Glenn interviews Ted Nugent on radio

Ted Nugent joined Glenn on radio to discuss some of the ridiculous regulations that have overtaken then country. Nugent explained an incident from a hunting trip in Alaska that gave him some legal trouble - nearly resulting in him being charged with a felony. Watch the clip above, and tune into GBTV tonight at 5pm for more on this story!

Full Transcript Below:

GLENN: Turn that hippie rock‑and‑roll music down. It's too loud. Ted Nugent is with us. He's on tour in Los Angeles. Are you still in Los Angeles? Didn't you have something happen in Los Angeles yesterday, Ted?

NUGENT: Oh, something happens every minute of every day but, yes, it happens in Los Angeles, too. I'm shooting .50‑caliber sniper rifles in Los Angeles legally, 100% legal.

GLENN: Really?

NUGENT: We went up to the hills, up to the Oak Tree Shooting Range to test out some new ammo that I'm creating and just hanging with the SWAT guys and with a bunch of commandos of law enforcement and military, and Mrs. Nugent and I were shooting large caliber weapons getting ready for real rock‑and‑roll excitement.

GLENN: Okay. So Ted, tonight you're going to be on the program and we're going to go into detail about what this government tried to do to you over the last, the last few and what you ‑‑ what you've just signed. You want to get into what you've just signed and then we can talk tonight about what the government did to you?

NUGENT: You bet. Bottom line is I've been hunting all my life, Glenn. My mom and dad raised me to be 100% legal, law‑abiding, respect law enforcement and to be in the asset column of life, to use my heart and soul to think and be conscientious about how I conduct myself. And now as a perfect human being, I've stumbled perfectly over the years on occasion, but at the tender age of 63, I don't stumble anymore. I really put my heart and soul, especially as a representative of the honorable hunting outdoor lifestyle and the gun owners of this country and people who celebrate the U.S. Constitution that is enforced and supported at such great sacrifice by the heroes of the military. That being said, I stumbled in Alaska. There was a new law that it's very important to note that I wasn't the only one that had never heard of it. We can't find anybody that ever heard of this new unprecedented law that if your arrow or bullet shows sign of nicking or touching an animal that your big game tag is null and void, including the resident judge in the courtroom who's lived in the only zone where this law exists. He said on record during the court proceedings that he had never heard of the law, and he deals with law enforcement and wild game enforcement all the time.

My attorney has been a lifetime licensed guide and outfitter in Alaska, a lifetime hunter in Alaska. He never heard of the law. That notwithstanding, I have by all information been the first and only person ever charged with this. The State of Alaska was not interested in charging me, but the federal government was.

GLENN: Now, it's very interesting because this has been going on for how long? I'm trying to remember. A year, year and a half?

NUGENT: Well, I ‑‑ the bear hunt in question took place with my sons in the Prince of Wales Island in 2009. Remember, Glenn, I've been hunting in Alaska since 1977 and the law has always been the same, that when you take possession of your animal, you apply your tag. That's the universal law.

GLENN: Sure.

NUGENT: Since the early 1900s.

GLENN: It's like ‑‑ it would be like if you're going fishing and you caught a fish and it got away, you wouldn't count that as one of the fish you caught.

NUGENT: That's it in a nutshell, yes, sir.

GLENN: I mean, it's ridiculous.

NUGENT: It really is. And I've got to tell you, they gave me the ultimatum the day after I endorsed Mitt Romney and this has been ongoing now in the California, I've got to tell you the California no‑contest plea I gave, I'm going to write a piece that's going to tell you about the horror story, the unprecedented horror story. Once again the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service.

Now, if some U.S. Fish and Wildlife service are getting angry at me, that would be guilt, you're guilty of corruption and abuse of power. I'm not talking about good agents. I'm not talking about agents who abide by their oath to the U.S. Constitution and follow the letter of the law, including the Fourth Amendment. I'm talking about jackbooted thugs who are kicking down doors predawn, guns drawn over a charge that there might have been, quote, feed within 450 yards of my tree stand bow hunting for deer in California, Glenn.

GLENN: This is crazy. Now listen ‑‑

NUGENT: Which carries the weight of a jaywalking ticket, by the way.

GLENN: I want you to know they threatened to charge, may I say?

NUGENT: Yes. My friend Mitch Moore.

GLENN: I was going to say that what they threatened to charge you in Alaska.

NUGENT: Oh, in Alaska. Felonies.

GLENN: Felony.

NUGENT: Felony.

GLENN: Felony.

NUGENT: Felony. The Lasiak was first designed many years ago to stop the illegal importation of endangered species. I supported it 100%. But now the Lasiak is being used to charge innocent young men and women who abided by every game law ‑‑ get this ‑‑ for shooting a deer with all the right licenses during the right season with the right equipment but because they used the wrong broad head, a broad head, by the way, which is the number one selling broad head on planet Earth that is legal everywhere except two states and they shoot their deer, proper licenses, proper tags, bring it home and they're charged with felonies equal to armed robbery and rape and murder.

GLENN: Yeah. And going to jail. Now ‑‑

NUGENT: Yes.

GLENN: Now, you lose your right to have a gun forever.

NUGENT: Yes.

GLENN: You go to prison.

NUGENT: To vote.

GLENN: Right. You lose everything.

NUGENT: You become ‑‑ it's just like, let me ‑‑ can I have just 60 seconds ‑‑

GLENN: Yeah.

NUGENT: ‑‑ to make an analogy that no one will fail to grasp? In Michigan they are slaughtering law‑abiding innocent farmers' livestock based on fraudulent terms, claiming they're feral and invasive when everyone on planet Earth knows that livestock within a confined pen or corral or fenced area, it can't be feral or invasive by any stretch of those terms. But they call them feral and invasive and they're destroying private property.

