Llamas On A Train? | Guests: Kelly Shackelford & Brad Polumbo | 2/28/19

Good morning.

The sun's up.

The birds are singing.

Oh, it's another beautiful day in the neighborhood.

Isn't it?

Yeah.

Sure.

I mean, you know, if you're,

look, we got another, we have another gun control bill rising.

It's great.

Yep.

By the way, gun control, well, you can control your guns at your own home and you're liberty safe.

Sure.

You can make the decision as to where your guns are instead of the government.

Wouldn't that be nice?

You are not responsible enough.

Even a liberty safe that nobody can get into, nobody can break into, nobody can steal.

Not secure enough.

No, never will be.

Liberty Safe right now,

having a big sale and make yourself

at home with a Liberty Safe.

Put all the stuff in it that you need to protect, you need to keep.

You need to make sure that if it's swept up in a tornado, it can be dropped a block away and it's still going to be closed.

If your house burns down, the Liberty Safe is still going to be standing and the stuff inside is going to be good.

It's Liberty Safe.

To see all of their special deals right now, go to libertysafe.com.

That's libertysafe.com.

We

remind you the best-built safes on the planet.

Barnun, LibertySafe.com.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

Oh, is the Glenbeck program?

I don't know what's more shocking.

The Democrats going for gun control or this documentary that says that Michael Jackson was a pedophile.

What?

I'm in total shock on both stories.

We begin there in one minute.

This is the Glenbeck Program.

Stu?

Yes, Glenn.

Remember the days when

I have made a vow to myself, I'm only buying new cars from here on out.

New cars?

I mean, used cars.

So you made a vow to the exact opposite of the thing you said.

Thank you.

I'm a Democrat.

Okay.

There you go.

Which means I'm not.

You just spend so much money in the minute you drive it off the lot.

It's funny.

It's like a long time story that everyone knows.

The second you drive off a lot, you waste all this money.

And still, everybody does it, or at least tries to do it.

I mean, it's the better decision to just buy something used, especially when you can actually have it protected.

It's not like you're buying something and it could break down and you have to deal with all the repairs.

If you have the car shield option, you don't have to deal with it.

You don't have to deal with it at all.

It's like, I mean,

you're covered with everything, and you have the

24-7 roadside assistance.

You get a rental car while yours is being fixed.

It's all free.

It just comes with your car shield.

All you have to do is just go to carshield.com.

Carshield.com.

You buy a car, it's 5,000 miles, 150,000 miles.

You still have that car.

I've got an old truck.

I brought it in, and I honestly don't know how much it was.

I know it was over $5,000.

I think it was like $7,000 to fix this thing.

I had no idea when I brought it in.

I was just like, yeah, just tune it up, just check it, make sure everything's okay.

What?

I didn't even get a call.

Car Shield just took care of it.

They knew that I had Car Shield.

Car Shield took care of it.

They said, when I arrived, hey, there was a problem.

I said, oh, geez, what did that cost?

And they said, well, it was, I don't know, $7,000.

And I was still reeling from that.

When they said, but we contacted Car Shield and we got it all taken care of, it was all covered.

That's why I don't remember the number.

All I remember is hearing in slow motion, it's all covered, covered, covered, which was fantastic.

Call 1-800-CAR 6,000.

1-800-CAR 6,000.

Use the promo code Beck, you're going to save 10%.

Or you can call

1-800-CAR 6000 or go to CarShield.com.

Either way, use promo code Beck, save 10%.

CarShield.com.

Boy,

it was quite a day yesterday, wasn't it?

Quite a day.

You had in the House, they were doing the people's work.

They were talking to Cohen, who

Cohen actually said yesterday, you know, if Donald Trump loses the election in 2020,

he's not going to go quietly.

Are you saying that the president of the United States

will, what, mount a coup?

That he won't, that he'll barricade himself and order the army to not...

Are you kidding me?

Yeah, then that's going to be like praised by the media.

It was all over the media.

And I pointed this out yesterday.

Excuse me, media.

Every time some crackpot would say, I don't think he's going to, every time.

Every journalist said what?

On the right, oh,

Barack Obama's not going to leave office.

Oh, yeah.

Every time somebody said that, we and every right-wing

host that I know of said, no, he's not going to do that.

So are you actually furthering this conspiracy theory?

Are you kidding me?

Everything they accuse us of, they do

10 times over.

Ten times.

It's not an excuse for us to do it if it's something bad, but it is, it's notable.

It's certainly annoying because every time they give you these big, preachy rants about all the oh, they care so much and they would never do these things.

And the second they have the opportunity to do them, of course, they do.

So, we did something earlier this week on television.

We showed you how the gun grab is actually going to happen.

In fact, I want to review that and go over that later on in the show today.

Oh, sure.

But

they just voted to pass H.R.

8, the bipartisan background checks act of 2019.

Now, who's not for this common sense background check for all firearm sales, including all private transactions and purchases made online and at gun shows?

Only a federally licensed firearms dealer, importer, or manufacturer are required to conduct background checks on customers right now.

Now, the law says that, and I'm quite honestly, I am okay with this.

If I'm gifting a gun to my son, it pisses me off that I would have to do this, but okay, all I have to do is go to my local gun store and have them do the background check of my son.

Okay,

but that's not what they're doing.

That's not what they're doing.

Stu

they respect the Constitution so much.

Oh, I know.

You can, I mean, they've been, this National Emergency Act, they've been talking Constitution all the time.

Right.

Democrats just are so passionate about the Constitution suddenly.

Right.

So they're never going to grab your guns.

No, they know that they'd have to get around the Constitution, and even a national emergency is not going to do that.

So what are they doing?

If you were sitting here and you're thinking, we got to get rid of guns, but America, they'll go to war.

You just try to take their guns.

They're going to go to war over that.

That is the line of a civil war.

It really is.

You try to go after people's guns and take them,

you're going to have a war on your hands, period.

Now,

how else could you do it?

How about if we made it illegal to even transfer a gun or sell a gun unless you went to a dealer, a licensed dealer?

Okay, well, that's not so bad because there's lots of licensed dealers.

But what if you could convince the banking system

to not do transactions or business with gun dealers?

What if you could convince them to say, hey,

we're not going to do any financial transactions or carry any notes or loan any money to a gun manufacturer?

Well, then

you didn't have to enact a law.

You didn't have to take away anybody's guns.

You're just making it impossible to buy, sell, or transfer a gun.

You're just violating the spirit of the Constitution.

That's so much better.

Oh, man, that's

probably violating the actual Constitution as well.

Yeah, no,

we did a big segment on that on TV.

If you happen to be a subscriber, blazetv.com slash Beck.

The proper code is Beck.

You can watch that.

And it goes into depth on the real ⁇ There's several journalists who have taken this on as a sort of personal jihad to tell, to kind of convince these banks to stop allowing any transaction that has to do with firearms.

Oh, yeah.

I want to say C-SPAN, but it's not C-SPAN, it's CNBC.

CNBC is doing

story after story after story with journalists who are saying, you know what?

Banks, you have a financial responsibility to stop doing business with

these kinds of people.

And they're doing it.

This is our financial freedom is slipping through our fingers.

You know, you have to control the media.

You have to control the military.

You have to control the financial sector.

Now, how do you control the financial sector?

Well, you give them money.

You rope them in by doing things like tarp, etc., etc.

You regulate the snot out of them.

And if you control the media and social media, you convince them that it is in their best interest to stop doing business with people that you say are nefarious.

And they're doing it.

We are losing voices every single day.

We are losing power and position every single day.

And they're doing it covertly as they always do.

I am telling you, people are going to wake up in the next five years and they're going to say, when did that change?

Right now, it's been changing for 10 years.

Right now, they are just closing all of these doors.

We all know the founders are stupid old people with teeth that are wooden and hair that's fake.

The hair thing is true, but the teeth is not.

But go ahead.

But the problem is we've never, we haven't developed.

What they did was fine for 1776 and 1791.

Let's think about today.

And what I think.

I think we've come to a point, and I think we've already partially implemented this plan, but I think we now propose a system of justice in which one person would propose a charge, and on, and I would say it should be on Twitter, and then whatever charges get the highest amount of retweets, that means it's a crime.

We've kind of seen it with Bill Cosby, right?

Like we've seen it with,

there was another one recently that the same sort of thing was, oh, it's kind of happening with R.

Kelly, right?

Like, oh, these are

good examples.

No, no.

Well, they committed crimes.

Yeah.

And we didn't, we're like, eh, shrug the shoulders.

Yeah.

But then when we got the retweets, then we turned on the justice system.

Yeah.

Maybe we wait to activate the justice system until the retweet number gets to a certain amount.

I see what you're saying.

I like that.

It's the first layer of justice.

Yes.

Right?

Like, if someone, if someone.

So, in other words, a police officer comes to your house and says, hey, there's a body laying there, and I just found this bloody person holding a knife over the body.

They take a picture.

picture.

A selfie.

The police officer should be a selfie.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Selfie with the body and the murderer, alleged, and then just says, crime?

Right.

And then tweets it out.

And tweets it out.

If they get over like 100,000 retweets, maybe you put on the percentage of population for local crimes.

And if it gets to a certain amount of retweets, then we're like, all right, we walk over to the old justice machine and we turn on the switch.

Well, okay, so I was going to say, we shouldn't probably do it on the first round because sometimes people get it wrong, you know, like they they did in Covington.

But then we all know that that guy, if he isn't guilty of that, he's guilty of something.

Well, would you see his face?

He's got such a punchable face, as we learn from every blue check mark on Twitter.

But I think this is part of it, Glenn.

Part of it is you take people who it's not about whether they committed the crime or not.

R.

Kelly and Bill Cosby looks like they definitely did do really terrible things.

And the Covington kid didn't.

But there's plenty of retweets.

Put him in prison.

That's the sort of justice system we need.

Look, if people are willing to take their time and invest it in retweeting a possible criminal action.

You can just do that without reading or thinking about it.

Exactly.

Throw them in prison.

Right.

And then

at some point, Netflix will release a documentary about their innocence.

And when that gets enough retweets, they're freed.

I like it.

I like it.

It's basically automated.

And our founders didn't see that.

No, they didn't see Twitter.

No.

How about this?

A A certain amount of tweets just unlocks the door of the cell and they walk out.

Like, we don't even have to have to.

Like it, like it, like it, like it.

That way we can get the capitalists out of the prison system.

Yes.

Yeah.

Well, except for Jack.

He'll be essentially making all decisions on our justice system.

No, but Jack is a Marxist with a monocle.

Now, I want you to think about this.

Okay.

There are Marxists who actually believe it, okay?

But most of the Marxists are the Marxists with the monocle, you know, the Monopoly guy monocle, right?

Who are like, yeah, I mean,

I am selling this Che shirt, so I am making money off of that.

I am using the capitalist system, but I'm a Marxist.

