Best of the Program | Guest: Andrew McCarthy | 12/11/18

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.

Hello, America.

We had a great, great podcast for you today.

Are you ready?

We start with Planned Parenthood in the Supreme Court.

Oh, I'm so glad we had that knife fight over the summer.

Yeah.

It really all turned out to be true, didn't it?

That Kavanaugh is just going to just really take the world by storm when it comes to Planned Parenthood and abortions.

There's reasons to worry about Kavanaugh early, and we talked about him

before all this went down.

And it's so far, the indications are not good.

Also, Andrew McCarthy joins us.

He tells us a little bit about what is really happening in Washington with the president.

He says, as a big supporter of Trump, that they are going to indict him.

What does that even mean?

Andrew McCarthy joins us.

And

JP Sears and Baby, it's cold outside Outside is now sexist.

It's a rape culture song.

Oh, I have so many shut-ups in me.

I get them all out in today's podcast.

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

It's Tuesday, December 11th.

All right, let me tell you about our sponsor this half hour.

It's Brick House.

Just ate my salad and my greens and my fruit.

Just had breakfast this morning,

put it in a little smoothie, just a scoop of it, and I don't have to have any vegetables today.

It's your hall pass.

It is.

The hall pass to a scare.

And it's not like a bogus.

It's like the real deal.

Yeah.

I mean, it's true.

It's not supplements.

It's the real food.

The real food.

And, you know, you get all the stuff that you need out of fruits and vegetables from Brick House Nutrition.

It's called Field of Greens.

And you put that in, you deal with it once a day.

And the good thing is it actually tastes good.

So it's not like, it's not a chore, but you get out of the way the actual chore of eating a real salad.

I'm so happy that I can say to my wife, nope, not going to have any of those.

Nope, already had them.

I already had them.

You can do it now, brickhouseglen.com.

Use the promo code, get 15% off your first order.

Don't eat a salad ever again in your life if you don't want to.

And be healthy.

It's brickhouseglen.com.

Experience the better you

tomorrow.

BrickhouseGlen.com.

This is the Glenbeck program.

So, do you remember the hand-wringing?

Do you remember the wailing?

The doomsday scenarios forecasted by the left during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation circus?

He is going to end women's rights.

In fact, he might end up killing all women.

Do you remember the protesters that were dressed like women from the handmaid's tale?

The hysteria.

It all came down to one issue.

The left was scared out of its collective mind that Brett Kavanaugh would somehow single-handedly overturn Roe v.

Wade and force women into the dark ages and bootleg abortions.

This monster was going to destroy all women's rights.

And then, a little something of interest to the pro-abortion crowd came down from the Supreme Court yesterday.

We begin there

right now.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

So

the abortion thing.

Yesterday, Supreme Court,

the court dealt a blow to conservatives.

Wait a minute, I thought Kavanaugh was the Antichrist.

Seems like we should have been the ones freaking out.

Now, there were several conservatives, us included, that said, wait a minute, this guy was not on the list.

Wait a minute.

This guy could be another Justice Thomas

or

not Thomas, but

no, the other guy that overturned Roberts.

He could be another Justice Roberts, and why is he added all of a sudden?

He wasn't on anybody's list.

They're freaking out.

We are all like, oh, we got to have him now.

Well, I'm not sure he, I mean, he teaches with Jesuits.

I'm not sure he's a real conservative.

Well,

there's two parts to this.

One is you're right you know that the the list that got donald trump elected did not have brett kavanaugh's name on it it was added after he was in office there are still 20 names on the original list that are not supreme court justices why did the list need to be expanded i i don't understand it there were real reasons why kavanaugh was on not on that first list and the obamacare decision he was involved in was a big part of that the second unrelated issue here is brett kavanaugh is absolutely a qualified justice and the attacks against him were absolutely unfair.

Correct.

So, I mean, it was completely fine, I think, for once he was nominated to say he is qualified, and it is the president's decision, and I understand all that, but he should not have been on the list.

There's 20 people still on the original list that were never named to be nominated as a Supreme Court justice.

There was no reason to go off that list.

The list is the big reason why Donald Trump was elected.

We had hundreds of calls over the election of people saying, look,

I don't like X, Y, and Z about Donald Trump, but you know what?

That Supreme Court list makes me confident.

And we're going to have Supreme Court justices.

We have to get good ones.

And it's a logical argument.

But why the fact that no one paid any attention?

Because Gorsuch was on the first list, and he's been great.

And he was right in this case.

So here we go.

So

the conservatives were hoping to challenge the individual state funding of Planned Parenthood.

