"Courage is Contagious" (Ben Shapiro, Rep. Thomas Massie & Austin Petersen join Glenn) - 2/27/18

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.

Love.

Courage.

I think it's pretty obvious to everybody now that there's something really rotten in Broward County.

The actions of the sheriff and his deputies that arrived at Stoneman shooting is becoming more convoluted today.

Last night, Laura Ingram reported that she had a source who revealed why the officers didn't initially enter the high school.

Listen.

Our sources near the Broward County Sheriff's Department are telling us that the deputies who arrived at the scene of the shooting were told not to enter the school unless their body cameras were turned on.

And then we found out that the deputies did not have body cameras.

So they did not enter or enter the building or engage the shooter.

So curiously, police also lost radio communications during the Parkland shooting.

And our source claims that radio communication also went dead during the Fort Lauderdale airport shooting in 2017 that he also got a lot of criticism for.

Now to lose precious seconds because of a lack of body cameras is outrageous.

We didn't have body cameras five years ago.

What would the officers have done then?

Scott Peterson, the deputy who stayed behind the concrete stairwell during the rampage, rampage, also defended his actions yesterday.

He issued a statement through his lawyer claiming that he heard gunshots but believed the gunshots were originating from outside of the buildings on the school campus.

The sheriff's office trains its officers that in the event of an outdoor gunfire, you're supposed to seek cover, assess the situation in order to communicate what one observes with other law enforcement agencies.

agencies.

Allegations that Mr.

Peterson was a coward and that his performance under the circumstances failed to meet the standards of police officers are patently untrue.

That's an end of the quote.

Now, maybe Peterson is telling the truth.

It's quite possible that he complied with all of his training.

It's quite possible that they were told not to go in with body cameras because that sounds like a political move, and we all know that the sheriff now is nothing but political.

But if this is the case, it seems like strict adherence to the rules and regulation has cost people their lives.

When does making sure a body camera is operational more important than saving a life?

The answer is never.

When does making sure that you're in compliance with an outdoor gunfire situation more important than tracking down and stopping a mass murderer?

The answer is never.

Look, I wasn't there that day.

And it's easy for all of us to play quarterback now after the game is over.

We don't know what really happened.

These all could be feeble attempts to cover the Broward County Sheriff's Department's actions or inactions.

They could be telling the truth.

We don't know.

Right now, we are desperately searching for somebody to blame for this tragedy.

But we already have that person in jail.

The guy who pulled the trigger.

Let's remember not to be too judgmental as we continue our search for the truth.

On who dropped the ball.

Could this have been prevented?

The answer is yes.

Now, without a lynch mob, let's find out exactly how and who was not doing their job.

It's Tuesday, February 27th.

This is the Glenn Beth program.

Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro.

Hello, Ben.

How are you?

I mean, in there, how are you?

Good.

Has anybody followed your lead on

not giving the name of the shooter?

Not so far as I'm aware.

So we over at the Daily Wire have taken up the policy in the last week and a half after Parkland of not showing the name or face of the shooter on our website.

I'm not aware that anybody else in the mainstream media have done that.

We're not the first to the ballgame, of course.

There are other outlets that have done that before.

But I am surprised that the same media that proclaims that every law-abiding gun owner in the country has to give up their rifle is happy to show continually on a loop the name and face of the shooter when there are many studies suggesting that mass shooters actually thrive on this sort of publicity.

And it drives actually more common mass shootings.

Trevor Burrus: So, Ben, we are totally unhinged now from facts.

The CNN town hall debate last week was grotesque, and they still don't get it.

I mean, I think

it would do a great service to CNN and a Jake Tapper if they would just come out and say, you know what, having that crowd there was a horrible idea.

Horrible idea.

Would you agree?

Totally agree.

I mean, I thought it was Orwell's two-minute tape.

I thought it was just a show trial for gun owners.

I thought it was a show trial for the NRA.

And, you know, I know Jake.

I like Jake.

I think Jake does a good job

when he tries, but

I think that that,

I told them this.

I I mean, I think that that I thought that was egregious.

I thought it was just egregious.

I thought the entire event was a setup from the start.

Jake was not a moderator.

Jake allowed the students to go up there and browbeat people like Senator Rubio, one of the students suggesting that when he looked down the barrel when he looked at Rubio, he was like looking down the barrel of the gun of the shooter, which is just an insane statement to make publicly.

And the crowd shared that because

it was more a bang mob than it was an actual crowd of people considering poss possible arguments.

I understand passions are high, but that's the whole point of being in the news business.

I mean, passions are high a lot of places, but there's a selective decision that's being made by news outlets as to which sorts of town halls you should set up like this.

I mean, I as I said at the time, I don't remember CNN doing a town hall in Texas on the border about illegal immigration after some high-profile killing of somebody by an illegal immigrant with all the members of the community.

Of course they wouldn't do that because they would say this isn't newsworthy.

It's not newsworthy that people are passionate and upset after a shooting.

What's newsworthy is the argument that actually happens on the basis basis of reason and decency, and both of those things have completely fallen away here.

And instead, CNN has decided to put on a particular set of students.

Now, there are a bunch of students who go to that school.

I mean, there's thousands of students who go to that school.

I know at least one of them who is a Second Amendment advocate who is not being booked every single day on CNN.

The ones who are booked every day on CNN are, of course, this small group of students that you've seen their faces plastered all over.

the media, Emma Gonzalez and Cameron Kasky and David Hogg.

And you know their names.

You don't know the names of the names of people who are killed, but you know the names of these kids who are on TV for the last two weeks, spouting gun control and suggesting that folks like Dana Lash, who we both know and like, you know, and are friends with, that people like Dana are actually uncaring about the deaths of children, which is just the sickest form of demagoguery.

I mean, I've been calling that out since Piers Morgan.

I hate that so much.

This routine where we disagree on policy and therefore we don't care if kids get killed, it's disgusting.

Well, I mean, you could make the case we care about kids getting killed in larger numbers

than what is happening now.

The greatest mass shootings in all of history come from out-of-control governments.

And that's why we have the Second Amendment.

To sit here and say we don't care about kids being shot, we absolutely do care about that.

But we also care about protecting the freedoms of children and the children that haven't even been born yet.

That's exactly right.

It's also true that even if you were to put aside the arguments on the founding level for the Second Amendment, you're telling me that that in this particular case, the FBI failed twice.

They were told specifically twice about the shooter by name, and they did nothing.

The local law enforcement had at least 45 calls, according to CNN, from the shooter's house, including the shooter himself calling the police on himself a few months ago, and they did nothing.

And then we had

an armed deputy who was present with a handgun.

And we're now being told by the media, of course, that a handgun can never go up against a rifle, which is just an insane contention that is completely meritless, as anyone who's ever fired a gun knows.

And then they're telling us that all of these law enforcement bodies fail, but we have to give up our guns.

So just to get this straight, my self-defense now rests on me giving up my gun to a bunch of people who will do nothing if somebody threatens me with a gun.

So

even on the most basic self-defense level, why in the world would I possibly give up my right to keep and bear firearms when the authorities aren't even keeping me safe?

I mean, according to the Latin bargain, this is like their only job.

Their only job is to private life, liberty, and property.

And they didn't do any of those things.

They're not protecting life, obviously.

They didn't in Parkland.

They're not protecting liberty because they want to seize my liberty and not protect my life.

And they're not protecting the property of the school.

Fenn,

where do you think this goes?

Because we all know that another shooting is going to happen because we're not taking care of the real issues.

We're not even willing to, you know, I was talking yesterday about,

you know, they'll take

and send the police for

a third grader who is brandishing a second degree look-alike firearm, otherwise known as a finger gun.

And yet, we can't have a conversation.

They'll say that's leading to violence.

And we can't have a conversation about our culture, about the violent nature of our culture, the violent nature of our movies, the

video games that our kids are deeply entrenched in.

I'm not saying I want to ban any of that or anything else, but we can't even have a conversation about it.

It's all about

control over you and

any way of you defending yourself.

So where do we go from here?

Because half of the country is dead set on that, it seems.

Yeah, I think that it's going to be hard to go anywhere because, again, the entire premise of this conversation has become you hate children.

And you can't have a conversation with someone when they're screaming, you hate children.

How are we supposed to come to any sort of agreement about that?

I think there are things that could be done.

I mean, I've suggested a bunch of things I think would be effective, not only the media refusing to show names and faces, but I think that David French has proposed gun violence restraining orders, which is a bunch of basically your family members and close friends can go to a court and petition to have your gun rights temporarily suspended if the court finds you mentally incompetent or a danger to yourself or others.

That seems like a decent idea to me.

There's been talk about, I am a strong advocate.

of better security in schools.

I went to a private school, and actually my private school was nearly targeted by a mass shooter.

A mass shooter drove past our private school targeting the Jewish school, targeting the Jewish school.

He saw there were armed guards, or at least he thought they were armed, and he just kept driving.

He drove over to the West Valley JCC and shot that place up instead.

That's because our school had hard security barriers.

It had a certain number of security guards per number of students.

There's bomb threat at our school every so often.

Nobody at that school has ever been shot or killed on premises, at least.

And it seems to me that we should be guarding our kids the same way that we guard our banks.

All of this stuff, I would assume, should get wide agreement across the spectrum because it's relatively uncontroversial that we should be protecting our schools in a better way.

But the left doesn't want to discuss any of those things, which demonstrates that there really is an agenda here.

And the agenda has a lot less to do with defending schools and defending kids than it has to do with the generalized gun control push that the left likes to engage in.

And more importantly, the moral push that you are a bad human being if you disagree with them.

Because again, this is what the Obama administration In the early years, they had 60 votes in the Senate, they had the House, and they did nothing on gun control, nothing, because they knew that the American people didn't didn't want it.

And then, as soon as the Republicans took back the House, suddenly it turned into, well, let's talk about gun control every single day and why Republicans are obstructionists, which says to me that this is a lot more about politicking than it is about protection.

Is it about their motivation to essentially get their base fired up and get you're coming up to an election?

They want all this new money coming in, and they don't necessarily want this problem solved because if it's solved, then they don't have the argument anymore to take to their base.

