GLENN

Glenn Finds Kumbaya Moment With Obama on His Last Full Day

This is so weird. What a coincidence. Finally, with Obama's final press conference and last full day in office, Glenn and his co-hosts found common ground with the soon-to-be former president.

OBAMA: I want to do some writing. I want be quiet a little bit, not hear myself talk so darn much.

"He wants to be quiet, and he doesn't want to hear himself talk so darn much. And we don't either," Co-host Stu Burguiere commented.

This is definitely a red-letter day.

"That's a basic fundamental principle of mine. You know, not hearing him talk so much," Glenn said.

Less talking, less time with a pen and phone --- things are looking up.

GLENN: Frustrating. Some might celebrate that this is the last day that we have to hear this, but a piece of audio from a press conference yesterday with Barack Obama that made blood shoot directly out of my eyes. And we begin there, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Oh, I -- I don't even know where to begin. Except with the audio. And I'm not sure I'm going to make it through a commentary on it. Here it is: Barack Obama yesterday in the press conference.

OBAMA: That does not, of course, mean that I have enjoyed every story that you have filed, but that's the point of this relationship. You're not supposed to be sycophants. You're supposed to be skeptics. You're supposed to ask me tough questions.

PAT: Unreal.

OBAMA: You're not supposed to be complimentary, but you're supposed to cast a critical eye on folks who hold enormous power --

PAT: Uh-huh.

OBAMA: -- and make sure that we are accountable to the people who sent us here, and you have done that.

You've done it, for the most part, in ways that I could appreciate for fairness, even if I didn't always agree with your conclusions.

(chuckling)

PAT: Wow.

JEFFY: Does that count as making it all the way through?

PAT: Yeah, we -- we did. I think we did.

JEFFY: We made it non-stop.

GLENN: No, I said I couldn't make it through the commentary about it.

JEFFY: Oh.

GLENN: Play -- play his thanks and warning -- because what he was doing yesterday --

PAT: Yeah, he was --

GLENN: -- was he was warning the press, how they have to behave under Donald Trump. And I just -- I just --

PAT: Yeah, because they did it with him. They were skeptics with him, not sycophants.

In fact, he said sink-ophants. Which I don't know what the hell that is.

OBAMA: That does not, of course, mean that I've enjoyed every story that you have filed, but that's the point of this relationship.

PAT: Yeah.

OBAMA: You're not supposed to be sycophants, you're supposed to be skeptics. You're supposed to ask me tough questions. You're not supposed to be complimentary.

GLENN: Stop.

PAT: Like that, what about being enchanted? What's the thing that's enchanted you the most? What a tough question that was. How do you choose what has enchanted --

GLENN: What was the best thing about your first year as president? What was the thing that you were most proud of? That kind of tough questioning from --

PAT: Yeah, that's tough. That's tough.

STU: Yeah, I was actually hoping whoever that reporter was that asked him how he was enchanted by the office, would come back on the last press conference and ask the exact same question. Did not happen, however. He did use the word "enchanted" during the press conference, though. So he brought it back around a little bit. But it was -- you know, look, there were some moments there that maybe that could frustrate you. You know, you're Mr. Bring Us Together, I thought.

PAT: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: I thought that wasn't you anymore. I thought that was the old Glenn Beck, you know.

GLENN: I didn't say anything about that. I was just pointing out what the president --

STU: Oh, I could tell. I got your tone. I got your tone. And, sure, you could look at that, and you would say -- well, you guys held my feet to the fire in a lot of ways. I guess those ways were invisible ways. But I guess he did.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: You could certainly look at that and be critical. However, what have we done today? We have obviously been skeptical of Donald Trump's presidency. We've outlined a few things we have liked about his run-up to the inauguration.

GLENN: A lot of things.

STU: You know, there's some very positive things there.

GLENN: I want to come back to the David Gelernter thing. That's a great thing.

