WATCH: "It's about control"

Tonight, one of the most shocking stories I have ever seen, and I’ve seen a lot. I’ve seen all the George Soros stuff. The government is snatching a child right out of its mother’s arms. This happened in California. All of the stories tonight that you will hear will have a common theme, and that is control.

We are living in a dangerous, dangerous time, and your neighbors better wake up from their slumber before it’s too late. A lot has changed in the last four years, but even more has changed in the last 86,497 days. That’s how many days have passed since these immortal words were penned: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” These were the things that were given to us by God.

America, because of these words and the document that contained these words, became the land of the free. We were a beacon. Before we grew arrogant, we were a beacon, and millions of people packed up their entire lives and traveled halfway across the world. Even when we were arrogant, we were still the best in the world.

People would put their families on rickety boats and come over in Chevys. They weren’t even boats. They wouldn’t even know if they would make it alive, but it was worth it. It was worth a shot. In some cases, families were so desperate, they split apart. The patriarch of the family would make the trek in hopes of succeeding and one day have the means to bring the rest of the family to America with him, and they would do it over and over again. One by one, they would come.

In my own family, my uncle Leo was the only one who the family could afford to send to America. It was just before World War II. His family knew what was coming, and he knew he had to come to America. And the rest may never have made it. They didn’t know what exactly was going to happen to their home country in World War II.

I just read a story just a couple of days ago about a Jewish family here in America that split because they didn’t even know what would happen to America. But they took their two children and sent one to Californian and one to Illinois, and they didn’t even know about it, just to have a chance. That’s what America was, a chance, a chance to survive, a chance to breathe the air that was free, a chance to break the chains that would bind people all around the world in darkness.

Here was a beacon, a chance to pursue their wildest dreams, to pursue happiness, whatever it looked like for them…and the chance to worship God as they understood him, not with one formula. No promises, no guarantees, no fancy home or a job, just a chance, and people came by the millions, because this was the only place you had a chance.

Everywhere else you were controlled, and man is not designed to be controlled. We’re individuals, each of us unique. It’s that crazy leftist word that I don’t think – it’s like they say in the Princess Bride, you keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Diversity, that’s what America was all about. People are still coming. The question is, is America still delivering on its promise? Are we still a free nation? I’m not really sure.

The German family who fled here to homeschool their kids because of religious persecution, they would say yes, it is. Eric Holder is trying to kick them, however, out of the country. So are we? Anna and Alex Nikolayev, that’s the story of the kid that we told you yesterday. They came here from Russia of all places wanting to be free. They’re probably wondering if they were better off back with Putin in Russia. They live in the socialist state of California.

What happened to them is one of the most shocking things I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen it all. Several armed police officers in California, escorting a social worker from Child Protective Services, stormed into their house without a warrant and physically removed their infant baby right out of their mother’s arms. Anna was smart enough to set up a video camera just before they entered, and I’m glad she did, because the story is so incredible, I don’t think anyone would believe it if you hadn’t seen this.

VIDEO

Officer: So I’m going to come in and grab your baby and don’t resists and don’t fight me, okay?

 

I’m going to grab your baby. Don’t resist and don’t fight me. Are you kidding me? That goes against nature. Remember the bear cub thing that we talked about a couple of days ago? You go into a cave, and you’re like, I just want to hug the little cub. Mommy is going to tear you apart. That’s nature’s law.

It’s amazing, especially considering just a few months earlier, this government that pretends to care about babies so much that they made it legal to kill that baby just as long as you kill it in the womb before you can see anything happening. But you’d have to pry that baby out of my cold, dead hands. But what would you do as a parent?

It’s easy to talk big. It’s easy to say that would never happen to me. I’d tell them a thing or two. Really? Would you? Would you? Don’t you think you’d feel a little helpless? Would you even know what to do? Can you imagine how frightened this couple was?

Who wouldn’t be intimidated when police officers barge into your home demanding custody of the baby, and you’re thinking wait a minute, they can’t really do this, can they? And when they say yes, and if you resist, it’s only going to make it worse. You may never get your child back. What do you do, America?

Can you believe that we are living in this country now when I have to ask you that question, and you actually have to seriously ponder it? That’s the sort of thing that you would expect in North Korea or China and Russia, not here in America. Now these are, by all accounts, loving parents who are just trying to get the best treatment possible for their five-month-old baby, Sammy. That’s it. The justification CPS used was severe neglect, and I want you to understand this scene, because I want you to see if you can find any neglect, let alone severe, any neglect in this scenario.

Baby Sammy was born in a hospital with a heart condition. He goes home. He starts to show flu-like symptoms. Mom and dad are concerned, so they take him to the hospital. Boy, that doesn’t sound like neglect, does it? Now, they’re sitting in the hospital, and a nurse comes in and starts to give the child medication. Mom says, wait, what are you giving to the baby? The nurse says, I don’t know. The doctor just told me to give it to him.

Now, what do you say as a parent? Stop. I don’t know what you’re giving my child. What are you giving my child? I want to see the doctor. That’s what I would say. Is that neglect, or is that concern? Well, the doctor comes in, recommends surgery, recommends you’ve got to do it right now. Well, the couple had already previously been told that if they would wait to have surgery, the baby would be bigger and would have a better chance of surviving. Now what would you do?

