Rep. Louie Gohmert might be the last member of Congress on Glenn's radio show

Towards the end of his radio program Friday, Glenn spoke with Rep Louie Gohmert to discuss the Speaker of the House situation.

Right away, Glenn told Gohmert, "you may be our last guest from Congress ever on this show."

Gohmert seemed to share Glenn's frustration with the conservative members of Congress who are now lining up to support Paul Ryan as Speaker of the House.

"You understand what a rare person it is that will give up power like Washington did," Gohmert said.

Speaking of Daniel Webster, who Glenn did his homework on and endorsed, Gohmert added, "He has shown, he can give up power of his own and get it back to the members."

Listen to the dialogue or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: We're just stalling -- Louie is on now. Let's go to Louie. Hello, Louie, how are you?

LOUIE: Well, as far as I know, but I'll take Gary Cooper for 100.

GLENN: All right. So, Louie, we're debating right now, you may be our last guest from Congress ever on this show.

LOUIE: Oh, no.

GLENN: Seriously.

LOUIE: Somebody around here has got to keep up the hope.

GLENN: Well, it's not us. It's not us. I am -- I just had Barry Loudermilk -- what do you think of Barry Loudermilk?

LOUIE: I like him. I like him a lot.

GLENN: Okay. Well, that doesn't work out well then for what I'm about to tell you. Because I was mad as hell, and I had him earlier this broadcast. And we had very cross --

LOUIE: Is he falling in line to support Paul Ryan?

GLENN: Yes, he has. Yes, he has.

LOUIE: Okay.

GLENN: And he told us because Paul has told him he's going to do the right thing this time. And he didn't know -- the first time when it was Daniel Webster, he didn't know who Daniel Webster was. And this time when it was Daniel Webster, he didn't even know who it was. He had to Google him.

PAT: So...

LOUIE: Okay.

GLENN: But he's voting for Paul Ryan because he has a grandchild, so it's for the children.

LOUIE: Wow, okay. Okay. Well, and that would be a reason that I would especially stay with my pledge to support Dan. I mean, you know. You've studied this stuff. And even back when you were on Fox and you had your blackboard and you were doing all this, Glenn. You understand what a rare person it is that will give up power like Washington did.

GLENN: Yes.

LOUIE: And you told us stories of that man. So, yeah, you know, Dan doesn't have the voting record that -- that I do or Thomas Massie that just walked in my office here. But he has shown, he can -- he can give up power of his own and get it back to the members. And, really, if we did that in this Congress, where we know two-thirds to three-fourths represent very conservative districts, but for years now, since -- actually since Tom DeLay was thrown out because he got indicted, we elected John Boehner as our leader. And we -- it has been nine years of marginalizing the two-thirds to three-fourths of our conference that was very conservative, and getting them to march to the tune of the moderates. And so I thought this was a real opportunity. And I didn't just think it. It is. It has been. And here we go. We're --

GLENN: Yeah, we've blown it again.

LOUIE: And this goes back. And Steve King told me before, God, you remember so many of these details. And I don't know. But it -- but going back to 2006 -- yeah, you told me I got 12 minutes. All right. I'll get this in.

Back in 2006, Bush had been pushing -- I'm a freshman. Bush was pushing to reform Social Security, and nobody was ready to jump on board, or not enough people for what he wanted to do. But I was talking to guys, and I felt like we had a movement going forward. I was excited. How about if we just do an initial reform by putting real money in the Social Security lockbox? And Al Gore there. But, anyway, because since the 1930s, as you know, they have immediately spent Social Security money as it went into the trust fund. There's never been anything to talk about. Nothing, but nonnegotiable IOUs. So how about if you put real money in there, made some kind of interest-bearing bonds, and we could be growing interest on that money instead of growing nothing and spending as it comes in.

And I got excited. A lot of guys were getting excited. Yeah, this could be -- we could probably get Democrats to vote for this. And so I went to the guy -- this was back in early 2006, that -- you know, so many of us have respect for on financial issues. I said, "Paul, what about if we, you know, put real money in Social Security. I think we got enough people to do it. I think we can get Democrat votes." He said, "Louie, we could never do that." And I said, "Why not?" I was shocked.

He said, "Well, because if we put real money in the Social Security trust fund, we end up buying bonds and securities, and we end up playing into the security market. We could never ever under any circumstances allow the government to do that."

And so imagine my surprise when two years later, I'm hearing my friend Paul down there in the well of the House telling people that we have to do the Wall Street bailout. We've got to do TARP because only the federal government has enough money and wherewithal to buy these mortgage-backed securities and hold them until they had value. I'm going, "Gosh, I wish that guy had been around back in 2006. We could have started reform on Social Security."

And I just knew TARP was so wrong. And it opened -- you know, I liked George W. Bush, but I think that was a bigger mistake than Iraq because it opened this door to everything Obama has done.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

LOUIE: No way Obama gets $900 billion in January if Bush doesn't get 700 billion back in October. It opened the door to all kinds of calamities.

And, also, there's also a reason Louie Gutierrez is a big fan of Paul's because of similar positions on amnesty. And some of the guys around here say, if we do an amnesty, we're done. Texas goes blue. You know, things go blue. And it's lost. Because people, as you've been trying to educate, you have to understand about the responsibilities before you're allowed to vote. And when you bring them in and say, "Here. Learn how to get benefits," you're not ready to vote yet. So, anyway --

GLENN: So, Louie.

LOUIE: One other point though. This is so critical to me. It's a big issue to me.

GLENN: Well, you're the last congressman we'll ever have on this show. So go ahead. Go out in style.

