RADIOFebruary 21, 2023

Glenn’s powerful NATIONAL DIVORCE message: ‘I’m keeping the kids’

The far-left has labeled Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene a radical once again, this time for her push for a ‘national divorce’ in America. But if THAT is deemed ‘radical,’ then why hasn’t the far-left’s intense push to transform and destroy EVERYTHING we once loved about America ever been labeled the same? In this clip, Glenn gives HIS powerful message on a national divorce. He shows how America’s Democrats have dangerously transformed nearly every sector of society, describes what YOUR Constitutional (and peaceful) duty is as a response, and explains why establishing a strong relationship with God is needed now more than ever. Plus, what it means when Glenn says that if a divorce DOES occur, then conservatives are ‘keeping the kids...’

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So we need a national divorce. I want to make sure I'm very, very clear on this. We need a national divorce, she writes.

We need to separate by red states and blue states, and shrink the federal government.

So she's not saying destroy America.

She's saying, we should probably not do business with one another, because we're killing each other.

And shrink the federal government.

Okay. Everyone I talked to says this from sick, disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats, to the traitorous last -- America last policies, we're done. Okay. Then the response, all those who support Greene's call to end the US. She didn't say that. But let's just take her -- let's just take it at her -- you know, we should separate and have a national divorce. They should have their US citizenship revoked. Really?

Because I know a lot of people on the left, that have actually called for the USA to end. And they haven't their citizenship revoked. So if you want to do that, let's just be consistent.

Here's -- here's the way I look at things today.

Remember when they said they wanted to reimagine the police? Many of us thought, no, he they don't want us to reimagine the police. They want to reimagine everything. When it comes to the police, they want to reimagine the justice system. The system that we have had in place for over 200 years.

The system that is -- is dictated and designed by our Constitution. They wanted to redesign and reimagine all of that. They wanted to reimagine all of our history. They were taking down statues. They -- they were making George Washington into a monster.

They wanted to reimagine our basic way of life.

Now, a lot of us thought that was foolish. A lot of us thought that was foolish.

Now, there's a new study out, that shows the results of this. And it's been a two-year study. And if you're a long-time listener, you know I will admit when I'm wrong. And the study shows, right or wrong. The idea of zero bail and arrest and release. They are not foolish, as it turns out. They are extraordinarily dangerous as well.

Now, common sense told many Americans, that it's a disaster. You don't do that. You don't just throw something out.

This is important.

You don't just throw something out, and say, let's reimagine. What's your plan?

What are you -- what are the steps you are going to take? What are you replacing it with?

Now, they've been studying this since June 2021. And they are dramatic. And there are no two ways to read the results. I'll quickly just give you this. If you had a zero bail policy, it appears as though more than 70 percent now of those who were released without bail, were -- went on to be arrested for additional crimes.

Okay? Seventy-eight percent of suspects released without bail were found to be rearrested for crimes. And if you gave bail, only 46 percent were arrested.

So that's really, really clear. And this is just one thing, of the reimagining of our entire system.

So we know reimagining war, how that's working out for us. Reimagining our military. Reimagining our Middle East policy.

We know how those things are working out for us.

So the left -- and let's go back to the police forces. The left forced a reimagining on our police forces, all across the country.

They got their way. No bail.

They reimagined the district attorneys with George Soros. They imagined all of it. Did it help?

Did it help the criminal? Or did it help the victim?

Did it help black people, white people, Hispanics? The communities.

Is life better in those communities. For anyone.

Is life safer for either the victim, the offender, or the community?

Is our law enforcement better, did it fix the rogue cop problem? Are our cops feeling like, they're not the bad guy, with no one watching their back?

Or do they feel like they are the bad guy, and no one is watching their back?

See, this goes to one piece of the entire puzzle, that they have been putting together.

And a society cannot survive very long, with lawlessness. And a free society, even less. So now that the results are officially in, on just this one topic, will the cities admit they're wrong?

Will they change this policy?

Will mayors, governors, legislatures, attorneys general, reign in this grossly failed experiment?

Well, my guess is no. Why? Again, I would have to go to common sense. A couple of things, one, admitting that you're wrong is very difficult, and politicians don't usually do it. But they also have this thing with Marxism, where they say the same thing after every Marxist, authoritarian failure. It just wasn't done right. Well, we just didn't do it right.

Okay. Well, let me ask, Seattle, you had all the power.

Portland.

What levers did you not control?

Why did it not work out well?

Were the wrong people in charge again? See, the only thing you didn't have was the power to physically or permanently silence all those who opposed you.

But you had the power to do that, more than any time since the 1950s and the red scare.

The reason why this won't change, is because it is clear, this was never a plan to make policing better.

It was a plan, and it was well-thought out.

But it was just a plan to destroy, to tear down, and to create chaos. And they've been very successful in that plan, all across America. And throughout almost every portion of society.

The plan to destroy the community. Destroy our history, standards. To destroy our story. To destroy our power, as an individual, and our power as a country. As far as, you know, domestically, our power as a country with foreign relations. And our physical power.

They've destroyed the relationship between parents and teachers. Parents and the state. Parents and their doctors. While destroying the stability of childhood. By refusing reality.

And confusing reality with fantasy. By destroying logic and reason. And empirical truth. And replacing it with activism, slogans, relativism, and dangerous lies.

So we have our proof on the reimagining of the police. We have it in a study. But we know the proof, on so many things.

I mean, anyone with common sense knew, this would be the result of no bail. How long will Americans of all political stripes, those Democrats, Republicans, independents. All of us. How long are we going to wait, before we demand, at the local, state, and federal level, that they end this wanton destruction of our entire way of life.

We are not safer today, in most of our cities now. The world is in much greater danger now, because we reimagined the truths that kept of our military strong.

