BLOG

‘Social Media Doesn’t Reward That’: Why Can’t Conservatives, Liberals Listen to Each Other?

How do we heal division in our country when we can’t even have conversations?

“I really feel one of the biggest problems is nobody’s listening at all,” Glenn said on today’s show while sitting down with Eric Liu. “Nobody feels heard right now.”

Liu, founder and CEO of Citizen University, leans liberal in his political views but has the same passion for bringing people together. He pointed out that we’ll have to be better than our political leaders if we want to reach across the aisle. We’re learning terrible habits from our political leaders and the way social media encourages extreme views.

“That’s a set of habits that nobody’s modeling for us in national politics,” Liu said. “Nothing in our daily lives rewards that. Social media doesn’t reward that.”

Listen to their full conversation on today’s show here:

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So much to the, I think, chagrin of my friends and chagrin of his friends, we are friends, Eric Liu. He is the founder and CEO Of Citizen University. Also, the executive director of the Aspen Institute. Citizenship and American Identity Program.

He's -- he's from Seattle. I don't think I need to say anything else. He's from Seattle.

(laughter)

GLENN: So we don't necessarily agree on everything. But we have become friends because we both are trying to find sane ways to have conversations with each other and other people. Or we're doomed. We're doomed.

Welcome. How are you?

ERIC: Glenn, it's great to be back. It's great to see you.

GLENN: How is Seattle?

ERIC: It's beautiful. It's thriving. It's booming. You know, you grew up in the area.

GLENN: I know. I love it. I love it. I love it.

I don't think I would be welcomed there anymore. I don't think I was welcomed there ten years ago, let alone today.

ERIC: Well, we'll follow-up and bring you back together, and we'll do something in Seattle.

GLENN: Yeah, good. I would love to.

So would you agree with me that both sides, to one degree or another, have become unhinged on the extreme edges?

ERIC: Yeah. I think our politics today, and especially if you spend more than ten minutes on social media, it is about voices on the unhinged extremes.

GLENN: Yeah.

ERIC: And it's about this pattern that plays out over and over, where each extreme has to gin it up in order to feed the rage and the anger about the other side's extreme.

GLENN: Yeah.

ERIC: You know, that is our politics as it's mediated, you know, especially through social media. But I think -- you were talking about this before we went on-air. There is a broad swath of, you know, sane people. You know, interested bystanders. People who aren't super active in politics, super active in commenting on politics, who just want to understand each other, and who just want to fix stuff.

GLENN: Yeah.

ERIC: And some of them are as progressive as I am. And some of them are as Libertarian as you are. And many of them are all points in between. But they're not interested in the game-playing and the posturing that so much of national politics is about today.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, I -- we're making everything about politics now. Absolutely everything is about politics.

And we're not going to survive. That's nuts.

The story today came out on sports -- sports illustrated. They just did a swimsuit issue, that doesn't have any swimsuits. All of the women are completely naked. And they're beautiful women. One is lying down naked, face up with the word "truth" painted on her rib cage. Another one is naked with "feminist" emblazoned on her arm. The other is the daughter of Christie Brinkley that is staring at the camera, laying on her side with the word "progress" written across her back. And they've put this -- this is -- I don't understand this. This is Sports Illustrated, a magazine for men, trying to say, see, we shouldn't objectify women. I don't understand that.

ERIC: Yeah. There's a lot that is great fundamentally about the Me Too movement and the fact that our society is waking up to shifting norms on what's okay when it comes to actually treating women with respect.

GLENN: I agree. I agree. I agree. Yes.

ERIC: But I do not look to Sports Illustrated as my moral guide on the objectification of women. Okay?

GLENN: How do we find a way -- and tell me what your feelings are on the people that, you know, on the -- on the dangers -- even Margaret at wood brought this up, the dangers of just these kangaroo courts, who are not even a kangaroo court. Just, you're guilty, and you're done if anybody accuses you.

ERIC: The danger is there. But I think actually as a society, we're navigate it right now. I mean, this is somewhat uncharted. Right? It's not like the society has tried before to have deep equity between men and women, on what -- who gets to harass whom. We've never done that before. We're having a society-wide reckoning.

