Best of the Program | Guests: Jeffy Fisher & Jim Geraghty | 8/1/19

All right, welcome to the podcast.

Today, we go over last night's debate, and we talk about Biden, his performance.

We talk about Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, Telsey Gabbard, who made noise, who was good, who was not.

Well, we can say basically, of course, all of them were bad when it comes to policy, but who is actually performing well enough to be the other side of the presidential election in 2020?

It's a big, new, it's a big story.

You want to know who's going to coming up against you, and we will get to that here on today's program.

Also have an interesting moment from our segment with Jeffy, which is the first time I think I've ever said that.

Would you say that's true?

Have you ever had an interesting thing from Jeffy before?

No, no.

I think this was the first.

The first one.

He's found a video of an interaction between a

driver and a cop, an older woman and a cop.

And how do you break this down?

Whose side are you on on this one?

I was kind of thinking I was going to go into this and be in the middle.

I ended up on one side pretty hard.

Jeffy did as well.

I think you did as well at the end.

It's interesting to kind of go through the video and see: did the cop act appropriately or not?

You know,

it's on the border for some people, not for me.

And we will talk about the election with Jim Garrity of National Review, who comes on to kind of give us a perspective of the election and the debates and where we stand right now,

and so much more here on the Glenbeck Program podcast.

You're listening to the best of the Glenbeck Program

with Pat and Stew for Glenn this week.

Uh, you can check out my show, uh, Pat Gray Unleashed, immediately preceding this, and then you'd listen to the podcast at your leisure at any time in point.

Um, so last night's Democrat debate, pretty agonizing, as was the night before.

You said on the pre-show, Stu, that you

disliked this group even more than the first night's group?

Yeah, I really did.

Watching it, I had to watch both of the entire debates because it's part of our stupid job.

It's hard, though.

It is really hard.

Every minute I want to stop.

Every single minute.

It's like, you know, it's like if you, now I know this would not necessarily relate to you, but I think it may relate to a couple people in the audience, which is when you had a lot to drink

and you go, you're back up near the bar and someone's like, hey, how about shots for everyone?

And you have that moment of like your body is screaming at you, don't do it.

Please don't do it.

Not another one.

But you're like,

I kind of have to.

I'm here.

All the people are around me.

There's that weird feeling like you just kind of, you don't want to be the one who's,

you know, who's bailing on the party.

And then you do it and you vomit

profusely all night.

What you're about to hear is a program where we're vomiting profusely all night.

That is the entire thing.

Because last, you're right.

Every other person that begins speaking, I think to myself, don't do it.

Don't stay here.

Don't take another shot.

And then I do.

And it's painful.

Night one, I thought, was

at least interesting in the idea that you had people who were saying,

I have a moderate view or a more moderate view than the crazy socialists, and then they were debating things I thought at least of substance, where last night it was just everyone picking on Joe Biden.

I mean, Kirsten Gillibrand was shameless.

You know, she has developed an immunity to shame.

And I don't know how you do that.

That's tough to do.

But she has developed.

She's super unlikable, too.

Super unlikable.

And she went to this ridiculous ridiculous attack about some op-ed Joe Biden wrote in 1879

about trying to protect families.

And you can just...

Do we have that?

Because

we do have that.

You can hear her trying.

Look,

I just want to know what he meant by that.

Really?

You just magically were offended by a 40-year-old op-ed today.

That's what happened.

And you're just curious.

You could have asked him probably a thousand times when you've been talking to to him in private over the past years if this was really offending you.

But instead, you're bringing it up on the debate stage.

It's just transparent.

Let's play that.

Jilla Brand and Biden talking about women who work.

Cut 18.

I just need to understand, as a woman who's worked my entire career as the primary wage earner, as the primary caregiver, in fact,

my second son, Henry, is here.

And I had him when I was a member of Congress.

So under Vice President Biden's analysis, am I serving in Congress resulting in the deterioration of the family because I had access to quality, affordable data?

I just want to know what he meant when he said that.

That was a long time ago, and here's what it was about.

It would have given people making today $100,000 a year a tax break for child care.

I did not want that.

I wanted the child care to go to people making less than $100,000.

So he's answered that.

And that's what it was about.

As a single father, who in fact raised three children for five years by myself, I have some idea what it costs.

I support making sure that every single solitary person needing child care gets an $8,000 tax credit.

Not good enough, though.

That would put 700,000 women back to work, increase the GDP by almost eight-tenths of 1%.

It's the right thing to do if we can give tax breaks to corporations for these things.

Why can't we do it this way?

Mr.

Vice President, you didn't answer my question.

What did you mean?

What did you mean?

When a woman works outside the home, it's resulting in, quote, the deterioration of family.

And that we are avoiding

votes.

It was the title of the op-ed.

She repeats this to get the viral moment because she needs to have an extra money.

Four out of ten moms have to work.

They are the primary or sole wage earners.

They actually have to put food on the table.

Eight out of ten moms are working today.

Most women are.

We get the points.

Stop her.

You know, look, you know what the deal is.

