RADIO

Elites want nuclear power for THEM, but NOT for you?!

After decades of trying to scare Americans about nuclear energy - which is SAFE - elites are now opening up to the idea ... FOR THEIR OWN USE. Glenn reviews how Bill Gates is reopening Three Mile Island to power his Microsoft AI data centers while global elites are pushing less reliable wind and solar energy on the rest of us. "We need to have windmills, but AI can have nuclear energy?" Glenn says. "That's INSANE!"

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Have you seen that all of a sudden, nuclear power is okay?

STU: I mean, that would be a great development, for good purposes.

GLENN: Right.

Okay. So here's what's happening. We need 3,000 percent more electricity by 2032, because of AI.

So we're going to have to start rationing electricity, if we don't come up with 3,000 percent more electricity.

AI is just taking -- just gobbling energy.

All right. So now, Bill Gates and the elites, are going to start building nuclear power plants.

And we're -- we're opening up 3-mile island. Now, I mean, man!

I have to see a chiropractor, this thing swings so fast. My neck. Oh my -- you get whiplash.

So wait. Nuclear power is okay for AI.

But it's dangerous for everything else.

We've been saying, nuclear power is the way to go for a very long time. Can't have that.

It's the cleanest energy. Can't have that.

Why is it being build for AI, and not for us?

We need to have windmills, but AI can have nuclear energy. It's insane.

STU: It's insane.

Although, there are so many things here. First of all, it's fascinating, as to how stupid the efforts for global warming have been.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Knowing this stuff was around the corner.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: The idea that we were trying to save thee percent of our energy, by getting extra energy efficient air-conditioners or whatever the hell we've been wasting our time with over the past years.

Instead of just saying, let's just get enough energy for everything everybody needs. Not to mention, we have continents. Entire continents still to still come online in this world.

We need a lot more energy. And it's so ridiculous. That we've been talking about this nonsense of cutting by three, five, 6 percent. It's so stupid.

GLENN: When we have to increase by 3,000 percent.

STU: And that's just us!

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Imagine.

GLENN: And China.

STU: There are entire nations. Like, India, China, Africa as a continent, that is largely offline completely.

So you have that. Then you have the situation where, in a way, this is exactly what the argument we've been making the entire time.

Now, it wasn't associated necessarily, directly with AI. The point is, we know we will need a lot more energy. And we need nuclear to fill that gap. We've been saying that for decades.

I mean, Michael Shellenberger did a documentary on CNN, when we were -- 2000. Mid-2000s. Late 2000s. Where he laid that all out this great detail. As an environmentalist. As this is the way it should go.

GLENN: Every serious environmentalist has said that.

I mean, this proves the point, they were only trying to collapse economies.

They were only trying to restrain the first world countries. And collapse them.

And bring them down. Now that they need nuclear energy. The elites do. Now, all of a sudden, nuclear energy is fine.

But for them. Not for us. We still need wind power. We still need solar power.

STU: I do think, if they're able to -- I am highly doubtful that they will get 3-mile island back online. Highly doubtful.

All sorts of local opposition there. Which is all going to be misguided, by the way.

But I will be very surprised if that actually happens. Think of yourself as a local politician, in Pennsylvania.

I don't know. I don't buy it. But whatever. I hope it happens.

GLENN: Money. Money. Money. Money.

STU: I know. But the money has always been there.

There's always been money for people in power.

GLENN: Yeah. But now you have Bill Gates and Google.

STU: Look, if the outcome of this, is that we get nuclear power. And it is something that becomes --

GLENN: But will we get it?

STU: Look, the bottom line, this will all feed into the grid.

And we are going to need to -- we need a certain amount of power for everybody. It -- the -- it's not really important who gets that specific power.

If that power goes -- let's say all the power goes to AI. Which is sort of a loose thing.

You can't really do anyway. But if it did, we would have more power in other areas.

GLENN: If -- unless they still continue to cripple the rest.

STU: Well, yeah. More importantly, if the stigma of nuclear power goes away, and we can build them for everybody else.

It's a really positive development.

GLENN: Yes, it is.

STU: Now, AI might kill us before it happens. It is a really positive environment.

GLENN: Yeah. They're talking about fast tracking these things.

It's 30 years. At least to be able to build a power plant.

You watch. You watch. These things will go up at lightning speed. But it will go up for Google and Microsoft. And all of the AI companies.

STU: You're way too more optimistic than me on this.

That's interesting. Because I just feel like, at the end of the day, they will try to do this, and it will fail.