LOUIE: Okay. Well, in the late '70s, Democrats and Republicans all agreed, if DC were ever going to have a full voting US representative, you have to amend the Constitution. They got it passed through Congress with two-thirds. Didn't get three-fourths of the states to ratify it. And so it didn't become an amendment.

So when we're in the minority in like '07, the Democrats bring a bill to amend the Constitution legislatively. And my friend and the guy I respect, Paul Ryan, supported it. He voted for it. And I'm telling you, there's just too many mistakes like that that are so foundational.

GLENN: They're not mistakes. Look, the G.O.P. has signed itself over to the -- to the Mitt Romneys of the world. And -- and, you know, that's -- that's where they're going. They're just going to ignore the people on the street that believe that we should return to a constitutional government. A constitutional republic. And do the things that the people want to do. I'm convinced that people like Paul Ryan -- I don't know Paul himself. But people like him. The G.O.P. kind of guys. They despise the average person that votes G.O.P. They just don't -- they think we're stupid. They don't agree with us. And, you know, you just don't know. You know, when you have somebody like Barry Loudermilk who comes on and says, "We have to return to the basic values. And I will go. And I need leadership. And I will vote against John Boehner." And then he votes for John Boehner. It's just, "Well, things have changed. I didn't understand. I'm more enlightened now that I'm here." That's ridiculous.

LOUIE: I don't know. But I can tell you though there is a remnant. Hey, Thomas, say hi to Glenn Beck.

THOMAS: How you doing, Glenn? This is Thomas Massie.

GLENN: Hey, Thomas.

LOUIE: Even though he went to MIT, he's a hero of mine. He's a smart guy.

GLENN: Thomas was on the show with us yesterday.

LOUIE: I just love him.

GLENN: Tom, I have to tell you, we have two people -- this is going out in style. You two are the last congressmen and senators we're ever going to have on this show. Because I can't do it anymore. I can't do it anymore. And I don't think the American people can do it anymore. We're sitting here. We're in here pitching for you. We want to help you.

LOUIE: Yeah, you have been.

GLENN: But every time the people call, they do things, it ends up that friends of yours betray us. And it's like --

LOUIE: Well...

GLENN: Where do we go, Tom? Where do we go, Thomas?

THOMAS: Look, apathy is the enemy. Don't let apathy get to you. Don't let it get to the listeners.

GLENN: It's not apathy. It's betrayal. Over and over and over again. It's just betrayal.

THOMAS: I know it's so tough. So many people put their faith in other men and women who have let them down. But there are a few of us up here who are not giving up. I guarantee you.

LOUIE: Well, I got to tell you, Glenn, we've been a little flippant here. But I know you're crushed. And I can tell you, I'm lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut.

(laughter)

LOUIE: This is not a happy time for me right now. I mean, you know...

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what, because there are -- I know there is a handful of guys who are really, really great. You two are two of them. I trust you. I can't believe those words are coming out of my mouth after the past few days, but I trust you two. And you guys have never let us down. And you guys are way out on the limb. You know, maybe what I would like to do is, I would like to sit down with the -- whoever it is -- and I want -- I want to know their name. And I want to look them in the eye and I want to know, "We're going to the wall. We're never going to sit down. We're never going to shut up." And maybe we just make this, you know, a caucus, if you will. And we know exactly who those guys are. And those are the only people that we're supporting. Because I can't take it anymore. I can't take the betrayal anymore.

LOUIE: Well, I understand that.

THOMAS: Keep this in mind, Glenn. The establishment here is terrified. They're actually scared.

GLENN: They have a strange way of showing it.

THOMAS: Well, Speaker Boehner is gone. Kevin McCarthy is not moving up. Eric Cantor HEP lost. These are three of their top generals who lost in the last 18 months.

GLENN: Right, but they just replaced him with Paul Ryan who will be stronger than any of those guys.

THOMAS: We will -- we will see. I mean, I hope he succeeds. I'm not hoping --

GLENN: Right. Right.

THOMAS: If he wins, I mean, we still have a race. There's still an election. I'm still for the Daniel Webster. But even if he should prevail, you know, we want him to succeed.

GLENN: Right. I get that. And I said to Barry Loudermilk today, we had him on the show. And he did not have a pleasant appearance on the program.

THOMAS: Oh, I'm sorry.

GLENN: I'm just mad as hell. But, you know, I said to him, I said, "Look, Barry, I appreciate the fact that you came on, you took the heat. And you add to stood here. He's the only one. We called all of them. None of them would come on. He actually did. And he stated his case. And I said, "Look, I'll be the first to say, thank God, you were right, but what do you -- what evidence do you have?" This happens this way every single time. And then we always say, "Well, I trusted him that time."

LOUIE: As an old history major with four years in the Army, you know, are destined to repeat it. When somebody has a long history, not just once -- and I'll tell you, John voted for the Wall Street bailout and he immediately after said, "I am so sorry. Worst vote of my life. I never should have done that." Well, I can respect a guy that at least acknowledged that. You know, I liked Romney, but he would never admit that Romneycare was a disaster. That would have helped.

GLENN: I know.

LOUIE: But anyway --

GLENN: Hang on. Louie, I have to -- I'm sorry. I have a network break. And I appreciate it.

LOUIE: I know how that goes.

GLENN: And thank you guys for actually having a spine and standing. If you can get me a list of names. I would love to put that on and broadcast so everybody knows who these people are who actually are standing. Because I ain't going to forget the names that didn't.

LOUIE: Our spines are stout, but we might need you to prop up our dead stout bodies.

GLENN: Thank you so much. I appreciate it. God bless you. Buh-bye.

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.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.