Glenn: We are a nation at war with Assad, period.

Since President Obama put forth his “comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy” to “degrade” and “destroy” ISIS last week, his administration has struggled to form a consensus as to whether or not we are actually at war with the terror group. On radio this morning, Glenn made a bold declaration: The United States is not preparing for war with ISIS. It is preparing for war with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“Make no mistake. We are not at war with ISIS. We are a nation at war or preparing to go to war with Assad, period. That's what's happening,” Glenn said definitively. “The President wanted to go to war with Assad. He wanted to destabilize the region with that dictator and get him out of there. And that's exactly what's happening.”

The White House has publically warned the Assad regime not to interfere with U.S. airstrikes in the region. During an appearance on CBS’ Face the Nation, Secretary of State John Kerry said the U.S. will not “cooperate” with the Syrian government.

"We're not going to coordinate it with Syria," Kerry said. "We will certainly want to de-conflict and make certain that they're not about to do something that they might regret even more seriously. But we're not going to coordinate, it's not a cooperative effort. We're going to do what they haven't done, what they had plenty of opportunity to do, which is to take on ISIL and to degrade it and eliminate it as a threat."

Additionally, Obama held a closed door meeting with a “group of visitors” last week during which he explained what he would do if was an “advisor to ISIS.” The contents of that conversation have since been leaked.

“The White House advisors just leaked one of the most damning things I ever heard the President say – any president say,” Glenn said.

TheBlaze reports:

The New York Times, citing “several people who were in the meeting,” reports that the president claimed Islamic State terrorists made a serious strategic mistake by murdering the hostages. He then reportedly revealed what he would’ve suggested if he had been “an adviser to ISIS.” The discussion reportedly occurred just before his primetime address to the nation on the Islamic State threat.

Obama said he would have released the hostages and pinned notes to their chests that urged the United States, “Stay out of here; this is none of your business,” according to the Times report. If the terrorists had done that, Obama reportedly argued, the group may have been able to diminish public support for U.S. military action.

“That was intentionally released. This is a president who does not want to engage in any of this stuff,” Glenn explained. “So he's saying, ‘Look, guys, we don't want do fight you… But what you're doing is pissing off the American people, and I have to do something’… That's what's happening.”

But perhaps the most important piece of this puzzle is the fact that part of Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy involves the arming and training of “moderate” Syrian rebels.

The only problem?

New reports indicate those same rebels have signed a nonaggression agreement with ISIS, in which "the two parties will respect a truce until a final solution is found and they promise not to attack each other because they consider the principal enemy to be the Nussayri regime."

Glenn believes if the Obama Administration was actually serious about defeating ISIS it would be arming and aiding the Kurdish Peshmerga forces that are the moderate force in the region.

“Why aren’t we arming the Kurds? If you want to arm someone, you arm the Kurds,” Glenn said. “You don't arm the Muslim extremists.”

But, again, Obama’s goal is not to decimate ISIS. Rather, he is looking to organize the Middle East.

“[But] this isn't really about the Kurds. This isn't really about ISIS. This is about Assad,” he concluded. “Hear me, these are the words of the President: Organizing the Middle East. If you want to organize the Middle East, you have to get rid of the dictators. This is a target on Assad. Make no mistake.”

Front page image courtesy of the AP

COVID is back! Or that is what we’re being told anyway...

A recent spike in COVID cases has triggered the left's alarm bells, and the following institutions have begun to reinstate COVID-era mandates. You might want to avoid them if you enjoy breathing freely...

Do YOU think institutions should bring back COVID-era mandates if cases increase? Let us know your thoughts HERE.

Morris Brown College

Both of Upstate Medical's hospitals in Syracuse, New York

Corey Henry / Senior Staff Photographer | The Daily Orange

Auburn Community Hospital, New York

Kevin Rivoli / The Citizen | Auburn Pub

Lionsgate Studio

AaronP/Bauer-Griffin / Contributor | GETTY IMAGES

United Health Services in New York

Kaiser Permanente in California

Justin Sullivan / Staff | GETTY IMAGES

There was a time when both the Left and the Right agreed that parents have the final say in raising their children... Not anymore.

