Best of the Program | Guests: Sen. Rand Paul & Vivek Ramaswamy | 9/26/24
43:25 Share

Spoiler alert. A two-word warning that we're about to ruin the end. But sometimes, spoilers can be worthwhile. And so, we designed the Lexus NX to reveal many things. Like taking the mystery out of how close you are between parking space lines. Or the time you'll arrive at your dinner reservation. Technology designed to remove surprise endings. It's just a better story that way. Experience amazing at your Lexus dealer.

On today's podcast, the Argentinian prime minister, what he said at the UN yesterday, it was amazing. Sounds something like, you know, what a founding father or a president of the United States might say, but we didn't say it. No, he did. Vivek Ramaswamy joins the program to talk about some truths about America First and the future of the movement. And Senator Rand Paul has some latest information on the assassination attempt on President Trump from the bipartisan committee

that will not really improve your mood, but it's vital we know of failures made by the Secret Service to make sure it never happens again. Here is the best of the Glenn Beck podcast right after this. My Patriot Supply. You know, when good old World War III gets going, going strong, I'm probably just going to stress eat. I mean, a lot, probably. Just being honest, you know.

If I'm going to go to all that trouble, I might as well eat food that's delicious. It's not going to last. World War III, it's not going to last 25 years. So I've got a lot of eating to do. Fortunately, I'll be riding the nuclear winter out with the tastiest emergency food from my Patriot supply. Right now, you really need to check out my Patriot supply's four-week emergency food kit. It's got everything your family needs during a crisis. 2,000 calories a day. It's...

I mean, it's really delicious food, and it can last up to 25 years in storage. We've seen mass panic before, and chances are pretty good you're going to see it again at some point. And I don't intend to be caught up in all that mess. I intend on stress eating.

So go to MyPatriotSupply.com. Save $50 on your four-week emergency food kit. My Patriot Supply, it'll send it over as fast as humanly possible. Your order will ship up in one day. It's shipped for free. So get your four-week emergency food kit right now at MyPatriotSupply.com. That's MyPatriotSupply.com. ♪♪

You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. So Javier Millet got up yesterday to the United Nations, and this is worth reading almost verbatim. Listen to this. To the authorities of the United Nations, to the representatives of the various countries that make up the United Nations, and to all the citizens of the world who are watching us,

Good afternoon. For those who do not know, I'm not a politician. I'm an economist, a libertarian liberal economist who has never had the ambition to be a politician. I'm an economist, a liberal libertarian economist who's never had that. But I was honored to be in the honored with the position of president of the Argentine Republic in the face of resounding failure of more than a century of collective policies.

This is my first speech in front of the United Nations General Assembly, and I'd like to take this opportunity with humility to alert the various nations of the world to the path that they have been treading for decades and the danger of this organization's failure to fulfill its original mission. I do not come here to tell the world what to do.

I come here to tell the world, on the one hand, what will happen if the United Nations continues to promote collectivist policies which they have been promoting under the mandate of the 2030 agenda, and on the other hand, what are the values of the new Argentina that we defend. I do want to begin giving credit where credit is due, the United Nations, and he goes into 70 years of blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Then he says...

The successful model of the United Nations, whose origins can be traced back to the ideas of President Wilson. Oh, yeah, it goes on to Wilson. Let me get... I want to be clear.

On the position of the Argentine agenda, the 2030 agenda, although well-intentioned in its goals, is nothing more than a supernatural government program, socialist in nature, which seeks to solve the problems of modernity with solutions that violate the sovereignty of nation-states and violates people's right to life, liberty, and property."

It is an agenda that pretends to solve poverty, inequality, and discrimination with legislation that will only deepen those problems. Because world history shows us the only way to guarantee prosperity is by limiting the power of the monarch, guaranteeing equality before the law, and defending the right to life, liberty, and the property of individuals. Does this sound like a founding father?

