Here’s the Cognitive Assessment Test That Trump Took – What’s Your Score?

January 18, 2018

WRITER

It’s customary for the sitting president to undergo a physical exam each year, but President Donald Trump decided to add another test to the mix: one that checks your cognitive abilities.

Here’s What You Should Know About ‘Fire and Fury’

The White House medical team selected the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a 30-point test that screens for memory loss and dementia. The unusual decision may have been influenced by critics’ accusations that Trump is not mentally fit to be president.

On today’s show, Glenn and Stu looked at the test, and Glenn had “Dr. Stu” check out his mental health. Can Glenn identify a lion, draw a cube and remember five words? Listen to the full clip (above) to find out, and then check out the test for yourself.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So the president had a -- had some -- a series of tests done on him yesterday. And his doctor said he is as strong as an ox. Now, this is not the crazy -- remember the doctor he had on that was like our movie doctor. You're like Dr. What's-his-face from Back to the Future. I would like a real doctor, please.

STU: Oh, yeah. This was during the campaign, you mean? And they were like, yeah, and he's super mega healthy.

Wait. Mega. Did you use the word mega as a physician? It was that type of thing.

GLENN: Yeah. I know you were from Columbia. But he just looked crazy.

STU: And they talked to him. And he didn't really examine him. And he was using strange words. He was using Trump words. It looked like Trump gave him the script to write. And no one, I don't think, really believed he wasn't healthy. But there was speculation in the media for sure --

GLENN: Yeah. I wanted the doctor questioned. Not because I didn't think Trump was healthy. Just because I thought he was nuts.

STU: Right.

GLENN: So yesterday, the president's results -- his test results were released to the press. And first, let's talk about his physical health. Here's what his doctor said.

VOICE: How a guy who eats McDonald's and fried chicken and all those Diet Cokes and never exercises is in as good a shape as you say he's in.

VOICE: It's called genetics. I don't know. Some people have just, you know, great genes.

I told the president that if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years, he might live to be 200 years old. I don't know.

He has incredible -- he has incredible genes, I just assume, you know. If I -- if I didn't watch what I ate, I wouldn't have the cardiac and overall health that he has.

GLENN: So he is in good, physical health. And you got to believe Donald Trump loves the gene talk.

STU: Oh, yeah. He's big on that.

GLENN: Yeah, he's big on the racehorse theory. Hey, we breed racehorses. Kind of a 1910 progressive eugenics kind of thing. He is all in, and so is the whole family.

STU: I love the, how can a guy eat McDonald's and be healthy? You can actually -- you know what, almost everyone in America eats McDonald's at times. You can be healthy.

It's funny, seeing people that are like, well, yes, I put butter in my coffee, but how can this man eat McDonald's? Well, of course nine stacks of avocado toast are completely fine, along with coconut butter. But how dare he have a piece of chicken.

GLENN: And who doesn't understand the genetics thing, that there are people who can smoke, drink, and eat sticks of butter, and live to 120?

STU: Yeah. Is it a good idea? Does it hurt your percentage chance to live longer? Yes. That does not mean that eating these things -- especially if you eat them without a ridiculous amount, that doesn't mean you're going to be unhealthy at all.

And then they have to throw the, how can he have all these Diet Cokes? I don't know. Maybe him eating zero-calorie beverages is the reason he can have McDonald's. Is that possible?

Brainiac. I hate that stuff. But he did pass the test and did pretty well. I think you could look at him and say, wow, he --

GLENN: I would hope --

STU: You're impressed by --

GLENN: I would hope that I would be as healthy as he is when I'm his age.

STU: Or now.

GLENN: Or now. I would take it five years ago.

(laughter)

STU: Retroactively trying to match a 73-year-old's health. That's good.

GLENN: Yep. I don't have the genetic predisposition to long life.

(laughter)

STU: That's not good.

GLENN: No.

STU: The other thing was -- by the way, we also found out today, apparently Sanjay Gupta, who is -- you know, you might think of him as a TV doctor. But they wanted him to be a high role, I can't remember was it? Attorney general?

GLENN: No, I think it was surgeon general.

STU: Yeah. For the Obama administration. He was their first choice. And he wound up turning that down. Apparently was saying, if you look at the numbers, that guy has heart disease.

