GLENNFebruary 20, 2017

The Legacy of Jane Roe and the Landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court Case That Changed America

In 1970, the woman at the heart of Roe v. Wade — Norma McCorvey --- was a self-proclaimed confused 21-year-old mother who found herself pregnant. Three years later, she would take on the pseudonym “Jane Roe,” and become the prominent plaintiff in the history-making Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade. After the landmark Supreme Court decision, McCorvey dedicated her life to overturning it, and became a notable pro-life advocate.

On Saturday, McCorvey died as a pro-life advocate at the age of 69.

"So McCorvey's child was over two years old and had been adopted by the time the Supreme Court actually came out with its ruling. She said, at the time I fought to obtain a legal abortion, but truth be told, I have three daughters and never had one, which is something that is left out of the story often," Co-host Stu Burguiere said on The Glenn Beck Program.

Of her role in the landmark court case, McCorvery had this to say in 2012:

I’m Norma McCorvey, the former Jane Roe of the Roe vs. Wade decision that brought "legal" child killing to America. I was persuaded by feminist attorneys to lie; to say that I was raped, and needed an abortion. It was all a lie. Since then, over 50 million babies have been murdered. I will take this burden to my grave.

Enjoy the complimentary clip above or read the transcript below for details.

PAT: The reason we have abortion on demand today is because of someone named Norma McCorvey, just a young woman who had an unwanted pregnancy and she decided to have an abortion.

STU: Just 21 years old.

PAT: Yeah, just 21.

STU: She herself said she was very confused at the time.

PAT: Right.

STU: She had gone through sort of crazy relationship issues.

PAT: And she was only pushed toward abortion when she went for help. She was pushed toward abortion. And from just about the minute she had the abortion, she regretted it. Actually, did she have the abortion?

STU: No.

PAT: I don't think she even wound up having the abortion, now that I think of this. She didn't even have an abortion.

STU: Yeah. That's the interesting part of the story.

PAT: She actually wound up having her child.

STU: Because the court case took too long.

PAT: That's right.

STU: She had birthed before that. And it wasn't immediately after. She had a period where she was still on board.

PAT: Still okay with it. That's right. That's right. Took a few years.

STU: And advocated for abortion and eventually turned around. One of the interesting things about it is, in the abortion debate, you always hear this: Well, what? So if the life of the mother is in danger, you want there to be no abortion. That's what you want when you say you want Roe vs. Wade repealed.

PAT: And, by the way, first of all, thing one, that almost never happens.

STU: No. Almost --

PAT: If this were 1783, it would happen all the time.

STU: Yeah, yeah, very important in 1700s.

PAT: It isn't the 1700s anymore. Or even the 1800s or even the 1900s. It's 2017. And doctors will just tell you that just doesn't happen. I've talked to doctors who have delivered thousands, tens of thousands of babies. And they've told me it's never happened.

STU: I will say particularly with partial-birth abortion, they say it never happens. You know, a pregnancy can complicate a lot of different things, obviously. And so it's not -- you know, the earlier it is, the more common. But, still, the issue with this particular thing, which I find to be so interesting is that when row -- Jane row, also known as Norma McCorvey, went to the doctor back in the day -- at that time in Texas, abortion was legal in the case of the mother's life being endangered.

PAT: Hmm.

JEFFY: Wow.

STU: That was the only exception they had at the time. But they had that exception before Roe vs. Wade in the state where Roe went to get the abortion. That is how ridiculous this has been twisted.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: That has always been an exception. It is a pre Roe vs. Wade exception. And honestly like an understandable one in that at the very least you're making some decision -- it's at least justifiable in that you might make the decision based on -- you're essentially choosing one life over the other at that point.

PAT: Oh, if it's between my wife and the unborn baby --

STU: Of course.

PAT: -- you're choosing the mother of your children every time. The love of your life.

JEFFY: You have to, right? You have to.

STU: So McCorvey's child was over two years old and had been adopted by the time the Supreme Court actually came out with its ruling. She said, at the time I fought to obtain a legal abortion, but truth be told, I have three daughters and never had one, which is something that is left out of the story often.

She -- the case went on for a long time. It wasn't until the mid-'90s that she became a born-again Christian and was received by the Catholic Church. I think she was Catholic for a while. I think she converted from that too. But she remained Christian. She said that she became a real -- a real outspoken opponent of abortion. I mean, think about this. You know, think about -- like what if Rosa Parks was, "You know, I was wrong about those buses." This is a big change. You know what, we should be sitting in the back. I got to be wrong on that one.

That would be a story, I feel like.

PAT: Yes, it would be a story.

STU: I don't think that would have ever happened. But it's an interesting thing in that this is the case, the name that everyone knows, Roe, this is the woman who came out and advocated against this procedure for two decades.

PAT: If it was Wade, you wouldn't have minded as much.

STU: No.

PAT: Because Wade was the person trying to allow her to have the abortion, right?

STU: No.

PAT: Or actually Wade didn't want her to. She was fighting for --

STU: Roe was the one. Yeah.

PAT: But, I mean, it's never talked about that even the person who got this law overturned, all through America and legalized abortion, even she was a very staunch abortion opponent.

STU: So she went as far as to work for an abortion clinic. Okay? She was working at an abortion clinic. And she had an anti-abortion group move in next door to her. I mean, think about this. They always say, "Oh, you shouldn't be able to protest out in front of one of these clinics." Think of this story: They moved in next door. During smoke breaks -- during smoke breaks, someone from Operation Rescue, which is Reverend Philip Benham said she was completely pro-abortion.

They started talking. Slowly, they became friends. And that was kind of the genesis of her conversion. And, I mean, it's an incredible story.

If this was the opposite -- like, for example, you know, some terrible ruling that the person who was involved in it recanted and went the other way. And I say a terrible ruling as far as the left's perspective. This would be the ultimate movie. This woman's story would be an incredible movie telling this incredible conversion.