It has been precisely the adoption of this agenda, which obeys privileged interests, the abandonment of the principles outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the United Nations, that has distorted this role of this institution and put it on the wrong path.

Thus, we have seen how an organization born to defend the rights of man has been one of the main proponents of the systematic violation of freedom, as, for example, with the global quarantines during the year 2020, which should be considered a crime against humanity. In this same house that claims to defend human rights, they have allowed bloody dictatorships such as Cuba and Venezuela to join the Human Rights Council without the slightest reproach.

In this same House that claims to defend women's rights, they allow countries that punish their women for showing their skin to join the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. In this same House, systematically, they have voted against the State of Israel, which is the only country in the Middle East that defends liberal democracy, while simultaneously demonstrating its total inability to respond to the scourge of terrorism.

In the economic sphere, collectivist policies have been promoted that threaten economic growth, violate property rights, hinder the natural economic process, preventing the most underprivileged countries in the world from freely enjoying their own resources in order to move forward. Regulations and prohibitions promoted precisely by the countries that developed thanks to doing the same thing they condemn today.

Moreover, a toxic relationship has been promoted between global governance policies and international lending agencies, requiring the most neglected countries to commit resources they do not have to programs they do not need, turning them into perpetual debtors to promote the agenda of the global elites.

Nor has the tutelage of the World Economic Forum helped, where the ridiculous policies are promoted with Malthusian blinders on, such as zero-emission policies, which harm poor countries in particular, to policies linked to sexual and reproductive rights. When the birth rate in Western countries is plummeting, heralding a bleak future for all,

nor has the organization satisfactorily fulfilled its mission of defending the territorial sovereignty of its members, as we Argentines know firsthand in a relation with the Maldivian Islands. We now have even reached a situation in which the Security Council, which is the most important organ of this House, has become distorted because of the veto of its permanent members has begun to be used in defense of particular interests of some."

Thus we are today, with an organization that is powerless to provide solutions to the real global conflicts, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which has already cost the lives of more than 300,000 people, leaving a trail of more than one million wounded in the process. An organization that instead of confronting these conflicts,

invest time and effort into imposing on poor countries what and how they should produce, with whom they should associate, and what they should eat, what they should believe in, as the present pact for the future intends to dictate. This long list of errors and contradictions has not been gratuitous, but has resulted in the loss of credibility of the United Nations in the eyes of the citizens of the free world in the denaturalization of its functions.

I therefore would like to issue a warning. Listen to this. We are at the end of a cycle. Collectivism and moral posturing of the woke agenda have collided with reality and no longer have credible solutions to offer to the world's real problems. In fact, they never had them.

If the 2030 agenda failed, as its own promoters acknowledge, the answer should be to ask ourselves if it was not an ill-conceived program to begin with. Accept that reality and change course. We cannot pretend to persist in the mistake by redoubling on a bet on an agenda that has failed.

The same thing always happens with ideas coming from the left. They design a model according to what human beings should be according to them. And when individuals freely act otherwise, they have no better solution than to restrict, repress, and restrict their freedom.

We in Argentina have already seen with our own eyes what lies at the end of this road of envy and sad passions, poverty, brutalization, anarchy, and a fatal absence of freedom. We still have time to turn away from this course.

I want to be clear about something so there are no misinterpretations. Argentina, which is undergoing a profound process of change, has decided to embrace the ideas of freedom, those ideas that say all citizens are born free and equal before the law, that we have inalienable rights granted by the Creator. Among them are the right to life, liberty, and property.

Those principles which guide the process of change that we are carrying out in Argentina are the principles that will guide our international conduct from now on. We believe in the defense of life for all. We believe in the defense of property for all. We believe in freedom of speech for all. We believe in the freedom of worship for all. We believe in the freedom of commerce for all. And we believe in limited governments, all of them.

And because in these times what happens in one country quickly impacts the others, we believe all people should live free from tyranny and oppression, whether it takes the form of political oppression, economic slavery, or religious fanaticism. That fundamental idea must not remain mere words. It must be supported in deeds, diplomatically, economically, material, through the combined strength of all countries, which stand for freedom."