GLENN: No.

STU: Look, I think it's a positive thing.

If AI and Bill Gates winds up making nuclear power, available to millions of more people.

GLENN: And that's where we disagree.

I don't think that will happen.

STU: Seriously, if they made one on their premise. And have it all feeding into them.

That means they're not pulling into the grid for other things.

We would have more energy to deal with on our own.

GLENN: And how fast are we destroying our energy?

STU: Yeah, well, very quickly, and we're not even utilizing a lot of it.

GLENN: Right. It will be power for me. No power for thee.

STU: But we need power to access. What is the AI doing -- if they're just using it on their own facilities?

And we can't turn our computers on?

Like we need to be able to access it. Companies need to be able to access it, for it to be valuable to them. So I don't know.

GLENN: Yeah, it's just crazy. Let me just ask you this. For people who say, that this election is not going to affect them personally.

Could you please call in today, and tell me, how much your power bill has gone up in the last four years, and the last year.

STU: Hmm gosh.

GLENN: Who has received a power bill. For your electricity, over the summer?

And compare it. How much has it gone up?

Just electricity. Let me ask you this: How much has your insurance gone up?

Your car insurance. Your health insurance.

Remember? You're going to save $5,000 per family. We just get Obamacare in. It will -- you haven't saved a dime. It's gone through the roof.

Everything has gone through the roof. But as they're cutting the electricity, there's one guy, who is saying, the number one thing I'm going to do, immediately, is get our power back online.

It doesn't affect you?

Really?

This -- this doesn't affect you at all?

Of course, it does.


STU: Imagine what they're going to go up to if and when AI really kicks into gear?

When we need 3,000 times, and we're only able to produce 20 percent more. Or, 3,000 percent more. Not 3,000 times more. That would be a lot. But all this power increase, we would need to deal with all this new technology.

And we can, if we're lucky, get a slight increase, if in our output. If we're lucky.

GLENN: They have been gobbling all of it.

I mean, it is. You are truly looking at Hunger Games kind of scenarios. Where the elites and the, you know -- the cities, that where all the elites live.

They will have the power.

You won't. You are really looking at Hunger Games. Without the Game.

I mean, well, maybe want.

I don't know. They love to kill people. That's the one thing they're really good at. Think about that.

No, seriously, think about how good they are at killing people. How hard they're fighting to kill people. It's their number one thing.

And we have to be able to kill our own babies. What?

We've got to be able to kill our own babies in the third trimester. That's on nobody's agenda.

In fact, how many of us have asked for any of this stuff?

Is that high on your agenda?

Moms. Moms.

Liberal women, is it high on your agenda, to be able to terminate in the third trimester?

Because that's what they're pushing for.

I don't think anybody wants that.

I don't think anybody has been like, you know what, let's bring in a whole bunch of illegals.

Hey, you know what we should do, we should bring the gangs in from Venezuela. And then give them all kinds of money.

Screw the veterans. Screw our own homeless.

Let's give foreigners all our own money. And then have them overcrowd the schools and the hospitals.

Did you vote for that? Because I didn't vote for that.

And you're not going to vote for any of the stuff that's coming your way.

This affects you. You will feel it. I think in ways, you probably have never felt politics before.

You're going to feel it in 2025. One way or another.

STU: And we have a candidate who basically won't really tell us if they're for fracking, for example.

Totally --

GLENN: No.

STU: I guess, she. That's the one thing she's actually on record saying, she's reversed herself on.

She has no reason for it. She has no -- no science of global warming has convinced her. But supposedly, because she needs to win Pennsylvania, she has changed her mind on the fracking ban.

GLENN: But not given any explanation on why.

STU: Right. Yeah.

GLENN: If you can't tell me why you haven't changed a lifetime view, you haven't changed a lifetime view.

Her record is not silent.

But she's silent on almost everything.

We're covering energy tonight.

Kamala's radical climate agenda.

That will bankrupt America.

Absolutely bankrupt it.

That's tonight at 9 o'clock on Blaze TV.

STU: We should also note, she's not giving any -- she's almost stopped flip-flopping.

Now she's not answering questions at all about what her policies are.

So I don't know which one is better. The fact that she's just kind of leaking flip-flops to reporters. That never ask any follow-up questions. Through campaign aides. Or what she's doing now. Which is not even answer -- I mean, Alex Thompson. Has been one of the journalists who has been over this.

He's at Axios, I believe. We will complain about journalists not doing their job. There are a few that are.

Alex Thompson has been one of them.

