California Guns Sales Skyrocket With Coming Restrictive Laws on 'Evil Features'

Biker, gun enthusiast, former bull rider and radio talk show host Mike Broomhead filled in for Glenn on The Glenn Beck Program today, Wednesday, December 28.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 3 for answers to these questions:

• Can you still work hard and be successful in America?

• Why do Chinese people still want to be Americans?

• How did Donald Trump flipped certain states to win them?

• Are California gun sales skyrocketing?

• What the hell is an evil feature on a gun?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

MIKE: It is the Glenn Beck Program. My name is Mike Broomhead. Phoenix, Arizona, is where I live. I'm in for Glenn today and tomorrow. Thanks for making the Glenn Beck Program a part of your day, wherever you're listening, however you're listening to us. We really do appreciate you being here, and I want to especially thank the hundreds of people on social media that have reached out to me this morning. I love social media and the interaction. It's just a great way for us -- and I do manage my own social media. I don't have anybody that does it for me. So on Twitter, I'm @BroomheadShow. On Instagram, Mike Broomhead. All one word. And I'm known for here in Phoenix for my blurry pictures. Yes, I'm not doing it on purpose now. It's just, for whatever reason, can't take a picture no matter how good the camera is. But you can see my photographs there. And the Mike Broomhead Fan Page on Facebook is where you can find my page locally in Phoenix. I do Morning Drive in Phoenix, Arizona, at KFYI.

And I want to wrap something up from last hour. The biggest outpouring I've gotten in response has been about work in America and jobs. And I've gotten some great tweets. And they've been terrific. And people have been kind. And I'm not -- Sharita said that, you know, that no one should feel that they can't -- if you want -- what you have isn't good enough, go out and get it. When there's a will, there's a way. And talked about going and getting her degree later in life, after retiring from the Army.

And thank you for your service. In the military, it is one of the great things about Americanism. And what I worry about with the regulation -- so when I argue politics, I come from a different place. I am a registered Republican. I say that unashamedly. But I am not a standard-bearer for the Republican Party.

I'm a standard-bearer for a set of what I believe are ideals. And the reason why I want limited government is because I think government gets in the way many times.

And so we do need rules and regulations. But when the powerful become more powerful -- and that's all it is about, is becoming more powerful, it becomes a detriment.

And so I know the -- it's about principle, not party. And so when I argue about the Democratic platform, it's because I think it's wrong. I'm not arguing with Democrats and calling them evil people. I believe they're well-intentioned. You know, my uncles were teamsters, for crying out loud, when I was a little boy. So you know what kind of family I came from. Everyone in that family, that entire family, all my cousins now Republican. Because what has become of the oppression of the Democratic Party is different. It's the haves and the have-nots. And it's class warfare that shouldn't be there.

So to kind of wrap a bow on the last hour where we were talking about jobs and influence and the working class in America, we should be telling our children, in our own homes, but the generation of children right now in high school, that there's a way for you in America, no matter who you are, to find a way to contribute and feel good about your contribution and make a living for yourself.

You're not going to have -- not many of us are ever going to have superstar money. It's not going to happen. But we can improve our station in life. We can change our career in midstream. We can do things differently at an older age and still accomplish things. Like it can't be done in other parts of the world. Why do you think as good as the Chinese economy is, that the Chinese people still want to be Americans?

America still stands for that land of opportunity to so many people in the world. And we should be proud of that. The class warfare is what has dragged this economy down for the last eight years. It is why we still see this huge disparity between rich and poor. Through this sluggish recovery -- if you notice, the Dow is through the roof. So if you've got a 401(k), it's doing better now. The rich have gotten much richer. But what are we doing at the grassroots level about jobs?

Well, the issue is, it costs so much money to do business. I want you to think -- put yourself -- if you're one of the people that are listening right now and throwing things at your radio because of what I'm saying, I just want you to be honest for a moment: If you had $10 million right now, under the current rules we have, where if you were to invest part of that money in a startup company and risk it and the government was going to take a huge chunk of your profits, to the tune of 35 to 40 percent, and then on top of that, regulations were such that it costs so much money to start a business, or would you live on that 10 million, have a nice life, and wait until, A, your taxes were lower so you kept more of your profits when you risk everything and, B, the regulations made it easier for you to start a business?

When I expanded my contracting company -- and I'm no genius. The people that are listening in Phoenix can attest to that. They hear me every day. I'm no smarter than anybody else. I'm as average as average can be. I just work hard.

When I expanded my business, I was able to get a 50,000-dollar line of credit on my house to expand my business.

I had a box of tools and a pickup truck when I started. And my concern is -- because I'm no genius. But my concern is, my grandchildren -- I got three grandsons. The oldest is five.

