Glenn welcomes ‘The People’s Sheriff’ David Clarke to TheBlaze Radio Network!

TheBlaze Radio Network announced a new podcast entitled 'David Clarke: The People's Sheriff', today during Glenn's radio show. Host David Clarke is the current Sheriff of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin and is an outspoken defender of individual liberties.

The weekly, one-hour podcast will launch on Saturdays beginning June 6 and will focus on law enforcement issues, knowing your rights, commentary on current affairs, racial issues, 2nd Amendment matters, and the importance of empowering individuals rather than the state.

TheBlaze Radio Network's VP of Programming, Dom Theodore, said, "Sheriff Clarke calls it like it is - with an emphasis on common sense and individual responsibility. I'm thrilled to have him join our lineup of amazing talent at TheBlaze Radio Network, where we are committed to being a leader in digital spoken word content."

Sheriff Clarke said, "What an honor to be a part of TheBlaze Radio Network! This podcast is an opportunity to add to the conversation of well-thought-out reason on issues confronting America. I look forward to being a part of TheBlaze family, working to keep the public well informed."

Sheriff Clarke joined Glenn on radio this morning to discuss his new show, the militarization of police, and more.

GLENN: Today, I want to make a major announcement on something we're doing with Blaze Radio. Blaze Radio is -- is kind of an experiment that we've been working on and really kind of kept it pretty quiet. We don't really advertise it or anything else. And it is already the 19th largest stream in the world.

It is wildly successful and allows you to be informed where you want, when you want, how you want. And we have made some additions to Blaze Radio that have been really exciting lately. And we want to make an announcement that we're adding another voice to Blaze Radio. And it's Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. He is a remarkable man and a voice that I think needs to be heard. Well-spoken, well-thought out. And we wanted to welcome him to the Mercury family now.

David, Sheriff, how are you?

DAVID: Good, Glenn. How are you doing? First of all, thank you for this opportunity. When I first came up, I said wow. I've had a lot to say recently over the last, you know, four, five, six, seven, eight years. But I've never had my own platform to do it. So it was always a situation where I had to be led by someone else's platform and whether they wanted to take a discussion. And I am so thrilled to be a part of the Blaze network, a brand that you have built, that you've grown and you've nurtured. And I simply want to add value to what you started. And participate in this larger conversation about America. You mentioned, it's not the country that I recognize anymore either.

But I think that it's important to provide pushback and a countermessage to this modern liberalism that's in full throttle, and that's what I want to do

GLENN: David, first of all, you'll add value. I've heard some of the test broadcasts that you've done. They're remarkable. My guy who used to be the head of CBS radio and Clear Channel radio, a truly remarkable man who is working with you on my behalf. He says that he believes you're one of the biggest talents he's ever heard. And that's only after the first show. You're a natural at this.

But more importantly, we're bringing you on, David, because you can speak with authority. And, you know, black lives matter. But white lives matter too. Young lives matter. Old lives matter. Blue lives matter. All life matters.

And we're getting into a place, David, that I don't -- I don't think this country has seen since the 1960s, and we're headed for real trouble with policing. With the militarization, with the disenfranchisement of the police, with the pitting of the police against the traditional supporters of the police, our cities are going to be in real trouble because I believe there's a real effort underfoot through people like the Nation of Islam and Al Sharpton and some of the friends of the president and the Black Panthers, to literally set our cities on fire. So we need a reasonable voice that can tell us and speak from a position of authority on what to do.

What do our policemen even do?

DAVID: That's kind of interesting. As you know -- many of your listeners may not -- I have 37 years of urban law enforcement experience. All my education -- my bachelor's degree is in Criminal Justice Management. My master's degree is in Security Studies, Homeland Security related to the United States Naval Academy Post Graduate School. It's been my life. It really has. I bleed blue. I tell people, if you cut me open, you won't find red. I bleed blue.

But, Glenn, I sat up and watched after the days of Ferguson, where this proud profession that I've been a part of just came under attack. And I've predicted -- and not because I'm in the prediction business. But I knew. I know cops. I know this profession. I know the importance -- cops matter. I know the importance that law enforcement and public safety has, especially in your urban centers. We have densely populated areas. You don't have all the social controls necessary for these things to work themselves out. So you need to have an intermediary. Especially in the American ghetto, that intermediary is the American police officer. White, black, Hispanic, Asian -- who else is going down into these areas? When we -- our police come under attack. It's, you know, the white cop who shoots the unarmed black guy. And our cops are racist.

