Glenn: "This should scare the living bat snot out of every American"

Tonight, I want to talk to you about science. I want to talk to you about the pinheads that think that they are better than you. President Obama has recruited a bunch of behavioral scientists, yes, a behavioral insights team. This should scare the living bat snot out of every American. We’re not for propaganda, right?

Are we for the kind of stuff that Goebbels was using? Because that’s what he did. He figured out if I put enough images of rats in front of people, and I say “Jew” every time you see a rat, will they start thinking that those rats are vermin? Yes, as it turns out, yes. And so we’ve always had this understanding in America, we don’t do propaganda. We’ve always been against it.

And to have some creepy behavioral scientists standing around in lab coats looking at the American public as rats, that’s a problem – at least it used to be. What they try to do is to suddenly influence your behavior, to make the government more efficient – that’s what the president says – no, to get you to do what the government wants you to do.

Behavioral science, it’s a key weapon. The president used it. In fact, he used a “consortium of behavioral scientists.” Oh, he did that during the 2008 election, and then he used it again in 2012, and nobody said anything about it, scientists looking at you like a lab rat. Cass Sunstein, this is one of the big problems I have with him. He is the behavioral science mastermind. He wrote about it and how it can be tested on the public in his book Nudge.

This is critical for people to understand. Progressives are not progressed. They’re not enlightened. They are early 20th century thinkers. They view themselves as superior to the rest of society. They think they know what’s best for you, what’s best for society, eat more carrots, drive hybrids, support the overthrow of regimes they don’t like, Libya, Syria. Oh, wait a minute. Libya and Syria, that’s the Progressives in the Democratic Party –

oh no, and also the Republican Party.

The secret is they always try to win people over with public debate. Wilson did it. FDR did it. This president has done it. And when they can’t win you over with debate, not because, you know, their solution is stupid, but because they honestly believe the American people are too stupid, they have to find another way to get people to behave the way they feel you should be behaving. That’s where behavioral science comes into play.

Now, I guess the ultimate behavioral scientists some people would say would be God and our churches, because that’s what used to control our behavior. But now you can’t leave your church because your church is the federal government. God is in Washington. And instead of preaching to you and telling you you should choose or you’re going to go to hell, what they have is choice architecture, where they remove all of the bad choices and leave people with only the good choices.

They argue that people are still free to make choices – you know, you can eat the flag, you can eat grass, or you could have a banana. You still have a choice. Which one do you want? They’ve trapped you in a box. Nobody’s going to eat this. Nobody I know…well, actually I do know some hippies out in California that blend this up and drink it. Anybody sane is eating this out of this choice architecture.

That’s how behavioral science works. It’s based in manipulation, coercion, and control. All of these attributes are distinctly un-American, but they are the cornerstone of the progressive ideology. Don’t take my word for it. Look it up.

This manipulation goes all the way back to the progressive pioneer Edward Bernays. This is the guy who really started selling soap. He was dubbed “the father of spin.” He was the master of swaying public opinion. We’ve talked about him several times. He changed how Americans ate breakfast. We used to have, I believe, coffee and a piece of toast. After Bernays, it was ham and eggs. That’s what it was for breakfast.

He made the cigarette sexy. He’s the one that got everybody smoking cigarettes in movies. One of Bernays’ greatest manipulations was his work, believe it or not, with bananas, the United Fruit Company. Based in Guatemala, the United Fruit Company gained incredible power because we started eating bananas.

The United States started importing bananas in the late 1800s, and the United Fruit Company dominated much of the country and portions of almost a dozen countries in the Western Hemisphere due to the power and control of corrupt dictators. And what would happen is these bad dictators would just give the United Fruit Company massive swaths of land as gifts, and then the United Fruit Company kind of like GE, what GE does today, just does whatever the dictator wants.

Unfortunately, the power for the United Fruit Company was challenged in the 1950s, and Guatemala elected a president who promised to take on the fruit producer and reduce their power through land reforms. Now this threatened these guys, and they turned to an army, an army of one, Edward Bernays.