Well, I think one of the most important things about being a Marxist is to get all the capital.

from the capitalists so you can do the just things exactly right it's a marxist in a monocle there you go and Jack is a Marxist in a monocle.

There we go.

All right.

Here we go.

I mean, what it's the first break of the show.

We've already solved the legal system.

Hey, what do you want to go next?

I've I, I've, I,

you didn't even notice the connection to AOC.

She's a Marxist in a monocle as well.

Oh, yes.

Right?

You put in, now you'd have to have a really big, weird, creepy-sized monocle to cover one of her eyes.

But she's a Marxist in a monocle as well.

You'd be using 30% of U.S.

glass output to get a monocle over that eye.

Torning is like, wait, wait, she needs a monocle?

Quick, buy up the rest of the stock.

All right, I want to talk to you about if you're in constant pain and not the kind of pain that comes from just having to read this crap every day.

Having to read the news day after day after day.

Have you seen me lately?

This is what happens to you, kids.

Can Relief Factor cure the Michael Cohen hearings?

No.

No?

No.

I tried.

It took morphine.

Took morphine.

Really?

Yeah.

Now, if you'd like something,

I was going to say 100% natural, but I'm telling you, opium is natural, baby.

Well, not by this.

It's kind of a different definition, I think, we're talking about here.

I just pined for the days when cocaine was actually in Coca-Cola, but that's just me.

Anyway,

this is 100% natural.

It's drug-free.

It was developed by doctors just to figure out how can we naturally reduce inflammation?

Because that's really where most of our pain is coming from.

Our body is inflamed.

You got to control the inflammation.

So they came up with Relief Factor.

It works for about 70% of the people.

70% of the people try it for three weeks.

And I mean, you do what I would do.

I would try it for three weeks.

And if it doesn't work, I'm not going to order some more.

That's why they have the three-week trial period at $19.95.

Because if it works in three weeks, it's going to work for you.

If it doesn't, if you don't see any results, stop taking it.

But they so believe in it that they know try it for three weeks.

70% of the people that do come back and order more month after month after month, just like I do.

I take it three times a day, and it has dramatically changed my life.

Relief Factor.

Has anybody noticed the show has gotten a little funnier lately?

It's because he's not miserable all the time.

That might be it.

ReliefFactor.com.

That's relief factor.com.

Call 800-500-8384, 800-500-8384.

It's relief factor.com.

10 seconds station ID.

So should we, should we, should we name the lawmakers that didn't stick to their guns?

The

Republicans?

Sure.

Sounds like fun.

Looks like Peter King.

No, he's terrible.

What?

Peter King is awful.

Now, if you'd want someone for good NFL analysis, Peter King is pretty good.

It's just a different Peter King.

The Peter King that's in Congress sucks.

Well, I don't know about that.

Breaking news.

I don't know about that.

So

he voted for this disaster of a Democratic gun control bill.

It was HR 8, by the way, because it's the eight-year anniversary of the Gabby Giffords shooting, which if you remember correctly,

if you remember correctly, that was the one that Sarah Palin asked people to go commit.

She was like, you know what?

Hey, go shoot this woman while she's standing at a grocery store.

No.

As it turns out, it was a psycho that was actually a Democrat, a wild progressive.

But I don't even need to point that out because he was crazy.

Yeah, I don't even know.

It wasn't even a wild progressive.

I just remember his big thing was grammar.

He believed grammar was attacking, like, people were using grammar in some way and, like, some grand conspiracy to attack the plan.

He was crazy.

As I said,

we didn't even need to point that out.

But we do need to point that out because they blamed that on me, on Sarah Palin, on everybody else at the time.

The Tea Party.

That was a Tea Party shooting.

No, it wasn't.

It was targeting.

Remember,

she had a poster.

I didn't want to talk about it.

It was targeted a district.

And now, of course, she is.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

She was there as they kind of went through this process with the bill.

And I believe her husband is now running for something in Arizona.

So it's become

a big rallying cry.

Of course, again,

I don't know how any of this stuff is constitutional, especially at the federal level.

It's a whole nother story.

It's not something that's going to get passed right now.

Obviously, the Republican Senate can make sure that that does not happen, at least for the time being.

But you want to think if the Democrats do get control of the presidency and they get control of the House House and the Senate, which if they win the presidency is most likely,

it would be very hard for Republicans to hold the Senate if they lose the presidency.

So going into this, if that happens, you will have Democrats in control of everything and the opportunity for them to take the next step in the sort of Overton window we're going through right now.

First, it was Democrats, oh, we only need 50 votes for judges.

Then Republicans, oh, we only need 50 votes for Supreme Court justices.

And the president has asked several times for only 50 votes for legislation.

Well, you're going to tell me Bernie Sanders isn't going to implement that the second he gets into office, or Betto or Rourke, or anyone else?

It's a democracy.

Right.

50, that's all.

Majority rules.

And they'll start implementing that stuff quickly.

I love this.

Majority rules.

When, when has America ever stood for the majority?

Seriously.

I mean, the whole country was created by a minority, right?

A minority of crazy people who who decided to leave another continent and come here.

Right.

And the whole idea is you cannot, the majority cannot oppress the individual.

And now we're like, a majority rules.

No, it doesn't.

No, it doesn't.

Not to the expense of the individual.

That's the problem with socialism.

I don't, you know, I don't even know how I'm giving.

I don't know how I'm giving this speech tomorrow.

I'm going to talk about socialism.

I have so many things to talk about at CPAC.

And

they're like, okay, everybody gets 12 minutes.

And I'm like, 12 minutes?

I can't even say hello to a crowd in 10 minutes

or 12 minutes.

It's true.

I've had meetings with you before.

And nothing even, I mean, they don't even start until 25 hours.

I mean, you can come to any of our stage shows.

You can come 30 minutes in it.

And I still haven't really gotten to the material yet.

So I've got something.

It started out at 30 minutes.

We've been working on it for a week, have it down to 18 minutes.

And I was thinking today, the problem is I always ad lib.

So if I cut it down to 12, it'll still be 18.

So I have to cut the text down to four minutes.

How are you going to talk about socialism in four minutes?

It's really bad.

That's about what you can do.

Good night, everybody.

Good night, everybody.

So I'm opening tomorrow.

And Mike Pence is going to be speaking as well.

I like Mike Pence a lot.

He's going to be speaking later in the day.

I'm curious to see how the CPAC crowd is going to

react when I walk out because it's always dicey.

Because remember, the first time I was there, I was like, you know, CPAC, you're part of the problem.

That was your big speech, yeah.

That was my big speech.

Yeah,

you progressives in

this auditorium right here, many of you are running CPAC.

It didn't go over really well.

You don't get invited to a lot of things,

and that's why.

I know, I know.

So we're talking to socialism, so it's about socialism.

So if there are any socialists, you won't like the speech tomorrow.

You're listening to Glenn Beck.

Man,

realestateagentsitrust.com, this is, look, you want to do business with people who feel the same way that you do, right?

I mean, you want to do business with people who have your same values, especially when it's the biggest transaction that you will ever make, buying and selling a home.

You want somebody that knows the business, knows what they're doing, knows what the real value of the house is that you're selling or you're buying, knows how to negotiate, and does it with principles.

That's what realestate agentsitrust.com is really all about.

We started this because I had a problem.

How do you find a good real estate agent?

How do you know you're getting somebody that you can trust and really knows it?

Go to realestateagentsitrust.com.

They'll help you buy or sell your home fast.

Get moving now with RealEstate Agents I Trust.com.

Real Estate Agents I Trust.com.

Blazetv.com/slash Beck is the place to go.

You can see this show every day.

If for some reason you wanted to see us instead of just hearing us, use the promo code Beck and get 10 bucks off.

Welcome to the program.

Hey, Pat Gray is joining us.

Pat, did you see the Nike ad?

The Nike ad?

The women's power Nike ad?

Yes.

You saw that yesterday?

In case you didn't see it, do we have the actual Nike ad?

The original Nike ad?

This is the one

about women.

Now watch this.

Go ahead and play that.

If we show emotion, we're called dramatic.

They're showing a woman crying after sports.

If we want to play against men, we're nuts.

They're playing a woman.

And if we dream of equal opportunity,

delusional.

When we stand for something, we're unhinged.

Super, it's going to be the calm down.

When we're too good, there's something wrong with us.

Okay, stop.

And if we get...

So they're saying, you know, you're crazy.

Nonsense.

Nonsense, right?

That is nonsense.

We've redone the ad.

Now,

this is, if you're watching the Blaze, you're going to really appreciate it.

I'm not going to say what the images are, but you'll understand.

If you're listening to the radio, you'll understand probably the second image in.

Here we go.

We've redone it.

If we show emotion, we're called dramatic.

I'm sorry.

If we want to play against men, we're nuts.

We want to stop it and you want to play those games.

Have a nice day.

And if we dream of equal opportunity,

delusional.

I am a man and I demand to be treated as an individual and I demand to be treated equally.

When we stand for something, we're unhinged.

I will stand with Israel.

I will stand with the Jewish people.

When we're too good, there's something wrong with us.

Beck had long argued that radical Islamists were pursuing a dream of establishing a caliphate in the Middle East.

And that's exactly what ISIS has managed to do.

And if we get angry, we're hysterical, or rational, or just being crazy.

I haven't seen anyone in Washington say I was wrong about the caliphate.

Oh, I seem to have been wrong.

Crazy, crazy, crazy, crazy, and crazy.

Do I want to vaporize France as much as I want to vaporize you?

So if they want to call you crazy

and you want to call me crazy,

go to hell.

Fine.

Show them what crazy can do.

Either Nike has it wrong, or Glenn Beck is a woman.

And it's debatable.

I'm not sure.

Well, for a long time, we've suspected you're about 85% woman.

I went with answer B.

Yeah, it's definitely that way.

It should certainly be posted on social with a poll.

Is Nike Rowland?

That would be hard for our listeners.

It would be.

It really would be.

It would be.

It would be.

So, Pat, as we were speaking about confused gender roles,

Michael Jackson, there's a new documentary, and I know this comes as a shock.

Two shocks in a row.

Democrats did try to take away your guns yesterday.

They passed a bill.

I know.

It's crazy.

And Michael Jackson apparently was attracted to little boys.

What?

Yeah.

Yeah.

We see that start.

Not recently, I can promise that.

Yeah, yeah.

So there's this new documentary out, and it's pretty disturbing.

It's out for HBO this weekend.

Looking forward to seeing it because it's apparently really convincing.

Every article I've read and every review about the documentary is that they do a heck of a job convincing people, even though they lied under oath and they admit that and they talk about that.

Yeah, because they were the star witnesses on Michael Jackson's behalf in the 92 or 93.

What is their excuse?

Because they defended him because of that weird relationship they had with him.

They loved him and they wanted to defend him.

It's interesting.

I actually am most interested in seeing you watch this, Pat, because you're one of the only people I know who kind of bounces back and forth as to whether you think Jackson did this stuff.

For a long time, I thought he was just asexual.