You know, these are the smears that we hear. And I go, wait a minute. Who else is going down there? I don't see the politician down there. I don't see the loudmouth demagogue like Al Sharpton down there. It's the American police officer who puts his or her life on the line, is willing to sacrifice their life, if it means that, in service to who in the American ghetto? Other black people. So to hear them maligned like this really bothered me. So I decided to step up and start to fight back, like I said. Countermessage. Defend this proposition. Look, I've said -- and I know this, and everybody knows. But I'll say it anyway. Are cops perfect? Not by any stretch of the imagination. Are police departments perfect? Not even close.

However, these communities we're talking about, these are the finest they have. They go down there with the best of intentions to do right, to do it within the rules. And every once in a while, something goes horribly wrong. But then to come down and throw all the maladies and the pathologies of the urban ghetto on the back of the American police officer and say, you go down there and do something about it. Keep them from killing each other, raping, robbing, and pillaging, and, oh, by the way, if something goes horribly wrong, you know, like it did in Ferguson and in New York and in South Carolina and in other areas, including here in Milwaukee County, all of a sudden it's, oh, the cops are the bad guys now. Let's go attack the cops.

Glenn, we expect that. Because we've seen that before from cop haters. All my 37 years. I know people that just don't like the police. We expect that from that -- that cabal. What we did not expect this time around was to see it come from an unlikely source. And that unlikely source is the political class, who -- we know we need their backing. Not only for resources, but at times when, yeah, maybe we made a mistake or even if we didn't make a mistake, like in the case of Ferguson, there was no mistake made. We don't expect the political class to turn us upside down and to attack us and want us criminally indicted and so on and so forth. That's what's different this time around

GLENN: We're talking to David Clarke. He's the sheriff in Milwaukee County. And if the name sounds familiar and you can't quite place it, it's because he was the guy who was featured on radio ads in Milwaukee saying citizens should not rely on police for protection. They should arm themselves. And they should be -- they're the first responders. And we have talked to him several times. He is fearless. And speaks his -- speaks his mind. And, quite honestly, I think that's what we need.

David, you know, as -- as we're watching this -- I think the police are being set up, myself. We are now starting to see that they're not patrolling because they won't get the backup they deserve. You're also seeing the decay because of the militarization, you're seeing people like me who I'm a big supporter of the police. But I'm gravely concerned about the militarization of our police because of what this administration has stated its goals.

We have now Al Sharpton who is one of the czars with this administration coming out and saying that the Justice Department needs to take over local policing. When the president says he wants to cut back on the militarization, what he's saying is, he wants to -- he wants to just not sell them tanks. But in that executive order, and I don't know if you've read it, in that executive order, it talks about the Pentagon and the Justice Department partnering with the local police, all the way down to things like uniforms. And what their uniforms will look like. It's a very frightening thing.

How can you help bridge the gap on making sure that the cops know that the average citizen still has respect for them? But we are concerned about some of the things that they're now being required to do and some of the things this administration -- we're trying to speak out and warn and say, look, you're going to be left alone because you're being set up. Do you believe that? And how would you respond?

DAVID: First of all, let's unpack that a little bit because there's a lot there. Your concern. I share that concern. I'm not at war with my community here in Milwaukee County. And I don't think any agency -- I have said from the beginning that that 1033 Program needs better oversight. There's no doubt about that. But I don't think that the president should have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. He said some of this equipment belongs in a battlefield. And my first thought was, has he been down in the American ghetto recently? I know he lives life in a bubble.

When you hear, you know, 15 dead, 37 shot in Baltimore in a weekend -- on Memorial Day weekend. When you hear 40 people shot in a month. When you go to Chicago and you look at, in one weekend, Glenn, 15 dead, 37 injured, 40 injured, that sounds like a battlefield. That doesn't mean that we should do overkill in terms of some of the overplus equipment. I think it needs oversight. Each agency should have to make a stronger case as to why they need this equipment. Some of this equipment is missing. It's not even accounted for. So I think it needs more oversight.

