'It's All Been Done Before'? - 2/16/18

The Blaze Radio Network

on demand

love

courage

truth

Glenn Beck It's Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Hopefully he'll be well enough to be back on Monday morning

as we continue to deal with the aftermath of the tragedy the other day in Florida, the school shooting that killed 17 kids.

It's just horrific.

And the fallout this time, I think, has been even worse than I anticipated.

The gun control push this time

feels even heavier than it was before.

They're demanding that Donald Trump do something about this.

I'm not sure what the president of the United States can do about this.

He can't

unilaterally do anything about gun control.

What do you want him to do?

The New York Post headline yesterday was, Mr.

President, it's time to do something with guns.

Okay.

What do you want him to do?

Well, they kind of name a few things they want him to do.

They want him to ban assault weapons, of course, things like the AR-15.

That's been done before.

Yeah, this is an interesting one.

Not just in some far-flung nation.

It's been done in this country in the 90s, and the Department of Justice released a report on the results, and it said it did not reduce the murder rate at all.

So it was completely ineffective.

It did absolutely nothing.

Nothing.

And, you know, that is, there have been other countries who have gone much further and received a big fat zilch for their efforts.

But this was here in the United States.

No effect from the Department of Justice, yet they still claim this is the number one thing they want to do.

Yeah, so reinstate the federal assault weapons ban, which did absolutely nothing.

And of course, then they want to prohibit the manufacture of

semi-automatic firearms completely.

Oh, you mean so basically every gun that is sold,

they just want to get rid of those.

Wow.

That's amazing.

I mean, that's further reaching than most proposals go.

By the way, further reaching than any proposal Barack Obama made while in office.

So just left of Barack Obama.

Well, no, considerably.

Not just left.

It's considerably left of Barack Obama.

Large capacity magazines are also one of the suggestions.

We hear that all the time.

Raise the age to buy firearms.

Most states been drinking under 21.

At 19, apparently,

Nicholas Cruz could obviously purchase weapons.

Ban gun sales to

fugitives from justice?

Aren't they already?

I mean, we already

can felons buy guns?

I don't think so.

And if you're a fugitive from justice, if you've broken the law, I think that's something that's already been done.

And, of course, increased background checks.

I don't know.

We already have background checks.

What kind of...

And he went through one.

Yes.

He went through a background check and passed it.

You know, I mean,

again,

you start getting to this point where you're just reaching for anytime there's an indication of anything.

And, you know, there's no way.

They didn't know that he had made the social media post when the background check went through.

There's no way they would have known that.

The FBI didn't even know who it was.

So they, you know, how would they, how would they have known it in a background check?

And there's this thing, I think there's this separation, especially with things like mental health, Pat, where

there's a separation between the left and the right.

And we can say that, you know, they want to take all of our guns.

And there are many who do, right?

I mean, they're proposing semi-automatic weapons.

If you got rid of semi-automatic weapons, if you're not a gun person, which I know I was not for most of my life, you might not realize that semi-automatic weapons means basically every gun.

I mean, there are a few guns that, you know, there certainly are some that are not semi-automatic, but the very basic standard gun that you would own for self-defense is a semi-automatic weapons.

Even a handgun.

Everything.

A Glock or whatever.

Exactly.

That's just what people have.

But there's a separation with mental illness where this stuff does come down to a weird disagreement between the left and the right.

And

I am sure the right is correct on this, but this is the definition of, I think, the disagreement.

The left looks at guns and says they can be potentially dangerous.

Therefore, we should, with any shadow of a doubt, if we have any shadow of a doubt, we should restrict their ownership to people.

That's what they think.

They think, okay, this could cause harm, therefore, we should be really careful about who we give them to, right?

Yes.

The right,

which is the correct argument, says the opposite, which is they may be dangerous or not.

However, they're constitutionally guaranteed.

So you have to be really super sure the other way before you start taking guns away.

And that separation is why, quote unquote, nothing ever gets done.

When it comes to other things like mental health and these, you know, when people say, oh, well, terrorists are on a watch list, so how can I get guns?

Well, the reason why that doesn't happen is because you can't take away guns from people because they're constitutionally guaranteed.

It is your right to be able to protect yourself.

So only after you give up a lot of those rights by being a convicted felon can you start taking guns away.

Just because someone is suspicious of you in the government, you can't just take them away.

Now, you can do all of these things.

All you got to do is amend the Constitution.

But what if the gun looks really

nasty?

Really, really dangerous.

What if a gun looks super dangerous?

You're thinking of the scary clause of the Constitution.

Right.

And no, there's not one.

Yeah.

Quite stunningly, there's not a scary clause.

There's not?

No.

No, for the guns.

So, I mean, though, for guns, there's a scary clause.

Well, there's a Santa Claus, but there's a scary clause.

What if they look military-style?

Yeah, no, it's not a military style.

In fact, the opposite is actually.

It's funny because people look at this all the time.

Joe Scarborough has this endless rant today.

I don't know if we're going to bother playing it, and we don't need to get into it right now, but an endless rant about how there's no constitutional right to own

military-style weapons,

assault weapons.

Exactly the constitutional right we have.

That's what it is.

In fact, the first ruling on this, when they went to ban

automatic weapons, and they had a ruling on this, this is back in, I want to say the 20s or 30s.

And

they went to, one guy wanted a sawed-off shotgun.

He's like, I want a sawed-off shotgun.

I have the right to own it.

And they said, no, you don't have a right to own it because the reason you don't have a right to own it is because it didn't have value in war.

You were not allowed to have it because it didn't have a military purpose.

And Scarborough's rant, which you may or may not hear during the course of the day, is all about weapons of war.

Weapons of war.

We don't need weapons of war.

Weapons of war

are not protected.

Of course they are.

Because when the founders were drafting the Bill of Rights, when they were drafting the Second Amendment, their thought was, you know, eventually

this government could turn on the people and they need to be able to protect themselves.

Why?

Because that's what they just went through.

They just went through protecting themselves from the government that was oppressing them in Great Britain.

That's how they won.

That's why they declared their independence.

So the thought process wasn't, hey,

you know, people are going to be wanting a gun for deer season.

And, you know, there's a lot of hunting and fishing going on in this country.

Let's just say they can have some, some, maybe some hunting rifles, but not anything war-grade, not anything military-grade.

Right.

It's not about hunting.

I can't see.

It's the exact opposite.

It's not about hunting.

It's not even about, although it's a definite benefit.

It's not even about necessarily protecting yourself and your house.

It's about protecting yourself from this government if they ever become that oppressive and tyrannical.

Or an invading force from elsewhere.

That's what the Second Amendment is about.

That's why we're armed.

And of course, Joe Scarborough at one point was familiar with this concept.

Of course he was.

Joe Scarborough voted to repeal

the assault weapons ban

when he was a congressman.

But then, you know, and people look back at this and, you know, they may remember this, after Sandy Hook, he came out and changed his mind on that.

And by Sandy Hook, I mean the time he started hooking up with his co-host, who has liberal gun values.

So when I say Sandy Hook in this context, what I mean is he was having sex with me

and he's decided to change his mind because she apparently runs the

Second Amendment position part of the household.

So

quote, Sandy Hook is in air quotes in this particular context, but he's become

left of everyone.

And yet yet he'll still.

Barack Obama.

Right.

Like yet he'll still brag about his NRA rating.

Yes.

Right.

Like, Like, oh, I forgot.

From 1995.

When he was voting against the assault weapons ban.

When he was doing that, yes, he had a good NRA rating because he was doing things that were consistent with the Second Amendment.

Now he's not.

It's the exact opposite of what he's doing.

So it just, it's constant with this.

And I, you know, look, you hate to have these arguments.

I don't, I don't know that you can stop defending the Second Amendment.

Because if you stop doing it, this is what will happen.

At some point, they will come and, I mean, how many times have they talked about Australia?

Australia was a massive confiscation program.

They use it as the example of, quote-unquote, what works.

Great Britain as well.

Great Britain as well.

Again, with Australia, all the studies afterwards showed no effect.

It didn't do anything.

Yeah.

In both Australia and in England, the gun murder rate actually went up.

In fact, in the case of Great Britain, I think it was triple in the immediate years afterwards.

And then it went back to about, now eventually, and it took a long time for this, but then it went back maybe 10 years later to about what it was before the ban, showing it's not effective at all to ban these weapons.

It hasn't helped in Australia and it hasn't helped in England.

So

I don't know why they continue to point to Australia and the UK.

It's not effective.

It didn't work.

That doesn't prove your point.

In fact, it does the opposite.

Here's this.

Let me give you two quotes about Australia.

2008 study University of Melbourne.

Quote, there is little evidence to suggest that the Australian mandatory gun buyback program had any significant effects on firearm homicides.

Another study concluded something similar.

The gun buyback and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia.

Now, again, think of what they did there.

They didn't do what they're talking about doing here.

You want to talk about left

of Barack Obama.

They went way further than anything Barack Obama ever suggested in policy terms or anything they're suggesting now.

They did something more like the Nazis did in the 30s.

They confiscated guns.

They confiscated guns.

Yeah.

They confiscated 35% of the nation's firearms.

Here, that would be 60 million to over 100 million guns.

Over a hundred.

You think they're going to go around and confiscate?

Because none of these programs, the assault weapons ban didn't confiscate one weapon, it just stopped you from buying new ones.

Yeah.

And that's what they're talking about now.

This is confiscating a hundred million guns.

And when they did this in Australia, there was no effect on firearm violence.

Think about that.

There's nothing.

They can say they want to do something all they want, but the something they want to do doesn't accomplish squat.

And they still keep suggesting it because it's got, as we said yesterday, Pat, nothing to do with these victims.

Nothing.

It's got zero to do with that.

It's not associated.

There's no, there are plenty of liberals.

There are plenty of people on the left who

think this would be effective because they don't know the facts and honestly feel for the victims of these tragedies and think, gosh, what if we take guns away?

It'll help.

Plenty of those people.

The people who are on TV talking about it every day are not those people.

Those people know the facts.

Those people have looked at these studies.

These people are familiar with the arguments.

These people understand that what they're suggesting, A, can't be done right now because you have, you could have done it in 2009 to 2011 when you had control of all three branches of government, but you don't have that now.

You have control of zero of them.

So the idea that you're going to get that through Congress right now, they know they have no chance of doing it.

They're using you.

If you're on the left making these arguments and quoting the 18 school shootings this year, they are using you.

They are trying to get your money into their campaigns.

That's the bottom line.

They don't care at all about these victims.

Not at all.

And I you hate to see people, random people who have good intentions, who just want kids to be alive in their high schools to be utilized like this by political parties and

activist groups.

But that's exactly what's happening.

It's sad.

It is.

And pathetic.

Yeah.

I want to get into the big, bad, evil, nasty, horrific NRA, too, and how they own all our politicians.

All of our politicians are owned by the NRA.

Why are they so cheap?

That's what I would like to know.

I don't know.

Why are they so cheap?

You're going to find out how cheap these people people really are.

Because

it doesn't cost that much to own the entire Congress.

That's amazing.

It's interesting, yeah.

It's fascinating.

It's amazing how the NRA can own the entire Congress, while other groups who donate far much more money to the left don't own them at all.

Not at all.

They don't even know what their opinions are, basically.

Right.

I mean, sure, the NRA is not even close to the top donor of these groups, but they are the ones that own the government all the time.

We'll share that with you coming up.

Simply Safe is the home security system we've been talking to you about for a very long time.

I think they had 10 employees when Glenn did his first spot for Simply Safe.

And, you know, Glenn, I think, first took them on because of their technology.

