Something that happened 151 years ago fills Glenn with hope today. What was it?

The below is transcribed from the opening monologue of Glenn's radio show:

151 years ago today, the world began to change again because of America. 151 years ago today, a man rode on a train quietly, just scratching out a few words on the back of a piece of paper. There's only one photograph of this. He appears in the photo blurry. 151 years ago today, a guy who was known as Moses at the time, a guy that the world later compared to Moses, great statues and monuments were made of this man. One is in Washington, D.C. The other one is in the harbor of New York. The Statue of Liberty. The Statue of Liberty is actually made for this man who at the time was known as Moses. Moses, a direct descendent from Father Abraham.

151 years ago this man, tired, beaten. I think lost, confused, a man of profound sorrows, stood up and said:

Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, it was conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now, we're engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We're met on a great battlefield of that war. We've come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives, that this nation might live. It's altogether fitting and proper that we should do this, but in a larger sense we cannot dedicate. We cannot consecrate. We cannot hallow this ground. The brave men living and dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It's for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work to which they thought here and so far nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be dedicated to the great task remaining before us, that these honored dead from them we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave their last full measure of devotion and that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. That this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom and that the government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from this earth.

One of the greatest speeches given by any man, given by our Father Abraham. Our Moses who freed the slaves.

Our pilgrims came here. They saw themselves as children of Abraham. They saw themselves as picking up the mantel of Moses and the lost children and tribes of Israel and coming across the great ocean, coming across the great sea, led by God, to come here, our pilgrims. Our pilgrims that on the second slave ship went and took the slave ship, freed the slaves and imprisoned the slave ship masters. Our pilgrims who were not the great terrorists, who were great friends to the Native Americans. Others came, but our pilgrims came with God in their heart.

Some of our founders were bad, bad people. But most of our founders were great, great men. They wrestled with slavery. But they knew that there was hope. They chose hope in us. They knew in their generation, they could not get it done. For all the Progressives that are expecting our founders to be perfect, may I remind you that your label "progressive" means exactly what they did. We cannot get it done in this generation. But we will move the flag as far as we can down the field and we will make progress.

Finally a man who had been abandoned by his father, a man who was loved by his mother until she died, a man who had to raise for a year in the wilderness his little sister, alone, eating twigs, nuts, berries, anything that he could find. A man who was so afraid of his father when he returned a year later and said, this is your new mom, that's how he introduced his wife -- this is your new mom. That he ran to hide behind the skirt of this total stranger because he was so afraid of his father, a father who said you're not going to read. There's no reason for you to read. But he learned and he was taught by his stepmother. A man who later said, everything I am I owe to my mother. The man who went through profound sorrow, found himself on the field of Gettysburg after losing every single battle. How he must have prayed, Lord, how can this possibly be? I'm here, I'm here. I'm trying to free the slaves. How is this happening to our nation? I understand, Lord. I understand. If every drop of blood that was drawn by the end of the lash of the whip needs to be paid for by the drops of blood drawn now by the sword, if that is the payment required, I understand. We will wash ourselves in blood. We will make ourselves clean in the blood of the lamb. Onward Christian soldiers.

He believed it was right. But it wasn't until Gettysburg that pushed him down into the ground. Losing battle after battle, asking, why, why, why, Lord. General, tell me why. What is it? Why won't you fight? What is it that you refuse to do?

It was after Gettysburg that he declared a day of fasting, a day of humility, a day of prayer and a day of thanksgiving. He said, we must humble ourselves or we're going to continue to lose battle after battle. We must understand, we don't have any of the answers, none of the answers. We've tried all the answers. Man has tried. We have tried to get rid of slavery. We have tried to set men free. We have a chance, for the first time in human history, we have a chance of changing the world. Look at what we've already done. And look at this cancer that is eating us from the inside. For the first time in human history, a nation had a claimed to be a Christian nation and actually was a Christian nation had split itself on the Bible and half of the people said, well, the Bible says I can have slaves. The other half knew better.

The other half listened to the pilgrims and said, no, no, that's not what the Bible says. It's immoral. Listen to this. It is immoral for you to take the bread earned by the sweat of another man's brow. Now, we say that's slavery.

But I just want you to listen to what they said. It is immoral for you to take your bread that has been earned by the sweat of another man's brow. How many of us are doing that now? How many of us have sold our children into slavery because we want the bread that is being earned by another man's brow. And that doesn't mean somebody who's out in the field being whipped. That means our children or our grandchildren or our great-grandchildren. We're approaching a century. We're approaching a century of our entire GDP. If we take everything that we make in a country, in this country, for 100 years, we will finally be debt-free. Every dime we make. That doesn't -- we don't pay for our food. We don't pay for our energy. We don't pay for our housing. We don't pay for education. Every dime we make for a hundred years we go to pay down the national debt. In 100 years we'll have it paid off. Congratulations. It's immoral. It's immoral to take your bread that has been earned by the sweat of another's brow.

But here's where I get hope today. Because today I ask you to do one thing. Today I ask you to really take into consideration one thing that I believe is one of the more true things that I've ever, ever seen. And that is that which you gaze upon you become.

What is it we're gazing upon?

We spend every day looking at the problems. We spend every day looking at Washington. What are we doing? We're becoming just like the problem. We're becoming angry. We're becoming vengeful. Some are becoming win at all cost, any cost, doesn't matter. Ends justify the means. Well, they're doing it. We better play that game, too. That which you gaze upon you become. And we become hopeless.

Darryl Strawberry was on with me last night. You want to talk about hopeless. Here's a guy shoving needles in his arms. Here's a guy taking heroin. He said outside, I had everything. Inside I had nothing. I didn't even know who I was as a man. I knew who I was as a ballplayer.

I know who I am as a broadcaster. Who am I as a man? Are you a car salesman? Are you a salesman or a rep? Are you a business owner? Are you a teacher? Are you a doctor? Are you an attorney? Who are you as a man?

I ask you today to change your attitude just for 24 hours. That which you gaze upon you become. I choose hope. That's what Abraham Lincoln did after he gave the Gettysburg address. He said we need to humble ourself. We need to choose God. We need to know where hope comes from. After he did the proclamation of thanksgiving, after he dedicated everything to God, rededicated, made a new covenant with God, just as a man named Abraham had done before, we won every battle after.

I choose hope.

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.

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.