However, I think the worse thing that we can do in the United States is federalize local policing. The Founding Fathers didn't want a federal police force. As far as I'm concerned, local policing is a state's rights issue. Each state is responsible for the -- securing the personal safety of their citizens in that city. There's a role for the federal government, and it's not running these agencies. It's not taking these agencies over. It's not telling these agencies, you know, one-size-fits-all. Training them. Setting up policies and standards.

And that's kind of what this whole 21st century task force that the president hastily threw together is trying to accomplish. You know, a one-size-fits-all. Every community is different. Every community's citizens -- and I think it's what you're speaking to, Glenn -- every community's citizens have different wants, needs, and standards. What they'll put up with, what they won't. So I think it needs to be left to the locals. I think it's a slap in the face of the state governments. Because if there's a problem in Ferguson with what was going on -- and there was. Okay. If there's a problem in one of these other cities as to what's going on, you have a state attorney general. You have other oversight. Each city has their own oversight board of civilians. And if they're not doing their job, well then, the state attorney general, I believe, should step in and maybe be that intermediary, not the United States attorney general and especially not the president of the United States.

GLENN: We're talking to Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke who is joining us now on Blaze Radio, Saturdays. It will be posted at noon Eastern at the Blaze.com/radio. A very outspoken guy. A guy who has been with us several times. And I want to take a quick break and come back and ask you one question. You're there in Milwaukee. I'd love to hear your impression of Scott Walker.

[BREAK]

GLENN: Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke joins us. He is the latest to join the Blaze Radio. You can find that at the Blaze.com/radio. And it will air on Saturdays. Or it will be posted on Saturdays. So you can hear him. He's fearless. He's the guy that Michael Bloomberg threw money hand over fist during his last campaign and he still won huge. He is a plainspoken guy who can speak with authority and tell you what's really going on from the police perspective. And we're proud to have him a part of Blaze Radio now because we're huge supporters of the police departments and they are coming under fire, big time.

Tell me about Scott Walker. Because we haven't -- we haven't quite made up our mind on him, David. From a distance, he seems to be good. But then there are times, wait a minute. He just kind of flip-flopped here. Is that who he is? Can you give us insight on him?

DAVID: First of all, I want to thank you again for the complimentary comments. I hope people do tune in on the Saturday podcasts. Give me a chance. I think they'll like it. As you know, I give people information unvarnished and no sugarcoating.

Full disclosure, first of all, I'm a friend of Scott Walker. We became friends because we both worked in Milwaukee government. I'm the Milwaukee County sheriff. Came in the same year that he did as County Executive, so we worked closely together. He's a strong supporter of law enforcement. Always made sure that we were properly funded.

But what I've learned about Scott Walker is he listens to people. He would come to me and say, Sheriff, I have this deal here or some funding situation. I want to know how this affects public safety. I would tell them. He's like, I don't know that I want to do that. He's very decisive, but he listens to his advisers. You can bet that he'll listen to his military commanders. You can bet that he'll listen to his economic advisers. But he will make the decision. He will not vacillate.

But the one thing I'm looking for. And I'm telling people now -- and I do have a bias about Scott Walker. But I say, vet everybody. Okay, they'll all do what you just mentioned. Every once in a while, you get a candidate, you say, hey, this guy is looking good. This woman is looking good. Then all of a sudden, boom. Oh, jeez. You know, flip-flop there. I'm not sure now.

That's what this process is supposed to do is weed all of that out. So I'm telling people. And I'll talk about this on some of my shows leading up into the 2016 election. But vet them all. They all have weaknesses. There's no perfect candidate. What I'm looking for is the person that will bring this country back to its founding principles. That's what we need right now. Leadership in that area. And I think that this process will allow us to identify that individual. I like Carly Fiorina. I like Marco Rubio. He has his issues. I like Ted Cruz. I'm not going to say I like all of them. I'm not a big fan of Rand Paul. Because he did some things that kind of insults me in meeting with Al Sharpton.

GLENN: Hang on. Okay. David, I'm out of time. But I'm hoping you'll give that story on one of your first podcasts. Thank you very much. Sheriff David Clarke new to the Blaze Radio.

Tapping the brakes on transgenderism in 2023

Hunter Martin / Contributor | Getty Images

2022 was the year of the emperor’s new clothes—where we were supposed to pretend that someone like Lia Thomas is a woman, legitimately beating actual women in swimming competitions. This carpet-bombing of common sense won’t be letting up anytime soon. Just before the New Year, the World Boxing Council announced that it’s going to create a separate category for transgender boxers. The WBC president said:

we are doing this because of safety and inclusion. We have been the leaders in rules for women’s boxing—so the dangers of a man fighting a woman will never happen because of what we are going to put in place.

