WATCH: Glenn’s impassioned reaction to Obama’s U.N. speech

President Obama addressed the Unites Nations General Assembly yesterday, and his speech consisted of several questionable declarations about the state of U.S. foreign policy and the state of the world as a whole. On radio this morning, Glenn unleashed a passionate rebuke the President’s words.

“No one wants to believe that the President of the United States, any president of the United States, is a habitual liar. Nobody does. But how many times do you have to see it for your own self and hear it with your own ears before that label becomes appropriate and absolutely unavoidable insanity to not attach that label,” Glenn asked. “It is way past appropriate to call the President a liar. He is a liar. What is truly incomprehensible, however, is that he can look into the eyes of the American people and look the world in the face and say the things that he said yesterday with a straight face.”

One of the issues the President attempted to address was the tactics and motives of the National Security Agency (NSA) both domestically and abroad.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We've begun to review the way that we gather intelligence so that we properly balance the legitimate security concerns of our citizens and allies with the privacy concerns that all people share.

“That's unbelievable,” Glenn said. “Our privacy concerns as citizens, who are guaranteed to be protected under the Constitution, have been ignored. They have been lied about and they have been shredded.”

We know Americans are uneasy with the surveillance techniques of the federal government, but how do our allies feel? Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff used her speech, which opened the U.N. General Assembly, to accuse the U.S. of violating human rights and international law through espionage that included spying on her email.

PRESIDENT ROUSSEFF: The permanent mission of Brazil with the United Nations and even the very presidency of the republic of Brazil were subject to interception of communications. Tampering in such a manner in the life and affairs of other countries is a breach of international law and as such, it is an affront to the principles that should otherwise govern relations among countries, especially among friendly nations. What we have before us, Mr. President, is a serious violation of human rights and civil liberties, a case of invasion and capture of confidential secret information pertaining to business activities and, above all, a case of disrespect against the sovereignty of my country.

“Does this sound like she agrees – that her concerns have been properly balanced by the President of the United States,” Glenn asked. “Who are we turning into? She is, quite frankly, pissed and should be. She has every right to be. She was actually scheduled to come to Washington for an official state visit, but she cancelled it. Brazil cancelled an official state visit because of this spying program. Do you know anything about this? Have you heard this in the news?”

The President, according to Glenn, has “ruined or weakened” our ties with our closest allies, as much as he has worsened our relationship with our enemies.

“They are talking now about the United States of America violating basic human rights. This is not Iran saying this. This is Brazil,” Glenn said. “And then our President has the gall to stand up and say this yesterday:”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: As a result of this work, in cooperation with allies and partners, the world is more stable than it was five years ago.

“You've got to be kidding me: The world was more stable than it was five years ago. This is why, honestly, we don't concentrate on presidential speeches anymore because blood shoots out of my eyes,” Glenn proclaimed exasperatedly. “I can't believe the Hollywood world we live in, where everybody allows him to get away with this. The world is more stable than it was five years ago?”

Let’s quickly rundown just a few of the unstable events that have transpired in the last five years:

“You mean like before Egypt was on fire? Before Egypt rounded up 50,000 Muslim Brotherhood clerics and outlawed the group? Really? You mean we're more stable now? Before two changes in Egyptian leadership within a year, including a military coup that we don't even know if you'll call it a coup or not? You mean more stable than when the Christian churches were burned to the ground and Coptic Christians were being massacred? Because these are the changes in Egypt, by the way, Mr. President, that you encouraged,” Glenn explained.

“The world is more stable now that we don't have a dictator in Libya,” he asked. “Don't like the dictator, didn't like him, but now Al‑Qaeda is in charge of Libya, and the world is on fire there.”

The world was less stable before Libya burst into flames and four Americans were murdered in Benghazi. It was more stable, when the world thought that we would actually go rescue our own people,” Glenn continued. “You have the gall to say that the world's more stable after Kenyan terrorists began rising up and murdering innocent people at shopping malls? The world was really less stable before the Syrian Civil War, which hundreds of thousands of people have been killed. Chemical weapons were used. Because we destabilized the world, Mr. President! And the world is on the brink of World War III, and you have the gall to say it's more stable?”

There is no quantifiable way to argue that the world is more stable now than when President Obama took office, so why is he even trying to make that case?

“Mr. President, you are far too intelligent for this. You know better than this, but maybe you don't because everybody is afraid to say anything to you. So maybe you don't. Maybe you've never learned a lesson because nobody ever has the guts to say anything to you,” Glenn said. “Nobody will ever say, ‘Do you realize what you've just done? Do you realize what that speech just did? Do you realize what the ramifications are? Do you realize, Mr. President?’ No. Instead, everybody fawns over you and says you're the greatest leader to ever live! So maybe you don't. But I can't believe anymore that you're not just straight‑up lying.”

“Let me understand this. Is that really your idea of stable, Mr. President? Is that really what you think is stable,” he continued. “Because to quote the Princess Bride, "You keep using that word, and I do not think it means what you think it means."

Glenn ended his impassioned monologue with a plea to the American people:

“Let me ask you something: Where are you? Where are you? When will you have the basic human dignity and decency to stand up and denounce,” Glenn asked. “I don't care if you denounce this man or denounce your vote. I don't care. You denounce what's going on. You stand up and say, ‘No, not in my name.’ When? For the sake of our lives, our children, our God, our liberty? When will you finally wake up and say, ‘I can't be a part of this, not in my name. Not in my name.’”

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

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.