Donald Trump and Woodrow Wilson—The Similarities are Getting Eerie

An eerie similarity between Donald Trump and Woodrow Wilson is emerging. You remember Woodrow Wilson, the president Glenn loves so much? Not. America's current problems with an out-of-control, overreaching government can be traced back to Wilson's progressive policies.

If you listen to the language of Trump, it sounds much more like a progressive than a constitutionalist.

"Ronald Reagan said, 'The problem is the government.' Our Founders said, 'The problem is the government.' Donald Trump says it's the people running the government," Glenn said Friday on The Glenn Beck Program.

From Donald Trump's perspective, the government doesn't need to be reined in, it just needs to be managed better. Now where have we heard that before?

Philip Dru: Administrator, a favorite book of Woodrow Wilson's, was written in 1912 by Edward Mandell House, an American diplomat, politician and presidential foreign policy advisor. Advisor to whom? You guessed it---Woodrow Wilson.

The book's hero leads the democratic western U.S. in a civil war against the plutocratic East, and becomes the dictator of America. Dru as dictator imposes a series of reforms that resemble the Bull Moose platform of 1912---then he vanishes. Considering the author had such a close position to the president, it's no surprise that some of the ideas in the book eventually made their way into public policy.

"Do you realize that if you look at [Donald Trump] as a great manager, you have completed the progressive, fundamental hope number one? You take the president and you make him nothing more than an administrator," Glenn explained. "The president is a guy who just manages the bureaucracy. You don't need a president. You don't need the Constitution. You don't need the Congress. You need a guy who just manages the bureaucracy."

Still not convinced Donald Trump is a progressive akin to Woodrow Wilson? Just listen to his new campaign song with children---creepily similar to Obama's kiddie propaganda song from 2008. What inspired Trump's anthem? A song from World War I used by none other than Woodrow Wilson.

Enjoy this complimentary clip from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Donald Trump probably had five boos last night. If you think you're going to unite the party around that guy, it's not going to happen. It's just not going to happen. He is a torch and burn everything that doesn't agree with him. He is Barack Obama. He's doing the same thing that Barack Obama -- you disagree with him, it doesn't matter if he liked you in the past. It doesn't matter if he said I had all my attorneys turn this inside and out. He's totally qualified. If it stands in his way, he'll say and do anything. He will destroy you to get his way.

What difference is it?

By the way, I saw something on a Facebook post that said -- because here's what I wrote last night.

While I strongly disagree with Donald Trump's view on Muslims, I believe he will only grow in numbers because Jeb Bush, believe it or not, who I also disagree with, was right. People are afraid because this president has denied the problem, can't name it, and has made us much less safe. That's what Jeb Bush said last night. And that's exactly right. People want security. And they don't believe anyone in Washington, DC, or anyone in the media anymore. They know that they've been lied to by the people that -- the people who trust radical Muslims in Iran more than they trust those who attend church in small towns all across America. They are tired. They know they've worked hard. They're not getting ahead. They don't even know what we're fighting this war for anymore. They're tired of seeing excuses made for criminals, illegals, people who burn down towns like Baltimore or Ferguson. And those who kill in the name of Islam. Always an excuse for those people, but never an exception for Americans. It's bottom up, top down, inside out. Things are so out of control that people rise up and cry out, "Help! Won't somebody do something?" They want somebody just to take care of the problem.

The bottom rises in despair, the top answers their call. Oh, I'll fix that problem. And it finalizes the transformations and turns us inside out. People never make good decisions in times like this. We made shameful mistakes in World War II. A progressive FDR had a problem with immigration, and they called them at that time saboteurs. We would call them terrorists today. German terrorists. We worried about Japanese saboteurs. Before Pearl Harbor happened, FDR had already drawn up his plans for concentration camps. Which, by the way, internment camp is not what FDR called them. FDR always referred to them as concentration camps. The moment he had an excuse of December 7th, he rounded up the Japanese. The guy who ran that program for a very short period of time was Dwight Eisenhower's brother. Dwight Eisenhower's brother resigned and told the new guy, "I hope you can sleep tonight. I can't sleep anymore because this is so terribly wrong."

People were afraid, and so they violated their principles because the government had failed to do their job and screen out the few and tell the truth about the German and Japanese people as it was growing in strength. They allowed FDR to do it because it allowed them to feel safe and it allowed them to not have to do any of it themselves. They didn't even have to think about it.

This was then. Too many Americans now want somebody to think for them. Quite honestly, watching Donald Trump last night, he sounded a lot like my uncle Bob. My uncle Bob, I don't talk about very much because my uncle Bob was not a good man. My uncle Bob, quite honestly, was an alcoholic and an abusive man. And after a few beers in, he would slur some rant and many people would say, "Damn right, pop!" He would never really say anything of substance. He would never suggest any real solutions. My uncle Bob was just mad. He would just say things that other people on barstools had said or would want to hear.