Fifteen years, he's going to be in high school -- or, I mean, he's going to be in college. Well, he may be in high school if he follows in my footsteps at 20. But at 20 years old, he'll either be in the job market, in college, or in the military. And if he's in the job market, is he going to have the opportunities I had? If he's got the -- the desire to jump out there and take the risk. Is the opportunity going to be there?

Because we've wiped that opportunity out for so many people. It is so costly to start a business now, just on the compliance issues alone. That unless you've already got a ton of money, you can't do it.

The individual that's willing to risk everything -- you know, mortgage their house to do something, you can't even afford to do it now at all.

So when I talk about lowering taxes at the corporate level, it's not because I'm snuggling up to the wealthy. I'm no silver spoon kid myself. I just don't think the government is entitled to it just because you earned it. I mean, I don't care who you are. And the decrease in regulation, I'm not saying because I don't care about the environment. That's ridiculous. Anybody that loves the outdoors, that hunts and fishes, cares about the environment.

Hunters and fishermen want to have the forest pristine and they want clean water because they want their grandkids and their great-grandkids to enjoy the forests like they do. They don't want to decimate the animal population. They don't want to cut down all the trees. They don't want to pollute the water. I don't want to pollute the air. I don't want to give my grandkids lung cancer because I don't care about the environment. But oppressive regulation drags down business and drags down opportunity.

I want my grandkids to have an opportunity to do what they desire to do with their lives. If they want to go to work eight hours a day, 40 hours a week, make a nice living, and spend every other minute with their families, God bless them, I hope they do it. If they're an entrepreneurial spirit and they're willing to work 100 hours a week on a dream -- and even if they fail at the dream, to have the opportunity to chase it, that's why I have aligned myself with the Republican Party in what the platform is supposed to stand for.

I don't agree with everything they've done. Trust me. Go back and listen to the podcast on my show. Go to KFYI.com. Listen to some of the podcasts. What I've said about the Republican Party.

But the principles of small government and standing on your own two feet, most people believe in, no matter what party they are. There are plenty of Democrats that aren't looking for a handout.

That's why Donald Trump flipped the states he flipped because he went into those states and he said to the working Democrats in those union towns, get your factories opened again. We're going to make sure you have your job. We're not going to hand you anything. You're just going to get your job back. You're going to keep your job.

Now, they believed him. And if they don't come through -- if the Republicans in the House and the Senate don't come through, you're going to see those two houses flip in the next four years. And Donald Trump will be out in four years.

This hour of the show, we're going to talk about California. I am a very big Second Amendment advocate for a number of reasons. And I live in a state that has got great gun laws, which are very lenient, and they're very pro-gun owner. But California is going the other direction. And so gun sales are going through the roof in the state of California.

We're going to discuss this idea here in a few moments, this hour. And also, one commentator is still talking about why Hillary lost and it's still not Hillary's fault. Now it's white fear. I don't know what white fear is. I'm white. Nobody whiter than me. Pretty sure that however white you are, nobody whiter than me. And I don't know what white fear is.

So we're going to talk about, again, racial tension in this country and the division again, if it's not rich versus poor, it's black versus white or men versus women or gay versus straight.

Talk about that political division, and is it time it all came to an end? We'll do that here in just a few moments on the show. It's Glenn Beck Program. My name is Mike Broomhead. We'll be back.

[break]

MIKE: My name is Mike Broomhead. Phoenix, Arizona. In for Glenn today and tomorrow. Thanks for making the Glenn Beck Program a part of your day. We're talking issue-based. This one is about guns. And I'm a Second Amendment advocate. I've owned guns most of my life. I'm a very excitable personality. You may have figured that out.

I've never brandished a weapon on a human being in my life, nor have I ever considered it, thank God.

I do know this: The second to last thing I ever want to do is shoot a person. The last thing I want to do is have to defend myself or my family and not have the ability. It's not about being a hero. Not at all. The last thing I want to be is a hero. I will talk -- I have been prone to arguments and even fistfights when I was younger -- I was -- I was going to say, I was a bit of a hothead. I am a hothead. Never considered taking a human life.

So the gun issue for me is about. Law-abiding citizens. And earlier I mentioned, it's about policies. When conservatives in America argue issues, dispassionately argue issues, we can win on the issues every single time. Because it's about personal responsibility. And I think even the majority of the people on the political left have a sense of personal responsibility. They may disagree to what level the government gets involved in things, but they do have the idea of personal responsibility.

So even within conservative circles, we disagree on things. And so we associate ourselves largely with people that agree with us. It's easier that way.

But we talk about issues with people when we disagree. We win almost every time. I can defend my pro-life stance, dispassionately, although it's a passionate issue.

And I've asked my friends that are pro-choice to just hear me out. I'm not calling you a baby killer. Don't give me the stupid line of keep your laws off my body. I don't care what you do with your body. Tattoo, pierce it, cut it off. It doesn't matter to me.

