National Review’s Jonah Goldberg: Moral Leaders Need to Stop Dismissing Trump’s Character

National Review senior editor Jonah Goldberg joined Glenn on today’s show to talk about President Donald Trump’s first year, both good and bad, and why it’s dangerous for moral leaders to make excuses for his deficiencies.

Glenn wanted to know: Why is there no middle ground on Trump? People can’t seem to be able to support him on good things while criticizing him on bad things.

“It’s all or nothing on both sides,” he lamented.

Voters have every right to decide which political leader will benefit their lives more. But Goldberg pointed to comments from Family Research Council President Tony Perkins as an example of extreme and misguided support for Trump. If evangelical leaders want to make excuses for Trump’s reported affair with a porn star, where do they draw the line?

“Going way out there to offer, as [Tony] Perkins called it, a ‘mulligan’ to Trump and basically minimize or dismiss his personal character … I think that’s really problematic for people who pretend to be or claim to be a leading moral authority,” Goldberg said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: A guy who's writing has really affected my life. And I have a ton of respect for. And I think is a brave and funny individual. Jonah Goldberg joins us now.

JONAH: Hey, Glenn, it's great to be here.

GLENN: It's great to have you on.

So let me start with this. Before we get in the news of the day and everything that's going on -- you were outspoken on Donald Trump. Tell me the things that he has done that you say, I can't believe it, this is really good.

JONAH: Oh, gosh. There are a bunch of.

GLENN: Right.

JONAH: Obviously, the judges. Starting with Gorsuch. But also on the lower courts. I like what I've seen, about 90 percent of the deregulation stuff.

And some of it is not necessarily his personal handiwork. I mean, Ajit Pai and Scott Gottlieb are doing great things at the FCC and the FDA.

You know, I think a lot of the things he has done, we would have gotten from any other Republican. But one of the things I think he deserves extraordinary credit for is moving the capital of Jerusalem -- I mean, the capital of Israel to Jerusalem. I'm not sure any other Republican would have done that. I'm not sure any other Republican would have touched Anwar quite yet.

So I think there are some things that he has done that are great. And --

GLENN: It's hard for people to -- it's so funny. Because if you say, well, you know what, I would like to live a little more sustainable life. You know, I think recycling is important. You're immediately a, you know, global warming crackpot to some. And if you, you know -- you know, go you don't believe in that, then all of a sudden, I don't believe in man made global warming, or I don't believe the solutions that we're saying, that will work, will actually work.

Well, all of a sudden, now you're a crackpot on the other side.

And there's no middle ground. There's no way for people to say, you know what, I really like Donald Trump. And I have to give him real high praise on these things. But I'm really kind of disappointed or disgusted by these things. We can't play that middle ground anymore. It's all or nothing on both sides.

JONAH: No. Look, I mean, that's a huge frustration of mine. And I think there are a lot of reasons for it. I really don't like this kind of binary tribal thinking, where everyone has a coalition. And we all must agree with members of our coalition. That our enemy coalition isn't our opponents. It's our enemies.

You know, the Democrats are an existential threat and all that.

Excuse me.

I don't like that kind of thinking.

But I think one of the reasons why we have it so much with Donald Trump is that, you know -- take -- take the various sex scandal allegations that roll out with Donald Trump, the latest one being this thing with Stormy Daniels. It's not enough -- you know, I don't -- I have no problem with voters doing a cost-benefit analysis and saying, you know, look, on net, he's been better for me and better for the country. He's doing things I like. But I really just can't stand some of that personal stuff or the tweeting or whatever.

You see people like Jerry Falwell Jr. and Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council just going way out there to offer, as Perkins called it, a mulligan to Trump and basically minimize or dismiss his personal character stuff. And I think that's really problematic for people who pretend to be -- or claim to be leading moral authorities.

And, you know, Jerry Falwell Jr. took over the mantle of basically his dad's empire, which tried to push Christian morality as deep into politics as they could get it. And I defended them for it for years. But I think one of the reasons why you get this binary thing is that because of Donald Trump's vanity and his narcissism and because of the defensiveness that so many of his biggest supporters have, you can't criticize X, while supporting Y. Because all Donald Trump wants to hear from anybody is flattery. And he needs flattery. And that forces you to either stay silent on things you cannot flatter him on, or to actually flatter him about things that he shouldn't be flattered on. And it's a bad psychological component.