Yeah, I think there's definitely some truth to that.

I'm not not going to say that their motives are awful and they don't care about kids or anything like that.

But I will say that they are that in the same way that the left did not resolve the illegal immigration issue when they had the power to do so because it is a valuable political tool for them.

I think they don't actually want to do the gun control stuff because if they do, number one, it's not going to stop the mass shootings.

It's not going to.

Not a single element that they have proposed is going to minimize or stop mass shootings other than total gun confiscation, which they proclaim they don't want.

And so they would rather gin up the base for the elections.

So we are either going to revive the Enlightenment or we are going to die in darkness.

Which one wins?

I'm with you on this.

I think that the Enlightenment,

it's become a controversial proposition to say things like, use your reason instead of your emotion and tell the truth instead of prevaricating.

If those are controversial propositions, we're in serious trouble.

So, you know, there's some of us who are obviously trying to fight back against that.

There's some of us who are trying to restore the nature of the Enlightenment.

But I think one of the great debates that's happening right now inside even the group of us who are pro-Enlightenment is what roots have to be restored?

Can you just restore Enlightenment's ideology without restoring respect for Judeo-Christian values and Greek thought?

Can you just take the cherry on top of the Sunday and then leave aside the religion and leave aside the reason?

Or do you have to go back to basics and try to relearn all of those things?

I think that's a big risk debate that's right now happening among people on the right and left.

It's a debate that I think that's happening between people, you know, like Jordan Peterson and Steven Pinker, for example.

But there must be broad agreement that at least we're trying to get back there.

And I don't think there's even broad agreement that we're trying to get to get back to Enlightenment mentality.

Yeah, I'm reading Steven Pinker's book now.

And

yeah, he is really,

you know, he makes a lot of good points, but the guy just does not like religion at all, to put it mildly.

And

I think we dismiss

religion because of its ills, and we fail to recognize that it set up for the very first time a real civil society where we were able to search for truth.

100%.

I mean, this is one of my great critiques of Pinker's book, and I'm actually writing a book that takes on his book in a pretty substantial way, not because I disagree with him about the value of reason, but because I think that he has, and I think the

materialist atheist movement has fundamentally undercut a lot of the contentions that they're seeking to support.

So you have an entire book by Pinker about the value of reason and the value of enlightenment thinking, and that neglects 3,000 years of history that went into building that.

Can you actually rip away the foundations of that, which are Judeo-Christian religion on the one hand and Greek thought on the other?

Just take those away, and then suddenly the superstructure is supposed to stand.

So he'll talk about reason.

He'll talk about the value of reason.

He'll talk about the value of the Enlightenment.

And not once in that entire book does he mention the French Revolution.

Well,

you can't do that.

I mean, if you're not going to mention Comte, if you're not going to mention the French Revolution, if you're not going to mention the progressives of

the early 19th century, 20th century, if you're not going to mention the risks that came along with the Enlightenment, an Enlightenment unmoored from traditional moral values and from Greek teleology, meaning the notion that the universe has a purpose that we can discover as individual human beings, if you remove all of that, then people are going to come up with a morally relativistic universe they think is based on reason pretty quickly.

And that, I think, is what Pinker neglects.

And I think that it's a problem for him.

I think that it's hard to build a moral system on the basis that we are balls of floating meat with no free will.

That is exactly the case, as I understand it, that Nietzsche was making when he said God is dead.

Okay, then who becomes God?

What man?

And that was the beginning of

this whole collective idea that led to mass murder.

Totally Totally agree.

And I think that, again, you know, Pinker mentions Nietzsche, but only to disparage Nietzsche's thought.

What he fails to recognize is that Nietzsche was making a diagnosis.

Nietzsche wasn't making a recommendation.

And Nietzsche was looking at the Enlightenment mentality, which had said, we are smarter than everybody else in history, and we have come up with our own reason, and that reason is going to guide us.

The cult of reason was actually a cult in the French Revolution.

The first official state religion of the French Revolution was the cult of reason, the goddess of reason.

And of course, that immediately devolves into people chopping each other's heads off.

I'm all for reason, and I love reason.

A reason has to be undergirded by a search for a commonly available truth that can either be found through nature and nature's God, as the founders put it, or can be found in the revelatory dictates of

divinely inspired religion.

Thank you, Ben.

Ben Shapiro, the editor-in-chief of the Daily Wire, sponsor this half hour, real estate as realestate agents I trust.com.

This is a company that started a few years ago because

there's just a better way to sell your house.

There has to be.

You know, when you take your car to the dealer,

you know, and something just

doesn't feel right, you're not a mechanic,

you trust the mechanic.

Do I really need this defibrillator?

I've never even heard of one.

You need trustworthy mechanics.

Same thing with a real estate agent.

You don't want one that just wants the listing so somebody else can sell it, or worse, one that undervalues your home just to sell it quickly you need a real estate agent that really understands the market uh it has real good values has somebody who not only has reason but also is undergirded with some principles we have the um the the best real estate agents in your town who we trust will get the most money for your home as quickly as possible the agents are full-time professionals who have great track records their word is their bond they're all fans of the show.

So it's like dealing with a family member, except a family member who really knows their business.

So go to realestateagentsitrust.com.

You want to buy or sell your home, realestate agentsitrust.com.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn Beck.

We're just talking.

I'm reading two books right now.

I'm reading Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules to Live By and Steven Pinker's Enlightenment Now, and it's a good juxtaposition.

I'm reading Pinker at night and Jordan during the day.

And they're both books that you have to just read over and over and over again and really listen to.

Jordan Peterson's book, number one New York Times bestseller,

I think people think is a self-help book.

And it is.

It's kind of cloaked as that, but it's really not a self-help book.

I mean, it's deep, deep philosophy.

And, you know, one of the chapters, I don't remember which one it is, I'm halfway through the book, and

it's on evil and how do we confront evil?

You know, when somebody decides to go to the bottom of the barrel, what do we do?

How do we deal with that?

And it's really what we're dealing with right now.

And we're not having that conversation.

And we need to.

Yeah, and it's, it's, there's a lot of this popping up right now, which is kind of

encouraging a little bit.

You know, a lot lot of people who are seemingly trying to actually get answers, people who are allowing the other side to make their rational point, and you make your rational point, and you just kind of hash it out.

And there's more and more people on both sides that are taking on their own side first.

There's some really interesting people we're going to have as future guests that are starting to take on their own side.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.

Loads of ammunition and a powerful AR-15.

Keep assault rifles out of the hands of police.

I want this to be the end of the Second Amendment.

The latest school shooting has ignited the gun debate.

Now, more than ever, you need to know the facts.

Get control.

Exposing the truth about guns on Amazon and wherever books are sold.

So, I'm going to tell you about a movement now

to get schools just to recognize the Sixth commandment.

Just can we can we recognize the sixth?

Don't have to have all ten.

Let's just put one in.

You can't murder.

How much of this has been how much of this has been

has the foundation for our society

been laid to grow these killers?

How much of just the removal of basic principles and then not replacing them with anything other than gobbledygook?

We're doing this now with science.

We're now saying that just because you say you're a man or say you're a woman, you are rejecting science.

We've always been told as religious people, you are science deniers.

But we are now being told that just because you say you're a woman, you are a woman, denying the X and Y chromosomes.

What is happening to us?

What happens to us is no matter what the God is, no matter what the God,

we used to develop a society based on what the shoebox says.

And inside the shoebox is a magic eight ball.

And that's what we've set our society up on.

Well, we might go and say,

you know, we,

am I a woman?

Shake the magic eight ball and it says, ask again later.

And we build our whole foundation on that.

Well, if you take away the magic eight ball,

you better replace it with something else that is going to decide what is true and what is not.

We've taken away our magic eight ball.

We've taken away the truth that we all recognize, the Judeo-Christian truth.

We have taken God and chased him out.

In our society, what made Western culture different

was we looked to Jesus.

Jesus was a messenger of peace.

Now,

religions got screwed up all the time.

All the time.

But generally speaking, when we would take these big leap forward, it was because we were basing our society and the greatest men in our society on Jesus.

They were the ones who sacrificed it all.

They were the ones who were peaceful, who were gentle, who were giving, who were healing, who were listeners and comforters,

who took more than their fair share for everybody else.

And that was something that was grown inside of us.

Now we've gotten rid of that character.

And what have we replaced it with?

Nothing.

There is no no hero.

There is no archetype.

There is nothing.

Point to what we're all striving to be.

You know, we all chanted, well, not all of us, but many chanted for change.

To what?

To what?

There has to be a point on the horizon.

To what?

Many of us said, you're going to make these changes, and they're never going to be enough.

It's never going to be enough

because you haven't told us.

If you told us that, look, we just want people to be fairly treated.

Gay people should be able to get married.

Fine, the way to solve this is to get the government out of marriage.

Otherwise, you cause far too many problems.

So get government out of marriage.

I don't, as a Christian, I don't get anything from the government declaring my marriage is sacred or valid.

Who cares?

What we've done, however, is created a system to where now, what about the wedding cake?

What about this?

What about that?

And the government has to be involved.

That's not American.

That's not freedom.

But because we don't have a point on the horizon where we're saying we're headed for that archetype, that's what we want.

And this is what people are like in that archetype.

And they're well-defined characters in all kinds of situations.

We know how Jesus acted when he was angry.

We know Jesus, how he was acted when he was being scourged and accused.

We know when he had the power to heal.

We know how he acted when he was offered up the wealth of the earth.

We know every scenario.

We know.

Where is that archetype for us?

This is, you know,

I'm reading Pinkerton and I'm also reading

Jordan Peterson at the same time.

And they're both coming at the problems of our society in very similar ways.

Jordan Peterson, however, is saying there is a case for God here.

Pinkerton is saying there's no case for God.

As I'm looking at, as I'm looking at things,

I'm realizing how foolish I have been and how much

how much I have to learn

and how I have how I have allowed people to shape my thinking for instance I've always thought Nietzsche was you know God is dead and it's nihilistic and it's all over and and there's nothing good nihilism

No, that's what he was warning against.

And it's amazing because

he makes this case that God is dead in something that he calls the parable of the madman.