It may have been, it may have even been at the time, because 40 years ago people believed that one of the parents should be home to raise the kids people just believe that i know it's ancient ancient thinking and so so so wrongheaded right that children should be raised by parents they should be raised by tv we know that now or video games or a daycare center um if you're kirsten gillibrand that's what you think that's just as good as either one of the parents being home are you saying the someone who's raising the kid by an ipad is a bad parent no i'm saying that's the way to go now okay because you said midway games and you said television.

You did not mention tablets, and I was concerned.

I'm sorry, that was an egregious oversight.

What did you mean by that?

I would like to know, as a parent who is raising their kid via iPad, I would like to know what you meant by that.

Can we all admit that it is the optimal situation, if you can, for one of the parents to be home and raise your kids.

It's a great option to have.

It's not always available to everybody.

No, but we all know that the ideal situation is if one of the parents can be home, then be home and raise the kids.

Right.

But, like, what's really bad, and again, Jilla Brand is terrible.

She's trying to do what Kamala Harris did last time, right?

She's trying to have this big viral moment.

Yep.

And here's the thing: you're talking fake outrage.

Like, your concept is, well, it's really hard to raise a kid as a single parent.

You're talking to a guy who tragically lost his wife in a car crash.

Yeah.

Right?

Like, this is the one guy who really does have experience in this world.

As he said, he was a single dad for a while.

Yes.

I mean, you know,

it is, it's one of those things where she's just not good at this.

She's pathetic.

And she just needs to just drop out and go away.

I don't think she has any chance of making the next debate.

She did not perform well at all last night.

And

at some level, the average person would say, I'm embarrassing myself in front of the nation and I need to stop doing it.

Well, that would require having some shame.

Some shame.

And she's immune to it.

Yeah, they don't.

All right.

Triple eight seven two seven b e c it's patent stew for glenn on the glenn beck program

more in 60 seconds this is the glenn beck program pat and stew for glenn triple eight seven two seven b e c we should we remembered that there was uh a little something something extra uh at the end of this clip so we need to finish the uh gillibrand biden exchange here because

joe kind of I mean, he does a good job.

He does a good job here.

Yeah.

Watch this.

Most women have to work to provide for their kids.

Many women want to be working to provide for their communities.

Either you don't believe it today, or what did you mean when you said it then?

At the very beginning, my deceased wife worked, but we had children.

My present wife has worked all the way through raising our children.

The fact of the matter is, the situation is one that I don't know what's happened.

I wrote the Violence Against Women Act, Lily Ledbetter.

I was deeply involved in making sure there are the equal pay amendments.

I was deeply involved in all these things.

I came up with the It's On Us proposal to see to it that women were treated more decently on college campuses.

You came to Syracuse University with me and said it was wonderful.

I'm passionate about the concern making sure women are treated equally.

I don't know what's happened except that you're now running for president.

So I stand

there.

I respect you

deeply.

I respect you deeply.

Yeah, we do.

We don't need a response.

She does it again, by the way.

She does it again.

But those words, and I would like to know what you meant by those words that I'm trying to get a viral video at to raise more money.

Why aren't you responding directly?

Because I need these to be together so there's not an edit, and then I can send it out to donors.

That is like, is legitimately what she's doing.

I mean, she just gets destroyed in that exchange.

And, you know, it is so true.

She is transparently awful when it comes to consistency.

She really did run as a congressperson, as a, you know, like a John Delaney, right?

She's like a conservative Democrat.

Yeah.

On immigration and I think even abortion and several other issues, she was much more conservative than she is now.

And she's, as soon as she ran for statewide office, she completely changed into a hardcore leftist.

And as Biden points out, and it's interesting because he's got this sort of information on every one of these people.

Every one of these candidates he has had backroom conversations with because they were all begging him for attention and position and

to heighten their profile because Biden obviously was in the White House for eight years under a president, by the way, that has something like a 95% approval rating among Democrats.

So this is not a, it's not a situation where the, you know, Biden is unfamiliar with these characters.

They're all just a, they're just shameless.

I couldn't believe the things they were saying about this guy.

And again, I don't like Joe Biden.

And not just him.

Yeah, not just him.

Obama.

Yeah.

They're going after Obama.

They're going after Obama and his record.

It's like, okay, so have you guys,

has Obama been taken off the throne of God himself?

Because at one point, that's almost who they believed he was.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I would love to see, I'd love to hear from today a Democratic, a normal Democratic voter, or if you happen to be married to a normal Democratic voter or have one in your household that was watching the debate with you.

Because I wonder if the average Democratic voter felt the same way that I did.

And I don't like Joe Biden.

I think he would be a horrific president.

And

I don't think he would be not only a good president, but he's not honest.

There's a lot of problems I have with the guy.

But it was so over the top.

The attacks were so ridiculous against him that I almost felt bad for him.

I was like, this is just like, they're just piling on him with these fake attacks.

And these are people that he's had relationships with that he's helped over this time.

And it felt so over the top and ridiculous.

