Red Flag Laws Mean GUILTY Until Proven Innocent | Guests: Robert Epstein & Kevin Williamson | 8/21/19

Thank you so much.

Gosh, we just have to.

I think we have to sit down in this chair earlier because we're just so busy getting everything ready for the show.

Let me tell you about home title lock.

Capital One had a data breach just hit.

Only 106 million of us,

that's it.

106 million of us had our names, home, addresses,

our banking information exposed.

Far greater risk

is home title fraud, believe it or not.

Home title fraud is rampant.

They're calling it an epidemic in New York.

Big payday, because what they do is they take all of the equity from your home.

They forge your name and actually sell it to this bogus person.

You don't know about it.

Nobody knows about it.

They go and take all the equity, borrow against it, and you're stuck with the loan.

Forget insurance, bank, or identity theft programs.

They don't touch it.

There's only one company that does, and it is Home Title Lock.

The first 60 days after crimes like the Amazon server Capital One breach are crucial.

So you have 60 risk-free days of home title lock protection if you go there right now.

Home TitleLock.com.

Home Title Lock.com.

Do it now.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

The numbers are beyond horrific.

Every day in the United States, 100 people are killed with guns and hundreds more are shot or injured.

Nearly two-thirds of all yearly gun deaths in the country are suicides, including a thousand children and teens.

Gun violence claims over 1,500 lives a year.

Gun suicides, 63% of all firearm deaths.

Something must be done.

Wait until you hear who wrote this.

Oh, it's going to make you really,

really happy.

Let's just say, I'll give you a hint.

This is from a political party.

They just sent it out to all their supporters.

Which political party do you think did it?

In 60 seconds.

This is the Glenbag program.

I've been talking a few weeks now about

the cruise through history that we're taking next spring.

And I'm more excited about it today than I was when we first started, because not only are going to be spending time in Italy, Greece, Croatia, Israel, learning about the history of the Republic and what makes America so unique in the world, not only going to be learning from David Lappin, I mean, sorry, David Barton, Rabbi Lappin, Bill O'Reilly, and others on this cruise,

but as of yesterday, Stu and I hatched a plan.

Yes, we're taking this cruise to the next level.

We are thinking, since we're going to Israel anyway,

that's Palestine to any leftists in the audience.

We might as well drop by and see Rashida Tlaib's dear old grandma.

Yeah.

I mean,

have some maybe a

nice hot meal?

Yeah, cookies and milk or something.

We thought maybe we would bring a package from Rashida to her grandmother in Israel, but we thought that might get us banned.

Yeah, if Rashida wanted us to bring something, it might sound.

Anyway, tickets are almost sold out on this cruise.

But if you order them this week, this week only, you're going to get $200 worth of ships' credit.

$200 ships credit this week only.

Visit Cruise Through History.

Did anybody give you a package at the airport to bring to Palestine?

Yeah, only one person.

Why do you ask?

Visit comesaileaway.com.

Come saileaway.com.

Do it now for all of the details.

The numbers are beyond horrific.

Every day in the United States, 100 people are killed with guns and hundreds more are shot and injured.

Is that true?

Hundreds, hundreds of people are shot and injured by guns every day in America.

Is that true?

Hundreds?

Well, I mean, you have, what, 40,000 deaths per year from guns.

So

I guess it would happen.

That, you know, of course, just means

that also includes suicides and all the occasions.

You know, disclaimer-related and everything.

Over 100 and just

deaths.

That's probably true.

You know, we should probably separate these out from violent, criminal kind of things.

You know what I mean?

Oh, yeah.

These death numbers include a guy

about to

slit a woman's throat and a police officer shoots them.

Like, that's included in that number.

Right.

Like,

a lot of these are just, you know, can we separate those out?

Let's have a separate them out.

Because, I mean, you know, one of the main things here, well, let me just get back to this.

One of the main things is the next line.

Nearly two-thirds of all yearly gun deaths in this country are suicides.

Now, do you really think that taking away a gun, by the way, that's not an AR, two-thirds of all of the gun-related deaths, two-thirds

are suicides.

Yeah.

And if you think that that is a gun problem, you're going to have to explain why countries like Japan with no guns have a much higher suicide rate than us, or Russia, who has a gun ownership rate of one-tenth of the United States, yet has a much higher murder rate and a much higher suicide rate.

In Pennsylvania, gun violence claims over 1,500 lives every year, with gun suicides comprising 63% of all firearms desks in Pennsylvania.

65% of veteran suicides in our state involve a gun.

Oh, we should take our guns away from veterans.

Everyday toll.

What an argument to make.

I know.

Yeah, let's argue to the people who've been defending our country

and who have trained with these weapons and done everything that they could to protect these liberties.

Let's take their guns away.

Let's take veterans' guns away.

Wow, what a wonderful idea that is.

The everyday toll of gun violence in America is utterly heartbreaking, and this violence routinely shocks the collective soul of our nation.

We look for solutions to end America's epidemic of gun violence.

One sure way to reduce firearms death is through the implementation of red flag laws, also known as extreme risk protection order laws.

To date, these laws have been enacted in 17 states and the District of Columbia.

Oh, well, then that's a good idea.

Back on February 14th, there was a one-year anniversary of Parkland.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

My proposal, Senate Bill 90, would allow our judges to temporarily remove firearms from people in crisis who pose an imminent threat of harming themselves or others.

Red flag laws.

Now, which party

sent this out?

You're setting us up here.

This is Senator Tom Killian, the 9th District,

and a Republican in Pennsylvania.

Sending to all of his supporters,

Republicans, is this who you are?

I mean, there's a lot of support for red flag laws among Republicans.

Yeah, well, the second, good for you.

It's good.

Good for you.

You're not, you are no longer, you are no longer a constitutionalist.

You cannot consider yourself a small government constitutionalist if you believe in gun control and infringement.

We're not talking about, look, I have no problem if you are

deemed dangerous after you've had the chance to testify,

you are innocent until proven guilty.

We cannot cross this line.

You are innocent until proven guilty.

The red flag law says some accuser can go to court and say, you know what?

They're very, very dangerous.

They're very dangerous.

I've been, look,

I was married to them for a very long time.

And the threats, oh, you would not believe the threats that they're making.

You don't think vengeance,

just pettiness would get involved.

You don't think that there's someone in your family?

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Maybe you're lucky.

I know in my extended family, I would not count it out that somebody in my extended family

or

relations

would say,

oh, yeah, yeah, I was at a family reunion.

The guy's unstable.

Oh, he's absolutely unstable.

You could have people sitting at this desk with you that would make claims like that to the courts.

I mean, if you've ever been through a horrible divorce, oh, my God.

Go back to.

You don't even have to go.

You could go to one of the brothers or sisters or uncles or aunts or anybody else that just was angry.

Why was Barack Obama our president?

Why?

Well, he won a Senate race in Illinois.

Why did he win the Senate race in Illinois?

Well, he was in a very tight race against Jack Ryan.

I want to say Jack Ryan, but that's the character, right?

Yeah.

Who was the guy?

I can't remember his name.

Ryan was his last name.

Who went through a very nasty divorce with an actress who, in the divorce proceedings,

accused him of all sorts of crazy stuff that somehow Barack Obama's people got unsealed, and then eventually his opponent, Obama's opponent, had to drop out of the race.

It is Jack Ryan.

Thank you.

Does it end up to be true?

I don't think so.

You know, obviously wasn't there.

And afterwards, after the divorce happened, there was a cooling off period.

And, oh, well, he's not that person and blah, blah, blah.

You're going through a divorce

all the time.

Your husband loves guns, loves guns.

And you want to bilk him for everything, every penny he's got.

Okay.

That's not an unheard of

scenario.

And because you're being pushed by the attorneys, you're angry, whatever it is, you're telling me that America, you can't see a husband or a wife, doesn't matter.

Yeah.

Say,

you know what?

You're going to give this to me, or

I'm going to talk about your guns.

It's objectively worse the other way, right?

Let's say a woman is maybe having an affair and the guy's very angry about it and she has a gun to protect herself against an angry man.

And the man goes and says, you know what?

She's nuts.

She's been threatening people.

I think my children are in danger.

Go take her guns.

They go do that.

Then she's vulnerable from him.

Right?

I mean, it is, it's a terrible thing.

And we've tried this red flag law thing out recently on another issue.

It's called Me Too accusations.

Yeah.

Where we've just been like, you know what?

Just take all their power away, take their jobs away, throw them out of society, and then we'll figure out whether they actually did it or not.

But then this, what makes this worse is that's not involving the government or the court system.

That's right.

That's just public opinion.

This is public opinion.

That's bad enough.

This one is saying, no, we deem you guilty before you even have a chance to answer the charge.

Yeah.

And

your reputation being of high quality is not a constitutional right.

People can

have all sorts of terrible opinions about you.

I don't know if you've noticed that some people have terrible opinions about you, even, Glenn.

Wait, what?

It's true.

But, you know, constitutional right is your right to bear arms.

So we're taking away a constitutionally guaranteed thing with no, I mean, because red flag laws already exist.

Red flag laws are when you go and you say, hey, you know, we need to get this person is really erratic and he's acting, and we need to have him committed, right?

Involuntary commitment.

These things already exist.

The only thing that the new brand of red flag laws does is it makes it so they take the guns before they figure it out.

Yeah, right.

This is like, I don't know if he's crazy.

Let's just take the guns and then we'll figure it out and see if it's true.

That is insane.

That's craziness.

That's upside down.

That is craziness.

That is against everything we stand for.

This is the, you remember, you're taking away a person's right

to be innocent.

Before guilty.

What you're doing is you're starting down this slippery slope that, look, things happen, so we've got it.

We're going to look at you as guilty, and everybody will know you're guilty.

And we're going to take your guns.

And good luck getting them back, by the way.

We're going to take your guns.

But if you prove yourself to be responsible,

excuse me?

This is, this is,

personally, I think that is civil war.

I think these red flag laws...

They're very popular, though.

I mean, they

don't hold very well.

Then maybe not.

I don't think people understand exactly what they are.

I don't think so either.

You know, and it's like, you know, you have a situation where

the research on the red flag laws, where they've been implemented, shows no effect on homicide rate.

It shows a very slight effect on suicide rate.

And we've seen, you know, some of these states we're talking about, a third of cases.

are later found out to be frivolous.

A third?

You're taking away the constitutional right from a third of the people you're accusing.

You can't do that.

That is not an American principle whatsoever.

I know we really, like, we all have these people around us that are like, oh, man, that guy seems dangerous.

This is why.

Most of those people don't go out and shoot people.

This is why I am not for the death penalty.

It's not because of life.

Innocent life.

I'm opposed to taking innocent life.

And that is why

I'm torn on the death penalty, but have finally come down on the the death penalty.

I'm against it.

Because we can make mistakes.

And I don't want to be responsible for taking innocent life.

So

put them in jail.

Stop all this nonsense of, you know, racking everything up.

If you're going to do it, then do it.

But you better make sure you're right.

You want to execute somebody.

Look how many people just from DNA tests.

Now, we may get to a point to where you got it because everything's on camera, everything's, but then you've got deep fakes.

Are you sure?

You don't want to put an innocent man to death.

You don't want an innocent man in jail.

You're going to destroy people

just on what?

One person or one side of an opinion.

There's two sides.

And we must have the

presumption of innocence for American citizens, not the presumption of guilt.

That is what leads to Stalin, Nazis, Mussolini, Mao, whoever you want,

when they can scoop you up or take your stuff or you lose your job through a court system

that says, yeah, well, we're going to, we'll get back to you.

We'll fix your life if we were wrong.

Really?

Where do you go?

Where do you go

after the sheriff or the FBI are at the front of your house taking out your stuff

because you've been deemed unstable?

Where do you go to get that reputation back?

Where do you go in this time where there is no forgetting because of the internet?

