RADIOApril 25, 2022

The end of CNN+ makes Glenn VERY happy. Here's why.

Glenn says not even a house built with ice cream would be as enjoyable as watching the absolute FAILURE of CNN+ — a project that lasted only 32 days despite 300 MILLION DOLLARS backing it (with more pledged money to come). So, to celebrate, Glenn and the guys take a look back at how one CNN anchor ridiculed Glenn’s own streaming service (which currently is breaking records)…plus, hear the hilarious way Glenn ROASTED Brian Stelter when the news broke.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: This is the Glenn Beck Program. We're so glad that you joined us. Sorry, I apologize for my voice. But it's the allergy season here. And it is worse than I've ever seen, in my life. But, you know, don't worry about it.

Hey. I have a gallon of milk in my refrigerator that's lasted longer than CNN+. It was -- it was canceled. And we found out about it, yesterday.

And then my wife came in, last night. And said, hey. You know the CNN+ has been canceled. And there was just a little joy that I expressed, a little bit of that. A little bit of it, on Twitter last night.

STU: I did notice this. And reading your tweets. They seemed to be specifically targeted to one CNN employee, in particular. For some reason. You say, hey, Brian Stelter, perhaps you can join me on my successful global media streaming service to discuss your company's 300 million-dollar failure.
(laughter)
Oh, man. That's the start.

GLENN: Awesome. That's great.

STU: PS, I won't ambush you. And my statements will be based in fact. So sad for you.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, this comes from the interview that I did. And it's a very popular clip on YouTube, of me walking off of the set for Brian. Because he -- he said, as usual, he really wanted to understand the right. And he really wanted to understand why people were, you know, backing Donald Trump. And, you know, just dismissing the media. That's very dangerous.

STU: It was very important to him. He brought you on. And then, of course, changed the topic of the interview, halfway through.

GLENN: All right. Can we play it?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: One is arguing justice. One is arguing mercy. Or they say they are. But they're not. All they're doing is playing politics. And the American people are tired of it. Who is talking about an actual solution on this? Who has actually done something? Who has actually been consistent and cared when it was a Democrat in office. And cared when it was a Republican in office.

You know, those people exist around the country. And they're watching you two. The media and Donald Trump playing this little game back and forth. And they're sick of it. They don't want to hear about it, from either side.

BRIAN: I want the critique because I invited you on. I'm self-aware to know that we can talk about this, because I know it's a problem. The mainstream media is having a very hard time. The mainstream media is having a very hard time, reaching Trump's base. That's a fact. We see it in all the polls.

GLENN: Well, then here's the deal, Brian. You all have my phone number. I've reached out to all of you in the past, and said, let's have a conversation, not on the air. You really want to understand? You want to hear the other side?

BRIAN: Why can't our viewers --

GLENN: Because it's all about ratings. Because this is all about ratings. This isn't about ratings. This is about saving our country. Bringing us together. Stop dividing us. I mean, you -- I can't --

BRIAN: So to be clear, you think I'm dividing the country. You think I'm dividing the country for ratings?

GLENN: Stop for a second. Brian, stop driving. Look at -- look at what you're doing. When did this become about you? This is about the media and the administration, that's what you guys want to make it into.

BRIAN: If it was about me, I would do like a 10-minute chalk board the way you just do.

STU: Oh. If it was about me, I would get on a blackboard the way you just do. Look at that. That's a good line.

GLENN: Well, then maybe you should.

BRIAN: I mean, the point is, I'm not making it about me. I don't see how I made it about me.

GLENN: You just said -- never mind.

Look, Brian, if you want to have a conversation, the media really wants to know, great. We can have that conversation. But every time someone -- every time I've approached, everybody always says, yes. But as soon as it gets tough or uncomfortable, nobody is interested. Nobody is interested in looking at themselves. And saying, what did I do?

I know what I've done. I know what I've done. I've tried to make amends. And I've tried --

VOICE: Yes. And we talked about it before. I completely agree with you. And we all do need to be more self-reflective.

I do have to ask you, there's this new headline on the Daily Beast saying, your company is in trouble. They were trying to find the buyer. Is this related to the point about being not talking to each other? That if you want to create that media company, there's not interest? What's going on with that?
(laughter)

GLENN: Wow.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Brian, thanks a lot. I think that's the most ridiculous question I've ever heard. I'm sitting here ready to talk to you about the detaining of children and parents and trying to break -- break families apart. Something that has been happening with Janet Reno. That's why it went to the Supreme Court in the first place. With Janet Reno. It's been happening. We want to stop it. And you want to play those games?

Have a nice day.

VOICE: What game did I just play?

STU: That's interesting. Because now, the topic of that interview. And obviously the only reason he had you on. Obviously, you could see the entire time, all he wanted to do, was get to this gotcha question, about your media company failing. It was interesting to me, that he was very concerned about your media company.

Which at the end of the day, my understanding is, it's still on the air. I feel like I do a show for it, every day.

Yeah. And then --

GLENN: TheBlaze is just the largest right of center streaming service. In the world.

STU: Okay. Okay. That's one way. That's one thing. One way to look at it. So that one is still around. And CNN+ lasted not even one month.

GLENN: No, $300 million flushed down the toilet.

