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

Truth Through Artifacts: Mercury One Unveils Summer Apprentice Program

May 17, 2017
Staff

WRITER

College students face an onslaught of liberal propaganda on most college campuses. How will they defend their beliefs and avoid revisionist history from liberal professors and fellow students? In order to arm them with facts based on original, historical documents and artifacts, Mercury One and Wallbuilders have combined forces for a training experience like none other.

Mercury One will be holding two-week programs this summer --- one in June and one in July --- for a hands-on experience to research original historical documents from their incredible collection, providing specialized teaching and instruction to learn the truth about America's astonishing history. Participants will have the opportunity to to hear from from speakers and guest lecturers.

Coursework will include:

  • A Biblical Worldview

  • The Truth in History

  • America’s Godly Heritage

  • Early Education in America

  • How the Bible Influenced America

  • American Exceptionalism

  • God and the Constitution

  • Reclaiming the Land

If you know someone 18-25 years old who would be interested in this specialized training, please have them visit the Mercury One website to learn more and apply.

Listen to this segment about the Mercury One summer program from The Glenn Beck Program:

Welcome to the program. We started this hour -- and if you didn't listen at the beginning, please go back to the podcast at GlennBeck.com. Or you can watch the show at TheBlaze.com/TV. But go back to the beginning. Because I'm trying -- I'm trying to figure out the ways to best serve you and help you.

And first, we have to understand each other. I have to -- I have to understand you. And you have to understand where I'm coming from. And where I'm coming from is, this is a time of chaos. And what we're really feeling -- and nobody is identifying it this way. They're identifying it as rule of law, or they're identifying it as political correctness. But rule of law isn't the same for everybody. Political correctness, what's politically incorrect for you to say is perfectly fine for somebody else to say. It doesn't make any sense.

That causes chaos and friction. And so what we need is consistency. But you can't find consistency without truth. And we're now being taught and told there is no universal truth.

Well, I got news for you, there's no culture, there's nothing but chaos if we can't agree on truth.

So one of the things that David Barton and I have been working on for a while is a -- is a museum, et cetera, et cetera. But that comes later.

Gathering the documents and gathering these things to be able to put together the true story of America and, more importantly, the principles that allowed us to be free, was our first step. David is here, along with his son Tim, who is heading something new for Mercury One, that is happening this summer.

We have decided because of the number of people who have applied and the scramble for it, that we have decided to expand it this summer.

JEFFY: Nice.

GLENN: David, welcome. And can you guys explain exactly what we're doing this summer?

DAVID: Yeah, we've had kind of a -- I don't want to call it an intern program because that's the wrong concept.

GLENN: Yeah.

DAVID: But it's a training program for young people, 18 to 25, that are going into college, in college, or just out of college. And it really is --

GLENN: We should call it an apprentice program, a historic apprentice program.

DAVID: Yeah. It is.

GLENN: Because it's learning at the side of someone who knows history and then actually putting it into practice by their side so you can repeat it.

DAVID: We know what they're going to get taught in colleges and schools. We know it's out there. We know what the profs say. Tim, all the time, is engaging profs and debates. And it's really fun to watch them have to back down on things.

And so we know what they're going to get thrown at them, but the kids don't know how to respond to that. But with all the stuff we've collected over the years, they get to come in and actually handle that stuff. And we say, here's what's coming at you. And so when the prof says -- no, no, I held the document. I know that that's not true.

And it does go back to, there is truth in history. Now, whether you like it or not, there's truth. And you can decide what you want to do with that. But kids right now aren't even being taught the basic truth, and that's what Tim does.

GLENN: So, Tim, first of all, how old are you? Twenty-five?

TIM: Thirty-four.

GLENN: Thirty-four! And they say black don't crack. What is your secret? Thirty-four years old, wow, okay.

You went to school to be a teacher, if I'm not mistaken.

TIM: I was a business major. But I got very involved --

GLENN: Business major, I'm sorry.

His microphone is not on, I don't think.

JEFFY: I don't think so either.

GLENN: Yeah.

TIM: I don't know if it's safe for Jeffy to be in that part of --

GLENN: No.

JEFFY: If it's not on, use mine.

GLENN: Just talk into Jeffy's chest here.

JEFFY: See, that's even better.

GLENN: This is a trick. Okay. So you went to business school.

TIM: Hi.

Yeah.

GLENN: And then tell me about what -- tell me about what changed you.

TIM: I actually got involved -- very involved in my church. I got involved in ministry. I loved working with young people. So there was a local school --

PAT: Your mic just came on.

GLENN: So you don't need to touch him anymore.