I wonder if this, the average Democratic voter was like the same thing.

This is ridiculous.

I mean, they're not even trying to hide that this is blatantly political.

I mean, they were not, these were not valid attacks.

And then they're, you know, I don't even know what Corey Booker was doing.

I know his eyes were wide open.

He was seeing everyone in the crowd.

That I know.

Because that is something he signals every time he speaks.

And I think.

You get the impression by watching Booker that everything he says, he's practiced in front of a mirror for 20 minutes beforehand.

And he's very, his eyes light up because he's seeing himself.

He really likes seeing himself.

He likes his reflection.

He loves his face.

He loves that he's on camera all the time.

And he just comes off as so prepared and fake.

And every one of these debates afterwards, the same things happen.

And I don't know if I'm just completely out of touch, but the he's constantly praised for his performance.

And I sit back and I'm just like, what were they watching?

What program were they watching?

Corey Booker is so

false.

He's trying too hard all the time.

And at the end of the day, I don't know how that connects to people, but I guess it does for some, at least in the media.

The media is constant praise for Corey Booker.

Constant.

They think he's the greatest guy in the world.

Every single one of these things, they say he does a great job on.

I thought he was terrible last night.

Terrible.

So we're talking about Corey Booker and his awful performance.

What was this Kool-Aid thing all about?

Here's a little exchange between Joe Biden and Corey Booker.

For the entire eight years he was mayor, there was nothing done to deal with the police department that was corrupt.

Why did you announce in the first day a zero tolerance policy of stop and frisk and hire Rudy Giuliani's guy in 2007 when I was trying to get rid of the crack cocaine disability?

Mr.

Vice President, there's a saying in my community, you're dipping into the Kool-Aid and you don't even know the flavor.

You need to come to the city of New York and see the reforms that we put in place.

The New Jersey head of the ACLU has said that I embraced reforms, not just in action, but in deed.

Sir, you are trying to shift the view from what you created.

I mean, I get cringe chills

watching him try to pull that line off.

Into the Kool-Aid when you don't even know the flavor.

Oh, wow.

Now, I am not the most cultured man in America, Pat.

So,

you're dipping into the Kool-Aid,

but you're unaware of the flavor.

First of all, flavor is always labeled on the outside of the container.

Very easy to.

If you're dipping into it, it's obviously in a bowl of some kind, and you can see what flavor it is.

Right, because they're colored.

Yeah, they're colored.

The current bowl would be grape.

Red would be maybe strawberry-flavored or cherry.

Right.

Orange would be, I don't know, orange-flavored.

Some of the things that

we have

a dumb expression.

And so let's say you get the flavor wrong.

You get another delicious flavor of Kool-Aid.

Is that the outcome here?

That sounds terrible.

Here's a guy, by the way, you know,

here's a guy who

has spent years walking through the walls of apartments and saying, oh, yeah,

to people when it comes to the Kool-Aid man.

The Kool-Aid man.

He has been delivering real information on Kool-Aid for decades.

Right.

And Corey Booker comes in here with this ridiculous saying and and tries to throw all of that information spreading out the window.

You know, the Koopie.

That's the wrong thing to do.

I'm fascinated by this because, I mean, look, I understand that perhaps I don't have the connection to some of these things that maybe I need to understand the Corey Booker.

You live in his community.

He's a man of people with his multiple condos that are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, his multiple businesses he's started up and somehow gotten millions of dollars of funding without any knowledge of how to actually run the businesses, which are now out of business.

And he was doing that while he was a mayor of a city.

Corey Booker's

history of corruption in that city is fascinating.

We did an entire episode on it a few weeks ago on the television show.

But the idea that

you're dipping, trying to understand it, you're dipping into the Kool-Aid, but you don't know the flavor.

It just doesn't seem all that problematic to me.

Well, it does.

Because let's say you think it's strawberry.

Okay.

But it turns out to be orange.

Yeah.

Are you going to vomit?

It really tastes good still.

I mean, it's a delicious, sugary drink.

And as soon as it's in your glass, don't you see that, hey, oh, I thought that was cherry, but no, it's orange.

So I'm going to drink it now anyway.

Now, there is a

pathway here, Pat, for people like us.

If you dip into the Kool-Aid and you find out it's Roundup, that might be be a different issue.

Now you've got a problem.

I have had a drink of Roundup, so for me, it would not be a problem.

But Mikey,

rat poison might be

a better example.

So

there is a pathway, though, for people like us, Pat, to bridge the gap between our community, the evil, white,

whitey, whitastic.

community of the suburbs where we've walled off our community in a bubble so that no one else of color can get into it.

That community that I assume that we live in because we've voted conservative in the past.

And the community of Corey Booker, not the one that he's making millions of dollars and living in a beautiful condo in the nicest area of Washington, D.C.

Not that Corey Booker, but the one that he's portraying here, you know, a man of the people, of the streets.

That's him.

He knows this talk.

This is natural for him.

That wasn't the first time he had ever said that in his entire life.

That pathway, however, to the bridge there is called urban dictionary.com.

