‘Is there anyone else in the media who will join me?’ Glenn reacts to Nancy Pelosi’s bold break of protocol

During a debate on the House floor on Friday, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was so unnerved by the commentary of fellow Congressman Tom Marino (R-PA), she got up out of her seat and ran through the aisles of the chamber toward Marino. Marino was speaking about the immigration crisis and the role the Obama Administration’s policies have played in facilitating the lawlessness at the border.

Watch the video of Marino and Pelosi below:

On radio this morning, Glenn explained the danger this moment represents. After recounting the beating of Senator Charles Sumner at the onset of the Civil War, Glenn challenged his colleagues in the media to consider the role they may have played in today’s divisiveness and what we can all do to move in a more respectful direction.

Below is an edited transcript of the monologue:

I want to talk to you a little bit about the state of our society. Left and right, we all want to belong to something bigger than ourselves. At the end of our life, we want to be able to look back and say, ‘Our kids live in a better world than we lived in because we did the hard thing.’ If you’ve ever gone through anything, you've ever been broken, you've ever faced a real serious challenge, you will say, ‘Give this to me. Let me take this on so my kids don't have to deal with it.’

But we have become a society that we no longer see our kids' future as real. We've bought into the lie that you can have everything that we can afford, that you deserve everything, that your kids don't really need you, that there's such a thing as quality time over just time. And I don't think any of that stuff is true, I really don't. And as a guy who has lived my life counting on quality time, I think it's a lie.

I watched the families that are great, and I've watched my kids now. My daughter is 8-years-old and my son who is 9, and I realize they are about to be 30. And where will that time have gone? I will have missed it yet again. And it matters. There are certain things that are true, and when we get to the end of our life, we will really only worry about our family and what did we do. I talked to a guy who was in a plane crash yesterday. He was in a plane crash and broke his back, couldn't get out, jet fuel was all over in this plane and spilling out on the ground, and he could hear the ignition of the engines. He thought, ‘Oh dear God, this thing is going to go up in a ball of fire.’ And nobody else was awake at the time. He had to get out. There were only three people on this plane. And the other two were relatively uninjured. He broke his back and thought that his legs were pinned in the plane. But when he really came conscious enough to realize and look down at his legs, he realized, ‘They're not pinned. There's nothing wrong with you.’ He's just sitting in his seat with nothing on his legs. He can't feel his legs. He unstrapped himself from the plane. He falls down into the center aisle. And he drags himself to the door just thinking his legs just aren't work for some reason. And he gets to the door and he tries to stand up and get himself up and there's no power to his legs at all.

A farmer had seen his plane go down, and it landed in a field. The farmer was on his tractor and drives out. This farmer and one of the pilots drag his body about 50 yards away from this plane and then he's in the hospital for almost a year. He couldn't walk. He's walking again. But it has been an unbelievable year of being broken. And he said, ‘Glenn, everything that they say about your life flashing in front of you, really happens.’ He said, ‘It's an amazing thing. You see things.’ He said, ‘Not once did I think about work. Not one scene was about my boss. Not one scene was about the quarterly profits. Nothing. It was all about my children. All about the things that I had done or didn't do in life.’

We're all like this. In the end, whether we admit it or not, we're all like this. We all believe that man should be free. Even the communists, even the fascists, convinced themselves that they're freeing people. ‘You'll be free if you live under Sharia Law because you're free to worship God the way you should worship God.’ So they even believe in freedom in a totally mixed-up, upside down world. We all believe that. And we all want to leave the world a better place for our children. We have to find a way to unite. We have to find a way to where we can live in a world where we disagree with each other.

Now, there are some things that we disagree on so much. For instance, Hamas. The Palestinians are not Nazis. But you can compare Hamas to Nazis quite easily but not the Palestinian people any more than you can say every German was a Nazi. That's not true. 30% of Germans voted for the Nazis. In the end, because they were all so afraid, some just bought into the propaganda. I mean their children were turning them in. In the end, I don't know what the percentage was, but we went over to fight the German people. But once we defeated the Nazis, we were not against the German people. The same thing with Hamas and Gaza. We're not against the people who live in Gaza. We're not against the Palestinians. We're against Hamas. We're against people who say, ‘Genocide is the way to go.’

So we have to find a way where we can talk to each other, where we can listen to one another, where we can have control of our own lives, and that we belong to something bigger than ourselves, something that means something in the end. I have been really concerned over the last 10, 15 years about what's happening in our world and in our country, and I have made some pretty bold predictions and stood alone on them. In 2007, 2006, I was talking about an economic collapse that was coming. It happened in 2008 because of TARP.

We're in the final bubble now called the ‘money bubble,’ and I predicted that in – what, 2007 – that we would bail everybody out and there would be a money bubble. And that's what USA Today had talked about last week in one of their op-eds: The money bubble.