Are there going to be cases where people abuse that -- the power that comes with that?

Sure. But are our institutions and are the leaders in our institutions fundamentally trying to reckon with that in good-faith? I actually think we are.

And even this kind of absurd Sports Illustrated cover is a sign that -- you know, one thing you can say about Sports Illustrated is they're trying to tune into the zeitgeist. They are aware of the market place, right? And they know the zeitgeist is, you got to be on the right side of the speech. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

But if I did photos of naked women and put #metoo, I don't think I would get the pass that --

ERIC: Well, exactly.

GLENN: -- from either side, in my case. From either side.

STU: Yeah.

ERIC: The question is one of -- you know, in the law, they talk about standing. Do you have standing to make a case? Right?

During the Super Bowl, we all watched the ads and stuff. I didn't think Dodge Ram trucks had the moral standing to use an MLK speech about the dangers of commercialism to sell trucks. To me, that was -- and to lots of Americans, that was, you know what, message and messenger not aligned here.

GLENN: You mean the MLK message?

ERIC: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: So the MLK message -- may I present an opposite point of view. That's a sermon that most Americans have not heard, was really good. I agree with you that the images of the truck coming in, halfway in. You're like, okay. That's really -- you don't need that.

Just a simple Dodge at the end would have been perfect.

ERIC: Yeah. Yes. Would have been great.

GLENN: However, I have had more email on a monologue that I did on forgiveness, and I used that sermon the very next day. I've had more email on that from people who woke up. So, I mean, you can't necessarily reject it as universally bad that they did it. Because it did affect people.

ERIC: Well, look, I mean, Sports Illustrated was trying to do something like the right thing. But the equivalent would have been, had they had a cover -- if they said, this year's swimsuit issue, here's what it looks like. And it was a black cover that just said, we're taking some responsibility for feeding this culture in which women are treated like objects and which men feel they have permission to treat women like objects. We own a piece of that.

GLENN: And it would be the lowest selling Sports Illustrated.

STU: But that would be a powerful statement. Writing it on naked women's bodies doesn't seem quite as --

ERIC: It would be low-selling as a swimsuit issue. But the whole country would be talking about it. Would be talking about Sports Illustrated.

GLENN: Yeah, that's true. That's true.

So who have you found, Eric, I have been looking for a while, people like you, that we don't necessarily agree, but we can have really good conversations. And we can move things forward together.

ERIC: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Who have you found on the -- on the left or in the media that is really willing to do that?

ERIC: Hmm. You know, and I'm not sure if she's been a guest on your show, but my friend Neera Tanden --

GLENN: Nope.

ERIC: -- who runs the Center for American Progress.

Big, big progressive think tank, that I know you cross swords with. Right? But Neera is both able and willing to have conversations with anybody. And to have them in ways that aren't just the made for TV food fight, that are really trying to say, what's your deal? Right.

What are you getting at here?

GLENN: I really feel one of the biggest problems is nobody is listening at all.

ERIC: Yeah.

GLENN: Nobody feels heard right now.

Somehow or another, the left still controls most of the media. Doesn't feel heard. And the right now that they control the House and the Senate, they don't feel heard. And it's because nobody is -- nobody is actually -- I guess emoting what the average person is feeling right now. You know, we're all scared. It's amazing. I saw a YouTube video of a liberal talking about how afraid she was that Donald Trump was going to build concentration camps. And it was in a room -- probably had 1,000 people in it. And they were all like, yeah, yeah. And I remember, I debunked the lie about Obama making concentration camps. Because that was a big deal.

STU: A big conspiracy theory at the time.

GLENN: Big conspiracy. I was called a conspiracy theorist for debunking that conspiracy theory. And now the other side is feeling the same kind of fear that so many Americans did when they didn't trust the president. And I think this is a moment where we can wake up and say, see, this is why the president should never have this much power. The president should not be able to affect our lives, to the point to where we're afraid of him.

STU: Yeah.

ERIC: I actually agree with that. I think there's one lesson that people on the left are learning today, and that is the dangers of this imperial presidency. Right?

