‘Is there anyone else in the media who will join me?’ Glenn reacts to Nancy Pelosi’s bold break of protocol

During a debate on the House floor on Friday, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was so unnerved by the commentary of fellow Congressman Tom Marino (R-PA), she got up out of her seat and ran through the aisles of the chamber toward Marino. Marino was speaking about the immigration crisis and the role the Obama Administration’s policies have played in facilitating the lawlessness at the border.

Watch the video of Marino and Pelosi below:

On radio this morning, Glenn explained the danger this moment represents. After recounting the beating of Senator Charles Sumner at the onset of the Civil War, Glenn challenged his colleagues in the media to consider the role they may have played in today’s divisiveness and what we can all do to move in a more respectful direction.

Below is an edited transcript of the monologue:

I want to talk to you a little bit about the state of our society. Left and right, we all want to belong to something bigger than ourselves. At the end of our life, we want to be able to look back and say, ‘Our kids live in a better world than we lived in because we did the hard thing.’ If you’ve ever gone through anything, you've ever been broken, you've ever faced a real serious challenge, you will say, ‘Give this to me. Let me take this on so my kids don't have to deal with it.’

But we have become a society that we no longer see our kids' future as real. We've bought into the lie that you can have everything that we can afford, that you deserve everything, that your kids don't really need you, that there's such a thing as quality time over just time. And I don't think any of that stuff is true, I really don't. And as a guy who has lived my life counting on quality time, I think it's a lie.

I watched the families that are great, and I've watched my kids now. My daughter is 8-years-old and my son who is 9, and I realize they are about to be 30. And where will that time have gone? I will have missed it yet again. And it matters. There are certain things that are true, and when we get to the end of our life, we will really only worry about our family and what did we do. I talked to a guy who was in a plane crash yesterday. He was in a plane crash and broke his back, couldn't get out, jet fuel was all over in this plane and spilling out on the ground, and he could hear the ignition of the engines. He thought, ‘Oh dear God, this thing is going to go up in a ball of fire.’ And nobody else was awake at the time. He had to get out. There were only three people on this plane. And the other two were relatively uninjured. He broke his back and thought that his legs were pinned in the plane. But when he really came conscious enough to realize and look down at his legs, he realized, ‘They're not pinned. There's nothing wrong with you.’ He's just sitting in his seat with nothing on his legs. He can't feel his legs. He unstrapped himself from the plane. He falls down into the center aisle. And he drags himself to the door just thinking his legs just aren't work for some reason. And he gets to the door and he tries to stand up and get himself up and there's no power to his legs at all.

A farmer had seen his plane go down, and it landed in a field. The farmer was on his tractor and drives out. This farmer and one of the pilots drag his body about 50 yards away from this plane and then he's in the hospital for almost a year. He couldn't walk. He's walking again. But it has been an unbelievable year of being broken. And he said, ‘Glenn, everything that they say about your life flashing in front of you, really happens.’ He said, ‘It's an amazing thing. You see things.’ He said, ‘Not once did I think about work. Not one scene was about my boss. Not one scene was about the quarterly profits. Nothing. It was all about my children. All about the things that I had done or didn't do in life.’

We're all like this. In the end, whether we admit it or not, we're all like this. We all believe that man should be free. Even the communists, even the fascists, convinced themselves that they're freeing people. ‘You'll be free if you live under Sharia Law because you're free to worship God the way you should worship God.’ So they even believe in freedom in a totally mixed-up, upside down world. We all believe that. And we all want to leave the world a better place for our children. We have to find a way to unite. We have to find a way to where we can live in a world where we disagree with each other.

Now, there are some things that we disagree on so much. For instance, Hamas. The Palestinians are not Nazis. But you can compare Hamas to Nazis quite easily but not the Palestinian people any more than you can say every German was a Nazi. That's not true. 30% of Germans voted for the Nazis. In the end, because they were all so afraid, some just bought into the propaganda. I mean their children were turning them in. In the end, I don't know what the percentage was, but we went over to fight the German people. But once we defeated the Nazis, we were not against the German people. The same thing with Hamas and Gaza. We're not against the people who live in Gaza. We're not against the Palestinians. We're against Hamas. We're against people who say, ‘Genocide is the way to go.’

So we have to find a way where we can talk to each other, where we can listen to one another, where we can have control of our own lives, and that we belong to something bigger than ourselves, something that means something in the end. I have been really concerned over the last 10, 15 years about what's happening in our world and in our country, and I have made some pretty bold predictions and stood alone on them. In 2007, 2006, I was talking about an economic collapse that was coming. It happened in 2008 because of TARP.

We're in the final bubble now called the ‘money bubble,’ and I predicted that in – what, 2007 – that we would bail everybody out and there would be a money bubble. And that's what USA Today had talked about last week in one of their op-eds: The money bubble.