We talked about the Caliphate. We talked about the rise of Nazis again in Europe and the old hatreds of the world. We talked about anti-Semitism on the rise. We talked about something that just made it in the newspapers last week, and this one came from Argentina. They're now blaming the United States for their inflation, and they're blaming the United States for their collapse. We talked about that four years ago. I'm really bad at timing. I don't know when these things happen. It's not that I can see the future. I know enough of history and I haven't been taught and trained by a guild.

There are certain things in history that happen and cycles repeat themselves. First, I looked for revolution around the world and I looked to the French Revolution and the American Revolution. I looked at what happened in Germany in the 1850s, in France, in the 1870s, in Russia in the teens, Cuba, Germany, China, all over the world. It's the same story, same pattern. But as we started to really fight with one another is when I first started to have this, ‘Oh-oh, wait a minute. We're in trouble internally. We are starting to hate each other.’ I started to look at the Civil War. And I told you a few years ago, it made me feel better when I did that because there was one thing that happened that we were so far away from. We had extra time.

But a soft version of it happened last Friday. If you remember, last week we were talking about Ted Cruz. They were talking about procedure. And the Democrats were very upset because of their procedure. And we were talking on the air about the Constitution. You got to care about the Constitution. Who cares about your little procedural rules? But that's a very big deal. And that's what made it in the papers, that Ted Cruz was a monster because he broke procedure when it came to the immigration debate. And what he did is he went over to the House, and he talked to the House members and said, ‘What are you doing?’ That was the crime of the century and it was in all of the newspapers about how bad Ted Cruz was.

But this was another procedure that was broken last week.

That's Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) running across the House floor ranting and raving about what Congressman Tom Marino (R-PA) is saying and he has the floor. She never asked for the floor. She just comes over and she starts wagging her finger in this face.

I don't believe that we are at this moment, but we took a giant leap toward this moment. I've been worried about an actual Civil War. And I do believe that we are a nation that is either at or near a ‘cold Civil War,’ where, thank goodness, nobody is firing shots at one another. But if you read the comment sections on the Huffington Post or TheBlaze, you hear the same stuff from left and right. Now, thank goodness it is only 5% of the population that is like that. But the vitriol is getting worse. And we can't engage in any of that. We have to strengthen our ties to people who we disagree with so we know each other, so we know that we're good people, that we don't wish them harm. We disagree, but we don't wish anybody harm. We stand shoulder to shoulder against those who would like chaos because there are those that would like the country to spiral into chaos. And whether they're communist or white supremacist, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the 80 or 90% of this country stays together – even though we disagree.

There came a time in the 1850s, and we've told you about this because, as I said, we were so far away from this. There same a time in the 1850s where both sides, the Whigs and the Democrats, both side were talking about slavery. They've been talking about slavery from the beginning of the country, and they were talking about getting rid of it. But they weren't going to do anything about it. And finally, this new party, this Republican Party started. They were like, ‘You guys are just playing games. Neither of you guys mean anything.’ The weaker of the two parties was the Whigs. The Republicans got out and they were the ones that were talking honestly about slavery, and they called it by name. They said, ‘You know, the people in the South, I don't care which party you're in, you're in bed with the horror of slavery.’ That's when somebody from the House broke all protocol, came across, and beat a guy within an inch of his life there in the well of the Senate.

Now, Nancy Pelosi clearly did not do that. But you saw the anger rise up in her so much that she broke protocol. Remember, just earlier this week, we heard how much protocol means. You don't have Ted Cruz break protocol and go over and talk to people in the House. This wasn't talking to people in the House. This is Nancy Pelosi enraged by what was said, running over and sticking her finger and then calling him inconsequential, calling him all kinds of names even after the incident. This is clearly not the beat-down of Charles Sumner.

But I warn you: This is an important event that Americans should see. And it has nothing to do with politics. If you agree with the Republican or you agree with Nancy Pelosi, it doesn't matter. This is an important moment that people need to see. When we dehumanize on the House floor, when they start being enraged and moving in that rage, we're in trouble. We're in very, very big trouble.

The good news is: There's still time. And there's time for all of us stop concentrating on ‘Glenn Beck said he was sorry.’ Is anyone else willing to say, ‘You know what? I did some things I'm not really proud of.’ ‘You know what? I've got to change my ways as well.’ Is there anyone else in the media who will join me? You don't have to agree with me. But is there anyone in the media who says, ‘Enough is enough’? We've got to stop worrying about the ratings. We have to stop worrying about the money. We have to start worrying about the things we're all going to worry about when we're on our death bed: What did we do?

Let's start to move towards a better future, one where we can at least talk with each other with respect.

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.