Which is not a Trump phenomenon or even an Obama phenomenon. It's been going back half a century at least, right?

GLENN: Been going for a long time, yeah, yeah.

ERIC: At least since World War II. Right? Concentration, power in the executive, right?

GLENN: Yeah.

ERIC: But I think you're -- I want to go back to something you were saying about listening and being heard, right?

We live in this time right now where there is -- and we've talked about this. There's so much pain. There's so much pain.

The segment you were doing right before the break, in which you were just speaking to a human, an individual about the pain they were feeling in their journey. And you were tying it to the pain that you have felt at various points in your journey, right?

That kind of conversation which is both about listening -- but it's about, I'm not just listening to the words you're saying and the points you're making. I'm trying to listen underneath, to the emotional currents there. That's a set of habits that nobody is modeling for us in national politics. And that we as citizens, frankly, it's gotten easier for us to shed those habits. Because nothing in our daily lives rewards that, right? Social media doesn't reward that.

GLENN: The media doesn't reward --

ERIC: The media doesn't reward that.

So we've actually got to build experiences where we see each other face-to-face again. You know, if we were having this conversation by phone, this would be different. But I'm looking you in the eye right now, Glenn. And I'm looking at you as you've spoken about these questions. And there's a human connection here. That I can't now just call you a nutjob and call you a this and call you a that. Like, we've connected on some level, right? It doesn't mean we're going to agree on the issues.

But it means I'm not going to demonize. And I think the deepest ill in our politics is how we've forgotten how to rehumanize each other.

GLENN: That's -- I just wrote a member of the press morning, a private conversation, that dealt with that. I said, we are -- we are calling each other subhumans, exactly the way the early, you know, 1920s Nazis were starting to. Train people that you're subhuman. If you don't agree with me, you're subhuman. And we're training each other that way.

But it doesn't -- social media is not the only one that doesn't reward it. Media doesn't reward it either. I mean, if you're not going to call somebody a nutjob or a Nazi. You don't win. And they don't put you on. And you, Stu -- was it you yesterday that said that you had seen somebody say, no, well, on the surface, this means X and X. And the guy was like, no. But that's -- can you tell the story?

STU: Yeah. It was an interview about some controversial comment that had gone on media. And they had brought someone on to kind of answer for it. And the typical kind of cable news back and forth. And that's essentially, when the person was pushing back against it. To say, yeah, but you got to admit on the service, it's an insult.

It's like, well, isn't the point here as human beings, that we go beyond the surface, that we think a little deeper about these things?

Because we can all get frustrated at the surface of it. We can all find the worst possible intent of a comment and turn it into something that is going to enrage our side. But that shouldn't be our goal.

GLENN: So, Eric, how do we do that?

ERIC: Well, it starts with something I actually want to give you guys credit for, which is, you got to put something at risk. Right?

When you started a couple years ago saying, I own my piece of how our politics and our political culture have gotten toxic. And I've decided I want to be part of the solution. I want to start reaching out and having conversations across certain divides, right? You put a bunch of stuff at risk.

You feel it acutely, right? You feel it every day. You put -- I don't have to name it. Right? It's not just about the business side of things and the listeners and the sponsors or whatever. I'm talking about reputational power and so forth, right? You put stuff at risk.

And I often ask myself and I ask my friends who are left of center, what are we willing to put at risk in order to change this politics? In order to go a little deeper, beyond the surface and beyond just this throwing of flames at each other? Right.

So number one, it's being willing -- and I want to name the fact that you all have started something and set in motion a different cycle of responsibility, taking rather than responsibility shirking with, right?

GLENN: Thank you.

ERIC: There is only one way to break the cycle of dehumanization and responsibility shirking, and that is to break it.

GLENN: Yeah.

ERIC: That is to say, you know what, I didn't start it. I'm not the one to blame. But darn it, I'm actually just going to say, I'm stopping right now, and I'm trying to change direction here. Go a little deeper. And rehumanize. And, yeah, I may pay some price for that. But this is a question of purpose.