But I genuinely believe that that is a human life inside that woman's body that deserves to be protected with the same laws that we would protect it if it were outside the womb. That's just my belief. It starts there. It's not about oppressing women. It's not about any of that stuff. I believe it's a human life.

And I'll go on and ask the question: If you had someone in your life that you loved that was pregnant that was intending to keep the baby, even in the time period when the baby is legally able to be aborted and that woman, God forbid, was involved in a car accident that caused her to lose the baby and the driver of the other car was drunk, would you want that drunk driver prosecuted for murdering that baby? If the answer is yes, then it's a human life. It can't be a human life when you want to keep it and a glob of tissue when you don't.

I don't expect I'm going to win anybody over that change their mind. But maybe they'll think about it differently, when -- they think I'm going to come at them and call them a baby killer. We win on the issues.

You know, one of the things I admire most about my friendship with Glenn -- Glenn Beck, of course -- is that he's always treated me like a colleague. And even -- and especially when we disagree about things, there's never been anyone more thoughtful about something, nor have I ever met anybody that wants to do the right thing and is willing to risk everything to do the right thing.

I was with Glenn on the border when -- when the listeners to this network, to this show donated all of that money so that those supplies could be taken to those kids at the border.

I am as anti-illegal immigration as they come. I live in a border state, where it is horrendous what's happening with illegal immigration on all of the issues tied to it.

But you go to McAllen, Texas. I saw the picture on my phone of a little boy, maybe eight years old, sitting on a cot in a tent. They -- they gave him clean clothes, shower, food, and they gave him a toy. It was a Woody Story (sic) toy from Toy Story.

And we looked in, and this little boy was sitting by himself on a cot. And we were told he's just going to sit there until they figure out what they can do with him. They got a family member somewhere. Where are they going to put him?

Now, I don't care where you stand on illegal immigration, how do you not look at a little boy and say, "He was one of tens of thousands, and what are we going to do?"

So when I look at situations like that, I'll go one further on the other side of it. Last weekend in June, we have the anniversary of the firefighters who were killed on Yarnell Hill here in Arizona. The 100 Club of Arizona donates money to these families, just to get them through. And the charities at Mercury donated $50,000 that year.

So I want to associate myself with people to put their money with their mouth is. And not just money. Put themselves on the line. So it's interesting that people would have the assumption that everybody that is associated with, friendly with, close to Glenn, would have to think like Glenn all the time.

He is one of the most thoughtful, nicest people I've ever met, even when we disagree about things.

And is one of the most conservative people I've ever met in my entire life. I just -- I think it's interesting that within our circles, it's funny I have -- I just got a message from one of my local listeners recently, a minute ago. Mad at me because I have John McCain on my show locally in Arizona. And I laugh because he's chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the United States Senate. Has been in the Senate forever, which to the -- much to the chagrin of many of you. But I like John McCain. As a person, I get along well with him, and I disagree with him on a lot of issues. But he is the senior senator in Arizona, the most recognizable name in American politics. He wins his elections by large numbers here in the state of Arizona. And I'm on the talk radio station in Arizona. Why in the world would I ever stop having him on my show?

And if you disagree with that, I respect you. But you can't come at me and question my conservative values because I would -- for the reasons I just gave you, have him on my show.

The time for us throwing stones at each other should be over. Republicans and Democrats should have one thing in common. We have a healthy suspicion of the people we elect to public office.

They can try to divide us, rich versus poor, black versus white, man versus woman, gay versus straight, but in the end, we should have a healthy suspicion of especially the ones we support and put there.

I think that's what makes us a great country. In the end, we know we say this all the time: I'm done talking to politicians. I'm talking to you. Because you and I can wipe out the entire House of Representatives every two years and a third of the Senate. Every two years. We have term limits. It's called the way we vote.

Unfortunately, you know, the same woman who said a few years ago, you have to vote for this bill to see what's in it -- called Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi will never be pried out of that seat by her voters, by that electorate. That's the problem with American politics.

All right. I'm done with the preaching -- the preaching of the sermon. We will talk about the California gun laws. I think it's an important story. I promise we'll get to it after this bottom-of-the-hour break. Again, @BroomheadShow on Twitter.

The Mike Broomhead Show Fan Page on Facebook. Or all one word, MikeBroomhead, on Instagram, if you would like to follow me there. Looking for the interaction during the break. This is the Glenn Beck Program. My name is Mike Broomhead. We'll be back.

[break]

MIKE: Thanks for joining us. Thanks for joining the Glenn Beck Show. Wherever you're listening, thanks for making it a part of your day. My name is Mike Broomhead. Phoenix, Arizona. In today and tomorrow for Glenn. The social media feedback is a lot of fun. Been reading and answering a lot of the tweets and some of the -- some of what's going on. I appreciate all of the comments.