VIDEO

United Fruit brings in Bernays, and he basically understood that what United Fruit Company had to do was change this from being a popularly elected government that was doing some things that were good for the people there into to this being very close to the American shore, a threat to American democracy, that it being at a time in the Cold War when Americans responded to issues of the Red Scare and what Communism might do.

He was trying to transform this and brilliantly did transform it into an issue of a communist threat very close to our shores, taking United Fruit again as a commercial client out of the picture and making it look like a question of American democracy, American values being threatened. “The Century of the Self,” British Broadcasting Corporation.

Okay, was that right or wrong? Almost every American would say that’s wrong, tell the truth. Bernays unleashed a propaganda war of epic proportions. He sent reporters to Guatemala on fact-finding missions. He set out to paint the new president as a Communist, even though he wasn’t a Communist. Bernays played on the fears of the American public because he had bananas to sell. He even created a fake news agency.

VIDEO

He also created a fake independent news agency in America called the Middle American Information Bureau. It bombarded the American media with press releases saying that Moscow was planning to use Guatemala as a beachhead to attack America. “The Century of the Self,” British Broadcasting Corporation

Okay, not true. Suddenly the news reports started hitting major American media. “Articles began appearing in the New York Times, the New York Herald Tribune, the Atlantic Monthly, Time, Newsweek, the New Leader and other publications, all discussing the growing influence of Guatemala’s Communists.” Really?

He also tried to soften the company’s image. This is what he did, Senorita Chiquita banana – I’m a Chiquita banana, and I’m here to say. Bernays wasn’t interested in conducting merely a PR war. He was also conducting an actual war, a revolution. Bernays was working to forge a new network of intelligence agents in Central America expressly to discredit the regime. It led to a successful coup d’état which was engineered by the U.S. government and the CIA.

You want to know why there are so many Communists down in Central America that hate our guts? Because of Edward Bernays. Here’s an example of the media barrage and the U.S. engaging. Look at this 1950s newsreel.

VIDEO

On the Guatemala-Honduras border, the town of Nueva Ocotepeque, headquarters of the Guatemala insurgents, is invaded by a planeload of American newsmen, including Al Waldren, Movietone veteran war photographer. Here to bring the world reliable newsreel reports from this latest global hotspot, his camera catches a press interview with secondary anti-Communist liberation leaders, Captain Menbieto and Colonel Lopez, who with maps explain how they hope to capture the capital city. Massing for an advance against the Communist dominated forces of Pres. Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán, the liberation patriots are well equipped with small arms.

Believe it or not, this is why people hate, they hate Capitalism too, because all for the sale of the banana. Many believe the anti-American protests were staged and orchestrated by Bernays himself. Bernays had masterfully created an entirely different and alternate universe.

VIDEO

He totally understood that the coup would happen when the public and the press when conditions in the public and the press allowed for a coup to happen, and he created those conditions. He was totally savvy in terms of just what he was helping create there in terms of this overthrow. But ultimately he was reshaping reality, reshaping public opinion in a way that’s undemocratic and manipulative. “The Century of the Self,” British Broadcasting Corporation

I will tell you that that’s exactly what happened again in Egypt and Libya. Now, after this coup, Guatemala went back to an oppressive dictatorship controlled by the banana people. In fact, it is this story where the term “banana republic” was born. Over the next 40 years, four decades, 200,000 in Guatemala alone were killed in guerrilla attacks, government crackdowns, civil wars all across Latin America, just so he could protect the banana people, perpetual revolution.

Oh, and one other thing about this revolution, as always, there are unintended consequences. At the time, there was this young Argentine leftist. He was an activist. He happened to be in Guatemala during this particular coup staged by Edward Bernays. He was a supporter of the president. And after the coup, he became so angry that he actually said it’s time for a revolution, and he became a revolutionary himself. His name, Che.

Che concluded that the Guatemalan coup was successful because the president just didn’t kill enough people. And during his violent time in Cuba, he made sure that same mistake wasn’t made again, personally ordering the execution of hundreds of political opponents and executing many of them himself. Enjoy your Chiquita banana

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

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?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

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.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

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.