STU: One of -- a famous poet said, we didn't start the fire.

GLENN: It was Billy Joel. Stop it.

ERIC: A poet. Yes, indeed.

(laughter)

GLENN: So what do your friends say to you, when you say, what are we willing to lose? What chip are we willing to put up?

ERIC: Let me tell you about something we've been doing at Citizen University. For the last year plus now, a year and a quarter, we've been doing these regular gatherings that we call civic Saturday. And these are basically a civic analogue to church. It's not church. It's not synagogue or mosque. But it's about American civic religion. Right? The stuff that you and I, civic nerds, are steeped in. Right? Understanding the language and the texts and what you might think of as civic scripture, whether that's from the declaration of the preamble or King speeches or Susan B. Anthony or whatever it might be, and understanding that we have all inherited this body of values and text and idea. And we do these gatherings with the Ark of the Faith gathering.

We sing together. You turn to the stranger next to you. You talk about a common question. There are readings of these texts.

There's a sermon that I've been giving. And then afterwards, there's more song. And then there's an hour afterwards where people kind of form up in circles and talk about, what are we going to do together? Right?

And I go to length to tell you about this, because number one, it's been amazing how people have responded to this. There is this need, across the left and the right, whether you are traditionally religious or not, there is this need in our political life for a space where we can come together and rehumanize, right?

Number one. Number two, when in that space, I've said to folks in these sermons what I've said here, which is, we've got to be willing to take risks. We've got to be willing to ask ourselves, what are we willing to put on the line?

And people are -- people sit there for a minute because they haven't been asked/challenged to do that in a long time, right? All of our political leadership is about, let me indulge you. Let me indulge your worst instincts. Let me indulge you. Not what can you do? And maybe even give up a little bit, in order to start solving the problem, right? And that leads to different kinds of conversations.

And, frankly, not all of them are about Trump or national politics. A lot of these conversations then come to life in our city, which is changing dramatically right now.

GLENN: That's what it should come down to in the first place.

ERIC: Yeah.

GLENN: Eric, we're going to continue our conversation at 5 o'clock tonight on the Glenn Beck Program. He has written a book, You're More Powerful than You Think. His name is Eric Liu. And we'll have more tonight at 5 o'clock. Make sure you join us on TheBlaze.com/TV.

RADIO

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

A new report accuses CAIR Action, the political arm of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, of breaking state laws with its political activism. Glenn Beck reviews this story...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me go over what is -- what's happening with -- with CAIR.

You know, the Founding Fathers were obsessed over accountability.

Because they knew one thing. You know, they did. They must get suggestions from people on, you know, through tweets. They studied every single system of government.

Every single republic that survived. That didn't survive.

Why didn't it survive?

They studied all forms of government. They were trying to come up with something that could -- could set people free.

And they -- they worked really hard on putting our checks and balances in place, because they knew, once power slips into the shadows. They knew, once power slips into the shadows, once influence becomes unmoored from law, what rises is not a republic.

It's a machine. And that's what you're seeing right now. We're not living in a republic. We're living in a machine.

We -- I think we're staring at one of the largest unregulated political machines operating in the United States ever! Okay.

There have been a couple of groups that are doing sweeping investigations, two watchdog groups. One of them is NCRI and the Intelligent Advocacy Network.

And they have concluded now that the political arm of CAIR, he known as CAIR action, has been operating nationwide with no legal authority, to do the things it has been doing for years now.

They're not allowed to raise money. They've been raising money. Coordinating political campaigns.

Not allowed to do it. Endorsing candidates. Not allowed to do it, they're doing it. Mobilizing voters, shaping policy, functioning as a national advocacy network.

They don't have the legal authority to do any of it. And no one has said anything.

Now, according to the report, CAIR action doesn't just have a paperwork problem.

Investigators found, state by state, that it lacks the license, the registrations. The charitable authorizations, required to legally solicit money.

Excuse me. Or conduct political activity, in any of the 22 states in which it operates. Think of that!

I know how serious this is, because I remember what it took to get the license in each and every state, for Mercury One.