This doctrine of the new Argentina is no more and no less than the true essence of the United Nations organization. That is the cooperation of the United Nations in defense of freedom. If the United Nations decides to retake the principles that gave it life,

and adapted again to the role for which it was conceived, you can count on the unwavering support of Argentina in the struggle for freedom. You should also know that Argentina will not support any policy that implies the restriction of individual freedoms of trade, the violation of natural rights of individuals, no matter who promotes it or how much consensus that institution has. For this reason, we wish to express officially that

Our dissent on the pact of the future, signed on Sunday, and we invite all of the nations of the free world to join us, not only in dissenting from this pact, but also in the creation of a new agenda for this noble institution, the agenda of freedom.

From this day on, know that the Argentine Republic will abandon the position of historical neutrality that characterized us and will be at the forefront of the struggle in the defense of freedom. Because as Thomas Paine said, those who wish to reap the blessings of freedom must, as men, endure the fatigue of defending it.

May God bless the Argentines and the citizens of the world and the forces of heaven. May they be with us. Long live freedom. Damn it. How great is that? I mean, this guy is quoting our Declaration of Independence and throwing it in our face. The Declaration of Independence and Thomas Paine, all of our founding principles. And he is saying, and look at Argentina. It is turning around.

And he's saying this has to be done because this Agenda 2030, this new pact for the future, which the United States passed, signed, excited about, he said it is going to cripple the entire world. And he's right. You want second citizenship. Maybe Argentina is the place to get second citizenship.

So the question is just how long he's going to be there. That would be my only concern because he seems to be promoting all of the right things and abandoning a historical precedent of neutrality, historical neutrality. That's a big, big change. Does he have enough people to support him? And not only that, but also his

Can he grow that and teach that to so many others? I mean, we had, you know, we had all of our founders in a row and we started from scratch and it took about 20 years to really screw it up. Part of the reason why I think it's possible is because he's loud.

Yeah. Right? Like, I think part, maybe one of the problems we've faced over the past, you know, 100 years or so is like, hey, we're obviously the most successful country. Everything's working really well. We all know it's because of capitalism and freedom. Everyone else should know it too. And over time, you know, with exceptions, right? Like, you know, certainly you'd say Reagan was an exception to this. Yeah. Someone who really loudly spoke

for the benefits of these principles. Donald Trump is loud defender of property and freedom and individual. Yeah, he's just more, he's still active. So I'm thinking more of a historical context. But like, I think as with Malay, if he becomes, if this, if he's able to set this country on this path and make it obvious what is, why it's succeeding throughout and

another addition to this and still up for debate, but if it succeeds, which so far it really is, but you know, it's short term. We don't, we don't know for sure if it succeeds long term, I think there could be a really major change in the world. Yeah, there could be. All you need is one spark. You know,

You know, the one thing that stuck out to me in his speech was one of the last paragraphs. As Thomas Paine said, those who wish to reap the blessings of freedom must, as men, endure the fatigue of defending it. How many people do we know say, I'm just tired. I'm just worn out. I just don't want to look at it anymore. Remember that line. Those who wish to reap the blessings of freedom must, as men, endure the fatigue of

Of defending it. More in just a second. First, let me ask you a question. How many days a week do you wake up feeling like somebody stuck a brick in a sock and then just beat you with it during the night? How many times during the day do you bend over to reach for something and then you have to make that sudden decision of, no, nope, not a good idea. Okay, one more question. What would you give to not go through those things?

Relief Factor is a daily supplement that helps your body fight pain by fighting inflammation, which is the source of most of our pain in our bodies and a lot of our disease.

Now back to the podcast.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. And don't forget, rate us on iTunes. Vivek, my friend, it has been a while since we've had a chance to actually sit down and speak. Welcome. Good to reconnect. How have you been, man? I'm good. How do you think things are going?