Six to three vote.

Court decided not to review the lower court decisions that blocked the states of Kansas and Louisiana from preventing Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funding.

To accept the case, the court needed four justices to vote in favor.

Now, to be clear, Medicaid funding in question does not directly involve abortions.

Federal law already prohibits using Medicaid to fund abortions, but it's going to Planned Parenthood.

Predictably, the court's four progressive justices voted against hearing the appeals.

Let the money go to Planned Parenthood.

I think also somewhat predictably, the court's chameleon conservative John Roberts voted with the progressives.

But wouldn't you know it?

The sixth vote against hearing the case came from Brett Kavanaugh.

In his dissent, Justice Thomas wrote that the cases in question were not about abortion rights.

He said, What explains the court's refusal to do its job here?

I suppose it has something to do with the fact that some

respondents in these cases are named Planned Parenthood.

Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty, end quote.

Justice Roberts, I'm sure, did this because he just wants everybody to get along.

He just wants to save the integrity of the Supreme Court.

While what, destroying it?

The point is not that Brett Kavanaugh is suddenly pro-abortion or a Planned Parenthood supporter.

It's that he's he's already showing himself to be the kind of justice some of us thought he would be.

Someone who, like John Roberts, might lean conservative sometimes, but won't always side with the usual conservative block, especially when it comes to things like life.

In other words, the left,

the left was positive, the sky was falling, that women are just going to be abused, and this is the linchpin on

a planned parenthood and abortion

yeah the sky wasn't falling it appears it was an acorn

the best of the Glenbeck program

I was thrilled to see how many people uh have been writing in and tweeting and Facebook posting how they are how they're joining You know, it was Tyler Perry,

Chris Rock, Kid Rock,

Kid Rock, and me

that went out and we did our local

Walmart and took care of all of the layaways.

And it was such a cool thing.

And I still challenge people in my position to go out and do something amazing because it's really...

What's great is it's not only good for you, but

it's spreading.

I had so much mail yesterday from people who said, I went and did this with my family, and I just, we only had, you know, $50 or we had $100 or we had $25.

And it was so cool to do.

So

engage in that.

Now, there's also a couple of things that I

don't know if I don't even know where to begin.

We have 13% of Americans will boycott Christmas spending.

13%

Still boycott Christmas spending?

Yeah, they say that they do not want to be a part of

this whole commercialization.

So they're not going to spend any money for the holiday season.

13%.

That's pretty high.

Allow me to roll my eyes a little harder at that one because, you know what?

First of all, it's not going to be 13%.

13% of people are not.

That's just not true.

Secondly,

why do we vilify commercialism so much?

What's so bad about it?

What's so bad about having cool toys and fun parts?

It can't be the whole holiday.

And if it's the whole holiday, then you're right.

You're doing it wrong.

But it was a great part of my childhood.

I loved getting cool things for Christmas.

My kids like doing it too.

You know, there's nothing wrong with materialism.

It's like this weird, like, and I know this isn't the way you're thinking about it.

But I feel like a lot of conservatives have adopted what is essentially an anti-capitalism liberal argument, which is like, oh, well,

buying things makes it nasty and dirty, and you're sullying

this season by getting involved in commercialism.

Commercialism is fine.

There's nothing wrong with capitalism and conservatism and commerce.

They're all pretty darn great.

And, you know, the fact is, if you let it become all about gifts, gifts, gifts, gifts, gifts, gifts, gifts.

Yeah, you're doing it wrong.

That's not the whole thing, but it is part of it, and that's okay.

So I agree with you.

I agree with you.

I didn't think you would.

Yeah, because I don't, it is not about the gifts.

It's how you embrace that.

It's

if you're making, for instance,

I have grown to really not like the month of December

because it has become about I have to go do this.

We have to go do that.

We have to do this.

We have to do this.

Did you get the cards out?

Everybody's expecting this did you get the presents for the people that you really don't even know

and you and you have you sent those out and don't forget all the parties gotta do this and the parties and all of this crap

that's not what this holiday is about we've we've made this the most stressful month ever instead of just making this the coolest month ever Just go and just be with people and help people and give people presents.

There's There's nothing wrong with that.

Right.

And I think you're arguing against being overscheduled, which I find

also just making it about stuff.

Right, but like a card is not about stuff, right?

A card is an acknowledgement to someone else, hey, I'm thinking about you in this time of year, right?

Like that's, but that is a task.

It winds up being a task because you want to make sure you get it to everybody and it doesn't feel like it's supposed to.