After all the insanity you’ve been told to accept about transgender athletes in recent years, his statement is remarkable. He’s admitting what common sense people have been saying all along—that trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages (from the fact that they’re actually male), and that those natural advantages could endanger biological women.

Trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages.

The WBC president went on to say:

In boxing, a man fighting a woman must never be accepted regardless of gender change. There should be no gray area around this, and we want to go into it with transparency and the correct decisions. Woman to man or man to woman transgender change will never be allowed to fight a different gender by birth.

Maybe the WBC is on to something here. Maybe the only way to solve the stupidity of letting biological males play female sports is to create a separate transgender category in every sport. That would make competition fair again. However, the trans agenda will never accept this because it doesn’t validate their transition—in fact, it admits that these are not authentically female athletes.

There is some rare, good news on this front. In late December, the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted to uphold a Florida school-board policy that requires transgender students to use the bathroom of their biological sex. Of course, the Left won’t accept this, so this case will probably go to the Supreme Court sooner than later. You’re supposed to always believe the science, except when it comes to your own body parts.

You’re supposed to always believe the science, except when it comes to your own body parts.

And by the way, if the Left truly cared about unbiased science as it pertains to transgenderism, they’d listen to their favorite European country, Sweden. Sweden’s national board of health recently updated its guidelines on treating children with gender dysphoria. Unlike the Biden administration and the U.S. medical establishment right now, Sweden’s new emphasis is caution:

the scientific data is INSUFFICIENT to assess the effects of puberty-inhibiting and gender-sensitive hormone therapy of children and young people.

The Swedish guidelines also mention the prevalence of de-transition cases as another reason for tapping the brakes on sex-change surgeries for children.

Common sense apparently does still exist, even in places like Sweden. If only America would listen.

Glenn wants to dive deep into different philosophical topics this year. As CRT and woke curricula are demonizing the "western tradition," it is vitally important that we preserve the tradition that gave birth our nation and gives context to the culture we live in today. Here are the top 11 books to give you a crash course in the western philosophic tradition. If you don't have the time to read them, you can find an overview to each of the books below!

1. Plato's Republic

The first titan of Greek philosophy, Plato articulated the set of questions that would drive the future western philosophical tradition. The pre-eminent question among Greek philosophers was "what is the thing that explains everything." In philosophical lingo, this question is framed as "what is the logos or the good." Plato argued that reality could be explained in terms of the "forms." For example, when you see multiple examples of a "courageous" act, then, Plato would argue, there is such a thing as "courage." The form of "the good" is the form that gives meaning to all of reality. Humans use their rational minds to contemplate what is good and then align their desires to "the good" in order to pursue it.

2. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

The second titan of Greek philosophy was none other than Aristotle, who was a student of Plato. Aristotle deviated from his teacher's claims about "forms" and instead argued that every single thing has a purpose, a telos. For example, the telos of a chair is to provide a place for someone to sit. In the same way that a chair's purpose is to provide a place for someone to sit, Aristotle argues that the telos of human beings is to pursue happiness.

In the first page of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle claims that every action is done for the sake of pursuing happiness, although, all too often, our actions are misplaced. We often pursue things we believe will make us happy when, in reality, they are fleeting, momentary pleasures that result in despair, heartbreak, or pain. Rather than conforming the world around us to fit our momentary desires, Aristotle argues that we achieve happiness by understanding the nature of the world around us and how we fit into it by actively cultivating virtues in order to make our soul "fit to be happy." Work and action, therefore, are not mere moral "to-do lists," but rather bring us fulfillment.

3. Augustine's City of God

If Plato is the first titan of ancient philosophy, then Augustine is the first titan of medieval philosophy. Medieval philosophy begins with the re-discovery of ancient philosophical texts that had been lost throughout the Roman Empire. As Christianity had taken root and spread across the western world, medieval philosophy integrated these newly-discovered texts into Christian theology. Augustine is the pre-eminent medieval Neo-platonic philosopher, incorporating Plato's philosophy into Christian theology.