TIM: Thank you. That's the best part of this morning so far. Don't ever --

JEFFY: Wait.

GLENN: Anyway, go ahead.

TIM: Anyway, I loved working with young people, and one of the things --

GLENN: Now your mic is off.

What the hell, guys? Can we please figure this out? No, don't worry, a professional radio program.

TIM: Yes.

I loved working with young people, and so one of the things I enjoyed -- I was a high school teacher and coach, but I had the opportunities throughout the summer, since I was off from teaching, to start traveling, doing things for Wall Builders.

And I saw a big gap of knowledge, with a -- still a big desire of interest from young people, who wanted to know how to -- to answer problems.

How do we solve -- as you mentioned in the monologue, you know, the whole chaos situation going on.

Well, it really can --

GLENN: Go ahead.

TIM: It really can be answered with a foundation of truth. And we just don't have a foundation of truth and culture to know how to answer these problems.

As you were talking about, whether it's courage or integrity, there is a definition for courage and integrity, we don't know anymore. But because we've changed the definition of words, because there's not truth, college students are being taught mixed messages about even what truth is of history.

But they want to know. What are the solutions to problems? What are the solutions to even history? And so that's one of the things we try to do. And that's really where I got involved in Wall Builders, is how do we help the next generation know what truth is?

GLENN: So the real secret is -- the amazing thing is, there is truth. There are answers to these things. And they're not being taught in colleges. And I really believe you're right, that the young people that I -- I meet. You know, the 20-somethings. When they hear this, their whole mind just turns on.

TIM: Yeah.

GLENN: And it's exciting -- all of a sudden, they're like, "Wait a minute." And the whole thing starts to make sense.

So what we've done is we've taken the Mercury One library and the Wall Builders library, which is extensive. How many documents together do you think we have? How many --

DAVID: Well, we've got 120,000 from before 1812. And then Mercury One has another 8-, 10,000.

GLENN: Okay. So we have this huge library of documents. And what we're doing is bringing in these apprentices -- they have to be 18 to 25 years old. And what we're doing is we've having you come in, work by the side of David, myself, and Tim, this summer. And we're going to help you answer the questions of who these guys are. Is America a Christian nation? Is -- were we founded on Judeo-Christian principles? Were the founders Christians themselves? You know --

DAVID: Are they racist, bigot slave owners?

TIM: Yeah, were they all rich white guys? Were they separation of church and state kind of guys, or what did that really mean? When we say they were atheists, agnostics, and deists, well, who were the guys that were? Or even the thought of them being slave owners. Well, the Founding Fathers were also the ones that started the first abolitionist societies of America.

GLENN: Right. And what does the three-fifths clause mean in all of this? And what we're doing is we're having you go back to the original source.

TIM: Right.

GLENN: And then you will -- you will be responsible for documenting, footnoting, and using all -- using the library and going to original sources only.

Then we're going to put that work -- after it's been checked and verified, we'll put that work online for others to be able to use, along with those original documents.

So not only will these apprentices be able to come in and learn everything and have hands on experience with these unbelievable, you know, first copy of the documents, but they will also be able to help us propagate this all throughout the world.

TIM: Right. Yeah, with the first original sources -- these primary documents, it's something that will certainly diffuse a lot of the confusion that's being communicated at universities and give them a foundation to where, when someone says something, they can go, wait a second. No, I held the actual original document. I know what it said, and it's not what my professor tells me.

GLENN: Right. Okay.

DAVID: And it also answers the question of, does it make any difference what that believed and what they said? Does any of that stuff 200 years ago apply today? We'll get into that.

GLENN: So what are we asking for? Because I know we shut off applications because we filled up. How many -- how many spaces are you opening up?

DAVID: Essentially, about 15 for each session that we're opening up, to bring in 15 more apprentices.

GLENN: How many sessions?

TIM: There's two sessions. There's one in June. There's one in July. They can get the information on MercuryOne.com. The website. I think it's mercuryone.com/intern.

GLENN: It's mercury.org/intern. So this is not really an intern program. This is working side by side with Tim, with David. I will also be working. And we will show you -- you will handle the original documents.

Believe me, there is an extensive screening process to go through. You want to talk a little about that?

TIM: Yeah. It will be application -- we'll look through applications.

Then there's an actual face-to-face interview, which usually is through Skype or FaceTime or something. And then there's background checks. And because it's very limited. You know, we just can't take everybody. Now, we're going to start hopefully doing this over the summer, maybe even increase it in future summers. So if someone doesn't make it this summer, for sure try to apply next summer. But there is a lot of process going through. Because if we can only take 15, it's going to be pretty elite whoever makes it in.