It was just way ahead of its time.

And now they are the fastest-growing home security company in the nation, protecting over 2 million people.

And they just released their brand new home security system, the all-new SimplySafe.

This has been completely rebuilt.

It's been redesigned.

And they've added new safeguards to protect against

the argument.

Well, well, what if they do this?

What if they do that?

Well, they've they've added new safeguards to protect against power outages down wi-fi cut landlines uh bats hammers everything in between uh the all-new simply safe was redesigned to be practically invisible you're not going to notice this in your house it's not going to ruin uh the house that you uh that looks so nice because they're going to drill holes and run wires they don't they don't do that uh and simply safe now has uh this great uh product which is brand new with the same great pricing 24-7 protection for only 15 a month.

And there's no contract.

It's smaller, faster, and stronger than anything they've built before.

Supply is limited.

Visit simplysafebeck.com right now to order.

That's simplysafebeck.com.

Protect your home with the newest technology.

It's simplysafeback.com.

Glenn Back Mercury.

Glenn Back.

It's Pat and Stewford, Glenn.

Still a little under the weather.

Triple eight, nine 933, hundred

93.

Who's responsible for all this?

All these gun deaths?

The NRA.

The NRA.

They're behind it all.

They're evil.

So far this year already.

Okay, we're into February.

They've spent a total of $264,000.

Oh, my gosh.

$264,000.

It's like $1.95 to you and me.

Yeah, right.

Come on.

That's nothing.

Well, you're thinking, okay, well, it's only February.

By the end of the year, Here's what they spent in 2016 presidential election year on Republicans and Democrats.

So this would be likely the highest amount they've ever spent in any year.

You would think so.

$1,085,000

total.

Most of that, almost all of it, went to Republicans, of course, but $1,085,000 spread out over

everybody they donate to.

They are not giving these candidates anywhere near the kind of money it would cost to own these guys and put up with this nonsense if

they don't believe in the Second Amendment.

I mean, that can't even be the top, it's not even close to the top donors for Republicans.

I mean, because obviously you go to unions, you go to other groups like that, it's going to be a lot higher than a million dollars spread over the entire Congress.

But I mean, even for Republicans, there's probably a dozen groups that give more money than that.

Why don't they own everybody?

Why can't these, you know, they talk about the evil Koch brothers donating all their money.

Well, the Koch brothers want less spending.

No one pays attention to them.

Yeah, we did a story on this, I don't know, six or eight months ago.

So, remember on those serials?

The Koch brothers were something like 18th in spending, and they were well down the list.

The number one

spender by far was a Democrat.

It was, I believe it was Tom Steyer, the guy who's right now launching the campaign to impeach Donald Trump.

And he's spending something like $20 million of his own money to try to get Trump impeached.

I haven't been been following him, but has that happened yet?

Not quite yet.

No, that has not worked yet.

So, a guy running commercials on MSNBC where every single program already says that you have to impeach Donald Trump, that somehow has not been effective in impeaching Donald Trump.

Isn't that strange?

That is very strange.

And he's vowed to spend like $100 million or something to get rid of him and to get his policies enacted.

And

he's horrible.

And

he spends way more than the Kokes do.

And the Koch brothers are the ones who are vilified continually.

Continually.

It's like the Koch brothers are donating billions of dollars every election cycle.

And they're not doing anything close to that.

So

and this is what I've never understood about the whole NRA owns the Congress thing.

The NRA

can donate money or not donate money, but it's the Congress person who has to vote, right?

They are the ones that have to vote.

And every two years with the House, you get a chance to say, I don't like the way they voted.

I can vote for somebody else.

And if they have voted only with the NRA and you don't like that, you could just change your mind.

The bottom line is the average person in America, particularly Republican voters, believe the same things as the NRA.

They believe the same things as

the Second Amendment indicates are legally required.

They believe your right to bear arms shall shall not be infringed.

That's what they believe.

Why do they believe that?

Because I guess the NRA was donating to them too.

I guess, which is weird.

Actually, a lot of those people are donating to the NRA.

You know, I mean, so does the NRA, is the NRA owned by the individual citizens?

It's a lot worse to when you're, it sounds a lot better to blame the NRA when in reality, what they're saying is The average American citizen that votes for Republicans and believes in gun rights are bad people.

And yeah, because when you're disparaging the NRA, you're disparaging their 50 million American members.

50 million.

That's a pretty good section, a pretty good cross-section of American people that you're disparaging all the time.

888-727-BECK.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.

You know, we've had a really good run with the market since, I mean, for a while now.

I mean, going back to 2008, since it bottomed out in 2009, 2010, we've had a really good run.

And a lot of people now are looking at their house and saying, you know what?

I've had this house for a long time.

I'm looking for something maybe a little bit different, maybe a little smaller, maybe downsizing, maybe just taking some money off the table and locking in the profits you've made over the past couple of years.

To do that, though, you need to maximize this because this could be the biggest financial opportunity you have in your entire life.

Selling your house in a nut market can mean setting yourself up for the rest of your life.

Realestateagentsitrust.com was set up by Glenn to make sure you can find an agent in your area that has a really solid work ethic, that understands that you need to be updated and be,

you know, to do business in a way that makes sense,

which you understand, that aligns with your values.

Realestateagentsitrust.com is the place to go.

Realestateagentsitrust.com.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

With patents, Du,

8887, 888727, BECK.

So the White House has called the latest congressional plan giant amnesty,

and they've rejected this.

Now, all four Senate bills have gone down in flames already.

So it's starting to look like

they're not going to get anything accomplished, which may be a good thing.

If you're not an amnesty fan and I'm not,

then this might be a good thing because all of these are now amnesty bills.

Yeah, if all of this fails, it just means Trump keeps his promise on DACA from the campaign, which is why, you know, part of the reason he got elected, right?

Right.

So, I mean, he's wound up giving a lot of ground on that particular promise to try to get other things done, to seem bipartisan, whatever, you know, whatever, you know, reasoning you want to assign to it.

But the bottom line is he was talked about getting rid of DACA on day one.

We're now in year two.

And again, his proposal is to keep DACA and expand it.

And you still can't get Democrats on board with it.

The talk was $800,000.

He offered $1.8 million.

Nobody was talking about a path to citizenship.

He offered that.

It was only supposed to be legal status.

So we have moved from legal status to path to citizenship and from $800,000 to $1.8 million.

And there was nothing given in return for that.

Nothing.

Nothing.

We've just now all adopted it.

He just offered it.

Yeah.

And he's still a terrible person to the Democrats.

That's amazing.

It's crazy.

So there's four bills that came up yesterday.

Here are the details on them.

There's the McCain-Coons bill, Chris Coons from Delaware, provided a path to citizenship to.

If John McCain's involved, you know.

Oh, you know.

You know that.

It's got to be good.

It's got to be good.

So what it did was, again, though, these are things that the president is.

Is this the latest, the Common Sense Caucus?

No, that's another one.

Okay, so first was Koons-McCain, provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants.

Offered no money for Trump's border wall.

Did include some border security measures.

It needed to get 60 votes.

All these need to get 60 votes.

It failed 52 to 47.

So it still got over the majority, but it was not enough.

Democrats voted almost

entirely in favor of it.

Republicans mostly voted against it.

So that was more of a Democrat-leaning bill, as you would be not surprised to hear when it comes to John McCain being involved.

And so basically, this is like:

if you don't give Trump money for a border wall, you're not going to get any Republican votes, which, okay, that makes sense.

If he's going to give up 1.8 million and he's going to give up path to citizenship, he should get the money for his wall.

Next one was from Pat Toomey.

Now, Pat Toomey, this is the one I think is probably the most conservative of the bunch.

Does not actually address DACA,

just talks about sanctuary cities.

will penalize sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce federal immigration policy by withholding federal funding funding from those municipalities.

This is the one, I think, of these four that I would probably vote for

because it was specifically designed just to do that.

It had nothing to do with DACA.

Didn't give

any amnesty to anybody.

What about the border wall?

Did it provide

just addressing this specific issue, sanctuary cities?

I don't understand why they won't fund the border wall at all.

They just won't.

They're not interested in border security.

Well, they do do this in some of the other bills.

The Toomey bill, however, Republican from Pennsylvania, who's generally speaking a pretty good senator, came out and said, look, let's just address sanctuary cities.

That's a big deal.

Let's just address that to try to get enough votes.

He got more than the previous bill.

He got 54 votes for it.

Republicans and a few Democrats actually supported it, but most Democrats were opposed, so that failed.

The next one was the so-called Common Sense Caucus.

And when you think common sense, I think we can all say the words together.

Susan Collins.

Collins.

I'm sure everyone was saying that in your car.

Yes.

Right as I was uttering it.

Because that's the first name that sprang to mind.

Susan Collins, of course.

So-called Common Sense Caucus was a large bipartisan group led by Susan Collins.

The plan had gained the endorsement of Democratic leadership, which tells you right off the bat that it's not necessarily going to be a great thing.

It was technically sponsored by Chuck Schumer.

However, it was a bipartisan bill.

The bill did things.

Here's what the bill did.

It did,

and this is what they thought this was the best chance of passing.

It gave the Trump guidelines on 1.8 million undocumented immigrants would have a path to citizenship.

And this is the one that they said they reached an agreement in principle on.

Yes.

Right?

Yeah, this is the big one, the Common Sense Caucus.

So it starts with all the stuff that Trump said he wanted and would give.

So 1.8 million undocumented immigrants, not 800,000, but 1.8 million.

Not legal status, but a path to citizenship, which is, again, a move to the left of both of those items.

And what the president called for.

Right.

So what did he call for?

Also, $25 billion for border security, and that includes money for the wall.

Now, there was a complaint you had mentioned about

because they pushed back against this.

That was not an immediate build of the wall.

That was pushed down the road several years.

And then I think it was

overall a 10-year plan.

And Trump was like, no,

we need it now.

Yeah, and

Trump said he wants

a lot of things.

We're going to go through his.

The last one is his plan.

They did not give him everything he wanted here.

They gave him a lot of the big

marquee asks.

And they tried to make it look like the wall would be built.

Right.

But just like in 2006, when they said it shall be built and it was written into the law, it wasn't built.

This wouldn't have been either.

Exactly.

So

the president and the White House pushed back against this bill, said this bill was a private.

They called it a giant amnesty plan.

And of course, it is a giant amnesty plan.

But so was his, kind of.

Yeah, the 1.8 million undocumented immigrants get a path to citizenship is what the president suggested, which is also a giant amnesty plan.

I mean, these are all amnesty plans, with the exception of what Toomey wanted.

These are all giant amnesty plans, just varying in their degree.

Again, had to get 60 votes, only got 54.

Democrats almost unanimously backed the plan, along with eight Republicans, but the rest of the GOP conference and a handful of Democrats blocked the bill.

Last up, and again, like that was probably the one that had the best chance.

And everybody was talking like that was, it's a done deal.

We got it done.

Here it is.

And then it went down in flames.

They got 54 votes, but that's not enough.

And by the way, the White House threatened to veto it anyway.

So they would have needed, what is it, 67 to override their veto, which they didn't even have anything close to.

So the last one was the Grassley bill.

Now, the Grassley bill is the Trump bill.

Grassley just took what Trump wanted and brought it to the Senate.

provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children.

Again, same number Trump had been proposing.

Offered $25 billion to fund the southern border wall.

Was that immediate?

Did we know?

It's Trump's plan.

Okay, so yeah.

That's immediate.

Substantially, and this is the other part that he threw on top and is asked for from the beginning.

He's been consistent on this.