Now, if you go to urban dictionary.com and you type in something you don't understand, it will attempt to tell you what it means.

So, here, don't be dipping in the Kool-Aid when you don't know the flavor apparently means when you say to a dumb person that they are getting in your business.

Now, I should point out, you may have heard B-U-S-I-N-E-S-S.

It's actually B-I-Z-N-E-S-S.

So when they're getting in your biz-ness

or messing with stuff they don't need to be messing with, and we have an example sentence here for you.

Bill, if Bill were to say, L-M-A-O, I bet she dumped you because you were a cheap ass,

Nick might respond, man, don't be dipping in the Kool-Aid when you don't know the flavor.

And I think now, with that perspective,

we can all understand

what Booker was was talking about, which, by the way,

what Biden was talking about was accurate.

You know, look, is it a terrible thing to hire a Rudy Giuliani guy to work on security in a major city?

Well, Rudy did a pretty freaking good job with it.

So I don't think that that is a.

Rudy turned that town around.

Yeah.

I think.

And his people.

Now, the Rudy Giuliani of today has looked at different than he is.

Right.

But back in the early 90s,

I mean, he fixed Times Square.

He did turn New York around.

And Giuliani did this for cities all around the country.

He, you know, doing consulting and stuff for cities all around the country and America to try to replicate those same results.

So the fact that Booker did that is not actually controversial, but you see Booker avoiding it because now Giuliani's tied to Trump and you can't say anything good about Trump.

I mean, they called him a white nationalist last night on television.

Flat out racist.

Flat out racist.

Multiple times.

They said he was helping al-Qaeda.

Jeez.

I mean, it is, they just cannot stop themselves.

The best of the Glen Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn.

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

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenbeck Program, 888-727B-ECK.

Oh, geez.

Oh, no.

Why are you here, Jeffy?

What happened?

I wanted to stop by.

Chew a little bit of the fat.

Why?

Chew a little bit of the fat with you today.

Again.

A day after the debate.

Why?

Excited to be here.

For the fourth time.

Why?

Who invited you?

This is what I want to know.

You did.

No.

You.

No, that's

completely untrue.

Which candidate invited you to this debate?

Michael Bennard.

Okay, Michael Bennard.

I would have guessed it was Gillibrand because she's the most annoying.

So there's no doubt about that.

She is really cringe-worthy, man.

Did you see her last night talking about

how she's trying to,

you know, she's a white woman,

but she's trying to act as if she's the voice of all the different colors of the rainbow?

It's really agonizing.

She's a white woman, but she's the voice of minorities.

Yes, and she's very, she's got a lot of guilt about being a white person.

She does not like that.

Of course she does.

I'm not a fan of her whiteness.

No.

Here is

Gillebrand talking about

her embrace of all the colors of the rainbow.

I think as a white woman of privilege who is a U.S.

senator running for president of the United States, it is also my responsibility to lift those voices that aren't being listened to.

And I can talk to those white women in the suburbs that voted for Trump and explain to them what white privilege actually is.

That when their son is walking down the street with a bag of MMs in his pocket, wearing a hoodie, his whiteness is what protects him from not being shot.

Oh, my God.

Take your white privilege BS and stick it.

That might be the worst clip of the entire thing.

Oh, that entire debate.

Number one.

Number one,

imagine being

a white woman in the suburbs and hearing that.

It's so condescending.

You're going to explain to me white privilege, senator.

Thank you.

Really, are you?

Because I can't wait for that one.

Number two, if she had white privilege, it must not be effective because she's at 0%.

I mean, you're telling me white privilege doesn't even get you to 1% in the polls?

Not even the one?

That's depressing.

And this is something that I don't, I don't, I mean, this is a kind of a news-based program.

So I'm going to break a little news here.

It's going to be stunning.

If you're driving, you may want to pull over to the side of the road.

If you want to have that moment, because this is, you may just jerk the wheel into a pole if you're going 65 of the highway right now.

I once, and it's only happened once,

saw a person of color walk safely in a hoodie.

I saw it.

I swear I saw it.

Now, when I pulled around the corner, he may have been shot immediately.

I don't know.

But I saw it.

Of course he was.

It was a good 30 seconds of safe walking.

Wow.

A person of color in a hoodie safely strolled for 30 seconds in my purview.

Do you have video proof of that?

I don't.

Of course.

And that's why no one believes it.

Everyone's like, oh,

did you get abducted by aliens too?

And yes, and I don't have video of that either.

But this is real.

I saw this happen.

They act as if, like, every, you know, again, the numbers do not support the idea at all that police are shooting black people at any rate higher than,

is, first of all, connected to the crimes and actions of the people involved.

And number two,

it is, they shoot more white people than they do black people.

Right.

By about double.

We know the people, you're much, much, much more likely to be killed by someone of the same race.

Black people are much more likely to be killed by black people.

White people are much more likely to be killed by white people

because you're more likely to be killed by someone around.

If you decide to break it out into the percentages and say which one is more...

Oh, don't you dare start down that.