Augustine claimed that God himself is the ultimate "form" or "the good" from which all of reality derives its meaning and existence. A thing is "good" insofar as it coalesces with the way God intended it to be. When a thing stays away from God's intention, it is "not good." From this, we get the Augustinian definition of "evil" as a "privation" or "absence of goodness," which ultimately corresponds to God's nature and character.

4. Aquinas' Summa Theologica

Just as Augustine incorporated Plato's philosophy into Christian theology, the second medieval titan, Thomas Aquinas, incorporated Aristotelian philosophy into Christian theology. Building from Aristotle, Aquinas argues that Christ is our happiness, the longing of every human heart and the object of every human action. Though we may think we are pursuing happiness outside of Christ, our this pursuit is misplaced and will result in fleeting pleasure and pain. True happiness and fulfillment, Aquinas argues, is found in Christ himself and the pursuit of his nature.

**Note: Aquinas' Summa is one of the largest works ever written and contains arguments about many different subjects--there are concise versions that will save you a lot of time!

5. Francis Bacon's Novem Organum

If medieval philosophy is defined by the incorporation of ancient philosophy into orthodox Christian theology, then the Enlightenment is defined as the rejection of both. English philosopher Francis Bacon kicked off the Enlightenment with a total rejection of the Aristotelian view of reality. The title of his book, the Novum Organum, or "the new order," is a deliberate tease of Aristotle's Organon, or "the order of things." Bacon's "new order" purports that, contrary to Aristotle, there is no inherent "nature" or "purpose" in reality. Rather, reality is something that we can conquer by means of knowledge and force, dissecting nature to its fundamental parts and reconstructing it into what we want. Bacon is considered the father of the scientific method, creating a testable means through which we can understand, break down and re-construct nature.

6. Descartes' Discourse on Method

Descartes is best known for his famous assertion, cogito ergo sum, or "I think, therefore, I am." In Discourse on Method, Descartes embarks on a rigorous endeavor to doubt anything that can be doubted. He postulates that all of reality can be doubted; however, the one thing that cannot be doubted, he concludes, is that there must be someonewho is doubting. Though we may think that we are in the matrix, we are thinking, therefore, we must exist.

Descartes's rigorous skepticism introduced a brand-new burden of truth. In order for something to be true, it must be beyond all reasonable doubt. Many continue to use Descartes' skepticism as a way to challenge religious belief. According to these modern-day skeptics, unless you can prove that God exists beyond any reasonable doubt, there is no way to actually know whether he exists. The severing of knowledge and faith is often attributed to Descartes.

7. David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature

Scottish philosopher David Hume took aim at both Plato and Aristotle. One of his most famous and consequential claims about human nature is, "reason is and always ought to be slave of the passions." This took direct aim at Plato's view of human nature. Plato argued that our reason or "rationality" should always rule our passions so that we will desire what is good. Hume flips this on its head, claiming that our reason is helplessly enslaved to our passions and will inevitably justify what we will already want. From this, Hume introduced a new articulation of moral relativism, claiming that humans are not able to choose between what is good and what is evil, but rather will choose what they want over what they don't.

8. Kant's Contemplation on the Metaphysics of Morals

Hume's moral relativism sparked panic within German philosopher Immanuel Kant. If we will inevitably do what we desire, how can we ever choose to do something good and moral for its own sake? We must, according to Kant, separate morality completely from the passions if it's to be saved. Kant, therefore, argues that duty is the highest good that man can aspire to. We do the right thing, not because we want to--on the contrary, we do the "right thing" because it's our duty to do so, especially when we don't want to. This breaks away from the Aristotelian notion that our happiness is inextricably intertwined with the pursuit of "the good."

9. Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil

Nietzsche wasn't convinced by either Hume or Kant's efforts to retain some semblance of civility or relativistic moral standard. According to Nietzsche, if there is no such thing as transcendent morality, then "moral maxims" are reduced to meaningless words purported by the people in power. Morality, therefore, becomes a game of persuasion at best, coercion and force at worst. People are reduced to winners and losers, opressors and victims, and whoever comes out on top gets to impose their desired view of the world on the losers. Therefore, the goal of the individual is to cultivate the "will to power," to become the powerful "ubermensch" or "superhuman," or else you will be reduced to a victim susceptible to other people's coercion and oppression.

