BLOGMay 08, 2017

Greg Abbott Uses Social Media Like a Boss to Ban Sanctuary Cities in Texas

Texas Governor Greg Abbott beat protesters to the punch, signing into law a bill that bans sanctuary cities in the state of Texas and holds lawmakers accountable for failing to uphold existing federal laws. The governor made the the unprecedented move of signing the bill on Facebook Live, reaching over one million followers on his Facebook page.

POLL: Do You Support Gov. Greg Abbott Signing Bill Banning Sanctuary Cities?

Governor Abbott joined Glenn on radio to talk about how the bill works, why its a good move for Texas and what defines a sanctuary city.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: Greg Abbott last night went on Facebook and signed a new bill into law, stopping sanctuary cities. Well, some say the problem is Texas doesn't have any real self-declared sanctuary cities. And how dare him do this on Facebook. What a coward. Or a genius. You decide. Greg Abbott, the governor of the great state of Texas, joins us right now.

(music)

GLENN: Welcome program, Governor Greg Abbott. I think the best governor in the entire United States. Welcome, sir, how are you?

GREG: Glenn, I'm doing great. Great to visit with you again.

GLENN: Great to have you on.

So last night, you go on Facebook and you signed a bill -- this is the first time I think anybody has ever done this on Facebook.

Why did you choose Facebook to do this? Why did you do it last night?

GREG: It won't -- it won't be the last time either.

Listen, this is the 21st century. We've seen an evolution with regard to digital media, with regard to the way that elected officials are communicating directly with their constituents. We saw it first with what Barack Obama did with digital media. We saw what happened in the Trump campaign. And now this is the next step. But listen, I have more than a million viewers. And it's important that I be able to connect directly with them unfiltered through other media. Obviously, other media across the entire country has picked this up and spread the story, which we are proud that they did. But you can expect, going forward, there will be many more ways in which we are communicating directly with the people who are citizens, the people that I have to answer to every single day.

GLENN: I have to tell you, Governor, I'd love to spend some more time talking to you about that. I think that is great. I know that we are living -- and everybody knows. We're living in a time now where you don't need a middleman anymore. And it will change things. And I'd love to talk about the ramifications of that, if we have more time. But let me go to what you signed.

Texas doesn't have any self-declared sanctuary city. And the Trump administration is having a hard time defining what a sanctuary city is. So what did you sign in last night?

GREG: Well, first let's talk about terminology. And if you don't mind, let me correct you a tiny bit.

GLENN: Sure.

GREG: A synonym of a sanctuary city is an outlaw city. It's a city or county that refuses to follow the law. And in the state of Texas, it is my opinion, that we do have a self-declared sanctuary city. In Travis County -- for your listeners, Travis County is the county in which Austin, Texas, is located. And the sheriff of Travis County has a written policy that is tangible for anybody to put their hands on, that says that Travis County is not going to comply with ICE detainer requests. In fact, the Travis County policy is such that if a person who is in the United States illegally and has either committed or been accused of a very violent crime, such as sexual assault -- sexual assault of a minor. Armed robbery. Working in conspiracy with the drug cartels. Any of those crimes and far more, the sheriff of Travis County, who is responsible for upholding the law and keeping our citizens safe, is going to release them, even if the federal government has a request to hold them for the federal government to come and take them. That, I think, is the quintessential definition of a sanctuary city. Travis County is the target and subject of this law that I signed last night.

GLENN: Okay. So now what happens to Sheriff Hernandez? What happens to -- I mean, Dallas is also a city that kind of plays games with -- with sanctuary. What happens to these -- these counties, these cities?

GREG: The new Texas law imposes very serious penalties. One is going to be fines that can add up to $25,000 per day. Two is that these officials -- let's say in this case, the Travis County sheriff, can be subject to forced removal from office, by the Texas attorney general. Three is, these officials can be subject to jail time, if they have sanctuary city policies or if they refuse to comply with the ICE detainer request.

GLENN: Excuse me my ignorance on this. But -- I remember hearing this a long time ago, and it may be complete bunk, that the sheriff is the only one that actually answers directly to the people. Police officers, police commissioners, et cetera, et cetera, don't, but that this is a -- this is a separate office that doesn't really answer to any chain of command. Is that true or not?