You know what?

I'm not going to do it.

Don't you dare.

You had a story about the police.

I did.

Well, you know, one of the things that is helping the police in your numbers that we don't get to them.

No, don't you?

No, I will not.

I definitely will not give you numbers from the FBI crime report.

Because I know that would be racist.

That would be the most racist thing you could possibly do today.

And I'll not have it.

Is there a more racist organization than the FBI producing their crime report with the numbers?

No, no, no.

No, there isn't.

There is not.

But the police officers are starting to wear body cams now, which is proving to their benefit

more times than not, it seems.

Yes.

But there are also times.

I'd want them if I was an officer.

Me too.

Absolutely.

I want him.

Absolutely.

But

there are times when you see a story like this where the 65-year-old lady in Oklahoma got pulled over by

a police officer and he had his body cam on.

And you go through and start breaking down the interaction.

And I don't know.

During this video, I'm for the cop and then I'm against the

police officer and then I'm against the police officer.

By the end,

I'm still confused, I think.

I'm a little torn on this one, too.

So we start off with the original stop with the officer pulling the lady over.

Well, I did issue for a defective equipment.

It's $80.

You have till September 16th to take care of this,

get you to sign over the exodus.

So you don't even give a warning for this you've been driving around for six months like that i'm truthful well i'm not going to give you a warning for something you've been driving for six months that well i don't want to sign it because i don't want to do 80

you don't want to sign it no because i don't think that i deserve to pay 80

for something that is fixable and i can fix it okay so now she doesn't want to sign the ticket right so you uh you go through

i process that too where i've been a little pissed off at the you don't want to sign the ticket the ticket and i don't want to sign it and it's the police officer's discretion

what happens here at this point though I'm completely with the police officer 100% completely with the police officer she's just being belligerent and like it's you I had a friend once who got pulled over uh for speeding and he said um they they said why were you speeding and he said well I guess I just tend to speed on this road and I was like that's the worst excuse I've ever heard you're telling him you've committed this crime like a hundred times

right and so uh here it's like it's nice of her and you give her some brownie points for being honest and saying it's been six months but once once the officer has that knowledge he has to give you the ticket right and so he's gonna give her the ticket and you know it's it's his discretion what happens is when you get pulled over for instance for speeding and they say you were doing 60 miles an hour in a 40 mile an hour zone and you just tell them well i wasn't going to be out that long I wasn't even out for an hour.

I don't even know what are you talking about.

Wait, what?

Did that work for you?

No.

Okay.

No, that's not.

So then now the officer is starting to get a little ticked off, right?

Instead of ripping the ticket off and giving it to her or throwing it in the car and saying, well, you're still going to get the ticket.

You still have to pay for it whether you sign it or not.

And really, that's what happens.

It doesn't negate the ticket in any way.

Not signing it doesn't do anything.

You still have to do it.

So now the officer is, you know, he's got a little, he's got his back up against the wall a little bit.

In his mind.

That's all you want.

Always step out of the car.

Why?

Because you're under a rush.

Step out.

Step out of the vehicle.

For not signing the ticket?

You can have that happen, yes.

You be be fair with me, and I'll be fair with you.

Step out.

No.

You're under arrest.

No, I'm not.

No.

I'm placing you under arrest.

Step out.

You are full of shit because you're not going to be under no arrest.

Stop.

Do not.

Do not take off.

Give me that and I'll sign it.

Step out.

No.

We're beyond that.

Step out.

Okay, so right now,

right now.

Okay, so right now, though, we've had two opportunities.

Two opportunities for the police officer to take the air out of this bubble.

De-escalate.

Right?

The whole thing.

At one point, I know

she said, just give it to me and I'll sign it.

And we're way past that now.

Right.

So, I mean, at that point,

he could have just given it to him.

Correct.

Okay, and I'll give you that one.

Now he's pissed.

He doesn't want to.

Right.

And I kind of don't blame him for that.

How long was the time between this first video and the second video?

Was he trying to convince her for five minutes?

Was it 30 seconds?

Some of this dash cam video seems to be edited a little bit

from the police officer.

So I don't know if it was a 20-minute.

Right, if it's 20 minutes and she's arguing with him for 20 minutes and then he finally says, all right, now you're under arrest.

Yeah, the reason I have more.

It's easier to understand his position.

If it's 15 seconds and she says she's not going to sign it three times and then he says you're under arrest,

there is a big line there.

Okay, so you're still kind of on the police officer side.

Yeah.

Kind of.

Yeah.

And she takes off.

And she is being belligerent.

And she did, by the way, start to roll away and stop.

Right.

And you can absolutely not do that with a police officer.

And then she left him.

She left.

And then she pulled away.

That was a dumb movie.

So now, okay, really dumb.

But he has all the information on her, right?

He knows where she lives.

He knows all that information.

He doesn't have to pursue her except he's ticked.

Well, you pull away from a cop after a traffic stop.

You absolutely, absolutely.

And it was a horrible traffic stop, too, because she had a light out.