No conservative, by any means. He's just out there asking actual questions that we should expect from candidates.

So He writes.

Let me just give you a few couple of examples of this. Harris' campaign is declining to say whether she still supports decriminalizing sex work, a position she took in 2019.

Asked for a brief interview on the topic, the camp didn't respond.

Okay.

GLENN: Kind of important, especially if you care about women.

STU: Yeah. 2019. Harris pledged a series of executive actions, to unilaterally give 2 million Dreamers a path to citizenship through parole in place. We asked if she still supported those actions. Her campaign declined to say either way.

Axios asked Harris' campaign whether she was available for a five to ten-minute interview, to discuss her position on immigration. A campaign spokesperson declined.

Since she ran for DA in 2003, Harris has been an outspoken opponent of the death penalty. We asked if she was still was opposed to it, and would push for legislation or an executive order to ban it. The campaign didn't respond.

Over and over and over and over again, they have done this.

They are -- we are now seeing a presidential campaign, in which one of the candidates will not tell you what her positions are, on the topics of the day.

GLENN: And it is so amazing, because you're noticing Donald Trump's positions becoming more and more clearly. Every single day.

STU: Yeah. He's got a new one every single day, it seems like.

And he's completely fine discussing them.
And yet, his opponent seemingly has no opinions on anything.

Is that a problem?

And I keep saying this. Number one, we should give credit to people like Alex Thompson. Who are actually doing their job.

In a nonpartisan, just normal journalist way. Thank God at least one person is doing it.

Secondly. It will be very frustrating, after all of this is over. And we say, the media did nothing here.

And what will they do?

They will point back to Alex Thompson, who was the one guy who was actually asking these questions.

Right?

They will ask as if, the media did cover it here.

Here are these examples. Yes. One person is doing it.

This should be a chorus. Not just for the country and the good of the nation. But also for the good of journalism going forward.

What candidate is going to answer policy questions after this? If you let her slide into the presidency without any policy positions, who the hell is going to give them to you, next time?

Who is going to say, you know what, gosh, I did flip-flop on that.

They're all going to ignore you.

TV

What Glenn Beck Never Got to Say to Charlie Kirk | Glenn TV | Ep 456

Charlie Kirk would have been president. Political violence robbed him of fulfilling that destiny, so now his friends, colleagues, and supporters throughout the world must figure out how to pick up the pieces and ensure that his legacy never ends. On a special episode of "Glenn TV," Glenn replays the most powerful, touching, and inspirational moments from his time guest-hosting "The Charlie Kirk Show" on Wednesday morning, one week after Charlie’s death. In a touching tribute to his friend, Glenn places Rush Limbaugh’s golden microphone next to Charlie’s — a symbol of Charlie’s longtime dream and the influence he has had throughout the world. Plus, Glenn speaks to "The Charlie Kirk Show" executive producer Andrew Kolvet and Turning Point USA COO Tyler Bowyer about who their dear friend was behind the scenes, the influence he’s had on America and the MAGA movement, and how Charlie’s fingerprints will still be present on future elections. Also, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Glenn discuss how Charlie Kirk helped launched her career, and Research Center Investigative Researcher Ryan Mauro shares how he has the smoking gun President Trump needs to take on George Soros’ network. These are the voices who knew Charlie well, but the number of people he indirectly touched and influenced is spread far and wide. Glenn ends with a beautiful song tribute by David Osmond and Cheyenne Grace, depicting just how mournful the entire world truly is. Rest in peace, Charlie.

RADIO

Fact-check: The 5 LIES circulating about Charlie Kirk

In the first week after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, some in the media and on the Left have tried to either justify or dismiss his death by spreading lies about what he said. Glenn Beck reviews an article by The Federalist, which debunks the 5 biggest lies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We were just talking about the five lies that are going around, about Charlie Kirk.

And it is -- it's reprehensible about what's going on.

Because people who are saying these things. Who are starting these things. They really need -- I mean, they know. They know.

Like Stephen King, really?

You really think that Stephen King.

You really think that Charlie Kirk is for the stoning of gay people?

I --

STU: I do think, though. A lot of these people have an image of everyone on the right, that --

GLENN: But it shows how unbelievably isolated you are.

STU: Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Now, king, in particular, I think -- like, I don't think Stephen King was lying on that.

I think he's -- and I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the -- in the drawer.

GLENN: He ought to be. You can't write like he does.

STU: He's not an idiot, right? He can form thoughts. But I think he's so completely isolated in his bubble. Like, if someone says something terrible, about a person like Charlie Kirk, and your image of him is he's basically Hitler.

