One person can make a difference

November 14, 2014

Writer

One of the big stories this week was a video clip of an Obamacare architect who made some startling admissions about Obama’s controversial health care bill. The video was actually from over a year ago but only recently surfaced -- today on radio Glenn spoke with the person who uncovered the video and didn’t quit until the public saw it.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: I want to tell you about the power of one. How one person can make a difference. One person who is motivated to get up and just say, wait a minute. Wait a minute. I want to figure this out. I want to tell you about a story? Philadelphia, who said I thought you said I could keep my health insurance. I thought you said if I liked my health insurance, I could keep my health insurance. Now, my health insurance has been canceled. I want to find out how this whole thing happened. So he started for looking for all the architects of Obamacare. He started to read everything he could about them. And finding all the speeches. Anything where any of these guys had ever -- had ever given a speech. And he started listening to them. And then he started to notice, wait a minute this guy didn't say much, but, boy, this guy did. This guy is calling the American people stupid. This guy has all kinds of stuff. He's not hiding at all. And he's one of the main architects. I want to introduce you to the guy who found Gruber, the reason why we know that this administration is lying is because of a guy just like you. Who said I've had enough. And he dedicated some time to go and find the truth. This is why net neutrality is really being pushed. They've got to controlled the internet because they can't control the press.

If the press is free and is you. You're not going to the White House correspondence dinner. Rich Weinstein is not going to the White House correspondence dinner. And once you lose control of the press, once you lose control of the narrative, you lose. Let bring Rich Weinstein in. He's from Philadelphia. Rich, what do you do for a living.

RICH: I'm an investment advisory.

GLENN: And tell me your story on how you found these Gruber videos.

RICH: You kind of described it. About this time last year, I lost my -- you know, as I've said before, the president kind of speaks with qualifiers a lot. When he said, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period. There's no qualifiers in that statement. So I thought, well, the ACA is not going to impact me because I like my plan, I'll keep it, period. Then exactly this time this year, we got the notice. Our plan is not ACA compliant.

GLENN: That's because you had a junk plan, this is the argument.

RICH: That's an awesome argument except for the fact -- I don't want to throw too much out there about myself. When I say it, don't think I'm trying to be cocky or anything.

I'm an investment advisor, I have an accounting degree, I have an MBA, I have an insurance license. My wife is an MBA. I'm qualified to figure out what kind of insurance I have. What else can you tell me that I had a junk plan? I laughed like you did. And I'm like, wait a minute. Do you know my situation better than I know my situation? I'm qualified.

So it's kind of funny actually.

GLENN: So then you went to see and you started looking, and you looked at all of the architects. And on some of the architects, you didn't find anything.

RICH: Right. There's Dr. Cutler, the first guy I looked at. Pretty interesting. Talked a lot about cost control. He really didn't say anything or do anything politically. There's kind of one thing politically he did, but it didn't really grab my eye that much.

Once I got through with him, I started looking at Dr. Gruber. And I went through all his stuff. And it took -- I just found an email -- by the way, yesterday I called in here. I was talking to Pat and Stu because I had sent you guys a video that I thought was important.

So it kind of sparked me. I look back at some of the emails I sent out. And I sent emails to a lot of people in the media saying, hey, look, I got stuff here. And that goes back to December of last year. Even I had forgotten it was that long. December -- early December of 2013.

GLENN: Wow.

RICH: I was sending emails, Facebook messages, whatever, to whoever in the media seemed interested in the law. And nobody --

GLENN: I will tell you, Rich, I just heard this morning from Stu and Pat that you had sent this, and I'm going to do an investigation. But I will tell you that I believe that our secret servant agent that Stu gave it to was on the phone at the time that you jumped our fence. So I'm not exactly sure what happened there.

RICH: If anybody out there can get somebody from the 5 to contact me, I will make them laugh hysterically. I guarantee it. They will laugh, guaranteed.

STU: At this point, we're ready to take any of your videos. You've obviously proven yourself as someone who can find some good stuff.

PAT: In fact, you mentioned you sent your stuff to keep Malinak. We have since had him killed. We lost him.

GLENN: He was, I don't remember -- I -- what?

PAT: We just shot him in the head.

GLENN: We killed him. And we told him, if he likes that bullet, he can keep that bullet.

RICH: Period.

PAT: So far he's kept it.

GLENN: So, Rich, now Nancy Pelosi is saying, she's never heard of this guy. She's never heard of Gruber. But we've got another video from you that shows that Gruber was -- said, I wrote this specific part of the bill, where she said he didn't write any of that. I didn't even know about him.

PAT: And she's been talking about him.

GLENN: Right. She's been quoting him.

RICH: The video I -- that I sent today actually was the same video that I sent -- the same video that's going to be included in the court case that goes back to July. You guys had that. So when I sent it back with Keith -- Keith is actually still alive because someone is emailing me under his name. I said, look, it's actually in plain sight. It's this same video from this noblest conference. You have it. It's all in plain sight. You just have to look. You have it already.

GLENN: Let me ask you this --

RICH: I didn't send you guys anything new. You guys already had it.

GLENN: We're loading the gun for a second bullet to Keith's head.

STU: We just replace Keith. We rotate them in. When we kill one, we just put another one in with the same name.

PAT: Saves time legally that way.

