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 Country Would Be On Fire' If This Michigan Woman Was a Man

August 09, 2017
Staff

WRITER

A 38-year-old mother in Michigan has been sentenced to up to 15 years in prison after having sex with two boys aged 14 and 15, respectively.

Brooke Lajiness, a mother of two from Chelsea, Michigan, was convicted on multiple counts of criminal sexual conduct, Michigan Live reported. Assistant Washtenaw County Prosecutor John Vella made the case that Lajiness was “clearly a predator,” saying that she sent the boys naked pictures of herself on Snapchat to lure them into sexual acts.

Glenn, Pat and Stu discussed the horrifying story on radio Wednesday.

“She said at her sentencing, ‘This has been the biggest regret of my life.’ You think?” Glenn asked rhetorically.

“You made a conscious effort on several occasions to make arrangements to meet my son,” the mother of the then 14-year-old victim wrote in a statement, “sneak out of your house, start your car, leave your husband and children at home and drive to my son’s father’s house, back into the driveway between midnight and 4 a.m., wait for my son to run the driveway, commit a crime and leave.”

Lajiness pleaded guilty in June to several counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct as well as counts of providing obscenity to children and accosting a child for immoral purposes.

"If this was a guy, if this was a guy that was doing this to, you know, 15-year-old women --- the country would be on fire," Glenn said.

GLENN: On Monday, a married mother of two in Michigan, who had sex with two boys, one 14 and one 15, he -- they -- they were lured into sex with her. She sent naked pictures on Snapchat. She's 38 years old. She was sending the boys pictures of herself in a bathtub and performing sex acts. She would go to the boys' house and drive up into their parking lot after 1:00 a.m., between 1:00 and 4:00. And the boys would sneak out, and they would have sex with this 38-year-old woman in the car.

Michigan State Police said they started conversing and exchanging nude photographs while they were still in middle school.

Thirty-eight years old. She said at her sentencing, "This has been the biggest regret of my life." You think?

(chuckling)

"My family means everything to me, and I've caused them a great deal of pain for these regretful choices that I have made."

PAT: Oh, clearly her family means everything to her.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: That went without saying, didn't it?

(laughter)

GLENN: Pat's having a really hard time with this.

(laughter)

PAT: It's pretty clear, man, her husband, and her children were uppermost in her mind.

(chuckling)

STU: Well, I think it's true. She was trying to expand the family.

JEFFY: Right.

STU: She loved the family so much, she was doing the act that expands it.

PAT: Uh-huh.

JEFFY: The biggest mistake of her life was getting caught.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Hey, who doesn't -- who doesn't, as a son, like to have the most popular mom in school? You know, you like hearing that your mom is cool. She's the -- oh, your mom is great. I wish I had a mom like that. You define maybe having a mom like that in a different way than perhaps she is defining that.

PAT: Yeah, I think so. Yeah.

GLENN: So the mother of one of the victims said, "You made a conscious effort on several occasions to make arrangements to meet my son, sneak out of your house, start your car, leave your husband and children at your home, and drive to my son's father's house, back in the driveway between midnight and 4:00 a.m., and wait for my son to run into the driveway, commit a crime and leave. Did you know this was wrong? Did you ever worry that you were doing harm to my son?"

Mom said, "The guys now at school pick at him. They say it's cool that he had sex with a mom. My son shared with me that the guys at school have no idea what he's going through."

STU: They pick on him by saying it was cool?

GLENN: She said the guys at school now pick on him, and others say that it's cool. So he's trapped in this world of a 38 -- if we -- if this was a guy, if this was a guy that was doing this to, you know, 15-year-old women --

PAT: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: -- the country would be on fire.

PAT: Sure. Yeah.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: On fire.

STU: Definitely a double standard on this one.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: There's no doubt.

GLENN: I mean, and I don't know. Is that right? I don't know.

GLENN: Is that right? No.

STU: Yeah, I think maybe -- maybe it is. Maybe it is.

(chuckling)

PAT: Maybe it is.

JEFFY: Stu, I'm with you. You have no idea. You may want to rethink your thinking because I'm with you.

PAT: I think maybe it is.

STU: Oh, wow. I think maybe it is.

PAT: We know you're with him, Jeffy.

GLENN: Yeah, wait a minute.

PAT: That's another thing that goes without saying.

GLENN: You're leaning towards the Jeffy side. You must know that you're wrong here.

STU: Right. This is not a good step in my life. I'm obviously developing the wrong way.

PAT: It's really not. But we do have that bias, don't we? Because what you're thinking that, you know, the kids -- that was the greatest thing that ever happened to them, right? That's your thinking. Now, if those were girls, you would not be thinking that.