That's supposed to be a nice gesture, right?

That's not about like, oh, here's something they're going to, they're getting some cool commercial gift.

Yes, you're buying the card and you could theoretically make the card, but that's all about a message, right, to someone that you supposedly like.

But how many times are you getting cards from people?

Like, for instance, I get a Christmas card.

Last few years, I've gotten a Christmas card from Vince Vaughan.

Vince Vaughn doesn't think of me in the holidays.

I'm not thinking of me.

You know what I mean?

I don't know how I got on his Christmas card list, but I got onto his Christmas card list and I get a Christmas card from him.

First of all, it's pretty cool.

No, it's cool.

It is cool, but it's like he's not thinking about me.

He's like, you know, you know, pal, it's been another year.

No, that, and that's what I mean.

It becomes a task.

Correct.

You know, my, uh, my wife is a classic, um, she loves Christmas and she's a classic overscheduler, I would say, in Christmas.

Like, so she signs up for every Christmas tradition and she signs up for every, you know, the kids are in every, you know, little Christmas thing.

And then every year we get here and she's like, like, oh, next year we're not doing X, Y, and Z because it's too much.

And it's true.

We run around like crazy.

Though I do love those things.

I do like going to those little traditional events.

And I like, you know, a lot of it's just like going to see people and doing things that you wouldn't normally do the rest of the year.

And, you know, we have two little kids, so they're in like 9,475 Christmas specials that we go to.

And then there's multiple showings of those, so we're about 15,000, 20,000 of those.

But I mean, again, like, you don't trade those things.

Like, you want to go do them.

I feel like, I don't know, I'm kind of glad that cheyenne's not in ballet this year right i don't have to sit through the damn nutcracker twice

i just i think

because it gets stressful because you're just adding it on to work right and at times it feels like a job like i was on vacation last week and i i feel like i was running around more than any normal work week you're running around to events and picking kids up and you're shuttling to the other thing and then you got to make sure you get there on time because if you're late, you know, you know, you'll miss it, and then you just feel like you've just adopted a new full-time job for the month.

But that's not capitalism's fault.

That is not capitalism's fault.

Commercialism is a part of Christmas, and I really don't think it's a bad part of Christmas.

I think it's great.

I like going and doing the shopping and giving people gifts that they don't, you know, that you got to come up with and pick out, especially with your kids, like the stuff that you're able to get them.

I mean, yeah.

no, it can't be your only priority, I think, is a better way of stating it.

I tell this story, I've told this story before, so I apologize, but there was one year that we hit it, the first year that we really hit it.

And I grew up in a family that, I mean, I got one present one year, and, you know, we struggled as a family, and I always wanted to do Christmas for my kids big.

You know, oh, yeah.

And so I did.

We hit it big one year.

I can't remember this.

I remember this year.

The presents, I i mean i really honest to god i went out and i bought everything i've ever wanted to get my kids and my wife for christmas i mean everything the presents the presents were like you couldn't even see the tree basically you couldn't see the tree you really couldn't see half of the tree and uh and it was the most empty and hollow christmas we've ever had none of us recall that as a good christmas and we got everything we wanted yeah it's not it's not about that it's a priority setting issue yeah right i mean you have to have the more important things or it's not, you're not doing it right.

But the fact that you get the little, it's like, you know, someone who is in shape might tell you,

you know, eating nonstop ice cream buffets is not the proper diet.

Shut up.

But a little ice cream at the end of a meal

can be great.

Yeah, it's balance in everything.

That's all it is.

It's just balance.

We swing.

from one side to the other and we swing so far.

The pendulum when it's in the middle is usually the right thing.

You know, an all-ice cream diet is not good.

Ice cream occasionally is good.

You know,

let's just say

a lifestyle where you've never worked out a day in your life in the end is not good.

This was a weird, I don't know.

I'm still working on that and convincing myself, and I can't really pull it off.

A little heroin

is okay, but you're dying

all the time i mean it just shakes up your holiday season exactly right so last night we finished the tree if you were listening yesterday i was i was abandoned at the tree okay on sunday um because uh i was i was decorating it the way my mother decorated you know you kind of you are just who you grew up as and uh you don't really realize it and pretty soon i found myself as the only one decorating the tree.

And I was like, hey,

what happened?

How come is it me?

And my wife from the kitchen said, yep, it's you.

And it was because I'm really OCD.

I'm just so OCD on things

and the tree.

And so I was doing it like my mother used to, which was, you know, okay, kids, you put the big things to block the hollow parts of the tree and, you know, blah, blah, blah.