GREG: Correct in this regard, in that police officers are not elected by the people. Sheriffs are elected by. The people. That said, sheriffs are one of the county officials who have to work in conjunction with county governance, which in the state of Texas, the leader of the county government is called the county judge, and then there's a county commissioner's court that the sheriff must work with. It's the county commissioner's court that sets the budget for the sheriff.

GLENN: How do you respond to people who are saying this is going to terrorize the Latino community?

GREG: Well, first, let's be clear about something. And that is that just because someone is here illegally doesn't at all mean that they are Hispanic. Remember this, Glenn, and that is more than half of the people who have been coming across our border illegally this past year are not from Mexico. They're coming in from across the entire world. So that part of the thesis is wrong. Second is that Texas is an open and welcoming state. In fact, even before Texas was Texas, we've been a blend of Anglo and Hispanic culture. And, as you know, my wife is the first Hispanic first lady. And so we're very supportive and open to immigration. People get this wrong in the terminology. They say that laws like this are anti-immigrant. That's absolutely not true. We're very pro-immigration. The only people who are subject to -- to being apprehended under this new law are people who are here illegally, who have committed a crime that ICE has caused them to put on their detainer list. If you are here and you've committed no crime whatsoever, you're never even going to be subject to this because ICE will not have you on their detainer list.

GLENN: So, Governor, here's one thing that I can't solve in my head. And I know you're a compassionate man. And I know this has had to cross your mind. There are those people who are here illegally who then -- who are good, decent people and whatever their situation is -- yada, yada. But somehow or another, a bad guy gets into their life and is abusing them. Beating them. Raping them. Whatever. And if they fear that they are going to be, you know, sent back home and something is going to happen to them or they just don't want to be on anybody's radar because they're pretty invisible, they won't say anything about that. And crime could go through -- really horrible kinds of crime could go through the roof in those communities. How do you solve that? And do you believe that's true?

GREG: We solve that in this law because we put specific exceptions in this law. If you are a victim of a crime, if you are a witness to a crime, you will not be asked about your immigration status, if you report that crime. We wanted to make sure that those people be accepted from those provisions.

GLENN: Now, they're calling this the papers please bill. But that's not what this -- you don't ask for papers if somebody is on a routine stop, right? I mean --

GREG: You're absolutely correct. Let me be very clear about this. Because a lot of critics misconstrue this as being the Arizona law. And the Arizona law that was reviewed by the United States Supreme Court, they specifically, quote, required law enforcement officers to ask about immigration status. First, I will tell you that part of the law was upheld by the United States Supreme Court, even the liberals on the United States Supreme Court.

GLENN: Wow.

GREG: The Texas law does not make that requirement. What the Texas law does, is it allows, but does not require law enforcement to ask about immigration status. Let me explain to you why. And that is, when a police officer pulls over somebody -- let's say in a car -- and they do it for you're driving too fast. You know, whatever the violation may be. Let's say they walk up to the car and they look into the car and the person in the car has tattoos on them that clearly indicates they are a member of MS-13 -- which, by the way, is growing in number in the state of Texas -- it would be right for the police officer to ask that MS-13 member, "Are you here in the United States legally?" And so it allows them in situations where this person could be the subject of an ICE detainer request, which an MS-13 gang member most likely would be, to make that inquiry. But it simply and absolutely does not require law enforcement officers to ask about immigration status. Anybody who says otherwise either doesn't know the law or they're misrepresenting the law.

GLENN: Governor, what do you think about the progress that -- and I don't want to get this into a Trump thing. About the progress of illegal immigration and the border wall, et cetera, et cetera, with this administration. Without -- because I don't want to put you in the middle of something here. Are we moving -- are we moving the way we should be, or have we surrendered this?

GREG: Well, we've had a problem for decades now, with regard to the legal immigration process. We have a completely flawed immigration system that must be fixed, and nothing has been done in the last few administrations, and nothing has yet been done under the current administration to fix our immigration process.

Let's be clear about this: Texas, and I think America, strongly supports a robust legal immigration system. What must be done is, we must implement reforms that overhaul our legal immigration system and couple that with strict enforcement against illegal immigration.