JEFFY: Conversion.

STU: Yeah. I mean, I'm trying to think of a good example of one. But there's been many of those stories, where the person comes out and at first advocates for the wrong side of the policy. And then history proves that they wound up being on the right side in the end because they converted in the middle and took a tough stand and couldn't believe what they previously had stood for. That's this story.

PAT: Right.

STU: It's just a policy they don't like, so almost no one knows it. And --

PAT: You're right. She would be celebrated. I mean, there would have been many, many major motion picture movies released about her.

JEFFY: What's interesting that too is that she began her conversion just by talking, you know, out back, smoking a graduate with the people that were against it next door. Didn't have anything to do with burning cars, throwing signs, hollering, dragging crosses across the street. It was just --

PAT: Killing abortion clinic doctors. None of that extremism.

JEFFY: Right. None of that. None of that.

PAT: How old was she?

STU: She was only 69. And she was in an assisted living facility.

JEFFY: At 69?

STU: Yeah, really -- really sad. Because, you know, was an important voice. The voice, really.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And an incredible thing -- an incredible turn of events. And I still think to this day -- and I've said it before on the air that I think this is going to be looked back in whatever -- 100, 200 years -- I don't know what the time line is, as the slavery of our day. The type of thing that people who believe and advocated for it will be trashed by future generations, the way they trashed the Founders for having slaves. And, again, a lot of that is unfair. And you have to view it in the period of the -- you know, you have to view it in the context of the time where it occurs. But it's the type of thing that will be so unthinkable, particularly as technology advances.

We're to the point now -- we showed a video on Pat and Stu the other day of a new type of ultrasound.

Thank you, Jeffy.

A new type of ultrasound where you can see the baby doing baby things. This is not like it's blurry and you can kind of see the face. They had the 3D ultrasounds that came out, you know, within the last, what? Fifteen years. And now they're kind of common. You can get them. They're more expensive.

But it's like to the point of basically you see the baby playing and turning around and doing all sorts of things that you'd recognize from a baby. And this is at 20 weeks.

JEFFY: Yep.

STU: This technology is going to prove to people that this is a crazy process.

PAT: And you think, wow, that's an active piece of broccoli in there.

STU: No, it's not broccoli, Pat. No, it's going to be a baby. Yeah, it's a baby.

PAT: Wow.

JEFFY: My heart must be working on that carburetor for that Buick moving around.

STU: No, it's not a Buick. It's not a Buick. It's a baby.

PAT: Are you sure?

STU: And over time, technology is working against the, quote, unquote, pro-choice argument here. The more we see these little pieces of broccoli as babies, the harder it is for people to justify this decision.

PAT: Yeah. And it's interesting because Beyonce is being celebrated right now because she's so very, very pregnant. And she's not pregnant with tissue or a Buick. She's pregnant with twin babies. Babies. And they've said it. And she says it. And, well, okay. Then how is it that nobody else is pregnant with babies? They're pregnant with tissue or a fetus or you don't want to say the word.

JEFFY: It's really strange that she's --

PAT: It's a weird phenomenon.

JEFFY: I mean, Beyonce is celebrated for -- because, well, she's the queen. But, I mean, over the past few years, they've really celebrated several -- numbers of celebrities for having babies, that it's this wonderful thing.

Like, what are you talking about?

STU: Well, and that's, of course, because they all know it's true.

PAT: Sure they do.

STU: They all know it.

PAT: They do.

STU: They all realize.

PAT: And that's why I cut them no slack for the time period. Because the time period is 2017. They know what's growing inside the woman and it's a human baby. They know that.

STU: Understood. However, I will say, it's a legal process. Society has decided --

PAT: Still.

STU: And really, the courts have decided that this is a legal process. So it should be viewed within that context. I think there are a lot of people who look -- you know, I'm not thinking about the thinkers. I'm not talking about people who are involved in this debate. You know, the debate as currently constructed is debating about whether it should be allowed before -- or excuse me, only before 20 weeks. I mean, there's -- we're talking -- we're giving you a five-month window to figure out whether or not you're going to keep this thing or not. And that's still considered too restrictive. It's not considered too restrictive in Europe. But it's too restrictive here. So that's completely different.

I think a lot of people who go to an abortion clinic, who grow up in a family where this is approved of, they just don't go into deep thought about it. It's a legal thing. They have a problem. They eliminate the problem.

And that is what -- you know, why it's important for us to continue blabbing about it. I mean, there have been hosts that have banned abortion talk on the air. We didn't talk about it all that often for a decent amount of this show's history. And we've talked about that before. It is important to talk about. It needs to be thought about.

You don't get the pass of, well, I don't know, it's legal, and it would solve my current problem as is. It needs to be considered thoughtfully.

JEFFY: And being against abortion is not hating women.

STU: No.

PAT: It's just the opposite. Just slightly over half of the people born will be women.

STU: Yeah, 27, 28 million would be alive under our policy.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: That would not be alive under the left's policy.

PAT: The hateful thing is to terminate all of those women, all of those females. That's the War on Women right there. You know, in Australia -- an Australian politician just said that -- because I guess in Queensland, Australia, they're -- it's still a criminal offense to have an abortion in some circumstances. And some MPs have said they won't support the legislation to decriminalize it. It's only lawful to prevent serious danger to the woman's physical or mental health.

But there's a politician saying that he believes these politicians owe women an explanation. It's a real cop out. If you're voting no, then you're saying it's appropriate for it to remain in the criminal code. Well, yeah, murder should remain in the criminal code.

And they're trying to make a big issue out of this. Because they're acting as if the women are the criminals, when the ones that are charged are the doctors. If you perform -- just like in this country, when there was -- when there was a criminal act involved in the abortion, it was the doctors that were held accountable, not the women.

