The French Vote Only Delayed the Coming Storm

The citizens of France elected centrist Emmanuel Macron in a landslide victory. In doing so, they voted to maintain the status quo and delayed the coming storm.

"A poll a couple of years ago found that 94 percent of the Czech Republic favor closing the borders completely --- but they're not. They're standing by the EU. What are the people doing? They're starting to become anti-immigrant," Glenn said Monday on radio.

RELATED: French Candidate Macron Claims Massive Hack as Emails Leaked

That's exactly what's happening around the world as elected officials pander to the politically correct and refuse to deliver what people want.

"I'm not a xenophobe. I'm not a racist. I'm not any of these things. But, guys, we have got to protect and know who is coming in," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: The French people had two choices: Delay the coming storm and maintain the status quo, which is probably what -- well, definitely what I would have voted for. Or I probably would have sat it out because I wouldn't have liked either candidate. Or given into the old world, you know, European nationalism.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: That was their choice. They didn't have a good option. And what they did was delay the inevitable. The status quo is what got them to this place in the first -- in the first place. And so they've just sealed their fate for another five years.

Now, here is what is really fascinating.

The Russians know this, I think, better than anybody else. A couple of hours before France entered their 48-hour media blackout, before the election, a massive leak of Macron's campaign and financial dirty laundry hit the internet. Now, why would you do it just before the media blackout? Because you would know that no media is going to be able to pick this up. So you'll only have the internet. And that could work to your advantage or disadvantage. But you'd only have the internet. The way to really affect it would be to release it a little bit earlier, perhaps. Perhaps.

STU: Well, they thought that the media would fight back against it.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: So they had no opposition against it because of the ban.

GLENN: Right. Perhaps. Perhaps.

STU: At least I think that was their theory.

GLENN: Perhaps it was their theory.

So 48 hours before France has a media blackout and nobody can say anything about the election or anything, and they release this. Now, it was a -- it was almost a carbon copy of the DNC Podesta hack. Investigators over in France have traced it back. Exactly the same group, Fancy Bear, who is a surrogate for the Russian military intelligence. Why wouldn't you hide that? Why would you use the same people, the same DNS -- why? Why would you do it so late in the game? Perhaps as Stu said, it is because they wouldn't have any opposition.

But I believe it's because they knew just like the rest of the pollsters, that there was a massive trouncing coming to Le Pen no matter what. And 11.4 million people are probably going to sit out. Can we lead to more people sitting out and being disenfranchised and just saying, "I don't care who wins anymore." Not to help Le Pen win, but to add to the discontent. Releasing the information pours gasoline on a bonfire. The French already feel like I've got to settle for the status quo. But now this guy's coming in -- he's facing a lame duck five-year presidency. The French and the global media going to have a field day now, exposing Macron and his party's dirty secrets.

You'll notice -- did you hear much fanfare that the Clinton Global Initiative closed on April 15th. Yeah, right? Right? Look that up.

STU: This would be the time that you would want to turn it on.

GLENN: Look that up. They had problems with donations, apparently. Apparently, all of the big countries --

JEFFY: I bet.

GLENN: -- like Saudi Arabia and Qatar and everybody else, they decided that they didn't want to do anymore goodwill. Or, they decided that there was no access to be purchased.

STU: It's not shutting down.

GLENN: No.

STU: They've -- I think what you're referring to is a report that they were downsizing.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: Uh-huh. Which you think would be the opposite.

GLENN: Would be the opposite. You're now out of the --

STU: Worry about the elections.

GLENN: Right. How can the Clinton Foundation make this move and nobody notice? Nobody in the press is even noticing about their donations from -- from these countries. That they're starting to dry up. Kind of interesting.

If she were president, I can guarantee you, WikiLeaks would be exposing all kinds of things. And I believe the Russians will eventually expose Trump for all kinds of things as well. Why? What do they want? They want public distrust and angst. That's what they want.

If Hillary Clinton would have won, I think they would have done the same thing here. The hacks would have kept coming because they're playing the long game. The leftists, the Islamists, the alt-right are playing that game as well. What do they want? An insurrection. They want to burn the whole thing down.

France just took a massive step toward burning the whole thing down. And one more thought on this. Next, the Czech Republic -- the Czech Republic is taking in refugees, and they oppose it. A poll a couple of years ago found that 94 percent of the Czech Republic favor closing the borders completely. They're not. They're standing by the EU. What are the people doing? They're starting to become anti-immigrant. Germany is also becoming hostile to the EU.

What is happening around the world? Is that people feel -- and see if you feel this way -- nobody is listening to me. Nobody is -- I'm not a xenophobe. I'm not a racist. I'm not any of these things. But, guys, we have got to protect and know who is coming in. I want the best and the brightest to come in. And I also will take those from war-torn countries, but I want to make sure, just like we would have done in Germany, I want to make sure they're not Nazis. I want to make sure they're not actual enemies of the United States. Nobody is listening to me about my job and my pay. And they're playing games with health care. And they've promised us one thing. And our health care costs as a family went through the roof. And I couldn't keep my doctor. I don't even know what's happening. I don't know if I'm going to be able to get insurance anymore.

And then the right does it. And the right was lying to us. The G.O.P. -- is somebody listening to me?

The answer is no, far too often -- far too oftentimes. Nobody is listening to me. I have no levers to pull. There's nothing I can do to get somebody to turn around and listen to me. I can't effect change. I can't even control my own life.

And I don't recognize this anymore. I don't feel like I belong even to polite society. It was one thing when I said, you know, I don't really recognize my country. And the left laughed. And now the left is saying, "I don't recognize my country." And the right is laughing. I'm not laughing. I didn't laugh then. I'm not laughing now. I don't recognize my country. But more importantly, I don't recognize the truth in anything.

I mean, they're now expecting me to believe that a man can say he's a woman. Just say it. I'm identifying as a woman. And I have to accept that? That a woman can identify as a black person. And blacks have to accept that?

I don't even recognize the truth anymore. And I know the rich are getting richer. And I've never been a guy who has had a problem with rich getting rich. The reason why I have a problem with rich getting rich now is because far too many times, it's because they have access to banks and loans and interest rates that I could never get my hands on. Or they have enough lobbyists to rig the game their way. That's not fair.

And they're telling me that I can't hold sacred the things I have always held sacred, things about God, things about my country. I'm told that that has no meaning. Or if it does have meaning, it's all bad meaning. That's how people are feeling.

And when you increase the stress of money, when you increase the stress of losing a job, not being able to make ends meet, people will listen to anybody who says, "I got a plan. It's those people over there. We just get rid of those people." Whoever they are -- left, right, in the middle -- it doesn't matter. Atheist, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, it doesn't matter. People will round people up when they're afraid.

Thank God the French rejected that kind of thinking this weekend. But unfortunately, as the press celebrates -- because the press doesn't get it -- it's not that they're intentionally -- they just don't get it. They don't hear you. They don't hear Europe. And because they don't hear, they celebrate. Ooh. Dodged a bullet there. Victory for us. France isn't as racist as America. No. No. You really don't get it.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

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.