Wait a minute. His doctor didn't say he had heart disease. But Sanjay, looking at the numbers, has been able to take the code and suck out heart disease from these numbers, apparently.

So we'll get more on that as that develops.

GLENN: Well, how old is he? Seventy-two? Seventy-three?

STU: Seventy-three, something like that, yeah.

GLENN: I mean, if you're 73 and you're living like Donald Trump, you know, I think you kind of -- you're kind of like, "A little heart disease isn't bad for me."

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Seventy-three, 75 years old, I'm thinking, oh, I only have a little heart disease. Good.

STU: Exactly. You think the guy has been able to do whatever he wants for how many years. He owns a lot of the best restaurants in America.

GLENN: He never exercises.

STU: Doesn't exercise.

GLENN: He's my hero. He never exercises.

He eats whatever he wants. And he's 4 pounds heavier than he was a year ago?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: God bless him.

STU: Especially going into that job, I mean, I would put on 60 in a week.

GLENN: We would have to have soup makers on constant standby.

STU: At some point, you just start building them with release flaps, where you can just expand --

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Just staple. Staple the sides together because you'll need the extra material later.

STU: Yeah, make it for someone who weighs 600, and I'll grow into it. I promise.

GLENN: That's right. That's right.

STU: But the other big thing about this was people wanted him to take a cognitive test.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And to test his brain. Because everybody thinks in the media, apparently, that he is just mentally unfit to be president. Now, mentally unfit to be president is completely different than I don't like his policies, I don't like his character, I don't like his demeanor. Like those are all things that the media obviously doesn't like. But it's completely different than whether he is mentally capable of thinking -- you know, thinking in a normal, human way.

GLENN: I think there are times that he is mentally lazy. Intentionally. He just hasn't thought things through. Just hasn't -- you know, I think he has changed from the personality that if you go back and look at the videotapes in the 1980s and '90s, but I don't think that's a decline in his mental health. I think that's just a -- you know, I haven't thought about it in a while. I'm 73 years old. I'm a little lazy on that.

STU: Right. But none of that stuff you would be able to detect in a mental test. So he took a mental test for the first time ever, apparently. No president has ever had to take one of these tests before. And it wasn't because the doctor was like, well, I'm unsure of this guy. Apparently Trump wanted it done so he could prove that he was okay.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, when you have people around you going, I don't know. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment, we could get him out of here. I'm taking a mental test.

STU: Yeah, why not? Let's prove that -- and that's obviously a ridiculous media narrative, right? You know, the idea that he is incapable of thinking like a normal human being is completely absurd.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: We do have the test, an example of the test.

GLENN: Yeah. So we thought -- because, you know, when you're given a mental test, I don't know, the president passed it. Could you pass it? We'll give you the mental test they gave the president in a minute.

GLENN: So the president passed his mental agility test. And, you know, they can't use the 25th Amendment against him because he's passed a -- you know, a sanity test, or a mental agility test. I will tell you, I have had these tests before. I've had it at Columbia, and I've had it at the Mayo Clinic. Because for a while, I was testing like I had severe concussions. And they couldn't figure out what was going on. And we were afraid that maybe I was going into early Alzheimer's or something. And so I had these tests.

And they're kind of spooky in a way. I mean, they're -- they're tough. And, you know, Stu won't let me see the paper now, so I'm a little nervous now.

STU: Call me doctor, please.

GLENN: Well, no, I'm the doctor.

STU: Call me Dr. Stu for today.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. Dr. Stu.

STU: Because you're right, I won't let you see it in advance. That will not give us the results we're looking for. I will say this, looking at this test, it is not a test of let's do a deep dive and search to see if there's anything wrong with your thought process.

It's more of a test that you would give someone if you highly suspect they have dementia or they just had a stroke and you want to be able to check whether they're able to complete basic human thought. Right?

It's not a -- it's not a type of test that you're going to read into and be like, oh, my gosh.

You know, it doesn't say --

GLENN: Do you have the whole test? Because the whole test, at least the one I took, took at least an hour.

STU: Yeah. This is one page. We can do it quickly.

GLENN: Oh. Okay. Okay.