GLENN: So, Jonah, what are you expecting from the State of the Union tonight that actually is meaningful?

I mean, I hate these things. Because it's nothing, but a gift list and an introduction of children without faces.

JONAH: Honestly, I think this is monarchist swill. And that we would be much better off if the president, like in the old days, just sent his letter to Congress.

GLENN: Yeah.

JONAH: Or if we had the State of the Union acted out by mimes. And anyone who -- whoever did the worst by a voice vote, was fed to wolves. I mean, I think that would be better.

GLENN: I think so too.

JONAH: But that -- so stipulated, I don't know.

Look, I think -- you know, his first address, the joint session of Congress, technically wasn't the State of the Union. Everyone is calling this his first State of the Union fine. But he did very well on that first one.

And it was one of the first examples. Because it was right at the beginning of his presidency, of everyone restarting the -- you know, the countdown. You know, it's like, there's a construction site sign outside of the White House that says, X-number of days since an unpresidential action by the president. Right? And that one was, all this stuff about how Donald Trump became president tonight.

Even Van Jones said it was a very forceful and good presentation. And I don't remember what (inaudible) did, but it was a matter of days, if not hours, that a tweet or some other thing that came out that just sort of took the chips off the table.

So, again, I think -- I think he'll probably give a good job. He'll try to make this immigration reform thing, which my magazine supports. I haven't made up my mind. Into a bipartisan overture to the Democrats. He'll try to sound magnanimous. He'll certainly brag about beating ISIS, which I think he should. He'll brag about the effects of the tax cut. And that's all fine and good. I just don't that know it has much lasting power. And I think part of the problem -- one of the surprises I had about the Trump administration was that he didn't immediately go cut deals with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi much earlier on.

GLENN: Yeah.

JONAH: Or didn't try to. And I think one of the reasons why, I think he personally would love to do that. I think he personally emotionally likes this idea of cutting deals, when working with Democrats. He knows those guys better. He grew up around those guys. He used to be one of those guys until fairly recently. But part of the problem was he listened way too much to Steve Bannon at the outset. And it's an unfair and an old joke. But, you know, that inaugural address probably sounded better in the original German.

(laughter)

And this was sort of blood of patriots, you know, Trieste belongs to the Italians kind of talk. And that was Bannon doing that. And he fueled all of that. And the problem was that Trump spent maybe the first six months of his presidency, and continues to this day doing and saying things that culturally and politically make working with Trump radioactive for Democrats, particularly the base.

And that is -- and that is one of the things that has made it is he very difficult for him to go across the aisle. I don't think that was Bannon's plan. I think Bannon actually believed his own BS. And thought this was the beginning of this vast nationalist protectionist movement. And it wasn't.

But Trump has politically painted himself in a corner. And makes it very difficult for Democrats to work with him. And very difficult for him to work with Democrats.

GLENN: We're with Jonah Goldberg. Senior editor of the National Review. I want to ask you, Jonah -- if you don't mind, I'm going to take a quick break. And then I want to come back and talk to you a little bit about tariffs. My kids ask me about tariffs. And why is this bad, Dad? And how does this work?

He has started to move into tariffs, which anybody who is free market really doesn't like. And a $1.7 trillion stimulus package. We'll get into that in a second.

(music)

STU: We should also get an update from Jonah about his new book coming out in a couple months. Suicide of the west: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy.

GLENN: It's going to be really good. Wow.

GLENN: Jonah Goldberg, from the National Review. A deep thinker. And a guy who just knows what he believes and his principles and keeps marching forward. A guy you can trust to have in battle with you.

Jonah, let's talk a little bit about the washing machines in America and why this makes a difference that there's now a tariff on it.

JONAH: Yeah. I mean -- look, I'm a free trader. And I think that free trade -- that protectionism being cast as a populist issue has always been a mistake, right?

The idea that -- what protectionism does, is it puts bureaucrats or businesspeople or politicians between the consumer and the products that they want to buy. It is elites saying, oh, no, these will cost you more. You can't get those. You have to buy this instead.

That's not populism. That's not democracy. That's elitism. That's statism. That's whatever you want to call it.

It is -- you know, Adam Smith recognized this in the Wealth of Nations in 1776, that businessmen are always trying to get an advantage over the public by conspiring to raise prices. And those kinds of conspiracies are almost impossible to stop.