And you know what’s amazing – it’s not your decision. It’s theirs. Their confidence in the quality of the care is a little shaken, because the doctor disagrees with the other doctor they just saw, and the nurse was like, I don’t know. I just give the baby whatever the doctor says. So they say, you know what, we want a second opinion. They want to go to another hospital. They want to make sure that they do the right thing before they start cutting the chest open of their child.

So they go to another hospital to get a second opinion. The second doctor says you know what, your baby is hydrated, healthy, clears the baby to go home. You’re fine. Now, does this sound like anyone even at all neglecting their children? After they left, the first hospital calls CPS and sends officers over to hospital number two. The officers show up, and they say, “Where’s the baby?” The doctor writes it all out. The baby is fine. I sent the baby home. The officers are totally satisfied, and they leave.

But that’s not good enough for the state of California. Oh no, it’s not over. Twenty-four hours later, CPS shows up at their home with armed police, breaks into their home. They do not have a warrant, and they essentially kidnap the child. Now I’m going to give you tonight a positive update to the story, and we’re going to be talking to the parents in just a few minutes, but the damage has already been done.

How can this possibly happen in the land of the free and the home of the brave? A child snatched from their mother’s arms…can you imagine? I’m just imagining what my wife – what would you do? How does it happen? Well, it’s easy – Progressives. You see, they know better than you. They’re smarter than you. They know – what do you know, really?

And God is out of the picture, so they are in control. See, it used to be God, then you, then the government. That’s the way our founders set it up. God was up here. He gave rights to you, and you say, I’m going to loan some of these rights to the federal government so they can do the things that I don’t have time to do so I can pursue happiness. That’s the way it worked.

But now government is at the top, you are underneath government, and God doesn’t even figure into the picture anymore. And if God doesn’t issue you your rights, who does? Certainly you don’t. Who are you to issue rights? The government does, and if the government starts to issue rights, they can issue them. They can issue rights over here but not over here. They can take them back. They can trample them. They can change them, because their rights, not yours.

They can do anything they see fit, because they have occupied the space of God, and this is exactly what our founders knew. The children don’t belong to you. You might’ve birthed them, but anybody can do that. They belong to the community. If this sounds insane, well let me remind you of the MSNBC promo, not just somebody in a panel going, oh yeah, I misspoke. No, no, this was a scripted promo from NBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry.

VIDEO

Melissa Harris-Perry: We have never invested as much in public education as we should have, because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children. Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children, so part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.

Sometimes I just fall to my knees and I ask God, how is it I can’t break through? How is that I can’t break through to the American people? How is it? How do we do it here? What is wrong with people? I’m the conspiracy theory? I’m the one pushing conspiracy? Are you watching the news?

Drop the private notion of your kid belongs to you. The collective controls them now. That’s insanity. Well, we’ll make better decisions when the collective is in control. Really? Do orphanages, are they better? Because those kids are controlled by the collective. All the Progressives think that they are going to be the one that finally solves it.

It’s the ageless socialist, communist riddle – how can we achieve this perfect utopia, collectivist society where it doesn’t end in starvation and, you know, people getting shot in the head? Well, it hasn’t happened yet, and it’s not going to, because it’s impossible. Man is designed to be free and chart their own course, not to be controlled. We are not designed to be lumped into groups or collectives. We can do that by choice, but we are designed as individuals. Look at your fingerprints – individuals.

We are completely and totally unique, and that’s diversity, the way it should be. And no one else in the history of the world is like you, but Progressives are trying to defy the laws of nature. Can I ask you this simple question: Can you imagine anyone having a greater love for your child than you? Besides your spouse, is there anyone? I think God, but that’s it. That’s it. No state, no group, no government, no social worker, nobody, no teacher, nobody can love my child more than I can love my child. That’s my child.

Yet, they keep trying to take me out of the picture and you out of the picture, because you parents, you just don’t know. We went to school for these things. Really? Parents now at a New York school are up in arms – but they’re all bigots, remember that – because they weren’t notified that students were forced to attend and participate in an anti-bullying presentation on homosexuality and gender identity.

Now, this is a program that they took 13- and 14-year-old female students, and they lined ’em all up. And they were forced to ask each other to make out and to pretend to be lovers. My 13-year-old daughter is going to be forced to stand in line and look another girl in the eye and say, “I want to be your lover”? What, are you insane?

The male students participated in a workshop which presented them with the idea that they should always have a condom in their pockets at all times. You never know when, you know, you’re going to need a condom. My 13-year-old son – thank you very much. They also got tips on how to identify – and I love this one – “a slut.”

So this is a seminar designed to create a bully-free environment, bully free, except for sluts. Well, I guess maybe sluts aren’t people. You can bully sluts, because they’re sluts, but just make sure you have a condom in your pocket when you do, because, you know, she’s a slut, you know what I mean? And you gotta have that condom, unless she’s a slut that likes to be slutty with other women, and then she should be in the other line.