Substantially curtails family immigration and eliminates the diversity visa lottery program in such a way that would, as Vox calls it, gut the legal immigration system.

Okay.

So that was the Trump plan.

That one got the least amount of votes.

In fact, couldn't even muster 40.

Failed 39 to 60.

Democrats opposed the bill completely, joined by a notable number of Republicans, while most of the GOP conference and a couple of Democrats supported it.

That was, it does not seem to have any chance to go forward.

And again, I think

it's not a huge surprise that

that would fail.

It's just a surprise if

you're an alien.

and you come down from the planet Zoltar, which is wonderful this time of year.

I got a condo up there.

You're an alien.

You you come down from Zoltar, you've never seen this before, and you say, okay, what are the debate lines?

The Republicans say they don't want to give amnesty to illegal immigrants.

And the Democrats say they want amnesty for illegal immigrants.

And in fact, their president passed a legal, they got it through without even passing a bill for 800,000 of these people.

And then you come, okay, so what's the state of the debate now?

Well, now the Republicans are offering not only the original 800,000, but another million on top of that.

Plus, they're not offering legal status, which was the debate before.

They're now offering a path to citizenship, which is another huge step to the left in this particular issue.

What they want in return is $25 billion for border security and a couple of changes in the way legal immigration occurs.

You would think, you'd say, number one, wow, the Democrats have won.

The fact that the debate is happening on those lines, you would say immediately, no matter what happens with any of these bills, the Democrats have already won the debate.

No doubt about it.

Secondarily, you'd say, why the hell aren't the Democrats accepting this?

They have been given everything they asked for, plus more,

plus more.

The offer from the Republicans more than doubled what the initial ask was by the Obama administration.

Okay?

And what happens in the end?

They reject it.

Because again, just like with the gun stuff we were talking about before, it has nothing to do with illegal immigrants.

It has nothing to do with dreamers.

They don't care about dreamers.

That has nothing to do with their calculus here.

If they cared about it, they would have passed one of these bills.

And, you know, to be fair to them,

they can't pass it by themselves.

However, there were bills in here, like the one Trump proposed, that they could have voted for and had passed.

But with everything we've outlined here and everything we've just talked about, why is it that no one in Congress or the president, the administration can't come forward and lay it out?

Look, here's what we've done for the Democrats.

We've given them everything they wanted really and more.

All we're asking is to secure our southern border.

That's all we're asking.

You can't come to the American people and sell that and put that right in the lap of the Democrats.

I just don't understand how nobody can articulate these things.

Nobody in the administration, nobody in the Congress can seem to articulate this so that we can break this log jam through the American people.

Because I think if you outlined it for them and you set it up this way, look, they wanted 800,000.

We gave them 1.8 million.

They wanted to legalize these people.

We're offering a path to citizenship and still,

still they're saying no.

You need to call your representative.

You need to tell them what you think of this.

You need to tell them whether or not you want our southern border secured.

Do you still want the

drugs to flow freely through it?

You want terrorists to be able to freely flow through the southern border?

You want illegals to pour into our country year after year as they have been for the last 30 years.

Is that what you want?

If not,

call your Democrat representative and tell them to vote for these bills.

And I don't know.

How can that not be done?

I don't know.

And I will say this.

I don't know.

Is there a place for people like you and I, Pat?

No.

Is there not?

No.

Probably not.

Where are the people that say, you know what?

I don't actually think we should double the number of DACA recipients.

I know.

You know what?

I don't think that a path to citizenship is the right thing

necessarily in this citizenship.

And no, there's no place for us in that anymore.

I think that ship sailed.

Don't you think?

I mean, it feels like that ship has sailed.

And it seems like that's not even a possibility anymore.

I know.

Well, it is even a possibility.

When the Republicans offer is to the left of what the Democrats ask for,

it's impossible to, I mean, the only thing, only Democrats' stupidity is going to lead to something here not passing because they won't accept very,

let's be honest about it.

Very favorable terms.

Very favorable terms.

Unbelievably favorable.

Terms that...

Let's just say in the campaign, Donald Trump knew he was going to do exactly this.

There's no way he'd admit it in the campaign.

He would have never admitted it in the campaign.

I don't think at the time he, I think at the time, he honestly believed he was going to be tough on DACA, and he honestly believed he would overturn it on day one, and he honestly believed that he would not give

a path to citizenship to illegal immigrants.

I think that's probably where his head was at that time.

But the bottom line is that's where now his head is in a totally different place.

And

he would never get through a primary.

in a Republican field of 17 people if you admit this is what you're going to do.

And now this is the Republican arguing position, not the Democrat one, the Republican one.

And still the Democrats won't go along with it, which is the only thing saving us.

Thank God the Democrats are like this because all they see here is an opportunity to oppose the president.

And thank God they see it that way because they could get tons of stuff that they actually want or advocate that they want.

It's their hatred for Donald Trump that keeps them from actually getting their policies done right now.

And to get

the wedge issue to continue.

They want that to continue.

They want to be able to go to their voters and say, we're the ones going, we're trying to protect the illegal immigrants.

We're trying to protect immigrants and they won't let us.

I mean, you know, 99% of people are not going to do just the research that listening to this last segment

would entail, right?

Just listening to what the four votes were and how they went down.

Most people outside of a talk radio audience are not going to pay attention to that.

They're not going to go through that process.

They're just going to hear Democrats good on

amnesty, or in my opinion, bad on amnesty, and Republicans are evil and they're opposing it.

And Donald Trump doesn't like them.

He calls them all rapists, right?

Like, that's what they're going to know.

And so I think maybe this will work to get donations.

But again, wouldn't it be nice

if these debates were actually about the policy topics they're supposed to be about?

Yeah, if they actually had the best interest of the American people at heart, that would be nice.

It's fantasy.

It would be nice.

It is fantasy.

Triple 8 727 back.

It's just amazing that's where we are.

So I have a 2012 car, and it's reached that age where

minor things are starting to go wrong with it.

And I guess that's expected after we're in year six.

I don't worry about those problems anymore because I do have the extended vehicle protection from Car Shield.

Getting covered by Car Shield is a great idea.

First of all, it's really easy to do.

It's affordable protection that can save you thousands on a covered repair.

Think about some of the big repairs you might come up with.

A new fuel pump costs over $500.

Replacing a water pump, over $1,000.

And if you need repairs to a control arm or a torque converter, stuff most of us have never heard of until it breaks, well, now you're talking thousands and thousands of dollars.

It doesn't even talk about the stuff that's new to cars like the computers and the GPSs and all the crazy electronics that are in there.

That stuff goes wrong.

It costs a fortune.

CarShield is the ultimate in extended coverage, and they get your favorite mechanic or dealership to get, they get them paid directly.

You don't have to go to some person you don't normally deal with.

You go to your favorite person and CarShield pays them.

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

Save yourself from high repair bills.

Get covered by CarShield like I did before something goes wrong.

Call 800-CAR6100 and mention the code BEC or visit carshield.com and use the code BEC to save 10%.

It's carshield.com.

Code BECK.

A deductible may apply.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn back.

Triple 8, 727 back.

We were just talking about the Olympics.

It was a terrible day for the United States yesterday for our Olympians.

But the other day, when the women's USA hockey team played Canada, lost 2-1, there was that huge fight that broke out at the end of it.

And there was just a brawl at the end of the end of the match.

And like, it's weird because they're all in the hockey costume, so you can't necessarily tell they're women until they take their.

And then there's just this.

And then it's like, it's kind of weird, isn't it?

It felt sort of strange to see a women brawl.

Maybe that's sexist.

It may be.

Maybe I should have thought.

Well, yeah, of course.

It's a hockey match.

Of course, watching women hit women is sexist.

I'm sexist.

I don't like it.

Don't dig it.

Don't like it.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.

Love.

Courage.

Truth.

Glenn, back.

It's Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

He's been, you know, feigning this illness since Valentine's Day.

And Stu is just making the point.

I mean, just get her a present.

Just get her a present already.

Okay.

Come on.

She knows.

Get her a present and come back to work.

She's obviously aware you blew it on Valentine's Day.

You can't fake the illness anymore.

Just get it, you know, order something from 1-800 Flowers, get on Amazon, get something done,

get back to work.

There's important things going on.

Exactly.

Exactly.

So

we've been hearing a lot

about

the shooter.

First of all, we heard he was a white supremacist.

Yeah.

Not from him, from white supremacists.

They're like, yeah, that's our guy.

That's our guy right there.

I don't know why you'd want to claim him.

It was very strange.

And that was my first instinct when I heard that.

Is usually the pathway here is someone murders someone, the name leaks out, and then reporters, people on the internet, et cetera, do their research and discover his name posted on a message board or some website somewhere.

And they say, oh, he's tied to this extremist group or that extremist group.

And that's usually the way these things go.

This was

he

killed all these people, and then immediately there were

those from this group called

Republic of Florida, which Republic of Florida is a white supremacist, it's a white nationalist group in that they believe they want to basically make Florida into its own country and withdraw.

And only, I think, pretty much only white people can be in it.

Which would be just from a logistical standpoint, difficult.

It would be, you know, a lot of transportation costs.

There would be a lot going on there.

So

they, that, they, the, one of the founders of this group comes out and says, oh, yeah, he was, he comes and he does exercises with us all the time, military exercises.

And, you know, yeah, he's there all the time.

And look, you know, we didn't, we gave, we actually bought a gun for him at one point.

Like, what person, you're in the middle of a mass murder and you're admitting to a potential straw purchase of a firearm.

That seems like a bad idea.

And it was a bad idea, although a different kind of bad idea.

Apparently, just this guy was trying to get

attention for his group.

At least that's what he's being accused of.

He now seemingly is admitting, and local police have also revealed that there is no tie between this guy and the white supremacy group.

And it's interesting to see this happen because these are the sorts of stories that set people's opinion forever.

They heard this.

This was unchallenged for a day, and now they're going to believe.

I mean, some percentage of the public is going to believe till the end of time that this guy was a white supremacist.

We have no evidence that that's actually true.

It may be true, but as of right now, we have no evidence to believe that he was associated with this group in any way.

I guess the guy who runs it is just sort of a troll, always looking for attention, constantly spreading his name out there.

He's, you know, one of these guys that, you know.

is constantly looking for this sort of negative attention because he believes it puts him on you know that side of you know the right side of history and again he's a white supremacist, so he's nuts.

But that's kind of his shtick.

He's done it before.

And by the way, I believe it was the ADL that initially did this, initially reported this,

the Anti-Defamation League.

And so it seems like that was them spreading fake news, essentially.

So that's something that should be noted.

FBI's under fire a little bit, too, over this guy, because there was a person in Tennessee who's a big YouTuber, and he saw this guy's post about how he was going to become a professional school shooter.

To his credit, the guy in Tennessee alerted the FBI right away.

Did all the right things.

See something say something.

He did.

He did.

And the FBI came and talked to him about it, but they never got to

the shooter.

Yeah, I mean, because if See Something Say Something only works, there's another step after that, right?

Do something about the something that was said.

Yeah.

And so he did two things.

The guy who saw the comment, and the comment said, I'm going to be, I want to be a professional school shooter, something like that.

And so he went to YouTube, first of all, and said, hey, there's this comment out there.

And went to the FBI and said, hey, there's this comment out there.

And seemingly took screenshots and stuff because YouTube's response was, that's a bad comment.

We should delete it.

So they deleted his comment.

And the name of the user was the same as the name of the shooter, which we are not talking about.

We're not disclosing at all in this program,

at least Pat and I aren't.

So

at some point,

they said, okay, look, we have this name.

It was his real name.

It wasn't like.

Yeah, it was the name.