Where do you go

when you go in for a job interview and they Google your name?

Oh, and they see the pictures of the guns leaving your house because you might be unstable.

Where do you go to get that erased?

Where?

Really not good, America.

Really not good.

There should be no

waffling on this.

You either believe in the Second Amendment or you do not.

All right.

Life lock.

Sometimes you're sitting in an airport.

You're bored out of your skull waiting for your flight.

And now you look down and you're like, geez, I'm going to be really bored if I don't charge this phone.

So you use one of the USB charging stations.

You know, not only to break the monotony, but you also have something to pay attention to during the flight safety speech.

You know, your phone is working.

So I have some disturbing news for you.

Turns out cyber criminals can modify those USB connections to install malware on your phone or to download data without your knowledge.

I know, I know.

Item 183, 471 on your list of crazy ways people can steal your information and things I don't have time to deal with.

That's why there is LifeLock.

Life Lock has an easy-to-stall software.

It detects a wide range of identity threats.

When there is a problem, your U.S.-based restoration specialist will work to fix it.

You plug in, it tells you, stop right now, there's a problem.

Don't do anything.

Call Life Lock.

They fix it.

Now, nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses, and nobody can fix everything in your life.

However, LifeLock sees the threats that you might miss on your own, and they help you every step of the way.

Join them now, get an extra 10% off your first year by using promo code BECK.

That's 1-800-LIFELOCK.

1-800-LIFELOCK or Lifelock.com.

Use the promo code BEC and get 10% off.

So

The Washington Post has just written an article.

Anthony Scarmucci and the nine biggest 180s on Trump ranked.

number 10 is Scarmucci I think number nine is Ann Coulter

now this is yeah because she's the she's the re the I was for him now I'm against him yeah no no no she wrote a book in Trump we trust okay and you know what I think he's been pretty decent on the border he hadn't been great and he hasn't you know done the border wall but he's I think he's tried she reportedly at least co-wrote his initial border proposal So she was very tied into the details of that.

And so she's maybe not excited that the wall has not been able to get that across the finish line.

Well, she says he deserves to lose re-election.

Okay.

Mike Pompeo is the next one.

Jason Chaffetz is number seven.

Coming in at number six, Mick Mulvaney.

Number five, Andrew Napolitano.

I didn't know that because he was very anti-Trump, wasn't he?

He's a libertarian, right?

So he's not going to like the executive sort of actions.

But I have not heard him flip on that.

I mean, he's not.

Has he changed that?

Oh, actually, no, he's gotten worse.

Oh,

I think he's gotten worse.

Once purveyor, deep sea.

Sarah Greg, he

recently accused Trump of unleashing a torrent of hatred in a Foxnews.com op-ed.

Trump claims this is because he declined to nominate Napoleon Tunnel for Supreme Court.

Then Anthony Scarmucci,

coming in at number three, Glenn Beck.

Hey!

Listen, you did well on the list.

Or did I?

This is no way to win

in either direction.

No.

You don't win in either direction.

However, if you remember right, it was just, I was only saying things because I was failing.

Yeah, it's weird how that's happened.

Yeah, now, now you're now Glenn Beck staked out, this is from the Washington Post.

Glenn Beck staked out principal ground against someone.

I love this.

Really?

Now it's retroactive admiration.

Where was the principal ground support of Glenn Beck in 2016 for these people?

None.

As someone who said, quote, he could be one of the most dangerous presidents to ever come in the Oval Office.

End quote.

Yeah.

He could have been.

He hasn't been.

Wow.

He could be in the future, but he hasn't been.

You know, when we had no evidence of what he would do in office,

yeah, he could have been.

I was very nervous.

Based on his past performance, he hasn't been.

After Trump's election, he pulled out Hitler comparisons, saying he saw the seeds of what happened in Germany in 1933.

Still see them.

See them in the Republican Party, see him in the Democratic Party, see them everywhere.

If you're not seeing fascism, communism on the horizon,

well, you're blind.

You're blind.

You can go anyway, any direction with any of these people.

They call every Republican Hitler Hitler every day.

I know.

That's the problem.

Today, even as Trump has stoked racial divisions and split the country in a way Beck once decried.

No, I still decry that.

I still think racial division is really bad.

I still think the way the president says things, I'm like, oh, please, don't, don't say that.

Please, don't say that.

But look at the media.

Trump is the one doing it.

I know.

When you're calling literally every one of his supporters, if they support him, a racist, who's stoking racist,

I mean, that's incredible.

Beck now says if Trump loses in 2020, I think we're officially at the end of the country as we know it.

Yes.

Have you looked at the other side?

Have you looked at who the Democrats are running?

Yeah, I think when they say, yeah, we're going to get rid of the free market system, you know, and I'll just do executive orders on the Constitution.

Sounds like the end of the republic to me.

You're listening to Glenn Beck.

All right, hex chair.

So you're sitting in a big meeting.

The door opens.

The big boss walks in.

You glance around the table.

Six people, six ex-chairs.

You're nearest the door.

And the unwritten rule is when, you know, the big boss walks to get up, you're supposed to offer her your chair.

See what I do there?

You look around the table and you meet the steely eyes.

Nobody moves.

You can't imagine spending the rest of the meeting in one of those folding chairs from the Spanish Inquisition.

You need comfort, you need stability.

You need the X-Chair.

It provides you with patented, dynamic, variable, lumbar support.

What are you going to do?

Well, you look at the boss and you say, you're the big boss.

You know what you should have done?

Should have bought seven chairs for this room.

I ain't giving up mine.

X-Chair on sale now for $100 off.

So

get off your fanny and buy a couple of extra for the office.

Go to x-chairbeck.com.

That's xchairbeck.com.

1-8444-XCHAR.

Use the promo code X-Wheels and you're going to get a free set of the new X-Wheels.

So when you walk in the door, the people can move farther away from the door.

So they don't have to give up their X-Chair for you.

It's XCHairbeck.com.

December 7th, Salt Lake City, Utah.

It's Glenn Becks doing a Christmas show live on stage.

Get your tickets at Glennbeck.com.

That's me.

Man, I'm really excited to welcome a brand new sponsor to the show, Takovis.

I know how ridiculous a great pair of boots can cost.

Takovis makes great boots and accessories.

They sell their boots directly to the customer, so their boots are half the price of anything that's even similar in quality.

They're all handmade with a 200-step process with only the best materials.

Their entire line honors the timeless traditional boot styles.

No silly stitching or sequins or loud colors or anything else.

These are just great boots like my grandfather would have worn.

With Tocovis, there's no need to break them in.

They arrive already, ready to be worn immediately, comfortably.

They're easy to order with tremendous customer service.

To Covis always has free shipping and free returns.

Check out their boots and their clothing and accessories right now.

to covis.com/slash back.

That's T-E-C-O-V-A-S.com/slash back.

Welcome to Mr.

Pat Gray, the host of Unleashed.

And you can hear that podcast wherever you get podcasts.

Really, really great.

Almost sounds like you added an exclamation mark to it.

I didn't, though.

I don't believe in any exclamation marks.

All right.

Did you?

Have you?

I told you a story about the queen, Queen Elizabeth, and exclamation marks?

I don't think so.

Okay.

So the

letter from Queen Elizabeth, this one, just sold at auction.

It sold for, it was, it became one of the most expensive letters ever sold from anything she's ever written.

Okay.

There's really nothing in the letter except an exclamation point.

And she never uses them or something?

Never.

Really?

She's on record saying, I hate them.

There is no reason to ever use an exclamation point.

There is nothing that important that has to be written that uses an exclamation point.

She's never used them except this one time.

And what did she feel so strongly about?

That the

crisis in her family

because of the press with Diana was almost too much to bear.

Exclamation point.

Oh, wow.

Yeah.

Wow.

So it sold, but it didn't sell for that.

It didn't sell for what?

She was

just the exclamation point.

Isn't that nuts?

Yeah.

Can you imagine being that

state your whole life?

Yeah.

And

let's not raise our voices

she doesn't seem like that in as presented in the crown you've seen you've watched that haven't you love the crown i love it too and have been waiting forever and now i've forgotten completely what was going on but it's been 18 years since the last episode i know uh hey mindhunter is back on if anybody was watching mind hunter the fbi story we have to get that guy back on it's a fascinating story pat but it's it's a it's a true story about the guy who first started interviewing serial killers and the fbi nobody wanted to do it they're like like, you're just trying to make excuses.

He's like, no, I'm trying to understand them because this is a new phenomenon.

And

I think the episodes ended with him having a nervous breakdown.

And we talked to the guy, and he was like, yeah, I did.

Oh, wow.

And so it's a true story.

It's a true story.

It's a true story.

The guy is fascinating.

Is it Netflix or Amazon?

I don't know.

I think it's Netflix.

Okay.

All right.

I'm going to look for it.

Okay.

Let me give you a letter, and I'd like to see your opinion on this.

Okay.

Okay.

This comes in from

This comes in from a listener.

Dear Mr.

Beck, I have watched and listened to you for years, and you have always owned the bad that you did,

and you changed.

So I believe

you deserve to hear the truth.

I was a skinhead for many years.

Oh, boy.

Not a good start.

Not a good start.

But if there's a but there,

I was always racist until I began to travel abroad.

It's amazing what happens when you start to, I don't know, get out and see other things.

So here we go.

You need to know that the alt-right does not love Trump.

In fact, he's despised for his love of the Jews.

They are using...

What a freaking weird world we live in.

I know, isn't it?

I know.

They are using him because he isn't racist.

But as the media keeps bashing him and calling him and all of his supporters racist, they are destroying the stigma of him being labeled a racist.

So now

they're essentially losing, taking the power and removing, or taking the word and removing its power.

Correct.

Calling someone a racist no longer means anything.

Correct.

So now, when you get a real candidate for the alt-right and they scream he's a racist, it won't mean anything.

The media is the alt-right's best weapon.

I can tell you more later if you wish to talk.

I know you're not a racist or a hater.

The only reason I tell you is my love for country, and I'm afraid war is coming.

This is from a guy who's in the skin.

I don't think they're afraid of a lot.

It's an interesting point because

they're able to make, let's say, the alt-right or one of these actual white supremacist groups, which we do know are low in numbers overall, but still

it's a poisonous ideology.

But if you're able able to actually go online and convince regular people that aren't racist that these racist accusations are not just non-stop BS,

you know,

it's going to be a recruitment tool.

So basically, they're saying the media is helping recruit people into the alt-right and to these organizations.

Or at least

making, blurring the line so much between real racism and real racists and, you know, Trump supporters that

you don't know.

You don't care.

You don't even look.

Yeah, and I'm fascinated by this from a political, at the political level.

It's like we talked about this a little bit, I think, maybe on the News NY yesterday, but there is, you know, Hillary Clinton did the whole deplorables speech, and she made this big speech.

And we remember it as, oh my gosh, well, she's calling all the Trump supporters deplorables.

That is not what she was doing.

She was actually talking to a Democratic audience and saying to Democrats, hey, I know you think everyone who could vote for Donald Trump is evil, you know, but there's a bunch of them that are in this basket of deplorables and a bunch of them are really bad, but there's some that might vote for us and are actually normal people who are just worried about the state of the economy, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Her point was, let's separate those Republicans into two groups, the evil ones and the good ones, right?

Now, obviously, we disagree with her analysis on this situation, okay?

There's a, it needs to be said.

However, what the Democrats are doing now is saying, don't separate them anymore.

They're all evil.

they're all

the same that's because the gop also didn't do that to hurt hillary clinton you had to say you had to create the image that she was saying all people on donald trump's

uh on donald trump's side are deplorable but like you both of these sides do these things for political reasons at some level hillary was doing it probably she probably does believe everybody on the right is is evil but she was doing it because she wanted to try to attract center-right voters right she was probably noticing that uh you know we're losing a lot of the democratic support in places to Donald Trump.