I just, and he had sleepovers with boys because he had a stunted childhood.

And it's

so he did it as an adult.

Right.

I think that you could make the case.

Pat and I talked about this for years back in the 80s and 90s, that this guy had his childhood taken from him, and he didn't know how to behave.

He didn't know what was real.

He didn't have any normal relationships.

And he became super, super awkward as an adult.

And you could see him being asexual.

Now, when he was like, no, there's nothing wrong with sleeping with a little boy.

Yeah, it was a little creepy.

Then you were like, no, I don't think so.

I suspected he was guilty and believed he was guilty, but you know, of course, you're just guessing.

Until that interview, then the interview happened, and I was like, oh, yeah, 100% now.

I thought he was guilty.

Are you talking about the interview with Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes or whatever that was?

That's the one where he was saying, I think it was.

60 Minutes.

Are you still saying that it's okay for a 45-year-old man to sleep with 12-year-old boys not related to him in their bed?

Of course.

Of course.

Why not?

That was a little weird.

That was a little weird.

Well,

not as weird as this

new revelation that one of the boys

did a wedding with Michael Jackson.

I don't know who was the bride, but the kid was.

The kid was the bride.

Yeah.

And the parents didn't

But they found out, and he supposedly, I mean, this is all alleged, that Jackson paid a million dollars to the father of the kid so that he wouldn't say anything about it.

Well, he would have the transaction.

Well, they had

another part of both the trial and that interview because he had paid off so many kids.

So many.

I mean, it was just hard to

believe he didn't do it.

Tens of millions of dollars.

But

you don't remember when you were wed to that 45-year-old man?

No, I don't remember that at all.

Really?

No.

He blocked it out?

Probably.

Yeah, because that's so normal.

No recollection.

Oh, how many 45-year-old men do that?

Have sleepovers with 12-year-old boys.

Well, and then

dress the little boy up like a little girl and then marry him.

And marry him.

Ah, it's so common.

Happens in some of the best cults in the world.

No, it's very weird.

It's definitely weird.

And I will say, though, sometimes you do pay off people who didn't ⁇ who

allegedly avoid the public.

Exactly.

They'll give you an example from yesterday's testimony uh michael cohen said he was going out to look to potentially pay off or buy a story about melania trump being hit in an elevator with then there was video of it and he's like number one i don't think it happened and number two like i'll say a lot of bad things about donald trump but he would never do that he would never hit melania and so like and like and they oh and he they didn't believe it was true they still pursued it to try to kill it out of the media because you know when you're at a certain level you do those things

you do you know the parents are culpable too here.

Big time.

If he did do this, then the parents are negligent and they should do time as well.

If somebody comes to me with a million dollars and says, hey, yeah, I know I married your son.

Oh, my gosh.

I don't care how much money you offer me.

No.

I'm going to please.

You are.

Or to allow them to stay over at Michael Jackson's house in the first place.

Yeah, that's crazy.

Think of the most famous person in the world right now.

Would you allow your children to spend the weekend with him?

No.

Hey, how about I drop them off Friday night and we'll pick them back up Monday morning?

No.

Do you remember when Michael Jackson called in on the show?

This is years and years ago.

Oh, this was after Valentine's Day, wasn't it?

It was Valentine's Day, and he wanted to, you know, we did the, like we just did on Valentine's Day where we bailed the guys out that,

you know, missed it or couldn't get flowers or whatever.

A couple of the year program.

Yeah.

And Michael Jackson wanted to participate in it?

Yeah, this is

the day after, I think it was.

He had heard it or 12 years ago.

He heard it initially and I think wanted to get in on it the next day.

Yeah.

So here it is.

Oh, you're on the Glenn Beck program.

Hi, Michael.

Hello.

Hey.

Hello, Glenn.

It's Michael.

Michael, how are you?

Well, I'm so sick of hearing about all of these freaks in the news.

Yes, I know you are.

There are so many freaks all over the media coverage.

It's horrifying.

I know.

Are you in the hospital?

I'm very sick.

You're very sick.

What What happened?

I know you were taken right to the hospital.

I was taken right to the hospital.

I'm here.

I feel awful.

You're still at the hospital.

I had a chance to listen to your show yesterday.

You did?

It was wonderful.

Really?

Can I still get in on that Couple of the Year thing?

I love that.

No, we've pretty much closed the door on the Couple of the Year thing.

We would really like an opportunity to be involved.

Well, this is where we would call, you know, your wife and, you know, apologize.

You didn't do anything for Valentine's Day?

Well, I hung out at the Chuck E.

Cheese.

It was wonderful.

Yes.

And then a private party there was terrific.

I love children.

I would never hurt a child.

I know.

I have the form here.

You'd have to fill out the form.

Oh, I filled out the form.

You filled it out?

You filled it out on the website?

I'm ready to go.

Okay, let's see.

Dear Mr.

Beck, I've never entered a contest like this before.

However, I felt I had to tell you about my beautiful cancerous fan.

I really can't express in words how uniquely wonderful the unnamed accuser truly is.

Honestly, at first, I thought I was attracted to

his age.

I don't think this is going to work, Michael.

Wonderful.

Keep going.

But as time went on, it turned into so much more.

I guess I knew it was true love the first time we

took the training wheels off his bike.

Hello?

Yes.

And that trip to the secret room behind the giant teddy bear.

Wow.

That was what a perfect time that was.

I guess what sets him apart is the distinctive way he isn't old.

Unlike any other

boy in the world of amusement park owning pedophile victims.

I'm sorry, unlike anybody.

Why was that?

Any other boy in the world of amusement park owning pedophile victims?

Anyway, I could go on forever, but that would take away from my time with him.

And I have to get back to work at the Neverland Ranch, where I molest children from 9 to 5 Mondays through Fridays, and sometimes in the overnights when they're sleeping.

Everyone always tries to make love so complex, and that's why I think we should be your Valentine's Couple of the year.

Because for me, it's simple.

I just love wine,

coloring books, and Corey Feldman.

Yeah,

we should have seen it.

We should have seen it.

All the signs were there.

There were hints when you, when you, I mean, I don't want to attack it here, but you see it here.

Yeah.

But you don't want to make too much of those answers, do you?

No.

No.

No, he had a bad childhood.

All right.

Let me tell you about blinds.com.

Blinds.com is the number one online blinds retailer in the world.

They have been selling.

I wasn't more clear earlier on.

Oh, my gosh.

Okay, they've been selling blinds online since 1996.

That's when everybody was on dial-up, so they had had to be really, really good at what they do.

And they've perfected this.

This is why they're the number one online retailer in the world for blinds.

Blinds.com.

Go to blinds.com right now.

You're going to save a lot.

You're going to get free samples.

You're going to get free shipping.

free on online design consultation 100% satisfaction guarantee it's all at blinds.com right now up until March 5th you'll get an additional 5% off the already great site-wide savings with the promo code Beck.

So, use the promo code back when you go to blinds.com and you'll get an additional 5% off.

That's blinds.com promo code BECK.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I'm having a difficult time catching my breath after

the Michael Jackson phone call

that just happened on the program.

By the way,

is this just another reason why you would say, I'm really glad I don't live in Portland?

Apparently, on the light rail train, what a surprise, Portland has one.

There was an unwelcome passenger with some.

And there's a picture here of a llama

on the light rail in Portland.

Well, it's just the one llama.

Not like there's multiple llamas.

Right.

And the old guy with the beard,

he's got the llama on a leash.

What?

It's his service llama.

Really, when you look at the llama from at least the perspective you're showing it to me, it kind of looks like it's an old guy with a beard.

Well, that's kind of...

Maybe in Portland.

Sure.

So is she saying there's something wrong with this?

That llamas, are you

an an anti-lamist?

What's your...

Well, no, I mean, this is

Caesar is the, quote, no-drama llama

and very well-behaved.

And he was well-behaved on his ride.

And he is, I'm not kidding you, a service animal.

He's a.

Is he an emotional support llama?

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

I noticed this

quite a trend.

Number one, with emotional support animals.

Number two, children's book authors have discovered that llama rhymes with both drama and mama, which gives them a lot of opportunities for rhymes in children's books.

Lots of books released

that

here is the complaint, Stu.

Transit police and fare inspectors, according to some, harass people of color, but apparently white people can do whatever the F they want.

That's a good hot take on that.

Wow, that's sizzling, isn't it?

Yeah,

because a guy bringing a llama on a train is a race issue now.

Every, oh,

it's amazing.

It's like,

here is

Martin Luther King who says, our goal here is to be colorblind, to make color not an issue.

And the result of his movement is color is the only issue.

No, this is not gender.

Gender shouldn't be an issue.

You shouldn't care about it.

It's a woman or a man you're hiring for that job.

By the way, it's the only thing that matters now.

Color and gender are the only two things that matter.

Everything can be boiled down to a just, every decision you make is based on whether you dislike black people or don't like women or think gay people are bad.

Maybe, just maybe, you make rational decisions based on the evidence available.

Like, what are you talking about?

You know, maybe llamas on trains, not a good idea whether they're white or black.

Maybe.

Who are you to say that I can't bring my

emotional support llama onto a train?

You know what?

Put all the llamas in the back of the train.

Give them their own car.

Separate the llamas from the people.

They're lesser than us.

Portland, no, don't do it.

Fill your light rail.

I pay money for a herd of llamas to ride

the light rail.

Let's do it.

Come on, there's got to be a llama rancher out there someplace that will take me up.

Let's fill Portland's light rail with llamas.

You're listening to Glenn Beck.

Let me tell you about American Financing.

American Financing, according to new data, more than half a million homeowners could lower their mortgage rates if you just refinance right now.

Are you one of those people?

Rates are still on the decline, sitting at a nine-month low.

It takes 10 minutes to call the salary-based mortgage consultants at American American Financing to learn more.

Get started now with a free mortgage pre-qualification from the salary-based mortgage consultants at American Financing.

They have an A-plus rating with the BBB, over 2,500 Google reviews.

They never charge upfront fees like some lenders do.

They charge just 500 bucks just to qualify.

They utilize every single loan that is out there.

They are working for you, not the bank.

You want the best deal, refinance, save a buttload of money, and a lot of hassle just by going to AmericanFinancing.net.

That's AmericanFinancing.net or call 800-906-24-40.

800-906-2440.

AmericanFinancing.net.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is the Glenbeck program.

Yesterday was a bizarre day.

We had a hearing on Capitol Hill that really made no sense unless you were a member of the media.

Then you were like, this guy makes

a lot of sense.

Michael Cohen was a joke.

He's always been a joke.

He's not credible.

He's never been credible.

Well, but he did say yesterday, well, I think the president won't give up the Oval Office without a fight, even if he loses the election.

Oh, really?

So, while the world was distracted by a lot of different circus shows, there was something important happening at the Supreme Court.

And it looks good for conservatives, at least at this point.

We'll tell you about it from a guy who was in the room at the Supreme Court yesterday.