Look, I think the tide is changing in a favorable way. For Trump, it's going really well. I actually hosted a rally in Waukesha in Wisconsin yesterday. I was at the University of Pittsburgh, an unconventional place for a Republican to go. But in the key state of Pennsylvania last week, I was in Springfield, Ohio, near my hometown. Here's my sixth sense of it. OK, I think President Trump is actually doing well with great tailwinds. I have greater concerns for the Senate candidates.

in some of these key state and i think it is a distinct possibility we win the presidency without a majority in the senate and i think that that would be just too bad because we can't actually fully govern and so one of the things i'm trying to do is to help a lot of those bound out ballot senate another candidate as well put president trump across the finish line of course but we have an agenda to implement that this is about not just the next four hundred four years but the next two hundred fifty years as a country

And that also is why I put the book out this week. And I want us to be ambitious about thinking beyond just this election about what we want to actually achieve. And that in some ways is the point of this book as well. So you've said the book twice. Um, let me just try to teach this to all the authors. Uh,

Make sure you always use the name of the book instead of calling it the book. That's why I put Truths, the Future of America First out this week. You're a lot better at that. Yeah, well, just remember that. Truths, the Future of America First. Yeah, okay. I call it Truths for a reason, is we've got to speak our truths to the left, but also to our own side, which we sometimes forget to do. And I try to do both those things. So give me some of those. Give me one on each side.

Yeah, I'll give you one on each side. Perfect. So the hard truth to the left is, for example, the climate change agenda is a hoax. And that is provocative to many on the left. But what I try to do is offer hard facts. I give them one concession. Are global surface temperatures going up?

Yes, they are. Well, that opens up their mind and then listen to what you have to say next, which is that that may not be a bad thing for humanity. In fact, eight times as many people die of cold temperatures rather than warm ones. And the truth is they used to be concerned about an ice age rather than being concerned about global warming as recently as the 1970s. So those are the kinds of hard truths on climate religion, on transgender religion, on racial ideology that I speak to the left.

However, to our own side, here's also a hard truth that I think we need to remember. We don't want to replace the left-wing nanny state with a right-wing nanny state. And the truth is, even if Kamala Harris is proposing price controls, we don't like to admit it, Glenn, but there are Republican U.S. senators and congressmen that have proposed price controls in other sectors as well. I don't like that either.

I hate it. So my answer, the hard medicine for the right in this book is we don't want to replace that left-wing nanny state with the right-wing nanny state. We want to get in there and shut it down. And that's also a court thesis of this book. So did you see Javier Millet's speech at the UN yesterday by any chance?

I did, actually. Yeah. He's talking about kind of the same kind of things. I mean, you know, he's directly quoting our Constitution, our founding fathers, and the Declaration. I mean, the world is at a crossroads right now. That's right. And we need it.

And then what hope does the rest of the world have if America itself abandons our own founding principles? You know, one of the chapters as well that I write about is actually about our own history. We've forgotten that sense of history. It was actually Malcolm X who famously said that a nation without history is like a tree without roots. It's dead. And in some ways, that's what I try to do also. In truth, I talk a lot about parts of American history and our Constitution and our founding culture

that i think we need to revive and the young people in particular glenn are hungry for a total of the university of pittsburgh last week it supposedly left of center campus but what i actually see is a lot of young people who are just hungry for something new to be part of something bigger and it's staring in the face of our country to america right here at home and i think that that's where it's given hope to people like our you know how your malay and argentina we've given him inspiration

In turn, I think we need to bring Javier Millet-style governance on steroids to the United States of America, and that's something I'm intent on. So, you know, speaking of things that are truths that are hard for our side, one of your chapters deals with the three branches of government, not four. But we look at the third branch, the executive branch,

You know, as this all-powerful branch. It cannot be. It cannot be. We have got to shut so much of that administration branch down. Fire and close so much of this. And you've got a lot of Republicans who are like, no, use it, use it, use it. No, that's really dangerous. Go.