GLENN: I said a few years ago, that what President Obama was doing was sending a message all around the world, come in. We're not going to enforce our own laws. And if I lived across the border in poverty, in a drug-ridden -- if I lived in a place where I knew my kids had no future and the president of the United States was saying, we're not going to enforce this, and if you get here, you're going to be here forever. I would absolutely take my kids across this border, for the promise of America. And I said at the time, it's -- it's -- a lot of this is our fault because we're telling them we don't care about this law. And if you're -- and if you are in their situation, you're going to roll the dice for a piece of this. Is it true --

GREG: Right. Barack Obama's approach to border security was the ole system (phonetic). Such as the matador saying "ole" to the bull charging at them, and just let them on through.

GLENN: Right.

GREG: But remember this, Glenn, and that is, why is it that so many people want to come to America as opposed to let's say Venezuela or some other place? The reason is because the United States of America more than any other country in the entire world is a nation of laws.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

GREG: And it is imperative that we as a people continue to ensure that America remains a nation of laws so that we will be the aspiration for people around the entire globe.

GLENN: Has our immigration here in Texas -- our illegal immigration, have you seen a decline in it?

GREG: There actually has been a decline.

GLENN: Small or significant?

GREG: During this calendar year, a very meaningful decline during this calendar year, where people who were coming across the border illegally has shrunk dramatically.

In this last calendar year, before the one we're in right now, there were more -- or about 1,000 people crossing the border a day. And now that has shrunk dramatically compared to where it was before. But we'll need to see. Because as most people known, the increase in cross-border activity typically increases during the May, June, and July months.

GLENN: Have we moved our border agents closer to the border since Obama? I mean, there was this huge gap for a long time.

GREG: You're exactly right. If you're going to secure the border, the best place to secure the border is at the border.

GLENN: Right.

GREG: One of the policies of the Obama administration was to remove more into the interior, the border security operations, so that people will have already crossed the border. It simply made no sense whatsoever. And so, yes, one of the changes is to move border security closer to the border. Another is to increase and enhance border security efforts. But that is something that the state of Texas is also doing. We're about to close out our new budget during the coming weeks. We continue to add more money from the state of Texas to secure the border because it is important that we be a state as well as a nation of laws. We welcome people here who want to immigrate to the United States legally. But we want to make sure that if there's anybody who is not following the law, the law will be enforced.

GLENN: I would love to have you back -- we're running out of time. I would love to have you back and talk a little bit about the culture of Texas and how -- if we're doing anything to protect the culture of Texas. It's one of the only states left that has -- or almost -- I can almost say had a unique culture. And it's -- it's really being destroyed. And I'm -- I'm -- and not intentionally or anything like that. Just because this massive influx from people all over the world and the country who were creating jobs here. And what we're doing to protect that. But let me leave you with just this one question here. Have we signed now officially to the Convention of States?

GREG: Yes. As of last week, Texas became the 11th state to sign on to the Convention of States. And Texas will be in the vanguard of leading that effort. Now that Texas passed it, I think many more states will come behind us. This is a common sense opportunity to return power to the people, away from the entrenched forces in Washington, DC.

GLENN: I -- I have to tell you, I think you are the best governor in the country right now. That's pretty easy to say. But the best governor I think I have ever lived under, and big supporters.

Greg Abbott, thank you so much, sir.

GREG: Thank you, Glenn. God bless.

GLENN: You bet.

Great, great leader. As you heard, very well reasoned. Doesn't get into hyperbole or name-calling. He just does it. Love him.

RADIO

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

A new report accuses CAIR Action, the political arm of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, of breaking state laws with its political activism. Glenn Beck reviews this story...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me go over what is -- what's happening with -- with CAIR.

You know, the Founding Fathers were obsessed over accountability.

Because they knew one thing. You know, they did. They must get suggestions from people on, you know, through tweets. They studied every single system of government.

Every single republic that survived. That didn't survive.

Why didn't it survive?

They studied all forms of government. They were trying to come up with something that could -- could set people free.

And they -- they worked really hard on putting our checks and balances in place, because they knew, once power slips into the shadows. They knew, once power slips into the shadows, once influence becomes unmoored from law, what rises is not a republic.

It's a machine. And that's what you're seeing right now. We're not living in a republic. We're living in a machine.

We -- I think we're staring at one of the largest unregulated political machines operating in the United States ever! Okay.

There have been a couple of groups that are doing sweeping investigations, two watchdog groups. One of them is NCRI and the Intelligent Advocacy Network.