What planet are we living on? Who thought this was a good idea? Some Progressive, over-educated numbskull, that’s who. We have the kind of government where bureaucrats are in charge, and parents have very little to say, either by design or by choice, because a lot of this is happening because a lot people are like, whatever. It’s just a school. It’s going to be fine. No it’s not.

The school superintendent shrugged off the criticism. I love this one. “[We] may require more notification to parents…” You might? You might require, really? Mom and dad, how are you feeling? Who has more control over your child right now, the school or you? Is your child with you more than the school?

Common Core is another control grab, federally mandated curriculum that forces every school to teach exactly the same way, homogenized, generic, zero chance of sparking any creativity in the children or in the teachers. They just jammed this one through the stimulus bill and bribed its way into most of the states, and parents have been left in the dark.

Now it’s finally being implemented in some states like New York, and the complaints are coming in. “Teachers, parents, and students complained that the tests were poorly designed, covered material that not been taught, and frustrated children to the point of tears.” Well, I hope the collective was there to hold them and wipe their little runny noses.

A professor at Columbia created a website for teachers and school administrators to share their feedback on Common Core. What did he find? Overwhelmingly negative, and these are the people who like Common Core. Let’s not forget, it teaches that Communism is everyone for everyone, and Capitalism is everybody out for themselves.

The masks are coming off, and we are seeing what Progressives are really all about, one word – control. Yesterday on radio, I played for you an admission from a gay activist. While I disagree with her, I actually have respect for her, because at least she’s being honest. This is Masha Gessen. Listen.

VIDEO

Masha Gessen: I mean, I agree. It’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there. You know, because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out 30 years ago. You know, I have three kids who have five parents, more or less. And I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally. I don’t see why we should choose two of those parents and make them into a sanctioned couple.

The world’s getting awfully complex here. I’m having a hard time following, keeping up. I could have a conversation with this woman every day of the week, every day of the week. At least she’s honest. These are the things the conspiracy theorists tell you that are coming down the pike, but nobody will believe you. Why, because they’re lying to you. They’re lying to you.

The institution of marriage is absolutely under attack, and if that happens, everything you know – families, parents, churches, all of it – gone. I know some Conservatives in this audience will not like this, but if you want to get married, I don’t really care. You can get married. You want to get married to a bike or a tree or a Buzz Lightyear action figure, I don’t really care. I really don’t care. Whatever dude, whatever – leave me out of it.

If that’s what your conscience dictates, I will support your right to be married in your church, and you can have the church of the, you know, the holy blue carpet, and you worship the blue carpet. I don’t really care. I’m not going to tell you what you can do in your church. Don’t you dare tell me what I can do my church.

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. The value of that pact does not come from a government sanctioning it. It comes from God. I make a pact, a contract between my wife and God. That’s it. What God has joined together, let no man tear apart. That’s it. I have homosexual friends. I have homosexual employees. I don’t have a problem with it – whatever – good people, good people. I don’t think – maybe they’re conniving, but I don’t think so. I don’t think most people have her opinion; that they want to destroy my marriage.

We have to fight for the right to be different, to follow our conscience. Why is government even in the marriage business? Why are they in the parent business? I don’t want them in my bedroom. I don’t want them at a yard sale. I don’t want them at my kids’ lemonade stand or my living room or my kitchen.

They shouldn’t be in my marriage business, but they’ve done it now. And now they’re picking and choosing winners and losers, not only in marriage, but in business, everything. It’s only about control. They are trying to control what relationships you are allowed and not allowed to engage in. Meanwhile, they are putting all the structure in so they can watch every relationship.

When government has that kind of control over decisions that should be made by you, we all lose, even the ones making the decision. They lose, too. When the collective conscience trumps individual conscience, we are in trouble, trouble like crowds of people cheering at the demise of traditional marriage.

I think of the letter that came from Ben Franklin to Thomas Payne when he says, I’m an atheist. God doesn’t exist. How dare you? That was Ben Franklin’s response, how dare you? You are reaping all of the benefits from these people who have been listening to God. You don’t have to agree with them. Look at the benefit of this society. And now you say it’s nothing. How dare you?

Get the state out of my bedroom. Get the state out of my classroom. Get the state out of my hospital room. Get out of my life. Eighty-six thousand, four hundred ninety-seven days later, I’ve got news for you, it’s still about freedom. It’s still about freedom; however, we are now entering the time when we’re not celebrating its acquisition. We are now defending it from extinction. And it’s amazing, because the same kind of powers that seek control today are the same powers that the founders fled from in the first place.

This Fourth of July, we’re going to be out in Salt Lake City, and we’re going to do Man in the Moon. It’s a whole three-day weekend, and I invite you to come. We’re going to change the way we celebrate Fourth of July because it has to be. We have to put things back in its rightful place.

And one of the things we’re doing, we’re singing some of the traditional songs or performing them for you, but we’re not singing any of the traditional versus, because I don’t think we hear ’em anymore. I don’t think we listen to the lyrics anymore. You know what, you want to solve the problem here, maybe we should just start singing different stanzas from the Star-Spangled Banner. Maybe that’ll make people see who we really are and where we came from.

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.