STU: I see what you're saying. You're saying women can't be doctors.

PAT: Well, okay. Women doctors sometimes could be involved here.

(chuckling)

STU: Unbelievable.

You played that trick on me a few weeks ago. But, yeah, I mean, obviously that's the way it's typically enforced.

But, I mean, really, it's not -- while the legality issue is incredibly crucial. And, you know, when you have something that is -- violates a central tenet of this country being life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, when you have something that so clearly violates that tenet, I can't -- it needs to be more than legal. Right? It's a situation where we wake up. We talked about this a while ago. In the 1950s, 45 percent of white people said, if a black person moved in next door to them, they'd move. Forty-five percent of white people in a poll said that.

JEFFY: What year was that?

STU: 1954. Mid-'50s.

Now that number -- well, and this is a number that's now 20 years old. I haven't seen an update for it because the poll I saw said only 1996 was the latest they did this. In 1996, it was 2 percent.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: From 45 to 2 percent. That's not because of law. That's not because they passed laws saying that black people must move next to white people.

It's because people -- white people over time realized how dumb their position was. Right? And they had a moral change of their heart, understanding the reality of the situation, which is that you shouldn't move out of your house if black people move in next door. It sounds silly.

JEFFY: It sure does.

STU: To say that now. Back then it was half of white people said that, almost. Forty-five -- and, you know, we know how difficult it is to deal with realtors and all the paperwork and all the craziness. This is not like I wouldn't go talk to my neighbor if he was black. This is, I would move. I would leave my home if a black person moved in next door. That number goes from 45 to 2 percent. Not because of law. Because people had a change of heart. Because people made convincing arguments over a long period of time. And right now, while it's a very split partisan issue, it shouldn't be. It shouldn't be that.

And, you know, a lot of people say, "Well, you know, you should be able to have it for X amount of time. And afterwards, you know, then it has to stop." The majority of the people say no to late terms. And that's good. But you need to be consistent here.

PAT: It's pretty close on abortion at all.

STU: Yeah, it's about split.

PAT: It's about split halfway down the country right now. It's almost 50/50. But I think it's 53/47. Something else. Right in there. So I think we have the momentum right now, and we just need to keep it.

STU: Yeah.

JEFFY: Good.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Advice for Men in Their 20s & 30s to Achieve YOUR Life Goals

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Matt & Maxim Smith HERE

Are young men prepared for a future dominated by AI, surveillance, and shifting societal rules? Glenn Beck sits down with Matt and Maxim Smith to explore how young men can reclaim their agency and build real-life skills in an uncertain and ever-changing world.

Order a copy of Matt and Maxim Smith's Book: “The Preparation: How to Become Confident, Competent, and Dangerous” HERE

RADIO

Trump told me why he's "DESTROYING" the White House...

Construction for President Trump's ballroom has begun on the East Wing of the White House, and every Democrat in America has lost their mind. Does the President have the authority to alter a historic structure like the White House? Glenn and Stu discuss, as Glenn shares the story where he reveals even Trump was shocked at how easy it was to get the alterations approved.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Well, you still haven't really addressed why Donald Trump for is knocking down the White House for his own --

GLENN: Well, he just hates America.

STU: That's -- what I've been reading. Yeah.

GLENN: Right. And how crazy excited the left should be that he's knocking down something built by slaves. They're like, we've got to preserve that.

Slaves made that!

It's weird.

STU: I actually do have questions about this though.

GLENN: What? What question do you have?

STU: Well, and they come from, you know, everybody's source of thinking these days. Which are group texts.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: I'm on with some friends. I have some really basic questions of like, I feel like, there would be a conversation and a bill passed if we're going to put a giant new building at the White House.

GLENN: No.

STU: That's not how it works at all.

Is it? How's it work? How does this work?

GLENN: You ready? So the president says, I want to change the White House.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: And the White House architect says, how would you like to change it?

And he says, this way. And they say, okay.

Well, you need to approve all the permits. Okay. I approve all the permits.

Okay. We change it. That's literally how it happens.

STU: Really? They can do anything they want.

GLENN: Well, I mean, within reason.

When I say within reason.

I think with restraint from public outcry.

Like, I want to paint the White House black.

Well, you know, as president, you can do whatever you want.

But I don't think that will fly with the American people.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So there some standards in there. I will tell you about a conversation I had with Trump next.
(music)

GLENN: She's about to become a mom.

She is scared beyond fear. Any fear she's ever felt before. She's maybe the most vulnerable she's ever been in her life. Or even will be.

And thank God, she is in a Preborn clinic. They offer a free ultrasound. She hears the heartbeat. She sees that little face and little hands on the screen.

And in that instant, that crisis feels like a connection.

Because when you see life. When you understand its worth, protecting -- protecting that child becomes everything.

Preborn works every single day to make sure that moment is possible.

They provide free ultrasounds. Counseling. Support to women, who are not looking for judgment.

They just need some hope.

They need some help. And when a mother chooses life. Preborn is there for her. Not just for the birth of the baby. With diapers. And formula. And baby clothes. And books and real community. Preborn is expanding their life-affirming care in the darkest corners of our nation. Would you like to help hurting women and save more babies?

You can do it. $28 will provide an ultrasound. $15,000 will put a machine in a needy woman's center, saving countless lives for years to come.

Dial #250 and make a donation. #250. Say the key word baby. Or go to Preborn.com/Beck. Don't forget I'm with Megyn Kelly this Saturday at the Dickies Arena. You want to get tickets, go to MegynKelly.com.
(OUT AT 10:29 AM)

GLENN: Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. We're glad you're here.

Thank you so much for listening. You know, Stu has been freaking out about the White House.

STU: I'm not -- I'm not freaking out. I just think it's an interesting. I thought there would be more of a process to something like this.

GLENN: No.