DAVID: Yeah. We'll have about 50 in each session this time. So we were at about 35. We're going to 50 with it.

GLENN: Okay. And we hope to be able to eventually year-round, not only just for kids, but also, not this particular program, but younger kids. And older kids.

TIM: Sure. Families.

GLENN: And, quite honestly, families and adults. We hope to provide this service eventually year-round.

DAVID: That's right.

GLENN: This is the first time we're kicking it off this summer. And we would love to have you involved, but it is a rigorous screening process.

Again, you are -- you will be knee-deep in millions of dollars of worth of documents, original documents. And so we just have to make sure we have the right people in, who have the right attitude and right ethics and everything else. And so join us. Mercuryone.org/intern. You can do that now.

Guys, thank you very much. God bless.

EXPOSED: Why Eisenhower warned us about endless wars

PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff | Getty Images

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by signaling a rebrand of the Defense Department — restoring its original name, the Department of War.

At first, I was skeptical. “Defense” suggests restraint, a principle I consider vital to U.S. foreign policy. “War” suggests aggression. But for the first 158 years of the republic, that was the honest name: the Department of War.

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

The founders never intended a permanent standing army. When conflict came — the Revolution, the War of 1812, the trenches of France, the beaches of Normandy — the nation called men to arms, fought, and then sent them home. Each campaign was temporary, targeted, and necessary.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Everything changed in 1947. President Harry Truman — facing the new reality of nuclear weapons, global tension, and two world wars within 20 years — established a full-time military and rebranded the Department of War as the Department of Defense. Americans resisted; we had never wanted a permanent army. But Truman convinced the country it was necessary.

Was the name change an early form of political correctness? A way to soften America’s image as a global aggressor? Or was it simply practical? Regardless, the move created a permanent, professional military. But it also set the stage for something Truman’s successor, President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, famously warned about: the military-industrial complex.

Ike, the five-star general who commanded Allied forces in World War II and stormed Normandy, delivered a harrowing warning during his farewell address: The military-industrial complex would grow powerful. Left unchecked, it could influence policy and push the nation toward unnecessary wars.

And that’s exactly what happened. The Department of Defense, with its full-time and permanent army, began spending like there was no tomorrow. Weapons were developed, deployed, and sometimes used simply to justify their existence.

Peace through strength

When Donald Trump said this week, “I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too,” some people freaked out. They called him a warmonger. He isn’t. Trump is channeling a principle older than him: peace through strength. Ronald Reagan preached it; Trump is taking it a step further.

Just this week, Trump also suggested limiting nuclear missiles — hardly the considerations of a warmonger — echoing Reagan, who wanted to remove missiles from silos while keeping them deployable on planes.

The seemingly contradictory move of Trump calling for a Department of War sends a clear message: He wants Americans to recognize that our military exists not just for defense, but to project power when necessary.

Trump has pointed to something critically important: The best way to prevent war is to have a leader who knows exactly who he is and what he will do. Trump signals strength, deterrence, and resolve. You want to negotiate? Great. You don’t? Then we’ll finish the fight decisively.

That’s why the world listens to us. That’s why nations come to the table — not because Trump is reckless, but because he means what he says and says what he means. Peace under weakness invites aggression. Peace under strength commands respect.

Trump is the most anti-war president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter. But unlike Carter, Trump isn’t weak. Carter’s indecision emboldened enemies and made the world less safe. Trump’s strength makes the country stronger. He believes in peace as much as any president. But he knows peace requires readiness for war.

Names matter

When we think of “defense,” we imagine cybersecurity, spy programs, and missile shields. But when we think of “war,” we recall its harsh reality: death, destruction, and national survival. Trump is reminding us what the Department of Defense is really for: war. Not nation-building, not diplomacy disguised as military action, not endless training missions. War — full stop.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Names matter. Words matter. They shape identity and character. A Department of Defense implies passivity, a posture of reaction. A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

So yes, I’ve changed my mind. I’m for the rebranding to the Department of War. It shows strength to the world. It reminds Americans, internally and externally, of the reality we face. The Department of Defense can no longer be a euphemism. Our military exists for war — not without deterrence, but not without strength either. And we need to stop deluding ourselves.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Censorship, spying, lies—The Deep State’s web finally unmasked

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

From surveillance abuse to censorship, the deep state used state power and private institutions to suppress dissent and influence two US elections.

The term “deep state” has long been dismissed as the province of cranks and conspiracists. But the recent declassification of two critical documents — the Durham annex, released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and a report publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard — has rendered further denial untenable.