In the People's Republic of California, the STATE, not parents, will determine whether children should undergo transgender treatments. The California state legislature just passed a law that will require judges in child custody cases to consider whether parents support a child’s gender transition. According to the law, the state now thinks total affirmation is an integral part of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare.”

We are inching closer to a dystopia where the state, not the parents, have ultimate rights over their children, a history that people from former Soviet nations would feign repeating.

Glenn dove into the law AND MORE in this episode titled, "Parental Advisory: The EXPLICIT plot to control YOUR kids." To get all the research that went into this episode AND information on how YOU can fight back, enter your email address below:

If you didn't catch Wednesday night's Glenn TV special, be sure to check it out HERE!

The Biden admin has let in MORE illegal aliens than the populations of THESE 15 states

GUILLERMO ARIAS / Contributor | Getty Images

There are currently an estimated 16.8 MILLION illegal aliens residing in the United States as of June 2023, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). This number is already 1.3 million higher than FAIR's January 2022 estimate of 15.5 million and a 2.3 million increase from its end-of-2020 estimate. Even Democrats like New York City's Mayor Adams Mayor Adams are waking up to what Conservatives have been warning for years: we are in a border CRISIS.

However, this isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010. In the first two years of the Biden administration alone, the illegal alien population increased by 16 PERCENT nationwide, imposing a whopping net cost of $150.6 BILLION PER YEAR on American taxpayers. That is nearly DOUBLE the total amount that the Biden administration has sent to Ukraine.

This isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010.

These large numbers often make it difficult to conceptualize the sheer impact of illegal immigration on the United States. To put it in perspective, we have listed ALL 15 states and the District of Colombia that have smaller populations than the 2.3 MILLION illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration. That is more than the entire populations of Wyoming, Vermont, and South Dakota COMBINED—and the American taxpayers have to pay the price.

Here are all 16 states/districts that have FEWER people than the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration.

1. New Mexico

Population: 2,110,011

2. Idaho

Population: 1,973,752

3. Nebraska

Population: 1,972,292

4. West Virginia

Population: 1,764,786

5. Hawaii

Population: 1,433,238

6. New Hampshire

Population: 1,402,957

7. Maine

Population: 1,393,442

8. Montana

Population: 1,139,507

9. Rhode Island

Population: 1,090,483

10. Delaware

Population: 1,031,985

11. South Dakota

Population: 923,484

12. North Dakota

Population: 780,588

13. Alaska

Population: 732,984

14. Washington DC

Population: 674,815

15. Vermont

Population: 647,156

16. Wyoming

Population: 583,279

POLL: Should the Government control the future of AI?

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, tech titans, lawmakers, and union leaders met on Capitol Hill to discuss the future of AI regulation. The three-hour meeting boasted an impressive roster of tech leaders including, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and others, along with more than 60 US Senators.

Tech Titans and Senators gathered in the Kennedy Caucus Room.The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The meeting was closed to the public, so what was exactly discussed is unknown. However, what we do know is that a majority of the CEOs support AI regulation, the most vocal of which is Elon Musk. During the meeting, Musk called AI "a double-edged sword" and strongly pushed for regulation in the interest of public safety.

A majority of the CEOs support AI regulation.

Many other related issues were discussed, including the disruption AI has caused to the job market. As Glenn has discussed on his program, the potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real, and many have already felt the effects. From taxi drivers to Hollywood actors and writers, AI's presence can be felt everywhere and lawmakers are unsure how to respond.

The potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real.

Ultimately, the meeting's conclusion was less than decisive, with several Senators making comments to the tune of "we need more time before we act." The White House is expected to release an executive order regarding AI regulation by the end of the year. But now it's YOUR turn to tell us what YOU think needs to be done!

Should A.I. be regulated?

Can the government be trusted with the power to regulate A.I.? 

Can Silicon Valley be trusted to regulate AI? 

Should AI development be slowed for safety, despite its potential advantages?

If a job can be done cheaper and better by AI, should it be taken away from a human?

Do you feel that your job is threatened by AI?