Is there anything that would make you stop believing in America?

A person's true character emerges when they are tested. "Hard times made us". Our struggles, our hardships, our trials - these are the things that define us as people. Ask yourself, is there anything that the country could do to you to make you turn your back on the things you believe in? Could you be persecuted, imprisoned, and cast out of America's borders, yet still stand up when called upon to do your duty? On radio Tuesday morning, Glenn shared the story of a relatively unknown American hero who was asked to do just that: Charles Pomeroy Stone, the man who laid the foundation for the Statue of Liberty.

I want to tell you an American story. A story that will really take us to a place to say, who are we? Who are we as people? What is it that we really believe? What is our responsibility, and what is our duty? I want to bring this up because of what we're dealing with, with ISIS and what we're dealing with, with our economy and our belief in who we are, belief in our country.

What could possibly be done to you that would crush your belief in those principles that we have always held self-evident? What is it that could be done to you? Could your country imprison you, discredit you? Is there anything this country could do that could make you say, I no longer believe in these things?

I want to tell you a story about a guy that you might ever heard of before, but should because you know his work. His name is Charles Pomeroy Stone. He's he's really a kind of interesting guy because of what he went through in his life and what happened in his life.

He was a soldier in the Civil War. He had a -- he was a soldier in the Civil War, and he's really probably most well-known for something the Battle of Balls Bluff. It was a small engagement. But the war was going badly for the North. I don't know all the details, but there was a bad blunder, and he got the blame for it. Now, he wasn't even there. There's no evidence showing that he was even there.

"Charles P. Stone" by Unknown photographer, restored by Michel Vuijlsteke. "Charles P. Stone" by Unknown photographer, restored by Michel Vuijlsteke.

But the Republicans in Congress were looking for a scapegoat for this, and Stone was the guy because while he was a Union soldier, he was a member of the Democratic party, so he was a Democrat.

He was a Democrat because - I love this, the irony here is just so amazing - he was a Democratic because he was sympathetic to slave owners.

So he was fighting for the Union army, but he was a Democrat because he was friends of slave owners. In fact, not only had he been tolerant and courteous with his slave owners in Maryland, but he had also issued orders that fugitive slaves who were finding sanctuary within his area would have to be returned to their owners.

But he was doing his best to try to keep Maryland in the hands of Lincoln and the Union. But it really enraged the Republicans because the Republicans were rabidly antislavery.

And so here's this guy, and the battle goes poorly. Well, they need a scapegoat. And the Republicans see this guy and they say, 'you know what, let's pin it on him'. He wasn't even at the battle. 'Let's pin it on him because we can get him out. Because we don't want anyone who is sympathetic with the slave owners on our side, so let's get him out'.

Now, they did everything they could to get him out. In fact, they railroaded him. What happened is Congress established a Joint Committee on the Conduct of War, and the Republicans had control of it; and in secret proceedings, the committee gathered evidence against Stone and judged him without even hearing his defense. He didn't have a chance to even have a defense. They just deemed him guilty. Concentrated power.

So what happened next? Well, he is trying to clear his name. He finally gets a chance to speak in front of the Joint Committee. But by that time, everyone had made their own decision. So he was done. He was carried off to Fort Lafayette in New York harbor where he spent 18 months in prison for a crime he didn't commit. He had nothing to do -- he was now in prison until -- for 18 months until finally they said, 'okay, we don't really have any evidence' and and it was overturned.

But he had been so discredited, he couldn't find any work.

Now, let me throw in something else that he did.

At the same time he's being called a traitor, same time all of this stuff is happening and he's no friend of the North, even though he's in the Union Army. In late February, right before this happened, he heard a plot against Lincoln. He learned from detectives in Baltimore that rebel sympathizers planned to assassinate President Lincoln as he was coming in. As he passed through Baltimore to his inauguration ceremonies in Washington.

So Stone went and he not only warned his superiors, but he got Lincoln to change his travel plans. And then he actually posted himself next to the carriage during the inaugural parade. He supervised all of the security arrangements, which include posting riflemen at strategic locations along the parade route and had 50 armed men all around the president that nobody knew.

This is really kind of the first Secret Service operation. That's this guy.

He finds himself in prison. Wrongfully imprisoned. He gets out after 18 months, but his name has been so dragged through the mud, nobody will hire him. He is an absolute pariah. Well, he's a brilliant strategist.

Well, the French need help. The French needs help over in Egypt. Time goes by. He's got to have some work. So he goes and assists the French. He learns how to speak French. He learns how to work with the French. I mean, that's not an easy thing.

He comes back to the country years later, it's now in the late 1870s. He still can't find a job. No one wants to hire him in America. He's still a pariah.

Now, where would you stand at this point?

This started in the 1860s. It's now been 20 years. You spent almost 20 months in a prison wrongfully accused. You saw your Congress, your politicians, gather together and hold secret meetings. You weren't even allowed to present your side of the story. They so destroyed your life. You cannot have a life here.

And that's when the government come knocking at his door. It's now 1883.

The government comes knocking at his door and says, 'We need your help because a few years ago we had some boxes show up, and we don't know what the hell we're even doing with those boxes. They've been sitting in a park. We've opened them up. We've raised some money, but we don't know what we're doing and, of course, all the instructions are in French. You know how to do it. Will you help us?'

On my desk, from the office of the American Committee of the Statue of Liberty.

He says, 'Yes, I'll help you build the Statue of Liberty.'

This is a purchase order signed by him for 8,000 cubic yards of stone that need to be delivered to the wharf of Liberty Island.

Purchase order signed by Charles Pomeroy Stone for 8,000 cubic yards of stone that need to be delivered to the wharf of Liberty Island. Purchase order signed by Charles Pomeroy Stone for 8,000 cubic yards of stone that need to be delivered to the wharf of Liberty Island.

I had no idea that the guy who helped build the Statue of Liberty, who oversaw the erection of the Statue of Liberty was a guy this country maligned, wrongfully imprisoned, ran out of the country. A guy who could not find a job. But was the only guy that could actually put this together.

How ironic that the man who was friendly to slave owners, who was maligned and destroyed because he was friendly to slave owners, he was maligned and discredited and went wrongfully to prison would be the one who fastened the feet with the broken chain onto the stone that he assembled.

This is just one of the items that is being looked at now to be put into the Museum. We're doing a Museum here for two days only. Here in Dallas, Texas. Stories like this, you've never heard before.

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.