Remember, a third of those who voted for Donald Trump, or about 20% who voted for Donald Trump, voted for Barack Obama.

I think what's interesting here, though, is that the lesson learned from that speech, from the deplorables moment from the Democrats, is we didn't call enough of the people racists.

We didn't call enough of them deplorables.

The problem was we only half-assed it.

We only called half of them racists.

We should have called them all racists.

And that's what they're doing now.

If that's the lesson they're taking from this, how are they possibly going to win this election?

Right?

Like, I mean, let's hope they're not.

Exactly.

Like, it's such a terrible strategy just from a political onlooker standpoint.

I mean,

take out who you think should win.

If you're the coach of this team trying to make the Democrats win, why on earth would you be spending all of your time calling all the voters for the other guy racist after you lost the election, possibly because of that?

Remember, these are the three states, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, michigan these states were states that were right in the middle of that battle these are the people they were calling all all these evil white blue collar people who just were racist and then they were considering trump because they were racist hillary's point was no well they're not they're doing it because of economic instability and and and worry and their point now is no no they actually were all racist and that's why they did it let's call them racists publicly and that'll work

they'll vote for us when we convince them that they're racists like that's an insane strategy

But the strategy now is

I don't have to be for anything, really.

I just have to be against the right person or the right thing.

I have to wear my virtue as a badge.

And so I come in and I say, I'm against the evil orange man.

And that's enough.

For a good number of people.

It's not, I don't think it's enough to win an election.

Is it enough to win over the people that cost you the election last time?

I don't think so.

I don't think so.

Does anyone get won over by being called a racist enough times and they're like, gosh, you know what?

Ah, that's me.

They got me.

You know what?

You know what?

I'm going to change and vote for the other side this time.

You know, they've convinced me.

That's not going to work.

I am evil.

I do hate poor people.

That's not going to work.

Wow.

You know what is going to work, I think, for like Joe Biden.

is his wife telling everybody, yeah, the other candidates are probably a lot better on just about everything.

But I didn't see this.

I don't even like like my husband that much.

But it was between him and a wino, and those are the only offers I had.

So I went with Joe.

I went with middle class Joe.

The other guy was lower class.

So

you got to do it, right?

You got to pull the lever for him.

Interesting strategic decision.

I didn't hear the Joe Biden thing.

It wasn't quite that bad, but almost.

Do we have the audio?

I have it here.

Here it is.

I just know that not all of you are committed to my husband.

And I respect that.

Your candidate might be better on, I don't know, health care than Joe is.

Right.

But you've got to look at who's going to win this election.

And maybe you have to swallow a little bit and say, okay, I personally like so-and-so better.

But

the bottom line has to be that we have to beat Trump.

I mean, that's bad.

I mean, to me, that's bad.

If that's the best your wife can do, hey, honey, I'd like you to go home and rest.

Maybe until 2022, if you will, please.

I don't think you need to be out there on the campaign trail.

It's just too hard and arduous for you.

So, is this the

essentially a paraphrase of the speech Jill got on her wedding night from her mom?

Like, look, there's a lot of other guys out there, and they're better.

They're much better.

They might be better looking.

They might be nicer.

They might be richer.

They're respectful.

And let's not, let's not, let's not, let's, let's not quote Jill and let's just move on from that scenario.

Am I the only one that

saw that, what she said?

No.

Yes.

I mean, I don't.

Play it again, please.

I know that not all of you are committed to my husband.

And I respect that.

Your candidate might be better on, I don't know, health care than Joe is.

But you've got to look at who's going to win this election.

And maybe you have to swallow a little bit and say, okay, i sort of personally like so-and-so better just saying but your bottom line has to be that we have to be trusted i think we should move on from here i think we should move from here okay i'm sorry i did notice that the first time i was trying to ignore it yeah i was too until he brought up that's what his wife said that's what his wife was told by his mom on the wedding night no yeah blame that on me yeah you should blame this whole thing on me that's that's i blame it on you and i blame it on those damn weapons of war.

That's what I blame it on.

Thank you very much, Pat.

Thank you.

Thank you for removing.

All right.

This is just wrong.

There are a few things that can ruin your day more quickly than a check engine light.

You're driving down the road.

You're singing along with the radio.

You know, people are looking at you.

You don't notice them because you're just blasting and blaring it out.

And all of a sudden, there it is.

The first sign that you get that maybe

something very expensive is coming your way.

That is why I have Car Shield.

I hate worrying about everything associated with car repairs.

I just want my car to work.

Have you ever done that?

You just brought it to the mechanic and just went, can you just make it run?

I just make it work, please.

That's all I want.

Is that too much to ask?

The downtime, the inconvenience, and the money.

Car Shield makes the process of fixing your car for a covered repair amazingly simple.

You can have the dealership do it.

I mean, honestly, the only reason why we have our favorite mechanic is because it's cheaper, right?

It's cheaper.

But why not have the mechanic at the dealership do it if you're not paying for it and put in all of the right parts that, you know, they weren't second-hand or whatever, they're just the right parts.

Do that.

Look, you sometimes might have a mechanic that, you know, maybe doesn't do all the best work.

And maybe, maybe, you know, you don't like them very much.

And maybe they spit on you as you walk by, but sometimes you just have to swallow a little bit and just go with them.

Okay.

Okay.

Let's stop talking.

They also provide provide

24-7 roadside assistance and a rental car while yours is being fixed.

This is not healthy.

My mind is going in all wrong places today.

This is bad.

Pray for me.

You get all of this for free with CarShield.

CarShield.com.

CarShield.com.

800.

Car 6,000.

800.

Car 6,000.

Use the promo code Beck.

You'll save 10% on your yearly membership at carshield.com.

Holy cow.

Look at how fat he has gotten.

That is going to be what people are saying as I walk out on stage December 7th,

a night which will live in infamy, to do our Christmas stories with Glenn Beck.

If you've never been to one of my shows, especially the comedy shows, the Christmas show is just, it's our favorite.

It is our favorite.

And you don't want to miss it.

I want you to know all of the stories in it are true.

100%

true.

They're insane.

Christmas stories with Glenbeck.

One night, one city only, Salt Lake, December 7th.

You can go to Glenbeck.com and grab your tickets.

I think there's a few floor seats left and some in the upper balcony, but it's going to be a great night, a great night.

And I invite you to attend.

all right so we got that going for us glenbeck.com uh coming up

we have um the guy you know the guy who is the professor at Harvard right or is it MIT I think it's Harvard

and he is he is doing studies on Google to see

you know are they are they swaying elections at all the answer he says is uh yeah

and he's got evidence now Vanity Fair just took him apart Took him apart because Donald Trump just tweeted, hey, you know,

Google

is, you know,

swaying elections right now.

Because Donald Trump got involved, now he's the craziest man to ever live.

Even though he's not a Donald Trump supporter, he voted for Hillary Clinton, which I think gives him a lot of credibility.

He doesn't have a horse in the race.

He's saying that we are on the verge of losing our republic because free and fair elections are a thing of the past because of Google manipulation.

And we're going to ask him on, because I want to, I mean, if it's true what Vanity Fair says, and I don't know this, but Stu says, because

he's a guy who really likes studies and stats and numbers and everything else.

And if what Vanity Fair says is true.

It's a crap heap of a study if what Vanity Fair says is true.

I just don't, I can't imagine.

I mean, we've talked to him at length about this stuff.

It's not like this guy doesn't have nuance in his understanding of how these things work.

He explained, he did an entire podcast with him, right?

I mean,

an hour where he was describing this research.

It's not as flippant as Vanity Fair makes it out, but I want to ask him these exact questions.

Yeah, so we get it from the horse's mouth.

And I also want to ask him: yesterday, the Google employees were

protesting and saying that Google needed to stop working with ICE

and Border Patrol.

Well,

wait a minute.

What are they doing?

I mean, if they're providing cloud service, they do that for everybody.

But are they providing information?

Are they

Google in bed with the government and working with ICE?

Because if so, yeah, that should stop.

But we should also know what they're doing.

How much information do you have?

Who are you giving it to, Google?

You're listening to Glenn Beck.

You know what's crazy is they say that we should sleep at 80 degrees at night, 82 degrees at night.

And if you have nest and the government decides to say, hey, we've got an energy crisis here.

We have to all work together.

Your temperature is going to automatically go up to 82.

I mean, that is obviously the risk.

Of course, you could always replace your nest if they started doing that.

Unless you can replace your nest.

Well, why wouldn't you be?

You're going to be red-flagged on nests.

Oh, okay.

Red-flag lost.

Well, look, we have

we can run about to talk a little bit about Google here in just a moment with a professor who has done a lot of research on it.

Apparently, really terrible research, according to Vanity Fair.

Yeah.

They did not like his research.

And if you want to go through the fairy fair.

Cranking the crazy to 11.

Yeah.

And now, look, if you're looking for scientific analysis of a peer-reviewed study, what you want to do is go to Vanity Fair.

That's the place you're going to land, obviously, as one of the most respected scientific journals in America.

Yeah.

Well,

I'm interested to hear his answers on this.

They're making very specific accusations.

You know, we are mostly known, we're not known for politics.

I mean, yes, people know us for politics.

Sure.

You know, secondary.

Sarcasm and everything else.

But really, this show is known for

its science and science standards, our many, many science documentaries.

And so we'll

get

a little heavy-handed in the science here in just a second.

So coming up in just a second, what is happening at Google Election and More?

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

So several times we have had Dr.

Robert Epstein on.

He is a senior research psychologist, American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology.

He's up at Harvard, isn't he, Stu?

I can't remember.

I think it's Harvard.

Right?

Yes.

So he's a guy who was going to vote for Hillary Clinton, may have voted for Hillary Clinton, but was doing a study to see is Google...

Is Google swaying anyone?

Is Google doing anything that you wouldn't notice unless you were really looking for it to sway the opinion of the American people?

His report is a little terrifying, and nobody paid attention to it until Donald Trump tweeted something about him.

And then, now all the guns are out.

It is, I mean, well, let me give you the Vanity Fair article headline.

Cranking the crazy to 11.

Huh.

Google says,

or I mean, Trump says Google will cost him 16 million votes.

We're going to talk to the guy who did the study and is currently doing the study.

And I think his work is some of the most important work out there.

Vanity Fair says it's garbage.

And if it is what Vanity Fair says it is, then it is garbage.

But somehow or another, Stu and I think that's not the way he did this research.

So we'll let him speak for himself and tell you what's really going on with Google in one minute.

This is the Glimbeck program.

We used to live in a country with wide diversity of opinions, yet we still had a basic set of shared values.

We might not have had the same religion, but we could agree that life was precious.

We might not have belonged to the same political party, but we could agree government should be kept small.

Yeah, those days are well behind us.

But that's why companies like Patriot Mobile are so important.

Patriot Mobile is America's only conservative cell phone company.

It's run by Patriots.

These are guys who are veterans

in our armed forces who believe in the good heart of this country the way that you do.

That's why I and thousands of others have made the switch.

to Patriot Mobile.

They're offering a special just for joining.

You can upgrade your phone to a brand new Moto Z3 Play for only $5 a month.

That includes a six-inch screen, expandable storage, high-quality camera, and so much more.

Switching is really, really easy.

You're going to save a buttload of money every single month.

You're going to get the same great sell service.

Your money's not going to be going to Planned Parenthood or La Raza.

PatriotMobile.com slash Beck.

PatriotMobile.com slash Beck.

Get the brand new MotoZ3 play today.

Supplies are limited.

PatriotMobile.com slash Beck.

We have Robert Epstein.

He is an author, editor, longtime psychology researcher and professor, distinguished scientist who is passionate about educating the public about advances in mental health and behavioral sciences.

Former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today.

He is now the senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and contributing editor for Scientific American Mind.

Yeah, he sounds like a dope and turning the crazy level up to ten.

Dr.

