.

He's running a great ad right now.

Again, looking at it from a Democratic mindset.

He's running a great ad right now, and he sounds presidential about how terrible Trump is.

And if I only listened to that ad and I was a rural Iowan who remembered him with Barack Obama for eight years, that's the guy I would vote for.

But if I went out there on the campaign trail and actually saw him without the makeup and without the script and just interacted with him retail style, I would walk away shaking my head thinking, I don't know that this guy can be president.

And I think that's why, you know, when he first burst onto the scene last March, he had poll numbers on a national level into the 40s.

We've never seen anything like this, really, maybe since Fred Thompson was your flavor of the month 10 years ago.

And then the more and more voters in Iowa and New Hampshire have gotten a chance to look at him, you've seen his numbers on the state level have flatlined compared to just the national name ID contest.

And it's because when you look at him up close, you just don't think he's up to the job.

But he still is number one.

He still is, is he going to take Iowa, do you think?

I don't believe he'll win Iowa.

And I think, you know, national polling

in these primaries is irrelevant.

And here's why.

It doesn't matter what anybody in New York's opinion or California or Montana or New Mexico's opinion is.

They're not voting right now.

And by the time the process gets to them, a lot of these candidates are going to be gone, and a lot of candidates are gone already.

So it really only matters right now what Iowa, New Hampshire, and then Nevada and South Carolina think.

All right.

So what is happening in Iowa?

What's happening in Iowa is, you know, Democrats have lanes just like Republicans do with evangelicals and libertarians and the Bush wing.

Well, there's wings in the Democratic, and, you know, Ted Cruz used to call them lanes.

There's lanes in the Democratic Party as well.

And the problem they're having is no one is able to break out of their native lane to consolidate support.

And so what we have now is you have Pete Butigic.

He is the candidate of the white suburbanites who desperately want a virtue signal to the leftists who hate them, who drive a Subaru, live in a cul-de-sac with a coexist buffer sticker.

And they love Pete Bedigic because they're anxious to show you they're not a homophobe.

They've not looked at his qualifications.

That's his only qualification to them.

And then you have the college campus feminist hard left crowd loves elizabeth warren and then you have you know your old school democratic you know traditional labor socially moderate uh by today standards anyway democratic party that likes joe biden and these and you've got these candidates now and bernie sanders is in there he's got his own base you know that he's sort of the ron paul of the democratic party he has his own insurgency base and he's eating into some of elizabeth warren's a little bit as well but these four right now it is very fluid.

Impeachment has chloroformed the room.

It's like if you open the door, you would realize

it's a zero oxygen room.

I couldn't breathe in here.

It's made everything stale.

So I would take all polling numbers and everything else, and I would not listen to any of that until about a week from now.

I will tell you that the Bloomberg Register Iowa poll has been pretty good over the years.

That's Anne Seltzer's group.

I think she's actually with CNN now.

They actually called me yesterday, so I'm I'm worried about how tight their turnout numbers are if they're calling me for a Democratic poll.

Okay, but I would wait and see what their numbers show, and then I would wait for this last debate before the caucuses.

And I could just throw in one more thing, too.

This is, I mean, February 3rd, we don't know what the weather is going to be like.

So let's say there's a massive ice storm and rural Iowans can't get to their caucus site, but a bunch of campus feminists can just walk across the quad at Iowa, Iowa State, Grinnell, et cetera.

That could make a huge difference where this is concerned.

And then, Glenn, something your audience needs to know is the way that the Iowa caucuses are structured in the Democratic side is different than in the Republican side.

You know, you're not going to get four, five, six candidates with 2% on the Democratic side.

They're going to have a straw poll for relevancy right away.

And they get in that room, you know, 10 years ago in the 08 caucuses when it was open on both ends, my caucus site, we shared a site with the Democrats in the hall over us.

We could not hear ourselves thinking.

It was like a labor rally.

And so they get into that room, and the emotion and the ethos begins, and the id starts to flow, and there's wide swings of opinions, and college girls start bringing their moms and grandmas and say, Don't you want to vote for Elizabeth Warren?

I think, you know, that creates a very fluid environment.

I do think we know who the top four are going to be.

I think, though, knowing the order is tough.

And keep in mind, not since

1988 was the last time there was a contested Democratic caucus that the winner of the Iowa caucuses did not win the nomination.

So anyone who tells you Iowa doesn't matter just doesn't know history or they're just not telling you the truth.

So what are the Iowans waiting for?

What are they looking for that would be game-changing in the next couple of weeks?

This is really all about, there's one issue that is paramount, who can defeat Donald Trump.

The problem is, while that you would think, and you've seen this in the Republican Party in the past, well, anybody but Obama.

But the problem is there's not an agreement on what that looks like.

Does a technocrat who doesn't address divisive issues and gives you a reassuring persona like a Mitt Romney, does that beat Barack Obama?