GLENN: Rich, how do you feel as a guy who doesn't do this for a living -- I mean, imagine, America, see, this is the thing. He sent this to us. He sent this to other people. He couldn't get us or anybody else to pick this story up. But he just kept doing it.

And through the power of persistence, the power of the individual, and the power of the internet, he could not only make this case, but eventually set the world on fire. This is why you have to control the internet. This is why you have to shut people down.

A, how do you feel about being just a regular guy, who has been working and been frustrate, but now all of a sudden America is talking about this?

RICH: Well, I've had this secret for like a year. And, you know, I tell my friends and my neighbors, and I had this habit of doing like the fire -- like I have it all inside me and you'll hear a year's worth of knowledge or information I've gathered in 45 seconds. And their eyes glaze over.

So it's coming -- like, there's still a lot of stuff that's coming out. And it's coming, and it's coming, and it's coming. And I'm not trying to -- I'm almost like a librarian at this point, where when they see a guy write an article, and I say, yes, they're getting there. And then I'll contact them and say, you need to see this. This will help you.

So I'm acting like a librarian because people need to see it. It's coming together. And, for me, it's really kind of relieving because it's a secret -- maybe not a secret, but it's stuff people should have been seeing for a long time. And I can finally it get out there. I just want people to think.

GLENN: Unfortunately, I feel the same way about the caliphate. Unfortunately, it's too late now on the caliphate.

By the way, did you them the other prediction that just came true yesterday?

I had said, when they started talking about ISIL, I said, the only thing hear that will happen is it will cause the fall of Assad and that's why we're in it. Yesterday, a story came out, I think it was from the pentagon that said, the real -- the real target here, the real fortunately that is happening is the fall of Assad.

So I understand how frustrating it is, Rich, when you can't get somebody to listen and then you start to see it happen. Unfortunately, a lot of things are just not going away. Now, they're talked about, maybe we should cut the funding on some of this and comprise here and here. You're never going to repeal this whole thing I don't think because of the progressives on both sides. Rich, what is coming next? What is the one thing that you would say, America, you need to know this, what is it?

RICH: I think the most important thing for now is -- again, I don't want to do the fire hose thing, but this Cadillac tax is really, really important. Because the way they describe the law was, 80 percent of the country gets their insurance from the government or from their company, and 20 percent get it from, you know, the individual market like I do. So we need to fix that individual market and leave the other 80 percent alone.

That's out there on video a bunch of times. Dr. Gruber made pie charts, and they're out there on the web.

You can't say that and talk about the Cadillac tax in the same breath. They're conflicting thoughts. Because the Cadillac tax, people think is just for the high-end insurance plans, but the way Dr. Gruber describes it on video, within a certain period of time, I don't know if he said 10 or 20 years, it's going to hit everybody, and it's targeted at the employer sponsored insurance.

So when he says, we're not going to touch the employer's sponsored insurance. That's a conflicting thought.

PAT: The ultimate goal is single-payer. They want to eliminate the insurance companies.

RICH: Maybe. I don't want to go there.

But in this thought, the goal was to get at the tax break people get for employer-sponsored insurance. That was the goal. That's what that whole carry thing was about. That's what that whole carry quote is about. They want to get rid of that tax break. $250 billion per year of lost revenue to the treasury, according to -- that's the stat. That's what they've been trying to get rid of.

Even John McCain, you know, because of the video you kind of wiggle your way through a little bit. John McCain, I think, had the same idea in his plan in 2008. He told people about that thing. But they're doing it in a more covert manner, and the way it's structured as per what the videos say, it's structured so you're giving insurance to your guy and the premiums go up, it's structured so that your guy is mad, not you, but at the, quote, unquote, evil insurance companies. It's out there. It's all out there.

PAT: Yeah, we played that from what you said earlier.

STU: Glenn, this goes back to what you've said so many times. Watching the other hand. They pass something. These rich people they're spending too much. They can't get a full tax break for all that. The plan down the line as Gruber outlines is 20 years down the road and we've now removed a tax break that would politically impossible to just --

GLENN: I love the quote from him in one of the videos where he said the president is very smart. He knew you can't get that passed the American people. So how do we break this up and put it in progressive pieces so we can get by? Then Gruber is, again, the American people are stupid.

Rich, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for doing this. Thank you for being an involved American and a persistent American and not giving up.

RICH: Anybody can do this. If you have something on your mind, go figure it out. I'm nobody special. Anybody can figure this out if they have something in their mind. It's probably out there in plain sight.

GLENN: Thanks, Rich. Appreciate it. God bless. You know what he is. Remember when we said, this is when we first started really going online with Twitter and everything else. And I said watchdogs. Bark if you're a watchdog. I said, because we cannot -- we're not experts in everything. We don't know. And this is the swim lanes that I've been talking about for a long time.

This is -- experts get people who are passionate about things, and they will do it because as reporters or journalists or even news agencies, we can't do all of it, but there will be a few people who are really, really dead indicated for personal reasons, and they'll know this one, thin, narrow lane. And they'll go in and they'll root it all out. That's the way this is going to work.

That's the way this new media works. It is no longer about some journalist. It's about a whole collection of people that you may only have one strike in your entire life, but it's because you know that. You've been there. You've seen that. Or you're motivated because something happened in your life and you'll go out and find it. Again, this goes back to, why does there have to be net neutrality? Because you have to shut people like Rich down.

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.

Glenn's Show Prep