Next.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Back to that story in one minute.

I want to talk to you a little bit about 23andMe.

We got our 23andMe DNA test back.

My son is 0.3%

African,

which I don't know if that's going to help him get into college.

I'm 1.3% Native American.

That's 13 times more Native American than Elizabeth Warren.

And I normally wouldn't care, but it just feels good to be able to say, you know,

I'm 13 times more special than Elizabeth Warren.

Maybe I'll apply for some teaching gigs somewhere.

Let's see if I can get those teaching gigs now.

Or are they going to oppress the red man in me?

I'm just not.

I think every time something goes wrong for you, that is your new answer.

They just don't like Native Americans.

Embrace it.

Embrace it.

23andMe, you can get not only your ancestry, but you get personalized insights based on your DNA with more than 125 genetic reports on health traits and so much more.

It really is a great place to start for health, and it is a great place to start if you want to track your ancestry.

It's 23andMe.

It was actually a lot of fun.

We did this with the whole family.

My son is adopted, so we needed to know his ancestry.

And it was fascinating And is really, we've talked about it, I think, every night since we had the test done.

And the kids and the whole family waited for it for the two weeks that it took to turn the DNA back

around.

23andMe.com.

Join us in this search for your history and your health.

23andMe.com/slash Beck.

That's 23andMe.com/slash Beck.

Kelly Shackelford, Esquire.

I don't know what that means.

Does that mean you're an attorney?

Does it just sound special?

Is that what it means?

Because it just sounds cool.

Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO of First Liberty Institute, joins us.

The First Liberty, in case you don't know, is the largest legal firm in the nation that all they do is try to protect religious freedom in America, fighting the good fight.

You were in the Supreme Court yesterday, and

First Liberty

was defending something that was a statue that has been around forever, commemorating those who lost their lives in World War I.

And a bunch of atheists got together and said, this is in the shape of a cross, and the city is mowing the lawn around it.

That's not right.

and wanted it removed.

What happened yesterday, Kelly?

Well, it's kind of surreal, as you say, that we're even at the Supreme Court on this.

I mean, this is the Peace Cross in Maryland, right outside of D.C.

It was put up almost 100 years ago by mothers who lost their sons in World War I, along with the American Legion.

And

at this point, you know, before the Supreme Court makes its decision, we are at a point where the Court of Appeals said it's unconstitutional.

After 100 years, we're going to have to tear it down.

In fact, one of the judges on the appellate court said, why don't we just cut the arms off the cross?

Won't that take care of any offense?

And

so

I can't even believe we're in this battle, but I think it might be something that could turn something really bad into good.

We'll see.

There's an approach, Glenn, that has been used now for many decades by the Supreme Court that has created just chaos in this whole area of the law, the establishment clause.

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.

It's called a lemon test.

Lemon test, that's right.

And the lemon test has no,

there's no parameters, right, on the lemon test.

We don't really know what that even means, do we?

No, they added to it, and part of the test now is that if

a person in the community were to walk by a memorial and they were to see that it's religious and it made it feel like an outsider in the community, then that's a violation of the establishment clause.

What?

Yes.

And so it's kind of the, it's what's called the offended observer gets to bring a lawsuit.

And it's like Justice Gorsuch yesterday made clear, he said, we don't allow this in any area of the law.

Somebody to come forward and say they're offended and therefore they have a right to, you know, bring lawsuits under the Constitution because they're offended.

But that's where we are with this.

There are a group of people, a small group of people, that don't want this memorial.

And so they want to tear it down.

And so, again, bad news is what happened below.

Good news is we have a shot here, and there was a lot of discussion about this yesterday.

And this was our goal to get rid of this bad lemon test that has created so much trouble in our country.

And really, it's created hostility to religion, which is not what the founders ever wanted.

Right.

So why do you think that this went so well yesterday?

Well, I think it's clear that some people would say there might even be up to seven justices who agree that there's nothing wrong with this memorial.

Again, the facts are so solid in this case.

I mean, the reason the cross was used, I mean, they're trying to say, well, they use the cross because they're supporting one religion over another and they're doing all this stuff.

The cross was used, if you look at any history, you go back at World War I,

millions of young men died, and they were putting them in graves overseas so quickly, and they were just slapping a cross in front of everybody just to make sure they knew there was a person.

And the pictures that came back were row after row after row of crosses as far as you can see.

And there were poems written about this and everything else.

So that was the universal symbol they picked to honor those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.

And so the idea of tearing down this memorial after 100 years would just be a disgrace and it would be unfathomable.

And I think the court realizes that.

So I think the only issue that is coming out of this is going to be, are they going to change the test, this test that's been used to kind of create these attacks on religious symbols and monuments and things around the country?

And

there were a number of justices, including the chief justice,

who

made clear that this thing is a mess.

This test, Glenn, this tells you something.

They use it when they want to knock something down, but then they ignore the test completely when they have to uphold something that the founders clearly thought was okay.

So there was a case just a few years ago about can you have prayer to open city council meetings?

Well, the founders had prayer to open their meetings.

They even paid a chaplain.

And so they couldn't say that that's unconstitutional under the establishment clause.

But if they had applied the lemon test, they'd have had to strike it down.

So they didn't apply the test.

So they talked about this yesterday and said, this is, I mean, we can do what we want as the Supreme Court, but we're forcing all the lower courts.

They have no idea what the law is, what things to apply.

And I think they know they need to do something.

And I think there's a really good shot that they're going to get rid of what has created really a catastrophe in this area of the law.

Kelly, if I'm not mistaken, the way the court is ruling on things,

there is a change in the court.

And is it just the addition of Gorsuch

that is happening?

There seems to be, and when it comes to religion, that the Supreme Court is starting to

define those boundaries a little bit clearer and actually protect.

Haven't we had several cases this session where they are protecting religious liberty?

There's some huge signals coming out, Glenn.

This case is one of them.

I think we now have five justices for the first time, maybe since the 1920s,

who actually believe in following the written word of the Constitution.

Holy cow.

And that's going to result in things changing because they're going to say it's not about what we want.

It's about what the framers said, what the Constitution said, what it means.

And I think when it comes to religious freedom, we have five that are really pretty solid on religious freedom.

I think Kavanaugh is a guy who, I mean, he donated,

Kavanaugh is a young attorney, donated his time on a case with me, you know, almost 20 years ago.

He's been committed to religious freedom his whole life.

He understands it.

And I think the same about Roberts, who's considered a swingboat a lot of of times.

So I think we're going to start to see some clarity and some good decisions come out.

And we're talking about the establishment clause.

We have another case, the Coach Kennedy case, the coach who got fired for going to a knee after the football game to say 20-minute silent prayer.

They issued a statement before conservative justices last month on that case that sent shockwaves throughout the country.

And that is, at the end of the decision that they had laid down, they actually said, you know, we've noticed that you brought a free speech claim first, not a free exercise of religion claim.

And they said that might be because of this decision, which is called the Smith decision, that has created such damage to the free exercise of religion.

And they said, but we haven't been asked to overturn that yet.

So that's not a subtle hint that they're ready to go after some of these really bad cases that have really hurt religious freedom for the last, you know, four or five decades.

And so, both on the establishment clause and the free exercise clause, both the religion clauses, we're really excited.

You know, it's amazing, Kelly.

The press is so focused on Donald Trump.

I mean, he is the ultimate red herring.

No comment on his hair.

He really is.

I mean, they are so focused on him that you could go in and say every baby gets an automatic weapon through the Supreme Court or through Congress, and I don't think that the press would even focus on it because they're so focused on him.

We feel like we're losing the battles almost every day because we see these huge leaps of power for the left that we're not seeing or hearing because nobody's reporting on these victories in the court and what's really happening in the court.

It's game-changing, isn't it?

It It is.

I can't agree with you more.

This is, I mean, I've been doing religious freedom work my entire life and,

you know, been working hard.

And I feel like everything we've all been working for for the last 30 years is beginning to happen and not in small ways.

And I think

this is going to be a huge return of power to the people.

getting the government out of sort of being the the religious monuments police.

And, you know,

part of the things we're talking about just from the case yesterday, you know, think of all the, you know, the menorahs that have been said, well, you can't put that menorah up in public around Hanukkah, or you can't do the Nativity scene, or you can't, you know, we can't have that Ten Commandments, or I mean, oh, my gosh, you've got a steeple on your city seal.

Well, you know, and so all that stuff is ridiculous if you're talking to the founders.

And I think, I mean, this case could end all of that.

And it'll it'll affect much more, but that's just real life things that people are used to seeing.

And so I think both the establishment clause and the free exercise clause, there's great hope.

We'll have to wait and see what the decisions are.

But I think it's going to be a really, I mean, we're talking about decades changing sort of the hinge point of history.

Like we've had decades of some really bad law, and I think we're about to move towards some decades of some really good law and religious freedom and the First Amendment.

I will tell you that David Barton told me that he said, Glenn, if the things come out the way they're feeling, he said, by the end of this session, he said, we may have more religious freedom than any time since the founding of the nation.

He said they've been screwing it up for so long.

He said, I think we're going back to the way things were originally intended.

Would you agree with that or is that too far?

No, I do.

I mean,

it's kind of silly.

You know, most nonprofit groups like our legal firm have a vision statement, and they're kind of pie in the sky.

You know,

if this happens, this would be Nirvana, right?

And ours is to return the country to the religious freedom that was the vision of our founders.

I never thought I would see it in my lifetime, but I think that's now what we're going to see, because we actually have justices who want to follow what the Constitution and the founders were doing.

And that's just unique.

We haven't seen that in our lifetime.

And so I think we're going to start to see decisions go back to what that founding vision was and the religious freedom that this country was built on.

And I think that's only going to be a blessing for the country and the future of everything we do.

Wow.

Kelly, thank you so much.

And thank you for the hard work that you've put in for so long.

Chief Counsel, First Liberty Institute, if you want to be involved, you want to donate.

I mean, they are doing amazing work right now.

Firstliberty.org, firstliberty.org.

Kelly, thank you so much.

God bless.

Thank you, Glenn.

You bet.

Now, if we could just get the justices to be good on the freedom of speech part, the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment.

Counter blessings on this.

I know.

No, I know.

We can get one amendment.

If we can get one-fifth of one amendment, which is what we're talking about, that's a huge win.

Do you see this thing in the New York Times about if you are going to splurge on buying something?

Yeah.

You should buy something, spend money where you spend the most time.

So the author's like, I works at home and has figured out now that the office chair would be a better value because then he was considering buying like a video game.

But they're saying eight cents per hour is what they figured out it actually costs.

Wow.

Eight cents per hour after like a year, which is like, that's pretty cost-effective.

If you're working at home to get like an ex-chair, for example, if I might suggest, you are

at a point where you're basically spending nothing for the amount of time you're there.

It's helping your posture.

It's comfortable.

You know,

I just saw an ad for, I think they're Herman Miller chairs.