Glenn, I'm glad you said that because this is the defining debate in the conservative movement right now. And we ought to have it. And there's good people on the other side of it who you and I respect, but nonetheless, who you and I also disagree with. That is the most important chapter in this book. Do you guys buy truths? Read one chapter of it alone. Let it be that branch on the, that chapter on the administrative state. We don't want to use the left-wing regulatory state to achieve conservative goals. We want to take agencies,

from the CFPB to the SEC to the FTC to the FDA and constrain their scope massively, shut down agencies like the U.S. Department of Education, countless others that should not exist, and

and return that to the states where it belongs. So it's not just the concentration of executive power, Glenn, which I agree with you on, but it's the concentration of power in the federal government. It wasn't supposed to actually reside in the first place, instead being returned to the states and to the people. Now, the publisher and my advisors, like I said, my political advisors are the same way. When I ran for president, they said, don't talk about this stuff. It bores people. So one of the things I try to do in this chapter in the book is

You know, it's the stuff that's the most boring that's often the most important. But I went out of my way in this chapter to try to bring to life how that administrative state, how that bureaucratic deep state actually has an impact on the lives of everyday Americans on the left and on the right. And the goal with this book is to equip people.

everyday Americans who agree with you and I to be able to make these points at the dinner table to their friends on the left. That was my favorite part of the campaign is, you know, we can dunk on the left. We can defeat the left. I did that during the media interactions I had during my campaign.

But my favorite parts of the presidential campaign were where we were actually able to persuade people on the left and bring them along. And I've gotten questions from a lot of Americans, how do I do that at home? That's exactly what this book is a toolkit to arm them to be able to achieve, and that's what we need to save the country. So give me that argument. You're sitting at the dinner table with a relative, right?

and you somehow or another come across the deep state, which is the administrative state. Make that case to me. I'm a liberal. So look, here's what I would say. You and I may disagree on policy, but let's agree on this, is that the people we elect to run the government ought to be the ones who actually run the government. And if it's your side that wins or your policies that win, I agree to abide by them.

if it's my policies that when you agree to abide by them but today ninety nine percent of the laws they call them rules but ninety nine percent of the effective laws in the country are not even passed by congress they're passed by three letter agencies and there's a story in the book of a fisherman who was put out of business by cumbersome regulations imposed by the EPA and other agencies and fish and wildlife services that effectively required him to pay money

that he didn't have in order to actually just be a fisherman in the country. And you know what? Congress never passed that law. So ordinarily, if that's a bad rule and a fisherman is being put out of business, well, people could vote their congressman out. But this time, you could vote your congressman out as many times as you want. That would still be the law of the land because it was a bureaucrat who could not be fired who wrote that into law. So we give countless examples of small business owners, everyday Americans, who have been harmed, who have been put out of business,

by laws that were never passed by Congress. And I think that's something that people on the left and the right can both jointly agree on. And I've seen that, you know, many of our friends on the left, you got to, one of the things we can do better, I think, in making the arguments is let's ourselves state the best possible argument they can make. Let's state it first and then pick it apart. What is their best argument? What's their best argument on that?

Their best argument on that is that, well, we the people sometimes can't be trusted. Okay, they would say that if left to our own devices, we're going to burn the planet so hot that humanity would cease to exist.

And what I reveal in the book is you gotta study history. That was actually the argument of the old world. I mean, King George in England, it wasn't that he looked down on us or wanted what was bad for America. He thought of you as the subjects. It was his benevolence to say that you, the people, can't be trusted to self-govern. I'm gonna do it for you for your own good. That's the premise behind the administrative state. And so the American bargain is that for better or for worse, and we gotta admit, sometimes we'll get it wrong.

But for better or for worse, we the people create a government that's accountable to us, not the other way around. And that is the American way. Tim Walz likes to call Republicans weird. Well, you know what? There's one response to that is America in the course of human history is a little weird because most of human history did it the other way. But we're proud of that. And that's what made America great the first time. And that's what makes America great again. So that's one of the theses of that chapter of the book.