Robert Epstein, how are you, sir?

Well, it's been a rough couple days, to be honest with you.

Yeah.

So, I mean, here's a I mean, here's a group of people that you probably

politically would agree with more than not.

They're getting trashed by the person you voted for on Twitter.

Well, I think Hillary Clinton should be ashamed of herself.

I mean, you know,

I really just gotten caught in the crossfire

here between Trump and Hillary.

And

the president sometimes, as you know, his tweets are not exactly entirely accurate.

And he did get a couple things slightly wrong when he tweeted about my testimony before Congress,

which was in July.

And so, yeah, I can tell you, you know, get what he did is slightly wrong.

But what Hillary did is reprehensible, especially since I've been a strong supporter of the Clintons for 20 years.

I mean, I have a signed letter from Bill

up above my desk here.

Wow.

And what she did is it's shameful.

It's shameful.

What did she do?

What did she do?

Well, she was replying to the president.

The president

said that, according to some guy, you know, some researcher,

Google shifted between 2.6 and sixteen million votes to me in twenty sixteen.

Well, I'm the researcher.

Yes, I testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee

in you know in July.

And

yes, I gave estimates of between 2.6 and 10.4 million, not 16 million.

And also Trump said that

that I said that Google manipulated the election.

I didn't have never said that.

I've said I found pro pro-Clinton bias in their search results sufficient to impact undecided voters

in a way that would shift that many votes.

I've never said they manipulated the election.

I found what I measured was the bias, which I mean was indisputable.

Hillary replied to him saying that study has been debunked, which is absolutely false.

And then saying, and the whole study was based on 21 voters, what I actually studied, what I actually captured and analyzed, which no one has ever done before, is I captured 13,207 election-related searches on Google Bingin Yahoo and the 98,000 web pages to which the search results linked.

That's what allowed me to measure the bias that people were seeing in search results.

And there was substantial bias in favor of Clinton, whom I supported,

in all 10 search positions on the first page of Google search results, but not

any bias in Bing or Yahoo.

So, you know, I found the bias, and now, based on experiments that I've been doing for six and a half years, I was able to estimate with that level of bias how many votes could be shifted.

I know that from, again, extensive experimental research, which now has involved tens of thousands of participants, five national elections in four countries.

I know precisely how bias can shift opinions and votes, and that's where I got those numbers from.

So, again, Trump got things slightly wrong, but what Hillary did was outrageous.

My research has never been debunked at all.

And then this slew of stories that have turned up.

I mean, they're literally, I'm not kidding you, there are hundreds of them all over the world.

And a few unconservative sources basically just kind of report the facts.

And then all the mainstream sources are basically saying

I'm incompetent, which I've never been accused of being my whole career.

That, again, this is my study was debunked, et cetera, et cetera.

I mean, it's terrifying that there could be so much bad information out there.

This is.

I think this is why we are

things are slowing down, not towards socialism, not even towards nationalism.

Those I think are going to speed up still.

But the mob mentality that you have to be all in on somebody or you're a traitor, I think that is actually starting to swing back to to a normal kind of feeling because average people are feeling what people like I have felt and others like Tea Party.

We have been feeling this for about 10 years and it is terrifying.

Me too.

It is

a good goal.

It's a terrifying

witch hunt.

And

where do you go to get your reputation back?

Bob, where do you go?

I don't know.

And

what I really accomplished in 2016 was setting up the first ever monitoring system to see what big tech companies were showing people.

No one's ever done that before because

tech's power to shift opinions and votes and purchases and attitudes and beliefs around the world derives from what they internally call ephemeral experiences, like search results.

They're generated on the fly.

They have an impact on your thinking.

They disappear.

They're gone.

They're not stored anywhere.

That's called an an ephemeral experience.

That's what Google people call it.

And it's extremely powerful in shifting votes and opinions.

I've shown in multiple experiments and, you know, published in peer-reviewed journals, you can easily shift twenty percent or more of undecided voters up to eighty percent in some democracy.

So how are they how how would they do that if they are doing it?

How would that happen?

Explain that to the the average person person who has not heard this before.

Okay, first of all, it can happen just because they're not paying attention to their algorithm.

And their algorithm, of course, always puts one dog food ahead of the other, and one vacation spot ahead of the other, and one candidate ahead of the other.

It has no equal time rule built into it.

And once it puts one candidate ahead of the other, then that starts to have a dramatic impact on undecided voters.

And as more undecided voters shift, the bias in search results gets stronger.

That shifts more undecided voters, etc., etc.

It's a bandwagon effect, what I call a digital bandwagon effect.

And I've measured these things very precisely.

And again, 2016 was a tremendous milestone year for us because we actually built a Nielsen-type system to look over people's shoulders with their permission and see what these companies were showing them.

Then we built the bigger system in 2018, and in 2020 we're trying to raise money to build a much bigger monitoring system because you will never know why

the next presidential candidate wins unless there has been extensive monitoring of all this ephemeral stuff, news feeds, email suppression, shadow banning, search suggestions, search results, et cetera, et cetera.

And I'm the only person in the world who's ever built such systems.

And we have to have these systems or we will not understand

what is going on and why somebody won or lost an election.

All right.

So

Dr.

Robert Epstein, senior research psychologist, American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, he is talking about Google and these algorithms that are changing the way we behave, the way we look, the way we think,

all underground and how they impact our elections.

Is it mygoogleresearch.com where people could donate if they wanted to

donate.

And yes, and Glenn, and you have been more helpful to me in that regard than just about anybody.

You've actually raised, without you knowing it, just because you keep giving out that link, you've raised a lot of money

for this research.

I want you to know that I believe this is one of the most important things that we can do.

You are actually, and I think you'll agree with this, you're actually way behind where you should be, but you are light years ahead of anyone else on the planet.

Would you agree with that?

Positively.

And I've been slaughtered now by mainstream media, which is my media.

That's my media.

I'm not a conservative.

This is an incredible story.

Okay, we have some detailed questions, and then I want to talk to you a little bit about

what Google may be doing

not only during this election but also

with ICE.

We'll get into that.

I'd just like to pick your brain on theories if you had any.

You can donate and I urge you, I urge you in the strongest of terms, if you have money that you can donate five bucks or you know $100,000 that you would consider this project.

There is nothing more important than getting your arms around the algorithms at Google.

MygoogleResearch.com, mygoogleresearch.com.

All right, back in one minute.

First, let me ask you, how many times has this happened to you that, you know, one day you notice your blinds in your house look as look as though they have been used to stop hand grenades?

Have you ever looked at your blinds and went, what happened there?

They're also the wrong color.

Maybe they're that, maybe they're that just that beautiful, beautiful olive.

I love those.

They were probably manufactured in the Nixon administration.

Time to get rid of them.

Do something smart.

Call blinds.com.

Very helpful design consultant.

We'll help you pick out the best new blinds that you can imagine.

The process of measuring your windows, you know, if you do that thing, you accidentally, you know, read the metric side of the tape.

Yeah, I know we were all supposed to learn it.

And then all of a sudden, it was over.

When your blinds come in and they're six inches short on either side, well, whose fault is it?

Well, it's yours, but that doesn't matter.

At blinds.com, they're going to replace it for you at no charge.

It's one of the many reasons why blinds.com, I use them, you should use them, and they're the number one online retailer for window coverings in America.

I mean, they're the best.

Blinds.com, they're having a flash sale today.

Save up to 40% on everything plus an extra $20 off with promo code Beck.

That's blinds.com.

40% off plus an extra $20 $20 off if you use the promo code back.

Rules and restrictions do apply.

It's blinds.com promo code back.

We break for 10 seconds.

Station ID.

Every day, it seems, somebody pops up in my world, like what Dr.

Robert Epstein just said.

i this is wait the they've turned the guns on me yeah this is my side oh look at what they've turned the guns on here peer review yeah now peer review doesn't matter i thought that was the all you know and i'll be all we're supposed to now peer review those studies they're gone how about um the fact that all of a sudden we're supposed to trust gigantic companies making decisions for us i mean i thought this was the exact opposite of what the left wanted you know what you want companies controlling all this information well it benefits them in this particular moment ignoring peer review benefits them in this particular moment so they'll take out out a guy who voted for them, which, you know, doesn't matter.

Doesn't matter.

Doesn't matter.

Apparently, he's garbage now.

It's really horrible, reprehensible.

I urge you to donate at mygoogleresearch.com.

Okay.

May I call you Bob or Robert?

Robert, if you like.

Okay, Robert.

So, Robert, we have some questions.

We went through the Vanity Fair article.

And if you read this article, if that's the way you were doing the research, it's crazy.

It's crazy.

Would you agree with that?

i i i did i i can't even read these things there are hundreds of them okay so

we're gonna go through it piece by piece and you just tell us is this how you do it if not tell us how you do do it go ahead the first accusation in here uh robert is they basically say that the reason why you're going after google is because you have a vendetta against them because in 2012 they warned visitors to your website that it had been hacked and serving malware to people who are reading it

Okay, I have no vendetta against Google.

I am probably Google's biggest admirer in the world.

I have friends at Google.

Yes,

my website was hacked in 2012, as everyone's is eventually.

And I got notified of this by Google, and that caught my eye.

I said, why is Google notifying me and not a government agency or a nonprofit organization?

And then as a programmer, I got intrigued too because Google Google was now blocking access to my website, not just through Google.com or through Chrome, which they own, but even through Safari, even through Firefox, which is a nonprofit-run browser.

And I got curious about how is that happening?

How can that be?

How can Google block you through Apple, Safari?

And so I started to kind of just look at Google more seriously.

I have no vendetta against them.

That's absurd.

And then later that year, there was research, early marketing research on the power of search rankings, that the power that search rankings have to influence people's clicks and purchases.

And that made me think, well, if that's true, then maybe

search results could be used to shift opinions or even shift voting preferences.

And so I started my first series of experiments looking at that.

And

it's not like you're Glenn Beck doing this.

You are the former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today.

You are also the senior research psychologist of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology.

Your job

revolves around how people make decisions and what causes people to behave in certain ways.

So, of course, you would be curious about this.

Of course, you would investigate it because this is probably, I think,

correct me if I'm wrong, Doctor, but I believe that in maybe five years, but in the next 10 years, we're going to have to have a serious discussion on

if you actually have free will because of what they're doing in nudging and how they will use and manipulate data.

Well, we're past that, Glenn.

You know,

in looking at

Hillary's horrendous tweet attacking me and telling blatant lies about me, I mean, we're way past that point of having any free will left because you have to understand Hillary's tweet by understanding how dependent she has been for years and years for votes and money from Google.

Google was her largest

donor.

Her chief technology officer, Stephanie Hannon, was a former Google executive.

I mean, I could go on and on and on and on about that relationship.

And she got that information that she tweeted from Google.

Wow.

That's a great point.

Wow.

It's

a little circuitous.

There's a little bit of incestual feeling here to some of this.

Do you have a yes or no question?

We have about 35, 40 seconds.

Yeah, I mean, I don't think we can get into any of those in 30 seconds.

Okay, so we want to get into

a couple more.

And then I want to ask you, I don't know if you saw this,

the Google employees yesterday, they don't have a problem with China apparently, but Google employees were protesting in front of Google.

They want them to stop helping and working with ICE and the Border Patrol.

And my first question

was:

wait, what is Google doing with ICE?

And are they providing information to the government?

Because I don't think that's kind of in the game plan for anybody, is it?

You're listening to Glenn Beck.

American Financing Corporation, NMLS 1-82334, www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org.

Okay, the most important thing you can do when you're thinking about financing or refinancing is when you're picking a company to help you, you have to ask,

are they in it for you?

Are they in it for them?

Today's mortgage rates are very low, and unfortunately, there's a lot of mortgage companies out there who would be more than happy to charge you upfront fees, reset you back to a 30-year term, and take advantage of you by selling you something that might look good on the surface, but is not in your best interest.