This California gun law story, it's on TheBlaze, if you want to go to TheBlaze.com. By the way, the new format on TheBlaze, I don't know if you noticed it, but I print out a lot of their stories. It's just a lot cleaner.

California gun sales continue to skyrocket, as strict anti-gun laws are set to kick in. Where have we heard this story before?

Every time the president of the United States over the last eight years has come out and talked about stricter gun laws and what they would call common sense gun laws -- first of all, it's an oxymoron and it makes me laugh. The other part of that is gun sales went through the roof.

These are not unreasonable fearmongering people. It's just common American people that realize the right to keep and bear arms is a cornerstone of who we are as a society.

And if someone is going to try to come in and hinder that, they want to get out in front of it. You can't have the number of guns sold in America over the eight years of this president and call it just a bunch of crazy people.

And I don't know what state many of you live in when you listen to this. I can tell you I moved from a fairly lenient gun law state of Florida, where I grew up, to Arizona -- almost 22 years ago.

Our gun laws are the most lenient in the country. I believe they're the most lenient. If you can legally own a firearm in the state of Arizona, if you legally own a handgun, you can conceal it without a permit. Now, I maintain a concealed carry permit. I like the training that goes with it. The knowledge of laws that goes with it. But I also like reciprocity, where I can travel to other states and maintain a concealed weapons permit.

But the laws don't change anything. I live in a very -- you know, Phoenix is the sixth largest city, but the surrounding cities around us, it is a very big valley. It's beautiful. It's safe. It's clean. I'm not mocking Chicago. But I'd rather be here than Chicago when it comes to crime or DC when it comes to crime with very strict gun laws.

Criminals bent on killing could care less if they're going to get hammered with a gun law violation. It sounds trite. It's not.

We should be fixing the problem. When you're -- if you go to the doctor with an ailment and they begin to treat you for the wrong ailment, A, it's horrible because they think they're solving a problem and they're not. And, B, the issue continues to get worse because they're not treating the right issue.

So California's gun sales continue to skyrocket as -- that when these laws go into effect -- a lawmaker was quick to use the tragedy in San Bernardino to put further restrictions on firearms within the state. Among the six bills that were signed into law is a law that requires semiautomatic rifles with evil features to be registered upon purchase.

Listen, I don't -- I don't want to lose my temper and I don't want to mock people. What the hell is an evil feature on a gun?

See, the problem is, there's a multitude of things that can be used to kill. And unfortunately, we've seen that. Pressure cookers. Backpacks. Vehicles.

No one is suggesting limitations on those. DUI is a horrible crime. You know, drinking and driving is just -- it's just -- it's unnecessary. That's why -- the consequences can be so devastating for such an easy fix.

But nobody suggests punishing good drivers because of the bad ones. You don't blame the car. You don't blame the booze. You blame the person that drank the booze and got in the car. No one is talking about smaller cars or limitations on cars. No one is talking about limited on the amount of alcohol you can buy at one time. No one is talking about any of that.

You put the blame where it belongs, on the abuser.

In Arizona, and I'm sorry to keep bringing up where I live, but we have very restrictive DUI laws. And very lenient gun laws.

And you look around this country and you see where the gun laws are very restrictive and the high crime rates, you can't reconcile the two. And for anybody -- when I only get insulted when somebody goes after low-hanging fruit in their mind, which is usually emotion. Is that any town, is that the organization that's cropped up after the Sandy Hook shooting, where there was another anti-gun group. And they make the assertion that if you're not in favor of the gun laws they're in favor of, you don't care about children dying.

I was doing afternoons in Phoenix, when Sandy Hook happened. And I remember being so physically ill, and I didn't know how I was going to go on the air that afternoon and talk about anything else or make any sense about what we saw happening. That a kid would murder his mother, drive to an elementary school, and then wipe out a class of second graders. And those families that showed up at that school that were segregated based on if you were a parent to one of the kids that were killed, you were segregated to be told that your child was dead.

As a matter of fact, one of the people I reached out to that day was Glenn. I said, "How do I make sense of this?" How do I go on the air and talk about this kind of evil and not break down?

Don't tell me that gun owners in this country have no respect for human life or don't care about dead kids or would rather have guns than children dying. It's an insult to say that.

But I can guarantee you this: California's restrictive gun laws will do absolutely nothing to lower the gun crime rate in that state. Not a thing.

Criminals will get their hands on guns. They always have. They always will. That's what makes them a criminal.

When you talk about the spree killers like the Adam Lanza kid in Sandy Hook or Jared Loughner here in Tucson, Arizona, when Congresswoman Giffords was shot and injured so severely. And the federal court judge was killed. And that small girl, Christina-Taylor Green was murdered at that scene. Or the shooter in South Carolina, Dylann Roof, or in Colorado in that movie theater, or go all the way back to Virginia Tech. Columbine.