We talked about the Caliphate. We talked about the rise of Nazis again in Europe and the old hatreds of the world. We talked about anti-Semitism on the rise. We talked about something that just made it in the newspapers last week, and this one came from Argentina. They're now blaming the United States for their inflation, and they're blaming the United States for their collapse. We talked about that four years ago. I'm really bad at timing. I don't know when these things happen. It's not that I can see the future. I know enough of history and I haven't been taught and trained by a guild.

There are certain things in history that happen and cycles repeat themselves. First, I looked for revolution around the world and I looked to the French Revolution and the American Revolution. I looked at what happened in Germany in the 1850s, in France, in the 1870s, in Russia in the teens, Cuba, Germany, China, all over the world. It's the same story, same pattern. But as we started to really fight with one another is when I first started to have this, ‘Oh-oh, wait a minute. We're in trouble internally. We are starting to hate each other.’ I started to look at the Civil War. And I told you a few years ago, it made me feel better when I did that because there was one thing that happened that we were so far away from. We had extra time.

But a soft version of it happened last Friday. If you remember, last week we were talking about Ted Cruz. They were talking about procedure. And the Democrats were very upset because of their procedure. And we were talking on the air about the Constitution. You got to care about the Constitution. Who cares about your little procedural rules? But that's a very big deal. And that's what made it in the papers, that Ted Cruz was a monster because he broke procedure when it came to the immigration debate. And what he did is he went over to the House, and he talked to the House members and said, ‘What are you doing?’ That was the crime of the century and it was in all of the newspapers about how bad Ted Cruz was.

But this was another procedure that was broken last week.

That's Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) running across the House floor ranting and raving about what Congressman Tom Marino (R-PA) is saying and he has the floor. She never asked for the floor. She just comes over and she starts wagging her finger in this face.

I don't believe that we are at this moment, but we took a giant leap toward this moment. I've been worried about an actual Civil War. And I do believe that we are a nation that is either at or near a ‘cold Civil War,’ where, thank goodness, nobody is firing shots at one another. But if you read the comment sections on the Huffington Post or TheBlaze, you hear the same stuff from left and right. Now, thank goodness it is only 5% of the population that is like that. But the vitriol is getting worse. And we can't engage in any of that. We have to strengthen our ties to people who we disagree with so we know each other, so we know that we're good people, that we don't wish them harm. We disagree, but we don't wish anybody harm. We stand shoulder to shoulder against those who would like chaos because there are those that would like the country to spiral into chaos. And whether they're communist or white supremacist, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the 80 or 90% of this country stays together – even though we disagree.

There came a time in the 1850s, and we've told you about this because, as I said, we were so far away from this. There same a time in the 1850s where both sides, the Whigs and the Democrats, both side were talking about slavery. They've been talking about slavery from the beginning of the country, and they were talking about getting rid of it. But they weren't going to do anything about it. And finally, this new party, this Republican Party started. They were like, ‘You guys are just playing games. Neither of you guys mean anything.’ The weaker of the two parties was the Whigs. The Republicans got out and they were the ones that were talking honestly about slavery, and they called it by name. They said, ‘You know, the people in the South, I don't care which party you're in, you're in bed with the horror of slavery.’ That's when somebody from the House broke all protocol, came across, and beat a guy within an inch of his life there in the well of the Senate.

Now, Nancy Pelosi clearly did not do that. But you saw the anger rise up in her so much that she broke protocol. Remember, just earlier this week, we heard how much protocol means. You don't have Ted Cruz break protocol and go over and talk to people in the House. This wasn't talking to people in the House. This is Nancy Pelosi enraged by what was said, running over and sticking her finger and then calling him inconsequential, calling him all kinds of names even after the incident. This is clearly not the beat-down of Charles Sumner.

But I warn you: This is an important event that Americans should see. And it has nothing to do with politics. If you agree with the Republican or you agree with Nancy Pelosi, it doesn't matter. This is an important moment that people need to see. When we dehumanize on the House floor, when they start being enraged and moving in that rage, we're in trouble. We're in very, very big trouble.

The good news is: There's still time. And there's time for all of us stop concentrating on ‘Glenn Beck said he was sorry.’ Is anyone else willing to say, ‘You know what? I did some things I'm not really proud of.’ ‘You know what? I've got to change my ways as well.’ Is there anyone else in the media who will join me? You don't have to agree with me. But is there anyone in the media who says, ‘Enough is enough’? We've got to stop worrying about the ratings. We have to stop worrying about the money. We have to start worrying about the things we're all going to worry about when we're on our death bed: What did we do?

Let's start to move towards a better future, one where we can at least talk with each other with respect.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.