And the ending

is what we've done.

We didn't listen to what he was saying.

Listen to this parable of a madman.

Have you not heard of

the madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours and ran into the marketplace and cried incessantly, I'm looking for God, I'm looking for God.

And many of those who did not believe in God were standing together there and excited considerable laughter.

And they said, Oh, you lost him?

Oh, did he lose his way like a child?

Is he hiding?

Oh, he's afraid of us.

Has he gone on a voyage?

Maybe he's emigrated.

They shouted and they laughed.

And the madman sprang into their midst and pierced them with his glances.

So here he is, around a bunch of people who are mocking the fact that he's looking for God.

He says, Where is he gone?

I'll tell you.

We have killed him, you and I.

We are his murderers.

But how have we done this?

How are we able to drink up the sea?

Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon?

What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun?

Is it moving, or are we moving?

Or are we perpetually falling backward, sideward, forward, in all directions?

Is there even an up or down left now?

Ask yourself these questions.

Is there an up or down left now?

Do you know what's up, down, sideways?

Do you know which way we're falling?

Are we falling to the left?

Are we falling to the right?

Are we falling forward?

Are we falling backward?

There's no consensus on this at all.

We have no idea.

That's what this, quote, madman was saying to the people.

We don't have any idea.

Is it not more and more night coming all the time?

Has it not become colder?

Ask yourself that question.

Are we not a colder society than we were 20 years ago, 40 years ago?

We're not colder in many ways?

Doesn't it seem like darkness is getting earlier and earlier now in our society?

He then says the famous quote from Nietzsche, God is dead.

God remains dead.

Here's what we don't follow.

And we have killed him.

How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves now?

Think of this.

If there is no God,

who's consoling?

Where do you get your peace, your solace?

He's saying, because in that society,

everybody found it with God.

That which is holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives.

Who's going to wipe this blood off of us?

With what water could we purify ourselves?

What festivals of atonement?

What sacred games will we need to invent?

Now think of that.

We had a system.

It was the atonement.

It was for Christians.

It was Jesus bore the sin so you can start over.

Well,

what is our ritual of atonement now?

We don't have one as a society.

There is no no one who makes up for everything.

There is no one who can forgive our sins.

We just have to do it.

You just forgive it.

All you have to do is stop drinking.

Just stop drinking.

All you have to do is just stop eating so much.

Just stop eating so much.

That's all you have to do.

Then why don't we do it?

You know what I have to do?

I just have to start exercising.

Why don't we do it?

There are things that we tell ourselves all the time that we just have to get over it, but why don't we?

That was an important ritual that we had.

Now here's where it gets interesting.

Listen to what the people said.

Here the madman fell silent.

He regarded his listeners.

They were silent as well and stared at him.

At last he threw down his lantern to the ground and broke and it went out.

I have come too early, he said to them.

My time is not yet come.

The tremendous event is still on its way, still traveling.

It hasn't reached the ears of men yet.

Lightning and thunder require time.

The light of the stars require time.

Deeds require time even after they are done, before they can even be seen or heard.

This deed is still more distant than them from the distant stars, and yet they had done it themselves.

Meaning.

Nietzsche is telling us now,

what are you going to invent?

Who's going to be your God?

Who's going to make your rules?

Now remember, he's writing this in Germany.

And he's saying, the Germans have lost their God.

You're now going to have to restructure.

So what is it?

So it was built on the progressive era.

It was built on science

and pseudoscience.

According to man.

And man said, you know what we have to do is treat everybody equally.

We have to be a collective.

Instead of God saying each of you are individuals, man said, yeah, but we're going to protect the individuals by working as a collective.

That led to death camps, death chambers, gas chambers, gulags, all over the world.

We have to fix reason firmly in her seat, but we also have to realize we've killed God in our society.

And it's going to end the same way it does every time a society kills God.

If you want to kill God,

then what are you replacing it with?

Let's be very specific on that.

What is our God?

What gives us eternal truth?

What is that point on the horizon that we need to fix and look at and say we're headed in that direction?

If you get rid of the God who gave us the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as individuals, if you get rid of him,

then it's logical to have a conversation about getting rid of those rights.

But then,

who is going to issue our rights and what exactly do they mean?

Again, reading Steven Pinker

and his book, Enlightenment Now, and also Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules to Live By, both approaching the same problem, one from

a spiritual aspect and one from an atheist aspect.

They're both worth reading.

All right, I want to talk to you about my

truck.

I have a truck that had a sensor going.

I don't know if anybody else has had this problem before, but I had a sensor go and it was $1,000.

And you're like, you've got to be kidding me.

Can it drive without the sensor?

If you have a car that is out of warranty, you need car shield, extended vehicle service protection from car shield.

My son-in-law doesn't have car shield.

If he would have had car shield, his ABS brakes

would have been taken care of.

Getting coverage by car shield is a great idea.

It's affordable protection that will save you thousands for covered repairs.

New fuel pump,

$500.

Replacing the water pump, $1,000.

You're talking of things that you're going to have to fix.

They're going to go wrong with your car.

Why not?

Pay into it now and get Car Shield so you don't have to worry about the thousands and thousands of dollars that you have to pay out when something goes wrong.

Car Shield, the ultimate in extended coverage.

They'll get your favorite mechanic or your dealership paid directly.

So sign up today, get 24-7 roadside assistance and a rental car while yours is in the shop.

Save yourself from high repair bills.

Get covered with CarShield like I have.

Call 800-CAR6100, mention the promo code Beck, or visit carshield.com, use the promo code Beck and save 10%.

That's carshield.com, promo code Beck.

Deductible may apply.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn, back.

Glad you're here.

You know, I'm actually more optimistic than I have been in a while because I'm hearing more and more people on the left say, okay, what do we do?

What do we do?

Because I can't take this anymore.

They can't take it on the left.

And so many people on the right can't take it on the right.

They just, they feel instinctively, this is not our best self.

It's a good example.

I tweeted something the other day about, it was,

you know, Trump is a fascist.

Give him all our guns.

Yeah.

Blatantly, and I wrote Smart Chance was the hashtag.

But the point is, if you think Trump is a fascist, you shouldn't want to give him all your guns, right?

I'm mocking the left.

I can't tell you how many Trump supporters.

I'm the

typical never Trumper.

Like just yelling at me as if I'm not on the side of, I'm on their side on this argument.

People can't even read a tweet for context.

It can't even get to the bottom of 280 characters to figure out what the hell the person is saying.

Yeah, I don't know how we, I don't know how we solve this, but there's some optimism.

There is optimism.

You're killing it.

But there is optimism because there are more people that are not engaging like that, that are tired of it and say, I'm done with that.

There's got to be a better way.

Mercury.

love

courage

truth

Glenn back I'm gonna go out on a limb that

that maybe it's not just me and maybe it's not just Stu

but I really don't like the direction of anything anymore I don't like I don't like any of this stuff anymore I I because it it's meaningless it really is meaningless in our life you know the the Fizergate thing release the memo We got to have the memo released.

This is an all-encompassing controversy like three weeks ago, right?

All, everyone was talking, release the memo.

No, not that memo.

They're going to release both of the memos.

No, Trump's not going to release the Democrat memo.

Oh, they're going to redact them too much.

Oh, my gosh, what's going to happen?

And we went back and forth and back and forth and back and forth for weeks on that.

And now they're both out.

So?

What happened?

What was the point of all of that?

I'm going to tell you something that no other talk show host in America would ever admit.

I saw the redacted Democratic memo.

I hit print and it sat on my printer and then on my desk for three days.

I had no desire.

I only read it because I had to for you.

So I just want you to know, please tell us to stop when you, because we're only doing this crap for you because we think you want it, but I think that you don't want it.

But here it is.

So the the democrats finally released their rebuttal memo and the world has gone dark all of a sudden everything has changed either that or nothing happened

the hyped bombshell memo really has nothing in it it doesn't tell us jack squat let me recap republican memo alleged the fbi and doj abused surveillance powers by lying by omission to the fisa court the memo claimed that the FISA warrant justification was based purely off the information in the infamous steel dossier, but the fact that the dossier was paid for by the

Democratic Party was kept hidden.

Now, here's the problem, as we stated at the time with the Republican memo.

There had to be some corroborating information besides the steel dossier that the FBI and DOJ used to justify a FISA warrant.

Had to.

Now, don't get me wrong.

Using the Steele dossier and concealing who funded it from FISA court is really bad.

But I just don't think there's any way the court would grant a warrant based purely off one dossier and a Yahoo News article.

And if that's true, we need to know it.

Now that sounds funny, but that's what the Republican memo insinuated.

Now, I said immediately after that document, oh, let's get the memo.

Release the memo.

Don't release the other memo.

Oh, geez.

We have to see the Democrat side, right?

Well, we finally got it over the weekend.

I was not interested at all.

It could have said,

Democrats threaten nuclear war and actually put a warhead in Donald Trump's pants.

And I would have been like, whatever.

The Democratic memo says, basically, exactly what we figured it would.

They did acknowledge that the steel dossier was used, but they downplayed its importance and pointed to additional sources of information.

Now, if you're curious about what that additional information is, good luck.

It's easy to find it in the 10-page report.

Just flip through and find the big black boxes that are overall of the type.

So basically, the Republican memo talks up the importance of the steel dossier in the Pfizer request, downplays additional sourcing.

The Democratic memo downplays the importance of the dossier, but talks up the additional sourcing.

And we all go around in circles again and again and again.

So, what should we be asking?

Why the hell are we doing this again?

It's Tuesday, February 27th.

This is the Glenn Beth program.

I have to tell you, I want to solve the problems.

I want to solve the problems.

I don't want to solve the problems by undermining the Constitution.

I think our problems are caused by undermining the Constitution.

I don't want to do that, but I am willing to look at new ideas.

I'm willing to work.

I'm willing to compromise on some things, not my principles, but I am willing to compromise on things where, you know, we don't necessarily agree.

But okay,

that doesn't shred people's life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness.

Okay, let's try that.

I'm looking for somebody who is reasonable,

somebody who

is as tired of it as I am.

Because we're not getting anywhere, and we're getting there fast.

