Glenn: It's time to start focusing on principles and faith, not politics and religion

Below is a transcript of this segment:

So this morning, I came in and, quite honestly, my heart was full of anger this morning. My heart was full of anger because I'm tired of religion. I'm really, really tired of religion.

Let me say this: We used to say don't talk about religion and politics. It always leads to trouble. May I suggest that that is something we really need to consider again. We shouldn't be talking about religion and politics. Glenn, you're on a radio show, you don't talk about politics. We talk about principles.

The problem with politics and the same with religion, everybody uses it as a game to win.

I'm winning for my religion. My religion is right. Your religion is wrong. You don't know. You're a bunch of sinners. You're going to hell. Oh, my gosh, you're deceiving. Shut up.

It is our understanding of religion - if we really understand our religion and we really actually practice our religion, maybe we're going to be okay. But religion is really important because it defines our doctrines and it defines what is it that we believe and it helps us live our faith. But if we start concentrating just on our religion and not our faith.

Remember, religion is to help us live our faith. The same thing with politics.

I hate politics. I hate politicians. Why? Because they've forgotten the principles that actually the parties used to stand for something. I honestly don't know if they ever did. But in principle, they were supposed to stand for something. And those things helped you further what you believed in.

But now, it's all about the win. Now it's either just about baptism. I got to win. I got to win. I get to get you into the waters. Come to my church. Your church is bad. My church is good. What? You got to stop voting for the Republicans. You got to vote for the Democrats because we care about children, we care about poor. We care about this. You guys don't care about that. No, you don't care about that. We care about the poor. We care about the people down at the bottom. You're hurting those. --  Shut up both of you.

What are your principles? What is your faith? Those things we can unite on: principles. Those things will heal the world: principles and faith. But we all spend too much time watering the weeds. You water the weeds and expect flowers to grow? Flowers are not going to grow. We're watering the weeds.

Every plant, every thing that wasn't planted by God - meaning, everything that doesn't fall in line with universal principles, universal truths - will be uprooted. You don't need me to do it. I don't need to go out and uproot it. I feel like I'm too small. I can't effect anything.

I was talking to Dan one of our writers this morning in the hallway before I came in. I said, people write to me, and they Facebook me, they tell me thank you so much for what you're doing. I don't know what I'm doing. I don't know what I'm doing. I'm no different than you, you don't know what you're doing. We're doing the best we can. We just get up and then we do it again tomorrow. That's what we're doing. We're all doing the best we can.

And all of us are made to feel insignificant. All of us are made to feel like we're not making a difference that we'll never make it.

You won't make it unless you play the games, unless you water the weeds.

 

Why?

You won't make it unless you vote for this person. You won't make it unless you go to this church and you adhere to this doctrine, not that doctrine, this doctrine.

What?

What are the things that are essential, essential for me to be able to make it? What are those things? Because I will bet you that we agree on 99.9%  on those things when you strip the label off it. Republican, Democrat. This church and that church. Forget about politics and religion. Let's talk about faith and principles. When we strip off the labels off them. And you were talking to an alien [because[ the only person you would trust now is some alien that you thought, okay, well, they don't have an agenda. They don't really know. So you would answer an honest question.

Everybody else: Well, what do you think? These politicians now on the campaign trail: Do you agree with what the president has done? Do you agree with his policies or not? It's a yes-or-no question. Give it to me. Yes or no, do you agree or not?

I know that there are subtleties. I know there are things that you will agree and disagree. Yes or no, on the whole, do you agree or don't you agree?

The Republicans: I don't agree! I don't agree! Of course, because they have to say that because of the way it looks. Because we have signaled that we have an attention span, and I'm not kidding you, an attention span four seconds shorter than that of a goldfish.

And so you can't say, well, I actually disagree with him. I do disagree on these things. We can't, because all the sound bite is, I don't agree with him. I do agree with him.

