Trump Aide Calls for a ‘Conversation’ About ‘the Definition of a Wall’ – What?

September 18, 2017

WRITER

President Donald Trump famously vowed to build “a great wall” on the southern borderduring his presidential campaign.

What’s going on?

Trump and Republicans have made some attempts to get funding for his promised border wall. But last week after meeting with Democrat leaders, Trump said, “We will build the wall later.”

Who is confused about the definition of a “wall”?

White House legislative affairs director Marc Short appears to be. “I think that what the definition of a wall is, is something that we all need to have a serious conversation,” Short said over the weekend on CNN’s “The Situation Room.”

The border will be secured by a “myriad of different structures,” Short said.

Last week, Trump tweeted that “The WALL, which is already under construction in the form of new renovation of old and existing fences and walls, will continue to be built.”

In another theory, Steve Doocy of “Fox & Friends” asked last week if the wall had “become symbolic.”

When is a wall not a wall?

On Monday’s “The Glenn Beck Radio Program,” Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere were perplexed over this new confusion about what a wall should be since Trump seemed to be definite during his campaign.

The reasoning behind a physical barrier on the border was so the next president can’t simply change immigration policy.

“We’ll be going back and forth, every four years,” Glenn said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Stu, I -- could you just do me a favor? Could you just Google something for me?

STU: Sure.

GLENN: A wall.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: Could you just Google that for me?

STU: Like the definition?

GLENN: The definition of a wall or wall.

STU: A continuous vertical brick or stone structure that encloses or divides a corner of land.

GLENN: No. Get to the one that says a concept of amnesty.

STU: I'm going to be scrolling for a while I think to get to --

GLENN: You don't think that's -- scroll amnesty wall. Google that. Amnesty wall.

STU: Amnesty wall.

GLENN: Because there's a new thing happening here -- and we're going to play the audio here in a second, where everybody is saying, "No, he didn't mean a wall, wall." Well, what the hell did he -- wait. What?

STU: You thought he meant a wall, wall?

GLENN: A wall, like the one that I thought we all agreed on was the definition of the four-letter word, wall.

STU: See, he didn't mean a wall. You're thinking of a wall like a wall you would use to separate to --

GLENN: Right. Yes. Yes.

STU: That's a common mistake, that's --

GLENN: Okay. What did he mean when he said -- no, he was talking about a concept. When he was talking about hanging solar panels.

STU: On the concept, yes.

GLENN: What kind of concept holds solar panels up?

STU: A wall concept.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: A solar wall concept hangs solar panels.

GLENN: So this wall, it's a wall concept, is that like an occasional table?

STU: Yes. I think it's like an occasional table.

GLENN: I mean, it's an occasional table. I don't know what it is the rest of the time, but occasionally, I think it's a table. I don't know what that means. So maybe this is a concept wall, like an occasional table. But I will tell you, if that indeed is true, occasional tables are always still tables.

VOICE: Is it a real wall that you're talking about, or a fence?

VOICE: I think that what the definition of a wall is something that we all need to have a serious conversation. In some cases, it will be a bollard fence, which was in fact, was appropriated last year. And we've already begun construction --

VOICE: In that tweet, the president tweeted yesterday, the wall, which is already under construction in the form of new renovation of old and existing fences and walls will be --

GLENN: This is Mark Short over the weekend from the White House.

VOICE: That's a far cry from there will be a wall and Mexico will pay for it.

VOICE: Well, Wolfe, there's already, in fact, in many cases along the Rio Grande River levies that are built. And, in fact, are higher in some cases than what the wall would be.

So, yes, it is a myriad of different structures along the wall that we expect to be secure to make sure that Americans are safe.

VOICE: He promised the wall, and Mexico will pay for it. Will he deliver on that promise?

VOICE: The president is going to deliver on his promise.

VOICE: How are you going to convince the Mexicans to pay for it? They say there's no way they're going to pay for it. The president of Mexico, he says, that isn't happening. We all saw the transcript of that conversation he had the president.

VOICE: Yeah, Wolfe, I've doubted the president before. I've been proven wrong. I suspect that he's going to make sure that that wall is built and that Mexico will pay for it.