I don't know if you know this.

We've already arrived.

So we need to start to have conversations with people that are taking on power in their own space.

I said this morning,

I'm going to start a conversation.

Courage is contagious, and I just want to start having conversations with people I may not even agree with.

Yesterday, we had the guy from Politico, editor-in-chief of Politico, who was taking on his own side and saying, I don't know about this Russia thing.

And he said he got a lot of pushback.

Good for you.

I may not agree with you, but good for you for saying, speaking truth to your power and saying, sit down for a minute i'm not sure it's all like that

and we start to have to start looking for uh people who can have those conversations in intelligent ways not just sound bites i think we have do we we have somebody here stu that maybe fits that bill i hope so i hope so too he's running for a senate in missouri austin peterson uh joins us austin welcome welcome austin

hi glenn thanks for having me on you bet you bet uh so you're how are things going uh with your candidacy

uh well we're not supposed to be doing as well as we are because the uh the republican establishment does not want me but uh we have actually had a sort of a sea change in the last month um this morning i officially filed to run with the secretary of state here in jefferson city so we've crossed the rubicon and um fundraising is going very well we've got a lot of press we've gotten a lot of good strong conservative endorsements.

Name ID is up.

I'm the hardest working man in the race.

I've been all over the state multiple times, made a lot of good connections, and people really like what they're hearing because, you know, I'm a different kind of a Republican.

And, you know, I love my country and the Constitution.

And I talk about how much I love freedom.

And that's really a message that brings a lot of Americans together.

And it really resonates well in Missouri.

So, let's talk about this.

You've had endorsements from Mary Matlin, Eric Erickson, Leon Wolf, who's the editor-in-chief of the Blaze magazine.

Tell me,

help steer us through what's happening in Florida right now.

You're in the Senate.

What are you saying right now?

Well, the first thing is, you know, we've got to be humans and empathize and say, I absolutely sympathize with the victims of this shooting.

And, you know, I have my principles that I want to stick to.

But the truth is, Glenn, is there's no tragedy, no matter how great, that justifies taking away the rights of innocent people.

And what bothers me is when I see some people on our side starting to cave to gun control measures through executive orders, and that's bothersome to me.

But I think that the truth is, is that an armed society is a polite society.

I think that

America is strong because America is free and we have a right to bear arms.

So I defend the Second Amendment and I think we ought to stick firm to it.

But yeah, we've got a problem.

I think it probably lies in mental health.

But you know what?

It also probably lies in our fathers, right?

Many of these shooters, they just don't have good fathers.

I had a wonderful father who taught me how to have firearm safety and how to use a gun responsibly and defend myself.

And that's probably what we need more of.

But frankly, as a senator, I don't know how to solve that problem.

Right.

I only have certain limited powers as a federal senator, and I can only be a moral leader and explain what I think the problem is.

Tell me what you think of the idea that our system is wholly inadequate for an irreligious and immoral people.

That's what our founders said.

Are we there yet?

I don't think so, Glenn.

Maybe it's because I'm young and naive, but I'm just really optimistic because I interact with a lot of people out on the campaign trail.

And when I talk to them about the future of our country, especially when you get, when the economy starts to improve, people start to look at things like these shootings in Florida more as anomalies than anything.

Because if you look at the data, violent crime involving guns is actually at an all-time low.

But the media likes to play it up.

Remember, if it bleeds, it leaves, right?

So people see all the negativity on the media and they confuse that for

real life, but it's not real life.

You know, shootings are, these kinds of shootings are very rare.

And I think we ought to look back at that

Reagan-esque sort of optimism.

America is a shining city on a hill.

I mean, the young people right now, the millennials, are now the largest voting bloc.

I don't think a negative message is going to sell.

I think we need a positive, optimistic message that protects religious liberty for all Americans.

It seems like, Austin, as far as the gun debate goes after the shooting, we have kind of a two-sided, an argument on two sides, which one, the left, which is saying we're going to grab as many guns as we can get away with at this particular moment and the the republicans seem to be pushing back on that and saying we're just going to infringe on your right a little bit is that okay

is that okay austin

no not this republican is saying things like that absolutely not we need to obey the constitution there's a reason why it's an enumerated right

and we need to follow due process.

I don't think mentally ill people who are dangerous should have guns, but the problem is the law enforcement agency is to blame because they failed to uphold their own protocols, right?

I don't understand why it is when we have a failure of government that we need to turn around and blame the freedoms of the people.

Like that's the issue.

It's not.

We even found out yesterday the shooter, Nicholas Cruz, tried to turn himself in.

He reported on himself as having

mental health issues and problems.

And then we had those sheriffs who didn't go in.

You know, why is it always that when government fails, people blame freedom?

I just, I can't go along with that.

So, Austin, I was watching CPAC, and they had

Marion LePen there.

They had invited one of the bigger conspiracy theorists from Gateway Pundit

to speak.

And I

look at the conservative movement and say, if that's who you're embracing, then I don't even know what a conservative means or what a conservative is.

Can you define the future of the conservative movement as you see it?

Thank you for asking that question, Glenn.

Glenn, I have had a conversation with Ben Shapiro about this, and both of us agree.

Conservatives need to accept the libertarian view on government, and libertarians need to accept the conservative view of institutions, families, friends, neighbors, churches that will be needed if we have a smaller government to solve society's ills.

And, you know, I think the problem is that libertarians and conservatives, we've been sort of at each other's throats.

But in order for us to

of the populist wave that we're seeing right now, which has, I'll admit, there are some libertarian instincts there, but generally

they tend towards the darker side, towards statism very frequently.

But I think the future with people like Ben Shapiro, people like yourselves, people like

myself out there advocating for a new alliance, a conservative, libertarian alliance, that could be very powerful.

If we all work together, I think that we can do something wonderful this year.

That's why I'm running for First Senate.

I'm trying to bring conservatives on board.

You know, I'm trying to bring libertarians on board.

Sometimes we fight, sometimes we hate each other, but I think that we should do what's in the best interest for our country.

That's why I'm running.

Do you have any, as far as congressmen, senators that are currently serving that you look at and you say, have this vision right?

We have one I think that does, Thomas Massey coming on here next hour.

Is there anyone that you look at like that and you say, finally, at least that person's in there speaking and I can team up with them?

Yes, obviously, I love Thomas Massey.

He's absolutely brilliant.

And there's, of course, Justin Amash in Michigan.

And then you have people like Rand Paul and Mike Lee and Ted Cruz in the Senate, who I very much identify with and I'd like to team up with.

You know, it would be the four horsemen of freedom next year if I can get in there to help those gentlemen.

But yeah, there are some true defenders of liberty in there, right?

We've lost a few over the years.

We've lost a few to populism, but I think that those people have stayed strong.

Thomas Massey hasn't caved on any gun measures.

Justin Amash is still fighting.

You know, Rand Rand was there at 3 a.m.

in the morning.

He was the only person who stood up there at 3 a.m.

and tried to stop that budget from being passed with the trillion-dollar deficits, $1 million a minute, $20 trillion debt.

Rand Paul stood alone, and I don't want him to do that anymore.

I'm wanting to help give some backup to those fine gentlemen.

How are you going to sell that to the people who no longer see the debt, obviously, as any kind of problem?

Well, you know, it's really the establishment that doesn't see it as any problem.

When I talk to the congressmen, you know, they're like, well, we need to govern.

And then

when you talk to regular people, they do see it as a problem.

I was at a high school in Higginsville, Missouri yesterday, and I talked to the young people.

They said, what are you going to do about the debt?

I'm like, well, you can't cut taxes and increase spending.

So you have to make reasonable cuts to spending.

I've always advocated for a simple across-the-board penny plan, penny out of every federal dollar cut at just the start.

But Congress doesn't seem interested in that.

And it bothers me because they campaigned on the promises for seven years back in the Tea Party days, Glenn, when you were out there at the Lincoln Memorial, everybody was talking about if you just put Republicans in power, then they will cut spending.

They'll overturn Obamacare.

They can't keep their promises.

And that's the problem is that we send people to Washington just because they have an R after their name, not based on what they believe, but because of what their party is.

I think that's the problem.

I will tell you, Austin, I have a great admiration for you.

You've taken on your own home of the libertarian.

You are a strong libertarian, but you have spoken uncomfortable things to your own people that had to be said.

And I am looking more and more for those people who, before they take on somebody else, take on your problems in your own house first.

And I respect you for doing that.

And I wish you the best of luck.

U.S.

Senate candidate in Missouri, Austin Peterson.

You want to get involved with the campaign, austinpeterson.com or on on Twitter, AP the number four, Liberty.

It's Austin Peterson, and he's running against McCaskill, right?

I mean,

she's wonderful in Missouri.

She's fantastic.

I can't believe anyone.

I figured she'd run unopposed.

Remember that gigantic data breach of Equifax last September?

The one that exposed Social Security numbers, names, and birth dates over 145 million customers?

Yeah, it was pretty bad, right?

Yeah, they come out and out and said, ah, we also

kind of

had the tax ID numbers and the driver's license numbers that were accessed.

Oh, okay, okay, good, good.

That's the kind of information that can be used by cyber criminals long after the breach, for years.

There's so many threats in today's connected world, and it takes one weak link for criminals to get in.

That's why LifeLock has their new identity theft protection.

It adds to the power of Norton Security now to help protect you against the threats to your identity, but also with Norton, your devices.

So you'll be able to see the things that others can't see.

And if you have a problem, their agents are going to work to fix it.

Nobody can stop all cyber threats, prevent all identity theft, or monitor all transactions at all businesses.

But LifeLock with Norton Security is now able to uncover the threats that you and everybody else are going to miss.

Go to lifelock.com or call 1-800-lifelock, lifelock.com, use the promo code Beck, save an extra 10% for your first year.

That's promo code Beck, extra10%, Lifelock.com.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn Beck.

Thomas Massey is going to be joining us in about

40 minutes from now.

He is so good

and one of the few that are really standing up in Washington, D.C.

We need more people like Thomas Massey.

We'll get to him in

just a second.

Also, there's some

other things that

I'd like to pass on to you.