STU: It's a basic test though. Your uncle has a stroke. They're at the hospital. Is there major problems with his brain? Here's a cognitive test. You go through it quickly. This shows you can do basic processes. Do you have a pen? We'll do it here?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: The first part is, there's three visual tests that won't work particularly well on radio. But we'll explain them. There's a bunch of numbers and letters for the first test and it gives you the beginning of the path. For example, the number one, there's a line drawn to A. Then there's a line drawn to two. You have to complete the pattern.

GLENN: Then a line drawn to B.

STU: That's a good. Yeah, why don't I just give you the answers?

So going down to B. Then B would go to three.

GLENN: Then that would go to C. Then it would go to 4. Then it would go to D. And then it would go to 5, and that would go to E. This is not a real --

STU: Let me see -- the next one. It is. This is the test. It's the Montreal Cognitive Test. Now, there's another one that says for Glenn to draw -- copy a box.

GLENN: I'm sorry. But this is a -- this is not -- this is not an invasive test.

STU: What it is, is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and don't -- I mean, you can rush through all you want. I don't know if you're trying to prove something here.

GLENN: No, it's just easy.

STU: Okay. So it's easy for Glenn. So there's three tests here. We'll be posting the results here online. How much time do we have, Sarah? Should we go through the next questions?

GLENN: Did I get those right, Doctor?

STU: I will grade you at the end. Thank you for calling me doctor.

GLENN: All right. I will tell you, I just -- I didn't even read the directions, they're so easy. If I have any wrong, it's because I didn't read the directions.

STU: Wow, President Trump was able to read the directions and get them right.

GLENN: Okay. I'll read the directions.

STU: I'll show you a picture. I'd like you to tell me what that picture is. What is that?

GLENN: That's a lion.

STU: A lion is the answer. Get that to my physician's assistant. The first answer was lion. Next one, I'm showing you a picture. What is this picture?

GLENN: That is a rhino. Rhino.

STU: A rhino. And finally I'm showing you this picture, what is this picture?

GLENN: That is an ostrich, a zebra -- a camel. Trust me, this is not --

STU: Lion, just writing down your answers. Rhino.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And a camel.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: Next up. Are you ready?

GLENN: I'm ready.

STU: I am going to read a list of words.

GLENN: Oh, boy.

STU: You must repeat them. Okay?

GLENN: Do I have to wait for a while and then repeat them or just repeat the word you just said?

STU: I'm going to read all five words, you're going to repeat them in that order. Are you ready?

GLENN: All right. Okay. Yes.

STU: Face, velvet, church, daisy, red.

GLENN: Faith, velvet. Daisy, church -- I'm bad at these.

STU: Okay. We're going to try it one more time.

Here is the five words. Repeat them in this order. Face, velvet, church, daisy, red.

GLENN: Face, velvet, daisy -- church, daisy. I can't remember.

STU: Okay. Premiere, we're going need to a new host.

GLENN: Going need to a new host.

STU: We're going to need a new host.

GLENN: I've gone through more difficult tests than these. I have a difficult time with some of them. I have a difficult time with them.

STU: We are learning things -- so far, we've learned many things. In my studies of your test so far, I've learned many things --

GLENN: When you see the lion is actually a chicken, we're -- you'll see how troubled -- how troubled we really are. Back in just a second.

GLENN: Now, I'm under -- I'm under a great deal of stress now.

STU: Welcome to the Dr. Stu Program. 1-800-DR-STU.

GLENN: That's not enough numbers.

STU: We're giving Glenn the cognitive test that the president passed with flying colors yesterday. And we're learning some interesting things as we go through this.

GLENN: Well, now he's telling me that there's certain grades for how well the clock is drawn and stuff. I made a clock face quickly. And just...

STU: Okay. That's --

GLENN: Okay. Here's a picture of a more detailed clock. Here's a grandfather clock. Does that help?

STU: There's an interesting section in the instructions about people who make excuses for their incorrect answers, that we can get into a little bit later.

GLENN: Okay. All right. Okay.

STU: We're now in the next section.

GLENN: Yes, next section.

STU: And here is --

GLENN: By the way, the president passed this with flying colors. I'm still in jeopardy here.

STU: I'm going to read you a list of digits. You need to repeat them in four-word order.

GLENN: Digits. Wait. What do you mean in four-word order?