STU: We have to have a conversation about what the word "wall" means.

GLENN: What do you mean?

STU: Because we were told there was going to be a wall.

GLENN: A physical wall.

STU: And now we have to have a serious conversation about the definition of a wall.

GLENN: No, actually we don't. Here's -- from Fox & Friends, here's Steve Doocy.

VOICE: Has the wall almost become symbolic? I mean, I know the president ran on it. It was a mantra. But at the same time, border crossings have gone down dramatically.

GLENN: Yeah.

VOICE: And you were talking about how the wall exists in certain forms. And there's money to go to it. It has to come from Congress. But do you think we'll get to the point where maybe they won't build a wall.

GLENN: Hmm. Maybe they won't build a wall.

STU: So the definition of wall is mantra? It's mantra?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: So it's not a wall, wall? Like when I think of a wall, I think of a wall.

GLENN: No. It's -- this is more of cotton in a vase. This is more decorative.

STU: Oh, it's decorative?

GLENN: It's decorative. The wall is more decorative. And gets us to start a conversation, which is another theory that was passed around this weekend.

VOICE: So is Trump going back on his promise on the wall, or was the wall his blunt way of raising the issue? Saying build a wall is just a catchier way of saying, fix our borders. Face it, saying I love you is way better than saying, "I have a biological attraction to you that may wear off at some point."

STU: I -- wait. So it wasn't a wall. It was a catchier way of saying control the border? That is what it is?

GLENN: That's clearly what it is.

STU: It's clearly what it was. So when they're saying wall, what they're saying is basically amnesty?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: Okay. So it's --

GLENN: Yes. See, here's the deal: Look, I understand people -- people are going to -- people want to live here.

They want to live where Fox is telling them to go live because you don't want to feel like you were duped. And I understand that.

And it is human nature. And you want to give somebody -- you've trusted -- you've put a lot of stock into. And so you don't want to feel like, "Oh, wait a minute. He was lying." So what you will do is you will lower the standards. It is the Overton Window. You will lower the standards and you will say, "Yes, well, him just saying that has turned around people coming across the border." Well, why is it? Why is it we wouldn't have a conversation in America on -- on amnesty, and why wouldn't we have a conversation on any kind of border security that seemed reasonable to people? We wouldn't have that conversation because we said, the next president that comes in, all he's going to do is reverse it.

You have to have a physical wall because the next president -- and so we'll be going back and forth. Every four years, we'll just be going back and forth. And we can't do that. That was your reason.

And now, people just don't want to feel humiliated. And they don't want to feel like they were duped. And so they are -- they're giving themselves an out. Please don't go over the cliff with the rest of society. Please don't do that.

There has to be something that is true and solid like a wall in your life, that you say, "Okay. I'm not going to cross this wall."

STU: So you're saying I can cross those lines when I need to is what you're saying? In my life -- there are certain lines that I can kind of just move over when needed?

GLENN: Exactly right. Except completely reverse it.

STU: Then everything will be fine.

EXPOSED: Your tax dollars FUND Marxist riots in LA

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

Protesters wore Che shirts, waved foreign flags, and chanted Marxist slogans — but corporate media still peddles the ‘spontaneous outrage’ narrative.

I sat in front of the television this weekend, watching the glittering spectacle of corporate media do what it does best: tell me not to believe my lying eyes.

According to the polished news anchors, what I was witnessing in Los Angeles was “mostly peaceful protests.” They said it with all the earnest gravitas of someone reading a bedtime story, while behind them the streets looked like a deleted scene from “Mad Max.” Federal agents dodged concrete slabs as if it were an Olympic sport. A man in a Che Guevara crop top tried to set a police car on fire. Dumpster fires lit the night sky like some sort of postapocalyptic luau.

If you suggest that violent criminals should be deported or imprisoned, you’re painted as the extremist.

But sure, it was peaceful. Tear gas clouds and Molotov cocktails are apparently the incense and candles of this new civic religion.

The media expects us to play along — to nod solemnly while cities burn and to call it “activism.”

Let’s call this what it is: delusion.

