Mark Levin Delivers Powerful Monologue on GOP Candidates, Where We Stand

Radio commentator Mark Levin articulated something in a monologue Glenn has been trying to say for a long time.

"You'll notice he's being much smarter than I am," Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

In his monologue, Levin pointed out he defended Donald Trump when the "morons in the establishment" were attacking him. However, as a conservative, he said he'd never defend everything the candidate has done, given Trump's self-described "transitions."

"We're not making the transition," Glenn said. "Trump is the one making these transitions, or so he says. I thought that was really telling and very powerful coming from Mark Levin."

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

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

GLENN: I want to play a little of this monologue from Mark Levin, who I have to tell you, listeners used to always say, "You and Mark have got to get together. You have so much in common." Blah, blah. And there was this bullcrap between us that somebody had, quite honestly, lied about me and was feeding him stuff that apparently that I was saying behind his back or whatever. And none of it happened. And the same person was trying to feed that garbage to me. And until we started talking, we realized, "Oh, my gosh, we have been played. We have been played." To keep us apart. And it was not just him. It was all of the talk radio people. Just try to keep us apart. Because if we would ever gather together, it would be -- it would be, you know -- political changes would be in the air.

So Mark and I over the past year or so have become very good friends. So we write to each other a few times a week. And I write to him. And he'll send me articles, et cetera, et cetera. And he's just wickedly smart. And he's right. I really, truly believe Mark Levin's idea of the Convention of States may be the last-ditch effort. It may be the only way to save the republic in the end. Because if one of three people get elected, I think we're headed for a dictatorship or dictatorship-lite. We're headed for something that does not resemble the republic because they will finish the transformation that Barack Obama started. And the Convention of the States will be the only way to reel it back in.

So, you know, I've been trying to pay attention to what he's saying because he's really super smart. I listen to a monologue this morning when I got up from a couple of days ago, that he gave. And I want you just to hear what he is now saying about the candidates and where we are.

MARK: I want to make it clear, when Trump was under attack by the morons in the establishment, I defended him. I didn't defend everything he said, and I'm never going to. I'm never going to defend everything that man's done, every contribution he's made, everything he's said, or I wouldn't be a conservative, now would I? It's he who has evolved or transitioned, he says. So that's worth looking at. What's different --

GLENN: Stop. Have you noticed that? He is being far more diplomatic than I have been. And we all know where Mark stands. Mark has been very, very clear on the past on Donald Trump. Not a conservative.

But you'll notice he's being much smarter than I am. He's trying to make the point to the Trump supporters, "He has said these things. He's the one. We're not making the transition. Cruz is not the one making the transition. Trump is the one making these transitions, or so he says." I thought that was really telling and very powerful coming from Mark Levin.

MARK: -- right now is that the attack on Cruz, in many ways is an attack on us. That's the problem.

He's nasty, nasty, nasty, Donald says. Why? Because Mitch McConnell thinks he's nasty? Because Bob Dole thinks he's nasty? Because the dug-in, ruling elite Republicans think he's nasty? Now we're all supposed to genuflect and say, "Yeah, he's nasty. That's right. We don't like Cruz. He doesn't get along with anybody."

Ladies and gentlemen, you're attacking yourself. I don't care who you like, it doesn't even make any sense. So all of a sudden --

GLENN: Stop. Listen to that. This is what I've been trying to say, but not nearly as eloquent as Mark has: It doesn't make any sense. The guy we prayed for -- I truly believe that the guy we prayed for is Ted Cruz. When we all got together and said, "We need a strong constitutionalist. We need someone who is going to return us to our values, but actually understand them. We need a guy who is going to go in to Washington and actually do everything he told us he would and not sell his soul out to the devil. Just remember where he came from. Be the Mr. Smith Goes to Washington that is willing to die on his desk on the floor." He's here. And now we're being told he's too mean, he's too nasty, nobody likes him, he can't win, he can't win even in his own party. That's a sign of, he's on the right track. And for us to attack him now, as Mark said, is an attack on ourselves.

MARK: What we thought was courage, what we thought was Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, you and I are supposed to believe this guy is bought out by the banks, this guy is nasty, this guy doesn't get along with anybody, screw him. Is that what we're supposed to do? I'm all in favor --

GLENN: Stop. Stop. I want you to ask yourself this: Has Mark Levin finally been bought off? Has Mark Levin finally betrayed the republic? Is Mark Levin a traitor? Has Mark Levin given up his principles? Has George Will given up his principles? Is George Will not really a conservative? Has Michelle Malkin given up her principles? Has Michelle Malkin, is she just doing this for money or for fame?

You know, when you look at special guests, you have to ask yourself, does that special guest have the same principles that we all said we were going for five years ago? Small government. No dictatorship. An end to the -- the -- the nonstop executive order after executive order. The not destroying your enemies.

How many times did we say, "I'm willing to sit down with Barack Obama. He won't listen to us. He's not listening to us?" And instead, he uses the IRS to destroy us. When you have a special guest, you have to ask yourself, "Is that special guest consistent, or are they now standing with somebody who would just as quickly use the IRS for an enemies' list on the other side?"

Is there a reason -- can you tell me, what reason does Michelle Malkin, how is Michelle Malkin going to get rich by standing up and saying, "This isn't right?" How is Mark Levin coming out and saying, "This doesn't even make sense. You're betraying yourself. We are attacking ourselves," how is he going to get rich? How am I going to suddenly become famous or rich by saying these things? It doesn't make any sense.

It's -- it's -- you've taken emotional gasoline. He's allowed -- Donald Trump has taken emotional gasoline and thrown it on everybody. It's the same tactic that Saul Alinsky talks about and that Barack Obama uses. It's just -- it's time to step back and be cool and say, "All right. Wait a minute. What is consistent?"

Now, a lot of people will immediately go to, "I want to win. We've got to win." And I understand that. I'm the guy who told you 20 minutes ago, the country is over. It is over. Catastrophic collapse is coming, and you're going to have to rebuild from the ground up.

So I know that. But who do we -- who do we become when we cross that Rubicon?

Featured Image: Conservative radio host Mark Levin acknowledges the crowd after speaking at a 'Cut Spending Now' rally at the conservative Americans for Prosperity (AFP) 'Defending the American Dream Summit' in Washington on November 5, 2011. (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images)

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

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.