STU: Normal order. The way I'm going to give them. All right. Two --

GLENN: Two --

STU: No. When I'm done with all five of them, you will then repeat the five.

GLENN: All right. Okay. Okay. All right.

STU: Yeah, two --

GLENN: Somebody write them down.

STU: No, you can't write them down. Just saying. Two.

GLENN: Two. All right. I'm sorry. Go ahead -- I got the first --

STU: I'm about to subtract some points. Listen to the five numbers. Two, one, eight, five, four.

GLENN: Two, one, eight, five, four.

But I would like to say, that it is five, two, one, eight, five, four. Because you said five several times before.

STU: I said two many times because you kept interrupting me.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. And two, two, two. Five, five, five -- it's actually five, two, five, two, five, two.

STU: Sir, we can remove you from office.

GLENN: All right. Go ahead.

STU: There's a silliness clause in this test.

GLENN: All right.

STU: I would like you to repeat these numbers in backward order. Put your pen down, sir.

GLENN: In backward order. I'm just finishing clock face.

STU: Put your pen down. You've already failed the clock test. Well, we'll see how you did on the clock. Repeat these in backward order. Seven --

GLENN: Backward order. Sorry.

STU: Seven, four, two. There are three numbers I just gave you.

GLENN: Two, four, seven.

STU: That is correct. You'll be getting the full test results here in just a moment.

GLENN: See, this is not like a real test. Is this really the one they gave the president?

STU: This is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and, yes, this is the test.

GLENN: Because I will tell you, I've had these before, and here's how they usually go, I'm going to give you five numbers. Okay. Let me give them to you here, Stu. Let me see if I can do this with you.

STU: He is stalling to get out of it. I'm getting that from my physician's assistant here in the other room.

GLENN: No. Seven, 14, 21, eight, three. Say them.

STU: Wait. You didn't tell me what we were doing.

GLENN: I'm saying. I'm giving you five numbers, you repeat them back. Seven, 14, 21, eight, three.

STU: Seven, 14, 21, eight, three. So you're saying the test designer has a problem?

GLENN: Yeah, he's a little insane.

STU: Is that the issue here? Are you trying to delay so we don't get to the end of the test?

GLENN: No, no, no.

Five numbers. Ready?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Five, three, 17, 40, nine.

STU: Five, three, 17, 40, nine.

GLENN: Give me the first five numbers that I gave you.

STU: Seven, 14, 21, eight, one, three.

GLENN: Okay. So the real tests, they keep doing this. They just keep adding five numbers. And they'll give you five numbers. Five numbers. Five numbers. What were the first five numbers?

STU: That would be impossible. And, again, that's an interesting distinction between the tests. The one you're talking about is, let's do an incredibly deep dive to see if we can find any hint of anything that's at the very beginning stages.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: What this is, you just had a massive stroke. Can you do the basics? That's what the president passed.

GLENN: In this test, they had the president draw a three-dimensional box. In the test that I've seen, they'll show you something like this.

STU: Where you're seeing like a rectangle, circle, square --

GLENN: Like a little antenna thing coming off the end. And then it comes out and it juts out. And they don't make any sense. And they show it to you for like are five or ten seconds. Say, remember this. They put it away. Now, draw it.

STU: Right. Much more challenging.

GLENN: And you have to draw it. Because it's very intricate. And there's no rhyme or reason to why it's built that way.

STU: And, Sarah, you would say this is a delay to not get to the answers in the test.

SARAH: Absolutely.

STU: Okay. Thank you. Okay. There you go. I would like you to clap your hands. Okay. Thank you. Here you go --

GLENN: You didn't say stop clapping.

STU: Please stop clapping your hand. Okay. Now, every time I say the letter A, I would like you to clap. Okay. That's it.

GLENN: That had A in it.

STU: When I say the letter A, you should clap. Ready?

GLENN: Got it.

STU: F, B, A, C, M --

GLENN: Go ahead.

STU: -- N, A.

GLENN: A. A.

STU: J.

STU: K. L, B, F --

GLENN: Now, is this the letter -- because they sound --

STU: F, A, K, D, E, A --

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

STU: A, A, J, A, M -- this is harder than I thought.

GLENN: Well, because the K and the J, if it's not in the letter, it does have J-A-Y. So it has an A in it. I'm just saying.