Now Glenn, if you had a lever action 30.30 and all of a sudden the federal government went, "We're now calling lever action 30.30 rifles machine guns. We're going to call them machine guns and we're coming to get them." They can call anything what they want. They're destroying animals that are not feral and not invasive. They're calling them things they're not. It's a lie.

GLENN: So in other words, in case you don't know feral means basically they're wild.

NUGENT: Yeah, feral means the animals have escaped.

GLENN: If they're in a pen ‑‑

NUGENT: They're not escaped.

GLENN: ‑‑ they can't be feral.

NUGENT: But they're enforcing this with guns, Glenn.

GLENN: Now Ted, there's so much more to talk about tonight, but I want to tell you something that I found. I've been reading a lot of stuff from the Communist Manifesto and early communism because you're dealing with a lot of Marxists in this government now, and one of the things they have to do is seize or destroy the property of rebels. And I thought, you know, who, who are the strongest people against this president and they would be the ones in the red states. And the red states, those are farmers and hunters.

NUGENT: Yes.

GLENN: I really truly believe ‑‑ I know why you were targeted. I mean, you were targeted and run through the wringer, and you're not my only friend that this has happened to. And I don't mean just for hunting. I mean for other things. I have had friends who are some of the most honorable men I know. I mean, I about blew my stack on Monday when I came back from the NRA and I heard what they were doing to you and you had to meet with the Secret Service. I blew my stack on the air and ‑‑

NUGENT: A stack blower.

GLENN: And I said, because I know who Ted Nugent is. I know. And I was so angry about it because not only is it Ted Nugent, it's other friends of mine who are being put through the wringer the same way. And they are ‑‑ they are being bullied, they are being threatened with prison time, they are being threatened, "Confess, confess, confess." And they're like, I didn't do anything wrong.

NUGENT: Yep.

GLENN: And in your case you did but it ‑‑ when was that law put in?

NUGENT: That law was enacted in 2004‑2005, and it's only in the Prince of Wales Southeast Alaska area has this law ever existed. Remember the judge that lives there never heard of it.

GLENN: So nobody's ever been charged with it.

NUGENT: No one's ever been.

GLENN: And how is it that the federal government, that the judge didn't know about it but the federal government knew about it and nailed you on it.

NUGENT: Because the federal government for a long, long time has been trying, increasing the net of felonies, what qualifies as a felony. Do you know that the humane society of the United States somehow convinced some soulless people in Pennsylvania that killing a deer illegally is now a felon, a felony. A felony.

GLENN: Can you talk about ‑‑

NUGENT: Now, I'm all for management of wildlife, I think you should stop poaching, I think you have to abide by the law. Even the goofy laws. Until you change a goofy law, you have to abide by it. But some of these laws are indescribably bizarre and illogical.

GLENN: You describe one more law, I've got to go in about a minute, but describe one more thing that is happening on your ranch here in Texas that is not, it's not illogical. It is ‑‑ it's inhumane.

NUGENT: Yes. I ‑‑ the scimitar‑horned oryx was brought to Texas landowners, private land, many years ago because it's a magnificent animal and it was endangered in Africa. It is no longer endangered. We put a value on it where we harvest the surplus bulls and we went from like 1200 to 20,000‑something oryx, more than stabilizing the herd because they're valuable to landowners. The federal government sided with an animal rights maniac to ban the hunting. I have to get federal permits to touch my thriving, growing, healthy heard of oryx. There was a ‑‑

GLENN: And if you leave them alone, if you leave them alone, it's like bunny rabbits. They will overrun everything.

NUGENT: They will eat everything and all life will cease. It will be a moonscape.

GLENN: Okay.

NUGENT: That's why the annual season of harvest is a stewardship duty. So I have a crippled calf oryx that has three legs that is all gaunt and my wife and I are watching it slowly die. But if I were to do the right thing and dispatch this animal, put it out of its misery, I would be a felon, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay. So we have people, we have people in this administration that are actually making the case that you should put a human down, a baby down if they're deformed, if they have any kind of handicap, if they don't have any quality of life, they should be killed; but you can't do it to an oryx.

NUGENT: It's unbelievable. My brain won't accept this vile abuse of power. We've got to take this country back. And I've got to tell you, Glenn, I'm walking the streets of Los Angeles. You wouldn't think it's Ted Nugent country but, my goodness, the support you have out here for blowing the whistle. You're doing We the people, freedom of the press, First Amendment duties, and the supportive out here is unbelievable. Everywhere, Glenn, every cop, every family, every person walking the street, the spiked‑hair, pierced‑ear guy, everybody says, "Go, Ted, we support you. Thank you for standing up for common sense." I've never seen anything like it, Glenn.

GLENN: Well, you won't find that at CNN. Or the administration.

NUGENT: Oh, but when I bring it to Piers Morgan or CNN, my buddy, I can't even think of his name, Anderson Cooper, believe me, when I bring it, their ratings are representative of common sense, I promise you that.

STU: (Laughing).

GLENN: Ted Nugent, we'll talk to you tonight at 5:00 and there's so much more to tell of this story. Thank you very much

NUGENT: God speed, Glenn. You guys are doing God's work. I'm with you.

GLENN: All right. Talk to you later.

POLL: Is Musk’s Mars dream a win or a curse for South Texas?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Trump's mineral deal with Ukraine: What you need to know

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Mark Carney's bombshell victory: Is Canada doomed under his globalist agenda?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.