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 French Vote Only Delayed the Coming Storm

May 08, 2017
Staff

WRITER

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.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.