And anybody who's ever seen a Herman Miller chair and thought, oh, I want, someday I want a Herman Miller chair,

you're only thinking that because you've never had a Herman Miller chair.

Those are the really expensive chairs.

And

they're not all that.

They really aren't.

They look great and you sit in them for a while and you're like, okay, that's a pretty good chair.

They're not.

I had one when we were in New York.

Didn't even bring it down here.

And they're really expensive.

And I just went back to normal chairs.

Now the X chair, which is cheaper than that one, this is a great chair.

I mean, we just ordered, I'm supposed to go up and if I can get to the studio tomorrow, do this show in the studio in Washington, D.C.

I ordered a chair for up in the studio.

We didn't do that with the Miller chair.

I did that with this because it's great.

It will really help your posture, your back, everything.

It's just comfortable.

So you can check them out now.

They have them, you know, for all sizes and all walks of life and

all prices.

So call 8444XChair and find out about it.

You can go online and visit xchairbeck.com.

xchairbeck.com.

You go there and you can find out all about them.

Make them any way that you want them.

xchairbeck.com.

Use the promo code Beck and you'll get a free foot rest.

Oh, and it's $100 off.

XChairbeck.com or call 844-4XChair.

10 seconds, station ID.

Coming up on the Glenn Beck program in 35 minutes,

what HR8 is really all about and why there is

hidden steps that are being taken that make H.R.

8, the common sense bipartisan gun control bill that the Congress passed yesterday, why it's not common sense, what you need to see.

They're building things separately, and when they all come together, that's when there's a problem.

Losing your gun rights without you ever figuring it out until it's too late, coming up in about 35 minutes on this program.

Also, I have to say thank you to everyone listening and viewing on the Blaze story today and the media post.

The Blaze is on fire, how it overtook Breitbart, and now has The Blaze as the number two conservative site on the internet just behind Fox News.

So it's really cool.

143%

growth in the last year.

Going out of business.

Well,

I mean, I don't think it's going out of business.

No, I know.

I know.

I mean, there's part of me, and I'm going to celebrate in this, and then I'll never say it again.

Don't bet against a man who has nothing to lose.

Just going to say that.

All right.

Go ahead.

I think it's exciting.

And, you know, the audience has been there the entire time.

Yes.

And thank you for this, for that.

And the growth in the ratings has been really strong over the past year.

We never talk about this stuff because it's

meaningless.

People don't care.

But I mean, it matters to us to at least say thank you.

And

we do notice.

I mean, we look at the radio ratings.

The radio ratings are through the roof.

Everything has been just amazing.

And we are greatly blessed.

And we are blessed by a very loyal audience.

And thank you.

Just thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.

I may have given up, but you never gave up on us.

And

I really am grateful for that.

And

just watch us grow now.

Exciting.

So we're number two behind Fox.

Yeah, Fox is so number two conservative media site behind Fox.

Yeah, and then it goes Washington Examiner is now third.

Breitbart is all the way back to fourth.

Then Washington Times, Daily Caller, and Western Journal and National Review.

And Daily Wire is after that.

So there's a lot of good sites in that.

You know, look, there's a lot of good sites in that group.

We're honored.

And I'll just say,

we'll be even better when

we had CRTV.

So then we merged and we went at Blaze TV.

And I think Blaze TV Wire would be great.

Yeah.

You're really pushing this one, aren't you?

And we could even be Daily Blaze TV Wire.

At some point, people's fingers get tired from typing.

Yeah.

No, it wouldn't be the Daily Wire.

It'd be the daily caller, daily Blaze TV Wire.

I'm just going to merge all of them together into one conglomerate.

I'm just

saying.

It worked.

What happens when you get everybody together and we're one big powerhouse that

has the clout that can move as one body.

We saw the reason why Fox News became as big as it was is because it was big enough and powerful enough to say, we don't care

and mount offensives instead of being on defense all the time.

Yeah, I mean, look, it worked for AOL Time Warner.

It could work for us.

Wait.

Hold this.

I'll rethink that one in the middle.

It was super deadly.

Yeah, let's come back to that.

In fact, just forget the whole daily Blaze TV wire thing now that I think about it.

You're listening to Glenn.

I haven't seen that yet.

My Patriot supply.

I want to talk to you about when emergency strikes, what's your first impulse, right?

That's, you know, that's your first one.

But then the second one is probably, but we got to go to the grocery store.

We got to get some groceries.

Well, the groceries, by the time you stop going,

the grocery store has already been depleted.

All right.

We are,

mark my words, history will show that we are already in or at the very beginning of what I believe is World War III, and it's all happening with ones and zeros.

That's not me.

That's Vladimir Putin.

It's all happening with ones and zeros.

When you need food, when you need to protect your family from storms or from whatever could come your way, make sure you are prepared.

Go to preparewithglenn.com right now.

Get your food storage that's good, good for you, and last, preparewithglenn.com 800-200-7163.

Been bragging about all the growth.

Why not get on board right now?

Blazetv.com/slash Beck before the URL gets too long.

Use the promo code Beck.

I'm going to bring on Brad Palumbo.

He is the assistant editor for Young Voices, online contributor for the National Review, and he's written an essay for Quillette.

If you haven't gone to Quillette.com, you need to.

There isn't a single time I've checked that website that I haven't found something really fascinating.

His essay is one of those, The Political Homeless Life of a Gay Conservative.

And he joins us now.

Hello, Brad.

How are you?

Hey, Glenn.

Thanks for having me on.

You bet.

Thanks for being so honest in your Quillette story.

Can you take us through,

maybe start here?

The guy who broke up with you because he was crying and said he just couldn't date a Republican anymore.

Yeah, so I worked on this piece for a long time, right, because I wanted to combine my personal experiences with people I interviewed with broader trends that I observed in the progressive world and in the LGBT media, and it eventually all found its way back to one place.

If you identify as conservative, but you also happen to be gay, life in neither side of the aisle is particularly comfortable for you.

So for me, that meant that I have experienced honestly widespread intolerance from other people in the LGBT community who should understand more than anyone that it's okay to be different, but largely they don't.

So that includes a boyfriend of multiple months who broke up with me in part because he was uncomfortable with my political views, which are by no means radical.

They're just not liberal.

And that's just another example of intolerance that I've experienced, honestly, too many times to count from left-wing gay people.

Now, Brad, I mean, as a guy who, you know, just was never good on the dating scene at all,

that sounds like something that somebody could have said to me and really they didn't know anything about my politics.

They were just like looking for something.

You know, it's not you, it's me kind of stuff.

Are you sure it wasn't, you know, I'm just throwing this one out here.

You're just not my speed.

I really don't think so.

We had some pretty intense conversations about that.

And it's been a recurring theme.

You know, when I first started putting myself out there on the dating scene in college, I would have people who would match with me on dating apps or on websites just to tell me to go and kill myself or off myself, or that I was a disgrace to the community, right?

Because I was a little bit well-known around campus for my conservative viewpoints and those sorts of things.

So, because it's been a reoccurring trend, I can tell you that I'm pretty confident it was

not just another excuse.

So, tell me about, because I think there's a lot of people that feel like they don't have a home anywhere.

And, you know, when it comes to gay people, you would think that it's a clear match because

a conservative should be about the constitutional principles that we have, which basically say, leave me alone.

I'm different, and I thought we were supposed to celebrate that I'm different, and you're different, and we're supposed to get along.

That's what the Constitution says.

It protects people to be who they are, so they so they can be who they are.

Um, and yet somehow the Republicans and

it comes from a lot of religious

conservatives that have made gay people feel very, very unwelcome.

So

is that changed?

Is that different?

How do you deal with the difference between the two parties?

Well, so first off, Glenn, I totally agree with you.

I think that I'm not personally a huge social conservative, but I do identify as a constitutional conservative for the reasons that you just mentioned.

You know, what does the First Amendment do if it doesn't protect your right to think differently, to be different, to have freedom of conscience?

And so that's one of the reasons I find the left-wing movement that's moving in on all these freedoms so unappealing.

But what I'll say is that it's a combination of two things that creates this political homelessness.

In part, it is what you have identified, that there's some lingering intolerance among the conservative movement.

I will say among young Republicans, I've really had extremely welcoming and accepting experiences.

But, you know, the reality remains that half of Republicans don't believe in gay marriage.

And I don't think that that makes them terrible people or evil or anything, but it does make me obviously not fully comfortable with the people who I would otherwise politically largely agree with.

And the same thing is true.

I'm sorry.

No, go ahead.

Go ahead.

Yeah, the same thing is true on the opposite side of the spectrum, right?

Because the progressive LGBT media ecosystem essentially acts like gay people who aren't liberals don't exist.

You know, you go to these websites, queerte.com, LGBT Advocate, and Out Magazine, and they have articles praising gun control and bashing Ivanka Trump.

And they call this the gay agenda, right?

They're basically acting like all gay people think with their body parts, and we're not individuals.

So they're trying to erase the 20% or so of LGBT people who don't think like that.

And for me, that's a huge problem.

So

let me ask you this, Brad.

My stance on gay marriage has been the same since the 90s.

I don't care.

I mean, it's not my business constitutionally.

The government only got into the marriage business to make sure that whites didn't marry blacks or blacks marry white, so we couldn't mix the races.

And later, it became about undesirables, making sure that we don't create any more undesirables.

The reason why government got into marriage in the first place, they're all bad and they have no place in anybody's marriage.

But as long as if you want to get married, I don't care.

If I want to get married, you shouldn't care.

But we shouldn't be in people's lives.

The problem with conservatives, I think, is there are some that are just like, it's wrong and God says it's wrong and that's all there is to it.

But there's, I think, a bigger majority of conservatives that say, look, that's them.

Whatever you want to do, go ahead.

But they're afraid that the gay agenda just wants to shut down all religion.

That it's not really about love.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, it does make sense.

I think the position that you're articulating is very intellectually honest.

And I think that the people who are still hold out against gay marriage, I hope that they can kind of come see the light, especially because I try to make the gay marriage argument from a case for family values, right?

Almost to appeal to conservatives.

But I think you hit on something that I do think is partly the own fault of the LGBT community.

When you have an LGBT advocate class that does target religion entirely, right, they're not just seeking freedom for to be who you are, to have kids, to get married.

They're seeking freedom to force other people, right?

Like, for example, Jack Phillips, the baker who didn't want to bake the gay cake.

The LGBT advocate class has really forced some conservatives to kind of dig in into their trenches because they're not just looking for freedom, they're looking to force their views onto other people.

And that's where I think both sides get it wrong.

Because a society that's truly tolerant, lets you have the right to be Christian, and we have the right to be gay, and we all just live our lives in peace.

And we all get along.

I mean, you know, we all get along.

One other thing, Brad, is how is it, and I say this really with socialists, but also,

you know, gay people as well.

A group of people, socialists, in Hollywood, that had to, were blacklisted, were tried, some of them went to prison, had to live in the closet, either because of their sexuality or because of their political beliefs.