Does putting Mitt Romney or Barack Obama on a national stage to have a worldview clash like a Rick Santorum or a Newt Gingrich, does that do it?

And so there's the same arguments happening in the Democratic side.

I know it sounds nuts to us, but if you follow their media and their Twitter, they think the reason they're losing to him is they're not nasty enough and they don't lie as much.

And so

there's that debate that is, and I know Stu follows that, so I'm sure he can verify that for me.

There's that whole debate.

And then there's the debate of we need a mainstream American source.

All right.

And so, you know, there's that, that's, that's actually what Joe Biden and Pete Buttigig are both running for that.

Pete Buttigieg never ever mentions homosexuality in his ads here.

He doesn't come across as any kind of activist, no effeminacy or anything of that nature.

He talks about being a soldier, a mayor of a small town in a red state.

And so he is, he is, he has kind of eaten into some of Joe Biden's support with that crowd as well.

Do you think that

a couple of narratives that come out of this, at least in the political media, is one, the caucus sort of situation you talked about earlier that's raucous and really, you know, has passionate supporters is a big indicator of potential upside for Bernie Sanders.

And that you get into the room where it looks like Warren's finishing third or fourth, and those Sanders people are going to bring the Warren people over to Sanders at the last minute.

And that, you know, with his fundraising numbers, he's doing well in New Hampshire.

There's a good poll for him today.

That, I mean, there is a path here for Bernie Sanders to be the nominee.

Do you buy into that?

I do.

And I didn't a few months ago.

I know it sounds morbid, but we started off talking about Joe Biden's competency.

So let's just go ahead and

round third while we're at it here.

But his candidacy has taken off since his heart attack.

He was dead in the water.

He was polling single digits in Iowa, single digits nationally.

He was behind Elizabeth Warren in New Hampshire.

His heart attack has,

if you go back and look at where his metrics were pre-that event to where they have been since, there's no question that that has been a galvanizing moment.

So you have to ask yourself, what the hell is wrong with people?

I mean,

a heart attack in an old guy, Ronald Reagan, even.

I mean,

that is not good news for somebody who's walking into a very high-stress job.

No, but I think for his base, it sort of coalesced them that, hey, we've got a window of opportunity to go full Soviet.

We can't lose this.

That was number one.

And then number two is Elizabeth Warren made the mistake of being honest.

Well, as honest as she was willing to be.

I know she was the clear frontrunner.

She was getting challenged.

Hey, show your work on your Medicare for all plan.

And like the true Wellesley College for Women Dina faculty, she's always wanted to be, she thought, you bet I'll put this all in a white paper and convince you that my one-size-fits-all plan, that you hated about Obamacare, supersizing it, you'll like it even more.

And even though it's what a lot of Democrats believe, it was a politically amateurish move.

And I think it made a lot of people that thought, hey, maybe she could beat Trump think if she's going to fall for the banana in the tailpipe at the first.

If she's going to answer the first political booty call here, then she can't lie well enough to do this gig.

She's just, she's just too much of a true believer.

And I think that has, that crushed her numbers because she had really eaten into a lot of Sanders' numbers.

She was kind of his softer side of Sears.

And when she showed that she could not match up politically with what they thought was going to be necessary to win, she's included.

Bernie has risen.

And

now you've got...

Buddigig and Biden fighting to be this more mainline candidate.

You've got this Amy Klobuchar, who from Minnesota, it's a neighboring state, who's not going to win here.

But if you get into that room and Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders' support is eaten up by the other, she could maybe surprise and finish in the top three.

She would only be taking votes away from Pete Buttigig and Joe Biden.

So that's why I think this thing is very, very fluid.

And I would caution anybody to make any dramatic pronouncements here until we get another week.

With that being said, dramatic pronouncements.

I would like you to.

If it were held today,

not in a couple of weeks, but today,

what would you say the landscape is?

If it were held today, it's going to be 50 degrees in Iowa today, and it's beautiful weather.

If it would be held today, we'd break a turnout record.

They'd be the highest voted in Iowa caucuses of all time by either party.

And then I think it would really just come down to when we get in the room, can Bernie Sanders and or Elizabeth Warren's supporters, you know, whether it's the Soviet id versus the feminist id, what wins out there?

And that's, you know, that's that's a little bit like, you know, asking me to forecast an apocalyptic event.

I hopefully don't want to be around here for.

So I don't know the answer to that, but it would come down to if one of those two in the rooms across Iowa can absorb the other support.

If they can, one of those two would win.

If not, then I think Pete Buttigieg would win.

But I don't think it would be an impressive win for anybody right now.

I think it's still very fluid.

Steve, thank you so much.

Make sure you follow Steve at Steve Dace's show.

You can hear Steve Dace on this network, on the Blaze Radio and TV network.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.