Election 2016: Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum calls in to discuss the issues facing the country

The list of potential GOP nominees keeps growing, and the latest man to enter the race joined Glenn on radio this morning. When it comes to standing against radical Islam, no one speaks louder than Rick Santorum. He spoke about the threat of the Islamic State, the role of government in the gay marriage debate, the police officer in McKinney, TX, and more.

GLENN: Rick Santorum is a good friend. And a good friend of the program. And somebody that I have -- and I truly believe this -- is the closest thing to Winston Churchill that we have on the planet today. Probably next to Benjamin Netanyahu. When it comes to radical Islam. Rick and I have talked about rallied Islam before radical Islam was cool. And talked about these kinds of days and what it's going to take and the kind of enemy we would face. Unfortunately, we're seeing all of the things that when Rick was even a senator, he was talking about, we've seen them all come true. And he's a guy who has truly been raised for this time to be able to deal with things like rallied Islam. We haven't spoken about this in a while. I'd like to get his take on it. He declared his candidacy for president of the United States when we were away on Memorial Day. So we have our first chance to speak to him now. Senator, or, Mr. Presidential Candidate, Rick Santorum. How are you, Rick?

RICK: I'm doing great, Glenn. It's so great to be back on your show. Thank you for having me.

GLENN: Thank you. How is your wife? How is your daughter?

RICK: Thanks for asking. Everybody is doing just great. Thank you. Our girl just got a great clean bill of health. And life is good.

GLENN: Good. So, Rick, let's start with ISIS. The president in so many words said, I don't really have a strategy on ISIS. The strategy that we are using is obviously not working. What do we do?

RICK: Well, the strategy is not working because we haven't identified who they are, what they want to accomplish, and why they're trying to accomplish it. I mean, it's all just denial that this has anything to do with Islam or that they have any designs that are religiously motivated.

It's really clear -- Glenn, you and I talked about this years ago, when he talked about the establishment of the caliphate and what that means. And ISIS has established a caliphate. They now have legitimacy within the Islamic world, at least the radical Islamic world, to call people to jihad, not just in Iraq and Syria, but all over the world, including the United States. And they're doing that. And as long as they can maintain territorial control in an area and expand that area, I believe they will grow exponentially. Because when I say grow exponentially -- and be able to recruit jihadists. What they believe is, if they can maintain this territory and expand it, that shows that Allah is blessing them, that Allah is with them, that they're defeating the great Satan. As America tries to stop them, that they can't. This will encourage more and more people to join them. So what the president is doing is the worst of all things. He's saying that he's fighting, not committing any real resources to do so, and giving ISIS an easy victory, if you will, as he moves into Ramadi -- as they move into Ramadi and other places.

GLENN: So, Rick, you're president of the United States. What's the first thing you do?

RICK: Well, the first thing you do is -- you step up the real campaign against ISIS.

Number one, we arm the Kurds. That's the first -- that's the easiest thing to do. This is a fighting force that can fight, will fight, and can win. We have to have a real air campaign. We're flying, according to Centcom that I saw recently, something on the order of 14 HEP sordis a day against ISIS. Which, 70 percent of the airplanes aren't even dropping ordinances. So we're not -- during the Gulf War, we flew 800 to 1,000 planes a day to try to win the battle. We aren't even touching ISIS with the handful of bombs that are being dropped on them. We have a real coordinated campaign with the Kurds. With whatever Iraqi forces that are willing to fight. We have to support the Jordanians. I mean, the Jordanians are in this fight they're willing to fight. They need more resources. They need more help. We can provide it to them. The Egyptians. The kidnapping of these 88 Christian girls in Libya. And the Egyptians are willing to fight the -- the -- ISIS in Libya. But we're holding back --

GLENN: It's truly amazing. We didn't hold back supporting Mubarak, a bad guy. But a better guy than we had with the Muslim Brotherhood. Then we supported the Muslim Brotherhood. Now we get a guy who may be the best person in the presidential palace in Egypt that they have had in modern -- in modern history, and we're nowhere to be found around this guy.