Is it just vengeance, or why can they not see

they're becoming the monster that they fought against?

I'm not sure.

Honestly, the causes of this kind of veil of intolerance that's sweeping the progressive movement and kind of the LGBT far left crowd, I'm not sure exactly what the cause is.

I will say that we have a tendency across our society when there was historic kind of oppression or anything to try to swing back to the, not to the middle, but too far to the other side.

And I think that the LGBT advocacy class has not been an exception to that rule.

They've absolutely done that because we have to acknowledge the fact that for a long time, LGBT people have really faced some terrible conditions in American history.

And I think largely that's not true today, and that's great, but that is probably why I think a lot of these people have swung far to the other extreme.

And that's understandable, but it's still fundamentally misguided.

Brad, it seems like the lesson learned a lot of times from these longer struggles with groups that have had tough times in America is to

pick a group that they think is helping them, whether it's

whatever group in the government, Democrats, Republicans, that they think is helping them, and then kind of stick to that side for a long period of time afterwards.

But it seems to me the decision should be made

in a way of thinking about collectivism versus individualism.

And

if you're a minority group or a group that's had troubles with the government in the past, the last thing to me you would want is the government to have more power in a centralized place where whenever X, Y, or Z group decide, you know, the country decides that they're the enemy next time, they're again going to be vulnerable.

If we empower people who are individualists, who believe in small government and limited government to be able to do these things and run the country without making these decisions as to what groups they don't like.

Isn't that just better for everybody?

Yeah, I could not agree with you more there because

one thing that drives me crazy is the same LGBT progressive advocates who will tell you the government is viciously oppressive are the same ones who want to take everyone's guns away.

So the point that

it makes perfect sense to me, right?

If you really think that the government has a history of being oppressive to certain groups, and I do, then you should want that government to be as small as possible because clearly it's shown that it can't handle widespread power.

So, I would love to see more LGBT people applying the lens of their historical experiences really to the question of today: how much can we really let the government start running people's lives?

Because individualism really is the ethos of my personal philosophy, and honestly, it should be that for more gay people.

So, how can people like us or just regular people who are just listening,

who are not members of the gay community, how can we help bridge a gap?

What can we do?

Well, so it starts with a couple things.

It can be hard at times to reach the other side when they feel trapped into this us versus them mentality, which is in part driven by kind of the identitarian dogma of intersectionality on the left.

But it's also, I think, driven by when you have high-profile conservatives who will say, or high-profile conservative media who will sometimes say or make comments or take positions about LGBT issues that are just either inflammatory and unfair or needlessly controversial.

For example, I mean if you're going to have traditional views about gender, I can respect that position, but if you go out of your way to, whenever you're debating it with somebody, tell them that they're mentally deranged, right, with a transgender person, you're being needlessly antagonistic and you're turning other people off from, I think, just your entire political movement with that.

So I think you can have the views you're going to have, but it's about taking an approach where you can try to meet people in the middle and try to make arguments that will appeal to them and won't

activate their us versus them mentality.

I tell you, Brad, I don't know if you've ever read this.

My dad made me read it when I was in high school, and I just read it begrudgingly.

And I picked it up recently, and

it has all of the answers we need.

It really does, even though it was written in

the Great Depression.

It's how to win friends and influence people.

And basically, it just said what it says what you just said.

Just said,

why not listen to other people, see what they're feeling, see what they need, see how you can help and just help them, help them

and be comfortable with that.

And then all of a sudden, you'll notice, wait a minute, my life has changed somehow or another because you're just being cool with everybody and really listening to them.

Brad, thank you so much for your article and thanks for being on the program.

Thanks for having me.

You bet.

Hope we can talk again.

Thank you so much.

It is, by the way, it's at quillet.com.

Brad Palumbo, just look at a politically homeless life of a gay conservative.

Really well worth the time to read.

And Quillette is worth your attention as well.

American financing.

I can't tell you what

is going to happen.

I just had Kevin Freeman in yesterday.

You know who Kevin Freeman is?

Yeah, a big economic expert.

He's on Plays TV.

Yeah, he does the Economic War Room, which is a really smart show.

And he was a guy who was consulting for the Pentagon, and he's the guy who found out that, yeah, there was a foreign state, a foreign actor that was trying to crash our economy in 2008.

I remember talking to him back then.

Yeah, that's when we were at Fox.

And I was talking to him yesterday, and

don't know what the card is that's going to be played.

Don't know what the first domino that's going to fall, but something's going to fall.

And

financially, the world is in deep trouble.

I want you to be prepared.

Please,

if you have a loan that has variable interest rates, please lock that loan in right now.

These are lows that are not going to come back again.

Please lock it in.

AmericanFinancing.net.

If you are renting, you might have noticed rent has gone up 5% over the last 12 months.

Renting is going to be a bigger demand on rent because people are not going to be able to get loans down the road.

Please go to AmericanFinancing.net.

They work for you.

They don't work for the bank.

They'll find the right loan for you.

Give you all kinds of options.

You can pre-qualify in 10 minutes.

There's no

money down or anything like that.

They don't charge you anything for pre-qualification.

Call 800-906-2440.

800-906-2440.

It's AmericanFinancing.net.

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

This is the Glenn Beck Program.

Program.

Welcome to the program.

Coming up in just a few minutes, we're going to talk about H.R.

8.

H.R.

8 is what the

Congress passed yesterday.

The House of Representatives passed

a bill yesterday that is common sense, bipartisan gun reform.

No, it's not.

It's neither common sense

nor is it really bipartisan.

This is a ruse.

They pass it one piece at a time.

They're passing this now with one piece.

Here's this one piece.

Look how harmless this is.

Oh, here's this other piece.

Look how harmless this is.

When you snap everything together, it's total control of your gun.

And for the moment, this shouldn't go past the House, right?

I mean, certainly.

If this goes through the Republicans, they are absolutely worthless.

I would assume, even if it did get through the Senate somehow, Trump would veto it.

There's no way he wouldn't veto this.

So I don't think this is going to happen, but this is a warning of what will come if they are able to sweep

the presidency and the Senate in 2020.

In 2020, we could be rightless.

And I'm not, that's no hyperbole.

You're listening to Glenn

Beck.

You don't think so.

All right, realestateagents I trust.com.

You want to sell your house, cut through the bull crap.

You don't have to deal with people that don't think like you.

And I don't mean

don't think like you.

I'm not going to talk politics with your real estate agent, but you do want to talk principles.

You want to know you can trust them.

You want to know that they really do have your best interests at heart.

They're not, you know, some used car salesman.

And that's where realestate agentsitrust.com comes in.

They know your market.

They know how much your house is worth.

They're going to price it right.

They're going to help you buy the next house at the right price.

These people do this full-time.

They are the best in your area.

Let us connect you with the best real estate agent at realestateagentsitrust.com.

That's realestate agentsitrust.com.

Great show on guns next.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is the Glenbeck program.

Democrats passed in the House a bipartisan common-sense gun control law, H.R.

8.

I need to tell you a story because Democrats know it's all about the story.

Well, I'm going to introduce you to some characters that will help you understand exactly

what story, what fairy tale you're being told

on how the

how the witch in the gingerbread house ends up with you in the oven and all of the guns.

Next.

We're going to do this.

Yeah, yeah, we're going to do this in one minute.

First, let me tell you about our sponsor making this broadcast possible is Life Lock.

The good old days when you only needed one password.

Hey, how about the really good days when you didn't have a password?

When you didn't need to type anything in.

Well, how about this?

Now we have to have 20 character passwords all random generated.

And still,

still,

you can have your information hacked into and taken.

You need the best in the business that can take care of your information and your identity for your bank, for your credit cards, for everything.

And now nobody can monitor all transactions.

Nobody can keep you completely safe.

But the best in the business is LifeLock.

They have been around forever.

They were the first in.

Lifelock.com.

They have the technology to be able to alert immediately and also clean up any mess that might happen.

They've got U.S.-based specialists, that's all they do.

And I'm telling you, it's not just the alert, it is the cleanup afterwards.

Trying to clean up a mess at somebody who's taken your identity is impossible for the average person.

Not for Lifelock.

This is what they do every day.

Lifelock.com.

Use the promo code back.

Lifelock.com.

You're going to save 10% with the promo code back at 1-800-Lifelock.

That's 1-800-Lifelock or Lifelock.com.

Now

I want to take you back in time to a story that you know

but I'm going to put all the pieces together.

Let me take you back to September 25th 2017.

A man checked into a room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas.

He had made several trips.

He had timed it out.

He had made sure nobody had noticed that he was taking 10 range bags full of guns and ammunition up into that room.

He did it over six days.

And on the sixth day, he

opened fire on people that were at the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival.

He killed 85 people.

He wounded 851 others, the deadliest mass shooting committed by one person in U.S.

history.

Then

he turned the gun on himself.

When police investigated his room, they found 23 rifles and one handgun.

They found 14.223 caliber AR-15 type rifles.

8.308 caliber AR-10,

one.308 caliber bolt action, one.38 caliber revolver.

And on the kitchen counter next to his hotel room,

there were four credit cards.

That's really what this story is about.

Not the guns, but the credit cards.

To understand what is coming now, you have to understand

Andrew Ross Sorkin.

and what he saw when he saw the credit cards.

Listen.

After Parkland, the shooting in Parkland, and trying to look at the role that banks and credit cards play in these things, I really decided to take a deep dive into this.

The article is called Devastating Arsenals Bought with Plastic and Nary a Red Flag.

It is a New York Times investigation that looks at mass shootings, every single major mass shooting in America since Virginia Tech in 2007.

And it really reveals how credit cards have become such a crucial part of the planning of these massacres in a way that I have to say I did not even appreciate myself.

The article is written by Andrew Ross Sorkin, works for the New York Times.

Now something tells me he's never fired a gun in his life.

But when he wrote the article, How Banks Unwittingly Finance Mass Shootings in The New York Times,

it's time to pay attention.

He starts by pointing out that there have been 13 shootings that have killed 10 or more people in the last decade, and in at least eight of them, the killers financed their attacks using credit cards, Virginia Tech, Binghamton in 2009, Fort Hood, Aurora, San Bernardino, Orlando, Sutherland Springs, and Vegas.

And he pointed out that over the course of eight months before the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, the shooter opened six new credit card accounts.

Just 12 days before the shooting, he spent $26,532 on a Sigsauer MCX.223 caliber rifle and a Glock 17 9mm semi-automatic pistol and several large magazines.

He also bought thousands of rounds of ammunition, and then he went out and bought a $7,500 ring for his wife that he bought on a jewelry store card.

Should the bank have allowed him to do that?

Because before that month, he spent about $1,1500 a month.

The difference was so dramatic that two days before the shooting,

the killer frantically searched Google for credit card unusual spending and credit card reports, all three bureaus.

He searched FBI and why banks stop your purchases.

So should Google have alerted anyone?