Well, you don't -- you don't spend time fact-checking it.

Of course, that guy -- he's that terrible human being. Of course, he said something like that. You don't even bother to check it.

You know, it's like, if I -- if you ran into a quote from Hitler, you've never seen, that was negative from Jews. As a journalist, you should probably check it.

You might think. That was probably true. He said a lot of things like that. That's how they think about people who are normal conservatives who want lower taxes and less regulation. And that is really, really disturbing.

So these lies are really prominent. People really believe these things.

GLENN: So there's a couple of -- here are the five. The first one is Charlie Kirk said black people were better off in slavery.

How big of an idiot, do you have to be, to believe that?

Okay?

Unless you're Crockett. Unless your last name is Crockett.

And I don't mean Davey. Black Americans were better off than slavery. No. That's absolutely no true -- not true. He never said anything like that. Now, what he -- what you're probably getting this from, and I'm going -- searching. I am on -- way metal detector on the beach with board shorts, sandals, and socks, looking for anything that even kind of sounds like that. But Charlie Kirk did say that, you know, they were talking about Jim Crow and how evil Jim Crow was. But he said with be, but if you look at the family, the black family before the passage of the civil rights act, which ended the Jim Crow laws, he said, the family was thriving.

And it was!

It was. Blacks had a lower divorce rate than whites did in I think 1961. They -- their families were stronger. Dads were in the homes. They had lower crime rates. I mean, it -- something happened around the time of the Civil Rights Act.

Now, my theory is, the Civil Rights Act was a -- was done by progressives. I mean, these are the guys who said no to the Civil Rights Act, just four years before. And -- and worked hard to stop the Civil Rights Act.

So what changed in those four years?

The assassination of President Kennedy. That changed your mind. Not even. Not even.

I mean, Johnson was the biggest racist up until he -- up until he died. Why would he create the great society?

My theory, this is just a theory. But my theory is, is because finally, the progressives had a way to keep blacks under their thumb and destroy the family. And destroy them, as people.

I mean, the Civil Rights Act, and more the Great Society.

The Great Society did more damage to the black family than -- than anybody could have done outside of Margaret Sanger. I think that's what he meant by that. It was evil.

You know, Jim Crow, et cetera, et cetera.

But if you look at the numbers on specifics, family, et cetera, et cetera. Blacks were doing better as families, before the Great Society.

And I think that undoing is absolutely -- is absolutely tied to it. And it was intentional, myself, I believe that.

Also, the next claim is that -- that Charlie Kirk said, black women have inferior intelligence. No, that's not what he said.

Now, they're quoting him saying that black women don't have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.

How -- how bad does your image have to be of people on the other side to believe that they could say that?

That Charlie Kirk could say that?

STU: Like, if you were to -- you know, I think about this a lot of times. When I think about how we react to crazy statements on the left.

My reaction a lot of times, when I hear someone saying that is wait a minute.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Even if they believed that, they wouldn't just blurt it out. What is the context of this? I want to know. I want to understand. That should be your first question when you run into a quote like that.

GLENN: Well, go to Snopes. They rate this one true.

STU: This is true.

GLENN: They rate it absolutely true.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Until you get to the last paragraph, when they say, well, we should point out, he wasn't talking about all black women. He was talking about four specific black women.

STU: Oh. Oh.

GLENN: So he's talking about Joy Reid, absolutely true. Sheila Jackson Lee, absolutely true.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Ketanji Brown Jackson. Jackson Brown, absolutely true.

STU: Well, she's not a biologist, Glenn.

GLENN: No. She doesn't know what a woman is. I'm not a biologist. Yeah.

And Michelle Obama, which I don't think is true. I think Michelle Obama is actually rather smart and conniving and just flatout evil.

STU: Yeah. There's a mix there. Ketanji Brown Jackson, for all the flaws that would happen. There's a Supreme Court justice, obviously isn't a moron.

GLENN: Well.

STU: I would say Sotomayor, I would be more confident saying she is a moron.

Though, I am -- for the job that she has, Ketanji Brown Jackson is a moron. You know, Joy Reid is a complete idiot. Wasn't Sheila Jackson Lee, those two follow the same category? You're right. Michelle Obama, I would not call an idiot.

Again, criticizing four members of a group does not mean you're criticizing the group.

GLENN: And he was criticizing people he thought were unqualified to make statements of -- of any intelligence on whatever topic it was that he was talking about.