The common denominator, guns? Sure. The common denominator was also that these were dangerously mentally ill people that had been warned -- their families had been warned, they had been kicked out of school on many occasions and told, "Don't come back until you've had some mental health counseling." As a matter of fact, in the case of what was going on in Colorado, they were going to his house with an intervention team, but he had withdrawn from school, so they didn't have the authority to do anything. So they didn't.

HIPAA laws have a lot more to do with solving this problem. To what level can we institutionalize or forcibly medicate somebody that -- you can't punish somebody for a crime they haven't committed.

But when someone's that dangerously mentally ill, how much intervention can be done? There's where the problem lies. Not in guns.

The most ridiculous example of that was Adam Lanza and the gun laws they wanted after Sandy Hook. They wanted background checks. They wanted to get rid of the gun show loophole and the hand-to-hand sales loopholes, where any gun sale had to be registered or had to go through a gun dealer, with the exception of family members. You could sell to a family member.

Well, the reason why that's ridiculous is Adam Lanza, A, was too young to possess the guns he had, so he was already violating gun laws. But, B, they were his mother's guns. So that new law wouldn't have stopped Adam Lanza from getting those guns if his mother gave him the guns.

No background check required. No stopping that young man from obtaining them legally if she could hand them to him. Now, we know the story. The story is, he murdered his mother with those guns and then went on the killing spree. I mean, it's a horrible thought. But if she had given him the guns, the law wouldn't have stopped it. He still would have had them.

So the very laws they came up with in the fallout of Sandy Hook would not have stopped Sandy Hook. And when we stop blaming what is to blame and we shift it to something else, we're in danger. Because we're not solving the problem. And we're treating something that's not the problem.

Guns aren't the problem. Certainly you and I aren't the problem. Someone explain how taking my gun away from me or limiting my access to firearms or ammunition makes us safer.

It doesn't. I'm armed most of the time. And most of the time, I don't even think about it. Because I'm not looking to use a gun. I'm not looking to brandish a weapon. But I'm also not looking to be a victim either.

So as a society, we have to decide. The state of California is crashing. Their economy is crashing because of the welfare state. They are taxing businesses and regulating businesses out of that state. They are running for the hills.

Other states here in the western United States like Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, they are just waiting because the businesses are leaving California. Economically, they are about to crash.

And with laws like this, it becomes a lawless nation because the law-abiding citizen is going to listen to the law because they have to. And the lawbreakers are still going to do whatever they please. And they're going to prey upon society. Because they're breaking the law anyway. You're going to murder somebody -- you mean the gun charge matters to you? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Before we end the show today, talk about the hypocrisy of a protected class of people. If you go back to remember, nobody was going to make the wedding cake for the gay couple, and businesses were fined and hammered. Well, something along those lines. But I don't believe that anybody is getting in trouble for this one. I'm going to get to a story to wrap it up here in just a couple of moments. I hope you'll stick around for it. My name is Mike Broomhead, and this is the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

MIKE: My name is Mike Broomhead in for a few more minutes today. And, again, in for Glenn tomorrow. Thanks for making the Glenn Beck Program a part of your day, wherever you're listening.

And before we get out of here, we may have to start a GoFundMe page. Not me personally. But maybe one of you. You may want to do this, to help this out.

There is a cafe in Hawaii that I'm sure is going to have to pay a hefty fine because, just based on precedent -- we know that there have been bakeries that didn't want to bake cakes for gay weddings. There were -- there was a farm that didn't want to host a gay wedding. They said, "We'll host a reception. We just don't want to host the ceremony."

And there has been story after story of businesses that have been run out of business or fined to the tune of thousands and thousands of dollars because you can't refuse service based on deeply held beliefs. That if you do that, then you are somehow hindering them. And they are not able to have what they want. Now, it's ridiculous. But that's -- that's the precedent that's been set.

Well, in Hawaii, Honolulu's Cafe -- 8 1/2? Is that what it's called? Gets rave reviews on Yelp for its -- one of its menu items. Very popular place.

But they have decided to post a sign that says, "If you voted for Donald Trump, you can't eat here."

Well, I'm sure that the Obama administration and the Justice Department and the civil rights -- they are -- they are going to hammer these people. I mean, you would think that just based on the fact that you've got to make the cake for a gay wedding, you can't refuse that.

You're going to get fined. You're hindering people. You are showing bias. So if you want, you could help this cafe by starting a GoFundMe page. Because I'm sure the government is going to hammer them. No, actually what's going to happen is they're going to applaud them for their courage in standing up for what they believe in.