But -- but they can only be effective and really damaging if the government gets involved. And, you know, I wrote, as you know, I wrote this book called liberal fascism, which got into fascist economics, and so much of that is about the government betting in between the producers and the consumers and deciding -- and picking winners and losers.

And that's what protectionism is. And so I get, you know, there are -- there are at the margins good arguments for the government, you know, retaliating against governments that are betraying trade deals, right?

I mean, you don't have to be 1,000 percent purist. My colleague Kevin Williams said in National Review -- just basically says, we should have a constitutional amendment that says, there shall be no tariffs or -- or limits on trade of any kind.

I'm not sure that I am there. You can make some arguments for national security stuff and all the rest. But as a general principle, protectionism boils down to the government picking winners and losers among a certain set of producers of -- or certain manufacturers, of certain goods and saying, we're going to help you out and conspire against the public to set prices higher than what they should be.

And I think it also -- if left to run rampant, always leads to a terrible place.

STU: Jonah, isn't it something too, because we as conservatives have talked for many years about opposing the redistribution of wealth. And if you follow the line of what a tariff purports to do, with the washing machines, for example, we're going to charge, you know, an extra 50 or $100 on every washing machine. It's going to cost people more money. And that money is somehow going to be filtered through the system and eventually get to create a certain amount of jobs. So you're essentially taking 50 or $100 from the average person buying a washing machine. And you're funneling that money to some worker in some city, who is going to make $50,000 or $60,000 on all those little groupings of $50. I know it's not that pure. But that is essentially just redistribution of wealth, which is something we're supposed to be opposed to.

JASON: No. That's exactly right. And it sort of gets to why I honestly and truly believe there should be a 0 percent corporate tax rate. Because no -- economists cannot for the life of them come to a consensus on who pays it. You know, on corporate taxes.

But one thing they're sure is that the consumer pays most of it. Right?

It's not like JE pays the -- you know, takes the corporate tax rate -- corporate tax payments out of some special kitty that -- some bad cat process, right?

It comes at the price of the widgets they sell. And same thing with Coca-Cola or any of these companies. So the idea that -- and the same thing goes with protectionism. There's this idea that somehow the government knows better how to organize a society.

For a couple dragging steelmakers to basically take over the issue of steel trade -- steel imports in this country. And what always gets left out of this is that there are a lot of manufacturers in the United States that need cheap steel to make the other stuff that we want to be manufacturing here.

GLENN: Yeah. It's really amazing, how much we're repeating from the Great Depression on letting these giant companies steer the policy of the United States, which will hurt all of the smaller companies.

I mean, it's a direct repeat, in many ways, from the 1930s.

JONAH: Yeah. Every big -- one of my greatest pet peeves is this mythology that these big corporations are, quote, unquote, right-wing. Right? We know that they aren't cultural issues. You know, big Fortune 500 companies were way ahead of the curve on things like gay marriage and all sorts of other things. I'm not criticizing them for it. I'm just saying that they're not these sort of Thomas Nast cartoons, bastions of like reaction or anything. That Marxist stuff is over.

And when it comes to economic conservatism, they're for every regulation that hurts their competitors and helps them. They're for free trade for me. But not for the -- or the other way around. They look at their bottom lines as sort of rent-seeking entities from the government. Go ahead.

GLENN: I just need to stop you. Because we're getting to a break. And I want to take you to another place. It was announced today that Amazon is partnering with Warren Buffett and JP Morgan Chase to go into the health care insurance business. But how Warren Buffett described it is astounding. We'll get to that, next, with Jonah Goldberg.

GLENN: So earlier today, in fact, it sent some health care stocks tumbling before the opening of the stock market today, Amazon, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase announced that they are exploring the option of getting into the health care business, the health insurance business.

Warren Buffett said, the ballooning costs of the Healthcare Act is a hungry tapeworm on the American economy.

We share the belief that putting our collective resources behind a company's best talent can in time check the rise of health care costs, while concurrently enhancing patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Here's the strange line in this: The company will be free from profit-making incentives and constraints, end quote.

Jonah Goldberg from the National Review. What kind of -- how does that work? I don't -- I don't know how that works.

JONAH: I don't really see it really clearly either. To me, and I haven't studied up on it, but it sounds to me, sort of the equivalent of what Google does. Where did provides, you know, free dry cleaning and, you know, free cafeteria. Free food and all that kind of stuff. And it's all heavily subsidized and doesn't make an enormous -- it doesn't make a profit of any kind. But it retains talent.

