Judge Him on His Actions, Not on What We Fear

Now that he has taken office, Donald Trump is beginning to take action and make good on some of his promises. Glenn and his cohosts reacted to some of Trump's early executive actions on radio Tuesday.

"Let's judge him on his actions, not what we fear," Glenn said. "Can we do that?"

Listen to the clip above or read the transcript below.

GLENN: Okay. Let's judge him on his actions, not what we fear. Can we do that?

STU: Of course.

PAT: It's fair.

GLENN: So just on this action, not what we fear -- because what I fear is the same thing you fear: We start putting up trade barriers and we start moving into the things that he's also said he's going to do and we move into the area of tariffs, and we're in real trouble. But he hasn't done that. On this, I think this is a good thing getting out of TPP.

STU: You know, there are risks to it.

GLENN: China will be able to write all the rules. Right.

STU: You know, obviously if our issue is China with trade, now China is going to be writing the rules likely for this entire group of countries, which will be their negotiating starting point for anything going further. Of course, you know, Trump would say that he's going to be able to negotiate better deals. And he may very well -- he might. So to this one, I'm not thrilled in that. But I know I'm in the minority for sure.

GLENN: You happy, Pat?

PAT: Yeah. I think that's a good thing.

GLENN: Reinstating a ban on funding some abortion services. Trump's order yesterday reimposes a ban initiated in 1984 by Reagan on government support for international aid groups that provide or counsel women on abortion services. To receive any US aid, nongovernmental organizations will now have to certify they do not perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning. This ban is called the Global Gag Rule, lifted by Obama after he took office in 2009.

What it doesn't do, it doesn't affect family planning or abortion policy here in the United States.

I think it's a step in the right --

JEFFY: It's a start.

PAT: However, good for -- what the hell are we funding abortions anywhere, but especially foreign countries.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

STU: That's an A-plus for me.

PAT: That's huge.

STU: And also, you know, it's been one of those things that every Democrat has not enacted and every Republican has. So Reagan had it on. Then the Clintons took it off. Then Bush put it back on. Then Obama took it off. So this is very consistent with past Republican policy since Reagan. And obviously as somebody who is pro-life, it's important.

GLENN: Third, ordering a government-wide hiring freeze.

Here's what the order does: The Trump administration directed the leaders of all federal agencies and departments to freeze hiring of new personnel. Any vacancies in the federal workforce as of noon on Sunday must remain unfilled, and no new positions may be created, except in limited circumstances, the order stated.

The decision is meant to counter the dramatic expansion of the federal work force since the Clinton administration, from 1.8 million civilian employees, to 2.1 million. The cost in health and retirement benefits are unsustainable, says the administration.

There's, frankly, to some degree been a lack of respect for taxpayer dollars for a long time, says Spicer.

What the order does not do: Military is exempt from the freeze. Each department or agency can also exempt any position that it deems necessary to meet national security or public safety responsibilities.

I think that's good. Just through attrition, you will cut the size of the government down dramatically.

STU: Yeah, I'm certainly a big fan of this one as well.

The left is -- their point is, just so we know, because it's always important to know -- their argument is essentially, of all the things that have expanded during the Obama administration, federal employment hasn't really expanded.

A lot of that is to do with economic collapse and that kind of thing. But he left office about the same employment level federally as he got into office, which is sort of surprising, I think.

GLENN: Really surprising.

STU: Because it did drop initially. And then it has come back up to even. So that's just something to note, if you care.

But, I mean, as a principle, I think it's a good idea. We obviously know the federal government is way too big. And this is -- you're right, a way of doing attrition without having to lay people off constantly and have all those negative headlines

GLENN: And it's hard to fire people.

STU: It's hard to fire people. You don't want to fire good people. When people leave, you don't replace them. And that has to go along with obvious cuts in the structure eventually. But there's enough fat on there that you don't have to think about that for a while.

GLENN: Yeah. Going to turn the federal workers against because how many times have we worked in a company where they just didn't hire replacements, and then you get -- congratulations, no pay increase, you get to do their job too. And you're like, oh, crap. So it's going to be bad on the morale of government workers.

He has announced his intention to renegotiate or withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, with Canada and Mexico.

He is in conversations with Canadian/Mexican leaders. Trump has made clear his intention to renegotiate the deal, though no formal steps have been taken. He has also convened his generals and informed them that they have 30 days to submit a new plan for defeating the Islamic State group.

So these are the -- some of the promises that he made. Remember, he was out and he said, "We're not going to fight this the way -- I'm going to go to the generals, and I'm going to tell them, you scrap what you're doing and come up with something else. I'm going to do that day one." This is where TIME magazine is like, well, he didn't do that.

Well, he's informed them, and he's convened them. And he's telling them that they now have 30 days.

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:


Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.