STU: Because I certainly was not think at this point, the American people understand what is about to happen. Which is like, the White House is about to double in size.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: My -- just by my eyeball look at it.

It looks like it will maybe be more than two times the size.

GLENN: It's going to be large! But it's not the actual White House. It's part of the east wing.

STU: That's -- that's a totally misleading commentary.

GLENN: No. It's not.

GLENN: Because the White House is the original piece from the 1700s. Okay?

That's the center house. The east wing and the West Wing was not done until FDR. They were added later.

STU: It was a big deal.

GLENN: The biggest change in the White House since FDR. And happened in our lifetime. Right after 9/11.

The White House became enormous. But it was all underground.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: They completely changed everything underground.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: And we didn't have a conversation about that at all.

STU: Because it's underground!

I assume all sorts of things are happening underground. Our well-known monuments and buildings.

GLENN: Right. Sure.

STU: But this is -- this is -- it's not a -- they keep saying this.

They're going to be changed the West Wing.

GLENN: No. The East Wing.

STU: They're going to be changing the East Wing. That's not what they're doing. This is like doubling the size of the White House.

Now, I'm not opposed to that idea.

I'm just sort of surprised that it wasn't like a big conversation and a bill.

GLENN: All right. Okay. Okay. You ready?

So was Donald Trump.

STU: What do you mean?

GLENN: So I'm in the White House with him. And I'm up in the private quarters with him.

And he is showing me some things that he is doing. And talking to me about some other things that I can't talk about. Because he doesn't want.

I don't know.

STU: He doesn't want to discuss it.

GLENN: I didn't want to discuss it. And I don't know why.

Because it's all really good stuff.

So, anyway, we're taking about it. And then he brings up the ballroom.

And we're walking down the stairs, from the residents, and we're going into the ballroom.

And he says, you know, this is the ballroom that Abraham Lincoln had dinners here.

I said, you know, it's that window over there, that Fredrick Douglass had to open up the window and had to crawl in because they wouldn't let him in because he was black. And Abraham Lincoln was like, let him in. He's my friend. Why is coming through the window?

And we were talking about all the history of the ballroom. And that it's very, very small.

Because it was built in the 1700s. And we keep using that ballroom. And he's like, we have to have a bigger ballroom.

We have it out in the wet, and the cold and the rain. Yada, yada, yada.

And so he said, we come over to a window. And he's like, right there, I will build a big, beautiful ballroom.

And it's going to better than anybody thinks. It's going to be the biggest, most beautiful ballroom. And I'm just trying not to laugh. Because that's the way he describes it.

And he said, you know, surprised that I could do that.

And I said, I bet. How long is that going to take? What's that process like?

And he's like, right. That's what I asked.

He said, I went to the -- I went to the -- I don't know, chief usher or somebody. Whoever is in charge of the White House. I think it's the chief usher. He said, I think we should have a ballroom. He's like, what do I do?

And he said, well, you just have to talk to the architect.

So he went to the White House architect. Now, this is a guy who makes sure the integrity of the White House stays. Okay?

You can't make it into a modern house. Okay? You're not going to redesign the inside. You can add some gold I guess.

You can add a lot of gold, I guess. You can't make it into. You can't wreck the integrity of the White House.

And he said, you know, I just put these flagpoles in. And he's like, all I had to say was, I want to put some flagpoles in.

He said, yes, sir. Where?

He's like, what?

One in the front. One in the back. They were like, okay. Tell us where.

We went out into the yard. Right here. Right there.

And they put them up. And so he's talking to the White House architect. And he said, we've got to have a ballroom. And I think we should have it over here in the East Wing. A big, beautiful -- and he said, but what is this going to take?

And he's like, well, it's going to be very expensive. Are you expecting the people to pay?

And he's like, no, I'll raise the money for it. I'll pay for it, and I'll raise the money, extra, so American people are not going to pay for it.

And the architect said, well, then all you have to do is sign the permits.

And he's like, what?

And he said, well, you have to go through the permitting process.

He's like, how long will that take?

He said, well, the President is the one who controls the process and signs the permits. So as on short as you would like it to be, Mr. President.

And he's like, are you kidding me? And he looked at me, he's like, I'll have this done by spring of next year.

So he can change it. The -- what you have to understand is, the -- the east wing and the West Wing, those -- those are FDR.

So FDR went into a works project. And he added those wings.

The east wing is where the first lady's offices are.

Just the east wing is like, you know, it's -- it's just the east wing.

And it's --

STU: Okay. Shade of the east wing?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. But anyway, and so what he's doing is he's taking some of it town, and he's going to link it to the ballroom. And the bail room is going to be the biggest, beautiful ballroom in Washington DC.

It's going to link from there. So you will walk -- if you're in the White House, you will walk from the front door, through the -- the dining room.
Or, the east dining room. You'll go into the East Wing, and you'll go to the ballroom.

STU: I'm looking -- I'm at the renderings as we speak. And that's exactly --

GLENN: I've not even seen the renderings. Just describe it to me. Can I see it?

STU: No. They're mine. This is my computer.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: This is the -- I can't obviously show it to the people here. You can see it over here.

GLENN: Okay. It's big, beautiful. What a surprise, the tables are golden.

STU: By the way, it's different --

GLENN: That's amazing. Holy cow.

STU: My conversation about whether this is the -- the -- you can't. It's already zoomed in. They're not the best images.

Here.

GLENN: There's nothing wrong with that. What is wrong with that? It looks just like the White House.

It fits. It's appropriate.

STU: I was in the middle of saying. It's -- my conversation on this is not whether it is -- looks good or is appropriate or anything like.

I actually think his point on the ballroom is so obvious, every president should have been making it.

The fact that we don't have a big room to have state dinners in.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Unless you wanted to do them off campus everywhere else.

You have to have that, and why not have it at the White House. It makes a lot of sense.