So you would think, well, the FBI can track down the guy with his, I don't know, name.

Right, you'd think so, right?

And I don't know.

I mean, like, I'm a little bit more

forgiving, I think, on these things, because you think about how does this work with the FBI?

They're getting thousands and thousands and thousands of these tips every day.

99% of them mean nothing and don't lead to anything, right?

So you get this.

They don't know where the person was.

This is an entirely uncommon name, though the spelling was a little bit uncommon, more uncommon, but it's not an uncommon name.

And so they did, but they didn't know he was in Florida.

They didn't know it was this person's name from Florida.

They didn't know where he was.

They didn't know anything other than just the screenshot.

Plus, YouTube had deleted the comment.

So they would have had to go through and,

you know, I guess get some sort of subpoena or some sort of warrant to get the information of the IP address and then track the IP address.

And I think the thought was

there's not enough to go on.

We have one YouTube comment.

What is that big FBI email collector we always hear about, though?

It's a big program where they can.

There's many of them, right?

Yeah.

Prism,

Edward Snowden program.

Something else, too.

There's several of these things, and you would think, well, one of those could have been employed, and maybe they tracked the guy down.

I don't know.

They had his name.

Name.

His actual name.

I mentioned yesterday that they, you know, maybe you should have done more than they did.

And somebody said, well, what do you want them to put him on jail just on the comment?

Well, no, but you show up and you talk to the guy.

If somebody makes a threat against the president, the Secret Service certainly shows up and talks to you and just kind of assesses where they think you might be.

Where's your head at right now?

Yeah.

And

if the FBI had done that and somebody was on to him, does that alter what he plans to do?

I don't know.

I don't know.

Maybe.

I mean, you certainly would like to take the risk, right?

We know how it turned out when they didn't do it,

which was not positive.

You know, they did call back the guy who reported it and they talked to him about it, but he had no information.

He just saw a comment.

And so, you know, and I think that I'm a little bit

with all these threats coming in and so much that they're dealing with, they see this one comment, and there's so many people online that say all sorts of crazy crap.

I mean, we get death threats every day on social media.

We could call the FBI on these things every day.

Are they going to check out every one of them?

I mean, of course not, right?

I mean, they can't, you know, and 99.9% of them are just people being jerks because they think they're anonymous and they can throw their stuff around.

Now, this guy put his name out there.

So you'd think

that's a strange step.

And maybe that warrants more examination.

But I think it's true.

If, let's say they knew where the person was, let's say he had Florida next to his name and they went to Florida, found the guy, went to him, said, did you post this comment?

Yeah, I mean, I was just screwing around, though.

I mean, I shouldn't have done it.

I mean, just that.

You know, he hadn't actually done a school shooting, right?

And even if you assess him and you say, this guy's a little bit of a danger, then what do you do?

He hasn't shot anybody.

I mean,

I guess the Democrats are

caused to search his house and maybe

find his weapons cash.

But maybe he doesn't, I mean, he didn't at that time have the weapons cash.

Yeah.

Right.

And so I think Democrats would say here,

if someone posts a comment like that, you put them on a list that means that they can't purchase firearms, right?

Like this would be one of their steps, I would say, right?

Because they said the same thing with terrorists.

They said the same thing with anyone who has any hint of mental illness.

I mean, I love the idea because this spreads fast.

Adam Lanza had a hint of mental illness.

He didn't buy any weapons.

His mom did.

So now everyone in his house, anyone in the house that has someone with mental illness, you're not allowed to have

firearm purchases.

So that can expand very quickly.

And it's why Republicans and conservatives and people who care about the Second Amendment are so hesitant to go anywhere near these things because they can escalate so quickly.

But even if you go there, Pat, and you say, hey, look, you know, you posted this comment and that person says, well, you know, I mean, I shouldn't have done it.

I was just trolling on the internet.

Stupid.

And then two years later, he goes and shoots up a bunch of people.

You're going to look incompetent in retrospect, but there's probably 50,000 of these people with the same exact thing happen that they didn't check out that didn't wind up shooting people.

And now we're kind of looking back and reverse engineering what they should have done when the job is a lot more difficult than I think that we were just kind of throwing out there.

And I go back and forth on this because part of me sees this Edward Snowden vision of they have every piece of information and they can do whatever they want.

And part of me sees this sort of generally speaking, I don't know,

incompetent group of people that, like, oh, he said he's going to kill someone.

Just throw that one in the trash.

We'll deal with that later.

Neither one of those is accurate, I'm sure.

You know, there's something in the middle there.

But it is really frustrating when

the guy, under his real name, said the thing he was going to do publicly.

Yeah.

And the FBI was alerted, and still there's nothing we can do.

That's really frustrating, especially, God forbid, you're one of the parents of these kids and you hear that story.

Wait a minute, he said he was going to do it online under his real name?

You actually saw it.

It wasn't like it just happened and you missed it.

You were actually alerted to it and you still didn't do anything?

That is really frustrating.

Really frustrating.

It is.

888-727-BECK.

More patents too for Glenn coming up this day.

There's a reason we've been talking to you about Life Lock's identity theft protection for, I mean, how many years now?

Back in the day, it was probably one in 10 people who experienced identity theft.

Now it's one in four and increasing all the time.

But Life Lock can help detect the threats to your identity that you might miss by just monitoring your credit.

Christian, a sound engineer, he joined Life Lock because he said, Look, from my perspective, I know my information's out there.

I don't like that fact, but it is the reality of the situation.

In 2014, he decided he had joined already, and in 2014,

it kind of paid off because he got an alert from Lifelock.

That alert said, hey, somebody opened five cell phone accounts under your name.

Did you just really want to talk to a lot of people?

Did you make that decision?

Also, a department store credit card.

They were opening his name and he called Lifelock and they said, look, sit back, relax.

We'll take care of it.

And they did.

Now he's a member for life.

Nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses.

You don't have to deal with identity theft on your own, though.

Go to lifelock.com or call them 1-800-LifeLock.

If you use the promo code BECK, that's 10% off your Life Lock membership.

The promo code is Beck.

Use that to save 10% at lifelock.com, Lifelock.com.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn Beck.

It's Patton Stu for Glenn on the the Glenn Back Program Triple 8.

727 back.

I don't know that I've ever heard

a less self-aware, more outrageous, or hypocritically ironic statement than the one that came from Senator Kamala Harris.

It is just

absolutely astounding what she said about this shooting.

And you might think when you hear what she said, she was actually speaking about something else.

But no, she's talking about

gun control, of course, in the wake of this shooting.

Here's what she had to say.

It's going to sound a bit harsh.

As a prosecutor for years and appreciating homicide, and kind of a strange statement.

She appreciates homicide.

Wait, who appreciates homicide?

A very strange statement.

Being able to talk with a judge about it and a jury about it.

I had to look at autopsy photographs.

When you see the effect of this extreme violence on a human body, and especially the body of a child, maybe it will shock some people into understanding this cannot be a political issue.

We have to be practical.

I support the Second Amendment,

but

we have to have smart gun safety laws.

And we cannot tolerate a society and live in a country with any level of pride when our babies are being slaughtered we wow uh

we can't support a society or live in a civilization with any level of pride when our babies are being slaughtered

uh

hmm they don't seem to have any problem with 60 million babies having been slaughtered in the last 45 years since roe v.

Wade.

You can't use the word babies when you're pandering to your gun control crowd.

You can't use that word.

It's not a good word for you.

And when you have a 100% rating from NARAL,

you shouldn't be talking about babies and the slaughter thereof.

There is no bigger slaughter than the slaughter of American babies in the last 45 years.

Literally 58,586,256 abortions since 1973.

Nothing on earth has killed more people

other than communism.

Communism and infectious disease.

Maybe infectious disease.

Yeah.

That's about it.

This is third, and nothing in the United States of America, nothing has killed more people than 58 million.

And I will say, too, it's the biggest slaughter in American history.

There's no question about that.

As you point out, 58 million is just the American number.

If I put that global number, it does exceed capitalism or a common community.

I'll bet it does.

And it does exceed probably infectious disease.

Infectious disease is a pretty bad one.

Maybe in the last century.

Sure, sure.

Sure, right?

Sure.

I mean, you wouldn't include the Middle Ages with that, but in the last hundred years, nothing has killed more people than abortion.

Nothing.

Nothing has slaughtered more babies, to use her term.

I mean, that is phenomenal that she chose those words when she has no problem with the slaughter of babies.

Would she look at the footage?

Because she's all about looking at autopsy photos.

Would she look at the fetus truck photos?

There's always the truck that drives around near the Super Bowl that has the big

picture of a fetus that had been dismembered on the side of it to try to impact people on abortion.

Does she look at those?

I mean,

that's really fascinating because she says a bunch of things here that we should adopt and use in this discussion.

Let's listen one more time and really kind of dissect what you're saying.

This might sound harsh.

No, it doesn't sound harsh.

It sounds like you're a massive hypocrite.

That's what I'm saying.

As a prosecutor for years

and appreciating homicide and being able to talk with a judge about it and a jury about it,

I had to look at autopsy photographs.

When you see the effect of this extreme violence on a human body, and especially the body of a child,

or a baby,

an infant, a fetus.

Maybe it will shock some people into understanding.

Maybe it'll shock people into understanding.

This is exactly why the people who

show the photos of aborted babies, that's exactly why they do it, to shock people into understanding, and yet they're treated like freaks.

Is Kamala Harris going to be treated as a freak here?

No.

This cannot be a political issue?

Oh, and I love that.

This can't be a political issue.

Abortion can't be a political issue.

We have to be practical.

We have to be practical about this.

We've slaughtered 58 million babies in 45 years.

We've got to stop the slaughter of babies.

It's not a political issue.

This is not about left or right.

This is about right and wrong.

This is about the slaughter of our children.

This is about the slaughter of minorities.

In a place like New York City, where more black babies are aborted than born,

we've got to stop that slaughter.

We've got to stop it.

It's true.

I mean, it's funny because

there's that constant call from the left to call Republicans racists, right?

People who are of the right racist.

Let's implement all of our policies.

Let's implement the craziest fringe stuff from all of our policies, in which

there is no race-based preference at all.

They talk about that with affirmative action or preference in schools, getting admission to colleges.

What if we repealed all of that?

What if all of that went away, right?

The other part is you'd have to implement our idea that we shouldn't abort children.

And so millions millions and millions of black people who are currently dead would instead be alive.

So your policies are ones that result in black people being dead.

Our policies result in them being alive.

Who is racist here?

It's such a ridiculous argument from the left.

I support the Second Amendment.

No, you don't.

But

we have to have smart gun safety.

I support choice.

I support the choice of a woman, but

we have to understand that there's another life at stake here.

here.

There's a whole separate DNA strand inside your body, which is a separate body from yours.

We have to understand that.

Now I support your choice, but you made that choice when you got pregnant.

You know,

in most cases.

If you didn't make that choice, then we've got a different issue.

But I support your right to choose.

at a certain step, but we've got to have some common sense about this, too, because we can't continue the slaughter of 58 million babies.

And we cannot tolerate a society and live in a country with any level of pride when our babies are being slaughtered.

Wow.

I mean, she's just giving us all kinds of ammunition there.

All kinds.

Triple 8727BECK.

Can't support the slaughter, and we can't be proud in a nation that allows the slaughter of babies.

Fascinating.

Just fascinating.

But we're the bad people.

We're trying to take away people's right to choose.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.

I have the same pattern every year.

I start off the year eating pretty good and maybe dropping a few pounds from the holidays, and then Super Bowl Bowl comes around and I blow it all over again.

It's kind of a planned part of my life to be honest about it.