STU: Yeah. And I think we can also -- people say you can't say anything positive about Trump. We've done that today. People say you can't say anything positive about Obama. I think we can do that too.

GLENN: Did I miss something in his --

STU: In his press conference. He outlined something I think we really, really agree with. And listen.

OBAMA: I want to do some writing. I want be quiet a little bit.

GLENN: Oh.

OBAMA: Not hear myself talk so darn much.

STU: Us too.

GLENN: We're there.

PAT: We absolutely agree with that.

STU: We also don't want to hear you talk anymore.

PAT: I don't want to hear him at all.

STU: We can go even further than you.

PAT: 100,000 percent.

GLENN: We have come across lines, and we're holding hands with the president in his last day.

PAT: Wonderful. Wonderful.

STU: He wants to be quiet, and he doesn't want to hear himself talk so darn much. And we don't either.

PAT: And we want the same thing.

GLENN: Wow. There's so much -- and that's a basic fundamental principle of mine.

STU: Right.

GLENN: You know, not hearing him talk so much.

STU: More quiet time.

GLENN: More quiet time for Obama.

STU: Yes. We agree whole-heartedly.

GLENN: Less time with the pen and the phone. And we're going to get that too.

STU: That's nice.

GLENN: Can I take a moment here and just say, "We made it."

PAT: Well, it's tomorrow at noon.

STU: It's tomorrow. It's tomorrow.

PAT: Tomorrow at noon.

STU: Slow your roll. He's still in office.

GLENN: You're right. He's about to suspend the Constitution, declare marshal law, and not go through with the inauguration. Because I've heard that from a lot of people.

STU: A lot of people. And I don't agree with that part of it. However, there were a dozen or two dozen regulations that were pushed through today. I don't have the list of them yet. But something in there can be quite terrible. We still expect him to pardon dozens and dozens and dozens of people that could be dangerous criminals.

GLENN: No. You don't put -- you don't put dozens of regulations through on your last day that are controversial.

STU: No. And you don't pardon the really controversial -- remember, this is a guy who a couple days ago pardoned a -- a terrorist who was targeting the overthrow of the government from --

GLENN: From Puerto Rico.

STU: From Puerto Rico.

GLENN: And bombed government buildings here in the United States. And was planning on bombing several places in Chicago.

STU: They found his apartment stuffed with C4, preparing for these actions.

GLENN: Unrepentant and an avowed communist, who still wants the communist state.

STU: And that was the opening act.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: They said today, it's going to be substantially more of pardons and commutations.

GLENN: You're right. He's already done 209.

PAT: Well, that was the other day. He's done 1597 commutations and pardons during his presidency. Almost 1600. And it will certainly surpass that today.

STU: By far the most. It was 273, just the other day. Two hundred nine commutations, sixty-four pardons.

PAT: Just the other day.

GLENN: Okay. So 209. And they said it's going to be substantially more today. It's kind of like, what is a few? Is a few three or is a few five? What does substantially more mean to this president?

STU: Because the way it was written, in theory, it could mean there will be a significant amount more, right? So like you had --

GLENN: It said substantially more.

STU: It said substantially more. So it could be another 50. Like that's a substantial amount, right? That's in addition to the 273.

PAT: Or it could be 500.

STU: The way I read it was substantially more that 273. So I don't know which one it's going to be.

GLENN: Right. I think it's more than 273. I think substantially more -- the way I read that, I'm expecting 1,000.

STU: You know what I was expecting -- I was thinking yesterday -- you made the great point yesterday, let's say in theory he just decided to -- everyone who had a marijuana-only conviction in prison, he could just say let them go. And I thought that was an interesting point. I don't know how you could do that pragmatically. You have to do them all individually.

GLENN: Are you in federal prison for marijuana?

STU: You can be, yeah. So theoretically, you know, that could happen. But, again, you'd have to do them all individually. He would have to be preparing for this for a long time. The other one that popped into my head on that same road though was, what about immigration? He knows that Donald Trump has been running on, we're not going to get rid of any of these dream acts. These executive orders. Couldn't he go through and pick whatever his 20, 50, 100, 1,000 best cases are as far as immigration law and exempt them from prosecution on those things?