Of which book? Of the book, Truth, The Future of America First. Thank you, thank you. That's right. It's actually top, it's number one on Amazon as of yesterday. Which is, what is? Truth, The Future of America First. Yeah, good. I hope everybody here reads it. I appreciate it, Glenn. All right, so make this case to those on the left, I'm sorry, on the right,

That say, you know, this was we all know this this country was made for a moral and religious people. And our founders said it's wholly inadequate for people who are not. We're just not that way. We need the big state to force people back into, you know, decency, et cetera, et cetera.

Yeah, so this is a temptation we face right now. First of all, the same shoe will then fit the other foot. We've seen that time again, that once you create the vectors for government control, we may believe today that we're using the levers of the bureaucracy to advance good conservative goals. Well, there will be, like it or not, in the next 20 years, there's going to be another Democrat elected. And once that precedent exists, that's how they use that to really advance religion, not

Not the religions that you and I have in mind, Glenn. Yeah, but we... But religions like wokeism and transgenderism and climatism. We have to fight fire with fire.

Vivek. So I believe that water is more effective. That's what I believe. I've always found that you put out a fire much more effectively with water. And there's a time. You've got to be a fighter. And you saw me during the presidential campaign. I'm not afraid to be a fighter. But you also have to be strong enough to protect the thing you're actually fighting for. Otherwise, you know, this is how a nation ends.

Elliot once said, right? Not with a bang, but with a whimper. And I think that I worry that if we adopt the methods of the left, we're not going to defeat the left. We're going to become them in the process.

And that's what I favor. That's a wake up call to the conservative movement in the book. That book is called Truths, the Future of America First. Well, there's two directions for the future of America first. One could be the direction of using the administrative state and the bureaucracy and the nanny state to achieve pro conservative ends. That's tempting. Avoid that temptation and take the right road envisioned by our founders from day one.

Get in there and dismantle that nanny state, shut down that bureaucratic state so we the people actually govern our country again. That's how we save a country for the long run, not just for tomorrow. You're streaming the best of Glenn Beck. To hear more of this interview and others, download the full show podcasts wherever you get podcasts. Let me go to Rand Paul. Rand Paul, Senator, welcome, sir. How are you?

Good morning, Glenn. Thanks for having me. You bet. So tell me, are we ever going to get to—we were just talking about the justice system and how corrupt it is. And, you know, this system of the Secret Service, we're not getting—I don't think we're getting any real answers. And it doesn't seem like anybody really cares anymore in the media or, you know, those in the Secret Service. Am I reading this right?

I would say, as far as Congress is concerned, there's been a remarkable amount of concern both on the Republican and the Democrat side. Yeah, I have been surprised.

We rarely get the Democrats to do anything. And they signed on to a report that basically condemned the first assassination attempt as a compilation of errors. I mean, just Secret Service errors, one after another, inexcusable errors. And we condemned those errors. But lo and behold, not a whole lot's been done in the second assassination attempt. And it's once again full of egregious errors. A guy waiting for 12 hours. Nobody knows he's there.

Turns out he's been there on and off for 30 days. So, yeah, these continue to be human errors. Now, the only success I can tell you is they are have at least now finally acknowledged they're giving the same Secret Service detail to Biden, Harris and Trump. So that is a step forward. It doesn't mean that we have good people running the place yet. But I've told people I'm not going to rest until there's response.

and whoever was in charge in Butler, and really who was ever in charge in Mar-a-Lago the other day, they are not showing the ability to be in charge, and they need to be replaced. I saw a story today that just says they're overworked and stretched thin. Since when have we had a problem with budget? Yeah, and here's the thing, and even that's not true. And really, when you have human error, you still put up.