RICK: Well, that's because the president supports the Muslim Brotherhood controlling Egypt. I mean, it's just almost impossible to conceive that the president is standing by this terrorist organization that was turning Egypt into a Sharia radical state, you know, sustaining the judiciary, doing all these things that were making it very clear that they were going to move away from democracy. The Egyptian people got it. They rose up along with the military and took the Muslim Brotherhood out. And our president continues to stand with them and objects to this government because they overthrew a legitimately elected government. This is the kind of -- I just -- it's almost incomprehensible how the president can look at that situation and not see who the good guys and the bad guys are.

GLENN: Okay. A couple of other things that are going on. One is, injustice on the streets. Our police now are no longer -- I mean, we have a guy in McKinney, Texas. Have you followed the McKinney, Texas, story at all?

RICK: Yeah.

GLENN: So this police officer has now retired. He quit the force. He's gone. That's insane to me. If I'm a police officer, I don't go and answer some of these calls now. And that's what's happening in some of these bigger cities. We've made our police officers guilty until proven innocent. And even when it's innocent, we don't really care. We are giving the rule of the street to thugs. In Baltimore, they were actually thanking -- the city officials were thanking the Nation of Islam and the Crips and the Bloods for holding the peace in the streets. What do you do? You're president of the United States, how do you get your arms around this one?

RICK: You know, this is a really tough one because what we've had unfortunately is a president who was in a position to actually heal a lot of racial divide in this country and he's done anything, but that. Which is unfortunate. Which makes it that much harder for the person who comes in after this president and try to repair that. The only way you do that is actually in my opinion is going after the root cause of the problems here and start talking about what's going on within the black community. Within the minority communities. And many poor communities. Not just black communities across this country. Which is the lack of opportunity. The breakdown of the family. The lack of opportunity for jobs and good-paying jobs because of a lot of other factors. Poor schools. I mean, there's just a whole series of issues here that have led to hopelessness and despair. And we -- this president simply has not addressed them.

He's promoted more government, more transfer payments, and not real opportunities, not real -- trying to heal the family and the family situations within those communities. All of those things are key. There's a big just published about six weeks ago by a guy named Robert HEP Putnam. And Robert Putnam is a liberal Harvard sociologist. And he concluded, in looking at the problems of being able to rise in America, that the number one issue was the breakdown of the family in these communities.

And we've had a president who had an opportunity to do something dramatic about that. And he's chosen not to. He's chosen to play the vice of politics. What I'm going to do, and one of the things that I pledge as president, we're going to focus on children and providing a society that will help nurture families again. That will start putting families as the number one priority for our country to try to heal those -- the wounds in these communities by restoring the building block of those communities, which is the traditional family.

GLENN: Okay. And the traditional family is usually supported by the traditional church.

RICK: Yeah.

GLENN: And I know last time -- it used to be, Rick, that they would ask people about gay marriage and everything else. And there was no reason to ask that. Nobody would change gay marriage. And nobody was trying to change the Constitution one way or the other on that. In a serious way.

Here's what's happened. The president -- now the Supreme Court is going to deal with gay marriage. And the -- we had David Barton on yesterday who showed us some things that came from the Department of Justice, their attorneys on the changes that they will inflict on churches. We will lose our -- our tax-free status.

RICK: Yeah.

GLENN: They will start telling us who we can and cannot hire. What we can say. What we cannot. Who we can marry, who we cannot. You're going to have to deal with that as president of the United States, what do you do there?

RICK: Well, this is tantamount to government establishing religion. When the United States government comes in and says, this is what you'll believe. This is how you'll practice your faith. This is a new religion. This lies, in my opinion, in the establishment clause of the Constitution that says the Congress shall make no law with respect to establishing a religion.

If the government goes around and tells churches what they have to believe in and what their doctrine is, that is something that is a violation of the First Amendment. That's why I have actually some hope that the court will not get this wrong. That they will not go as far as some are suggesting. Because there is no -- there is no way that the left will stop at just tolerance. They will demand conformity. They will demand it from the church and every institution. They will demand it from businesses. And there will be no tolerance to a different point of view on this issue. And that's why, again, I'm hopeful that the court will not do what it is -- does. But if it does, I will tell you, and I said this on Meet the Press a couple weeks ago -- that's the court's opinion. They're entitled to their opinion. But the president and the Congress have an opinion too of what the Constitution is. And if they get it wrong and the consequences are what I suspect they will be toward people of faith, then this president will fight back.