And what they did, is they said, he thinks that all black women are just dumb.

I mean, that is so incredibly dishonest.

Charlie Kirk said, gun deaths are worth it to keep the Second Amendment.

STU: This is one I heard a lot.

This is one that a lot of people on the left are using as justification for their celebration.

He said, you know, well, you just have to deal with the deaths if you want to have a Second Amendment.

And, you know, I don't know if you have the context --

GLENN: I have it -- I have his answer right here.

You ready? You will never live in a society where you have an armed citizenry. And you won't have a single gun death.

That's nonsense.

It's drivel.

But I am -- I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year.

So you can have the Second Amendment right to protect your other God-given rights.

It's a prudent deal. It is rational to think that way.

STU: I mean, and obviously -- every time -- if you have a free society, you take risks with it.

There will always be people. Horrible, horrible human beings that all seem to donate to Democrat causes, that will do things, like we saw one week ago today.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And that is -- you know, I -- again, you can't speak for Charlie Kirk.

He spoke for himself so eloquently.

But he -- even what occurred last week, would not change his mind on that.

Even -- now that something terrible has happened to me and my family, we should overturn the Second Amendment. And people shouldn't have the right to defend themselves.

You know that's how he would feel about it. And this is, if anything, pointing to his incredible consistency on the rights that we have, in this country. You know, it is a sad -- sad, unfortunate fact about so many things.

Sad, unfortunate fact about automobile travel.

That you do have to deal with some automobile accidents.

When you have highways where you can drive 55, 65, 75 miles an hour, we all understand that to be true.

GLENN: It's unreasonable to think that you can live in a society with automobiles, and not have some automobile accidents.

STU: It's absolutely true.

GLENN: It's exactly what he said about guns.

STU: And, frankly, the other thing that is important to understand, if you did eliminate all guns, you would not eliminate all murders.

GLENN: No. They did in England.

STU: Oh, they did. We're all set?

GLENN: There's no murder there.

STU: No violent crimes there.

I keep reading about them. Is that all false?

GLENN: Yeah. That's Donald Trump. You know what I mean?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's -- last one, Charlie used an Asian slur. Now, I'm not going to use the slur, obviously. I'm just going to say, it's what happens sometimes with armor. There's a very famous saying with armor, that has nothing to do with the Chinese or Asian at all. But I'm not even going to put those together in this context now, you you'll have to figure it out.

The thing is going around, he used that slur to yell at an Asian woman in the audience.

Now, again, what kind of monster -- or how --

STU: You should know on its face, that's false. You should know that's false.

GLENN: Yeah. How stupid would Charlie Kirk have to be, okay?

So, you know, there's nothing. There's nothing like that. Well, I'm sorry.

He was screaming something at a woman when they were talking about capitalism, and he was yelling, Cenk, not the other word. Okay? And who is that? From the Young Turks --

STU: The guys from the Young Turks.

GLENN: That's what he was saying.

STU: Oh, gosh, that's just so bad. You know, the other one was the Stephen King situation, where he quoted some horrible thing that Charlie Kirk said.

And, again, he knitted eventually, that -- that it was false.

But it was -- it was -- he was quoting someone else, in an incident, and critiquing that position.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Yes.

STU: Which was a bad position. But he was bringing it up to quote him and critique him, which is a very standard thing they did on the left. This is a standard tactic of Media Matters when you're quoting someone else or saying something.

They'll act as if I say it.

GLENN: You repeat a lie often enough, and the public will remember it. Glenn Beck is quoting Hitler. Glenn Beck loves Hitler.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Yeah. Hitler said that, but that's not what I was saying. That had nothing to do with the conversation, for the love of Pete.

STU: Yeah, again, if you had something against Charlie Kirk, you wouldn't need to go to this stuff. If our opinion of Kirk, which was a guy who worked hard to debate people.

Who tried to practice politics and civic life the right way. Who tried to be a shining light for his faith, which was vitally important to him and his family. If that vision of Charlie Kirk was false, you wouldn't need to go to these things.

GLENN: No.

STU: You could come up with 50 different things he said that were really offensive. Instead, what you come up with are lies. Because that's what you're in the business of.

GLENN: Yeah. And there is a problem.

The -- we now know. And we'll have more on this later today. On the Charlie Kirk show.

And then on tomorrow.

But we now know that the Chinese and Russia are involved with disinformation campaigns.

Based on Charlie Kirk, trying to get us to push us into Civil War. And we know it for a fact now.

So just be very careful what you read online.