And so maybe this is just an effort to create something that, you know, isn't necessarily seen as a profit center, but it's seen as a very useful sort of retention center. Because health costs are eating up a lot of big businesses.

And, you know --

GLENN: So could it be --

JONAH: Reducing cost isn't the same as reducing profits. But in a certain kind of accounting way, it kind of is, right?

GLENN: Right. But I'm trying to -- do you have to be a member of the bank and do everything with Amazon?

I don't --

JONAH: I don't know. I don't quite get it either. I think what they want -- first of all, I think part of the problem is -- and Warren Buffett is very good at this stuff, and so is Jeff Bezos. And so is Jamie Dimon. They want to sound as altruistic as possible.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

JONAH: And so, you know, it's sort of like the old cliche about how, if someone says it's not about the money, it's about the money. If these guys are saying -- I don't trust these guys to say, it's not really about the profits. You can't be two of the three richest people on the planet and not have some concern about profit.

But --

GLENN: Well, you've also left out the nation's largest bank.

JONAH: Well, that too. Except for that, Mrs. Lincoln.

GLENN: Right.

(laughter)

JONAH: So it's a weird thing. And I'm not saying it's impossible for them to be altruistic. You drive around this country and you look at all the libraries named after Getty's and Mellon and those guys. There's a lot of those possibilities. But that doesn't sound like this. This sounds like a very clever PR spin on maybe something that's very smart that will undermine CVS and United Health and some of these other tech -- medical health care giants. And, frankly, they all need to be disrupted and undermined. Because the health care sector just stinks.

GLENN: It just doesn't work.

Yeah. All right. Let me change subjects. Because we have the president's State of the Union address. And I have a feeling he's going to be announcing his $1.7 trillion dollar stimulus package. Conservatives freaked out at 780 -- I mean, I can remember. $787 billion. We thought that was outrageous.

Now it's somewhere between 1.5 and 1.7 on a stimulus package. That comes the same week that someone advised the president that we should be building -- the government should be building the 5G network. Thank God for Ajit Pai from the FCC. And the other, both Republicans and Democrats on the FCC said, no, we don't have any place doing that.

Who -- who is advising the president right now on some of these things? And do you see us being able to effect this out-of-control spending and kind of, you know, adoption of, let the state take this business on attitude?

JONAH: Well. This is not going to make me popular with anybody. But I think one of the things that has been remarkable about the Trump presidency so far is how well under incredibly trying circumstances the institutions, particularly, you know, the House and the Senate and the establishment, generally, including in his own administration, has been able to manage and direct the Trump presidency from some of Trump's worst instincts. And, you know, I think Trump probably wanted to do infrastructure, day one. He wanted tariffs, day one. You know, he wanted all sorts of things day one that Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell said no to. Or sort of engineered the system to make it impossible.

And the problem is, is all they were really doing is kicking the can down the road. There are very few things that constitute core ideological beliefs of Donald Trump. One of them is protectionism. Another one is this infrastructure stuff. And he still has this belief, which Bannon had too, that spending hugely on infrastructure can buy Democratic support.

I don't think that's necessarily true anymore. I think it would have been true at the beginning of his presidency. But he didn't go that way.

In terms of the more dismaying, you know, sort of ideological corruption of the G.O.P., to supporting this stuff, I find it repugnant.

You know, if you honestly believe in protectionism and if you honestly believe in massive, you know, Keynesian economic spending, where you just give the economy this huge sugar rush and all that kind of stuff. If you believe that stuff, you have -- is there a reason for you to go out there and advocate for it?

But there are so many people, I know, personally, who don't believe this stuff. And who have suddenly changed to endorsing it. Or didn't believe this stuff. But suddenly endorse it because Donald Trump likes it.

Now, it is possible that some of these politicians in closed rooms have been ensorcelled by Donald Trump's Aristotelian gift for persuasion and rhetoric and explaining to them that protectionism is better.

But I don't think that's really the case. I think this is purely an example of power corrupting people. Of people sucking up to power. Of bending and jettisoning their principles in order to be in the good graces of the ruler. And it's very, very sad. And the G.O.P. to the extent that it's going to be a conservative party, free market party going into the future, is going to spend decades cleaning up this mess.

GLENN: Jonah, could I ask you to come back at some point and just tell me what it was like growing up in your home?

JONAH: Sure.