The killer in Aurora, Colorado, the movie theater, spent $11,000 on guns and ammunition, all on a credit card.

The issue now has revealed a split between the banks and credit card companies.

On one side, there are companies that support monitoring as a form of public safety.

Following the shooting in Parkland, Florida, Citigroup adopted a new code of conduct for gun dealers and manufacturers that the bank does business with.

It requires retailers to impose age limit restrictions on gun sales.

That is against the Constitution.

There is no law, but Citigroup has said, well, you know what?

This is what we want to do as a company.

And have they received any pushback from the general population?

Check your credit cards.

Do you have a Citi card?

Do you do business with Citibank?

Do you think the left would be doing business with Citibank if this was reversed?

If Citibank said, we're not going to do any transactions or any financial services with any doctors that will not support abortion.

Do you think the left would have Citibank's attention yet?

CEO Michael Corbat said the policy, quote, is intended to preserve the rights of responsible gun owners like myself while relying on best sales practices to keep firearms out of the wrong hands.

The new policy does not restrict Citigroup customers from using the company's cards from gun purchases.

Bank of America took took a similar approach.

They stopped giving loans to gun manufacturers.

Overwhelmingly, however, good news is banks and credit card companies have refused to take part in any kind of monitoring.

So you have Bank of America and Citigroup.

Do you do business with either of those?

Remember, the left, if they were told, no, no, no,

it's not the whole doctor thing.

No, it's just if they if they say that a minor can have an abortion,

I mean,

after they're 18 or 21, that's fine.

But

if those people are saying they can have an abortion without their parents' permission under 18, why we're not going to do any financing for that organization, do you think the left would put up with that?

Now, even if the banks and the credit card companies agreed to start monitoring purchases, gun sales are tough to track because they many times appear on statements as, you know, sporting goods or retail shop purchases, you know, places like retailer, like Walmart, et cetera, et cetera, sometimes discount stores, it'll just be marked variety.

So

who knows what that is?

And then there are stores like Dick's Sporting Goods that imposed restrictions on their gun sales.

How'd that work out for them?

Now, Joseph Moreno, he's a former federal counterterrorism prosecutor, staff member of the FBI's 9-11 Review Commission.

He says this is easy to fix.

He said they have all the infrastructure in place.

They can deal with suspicious activity.

It would just be tweaking it a bit to consider firearm-related information.

And information is the key word.

Information.

Why does Google have anything in your house?

With a microphone?

For information.

You think you're getting information?

No.

They're getting much more information about you.

Facebook.

It's all about information.

We are living in surveillance capitalism times.

Information is the key word.

Now, there's lots of things that already happen.

For instance, a bank has to report anytime a single person makes a transaction over $10,000.

I'm going to put $10,000 cash into my account.

I'm going to take $10,000 out.

Whether the transaction is legal or not, they have to report it.

And banks must report the transactions over $5,000 if somebody just has a feeling that's suspicious.

There are also laws that restrict gun purchases.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, firearms dealers must report if someone buys two or more handguns in a span of five business days.

There's also a lot of official blowback from the idea that the banks could monitor our purchases, effectively compiling a list of all the gun owners.

Last year, John Kennedy,

not that John Kennedy, a Republican senator from Louisiana, introduced the No Red and No Blue Banks Act.

The bill would prohibit the federal government from giving contracts to banks that would discriminate against lawful businesses based solely on social

policy considerations.

Even the ACLU has come out against monitoring by credit card companies, saying that those efforts, they are afraid, to prevent mass shootings could infringe on individual rights.

Do you think?

Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst at the

ACLU, the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, he says, quote, the implications

The implication of expecting the government to detect and prevent every mass shooting is believing the government should play an enormously intrusive role in American life, end quote.

Which brings us back to Andrew Ross Sorkin's New York Times article.

Sorkin doesn't seem convinced by any of this stuff.

He would prefer if the government stepped in and forced credit card companies to start monitoring their customers, or at least the credit card companies that

made that choice of their own volition.

Listen to this and interview with him on PBS.

So, right now,

legally, you decide you're going to send $10,000 anywhere.

That gets reported to the government.

Instantly.

Instantly.

Already does.

So we could instantly have reported this person just stockpiled $40,000 worth of weapons and grains.

Absolutely.

Now, he then starts to take it in a strange direction.

Listen.

By the way, the credit card industry has, on its own volition decided that there are certain things they don't want to finance.

So if you want to buy Bitcoin, you can.

Marijuana, in many states, is legal.

You can't.

MasterCard, interestingly, recently went to a website that had some hate speech on it and said, we're no longer going to allow you to use credit card transactions using MasterCard because of this hate speech.

So there are companies that are taking positions, if you will, on some of these things.

And the question is how that can work in relation to guns.

Now, so he's, I I guess he's all for the hate speech.

By the way, that hate speech was not hate speech.

That hate speech came from a friend of mine and a friend of this program.

That hate speech was speaking out about the Muslim Brotherhood and not in hateful ways.

A guy who used to brief Bill Clinton and George W.

Bush on what Islamicists really want.

Now he's called a hater.

And so now they're not going to do any transactions for him.

That's hate speech.

Sorkin's article quotes a number of experts who more or less repeat a version of the same thing: card credit card company should bear responsibility for mass shootings.

Now, what does this have to do with HR8?

I continue the story in one minute.

Our sponsor is Filter Buy.

I know nothing about how to maintain a home.

Nothing.

Sink is leaking.

I don't know.

Is there a little knob thing underneath there that we change?

Usually the knob thing is the change that you want to make.

Right.

Change the knob, twist the knob.

If you pull it, the hammer is a good tool.

If you go in there and you start hitting things, a lot of times it just fixes it.

And it can't be fixed with a hammer or duct tape.

It can't be fixed.

It just can't be fixed.

So that's accurate.

Sell the house.

Anyway, filter buy.

Filter buy is one thing that we can all do, except

I never have because I never think about it.

I forget all the time.

And I just, I gotta run to Home Depot and get a filter.

Wow.

And I just leave it in there.

And then what happens is

they kind of like clogged up, then moisture clogs up there, and then mold forms, and then you have all sorts of problems.

All sorts of problems.

So here's the thing: go to Filter Buy.

FilterBuy.com.

They have sizes for

elephant-sized filters and whatever fits in your home.

They're all made here in America.

It's this great story about how this company retooled and they just didn't want to let go of this, this old company that had been in town forever, didn't want to lay off the workers and didn't want to lose all these jobs.

So they said, what could we make?

And they decided we can make air filters and we can make them better than anybody else and we can get them to the customer in an easy way.

And you'll save 5% if you sign up for auto renewal.

There's just, there's nothing, I mean, this is just a win-win-win-win all the way around.

It's filterbuy.com.

Change your filters now and don't ever have to think about it again.

Filterbuy.com.

That's filterbuy.com.

10-second station ID.

Okay, there's one thing about making the debate about guns harder,

and that is the media does such a bad job of actually giving you the facts without pushing their own agenda, which is uniformly left-leaning.

People hear the message over and over and over again, and you start to think, well, that's an accurate portrayal.

So when they say, oh, this is common sense gun legislation, they think that that is.

The worst thing that happens is they start to think that's the truth.

This causes a trend called the spiral of silence.

The idea that people holding views contrary to those dominant in the media are moved to keep those views to themselves for fear of rejection, unaware that there are plenty of like-minded people all around them who also feel alienated by the predominantly liberal voice of the media.

That's why we started the 9-12 project.

We started it because you're not alone.

See how many people feel exactly like you do.

The news media is very powerful, and the voice of the media seems to be everywhere.

And they can select and maintain the narratives at will.

They can impose values, often the values of the journalists that are writing the stories.

And this imposition of silence amounts to a kind of authoritarianism that violates free speech and all of the principles of America.

The New York Times, this article, no exception.

As you might expect, Sorkin's article subtly makes it clear which side he and the New York Times are on.

Here he is again in the PBS interview as he reveals that this is not a news story, but rather a social justice issue.

Listen.

Right after

I started writing about this after Parkland, the good news was a number of banks actually did take a step back.

A Bank of America Citigroup said, you know what, we're no longer going to finance gun manufacturers.

So the next question is, do you want to finance effectively the shooters?

So,

let's look at that here.

The column suggested that financial firms had an opportunity to help reduce violence by pushing for more responsibility practices for the gun industry.

And as a result, some banks ended their relationships with gun makers, and some investors pushed manufacturers for more transparency.

Well, he's also leaving out the fact that the governor of New York also said, Hey, by the way, if you're going to do business with gun manufacturing, it's just a lot easier for us.

We're going to need to bring in some more auditors and things because those guys can be a little sketchy sometimes.

Not all of them, but some.

So if you're doing anything, just let us know because we're going to have to view you with a little more scrutiny.

Well, what does that tell you?

That if you just don't, as a business, just don't get involved.

Just don't get involved.

Now,

I'm going to leave you with this quote, and then I'm going to show you how it all connects.

We need to step back and think about what tools we use to combat terrorism and money laundering, and think about the financial rules associated with the Patriot Act.

In a really very

real sense,

I think these mass shooting events are terrorism.

So, what is that telling you?

These are these are death machines.

These are these

semi-automatic, fully semi-automatic machine guns.

I know we could spend an hour just parsing that sentence, how that doesn't work.

Think of the children.

This is what is happening, and it is called

your loss of financial rights

that nobody even talks about.

But if you can stop someone's speech by putting them behind a digital ghetto wall where they can't process anybody's credit card, where they can't do any financial transactions,

you don't have to ban them.

They just disappear.

Now, how does this working with the gun manufacturers and gun stores trying to stop their financial services?

How does that relate to what was just passed yesterday with HR8?

I'll tell you when we come back.

You're listening to Glenn Beck.

You have to be self-reliant.

There are so many things right now.

Did you know that the banks changed the rules to where you're the lender of last resort?

So you're the last in line.

If they go bankrupt,

you're not getting your money out of the bank.

They can declare and say, no, we had financial issues.

We had to take your savings and we had to apply it over here to one of our debts.

That's the common sense, bipartisan changes that Congress made for the banks to save the banking

institutions.

You now

are the backstop.

They're too big to fail, but you're not.

You're not.

Now, here's the thing: you've got to have your risks spread out.

Please call Goldline, 1-866-GoldLine.

They're standing by.

Just ask them for information on what the banks have done and how you can invest in gold.

They'll send you all this information and you'll be able to do your own homework.

866-GoldLine.

The Second Amendment is being fought in other ways than the typical ones.

We're going through that now now with how the financing industry is taking it up.

Coming up.

I want to talk to you a little bit about guns and why H.R.

8 and today Peter King is introducing another gun ban bill, another gun control bill.

It's H.R.

1112.

I'll tell you about that here in a second.

But what

I just set up

was how the New York Times columnists and how others, including now the governor of New York, is pressuring these financial institutions based in New York,

Citigroup, MasterCard,

all of these people, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo,

that look, if you're going to do business with gun stores, gun manufacturers, you're going to help,

you know,

these,

what do you call them, the gun conventions.