So we could operate. We could raise money. We could do things in those states. It's a lot of work. And if you don't do it, you go to jail. And they find out pretty quickly.

Okay?

22 states, they operate not one, zero legal authorization.

In Washington, DC, the city where CAIR action is incorporated, the department of licensing and consumer protection told investigators, they have no record of CAIR action ever obtaining the basic business license required to solicit funds or to operate.

Imagine how long would you last in business, especially if you were controversial.

How long would you remain in business, if you never had a business license?

You think somebody would figure that out?

In a sooner time than I don't know. A couple of decades!

This report means, that the organization if true, is engaging in unlicensed inner state solicitation.

It has exposed itself to allegations as serious as deceptive solicitation. Wire fraud and false statements to the IRS. These are big things.

And this is not political rhetoric.

Are these phrases written in black and white. In the law.

And by investigators. In California, one of CAIR's most active hubs. The state attorney general has said, the state attorney general of California has said, same pattern here!

The state of California, to say, yep. That's what's happening here.

CAIR action has never registered with California's charitable registry.

Never filed the required CT1 form. And has no authorization whatsoever to request donations. But they've been doing it in California anyway.

Fundraising, selling memberships. Issuing endorsements. Mobilizing voters. All of that has been done by CAIR action. There's no record of any license. Any permission, ever. Going to CAIR. From California. That's according to their attorney general.

Wow!

That's pretty remarkable, huh? How does that happen?

It's not just the coast. It is also happening to the Midwest, the South, the Mountain West. Every state hosting its own CAIR action fundraising page, complete with the donate now and become a member portal, despite no trace of the legal filings required to operate. That's bad!

Now, here's where the stakes rise.

Because CAIR action presents itself openly, as the political arm of CAIR National.

Investigators are now warning that any unauthorized fundraising or political activity.

Could become CAIR's national responsibility as well.

So, in other words, the parent, CAIR itself, might be held responsible.

Meaning, this is want just a rogue subdivision.

This could implicate the entire National Organization of CAIR.

Now, this is happening at the same time it's coming under national scrutiny. It's also Texas.

And I think Florida have designated the group a foreign terrorist organization. Members of Congress are now asking the IRS, the Treasury, the Department of Education to investigate all of its partnerships, all of its financing, all of its influence operations. I mean, I think they're going to be in trouble.

How long have we been saying this?

But every time, I have pointed out anything about CAIR, I have been called an Islamophobe, which shuts everything down. That is a word, developed by people like CAIR, to shut people down, so you'll never look into them.

So what happens next?

First of all, the reports have to hold up.

Regulators now have an obligation. Not a choice. An obligation to act!

State attorneys general in these 22 states, they might pursue fines, injunctions, criminal referrals.

All of them need to take action!

The IRS, needs to take action. Investigate tax exempt fraud. Treasury Department may review foreign influence or money flow violations.

Anything coming from overseas.

Oh, I can't imagine it. They're so buttoned up, right now.

DC regulators may determine whether CAIR actions entire fundraising operation has been unlawful from the beginning.

But here's the deeper question. And it's not bureaucratic. This one is constitutional.

Can the United States tolerate an influence machine, that operates outside of the legal framework, designed to prevent corruption, foreign leverage, and untraceable money?

If I hear one more time, talking about how AIPAC has just got to be investigated. Fine. Investigate.

I'm not against it.

Investigate.

Why aren't you saying anything about CAIR?

It feels like it might be a tool in the hands of a foreign operation.

Why aren't you saying anything about this?

Because here it is! It's not like, hey. I wonder why.

This is it! This is it! This isn't about silencing CAIR. Muslim Americans are -- that are full citizens, they have every right to speak. Every right to vote. Every right to organize. Participate in public life. No question! They can disagree with me, all they want.

But no organization. None! Not mine. Not yours. Not theirs. None. Should operate a nationwide political network, in the shadows and be immune from all of the guardrails that every other group must follow!

That's called a fourth branch of government!

That's how a fourth branch goes.

By the way, CAIR has placed all kinds of people in our Department of Homeland Security. Et cetera, et cetera. This organization has done it!