GLENN: I mean, your dad -- you just released one of your dad's writings. Your dad wrote for the Wall Street Journal. So he was -- you know, you grew up around a guy who was in -- in and around these circles and monitoring them. You know, since you were little. Your mother was the one who told Monica Lewinsky, save the dress. And make a tape.

Not Monica Lewinsky. But Linda Tripp.

I can't even imagine -- I know my experience of -- of, you know, just that one event, I can't imagine that my mother was involved in any way or not, how -- how this just affected you.

JONAH: Well, you forget that when my mom -- when I was a little, little kid, my mom was in a scandal with the Nixon administration, which we can get into some other time.

But, yeah, you know, look, I had a strange childhood. And, you know, I'm not -- I'm not your typical pseudointellectual demi Jew from the upper West Side of Manhattan.

And it's -- you know, but I'm very grateful to my parents to the sort of weird, goofy, strange upbringing that they gave me. You know, my dad's idea of -- my dad was your classic sort of Jewish intellectual. And his idea of a vacation was either going to the other side of the couch to read a different magazine, or book. Or going to Europe and looking at museums. Or going on long walks with his sons to explain to them why Stalin was really, really bad.

And, you know, that was sort of my -- you know, I got most of my education from my dad.

GLENN: Did you ever kind of roll your eyes -- because every child goes through a period where they're like, oh, jeez, they're going through this stuff again.

Did you ever roll your eyes on that Stalin stuff, or did you buy it the whole time?

JONAH: Well, it was -- a lot of it was sort of like the karate kid, where Ralph Macchio doesn't know why he's waxing on and waxing off. And paint the fence up and down and up and down. And then all of a sudden, sort of my late teens, I kind of discovered, holy crap, I know a lot more about this stuff than everybody else in this room.

And to me, it was just my dad talking. And, you know, I used to tell people that, you know, one of my earlier memories is of my dad pushing me on a swing, explaining how the Yugoslavian black hand was the first modern character.

And one time, I wrote about this in the eulogy I wrote to my dad, where we're walking down the street, going to get bagels on a Sunday morning. I couldn't have been older than seven, maybe eight.

And all of a sudden, my dad stopped dead in the middle of the sidewalk. Squeezed my hand really hard. And said to me, totally straight face. Jonah, if you are ever pulled over in a South American country, tell the officer I'm so sorry, is there any way I can pay the fine right here? You don't want to go down to the jail.

And then we went back to walking. And I thought, okay. Daddy. You know, I mean.

So he was a strange -- he was a peculiar duck, as you would like to say.

GLENN: Who did you get your sense of humor from? Mom or dad?

JONAH: The dry stuff I get from my dad, the more Gonzo crazy stuff I get from my mom.

GLENN: Yeah. So the more dry stuff -- you're implying that there is a shot that maybe your dad was joking about the, you know, South American police officers?

JONAH: Unclear. He just thought that kind of stuff -- it amused him to say it. But he almost never broke character.

I'll give you another example. Again, I wrote about it in the eulogy. When I was a teenager, long story short, I accidentally rubbed some hot sauce in my eye. And I went running into the bathroom to wash out my eye. And I'm like tearing up. And it stinks. Whatever.

My dad walks by. Bathroom door is open. He walks in, and he says, what happened? And I'm like, blubbering. Oh, I got hot sauce in my eye. I was eating cheese and crackers. And he just dead-panned said, "Damn it. I wish I had told you not to rub hot sauce in your eye." And just walked out of the room.

GLENN: Jonah Goldberg, you can follow him at the National Review Online. I follow his Twitter page.

STU: Yeah. @JonahNRL. I'm very now concerned that I'm doing a terrible job as a parent. I have not told my kids to not put hot sauce in their eyes or what to do when they get arrested in a South American country. But I got a couple years to get that. A couple things from Jonah.

GLENN: We have to talk to him about this too. We have so much stuff to talk about. Is Jonah still on the line?

Jonah, can you give us a highlight of your new book. When does it come out?

JONAH: It doesn't come out until April. For some people I try to explain it, it's kind of like a prequel to liberal fascism. And it explains where our -- where the greatness of western civilization and where the greatness of America comes from. And how our decline is a choice. And the greatest threat to America and the West is the pervasive ingratitude to how good we have it and how we got here.

The table starts about 250,000 years ago and goes through the invention -- how we got capitalism, how we got democracy, all the way up to the present day. So it's a big book.

And I'm pretty proud of it. So...