PAT: Rick, the media's tactics with you last time and now are either ignore you or attack you. And still last time you finished second. Now, the latest thing is that supposedly one person showed up in Iowa. Tell us what really happened there.

RICK: Yeah. Well, the funny thing was. The last time around, I had that happen to me once too. I went to a town hall meeting, and only one person showed up. It turned out to be in all honesty the best town meeting I ever had. The one person who showed up became my coordinator for the county. She actually became the regional coordinator. And it turned out, the fact that I had time with her to be able to talk with her, it turned out to be the greatest thing.

GLENN: Which, by the way, had you -- had you end up second place. So it's happened before.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: In a town of 300 people. So three people show up. And you're 1 percent of the town showing up. And it's happened before. But they're attacking you.

RICK: Yeah. You know, look, when I did this the last time, no one was paying any attention to me. I mean, I was going around, going to all these small towns with 2- to 300 people. And, of course, you won't get 50 people. I mean, last night, we were at a town a little larger in Iowa. And we had 50 people at a reception. They didn't cover that. We had a great town hall meeting for an hour and a half.

But when you go to a lot of small towns during the middle of the afternoon, during workdays, and people are out doing their things, you will get a smaller crowd, and that's what's expected. That's what makes this so hard because politicians are used to being cheered by big crowds and being in front of audiences. And this is all about meeting real people and the one person, by the way, who was there signed up to be a caucus chairman for us. Agreed to actually run the county for us.

GLENN: Now, I've read conflicting reports that there were more than one.

RICK: There actually was more than one. There were three or four people there.

GLENN: Okay. Doesn't make it that much better.

RICK: One person was at the bar and had a milkshake with me. I think that's what they were taking. But the point is, we don't -- to me, it's all about quality and not quantity. Particularly these little counties of just a few thousand people in the county. That's what makes it hard to do. That's why people don't want to do it because you don't want to take a hit. And from my perspective, I'll just keep chugging away. They can criticize my one or two or three people that I get to volunteer in every county. But, you know what, that's how I won Iowa last time.

GLENN: Rick, would you do me a favor? Can we sit down sometime? I want to meet you someplace. Your house. Someplace. I'll bring my cameras, and I want to put a list of, I don't even know, 25, 50 questions together. And I'll ask all the candidates that I would seriously consider voting for -- I'm not going to ask Jeb Bush or Chris Christie or some of the other clowns -- but, you know, about four guys who I would consider voting for. I'm going to ask them exactly the same questions, so there's no gotchas or anything else. Would you do that?

RICK: Yes! I will never forget, one of the first interviews you ever did with me. We did this, and I was in a parking lot in north Pennsylvania. And you said, I have 20-some questions, yes or no answers.

GLENN: That's right.

RICK: You asked me about 20-some questions, and you demanded yes or no answers. No caveats. I finished. And I'll never forget what you said as long as I live. I finished the last question, and you said, I want to kiss you in the mouth.

[laughter]

GLENN: Well, that's sick. Although, we have found out now, it's perfectly normal.

RICK: Normal. It's a natural reaction for that.

GLENN: That's right. It's a perfectly natural reaction. Rick, all the best of luck to you. And we will -- we will schedule sometime where we can really sit down and go in. Because I want to talk about the size of government and where you stand on some of the more Libertarian issues.

RICK: Love to talk about that.

GLENN: Is there a website? I'm doing Pat's job.

RICK: RickSantorum.com. Even a dollar helps us. Help us out. Join the fight and get out there and make a difference for your country.

GLENN: RickSantorum.com. Thanks a lot, Rick. I appreciate it.

RICK: Thank you.

GLENN: You bet. Buh-bye. He's a really good guy. Really, really good guy.

PAT: He is.

GLENN: Why are we not on his bandwagon?

PAT: I don't know that we're not. I mean, we're still deciding. Still deciding.

GLENN: He's probably one of the four.

PAT: He's in there. Yeah.

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.