One, the American Family Association is asking that every school in the country put this statement on their school marquee or school sign for one week, you shall not murder.

While the country is

going through what we're going through right now, murder is against the law in every state.

And

these few words emphasize that it's morally wrong.

We tell students, don't

stop bullying.

Don't bully.

Say no to bullying.

Don't text and drive.

Say no to drugs.

Don't drink and drive.

How many schools have the courage to put you shall not murder on their school signs?

Just for a week?

There is an open letter to American schools,

and you can

share this idea.

Tweet a picture of your school sign using the Twitter hashtag.

Hashtag number six.

Hashtag number six.

Isn't it bizarre that we that that would be controversial?

Really?

It's like what's controversial about it?

The word shall

because that makes it sound biblical

that it came from God.

Right.

That makes it sound biblical.

Yeah.

I mean,

I guess if you put up there, hey, please don't kill other people, is that controversial?

I don't know.

Seems like that's kind of an obvious point.

And it seems like we're all kind of able to, you know, you have to be able to respect life and you have to be able to defend life.

I mean, think of what, think of the loops and the hoops that you have to jump through to be able to be against putting you shall not murder on there.

What is going through your head?

You're signaling some biblical thing.

You want people, you're endorsing God.

Yeah, but think about like, is that an accusation or are you complimenting me?

Which one are, which one are you?

It's crazy.

It's now become some sort of attack that you'd, God forbid, someone in public life would admit.

Put it up in your school sign:

you shall not murder, and

take a picture of it.

Put it on Twitter.

Hashtag number six:

Glenn Beck.

Mercury.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Anytime that we engage in a discussion or a debate,

the scope of that discussion is framed by the words that we choose.

And if we include some words and exclude others, we automatically shape the discussion and help predetermine the given outcome.

Because words have so much power over the outcome of our discussions, if you can control the words and the language being used, you have a strong advantage in determining the ultimate outcome.

By controlling the language you use,

you have the power over what people think and decide.

Now for the last, what, two weeks,

since the Parkland, Florida shooting by a deranged lunatic,

the nation has re-engaged in a long-lived debate.

Since the 14th of February, every newspaper, every website, every pundit, every Facebook feed has been filled with, quote, the great gun debate.

We have to debate gun control.

We have to have common-sense discussion about what types of guns people are allowed to have and when they're allowed to have them.

Because if you don't,

you don't care about children.

You want more people to die.

We're trying to get past the senseless and cruel killing of our fellow citizens and our fellow children.

And yet the left and the media have demanded that we work with them and finally enact common sense gun control.

But the problem with all of this is there isn't a gun control debate to be had.

There's none to be had.

There is no such thing as a gun debate.

It doesn't exist.

It only exists because we insist on engaging in it.

Let me have Thomas Jefferson explain.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.

And that they're endowed by their creator with certain unalienable, unchangeable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and property.

Jefferson put it very clearly and very plainly.

By the nature as a species, each of us is free.

We're a free being.

That's the first principle of being man.

Our natural state is free.

Our natural state is to be self-aware.

We're a self-aware being with the capacity to make choices.

And because our rights are natural to us as human beings, they cannot be changed by anyone.

To remove the rights is to remove our humanity.

Let me say that again.

To remove our rights

is to remove our humanity.

Because we are born human,

we have rights.

So there's So there's no such thing as a gun debate.

We aren't having a a gun debate in this country.

We are having a freedom debate in this country.

And it is important that we treat it as such.

You're against common sense gun control.

No, I am for maximum freedom because it is our freedom to choose our own course.

It is the freedom to choose our own course because of the rights that we are

given,

because we are human,

that I'm standing up for.

I'm standing up for the state of being human.

They're framing the scope of the discussion and driving their desired agenda by limiting the language being used to common sense gun control, which means they're already winning.

But make no doubt about it.

This is not a debate about your guns.

This is a debate about your freedom.

This isn't about gun control.

This is about you control.

It's a debate about controlling people.

You know, the amazing thing about the Second Amendment is it is designed around an inherent self-fulfilling prophecy, kind of

an auto-renewal that

sets it apart from all of the other amendments set forward in the Bill of Rights.

It's really ingenious when you think about it.

Our founders thought to enshrine our basic right to self-defense into the Constitution for one very explicit reason.

What was that reason?

We've said it before, and it's common knowledge around most, but in case you have friends or neighbors or colleagues who still thinks nobody needs an AR-15 or other quote-unquote weapons of war, they need to know not only how wrong they are, they need to know why they're wrong.

The fact

that the exact intent of the Second Amendment was that every citizen should be armed with the same weapons that the soldiers have in the standing army because the goal of the amendment was to ensure that a standing army, which we never had until 1955,

that a standing army, because the goal of the amendment was to ensure the standing army could never be used to take rights away from people.

So we had to have

armed citizens.

So in case the government ever went crazy and said, we're taking away your rights, people could defend themselves.

If we all had pea shooters and they had rifles, we would lose.

It's why every dictator, the first thing they do is take up all of the guns.

It's why there's no logic to the left's debate right now.

If you really listen to them, Donald Trump is a dictator.

Let's surrender all of our guns.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

There's no logic there.

If you're afraid he's a dictator, the last thing you do is give up your right.

to be able to overthrow a dictatorial government.

So they'll say he's a dictator, but at the same time, they'll say, well, the revolution's never going to happen here.

It's already happening.

You have a violent revolution.

What are you going to take on the military?

Well, yes, if there's a dictator, yeah, I would be willing to do that.

You wouldn't.

You just want to go along with it?

So weapons of war is exactly what we are supposed to have.

And therein lies the genius of the Second Amendment.

Because the minute somebody, I mean, you pass an amendment that ensures you have a well-armed populace that can stand against any tyranny of any government who would use force to deprive citizens of their natural rights, then you pass an amendment that says we're taking away that right.

You've proven that the Second Amendment is needed.

You've automatically, if they use force to disarm the populace, the need for the Second Amendment is openly proven.

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So the left has a logic problem here.

Whatever bills they pass banning assault weapons or anything else, given that tens of millions of Americans will not agree,

and if you get down to taking guns,

they will refuse to comply,

and then that will compel the government to use force, which makes the Second Amendment a self-fulfilling prophecy.

What is it all about?

The Second Amendment wasn't for hunting.

And it really isn't about fighting the government.

It is about ensuring people's freedom.

The freedom to make and chart their own course.

To be who they believe they were born to be.

As long as they're not killing people, ripping people off.

I was born free,

and my rights and my liberty are mine by nature.

We have to reframe the discussion.

This debate is about freedom, about how our natural God-given freedom and how much of our humanity are we willing to surrender to satisfy an angry or terrified mob?

I am willing to sit down with anybody calm and rationally and talk about how do we protect our children.

But the best way to start is to protect our schools, to actually fortify where our treasure, look at how we fortify Fort Knox.

And I contend there's nothing in Fort Knox.

Our greatest treasure is in our schools, our children.

So when you say we have to talk about guns, I'll say to you, we have to first talk about security.

Let's secure our schools.

Let's secure our greatest treasures.

When you say, well, we still have to talk about guns,

I will then say to you, no,

you mean now you want to talk about the basic human freedoms and which one you believe

you can infringe upon or take away.

It's not a gun debate.

It's a debate about control.

Gun control works in other countries.

40% of all guns are sold without background checks.

More guns means more murder.

Mass shootings are becoming more common.

You've heard all these lines a thousand times.

Know the facts.

Get control.

Exposing the truth about guns on Amazon and wherever books are sold.

With volatility in the stock market, wild swings in Bitcoin, and the constant turmoil in Washington, you may not have noticed, but gold came off its best year since 2010, and gold is up almost $100 since mid-December with lots of room to run.

Gold has always been a safe haven for centuries, since the beginning of time, and it performs well in times of volatility.

Now,

if you've done well in the cryptocurrency or extended rise in the stock market, have you considered reviewing your portfolio and make sure you're properly hedged and move some of those over to other assets, including gold?

Gold is not an all-in strategy.

It's not.

This is an insurance.

The way I look at it is an insurance policy.

It helps you spread out the risk.

It helps you diversify.

It is part of a long-term investment strategy.

As a reminder, Goldline is under new ownership with better pricing in the same great service.

And it is a great time to be thinking about adding to your IRA.

From now until the end of the month, Goldline is offering $750 in free coins when you purchase $25,000 or more using their industry-leading Express IRA program.

What do you have in your IRA?

Call 866-GoldLine, 1-866-GoldLine.

Ask them about their IRA special that is happening right now.

866Goldline or Goldline.com.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn Beck.

Mona Sharon is on with us tonight at 5 o'clock.

I'm really anxious to speak to her.

She spoke at CPAC last week, and some people walked out on her.

Some people were very upset and other people

were

standing on their feet, cheering, and yet still others were being neutral and talking to her behind the scenes, going, I'm glad you said this.

That's a common refrain we hear.

Yeah, it is.

We're familiar with that sort of conversation, aren't we?

Thank goodness you're saying this.

I don't have the courage to say that.

Oh, really?

Thank you.

Thanks.

Anyway, but she's going to be on, and she wrote a great op-ed in the New York Times about

where do we go from here?

What does it mean to be a conservative?

And I think the title of it is,

I'm glad I was booed at CPAC.

Interesting.

But she's going to be joining us tonight at 5 o'clock.

And I want to talk to her a little bit about the alt-right movement that has infiltrated.

I mean, she worked with Reagan and everything else.

She's quite a scholar.

So

how big is the gun debate right now?

We know how important our Second Amendment Rights are.

People are looking for the facts on that.

I was just looking, scrolling through Amazon here, and there's a section called, it's a books about the Constitution.

So the number eight book about the Constitution is currently Control, your book about guns,

exposing the truth about guns.

Number eight, that's the Kindle edition.

At number seven is

the Know Your Bill of Rights book.

Number six, Glenn Beck Control, the audio edition.

Number five is a hardbound copy of the Constitution itself.

Number four is the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence.

Number three is the Federalist Papers.

Number two, the Constitution of the United States, a paperback copy.

Number one, the book copy, Control, Exposing the Truth About Guns.

Holy cow.