GLENN: And the name of it? Suicide of the western --

JONAH: The Suicide of the West. Which is somewhat of an homage to a famous conservative intellectual named James Burnham who wrote a book by the same name in I think 1964, I want to say. And it covers some of that ground, but gets into a lot of economic theory. And I think is pretty readable. And even if you disagree with some of my points, there's just a lot of interesting, fun stuff in there. So...

GLENN: Yeah. Jonah, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

JONAH: Hey, thank you, guys.

GLENN: You bet. Buh-bye. He doesn't sound like he's like his dad at all, in going to the other side of the couch for a book.

STU: No. Not at all. Not at all.

GLENN: He's always, it starts 25,000 years ago.

Oh, okay. So it's simple. So all right. Good.

STU: That's the good thing about -- because liberal fascism is not a simple topic at all. But it's so readable. That's why I love Jonah's stuff.

GLENN: He's funny. He finds a way to distill it.

How big is that book? Three hundred pages? Three hundred fifty pages? It's not a long -- and it covers everything. It's really good.

11 things you can do to help stop the Great Reset

Photo by Arthur Franklin on Unsplash

The foundation of the American way of life is freedom from tyranny, which can only exist in a nation that defends the rights, powers, and property of individuals and families. Over the past two centuries, the greatest threats to liberty have come from governments, both foreign and domestic. And from the beaches of Normandy to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, Americans have repeatedly conquered the challenges placed before them by those seeking to extinguish or limit individual rights.

However, over the past few years, a new, potentially catastrophic danger has emerged, but not primarily from the halls of Congress or state capitols. This threat to freedom has largely emanated from the board rooms of the world’s wealthiest, most powerful corporations, large financial institutions, central banks, and international organizations such as the United Nations and World Economic Forum.

In an attempt to secure vast amounts of wealth and influence over society, corporate CEOs, bankers, and investors, working closely with key government officials, have launched a unified effort to impose environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards on most of the industrialized global economy. ESG standards are also referred to as “sustainable investment” or “stakeholder capitalism.” According to a report by KPMG, thousands of companies, located in more than 50 countries, already have ESG systems in place, including 82 percent of large companies in the United States.

ESG standards are designed to create a “great reset of capitalism” and to “revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.” ESG supporters plan to enact these radical changes by using ESG schemes to alter how businesses and investments are evaluated, so that instead of focusing on the quality of goods and services, profits, and other traditional economic metrics, companies — including financial institutions — are evaluated largely on their commitment to social justice and environmental causes and then assigned scores so that companies can be compared, rewarded, or potentially punished.

Supporters of the movement for a Great Reset also plan on using technology to limit free speech and privacy rights, and they support creating vast new government programs that are designed to transform the Western economy via the Green New Deal, European Green Deal, a federal jobs guarantee, and basic income programs.

Together, the proposals that make up the Great Reset represent the most serious threat to freedom in the West since the fall of the Soviet Union and perhaps since World War II. But there is hope. We can stop the Great Reset, but only if we act quickly and with great conviction.

Below are 11 steps you can take to push back against the Great Reset. These steps represent a powerful bottom-up, grassroots approach to the Great Reset’s top-down plan to remake the world. Although many of these steps won’t be easy for everyone to take, they are essential for ensuring that our children and grandchildren will grow up in a world that protects the rights of individuals and empowers families, rather than wealthy special interests, financial institutions, and large corporations.

1. Live Not by Lies: The time for remaining quiet is over. When you hear or see something that you know to be false, speak up. Be kind, generous, and compassionate, but do not, under any circumstances, allow lies to infect your life. Further, do not support organizations, publications, politicians, schools, or any other institutions that regularly promote false claims.

2. Buy Local: The reason the Great Reset is so powerful is because so many of us have become totally dependent on large multinational corporations. They can be easily manipulated in a way that small, local businesses cannot. Learn to buy local, whenever possible, even if it means spending more money on your purchases. Yes, big corporations offer conveniences and low prices that many small businesses can’t compete with, but those benefits come with a great cost: your freedom.

3. Bank Local: Big financial institutions and banks are driving much of the Great Reset movement. They have started to use their incredible wealth and power to alter society by financing only those businesses who agree to the terms of the Great Reset. This problem is going to get worse, so it’s important to find local banks and credit unions you can trust and who refuse to utilize ESG scores and other discriminatory schemes.