Not at American Financing.

Their mortgage consultants are salary-based, which means they're in it for you.

They're trying to win it for you.

10-minute phone call can get you an assessment that may save you thousands of dollars over the course of your mortgage.

And there's lots of good reasons besides just the current market to refinance.

Now may be the time to upgrade.

Now is the time to call AmericanFinancing.net.

If you're a responsible, economically responsible individual, you owe it to yourself to see how much money you can save in refinancing.

800-906-2440, AmericanFinancing.net.

Go see Glenn Beck.

Christmas stories in Salt Lake City, December 7th at Kingsbury Hall.

Get all the ticket information at glennbeck.com.

We're going to continue our conversation.

The line just dropped.

It had to be Google.

They know.

They know everything, Stu.

They know everything.

This is what happens.

You know, I mean, we were just talking a little bit about the Your Christmas show coming up.

And I would say go directly to Glennbeck.com if you want the tickets.

Do not Google it.

Because who knows?

They'll take you to some socialist event.

Oh, yeah.

That's what all of, you know what?

That's what Dr.

Robert's research actually showed.

Yeah, you'll be like, well, it had a lot of red on the page.

That's all I remember.

No, no, no.

That wasn't Christmas.

That was was communism.

Both start with C, but different.

Christmas stories with Glenn Beck happening in Salt Lake City, December 7th.

Grab your tickets.

They're almost all gone.

One show, one night.

Gonna be great.

Going to be great.

I'm really excited for it.

Really excited.

Yeah, it's a lot of fun.

It's a really funny show.

And, you know, when you get to that point of, you're in December, the last thing you want to do is think about politics.

I swear this is why the first Tuesday in November is a good time for the election.

You get it over with.

you pass the election time, and then you get to launch yourself into the holidays and hopefully forget all the craziness going on.

Yeah, food comas.

Food comas.

Yeah.

We have Kevin Williamson coming up in just a second.

And we have Dr.

Robert Epstein.

Is he back on the phone?

I know it's not yet.

Okay, well.

Well, he's avoiding my tough questions about his research.

He's like, ah, Stu's going to ask me tough questions.

Vanity Fair is a good idea.

Vanity Fair.

Explain what Vanity Fair said about him.

A couple different things.

They said they were the ones that basically,

and they did this, they cited TechCrunch as the source of this, basically saying that he had a vendetta against Google because they said something bad about his website in 2012, which is a weird sort of vendetta.

They didn't even say something bad.

They just said, hey, we think you might have malware.

And he was like, oh, that's interesting.

Like, how did they even know that I should trace that back?

That's interesting to understand,

which it is.

Right?

Like, it's an interesting thing to kind of look at and understand, especially if you're someone who I, when I was the editor-in-chief of Psychology Today, how are these things happening?

and who are they affecting and the way that they're doing it?

I do believe he left out one part of the story, which doesn't make it make it

worse for him,

makes it better for him, I think.

But I think if I remember the story right, I think he was

he had just spoken out about Google, and then it was like the next day he was banned.

And he was kind of like,

huh, how's that working?

How's that?

How's that working?

That would reverse kind of the way that they had

been

presented in the Vanity Fair article.

So they made him look like

he had a vendetta against Google.

I think his statement on Hillary Clinton, who he's always spoken highly of on this program, he was always, I mean, he voted for her.

Yeah, that sucks, right?

You know, because I mean,

it's not no surprise to me, of course, that Hillary Clinton would do such a thing.

But

this has happened to people that I know in

conservative circles who might be fans of bands that wind up making public statements against them later on.

It's a weird thing.

You had that happen to friends of yours?

Because

I know you have one friend that that happened.

He may be very nearby me right now.

But you think about that.

Like if you're an entertainer, right?

You're a band.

You're a candidate trying to get people to vote for you.

Right.

And then you're coming out and just...

just, you know, basically, I mean, Hillary Clinton obviously doesn't know the details of this research, right?

Like, she probably has just Googled it quickly and saw a critical article and wants to make her little point against Donald Trump.

And she does it at the expense of an individual who has been supporting her for 20 years, who has a letter from her husband

above his desk in his office.

A person, you know, and this has happened.

Like, the same thing has happened.

We had a guy, we had a guy who worked for us here, too, as well, who

loved a particular band and fought all the time to get them, to get their music on the air as like bumpers and stuff because he just loved them.

And finally, it got up on the air, and

then they, the band came out and like trashed.

I would never have my music on Glenn.

It's like, you have a real fan here who supported you for a really long time who fought for your music to be heard by millions.

There are only two celebrities that have never backed down.

Michael Bouble.

Yeah.

You know, Michael Bouble actually came while I was on Fox.

Yeah.

I mean, he took so much.

He got into a fist fight at a hockey hockey game over me.

And he's like, Glenn, I don't care about American politics.

I mean, this is not my country.

But I took one in the face for you.

So Michael Bouble.

And

the other one that has been very surprising to me, I'm a huge fan of Ricky Gervais.

I think he is hysterical.

I think his writing is brilliant, just brilliant.

I don't agree with anything that he says politically, you know, I think.

I mean, I know he's for freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

Yeah, for sure.

You know, he goes on, you know, vegan rants and it's like, okay, okay, okay.

And I've tweeted a couple of things about his shows,

and he'll get a lot of heat because he'll retweet and

then he'll defend.

I don't care what his political views are.

He thinks it's funny.

I mean, there's very few people that are willing to do that now.

Yeah.

It is very rare because you're exposing yourself as not woke enough.

Right.

You know, you can't do that in this society today.

And it's kind of nice.

It's kind of, it's really nice to see that

courage.

Okay.

So Epstein is back on the phone with us.

Doctor, you there?

Oh, boy.

Hi, Mayor.

Okay, all right.

We thought Google got you.

All right.

We have a couple, just a real couple of questions from the Vanity Fair article.

Just tell us where they have it wrong.

All right.

I'll just read these to you.

You tell me what the story is.

Where does Epstein get his numbers?

Talking about the ones that the president tweeted.

This is a bit murky, but a couple years ago, he published a paper showing that search results can bias decision-making.

The limits of the paper are so breathtaking that I'm not sure how you can draw any real-world conclusions from it.

But basically, he came to the unsurprising conclusion that if you A, give people a choice of two politicians they've never heard of, and B, provide search results that are unanimously positive toward one and negative towards the other, then C, they'll tend to support the person who got the positive results.

Is that the limit of your study?

Is that how it worked?

Of course not.

I've conducted dozens of experiments like this involving five national elections in four countries with tens of thousands of participants.

And this goes beyond elections, too.

What I've shown is when there is a bias in search results toward any candidate or cause or company, that shifts opinions.

And in the case of undecided voters, it shifts voting preferences.

And it's a very,

you know, it's a highly predictable phenomenon.

It's something that I've...

Isn't this what Cass Sunstein wrote books about?

Nudge.

Yeah, I mean, this is.

Nudging, right?

Right.

It's more than nudging, though, it turns out, because when I first conducted experiments

like this, I thought I could nudge, and I could get shifts in voting preferences of 2% or 3%,

which is not much, but right, a lot of elections are close, so that could make a difference in very close elections.

First experiment I ran, I got a shift of 48%.

Second experiment, I got a shift of 63%, and so on.

Then I did a national study in the U.S., a national study in India, et cetera, et cetera.

I did it with real voters in the middle of a real election in India.

And these are humongous numbers, and this kind of shifting is invisible to people.

Virtually no one can see the bias in search results, so they think they're making up their own minds.

And the very few people who can see the bias, they shift even farther in the direction of the bias.

Wow.

And this leaves no paper trail because this is all ephemeral stuff, you know, as they say internally

at Google when they're trying to talk about how they're going to manipulate people.

This is all ephemeral, so it leaves no paper trail for authorities to trace.

And you can't go back in time and look at the search results and the search suggestions

that

people have been shown.

Okay, and one more here for you from the article of Vanity Fair saying, Epstein presented another study in which he argued that Google's algorithms are biased because their search results are dominated by news from mainstream outlets like the New York Times and Los Angeles Times rather than conservative sites like Breitbart.

Using this theory,

Epstein

tracked, excuse me, 47,300 searches by dozens of undecided voters in the districts of newly elected Democratic representatives, and then claimed that an estimated 35,455 voters who were on the fence were persuaded to vote for a Democrat entirely because of the sources Google fed them.

So

is that an accurate summary of what you did with that study?

Well, it's kind of a mishmash, but yes, in 2018, I set up a more ambitious monitoring project.

So

these aren't scientific experiments.

I do scientific experiments, of course.

But setting up these monitoring systems, that's a whole separate enterprise.

Learning how to do this kind of monitoring, that's extremely important for democracy and for human autonomy worldwide, just learning how to do this monitoring.

So, yes,

I set up a bigger monitoring system,

and we collected a lot more data, and we did a more sophisticated analysis.

Still not enough data.

That's why you're raising money.

Still not enough data to act conclusively on anything, right?

Aaron Powell, Jr.: Well, no, that's not true.

We had a massive amount of data in 2018,

and we didn't

just show definitively how many votes were shifted in the three congressional races that we monitored closely.

But we then modeled what would happen nationwide in 2018 if that level of bias had been present throughout the country, which it very likely was, bias towards Democratic candidates, which is what we found in Google,

but not on Bing and Yahoo.

See, that's important to realize.

You know, if you're finding it on just one search engine but not the others, you know, you have to kind of wonder about that company.

The point is, what we found by modeling, based on the massive amount of data that we collected, is if that level of bias had been present nationwide, that would have shifted 98.2 million votes to Democrats.

Wow.

And I like Democrats.

With no one knowing that this had occurred, now 98.2 million would have been spread across hundreds and hundreds of races, but still, that's a lot of votes when you consider that the manipulation is invisible and leaves no paper trail.

Okay, so I just have to ask this question.

I think I know the answer to it, but I want to hear it from you.

You're on the winning side.

These are Democrats.

You like that.

92 million votes, that changes the world for the Democratic Party.

Why would you expose this?

Because

I put democracy and the free and fair election in our country ahead of any particular party or candidate.

It's that simple.

I have to speak out because the numbers are so large and because we don't really understand what's going on these days, not without monitoring systems.

I'm the only person in the world who's built two such systems so far, and the one I want to build for in 2020 will be much, much larger and much more sophisticated, and it won't just be looking at search results.

It'll be looking at news feeds and email suppression and shadow banning.

All of the shenanigans that are being perpetrated right now on the American electorate.

We're going to look at the whole thing, and it's going to be very, very expensive.

And, you know, I'm in panic mode right now because of just what's happened the past couple of days, set in motion by hillary clinton whom i supported in 2016.

doctor um how much money are you looking to raise

well this is a big project this is this is going to need 50 million dollars at least 50

million

whoa

I'll write you a check.

Don't worry about it.

This afternoon, we got that for you, Robert.

Thank you.

I wouldn't cash it up, but I'll write it.

We've raised,

this audience for, you know, to save Christians in the Middle East, we raised $26 million in, what, how long?

Eight weeks, 12 weeks?

It's a little longer than that, but it was a lot of money.

It was over $20 million by Christmas.

We launched it in August, and by Christmas, we had $20 million.

That's an awful lot of money.

You need some million.

But

I can't tell you in strong enough terms, we are losing time on Google.

and Google is happy to assist the Chinese.

Once the gate closes, it's too late.

We have to have an understanding of what Google is doing, and they must

be hogtied or at least exposed.

We have to know what's going on.

You are easily manipulated, and as the good doctor just said, you won't even know it.

And this goes beyond elections.

This goes to your children, what they believe, what they think, what history is.

All you have to do is manipulate history in a way that

you don't even see.

And all of a sudden, everybody believes.

I mean, how many times do you hear your kids?

Well, I Googled it.

Yeah, it was on Google.