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: Because they're not citizens, there might be a weird line there, but in theory, he could probably do that to a lot of people before he walks out and implement his law -- and that would not be one that Trump would reverse.

GLENN: No, he can't. Because it's not executive order. This is presidential privilege.

STU: Yeah, presidential pardon. He's in the Constitution. He's allowed to do it.

PAT: And there's the Hillary thing. Will he pardon her in advance of any --

GLENN: No. Because nobody is going to go --

STU: Trump has pretty much said that. I don't want to hassle the family anymore, is pretty much what he said.

GLENN: No, she's done. She's gone, and they're not going to do a thing about it.

STU: I will say, someone polled the New York mayoral race. And Clinton was up by something like 20 points over de Blasio. So she -- I mean, that's still a big gig. If she wants a role like that, she might be able to get it. She might not be gone.

GLENN: Go ahead, New York. Take her.

STU: She would probably be better than de Blasio, to be honest.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, she would be. She would be.

STU: They're both nightmares. But she probably would actually be better for New York.

GLENN: Yeah. And the crime families would like her too.

These 15 Lines From “1984” Are No Longer Fiction
RADIO

These 15 Lines From “1984” Are No Longer Fiction

Glenn has been warning for a while now that George Orwell’s dystopian novel, “1984,” reads like a newspaper today. Well, he recently stumbled upon an article that lays it all out. Glenn reviews the article from The Federalist, “15 Times 2024 Was Orwell’s 1984,” that shows just how dystopian our society has gotten: "That is where we are, America. We are living in 1984."

You can read the full article HERE: https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/19/...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's say, hello, and welcome back to Stu Burguiere. hello, Stu.

STU: Hey, Glenn, how are you?

PAT: Good. Nice to have you. Nice to have you here.

Let's go true a couple of things here. I was reading a story about Donald Trump getting ready to go to the debate next week.

And he's preparing and people are speculating. Why would he ever accept?

Why would he -- so you think Donald Trump is not going to accept all of the baby conditions that Joe Biden has set for the -- for the debate?

Of course he will.

He's not going to be set. They won't say to him. Oh, well, we wanted to debate.

But he wouldn't. He'll do it. And he will do pretty well.

But Joe Biden is going to do better than he probably would, in any other format. And Donald Trump said, they'll probably pump him up.

Now, I don't know if -- I don't know if that is true. But it sure explains the performance of let's say, the State of the Union address. Where he was vigorous.

He was like, whoa!

Who is this guy?

I believe, and we won't know for decades, but I believe they are juicing him, on important nights.

This is not new, this shouldn't come as a conspiracy theory or a shock to anybody.

They did it with JFK, and they're -- they did it with FDR. In fact, FDR is probably the closest parallel to Joe Biden. FDR, the war was going well.

We're starting to turn the tides on -- on Germany. But we hadn't gone on to D-Day yet.

I'm sorry. FDR comes back from the meeting with Stalin.

And Churchill in Tehran. And as he comes back, he's got a really bad violent cough.

He starts to lose weight. He's constantly fatigued. His daughter Anna was so freaked out by all of it. That she pressed the doctors. Please, could you please have him see a cardiologist, at Bethesda. So he went in to Bethesda hospital, for examination.

And when he came out. Everything was great. No. The president is in perfect health. However, according to the medical notes, that were published, six decades later, that doctor diagnosed him with reduced lung capacity. Hypertension. Or high blood pressure.

Which we didn't have a way to treat back then. Acute bronchitis.

And most seriously, acute congestive heart failure. So now, they're not treating him, because we didn't have the medication.

The only treatment was regulating a patient's lifestyle. And, you know, herbal drugs. And then telling him, don't drink alcohol.