STU: Now, the next question, you specifically warned me not to give you any math questions, which is not something you could ask the doctor. You can't say anything, but blood tests. You can't do that.

GLENN: Yeah, I didn't ask the doctor to not --

STU: I'm going to give you a number. I would like you to subtract seven from that number.

GLENN: Seven.

STU: Okay?

GLENN: Fourteen.

STU: I haven't started yet.

GLENN: All right.

STU: The number is --

GLENN: Twenty-one.

STU: I haven't started yet, so you can't --

GLENN: Seven. Six, five, four, three, two, one.

STU: I think we lock you up after this. Okay. One hundred. Subtract seven.

GLENN: Ninety-three.

STU: Subtract seven from that.

GLENN: It would be 93. Ninety-two, 91 --

STU: You can use your fingers. It doesn't say you can't.

GLENN: Oh. Ninety-three, 92, 91, 90, 98 -- no, that the be right. Eighty-nine, 88, 87, which would be wrong.

STU: See, in the test materials, there's no point, where it recommends the doctor harass the patient to try to pressure him into correct answers, but that is what I'm too good.

GLENN: Okay. Seventy-one.

STU: All right. We're going to move on. Repeat the sentence.

GLENN: Twelve.

STU: I only know that John is the one to help today.

GLENN: I only know that John is the one to help today. But the trick is repeat this sentence, because that's what you just said. So it's a trick question.

STU: Okay. Here's another one I'm going to give you, and I would like you to repeat it. Here it goes: The cat always hid under the couch when dogs were in the room.

GLENN: Here it goes: The cat always hid under the couch when dogs were in the room.

STU: Okay.

Let's see.

GLENN: Twenty-nine.

STU: I don't even understand that question. Okay. Let me ask you this one. We're looking for similarity here. For example, a banana and an orange. The similarity would be they are both --

GLENN: Round.

STU: Fruit. Okay.

GLENN: Colorful.

STU: Similarities between trains and bicycles.

GLENN: Both have wheels.

STU: Okay. Of course, obviously not true.

GLENN: Yeah, but trains have wheels, bikes have wheels.

STU: I'm not here to judge you, sir, except for --

GLENN: Both are made out of metal.

STU: Okay. A watch and a ruler.

GLENN: A watch and a ruler.

STU: What's the similarity there?

GLENN: I'm trying to think of something that just doesn't work. They both have numbers. They're both measurement.

STU: Don't try to justify --

GLENN: They're both round.

STU: Okay. Now, I earlier on gave you five words --

GLENN: Oh, you --

STU: If you get one of these --

GLENN: It is that.

STU: That is in here.

GLENN: Yeah, it was. Face, velvet -- all I can think of cake -- so I think automatically cake.

Face, velvet. I don't remember.

STU: Okay. And -- all right. And then what -- well, I'm not going to give you the date, month, year, all that stuff. You know where you are. Date.

GLENN: Do not ask me that. I really don't know the date.

STU: I don't know it either.

GLENN: I don't know the date. The 18th?

VOICE: It's Wednesday, January 17th.

STU: Thank you. We have it at the beginning of every show.

GLENN: It's Wednesday, January 17th.

STU: What year?

GLENN: 2018.

STU: What's today?

GLENN: Wouldn't it be great if it was -- if one of the real legitimate questions, who is president? You would be like, me.

GLENN: Me.

STU: What place are you in?

GLENN: A chair. Studio.

STU: What city?

GLENN: Las Colinas. Earth.

STU: City, you got that.

VOICE: You're listening to the Glenn Beck Program.

GLENN: Okay. Got it.

STU: We'll take a break. And I will go through and grade this for you.

GLENN: Could you kick me off the show? Is there the 25th Amendment that you could just kick me right off --

STU: This has been a giant ruse to make you take this test and see if you're mentally fit to do this program.

GLENN: Wow. I will tell you, that is -- with the exception of one of the last questions of, oh, and what was those five words? That was not --

STU: Not hard, right?

GLENN: Yeah, not hard. You know --

STU: You could easily screw one of them up. You could easily have a problem here or there. Now, Trump did very well on it. But, again, he also knew, if he got anything wrong, it would be a major news story. So he maybe focused a little bit more than you. However, we could make it a major news story too.

