Joe Biden's mental decline is a national security risk

July 05, 2024

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

CEO/Founder

Editor's note: this article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Joe Biden’s debate performance isn’t about politics anymore. It’s about the critical state of our national security. This is the weakest our president has ever appeared. Never in my lifetime have I seen a U.S. president appear so feeble and incapable. If I'm Vladimir Putin, I am storming Europe. If I am Xi Jinping, I am invading Taiwan — right now.

I remember when Ronald Reagan was in the hospital after being shot. That was a very nerve-wracking time because, for a moment, we didn't have the president in charge. He transferred his presidential powers to the vice president while he was in the hospital at the beginning. It was terrifying because you knew the world was watching.

Joe Biden’s debate performance isn’t about politics anymore. It’s about the critical state of our national security.

Our enemies are always looking for moments of weakness. During the debate, it confirmed to our enemies that we’ve endured nearly four years of weakness.

Three categories of people watched last week’s debate.

There were those who believed the media's claim that Biden's senility was just a Republican "cheap fake" and that the president has never been sharper. This group is probably in shock after seeing his debate performance. For those in this group, here's what you should be thinking right now: I cannot trust any of my trusted sources because they all lied to me.

Then, there are those who participated in the con. Anybody who has talked to Biden, has seen him up close and personal, and has had conversations with him is culpable. Those of you who ran the con in the press, the White House, and the Democratic Party, shame on you! You have put our country in grave danger.

Then, there are those who are responding to the debate by saying, "The Democratic Party is in trouble. What are we going to do for the election? Can we get him to step down before the convention? If we do, how do we pick a new candidate?" People in the first two groups can fall in this category. But these are political questions. We need to step away from politics and the election for a second. We need to talk about the state of our country.

I'm singularly concerned with how we get this man away from the football!

We are now facing nuclear threats that we haven't faced since the 1960s. Even though the 1960s was a time of great fear and uncertainty with the Soviet Union, we had John F. Kennedy. He was in so much pain, unbeknownst to the American people. The doctors were jacking him up on drugs. But at least he was sane and sharp!

In 2024, we have Joe Biden. Do you realize the responsibility he carries to determine your fate in a national emergency? As president, he would have seven minutes to decide how to respond if any of our global enemies launched a nuclear attack. If North Korea launched a hypersonic weapon at us, he would have less than seven minutes to decide what to do. Our military wouldn't even have enough time to verify if it was a nuke or not. They open the football and take out what's called the "Black Book of Death." That's how serious this is! The president has to look through it and decide, "This city, this system, these ships, these silos will be saved." Then, the guy who is with the football acts as a kind of actuary. He takes the president's selection and says, "Mr. President, this is going to result in this many deaths."

Take this as a hypothetical example. Let's assume the president decides to retaliate against North Korea if it launches a ballistic missile at the United States. The "actuary" would point out that some of those targeted North Korean cities are up against the border of China. That means that radiation will blow into China, killing an additional 250,000 Chinese. The Chinese will look at that as aggression, and they may launch their own nuclear weapons at us. The radiation may make its way as far north as Russia, and that country will likely retaliate. The "actuary" will explain all of this to the president and ask, "Is this your selection, sir?"

Do you trust Joe Biden with that responsibility, regardless of your political affiliation?

I am so angry that I haven't heard a single person on television or in the political realm talk about the state of the country! They're all talking about the election: "How do we replace Biden before the convention? How do we get him off the ticket?"

Get him off the ticket? I'm singularly concerned with how we get this man away from the football!

Do you know what our enemies are thinking? If there were any opportunity to take advantage of the United States' weakness, it's now. Our country is in more danger than at any point possibly in my lifetime — and I grew up during the Cold War. We are weak, and the world knows it. Our enemies know it. They are threatening nuclear weapons, and we cannot have this man with the "black book of death" and the button!

Does anyone understand what we saw during the debate? You didn't see a presidential candidate. You saw the current president of the United States! That should terrify you regardless of your political affiliation.

If you are on the right and were celebrating after the debate because you thought, "This is going to be great for Donald Trump," be careful what you wish for. If you are somebody on the left thinking, "Oh well, this just played into the caricature that the right was trying to build about Biden," do you think we want our country to be destroyed? Does any American want our president to look like that? What is wrong with us?

We're in trouble, not merely because of Joe Biden. We’re in trouble because people are not recognizing the danger that is right in front of us. I've been saying a lot lately, "May God save the republic." He cannot do what we won't participate in. We must get this man out of office.

The DARK truth behind the Macrons' absurd lawsuit

WPA Pool / Pool | Getty Images

While the media obsesses over elite scandals, Glenn is having a field day exposing the Macron lawsuit farce—and the twisted truth it tries to bury.

The era of unchecked narratives is coming to an end. We're reclaiming reality, one scandal at a time.

On his show, Glenn couldn't hide his glee over French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte suing Candace Owens for claiming she's really a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux. Glenn called Brigitte the "Jeffrey Epstein of France" for grooming a 15-year-old Emmanuel when she was his 40-year-old teacher, and speculated that she is pressuring her husband to silence the rumors. Glenn also mocked the blatant overkill, which included childhood photos, birth announcements, and a desperate proclamation that Brigitte is "a woman."

But it goes deeper: The liberal elites have long proclaimed that transitioning is "wonderful," so why sue over the insinuation? It's hypocrisy—elites demanding silence on grooming while forcing conformity. This isn't about truth; it's control, proving no one's above scrutiny.

Want to see the absurd lawsuit firsthand? Download the Macron v. Owens lawsuit PDF here and see the evidence for yourself.

Download the PDF here.

BREAKING: Top-secret 2020 House Intel report on Brennan's ICA revealed

Brooks Kraft / Contributor | Getty Images

The following oversight report from the House Intelligence Committee examines the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) rushed out by the Obama administration before leaving office in January 2017.

This report has never been released to the public. Until now.

The House Intelligence Committee’s review began in 2017, shortly after the ICA’s release, and continued through 2020, paralleling a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 election, which concluded in fall 2020.

Before its declassification by President Trump and public release by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, this report was among the U.S. government’s most highly classified documents. Its sensitive level of compartmentation prohibited storage on top-secret computer networks. Only five physical copies existed, all secured in safes under strict protocols. This extreme classification suggests the Obama administration sought to prevent the public from learning the extent of its alleged deception.

Download the PDF here.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn's Show Prep