But Riguzone is helping me bounce back this time.

Usually it takes me a month or so to actually bounce back from the Super Bowl.

Not this year.

I'm bouncing back now.

I've been doing, I've lost what, 10 pounds since the beginning of the year, 12 pounds, something like that.

And Ridgezone helps because it helps curb your cravings.

It helps your metabolism speed up.

And it is a great idea for you if you are doing the same thing that I'm doing, trying to drop a few pounds and get back into a little bit of shape.

Ridgezone.com is the place to go for this.

R-I-D-U-Z-O-N-E.com.

You're going to get 30% off if you use the code STU.

There's nothing wrong with getting a little bit of help when you're trying to lose weight.

It's hard.

And Ridgezone can help you.

R-I-D-U-Z-O-N-E.com.

Offer code STU.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

With Pat and Stuford, Glenn.

So

33,000 people are murdered by guns every single year.

Isn't it time we finally addressed that?

Isn't it?

Isn't it?

I mean, it's way past time.

You want to address the fact that it's not actually 33,000 people?

Is that what you're saying?

No, it's probably, what, more like 150,000 or I don't know, 3.6 million?

How many people are being killed by guns every year in this country?

Well, 10 million?

The murder statistics don't exactly support the 33,000 number or 32,000 number that's been thrown around a lot by the media lately.

It's much, much higher than that, right?

Much, much higher than that.

No, it's not.

It's much lower than that.

In fact, considerably lower.

Because the thing that they usually leave out of that stat, 32,352 gun deaths is what they talk about from the CDC.

21,175 of them were suicides.

Wow.

That is an incredible

incredible statistic.

Because,

you know, look.

Because if you're going to commit suicide, there's a lot of different ways to do it.

You're going to do it another way.

That's 65% of these, by the way.

65.4% of the number are suicides right off the bat.

Now, look, for example, Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the United States, but almost no guns whatsoever.

Because culturally, that's a big deal there.

Not a good decision, but it's a big deal there.

So they have a higher suicide rate, but almost no gun crime at all.

There's no guns available for people to kill themselves, yet they keep killing themselves somehow.

And we all know how those things occur.

There's hangings, there's overdoses, there's all sorts of things that you can do to kill yourself.

It is not...

It's not difficult to do if you want to do it.

And that is obviously terrible and tragic, but is not really part of the conversation when it comes to guns.

If you want to kill yourself, you can kill yourself in a million different ways.

So 21,000 of the 32

are suicides.

Right.

Wow.

So that brings it down to like 11,000?

Yeah, 11,177.

Now, if you look at that number a little bit further, 8,353 were murders of various sorts.

The remaining 2,500 were accidents and

unintentional injuries,

which, again, is, I think, you could make an argument that that is part of the gun conversation.

Like, you know, there are some people who have accidents, handle guns poorly.

They get in the hands of children, whatever the situation is.

However, that's not going to be affected by an assault weapons ban, right?

A kid who picks up a gun probably isn't going to pick up the AR-15.

It's going to be very difficult for them to handle, right?

They're going to pick up probably a handgun

and, God forbid, do something bad with that.

So really,

it's part of the gun conversation generally, I think you can fairly say.

However, it is not part of the school shooting conversation.

Right.

Right.

It's just, I mean, so it leaves you with 8,583 deaths that were murders.

That is,

you got to break those down a little bit more as well.

Let me give you this stat.

This is from.

a study on this exact thing.

Let's see.

Hold on.

Here it is.

A lot of paper here in front of me.

So about

one study after another shown legally purchased weapons, which follow all the normal firearms transfer rules, accounted for somewhere between 6 and 8% of the murders.

6 and 8%.

So you round that off to 10.

You got about 850 of those murders that actually happened through

legal terms.

Now, let's say a person who goes through a background check and does all the things they have to do, perfect, it's Pat Gray, the perfect citizen, right?

Pat Gray owns multiple firearms and has them at the house.

If someone breaks in and for some reason

they're not kept in your liberty safe for whatever reason, and they take those guns and they go and kill someone, like there's no way a law stops that.

The person was willing to break into your home and steal your gun.

And they are going to go kill someone outside of that.

There's no background check that covers that problem.

It's interesting to note that if you're willing to to kill people, you're probably willing to break other laws too

because it seems like that's like generious law, right?

Like, if there's the one because I think there's a lot of people who will say, you know what?

Sure, I'll embezzle from my company, sure, I'll steal from

a purse from someone on the street, yeah, sure, I will do all sorts of terrible things, engage in crimes after crime after crime, but I'm not gonna murder somebody.

There's a large chunk of the criminal population that's that does draw the line at murder, I think.

There's a lot of crimes of convenience.

There are crimes of

the ability to be able to feed yourself or be able to just want a new TV.

There's a lot of stuff that you can do crime for, but usually murder is

deserved for the ultimate criminals, right?

But they say between 6% and 8% of all murders, so we'll throw it around 800 to 850 of the murders are with legal firearms.

So maybe if you expanded those laws, you could get a few more.

It's possible.

The other side of this is when it comes to murders by rifle.

Now, again, they're talking about banning the AR-15 assault rifles, Pat.

They don't break it down like that, unfortunately, in the CDC numbers.

They do break it down to the category of rifles that includes things like bolt-action rifles, deer hunting rifles, all sorts of rifles that would not be banned by an assault weapons legislation.

However, that number, 2011, of the 8,583 murders, 323 were committed with rifles.

323.

Now, overwhelmingly, the most murders, if you actually wanted to stop murders, what you would do is go after handguns because handguns are the ones that are usually committing the crimes.

However, they're going after AR-15s because this is in our general consciousness right now, right?

We keep seeing these mass shootings.

We all hate them.

I mean, I think they said something like 400 people had been shot since

Sandy Hook, including Sandy Hook,

which, you know, again,

by AR-15s?

Are those all

the shoes?

It's just been mass shootings, mass school shootings.

Yeah.

I think it was 400 people had been shot in school shootings.

Now, that would not include, for example, Vegas, right?

There's been other mass shootings that did not happen in schools, but 400 people have been shot at schools since 2000, that was 2012, right?

The end of 2012 was Sandy Hook.

So you're talking about five years, roughly, which would give you about 80 per year, a very terrible number, which is exactly 400 too high, right?

Since 2012, the number is 400.

It's 400 too high.

We all know that.

However, it's about one per week, a little over one per week.

And there are 100,000 schools in the United States.

So can

I'm not saying

I'm a parent of two kids in school.

This is a real issue to me.

I'm not dismissing it.

It's freaking really important.

And I spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about these things.

You know,

protecting your kid is the most important thing you can do,

but can you legislate out one death per week in a hundred thousand schools?

I don't know that you can.

Can you shave a little bit off the edges with certain proposals?

Probably, but the proposals they're going after

are specifically shown to not work, not only here in America, but also much further-reaching proposals that were enacted in Australia that also didn't work.

So I don't know where you go with this.

I think there is a part of this that is really uncomfortable.

We talked about the Australia situation.

They did between about 30% of the guns nationwide.

They confiscated and or purchased.

It was basically

confiscate and compensate.

They gave you some money, but they took all the guns from you.

You had no choice.

You weren't willingly selling them.

They took the equivalent here in the United States, it would be about 100 million guns.

Now, 100, think about the logistics of a program that confiscates 100 million guns out of the United States.

First of all, that's not happening.

Second of all, it would be impossible.

Third of all, it would be insanely expensive to purchase 100 million guns.

If you did that, what would the result be?

You'd still have 200 million guns in the United States.

And none of the proposals coming out of Washington are even advocating confiscating these guns.

They won't admit to wanting that.

They're just saying they won't let you buy new ones.

And not, you could still buy lots of guns.

You just can't buy certain types of guns.

So what would the result be?

Instead of there being, let's say, 300 and 310 million guns now, you'd have

with no legislation, 320 million guns, instead you'd have 319.5 million guns.

You think there's really going to be some drop in crime because of that?

It's insanity.

It's insanity.

It's a unicorn.

You're just wishing you see a horse with a horn walk down the street.

It doesn't happen.

They sadly don't exist.

Spoiler alert.

Thanks for ruining it.

What if we did this?

What if we took all of our guns and we fired them all at once

and exploded them in space?

What if we fired them at the sun?

Yeah.

What if we just

take the world in a love embrace?

Okay.

Fire all of our guns at once and explode them in space.

That sounds like an interesting proposal.

Do you have anything further on what would happen?

Then we'd be like a true nature's child where we were born, let's say, born to be wild.

We could climb so high,

we'd never want to die.

And wouldn't have to, with all the guns taken at once and exploded into space.

You wouldn't have to.

Right.

Or, like, is suggested by

another group of wonderful people who have come up with incredible plans.

What if all of the bomber jet planes above our nation turn into butterflies?

They just turn into butterflies above our nation.

Is there a specific legislation that would make this occur?

Do we have anything that's been sketched out?

It's a stock legislation.

It's the protest song of the 60s legislation.

We just make it happen.

We just make it happen.

I think it'd be wonderful, don't you?

I do.

I do.

It would just be wonderful.

It would be great to have all of the violent power in the hands of the government because no government has ever misused it.

People don't realize that.

Correct.

They are, you know, now, sure, you could look back at history in those dusty old books and dig up an example or two

of 20 million people dead here, 7 million people dead here,

6 million over there,

1.2 million dead over there.

I mean, you can find examples occasionally.

Oh, if you're a stickler.

Yeah, yeah.

If you want to be a nerd and you just want to read big, thick, black books of communism that tell you the stories of, you know, millions of people dying when they're in unarmed resistance against a government that has all the weapons.

I mean, you can find the example

if all you have to do all day is search for it.

Okay, maybe you could dig up a couple of times where a government went wrong and rolled over over its population because it came up with a reason, whether it was their own power or some ideology or some

religious fervor, sure you can dig them up.

But I think if we're all going to be rational and we're going to come up with common sense measures, the exploding the guns into space is the way to go.

That's the way to go.

It is.

And the planes into butterflies.

Right.

You're right.

I mean, you know,

those bomber death planes riding shotgun in the sky, if they turn into butterflies above our nation, we'd just be a world of peace then, right?

Or we'd be completely unarmed, and then Russia and China would swoop in and crush us.

I will say, not to mention.

We would have a massive problem with giant butterflies.

That would be terrifying.

Imagine that.

You ever see Mothra?

That's what happens in those situations.

This doesn't turn out well.

You just get killed by massive butterflies instead.

Butterflies are just insects with pretty wings.

Okay?

Well, it's better to be killed by a butterfly, though, than a jet plane, right?

A bomber jet plane?

I think it would be way more creepy.

I mean, a bomb drops on you, it's instant.

This is like the equivalent of like, what was that William Shatner attack of the killer spiders where they all just kind of creepy crawl at you all over the place?

Imagine what would happen if we took the thousands of planes in this guy and converted them into airplane-sized butterflies.

This is a terrible policy.

Why?

What?

You realize this.

50 years of this policy existing, and no one's called out.

And nobody has.

The problem with, I don't know, creating thousands of giant butterflies that are the sizes of 747s.

Yeah, you know what?

When I think about it that way, it's not that great an idea.

It really isn't.

Triple 8727, B-E-C-K.

You're going to sleep well tonight.

No nightmares are coming your way.

Well, you know what?

Maybe they won't if you have a Casper.

If you have a great night's sleep every single night, maybe you don't dream about giant butterfly attacks, but it does happen to some.

A team of engineers at Casper's, they've worked nonstop prototyping, collecting data, and engineering what is the most comfortable mattress you can purchase.

