Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Glenn’s interview with David Barton

October 04, 2012
Wilson

Writer

Today on radio Glenn talked a little about the debate with David but also about what David calls his ‘most important’ project yet: The Founders Bible. David calls it the Bible that built America - check out the conversation in the clip above.

Full Transcript of story below:

GLENN: Let's go to David Barton. David, where were you? Where were you? Really, it was a night we'll all remember where we were when we saw Obama questioned and taken down for the first time. Where are you last night?

DAVID BARTON: Well, actually excuse me. Last night I was actually flying in from Columbus, Ohio at the time. So I got the replays. I didn't get the live.

GLENN: It was it was amazing. Romney was such a man of honor and clarity.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: There was just no I mean, it was remarkable, I thought.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah. And everything I saw after I landed was exactly that. It was the calmness and it was the competency and the proficiency and, you know, I'm sorry. What you just did with Gore in Denver is great. I've got to say if that were true from a scientific standpoint, the Broncos would be undefeated, the Rockies would be undefeated, and the Nuggets would be undefeated because every team comes into town to play those guys and that would mean none of them could win. So that may be the most ridiculous story I've ever heard, ever.

GLENN: You're a historian, I'm not, but I think you should check on that before you make that bold claim.

DAVID BARTON: I'm sure Patrick Henry had something to say on that because he talked about a lot of stuff but I tell you that's one of the best concessions of defeat I've heard in a long time. That's amazing.

GLENN: David, what do you think, for somebody because there's a lot of Americans that are not on the Romney bandwagon.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: And I think a lot of Americans were like, we've got to lose a candidate or we have this and we have that and, you know, he's not going to be able to fight in the debate. This is the debate that everyone was afraid of.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: This was the RomneyCare debate and I mean, look. He just stomped.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: What do you think is going to happen now with people on our side? Do you think this energizes them and all of a sudden they find themselves going, "I am I am anxious to vote for this guy?"

DAVID BARTON: I think that there's going to be some energy added to the fire, but I think a whole lot of energy is created by Obama himself and by really the crisis in which he's placed on the nation. I don't think there's anyone that doesn't know all the different areas that he is so screwed up, religious liberties are at stake and, you know, that was one of the things that was hit last night was life and religious liberties. I don't think there's many people don't understand that and don't understand the economic side. I think this is going to give some people some more comfort in going forward and say, "Hey, this may be a whole lot better option than what I thought." But the energy level is still high.

GLENN: Anything, anything that you saw that stuck out at you?

DAVID BARTON: Yeah. You know, what I saw was the calmness and the not being shook. The competency. He really acted like a chief executive. He handled all the stuff. He really made a contrast. And there was times when you could see the president visibly shaken.

GLENN: Yeah.

DAVID BARTON: Just, his confidence was gone. And I think that that's the image you want. I mean, I go back to what Ann Romney did. I think one of the most significant parts of what she did at the convention actually was giggling. And I say that because we've always thought of the Romneys as ivory tower, way up there hifalutin New England people and she suddenly became just like a cheerleader, just like the girl next door and it was a really cool effect. I think that's the same kind of psychological effect that it had last night. People are really comfortable with his confidence and, wow, you know, he didn't struggle. He really made the president struggle. And I think that that's part of the takeaway is that they get a confidence, a feel of confidence in what he did last night.

GLENN: I don't know if any I don't know if they've posted it yet up on TheBlaze but I tweeted a picture out today of the Romneys making peanut butter/jelly sandwiches backstage.

DAVID BARTON: I love it. Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, they're real people.

DAVID BARTON: They are. And see, that's not the image that's come through.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

DAVID BARTON: And so all the benevolence he's done and all the stories we're finding out about him, that just changes the whole image of what we've all thought about him for the last four years.

GLENN: So David, let me switch gears. I tweeted last night after it was all said and done to remember to fall down on your knees in thanksgiving.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, I prayed yesterday like never before that the scales would fall from people's eyes, that you'd be able to see who he was.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: And who Obama was. And I mean, I you know, I think this was just, you know I believe in divine providence and divine protection.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: And I think we saw that last night, and we have to give thanks.

Let me let me switch gears here a little bit and talk about your Founders Bible. Because you said to me last week when we spoke off air about the Founders Bible. You said this is probably the most important thing you've ever done.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah. No question in my mind. I think the best way I've heard it described is if you go back historically, the Geneva Bible is the Bible that built America, shaped a generation because it took the Bible but it made it very practical through commentaries.

GLENN: Explain. Explain what the Geneva Bible is. That's the Bible that our founders used. It wasn't the King James Version. They used the Geneva Bible. What was the difference?

DAVID BARTON: The Geneva Bible is what came out of the reformation and it was people saying, wait a minute, I know we've done it this way for 1400 years but look what the scripture says. This is wrong. We're not supposed to be electing kings. We're supposed to be electing leaders ourselves. So that's where we get Republican government. That's why we found out that we should be buying land from the Indians rather than taking it from the Indians.