And don't necessarily repeat everything that you see.

TV

Shocking timeline: How “protests” turned into radical attacks in 2025

In the aftermath of the assassination of Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk, it is important to realize that a chilling pattern of far-left radical attacks had already emerged in 2025. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to lay out the timeline, connect the dots, and explain why what looks like a “protest” on one day can turn into an actual attack on the next. Glenn walks through each high-profile incident, the groups and ideologies involved, and the national implications for safety, free speech, and public order.

Watch This FULL Episode of 'Glenn TV' HERE


RADIO

Glenn Beck warns of dangerous government powers in proposed Charlie Kirk act

President Trump and others have posted in support of a proposed Charlie Kirk Act. But Glenn Beck gives a warning: there are 2 versions of this going around. One, proposed by Sen. Mike Lee, would stop the government from using propaganda against Americans. The other would go further, giving the government dangerous powers over truth. Glenn Beck explains the differences as well as what the Smith-Mundt Act was and why an Obama-era decision may be connected to the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. I want you to just spend a couple of minutes with me, and switch everything that you've been thinking on, off for a minute. This is very important. I want to take you back to the world in 1948, okay?

The ashes of World War II are still warm. The Cold War is already beginning to chill in the air, and the Soviet Union has a propaganda machine that is in full swing.

Radio Moscow, Pravda, endless streams of anti-American stories are pouring into the homes of men and women, all across the globe.

And Congress looked at this. And said, we need a counterbalance on this.

America needs to tell her story to the world about liberty and about her finding ideals.

And we need to tell it to the rest of the world.

This is the birth of the Smith-Mundt Act. Okay? We needed to launch things, at that time. Like the Voice of America, and radio-free Europe, and Radio Liberty.

These were not just radio stations. For many who were behind the curtain, these were lifelines.

A Polish dissident in the 1970s or a Hungarian who lived through the 1956 uprising, they'll tell you, they're huddled in the dark, and they have that dial of that radio.

And they can tune it. They carefully tune it, listening to an American voice break through the static and break through the darkness. That says, freedom is real. And the world hasn't forgotten you. They remember that as being very important.

But and here is the key: We, as a society, drew a very bright red line, none of this could ever be used in the United States. Congress rightfully was terrified of unleashing a government propaganda machine on its own citizens. Now, I want you to remember. 1948, Congress is still Democrat.

Okay?

You just had 20 years of the same president, FDR.

They're about to say, no president can serve that long.

The Democrats said, no Democrat president. No Republican president can ever serve that long. Because we were so close to fascism.

So the Democrats are very concerned about the government going fascistic.

And they should know about it. Because they remembered the control commission.

Now, let me take you back to World War I. The Creel Commission is something that nobody remembers, and everyone should.

Because it's what whipped America up in a frenzy, to get us to go into World War I.

You know it, because you remember the I want you Uncle Sam poster. And I've always hated that Uncle Sam poster because of the Creel Commission. I love it. I think it's really beautiful. It was created by an artist, that he didn't create it for the Creel Commission. So, you know, he was innocent. But it was the Creel machine that plastered it on every wall, every post office, every train station.

And suddenly Uncle Sam's finger was pointing at you. It wasn't just a poster. It was a summons. It was you. We need you to go to war. Americans did not want to go to World War I. In fact, Woodrow Wilson said, the other side, he will put you into war. I will keep I out of war. He knew that wasn't true.

Within three months after his reelection, we're at war. But he had to bring the country along. So the Creel Commission, through films and songs, films like the Kaiser, the Beast of Berlin, it turned the -- it turned Germany into a cartoon villain. George Cohan, he wrote songs, over there. Over there.

All of these things were done by the government, as propaganda to get Americans to go over there.

And fight. Then the government went even further. And they started hiring these, what were called Four Minute Men.

Now, imagine this, you're sitting in a movie theater.

The film. You're watching maybe the -- the newsreel. And as they're changing the reels, some guy who just in the audience, stands up, walks to the front. Clears his throat. And he delivers this really well-thought out and rousing four minute speech about patriotism. And liberty.

And crushing Germany.

The government had 75,000 volunteers. They gave millions of speeches, when anybody would pause in churches and schools. In parks.

In theaters. They were called Four Minute Men.

This was social media before social media. They were short bursts. And they seemingly were everywhere, and always on message.

Because the message was crafted by the government. Then the Creel group, through our government, published booklets, official bulletins. They planted stories in the press. This is when we really started really getting into the press, and information was -- had one goal. All of the information. And that was rallies for the -- rally support for the war, and drown out anybody that was disagreeing with that. Okay?