You shouldn't give the humans more money. And the thing is, if you look at their budget, their budget's gone up like in the last three or four years, gone up like a third. Just last year, it went up 14.5%. We spend over, I think it's $1.3 billion.

this is not a funding problem every one of these things we looked at and you know we've written a an entire report came out yesterday as dozens of errors none of them include money no one was in charge no one takes responsibility no one admits it was their job to walk around the grounds and say wow look at this roof it's only a hundred yards away pointed right at the stage why don't we put a counter sniper up there we also know that the trump campaign and the trump secret service

ask for months for counter snipers the first time they finally get counter snipers is at butler and thank god the counter snipers were there because if they had not taken the shooter out as quickly as they did it obviously was a lot of errors but they still took out the shooter very quickly

Had they not, it gets off another 10 rounds. He could well have hit and killed Trump with a second shot or more Secret Service and more spectators. So we're lucky they finally did, but we'd like to know why they were turned down for six months.

you know, were they sent to protect the first lady instead of Trump? There's a lot of questions that are unanswered and we're still trying to get to the bottom of it. But this is the fight we have all the time with the executive branch. You know, I've been trying to get information about the COVID cover up for three years.

It's non-classified, and they still fight me on that. So you can see it's fighting tooth and nail. And really the only way you get people to give you information is the opposite of what they do. You withhold money. If you withhold their money and withhold your salaries, all of a sudden the documents start showing up. So have we dismissed the supposed –

coded, I don't even know what they were, apps that he had between two other dark kind of countries.

I guess he... The first shooter. The first shooter. You know what I'm talking about? Yep. He had several encoded apps where he was communicating with someone. No one's dismissed him. I think they just don't have the ability to crack him is what they're apparently telling us. I think that everything about both the first and the second shooter look like independent shooters, not that sophisticated. That's what makes it more troubling is that an unsophisticated shooter...

two times in a row was able to get to the point where he could have killed former President Trump and realized there are also credible threats now from Iran saying that they will do it. And Iran's a much more sophisticated enemy. I mean, if nothing else, the Iranians are pretty good with missiles and with drones and with technology. And, you know, we have to have the appropriate defensive wear in place. And, you know, we just barely got counter snipers for Trump.

But I've been pushing and pushing to make sure we have the sophisticated defense equipment that's necessary to stop a state actor from assassination. This is absolutely insanity that we, you know, the leader of the world is grappling with technology. And, you know, we got to get better technology. We have this. This is I mean, we're becoming a third world country quickly. It feels like we're becoming the end of the Soviet Union.

Yeah. And the thing is, is, you know, there is no excuse for what happened. It really wasn't a lack of money, lack of resources. This was just common sense. No one's in charge. But really, in the first shooting, it's pretty dramatic. A guy's on the ground for 90 minutes.

And your local police are pretty good at having suspicion. Even regular people are pretty good with suspicion. So they have suspicious, you know, suspicion of this man for nine, young man for 90 minutes. Nobody really does anything though. They kind of start looking for him, but they don't find him. But really he had a backpack big enough to fold an AR-15 into. He's using a range finder and he looks suspicious. Wouldn't you think that that's enough to remove former president Trump from the stage? Yes.

They never did it. They finally announced it all globally and Secret Service hears about it with 27 minutes to go. So this is still probably 10 minutes before Trump takes the stage. They have 27 minutes till the shooting. They still don't take him from the stage, but then they have a last chance.

At 6.06, the shots are at 6.11 in a couple seconds. At 6.06, people are shouting, man on a roof, man on a roof. At 6.08, the police are shouting, man on a roof, man on a roof. They're running towards the building with guns drawn.

The counter sniper sees him running. He points his gun over there. Everybody's looking there. And yet no one says take Trump off the stage. Man on a roof is enough to take the former president from the stage and they don't do it.

between six Oh eight and six 10, it is radioed to the main tent, the security tent for the secret service and the local police. They're in one tent. They do hear the message. Does any of them say, take Trump off the stage? They start making phone calls to do something about the man on the roof, but nobody takes him off. So it's like, this seems like one Oh one insecurity and I'm not an expert in security. I would think the first thing you do is take the president off the stage. This sounds like the Keystone cops.