This is -- you cannot have a fourth branch of government.

They must abide by the laws.

No -- you can't have a branch that nobody elected. Nobody oversees.

Nobody holds accountable.

We talked about this yesterday, on yesterday's podcast. So what needs to happen is total transparency. CAIR action has to release its filings. Its donor structure. Its compliance records, if they exist. Equal enforcement under the law. I don't want them prosecuted in special ways.

Look, if AIPAC is doing the same thing. AIPAC should be prosecuted exactly the same way.
I want it equal. I want constitutional rule.

If conservatives, if Catholics, pro-Israel, environmental, Second Amendment groups, if they have to comply by the state law, so does CAIR action.

And if CAIR action has to do it, so do the Second Amendment groups and environmentalists, and pro-Israel and conservative groups. The law cannot be selective. It can't be!

I don't know how that's controversial in today's world. But somehow or another, they will find a way.

The Feds have to review all of this. If the report is accurate, the IRS and the Treasury have to determine whether false statements or unlicensed interstate solicitations have occurred.

Americans deserve to know what exactly, who is influencing our elections. Who is shaping our policy? Who is raising money in their state?

Especially physical the organization claims political authority, that it doesn't legally possess.

Because history will teach us one unchanging lesson. When a republic stops enforcing its own laws, someone else will always step in to fill that vacuum because power abhors a vacuum!

Unregulated, political power abhors a free people. So while it's about CAIR, it's not about Muslim Americans. It's not about religion.

As always, at least on this program, we try to make it about the rule of law.

One standard for everyone or no standard at all!

And that more than anything, will determine whether or not our institutions remain worthy of the freedom and responsibility that we have entrusted to them.

TV

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

America is entering a year of historic upheaval from Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the spiritual shock that followed, to Trump’s tariff revolution, China’s rare-earth war, collapsing energy grids, AI displacement, and the looming fights over Taiwan and Venezuela. Glenn sits down with BlazeTV hosts ‪@deaceshow‬ and ‪@lizwheeler‬ along with his head researcher Jason Buttrill, to break down the biggest stories of 2025. Plus, they each give their most explosive prediction for 2026 that could shape our politics, economy, national security, and civil rights in ways Americans have never experienced before.

RADIO

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

For nearly a century, Washington DC has been ruled by an unelected “expert class” operating as an unconstitutional fourth branch of government — accountable to no one, removable by no president, and shielded from all consequences. Glenn breaks down why Trump’s firing of the Federal Trade Commissioner could finally dismantle the 1935 precedent that empowered technocrats, how Ketanji Brown Jackson exposed the Supreme Court’s embrace of expert rule, and why America cannot survive a government run by people who never face the voters and never pay for their failures.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So President Donald Trump fired the federal trade commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. Federal Trade Commission is an administrative position. I mean, this is under -- the head of the federal trade commission is a cabinet member.

And if the justices uphold Trump's firing of Slaughter, that will overturn a precedent that was horrible, that was set in 1935. Remember, 1935, we're flirting with fascism. You know, everybody thinks. Because they haven't seen the horrors of fascism yet.

Everybody thinks fascism is neat, blah, blah. So what they do is they say that this is an independent person. And the president can't fire them. Because they're, you know, an independent agency.

Well, wait. That would make a fourth branch of government. Our Constitution is really clear.

There is no such thing as a fourth branch of government. Right?

So that's what they're deciding. Now, here is Ketanji Brown Jackson, who is talking about how we really need to listen to the experts. Cut four.

VOICE: Because presidents have accepted that there could be both an understanding of Congress and the presidency. That it is in the best interest of the American people to have certain kinds of issues, handled by experts. Who, and I think you -- in your colloquy, Justice Kagan, have identified the fact that these boards are not only experts, but they're also nonpartisan. So the -- the seats are actually distributed in such a way, that we are presumably eliminating political influence because we're trying to get to science and data and actual facts, related to how these decisions are made.

And so the real risk, I think, of allowing non- -- of allowing these kinds of decisions to be made by the president, of saying, everybody can just be removed when I come in, is that we will get away from those very important policy considerations.