And as the day grew late, in the end, they'd just slap each other on the back and say, "Damn, right, Bob." And they would order another Rainier beer.

Will America think -- will they think, or will they actually go for another man with little or no detail, who just simply calls for hope and change? Or in this case, I'll make America great again.

Here is a response to that on Facebook last night that I read this morning when I got up.

A guy said, "Glenn, you don't understand. It's not that we don't -- we Trump supporters aren't thinking for ourself. We are thinking for ourself. It's not that we think he's going to fix all our problems." Now, listen to this. I want you to listen to this closely. Because if anybody in this audience thinks I've changed. That I'm the one that has changed. Listen carefully to what he said.

We just see Donald Trump as a great manager. Now, can anyone tell me why that might set me off and be proof that I haven't changed, you have?

PAT: Philip Dru: Administrator.

GLENN: Thank you, Pat.

Do you realize that if you look at him as a great manager, you have completed the progressive, fundamental hope number one? You take the president and you make him nothing more than an administrator. The president is a guy who just manages the bureaucracy. You don't need a president. You don't need the Constitution. You don't need the Congress. You need a guy who just manages the bureaucracy. Philip Dru: Administrator. That's exactly what you are seeing in Donald Trump, a progressive that doesn't say the problem is government. He says the problem is the dumb people in government. We've got the wrong people in government. We've got the wrong managers. We have the wrong people negotiating.

Ronald Reagan said, "The problem is the government." Our Founders said, "The problem is the government." Donald Trump says it's the people running the government.

He's not proposing that we shut down whole sections of the government. He's saying, "I'll manage it better."

That's not constitutional. The favorite -- his favorite novel, Woodrow Wilson. Oh, I hate that guy! Woodrow Wilson, his favorite novel was a novel called Philip Dru: Administrator. He read it like three or four times during his administration. It was written by a progressive to put it in novel form of how our government will work when we've completed this task.

It's a horrible book. But it's available for free. I think you can get it on Amazon.com. It's one of those books that is in the public domain so you can download it for free and read it. It's horrible, horrible, horrible, like dime-store novel fiction.

But when you read it, you'll meet Donald Trump. He's a reluctant servant. He just doesn't want to do it. I have a life of my own. I'm not the guy to be your president. I don't need this job. I don't want this job. Okay. Well, I'm the only guy that can do it. I happen to be in the right place at the right time. And damn it, I just care about my country. So I will. And I'll go in there and I'll serve. And I'm going to go in there and I'll fix this because we have all the wrong people running everything. Congress is all screwed up. The administration is all screwed up. I'll just go in. I'm a humble servant. And I'll just go in and I'll manage this right.

Well, about halfway through the book, he has managed things exactly right. In fact, he's managed things so great that he's decided to put a new council together to go state by state and manage the states as well. Because the states don't really work. And the Constitution as it stands doesn't really work. You can't get things done fast enough. And many times the state constitutions argue against things that are now in the US Constitution. So we all have to come together and work together. And I can do that because there's a lot of these politicians that are just standing in the way. But I'm a good manager. And you know me. I just care about the country.

Philip Dru: Administrator. It's happening. No, Glenn, it can't happen. He's a Republican.

The Republicans started the progressive party. It was Theodore Roosevelt.

GLENN: Can we play the audio? Remember the audio of -- of Barack Obama when he had the kids sing and everybody was really creeped out by this audio.

(music)

GLENN: Do you remember how all of us -- all of us said, "That is creepy. That is creepy propaganda that's now being pushed out for the kids?" I'd like to play a new song by a new candidate. Here it is.

(music)

PAT: Yeah! Everybody!

(music)

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: What, you have a problem with this?

PAT: Oh, man.

STU: Yeah.

(music)

PAT: Isn't that great?

GLENN: So president Donald Trump is going to make things great again. A new song for kids which I think is fantastic. And what I really, really like and I think is super is the fact that it's based on a song from World War I used by -- gosh, I can't remember who that guy was. Jeez. I know I hate him.

STU: Isn't his last name I Hate That Guy?

GLENN: I hate that guy. Oh, yeah. Woodrow Wilson. What a surprise.

Featured Image: Screenshot from The Glenn Beck Program

Presidential debate recap: The good, the bad and the ugly

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The second presidential debate was many things--some good, some bad, but one thing was made clear: this election is far from over.

If you were watching the debate with Glenn during the BlazeTV exclusive debate coverage, then you already know how the debate went: Kamala lied through her teeth and Trump faced a three-pronged attack from Harris and the two ABC moderators. This was not the debate performance we were hoping for, but it could have gone far worse. If you didn't get the chance to watch the debate or can't bring yourself to watch it again and are looking for a recap, we got you covered. Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly from the second presidential debate:

The Good

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Let's start with what went well.