Tobacco. Don't do any of that. So that means in May of 1944. A month before D-Day. The daily schedule of the US. Unbeknownst to the American people, was only four hours a day.

He could only work and be involved four hours a day.

Now, he did that for a while. And he started to improve a little bit. But in July, of 1944, he had another doctor examine him. And said, he's not going to survive the term.

And he's got another full-term coming up.

And there's an election. And I don't think he will make it for the entire full-term in office.

Panel of experts were called in. They all examined.

And they all agreed. He's not going to make it.

Okay?

Did the American people know that?

No!

They didn't. It was too important to the country, to make sure that he looked strong and vigorous.

Well, what do you think is happening with Joe Biden?

Do you honestly think that things that have been done before, are not being done right now?

And what's disturbing about it, is these people work for us.

Now, I understand, maybe. Perhaps. In war. Although, no. I don't. No, I don't.

I need a president that is vigorous.
And if a president is not vigorous, especially at a time of war, I don't know if you're paying attention to what's going on in the world. But we are growing ever so close, to nuclear war.

There was a -- what was it. Oh, it was one of the former Soviet satellite states. And the president came out, and he's like, look, you can think, whatever you want about the United States. Or whatever you want about Russia.

But we're out of this. Because. Both cannot back away from this. And I think we're months away from a nuclear war. And somebody has to stand up and say, get to the peace table.

And it's -- it's very compelling. Very compelling to listen to him. So should we know about the President's health? Of course we should. But we won't.

Because we are living in the days of 1984. Listen to these 15 things, that Monroe Harlis (phonetic) pointed out in the Federalist. Fifteen ways that 1984 is 2024. Quote, from the book, the party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final and most essential command. Have you seen this? Have you seen the party demand you to reject your eyes and ears? All the time.

We're seeing it all the time. Two, endless wars. Quote, they add nothing to the wealth of the world, since whatever they produce is used for purposes of war. And the object of war is always to be in a better position in which to wage another war. End quote.

Have you seen the video of Joe Biden talking about American weapons being used for direct strikes inside of Russia?

And why -- why -- why do some people speculate, that the real purpose of this is to get rid of all our own old weapons so we can make new weapons, which will be better in the next war.

Doesn't this sound exactly like 1984. Number three, separating babies from mothers at birth. Quote, from the book, already we're breaking down the habits of the revolution which have survived from before the revolution.

Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. What exactly is the issue here?

Well, the issue is: The well-being of a child.

A living, breathing human, who was created for the sole purpose of being sold and ripped away from her mom.

This is -- this is something that is happening through surrogacy. And honestly, later in life, it is happening, because of political correctness.

Four, hatred of purity and goodness. I hate purity. I hate good is not.

I don't want virtue to exist anywhere. I want everyone to be corrupt to the bones. End quote.

Well, did -- did anybody see what -- what happened to Butker for being a Christian?

They tore him apart. Condemned him. Ray Rice. Nothing compared.

Five, the news lies. One knows the news is all lies anyway, from 1984.

Yeah. Well, what do we think? Do we all know that the news is nothing, but a lie? And now the news is saying, they are fighting advertise information?

Six, the destruction of the family. The sex impulse was dangerous to the party. And the party had to turn it to account. They had played a similar trick with the instinct of parenthood. The children on the other happened were systematically turned against their parents and taught to spy on them and report their deviations. The family had become, in fact, an extension of the thought police.

Do I need to give you an example? Seven, political correctness.

Don't you see the whole aim of newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?

In the end, we shall make thought crime literally impossible because there are no words in which to express it.

Producers. Birthing people. Chest feeding. Eight, persecution of political opponents.

Power is a means. It is an end. The object of persecution is persecution.

Reporter, President Trump refers to himself as a political prisoner and blames you directly.

What's your response, sir. He just smiles.

Nine, the innocent are suffering.

How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?

By making him suffer. Exactly barbecue by making him suffer.

Obedience is not enough. Unless he's suffering.

