Deputy PM Explains How Extreme Vetting Has Prevented Terrorist Attacks in Poland

Polish Deputy Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, joined Glenn on radio to discuss why Poland continues to refuse refugees from Islamic countries.

Poland and Hungary refused to cooperate with 2015 deal that proposed the allocation of 160,000 refugees to relieve several EU members including Greece and Italy and received heavy scrutiny for their decision.

“The European borders are not secure,” said Morawiecki. “Millions of refugees come every year to Europe and then you can see all those pictures of terror attacks all over the place, in particular, in France and Germany. Poland is safe. We don’t have it.”

Poland is one of the few European countries that have not experienced a terrorist attack since mass migration from Syria and North Africa began.

“This is because we treat security very seriously. We do not allow for the Islamic migrants and Islamic refugees to come without very thorough scrutiny … And this is the main reason,” said Morawiecki.

“And in many different ways, they are attacking our civilization. They hate Christianity. They hate Europe. So, I think that we have the right … We have the right and obligation to defend it for the next generations.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So the alt-left, Antifa, is growing here in the United States in Philadelphia. They just had a big meeting. They're going to eradicate 21st century slavery. What is that?

Well, they want a revolutionary abolitionist movement. They're raising funds now for an underground railroad to help people escape the state because, quote, the Civil War was never resolved. And the system of slavery just transitioned into the prison industrial complex.

So they're going to help, I guess, prisoners escape in an underground railroad. And they are basing themselves in Philadelphia because of Philadelphia's rich revolutionary tradition. They are -- they're calling now -- they had workshops. They're calling the police our enemies in blue.

They're seeking to abolish all gender. They're calling on members of Antifa to steal tools and lands so they can build their own state independent of the United States. And they plan to build local defense teams and councils.

They also are extolling the revolutionary movement in Syria. They say that they are going to build a worldwide movement towards communism. They are -- they -- they're dressed up in all black. They're carrying machine guns. The video is absolutely astounding. It looks like an ISIS video.

That's what the press says is fine. Antifa. That's going to come back and backfire on them. America is not a place that looks at communists and says, "Well, they're better than the Nazis. Or the Nazis, they're better than the communists." No, we made this decision a long time ago. For 50 years, we fought this war. First against the Nazis, then against the communists. They're both bad. And it seems like you can't get that message anywhere in the United States.

Instead, where is that message coming from? Places like Poland. Poland is more United States than the United States is. You don't believe me? I have the deputy prime minister of Poland on with us. And we begin, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Poland's deputy prime minister, Mateusz Jakub Morawiecki is with us.

Welcome, Prime Minister, how are you, sir? Do I call you Deputy Prime Minister? I'm not sure what the protocol is.

MATEUSZ: Both is okay. Thank you very much. Thanks for having me. I'm very fine.

How are you?

GLENN: Very good. We're glad you're here in the United States. I know you've been talking to key business leaders and political leaders in the United States. And I appreciate you taking some time out and talking to me.

I am impressed with the former Soviet republics. Because they know what's happening in the world.

Can you tell me your view from across the water on the things that you're seeing happening here in America -- and I don't want to make this about politics -- but what do you see that is growing up within our ranks that concerns you?

MATEUSZ: Sure. Even these days, very big military exercise starting done by Mr. Putin, which is indicating how dangerous and how aggressive Russia may be. And we should not forget about this Russian hacks on emails and all what they are doing in the (inaudible) unconventional war. And Ukraine is indicating that they -- they -- this is still their main way, how they do politics.

Like today, Poland is a safe country. We are a strong country. But we -- we need very close cooperation, like we have -- we have historically all the way from (inaudible), we have fought during the War of Independence. And then in -- our soldiers are in Iraq and in Afghanistan, together hand in hand with American soldiers.

And there are all the idealists who think maybe we should not think about the defense policy too much because everybody wants to live in a peaceful world. It's great. But this is not true.

And this is -- this is one aspect, how I think that proximity to Russia, we can explain how -- how difficult it is. And, you know, the proximity is really like, if there was between New Jersey and New York, we can feel the hot breath of Russia there on our neck.

GLENN: So tell me what that means. Talking to the deputy prime minister of Poland. Tell me what that means to you. Because here in America, we've been so isolated. And our universities have stopped teaching that -- well, I don't know if they ever did. But teaching that communism is bad and a -- a killer that is only surpassed by disease.

You lived through it. The people of Poland lived through it. Tell me what America should know about communists.

MATEUSZ: Of course, we lived through this. And, well, like I myself was imprisoned. And my father who was fighting in the solidarity times during the '80s, he was in prison for a long time.

And the transformation, which started in 1989, was by far not complete because the same -- I just give you an example. The same judges who have maybe passing sentences on the -- the fighters for freedom in the '80s, like my father or myself or many of my friends, the same judges are today judges in the Supreme Court.

This is what happens in -- if the -- if there is not real deep transformation in a system.

Which is -- which is -- which was okay because there was not any bloody revolution in 1989, 1990. But then I asked everybody to understand why we would like to have this second transformation today. And why we have the worst -- the worst judiciary system amongst all the 28 countries of the European Union, and we want to deeply reform this. And then the counterattack of all our enemies is -- is so visible. And who is among -- amongst those -- those attacking us? Of course, companies. And top companies are there because they feel very well in a system which is vague, which is not based on meritocracy, which is based on corporationism, as we call it in Poland. Lots of dependencies on different corporations, lawyers, judges, and so on.

