Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Glenn predicted Petraeus dismissal 2 weeks ago

November 12, 2012
Wilson

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."

"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."

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.