And they have concluded now that the political arm of CAIR, he known as CAIR action, has been operating nationwide with no legal authority, to do the things it has been doing for years now.

They're not allowed to raise money. They've been raising money. Coordinating political campaigns.

Not allowed to do it. Endorsing candidates. Not allowed to do it, they're doing it. Mobilizing voters, shaping policy, functioning as a national advocacy network.

They don't have the legal authority to do any of it. And no one has said anything.

Now, according to the report, CAIR action doesn't just have a paperwork problem.

Investigators found, state by state, that it lacks the license, the registrations. The charitable authorizations, required to legally solicit money.

Excuse me. Or conduct political activity, in any of the 22 states in which it operates. Think of that!

I know how serious this is, because I remember what it took to get the license in each and every state, for Mercury One.

So we could operate. We could raise money. We could do things in those states. It's a lot of work. And if you don't do it, you go to jail. And they find out pretty quickly.

Okay?

22 states, they operate not one, zero legal authorization.

In Washington, DC, the city where CAIR action is incorporated, the department of licensing and consumer protection told investigators, they have no record of CAIR action ever obtaining the basic business license required to solicit funds or to operate.

Imagine how long would you last in business, especially if you were controversial.

How long would you remain in business, if you never had a business license?

You think somebody would figure that out?

In a sooner time than I don't know. A couple of decades!

This report means, that the organization if true, is engaging in unlicensed inner state solicitation.

It has exposed itself to allegations as serious as deceptive solicitation. Wire fraud and false statements to the IRS. These are big things.

And this is not political rhetoric.

Are these phrases written in black and white. In the law.

And by investigators. In California, one of CAIR's most active hubs. The state attorney general has said, the state attorney general of California has said, same pattern here!

The state of California, to say, yep. That's what's happening here.

CAIR action has never registered with California's charitable registry.

Never filed the required CT1 form. And has no authorization whatsoever to request donations. But they've been doing it in California anyway.

Fundraising, selling memberships. Issuing endorsements. Mobilizing voters. All of that has been done by CAIR action. There's no record of any license. Any permission, ever. Going to CAIR. From California. That's according to their attorney general.

Wow!

That's pretty remarkable, huh? How does that happen?

It's not just the coast. It is also happening to the Midwest, the South, the Mountain West. Every state hosting its own CAIR action fundraising page, complete with the donate now and become a member portal, despite no trace of the legal filings required to operate. That's bad!

Now, here's where the stakes rise.

Because CAIR action presents itself openly, as the political arm of CAIR National.

Investigators are now warning that any unauthorized fundraising or political activity.

Could become CAIR's national responsibility as well.

So, in other words, the parent, CAIR itself, might be held responsible.

Meaning, this is want just a rogue subdivision.

This could implicate the entire National Organization of CAIR.

Now, this is happening at the same time it's coming under national scrutiny. It's also Texas.

And I think Florida have designated the group a foreign terrorist organization. Members of Congress are now asking the IRS, the Treasury, the Department of Education to investigate all of its partnerships, all of its financing, all of its influence operations. I mean, I think they're going to be in trouble.

How long have we been saying this?

But every time, I have pointed out anything about CAIR, I have been called an Islamophobe, which shuts everything down. That is a word, developed by people like CAIR, to shut people down, so you'll never look into them.

So what happens next?

First of all, the reports have to hold up.

Regulators now have an obligation. Not a choice. An obligation to act!

State attorneys general in these 22 states, they might pursue fines, injunctions, criminal referrals.

All of them need to take action!

The IRS, needs to take action. Investigate tax exempt fraud. Treasury Department may review foreign influence or money flow violations.

Anything coming from overseas.

Oh, I can't imagine it. They're so buttoned up, right now.

DC regulators may determine whether CAIR actions entire fundraising operation has been unlawful from the beginning.

But here's the deeper question. And it's not bureaucratic. This one is constitutional.

Can the United States tolerate an influence machine, that operates outside of the legal framework, designed to prevent corruption, foreign leverage, and untraceable money?

If I hear one more time, talking about how AIPAC has just got to be investigated. Fine. Investigate.

I'm not against it.

Investigate.

Why aren't you saying anything about CAIR?

It feels like it might be a tool in the hands of a foreign operation.

Why aren't you saying anything about this?

Because here it is! It's not like, hey. I wonder why.

