Glenn predicted Petraeus dismissal 2 weeks ago

November 12, 2012

Writer

General David Petraeus resigned amid scandal last week after admitting he had cheated on his wife of 38 years with a woman 20 years his younger. Interesting timing, considering Petraeus was set to testify in the Benghazi investigation and will most likely no longer take part. Why now? And why was the man once hated by the left (‘betray-us’) there in the first place?

"This all makes sense if you ‑‑ if you think like a revolutionary. Go back to where General Petraeus was when Barack Obama got into office. Do you remember? There were rumors that he was going to run," Glenn said. "We were all looking for a hero to ride in a white horse and this guy had credibility. Everybody, everybody liked General Petraeus. And remember what the left was saying. This is why this was so important. If you remember what the left was saying at the time, the left was saying that General Petraeus was General Betray Us. He was moveon.org's chief target. The left hated General Petraeus. Why? Because he was good at what he did. He was effective."

"So Obama comes in and he puts him and sends him back to Afghanistan. And I remember doing the show at the time saying, 'Don't do it, General Petraeus, don't do it.' But the guy stood up and he did the right thing. And I was saying, 'Don't do it because they're trying to take you out. They're trying to put you in a situation to where you're removed from the line of sight here in America. And they'll destroy you in the end.'"

"So he goes over and that's when he starts to have an affair with this Broadwell woman."

"Then the president of the United States takes Leon Panetta who hates the Pentagon and instead of putting General Petraeus in charge of the Pentagon, he moves the guy who has always been for defunding the military and doesn't have military background, he puts the guy who was at the CIA in charge of the Pentagon and takes the logical choice of the Pentagon (Petraeus) and puts him in the CIA."

"Now why would you do that? Why would you do that? That doesn't make any sense," Glenn continued.

It's been reported that James Clapper and the FBI knew of the affair before Petraeus was put in charge of the CIA.

"So the administration knew that the guy they were going to put in charge of the CIA was having an affair. That doesn't sound smart to me. That doesn't sound ‑‑ that doesn't sound wise in any stretch of the imagination. But they did it. And they put him in charge of the CIA."

"Now, when Leon Panetta was at the CIA, you never heard about these intelligence problems: 'Well, it was a lack of intelligence. Well, it was bad intelligence.' You never heard that. Because if you did hear that, wouldn't that be interesting. That you would take somebody who was having all of these problems with the intelligence, 'Well, there's a problem with the intelligence, there's a problem with this, there's a problem with that,' and then move him over to run the Pentagon. That would be irresponsible, wouldn't it?

"So our problems with intelligence all start to pop up you when General Petraeus, the guy America trusts, the guy they know is having an affair, all of a sudden there's these bad intelligence problems. Hmmm."

"And then we get to the Benghazi situation where everybody was saying intelligence, intelligence, intelligence. And I'm up in my office after the show two weeks ago and I say to myself, 'Something's wrong. Something's wrong.' I come down to the studio, two weeks ago, and I say this: Watch for Petraeus to take the blame. As I've been thinking about this and I've been thinking where's Petraeus? Petraeus is the guy who's been set up as the ‑‑ he's the intelligence guy now. He's the head of the CIA. Everybody trusts Petraeus. Remember when they moved him over there and they were like, why is he doing that? They're getting him out of the way. Put this all together. Who have they tried to sell down the river every step of the way, the intelligence? Sloppy intelligence, didn't know, didn't know, didn't know, everything. You watch: Petraeus is going to be the fall guy. They're going to have him step down. They're going to point all fingers to him. You watch. He goes to Princeton. I think he goes to Princeton."

Your browser does not support iframes.

"Two weeks ago they were talking about Petraeus was considering leaving, stepping down and going to Princeton and running Princeton. And I thought to myself, Wait a minute. General Petraeus, General Betrayus, that guy, going to run the university where Van Jones is a professor. Where Peter Singer is a professor. Isn't Cornel West also a professor at Princeton? Is it Princeton?"