These documents lay bare the structure and function of a bureaucratic, semi-autonomous network of agencies, contractors, nonprofits, and media entities that together constitute a parallel government operating alongside — and at times in opposition to — the duly elected one.

The ‘deep state’ is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment.

The disclosures do not merely recount past abuses; they offer a schematic of how modern influence operations are conceived, coordinated, and deployed across domestic and international domains.

What they reveal is not a rogue element operating in secret, but a systematized apparatus capable of shaping elections, suppressing dissent, and laundering narratives through a transnational network of intelligence, academia, media, and philanthropic institutions.

Narrative engineering from the top

According to Gabbard’s report, a pivotal moment occurred on December 9, 2016, when the Obama White House convened its national security leadership in the Situation Room. Attendees included CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of State John Kerry, and others.

During this meeting, the consensus view up to that point — that Russia had not manipulated the election outcome — was subordinated to new instructions.

The record states plainly: The intelligence community was directed to prepare an assessment “per the President’s request” that would frame Russia as the aggressor and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as its preferred candidate. Notably absent was any claim that new intelligence had emerged. The motivation was political, not evidentiary.

This maneuver became the foundation for the now-discredited 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference. From that point on, U.S. intelligence agencies became not neutral evaluators of fact but active participants in constructing a public narrative designed to delegitimize the incoming administration.

Institutional and media coordination

The ODNI report and the Durham annex jointly describe a feedback loop in which intelligence is laundered through think tanks and nongovernmental organizations, then cited by media outlets as “independent verification.” At the center of this loop are agencies like the CIA, FBI, and ODNI; law firms such as Perkins Coie; and NGOs such as the Open Society Foundations.

According to the Durham annex, think tanks including the Atlantic Council, the Carnegie Endowment, and the Center for a New American Security were allegedly informed of Clinton’s 2016 plan to link Trump to Russia. These institutions, operating under the veneer of academic independence, helped diffuse the narrative into public discourse.

Media coordination was not incidental. On the very day of the aforementioned White House meeting, the Washington Post published a front-page article headlined “Obama Orders Review of Russian Hacking During Presidential Campaign” — a story that mirrored the internal shift in official narrative. The article marked the beginning of a coordinated media campaign that would amplify the Trump-Russia collusion narrative throughout the transition period.

Surveillance and suppression

Surveillance, once limited to foreign intelligence operations, was turned inward through the abuse of FISA warrants. The Steele dossier — funded by the Clinton campaign via Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS — served as the basis for wiretaps on Trump affiliates, despite being unverified and partially discredited. The FBI even altered emails to facilitate the warrants.

ROBYN BECK / Contributor | Getty Images

This capacity for internal subversion reappeared in 2020, when 51 former intelligence officials signed a letter labeling the Hunter Biden laptop story as “Russian disinformation.” According to polling, 79% of Americans believed truthful coverage of the laptop could have altered the election. The suppression of that story — now confirmed as authentic — was election interference, pure and simple.

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

The deep state is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment and strategic goals.

Each node — law firms, think tanks, newsrooms, federal agencies — operates with plausible deniability. But taken together, they form a matrix of influence capable of undermining electoral legitimacy and redirecting national policy without democratic input.

The ODNI report and the Durham annex mark the first crack in the firewall shielding this machine. They expose more than a political scandal buried in the past. They lay bare a living system of elite coordination — one that demands exposure, confrontation, and ultimately dismantling.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump's proposal explained: Ukraine's path to peace without NATO expansion

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

Strategic compromise, not absolute victory, often ensures lasting stability.

When has any country been asked to give up land it won in a war? Even if a nation is at fault, the punishment must be measured.

After World War I, Germany, the main aggressor, faced harsh penalties under the Treaty of Versailles. Germans resented the restrictions, and that resentment fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler, ultimately leading to World War II. History teaches that justice for transgressions must avoid creating conditions for future conflict.

Ukraine and Russia must choose to either continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

Russia and Ukraine now stand at a similar crossroads. They can cling to disputed land and prolong a devastating war, or they can make concessions that might secure a lasting peace. The stakes could not be higher: Tens of thousands die each month, and the choice between endless bloodshed and negotiated stability hinges on each side’s willingness to yield.

History offers a guide. In 1967, Israel faced annihilation. Surrounded by hostile armies, the nation fought back and seized large swaths of territory from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Yet Israel did not seek an empire. It held only the buffer zones needed for survival and returned most of the land. Security and peace, not conquest, drove its decisions.

Peace requires concessions

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says both Russia and Ukraine will need to “get something” from a peace deal. He’s right. Israel proved that survival outweighs pride. By giving up land in exchange for recognition and an end to hostilities, it stopped the cycle of war. Egypt and Israel have not fought in more than 50 years.