That's not convention.

You know, where they do the gun sales, the yeah, gun shows.

If you're going to do any help in any of the transactions and take any credit cards at the gun shows, then we can't help you.

We don't want to finance you.

We don't want to have financial services.

And the American people

who believe in the Second Amendment still do

business with Citigroup, still do business with MasterCard, MasterCard,

then you are giving them the rope to hang yourself with.

They're going to hang you with it.

They already are.

Now, yesterday, the White House says it's against both of these bills, but yesterday they passed H.R.

8.

Now, what is H.R.

8?

H.R.

8 is common sense bipartisan legislation that says you have to have an expanded background check.

Now this expanded background check means that if you want to buy a gun privately, now this is going to sound like common sense, if you want to buy a gun from a friend or whatever, you have to go to a gun store and have the gun store or the manufacturer

do the check for you and they have to process it even if it is you know even if it's just between two friends, it's like I want to go over and borrow a cup of flour.

Okay, well, I got to go over to the bakery.

So, get in the car with me.

We're going to go to the bakery, and they're going to measure the flour, and they're going to do a big background check.

The banker loves it when he gets to waste his day weighing somebody else's flour, doing all the background check.

He's going to charge us a buttload of money to do it because it's a pain in the ass that he gets nothing out of.

We have to go to the bakery real quick and then I can loan you that flour or give you that flour.

That's insanity.

But it's common sense.

Okay, let's say it is.

Well, what happens when you pass a law that says you cannot do it without the gun manufacturer or the gun store being involved?

And then on the other side, you have financial institutions no longer giving loans or doing any any financials transactions for manufacturers or gun stores.

How are you going to get your gun?

How are you going to do it?

They've closed all the loopholes.

You want to talk about a gun loophole?

It's this.

Now, here's what the bill that Peter King, a Republican, has sponsored today.

It's a enhanced background check 2019.

It's going to be voted

on the House today.

It has 15 co-sponsors.

Only one of them is a Republican.

It's Peter King of New York.

And that bill will extend the amount of time firearms dealers must wait for a response from the background check system before the sale can proceed from three days to 20 days.

Well, that's what's happening with technology, Glenn.

It's getting harder and harder for computers to communicate with each other slower and slower and slower.

It could take up to 20 days to get a response on that one.

I know you don't know.

You can't run a background check to see if anybody's been arrested that fast.

No, it's impossible.

It's impossible.

That's why it used to take three days back in the days when technology was good, but now it's 20 days.

So

when the Obama administration was in, and this happened during the Clinton administration, and gun store owners, correct me if I'm wrong,

they would wait the full three days.

The system is down.

Oh, we're having problems with the computers.

Oh, this is happening.

Oh, this is happening.

The minute George Bush got into office, magically those were fixed.

And then it started happening again, strangely, as soon as Obama got in.

They are going to use those 20 days.

They are going to make it a hassle in every possible way.

They are closing down all of the avenues.

They're also talking about a tax on your bullets.

So they will price everybody out of it.

So only drug dealers would be able to buy bullets.

Only rich people would be able to buy bullets.

But the people that the drug dealers are killing on the streets, they won't have the opportunity to defend themselves.

They won't be able to afford it.

Yeah, I was watching

a movie on the worst mass shooting in in history, and you might think it was the one in Vegas, but no.

Well, actually, technically, about the first 10,000 worst mass shootings in history are all responsible by large governments.

So I should throw those out by an individual in Norway.

You may remember this.

The guy who went on, he first of all set off a bomb in downtown

to try to kill the prime minister, and then took a boat over to an island where they were having a

retreat.

It was like a camp for kids of really rich parents, basically, and went and slaughtered 69 of them

at one big time when there was really nobody over there.

And it was interesting to see that.

First of all, somehow this guy was able to get the guns and bullets that he needed in Norway, where they have much more restrictive laws.

It's almost impossible to get guns over there.

And somehow he was able to do that and still kill a bunch of people.

And yes, it was an island.

So he did have a separation there.

However, you know, you you'd wonder if people were more likely to be armed, whether he c anyone could pull something like this off.

You know, there's no guns.

He knew going over there he was going to have no resistance whatsoever.

Now, a lot of them, there were counselors and there was people who were running the camp, a lot of them.

If you try to do that in Texas, most likely one of them, even at a camp, is going to have a firearm unless, of course, the government has told them it's a no-gun zone and they can't go into it.

But like, there was no there was no gun law that stopped that.

There was no person to put up a defense.

It was basically just a bunch of kids running for their lives on an island.

And that does not turn out well.

So I want to tell you part of a personal story here, and ask me no questions, and I will tell you no lies.

My family, in the last couple of weeks, have gone through a significant scare,

security-wise, and

significant, probably one of

a bigger scare than we've had in a very long time.

Wow, really?

And

so we had a gun discussion in our family, and one of my daughters is in love with two of my daughters, in love with shooting and everything else.

My other daughter just doesn't like it.

She just doesn't feel comfortable around it.

And she never has.

And I've never pushed it.

I mean, if you're not comfortable around it and you don't want to do it, I'm not going to force you to do it.

That's bad.

You have to take on the responsibility to have a gun.

And to have that responsibility, you have to want to do it.

Well, this scared our family so deeply.

We were all at the gun range, including that daughter.

And

she's never really gone shooting.

I think she's gone shooting with us once, and she shot maybe once, and then she stepped away.

She's like, I don't want this.

Her fear has always been of I'm not responsible enough to have a gun.

Okay.

And I think that's a really good position.

If you don't, good fear to have.

It's a good fear to have.

And I explained to her

because she fought and

she's a really good shot.

She was shooting and she stopped after like 10 or 12 pulls and she said,

Dad, I said, how are you doing, honey?

And she said, I'm just, I'm just, I'm freaked out.

I'm, I'm afraid.

And I said,

because it's a deadly weapon?

She said, yes.

And I said,

well,

a couple of examples.

I'll share one.

Do you remember the first time you drove a car?

How freaked out you were when you first drove a car?

Because all of these things were happening and any of them, you could either wreck the car, kill yourself, or kill somebody else.

Remember how freaked you were the first time you drove with people walking around your car you were kind of in a crowd and you had to kind of drive through remember how freaked out you were you're not now because you have the experience with it you know what you're doing so you have to get past that

so after we were done uh i took her to the gun store and um and we all got guns And

she said, we were standing there looking at all of these weapons and she said,

Dad, what is the difference?

I mean, look at that.

Look at that rifle.

What is that rifle?

And I said,

that's a modern sporting rifle.

She said, no, no, no, the one that's black and has all this stuff.

I said, yeah, it's a modern sporting rifle.

She said, no, that one is a sporting rifle.

And it was a gun that was green, you know, and looked like an old rifle.

And I said,

what's the difference between those two?

I don't know.

And I said, that's the media.

That is the media.

You know what the difference is?

Brought the gun guy over.

You tell me the difference.

Yeah, the packaging.

You know, this one has wood.

That one doesn't.

It's all in the media scaring people on what these guns do.

And if you understand and you have the right attitude, as she did and as my family does, you should be afraid of guns.

They do kill.

That's why you have one in your hand.

You can talk about sports all you like and I am a sports shooter.

I love sports shooting.

But that's not why I have a gun.

That's why it's not in, it's in the Constitution, not for sports shooting.

So you have a gun and that's what it is designed to do.

And you should be afraid of it, but a healthy fear of it that makes you responsible.

Right.

There's a lot of irrational fear about guns.

Right.

I mean, you know, especially if you grow up, I mean, again, I grew up in the northeast in Connecticut where guns are just not, you know, there's just not a lot of people have them.

It's not really the culture there, at least where I lived.

And it takes a long time for you to even think about, like, when you would see someone with a gun, it's so foreign to you.

In a giant chunks of the country, you know, where tens of millions of people live, they never see anyone carrying a gun.

No.

And so when they see it, they freak out.

We make fun of these people all the time that report, you know, individuals that look suspicious and they're just carrying a gun.

Like, that's actually a right in the Constitution, but it's so foreign to so much of the country.

And in some of the, in parts of the country, and they don't understand it, parts of the country, somebody wearing a gun is like, That woman over there has a purse.

Right.

Right.

Yeah.

Yeah.

We're in Texas.

Yeah.

She's got a purse in a bit.

She's got a gun in there as well.

Just be aware that these gun grabbers are after your gun.

Common sense

from the left,

there is no common sense anymore from the left.

They're also studying reparations.

Understand who you're dealing with.

And quite honestly, if you're with Citigroup, why are you still with Citigroup?

Any of these companies that are banning voices or banning constitutional rights, what are you doing?

Relief factor.

If you are in constant pain, I want you to know you're not alone.

If you have been suffering from neck or back or whatever it is,

inflammation is the biggest key.

And we eat so much crap that inflammation is a part of our life.

And that just makes things so bad.

If you can reduce the inflammation in your body, many times your pain is lessened to a tolerable level or goes away.

This is a 100% drug-free created-by-doctors pill that you take three times a day.

It's actually, I think, three pills, and you take them three times a day: breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

And I'm telling you, greatly reduces your pain.

At least for what, 70% of people?

70% of the people.

Everybody.

That's why they say try it for three weeks.

Try it for three weeks.

If it doesn't work for you, stop taking it.

But if it does, you get your life back.

Try the three-week quick start.

It's $19.95.

You just go to relieffactor.com.

I do this every day and it works.

800-500-8384.

800-500-8384.

It's relief factor.com.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi threw her support for a commission to study slave reparations.

Could these guys

be any more radical?

Reparations.

We will find out if possible.

Oh, my gosh.

Reparations, 70% income tax, government-run drug companies, government-run medicine, the Green New Deal, the end of capitalism,

kill a baby right after birth, officially deny God three times in your platform.

I mean, the wealth tax.

The wealth tax.

What

else could these people be for?

We haven't even had a debate yet.

We're what, nine months away from this thing really being, I mean,

being even close to, you know, going, this primary, where they're all pushing each other to the left?

Can you imagine what they're going to be proposing in six months?

When they're all coming after each other and trying to race to the left.

I mean, this is insane.

It's going to be incredible.

This is insane.

And you know what?

If the economy stumbles or

Donald Trump, you know, stumbles somehow or another, and you know the media is going to be helping out.

You know the media is going to be helping out.

Can you imagine if these guys win?

And they will target that 50, that filibuster immediately thinks, oh my gosh.

They will take that down to 50 votes and they will will be able to pass all sorts of stuff.

It is nuts.

By the way, do you know who the number one news source, trusted news source for Americans is?

Do you know what number one is?

I don't know.

BBC.

Number two?

What?

BBC, number one.

Number two, Fox.

Think of all of how much has been said about Fox.

How many millions have you had to pay for this advertising, this anti-Fox advertising?

They're still the number two.

CNN,

number eight.

You're listening to Glenn Beck.