10. C.S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man

After the Enlightenment ends in a grand, destructive finale with Nietzsche, Christian philosophers in the 20th century attempt to pick up the pieces and resurrect the ancient and medieval philosophies that had been cast to the side. In The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis famously laments that mankind has become "men without chests." This is a direct reference to Plato's view of human nature--there is nothing linking our mind to our heart. Intellectually, we have dissected all of reality into its individual bits, stripping it of its holistic beauty, while also succumbing to our whims and passions with no notion of a transcendent moral law. Lewis calls for the re-marriage of our minds and our hearts, so that we will not only pursue what is good, but moreover, we will desire to do so.

11. Alasdair McIntyre's After Virtue

The latter part of the 20th century saw the resurgence of Aristotelian ethics after being largely dismissed over the past 400 years during the Enlightenment. Scottish Catholic philosopher Alasdair McIntyre was and continues to be one of the foremost leaders of this movement. In his magnum opus, After Virtue, McIntyre takes aim at the entire Enlightenment project itself and shows how it ultimately fails by its own standards. If reality is a mere power dynamic, as Nietzsche argues, and if morality is an act of persuasion and passion, as Hume purports, then we have no reason to take their views seriously. If all of reality is relative, then the statement "reality is relative" is itself relative. It becomes victim of the self-refutation of its own standards. Transcendent morality, he argues, must exist, because there must be some standard by which we judge reality and can say with determination, "this is good" and "this is evil."

The Biden Admin EXPANDED abortion access because they DON'T believe in the Constitution

Joshua Lott / Stringer, JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

This month has already produced an extreme example of why we need a functional and more conservative Congress in order for America to have a chance at moving forward—because the Left does not believe in the Constitution.

Sure, if you confronted a Democrat in Congress, they would probably claim some sort of allegiance to the Constitution—but as a practical matter, they do not believe in it.

Instead, the Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch. Why? Because it has the furthest reach through all the various departments, and it can move the fastest—in short, because it’s the most dictatorial. It only takes a department head to write a new memo, or even better, the President to sign a new executive order to carry the force of law.

The Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch.

Do you recall any of the Left’s favorite Supreme Court decisions over the years—something like gay marriage for example—and how Republicans immediately tried to subvert it, using the executive branch to try to nullify the decision? Yeah, that never happened. But that is exactly what Democrats have done in recent weeks to expand abortion access.

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions. When the miraculous overturning of Roe v. Wade happened last summer, President Biden called it “a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions.

Recently the FDA approved local pharmacies to issue abortion pills. For the first 20 years after these pills were developed, they were not treated like typical prescription drugs. They had to be dispensed in-person by a doctor. That in-person requirement is now gone.

Keep in mind that the Left’s go-to line is that abortion is always about the health and safety of women, yet a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions. Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of abortion-related ER visits following use of the abortion pills increased by 507 percent.

Chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions.

And now the Biden administration is making these less-safe abortions much more accessible. Thanks to the FDA’s rule change, Walgreens and CVS have already agreed to dispense abortion pills in states where abortion is legal—effectively turning these stores into new abortion clinics.

As for states that have abortion bans, "Team Biden" announced a new way around those too. Three weeks ago, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal. What’s their rationale? That the sender cannot know for sure whether the recipient will use the pills illegally or not. So it’s totally okay.

The U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal.

Georgetown Law professor Lawrence Gostin told the Washington Post that this Justice Department opinion is “a major expansion of abortion access in the United States.”

So, to recap—the Biden administration has used the FDA, the Justice Department, and the Post Office, which all fall under the executive branch, to provide an end-run around the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Expanding abortion was easy—simple policy tweaks and declarations that carry the force of law without an ounce of input from actual lawmakers in Congress—all because it comes from the grotesque, bloated, apparently pro-death executive branch.

Glenn is one of the most outspoken critics of the World Economic Forum and their vision to use crises to reconstruct the world order known as The Great Reset. The recent WEF summit in Davos confirms what Glenn has long warned about: globalist elites seek to upend our democracy, freedoms, and way of life to achieve their utopian climate goals. Here are 15 quotes from the 2023 Davos Summit, revealing their true intentions in their own words:

1. Saving the planet

When you hear the word, "Davos," the first thought that should pop into your mind is an elite group getting together to save the world from imminent climate disaster... at least they think of themselves that way. According to John Kerry:

I mean, it's so almost extraterrestrial to think about saving the planet.