And the other reason they don't answer that question is because they don't have the balls to answer that question. They're not willing to actually suffer the consequences of what they believe in because they're about politics and not policies. They're about religion and not faith.

So as I sit down this morning and I'm going over all the things that we can talk about today, I see the real important things. The shootings up in Ottawa. What's happening to us? You know what's happening to us. You know what's happening to us. We have been infiltrated. There are those who believe in the radical teachings of psychopaths. Psychopathic Islam. Radical Islam? No. Psychotic and psychopathic Islam. Let's start being a little more clear. They're not radicals. They're psychopaths. They're here.

Last night if you happened to watch 'For the Record', you saw they're here. They're in Boston. We're telling the story of the Boston imams and the Boston mosque and the Boston council of Islamic relation or whatever the hell that is. Nobody up in New England wants to tell this story. Nobody in the press has the courage to tell this story except a few.

Most Americans don't have the courage to look at the story. Why? Because I can't do anything to change it.

That what you gaze upon, you become. Are we watering flowers or are we watering the weeds?

Nobody ever says if you have cancer, you know what you need to do, go home and concentrate cancer. What you can do is concentrate on cancer and where exactly it's eating at you. What I would do is spend all your time reading about cancer.

Laugh. Live life. Concentrate on the positives. You want to think about cancer? Concentrate on how it is being eaten and destroyed by you, not that it's eating you. That you're eating it.

Are we doing that as a people? Are you doing that as a person? I sure the hell am not.

We bring you stories of cancer. Instead, we need to bring stories of how cancer is being destroyed and eaten and how it's being eaten and that there is hope on the horizon. And more importantly than those stories that show the cancer being eaten, stories that just are good. Stories that are uplifting. Stories that you unite us, don't divide us. Faith over religion. Principles over politics. Those stories.

You know, the days when everything was grass fed. In the days when nothing was manufactured. You went out and you killed it, and then you ate it. Couldn't eat certain animals.

So here comes this carpenter. He's a carpenter. You're a carpenter, do you even know how to read and write? Let me tell you what the law is. The law is: You don't eat these things. And the carpenter says, you know, it's not really the things that you eat that destroy and defile you. It's not the things that go in your mouth, it's really the things that go out of your mouth that defile you.

What a condemning statement that is. What a condemning statement that is for those feminists that absolutely jumped the shark. Feminism is over. Mark it down. It was the six years old dressed as princesses being taught how to say the F word. That's jumping the shark. That's the end of feminism. What woman looks at little girls and says, that's right. No woman worth her salt. No mother wants to be a part of that. That's anger.

Why do men generally, why are they the ones who say go to war? Because we're the ones who are much more prone to anger. Look at what the feminist movement has done. It is not what's going in, it's what's coming out that's defiling them.

So I'm talking to Pat and we're sitting here. And we're like, okay, what do we talk about then? What do we talk about today?

There's a lot. But if I believe my faith, if I want to practice my faith, then I better watch what comes out of my mouth.

I better have the faith that says: Anything that God hasn't planted is going to be uprooted.

Not because of me. I mean, I will be involved. He uses our hands, our backs, our bodies, our brains. He didn't just put prescription bottles down in the ground with antibiotics. That is a miracle from God, but he used us to develop it.

But as I look at the world and what is happening and to be able to point the fingers and say, you want that to happen here? What happened in Ottawa is coming here. You know it and I know it. It's coming here.

We can ring the bell. But pointing the fingers, I'm not sure isn't watering the weeds.

And before I went on the air, I opened up my favorite book and read this: Let them alone. Let them alone. They're blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, they're both going to end up in a ditch. Leave them alone.

Let's not end up in a ditch. They're blind. They're blind. And they're leading the blind.

Let's talk about principles. Let's talk about faith. And maybe, we should listen to our parents and what they taught us.

Don't talk about politics or religion because nobody wants to hear it. It only leads to arguments.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

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.