Well, okay, that doesn't, they're not God, but they are approaching that status.

And if you are, if you have any money that you can spare, this one for humanity's sake,

this is human rights 101.

I want you to go to mygoogleresearch.com.

Mygoogleresearch.com.

Real quick, can I ask you in 30 seconds, do you have any idea what Google might be doing with helping ICE?

Well, yes.

I mean, of course, Google works very closely, not just with our government, but with governments governments around the world and especially with our intelligence agencies.

They were funded in part in the very beginning by the NSA and the CIA.

Yeah.

And that relationship is very strong.

So they help out

all of the agencies

and they work with ICE and they supply data.

And of course, they have the most extensive surveillance

information of any entity in the world.

All right.

Doctor, thank you.

We'll talk again.

Appreciate it.

God bless.

Thank you, God.

MyGoogleResearch.com.

All right.

This is the month where most burglaries happen in the United States.

And I want you to know that SimplySafe will protect every door, every window, and every room in your house.

Professional 24-7 monitoring.

There's no contract, no hidden fees, no fine print.

It's $15 a month.

There's a lot of things to worry about in today's world, and there are a lot of things you can just take off and go to somebody else to let them do it.

And SimplySafe is the company i trust go to simply safebeck.com that's simply safebeck.com

welcome to the uh program we're really glad you're here um

we have we have i think one of the funniest writers who's not a comedian he's an intellectual um I think we have one of the best and funniest writers in America today.

Coming up next, he's in studio with us, Kevin Williamson.

He has a new book out, The Smallest Minority: Independent Thinking in the Age of Mob Politics.

He's joining us next.

You will enjoy it.

For millions of Americans, pain dramatically changes quality of life.

I have met with so many members of this audience who have real debilitating pain, and their stories are heartbreaking.

But what's really nice is they told me stories about how hopeless they were because their lives just cascaded into a fog of heavy pain medications, and that led to terrible choices and consequences, blah, blah, blah.

And then they started to take Relief Factor.

I have seen the change in their life.

Being able to play with their grandchildren or just play golf, the results are the same.

You get your life back.

You get your life back.

70% of the people who try this, it works.

It works for me.

It's relief factor.com.

Try it for three weeks.

70% of the people who try it, it works.

Take it for three weeks.

If it's not working in three weeks, it's not going to work.

You're out 20 bucks.

But if it does, you get your life back.

You want a drug-free and natural way to ease your pain and get your life back?

Go to relieffactor.com.

That's relieffactor.com.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

So here we are living in a time of mob rule.

We live in a mobocracy right now.

And

it doesn't matter who you vote for,

it doesn't matter anything as long as you're with the mob.

If you're not with the mob, if you betray the mob at all, if you have a different opinion on anything from the mob, you're out.

A guy who lived this has written a really powerful and very funny book about it.

I think he's probably America's best writer.

And

this, you can tell, has been written from the heart of his bottom.

He is passionate about it.

We go to him in one minute.

This is the Glenbeck program.

All right, I'm in radio, so I, you know, I've been on the radio, you know, circus train for my whole life, and that is usually a life of just constantly trying to sell your home, and I always get screwed.

And I don't know who to call.

I mean, who are you going to call?

Well, I saw, you know, a busboard with that person's face on it.

Well, that's great.

Are they qualified?

I don't know.

I don't know what to ask.

You need a real estate agent that you know is qualified, someone that you trust is a good, decent businessman, has your same values, knows the price of your home, what it should sell for, is on the up and up, and actually, you know, works for you.

Well,

about seven or eight years ago, I was having problems yet again with another house, and I began to meet some of the best agents in America, Joy in Pennsylvania and Marty in North Carolina, or Josh in Salt Lake City,

Andrew in Tampa.

I learned what great agents actually do, and

I thought, wow,

they're all saying similar things.

They're all saying, in fact, exactly the same thing.

Let's go find all the agents like that and then make them available to you because these are the people that I trust to sell my home.

I would trust to help me buy a new home, and you can too.

If you're looking to buy or sell a new home, they're going to get it done fast.

They're going to get it done right.

And for the least amount of money, if you're going in and the most amount of money going out, it's realestate agentsitrust.com.

Realestate agentsitrust.com.

A man who began his journalism career in the Bombay-based Indian Express newspaper group.

I don't even know how you would go about doing that.

Kevin Williamson is here.

Hello, Kevin.

How are you?

It helps to have a friend in college whose family lives there and introduce you to some people.

Yeah, that's how I ended up there.

Okay.

I didn't know the first thing about it so you were uh you were a uh you started there in bombay yeah had you ever been to bombay i'd never been outside of the united states except for mexican border towns growing up in texas yeah so it's a little different than texas the u.s or mexico yeah um you know when i got there um no one even knew what the population of bombay was at that point in the 90s because it was such a crazy chaotic place they thought maybe 20 million maybe 25 million it was uh but it's a great place to be a newspaper guy because everyone read newspapers there you know a typical household would get four or five newspapers a day.

So it's a tremendously fun place to start a newspaper criteria.

Yeah.

And then you became a theater critic.

Some years later, yeah, when I was living in New York, I wrote the theater column for the New Criterion for a while.

But aren't you, I mean, don't you have to be an old, cantankerous bitter man to do that?

Or are you?

I've been an old, cantankerous, bitter man since I was about 11.

And so

I'm kind of growing into it.

Right, okay, yeah.

Your body is starting to catch up with your body.

Unfortunately, I've been waiting for my hair to turn gray for years years.

Yeah, it's been there.

Don't wish for that because I always wanted my hair because everybody in my family, by 30, they're white.

Yeah.

And it took me to 50.

And now, and I was like, well, everybody's got the great white hair.

And now I have it.

And I'm like, good God, you look like you're a thousand years old.

All right.

So

you've written a new, you've written a new book, The Smallest Minority.

By Borderline Unpublishable Angry Profane Book.

So I

just, I find...

You can't read from this book on the radio.

Oh, yes.

No, there's one paragraph.

There's one paragraph that I'm not going to read, but I'd like you to read.

Oh, dear.

Because

it is one of the greatest screeds of all time.

Oh, no, I don't know if I can find it here.

It was

you describing people.

That you, you know, you had a...

Oh, shoot.

Where is that?

Oh, here it is.

Here it it is.

Here it is.

Pick it up right here.

Let's see.

He's like testimony.

You're like, actually.

Did you write this?

Everyone knows I'm a monster.

Can I go spook to you?

Do everyone I know

to a monster to the end of that paragraph on the next page.

I would much rather you read it.

No, no, no.

I would not read it.

No, it's got words in it.

I can't pronounce it.

It's strange to read your own work.

No, it's not.

This is like when you're reading it.

You got to read it the way you meant it, too.

Well,

I should sometime tell you the sentences that that got left out.

They edited this thing?

Are you saying?

Oh, man, you wouldn't believe the original version.

Oh, my gosh.

This is after edits.

This is the boulderized version of the book.

Oh, my gosh.

This is the first paragraph.

Listen to this.

So it starts, everyone knows I'm a monster.

And by everybody, I mean all good, decent, serious newspaper analog reading people.

And by all good, decent, serious newspaper analog reading people, I mean you sad, atavistic, masturbatory specimens out there in the woolly wilds of America, by which I mean you put-pounding put-pounding nobodies in Brooklyn or Guyman, Oklahoma, depending on your tribe, obsessively following intramedia squabbles on social media, cheering for what you imagine to be your side like a bunch of marginally employed and pass-through-time NFL cheering leg-tattooed douche rockets at some ghastly absorbed sports bar, and enjoying a nice bottle of the warm and comforting illusion of solidarity as though Tom Brady or Levyon Bell would have taken a voluminous equine piss on you from a great height if you were smoldering and crackling on the sidelines like a sizzling plate of Kansas City burn in.

No, the question is, that would have taken me a week to write that.

That is just brilliant.

How long did that take you to write?

As long as it did to read.

So, okay, funny thing about this book is, you know, it's got a bunch of footnotes in it.

And

most of the book is sort of halfway like a normal political book.

And then the footnotes...

which are about maybe a quarter of the book, are the kind of running commentary of what I'm actually thinking as I write this stuff.

And the footnotes were the part that were

problematic for

the editors, I think.

There are a few of them that didn't make it in.

I'll share with you off the show.

Yeah, maybe you can share in our podcast.

Yeah.

I don't think I can even share on your podcast.

Really?

Wow.

Did you think that it would go in, or you were just like, I don't care?

I figured I would just give it a shot.

You know,

Regnery, I like working with Regnery, but when they put out the press release for this book, they called it, you know, hilarious and profane.

This is before the book was done.

I figured they're going to put profane in the press release.

That's license, right?

That's right.

I can do what I i want right right and you did kind of yeah yeah and you did so so take me take me through it i'm gonna we're gonna talk about it we're gonna do a podcast uh today for uh broadcast in a couple weeks but and we'll go through all of it but take me through the the premise of the uh of the book yeah i started writing don't leave out any of the uh acerbic or

i started writing the book in in 2015 after you know witnessing a number of these dumb you know kind of twitter mob freakouts the A lot of them weren't really exactly political or political people.

The Justine Sacco business and the guy getting canned from Google and all that.

And there was something to me that seemed weird and kind of ritualistic about this stuff.

It was a kind of public ceremony.

It wasn't really something that was about the issues that it pretended to be about.

And so I wrote part of the book at that time in a book proposal and I sent it around and nobody wanted it.

And then a couple years later, I went to work for the Atlantic for three days and got fired.

And my phone started to ring before I got to the airport literally and I was waiting on the plane to come home to Texas and people were suddenly interested in the book

so I'm going to go figure it's an ill-willed an ill wind that blows me no some good

but um

so the book is about um some of the social and political reasons for why people have become so hysterical and theatrical in terms of their political engagement.

And what I really ultimately argue is it's not really about politics.

It's that people have a certain emptiness in their lives in a sense that they lack connectedness.

And these media mob phenomena and social media, you know, this kind of performative theatrical, hysterical politics gives them a false sense of having been involved in something important.

It gives them a sense that they've been involved in something meaningful when they're not.

But it kind of feels good.

And so people go to it in this weird, addictive, compulsive way.

So it's not really politics that's happening on Twitter.

It's this weird, embarrassing public group therapy session.

And that's essentially what the book is about.

So,

but it is, it's being used by politics.

Sure, yeah.

We just had, I said this, too, almost every day now I meet somebody, and usually now from the other side, that has just been affected, lost their job, lost their career.

We just had a really brilliant psychiatrist on with us a few minutes ago.

And

he's now being targeted by Google and Clinton, who he voted for.

Yeah.

He's a fan of Google.

I mean, he has respect for Google.

And Clinton, he said, I've got a letter from Bill Clinton hanging above my desk.

And now they're taking me out and saying that I'm a monster.

Yeah.

There's a bit in Corey Alanis about that, how, you know, you're the favorite one day and the villain the next day.

And that seems to be the case of it.

One of the things I get into the book a lot is the emergence of that very thing of the use of employment as a weapon of political coercion.

And I think that's a really interesting subject to follow up on because this phenomenon of the demand for homogeneity and conformity is not really so much a problem for people like you or me.

I mean, we're in the controversy business.

It's what we do.

You know, maybe you lose an advertiser here and then, maybe you lose a gig here or there.

But, you know, that's kind of what we do.

It's a much, much bigger problem if you're someone who's trying to manage a Starbucks in Philadelphia and you're going to lose your job because you're enforcing company policy, but it becomes this viral Twitter phenomenon.

Or if you're a programmer at Google or you're someone who works at a a bank or you're someone who's a hairdresser,

and make examples of these people and that kind of psychic terrorism is effective.

And now people know just not to voice opinions in the first place if they're any way afraid that it might be unpopular or non-conforming.