2. Private jets

What most people think when they hear the word "Davos" is a group of global elites flying in on private jets to talk about climate change... and yes, John Kerry does own a private jet, no matter how many times he denies it:

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

You always hear some weird, dystopian projects coming out of WEF, like "The Global Collaboration Village," a new metaverse community aimed at strengthening "global cooperation." It sounds like the next installment of Brave New World. According to Klaus Schwab, Founder and President of the WEF:

The Global Collaboration Village is the pioneering effort to use the metaverse for public good, to create global cooperation and to strengthen global cooperation in the metaverse or using metaverse technologies. For me, it's a dream coming true because the village allows the Forum to create a more larger and open platform where everybody can participate.

4. Climate revolution

However, the core theme throughout WEF summits is the immediate need for a climate revolution and how businesses are selfishly blocking the revolution because they want to make an extra buck. Here's how John Kerry summed up the sentiment:

How do we get there? The lesson I have learned in the last years [...] is money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

5. Do or die

This often turns into alarmist language, like having to choose between wealth and our planet's survival... Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at University of Amsterdam, said it eloquently:

If we do the minimum at this pivotable moment in our history, then we and our children – even if we are rich – will live in the danger zone. But if we – business people, governments, citizens, cities – take action today, then we and our children will have a future worth looking forward to.

6. Colossal risks

Potsdam Institute's director Johan Rockström, used similar language, claiming we are "taking colossal risks with the future of civilization":

We are taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth, we are degrading the life support systems that we all depend on, we are actually pushing the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization, pushing Earth outside of the state that has supported civilization since we left the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago.

7. Rain bombs

"Colossal risks" like... rain bombs? We didn't make that up. Ask Al Gore:

That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs.

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

How do we secure our survival? According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we have to "end our addiction to fossil fuels." This entails wiping out our entire energy industry, displacing millions of workers, and relying on global governments to usher in a new green industry. In his words:

So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap, and that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution, to end the addiction to fossil fuels, and to stop our self-defeating war on nature.

9. Complete transformation

It isn't hyperbolic to argue that the globalist climate goals will completely transform the world economy. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted:

The net-zero transformation is already causing huge industrial, economic and geopolitical shifts – by far the quickest and the most pronounced in our lifetime. It is changing the nature of work and the shape of our industry.

10. Scientific necessity

Of course, to bring about this "net-zero" transformation, we will have to override small, "political expediencies" like democracy to do what is "scientifically necessary." According to Zurich Insurance Group’s head of sustainability risk John Scott:

We’re living in a world right now where what’s scientifically necessary, and what is politically expedient don’t match.

11. Illegal hate speech

Doing away with "political expediencies" would also require the censorship of dissent, which would likely manifest in hate-speech laws. When asked by Brian Stelter how the discussion of disinformation relates to everything else happening today in Davos, European Commission VP Věra Jourová shared this prediction:

Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.

12. Climate first

We will also have to forego national interests on the international stage. America won't be able to advocate for policies and interests that benefit Americans. Instead, we will sacrifice national interests for the sake of global climate interests. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said:

The key question is not China First, US First, Europe First. The key question for all of us is Climate First.

13. The role of war

We can also expect globalist leaders to use crises, like the war in Ukraine, to expedite the "net-zero transformation." Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz said:

Ultimately, our goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 has been given an additional boost by Putin’s war. Now we have even more cause to move away from fossil fuels.

14. Blame game

Globalist leaders will continue to blame ALL of the crises in our society on climate change to justify the "net-zero transition," from the energy shortage to "mistrust, selfishness [and] xenophobia." Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez said:

Our present struggle is not only against Putin or the energy shortage. It is also against fear, mistrust, selfishness, xenophobia, and environmental disaster. And its outcome will define life in the West and beyond for decades to come.

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

While we sacrifice our national interests for the sake of the "greater global good," we can expect our foreign enemies, like China, to benefit. Suisse Chairman Axel Lehmann said:

The growth forecasts now for China is 4.5%. I would not personally be surprised when that would be topped.

Conclusion

Glenn has been clear about the distinction between wanting to transition to green practices on your own accord and being forced into that transition by globalist, unelected elites. Leaders at Davos will continue to use alarmist language to justify their crackdown on democracy and freedom to bring about their leftist utopia. We have to cut through the alarmist language and in order to protect our freedoms.