Anyway,

the criminal activity of that is just huge.

Again, though,

who does that?

Would you ever do that?

Not you, Jeffy.

Pat, would you ever ever do that?

And the reason you wouldn't do it is because you're pulled over 15 times.

Right.

So I've had plenty of, I've had ample opportunities.

Right.

No way.

And I think most people know better than that.

Right.

Yeah.

You know better than that.

You don't disrespect Bakoff like that.

So now she's pulled away and he's pursuing her and finally catches up to her.

He's after that.

Get out of the car.

Get out of the car.

Now he's pulled his weapon on her.

Get out of the car.

Now the gun thing is maybe a tad extreme.

Now he's pulled his weapon out.

He's pursued her.

Jeez.

Got her pulled over.

We hear multiple police officers.

Now we've really escalated here.

We sure have.

We have really escalated.

Are you with the cop at this point or the or the person?

Look, if someone runs from a cop, and now you can say, well, she's only an old white woman.

And I know.

She's a 65.

65-year-old.

Look, I know.

I know

with a black person in a hoodie.

We know what you do there.

Well, they'd be dead already.

But again, if this was a 25-year-old.

As soon as he saw the person in the car with the hoodie, it would have shot him.

It would be dead away.

If this is a 25-year-old guy in a car and he pulled away, they would absolutely go after him and do exactly what they're doing here.

And the reason.

You know what?

That's a little bit sexist on my part because I would think almost...

I think I might believe it's almost appropriate to approach him with a gun if it's a 25-year-old kid.

Yeah, and part of that is like you might suspect there's an additional crime.

Why are you running from the cop for an $80 ticket?

You're expecting that maybe there's something more going on here.

The belligerent older lady, I just think.

Come on.

Oh, come on.

But again, and a belligerent older lady has

a finger, and she can pull a trigger.

But he's already dealt with her.

He's already seen that, you know, the odds are she's not armed.

Right?

I mean, he's already dealt with her up to the vehicle.

But he's not shooting.

He's just

shooting, right?

He knows how to do it.

He pulls his weapon so that she gets, you know, ordering her out of the car.

And then

what transpires.

Get out of the car.

You better leave me.

Oh, and now he's gonna drag her out.

Just pull her right out.

Put your hands behind your back.

Put your hands behind your back.

Meow.

Rolls over.

Oh, oh, and there.

Okay.

Now comes the taser.

And he tased her.

Put your hands behind your back.

Put your hands behind your back.

Lay down and put your hands behind your back.

I mean, you can't see.

There's no question she's in the wrong.

All right.

Yes.

So he put his weapon away, drags her out of the truck,

drags this old woman out of the truck, throws her down on the ground.

There's no

ordering her to put her hands behind her back.

She obviously is going to have a difficult time doing that as a 65-year-old woman, not quite as in shape as us.

And so she's going to have a difficult time.

Not as in shape as us.

Can't put her arms.

I mean, difficult.

She can't do it.

So she rolls over, and as she's rolling over, she's kicking, and she kicks him in the groin.

Oh, man.

I don't know that that was, I mean, that was an accident.

Oh, stop it.

It was not an accident.

So then she rolls away, and he tases her.

Oh, I tases her.

You're infuriating on this.

Come on.

Yeah,

come on.

I'm with him.

Thank you, Paul.

I'm with him.

She is absolutely doing everything wrong

in this issue.

And, like, look, I think you're right.

Could he have maybe de-escalated it at one point and probably maybe should have taken that window?

But she's acting completely irresponsibly.

She's doing things that she absolutely should not do.

And then you come up with this, she's old, so she can't put her hands behind her back nonsense.

She's holding her down.

You just dragged this woman out of her car.

What if she laid down and put her hands to her sides then?

She's not doing that.

She's fine, but she got up and kicked a police officer in the back.

She's in the balls.

First of all, she rolled over.

She didn't get anything.

She rolled over and kicked a police officer in the balls.

Then he taves her, and he gets her handcuffed.

Later, you see, he gets her handcuffed, and then he's trying to be, are you okay?

Are you hurt?

Everything okay?

She's like, no, I'm not okay.

I'm hurt.

Is he hurt?

Because that's happened to me before, and it doesn't feel good.

No, it doesn't.

So now she's been charged with a felony assault on a police officer, one misdemeanor for resisting arrest.

And let's not forget about the broken taillight, the towing charges, the lot charges, all of this.

All of this for a broken taillight.

Kind of shows that she should have maybe signed the ticket and she would have avoided all of it.

I'm 100% team cop on this one, I got to say.

And that's the thing.

You know, this is what everybody does with these incidents.

It's just what Jeffy just did, which is she does all these other things, and then it'd say all of that over a taillight.

No, no, an $80 ticket was over the taillight.

It would have been over a long time ago.

It could have been had the police officer had better training.

Okay.

You're infuriating.

This is the best of the Glenbeck program.

Jim Garrity of National Review, also the author of Between Two Scorpions, a dangerous click novel.

So, Jim,

talk at me a little generally here.