The issue of bias and hate crimes is one that has always bothered me. Because if I go out on a date and somebody decides either they don't like me or they don't like her, so they beat us up, or in front of us is a gay couple and they beat them up because they don't like gay people, they should be punished to a greater degree for beating up the gay couple because it's a hate crime. Well, it's not a love crime if you beat me up.

So the idea -- and I thought our justice system was supposed to be blind. I thought we had equal justice for crimes. That if you commit a crime against somebody because you don't like them because of their race or you commit a crime against somebody just because you're a criminal, the punishment should be the punishment.

And the other side of this -- if this Hawaiian cafe doesn't want Trump voters there, Trump voters should take their money someplace else. And if you're a gay couple planning a wedding and somebody doesn't want to do business with you, take your money someplace else. You don't make your wedding a political statement. Well, you shouldn't anyway.

We're just about out of time. Tomorrow I'll be back in on the Glenn Beck Program. Again, @BroomheadShow on Twitter, MikeBroomhead on Instagram, or the Mike Broomhead Show on Facebook. Thanks for being a part of the show today. I'll be back tomorrow. Have a great day, everyone. God bless.

Featured Image: Pexels

4 ways Biden is SABOTAGING Trump on his way out of office

ROBERTO SCHMIDT / Contributor | Getty Images

President Biden has less than a week left in the White House, but that doesn't mean he's down for the count quite yet.

Next Monday, January 20th, President-elect Trump will be officially sworn into office, marking the beginning of his second term. But after such a bitter and contentious election, the Democrats aren't ready to roll over. Instead, they have been working around the clock to ensure that Trump will face as many obstacles and challenges as possible the minute he is sworn in. These political landmines are designed to sabotage his presidency—at the cost of the well-being of the American people.

Biden's job approval rating currently sits around 38.7 percent, one of the lowest approval ratings of any president, he has nothing to lose from these reckless ploys. Here are four ways Biden and the Left are trying to sabotage Trump:

Pardoning criminals

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

In November, President Biden customarily pardoned the Thanksgiving turkey ... along with his son Hunter and dozens of other controversial criminals, including 37 felons on death row. Hunter's 11-year-long blanket immunity sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents, and we may never know the full extent of the Biden family's crimes and corruption.

Destroying U.S. energy

J. David Ake / Contributor | Getty Images

Biden has made several moves that have damaged America's ability to produce its energy independently, including canceling the Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office. Earlier this month, Biden signed another order that has dire consequences for the energy sector, effectively blocking any new drilling off the U.S. coast indefinitely. This not only further kneecaps the U.S. oil industry during a time when gas and energy prices are on the rise, but moreover, the way the executive order was written means Trump will have a much harder time undoing it. Thanks, Biden.

Escalating overseas wars

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

America's involvement with the ongoing war in Ukraine has been tenuous from the beginning, but under Biden, it has escalated to a Cold War-like proxy war. Neither pleas from Americans in need nor threats from Russia have deterred Biden. He has approved countless aid packages sent to Ukraine, totaling billions of dollars. Recently, Biden has decided to up the ante by supplying Ukraine with long-range missiles, despite Putin's warnings that Russia would consider this an act of war. It's almost like Biden wants to start WWIII before handing the reigns over to Trump.

Installing a "shadow cabinet"

For years Glenn has warned of the dangers of the deep state, and its very existence has been denied ... until recently. Shortly after the election Democratic Rep. Wiley Nickel made a disturbing speech on the House floor where he proposed the creation of a "Shadow Cabinet" designed to hamper the Trump administration and to step in if Trump were removed from office. This "Shadow Cabinet" would be composed of Democrat counter-picks to Trump presidential cabinet members, and they would scrutinize every act made by the Trump administration and propose alternative actions. This just proves that the deep state will do anything to stop President Trump.

How California leadership is to blame for HORRIFIC wildfires

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

California's progressive policies emphasize ideology over lifesaving solutions. The destruction will persist until voters hold their elected officials accountable.

America is no stranger to natural disasters. But it’s not the fires, floods, or earthquakes that are the most devastating — it’s the repeated failures to learn from them, prevent them, and take responsibility for the damage.

My heart goes out to the families who have lost homes, cherished memories, and livelihoods. But if we’re going to help California rebuild and prevent future disasters, we need to confront some uncomfortable truths about leadership, responsibility, and priorities.

California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

While Californians continue to face heart-wrenching losses, those who have the power to enact change are mired in bureaucracy, regulation, and ideologies that do nothing to protect lives or preserve the land. The result? A state that keeps burning, year after year.

Where did all the water go?

We all know that water is essential to life. When NASA searches for signs of life on other planets, it looks for water. Yet, California has spent decades neglecting its water infrastructure. The state hasn’t built a new major reservoir since 1979 — over 40 years ago. Back then, California’s population was roughly half what it is today. Despite massive population growth, the state’s water storage capacity has remained frozen in time, woefully inadequate for current needs.