I mean, this is all the best technology.

It has a unique combination of foams that provide the pressure relief and alignment, so you feel perfectly balanced and comfortable.

And that's what you need when you want to get some sleep.

Try Casper yourself because

their point is like, yeah, we have have the best mattress there is, but you know what?

We'll take the risk here because we're going to put this mattress in your home for 100 nights and you can try it risk-free.

Sleep on it.

If you don't love it, well,

they'll take it back.

They'll ship it to you in this gigantic, it's a really cool thing that they do with the box, which is something Glenn's talked about, but it's for free.

And by doing this, they've eliminated the middleman and they've saved all the money for you.

Plus, if you don't love it, you don't have to put it back in the tiny box.

They've come to pick it up and they will refund you for everything.

No questions asked.

This President's Day, not only is Casper saving you from long lines during the holiday weekend, you'll also save $125 on purchases over $1,250 and $200 on purchases over $2,000.

Don't miss out.

Take advantage of the special limited time offer by going to Casper.com.

That's Casper.com.

Casper.com.

Terms and conditions apply.

Glenn back Mercury.

Glenn back.

It's Patton Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Hopefully, he's back on Monday.

There's another interesting report of another Playboy playmate who claims to have had an affair with Donald Trump back in 2006.

He was very reportedly busy in 2006.

Yeah, apparently, he goes at the same golf tournament he was dealing with Stormy

Daniels.

he also apparently hooked up with,

by her word, Karen McDougall, a slim brunette who had been named Playmate of the Year eight years later.

She actually was a voted runner-up for Playmate of the 90s.

An honor that

imagine if your daughter could talk about her.

Runner-up to Pam Anderson only.

Only Pam Anderson beat her.

So

she's fantastic.

And so she, again, has very detailed notes, about 12 pages of handwritten notes that she wrote down, I guess, at the time, and then somehow,

and we'll put somehow in quotes.

I mean, I'm sure she wanted it to get out, but somehow it made her its way to one of her friends who turned it over to Ronan Farrow, the guy who broke the Harvey Weinstein scandal.

And so now that's blowing up to yet another one of these scandals.

White House, of course, has denied it.

Yep.

They called it an old story, just more fake news.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.

Love.

Courage.

Truth.

Glenn.

Back.

It's Pat and Stewart for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Hopefully, he'll be better by Monday.

I would expect so.

Even if he's not, he needs to get in here because he's been faking it all week.

We all know that this started on Valentine's Day and he's just perpetuating it now.

We all know what he's doing.

Yeah.

He didn't get anything for Tanya.

So, oh, I'm sick.

And

it was just to buy time.

And he's probably sending somebody out to scramble and find something at the last minute.

Right.

He didn't have anything ready for Valentine's Day.

And then you can't just, you have to, if you're faking that you're sick enough to miss Valentine's Day, you can't just have it to be a one-day illness.

No, it's got to be.

You're really sick.

And then he's like, you know,

go back on Friday?

No.

You know, I think I need those two days to rest up to get my, you know, to get recharged for Monday.

I think that's the way he's thinking.

And I mean, obviously, we all understand what he's doing,

but

it's disappointing.

It is disappointing.

Disappointing from what?

As is CNN's effort to use

some of the kids from Parkland High to push forward their gun control agenda.

The interview that Alice and Camerata did with two of the students,

to me, this is just despicable.

This is just despicable.

Listen to this.

I mean, is this not just trying to push them into saying what you want them to say?

You also have lost people.

You also endured all of this and you were inside.

And so when people like, you know, this conservative firebrand, Tommy Lauren,

tell you how you should feel and what you can talk about today.

Let me read the tweet.

That's not what you're talking about.

Wait till she reads the tweet.

Yeah.

You tell me if this is what she was doing.

Was she telling them how to feel?

That got you upset from Tommy Lauren.

It says here, can the left let the families grieve for even 24 hours before they push their anti-gun, anti-gun owner agenda?

My goodness, this isn't about a gun.

It's about another lunatic.

Now, at no point did Tommy say anything like what she was accused of there.

Nothing.

Nothing at all.

She's stopping.

Not even close to that.

Politicians and people who are trying to push for policy, not about the victims' families.

And she's not telling them how to feel in any way.

Anyway.

I just got angry.

Like she's trying to use like left and right.

I don't think it's about any sides of the

political parties or anything.

It's about children died.

Like it doesn't matter what

side of the gun control argument you're on.

Like people are dead.

And when is the right time to talk about it?

Okay, hold on.

So, because I mean, I understand it isn't about left and right when it comes to people dying.

We all want to stop it.

I assume we're all on the same

part there, the same part of that argument.

The issue is we don't agree on how to do it.

Right.

So, there is a lot of people.

That's where left and right come in.

So, it does, like, you can't say it doesn't matter where you stand on gun control.

We just need to implement gun control.

Well, that's not a good,

it does matter where you stand on gun control if your end game is gun control.

Yeah.

And that's what it is.

Yeah, I think anytime, I think it's right now.

I think it's two days ago.

We have to talk about it because there's no,

it's already too late to change.

That's great to get these 16-year-old kids involved in this discussion.

In the middle of a tragedy.

Something they, in the middle of a tragedy where their emotions are all high

and it's an issue they don't know anything about.

No, I mean, look,

that's not a knock on these particular kids.

It's like, I know, I didn't know anything about it either when I was 18 years old.

Right.

That's not,

it takes time.

That's why they don't vote.

Right?

At 16.

They don't have the life experience.

They don't have the knowledge.

They don't understand the world enough to vote at 16 years old.

That's why they don't vote.

And so is there a value to talking to someone who survived a terrible thing like that?

Yes.

To try to convince them to accept your particular policy prescription in that moment is a terrible idea.

And again, this is why we don't, the whole thing is, what did they ask her about?

When you saw Tommy's tweet, how did you feel?

I felt anger.

Well, that is not a good decision-making time.

Right?

When you're feeling angry, you're feeling emotional.

This is not the time that you make your best decisions.

And And the idea that you're going to bring them on as, let's be honest, the way they're using, and this is not just CNN, a lot of networks are doing this, but they're using these children as props.

They're using them as props.

Hey, hey, convince everybody that because we're trying to draw on everyone's emotions, despicable.

Try to convince everybody to sign up for my gun control legislation, the thing I'm wanting to push.

And the last thing in there is,

when is it the right time to talk about this?

When is it the right time to talk about this?

And everyone keeps saying the same thing.

This is a new battle cry.

Yeah, it was because they are offended when you say what Tommy said, which was just, hey, let's have a couple minutes of grieving before we start jumping into raising money for your activist group.

That's all she's saying.

It's a completely defensible position.

But now the left is pushing back on that, saying, well, we should have been talking about this a long time ago.

We should talk about it right now.

There's two things that.

You're right.

Now is not the time.

Right.

Last week was

last year.

10 years ago.

Same time.

The other night.

First of all,

it is not the right time to jump into policy because of what we just talked about.

It's an emotional time, and you don't make your best decisions when you're emotional.

We talked about this right after 9-11, the Patriot Act, right?

Did we, whether you like the Patriot Act or not, did we have a real debate about every part of that?

The answer to that was no.

We passed it in like a, it seemed like five minutes.

Because it was an emotional thing.

It was an emotional thing, and we were scared.

Our emotion at that time was fear.

And the emotion here is also fear.

It was fear and anger combined.

And fear and anger don't combine to good policy.

I mean, we know that in our homes, when you don't make decisions,

every time you get in a fight with your wife, you don't say, oh, well, we're getting divorced.

You don't make policy decisions at that moment.

You let yourself cool down.

We don't go to bed angry.

Something as unimportant as grocery shopping.

They tell you not to do it when you're hungry.

Why?

Because you'll make stupid purchases.

How much more important is this?

It's a great point.

It's a great point.

And it's just, it's just frustrating that they, they drag in real, you know, victims and people who went through this to try to accentuate this point.

Because what they're doing, the reason why they want to talk about it now, the reason why they feel like today is the most important day, and they will admit this to you.

It's because never let a crisis go to waste.

They know if they wait, people will start thinking with their brains instead of their hearts.

And they need you to think with your hearts and your emotions to get these things done.

Because when you use your brain, you don't want to use their policies.

Their policies don't make sense when it's brain time, when it's heart time, and it's emotion time and it's feels time.

Then it feels like maybe we should do those things.

Then you realize you've got to do something.

Something.

Even if it's not the right thing, we've got to do something.

Something.

Let's show you.

Just to show something.

Just to prove to people that we care about these things.

We need to do it.

Doing something.

Something.

One thing.

Anything, something.

And you'll notice it's never accompanied with specific policy prescriptions.

No.

It's just something.

And if you're any more specific than that, it's gun control, right?

It's gun control.

Common sense, guns.

Common sense control.

Common sense reform is usually because gun control is bad.

Everybody knows

that's not what that's not allowed, frankly, by the U.S.

Constitution, which said, which says that it shall not, our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Well, there's a lot of wiggle room in that phrase, though.

A lot.

Shall not be infringed.

A lot.

None.

None.

None.

No wiggle room.

There's no wiggle room.

It shall not be infringed, it is pretty clear.

We already have, in this country, created a lot of wiggle room that isn't there.

Yeah.

Okay.

We have.

You know, and now they want to create more of it.

And we've accepted that.

And even the right has accepted that.

Okay, well, we've done certain things.

Like, all right, can you own a bazooka?

Well, no, you can't own it.

Can you own a tank?

No, okay, you can't own a tank.

Can you own a machine gun?

Well, okay, no, you can't have that either.

Can you own

a weapon of war, though?

Oh, no.

Can you own a scary-looking weapon of war

and

literally a weapon of mass destruction?

An AR-15.

Can you own that?

Well,

that's what they're trying to get rid of now.

That's what they're trying to get through.

Have you heard anyone give the policy prescription for the 5 million AR-15s that are already in private hands?

No.

What's the policy?

Are you going door-to-door for those?

That's not a good idea.

Are you going to send out self-addressed stamped envelopes for people to send them to you?

How does that work exactly?

Mail back your AR-15 in this self-addressed stamped envelope.

I hope it's padded.

I hope it's one of those nice padded envelopes because that's a whole nother situation.

And I would love to see that go on.

I would not love to see it because that would be a

disaster.

Disaster.

But again, they're not even asking for that, right?

They're just saying no one can buy new ones, which is something we've already tried and didn't work.

Didn't lower

rates at all.

Yep.

So it's just

unfortunate because there was a story in The Guardian.

Five things you could do right now to reduce gun violence in America.

Five things.

Okay, thing number one.

Thing number one, demand your city use data-driven strategies to reduce violence.

More than 25% of gun homicides happen in neighborhoods that contain just 1.5% of the country's total population.

The Live Free campaign and the Community Justice Reform Coalition are working to organize communities most intensely impacted impacted by violence.

These activists believe that making neighborhoods safer requires addressing gun violence, police shootings, and criminal justice reform at the same time, not as competing issues.

So, again, that doesn't necessarily mean gun control, but maybe there's some elements of that.

And

the Guardian says you can do that.

Strengthen your state's approach to guns and domestic violence.

Again, this is something that I think a lot of people agree with, even if you have Second Amendment beliefs.

Tougher statements.

What does that mean?

If you're convicted of

domestic violence, you can't have a gun.

You can't have a gun.

Okay.

All right.

Support the effort to pass extreme risk protection orders.

Advocates have launched a joint effort this year, over 20 states, to pass extreme risk protection order laws, which give family members and law enforcement officials a way to petition a court to temporarily bar at-risk people from possessing firearms.

California has a version of this.