While there was certainly room for improvement, Trump's performance wasn't terrible, especially compared to his performance in other debates. He showed restraint, kept himself from being too brash, and maintained the name-calling to a minimum. In comparison, Kamala Harris was struggling to maintain her composure. Harris was visibly emotional and continued to make obnoxious facial expressions, which included several infuriating eye-rolls and patronizing smirks.

The Bad

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite all that, the debate could have gone much better...

While Trump was able to keep his cool during the debate, he was not able to stay on track. Kamala kept making inflammatory comments meant to derail Trump, and every time, he took the bait. Trump spent far too long defending his career and other extraneous issues instead of discussing issues relevant to the American people and revealing Kamala's failures as Vice President.

Trump's biggest blunder during the debate was his failure to prevent Kamala from leaving that debate looking like a credible option as president. Kamala was fairly unknown to the American people and had remained that way on purpose, giving only one interview after Biden stepped down from the campaign. This is because every time Kamala opens her mouth, she typically makes a fool of herself. Trump needed to give Kamala more time to stick her foot in her mouth and to press Kamala on the Biden administration's failures over the past four years. Instead, he took her bait and let her run down the clock, and by the end of the debate, she left looking far more competent than she actually is.

The Ugly

If anything, the debate reminded us that this election is far from over, and it's more important now than ever for Trump to win.

The most noteworthy occurrence of the debate was the blatantly obvious bias of the ABC debate moderators against Trump. Many people have described the debate as a "three vs. one dogpile," with the moderators actively participating in debating Trump. If you didn't believe that the media was in the back pocket of the Democrats before, it's hard to deny it now. Kamala stood on stage and lied repeatedly with impunity knowing that the moderators and the mainstream media at large would cover for her.

The stakes have never been higher. With so many forces arrayed against Trump, it's clear to see that the Left cannot afford to let Trump win this November. The shape of America as we know it is on the line. Kamala represents the final push by the globalist movement to take root and assimilate America into the growing global hivemind.

The election is far from over. This is our sign to stand up and fight for our nation and our values and save America.

Glenn: Illegal aliens could swing the 2024 election, and it spells trouble for Trump

ELIZABETH RUIZ / Stringer | Getty Images

Either Congress must pass the SAVE Act, or states must protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Progressives rely on three main talking points about illegal aliens voting in our elections.

The first is one of cynical acceptance. They admit that illegal immigrants are already voting but argue that there is nothing we can do to stop it, suggesting that it’s just another factor we should expect in future elections. This position shows no respect for our electoral system or the rule of law and doesn’t warrant further attention.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches.

The second talking point targets the right. Progressives question why Republicans care, asking why they assume illegal immigrants voting would only benefit the other side. They suggest that some of these voters might also support the GOP.

On this point, the data says otherwise.

Across the board, immigrants vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, regardless of what state they’re in. The vast majority of migrants are coming up from South America, a region that is undergoing a current “left-wing” experiment by voting for far-left candidates practically across the board. Ninety-two percent of South America’s population favors the radical left, and they’re pouring over our border in record numbers — and, according to the data, they’re not changing their voting habits.

The third main talking point concedes that illegal immigrants are voting but not enough to make a significant dent in our elections — that their effect is minuscule.

That isn’t what the numbers show either.

Texas just audited its voter rolls and had to remove more than 1 million ineligible voters. The SAVE Act would mandate all states conduct such audits, but the left in Congress is currently trying to stop its passage. Dare I say that the left's pushback is because illegal immigration actually plays in Democrats' favor on Election Day?

Out of the 6,500 noncitizens removed from the voter rolls, nearly 2,000 had prior voting history, proving that illegal aliens are voting. But do the numbers matter, or are they “minuscule,” as the left claims? Let’s examine whether these illegal voting trends can make a dent in the states that matter the most on Election Day.

The corporate legacy media agree that Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will swing the election in November. By Election Day, an estimated 8 million illegal aliens will be living in the United States. Can these 8 million illegal immigrants change the course of the 2024 election? Let’s look at the election data from each of these seven swing states:

These are the numbers being sold to us as “insignificant” and “not enough to make a difference.” Arizona and Georgia were won in 2020 by a razor-thin margin of approximately 10,000 votes, and they have the most illegal immigrants — besides North Carolina — of all the swing states.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches. The progressives are importing an electorate to extend their ground by feet, yards, and often miles.

This is why Democrats in Congress oppose the SAVE Act, why the Justice Department has ignored cases of illegal voting in the past, and why the corporate left-wing media is gaslighting the entire country on its significance. This is a power play, and the entire Western world is under the same assault.

If things stay the status quo, these numbers prove the very real possibility of an election swing by illegal immigrants, and it will not favor our side of the aisle. Congress must pass the SAVE Act. If it fails, states must step up to protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Hunter pleads GUILTY, but did he get a pass on these 3 GLARING crimes?