Real planning process you had to do it.

Planning, and it was not fun.

And so last night we decorated the tree, and I

let it go.

And it was, it was, it was, it was fun.

It was fun.

It was, I actually did enjoy it.

It was very difficult once I sat down because I couldn't, I couldn't, I couldn't stop.

And then I realized what I think it is.

We have a fake tree.

And fake fake trees, because we have, when we got a, when we spent our Christmas up at the ranch in the mountains, we get a real tree.

In Texas, you don't want a real tree.

You don't want a tree.

First of all, you have to mortgage your house to get a real tree.

And

second of all, it's like a, you know, it's like a Charlie Brown Christmas tree.

All the needles just fall off

the minute the clock strikes 12, all the needles fall off because they've been dead for so long.

Anyway,

so we have a real tree when we celebrate Christmas up at the up at the ranch because we could just go out and cut one.

I'm not like that at the ranch.

I'm not like that at the ranch because the tree is imperfect.

The tree is just like, I sat down on the couch and I looked at this damn tree and I thought, how did I ever like this tree?

It's like a perfect cone.

And I realized

that's not what a Christmas tree is supposed to look like.

It is supposed to just be like, you know, the handmade stuff and the stuff, and it's just kind of imperfect.

I mean, so much of it is tradition, right?

Did you grow up with all real trees?

I didn't.

You had fake trees?

We had fake trees.

Really?

Fake trees.

That's surprising coming from you.

I know.

Because I love the fake trees, man.

They're so much easier.

They are.

That's where I got, but I don't know.

It just doesn't seem as authentic, maybe.

I don't know.

No, it's true.

You're trading convenience.

authenticity.

You are.

I'm not always opposed to that trade, however.

Neither am I.

Not always.

Not always.

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

Like listening to this podcast?

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

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

Patriot Mobile is

is a phone service

that will give you all of the great coverage that you want.

They're just not going to take the money from you

and then invest that in causes that you don't believe in, like Planned Parenthood.

Patriot Mobile actually is going to let you invest your money into the causes that you believe in.

But most of these cell companies,

they give all kinds of money to crazy, crazy causes that you work hard against.

It's true.

Why'd do you do that?

You can go with Patriot Mobile.

They were created to solve that problem.

They're the only conservative cell phone company in America.

Go to patriotmobile.com/slash blaze.

Get started today.

When you use the offer code Blaze, they're going to waive the activation fee for up to two lines.

PatriotMobile.com/slash Blaze or 1-800 of Patriot is the place to go.

All right, we have Andrew McCarthy on with us, contributing editor of the National Review.

Andy, I was, you are one of the only voices that have penetrated my world when it comes to what's happening with the Trump investigation because you have credibility, and I know that you're a Trump supporter, so you don't have an axe to grind.

And so, when you say, I think he's going to be indicted because this is the way this is being written,

it carried some weight, and I wanted to talk to you about it.

How are you, Andrew?

I'm doing just great, Blunt.

How are you?

I'm great.

I've been, and I don't know if other people feel this way, but I've been really confused with all that's going on because it's all leaks or speculation.

And,

you know, I'm just waiting for the thing to, just when the shoes drop, then we'll talk about it.

But you are a federal, a former New York federal investigator, sorry, prosecutor.

And so you used to write

the things like you just read from Cohen's,

what do you call it?

What was

the sentencing sentencing memorandum.

So you used to write it, and those things, and you say this is very telling.

Can you explain?

Sure.

I think, Glenn, you're right to be suspicious when you hear the leaked information, because obviously the people who leak are telling you they're sort of mining the parts of the story they want you to hear and holding back other stuff.

Whereas when they do these court filings, this is a 40-page document that is customarily filed about a week or two in advance of the imposition of sentence by the court, you get a full flavor of what the government's theory about the cases and where they're going with the investigation.

And it seemed to me that this sentencing memo is more directed at President Trump than it is at Cohen.

Sentencing memos are interesting in terms of legal filings because they're not kind of dry legal issue-oriented submissions.

They're almost like jury arguments, except they're meant to persuade the sentencing judge.

So they tend to be more forceful and colorful and

sort of filled with their prosecution theory.

And here, this one reads in the part of it that deals with the campaign finance laws as a testimonial to the importance of those laws to the integrity of the system

and how they are meant to make sure that the rich and the powerful

don't usurp all of the power in the system and designed to fight against public cynicism about money in politics.

I mean, it almost seemed to me like

it was drafted with the president in mind more than Cohen.

And then I look at the other attendant situations or attendant circumstances that you have here.