This is it! This is it! This isn't about silencing CAIR. Muslim Americans are -- that are full citizens, they have every right to speak. Every right to vote. Every right to organize. Participate in public life. No question! They can disagree with me, all they want.

But no organization. None! Not mine. Not yours. Not theirs. None. Should operate a nationwide political network, in the shadows and be immune from all of the guardrails that every other group must follow!

That's called a fourth branch of government!

That's how a fourth branch goes.

By the way, CAIR has placed all kinds of people in our Department of Homeland Security. Et cetera, et cetera. This organization has done it!

This is -- you cannot have a fourth branch of government.

They must abide by the laws.

No -- you can't have a branch that nobody elected. Nobody oversees.

Nobody holds accountable.

We talked about this yesterday, on yesterday's podcast. So what needs to happen is total transparency. CAIR action has to release its filings. Its donor structure. Its compliance records, if they exist. Equal enforcement under the law. I don't want them prosecuted in special ways.

Look, if AIPAC is doing the same thing. AIPAC should be prosecuted exactly the same way.
I want it equal. I want constitutional rule.

If conservatives, if Catholics, pro-Israel, environmental, Second Amendment groups, if they have to comply by the state law, so does CAIR action.

And if CAIR action has to do it, so do the Second Amendment groups and environmentalists, and pro-Israel and conservative groups. The law cannot be selective. It can't be!

I don't know how that's controversial in today's world. But somehow or another, they will find a way.

The Feds have to review all of this. If the report is accurate, the IRS and the Treasury have to determine whether false statements or unlicensed interstate solicitations have occurred.

Americans deserve to know what exactly, who is influencing our elections. Who is shaping our policy? Who is raising money in their state?

Especially physical the organization claims political authority, that it doesn't legally possess.

Because history will teach us one unchanging lesson. When a republic stops enforcing its own laws, someone else will always step in to fill that vacuum because power abhors a vacuum!

Unregulated, political power abhors a free people. So while it's about CAIR, it's not about Muslim Americans. It's not about religion.

As always, at least on this program, we try to make it about the rule of law.

One standard for everyone or no standard at all!

And that more than anything, will determine whether or not our institutions remain worthy of the freedom and responsibility that we have entrusted to them.

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

America is entering a year of historic upheaval from Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the spiritual shock that followed, to Trump’s tariff revolution, China’s rare-earth war, collapsing energy grids, AI displacement, and the looming fights over Taiwan and Venezuela. Glenn sits down with BlazeTV hosts ‪@deaceshow‬ and ‪@lizwheeler‬ along with his head researcher Jason Buttrill, to break down the biggest stories of 2025. Plus, they each give their most explosive prediction for 2026 that could shape our politics, economy, national security, and civil rights in ways Americans have never experienced before.

RADIO

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

For nearly a century, Washington DC has been ruled by an unelected “expert class” operating as an unconstitutional fourth branch of government — accountable to no one, removable by no president, and shielded from all consequences. Glenn breaks down why Trump’s firing of the Federal Trade Commissioner could finally dismantle the 1935 precedent that empowered technocrats, how Ketanji Brown Jackson exposed the Supreme Court’s embrace of expert rule, and why America cannot survive a government run by people who never face the voters and never pay for their failures.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So President Donald Trump fired the federal trade commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. Federal Trade Commission is an administrative position. I mean, this is under -- the head of the federal trade commission is a cabinet member.

And if the justices uphold Trump's firing of Slaughter, that will overturn a precedent that was horrible, that was set in 1935. Remember, 1935, we're flirting with fascism. You know, everybody thinks. Because they haven't seen the horrors of fascism yet.

Everybody thinks fascism is neat, blah, blah. So what they do is they say that this is an independent person. And the president can't fire them. Because they're, you know, an independent agency.

Well, wait. That would make a fourth branch of government. Our Constitution is really clear.

There is no such thing as a fourth branch of government. Right?

So that's what they're deciding. Now, here is Ketanji Brown Jackson, who is talking about how we really need to listen to the experts. Cut four.

VOICE: Because presidents have accepted that there could be both an understanding of Congress and the presidency. That it is in the best interest of the American people to have certain kinds of issues, handled by experts. Who, and I think you -- in your colloquy, Justice Kagan, have identified the fact that these boards are not only experts, but they're also nonpartisan. So the -- the seats are actually distributed in such a way, that we are presumably eliminating political influence because we're trying to get to science and data and actual facts, related to how these decisions are made.