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Last week, Hunter Biden made the shocking decision to suddenly plead guilty to all nine charges of tax-related crimes after claiming innocence since 2018.

Hunter first tried an "Alford plead" in which a defendant maintains their innocence while accepting the sentencing, typically due to the overwhelming evidence against them. Hunter's Alford plead was not accepted after the prosecutors objected to the suggestion, and Hunter quickly pleaded guilty.

Glenn could not believe just how disrespectful this situation was to the justice system and the American people. After years of lying about his innocence, which only served to deepen the divide in our country, Hunter decided to change his tune at the last minute and admit his guilt. Moreover, many expect Joe Biden will swoop in after the election and bail his son out with a presidential pardon.

This isn't the first time Hunter's crimes have turned out to be more than just a "right-wing conspiracy theory," and, odds are, it won't be the last. Here are three crimes Hunter may or may not be guilty of:

Gun charges: Found guilty

This June, Hunter Biden was found guilty of three federal gun charges, which could possibly land him up to 25 years in prison. Hunter purchased a revolver in 2018 while addicted to crack, and lied to the gun dealer about his addiction. While Hunter could face up to 25 years in prison, it's unlikely to be the case as first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum sentence. That's assuming Joe even lets it go that far.

Tax evasion: Plead guilty

Last week, Hunter changed his plea to "guilty" after years of pleading innocent to federal tax evasion charges. Since 2018, Delaware attorneys have been working on Hunter's case, and just before the trial was set to begin, Hunter changed his plea. According to the investigation, Hunter owed upwards of $1.4 million in federal taxes that he avoided by writing them off as fraudulent business deductions. Instead, Hunter spent this money on strippers, escorts, luxury cars, hotels, and, undoubtedly, crack.

Joe's involvement with Hunter's foreign dealings: Yet to be proven

Despite repeated claims against it, there is ample evidence supporting the theory Joe Biden was aware of Hunter's business dealings and even had a hand in them. This includes testimony from Devon Archer, one of Hunter's business partners, confirming Joe joined several business calls. Despite the mounting evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's overseas business dealings and was using his influence to Hunter's benefit, the Bidens still maintain their innocence.

Why do we know so much about the Georgia shooter but NOTHING about Trump's shooter?

Jessica McGowan / Stringer | Getty Images

It's only been a few days since the horrific shooting at the Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia, and the shooter, Colt Gray, and his father, Colin Gray, have already made their first court appearance. Over the last few days, more and more information has come out about the shooter and his family, including details of Colt's troubled childhood and history of mental health issues. The FBI said Colton had been on their radar.

This situation has Glenn fired up, asking, "Why do we have an FBI?" It seems like every time there is a mass shooting, the FBI unhelpfully admits the shooter was "on the radar," but what good does that do? While it is great we know everything about the Georgia shooter, including what he got for Christmas, why do we still know next to NOTHING about Trump's would-be assassin? Here are three things we know about the Georgia shooter that we stilldon't know about the Trump shooter:

Digital footprint

Just a few days after the shooting, authorities have already released many details of the Georgia shooter, Colt Gray's, digital footprint. This includes extensive conversations and photographs revolving around school shootings that were pulled from Gray's Discord account, a digital messaging platform.

Compared to this, the FBI claims Thomas Crooks, the shooter who almost assassinated Donald Trump, had little to no digital footprint, and outside of an ominous message sent by Crooks on Steam (an online video game platform), we know nothing about his online activities. Doesn't it seem strange that Crooks, a young adult in 2024 who owned a cell phone and a laptop left behind no digital trail of any relevance to his crime?

Home life

The FBI has painted a vivid image of what Colt Gray's home life was like, including his troubling relationship with his parents. They released information about his parents' tumultuous divorce, being evicted from his home, several interactions with law enforcement and CPS, and abuse. Investigators also found written documents of Colt's related to other school shootings, suggesting he had been thinking of this for some time before committing the atrocity.

In contrast, we still know next to nothing about Crooks's home life.

How he got the weapon

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Colt Gray was gifted the rifle he used in the shooting from his father for Christmas last year. We also know Colt's father is an avid hunter and would take Colt on hunting trips. In 2023, Colt was the subject of an investigation regarding a threat he made online to shoot up a school. During the interview, Colt stated he did not make the threat. Moreover, his father admitted to owning several firearms, but said Colt was not allowed full access to them. The investigation was later closed after the accusations could not be sustained.

In comparison, all we know is that Crooks stole his father's rifle and did not inform his parents of any part of his plan. We have no clue how Crooks acquired the rest of his equipment, which included nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bullet-proof vest, and several homemade bombs. How did Crooks manage to acquire all of his equipment without the FBI taking notice?

It feels like the FBI is either incompetent or hiding important information from the American people. Or both.