VOICE: We will get away from US policy considerations, and it will create opportunities for all kinds of problems that Congress and prior presidents wanted to avoid, risks that flow inevitably, just given human nature, the realities of the world that we live in.

GLENN: Okay.

Now, remember, what she's saying here is, we have to have experts.

We have to have experts. We have to have experts that don't really answer to anybody. Okay?

They're appointed. And then they're just there. This from a, quote, judicial expert, who cannot define a woman, because she's not a doctor.
She's not a scientist.

She needs an expert to define a woman.
That's how insane her thinking is. Okay?

Now, I would just like to ask the Supreme Court, when you want things run by experts, do you mean things like the State Department, or the counsel of foreign relations, that have gotten us into these endless war wars for 100 years?

Because these are the things that Woodrow Wilson wanted. He wanted the country run by experts.

Okay. So is it like the Council of Foreign Relations, that keep getting us into these endless wars.

Or is it more like the Fed, that directs our fiscal policy, that has driven us into $38 trillion of at the time. We have all powerful banks. That strangely all belong to the fed. And endless bailouts for those banks. Are those the experts that you're talking about?

Or are you talking about the experts that are doctors, that gave the country sterilizations, lobotomies, transgender surgeries. You know, or should we listen to the experts, like the ones that are now speaking in Illinois, to get us death on demand like Canada has, with their MAID assisted suicide, which is now the third largest killer in Canada. MAID, assisted suicide, third largest killer in Canada. Experts are saying, we now need it here, and they're pushing for it in Illinois. Or should we listen to the experts? And I think many of them are the same experts strangely, that brought us COVID. Yeah. That was an expert thing. They were trying to protect us. Because they need to do this for our protection. So direct from the labs in China with the help of the American experts like Fauci. We almost put the world out.

Should we listen to those guys?

Or the experts that brought us masking, and Home Depot is absolutely safe. But Ace Hardware wants to kill grandma. Which are the experts that we want? That we want to make sure that we have in our lives? That they don't answer, or can't be fired by anybody. Because I'm pretty full up on the experts, myself. I don't know.

But you're right. These experts would keep the president in check, and they would keep Congress in check. And you in check!

And the Supreme Court, which would be really great. You know, and you know who else they would keep in check? The people.

So, wow, it seems like we would just be a nation run by experts, and our Constitution would be out the window, because that's a fourth branch!

And if you don't believe me, that, you know, these experts never pay a price. Can you name a single expert?

Give me a name of an expert, that gave us any of the things that I just told you about.

Give me the name. I mean, give me the name of one of them. Give me the name of one of them that went to jail. Give me the name of one expert that has been discredited.

You know, where your name will be mud in this town. Do you know where that came from?

Your name is going to be mud. It's not M-U-D. It's M-U-D-D, that comes from Dr. Samuel Mudd. Okay? He was a docks man. He was an expert. He was that set John Wilkes Booth' broken leg. He made crutches. He let him stay there for a while. He claimed he didn't know him, but he did know him.

In fact, one of the reasons they proved it.

Is because when he pulled the boots off -- when he pulled both of his boots off, right there, in the back, you couldn't have missed it. It said "John Wilkes Booth."

He's like, I have no idea who he was.

Yeah. Well, you knew him in advance. This was a predetermined outpost where he could stay. It's clear you could know him.

The guy was still discredited, we still use his name today. Your name will be mud in this town.

And we think that it's like dirt, mixed with water kind of mud. No, it's M-U-D-D, Dr. Mudd. The expert that was so discredited, went to jail, paid for his part of the assassination of -- of Lincoln.

Give me the name of one of the experts in the last 100 years, that has brought us any of the trials and the tribulations. The things that have almost brought us to our knees. Give me the name of one of them. Can't!

Because once an expert class, they don't answer to anyone. So they never go to jail.

Wow! Doesn't that sound familiar. People never going to jail!

There's a rant that's going around right now, that I did in 2020. And everybody is like, see. He's talking about Pam Bondi.