Another ‘peaceful’ riot

If the Titanic “mostly floated” and the Hindenburg “mostly flew,” then yes, the latest L.A. riots are “mostly peaceful.” But history tends to care about those tiny details at the end — like icebergs and explosions.

The coverage was full of phrases like “spontaneous,” “grassroots,” and “organic,” as if these protests materialized from thin air. But many of the signs and banners looked like they’d been run off at ComradesKinkos.com — crisp print jobs with slogans promoting socialism, communism, and various anti-American regimes. Palestinian flags waved beside banners from Mexico, Venezuela, Cuba, and El Salvador. It was like someone looted a United Nations souvenir shop and turned it into a revolution starter pack.

And guess who funded it? You did.

According to at least one report, much of this so-called spontaneous rage fest was paid for with your tax dollars. Tens of millions of dollars from the Biden administration ensured your paycheck funded Trotsky cosplayers chucking firebombs at local coffee shops.

The same aging radicals from the 1970s — now armed with tenure, pensions, and book deals — are cheering from the sidelines, waxing poetic about how burning a squad car is “liberation.” These are the same folks who once wore tie-dye and flew to help guerrilla fighters and now applaud chaos under the banner of “progress.”

This is not progress. It is not protest. It’s certainly not justice or peace.

It’s an attempt to dismantle the American system — and if you dare say that out loud, you’re labeled a bigot, a fascist, or, worst of all, someone who notices reality.

And what sparked this taxpayer-funded riot? Enforcement against illegal immigrants — many of whom, according to official arrest records, are repeat violent offenders. These are not the “dreamers” or the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. These are criminals with long, violent rap sheets — allowed to remain free by a broken system that prioritizes ideology over public safety.

Photo by Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg | Getty Images

This is what people are rioting over — not the mistreatment of the innocent, but the arrest of the guilty. And in California, that’s apparently a cause for outrage.

The average American, according to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, is supposed to worry they’ll be next. But unless you’re in the habit of assaulting people, smuggling, or firing guns into people’s homes, you probably don’t have much to fear.

Still, if you suggest that violent criminals should be deported or imprisoned, you’re painted as the extremist.

The left has lost it

This is what happens when a culture loses its grip on reality. We begin to call arson “art,” lawlessness “liberation,” and criminals “community members.” We burn the good and excuse the evil — all while the media insists it’s just “vibes.”

But it’s not just vibes. It’s violence, paid for by you, endorsed by your elected officials, and whitewashed by newsrooms with more concern for hair and lighting than for truth.

This isn’t activism. This is anarchism. And Democratic politicians are fueling the flame.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck's 'No King but Christ' merch: Will faith STOP the chaos?

On Saturday, June 14, 2025 (President Trump's 79th birthday), the "No Kings" protest—a noisy spectacle orchestrated by progressive heavyweights like Randi Weingarten and her union cronies—will take place in Washington, D.C.

Thousands will chant "no thrones, no crowns, no king," claiming to fend off authoritarianism and corruption.

But let’s cut through the noise. The protesters' grievances—rigged courts, deported citizens, slashed services—are a house of cards. Zero Americans have been deported, Federal services are still bloated, and if anyone is rigging the courts, it's the Left. So why rally now, especially with riots already flaring in L.A.?

Chaos isn’t a side effect here—it’s the plan.

This is not about liberty; it's a power grab dressed up as resistance. The "No Kings" crowd wants you to buy their script: government’s the enemy—unless they’re the ones running it. It's the identical script from 2020: same groups, same tactics, same goal, different name.

But Glenn is flipping the script. He's dropping a new "No Kings but Christ" merch line, just in time for the protest. Merch that proclaims one truth: no earthly ruler owns us; only Christ does. It’s a bold, faith-rooted rejection of this secular circus.

Why should you care? Because this won’t just be a rally—it’ll be a symptom. Distrust in institutions is sky-high, and rightly so, but the "No Kings" answer is a hollow shout into the void. Glenn’s merch begs the question: if you’re ditching kings, who’s really in charge? Get yours and wear the answer proudly.