How can you be sure, he's obeying your will and not his own.

How about the 75-year-old Paulette Harlo, who is in poor health.

She also was somebody who -- I believe survived a -- a communist cooperation catch.

She's in prison for two years, for praying outside of an abortion clinic.

Truth is redefined. Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equal four.

11, hypocrisy from government agencies. The ministry of peace concerns itself with war. The ministry of truth with lies. The ministry of love with torture. And the ministry of plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental. Nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy.

They are deliberate exercises in double think. Remember, the FBI is a terrorist organization.

It's the American Stasi. It exists entirely to terrorize the American people on behalf of a corrupt and evil regime.

No, no, no.

The FBI is the center of truth.

Contradicting beliefs. Double think means to the -- has the means -- the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one mind simultaneously, accepting both of them.

Just so we're clear here. Democrats who are campaigning against Trump. Based on dubious charges of sexual assault. They engineered.

Are still inviting people like Bill Clinton to headline big ticket events, along with his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Even though that's been well-established, they're still okay with that.

Thirteen, dates altered. Every record has been destroyed or falsified. Every book, rewritten. Every picture has been repainted. Every statue, street building has been renamed.

Every date has been altered.

Well, in an attempt to replace Easter, the most important Christian holiday of the year with Transgender Day. I think, you know, that kind of does it. This is the beginning, and worse is coming.

Fourteen, no trust. We have cut the links between child and parent, between man and man. No man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future, there will be no wives. There will be no friends. And statistics are lies.

The fabulous statistics continue to pour out of the telescreen.

As compared with last year, there was more food. More clothes.

More houses. More furniture. More cooking pots.

More fuel. More helicopters. More books. More babies. More of everything. Except for poverty, disease, crime, and insanity.

That is where we are America. We are living in 1984.

Is THIS Why Democrats Want to Draft Our Daughters?
RADIO

Is THIS Why Democrats Want to Draft Our Daughters?

The Democrat-controlled Senate is debating a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that includes a plan to register women for selective service…which would make them eligible for the draft. But Senators like Utah’s Mike Lee are standing up against it. Sen. Lee joins Glenn to explain what’s going on here. Why would the Democrats do this? Are they REALLY that woke? And does it have any chance at passing? Sen. Lee also responds to Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn’s statements that seem to support registering our daughters for selective service …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Chris Bedford has a great article out on the Blaze.com today. The Democrat's strange obsession with drafting your daughters.

I don't even understand. I mean, I understood this long ago. It was a way for Democrats, who didn't like war, to kind of, you know, ramp up the odds that we wouldn't go to war, if, you know, we had a draft.

And then we drafted your daughters. Nobody would want to go to war. I get that. Except, the Democrats are now the pro-war party.

So what the hell is happening?

And this just seems to have come out of nowhere. The most outspoken voices on this, are Chip Roy. And Mike Lee. And Mike is -- Mike is with us now. Can you please tell us what is happening with the draft stuff, Mike? Why is this happening?

MIKE: Yeah, look, the draft our daughters agenda has no place in our national defense. I think what they're trying to do. They're trying to engage in this, this sort of radical egalitarian exercise, where for aesthetics purposes, we're deciding to just show how woke we are. How open-minded we are.

GLENN: Do you really think that's -- do you really think that's motivating them at all?

MIKE: Well, yes. Because I can't fathom any other reasons why they would want to do it.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

MIKE: Look, you don't send women to fight. As long as able-bodied men exist and are available to fight, it's a fundamental notion. You don't even have to get to a moral question on this. It's a survival question. To draft our daughter's push, has been something that keeps getting recirculated every two years.

It's failed before every single time. Congress has rightly rejected previous attempts to draft women.

And they're quietly trying to slip it into the NDAA. The National Defense Authorization Act.

It's a bill that Congress passes once a year, to establish priorities for military. But people have already said no to it. It's an underhanded tactic, to include it in the base bill of the defense authorization act.