4. Support Local Farms: If you live in an area that has local farms and farmer’s markets, consider buying as many of your groceries as possible from farmers. In the future, food production and distribution are going to change dramatically. It’s important that you support local farmers and build relationships with individuals who can provide you with the goods you need in a time of crisis. One of our main goals must be to make local communities as self-sufficient as possible, and that cannot happen unless we support local farms.

5. Be Vocal: After starting to shop and bank locally, be sure to tell big financial institutions and corporations why they have lost your business. They need to know that their decisions have serious consequences.

6. Run for Local Government: Local and state governments will soon be our most important defense against the Great Reset. Consider running for your local school board, zoning board, or even for a state legislative office. If you don’t feel qualified for these positions, find someone who shares your values and help them run for office. If we don’t have control of our local governments, we won’t be able to halt the Great Reset.

7. Demand That Your State Pass Laws Against ESG Scores: In America, states have a tremendous amount of power to slow the Great Reset and protect their citizens from abuses by large corporations, banks, and international institutions. They can do this by passing laws that make the use of ESG metrics and other, similar systems by financial institutions illegal, when used as a precondition for banking services, financing, investment, etc. ESG scores are, by definition, discriminatory and should be made illegal by state lawmakers who care about protecting their citizens’ rights.

8. Make Responsible Spending a Key Issue for Politicians: In recent years, politicians on the ideological left and right have totally abandoned responsible fiscal policy in favor of vast money printing and loose monetary policies. The many trillions of dollars that have been “printed” in recent years put our economy at risk and are being used to fuel the Great Reset. Without these trillions of dollars of printed money, it would be exceptionally difficult for governments and financial institutions to buy off corporations.

9. Organize Anti-Great Reset Groups: No matter where you live, there are Americans in your community who do not support the Great Reset — Republicans, Democrats, and independents alike. Find like-minded neighbors and organize a local, peaceful resistance. Find people you can trust and agree to support one another when times get tough. Now, more than ever, we need to develop dependable communities.

10. Buy Property and Diversify: Property ownership is going to become increasingly more difficult in the months and years to come. It’s important that you work with a qualified financial adviser to help you figure out the best way to buy property and diversify your investments. Buying hard assets, including real estate and precious metals, could be a good way for you to protect against the Great Reset and a possible financial collapse. If you already own property, resist selling it to large corporations and financial institutions, whenever possible. (This is not financial advice, and I’m not a financial adviser. Talk to an expert you trust before taking action!)

11. Make the Great Reset a Litmus Test for Politicians: Before supporting politicians, find out if they know what the Great Reset is and what they plan to do to stop it. If they aren’t familiar with the Great Reset or don’t have a plan to halt it, then demand that they learn about the Great Reset and develop a proposal to prevent it. Political leaders who refuse to take the Great Reset seriously do not deserve your support. This is the key issue of our generation.

Scott Quiner was transferred over the weekend to a hospital in Texas after doctors in Minnesota threated to terminate life support measures as he battled severe complications from COVID-19. Scott's wife, Anne Quiner, appealed to the courts for a restraining order to prevent the hospital from pulling the plug as she sought a new facility to provide medical care for her husband. Scott was unvaccinated when he tested positive for COVID-19 in late October, 2021.

Anne and her attorney Marjorie Holsten joined "The Glenn Beck Program" Thursday to describe their frantic efforts to halt the hospital's decision to turn off Scott's life support — allegedly because he was unvaccinated — and just how difficult it was to get him the medical treatment he needed.

"It was absolutely stunning," Holsten told Glenn. "[Anne] came in and she has this order, I saw the screenshot from the [online medical] chart that said [Scott] is basically scheduled for execution at noon the following day."

According to Holsten, the Minnesota hospital responded to her appeal for a restraining order by claiming that the "position" to keep Scott alive "is not supported by medical science or Minnesota law. As a result, Mercy will ask the court to issue an order that Mercy has the authority to discontinue Mr. Quiner's ventilator and proceed with his medical care plan."

"The 'medical care plan' was the plan to discontinue the ventilator at noon, which leads to death very shortly. So that was at 10 o'clock, but then at 11 o'clock, before the 12 o'clock execution, the judge did, in fact, sign an order saying the hospital is restrained from pulling the plug," she added.

Anne told Glenn that doctors in Texas were shocked by Scott's condition after he arrived from the Minnesota hospital. Not only had he been given dangerous drugs, he was also found to be “severely malnourished."