"The dumping ground for the Center for American Progress, Van Jones' university he's going to go run? I'm sorry, the university that has the Woodrow Wilson Center for Politics? Really? You're going to go run that? They're going to embrace him? He's going to run that? Wow, is that a wild ‑‑ that's a wild turn of events, isn't it? How'd that one come about? Who wanted to get him? Who's been campaigning for him to have that? How'd that one happen? That one happened, I'm convinced, because somebody said, 'General, General, General, look at ‑‑ you can leave right now and keep your career,' knowing that a man like that will say, 'At least I can shape young minds. I may have made mistakes or I may have done this or whatever, whatever they got on me, I can leave and I can leave with some honor and dignity and I can go shape minds.' And he'll say in himself, 'It's better than having no credibility. At least I can go and I can make an impact' because somebody like General Petraeus would know one of the problems with our country is... education."

" So one of our problems is education. "I can go in and do it." Now maybe General Petraeus is like Colin Powell. I don't know. Maybe he's a big progressive. I have no idea. But I will tell you this: We ‑‑ this was a CIA safe house. We were at least running guns. I'm beginning to think it's much, much, much worse. But we're at least running guns in that safe house."

"General Petraeus knows it, knows everything about it. He's got all the information. The week before he testifies, this comes out? The president knew; they held it. They held it. This is what the mob does, gang. You've got to look at our president and this administration as Al Capone because that's what you've got. This is what they do. They hold the information, 'General, you're not going to say anything.' I don't think this general can sleep at night. And here's why he probably won't say anything: Because he has two children."

Glenn said that the other piece of information that has been released is a reference to sex under a desk.

"That's a warning shot," Glenn said. Glenn believes that the White House has more information that could be even more embarrassing for his family and that they will release it if he doesn't keep quiet about Libya.

"I don't think he's going to say anything. If he is the man we thought he was, he will. And his children will suffer for it."

"This is why I've said to you have got to have your closets clean. They will destroy you. If there's anything you're doing, they will use it against you and they will destroy you. Period. Have your closets clean. Otherwise your family will be on the frontline and your family will be destroyed as well. As his family will. He has to make the choice. I believe he's going to Princeton. Congratulations on another lucky Obama winner."

Later in the show, Glenn explained that this incident also serves to discredit the military, something that Glenn believes is necessary to destabilize a country.

"So if you're trying to take over the United States and have a revolution, how do ‑‑ what do you need? You have to have the media. Well, you got that one. Have to have the education system. You got that one. Have to have the government, have to have leaders in top of the government. You got that. And you have to have the military," Glenn explained.

"Let me tell you something: What's happening right now, Petraeus' story is not over. Petraeus is going to lose more and more credibility."

"The media loves a good sex story - unless it's about a liberal and then it's their private business. But if it's about a conservative and if it's about a military hero, they love a good sex story. So the media will run with this until there is just no more running with it. And they will destroy," he said. "Right now you think of General Petraeus with all of those ribbons on. Soon all you will think of him is a guy who was doing something nasty underneath his desk. And no one will listen to him."

"General Petraeus, you have one option: You go nuclear right now, my friend. That is your only option: Mutually assured destruction. And they don't mind it. They don't mind it. They will push every damn button."

"Somebody better stand up."

EXPOSED: Your tax dollars FUND Marxist riots in LA

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

Protesters wore Che shirts, waved foreign flags, and chanted Marxist slogans — but corporate media still peddles the ‘spontaneous outrage’ narrative.

I sat in front of the television this weekend, watching the glittering spectacle of corporate media do what it does best: tell me not to believe my lying eyes.

According to the polished news anchors, what I was witnessing in Los Angeles was “mostly peaceful protests.” They said it with all the earnest gravitas of someone reading a bedtime story, while behind them the streets looked like a deleted scene from “Mad Max.” Federal agents dodged concrete slabs as if it were an Olympic sport. A man in a Che Guevara crop top tried to set a police car on fire. Dumpster fires lit the night sky like some sort of postapocalyptic luau.

If you suggest that violent criminals should be deported or imprisoned, you’re painted as the extremist.

But sure, it was peaceful. Tear gas clouds and Molotov cocktails are apparently the incense and candles of this new civic religion.

The media expects us to play along — to nod solemnly while cities burn and to call it “activism.”