We should be putting policies like this, revolutionary policy into it.

It's very similar -- what they have been doing -- putting this together, and then ramming it through the Senate floor. Telling us we have no opportunity to amend it once it gets to the floor.

Someone will start sounding the alarm bells now, before it gets to the Senate floor or the House floor saying, absolutely not. The American people are going to take this.

GLENN: Okay. So you said it was a matter of survival. Explain that.

MIKE: Well, okay. So the purpose of having a military and therefore the purpose of having a draft, to staff the military, is to break things and kill people, just to put it very bluntly.

And so you don't -- you don't put women out there, as long as able-bodied men exist, and are able to fight.

For all sorts of reasons, including the fact that you -- you've got -- that men have this biological advantages in war, that need to be utilized. And it just sends all the wrong messages.
To our own people, and to whatever country or entity that we're fighting.

That our -- our able-bodied men are not all going to go out there.

We will send women instead.

Sends all the wrong messages. And that's not going to work well.

And so, every time people hear this, they need to reiterate their desire. If they feel the same way, they should repeat the phrase, don't draft our daughters. Just don't do it. That goes over pretty well. Once people hear a phrase like that, they tend to back away from it. And we shouldn't let them think that this is just a noncontroversial basic housekeeping. Just, you know, upbidding our legislative book to reflect modern realities. No. This is a fundamental shift, and one that we're not going to fall for.

GLENN: I mean, one I usually don't disagree with, Marsha Blackburn.

She said, this is about opportunity. It's not about combat. It's about their opportunity to serve.

Well, you know, I just found a picture of my grandparents. My grandfather is in a -- a military Marines uniform.

And my grandmother is in a Salvation Army uniform. And, you know, they -- women served all through wars in different capacities.

You can serve, it's just your body is not made for the -- the -- for a war. You can't drag your 200-pound companion off the battlefield if you're a 125-pound woman. You might be able to, but it's not going to be easy.

MIKE: No. Exactly right. And like you, I'm -- normally, I agree with Marsha Blackburn. I had not heard her say that. Let me just respond to this point.

As it's similar to the points that others have made on this front. This is not about opportunity. Opportunities already exist.

Opportunities already abound for people of both sexes to support the military. To be part of the military. To serve in combat or noncombat position, as they may choose.

This is not about that. This is about whether we will use the coercive force of the state. Have the coercive force of the United States government, in order to -- a point of a gun, order someone to take steps that could result in their being drafted. In their being brought up at the point of a gun. To a battlefield somewhere.

We shouldn't do that. We're not going to do that. This is not about opportunity. This is about right/wrong. This is about survival.

GLENN: Right. I am not for a draft in any case.

I think, you know, there's some people who disagree with me, who are in the military.

But I think there's a draft brings people in, that have no desire to be there. No desire to really fight.

I mean, unless we're in World War III, which we could be. Check the clock.

Unless we're in World War III. And the country needs, you know -- I think you always keep to a system, where it's a volunteer army for as long as you possibly can.

Because you get the people who are mentally and physically capable and ready to do it.

MIKE: You're exactly right, Glenn. But this is where you get tricky. Because you're right. And I think most people would agree with you, including most -- many of the people pushing this effort to require women to register with the selective service. What they would say here is, oh, this isn't about the draft. This is just about requiring them to register with the selective service.

Whether or not we actually have a draft. Well, Congress would have to authors that, before we could draft nip.

See, that's where you -- it's -- it's if you get hooked on that one.

You can say, oh, well, I'm not voting to draft women.

I'm just voting to require to register with the selective service. And then next time, if we are facing World War III or some other conflict.

For whatever reason, in order to survive. We've got conscript people involuntarily into the military. It will be automatic, because women will already be registered with the selective service. So that's the decision that we have to look to right now. We have to treat this as, do we want to draft women?

And I believe that among Eric and other people. The answer is a resounding no. And it should be.