GLENN: Except, I don't want to pay for it, as a citizen. I don't want a dime going for it.

You know what? Hey, all you Frenchies, you can eat on the lawn. Literally, on the lawn.

Just throw the food out on the lawn.

Yeah, I mean, I'm fine with that.

But if he wants to pay for it. If he wants to get rich people to pay for it, go for it.

I don't want any of my tax dollars going for it.

STU: Right. So my criticism is not how it looks. And that we need it.

We actually showed the inside of it. It seems like the facility we should have for these type of events.

We're going to have them somewhere. Why not have them there?

GLENN: Right. And who better to build it than one of the best builders of all time.

STU: Donald Trump. We've had this conversation about how you project American power.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And I think Trump's approach to -- particularly in the Middle East. I think it's been effective around the world. Of these trappings actually are effective in diplomatic relations with other nations. Donald Trump has a lot of places that are lined in gold. That can have meetings. It's not like that's what he wants it for. The left tries to portray. Of course, he does.

No. It means something to him. And he knows how these people think.

GLENN: No. No.

Because I asked. I -- I won't tell the whole story.

But I really want to, really desperately.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: But, you know, he's gilding everything.

And that's not necessarily my favorite look.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And -- and he -- he came in, Tania and I were alone in the Oval for a while. And we were talking about it.

And he comes in. He says, you know, I'm doing all of this.

You see all the gold? Yes. You can't miss it. You can't miss the gold.

And he's like, you know, it's so important. These foreign leers, they all come from palaces. And they don't understand. And I know, you know, the White House is different. America is different. But they understand power in a different way.

And he said, they are coming from these old countries. And these big buildings.

And these palaces.

And he said, it is important for us to project power.

STU: Yes!

GLENN: And that's -- and that is why he's doing this. Not because he likes gold. He's doing it to project power and wealth.

Notice how many prime ministers.

They're all flying in all the time, from all over the world. You know, I've never seen a president meet with so many foreign dignitaries in the White House all the time!

STU: Yeah. And the media likes to say, well, that's because he's self-important.

And he's --

GLENN: No. He's projecting American power.

STU: Yes. I think so too.

When I say it's important to him.

That's why it's important to him.

He believes it's an important tool in that world.

GLENN: Correct. It's not him.

He knows the language they speak. And not just body language or, you know, spoken language.

All of the entire -- that's what protocol is all about. It all means something.

STU: And so my criticism -- and it's not even criticism.

My observation is not whether it fits. Or whether we need it, or whether it's appropriate.

My -- I don't think my observation here in the group text, that we started this with, which is that, holy crap.

I don't think the American people have any idea what's about to happen. Like every time I bring this up to Glenn.

And we have to understand how these conversations work.

I say, people will look at the White House. And it will be totally different.

He's like, oh, president Tyler did on more than that. In 1940 -- shut up!

That's what I get from Glenn.

Oh, well, there was more changes underground. You don't understand the piping -- that he totally changed the -- the -- the piping back in 1807. You moron!

Okay. I'm sorry.

I didn't know that. What I think of. And, you know, FDR made these changes.

My whole life, it's been the same, pretty much from the outside.

I know what the White House looks like. You go up there, I look at the White House.

It looks like the White House.

It is not going to look like the White House when this is over. It is going to look like the White House plus another White House next to it.

And it's going to be, I think, massively impressive. But I'm surprised there's not more conversation about this.

GLENN: When was the last time you were in Washington, DC?

STU: The inauguration.

GLENN: So you would not believe the difference in the White House grounds.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: The difference from, you know, when I went with George Bush.

You could stand right at the front gate.

STU: Right.

GLENN: You can't do that anymore.

They've taken the park. The park in the back is all gone.

The security --

STU: Just for security.

GLENN: Everything. All of the trees. Everything that has been done to not see the White House.

Except, for that iconic front.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

Everything is -- is not really -- you don't see it like you used to anymore. You don't walk up to it.

STU: The last -- I was in town for the inauguration. Last time I actually walked by the White House.

It's been a long time.

GLENN: Oh, you would not.

You will not recognize it.

I mean, just driving by and seeing it.

You will get pictures and everything else. But walking by it.

Today, you wouldn't recognize it.

It's -- it's -- what has -- what has happened with security is so sad. When I have the bell from the White House front desk, they're will it used to be a little desk right in the front, right as you walk in. There was a desk, and a bell. And I -- I have it. I think it is from Tyler's, you know, administration.

STU: Of course.

GLENN: And you would walk in. And you would hit the bell. And you would say, I want to see the president.

And somebody would say, okay. All right. Sit over there.

And you would wait. And you might wait all day, but you got -- you can walk in without an appointment and see the president of the United States.

You're not getting within two blocks of the White House right now.

It's sad. It's sad what's happening.

STU: Yeah. And for good. I wouldn't disagree with that either.

It's for good reason, security-wise.

I think back, the classic. I think what everybody thinks of when they think of the White House.

Is the scene from Superman two.

GLENN: Try to remember.

STU: When they showed the White House. And it's supposed to be -- it's a motion picture.

But they were too lazy to actually get video footage of the White House.

So it's just a still.

And you can tell, because there's like things that should be moving. That aren't moving. Right.

GLENN: Is that because --

STU: I think that's Superman.

GLENN: On Independence Day, they blew it up.

STU: But that's another example.

You had that picture of what the White House looked like. And, you know, I guess from certain angles, it looks pretty much the same. From the front. You won't notice it. Because it's kind of wrapped around the back. The back is pretty iconic too.

It's not going to look like that anymore.

In some ways, it will look a lot better or impressive.

It is a major change. That when you say, hey, they're redoing the West Wing, putting a ball room in there. That's not what they're doing.

GLENN: East.

STU: Sorry, East. I hate Glenn.

GLENN: I'm only saying it because I know how much he hates it.