I think, like, in 2016, the Republicans, I think, attempted at least to learn lessons about sort of the structure of this, where they had the kiddie table debates and the adult debates, and there's so many candidates, and I don't know if they have any idea how to deal with it.

Looking at the way the Democrats have structured this, did they learn any lessons?

Do you think this has improved the process at all?

Yeah, I suppose if you're

Andrew Yang or Marion Williamson or even Michael Bennett, who believe it or not is a senator from Colorado, he's a very low, little low, low name ID, but he is really, he's a real person in America.

John Delaney really exists.

Look, John Delaney has been on prime time debates for now.

It's going to be four hours now,

maybe five, depending on your stopwatch.

That's actually pretty good.

You know, that's not something that Bobby Jindal got and all he did was turn around the state of Louisiana during his governorship down there.

One of the things, look, I wrote yesterday in the corner on National Review Online.

There's not, parties would never choose to have.

25 presidential candidates as the Democrats have this time.

They would not choose to have 17.

And my fear is that 2020, you know, Trump wins, Trump loses either way, you know, could have possibly two parties could have, you know, no incumbent nominee.

25 might look like even small.

There's nothing to, it's a tragedy of the commons.

Everybody's got an incentive to run.

And they end up making it hard.

Because think about it.

Think about all the candidates who went into it wanting to be good in a debate.

But the measuring stick is not, are you good in a debate?

The measuring stick is, can you be memorable?

And that's a much higher bar to clear.

And that's one of the reasons, like, you know, marianne williamson talking about dark psychic forces that's memorable you know how your health care plan would affect the uh current health insurance of union members in michigan that's probably not going to be as memorable yeah as everything else on there it does it does incentivize sort of strange behavior in a way you know you have this situation like the delaney um and elizabeth warren back and forth on healthcare was i thought really instructive to that it's like delaney was i thought on substance just smoked her i mean

he knew the topics.

He really had good knowledge of all.

I mean, he went deep.

He was impressive, I thought, Delaney in that debate.

And obviously, he's working against a room who really wants, you know, something more left.

But the memorable moment is Elizabeth Warren saying, well, why do you run for president if you don't want to try for difficult things?

Well, you know, again, we were talking about this before.

It's like it could be, well,

we're going to make wings sprout out of everyone's back.

Well, that's a difficult thing, too.

But, you know, there are some things where you're limited.

And, you know, he's making a very pragmatic, smart point.

And the reward goes to Elizabeth Warren, who comes up with kind of a catchy line and everyone cheers at it.

That's just, you're incentivizing bad behavior.

Yeah,

Stu, if I'm ever on a debate stage, and one of my rivals says, if we can dream it, we can do it.

I'm going to tell them, flap your arms and fly.

See how that works out?

No.

Some things you dream, you cannot do.

And it's interesting, because everybody remembers Warren slamming Delaney.

If you look back to what Delaney said the moment before, she was saying, scoffing at him about his skepticism, his pessimism, his lack of ambition, it was he wanted to rebuild our, improve our infrastructure, create jobs, raise wages, create universal health care.

There's like one or two other fairly big goals in there.

That's not an unambitious agenda.

That's fairly standard issue democratic politics.

And, you know, Elizabeth Ward is saying, phew, oh my goodness, could you believe this guy?

You know, why should anyone run for president if you're going to talk about what you can't do?

Well, I mean, for starters, there's the Constitution.

There's limitations to the power of the president of the United States, the need to build a consensus in Congress to get it through the House, to get it through that.

There's judicial review, the checks and balances.

Maybe what you're proposing isn't constitutional.

You know, maybe it would be good to have, let's have one debate where every candidate just gets up and say, I'd like to do X, but the Constitution power does not, the president does not have that power.

Last debate, presidential candidates were saying we're going to get rid of the filibuster.

Wait a minute.

The president doesn't decide what the Senate does with the filibuster?

It really turns into, when I am king, I will do these things.

And that's not how the American system works.

And this, just generally speaking, as a country, because this, I think, very much affects the right as well.

We really are at the point where we're just elevating these politicians into kings and heroes, and you are judged as your adherents to whatever they're talking about at a particular moment.

That seems to be certainly, has certainly hit the right side of the aisle.

It's, I think, certainly hitting the left side of the aisle as well.

And it is the exact opposite of the way this country was formed and the way we're supposed to be thinking about these things.

This is not supposed to be some big contest where we all run towards our hero and have them solve all of our problems.

We have a system, and it's worked pretty well for the last couple of hundred years.

It has.

My former colleague, and I'm sad to see him go, Jonah Goldberg, used to quote, I believe it was William Rusher, who was one of the publishers of National Review, who said,

look, you want to like a politician, fine, but never fall in love with a politician.

And he didn't mean romantically.

He just meant that sense of where you put him up on a pedestal.

Just because, you know, first of all, if you're a committed conservative or you have some sort of issues or policies or beliefs you really believe in, sooner or later, that politician,

if not nine times out of 10, probably 99 times out of 100, they're going to have to compromise in some way.