The government actually encouraged kids to spy on their neighbors.

That you were encouraged and post -- post men did this.

To go through the mail, if they saw -- if they saw letters that were coming in. Ask they wanted to know, who it was. And are you a German spy. Are you somebody who is going to be against the war?

Postal workers went through your mail. And it was legal at the time!

You were encouraged, operators were encouraged to listen to people's phone calls, and to report if they were on the other side.

This is Germany.

In fact, because of the Creel Commission, Germans, and what's his name?

The head of the German propaganda, oh, what's his name? The German douche bag. I can't remember his name. Anyway, what was his name?

STU: Goebbels, is that who you're talking about?

GLENN: Goebbels.

STU: Although, I like your name for it, frankly.

GLENN: Yeah. Goebbels, the douche bag.

Anyway, he said, we lost World War I because of American propaganda. But we learned how Americans did it.

And that's what Goebbels did in World War II. All of this propaganda. Okay?

By the way, American advertising, up until World War II, it was called propaganda.

What I heard, I wouldn't have said, now a message from our advertiser.

I was delivering literally and it was cool at the time, to call it propaganda.

Because that's what it was. Paid for propaganda.

Bit after Goebbels took it. And did what he did with it. We were like, oh, propaganda is bad!

Okay?

So here's what -- here's what happened because of the Creel Commission. They were pushing uniformity of thought. They did that by making sure Americans were hearing the same slogans. The same images. The same stories from every direction. Which created the illusion of unanimous consent. I want you to think about life today.

I want you to think about life during COVID.

What was the goal of the government.

To crush any dissent, and to control all of the messages that were going out, to make sure that you were hearing the same slogans, the same images. The same stories from every direction, to give you the illusion that it was unanimous consent.

What about the global warming? It's exactly the same.

Then on top of it, the Creel Commission demonized dissent. Okay? German Americans were part of this country forever.

In fact, we were I think two votes away from making German our official language, as the United States, not English. But they were all of a sudden, branded as traitors.

You couldn't -- a priest went to jail, because he gave the last rites to a German who fell down in front of him on the streets and was dying. And a priest spoke German and gave him the last rites in German. That priest went to jail! Okay??

Okay? So they demonized dissent. Then they suppressed free speech. The propaganda campaign dovetailed with the Espionage Act of 1917. The Sedition Act of 1918. If you criticized the draft, if you questioned the war, you could be fined. You would be ostracized, and you would go to jail.

This is Woodrow Wilson, gang. Does any of it sound familiar?

Now, here's what the aftermath was, after the war. When the war ended, the mask came off. Millions were dead, and Americans felt absolutely duped. They felt that they were tricked into going into a war that they were manipulated into. They didn't even understand it. And that's why we were such isolationists, in the 1920s and our 1930s, because our own government had manipulated the population to go in to fight this war, and they felt so manipulated and so betrayed by their own government. They were like, I don't want anything to do with foreign wars, okay?

So why did this -- why did this happen in 1948?

Well, because in 1948, all of this stuff is happening, and we're saying, okay. We need to have some sort of -- some sort of boundary.

Because we're going to start all of this propaganda, for the United States. And it cannot be ever turned on the people of the United States. Okay?

So then why -- why was it repealed?

It was repealed without any really kind of conversation. Because it was slipped in, called the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act.

It was slipped in to a defense authorization bill. Just like it's happening right now, the government didn't pay its bills.

They couldn't come up with the -- with a way to actually fund everything. Because we have to act as an emergency, otherwise all of our war machine. And it's all going to stop. And the world is going to die. And panic and all of that.

;And so somebody has slipped the bill in. And we modernized it.

Why did we modernize?

Well, because don't you like transparency?

I mean, we're doing this overseas. We're doing this propaganda overseas. Do you know -- taxpayer. You're paying for it. Shouldn't you see it?

There was a Congressman Max Thornberry. He was one of the sponsors. And he said, quote, today the law prevents the American people from seeing or hearing the same things we broadcast overseas, and that doesn't make any sense.

We paid for it. Okay. Then they switched that from transparency to, and it's helping fight terrorism. It will let the Department of Defense and the State Department share counter radicalization material both abroad and at home, because we have to modernize this. The internet is everywhere, okay?
So who doesn't want to fight terrorists? Who doesn't want transparency?

Now, here's what actually happened. I'll tell you in 60 seconds. First, Stu.