Here's a problem with that, though.

You've got an at-risk person in your house.

That means you can't have any guns in in your house, right?

Yeah.

I mean, it doesn't just take it away from the person.

It would also take away the parents or the siblings or whoever has a legally purchased gun.

Yeah, and these are not things I think some of the stuff you couldn't get passed because they would restrict people's rights to bear arms.

And, you know, that's the thing we never really talk about is that bottom line is most of the stuff that the left is

proposing winds up getting overturned in the Supreme Court anyway.

So, I mean,

we fear these things because they're going to try to take these guns away and they're going to try to do all these things.

They can pass all the stuff that they want.

Overwhelming possibility that it gets overturned by the Supreme Court anyway.

Yeah, as long as the Supreme Court is in its current configuration,

that could change if the liberal ever packs the court.

Of course.

Learn how to identify when someone's at risk.

Sandy Hook Promise, an advocacy group founded by family members of the Sandy Hook shooting, has trained more than 2 million students and adults to know their science.

No, like that sort of stuff is, of course, you can do that, right?

You try to learn to have gun owners lead the way in preventing gun suicides.

And again, this is a smart point in that, as we point out, 65% of gun deaths come from suicide, not murder.

So, can you do those?

I don't know.

I mean, that might reduce it a little bit.

I think to me, we talked about the whole media situation.

I noticed another person, I think it was on CNN yesterday, not giving the name of the shooter.

There was a shooter in, and I don't have it in front of me.

I crushed I had the story, but I'll give you the baseline here.

Grandma goes into a kid's room, opens up his journal because

she's feeling kind of weird about what's going on.

He just seems a little bit off, opens up his journal, starts reading

line-by-line plan on how he's going to go murder, do a school shooting in a specific school, which he flipped a coin to figure out which school it was going to be,

detailed plans, and his description about how he wanted to set a record and outdo all the other school shootings.

He'd read a lot about other school shootings and wanted to make sure he did better than that.

He'd learned from their mistakes.

Again, this is media obsession with this stuff.

He comes to it and he says, I want to beat those guys.

Luckily, the grandma actually looked at the journal and then looked in his guitar case, which included the weapon that he was going to use in the particular school shooting.

He had planned the school.

He had all sorts of details about it.

And think about this.

What a moment it must be if this kid's your grandson is doing this.

You open it up.

you have this knowledge.

What do you do?

Luckily, she called like she should have.

Authorities, they arrested the kid.

And

not only did she prevent dozens of deaths, possibly, at this school, also she prevented most likely her grandson's death, who would have either been shot or he would have shot himself.

It's interesting.

They did arrest him?

They did.

On what charge?

I, again, don't have the story in front of you.

Terrorist threats or something?

The defense was raising the point I think you're raising, which is he didn't actually shoot anybody yet.

He was just musing in a journal.

Now, of course, he had grenades and he had a gun.

Okay, so he was.

So

he was pretty well armed

to do this.

Although, you know,

there wasn't necessarily a law that prevented him from having the gun, right?

I mean, he could have had the gun.

Where does a teenage kid get grenades?

That's a good question.

That's amazing.

It may have been explained in the story.

I'm sure in the investigation, they will come to that conclusion.

But the point being that, you know, there are, if you can uncover these things beforehand, and we have caught a lot of them.

Yeah.

Thank God.

I mean, being more aware is a big part of that.

And I think not encouraging these people to be these famous celebrities in their communities, I think that helps too.

And we can, and we can, that's one that, again, the media can do without passing any legislation.

They can't blame Congress for it.

They can't blame anybody for it except themselves.

Don't make them famous.

Don't make them famous.

Take every step that you can.

What would that do?

Would it reverse one out of every 10?

Maybe.

Maybe.

And then, you know what?

Really worth doing.

Really worth doing.

888-727-B-E-C-K.

Are you hiring for your new business?

Every business needs great people and a better way to find them.

And I think everybody that goes through and runs a business has these moments where you're trying to find somebody to do an important job.

Somebody's left or something, and you need to find the best person for that position, and you don't know how to do it.

Something better than posting your job online and just praying for the right people to see it.

Well, ZipRecruiter knew there there was a smarter way.

They took steps to make sure this happened.

They built a platform that finds the best job candidates for you.

ZipRecruiter learns what you're looking for.

They identify people with the right experience.

And it's an outward push.

They actually invite the people that are right for your job to apply for your position.

These invitations have revolutionized how you find your next hire.

In fact, 80% of employers who post a job on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate through the site in just one day.

And ZipRecruiter doesn't stop there.

They even spotlight the strongest applications you receive.

So you're not sorting through millions of these things and you never miss a great match.

The right candidates are out there.

ZipRecruiter is how you can find them.

Find out today why ZipRecruiter has been used by businesses of all sizes and industries to find the most qualified job candidates with immediate results.

Right now, you can post jobs for free on ZipRecruiter.

Check it out: ziprecruiter.com/slashbeck.

It's ziprecruiter.com/slash beck.

Glenn Beck Mercury.

Glenn Beck.

It's Patton Stewart for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Mitt Romney finally made the long-awaited announcement that he's running for Senate.

So when

Oren Hatch is stepping down the end of this term, and so in November, you'll be able to, I mean, everybody's going to vote for Mitt Romney, and he'll be a U.S.

Senator from Utah very quickly here.

I I mean, they think they might, someone might try to primary them, but I don't think it's going to work.

I think Mitt will probably win 75, 80% of the vote there.

Probably.

So his announcement did come out, and it was beautiful.

You know why?

Mountains.

Mountains.

Mountains, snow.

Oh.

Because I don't know if you know this.

In Utah, they have both mountains and snow.

Wow.

And they have trees

and lakes.

And that is true.

And other bodies of water.

Is that what they were showing?

Yes.

You get the beautiful landscapes.

Have you heard this yet?

Here's the.

I haven't.

This is from Mitt Romney, his announcement.

I have decided to run for United States Senate because I believe I can help bring Utah's values and Utah's lessons to Washington.

Utah is a better model for Washington than Washington is for Utah.

Over the last five years, Anne and I have spent a good deal of time with our 24 grandchildren.

I've gone back to business, campaigned for Republicans, and met with young people across the country.

Anne has championed her Center for Neurologic Research.

Given all that America faces, we feel that this is the right time for me to serve our state and our country.

I ask for your support and your vote, and I look forward to meeting you over the coming year.

If you give me this opportunity, I will owe the Senate seat to no one but the people of Utah.

No donor, no corporation will own my campaign or bias my vote.

Wonderful.

And let there be no question, I will fight for Utah.

Okay.

All of that sounds fine.

But then there was just a little teeny bit more when he.

Washington has that backwards.

Utah welcomes legal immigrants from around the world.

Washington sends immigrants a message of exclusion.

Ugh.

Okay.

Here's the problem with that statement.

Washington welcomes legal immigrants as well.

The battle right now is over illegal immigrants.

And, you know,

when you muddy those waters, it just you're helping the Democrats.

It's just so disingenuous to say Utah welcomes legal immigrants when Utah also welcomes illegal immigrants.

And so does Mitt Romney.

And so that's what needs to stop here.

And

that's what the battle is.

Can we stop being disingenuous?

Everybody welcomes legal immigrants.

I mean, I will say there's some that don't, but it's not.

David Duke.

Certainly David Duke.

There's very few.

Seriously, there's few people who don't want any immigration.

Right.

I mean, I don't know anybody like that.

There might be some.

There might be.

There probably are some.

There probably are.

I just don't know them.

I will say there's a new genre.

Certainly the alt-right types don't want that, right?

And so obviously that group has grown over the years.

But I mean, there's obviously legal immigration built into every policy of security that Trump has proposed.

But again, Romney, big improvement over Orange Hatch.

I'm not a huge Romney guy, but it's an improvement.

Yeah, I'd say it probably is.

Glenn Beck, Mercury.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

With Patton Stu, Triple H

727 Beck, we welcome

to this studio.

I mean, I use welcome loosely, Jeffy Fisher.

Boo.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

People just boo when Jeffy walks in.

People do, or are you?

Well, I'm a person.

So I think it qualifies.

Jeffy is joining us.

We have a

Jeffy, if you don't remember this, we had the Mercury One gala, was it back in December, November?

November.

November.

And Jeffy was there, unfortunately.

They let him in the doors.

Well, he cheated during the entire lead-up to the Armadillo race.

And then he cheated at the actual Armadillo race.

Right.

If you don't remember, we were raising money for

the great causes that Mercury One does, including freeing people all around the world and saving them.

And we were talking about the Armadillo race.

For some reason, this got worked into

the conversation, which made no sense.

But we had to raise money for our Armadillo to win the Armadillo race.

And Jeffy cheated to raise the most money, first of all.

He cheated.

Oh, yes.

Obviously.

He was working with the people who ran the thing.

And I believe like every other donation or something, no matter who it was given to, went to him.

Right.

We all set it up in advance.

You sleep better at night.

I don't just sleep better.

I know for a fact you did that.

I know for a fact

that's what you did.

Yes.

Yes, I do.

Yes, I do.

It is not true.

You'll see it.

And shockingly, Jeffy found a loophole in the rules to

abuse them.

The problem with the armadillos was they were stupid.

Very stupid.

And they didn't know where they were supposed to go.

So they'd start heading one way and then they'd decide, nope, I'm going to go back there.

And so Jeffy picked up the track behind him and pushed him along, making them go only forward.

By the way, that rule has been changed.

I've been aware that that rule has now been changed in Armadillo Racing Rules.

That's what I've heard.

I found that out as soon as I also got my plaque for being inducted into the jockey Armadillo Hall of Fame.

Jeffy's basically Bill Bellercheck of Armadillo Racing.

Like he's always finding the little loophole in the rule to exploit it, and then they change the rule the next year.

I mean, all you have to do is say, hey, congratulations, and we'll move on.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Not to you, though, but to Cynthia and David Bray, who are joining us.

You guys are from Washington?

Battleground, yeah.

Very cool.

Where is that?

Is that near?

That's near Vancouver, right?

Right, just northeast, about 15 way out there.

Okay.

So

it's like suburban Vancouver?

Okay.

And you guys are the raffle winners of the beautiful truck that was raffled off.

Yep.

Congratulations.

That's what they tell me.

Kind of a big deal.

So, what car do you have now?

What are you replacing?

Another little truck.

Well, maybe.

He's got another little truck.

I got a 93.

Ford 3.

Ford 93.

Oh, wow.

Junker.

Nice.

Yeah.

A 93.

Yeah.

Well, I'll have to get used to the power windows because they're going to be able to get a little bit of a rifle.

That's great.

And so you guys, now you didn't.

Well, you say this all the time, but you don't have to show up to win the raffle.

You guys were not actually at the Mercury One

gala.

You, what heard us talking about it on the air?

Yep.

And I wanted to.

I just took a flyer.

How many tickets?

Did you buy like 100 tickets?

I bought one.

One ticket.

That's it.

That's pretty awesome.

That's amazing.

That's pretty awesome.

Because I buy one ticket all the time and I never

win.

I never won these things.

Have you guys ever won anything before?

Not like this.

No, not like this.

Well, he has, but I only when I sign him up.

But I signed up myself this time.

Wait a minute, if you sign him up, I think it's your prize.

You should at least deserve 50% of the prize but this one's mine this one's yours so this is yours you're gonna be driving this yourself this is awesome uh you uh you have listened to glenn for how long oh since way back on fox really so long time listeners this is very cool i know because you hate it we would have hated if you're like actually i'm a big uh you know piers morgan fan and i have to put in just give me the truck i'm a big time i'm going to take this i'm going to sell it and donate it all to some left-wing charity that would be very disappointing so all going all the proceeds go to Planned Parenthood.