Number one,

they didn't really need these campaign finance counts on Cohen.

His sentence is really driven by the bank fraud and the tax fraud counts.

These add

negligibly at most to his case, but they're obviously critical in connection with Trump.

At the guilty plea allocution, they gratuitously had him say that he was directed by Trump in connection with these payments.

That is not not something that was necessary to the factual basis for Cohen's own plea.

And ordinarily, prosecutors in public proceedings do not go out of their way to implicate uncharged people in felonies.

So it seemed to me they were sort of reaching to do that.

And it doesn't, I don't see that they have any other purpose of doing that.

except that they want to lock Cohen in on this version of events, and this is their chance of doing it.

And then the other thing I would point to is they have given immunity, I believe, to four different people in this campaign finance investigation.

Campaign finance is not a very serious

felony in the greater scheme of things.

They've given immunity to two people

connected to the National Inquirer and I believe two people connected with

the Trump organization, which relates to the structuring of the reimbursement payment to Cohen.

I don't think they gave four people immunity to tighten up the case on Cohen that they didn't need.

So

the T-leads.

Okay, so

what does that tell you they're going to do with Trump?

Well, it seems to me they're going to indict him.

One of the things, Glenn, that I should have said was that I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about what these two campaign finance finance counts allege.

Most people, I think, believe

that because Cohen had a $2,700 limit as a normal contributor, that these payments were way above that limit, and that's why he had to plead guilty.

But very interestingly, the first of the counts is not that Cohen made an illegal payment.

It's that he caused a third party, namely the business entity that controls the national inquirer,

to make a payment that was illegal for the national inquirer to make.

And the point here is:

the theory is

even if a transaction would be legal as to you, if you did it yourself,

it is still illegal to cause a third party to do something that would be unlawful as to that third party.

And it seems to me that that answers directly what Trump's lawyers have been saying about this, which is that the president, because he was the candidate, did not have a limit on what he could spend on his own campaign.

Now, I've always thought that was a kind of a flawed explanation because

there's two parts that are important to campaign finance.

One is the limits, but probably the more important one is reporting.

So even a candidate has to report what he spends.

But

for our narrow purpose here,

if Cohn is being directed by Trump and they have Cohn plead guilty to causing a third-party entity to make an illegal contribution, it seems obvious to me that Trump also has to be guilty of that.

So

it at least looks to me like that's the case case they're trying to make.

Right.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

All right.

All right.

Let me give you a couple of things here, Stu.

You can choose the news because I'm just not going to be able to get through everything.

Facebook has filed a patent to calculate your future location.

That one is fascinating.

Yes, it is.

The new exercise guidelines.

Not bad news if you don't, if you're like me.

That's tempting to hear, right?

Because it's that time of year where

every time I pass a plate of cookies, there's no more cookies on the plate when I walk by it.

It's really, it's amazing.

How can it be so hard to not eat a cookie?

But it is that hard.

And

what the trade war in China is really all about.

What do you want to do?

Definitely not the boring trade war thing.

Well, tell me that.

You got to tell me the exercise thing.

Okay, so here's the exercise thing.

Okay, for the first time in 10 years, new rules on exercising.

Remember, I think we're at Butter is Okay again, aren't we?

Butter was okay, then it was bad, then it was really bad, then it was okay, then it was bad again, and I think we're back to Butter is okay.

I think you're right.

Okay, so it's a little slower,

but for the first time in 10 years, they've come up with new exercise guidelines.

And when I say they,

I would have had to read the story a little bit more deeper to know who they are, but I think think we all know that's what they want you to believe.

I do think that's the problem with so much of this reporting, especially on health and food and stuff, is that it's not necessarily that the study is bad or has no value.

It's that the media is so horrible at reporting it, where they just take, like, there's a study on four mice that indicated something slightly.

Change the way you eat.

Like, that's not what any of those things are supposed to do.

Right.

Okay, and I, and this is all framed as good news, okay?

Uh, The new exercise guidelines aren't increasing the recommended amount of exercise for teens and adults.

Okay, that sounds like good news.

That does sound good.

But they're not decreasing them either.

Wow.

So that sucks.

However, they do change the definition of exercise a bit, so it is easier to hit.

This comes from the Journal of American Medical Association and the Department of Health and Human Services.

And

if you're not hitting the guidelines that were released in 2008, don't feel bad.

Eight in ten people are like, I don't give a flying crap what they say.

But here's a subtle but important change.

They no longer define exercise as an activity that lasts at least 10 minutes.

