Megyn Kelly Tells Glenn How 7th Grade Bullies Prepared Her to Handle Trump

Megyn Kelly, host of The Kelly File on Fox News and author or the new book Settle for More, joined Glenn on radio today for an enlightening conversation about her all-American values and how she views adversity as an opportunity.

"It's a pretty incredible story," Glenn said.

In particular, Megyn told Glenn about an experience in 7th grade that both scarred and shaped her.

"You can learn a lot about life in the seventh grade," Megyn said.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• How did a group of 7th grade girls make Megyn Kelly feel loneliness and deep sadness?

• What dawned on her about Trump's relentless attacks?

• Why did Megyn Kelly called Glenn "a gentleman throughout?"

• What torrent of threats were unleashed after the now infamous debate question?

• What's Megyn Kelly's blueprint for beating bullies?

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

GLENN: Welcome to the program, Megyn Kelly. How are you, Megyn?

MEGYN: Hi, Glenn, it's great to be here.

GLENN: Thank you. Shoot. We have a horrible connection. Can we play with that as we talk?

Megyn, I haven't read your book yet. Just came out yesterday. Just got it actually this morning. Have thumbed through it. Have read some excerpts from it. It's a pretty incredible story. And you're ruffling some feathers right now in several areas.

Can we start with Donald Trump? And tell me if I have this story right -- and this is what you wrote in the book or not.

MEGYN: Okay.

GLENN: The Donald Trump story, if I may share a story -- I was on your show one day when you were in lockdown, may I go farther than this? Do you remember this?

MEGYN: Keep going.

GLENN: Okay. And you were having significant security issues.

MEGYN: Yes.

GLENN: And real death threats. Your family was under attack. And you had never seen anything about it. And I was I think maybe in Iowa or Nebraska. And I was waiting for you to come into the studio. You were about an hour late. And we had a conversation, and it was a quite frightening time in your life.

MEGYN: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Do you want to talk about that at all?

MEGYN: Well, I mean -- look, let me just start with this. This book, Settle for More, is about my life and my values, which I think are not just mine, but American values -- at least, used to be. Right? I don't know about today's day and age and these kids.

But one of the things that you see throughout the book is that I think adversity is an opportunity to grow and become stronger. And I can certainly say that my year of Trump, as I describe it in the book, has done that for me.

And it has been a difficult year in many ways. I mean, in particular, the security scares were bad. And clearly unacceptable. No journalist should have to go through that just to cover a candidate.

GLENN: Nobody should.

MEGYN: But I dealt with it. And I think I actually now have a bit of a blueprint for others in how to deal with it. And I hope when people close this book, they will understand that, you know, I think you can grow if hard times come your way. And it's an opportunity to evolve. And as far as Trump and I go, I think we're in a better place now.

GLENN: May I pursue this because of what was printed in the New York Times of what you wrote. And, again, I'm sorry. I have not read the book. I just got it this morning.

MEGYN: Stan Burgos (phonetic).

GLENN: Yeah. I know.

The New York Times spun this as what you were saying in the book was you knew no one was going to come to your rescue, no one was standing by you. I don't necessarily want to get into this, but I have been shocked and horrified at the way you have been treated by several people. And no one stood by you. But you -- the New York Times made it seem that no one was going to stand up for you, and so you had to solve it. And basically, the way I read it from the Times is you had to go kiss his ring and make it go away and make it stop.

MEGYN: So that's not exactly right. I did have people stand up for me. And just so your listeners know, you were one of them. And this is, I'm sure, knowing you, not something you talk about, but just so everybody knows, Glenn would write me the kindest, most supportive, uplifting messages in the darkest days that offered to help and offered to do anything he could. And expressed, of course, genuine concern. And just, you were such a gentleman throughout, Glenn, and I just want to make a record of that to people.

GLENN: Thank you, Megyn.

MEGYN: But what had happened with Trump was he was relentless. You know, he just couldn't let it go. And the book documents how in the initial days after that August debate, I understood he was angry. And I -- I understood why. It was definitely a tough question for him. I don't regret it, but he was new to the game. All these other guys were seasoned politicians, and he's up there like, "Hey, I'm here to get you ratings," and then it's all of a sudden a punch of the face. And he's like, "What the hell is that?" Right?

So I understood his initial anger. But I didn't really understand how he couldn't let it go.

My point is, Roger Ailes did try to stand Trump down many times, but he was unsuccessful. And Sean Hannity, who is tight with Trump, tried to stand Trump down many times, but he was unsuccessful. Hannity was successful in getting some more talk radio guys sort of, you know, not gin up so much hatred at a time when I was under serious threat and I was, you know, having to live my life with bodyguards, which is not how a journalist normally lives or should have to live.