Wow, that's a really rough.

That would have been bad.

Yeah.

Very cool.

Well, Jeffy is our congenial host here, and he's going to walk you guys out around the corner.

Can you move here?

Yeah, yeah.

Jeffy, I will say Jeffy moves really slow, but follow him.

I'll walk you out so you can see the truck.

Yes, start this bad boy up.

Drive this back to Washington.

This is very cool.

And you guys are going to drive it back, huh?

Yep.

You can keep your headphones on as you walk out there so we can talk to you.

Okay.

Yeah.

Very cool.

Cynthia and David Bray all the way from Washington.

They're going to drive this thing back.

Now, as we're walking out here, before we get to the truck, I've got an envelope with some cash in it.

Really?

And I'll make you a deal.

I'll make you a deal.

All right.

You take the envelope with the cash, and I keep the truck.

Wait, I don't think so.

Yeah, smart move.

I know the envelope looks thin, but they're big bills.

I don't know.

It would have to be the Woodrow Wilson $100,000 bill to make that worthwhile.

And it probably isn't.

Oh.

Coming around the corner here.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So you've seen the truck now.

That's a beautiful, beautiful truck.

Not Canyon.

No, GMC

GMC Canyon.

Stupid Jeffy.

Very cool that they donated this through Mercury One.

You guys should get in and start it.

Let's see if Jeffy took the engine yet.

Absolutely.

My impression is that Jeffy probably stole something out of this truck, considering he was in charge of this project.

It's got no radio, no air conditioning system.

It's all in the back of Jeffy's car right now.

Oh, they just fired it up.

I can hear it.

It started.

That's a good sign.

Yep.

Very cool.

Cynthia and David Bray

for Mercury One.

And not only did they get a free truck, they also helped all sorts of people around the world

who are involved in all sorts of terrible things.

You know, there's been multiple millions of dollars saved,

donated to help save Christians in the Middle East.

You don't have to keep the car.

We're going to all die of fumes if you keep the thing running.

We're inside.

You do realize that.

Yeah, go ahead and turn it off.

You can turn it off now.

Unless you want to utilize it to run Jeffy over.

That is okay.

I think that's what they were going to do.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, Cynthia and David.

And thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you on a much smaller level to Jeffy.

And thank you to everyone who donated to Mercury One.

You know, a lot of times you donate money, you kind of forget that you even did it.

It's going to really, really good things.

And Glenn is going to be back next week to announce kind of a cool new initiative that they're doing, which is a big deal.

Glenn is not known for understating

the things he wants to accomplish.

And this next one's going to be ridiculous.

It's a really cool announcement he's going to be coming out with next week

to help an incredibly devastating problem around the world.

And that's going to be all next week.

On the TV show, you'll get a taste of that as well next week.

And then we'll be talking about it here on radio as well.

And I don't know if you get a free car out of it, but you probably get something even better.

All right.

You were talking about the grandmother who discovered and thwarted the Washington school shooting by just finding her grandson's journal and calling the police.

And we were wondering, okay, well, the guy didn't actually do anything.

I'm glad you stopped him, but what do you charge him with?

Right.

It's hard to get those.

Sometimes, I mean, this is what happened with if you remember to catch a predator, Chris Hansen, used to have a bee.

Hey, sit down,

have some cookies and some lemonade.

Why were you talking to a 13-year-old girl for 47 consecutive hours?

Why did you, we have these transcripts.

Can I read you some of these transcripts?

You said you wanted to meet up with her and do that thing.

What did you mean by that?

Like, that was the, I love that show.

I want that show back so badly.

Yeah, that is something else.

I feel like it had really good ratings.

I think it was just one of those things where there were some legal issues around it.

I think so.

Because a lot of people felt entrapped.

Entrapment.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Which I disagree with, by the way.

I do too.

I think, on that on those circumstances.

But it's somewhat similar thing here.

Luckily, this kid did additional things.

First of all, he robbed a convenience store to get money to fund the plot.

So they had him on that.

And when he was arrested,

he also punched the police officers.

They have him on assaulting a police officer.

Pretty clear he was doing this, but the detailed plans were pretty detailed.

He was going to take guns.

And if you're saying, well, we could have prevented him from having that gun somehow, he was also using homemade explosive devices, and he was bringing them to ACES High School.

Imagine if you're at that school or your kids are at that school today.

Jeez.

You were chosen in a school plot, and luckily it was stopped by the grandmother of the 18-year-old,

a name we will not give you, but his rifle was stored in a guitar case, which she discovered after reading the journal.

Authorities arrested O'Connor at the school where he was found carrying marijuana and a woman and a knife.

If this is somebody you know, a relative, a loved one, how sick you would be.

I mean, this had to be such a horrifying discovery to the grandmother, right?

Can you imagine?

You think you're going to.

Oh, man.

I mean, she must have had some sense or she wouldn't go in there and read the journal.

It's funny because in the journal,

he writes, I need to make this count.

I've been reviewing many mass shootings, bombings, and attempted bombings.

I'm learning from past shooters and bombers' mistakes.

You probably should have learned that you don't write it down in in your journal.

That's going to be probably step one.

But keep doing that.

If you're out there, mass shooters, write it down in as many places as possible.

So hopefully we can catch you.

He wrote, I'm preparing myself for the school shooting.

I can't wait.

My aim has gotten much more accurate.

I can't wait to walk into that class and blow all those effers away.

I don't understand.

People he doesn't even know.

No.

Doesn't even know.

You know, a lot of times they say, well, he was picked on or he wasn't popular in school or he's a loner or a loser.

This kid just chose them randomly by a coin toss.

He didn't even know these kids and was going to kill them.

You know,

it does say something about

the value of human life

that is assessed by some of these young kids.

They don't have any.

And once again, he wanted to make, basically get a record.

He wanted to outdo the other school shooters that have been made so famous over these years.

And, you know, this is a step you can take.

Once again, the violence, gun violence, murder rate is down by like 50%.

It's not like it's going up.

It's down dramatically.

The only thing we're seeing rise are these celebrity mass shooting type of situations.

And the idea is, oh, we take away the guns.

Well, you're never going to be able to take away the guns.

And even if you took them all away or abandoned, you know, got rid of new purchases of assault rifles, which is what they're trying to propose and will never get done anyway.

But even if you did that, you'd still have 5 million AR-15s or 10 million AR-15s still in the streets.

You'd still have 300 million other guns still on the streets.

You'd still have new purchases of handguns, which arguably

could be easier.

And you're never going to stop someone from, I mean, with three, in the world of 3D printers, you think you're going to stop the size of a magazine?

Come on.

What moron believes that?

You could 3D print one of those things in 10 seconds.

It's a ridiculous

collection of ideas.

And in the end, it's not going to do anything.

He was going to blow people up with bombs anyway.

So, I mean, at least, at the very least, you can stop making these people famous.

And I hope the media will take some steps in that direction.

Me too.

That's an easy fix right there.

I mean, and I mean, will it are you guaranteed to stop anything?

No, but it very well might.

So, why wouldn't you just do it?

Hard to imagine it hurts the situation.

Yeah.

I can't come up with a situation where, oh, you know what?

That's a bad thing.

It's a bad thing.

I I wish we had made them more famous.

And I don't think that's going to happen.

888727BECK more Pat and Stew for Glenn coming up.

All right.

Volatility in the stock market.

You've been seeing that a little bit lately.

Bitcoin, I mean,

it was at $19,000, then it was at $6,000, now it's back to $10,000.

It's all over the map.

You might not have known with all the attention on those markets that gold just came off its best year since 2010, and gold's up over $100

since mid-December or so.

Lots of room to run, I think.

I mean, you know, you got to make your own decisions on investments, of course, but gold is a part of my portfolio.

I think it's a good thing to maybe consider making it part of yours.

Gold has been a safe haven for centuries.

We all know that.

It performs well in times of volatility.

That's kind of why people go to gold.

When things become a little bit uncertain, it winds up really being

profitable.

And if you've done well in, you know, speculating in the cryptocurrency, you've kind of gone through that gambling process and you've

been able to take a little bit of money, maybe take a little bit off that table and go and put some into gold.

Gold isn't an all-in strategy.

You don't have to do everything.

It doesn't have to be 100% gold.

No one's even recommending that.

In fact, Goldline isn't even recommending that.

They're saying consider a piece of your portfolio to put in there.

And remember, a reminder, Goldline is under new ownership with better pricing and the same service.

They also, another reminder, to help celebrate the Winter Olympics, Goldline is giving away an officially licensed Team USA Olympic one-ounce silver round.

I've got it in my hand right now.

It's very cool.

Very cool.

If you're a big, if you're into the Olympics, you're definitely going to like this.

And they're giving it to you for free, so why not?

It's a one-out silver round.

It's on your next purchase.

Call them 866Goldline.

Ask how you can get the special, this really cool coin, 866-Goldline.

Call now, 866-GoldLine.

Glenn back,

Mercury.

Glenn back.

I don't know about you, Stu, but when I'm thinking healthy meal for the kids, the first place that comes to mind,

McDonald's.

Right, That's what I was doing.

And let's get them a quick happy meal, which is going to be super, super healthy.

And then we'll go work out at the gym.

Or maybe we'll work out first.

And then we'll go get the happy meal.

I usually combine them.

I eat them on the treadmill.

Well, okay.

Yeah, that's fine too.

Big handful of fries on the treadmill for each step I take.

And because of this, you know, health-conscious

McDonald's

mindset, I think, of American people, they're taking cheeseburgers and chocolate milk off their happy meal menu in an effort to cut down on the calories, sodium, saturated fat, and sugar that kids consume.

I will say, this is one of those cases you got to read past the headline.

Because just like they were talking about with the Tommy Larin tweet, when I heard this, when I read this headline, I felt anger.

Oh, you do?

I felt anger.

Like Kippley, the freaking McDonald's is going down this stupid road.

I know.

When you read the story,

what you realize is, first of all, they're keeping hamburgers on the menu.

They're just taking the cheese off of it.

They're just saying, because now they have a hamburger and a cheeseburger happy meal.

Now they will just have a hamburger happy meal.

The idea being that, of course, any human being knows that if there is a hamburger, there is also a cheeseburger, because the difference between a hamburger and cheeseburger is just a slice of cheese, which we all know they have.

So you can still order a cheeseburger, and what they will give you is a cheeseburger.

But wait, I thought they were taking the cheeseburger off the menu.

They are, but you could still order it.

They just aren't telling you that it's there.

Why?

Because they want everything to fall under these guidelines of the amount of calories.

So it's not like they're replacing the cheeseburger in the happy meal with kale.

Right.

Is that what you're telling me?

There's no kale burger.

It's 100% of it.

There's no new McKale at McDonald's.

You just have to ask for the cheese on it instead of just being unlisted on the menu.

As if we don't know.

Stupid.

We all know there's a cheeseburger there if there's a hamburger there.

All the times a hamburger is there.

A cheeseburger is also there.

All times.

It's always available at every place.

This is not something that's a mystery to America.

Well, do I have to replace the fries with apple slices, though?

No, they do give you apple slices and fries.

Oh, really?

But they gave you these, they have because I like it's three fries.

Oh, you know this because you, whenever you want something healthy, you bring them to McDonald's.

Yeah, it's there all the time.

But you're not having anything out of it.

There's little baby fries now with like 12 fries in it.

It's not impressive, but it's adorable.

It's McDonald's.

Come on.

Can you realize you're McDonald's?

Glenn, back.

Mercury.