GLENN: No, I don't think so. I think somebody questioning your mental agility, if you're taking it seriously, that's a lot of pressure.

STU: Okay. We'll hold you to the same standards then. I was going to give you a break, but we'll be happy to hold you to the same standard as the president. I think that's fair.

GLENN: That's not what --

STU: I'll go through a little grading here. And you do the commercial, if you can get through it.

GLENN: Face, velvet, cake. Orange. Trapdoor.

STU: Is this the commercial? Or are you --

GLENN: Just trying to remember what those words were.

STU: Got it.

Glenn: Pay attention to what the State Department's RADICAL reset is signaling

John McDonnell / Stringer | Getty Images

For years, the U.S. State Department operated on inertia—an institution locked into a cycle of caution, consensus, and risk aversion.

Speeches were careful, strategies were diluted by committees, and action was often defined by what couldn’t be done. The language was always the same: "nuance," "complexity," "stakeholders." Rarely was it about results.

That has changed.

What’s come out of the State Department in the last hundred days is a complete departure—not just in tone, but in structure.

Under Secretary Rubio, the department isn’t just adjusting tactics. It’s undergoing a philosophical reset.

The most telling shift is this: the department is no longer preoccupied with managing decline or defending abstractions. It’s operating from the premise that U.S. foreign policy must serve actual national interests, not vague global norms or ideological missions.

Look at the key decisions. The Global Engagement Center—an office that claimed to combat disinformation but increasingly acted as an internal censorship tool—is gone. Not repurposed. Not renamed. Eliminated. Aid programs that masked themselves as diplomacy while undermining core U.S. positions have been cut. Contracts to NGOs with open hostility toward U.S. policy goals? Revoked.

This isn’t cosmetic. It’s structural.

The department’s reorganization is consolidating power downward—removing bureaucratic silos, emphasizing merit over ideology, and restoring clarity to diplomatic goals. This isn’t about optics. It’s about removing friction between strategy and implementation. On immigration and border enforcement, there’s now a foreign policy posture that treats visa privileges as exactly that—privileges, not entitlements. Visa holders who break laws or support terrorist groups lose their status. Period. No press conference required. Just enforcement.

Regional partnerships are now framed by expectations, not entanglements.

Countries that allow mass illegal migration into the U.S. are being held accountable. Agreements are being structured around reciprocity. When those agreements are ignored, consequences follow. China’s influence in the Western Hemisphere, long treated as inevitable, has been directly challenged. Beijing’s role in Panama, particularly regarding the canal, has been dismantled through diplomacy backed by leverage, not lectures. That wasn’t done through press statements—it required statecraft, pressure, and the willingness to say no.

In Europe, there’s been a reframing of NATO obligations. Not as symbolic unity, but as measurable responsibility. The benchmark is no longer two percent. The conversation is now five. That changes the nature of the alliance. In Africa, the posture is shifting from dependency to commercial engagement. Trade, not aid. Access, not assistance. Diplomacy with terms, not with guilt.

The contrast is stark.

This isn’t a matter of tone or branding. This is a systemic shift away from a model that rewarded process over outcomes, toward one that is rediscovering the purpose of diplomacy: to secure advantage, resolve conflict, and protect national interests.

This recalibration will not be popular in foreign capitals used to ambiguity, or in institutions comfortable with drift. It’s also not universally admirable. It’s direct. It’s unambiguous. And it signals something rare in modern American foreign policy: conviction.

That alone is worth paying attention to.

Glenn: Why Memorial Day is not just another holiday

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

They wore the uniform so you could live free. This holiday, ask yourself if you're living in a way that honors that sacrifice — or cheapens it.

Your son has been a Marine for what feels like an eternity. Only those who have watched their children deploy into war zones can truly understand why time seems to freeze in worry. What begins as concern turns to panic, then helplessness. You live suspended in a silent winter, where days blur and dread becomes your constant companion.

Then, in an instant, it happens. What you don’t know yet is that your child — your most precious gift — fell in combat 60 seconds ago.

This is a day for sacred remembrance, for honoring those who laid down their lives.

While you go about your day, unaware, military protocol kicks into motion. Notification must happen within eight hours. Officers are dispatched. A chaplain joins them. A medic may accompany them in case the grief is too much to bear.

