Glenn Beck RIPS Joe Biden for hypocritical response to SCOTUS ruling



President Biden might need to take a break from the podium.

After the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, the president gave a speech slamming the court’s ruling — which granted former president Donald Trump absolute immunity for presidential actions and presumptive immunity for “official actions.”

Biden claimed in his speech that the ruling allows Trump to do anything, including going after political opponents with the law.

“What I’ve been hearing, Glenn, over the past 24 hours, my understanding is the Supreme Court gave a James Bond license to kill to the president of the United States,” Stu Burguiere jokes to Glenn Beck.

And he’s not wrong — as that is what Biden alluded to.

“This nation was founded on the principle there are no kings in America. Each, each of us is equal before the law. No one is above the law,” Biden said, stumbling through his words. “Today's decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits to what a president can do.”

“It’s a dangerous precedent, because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law,” the president continued.

Glenn can’t believe what he’s hearing and points out the blatant hypocrisy.

“What they’re saying is he’s going to silence speech. Donald Trump will silence any dissent. And that’s not happening now,” Glenn says sarcastically.

“Let’s say you’re running against a guy who Donald Trump didn’t think he could beat, then he would just make up some charges and then get the guy arrested and then keep him, you know, in the court system, until you finally got him into jail. That’s what Trump could do,” he adds.

Biden was being a hypocrite regarding not only the attempted jailing of Trump but also the jailing of those who participated in the protests on January 6.

“If we’re really going to go all the way, what should be terrifying is that Donald Trump could just round up a whole group of people because he didn’t like them, you know what I mean?” Glenn says.

However, as the Supreme Court ruled, the president’s actions must be constitutional.

“If the president acts in an unconstitutional way, then you can get him. But unless it’s unconstitutional, he can’t do it. So it would be unconstitutional to round up the people that disagreed with you. It would be unconstitutional to silence those who oppose you. It would be unconstitutional to go after your opposing political foe and try to put them in jail,” Glenn continues.

“All things that Joe Biden is currently doing.”


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

SCOTUS DISASTER: 'Conservative' judges side with libs on key border case



The U.S. Supreme Court has voted to allow the federal government to resume cutting and removing razor wire installed by the state of Texas on the southern border.

The 5-4 vote was swayed by Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett, who sided with liberal judges Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor in the ruling.

“I don’t understand how you could possibly make this determination,” Sara Gonzales says, adding, “and now, while we wait for SCOTUS to hear the larger case, we just get to keep letting all of these people in unvetted.”

Stu Burguiere agrees but notes this is a process decision by the Supreme Court.

Burguiere believes it “doesn’t necessarily mean they’re arguing against Texas’ right to defend themselves,” though it does “make us more vulnerable for an extended period of time.”

He adds that while Justice John Roberts is a “lost cause,” this decision does make him nervous about Amy Coney Barrett.

“Hopefully this isn’t an indication of what’s to come,” he says.

However, with the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade, SCOTUS has given conservatives hope that what’s to come won’t be all that bad.

“That has helped, I think certainly in that case, but it’s not a cure-all,” Burguiere says.


Want more from 'The News & Why It Matters?'

To enjoy more rundowns of the top stories of the day, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

New SCOTUS Ruling Limits State Court Interference With Election Laws

In Moore v. Harper, SCOTUS held that the Federal Constitution's Elections Clause 'does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.'