STU: $300 million. That's incredible.

PAT: Remember when you invested 300 million into TheBlaze, though? You remember that?

STU: Yeah. You flushed that down the toilet.

GLENN: No. Didn't do that. Didn't do that. That's why there might have been a little glee in my tweets.

STU: I sensed a little glee. Did I mention my streaming service had 300,000 subs, when streaming services didn't yet exist? It was only the Major League Baseball of TheBlaze. That's right.

That was the first couple. That was over ten years ago. I could say that your pompous ass didn't make -- didn't make ten weeks. Didn't bring me joy. But I will leave the lies to you, and CNN. And then you really got -- see, you like the self-reflective nature, that you had in that interview.

You brought back again. And you said, I am sorry, Brian Stelter, for that last tweet. I just lashed out after hearing the news about the biggest media failure of all time. Without thinking about how worried you must be, about your upcoming unemployment situation. Please know, you're in my thoughts.
(laughter)
GLENN: I wanted to say my thoughts and prayers. But I know he dismisses the prayers.

STU: Right. There you go. Okay. Now, this is you again. After rereading the tweets, I see how childish they appear. But after being subjected to your constant lies and the transparent hatchet job you call a career, the epic fail of CNN, makes -- makes -- makes us believe in the old saying, that evil loses in the end.

And believe me, Brian Stelter, this is the end. I mean, the breathtaking speed at which CNN+ crashed was a spectacular, almost Ziegfeld Follies' end?

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Follow me on this one.

STU: Okay. That would be assuming that Ziegfeld had ever spent $300 million on his show, to only have it close in eight weeks.

But, of course, he didn't. Crap, Brian Stelter, I apologize. I used a hypothetical Ziegfeld Follies' comparison in my last tweet.

I made the point, that the failure of CNN+ was so epic, that it was akin to Ziegfeld having a $300 million production close in eight weeks. Sorry. I meant four weeks.
(laughter)
One more thing, Brian Stelter. On CNN+'s epic $300,000,000 4-week flameout.

The Hindenburg of media failures.

Please note, I only use Ziegfeld Follies because I thought it would be relatable to you and your elitist, out of touch, New York City, upper west side, snotty coworkers.

Brian Stelter, when you're part of the cry of the business version of the Titanic and bodies are still in the freezing water, crew members begin to question themselves and become introspective. What did you do wrong? May I suggest a few things that I'm sure you may be thinking. And then you go into -- you launch into a plethora of things that they have done wrong. Of course, this is available on Twitter.

GLENN: Of course, it starts with Donald Trump. That's the reason why they failed. You know they're blaming it on somebody. But not themselves. They will learn nothing from this.

STU: At no point, did anyone rationally believe this would work. Why -- a network that no one watches when it's free on your cable system. Why would people spend money, to go out there, and justify -- and we keep saying $300 million. The plan was $1 billion over four years, on the streaming network.

Who could possibly believe that would work?

I mean, it's the -- it was dead before it began. Discovery because of the merger work, could not say that to CNN.

They could not say, the second we're taking over, we're shutting this thing down. They couldn't say it legally. So they did everything they could. And outwardly said, you know, this doesn't seem like a great idea. But they couldn't specifically tell them to change the plans. So they didn't. To make sure they protected the merger. The second they get in there. Well, obviously, this isn't going to work. The people at CNN rushed it through to start it, before the merger went through fully. So they could get it on the air. And made such a big deal about it, trying to lock discovery into keeping it going.

You know, they said stuff like, this is the most important moment in CNN's history. It's going to be the change the face of the news media.

Hoping that discovery would come in and say, how will we get out of this?

GLENN: It sounds a little like the Democratic plan in Washington, doesn't it? We'll just start all these things. And then hope the Republicans won't take them out.

STU: Take them down.

GLENN: And, you know what, if the Republicans do what they usually do, they won't take it down.

STU: Discovery didn't act like the Republicans. They acted like a company that wants to make money.

GLENN: Yeah. That wants to survive, you know what I mean?

STU: I mean, how hard did you laugh, when you heard this yesterday, Pat?

PAT: Oh. I loved it. I laughed until I wept. I was weeping for joy.

GLENN: You know what, can I tell you something? We honestly, with a very few elections on election take. We don't gloat. I don't enjoying people's failures.

PAT: It's impossible not to enjoy --

GLENN: I enjoyed this so much. I enjoyed this more than if they would have said, Glenn, not only would you get Willy Wonka's chocolate factory. You're going to be living in a house built with ice cream, okay?

You couldn't have made me happier. Than this failure.

PAT: Uh-huh. We were thinking of the biggest business failures of all time. And it's kind of on par with pets.com. Remember the spectacular --

GLENN: On par. No.

PAT: But it's way beyond that.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: Pets.com lasted 262 days.

STU: Wow. That's pretty good.

PAT: This lasted 30 days. Thirty-one.

GLENN: This really is the -- more akin to the Titanic. That ship lasted one voyage.

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: It was unsinkable. It lasted one voyage, and rested at the bottom of the sea.

STU: At least it made it halfway across. You can't argue that with CNN+.

PAT: You cannot.

GLENN: This would be like the Titanic sinking in the dry dock. That's how bad this is.

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.

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.

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.

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.