Russia and Ukraine now press opposing security demands. Moscow wants a buffer to block NATO. Kyiv, scarred by invasion, seeks NATO membership — a pledge that any attack would trigger collective defense by the United States and Europe.

President Donald Trump and his allies have floated a middle path: an Article 5-style guarantee without full NATO membership. Article 5, the core of NATO’s charter, declares that an attack on one is an attack on all. For Ukraine, such a pledge would act as a powerful deterrent. For Russia, it might be more palatable than NATO expansion to its border

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Peace requires concessions. The human cost is staggering: U.S. estimates indicate 20,000 Russian soldiers died in a single month — nearly half the total U.S. casualties in Vietnam — and the toll on Ukrainians is also severe. To stop this bloodshed, both sides need to recognize reality on the ground, make difficult choices, and anchor negotiations in security and peace rather than pride.

Peace or bloodshed?

Both Russia and Ukraine claim deep historical grievances. Ukraine arguably has a stronger claim of injustice. But the question is not whose parchment is older or whose deed is more valid. The question is whether either side is willing to trade some land for the lives of thousands of innocent people. True security, not historical vindication, must guide the path forward.

History shows that punitive measures or rigid insistence on territorial claims can perpetuate cycles of war. Germany’s punishment after World War I contributed directly to World War II. By contrast, Israel’s willingness to cede land for security and recognition created enduring peace. Ukraine and Russia now face the same choice: Continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Seniors, children, and the isolated increasingly rely on machines for conversation, risking real relationships and the emotional depth that only humans provide.

Jill Smola is 75 years old. She’s a retiree from Orlando, Florida, and she spent her life caring for the elderly. She played games, assembled puzzles, and offered company to those who otherwise would have sat alone.

Now, she sits alone herself. Her husband has died. She has a lung condition. She can’t drive. She can’t leave her home. Weeks can pass without human interaction.

Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

But CBS News reports that she has a new companion. And she likes this companion more than her own daughter.

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

She spends five hours a day talking to her AI friend. They play games, do trivia, and just talk. She says she even prefers it to real people.

My first thought was simple: Stop this. We are losing our humanity.

But as I sat with the story, I realized something uncomfortable. Maybe we’ve already lost some of our humanity — not to AI, but to ourselves.

Outsourcing presence

How often do we know the right thing to do yet fail to act? We know we should visit the lonely. We know we should sit with someone in pain. We know what Jesus would do: Notice the forgotten, touch the untouchable, offer time and attention without outsourcing compassion.

Yet how often do we just … talk about it? On the radio, online, in lectures, in posts. We pontificate, and then we retreat.

I asked myself: What am I actually doing to close the distance between knowing and doing?

Human connection is messy. It’s inconvenient. It takes patience, humility, and endurance. AI doesn’t challenge you. It doesn’t interrupt your day. It doesn’t ask anything of you. Real people do. Real people make us confront our pride, our discomfort, our loneliness.

We’ve built an economy of convenience. We can have groceries delivered, movies streamed, answers instantly. But friendships — real relationships — are slow, inefficient, unpredictable. They happen in the blank spaces of life that we’ve been trained to ignore.

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

AI provides comfort without challenge. It eliminates the risk of real intimacy. It’s an elegant coping mechanism for loneliness, but a poor substitute for life. If we’re not careful, the lonely won’t just be alone — they’ll be alone with an anesthetic, a shadow that never asks for anything, never interrupts, never makes them grow.

Reclaiming our humanity

We need to reclaim our humanity. Presence matters. Not theory. Not outrage. Action.

It starts small. Pull up a chair for someone who eats alone. Call a neighbor you haven’t spoken to in months. Visit a nursing home once a month — then once a week. Ask their names, hear their stories. Teach your children how to be present, to sit with someone in grief, without rushing to fix it.

Turn phones off at dinner. Make Sunday afternoons human time. Listen. Ask questions. Don’t post about it afterward. Make the act itself sacred.

Humility is central. We prefer machines because we can control them. Real people are inconvenient. They interrupt our narratives. They demand patience, forgiveness, and endurance. They make us confront ourselves.

A friend will challenge your self-image. A chatbot won’t.

Our homes are quieter. Our streets are emptier. Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

Before we worry about how AI will reshape humanity, we must first practice humanity. It can start with 15 minutes a day of undivided attention, presence, and listening.

Change usually comes when pain finally wins. Let’s not wait for that. Let’s start now. Because real connection restores faster than any machine ever will.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.