Revenge vs. Love: This election choice is clear

There's one day left before the most important election of our lives and most important election since 1860. And the candidates were out making their final case to the American people, and this is the case that the president has been laying out for the last couple of weeks. This is the one he's been laying out as his final case to the American people.

You may be frustrated sometimes with the pace of change. I'm frustrated too sometimes. But you know where I stand. You know what I believe. You know I tell the truth. - Barack Obama

Wow. He's frustrated just like you. Going on his how many vacations a year, jetting all around, not having to worry about the price of gas. He's frustrated just like you. Just like you. But you know that he always tells the truth. You know where he stands. That's his case. You know where he stands. Israel doesn't know where he stands. Iran doesn't know where he stands. The SEALs don't know where he ‑‑ the parents of SEALs who have lost their lives don't know where he stands. People who said, hey, gas is too expensive and then hear him say it was only $1.87 when I got into office because Bush had destroyed the economy, they don't know where he stands. Small business owners don't know where he stands. People looking for a job don't know where he stands.

We've discussed several times before, including very recently, the proven lies. There are things that you don't really know where he stands and then there are proven lies that he has told. I've never looked back, and this is not a judgment on him. This is more a judgment on America and the press. I've never looked back and marveled at how many people will fall for and accept, knowingly accept a falsehood. I've never seen it before in my life. And after being caught in lie after lie after lie that he has the audacity to look the American people and the media in the eye and then say, you know I always tell the truth." You can't go through all of the things that we have gone through over the last four years because it is unbelievably numerous. The places where he actually lies to you. Says one thing but then is caught on tape saying something else behind closed doors.

He was asked, is it fair for somebody like you making $20 million a year to pay a lower tax rate than a nurse or a bus driver? And Romney said yes, I think that's fair. That didn't happen. That's not true. That was an out‑and‑out lie. And every fact‑checker on the planet has already said, "That's a lie." And Obama knew it. Romney was specifically referring to the principle that capital gains should be taxed lower than other income because it's been taxed once already, a principle, by the way, that Obama agrees with in his own tax policy. But that hasn't stopped President Obama for knowingly distorting and lying. Obama has continually lied about Romney's plan for GM. And while lying about it, he calls Romney the liar. Even though virtually every fact‑check organization has backed Romney on it. Romney wanted GM to go through bankruptcy. A managed bankruptcy. That doesn't mean put it out of business and destroy it. Every airline has gone through management ‑‑ what is wrong with us, America? Then Romney wanted to go the extra step and say loan guarantees from the U.S. Government to keep them going forward: Obama continues to claim that women rely on Planned Parenthood for mammograms. They don't. Planned Parenthood doesn't do mammograms. But that's the way he can say, "I'm not talking about abortion. I'm talking about the great work that Planned Parenthood does on mammograms." They don't do mammograms! Obama claimed that Romney lied about oil production on government lands. He didn't. He was right. And virtually every fact, I think every fact‑check organization verified that within minutes of him saying it. For eight years now Obama has claimed that business get a tax break for shipping jobs overseas. Romney says, I've been in business my whole life; I've never even heard of that. I've been global business. I've never gotten a tax break. Obama mocked him, called him a liar.

So what are the facts? If you ship your jobs overseas, you can deduct the moving costs. Now, that's not a tax break. You're spending the money to move overseas. That's no tax advantage. That's ‑‑ the tax advantage would have to continue on after the move. Just like every other company in the world. It's not a special thing. If I move my company from one place to another, if I move it from New York, please, people in New York, move to Texas. And on Wednesday listen to me. If he loses, if Romney loses, move soon. I will get a business deduction for moving those people from New York to Texas. That's the way it works. That's not to move people overseas. It's fairness. It's the same for every company. Are you telling me that there aren't some companies that need to say, "Hey, Bill, we've got to open this up in China. We've got to be over there. We need a representative." So they're not going to get their tax deduction for moving but they will some place here in the United States? That doesn't make any sense. There's no incentive for being overseas.

On the Benghazi situation, even Candy Crowley admitted after the debate that it was Romney who was right about the way Obama had presented that attack. He continues to lie about that. Obama hasn't ‑‑ he keeps saying it: Mr. President, I'm sorry, but we don't know that you always tell the truth. In fact, I contend a vast number of Americans know just the opposite.

We also know that you're nasty, you're small‑minded and you're divisive in much of your rhetoric. And I know you don't like to hear that and nobody likes to say that to the president of the United States. But we have tons of evidence of you doing it, from 2010:

But they're going to be paying attention to this election. And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying we're going to punish our enemies and we're going to reward our friends who stand with us on it... - Barack Obama

We're going to punish our enemies? He was specifically talking about anyone running for the GOP. Punish, if Latinos don't punish our enemies. If that is not small, nasty and divisive, I don't know what is. But that's just ‑‑ that's just one of the many examples. That one's from 2010. I can give you one from this weekend.

And at the time the Republican congress, any Senate candidate by the name of Mitt Romney (Boos from crowd) No, no, no. Don't boo. Vote. Vote. Voting's the best revenge. - Barack Obama

Let me tell you something. I am going to share this with you. I wasn't going to, but I am. If you look at history through a biblical world view, the last step before a nation is completely destroyed is they drive the righteous from among them. If this isn't a sign from a group of people that will drive the righteous from among them, and that's the last step before God's wrath comes, I fear for our country and it is ‑‑ it cannot be overstated. It cannot be called paranoid. The best revenge, punish your enemies, and Valerie Jarrett last week saying "we don't forget"? That's Occupy Wall Street. That's the French Revolution. Now it's our turn? What are you talking about? You've had the last four years. What do you mean now it's your turn? That goes to Vladimir Putin: I'll have more flexibility. Hear me. If you are a God‑fearing person, hear me. Last call, America. Last call. Because the righteous will be driven from among them.

But I believe in the American people. I believe that we are not too far gone. I believe that people can watch and see the difference. They can feel the difference. When you watch Barack Obama, you can just see he is angry. When you watch Mitt Romney, you can see he is not. We are not an angry nation. We don't listen to demagogues like that. It doesn't work. No matter how much power he has amassed, no matter how many friends in the media he has, Americans know. And if they reject it this time, and if they're so dead inside ‑‑ that's a possibility. If they're so dead inside that they can no longer see the difference between good and evil, we will be destroyed because we will be a remarkable evil on this planet. Our technology alone would make us so dark and so spooky that it is beyond comprehension. But I don't think we're there.

Thomas Jefferson said trust the American people. They will see their mistake and they will correct it. I have prayed this whole election. For 40 days I have fasted: Lord, just let people see who Mitt Romney is. And let people see who Barack Obama is. I didn't ask for any special favors, not somebody to win one way or another. Just let people see who they are. Now it's up to you. Now that you've seen them, what are you going to do about it? Are you going to vote because it's the best kind of revenge? May I ask, revenge for what? What have we done to people that make them so angry? What have we done? We disagree with each other. What have we done to you? Created a country that allowed you to become the president of the United States of America? My gosh, what a curse around your neck. What have we done? That's how twisted and evil and angry and divisive they really are. And you hear that...and then you have to choose: Do you want that... or do you want this.

Did you see what President Obama said today? He asked his supporters to vote for revenge. For revenge. Instead I ask the American people to vote for love of country.

- Mitt Romney

The choice is a simple one and it is in your hands tomorrow.

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

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.