I mean, you're that convinced that this is all just human error? I mean, because that's a lot. It's the Keystone Cops all the way through. Yeah.

I just have no evidence otherwise. I will tell you the one thing that will be hard to prove and no one's really ever going to know is they denied counter snipers for six months. They denied extra security protection that was being recommended by the Trump Secret Service and the Trump campaign. That was denied for six months. I'm not going to be able to get inside the head of the denials and write down that they did it because of bias. But I can tell you from meeting people throughout government, Department of Justice,

CIA, FBI, people who are supposed to be unbiased are so deranged by their hate of Trump that they do bizarre things. I mean, look at the whole Peter Strzok thing and his mistress. All of that was hatred of Donald Trump, and they still worked with the FBI. And what did the Department of Justice do in the end? They gave him a million-dollar payout. They said we were unfair to poor Peter Strzok, who was trying to make sure there was no chance Trump could be elected. Jeez.

It's insane. Is anyone going to be held? Wait, wait, wait. Before I get there, one more thing on the shooter from the golf course. He didn't go to jail. He should have been all over everybody's radar. He had to have been over the CIA's radar. Do you think that that was all just...

I don't know any more about that than what I've seen. All I've seen is stuff from the press. We haven't done any interviews on that, and we would have to have interviews with CIA. They barely talk to us. They don't believe in any oversight of the CIA or the FBI. If I request a conference with them, it's like pulling teeth. If I beg someone on the Intelligence Committee, I can sometimes get a meeting with the CIA or the FBI. They're beyond oversight. People need to realize this.

Not only is there a deep state, the deep state is not responsive to your elected officials. They just basically thumb their nose at us. So how is that going to change?

The only way it changes and the way historically it worked is we had the power of the purse. You have to have people with guts who run the appropriations committees. There are some that are favorable, but many people on the appropriations committee are there to be a rubber stamp for more money. So they're more used to in a crisis like the Secret Service, let's give them more money, whereas historically what you did is you withheld their money until they gave you all the documents. But nobody really –

Nobody uses the power of the purse. It's not used at all. Nobody seems to have the courage. I mean, we had an opportunity to get the SAFAC passed. Nobody had the courage to do that. We're coming back in, I think, December. Are we going to hold up? We have under two minutes. We have like 90 seconds. Okay.

Yeah, you know, the thing is, is with the COVID cover-up, I've been trying to get non-classified documents. We voted unanimously to declassify everything. That's not even the problem. I can't get non-classified documents. But I would get them within a week if the appropriators, the spending folks on Republican and Democrat side would, you know, hold their feet to the fire and say no more money, but they haven't done it. I'm still hoping with a new presidency I get those documents declassified.

But with this, with the Secret Service, I can tell you this and tell your listeners this. I'm not giving up on it. I will stay on this until someone is held responsible. And to my mind, that means someone has to lose their position. Yeah, maybe multiple people lose their position. And I hope, and I've been so heartened by your work on the COVID stuff that you're just not going to let that go. Because COVID, this is, I mean, this...

Millions of people died around the world. Somebody has to pay for that. Somebody has to be held accountable. Rand, thank you so much. Thank you. Appreciate it. Senator Rand Paul, the senator from Kentucky. Ryan Reynolds here from Intmobile. With the price of just about everything going up during inflation, we thought we'd bring our prices down.

down. So to help us, we brought in a reverse auctioneer, which is apparently a thing. Mint Mobile Unlimited Premium Wireless. How about you get 30, 30, how about you get 30, how about you get 20, 20, 20, how about you get 20, 20, how about you get 15, 15, 15, 15, just 15 bucks a month? Sold! Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. $45 upfront payment equivalent to $15 per month. New customers on first three-month plan only. Taxes and fees extra. Speeds lower above 40 gigabytes each detail.