Three figures arrive at your door. One asks your name. Then, by protocol, they ask to enter your home. You already know what’s coming. You sit down. He looks you in the eye and says:

The commandant of the Marine Corps has entrusted me to express his deep regret that your son John was killed in action on Friday, March 28. The commandant and the United States Marine Corps extend their deepest sympathy to you and your family in your loss.

This moment has played out thousands of times across American soil. In 2003 alone — just two years after 9/11 — 312 families endured it. In 2007, 847 American service members died in combat. In 2008, 352. In 2009, 346. The list goes on. And with every name, a family became a Gold Star family.

Honor the fallen

For most Americans, Memorial Day means backyard barbecues, family gatherings, maybe a trip to the lake or a sweet Airbnb. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying these things. But we must never forget why we can.

Ask any veteran who lived when others did not, and you’ll understand: Memorial Day is not just another holiday. It is a solemn day set apart for reverence.

So this weekend, reach out to a Gold Star family. Acknowledge their pain. Ask about their son or daughter. Let them know they’re not alone.

This is a day for sacred remembrance, for honoring those who laid down their lives — not for accolades but for love of country and the preservation of liberty. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13).

They died for the Constitution, for our shared American ideals, and the worst thing we could do now would be to betray those ideals in a spirit of rage or division.

We cannot dishonor their sacrifice by abandoning the very principles they died to protect — equal justice, the rule of law, the enduring promise of liberty.

This Memorial Day, let us remember the fallen. Let us honor their families. Let us recommit ourselves to the cause they gave everything for: the American way of life.

They are the best of us.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump exposes Left’s habeas corpus hijack in border crisis

Chicago Tribune / Contributor | Getty Images

Democrats accused the president of declaring war on civil rights. In reality, he’s defending habeas corpus while they drown it in delays and legal loopholes.

Tuesday’s congressional testimony from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem turned heads for all the wrong reasons. Pressed to define “habeas corpus,” she stumbled. And while I respect Noem, this moment revealed just how dangerously misunderstood one of our most vital legal protections has become — especially as it’s weaponized in the immigration debate.

Habeas corpus is not a loophole. It’s a shield. It’s the constitutional protection that prevents a government from detaining a person — any person — without first justifying the detention before a neutral judge. It doesn’t guarantee freedom. It demands due process. Prove it or release them.

Bureaucratic inertia, activist judges, and political cowardice have turned due process into a slow-motion invasion. And the left knows it.

And yet, this doctrine — so essential to our liberty — is now being twisted by the political left into something it was never meant to be: a free pass for illegal immigration.

The left wants to frame this as a matter of compassion and rights. Leftists ask: “What about habeas corpus for migrants?” The implication is clear: They see any attempt to enforce immigration law as an attack on civil liberties.

But that’s a lie. Habeas corpus is not an excuse for indefinite presence. It doesn’t guarantee that every person who crosses the border gets to stay. It simply requires that we follow a process — a just process.

And that’s exactly what President Donald Trump has proposed.

Habeas corpus, rightly understood

Habeas corpus is the front door to the courtroom. It simply requires the government to justify why someone is being held or detained. It’s not about citizenship. It’s about human dignity.

America’s founders knew this — and that’s why they extended the right to persons, not just citizens. Habeas corpus isn’t a pass to stay in America forever — it’s a demand for legal clarity: “Why are you holding me?” That’s it.

If the government has a lawful reason — such as illegal entry — then deportation is a legitimate outcome. And yet, the left treats any enforcement of immigration law as a betrayal of American ideals.

The danger today isn’t that habeas corpus is being ignored; it’s that it’s being hijacked. The system is being overwhelmed with bad-faith cases, endless appeals, and delays that stretch for years. Right now, the immigration courts are buried under 3.3 million pending cases. The average wait time to have your case heard is four years. In some places, people are being scheduled for court dates as far out in 2032. Where is the justice in that?

This is not compassion. This is national sabotage.

Weaponizing due process

The left uses this legal bottleneck as a weapon, not a shield. Democrats invoke due process as if it requires the government to play a never-ending shell game with public safety. But that’s not what due process means. Due process means the state must play by the rules. It means a judge hears a case. It means the law is applied justly and equally. It does not mean an open border by procedural default.