GLENN: And it was it was the commentary on the side.

DAVID BARTON: It was the commentaries that did it and that's what drove King James crazy. That's why he came out with the King James Bible. It was essentially the same language but he would not allow commentaries in the Bible. And so the commentaries is what was used to build our judicial system, our legal system, our government system, our education system, our economic system. And so the same commentaries the founders made 250 years ago, that's what we've taken to the Founders Bible.

GLENN: Okay. Now, explain this a bit when you say you've taken it from the commentaries. Because you and I have had this conversation that the language of our founders is so riddled with biblical verse that most people don't even know. If you don't know the Bible inside and out, you don't know that that's a quote from the Bible.

DAVID BARTON: That's exactly right.

GLENN: And so you took their writings.

DAVID BARTON: We took the writings. For 25 years we've been collecting their documents and writings. We have 100,000 of their writings. And what we found is they are loaded up with Bible references and Bible verses. And we've been collecting that. And then last year a Bible publisher came and said, "Hey, let's do a commentary on the Bible." And I thought, hey, this is a great time to let the Founders comment on the Bible. And for example, three times John Adams cites Jeremiah 17:9 as why they did separation of powers in the Constitution. Now, I don't think anybody today would choose that verse that they were doing separation of powers, but there's a reason they did that. The same with economic system.

GLENN: Wait, wait. Let's pretend that John Jeremiah, the one you quoted.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah, Jeremiah 17:9 says, "The heart is desperately wicked. Who can know it." And from that they get, you know, that's the depravity of man. Man's going to do the wrong time every time he gets a chance unless there's some type of divine intervention to change his heart and so if that's the case, we better figure on government doing the wrong thing every time. So we need to divide the powers up so that maybe one branch will be righteous while the other two are wicked and maybe there's a way for one to check the others. And so they go into extensive, extensive presentation of why that verse is what drives their idea of separating the powers. And George Washington jumps on that, as does Alexander Hamilton and James Madison and others. So that becomes a very significant verse in shaping their thinking on why do separation of powers.

GLENN: What is the what is the thing as you were putting this together? What is the one place or one area or topic that you think, "Oh, my gosh, if people just knew this today"?

DAVID BARTON: You know, I don't know that there was one. The one area that got me was how applicable all the stuff is to today. When they started talking about types of taxes that are good and types of taxes that are bad, man, I saw our tax code and said we've really screwed this thing up. When I saw what they said about how to help the poor and social programs, I looked and said, man, we've really goofed this thing up. And what was profound most to me was how relevant all of that stuff 250 years ago was to exactly the stuff we're facing today. And quite frankly I may have been most shocked over all the things they had to say about abortion. Because I just didn't realize it was an issue back then. And all of the biblical references on why abortion is wrong, and I

GLENN: How did they wait. How was there abortion? I didn't know that, either.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah, I actually have an 1808 book on abortions in America. Jefferson and the other guys, and their legal codes made abortion illegal because they said it's a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's god. There's nothing in nature that kills its young while still in the womb. And as it turns out abortion was a big issue back then. But the difference was they said it's illegal as opposed to Roe V. Wade saying it's legal. So that's the kind of stuff that shocked me

GLENN: I've never

DAVID BARTON: was how applicable it was to what's going on today.

GLENN: Wow, had absolutely no idea.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: David, the you came under an awful lot attack, huge attack like I've never seen before. I talked to a preacher the other day and I said, have you read David's Bible yet? And he said, I just got a copy of it. And I said, you know, I just thumbed through it and just, you know, start reading some of the stuff in it. It's remarkable.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: He said, I think this Bible is the reason David came under attack. He said, I think that you know, I think this is so important that that's why people tried to discredit you. Not saying that they knew that. But that's why you are you've been just ravaged in the last year.

DAVID BARTON: Well, I really think that this is a new Geneva Bible. This is what will shape this generation or can shape this generation's thinking, and this will last for generations to come because it's timeless truth, of guys that did it 250 years ago. And I do think that that's probably why all of the attacks came is to try to minimize this and discredit this and bring this down before it even happened. And I didn't realize that at the time and I don't think the guys making the attacks realized that at the time, but I think, you know, in a way that both God and Satan had debates back over Job, I think that's probably what was going on at the time was, hey, this is coming out; I've got to do something to knock this down before people start reading it. And I really, I think he's right. I think

GLENN: You and I have been you and I have been ridiculed in the last couple of days because we've talked about divine providence and that, you know, the Lord's will will be done.

DAVID BARTON: Yeah.

GLENN: If we stand, if we stand at guard.

DAVID BARTON: Yep.

GLENN: I thank you for standing guard for so long and thank you for your work. If you want to get this, you can get it at WallBuilders.com. It's the Founders Bible, the original dream of freedom, the Founders Bible. Get it at WallBuilders.com. Do it now. Every American should own a copy of this. David, we'll talk again. Thanks so much.

DAVID BARTON: Thanks, Glenn. Bless you, bro.

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.