And so I did have some support. But it just wasn't working. You know, it was like, they were trying, but it wasn't working.

And after nine months of it, Glenn -- and the book sort of documents how just every time I would think it was over, it wasn't over. And I'm not just talking about nasty tweets. We've all been subjected to that. I'm a big girl. I can take that. It was the torrent of nastiness that those would unleash in my life and of threats, I mean, real security threats. And people coming to my home, and on my doorstep threatening and screaming obscenities at me on the street in front of my children. And not being able to go anywhere without an armed guard, including Disney World. I mean, it's just like, what the hell is going on here because of a debate question?

So in April, if memory serves, of 2016, it dawned on me that Trump was never going to let this go. That he was enjoying the story line and that, that meant it would be up to me to write an ending to it. And I knew if I could in front of him, he would stop.

And there was no apology. I mean, I wasn't -- he wanted an apology from me for my debate question. That wasn't happening. I didn't want an apology from him. But we had always had a good relationship. So I knew if I could get in there, sit down with him and just talk, we would be okay and he would stop. And that's what happened.

GLENN: There is a theme that is going on in the country today, and it's whether or not -- you know, we for years have been told for years to stop bullying. And what that meant in the past was, "No, kids, you cannot play dodgeball anymore because you might get hit in the face." There's a difference between the bullying that has been -- you know, that the left has been saying has happened and real bullying.

MEGYN: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And you have -- have seen your share of it, as, you know, the bullying that was happening with Donald Trump, the bullying that was happening with Roger Ailes. And it seems as though the country doesn't necessarily care all that much on either side. Is that right? Is that how you're feeling?

MEGYN: Well, first of all, I know that you have experienced this yourself because there's just something about the way some of Trump's supporters marched to the beat of his drum, that whenever he sends out a negative message about somebody, it really does wreak havoc in that person's life. And I haven't seen a lot of people talk about it.

Erick Erickson has written about it. You know, he got some just terrible death threats to his family. And I know you've been subjected to some of that too, just for being a Trump critic. Which is -- this is America. We have dissenting points of view. We as journalists are supposed to be skeptical in our coverage.

But, yes, I do draw a distinction though between bullying, which my book, Settle for More, talks all about. I have had real experience with. I had a brutal seventh grade year, in which my group of friends all turned against me. And I was in tears for much of the year and very, very alone with no friends. And it was hard. You know, this was 1983 when you didn't have helicopter parents intervening at every turn. But it does teach you a thing or too

GLENN: Why did they turn against you at seventh --

MEGYN: Who the hell knows?

GLENN: Why was that an important story to tell?

MEGYN: Well, first of all, who knows, right? These are 12-year-old girls who are just -- who can be the meanest some B's you ever -- terrible.

(chuckling)

GLENN: I have to tell you, I have found that women -- some of the meanest tweets, some of the meanest Facebook posts, and some of the meanest emails I've received, I'll read them and say, "This guy is out of control." And it will be signed by a woman.

(laughter)

GLENN: I mean, women are nasty at times.

MEGYN: Yeah. We can give as good as we get.

GLENN: Ooh. And then some.

MEGYN: And, you know, it all begins in the seventh grade, Glenn. You can learn a lot about life in the seventh grade.

You know, in the book, I tell this story about -- take a step back on the bullying. But in the book, I tell the story about how it culminated in -- because I used to be popular. And then suddenly one day, this group, they just turned on me, and I had no friends.

And they would, you know, flick the spitballs at me and try to trip me in the hall. I used to be overweight. I used to have bad skin. They would make fun of every vulnerability.

JEFFY: Me too.

GLENN: Wow. Boy, must be fun --

MEGYN: One day I was at home. It was a Saturday night. The most popular girl was having a big party, and I was home alone with my parents.

And my phone rang. I said, "Hello." And she said, "You know, it's me." She said, "Do you know where all the people are from my party?" And I said, "No." And they all screamed into the phone, "We're here."

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

MEGYN: And they hung up. I hung up the phone in front of my parents who didn't know what had just happened. I lied and told them it was a wrong number.

And I went out in my backyard, which had iced over. This is upstate New York, Albany, suburb. And there was snow on the ground that had iced over. And my sneakers -- I went out there, Glenn. I put my hands in my pockets, and I sort of skated across the ice in the darkness, with tears streaming down my face. And I can remember it to this day, you know, just that feeling of ostracization and loneliness and just deep sadness and the desire to connect and feel like you belong. And so, you know, those scars they take a long time to heal.

And the truth is, it took me some 20 years before I had even realized what they had done to me, what that year had done to me as a person. So I do take bullying very seriously.