And so the real risk, I think, of allowing non- -- of allowing these kinds of decisions to be made by the president, of saying, everybody can just be removed when I come in, is that we will get away from those very important policy considerations.

VOICE: We will get away from US policy considerations, and it will create opportunities for all kinds of problems that Congress and prior presidents wanted to avoid, risks that flow inevitably, just given human nature, the realities of the world that we live in.

GLENN: Okay.

Now, remember, what she's saying here is, we have to have experts.

We have to have experts. We have to have experts that don't really answer to anybody. Okay?

They're appointed. And then they're just there. This from a, quote, judicial expert, who cannot define a woman, because she's not a doctor.
She's not a scientist.

She needs an expert to define a woman.
That's how insane her thinking is. Okay?

Now, I would just like to ask the Supreme Court, when you want things run by experts, do you mean things like the State Department, or the counsel of foreign relations, that have gotten us into these endless war wars for 100 years?

Because these are the things that Woodrow Wilson wanted. He wanted the country run by experts.

Okay. So is it like the Council of Foreign Relations, that keep getting us into these endless wars.

Or is it more like the Fed, that directs our fiscal policy, that has driven us into $38 trillion of at the time. We have all powerful banks. That strangely all belong to the fed. And endless bailouts for those banks. Are those the experts that you're talking about?

Or are you talking about the experts that are doctors, that gave the country sterilizations, lobotomies, transgender surgeries. You know, or should we listen to the experts, like the ones that are now speaking in Illinois, to get us death on demand like Canada has, with their MAID assisted suicide, which is now the third largest killer in Canada. MAID, assisted suicide, third largest killer in Canada. Experts are saying, we now need it here, and they're pushing for it in Illinois. Or should we listen to the experts? And I think many of them are the same experts strangely, that brought us COVID. Yeah. That was an expert thing. They were trying to protect us. Because they need to do this for our protection. So direct from the labs in China with the help of the American experts like Fauci. We almost put the world out.

Should we listen to those guys?

Or the experts that brought us masking, and Home Depot is absolutely safe. But Ace Hardware wants to kill grandma. Which are the experts that we want? That we want to make sure that we have in our lives? That they don't answer, or can't be fired by anybody. Because I'm pretty full up on the experts, myself. I don't know.

But you're right. These experts would keep the president in check, and they would keep Congress in check. And you in check!

And the Supreme Court, which would be really great. You know, and you know who else they would keep in check? The people.

So, wow, it seems like we would just be a nation run by experts, and our Constitution would be out the window, because that's a fourth branch!

And if you don't believe me, that, you know, these experts never pay a price. Can you name a single expert?

Give me a name of an expert, that gave us any of the things that I just told you about.

Give me the name. I mean, give me the name of one of them. Give me the name of one of them that went to jail. Give me the name of one expert that has been discredited.

You know, where your name will be mud in this town. Do you know where that came from?

Your name is going to be mud. It's not M-U-D. It's M-U-D-D, that comes from Dr. Samuel Mudd. Okay? He was a docks man. He was an expert. He was that set John Wilkes Booth' broken leg. He made crutches. He let him stay there for a while. He claimed he didn't know him, but he did know him.

In fact, one of the reasons they proved it.

Is because when he pulled the boots off -- when he pulled both of his boots off, right there, in the back, you couldn't have missed it. It said "John Wilkes Booth."

He's like, I have no idea who he was.

Yeah. Well, you knew him in advance. This was a predetermined outpost where he could stay. It's clear you could know him.

The guy was still discredited, we still use his name today. Your name will be mud in this town.

And we think that it's like dirt, mixed with water kind of mud. No, it's M-U-D-D, Dr. Mudd. The expert that was so discredited, went to jail, paid for his part of the assassination of -- of Lincoln.

Give me the name of one of the experts in the last 100 years, that has brought us any of the trials and the tribulations. The things that have almost brought us to our knees. Give me the name of one of them. Can't!

Because once an expert class, they don't answer to anyone. So they never go to jail.

Wow! Doesn't that sound familiar. People never going to jail!

There's a rant that's going around right now, that I did in 2020. And everybody is like, see. He's talking about Pam Bondi.