Truth unleashed: 95% say media’s excuses for anti-Semitism are a LIE

ELI IMADALI / Contributor | Getty Images

Glenn asked for YOUR take on the rising tide of anti-Semitism, and you delivered. After the Boulder attack, you made it clear: this isn’t just a news story—it’s a crisis the elites are dodging.

Your verdict is unmistakable: 96% of you see anti-Semitism as a growing threat in the U.S., brushing aside the establishment’s weak excuses. The spin does not fool you—95% say the media is deliberately downplaying the issue, hiding a cultural rot that’s all too real. And the government’s response? A whopping 95% of you call it a disgraceful failure, leaving communities exposed.

Your voices shatter the silence. Why should we trust narratives that dismiss your concerns? With 97% of you warning that anti-Semitism will surge in the years ahead, you’re demanding action and accountability. This is your stand for truth.

You spoke, and Glenn listened. Your bold response sends a message to those who’d rather ignore the problem. Keep raising your voice at Glennbeck.com—your input drives the fight for justice. Take part in the next poll and continue shaping the conversation.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

JPMorgan Chase CEO issues dire warning about America's prosperity

Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Jamie Dimon has a grim forecast for America — and it’s not a recession. He sees a fragile nation drifting into crisis while its leaders fight over TikTok.

Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase — one of the most powerful financial institutions on earth — issued a warning the other day. But it wasn’t about interest rates, crypto, or monetary policy.

Speaking at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California, Dimon pivoted from economic talking points to something far more urgent: the fragile state of America’s physical preparedness.

We are living in a moment of stunning fragility — culturally, economically, and militarily. It means we can no longer afford to confuse digital distractions with real resilience.

“We shouldn’t be stockpiling Bitcoin,” Dimon said. “We should be stockpiling guns, tanks, planes, drones, and rare earths. We know we need to do it. It’s not a mystery.”

He cited internal Pentagon assessments showing that if war were to break out in the South China Sea, the United States has only enough precision-guided missiles for seven days of sustained conflict.

Seven days — that’s the gap between deterrence and desperation.

This wasn’t a forecast about inflation or a hedge against market volatility. It was a blunt assessment from a man whose words typically move markets.

“America is the global hegemon,” Dimon continued, “and the free world wants us to be strong.” But he warned that Americans have been lulled into “a false sense of security,” made complacent by years of peacetime prosperity, outsourcing, and digital convenience:

We need to build a permanent, long-term, realistic strategy for the future of America — economic growth, fiscal policy, industrial policy, foreign policy. We need to educate our citizens. We need to take control of our economic destiny.

This isn’t a partisan appeal — it’s a sobering wake-up call. Because our economy and military readiness are not separate issues. They are deeply intertwined.

Dimon isn’t alone in raising concerns. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has warned that China has already overtaken the U.S. in key defense technologies — hypersonic missiles, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence to mention a few. Retired military leaders continue to highlight our shrinking shipyards and dwindling defense manufacturing base.

Even the dollar, once assumed untouchable, is under pressure as BRICS nations work to undermine its global dominance. Dimon, notably, has said this effort could succeed if the U.S. continues down its current path.

So what does this all mean?

Christopher Furlong / Staff | Getty Images

It means we are living in a moment of stunning fragility — culturally, economically, and militarily. It means we can no longer afford to confuse digital distractions with real resilience.

It means the future belongs to nations that understand something we’ve forgotten: Strength isn’t built on slogans or algorithms. It’s built on steel, energy, sovereignty, and trust.

And at the core of that trust is you, the citizen. Not the influencer. Not the bureaucrat. Not the lobbyist. At the core is the ordinary man or woman who understands that freedom, safety, and prosperity require more than passive consumption. They require courage, clarity, and conviction.

We need to stop assuming someone else will fix it. The next crisis — whether military, economic, or cyber — will not politely pause for our political dysfunction to sort itself out. It will demand leadership, unity, and grit.

And that begins with looking reality in the eye. We need to stop talking about things that don’t matter and cut to the chase: The U.S. is in a dangerously fragile position, and it’s time to rebuild and refortify — from the inside out.