Let’s call this what it is: delusion.

Another ‘peaceful’ riot

If the Titanic “mostly floated” and the Hindenburg “mostly flew,” then yes, the latest L.A. riots are “mostly peaceful.” But history tends to care about those tiny details at the end — like icebergs and explosions.

The coverage was full of phrases like “spontaneous,” “grassroots,” and “organic,” as if these protests materialized from thin air. But many of the signs and banners looked like they’d been run off at ComradesKinkos.com — crisp print jobs with slogans promoting socialism, communism, and various anti-American regimes. Palestinian flags waved beside banners from Mexico, Venezuela, Cuba, and El Salvador. It was like someone looted a United Nations souvenir shop and turned it into a revolution starter pack.

And guess who funded it? You did.

According to at least one report, much of this so-called spontaneous rage fest was paid for with your tax dollars. Tens of millions of dollars from the Biden administration ensured your paycheck funded Trotsky cosplayers chucking firebombs at local coffee shops.

The same aging radicals from the 1970s — now armed with tenure, pensions, and book deals — are cheering from the sidelines, waxing poetic about how burning a squad car is “liberation.” These are the same folks who once wore tie-dye and flew to help guerrilla fighters and now applaud chaos under the banner of “progress.”

This is not progress. It is not protest. It’s certainly not justice or peace.

It’s an attempt to dismantle the American system — and if you dare say that out loud, you’re labeled a bigot, a fascist, or, worst of all, someone who notices reality.

And what sparked this taxpayer-funded riot? Enforcement against illegal immigrants — many of whom, according to official arrest records, are repeat violent offenders. These are not the “dreamers” or the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. These are criminals with long, violent rap sheets — allowed to remain free by a broken system that prioritizes ideology over public safety.

Photo by Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg | Getty Images

This is what people are rioting over — not the mistreatment of the innocent, but the arrest of the guilty. And in California, that’s apparently a cause for outrage.

The average American, according to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, is supposed to worry they’ll be next. But unless you’re in the habit of assaulting people, smuggling, or firing guns into people’s homes, you probably don’t have much to fear.

Still, if you suggest that violent criminals should be deported or imprisoned, you’re painted as the extremist.

The left has lost it

This is what happens when a culture loses its grip on reality. We begin to call arson “art,” lawlessness “liberation,” and criminals “community members.” We burn the good and excuse the evil — all while the media insists it’s just “vibes.”

But it’s not just vibes. It’s violence, paid for by you, endorsed by your elected officials, and whitewashed by newsrooms with more concern for hair and lighting than for truth.

This isn’t activism. This is anarchism. And Democratic politicians are fueling the flame.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck's 'No King but Christ' merch: Will faith STOP the chaos?

On Saturday, June 14, 2025 (President Trump's 79th birthday), the "No Kings" protest—a noisy spectacle orchestrated by progressive heavyweights like Randi Weingarten and her union cronies—will take place in Washington, D.C.

Thousands will chant "no thrones, no crowns, no king," claiming to fend off authoritarianism and corruption.

But let’s cut through the noise. The protesters' grievances—rigged courts, deported citizens, slashed services—are a house of cards. Zero Americans have been deported, Federal services are still bloated, and if anyone is rigging the courts, it's the Left. So why rally now, especially with riots already flaring in L.A.?

Chaos isn’t a side effect here—it’s the plan.

This is not about liberty; it's a power grab dressed up as resistance. The "No Kings" crowd wants you to buy their script: government’s the enemy—unless they’re the ones running it. It's the identical script from 2020: same groups, same tactics, same goal, different name.

But Glenn is flipping the script. He's dropping a new "No Kings but Christ" merch line, just in time for the protest. Merch that proclaims one truth: no earthly ruler owns us; only Christ does. It’s a bold, faith-rooted rejection of this secular circus.

Why should you care? Because this won’t just be a rally—it’ll be a symptom. Distrust in institutions is sky-high, and rightly so, but the "No Kings" answer is a hollow shout into the void. Glenn’s merch begs the question: if you’re ditching kings, who’s really in charge? Get yours and wear the answer proudly.