So now,

how many minutes is it?

Just

any kind of heart rate increase.

You can count that time for any length of time.

So now,

if that's true, sex counts for most people.

There you go.

I will say too, I'm not going to start exercising more, but I am going to be closer to the minimum amount of exercise I need to do.

Correct.

Because zero is closer to whatever they're saying now than 10.

Yes.

So if you just park a little bit further away,

you know, from your office, that counts now as exercise.

And that's a good thing to do if there are no spots that are closer than the one that you're going to.

That's right.

They say you don't have to go to the gym for 10, 15, or 30 minutes, which I don't have to worry about crossing that off my calendar because I'm not doing it now.

Although that will lower your exercise now, they're swiping the calendar event off.

You're right.

So I am exercising.

Well, no, I can't cross it off.

I could put it in and then cross it off, and I'm doing double the exercise.

They say it's still

2.5 to 5 hours of moderate intensity exercise or 1.25.

No, this is per week.

Or 1.25 to 2.5 hours of vigorous intensity exercise per week.

A week is the seven-day one, right?

I know.

I could watch five hours of television or Netflix, but I can't walk for five hours.

That's just.

They do keep.

I feel like I don't know if these studies are actually showing this or they're just dumbing it down.

Like there was a study that came out a few years ago that said it's as effective to do 10 minutes of high-intensity exercise as it is to do like 45 minutes to an hour of lower-intensity exercise.

And that seems like, wow, like 10 minutes, of course, I can do 10 minutes.

And I don't, I mean, I, that's kind of makes some sense to me, like, because it's high-intensity, but the other part of me just thinks they're just like, well, let's get them to do one minute.

If we say 10, maybe they'll do one.

So, do you?

They're just so round and blubbery.

Can we at at least, you're not all Santa Claus.

You don't want to look like the cartoon Wally.

You know, you don't want to look, because I think that's what we're all going to turn into.

So

when you're looking at the high-intensity exercise, do you remember when we first met Ray Kurzweil in 2006?

Yes.

Ray Kurzweil is a futurist.

He's a transhumanist.

He takes

like 600 tablets of different minerals and everything else a day.

Yeah.

Yeah.

He's like, I mean, you'd be swallowing pills all day, all day.

Would you get full by that?

I don't know.

I feel like he wouldn't want to eat anything else.

You'd just be filled with pills all day.

So he's taking all of these supplements every single day, and he really watches everything.

And he invented this exercise machine that is a total body workout.

And I remember looking at it because he said, you do it, use it for five days or five minutes a day, and you got everything you need.

And the guy's in really good shape.

And when I met him in 06,

he had just started looking at his, about five years before, started checking his

actual physical age

of his tissue.

I don't even know how you do this, but he had gone back eight years in physical age when I had seen him the next time.

This is the thing that's in the Sky Mall magazine, isn't it?

It was like one of those devices where you're

one of those, but I think he came up with it and he uses it every day.

And everybody then said, Oh, no, that's nothing because you can't do it for five minutes, and that's that won't help you at all.

And he was the guy going, Yeah, no, it helps a lot.

Do it.

So

I'm only fat because the government said I couldn't not be fat in five minutes.

I know it's too late.

Show to blame the government for stuff.

So I'm with you on this one.

Amen, brother.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Back in just a second, as the program continues, we look at what Facebook is now doing to predict where you're going next.

Oh, this sounds like fun.

Hello, China, and George Orwell's 1984.

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

So you have the Google CEO today testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, and they say, well, you know,

you know, we don't have a political agenda.

You don't have a political agenda?

Really?

Did you watch

your meeting the day after the election?

When you all got together and said, you know, hey, we think the world's going in a different direction, but there's more we can do?

What are you talking about?

In some ways, I almost feel like they actually believe it in that it's not a political agenda.

It's just right and wrong.

Yeah, it's a religion.

Right.

It's like, you know, it's global warming is a good example of this, right?

Like, it's, it's not a political agenda to say that we need to spend $500 trillion to stop global warming.

It's just we have to or we're all going to die.

Well, you know, what you're not seeing there is there is a political agenda that you're not.

No, it's science and we're right.

Well, yeah, but what you're saying your solution is,

there's a lot of debate on that.

But they don't see it that way.

It's the same thing with like when they're talking about deplatforming people, right?

And they're taking, well, you said something that was bad about Sharia law or you said something that was bad about

transgenderism.

Well, they don't see politics in that because it's so obvious what's right and what's wrong.

To them, they're in a bubble where 100% of the people around them agree.

So, this is not a political issue.