No, no. I got to play this for you, a little later on in the program. But I want to get to the experts and what the Constitution actually says about that. Because you don't need my opinion. What you need are the actual facts. So you can stand up and say, yeah. I think Ketanji Brown Jackson is an idiot. Okay?

And she's really not an expert on anything. Especially the Constitution. You need the facts, on what the Founders said. Because the Founders would be absolutely against what they did in 1935.

Because that just -- what does it do?

It just sets up a fourth branch of government.

RADIO

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

The biggest media merger in modern history is unfolding, and Glenn Beck warns it’s the most dangerous consolidation of power America has faced in decades. With six corporations already controlling 90% of the nation’s news and entertainment, a Warner-Netflix or Warner-Paramount megacorporation would create an unstoppable information cartel. Glenn exposes how “too big to fail” thinking is repeating itself, how global elites and “experts” are tightening their grip, and why handing our entire cultural narrative to a handful of companies is a direct threat to freedom. The hour is late — and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: By the way, it's never good when you consolidate power. It's never good.

And what is going on now, with this Netflix Warner Brothers paramount stuff, I don't care if Larry Ellison is a conservative or not.

No one should have that much power.

I did a show, gosh, four years ago. I don't even remember when I did it.

We looked it up. In the 1980s. 19 percent of American media was owned by over 50 companies.

Forty years later, 90 percent of the media is watched and controlled by six companies.

National Amusements, the Red Stone Family controls CBS, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon, gaming and internet. Simon & Schuster Books. That's all one.

Disney, ABC, ESPN, History Channel, Marvel, Star Wars, video games and print.

TimeWarner controls CNN, Warner Brothers, HBO, Turner, video games, internet, and print media like TIME. Comcast, MSNBC, NBC.

CNBC, Telemundo, the Internet.

New Corp. Fox. National Geographic. Ton of others. Sony, with a ton of movies, music and more. The big six. They're valued at nearly $500 billion.

Now, this is something I put together five years ago. So I don't even know. This is probably not even valid even today.

And now we're talking about Netflix, Warner Brothers. Paramount, into all of these one giant corporation. It's wrong! It's wrong!

We can't keep putting all -- everything into the hands of just a few! It's what's killing us!

We've got to spread this around. We can't -- the government cannot okay mergers like this.

They're big enough he has

What happened -- what happened when the banks went under, or almost went under in '08. What did they say the problem was?

They said the banks are too big to fail.

Too big to fail.

Because they were providing all of the services, everybody needs. All the time. And there's only a handful of them.

So if they fall, then everything falls.

Right?

That was the problem. So what did we do to fix it?

We made them bigger!

We let them merge with other banks, and gobble up other things!

And started taking on the local banks.

And so now, your banks that were too big to fail. Are now even bigger. And their failure would be even worse!

What is wrong with us?

Seriously, we're not this stupid.

We're not this stupid.

I think we're just this comfortable.

We just think the experts have a plan. No. The experts don't have a plan.

Their plan is stupid. Their plan is to make it bigger.

Every time it fails. Make it bigger. Push it up.

Make it more global.

No. Haven't you seen what the entire world is like?

The entire world is over-leveraged. The entire world is on the edge.

The entire world is being redesigned.
So what do we do? We don't allow them to make things bigger! We need to start taking more individual and local control of things. They're making it bigger. Which will make the problem bigger. And make the problem so big, you won't be able to do anything about it, because all the experts. All of the heads. They'll all -- there will be six of them. And they will all be sitting in one room.

And they will all be making the instigations. And with them, making those decisions will be all the heads of all the countries around the world, that you're not going to have a say in any of that. They're already trying to do it with the WEF.

But if -- if the Supreme Court says, no, experts matter. And the president can't fire them. You will not have any control over anything!


We're at this place, where we can back out. We can turn around.

We can do it.

It's not too late. But the hour is growing very late.

I don't know about you, I don't like being this.

Up to the edge, you know what I mean?

I would rather have lots of breathing room, between me and the edge of the cliff.

But we don't have that anymore.

Everything has to be done right.

And we have to pay attention.

And the worst thing we can do is make things bigger.

Dream big, think small.