Truth unleashed: 95% say media’s excuses for anti-Semitism are a LIE

ELI IMADALI / Contributor | Getty Images

Glenn asked for YOUR take on the rising tide of anti-Semitism, and you delivered. After the Boulder attack, you made it clear: this isn’t just a news story—it’s a crisis the elites are dodging.

Your verdict is unmistakable: 96% of you see anti-Semitism as a growing threat in the U.S., brushing aside the establishment’s weak excuses. The spin does not fool you—95% say the media is deliberately downplaying the issue, hiding a cultural rot that’s all too real. And the government’s response? A whopping 95% of you call it a disgraceful failure, leaving communities exposed.

Your voices shatter the silence. Why should we trust narratives that dismiss your concerns? With 97% of you warning that anti-Semitism will surge in the years ahead, you’re demanding action and accountability. This is your stand for truth.

You spoke, and Glenn listened. Your bold response sends a message to those who’d rather ignore the problem. Keep raising your voice at Glennbeck.com—your input drives the fight for justice. Take part in the next poll and continue shaping the conversation.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

JPMorgan Chase CEO issues dire warning about America's prosperity

Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Jamie Dimon has a grim forecast for America — and it’s not a recession. He sees a fragile nation drifting into crisis while its leaders fight over TikTok.

Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase — one of the most powerful financial institutions on earth — issued a warning the other day. But it wasn’t about interest rates, crypto, or monetary policy.

Speaking at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California, Dimon pivoted from economic talking points to something far more urgent: the fragile state of America’s physical preparedness.

We are living in a moment of stunning fragility — culturally, economically, and militarily. It means we can no longer afford to confuse digital distractions with real resilience.

“We shouldn’t be stockpiling Bitcoin,” Dimon said. “We should be stockpiling guns, tanks, planes, drones, and rare earths. We know we need to do it. It’s not a mystery.”

He cited internal Pentagon assessments showing that if war were to break out in the South China Sea, the United States has only enough precision-guided missiles for seven days of sustained conflict.

Seven days — that’s the gap between deterrence and desperation.

This wasn’t a forecast about inflation or a hedge against market volatility. It was a blunt assessment from a man whose words typically move markets.

“America is the global hegemon,” Dimon continued, “and the free world wants us to be strong.” But he warned that Americans have been lulled into “a false sense of security,” made complacent by years of peacetime prosperity, outsourcing, and digital convenience:

We need to build a permanent, long-term, realistic strategy for the future of America — economic growth, fiscal policy, industrial policy, foreign policy. We need to educate our citizens. We need to take control of our economic destiny.

This isn’t a partisan appeal — it’s a sobering wake-up call. Because our economy and military readiness are not separate issues. They are deeply intertwined.

Dimon isn’t alone in raising concerns. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has warned that China has already overtaken the U.S. in key defense technologies — hypersonic missiles, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence to mention a few. Retired military leaders continue to highlight our shrinking shipyards and dwindling defense manufacturing base.

Even the dollar, once assumed untouchable, is under pressure as BRICS nations work to undermine its global dominance. Dimon, notably, has said this effort could succeed if the U.S. continues down its current path.

So what does this all mean?

Christopher Furlong / Staff | Getty Images

It means we are living in a moment of stunning fragility — culturally, economically, and militarily. It means we can no longer afford to confuse digital distractions with real resilience.

It means the future belongs to nations that understand something we’ve forgotten: Strength isn’t built on slogans or algorithms. It’s built on steel, energy, sovereignty, and trust.

And at the core of that trust is you, the citizen. Not the influencer. Not the bureaucrat. Not the lobbyist. At the core is the ordinary man or woman who understands that freedom, safety, and prosperity require more than passive consumption. They require courage, clarity, and conviction.

We need to stop assuming someone else will fix it. The next crisis — whether military, economic, or cyber — will not politely pause for our political dysfunction to sort itself out. It will demand leadership, unity, and grit.

And that begins with looking reality in the eye. We need to stop talking about things that don’t matter and cut to the chase: The U.S. is in a dangerously fragile position, and it’s time to rebuild and refortify — from the inside out.