That's why Jack can go to Burma.

They're killing Muslims.

They're killing Christians.

They're just erasing whole populations.

And he's fine.

He's fine.

No, it's beautiful.

And I'm here for meditation because it's a perfect place to meditate and figure out what the next good thing is we can do.

Well, here's an idea.

Don't go to Burma.

Here's an idea.

Go to Burma and speak out about the atrocities that are happening.

How's that one, Jack?

I mean, I don't need even to meditate on those ones.

I got them pretty quickly.

Ooh, that one just came to me.

Wow, and I'm still not meditating.

Today, we have Google testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee about what do they do?

What is it they do?

What are you tracking people?

Are you banning people?

You blocking people?

They're going to bring up today that Google employees sought to block Breitbart from Google AdSense

less than a month after President Donald Trump took office.

Now, this is according to leaked emails,

internal emails, where they were just saying, we got to stop Breitbart.

And that is,

that goes right in line with what

they were talking about in that Google meeting,

that big corporate meeting.

They were open about it.

And it doesn't have to come from the top.

It can come from just a group of people

in a room that just says, hey, turn this down, turn that down, change the algorithm a little bit.

Nobody up in the upper end even needs to know.

All right.

Even if it's only one person.

We saw that with, what was it?

It was on Twitter.

Didn't they ban Donald Trump one person on their way out of the building because they were leaving?

Yes.

And that's a minor example.

They were able to turn it around pretty quickly.

But of course those people exist.

They exist in every organization.

Both sides.

Yeah, especially when you're told all the time that here's a guy who wants to kill all immigrants and gay people and all the horrible things that Trump and every Republican is accused of.

Well, of course, you have to stop them.

It's the only right thing to do.

Right.

And it would happen on both sides if we had a side.

I mean,

if we had a Google or Twitter or Facebook, I imagine that there would be people that would want to do that as well.

To the other side, we got to stop, got to stop and shut down the Antifa voices because it's just the right thing to do, right?

So it's human nature, and they just, like all progressives, they just deny human nature.

It's in pretty critical places.

Now, Facebook has just filed for a patent to calculate your future location.

They have several patent applications for technology

that uses your current location data to predict where you're going and when you're going to be offline.

The Facebook spokesperson says that doesn't, just because we

filed a patent doesn't mean that we have

an intent or any indication that we want to follow you while you're not offline or predict where you're going.

Might be a problem with our patent system, by the way, if that is a legitimate excuse.

we all know that they do have some use for it, but like, you shouldn't be filing patents if you have no intention on ever using them.

It's like, oh, well, I came up with an idea that theoretically could be possible.

Let me patent it so that someone, when they actually come up with the idea in 20 years, has to pay me a bunch of money or can't use it at all.

Right.

That's why so many, I mean, this is that's just a separate issue, but it is

a bad one in the United States right now.

So, what it's going to do is

the application is called Offline Trajectories, and it's a method to predict where you're going to go next based on your location data.

The technology described in the patent would calculate the transition probability based at least in part on your previously logged location data associated with a

plurality of users who were at the current location.

It will also use the data of other people you know as well as that of strangers to make predictions.

So it's going to be able to predict you based on what you've done before.

It will also predict you because it will go out and look at your friends and what they've done.

But also,

if I'm reading this right, it will look at your friends and where they are.

So if your friends are gathering at some place and you're driving in the general area, likely you're going there.

Okay, you're still not convincing me this is a good use of

technology.

What do you mean?

It's just going to make it easier.

It's going to make our lives easier.

So you get ads in places where you don't even have the internet.

That sounds horrible.

I don't like when I get them when I do have the internet.

No, they just need to know where you are at all times.

Oh, that's it.

That's it.

They just, is it?

Do you, I mean, because a lot of this stuff is,

I've noticed this with like, you know, like the Uber and Lyft type of apps and where they will, you know, you go a certain way a certain certain amount of times.

They say, oh, this must be your house.

This must be your work.

The one that's really funny is the, we have the GPS in my wife's car, and it now draws new roads on the map.

Because if we go to a place where they don't have

a road mapped a certain amount of times, it realizes, oh, there must be a road there.

and then draws the road on the map.

It's actually remapping kind of in real time, which was very funny because one time I was driving down the street and I looked over and I saw this circle on the side of the road.

And it kind of looks like almost like a dirt road when they draw a new road on there.

It was a circle.

It was like a well-defined circle and there were lines all around it.

And I'm like, what the heck is that?

And I pull up and I realize it was Krispy Kreme.