And when Donald Trump began to act up -- again, in the initial phases, it's like, "Okay. It's a politician that's unhappy with me. I'm experienced in that." But when it was so relentless -- I knew I was not going to submit. You know, actual bullying is intimidation designed to get a certain effect, you know, to have a certain effect.

GLENN: Yeah.

MEGYN: They're looking for compliance, right? To -- to cow you.

And Donald Trump never managed to do that with me. I -- I covered him without fear of favor, every day of that campaign. And so I feel like it was an attempt at bullying, but not an actual bullying, right? Because there was no submission.

But I will say this, when I came out of the bullying, and over the years in thinking about it, I did realize that in dealing with the bully in general, the best course is to send the bully a message that he's nothing to you, right? That there's a good me when you raise a child, the bad me. If you don't pay positive attention to your child, he'll act out badly. And if you don't pay attention to that, the worst thing that you could do to a child is send them the not me message. And I think when you're dealing with a bully, the not me message is the best message you can send. And I think it really irritated Donald Trump over the months that I would not respond to him. But I think that's a proven course for how to handle, as an adult, someone who is trying to push you around.

GLENN: Megyn, I have talked to several people who have expressed the feeling of, "This is not the ending." And it has nothing to do with Donald Trump. It has everything to do with the way our society is going. And the economy and world affairs, if we don't turn a corner here.

MEGYN: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And the people who are saying, "I want to stand, but it's lonely. It is really, really lonely. And I don't know if I can do it."

MEGYN: Uh-huh.

GLENN: What have you learned from truly standing almost alone, or you had to have felt pretty alone even though you did have some people back -- I'm glad to hear that some of the Fox people were backing you behind the scenes?

MEGYN: Well, I don't define myself by applicant or this job or just my identity as a news anchor. And that's been key to everything for me. And, you know, in this book, you know, I talk about what -- what -- a piece of advice that was given to me long ago by one of my first law bosses, when I was practicing law, which was, "In times of trouble, remember who you are."

And what does that mean?

It means, what defines you? You know, who are you? Am I Megyn Kelly news anchor? Well, that's something I do, but it's not who I am.

You know, I'm -- I'm a woman. I'm a person, a woman, a wife, a mother, a daughter, a sister. You know, those are the things when I think about who I am, I think about those people who made me those things. And the influence they've had in my life. And the times we've shared together and the laughter and the tears. And those are the things that are important to me. And that if I ever were, God forbid, to lose would change who I am, you know, would deeply affect me in ways I couldn't change back, not not this job, not, you know, who is even in the Oval Office, Glenn.

And I think that people should hold on to that, because they can try to bully you. They can say mean things about you. But they can't change your soul unless you let them.

And for me, I feel like, you hold on to your integrity, you hold on to your ethics and who you are, which, of course, is what you do behind closed doors when no one is looking. And you hold on to what you hold most dear in this world. And those things don't tend to change. And they certainly aren't dictated by the internet or anything anybody says in a public forum. And you'll be good. You know, just keep redirecting yourself to that stuff, remembering who you are, and you'll be good.

GLENN: The name of the book is Settle for More by Megyn Kelly. It is out today. Megyn, I would like to read the back and then when things slow down for you, I would like to have you back and talk a little more because I think you are one of the more fascinating people in the media today and somebody who actually really tries to be fair and to get it right. And I appreciate that.

MEGYN: Thanks, Glenn.

GLENN: Megyn, thank you. We'll talk to you again. Settle for More is the name of the book by Megyn Kelly. Back in just a second.

Featured Image: FOX news host Megyn Kelly looks on during the Republican Presidential debate sponsored by Fox News at the Iowa Events Center in Des Moines, Iowa on January 28, 2016. (Photo Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

Tapping the brakes on transgenderism in 2023

Hunter Martin / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

Trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages.

The WBC president went on to say:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. Plato's Republic

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

2. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

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

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

3. Augustine's City of God

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

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

4. Aquinas' Summa Theologica

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

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

5. Francis Bacon's Novem Organum

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

6. Descartes' Discourse on Method

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

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

7. David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature

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

8. Kant's Contemplation on the Metaphysics of Morals

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

9. Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil

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

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

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

11. Alasdair McIntyre's After Virtue

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. Saving the planet

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

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

2. Private jets

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

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

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

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

4. Climate revolution

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

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

5. Do or die

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

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

6. Colossal risks

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

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

7. Rain bombs

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

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

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

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

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

9. Complete transformation

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

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

10. Scientific necessity

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

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

11. Illegal hate speech

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

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

12. Climate first

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

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

13. The role of war

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

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

14. Blame game

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

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

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

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

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

Conclusion

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