GLENN: Let me ask you this.

My sister was freaking out a couple weeks ago.

Because they made it automatic now. We used to have register every mail registered.

When you turned 18. You register for selective service.

And it always freaks you out as a teenager. Wait a minute. I have to, what?

But, you know, we haven't seen a draft since the '60s or '70s. And it's just not -- it's just not in the cards.

But why are all these things changing right now?

What is going on, Mike?

Some people will look at this and go, they'll get us ready for war.

Are they? Or is this just -- what is this?

MIKE: Okay. So I think the best way to understand this. From years ago, at an event post by the Enterprise Institute, I heard someone give a speech about they talked about, ways in which we should be wary of a government, as it becomes more efficient, through technology and otherwise.

Government efficiency can be, sounds like, often is a good thing. He pointed out, that in some areas where civil liberties are confirmed, hyper efficient government poses a greater threat to our liberty. Perhaps this is one of them.

Where, new steps, you go out to take an affirmative step that takes people focused on it, where it happens automatically. They don't even think it through all that much. And perhaps they don't want people thinking about it. They just want to register them on their own. Sort of like a government is efficient in a lot of ways that otherwise would undermine our liberty, with the way that it spies on people. For example, under Section 702 applies that that's an example of another efficiency that undermines our liberty.

We ought to watch out for all of those.

GLENN: Hmm. Mike, thank you so much.

Any just on the Senate race today? In Utah. I know you didn't endorse anybody.

MIKE: Well, yes, I did not endorse that race. I did endorse in the Second Congressional District and the Third Congressional District.

The second I endorsed Colby Jenkins. Who is a fantastic human being. A Green Beret. And I encourage everybody to go and vote for him. Also on the third congressional district in Utah. Dr. Mike Kennedy. Both a doctor and a lawyer, proud public servant, state senator. And somebody who loves the country very much.

So looking forward to the results tonight.

GLENN: All right. Thanks, Mike.

Appreciate it. God bless. All right.

Is America Doomed? How YOU Can Restore Hope & Save the Republic | Glenn TV | Ep 364
TV

Is America Doomed? How YOU Can Restore Hope & Save the Republic | Glenn TV | Ep 364

There’s a powerful darkness that has stretched its arms all across America. But will that darkness end our nation, or will it instead cause Americans to reach deep down and discover the capabilities we all have to turn our country back to the ideals our Founding Fathers inspired? Four years ago, amid tyrannical COVID policies, Black Lives Matter riots burning down U.S. cities, and D.C. politicians hell-bent on dividing Americans, Glenn invited you to join him virtually for July Fourth at the Standing Rock Ranch in Idaho. But with the 2024 presidential race in turmoil, an aged and ailing President Joe Biden, and Donald Trump still facing persecution from the Left, today we need answers more than ever before. So join Glenn again this Independence Day as he takes you on a tour through his ranch while using the vast, isolated mountains to teach lessons from history that may give us the answers we need to restore this nation. From Benjamin Franklin’s inspiring words at the Constitutional Convention to George Washington’s position flag and the importance of the song "Amazing Grace," Glenn reminds us all just how sacred America’s land truly is. He’s joined by the Millennial Choirs & Orchestras and David Osmond, who perform beautiful, patriotic songs that help bring these stories from history to life. Like men, we’re refusing to read directions. This time, the directions are the Constitution of the United States. So this Fourth of July, join Glenn to rediscover the steps you can take to restore hope and save the Republic.

The Most Important Thing You Can Do This Fourth of July
RADIO

The Most Important Thing You Can Do This Fourth of July

The biggest issue with our country, Glenn says, is that we haven’t stuck to our mission statement. How many of us even know what it is? This Fourth of July, Glenn invites you to read it. It’s called the Declaration of Independence and if you don’t want to read a dusty old document, Glenn will read it to you — it’s THAT important. But he also reads from the original draft of the Declaration, which debunks one of the Left’s biggest lies about the founding of America.