No, no. I got to play this for you, a little later on in the program. But I want to get to the experts and what the Constitution actually says about that. Because you don't need my opinion. What you need are the actual facts. So you can stand up and say, yeah. I think Ketanji Brown Jackson is an idiot. Okay?

And she's really not an expert on anything. Especially the Constitution. You need the facts, on what the Founders said. Because the Founders would be absolutely against what they did in 1935.

Because that just -- what does it do?

It just sets up a fourth branch of government.

RADIO

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

The biggest media merger in modern history is unfolding, and Glenn Beck warns it’s the most dangerous consolidation of power America has faced in decades. With six corporations already controlling 90% of the nation’s news and entertainment, a Warner-Netflix or Warner-Paramount megacorporation would create an unstoppable information cartel. Glenn exposes how “too big to fail” thinking is repeating itself, how global elites and “experts” are tightening their grip, and why handing our entire cultural narrative to a handful of companies is a direct threat to freedom. The hour is late — and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: By the way, it's never good when you consolidate power. It's never good.

And what is going on now, with this Netflix Warner Brothers paramount stuff, I don't care if Larry Ellison is a conservative or not.

No one should have that much power.

I did a show, gosh, four years ago. I don't even remember when I did it.

We looked it up. In the 1980s. 19 percent of American media was owned by over 50 companies.

Forty years later, 90 percent of the media is watched and controlled by six companies.

National Amusements, the Red Stone Family controls CBS, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon, gaming and internet. Simon & Schuster Books. That's all one.

Disney, ABC, ESPN, History Channel, Marvel, Star Wars, video games and print.

TimeWarner controls CNN, Warner Brothers, HBO, Turner, video games, internet, and print media like TIME. Comcast, MSNBC, NBC.

CNBC, Telemundo, the Internet.

New Corp. Fox. National Geographic. Ton of others. Sony, with a ton of movies, music and more. The big six. They're valued at nearly $500 billion.

Now, this is something I put together five years ago. So I don't even know. This is probably not even valid even today.

And now we're talking about Netflix, Warner Brothers. Paramount, into all of these one giant corporation. It's wrong! It's wrong!

We can't keep putting all -- everything into the hands of just a few! It's what's killing us!

We've got to spread this around. We can't -- the government cannot okay mergers like this.

They're big enough he has

What happened -- what happened when the banks went under, or almost went under in '08. What did they say the problem was?

They said the banks are too big to fail.

Too big to fail.

Because they were providing all of the services, everybody needs. All the time. And there's only a handful of them.

So if they fall, then everything falls.

Right?

That was the problem. So what did we do to fix it?

We made them bigger!

We let them merge with other banks, and gobble up other things!

And started taking on the local banks.

And so now, your banks that were too big to fail. Are now even bigger. And their failure would be even worse!

What is wrong with us?

Seriously, we're not this stupid.

We're not this stupid.

I think we're just this comfortable.

We just think the experts have a plan. No. The experts don't have a plan.

Their plan is stupid. Their plan is to make it bigger.

Every time it fails. Make it bigger. Push it up.

Make it more global.

No. Haven't you seen what the entire world is like?

The entire world is over-leveraged. The entire world is on the edge.

The entire world is being redesigned.
So what do we do? We don't allow them to make things bigger! We need to start taking more individual and local control of things. They're making it bigger. Which will make the problem bigger. And make the problem so big, you won't be able to do anything about it, because all the experts. All of the heads. They'll all -- there will be six of them. And they will all be sitting in one room.

And they will all be making the instigations. And with them, making those decisions will be all the heads of all the countries around the world, that you're not going to have a say in any of that. They're already trying to do it with the WEF.

But if -- if the Supreme Court says, no, experts matter. And the president can't fire them. You will not have any control over anything!

We're at this place, where we can back out. We can turn around.

We can do it.

It's not too late. But the hour is growing very late.

I don't know about you, I don't like being this.

Up to the edge, you know what I mean?

I would rather have lots of breathing room, between me and the edge of the cliff.

But we don't have that anymore.

Everything has to be done right.

And we have to pay attention.

And the worst thing we can do is make things bigger.

Dream big, think small.

Glenn's Show Prep

Greg Abbott Uses Social Media Like a Boss to Ban Sanctuary Cities in Texas

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

Transcript

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

Transcript

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

Transcript