And we don't like -- we want the system to be more republican, more democratic. And this is why we have so many incomprehensions around us and misunderstandings.

GLENN: Are you concerned at all, deputy prime minister of Poland, are you concerned at all about the rise of heritage groups, as they're calling themselves? You know, the Javax (phonetic) Party or Golden Dawn here in the United States, the Nazi Party? We've got extremists on both sides. And it's in some ways starting to look like the 1930s or 1920s in Europe all around the world. Are you concerned about the rise on both sides?

MATEUSZ: I am concerned about the rise on both sides. And in Europe, it's -- it's particularly visible on the left side. But there is also some examples on the right, like Marine Le Pen in France.

Therefore, first prerequisite for safe Poland, safe Europe, safe world is to prevent terrorist attacks and to really deal with the mass migration and policy like Australia did or like America did. Australia has managed to stop the flow by securing its own borders. And the European borders resident secure. Millions of refugees come every -- every year to -- to Europe. And then you can see all those pictures of terror attacks all over the place, particularly in France or Germany. Poland is safe. We don't have it.

GLENN: Right. Why is Poland -- if I'm not mistaken, you're the only main country in Europe that has not been hit by a terrorist attack. Why?

MATEUSZ: Yeah, yeah, that's correct. Absolutely. Recently in Spain, in Barcelona. Before that, in the UK in many places, in France, and in Italy, and Germany. So we are the only of the six countries, which did not experience terror.

GLENN: Why?

MATEUSZ: This is because we -- we treat security with -- very seriously. We do not allow for the Islamic migrants and Islamic refugees to come without very thorough scrutiny by our -- by our social security and so on. Sorry about -- secret service and our special services for those activities. And this is -- and this is the main reason: Germans and French, our friends and partners, they have allowed virtually millions of those refugees. And most of them, there are many decent people, good people. But unfortunately, there are many not-so-decent people, very bad people.

And they are -- they are attacking in all sorts -- in many different ways. They're attacking our civilization. They hate Christianity. They hate Europe.

So I think that we have the right -- we are the -- the heart of the Christian civilization. And we have the right and obligation to defend it for the next generation. So we can allow for -- for -- of course, for migrants. And, for instance, in Europe -- sorry, in Poland, we do our job too. Because we -- we have accommodated one and a half million Ukrainian population. Many of them are refugees from eastern part of Ukraine, where there is war. Because Ukraine was attacked by Russia. So we are doing our part. We contribute to calming down the situation. And we go the middle road. We try to persuade our partners in Brussels, that this -- the refugee policy is very dangerous for -- for the whole of Europe. And we have to preserve our borders. We have to have safe countries.

GLENN: I'm talking to the deputy prime minister of Poland. How concerned are you that if the world doesn't wake up, we are going to be reaping the seeds that are being sown right now. And perhaps that ends in yet another global conflict.

MATEUSZ: Well, this is -- probably to your opening remarks, the situation is probably not that bad as it was in the '30s with Hitler and Stalin and the weak democracies and so on. But I am concerned that the situation might go in the wrong direction.

GLENN: Yeah.

MATEUSZ: Therefore, there is this old Latin saying (foreign language), which is, you know, we have to be well-armed and well-equipped. And we have to contribute to military spending. And, by the way, Poland is not amongst the five richest countries in NATO. But we make sure to be one of the five who comply with the two percentage points of GDP military spending rule, which was -- which was actually realized by President Trump when he was in Warsaw just two months ago. And we are a very, very reliable ally. And I think Article V of the Washington treaty is a very important element of the whole architecture of peace going forward.

Another one is also dealing with the security of our own borders, like America does, like Australia does.

But in Europe, many countries are not doing their part. So our advice to our European friends is to really concentrate on our own security and to eliminate all those extremes from the left and from the right.

Some of them, they have to be brought to the table. And persuaded in a civilized way. But some of them who are really extremists in France and in German, some Islamic parties and so on, they should be taken under a microscope and should be so -- we should be so vigilant about them as never before.

GLENN: Poland's Deputy Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki. Thank you so much, sir. I appreciate it.

MATEUSZ: If I could just add one sentence, on behalf of the government of the Republic of Poland, I would like to express my sincere condolences on the terrible tragedy caused by the Hurricane Harvey. So we are very sad about this. And if the government of Poland could do anything to help our American friends, our -- the people from America, we could -- we could do everything possible at our -- at our end.

GLENN: Gosh, that's nice to hear. Thank you so much. We appreciate that.

MATEUSZ: Thank you.

GLENN: We can tell that was heartfelt.

MATEUSZ: Thanks for having me.

PAT: He's a class act.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think you can hear, you know, why is he over here in America? What are they doing? Obviously, they are worried about the bear. Obviously, they are worried about what is coming on their own border. And they are looking to find some allies in America. They are more America today than we are. And they're looking for some allies in America who is going to say, "Hey, is anybody going to help us stand?" Because the big, bad wolf -- or in this case, the big, bad bear is coming back.

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.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.