And you're going to look at that compromise and say, oh, I can't believe they did that.

What a sellout.

How could he do that?

But that's the nature of governing, right?

That at some point, you have to, if you want to get those 51 votes in the Senate, you want to get 60 votes if there's going to be a filibuster, you want to get a majority, you're going to have to give a little.

You're going to have to say, okay, I'll give you some on column A and you give me some on column B.

And that's political reality.

Those of us who care about these things tend to be, if not idealists, then we have this idea in our heads of how things ought to work.

And sometimes that's plausible and feasible in the political realm and sometimes it's not.

So the answer is to never get too attached to these guys.

And I like to periodically joke, you know, look, presidents, stew, they're temp workers.

You know, you got a four-year contract, and if you're good, we'll keep you another four years.

And after that, you're gone, even if we think you're doing a great job.

And so we shouldn't be thinking about them as these, you know, grand men of history who

already picturing the statue of them on the horse that they'll be

somewhere in Washington or something like that.

Rushmore's full up, guys.

Thank God.

So let me give you this.

Let me give you a scenario here.

I want to take off the table Sanders and Kamala Harris and Warren and Biden.

And I'm going to take Buddha Judge too off the table for you.

You have to pick one person who you think has the best chance to win.

Not the one you want to win but the one who has the best chance to win if you had to pull someone out of those lower tiers what do you what do you do

wow that's that you seriously deep down it's a five-person race and that's that five you just took off the table there are the five

um i guess you know the one for a while beto was generating excitement in the very beginning um although i think looking back i mean i i have really relished the the uh the icarus like fall of beto overwork over the last year or

two because i remember writing about this guy back during the early part of the Senate race saying, you know, look, give him a little bit of credit.

He's kind of charismatic.

He campaigns hard in his races that he won for El Paso City Council and there.

But beyond that, no, he's not.

You know, the only that's Kennedy-esque about this guy is his driving record.

And

the, you know, and so the idea that it was better than usual for a Texas Democrat, but, you know, not this world beater.

And that the only way he was going to beat Ted Cruz is if Ted Cruz was asleep at the Switch, and that didn't happen.

So he goes in there and all of a sudden it's not, you know, him buoyed by a media that just absolutely loathes Ted Cruz.

Right.

And it's, you know, he doesn't have it.

And he doesn't have the national media operating as his

as his, you know, his press, you know, issuing press releases for him.

He got glowing coverage, probably on par with Obama in 07 and 08.

And now you put him on, and he just wilts.

And all of a sudden, the jump in on the diner comes kind of weird.

And you hear he tried to trick his wife into eating baby poop.

And you're like, what's what's wrong with this man?

You know, so by that, by the standards of whoever had that stature, early on, Beta Orwork had that kind of stature.

Beyond that,

Booker is probably in the best shot, the best shape in South Carolina.

And I think if he had stuck to what he had built his career on, kind of this a little bit kumbaya-ish, but you know, almost like Marianne Williamson, we're going to win this race with love, you know.

But look, Corey Booker, back in his Newark mayor days, was not a down-the-line lefty.

Um, and so there was some potential there.

But uh, I think

one of the interesting stories about this 25-person race on the Democratic side is that early on, it looks like most Democratic primary voters, or at least the people who are answering their phone for the polls,

looked at the top, the massive group, picked five dishes from the buffet table they liked, and they're really not interested to looking at the other options that much.

Yeah, I think that that is the state of affairs at the moment.

Um, before you go, Jim, can you give me a couple minutes?

Set me up to read Between Two Scorpions.

Sure.

For those who are used to reading me in politics, this is really not all that political.

This was my attempt to

vent some creative energies into the realm of the spy thriller.

I love Brad Thor, Tom Clancy,

Daniel Silva, all that kind of stuff.

People who have read it have really enjoyed it.

I think we're up to 118 reviews on Amazon.

It is available at this point only on Amazon.

So if you really hate Jeff Bezos,

I'm sorry to inform you of that.

Available on Kindle, available paperbook.

It's an entire $13 on paperback.

I think you can do that.

Or if that's too pushed for your blood, it's a $3.99 on Kindle, and I think most people win.

People are enjoying it.

It is a kind of little quirky, a little bit odd, funnier than your typical thriller.

But it really much is about a terrorist plot.

I just kind of sat down and said, okay, if I were a terrible terrorist, how would I attack America?

How are we vulnerable?

And without giving too much away, I think our social divisions, our cultural divisions, are where we're very divided.

And if somebody set out to tear apart our social fabric,

I feel like we've done about half the work for them so far.

So thrills, chills.

Lots of people are enjoying it.

So I'm very pleased with that.

Hope everybody checks it out.

Good beach reading for the remainder of summer that we have here.

Very cool.

Between Two Scorpions, a Dangerous Click novel.

It's available now.

And of course, you can get Jim stuff all the time on National Review.

Jim, thanks so much for joining us.

Thanks for having me, Stu.

Great to be here.

The Blaze Radio Network

On demand.