"The doctor [in Texas] spent two hours with Scott and when he came back out, he said, 'I don't know how he even made it, how he even survived that other hospital ... but I will do everything I can to try to save his life,'" Anne explained.

"And the doctor [in Texas] said Scott was the most undernourished patient he has ever seen," Holsten added.

"Glenn, we are first bringing this battle to the court of public opinion," Holsten continued. "What we are showing the world is that Scott was near death because of the protocols used in that [Minnesota] hospital, but now he is recovering. He is getting better.... Now, we're not planning a funeral, we're planning for his release."

Watch the video clip below for more details.

If you'd like to help support the Quiner family, please consider making a donation to GiveSendGo.com/Anne.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

The Great Reset is not just an elitist idea — it’s not even a socialist utopian concept. It’s a real-world fascist threat to every American from Wall Street to Main Street. It’s happening now in policies and cultural shifts big and small, obvious and subtle, from environmental promises to corporations going woke. But the mainstream media, global elites, and politicians brushed off the Great Reset as “nothing to see here.” Another myth they push: “The World Economic Forum is just a conference for elites who have no REAL power.”

Glenn Beck first exposed the Great Reset almost two years ago, and the globalist cries of "conspiracy theorist" soon followed. They said he believed the WEF was a “master cabal calling the shots from some evil underground lair.” But Glenn Beck never said that. Instead, he uncovered the true intentions of global leaders in finance and politics by simply highlighting their own words.

This week, the same global elites are doubling down on their agenda at the World Economic Forum’s Davos Agenda virtual event. But still, the global elites — like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey — are trying to downplay the WEF’s influence to stop people like us from interfering with their plans. The oligarchy will prosper in the new world order they’ve designed. You will not.

So Glenn unveils a master chalkboard based on his best-selling new book to outline the threats from globalists and why we must stop their agenda if we hope to keep the precious freedoms we still have.

Watch the full episode of "GlennTV' Below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Kim Iversen, journalist, YouTuber, and host of "The Kim Iversen Show," reacted to Glenn Beck's appearance last week on "Tucker Carlson Tonight" by conceding that, while the subject of Beck's new book, "The Great Reset: Joe Biden and the Rise of Twenty-First-Century Fascism" might at first sound "a little bit loony," closer analysis confirms "this isn't such a crazy conspiracy theory after all."

"Glenn Beck was on Tucker Carlson's show last week touting what has been called a right-wing conspiracy theory and discussing his new book, 'The Great Reset: Joe Biden and the Rise of Twenty-First-Century Fascism'," began Iverson on The Hill's "Rising."

"Well, maybe that all sounds a little bit loony — and believe me, I do think Glenn Beck tends to be a loon," she quipped. "But, maybe this isn't such a crazy conspiracy theory after all. And after seeing everything we've seen with the governments enacting all sorts of authoritarian controls and many other conspiracy theories coming true, maybe there's something to be concerned about. So, what is the Great Reset? The name even sounds conspiratorial, but believe it or not, it's a real thing."

Iverson went on to explain exactly who is behind the Great Reset, what their agenda entails, how they are using the COVID-19 pandemic to "to rebuild society in a way the global elites see best fit."

"You'll own nothing and you will be happy: That's what they're saying," Iverson explained. "And with inflation sky high and no signs of it slowing down, they might be right. We are on our way to becoming a nation of renters, but don't worry it's nothing to fear ... don't worry, everything is being done under the premise that this is all ... being done for our own good, the benefit of a collective society, and we will be happy," she added sarcastically.

Iverson concluded by asking, "Who thinks it's a good idea that a bunch of corporate millionaire and billionaires and world leaders are getting together and coming up with what's best for we the little people? I mean, who thinks that that's a really good idea? And who thinks that they are going to be doing it for our benefit? But, of course they're going to frame it like 'Oh, this is good for you. You're going to rent. You'll own nothing and you'll be happy. Don't worry about it' ... When you look at the actual list of partners with the World Economic Forum, they control everything. They control media. They control health. They control business. They control everything, and so then it does become, how do we people fight against that?"

Watch the video clip below to hear Kim Iverson break it down and don' t miss Wednesday night's special episode of "GlennTV" on BlazeTV’s YouTube channel.

Iversen joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to discuss what The Great Reset is and how YOU can help stop it. Watch the video clip from "The Glenn Beck Program" below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.