RADIO

Is Trump secretly resetting America’s economy with gold?

The price of gold is skyrocketing, and that’s usually a bad sign for our economy. But this is no normal economic market under President Trump. What if Trump is using a little-known strategy that hasn’t been seen in decades? Glenn Beck reviews the theory which, if it works, could save our economy, and it all revolves around Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Before I start this on gold. I want to ask you: What is Donald Trump? Is Donald Trump a guy who likes to cut the spending?

No. He believes in debt, right.

But what he believes in more than debt is growing the bottom line.

So you grow your way out of things.

So keep that in mind. As I'm trying to make sense of gold.

And what I'm going to share with you is just a theory. I think I might be right on this. But I don't know. Okay.

Gold is rocketing. You know, it's -- now almost. What is it? Forty-three or $4,400 an ounce today. And I've always told you, you don't want to see a world with 5,000-dollar an ounce gold. When 5,000-dollar an ounce happens, that means the trust is going away for the financial system. And the financial markets.

The dollar is starting to weaken. And the -- the world is sending a signal, we don't trust any of this anymore!

Now, that may be true. That may be true.

But let me take you to another place. Because maybe something that is happening, that doesn't fit that script. Because you're dealing with something new. You're dealing with Donald Trump.

So I think behind all of it. There is a new strategy, that is taking shape in Washington.

Congress, you know, doesn't have the stomach to cut any of the spending. And Donald Trump believes the opposite, grow can't way out.

Okay? So that's a recipe for a deficit, that is really quite frightening.

But there is someone, and I think it's Bessent. Who is finding a way to pull downtown deficit, without the usual political bloodshed. One of the misunderstood tools in that strategy is something that you're going to be amazed that it hasn't happened before.

It is the revaluation of gold.

Right now, the government values its gold reserves. We have 260 million troy ounces.

That's what they say officially. We might have none. But we have 260 million troy ounces. But we only value it at $35 an ounce. Why?

Because that's the price that FDR in the 1930s set gold at. And said, it's worth $35 an ounce.

That hasn't changed. So that means on paper, all of the government that we have. On paper, the whole gold hoard is only worth $9 billion. Okay. So wait a minute. But market price today is almost $4,500. Which would make that 9 billion actually worth $1.1 trillion.

Now, think about that.

The United States is sitting on a trillion dollar asset, and we don't even count it!

Why does this matter?

I want you to think of your home.

Imagine you're going into a bank, and you want to go buy a car. Okay? And you have your salary. And you're in debt. And you're just barely making it. But your home on paper, has only been valued at $5,000. Because when your parents bought it all those years ago. It was $5,000. And now, you're sitting here. And it hasn't changed in value.

It has in reality. But you're still counting it as the bank. And saying, yeah. Well, my grandfather. Or father paid $5,000 for this.

So it's worth $5,000. You know. The bank would know, no, it's not. It's worth a million dollars today.

What changes if this is called mark to market? This is a usual thing. You mark the price to what the value is. The price of your house goes down, you are poorer, on paper. Because the value of your house has gone down.

And it's marked to market.

If your price. If the price has gone from $35 an ounce, to $4,500 an ounce, then you mark to market, and then everything changes. Suddenly, if that's your house, 5,000 to a million dollars, now you can buy that new car. You walk into the bank. You're like, I will buy a 50,000 dollar car. And they're like, well, let me see your assets. And you're like, oh, well, you have a house that's been paid off, and it's worth a million dollars.

Where, yesterday it was worth $5,000. Today, it's worth a million dollars. Because it's actually worth that if you sold it.

So the bank goes, oh, you're fine. You're fine.

Yeah. Sure. Here's 50 grand. Go buy that car.

Suddenly, your profile looks different overnight.

Okay?

That is what I believe is coming in America. I believe they're going to revalue gold.

Without raising taxes. Without cutting a single program, it would instantly improve the nation's balance sheet.

Our debt to asset ratio, would shift dramatically. Have you noticed in the last year, everybody is like, their debt to -- their debt to asset ratio is way out of whack. And they're now 125 percent.

Whatever it is. Okay?

That would change. The dollar would legitimately appear to be stronger, and the deficit, at least on paper, would shrink!

Now, add to that, again, what Donald Trump believes. And you may not agree with it. But he believes, I can grow the economy.

So you combine that with the H-1B one visa fees. You do the tariffs. Expected, you know, to bring in money. And then also, the expected eight to $12 trillion in foreign capital investments. That are flowing into the United States.

If all of that is real, suddenly, the picture doesn't look quite so desperate.

Because it looks like, we are growing again. And we actually would be growing again.

The debt doesn't shrink by cutting. It shrinks by growing.

It shrinks by growing the economy and expanding the economy, beneath it.

That's Trump's mark!

That's always what he's believed in.

So while I've been sitting here going, you don't want 5,000-dollar gold, you don't!

But it also might be a good thing. Let me give you this. There's more. Washington is floating the idea. And Mike Lee got hammered for this.

But this is a Bessent idea. Mike Lee is floating the idea of selling off portions of fast, federal portfolio. We have all this land. These are not national parks.

These are not. We have millions of acres of un-- unproductive, and unused territory.

I have known this from central bankers for 20 years. That they actually have said, we should sell the national parks.

You know how much the national parks. I don't want you to sell me the national parks. No. What are you talking about? No. We're not selling the national parks.

But that's not what they're talking about. They're talking about cutting the inefficiency out of every department. And taking land that is unusable, and sellable, that the government is holding, and doesn't need to hold.

Selling that land, okay?

Which would allow us to build more houses. Expand. Et cetera, et cetera.

And -- and increase the bottom line on the ballot sheet. Suddenly, with all of this, the pressure valves are opened up.

Okay? Also, put in here, nobody seems to be panicking about the government shutdown. And what is the government shutdown doing? What is Bessent hoping he gets an opportunity to do? Cut.

