RADIONovember 06, 2023

These 3 UNUSUAL factors make the 2024 election the WEIRDEST Glenn has ever seen

"This is the most bizarre primary I have ever seen in my lifetime," Glenn says. With only a year left before the 2024 election, Glenn and Stu review the very unusual state of the race: The leading Republican candidate, former president Donald Trump, is facing multiple lawsuits that could land him in prison, the leading Democratic candidate, President Biden, is tanking in the polls, and we could see a rematch between two presidents. So, can Trump win from jail? Will the Democrats kick Biden out of the race? Glenn gives his thoughts ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So we've been talking about the New York Times polls, that has come out. And give me a snapshot from that, just to recap, Stu.

STU: Basically, it was a poll of swing states.

Which, in my view, it's a better way of doing these polls, than like a national number.

Because in reality, we all know that, you know, Donald Trump is going to win Idaho. And the fact that they can pull a few votes out of that, to make it a national number isn't all that important, right?

GLENN: I am worried about Texas, quite honestly.

Lots of new people in Texas. If they can -- I mean, if there's any kind of fraud in this state. And, by the way, look, they're challenging Ted Cruz.

STU: Well, they challenged Ted Cruz before, and they won. They have Beto O'Rourke. That threw more money out of it, and he still lost.

And, again, when it comes to the fraud thing, that's almost a separate topic. Right?

I'm looking at -- you can only look at this, at what is actually going to happen. If they do some trickery, what will they do?

There's no way you can predict that. When it comes to these six states, excuse me.

You have a situation, where Joe Biden is losing five of them.

And by some of them, very large margins. Nevada by ten to Donald Trump. Nevada, of these swing states, is probably one of the more difficult ones for Republicans to win.

One of the more blue states out of these.

Georgia. You have Trump by six. Arizona, Trump by five. Michigan, Trump by five.

Pennsylvania, Trump by four. If Donald Trump wins Pennsylvania by four points, he will win the election.

And then finally Wisconsin. Which is actually polled. It's been one of those states that has in polling, off more than almost every other state.

Almost always, Wisconsin seems to look more positive for Democrats. Than it winds up being in the actual election. That's important to remember. But Wisconsin here, it's Biden plus two.

Now, the other candidates, they did DeSantis and Haley in these polls as well. Both DeSantis and Haley win Wisconsin comfortably actually. And neither DeSantis nor Haley lose any state against Joe Biden.

Any of these six. That's not been something that's been talked about as much. There are two states, in which DeSantis is even with Joe Biden. But both Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis either win or are tied in these states.

This is the most bizarre, just the most bizarre primary I've ever seen in my lifetime.

STU: So weird.

GLENN: I mean, you've got a guy who they're doing everything they can, to put him in jail.

He may be in jail by the time the -- the election comes around.

And I don't know honestly know if that will help or hurt him. I really don't know.

STU: Think about --

GLENN: It's crazy. Just that.

STU: Think about all the things that are strange.

You have a guy who may go to prison. It may help him. It may hurt him.

The leading candidate is not participating in the debates. That's a weird thing, right?

The leading candidate is a former president of the United States.

That's really weird, right?

When it's not consecutive terms. It's happened.

But it's pretty odd.

On the democratic, you have a guy that is overwhelmingly disliked by his own voters. In this poll. More than half of Biden's voters say he's too old to be president.

GLENN: Listen to this.

His approval on the economy, in the battleground states. The economy, his approval is 39 percent.

STU: That's catastrophic.

GLENN: With 57 percent disapproving. CBS, and I think it was CNN, just took a poll, about, where we are in the wrong direction? Right direction?

Seventy-four. In one poll. And 75 percent in another poll, say we're on the wrong track.

That's historic.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: He has 9 percent strong approval, on the economy.

And 48 percent registering strong disapproval. It's worse than a five-to-one ratio of strong, you know, anti on the economy.
,
Five to one.

Also, separate polling for Gallup going back seven decades. Republicans have never been before enjoyed a larger edge on the primary issue of the day, the economy.

Seven decades. Seventy years. They've not seen polling like this.

STU: Through Reagan.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Think about that.

GLENN: Yeah. 40 percent of people that are polled right now, say they're afraid their income is not going to be able to cover the House and the food, because of inflation. And they know who is responsible.

They are blaming it on Bidenomics.

Real -- real incomes -- declining real incomes make the stables of life, difficult to finance. And housing affordability has never been worse.

This is according to Goldman Sachs. The first time in history, the average apartment rent is $2,000 a month.

The average apartment. Up from 1600 when Biden took office.

Battleground state voters overwhelmingly blamed poor policies for this financial squeeze.

71 percent now say it's government policy that has not been contributed to this rise in rent, with 50 percent blaming the government a great deal.

That's -- that's pretty significant.

STU: Yeah. Yeah. I would say it is.

And, you know, when you look at the economy. There are some interesting breakdowns, when you look at the economy. They're all bad for Biden. There's nothing there.

Even people who didn't like Trump, are saying, well, look, at least the economy was good when he was president. If you go back, Glenn, 30 or 40 years, the only two times that people were really optimistic on the economy overall, were like 1998 to 2000. The end of that -- the Clinton era. When the internet was kicking it in. Right before the recession, that started, by the way, when Clinton was president. But people didn't know that during the election. And then secondarily was the period '17 to 2019. Sorry 2018 to March 2020. The cutoff was March 2020.