So no, Trump is not proposing the end of habeas corpus. He’s calling out a broken system and saying, out loud, what millions of Americans already know: If we don’t fix this, we don’t have a country.

This crisis wasn’t an accident — it was engineered. It’s a Cloward-Piven playbook, designed to overwhelm the system. Bureaucratic inertia, activist judges, and political cowardice have turned due process into a slow-motion invasion. And the left knows it.

Abandon the Constitution?

Remember, the Constitution is not a suicide pact. But how do we balance the Constitution and our national survival without descending into authoritarianism? Abandon the Constitution? No. Burn the house down to get rid of the rats? Absolutely not. The Constitution itself gives us the tools to take on this crisis head on.

The federal government has clear authority over immigration. Illegal presence in the United States is not a protected right. Congress has the power to deny entry, enforce expedited removals, and reject bogus asylum claims. Much of this is already authorized by law — it’s simply not being used.

President Trump’s idea is simple: Use the tools we already have. Declare the southern border a national security emergency. Establish temporary military tribunals for triage. Process asylum claims swiftly outside the clogged court system. Restore “Remain in Mexico” so that the border is no longer a remote court room. Appoint more immigration judges, assign them to high-volume areas, and hold streamlined hearings that still respect due process.

That’s not authoritarian. That’s leadership.

The path forward

Trump is not trying to destroy habeas corpus. He’s trying to save it from being twisted into a self-destructive parody of itself. Leftists have turned due process into delay, justice into gridlock, and they’re dragging the entire country into their chaos.

It’s time to draw the line. Protect habeas corpus. Use it lawfully. Use it wisely. And yes — use it to restore order at the border. Because if we lose that firewall, we lose the republic.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Betrayal of trust: Medicare insurers face lawsuit over kickback scheme

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Editor's note: This article is sponsored by Chapter.

The U.S. government has filed a major lawsuit under the False Claims Act, targeting some of the biggest names in health insurance—Aetna, Elevance Health (formerly Anthem), and Humana—along with top insurance brokers eHealth, GoHealth, and SelectQuote. The allegation? From 2016 to at least 2021, these companies funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal kickbacks to brokers to steer seniors into their Medicare Advantage plans.

If the allegations are true, it means many Americans may have been steered into Medicare Advantage plans that weren’t necessarily the best fit for their needs—not because the plans were better, but because brokers were incentivized by illegal kickbacks.

The Kickback Conspiracy

Navigating Medicare Advantage’s maze of plan options is daunting, so beneficiaries rely on brokers like eHealth, GoHealth, and SelectQuote, who claim to be unbiased guides. But from 2016 to 2021, insurers Aetna, Humana, and Elevance Health allegedly paid brokers millions in kickbacks to favor their plans, regardless of quality. Disguised as “co-op” or “marketing” deals, these payments were tied to enrollment targets. Internal emails revealed executives knew this violated the Anti-Kickback Statute, with one eHealth leader joking that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) would miss a $15 million Humana deal for minimal enrollments. Brokers used call routing to prioritize high-paying insurers, betraying beneficiaries’ trust.

Discrimination Against the Vulnerable

The scheme wasn’t just about profits—it targeted vulnerable beneficiaries. Medicare Advantage must accept all eligible enrollees, including disabled people under 65. Yet Aetna and Humana allegedly pressured brokers to limit their enrollment, as these beneficiaries were deemed to be less profitable. Brokers complied, rejecting referrals and filtering calls to favor healthier enrollees, incentivized by bonuses. This violated federal anti-discrimination laws and CMS contracts, undermining the founding principles of Medicare by discriminating against the very people it was created to aid.

False Claims and the Pursuit of Justice

The schemes led to false claims to CMS, with insurers certifying enrollments as “valid” despite kickbacks and discrimination. The government paid billions, unaware of the fraud. Examples include Humana’s $12,477 for a 2016 enrollment and Aetna’s $79,047 for a 2020 case. On May 1, 2025, the U.S. filed suit, seeking treble damages and penalties under the False Claims Act. Aetna and others deny the allegations, per May 2025 reports, promising a fierce defense. The case, demanding a jury trial, seeks justice for beneficiaries and taxpayers.

Glenn's Show Prep