I will tell you, I think that

I would have agreed with you just a few years ago, but I believe my voice, and I didn't feel this way at Fox, okay?

And they were coming after me like crazy.

I do believe my voice could be silenced.

I could be erased now from history and just not, you're just gone.

You think?

Yeah, you don't?

I think you, well, not to flatter you, but you sell an awful lot of books and have an awful lot of listeners.

I think it would be hard to do that.

But a lot of that, and I think maybe.

Will you remind the

Navy SEALs when they turn dark and they're working for the corporations and come to get me at night?

But a lot of this stuff, when it comes to people like you, though, I think, I think you saw this really in the Roseanne Barr case, where the public Twitter mob phenomenon is really a pretext for things that are going on inside the company.

You know, no one at ABC is making multi-million dollar programming decisions based on what at Caitlin321Vegan on Twitter has to say

about, you know, Roseanne Barr, right?

Right, right.

I didn't lose my job at the Atlantic because people were freaking out on Twitter.

I lost my job at the Atlantic because of things that were going on.

on staff and in the company.

And that tends to be the case, I think, more for people like us.

And you've seen this in the positive outcomes, too.

I'll say a kind word for the New York Times, which has had several of its writers and people targeted in this way.

And they've said, no, we're the New York Times.

We hire who we like, and we're going to keep Brett Stevens on the staff and who we like.

That's the way Premier Radio is.

That's the reason why we're still on radio, is because of iHeart is an amazing company that just is like, I don't care.

I don't care.

We'll put any voice on.

And as long as they don't lose our license and they're generally responsible, we don't care what their opinion is.

We'll put them on.

And we don't care what the mob says.

Yeah, and it's going to be up to institutions to stand up to this kind of thing because individuals, even ones that have some outlet like I do, really rely on institutions to be the ones who are going to stand and run guard on this.

But that's what I mean.

I think that

you could erase, because Google is quickly becoming every outlet.

It's becoming the I mean, if you're not with Google, you're not around.

And that's one of the misunderstood things about this.

You know, like that freak out about James DeMore at Google was not about some nobody programmer that no one cares about.

It was about Google.

It's not about we can get this fired.

It's we can make Google jump when we say jump.

And we can make Facebook jump when we say jump.

And we can make the New York Times rewrite a headline when we say the New York Times is going to rewrite a headline.

So that the people involved in this who, you know, get fired or otherwise are really just sort of instruments.

They're props for this great active theater.

It's more about controlling the institutions.

And that's where institutions really have to stand up for themselves.

And that's the shame of particularly the university culture, where you've got a bunch of academics who depend on intellectual honesty and intellectual freedom, but will not stand up for it in their own institutions.

All right, back in just a second with Kevin Williamson.

The name of the book is The Smallest Minority: Independent Thinking in the Age of Mob Politics.

It's a must-read.

It is profane.

It is profane, but in a strange,

all that feels good sort of way.

You'll never feel so smart after swearing so much.

You know, I have to tell you,

does

what's his name?

He's on O'Reilly all the time,

the comedian

Dennis Miller.

Dennis Miller.

Does Dennis Miller ever look at you and laugh?

And he just doesn't even know what you're talking about, but he laughs?

I hope so.

I don't really know Dennis Miller, but I hope he does.

Yeah, because that's the way everybody is with Dennis Miller.

And I think Dennis Miller may be that way with you.

That we're like, I know that's funny.

I don't get the reference because I'm not smart enough.

But, all right, everyone deals with pain from

time to time.

It's one of the few guarantees you have in life.

Death taxes pain as well.

When it happens, you just go along, you do the best and deal with it, and you move forward.

But sometimes, there is no moving forward because sometimes when it comes back day after day, it fills your world and steals some of the joy out of your life.

And then you're like, hey, maybe I could take some opium or something.

It doesn't work out out well.

It doesn't have to be that way.

Relief factor is a great way to reduce the inflammation that causes pain, and it works for 70% of the people who try it.

Relief Factor is not a drug.

It's a combination of fish oils and botanicals, which is the reason why it took me about four years to take it because I'm like, that won't work.

You know, although I don't see very many fish with walkers,

but I just, you know, Dow Chemical has to be involved if it's going to work for me.

This is fish oils and botanicals, and it works.

It clears the pathways in your body that are susceptible to inflammation.

1999, you get a three-week quick start.

Try it.

See if it helps you.

Get your life back.

Get rid of your pain.

Drug-free, natural way to get pain out of your life and get your life back on track.

It's relieffactor.com.

That's relieffactor.com.

We pause for 10 seconds.

Station ID.

So, I'd like to, may I change the subjects a bit here, Kevin, with you, and go to red flagging.

Sure.

I just got a

listener sent in a

fundraising piece from a

senator in,

where was it, Pennsylvania, that was making the case that we must have red flagging.

Your thoughts on what's happening?

I don't understand the basic case for red flag laws.

So David French at National Review and I have debated about this a little bit on the corner.

I kind of distrust the whole premise of it.

But what's used as the example is that we have these laws for involuntarily committing people for mental care when they seem to present an immediate threat to themselves or others.

And there's a process there by which a judge and a doctor are involved, and we've got this way of doing it.

So they want to use that as the basis of the red flags laws, or the red flag law.

I think that ought to be the red flag law, that if you think someone actually is a danger to himself or someone else,

rather than messing around with whether this person can buy a gun, then we should probably ensure that this person

is under mental health care.

So I think to that extent, we've already got the red flag law that we need.

And people will say, well, it's very onerous and it's hard to get through this process and it's hard to do it should be yeah exactly that's how we want it we're talking about the bill of rights here and um i'm i'm always pretty queasy about the idea of suspending anyone's civil rights uh when they haven't been charged with a crime or convicted of a crime or even arrested for a crime we're taking look if if somebody comes in and if i you know i come in in the day and i say

I got Pop-Tarts in my pants.

I have Pop-Tarts in my pants.

And I'm eating Pop-Tarts from my pants.

You might say, Glenn, you might, you know what?

Why don't you take the day off?

You might call Tanya and say, he might need to see a doctor.

But if I'm coming in with a gun or I'm dangerous, then you might call police and I should be taken to the doctor.

And a doctor and a judge should decide with my wife if maybe I, you know, have more than Pop-Tarts.

I may have guns and maybe that's a danger.

That's the way you deal with it.

What they're trying to do is with this red flag law,

nobody will take it that far.

Nobody will take take it that far.

But I'm telling you right now,

you can't tell me that there aren't a lot of people who have been divorced, that in that divorce proceeding, somebody might say, you know what?

And he's dangerous, and he's got a lot of guns.

Yeah, one other thing about having been a small-town newspaper editor is you spend a lot of time reading court records of those very things, you know, divorce cases, custody cases, stuff like that.

And probably half of the death threats I ever got in my life were editing a small-town newspaper and writing a DUI story about some guy who was in a custody dispute with his wife and thinks he's going to lose his kids because this thing comes up.

And the sorts of accusations that are made in those situations tend to be often irresponsible, and there's not much of a downside for doing it.

We don't really retaliate against people for that sort of thing.

I don't have as much faith as a lot of conservatives do in the law enforcement and prosecutorial apparatus, although I think that the prosecutors are a bigger problem than the police officers are for the most part.

And I don't really trust them with the power they already have.

And to give them additional power on top of that to essentially make an end run around the Bill of Rights,

I'm going to take some convincing.

I'm going to take a little convincing.

But I don't think a lot of America is needing a lot of convincing.

The really maddening thing about this is that if you look at, say, the U.S.

Attorney's Office for Illinois, they will not prosecute a strawbuyer case.

They just won't.

They don't think it's worth their time unless it's part of a big organized crime investigation.

The current conviction rate for illegal handgun cases in the Chicago area is about 14%.

We've got laws on the books that we ought to be enforcing.

We really ought to be going after straw buyers.

We ought to be going after people for minor weapons charges before they become homicides.

We've got a lot of things that we could be doing on this front that we just simply refuse to do because law enforcement is basically lazy.

If you look, all of our gun control proposals are targeted at licensed gun dealers and the people who do business with them.

They've got addresses and business hours and records.

They're really easy to police.

Whereas guys who are selling, you know, Glocks out of the trunk of their car off the interstate somewhere are a lot harder to catch.

All right, more with Kevin Williamson in a minute.

Yeah, gotta have to have to have a consequence.

Is the Glembeck program around?

You know, we have all known and trusted the name of of Norton for a long time.

They've been the go-to name in internet security since the internet was a toddler.

And they remained vigilant because of the rise in cybercrime as the internet takes up more and more of our lives.

And the job has only gotten harder over the time, and they are rising to the occasion.

Norton has now a secure VPN that is easy to use.

It's a virtual private network that has bank-grade encryption to hide anything that's going on online.

I think you have anything to hide, but you know,

why is Google giving me all of this free information?

Because they know what they can get from me for free with me thinking, I don't have anything to hide, I don't have anything of value.

They know the value of it.

Norton Secure VPN creates a secure tunnel for the information you send and receive online.

So cyber criminals can't see it while you're connected to Wi-Fi.

It also blocks companies that want to track your browsing activities.

Norton Secure VPN, seamless.

Install it once.

Let it run in the background.

It's Norton Secure VPN.

You get it at Norton.com/slash VPN.

Christmas stories with Glenn Beck.

The show is December 7th live in Salt Lake City at Kingsbury Hall.

Get your tickets and information at glennbeck.com.

I want to see if we can start a conversation with two words, and usually not the words that you can start a conversation with.

Mojo burrito.

Oh, I'm fascinated by that.

I mean, this is a story about someone who went to the Charlottesville rally.

Yeah.

He was out there with the torch.

He's got the tiki torch, walking around.

Jews will not replace us.

Got the short haircut.

Got the whole thing.

Got the whole thing.

Yeah.

Works at Mojo Burrito.

Yeah.

And they find him at the Charlotte.

He's not one of the very fine people.

No, no.

No, there's on both sides, we know.

No.

He made very fine burritos.

I was doing that.

He may have been a very fine worker at Mojo Burrito and all that that entails.

Social media finds his pictures, right?

He's at this rally.

Well, everyone at this rally, we have to get fired from their jobs.

Obviously, like these people are racist, and they are.

Terrible, terrible ideology, terrible, terrible,

not good people.

So the guy comes back, and there's a big controversy, and he gets fired from Mojo burrito, right?

And so, what is the outcome of this?

So, now we have taken a person who seemingly was, if he wasn't serving black people burritos, then yes, huge problem.

But if he's making normal burritos, not racist burritos, at his burrito place, we've now taken him, we've gotten him fired from a burrito place, so now what?

He can sit at home with lots of free time and our money from all of the programs he's now joined.

We're going to pay for him to sit at home and plan his next racist protest.

We're with Kevin Williamson, who's written the new book, The Smallest Minority, Independent Thinking in the Age of Mob Politics.

Mojo Burrito.

Yeah, Mojo Burrito figures

occasionally in the book.

Although the expression I use is the powers that be at Mojo Burrito

Well, it's a very dark, clandestine group that runs Mojo Burrito.

Right.

Yeah, I think probably so.

So, you know, often we see these situations where people are getting, you know, fired from their jobs for perfectly defensible ideas or for things that are being taken out of context or distorted.

But sometimes it's people who are genuinely jerks and have awful ideas.

And this guy is one of them.

But I wonder if we really want to make Mojo burrito or companies like it the arbiter of what you can do in your private time.

Is every job in America now a political job, including making burritos at some burrito shop no one's everwise heard of?

I can kind of get it if you're the chairman of GE and you've got some political connections to your job.

But this is a guy making probably eight bucks an hour somewhere if he's lucky who makes burritos.

And do we really want to create a political culture that says there is no private space?

That not only is every job a political job, but everything that everyone does at a job like that also is political.

When the stupid thing happened with these Covington kids, there was a deal where there was a kid in the picture who was standing like 40 feet away from the kid who was in all the pictures.

