Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

The Strange Alliance Between Steve Bannon and Alex Jones

April 19, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Word on the street is that Steve Bannon is leaking valid scoops to ridiculous media personalities like Alex Jones to give them more credibility.

"Apparently he is feeding Alex Jones --- and a guy who is even crazier than Alex Jones --- legitimate scoops to be able to prop up their conspiracy theories," Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

That slash-and-burn approach confuses the waters.

"If you can't believe anything, then you'll believe everything," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment beginning at mark 29:20 from The Glenn Beck Program:

STU: But this is what people do. I mean, Jeffy is a good example of that. It's how people think. They will take 100 statements in a row they know are false. Look for one that has the slightest bit of truth and investigate it. It's so bizarre.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: Now, that takes us right back to the White House. This is what Bannon is doing. Remember, Bannon is a burn it down. What's he want to burn down? The system. The best way to burn down the system is ruin your trust in everything.

If you can't believe anything, then you'll believe everything. It's just, who is the strongest up at the top of the hill? And he plans on being that guy.

So what is he doing?

STU: He is -- well, again, the reports are that he is leaking and other White House officials are leaking valid scoops to people who are generally would be considered a conspiracy theorist or crazy people. Like Alex Jones.

GLENN: Yeah, we're talking about the Alex Jones and worse.

STU: And worse. And the reason they're doing this is because they want people to believe there are more crazy things. So when -- you leak something to Alex Jones and he comes out with it and he turns out to be right, just like when the president during the campaign used the argument with National Enquirer, well, you know, Ted Cruz -- did his dad kill JFK? Or was he involved in some way? But they had the John Edwards thing right.

PAT: They got that right.

STU: So they used -- they had X, Y, and Z right. So you can give a couple examples, and that one is, I mean, really hard. You're talking about 30 years of the National Enquirer being wrong, and you can pull out three or four stories where they were right. Here, you know, these are people that most people are not at all -- are not at all familiar with.

GLENN: Alex Jones is wrong more times than the National Enquirer in one day.

PAT: Oh, I'll not have you disparage this man.

GLENN: He's wrong more times than the National Enquirer has been in 30 years.

STU: Well, you're valuing frequency over timeline, and I understand that. But either way --

GLENN: Yes.

PAT: Listen to all the things this guy had right. Listen to them.

ALEX: And to feel what the children are feeling.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: He's feeling it.

ALEX: God Almighty.

STU: He's feeling the children.

GLENN: Don't do it, Pat. Here he goes. (crying).

ALEX: Folks -- folks, we got to get good people to stand up against these people. (crying).

(chuckling)

PAT: I probably shouldn't have done the show today.

ALEX: I probably shouldn't even have done this radio show today.

PAT: Or any day.

ALEX: Because I have this disgusted cover.

STU: Globalists.

ALEX: I just hate the globalists, but it's more than that.

STU: I love that.

(laughter)

ALEX: I just get flippant and angry, but it's because deep down, I can see what they're doing. And we have a responsibility.

PAT: Tell us why. Tell us why, Alex.

GLENN: Where are the men?

ALEX: To stop these globalists.

Where are the men in this country? Where are the men in this world? What the hell have we become? We just offer our children up to the system with the fluoride in the water and the GMO hurting them. And we let fat perverts grab them at the airport to train them for the pedophile government.

PAT: Right.

ALEX: And we've just got such a sick society.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: Earlier, I was going to say, no, his lawyer is lying. And he's not a performance artist. But that is such performance. I mean, there's no way that is real.

PAT: No, I think it is.

JEFFY: Oh, I don't know. We've watched enough clips --

PAT: I think it's real. I think it's real.

JEFFY: We've watched enough clips. If you start rolling into more and more Alex Jones clips, you get to the point where it's real.

PAT: Well, it's all like this. It's all some version of this.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: It's not all as hysterical, where he's crying and slobbering. But it's all, you know, screaming. And the intensity is always there.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: He's just -- that's him.

GLENN: What I know is real with him is when he takes his shirt off, he's -- something snaps in him.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Really dark snaps in him. And he takes his shirt off. And it's like a roid rage.

STU: Well, it's just because I've had some jalapeÒos. I've been eating some jalapenos.

PAT: I ate a steak last night. I ate a steak. A T-bone. Got a lot of testosterone. Lot of protein.

GLENN: I eat steak almost every day. You know, I have hamburger. I have meat of some sort from a cow.

PAT: Right. Me too. Me too.

GLENN: Almost every day. Never have that problem.

PAT: I know.

GLENN: My testosterone is very low. Don't have that problem.

(chuckling)

STU: Plenty of other problems. But not that.

GLENN: Not that.

JEFFY: Think of this though. That right there got custody of the kids, right?

PAT: Yeah, that's crazy. I mean, how did that happen?

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: How did that happen?

GLENN: So what does that mean about his wife? Do we know anything about his wife?

JEFFY: I don't know. I know.

GLENN: How does his wife lose custody?

PAT: I don't know.

GLENN: Oh. I would give -- I mean, if I could just take a vacation and just go down -- wouldn't that be the most entertaining vacation.

JEFFY: It would be so much fun.

PAT: Yeah, to be at that trial.

GLENN: Oh, to be at that trial and just sit there and watch that. That is -- I mean, I would bring popcorn. That's a movie.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: If you want to -- if you want to go down and you want to be the, you know, reporter for us and, you know, call in tomorrow, call us right now.

JEFFY: That would be great.

STU: That would be interesting to see.

PAT: That would be fun.

STU: I mean, there's a couple of reporters in there. I guess, day one, there was almost no one in the courtroom. And now --

GLENN: It's starting to get packed.

PAT: It's packed?

STU: They're bringing in a crowd now.

GLENN: No, it's a show. Come on, that's a show. That's a great thing.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.