STU: Not think that way at all. It is sexism. But it is --

GLENN: Can I tell you something --

PAT: It is. And it's wrong.

GLENN: -- look at how hard we work to keep our children moral, to keep them on the right track, to try our best to help them through -- and then when they turn 18, you know, their life is their life. And they're going to make their mistakes and make their choices. And whatever. But to protect them as long as we possibly can.

You know, you send your kids to school and you know they're going to fall in with the wrong crowd. Or they could fall in with the wrong crowd. They could be doing things that -- your parents never knew what you were doing. Why do you think it was different with you? But you try.

To have a 38-year-old adult come and prey on your children is beyond understanding.

STU: Yeah. And this is an extreme case as to what age this went on. It was very early. Usually these things are typically like high school situations. And they're still wrong, obviously. I think there's an issue where, you know -- for example, saw this stat yesterday. The world record 100-meter from a female is slower than the best time for a high school boy in the last year. So the world -- all-time world record for a female is slower than the best time -- in high school this year for guys.

And so there's a physical level here of -- of victim versus predator, where a male, who is stronger -- and I know these things don't happen. We're not allowed to say these things anymore. But there's differences. Yeah, don't hire me at Google. There are differences between men and women. And I think when you see a man go after a younger woman in high school, you think predator to victim. Where the male in this particular case, likely was much stronger than the woman. It doesn't feel as physically -- it's manipulative mentally, and it's a physical act, but it's not a forceful act, so we categorize it differently. That's obviously not right because both acts are completely --

GLENN: It's not a forceful act. Look at the girls that are with R. Kelly right now.

STU: This is a -- yeah, bizarre story. Did we talk about that at all?

GLENN: Okay?

I don't know if we have. So with R. Kelly. And they're staying -- where is this? Atlanta? And they're -- I mean, have you seen the interviews? They're supposedly totally free to leave.

JEFFY: Getting help with their career.

GLENN: Uh-huh, yeah, right. So R. has all of these women that have really, truly been brainwashed. I mean, if you watch the interviews with these girls, they have absolutely -- I mean, are you free to leave here?

Well, I don't feel comfortable talking about that now.

Okay. Are you free to talk about R. and, you know, maybe the things that you guys are doing?

No, I'm not. You know, I just love him. I just love him.

I mean, it's creepy stuff.

STU: And R. is obviously not his first name.

GLENN: That's what I like to call him. His friends call him R. His friends call him R.

PAT: And you're friends with this dirtbag?

STU: Really? I don't think so.

(chuckling)

PAT: He's been in some really questionable situations for a long time.

(laughter)

STU: This is --

PAT: I mean, at least 20 years, right?

GLENN: This is the most bizarre surreal conversation I have had.

PAT: So weird. Well, he's a dirtbag from way back.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: And continues to get away with it.

GLENN: Hang on. These girls are all of age. They're all of age.

PAT: Yeah.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: So who are you to say, who are you to judge?

PAT: That he started a sex cult? Uh, I'm Pat.

(laughter)

STU: But, I mean, that is a different story. It is interesting in that in 2002, he had the underaged girl sex tape, which is -- that's -- you're in criminal area here. If you have underage girls and you're living with a bunch of them, there's nothing criminal about that, unless you decide to marry them. Because that law -- that sort of love is not allowed. We all know all love is equal and all love is allowed, but not that sort of love.

PAT: Right.

STU: If you have married multiple people, then that is not allowed. However, R. Kelly living with them and having sex with all of them is completely allowed. I want to sure we understand, it's the level of commitment that is illegal. That's the problem here.

PAT: It's a strange, strange line. If you're more committed, you can't. That's not legal. Sorry.

STU: If you're super-duper into it and you actually sign legal documents, wow, that's terrible. But if you're just doing it on the side and you can -- you know, whenever you feel like, jump in and out of every relationship, totally fine. I want to make sure we all understand love is equal, except the loves that aren't equal.

(chuckling)

PAT: Bizarre.

STU: I always find that argument to be fascinating. I'm sorry.

GLENN: No, I remember being told, you know, that that idea of slippery slope would never happen. It's only a matter of time. And the only reason it hasn't happened is because --

PAT: They don't have as good a PR firm.

GLENN: They don't have a PR firm. That's it. If polygamists had a PR firm and they were -- and they were on the left, absolutely they would be arguing for it.

PAT: Yeah. If it wasn't tied to religion, they'd probably already be -- it would be legal now.

GLENN: Yeah. And may I say, crazy religion.

PAT: Yes. You may say that.

GLENN: Okay. Good. I just want to make sure -- I'm not sure what's crazy anymore. I'm not -- I'm not sure where anybody stands anymore.

STU: They don't stand anywhere. That's kind of the problem.

PAT: Yeah.

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.