STU: Yeah. Let me tell you about Prize Picks. You know, we're talking about daily fantasy sports, which is a nice escape, honestly from where we've been over the past three weeks.

If you remember fantasy sports and you're like, oh, gosh.

Yeah, that's a lot of work. I have to be on there, every single day. You don't have to do it that way. Prize Picks brings it back to what it was meant to be. Simple and quick and actually enjoyable.

No drafts. No leagues. No season-long commitments. You just look at the player projections for the day, decide if they'll do more or less than what is listed, build your lineup. And then you're in.

It takes less than a minute to play. And you can mix or match players across different sports, football, baseball. Basketball.

Whatever -- whatever you want.

You don't have to be a stat wizard. You don't have to be a sports insider. You just got instincts, and you have an opinion.

You can win Prize Picks. It's daily fantasy, the way it should be. Fun, flexible, and easy to fit into real life and a nice escape. No stress. Just sports your way.

Download the app today. Use the code Stu.

Get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup. The code is Stu, to get 50 bucks instantly when you play your first 5-dollar lineup. It's Prize Picks. And it's good to be right. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So in 2012, the left decides, we have to get rid of this propaganda thing.

Okay?

Once the firewall was gone, and it's just a blip, no one even really noticed it. Suddenly, the government agencies could circulate diplomacy campaigns, inside of the United States.

And we saw this. This is where you get your USAID. The NGOs. Doing all the things here in the United States.

Because they can all do it. During COVID, you saw this.

You saw government-funded messaging, quietly merging with the media campaigns and big tech content moderation. Narratives weren't debated. They were handed out by the government. And then they were enforced. Then take the DHS disinformation governance board.

This is a direct descendent from this shift. Okay?

It was the government openly declaring it had a role in policing speech at home.

Look at the 2016 aftermath of the elections. Reports now confirm that the US government funds originally intended for overseas information campaigns that had filtered into domestic projects that fact-checked, flagged, and suppressed certain narratives online. The line between foreign propaganda and domestic persuasion was completely gone. Everything they worried about in 1948, was now happening after 2012. Okay. So why am I bringing this up today?

Because after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, we have been asking for this to be reinstated.

This Smith-Mundt Act has to be reinstated. But after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, there is a new wave of enthusiasm for this as there should be.

But some people on our side, are now demanding more than just a firewall.

You go to change.org. And there's petitions for a Charlie Kirk act.

And it will not only stop government propaganda. But it goes further than that. It starts to punish private media. Educators. Social media platforms. For spreading what they call false narratives. So this is -- this is our side saying, yeah, well, now we want the power to do what they did. Okay? Hear me clearly.

Accountability matters! Lives are destroyed, reputations are smeared. And that matters.

But we have systems in place for that.

What this proposal opens is a new door. A terror where government decides, what is and isn't falsehood.

And the government cannot do that. History teaches us. Once the government claims the authority to define truth.

Liberty is gone. Okay?

Now, enter Mike Lee.

Mike Lee has another proposal. Mike Lee has a version. That he is submitting to Congress. And trying to get it passed. And every American should be for this.

Right or left.

Every American should be for this. He's not going to reinvent the wheel. He just wants the old firewall put back. That's it.

Period.

The government must not, and cannot propagandize its own people. Restore the very bright red line that was attacked in 1948.

It's not about silencing speech. It's about preventing the most powerful institution on earth, with the endless resources of that institution, the government.

And the endless reach, from turning its firehose of influence in on the American people.

This is why it matters. I want you to think of -- I want you to think of football.

Oh, boy. Dangerous.

You wouldn't let the referee this a football game, put on a jersey, and join one of the teams. Okay?

But that's what the repeal did. It let the government be both the referee and the player in the arena of ideas. Mike Lee is saying, put the stripes back on their jerseys. Make sure they're in black and white stripes. So we know exactly who they are!

Change.org and some people on our side want to make the ref not only a player, but the judge, the jury, and the executioner. It cannot happen.

This is -- I'm telling you, if this goes through, Mike Lee is proposing something that is clean. Doesn't have any of this in.

So support the Mike Lee Mundt Act. But if you're hearing people talk about, we have to go further, that is the Patriot Act of our day. We're standing at a fork in the road.

Reinstating the Smith-Mundt protections. They're not going to solve all the problems of misinformation, but it reestablishes the ground rules. And tells Washington, you cannot propagandize us, period.
(music)

Once truth belongs to the state, truth itself ceases to exist. Support Mike Lee's bill.

Restore the Smith-Mundt Act.