Moreover, billions of gallons of rainwater flow straight into the ocean every year because no infrastructure exists to capture and store it. Imagine how different things could be if California had built reservoirs, aqueducts, and desalination plants to secure water for its dry seasons.

Water is life, but the state’s failure to prioritize this essential resource has put lives and ecosystems at risk.

Misplaced priorities and critical leadership failure

This neglect of critical infrastructure is part of a larger failure of vision, and in California, the consequences of that failure are on full display.

Consider the progressive leadership in Los Angeles, where the mayor cut the fire department’s budget to fund programs for the homeless, funneling money to NGOs with little oversight. While helping the homeless is a worthy cause, it cannot come at the expense of protecting lives and property from catastrophic fires. Leadership must put safety and well-being over political agendas, and that’s not happening in Los Angeles.

The same misplaced priorities extend to environmental policies. Progressive leaders have blocked sensible forest management practices, prioritizing dead trees over living creatures. They reject controlled burns, forest thinning, and other commonsense measures, bowing to the demands of activists rather than considering real solutions that would protect those they govern.

California’s wildfire crisis is, in many ways, a man-made disaster. Yes, factors like Southern California’s dry climate, strong Santa Ana winds, and little rain play a role, but the biggest contributing factor is poor land management.

The forests are choked with dry brush, dead trees, and vegetation that turn every spark into a potential inferno. The crisis could have been mitigated — if only the state had made forest management and fire prevention a higher priority.

Finland and Sweden, for example, understand the importance of maintaining healthy forests. These countries have perfected the art of clearing underbrush and thinning trees sustainably, turning potential fire fuel into biomass energy. This approach not only reduces the risk of wildfires, but it also creates jobs, boosts the economy, and improves the ecosystem. And yet, California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore these solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

We need to stop pretending that something as devastating as the Palisades and Eaton fires are just “part of life” and hold leaders accountable.

Insurance rules put California residents at risk

California faces another major and often overlooked liability when it comes to natural disasters: insurance.

California’s ongoing disasters make the state an uninsurable risk. Insurance companies are pulling out because the odds of widespread devastation are just too high. This creates a vicious cycle: With private insurers gone, the government steps in to subsidize high-risk areas. This enables people to rebuild in fire-prone zones, perpetuating the destruction. The solution isn’t more government intervention; it’s better decision-making.

This doesn’t mean abandoning people to their fate, but we must address the root of the problem: California’s inadequate disaster preparedness and poor land management. If the state continues to resist commonsense solutions like forest thinning, controlled burns, and better zoning laws, no amount of insurance or government assistance will ever be enough to mitigate the losses. The cycle will repeat until the costs — financial and human — become unbearable. It’s time to stop pretending the risk isn’t real and start making decisions that reflect the reality of California’s landscape.

What’s the solution? California’s government needs to put its people over harmful political agendas that put its residents at risk. Start by managing your forests. Implement controlled burns, remove dead trees, and clear underbrush.

But how you vote matters. California’s progressive policies have focused on political correctness and ideology instead of practical, lifesaving solutions. Until voters hold leaders accountable, the cycle of destruction will persist.

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

Crazy enough to be true? The connection between the Cybertruck bomber and cryptic drones

WADE VANDERVORT / Contributor | Getty Images

Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation.

A chilling story has emerged: A whistleblower, claiming to possess knowledge of advanced military technologies and covert operations, took his own life in a shocking explosion outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas. He left behind a manifesto filled with claims so extraordinary they sound like science fiction. Yet if even a fraction of them prove true, the implications are staggering and demand immediate attention.

This whistleblower alleges that the United States and China developed “gravitic propulsion systems,” technologies that manipulate gravity itself to enable silent, undetectable flight at unimaginable speeds. According to his claims, these systems are not theoretical — they are operational, deployed both in the United States and China. If true, this would render conventional defense systems obsolete, fundamentally altering the global balance of power.

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever.

Imagine aircraft that defy radar, heat signatures, and missile defense systems. They carry massive payloads, conduct surveillance, and operate without a sound. If such technologies exist, they pose a national security threat unlike any we’ve faced.

But why haven’t we been told? If these claims are false, they must be debunked transparently. If true, the public has a right to know how such technologies are being used and safeguarded.

The whistleblower’s manifesto goes farther, claiming that with this technology, the United States and China developed and deployed the infamous drones that were seen across the United States starting late last year. He alleged that China launched them from submarines along the U.S. East Coast, calling them “the most dangerous threat to national security” because of their stealth, ability to evade detection, and unlimited payload capacity. He ties this advanced technology to other surveillance systems, creating a network so advanced it makes our current intelligence capabilities look primitive.