And people tracked down who this kid's mother was and contacted her employers and tried to get this woman fired from her job.

So we're going to get people fired from their jobs because you've got a child, a minor child, who's standing 40 feet away from a guy in another picture.

And the guy in the picture might have been doing something naughty.

Although, as it turns out, he wasn't.

That's weird.

That's not normal.

Normal people don't do stuff like that.

That's not normal liberal democratic politics, but that's where we are now.

You know where that is.

If you read,

you read anything from anybody who lived in 1930 to 33 Germany.

Yeah, East Germany, especially.

Yeah, they said that.

Oh, yeah, Nazi Germany as well.

But East Germany later had that very, that great culture of being an informer.

Yeah, you had

life

was political.

Yeah.

I mean, that's politically correct.

That's where it comes from.

But, I mean, life was political.

Everything was political.

And the people who, you know, came through the Weimar Republic and then into National Socialism and the Nazis,

they talked about it.

We didn't talk about these things with people.

We didn't have that.

We didn't grow up like this.

We didn't, not everything wasn't political.

My son said to me at one point, we were watching

Springtime for Hitler, Mel Brooks.

It's hysterical, hysterical.

And and uh my son in my house growing up in my house he was like 12 at the time and he said dad the government this is the original the government allowed them to make this movie

holy cow yeah

He regretted saying that because it led to about two-hour rant.

Naturally, yeah.

Do you think there's any movie that Mel Brooks made that could be made today?

Nope.

I don't think one of his movies you can make today, probably.

Not even Spaceballs?

Certainly not Spaceballs.

No.

That's just because it really doesn't hold up.

I loved it when it came out.

It really does not hold up.

Plus, the Star Wars canon is now so confused.

Yeah.

It's hard to parody.

I think that there should be private space in the world.

I think there should be such a thing as private life, including for bone-headed Nazis, including for people who have really, really awful ideas, including for people who are Maoists and have all sorts of crazy political ideas.

And I think that that also holds true of people who have service jobs at places like Mojo Burrito.

I don't think we really want to deputize America's employers to be the arbiters of what's politically acceptable in private life, not to mention in public life.

And this is perplexing for me that progressives have embraced this because historically progressives have always presented themselves as being the people who are keeping corporate power in check.

And now they want to deputize essentially the Fortune 500 to be America's cultural police and to say this is what is acceptable and this is what's not acceptable.

And this applies at all times, in all places, everywhere.

I can see firing a guy.

I used to work at Burger King.

and if I started giving people Heil Hitler salutes at Burger King, I think Burger King would have been completely within his rights to fire me over that.

You said have it your way.

Yeah, not with the salute.

Not with a salute.

And plus, you know, the jack boots are not part of the official uniform.

And Burger King was a big stickler about the uniform when I used to work there.

Hitler was a vegan.

Yeah, that's true.

Hitler was a vegetarian out here.

This was something someone was doing in private life.

He just happened to be photographed doing it, and people tracked him him down and all the rest of it.

And I think that is basically nuts.

And I don't think we want to live in that world.

And we're seeing that right now in Texas, if you'll just forgive me for a second, with Joaquin Castro.

Do you really want to live in a world in which your local congressman is going to try to ruin you, your business, and your family financially?

And your political crime is that you just made a donation to the other party's presidential candidate?

I'm not a huge Trump fan.

I wrote a whole book called The Case Against Trump.

But making a donation to the Republican Party's presidential candidate is not like

walking around with a swastika flag.

It's not the same thing.

Are you sure?

Pretty sure.

So here, you know, you're talking about companies.

So

purchased.

Have you ever seen one in real life?

Yeah.

Nike box

with the Betsy Ross flag on the shoe.

Now.

It's actually kind of not a bad show.

Do those actually go for sale at some point?

No.

Well, yeah, yeah.

But like two of them so.

Yeah.

Okay.

So this was actually

purchased in Georgia for $148.

Did you pay any more?

You could have bought a car for what you paid for those cases.

What do you think?

What do you think that's worth?

This is why socialism will never work.

What is this worth on the actual free market?

On the free market today, what's this worth?

$2,500.

No.

No.

I'm low.

Yeah.

Hey, this is a Nike.

One that was pulled from the market.

So the one that that was red, white, and blue.

An original Air Jordan goes for like $60,000, right?

So maybe those I'll go $20,000.

Okay, good.

You made me feel a little better.

Seven.

$7,000.

Two days before, they were $5,000.

I mean,

that's nuts.

That is absolutely nuts.

And

it is a good-looking shoe.

Yeah, it's not a nice looking shoe.

I'm as Nike.

Yeah, as Nikes go.

I would have bought that.

It's a great shoe.

It's a cool-looking shoe.

You know, if you really want to to be like over-the-top patriotic, you can wear that.

They ban it.

Now, tell me about companies like Nike.

Is it that we are just becoming this

second-tier country or market, that China is the market, so they don't really care about us anymore?

What is this?

I think that these West Coast corporate executives, especially, and they're worse on the West Coast than on the East Coast.

I think they're pretty PC on the East Coast, but in in a different kind of way.

They're really easy to bully.

You know, your Facebook guys, your Mark Zuckerbergs, people like that, your Google guys, yeah, they're left of center, but they do not go to these extraordinary lengths that they do to accommodate this stuff because it's their political identity.

I mean, it's partly their political identity, but it's because they're easy to bully.

We wouldn't be having any of these conversations about Facebook and antitrust enforcement and all the rest of it if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016.

People lost

their

word I can't say with Facebook because of Donald Trump winning the election, and they want to blame someone for it.

They can't blame Hillary Clinton for it, so they blame Facebook for it.

And Facebook certainly

made some bad calls and did some bad things.

They didn't change the outcome of the election, but they're easy to push around these guys, and they're easy to shame because

they want to look good in front of their friends like everyone else.

And I think they're different from your Wall Street types who are sort of take a, you know, more of a screw-you attitude toward this stuff, and they're a little harder to push around.

And Nike, I think, is an easy company to push around.

I think they've shown themselves to be an easy company to push around.

And the problem is that Twitter's not a real good CEO, and Twitter's not a real good magazine publisher, and Twitter's not a good headline writer.

You know, Twitter's not a very good HR boss, but Twitter's in charge of a lot of this stuff now.

I think this is changing.

I think it's starting to go the other way.

I think we're early on it, but I think it's starting to go the other way.

Do you agree with that?

I have some hope that people will get bored with it.

So a lot of my argument about this stuff is that people go to this because it feels exciting and they're going to it not for political engagement, but just for entertainment value.

It's not actually that entertaining.

You know, I do this stuff all day.

I get bored with it and it's my job.

People who are doing it just kind of recreationally, their attention is going to move on, I think.

It's kind of like Survivor.

I mean, there was a while there where we're all watching Survivor and Mark Burnett, where everybody was talking about him.

And now, you know, you're like, Survivor, that's still on?

Really?

They're still doing that?

I've never even seen Titanic.

Yeah, yeah.

So, I mean, but there was a time where it gets really, really hot.

Everybody's talking about it, and then it's over.

And I think it's not just going to be over.

I really actually fear the backlash.

Yeah, I think this stuff moves like fashion does, too.

You know,

if you look at, for instance, the really, really fast evolution of the sort of acceptable language we're using with trans people,

it really looks like it's overnight.

Right, yeah.

Well, I remember when the Bradley Manning story first broke and people were trying to write this story about there's this guy we've all known as Bradley Manning who now wants to be known as Chelsea and he's come out of strands and blah blah blah blah blah.

People were really having a fit over using the name Bradley Manning in this story.

Like five minutes after the guy made his announcement, you got dead naming.

Dead naming.

And Twitter, of course, has an official policy against this.

One of the problems with the fact that these companies are so hard to push around is that corporations like single solutions.

They like one size fits all solutions.

And there are other countries that don't have our free speech laws.

And not backward countries like China, but countries like Germany that have a very, very different conception of what the government's role in policing political speech is.

And it's sort of like California and their emission standards, where they're more strict than the rest of the country.

They end up becoming essentially a national standard.

I worry that the speech laws in a place like Germany or Austria end up becoming essentially the world standard because the tech companies want to comply, but they want to comply one time.

Okay, well, you're always happy.

That's a happy ending.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Kevin Williamson, the name of the book is the smallest Minority Independent Thinking in the Age of Mob Politics.

It is a very, very funny book, very smart book.

It's like four books in one because you have to read it four times to really understand all of it.

But

it's a book of our time, and like I said, well-written and very funny.

Kevin Williams.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Glenn.

You'll be on with us at five o'clock today.

We're also going to do a podcast where we're going to go deep in some of these things.

So watch for it at blazetv.com.

Somewhere right now in America, within the sound of my voice, there's a man driving a long-haul truck across the interstate.

It's his frontier.

He knows he's among some of the last of the dying breed.

The world moves on with or without us, and very soon the trucks that crisscross the fabric of our nation are going to be driven by machines.

But he feels the comfort of the coming retirement, just over the next hill, maybe two or three.

It's the comfort of a man who's earned the pride in his stride, a man whose boots are just as comfortable resting on a porch as they were all those years driving in his own personal kingdom.

When you get a pair of Takovis boots, you can feel the same comfort that he feels.

You can mark out your own frontier.

Takova's boots are made handmade in traditional Western styles by the best bootmakers around, and because Takovas sells directly to their customers, you get the quality product for about half the price of a similar boot.

Process is easy, it's accurate, they have free shipping, free returns.

You can get your pair now at tocovis.com slash back.

That's T-E-C-O-V-A-S.com slash back.

Takovis Boots, Western goods, for your frontier.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I remember the first time we got hit by like left-wing activists and they were trying to get all of our advertisers to drop.

And it was like the first time it happens, you're like panicked.

Like, oh, what's going on?

I can't believe they're, why are they lying about this?

They're calling me.

And eventually I thought, look, the companies are going to realize this is the same 12 people emailing them and they're going to know it's nonsense eventually.

And that really never happened.

I mean, they go down these roads.

No, because the companies found that they could.

shape their own image and exploit it for their own benefit, which is something I didn't see coming.

And you guys were just talking about how eventually people get bored with the social media mob mentality.

Maybe.

Maybe they get bored by it.

But look around the world right now with what you're seeing in Hong Kong, what you're seeing in Italy right now, where there's a controversy about a boat of immigrants that turned into a kind of a social media firestorm that now looks like it's going to overturn the Italian government.

It's too much of a power surge, I think, for the average person.

We look back at

really good revolutions, like, for example, ours, where here's a bunch of average people with some great ideas and they overturn the power.

That's something we praise for hundreds of years.

So, the power surge that I think comes from the average person getting on social media and being a part of a movement that they see as taking down some evil person of power.

I don't think that, I don't think that ever gets the novelty, doesn't go away from it.

So, there is,

you know, I just read a line.

I wish I knew where it was.

Oh, it's right here.

Hatred is the most accessible and comprehensive of all the unifying agents.

Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in God, but never without a belief in the devil.

That is

from 1951, and it's in Kevin Williamson's new book.

It's funny that you asked that because the American Revolution had God.

Whoever focused on the devil focused on God.

The French Revolution focused on the devil.

And look at the power.

These people who had never had power, they could behead the king.

Until it got so bad, they realized they're going to behead all of us.

There's not going to be anybody left.

When they got to the point of, you know what, kill some of the people who are unemployed.

It'll keep the unemployment rate down.

That's when everybody went, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

In America, because we've always focused on good as opposed to the devil, we haven't gotten there.

But this time,

we're focusing on the devil.

Get the bad guy.

Got to get the bad guy.

When you do that,

it's going to turn eventually on you.

And it's starting to turn on people on the left, and it already has been for a long time on the right.

If people get sick of that before we get to executions, that's good.

But it will burn itself out eventually.

Just the question is: where's our bottom?