So now you're expanding with gold. The possibility of selling federal land at some point. You're bringing in $12 trillion of investment. You're getting the raw earth minerals from Venezuela and from South America and from elsewhere in the world. You've solved our military peace problem. We're no longer the world's policemen. So we're not having to do all of that stuff, which is a drain on blood and treasure. All of a sudden, you're target to see that America is actually shoring itself up.

So what looks like chaos right now, may actually be a controlled implosion. Of a broken system.

Because remember, this is exactly what the left was going to do.

The left, through the WEF and the Great Reset, they wanted to implode the system.

But they had a safety net that we were going to fall into, and that was a global world order. Donald Trump doesn't believe in a global world order, but he does believe, we are in trouble!

He knows that.

He has a different idea. I think we might be seeing a reanchoring of America's finances in hard assets, real productivity, and if Bessent and the president can pull this off, we may be watching the birth of a -- the building of a -- of a new foundation of a new financial order. One where, you know, we're -- we're regrounding ourself in -- in value that's actually real.

It's dangerous. If confidence breaks, if the terrorists who are already here, thank you, Joe Biden, managed to disrupt the perception of reality.

If we start having, you know, real trouble on our streets, and we go unstable, then the illusion flips.

The -- the revaluation becomes a revelation, that even gold cannot cover the sins of a government that has just not paid attention for this long. And, you know, there's no pretending that. But if we can hold together this fragile unity in this country long enough and they can revalue the system and rejigger the system, keep your eye on gold.

It may be the canary in the coal mine. It may be, this is real trouble.

But remember, not every alarm means disaster.

It's how you react to it.

You I would have told you four years ago, and I did. When we said, we're going to -- we're going to kick Russia and China off the SWIFT system. That's a really bad idea. Because you have no plan. You have no replacement for the SWIFT system. You're now taking the assets of a sovereign country and saying, "Yeah, we can do that." That will drive the prive of the dollar down. People will sell our reserve currencies. And the only thing they had as backup was a global new financial order.

None of us wanted!

Notice, we're not talking about CBDCs.

We're talking about gold.

This government is talking -- Donald Trump is talking about rebalancing and growing. Not a global world order.

So it could be that the price of gold is, you know, just a fire. That could burn out of control.

As it would have just a few years ago. And it still may. But it also may be that the rise in gold and what's happening with Donald Trump is a backfire. Is a -- you know, when you set fire in a forest fire, and you burn back into it, to put it out. This may be a fire that we're setting that could put all of this out. It may -- this heat may actually forge something new.

Because I think there's real strategy here. When you look at what I talked to you about a minute ago. Why are we bombing those boats?

That's strategy for something bigger. That's not -- that's not a War on Drugs.

That's not. That's strategy for something bigger. Knowing that he's resetting the entire world.

Knowing that he likes the revaluation of things. And he likes to grow the asset sheet.

Knowing he's not a dummy. Knowing that he wants to keep America's sovereignty true. Gold will tell the story. Whether it's collapse or America's rebirth. One way or another, we're going to know, soon.

We're going to know soon.

Watch gold!

RADIO

The real war in South America—And why CHINA should be terrified

Is President Trump’s “war on drugs” against Venezuela actually about something much bigger? Glenn Beck looks at Trump’s bombing of drug boats in a new light: Is Trump really trying to reset the global order and stop China’s economic conquest in its tracks?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So when we talk about the War on Drugs, most people just kind of roll their eyes. We've been talking about the War on Drugs forever. And it doesn't make a difference at all.

Another failed campaign. Another round of speeches. Another generation caught in the crossfires. But what if I told you, the drug war that you're actually watching today, has almost nothing to do with cocaine or fentanyl.

I think the average person would go, yep. That sounds true.

And I believe it is. It has everything to do with oil and minerals and the rebirth of American sovereignty.

But you have to understand about Donald Trump, he is reshaping everything. Just as the WEF said, we're going to go for The Great Reset. We're going to reshape the world. He's doing that single-handedly. He's taking on everything and reshaping the world to have a stronger America and one that is protected, not mired in endless wars. And strong financially and militarily. So we can protect ourself. With American sovereignty.

So what's taken place right now in South America is not a narcotics operation. Again, this is my opinion. You know, I was talking about it yesterday. I was like, it's like the Monroe Doctrine.

This may be as important as the Monroe Doctrine, which the Monroe Doctrine was in this hemisphere, don't screw with any of our allies. You're not going to put enemy ships.

And you're not going to play around with countries in our hemisphere. This is our hemisphere.

America is supreme in this hemisphere. You do your own thing. Then we kind of got weak on that. And then China was all over.

Russia was all over the southern part of the western hemisphere.

So what he's doing is he's putting a new Monroe Doctrine together. That's Donald Trump!

Now, look at the map. Try to -- you really have to look at it. Because I could say, imagine the map. And nobody can imagine the map. Venezuela, Guyana, Colombia, okay?

Three names, you almost never heard anything about on cable news five years ago. And suddenly, they're the front page priorities for Washington, DC, and our military.

What? Well, they're smuggling drugs. Yeah, well, they might be. But they're also doing a lot of other things. Including as they told you, terrorist island in Venezuela. They have Hamas and Iran in Venezuela. But whoever controls this little triangle, controls the western hemisphere.

And controls the western hemisphere's future. Its energy. Its minerals. And its manufacturing independence. And Venezuela is the fulcrum. Okay?

It holds the largest crude reserves on earth. And it's oil that is perfectly suited for America's Gulf Coast refineries.

But China and Russia have been moving in. They're like vultures sitting there, offering loans and sweetheart deals to Venezuela. And Venezuela has become more and more communist. And more and more hostile to America.

And they are trying to mortgage that entire system to Beijing's state-run oil giants.