It was where my wife had gone to Krispy Kreme with the kids so many times, it thought it was a road.

Oh my god.

It really happened, which is that

it's probably not good for the diabetes future of my children.

No, but you know what?

Seriously, if that happened,

think of the implications.

If that happened and you did have a problem with weight or something else, and your health insurance would be alerted that you are going to Krispy Kreme a lot.

That's a great point.

And

that is all

that data is so valuable to them that they will do everything they can to give you things so that you will give that data to them, right?

Like, you know, there's a new

Google phone service out.

And I, you know, this struck me as interesting.

You've been so.

Don't do it.

Don't do anything, Google.

Do not

have an Android.

Don't use Google Chrome.

I keep saying this, I've got to put it in my Google Calendar to remind myself to get myself off of Google.

I know.

But it's true.

They have the phone service, and it had

a cool feature to it.

I think it was like there's thousands of Wi-Fi hotspots that you automatically get access to if you sign up to their plan.

And I was thinking to myself,

you know, I use so much freaking data.

It would be great to have, just be able to hop on Wi-Fi when you're at some, you know, wherever these things are.

It's kind of a cool, it's kind of a cool thing, and you don't have to learn all the passwords, it just automatically does it.

And you know what's great about that is Google pays for all of those access for your data, so they're just paying it out of the goodness of their heart.

They just want your life to be easier, and so this giant corporation is just paying those billions of dollars to give you all of those free Wi-Fi hotspots all over the world for everybody because they're just those they're good, they're good people,

or

they found a way to make more money off of you

because your information,

they'll have greater access to your information.

I think it's the second one, Stu.

Hmm.

You're just negative.

You're just being negative.

I know.

And it's true.

I mean, like, I think these things a lot of times do actually make your life better.

And because of that,

we are losing.

It's a brave new world.

Yeah.

You You said this before.

You said this when we were doing our stage tour.

You know, China is doing 1984 and we're doing Brave New World.

And it's true.

We're doing this completely willingly.

We're giving them all the technology.

We're giving them all the information so they can use with their technology.

And, you know, it improves your life by like 187th of a percent.

And we're like, eh, all right.

It's a way to know where I am all the time.

Right.

And

now predictive technology.

Remember I told you yesterday there was a new thing out now that shows that they can predict, there's this new scan that can predict, they've only tried it on animals, where an animal is going to move next.

And

it's an incredible thing.

Just look it up.

Through brain waves, right?

Brain waves.

And so they're shooting this thing at an animal, and it can see their brain.

And the way it sees it, it distorts the animal.

It actually sees the movement of the animal before the animal moves.

And they can predict all kinds of behavior on this.

Well, this is here they are.

Here's Google saying, hey, we're going to have predictive technology too, just based on what we know about you and your friends, et cetera, et cetera, on where you're going.

Just look at France.

What's happening in France?

This is the closest to a revolution that France has had for a long, long, long time.

This could end in actual revolution in France.

You think with all this technology that the governments are not going to say, hey, we need to know where these people are.

Of course, they will.

Of course, they will.

Even China's already way down that road.

If you tried to have a revolution in China right now, especially in a major city, you'd have no chance of being able to pull it off.

Now, again, like, revolutions are a lot of times not so positive.

But most times.

Most times.

There's one example I can think of that was pretty good

here in America.

Yeah, American Revolution.

I think it's the only one that ended this way.

Well, it ends with the people who started, right?

I mean, it's one thing to do.

It ends with the original goal and the original people.

And a lot of times we saw this

in Egypt and throughout the

Arab awakening,

where

it winds up being some other powerful group that's not the first powerful group, but not the kids.

The teenagers don't wind up taking over.

And they're like, oh, we're really passionate about this this week.

And then now we're being crushed by the new government next week.

We talked about this yesterday on the news and why it matters.

That what's happening in France could very well be what happened in Hungary.

You know, it it was

top-down, bottom-up, inside out.

And

you want that

core of protesters to rise, cause chaos in the streets, to make everybody say to the government, you got to stop this.

And so the government does.

Little do they know, the government is not necessarily on their side.

And it comes down, clamps down, and you have communist Hungary.

So that's exactly how it happened in the 1950s.

They did not want to be a Soviet satellite, but there were riots in the streets, and enough people in high places that said, you know, we've got to do this, we have to do that.

And next thing you know, the Soviet tanks are rolling in, and they're a communist Soviet satellite.

We could see this, except this time, they have the technology to stop anybody who is

even, literally, even thinking

that that's a good idea.

The Blaze Radio Network

on demand.