Understandably.

GLENN: We talked about it. Everything was going so well, that only some catastrophic event at the end of his term. And lo and behold, a catastrophic event.

STU: We did see one. Listen to this, Glenn. This is an interesting breakdown from the Times on the economy. A pound of bacon costs an average of $7.08 in the US. 21 percent than when Biden took office.

GLENN: 21 percent.

STU: The price of coffee beans has risen 33 percent.

A gallon of gas is 72 percent more expensive. And because inflation affects everyone, it can damage the public more than anything else.

In parentheses, yes, the inflation has fallen sharply this year.

But most prices have not fallen.

Only their rate of increase has. This is something we made a point on this a hundred times. When you can see they're trying to baby -- spoon-feed this to their actual Democrat audience here. And saying, hey. The reason why this stuff isn't working here.

Is the rate might be coming down a little bit. But the prices are still increasing. It's a rate of rate of increase.

But listen to the -- I thought this was fascinating. A president can't do much to bring down prices in the short-term.

Yet, Biden has taken steps to reduce energy prices. Again, this is a Democrat talking to other Democrats.

Think of it from that perspective.

GLENN: We're in Alice in Wonderland.

STU: He approved an enormous new oil project on federal land in Alaska, while enacting billions of dollars of subsidies for clean energy.

Again, we know that doesn't bring down. But the Alaska thing is kind of interesting.

He's been strangely unwilling to brag about the Alaska Project. As Matthew Eglesias noted in a recent Substack newsletter: Biden seems more focused on avoiding criticism from climate activists, than on winning over swing voters who can help reelect arguably the most climate friendly president ever.

Again, Democrats speaking to Democrats.

Ignore some of the context here.

GLENN: My eyes are bleeding. I feel like the guy in Casino Royale, where blood is just trickling out the side of my eye, you know.

STU: You think about it from just a political standpoint.

You have this one thing in Alaska. You would think in this moment, you are touting that to swing states. Right?

You're going crazy. Making it a much bigger deal than it actually is.

There's a similar dynamic on immigration. Undocumented migration to the US has surged after Biden took office, partly in response to his welcoming campaign rhetoric. That's one way to put it.

GLENN: Listen to that. That's Democrats to Democrats. They don't say that mainstream. What rhetoric?

No. We were not inviting -- they sent a strong message. Yeah. Uh-huh.

STU: Many Americans are unhappy about the surge. Although, Biden has since taken steps to reduce the surge. Again, not how I would describe it. However, although Biden has since taken steps to reduce the surge. He rarely emphasizes these popular steps. These are steps that poll well with the American people. He seems more focused on progressive activists than swing voters. So what does that mean, Glenn?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Why wouldn't he tout -- politically speaking, go to the middle, say, I swear I'm doing stuff. I know you don't see it, but I swear I'm doing it.

Instead, he's worried about criticism from crazy left-wing activists.

GLENN: Because crazy left-wing activists put him into office.

It was the unions. And the crazy left-wing advocates. That are the ones who are also backing him up with muscle.

That's why he's now saying, you know, Israel. You should be nicer to Hamas.

We -- maybe you should slow down. Because he's lost. Or in danger of losing the people, that are behind.

Did you notice the signs?

Did anybody look at the signs that were on the streets of Washington, DC, or New York or every place else this weekend?

STU: You're not talking about the ones where they're painting the Stars of David on the street?

GLENN: No. No. No. Where they killed that woman?

No. I'm talking about the printed signs about a free Palestine. The bottom of it, go look at the pictures.

Provided by the socialist worker's party.

Okay?

This is a socialist-run thing.

So you've got all of that, wrapped up into the Palestinian thing.

He cannot afford to lose his muscle.

He can't afford to lose those advocates. Because those are the strongest. What's going to happen. Is you will have those people, or you're going to have the people that are like, you know what. I'm not even going to vote.

Because that's the way, I think that's the way, your supporters are getting on Biden.

If they don't flip. They're just not motivated.

Because he's not doing anything good. For them.

STU: How much of this is Biden guarding his flank for a challenger, like a Gavin Newsom. Like someone else who will come out of the woodworker and say, you know what.

GLENN: Oh, I think a great deal of it. A great deal.

Listen to this from Axlerod.

STU: David Axelrod. The former -- Obama administration official.

I don't remember his exact role.

GLENN: It's very lately to change horses. And a lot will happen in the next year. That no one can predict. And Biden's team says his resolve is firm to run. I'm justly proud of his accomplishments.

However, his poll numbers send tremors of doubt. Not bedwetting. Legitimate doubt.

Trump is a dangerous, unhinged demagogue, whose brazen disdain for the rules, norms, laws, and institution, or democracy. Should be disqualifying.

But the steaks of miscalculation here are too dramatic to ignore. Only Joe Biden can make this decision.

If he continues to run, he will be the nominee of the democratic party.

What he needs to decide, is whether that is wise. Whether it is in his best interest or the country's.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: He's got to have somebody behind him.

STU: He's a power -- he's a big, you know, group of connections inside the Democratic Party.

This isn't just some guy saying this. This is a big deal.

GLENN: Oh, no.

This is Axlerod. This is Axlerod.

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.