If athletes really want to protest, here are some stories they could focus on...

Well, hello, America, and welcome to The Glenn Beck Program and TheBlaze. I’m Stu Burguiere, filling in for Glenn.

Finally, some big-name athletes are taking a stand. Lebron James, Kyrie Irving, and a few other NBA players wore “I can’t breathe” shirts during warm-ups last night, and in recent weeks, several players have given a nod to the “hands up, don’t shoot” mantra from Mike Brown protesters. I don’t know about you, but I’m all a tingle to see professional athletes finally make a political and social statement like that.

Sports had been one of the few remaining places I could escape from the craziness of our day-to-day, the insanity of the news, and whatever other struggles we have going on in our lives and just sit back and enjoy the show. But thankfully that’s over now, and we can look forward to the game and a message too, a lecture or a political statement. I can’t wait. And who wouldn’t want to get their political messages from people who specialize in bouncing and throwing balls?

Before you get all negative and say sports is finally ruined forever, think of the positives. Okay, there’s really none, but who knows, maybe some good will come of this trend. Since they’re concerned about making black lives matter, maybe we’ll see this very soon. I mean, it’s really possible, right? I mean, I can see this happening.

In New York City, black babies are more likely to be aborted than born. Over 31,000 were murdered, while only 25,000 were actually born. In the past 10 years, 16 million black babies have been murdered. Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, that’s only three individuals, but if abortion were illegal, the black population by some estimates would be 36% larger. That’s more people than the population of every single U.S. state, except four: California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

Here are some other possibilities. What about this? You know, everyone loves the Constitution, right? Can’t you see Reggie Bush coming out with the Second Amendment shirt? Possible, right? Benghazi, I mean, people want to draw some attention. I haven’t seen a lot of the Benghazi shirts. I don’t think people want shirts with Hillary Clinton’s face on it. That might be the possible reason for that one.

How about this one, just a good old classic 'don’t tread on me'? That could happen too. Maybe the story of 22-year-old Chris Lane, who was murdered for simply being white will finally gain the notoriety it deserves. And I know I’m getting a little carried away with my expectations here, but perhaps this trend means we will finally see the day when someone has the courage to stand with the victims you never hear about, celebrity dudes who’ve been raped.

Shia LaBeouf, he held a days-long art exhibit where he sat in silence and let people come talk to him one on one. And during the “performance,” he was tragically raped. Since he wasn’t allowed to say anything, you know, for the art, he had to sit there and endure this rape. That’s a huge problem for celebrity men. The last thing a 20-something-year-old guy expects to deal with when they become famous are herds of gorgeous women who will do anything, literally anything, to hook up with them.

These men just want to focus on their careers and charitable endeavors and of course their art. Can you imagine having to fend off dozens of supermodels everywhere you went? It’s a horrible, horrible life, and it’s time someone takes a stand with Shia LaBeouf and all the male celebrity rape victims out there. I know I’m going to go to a field soon and see this, #Iammalecelebrityrape. We can only hope.

I am getting a little ahead of myself. Little baby steps, baby steps…we’ll take what we can get at this point. Maybe we can get someone to hold this sign up, you know? Oh yeah, “I’m not stoopid,” yeah, that’s kind of a reference to Jonathan Gruber, who was on Capitol Hill today for congressional hearings, and he was thoroughly grilled by Trey Gowdy and others and rightfully so.

He’s the ObamaCare architect who was caught on camera repeatedly bragging about the purposeful lack of transparency and relying on the stupidity of the American voter to get it passed. Remember this classic?

VIDEO

Gruber: …just like lack of transparency is a huge political advantage, and basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to get anything to pass.

Stu: It was. Most of the mainstream media didn’t pay much attention, but it’s a pretty damning statement. Naturally, Obama and Democrats distanced themselves from him.

VIDEO

President Obama: I just heard about this. I get well briefed before I come out here. The fact that some advisor who never worked on our staff expressed an opinion that I completely disagree with in terms of the voters is no reflection on the actual process that was run.

Stu: He’s just a random advisor, barely even knew he existed. Nancy Pelosi said she didn’t even know who he was. Of course, the problem here is, remember, this is 2006, okay? 2006 Obama, he disagrees. He said he stole ideas liberally from Jonathan Gruber at a conference where he spoke with Jonathan Gruber. And look at Nancy Pelosi’s Gruber-induced schizophrenia.

VIDEO

Pelosi: I don’t know who he is. He didn’t help write our bill, so with all due respect to your question, you have a person who wasn’t writing our bill commenting on what was going on when we were writing the bill. I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT’s analysis of what the comparison is to the status quo versus what will happen in our bill.

Stu: So when he was an unknown MIT professor, they loved him. He was the toast of the town. He gave the credibility of MIT. In fact, he even made a comic book starring himself that explained how wonderful ObamaCare really is. Do we have the comic book, please? Thank you. Oh, here it is. I could get you a copy of this really cheap, really, really cheap.

Look at this. You flip through, you get all the superhero…look at them. There’s monsters, and monsters are going to scare you. There’s our hero, Jonathan Gruber. See, he’s the smart one with the glasses, and he’s talking to all the idiot police officers and the stupid ambulance drivers about how they don’t know anything about healthcare and all the dumb voters and the morons, and he’s the smart one telling us all the truth about healthcare.

Of course, he now admits he was lying the whole time. On the back cover, you have endorsements from John Kerry and of course Center for American Progress as well. Now that he’s been exposed as just an arrogant progressive jackwagon, they play dumb. But forget all the politics of it all. Money talks. How much did they think this guy was worth? His salary should give some clues as to whether he was more architect or some advisor we don’t even really know. Here was his answer on Capitol Hill today.

VIDEO

Rep. Jordan: I don’t care what you were informed, Mr. Gruber. I care about what I’m asking you is how much money did the taxpayers, state or federal, pay you to have you then lie to them? That’s what I want to know.

Gruber: Over this fiscal year and the previous fiscal years—

Rep. Jordan: No, total. I mean, look, look, this has been a five-year ordeal with this law. We want to know how much you got from the taxpayer and then made fun of them after you got the money and lied to them.

Gruber: I don’t recall the total.

Stu: Who would know? I mean, if people pay you millions of dollars, you’re going to know? The arrogance really was infuriating. He absolutely knows how much money they paid him, and Americans are absolutely owed an answer, but instead he goes crawling to his attorneys. That’s our money. Just man up and tell us.

Of course the reason goober Gruber didn’t want to reveal how much taxpayer money he received is because he got filthy rich—$400,000 from DHHS, 2 million from NIH, 1.74 million from the DOJ. The DOJ? What the hell is the DOJ paying this guy millions of dollars for, seriously? A hundred thousand dollars from the State Department, and then various states also paid him hundreds of thousands of dollars. All told, we paid this guy $5.9 million to bring us ObamaCare, among other fabulous projects.

Sounds like a high amount for “just some advisor,” but then again, the government has never been accused of frugality. They pay millions of dollars for toilets. Maybe they thought Gruber was a porta potty. I’m not sure. Let’s not forget, by the way, that ObamaCare is a complete and total failure. There are some 40 million uninsured in America. Seven million “allegedly” are enrolled in ObamaCare, but 4 of those 7 million lost the plans they were already having, they are ready paid for, and they liked, and they were told that they could keep. So that means this giant, massive government program designed to cover, I don’t know, 40 million people is covering about three, and we’re the stupid ones. What a waste.

Maybe that’s something we can look forward to seeing future athletes protest. I hope so. Back in a second.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.