So what are we doing? Well, we haven't done anything about it. We've just let them go in.

Now, all of a sudden, we're doing Navy drills in the Caribbean. And we're doing sanctions. We're moving more ships and more Naval assets, I mean. It is -- it is a full-fledged onslaught. We are sending a message. And I don't know that we're sending a message just to the drug lords, okay?

This is a pressure campaign. That kind of looks like the old drug war, but is really, I believe, designed to crowd out the Chinese influence.

This is about keeping Venezuela's energy in the Western family. Not letting it become another victim of the Belt and Road Initiative and a pawn of China.

Then there's Guyana. Which I thought was in the other hemisphere. I had no idea it was on this continent that's, you know, just below us. Apparently called South America. It's tiny.

It is quiet. And suddenly, a gold rush of oil!

Now, an American company, ExxonMobil leaves the charge there. And Washington didn't just help fight traffickers. It's defending America's offshore platforms. They're building radar networks, they're locking down the entire coast. Because it's not just about barrels. It's about cables. It's about information.

It's about pipelines. It's about rare earth minerals.

All of those things are going to power the next century. And then Colombia, we know. Because that was the first thing that all of a sudden, Donald Trump started talking about Colombia, and then the Panama Canal. And everybody was like, "What are we talking about? Are we back in 1958?" No, nobody talked about it. Nobody had paid attention to it. This guy, he's so far ahead of the curve, he's so far over the horizon, I don't think people really understand what he's doing. Colombia is the hinge between the Caribbean and the Pacific. So we were told for decades that the US military presence there was about fighting the cartels. Maybe.

But I think the truth is that Colombia is the geographic and logistical bridge between the hemispheres. Okay?

It guards both oceans. It buffers the Panama Canal. It sits atop minerals every modern economy needs now. Lithium, rare earth. All of this stuff.

You control Colombia and you control the Western hemisphere's arteries. Now, that's not drug interdiction. That's grand strategy.

This is how -- I kind of want to make sense of the world on two things. And it all hinges around a theory that I'm peddling. A theory. And I could be wrong on this.

That when I look at all of the dots. They don't make sense. This is about that submarine, with cocaine in it. Really. Is it?

We're sending our entire military out to get the submarine. I mean, I want drugs to stop. I get it. But really?

It doesn't make sense to me. So the dots don't make sense. And there's too many on the board, that just don't make too much sense.

Unless you start to frame it in another direction, with not only South America and what we're doing with Venezuela and the drug war, but also gold.

So then I want to finish this in a minute, but then I want to move to gold. Because I want to tell you, I think there's a grand strategy here, that everyone is missing. Okay?

So why does all of this matter?

Trump is the first president since Reagan, I think, to understand that America's strength doesn't come from endless foreign wars. It comes from owning the supply lines. From building the sovereign trade. The energy. The technology pipelines. All of the stuff that runs all the way through our hemisphere, not Beijing. So he's not trying to make America the world's policeman anymore. He's not doing that.

He's making us the secure Citadel. He's forcing every region. Europe. Think of what he's done with NATO. What is he doing?

We're not going to be your policeman anymore. You've got to the step up to the plate. You've got to do it. The Middle East. We're not going to be policemen here anymore. All of you, you do it. You get together. You make peace. He's brokering peace. And also, saying to the rest of the world, "You need to step up."

And he's doing it in Latin America, to the police themselves!

Every move you see. Sanctions. Seizures. Aid freezes.

Even visa crackdowns.

This is all, I believe, about locking down critical resources before China does.

This is economic warfare disguised as moral policing. Okay?

And the irony is, it may be one of the smartest uses of the drug war apparatus we've ever seen.

This one might actually work and do something. So let me tell you something that nobody else is telling. Let me give you what everybody is missing. This is not about ideology.

This is not about drugs. This is about global architecture.

Trump is tearing down the old corrupt border, the WEF great reset corrupt global order. And he is building one not on dependency and debt and endless intervention.

He's chopping the trees down. He's paving the road. And he's laying the asphalt for a new one. A hemisphere that produces its own energy, defends its own borders. Works together. And reclaims the American right to chart its own destiny, while encouraging all other countries to do exactly the same.

And he's making as many allies as he can. In any way he can.

That's what's really happening, I think, behind the headlines. While everybody else is like, shouldn't we do this?

Before you talk about a drug war, ask yourself, does that make sense?

Now, to everybody who is like, no kings! Yeah. That might make sense. Because you're not thinking anyway.

I invite to you look at a much bigger picture.

We know the rest of the world was way down this path of a new global world government and a global world order.

We also know, Donald Trump was never for that. We know that Donald Trump doesn't like wars.

So why do we have the military, Venezuela, of all places?

Because this is not about chasing strugglers through jungles. This is about chasing China and Russia out of our own backyard.

It is a quiet, strategic, and I think, if I'm right on this. A brilliant reset.

Because if Trump succeeds, historians are going to look back at this time and call it for what it truly is. The second Monroe Doctrine.

The moment America stopped apologizing for defending its own hemisphere.

And begin re-- and began rebuilding it's own sovereignty.

Trump believes in a strong America. America first. That doesn't mean, we're going to leave every other country alone.

It just means that we have to do the things that we have to do, to make sure we are strong enough and strengthen the countries around us, as well. And the countries that we have been protecting all these years.

Give them the impetus and also the -- and also the act like to come together in their own regions and rebuild and -- and protect their own sovereignty 1 barrel, one chip, one border at a time.

Glenn's Show Prep

The Legacy of Jane Roe and the Landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court Case That Changed America

Advice for Men in Their 20s & 30s to Achieve YOUR Life Goals

Trump told me why he's "DESTROYING" the White House...

Transcript

Is Trump secretly resetting America’s economy with gold?

Transcript

The real war in South America—And why CHINA should be terrified

Transcript