Yeah.

And that's a book that came out in, what, 2013, 2014, something like that?

Yeah, I don't remember.

It was right, it was right around Sandy Hook, was it not?

I think it came right after Sandy Hook.

And

it's a fantastic book.

If you, you know, we made it in paperback and we made it short and pithy.

So it answered all of the questions and all of the debate.

So

you could have that at your fingertips and you could share it with friends.

And if you know anybody who cares about the Second Amendment, you've got to have the facts down.

Yeah, because it has every argument being made now and all the information you need to know about that argument with all the stats and all the backup.

Plus, it's short and easy to read.

It's digestible,

and it's currently $7 on Amazon.

So for $7, you're going to get every single fact you need to know about the gun debate, and you'll be able to

walk into

the battles that you have

when it comes to policy with the ammunition you need.

But it also has suggestions on, okay, so what do we do?

And a really controversial section of the book is video games.

And I went to

Lieutenant Colonel Grossman, who is the guy who wrote, literally wrote the book on killing.

It's called On Killing.

And

it is the Pentagon's go-to book on what killing does to a person,

how do you get people to kill?

It is the number one scholarly book in the world on killing, and he is dead set against video games.

He says these video games, these first-person shooter games, are dangerous.

It's very controversial, but you should read it, especially if you have kids that are playing those games.

Read it.

The book is Control, available at Amazon.

Seven bucks now.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.

Love.

Courage.

I mean, do we have a king or do we elect people?

I don't even know how our system works anymore.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied the Trump administration's appeal to quickly end the DACA program.

The White House made an unusual request to the Supreme Court after two lower court judges issued injunctions last month blocking President Trump from ending DACA.

Now, in case you need a quick refresher, DACA, former President Obama, created this program in 2012, and he did it outside of the legislative process.

This is where he said, excuse me, sometimes, oh my gosh, I bore myself to death.

This is where he said,

you know, I have a phone and a pen.

He'll do it through executive order.

Now, it's a program that allows illegal immigrants who came here to the U.S.

before they turned 16 to apply for a permit that keeps them from getting deported and allows them to work.

Around 800,000 so-called DREAMers applied for the DACA permit.

Obama claimed his program was not a path to citizenship, just a measure that temporarily would help those young immigrants until Congress got its act together to pass permanent immigration legislation.

He did a lot of executive ordering that way.

Now, I know this is a shock, but Congress never passed anything.

So the DREAMers were allowed to renew their two-year permits for an additional two years.

President Trump inherited this gigantic DACA mess from Obama.

Trump is continually blamed for being anti-immigrant, but the left forgets a key part of the narrative here, that several states were threatening to sue the government over DACA.

Facing that pressure, Trump announced last September that the program would end in six months.

That deadline is next week.

In the meantime,

if your DACA permit was set to expire before March 5th,

you've been given an extra month to apply for renewal.

Those who did so got two more years of permit protection, but a federal district judge in Northern California blocked the plan to end DACA, ruling that Trump has to keep accepting renewal applications past March 5th.

There's no rules for anything anymore.

The Trump administration then asked the Supreme Court to step in and allow DACA to end

on the original deadline.

The court didn't issue any opinion on the matter.

It just refused to deal with it right now.

So that doesn't change anything.

It just means we kick the can down the road and the battle goes on in the lower courts and the DACA program will continue as it has since Obama decreed it in 2012.

Of course, you know, Congress could step in at any time and actually pass some sort of reform legislation.

But then again, hell could freeze over as well.

It's Tuesday, February 27th.

This is the Glenn Beth program.

Thomas Massey is with us.

He's a representative from Kentucky.

He is great on the budget.

He is great on the Constitution, on guns.

And it's always a pleasure to have you on, Tom.

Thank you so much for being with us.

Thanks for having me on, Glenn.

So

can you help me out here?

Is there any constitutional law at all anymore as far as Congress and the government is concerned?

Very little.

And I heard your beginning there before I came on.

Let's not forget that Obama said two dozen times he didn't have the authority to do DACA.

Correct.

So by what authority is this being held up?

We have a constitutional crisis, in my opinion.

We absolutely.

In other words,

the executive branch needs to somehow take authority here for this.

And sometimes Congress needs to take authority on things that the executive branch has usurped.

For one,

Congressman, is the idea of the budget.

We hear all this budget talk.

It's not budget.

It's a continuing resolution.

It is a suicidal way to run a government.

And

it has no standing.

There is no government.

There's no budget here.

You know, General Mattis spoke to us at the retreat, at the Republican retreat, and he said, you know what's worth more than 10 battleships to me in the next war and the next fight?

He says, it's an example of a functioning republic back there in Washington, D.C.

And he's right.

When you're trying to win the hearts and minds of the 90% of the people in that country that aren't taking up rifles, you better darn well show them that our government works better than the dictatorship they've got.

But so far, we've been dysfunctional here on the budget.

It is extremely frustrating to me.

So, first of all, can you explain the continuing resolution to the average person?

They have no idea.

They hear, oh, the budget, it's going to shut down because the budget talks.

No, it's a continuing resolution.

Well,

it's legislative malpractice, first of all.

They're 12 months in a year, okay?

And when you do a continuing resolution, you just basically cut, copy, and paste a few months and paste them into the next few months in terms of spending.

You don't really change the spending.

You don't decide where the spending should go.

You just keep doing what you were doing.

And

this is a legislative crisis.

This is going to be the fifth or sixth continuing resolution.

By the way, I haven't voted for any of them.

I was in that train wreck going to the Republican retreat.

Mike Lee was sitting next to me.

I hit my head.

And when I came back up, he said, Are you okay?

I said, I think I'm okay, but if I vote for a continuing resolution, let's get me a CAT scan.

Mike Lee can confirm that story.

Yeah.

So, well, you don't use Mike Lee as

your source

unless you're prepared to

have him vouch for it because he'll always tell the truth.

Oh, yeah.

Absolutely.

So, the continuing resolution,

it is Congress abdicating their power because they have the power of the purse.

And so you can't do anything

unless it's coming through Congress and you're saying, this is where this is spent.

This is where this is spent.

This is how much.

That's right.

It's a complete abdication of our responsibility and our authority.

There is a solution.

There is a solution to all this.

The problem, Glenn, is that four people inside of a room behind closed doors are trying to write an omnibus bill, a bill that will fund all of government, instead of letting 435 members in the House and 100 senators debate this and come up with 12 separate bills that would fund the 12 separate parts of government.

The problem when you put all of this in one bill is it's ripe for taking hostage.

Look,

the last time it happened, it was Schumer and Durban.

They said we want DACA and we're going to take all of government hostage.

But nobody should be allowed to take

all the government spending hostage, not even the Freedom Caucus, frankly.

And that wouldn't be possible if we would pass 12 separate bills.

I call it letting the 12 hostages out of the room one at a time.

I propose put the first bill on the floor.

It should be the legislative branch that you fund.

Challenge these guys not to fund their own salaries.

I would die laughing if they vote against their own salaries because they're so self-interested.

Of course, they're going to vote for their own salaries.

So you get, and their staffer's salaries would be in that too.

So you'd get a 12th of that government funded.

The next thing you put up there, let's say the judicial branch, okay?

We've got to fund the judicial branch, and most people will vote to fund that.

Another one, this is one of my favorites, it's the bill, the financial services appropriations bill.

It's also got Washington, D.C.

in there because it's a federal city and it has to be appropriated.

Well, what Democrat is not going to vote to fund Washington, D.C.?

I mean, it is 96-plus percent Democrat here.

And then what Republican is not going to vote to fund financial services?

Are they going to go back and tell their banker friends, sorry, we didn't get your bill passed?

So that is one appropriations bill that comes up here in front of Congress that can pass with bipartisan support, that nobody is going to take hostage to try and get whatever it is they want.

Let those hostages out of the room one at a time.

Even the Democrats were begging to fund military salaries at some point in the last shutdown because they were taking so much heat.

Let's put the bill that funds the military on the floor.

Pass it.

You will get bipartisan votes to pass that.

And by the way, Glenn, I told you I never voted for a CR, but I have voted for individual appropriations bills when they come to the floor.

That's because you may not be able to get a majority for a bill that funds all of government at once, but you can almost always find a majority for little slivers of government like the judicial branch.

The problem with this, Tom, and this is not my problem.

This is actually a reason to do it, is

the left or the special interest right will say,

well, no, you don't want to do that because then that's going to leave this little orphan out here all by itself.

And I don't know if we can get enough votes to pass a budget for that because it's not very popular.

Yeah, well, what you'll be left with is the EPA, the Department of Labor.

Yeah, they're worried about that because then when somebody takes the Department of Labor and the EPA hostage and says, if I don't get my whatever it is, I'm going to shut these down.

Everybody just sort of drums their fingers on the table and says, hmm, that might not be such a bad idea.

Can you imagine the countdown clock on CNN to days until or hours until the EPA shuts down?

Like, nobody's going to watch that or care when it does shut down.

Well, look.

So

what's standing in your way from getting it done this way?

No, another way for it.

Who is standing in your way?

Leadership.

It's in the House.

I'm not going to talk about the Senate because I don't work in the Senate, but here in the House, it's a complete, total failure of Paul Ryan to facilitate an orderly process.

It's because they don't trust our Republican form of government.

They think that four people in the House and four people in the Senate should do all of this work and that we can't be trusted with offering amendments and voting on various parts of the government.

Does it want to do it all?

Is it too far to say that

we are in a way already at a dictatorship of four people?

Yeah, oligarchy, whatever you want to call it.

We are there.

And the rest of us are ornamental.

We are ombudsmen to

the rest of government.

I mean, I can give you a tour of the Capitol here, Glenn, if you'd like, and I'll come to your Rotary Club.

And I can tell you...

And I can act like what Paul Ryan is doing is, you know, I had a hand in it, but the reality is there are four four people writing this legislation, and the rest of it are told to take it or leave it.

And we're basically dared to go home and face our constituents not having voted for roads and bridges or not having voted for the military.

See, it's also our leadership that's taking this hostage because they know they can get us to vote for all the money at the Department of Labor and the EPA if they put it in with the rest of it.