These claims may sound far-fetched, but they highlight a deeper issue: the cost of government secrecy. Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation. Without transparency, these incidents dangerously erode public confidence in our leaders and institutions.

The cost of secrecy

Beyond technology, the manifesto also alleges moral failures, including war crimes and deliberate cover-ups during U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan. In one particularly harrowing claim, the whistleblower describes attacks in Afghanistan’s Nimroz Province in 2019. He alleges that 125 buildings were targeted, with 65 struck, resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths in a single day. Even after civilians were spotted, he claims, the strikes continued knowingly and deliberately.

The United Nations investigated similar incidents and confirmed civilian casualties during these operations. However, the whistleblower’s accusations go farther, implicating high-ranking officials, the Department of Defense, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Central Intelligence Agency, and even top military generals in a broader pattern of deceit, eroding the moral integrity of our military and government.

Whether these specific claims hold up, they underscore a larger issue: Secrecy breeds corruption. When people in power hide their actions and evade accountability, they break trust — and everyone pays the price, not just those at the top but also the citizens and soldiers they serve.

Transparency is an imperative

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever. From the COVID-19 pandemic to the Capitol riot on January 6 to the potential misuse of advanced technologies, the American people have been kept in the dark for too long.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and sunlight is coming. Transparency must become our rallying cry. As we look to the future, we must demand accountability — not just from those we oppose politically but from all leaders entrusted with power. This isn’t about partisanship; it’s about preserving our nation from self-destruction.

As we enter a new chapter in our nation’s history, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Whether it’s uncovering the truth about advanced technology, holding perpetrators of corruption accountable, or seeking justice for war crimes, we must act. This isn’t just a call to action — it’s a moral imperative.

Our strength lies in our unity and our resolve. The powerful fear an informed and vocal citizenry. Let’s prove them right. By demanding transparency and accountability, we can restore trust and ensure that the government serves the people — not the other way around.

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

Mark Zuckerberg's recent announcement to lift content moderation policies across all of Meta's platforms and end the company's reliance on third-party fact-checkers, at first glance, is an incredible left turn given the platform's long-term participation in online censorship. However, does their shift signal a genuine change of heart, or are there more selfish motivations at play?

On the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn and Stu looked at both perspectives. On the one hand, Zuckerberg's announcement, adding UFC President and avid Trump supporter Dana White to Meta's board of directors indicates major progress in America's pushback against online censorship. However, Glenn also posited that Zuckerberg's intentions are chiefly to win the good graces of the incoming Trump administration in order to maintain Meta's controversial work in virtual and augmented reality technologies (VR/AR).

There is evidence for both perspectives, and we lay it all out for you below:

Did Zuck have a genuine change of heart?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Zuckerberg’s bombshell announcement, at face value, suggests that Meta recognizes the greater demand for free speech on online platforms and growing discontent against content moderation that has censored non-mainstream political opinions, including Glenn and Blaze Media. Zuckerberg described this shift as an authentic attempt to return to the company’s roots of promoting free expression, acknowledging past mistakes in suppressing voices and content deemed politically controversial. Moreover, Meta's new adoption of community-driven content flags similar to X positions itself as a platform that values user input rather than the biased perspective of any single third-party "fact-checker."

Additionally, Zuckerberg’s evolving views on Donald Trump strengthen the argument that his "change of heart" is genuine. Before the 2024 election, Zuckerberg expressed admiration for Trump, even calling him a "badass" after the first assassination attempt, noting how the event changed his perspective on the then-presidential candidate. Moreover, his embrace of new board members, such as UFC President Dana White, a staunch Trump supporter, further suggests that Meta may be diversifying its leadership and welcoming a more inclusive approach to varied political opinions. In this context, Meta’s move away from fact-checking can be interpreted as a commitment to fostering an environment where free speech and diverse political perspectives are genuinely valued.

Or is it about self-preservation?

DREW ANGERER / Contributor | Getty Images

While it is tempting to view Meta’s policy change as a sincere commitment to free speech, there is also a compelling argument that the company’s motivations are rooted in self-preservation. Glenn suggested Meta’s financial interests, particularly in virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) technologies, indicate its pivot may be less about principle and more about ensuring continued government contracts and capital flow. Zuckerberg’s significant investments in VR/AR technology, which has already cost the company billions, may be driving his need to align Meta’s policies with the political climate to safeguard future funding from both the government and private sectors.

Moreover, the company’s financial projections for the coming years show a sharp increase in advertising revenue, driven primarily by Facebook’s dominance in social media. This revenue helps sustain Meta’s ambitions in the VR/AR space, where it faces significant losses. The government’s involvement in funding military and tech projects tied to VR/AR underscores the importance of maintaining favorable political relationships. For these reasons, many view Zuckerberg's policy change as an attempt to position Meta for maximum political and financial benefit.