All right, so let's switch gears here.

Let's go to guns.

Yeah.

What do these four people believe believe on infringing on the Second Amendment?

Well, they're horrible, and they'll blow whichever way the breeze blows.

And let me tell you,

I am just furious with my colleagues here.

We had a shooting in Kentucky, okay?

a school shooting recently, and there was the shooting, obviously, in Florida.

And I've talked to survivors of Columbine, the Columbine shooting, and they are furious.

The people that I talk to are furious that my my colleagues are offering unserious solutions.

Look, let me give you, for instance, the assault weapons ban or raising the minimum age to buy an assault weapon.

Look, when Columbine happened, the assault weapons ban had been in place for five years, and they didn't even use a so-called assault weapon.

And then they talk about raising the age to buy a long gun.

Well, the age to buy a handgun is 21 already, but the kid in Kentucky who committed the shooting there was 15 years old.

There's no background check, no minimum age in the world that would have stopped him.

Or the one in Connecticut that took his mom's guns, shot his mom, and then went to school and shot his classmates.

These aren't problems that are solved with background checks or universal background checks.

I mean, in Columbine, they used straw purchasers.

The two perpetrators, and I'm not going to use their names.

I don't think anybody should say these lowlife's names and memorialize them.

But the two perpetrators in Columbine, they got an 18-year-old girl to buy the long guns, and then they got a 22-year-old guy to buy the handgun for them.

Those were straw purchases.

Those weren't individual transfers.

Those were straw purchases, and those are illegal already.

So, Congressman, we're talking to Congressman Thomas Massey from Kentucky.

I hear this from people, and I think the mood of the country is changing on both sides.

People are tired of the extremes, and they want something to be done.

And it's not just anything.

They want something.

They can tell in this that, you know,

look at we we

protect what I contend what I contend is an empty Fort Knox.

And we protect that because that's where our, quote, treasure is.

Well, the average person's treasure is in the school, and we're refusing to harden those and protect them.

We're doing worse.

We're advertising their vulnerability by calling them gun-free school zones.

98% of mass public shootings happen in a gun-free zone.

And I think think our kids deserve to be in the 2% category where only 2% of them happen, not in the 98% vulnerable.

That's why my solution would be to arm teachers.

Now,

here's what you'll hear.

Oh, teachers don't want the training.

Teachers don't want the responsibility.

Teachers will shoot students.

Police will shoot teachers.

Teachers, you know, et cetera, et cetera.

There's already 12 states that do this and a lot of private schools.

Just an hour ago, I talked to somebody from Kentucky up here visiting.

Yeah, my kid goes to a private school, and out front, the sign says the teachers are armed.

He says, I don't have to worry about my kids when they go to school.

Same here in Texas.

Yeah, and in Oklahoma.

If you've got a concealed carry permit, you can carry, the teacher can carry it in the school.

Look, once you take out New York City and California, 8% of Americans have concealed carry permits.

And I have reason to believe there's probably about 8% of teachers, too.

So there's 8% that already have passed the qualifications in their state, already own a firearm, already know how to use it, and are comfortable carrying it.

I wouldn't make it mandatory, but 8% of the teachers armed, that would stop these things now.

Congressman Thomas Massey from Kentucky.

Thank you, Congressman.

On Twitter at repthomasmassey and massey.house.gov, of course, the website.

He's a really smart guy.

One of the good guys.

One of the people who doesn't think the Second Amendment says that our right to bear arms shall not be infringed, except by a little bit.

Sometimes, I mean, come on.

That's not what it says.

I want to talk to you a little bit about Goldline and the threat of inflation.

Do you know that your money, the U.S.

dollar, has lost 11% of its value since 2016?

That's pretty remarkable.

Imagine if I, if, I mean, well, I am telling you this.

What you have in your bank account, what you have in your savings, savings, what you have under your bed or in stock or whatever, has lost, if it's in U.S.

currency, has lost 11% of its value

in the last year.

I don't know.

That's pretty significant, don't you think?

This is why gold is a safe haven against inflation.

When the dollar starts to go down, gold goes up.

That's why gold line had its best year, you know, last year since, what, 2010.

With the rise of the stock market, with the instability, with what the government is doing, all of these things, the printing, the interest rates that are going up, please consider gold.

And the people that I've trusted for years is Goldline.

They are under new management, so they have new ownership, actually.

So they have better prices, but the same people that were so good at customer service, they're all there.

Goldline, 1-866-GoldLine, 1-866-GoldLine or goldline.com.

If right now they're offering $750 in free coins when you purchase $25,000 or more using their industry-leading Express IRA program, call them about the special, 1-866-GoldLine.

Glenn Back Mercury.

Glenn Back.

You know, it's amazing to me that,

you know, arming teachers is so bad.

You're not talking about, you know, Mrs.

Webb, the, you know, fifth grade math teacher, who is this little old lady who carries her purse in.

It's still patent leather and is teaching math.

Unless Mrs.

Webb is already trained and she carries a gun in her purse already.

That's what you're talking about.

You're not talking about arming people.

You're saying, I'm not going to tell people who are concealed carry permit holders already to leave their gun at home.

Right.

Arming teachers is a bad way to put it because it seems like you're making an army of

librarians that are going to bring in.

They're like, oh, I don't know.

I don't know.

How do I handle this?

Like, no, that's not what we're talking about.

These are people who already own guns in their real lives, and they take those guns into every other building they walk into on a daily basis except work.

They are able to not shoot people all over the place, but yet we expect that they're going to start executing people for some time.

Every reason

I am for this, but I'm also for just, let's let's all have a secret, okay?

Let's tell everybody that some to 10% of the teachers in every school is armed.

Then take down the gun-free zone, and let's just tell everybody that, hey, oh, the teachers are armed here.

Why would we advertise, come on in, the shooting's free?

Yeah, even if you want your school to be a gun-free zone, don't tell people that it's a gun-free zone.

You would never put a sign up in front of your house that said, we don't have an alarm.

We don't have a gun, we don't have a dog.

You would never do those things in front of your house.

We don't have a dog.

We're a dog-free, burglar, I mean, a dog-free, burglar-alarm-free, phone-free house.

You would never do that.

It makes no sense.

The point is you want

a gun-free zone is a danger-free zone for criminals.

Here's a good example.

People, when burglar alarms first started coming on the market, they were expensive.

And they were always like, you know, brinks.

And they had stickers that you would put on the door and little signs.

And people tried to buy those signs

because they couldn't afford the burglar alarm.

But they thought, if I just put the sign in the yard, we're doing the opposite.

No protection here.

Come on in.

It's insanity.

Glenn Beck.

Mercury.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

So, Pat Gray is here from Pat Gray Unleashed.

Welcome to the program.

Thank you.

Hello, Pat.

What's on your mind today?

I'm pretty proud of FedEx for standing up to the pressure, standing up to the 16-year-olds who are tweeting about him, who are all over them with social media.

And they actually said, No, we're not going to cut ties with the NRA.

We're not going to do that.

How many companies have had the giblets to actually make that decision and stick with them?

Very few so far.

Yeah, very few.

There have been a couple.

So, now, how do you, where do you stand on, I mean, I don't like it.

I don't like it that people are cutting ties with the NRA because it is making the NRA membership look like we're killers and we're not.

We're, you know, it's, it's like, you know, AARP or ACLU.

The ACLU believes in things.

You're going to give them a discount?

So I don't like this,

but I

also understand it from the business side of the left is so nasty, they will destroy your business.

I personally think don't do any of them.

Don't do ACLU.

Don't do the Sierra Club.

Don't do any of them.

Yeah, but I mean, these are.

These are private businesses making decisions on their own.

They're not being forced into these deals.

At least for me, I didn't join the NRA for the discounts.

Zero people did.

Let's be honest about that.

Very few people did.

I don't think anybody did.

In fact, I don't even know about most of the discounts.

I've been kind of.

I'm surprised.

I know.

I was like, I could have been getting a deal this whole time.

What is your arrangement?

Yeah.

United Airlines.

Yeah, I didn't know about that.

I didn't either.

I guess as I think about it, I have been asked a few times if I'm a member of the NRA because there are certain times when you can get that discount.

Usually, when you're, I mean, but the only time they're going to ask you that probably is around firearms, which some people might think, okay, you know, firearms, like firearm training and things like that, you might be able to get discounts.

But Enterprise rent a car?

Like, there was never a point where I was like, oh, gosh, I got to go to Enterprise to get that discount because I'm an NRA member.

And of course, David Hogg went to work on him immediately.

So which companies use FedEx the most?

We could pressure them to stop business until FedEx ends their support of the NRA.

Sell FedEx stock.

If they want to stick with the NRA, we'll stick with UPS.

This is economic economic terrorism.

It is.

And economic terrorism.

And when does this guy go from a sympathetic, you know, 16-year-old character who's grieving to just your average extremist left-wing activist?

Tell me how you felt about Delta getting a slap

from the lieutenant governor of Georgia.

Said, fine, then

you don't get your tax breaks.

How I felt emotionally?

I felt good.

And it was satisfying.

It is satisfying.

Yeah.

Emotionally, it feels good.

Emotionally, it just feels good.

For a second, you're like, yes.

Although I don't think I like that.

Although maybe government shouldn't be giving out goodies to.

Yeah.

You shouldn't be.

You shouldn't have been giving them to them in the first place.

But if you're going to give it to them, you need to base it on, is it good for the state?

I mean, this would really make me, if I was in Georgia, I'd be looking at, wait, whoa, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

Why Why are you guys giving these out?

I mean,

if it's so frivolous that something for the NRA, which no NRA member has, I contend, really cares about the discounts.

They care about being labeled a terrorist or a killer or something like that.

That's what that's about.

Tell me

you're not going to give them that tax, but...

You were making the case that this was good for jobs and everything else.

So wait, what's happening here?

I mean, it's not good.

It's true.

It's like, is the policy the right policy or not?

It doesn't become the wrong policy because you're upset at something else they did that's completely separate from what's going on.

Does it become the right policy when it feels good?

I don't think that's the standard we're supposed to be hitting for hitting.

It does today.

It does today.

It does today.

But again, it goes back to

you shouldn't be carving out tax breaks for individual companies anyway.

Anyway, they shouldn't have had the tax break in the first place.

Look, if you want to do your Hollywood and you say, hey, we want to keep our movies here, so we're going to lower the tax base for

all movie studios.

Even that.

Yeah.

We're just picking an industry rather than a bunch of people.

I agree with you, but it's better than just saying, you know, this particular company, this particular company.

And it brings benefit to your state.

Yeah.

Your state's going to make money from the movie studio there.

I mean, look what, you know, Louisiana, the only really reason why the

duck Dynasty happened is because Louisiana made its tax burden so low if you developed and shot movies in Louisiana that it was crazy.

So they actually, the company got together and said, find something in Louisiana.

That's how they found the guys from Duck Dynasty.

They found it because they were financially motivated to find that.

So

it can help you.

It can.

But that's a real question.

Like, where does that money come from?

Right.

Are you raised taxes on other people in the state to pay for duck dynasty?

I agree.

I don't want it.

I don't want special favors.

I don't want tax breaks.

I want flat taxes, period.

That's just not going to happen.

But this is an interesting reveal of how transparent this process is.

Here's a favor for Delta.

Now we don't like their policy.

So now we're taking it away.

It's like we're giving you a giveaway.

Now we're slapping your wrist.

And what makes a difference?

What makes us different?

We like it this time.

But

you know,

if the government said to us,

you know, oh, you're supporting the NRA, oh, you don't get your tax break.

Would you be cool with that?

No.

No.

Of course not.

So we can't celebrate when something, when injustice is done to the other side, it might feel good, but that's not necessarily how you should rule your life.

Very true.

But I do notice that you're avoiding, again, as usual,

the real issue.

What is the real issue?

Well, like, you don't know.

I mean, is this just some kind of massive cover-up with you guys?

I wanted to talk about it.

Glenn said no.

I hate to out you on the air, but Glenn said.

Do I have to go to the tape?

You're going to have to go to the tape.

You don't know what you're talking about.

I'm going to show you our real issue

you're avoiding.

Okay.

Here it is.

Ladies and gentlemen, I can now officially say that

it's about a 90% chance that the Florida event at the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas

high high school that's killed 17 people and injured over 20.

Was a fraud.

False flag.

Is a deep state false flag

operation.

Yes.

It's not just a false flag.

It's a D state false flag.

However, I will say he's leaving out on the table that 10% chance that it's maybe something real.

No.

That's unbelievable.

Is that incredible?

Every

Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, now Florida, and I think every shooting in between.

There's never been an actual tragedy that's ever occurred.

And remember, when he went on Megan Kelly, he apologized.

He said, well, that was taken out of context.

What is the context on this one?

The 10%.

Did he?

He just said it was 90%.

I didn't say it was 100.

Right.

Can LeBron James be like, I want to officially announce that there's a 90% chance I go to the Miami Heat?

Like, no, you say it's official when you make your decision, not when there's still an outlying chance the opposite is true.

Well, I mean, even if he said, well, you cut that out of context, because right before I said, everything I'm about to say is untrue, there's a 90%.

Well, then you said there's a 10% that it was.

That's crazy.

That's amazing.

Did he give his reason at all why it was a false because he's very sure?

Well, there's crisis actors, you know, these actors that are out there, like David Hogg and all the rest.

They're too good.

They're too

seasoned.

They're crisis actors.

My favorite part.

And then something about,

okay,

there was a videotape, and we actually saw it and we played it from a girl, a student who was interviewed by KHOU-TV in Houston.

They were there because the Astros are in training camp, and so he just went from training camp over there to cover it.

And the girl said, I walked down the hall next to this guy, and he wasn't armed at the time.

And she said, well, when I heard shots and then I saw you without a gun, I was surprised it wasn't you.

And he said, huh?

And then they left the school.

But so he's taking that to mean he wasn't the shooter because the shooter was supposedly going on at the time.

Whereas I think that he had already put his guns down by then, changed his clothes, and was sneaking out with the rest of the kids.

That's exactly what happened.

That's what he did.

And the police thought he was still in there because the videotape was on a 21-minute delay for some unknown reason.

But these are the things Alex Jones can't noodle through.

Oh, my gosh.

And so that's one of the, and then there was something about they were

some of the kids were funneled up to the third floor.

I don't even, I didn't even understand that explanation.

One of my favorite ones is they went back afterwards and of course started looking through this.

And again, like David Hogg has reached the point where he is in the public debate and his points need to be talked about.

It's ridiculous.

You know,

Charles C.W.

Cook put this really well.

Hogg's defenders have cast upon him in an instant diametrically opposed terms as an irrelevance, as a mere kid, as a grieving ornament who sits outside our national conversation and one who of course is bringing all these points up this is extraordinary how obvious one wonders do his champions intend to make it that they are using him to launder his views that is exactly what the left is doing right now um but they

he from the crisis actor nonsense from alex jones one of my favorite parts was after this all happened and he's going on tv all the time they went back and found pictures of him when he was at he took a tour of cnn

like earlier in his life, and they found pictures of him.

Like, you know, like anyone would be, if you happen to be interested in news, you might go, you know, take a tour.

Like, there's, we used to see tours go through CNN all the time while he was there, all the time.

And so, he took

hallways with special windows on the second on the floor above us, looking into the studio built just for tours.

For tours, like, they, people, it's like

the NBC tour, yeah, exactly.

So, they found pictures of him at CNN, like previously, and they're like, Look, he did this for CNN.

And it's like, come on.

Like,

it's just this retroactive, like, reverse engineering yourself into whatever you previously believed.

And Alex Jones does this every single day, and he's 90% sure he's got this one right.

We are getting to the place.

I remember thinking years ago, how did they get away with the rice dog fire thing?

I mean, that was the catalyst.

And Hitler had said that he had a seance with somebody, and they said, the rice dog is going to catch fire on this date.

Lo and behold,

it did.

How did they get away with it?

Because people wanted to believe that.

It's interesting because I think you'd think it would have been harder to get away with something like that now, right?

Because there's so much more media, but I think it confuses it.

It's easier.

It's amazing.

Pat Gray, by the way.

And I guess he'll, I hope he'll be covering the 90% false flag we now know he has the Florida shooting.

Either that or why we use

spoons for grapefruits, but no spoons for oranges.

Well, that's coming up today.

Actually, we're going to do that on the news and why it matters.

Oh, exactly.

That's 5.30 Eastern on the Blaze TV.

Pat will be on that as well.

Doc Thompson, myself, Sarah Gonzalez, and Glenn Beck.

Imagine going about food for weeks.

This is what's happening in Venezuela.

Do you know the average person in Venezuela has lost 26 pounds in the last year?

Can you even imagine that?

Everyone you know has lost 26 pounds, and it's not because because you're all getting together going, Yay, you made it.

It's because, holy cow, you made it.

This is what happens when FEMA trucks roll through your neighbor, they drop a neighborhood and they drop off care packages inside, mostly junk food, potato chips, chocolate bars, even expired MREs.

This is what happened in Puerto Rico.

In Venezuela, they don't have any of those trucks.

And in December, the

FEMA, the Emergency Relief Management Association, said,

by the way, we're out.

The next hurricane or the next disaster that hits, we're not going to be able to be there.

So are you prepared?

I want you to go to my Patriot Supply and let them help you build your food storage plan.

They have really come through on this.

One year of emergency food, breakfast, lunch, and dinner for a year, $999.

A year's worth of food for under $1,000.

Now, this is $1,000 savings,

but it's happening this week.

So you have to call them now, 1-800-942-2325.

Ask them for the Glenn Beck one-year food kit special.

The price is $1,000 off.

When you're looking at

food for 52 weeks, for one person, breakfast, lunch, and dinner, for $1,000,

you're not going to find that that anyplace else.

And it's good, nutritious food, 800-942-2325.

800-942-2325 or at preparewithglenn.com.

Glenn, back, Mercury.

Glenn, back.

All right, so let's get some comments from you on the Chinese president to serve unlimited terms now.

Jonathan wrote in, you know, people could revolt against an oppressive government.

They just need to take up.

Oh, yeah, guns have been confiscated.

Daryl writes in, U.S.

has two choices, get tough on China or learn Chinese.

More than 70 lawmakers in Florida call on Broward County Sheriff to be suspended for incompetence.

Sue writes, he knows he's going to end up becoming the darling for the left, a real hero and champion for their causes to further their agenda.

Rob says, what what this country needs is better firearms, safety, and education.

But hey, let's just let the media outlets

keep themselves at each other's throats instead.

The mayor of California that gives illegal immigrants a heads up about impending ICE operation.

Rodney wrote, this should be immediate jail time for obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting a criminal.

She's also reignigged on her oath of office to uphold the Constitution.

Supreme Court refuses White House requests to overrule Lower Court's DACA injunction.

This one really puzzles me.

This should never even have needed an appeal.

The law, and this is very clear.

The rule that a president can't rescind a blatantly unconstitutional executive order is ludicrous.

I thought DACA was done by executive order.

Why can't it be done the same way?

Asked Rick.

Shooter and the timeline that we did yesterday.

Glenn, thank you.

I get it.

I love you when you're behind or when you're in front of a chalkboard.

And Stu says we've missed one story today.

Well, Canada's government is at it again.

They've once again denied that Justin Trudeau is the love child of Fidel Castro.

And we all know this is true.

Oh, my.

They say, oh, he's...

He's Pierre Trudeau is his dad.

Yeah, right.

I mean, come on.

We all know.

He looks just like Fidel Castro.

Look at the pictures.

It's blatantly clear.

It's a false flag.

I was going to say this is a deep state, false flag.

It is a deep state, false flag.

It is a deep state, false flag.

They actually, because this is, I mean, they look similar when they were younger.

That's basically the basis of this theory.

But there is a, it was so, it's been passed around so much on the internet that the Canadian government had to actually issue a formal denial that their prime minister was the son of Fidel Castro.

Unbelievable.

We'll see you tonight on the Blaze TV at 5 o'clock and 5:30.

The news and why it matters.

Don't you?