We are economically in peril. The dollar value. Because we're reimagining what it means to print money. Our borders are not secure.

Our citizens are not in charge. They are not listened to many of the times.

Is our government even engaged in the basic tasks that we, the people outlined for them, when we, the people established the government.

Because we told them in writing, that we were just lending them our power, in order to, quote, form a more perfect union.

Are they moving toward a more perfect union, or a divided union?

We told them, we would lend them our power, to establish justice. Is justice being served, or justice being redefined against the people's will?

Are they ensuring our domestic tranquility. Or are they the source of a lot of our problems?

Providing for the common defense. Promoting the general welfare. Are they securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity?

Are your children going to be freer, than you are?

Boy, I would say, that is a big no. So I don't know if they're even engaged. I contend, that they have not just failed on this job, but they've become hostile to the meaning and purpose of that job.

And we let them.

But our Founders knew that this would happen. They knew we would tolerate it, up to some point. From the Declaration of Independence. All experience has shown, that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they're accustomed.

We're used to this.

And it's still -- life goes on. I mean, I'm free to go to the movies. I have a job. Whatever.

So we tolerate too much.

But that's expected. But we told them, that their job was to secure the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Governments were instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. But it goes on.

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people, to alter or abolish it. Not a period. A comma.

And to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them, shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness.

So what they're saying here is, you have to build the net to fall into. You have to show what you're going to replace it with.

And you'll notice that anyone who says, I don't want to replace it. I want to live by the Constitution, are deemed radicals.

And those who want to reimagine everything, are not radicals. Well, that's an upside down world.

They said, prudence indeed, will dictate the governments long established, will not be changed for light and transient causes. But when a long chain of abuses and usurpations, now, listen to this, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces, otherwise known -- shows clear evidence a design, to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right. It is their duty to throw off this government, and provide new guards for their future -- future security.

Now, that's a fascinating phrase. Think of that. A long train of abuses and usurpations. So things that are happening, that are -- are destroying your freedom. Your way of life. Our Constitution.

And they're all -- they're all ending the same way, as anybody -- you've ever heard. Hey, how come. I mean, this is a mistake. This is a mistake. This is a mistake.

How come there's never a mistake that goes the way of the Constitution for America. That's a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object.

The destruction. And when you have clear evidence, that this is a design, this isn't just happenstance.

There are people designing this, that put us into absolute despotism, then you have a right and a duty.

So the two questions remain. Do you see, a long train of abuses and actions, that are trying to destroy your rights and powers?

Do they all point to the same object? To the same direction. To destroy our system of rights, checks, and balances. Justice.

Security. To -- to give us a completely new form of rule and society. I think the answer to that one is clearly yes.

But it may not be for those who have their heads in the sand and are not paying attention to the news.

Have we, the people been informed and involved in those decisions?

Because if we were all doing it, and they were sharing and saying, look, we're going to do this.

We want to abolish these rights, in the Constitution. We want to make sure that we have an administrative state. And Congress is irrelevant.

And we all talked about it openly. And we all decided, that would be different. But that's not what's happening.

More in just a second. First, let me tell you about Good Ranchers. Unless you have resigned yourself to what the World Economic Forum wants you to do, and that's eat bugs or worse. Become a vegetarian, you're probably going to buy meat for yourself, and pretty regularly.

And that is really expensive. And it is expected to go up another 15 percent this year.

Lock in your prices. And also, get American beef. Over 80 percent of the grass fed beef that you will find in stores, is imported. Even though, it has the little American flag on it.

People lie sometimes. But not Good Ranchers. Ditch the usual.

It doesn't cut it anymore.

Go to GoodRanchers.com.

Snag 30 percent off -- with the offer code Beck. At GoodRanchers.com.

100 percent satisfaction guarantee.

This is a great, great box of meat. We just got a delivery on it a couple of days ago.

Quality, quality meat, all from America, and American ranchers.

You can set up an affordable and delicious subscription, to American meat, delivered to your home. That's fish, that's meat. That's also chicken.

Really good. America's best from GoodRanchers.com.

Promo code Beck. GoodRanchers.com.

Promo code Beck. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
So do we have a long train of abuses and actions, trying to destroy?

Have you been involved in it, or have you been lied to?

Have you been diverted, silenced?

Gas lit? Have you been told things like ESG and The Great Reset. Are fables. Lies. Disinformation.

Conspiracy theories. And now see that they are not that.

And how many times have you been told one thing by your government, and then I realize, they are actually doing that.

Have they allowed chaos to breed and burn on our streets? Only to excuse them with the torch. And then discredit or silence those people. Call them terrorists.

When they're actually law-abiding citizens, who are just standing up and saying, law and order?

Has the government grown past their constitutional restraints?

And has it been to enhance and secure your individual rights, or has it been to chain you, while freeing those who are in bed with government.

And are all of those abuses and actions pointing the same direction, or not?

Now, you have a right and duty, but that's only the first question. How?

What is that duty? How do you do it?

Now, this is where everyone stops. This is where everybody says, we have to separate and have a national divorce. And others say, that's traitorous. That's treason.

Well, that's because people aren't answering the second question. The Constitution and the -- and the Declaration of Independence are very clear on your rights and your duty.

But the second question is: How? What does that mean?

The answer, next.
(music)

Cheryl wrote in about her dog's experience with Ruff Greens. She says, I was actually a bit skeptical, that this would have any difference with my dogs. But the difference is unbelievable.

I decided to buy it when my 11-year-old dog had to have surgery, and wasn't really doing well.

Within a week's time, she was playing like a puppy. I am totally amazed how better -- how much better my dog is acting. My dog's digestion. Thank you, Ruff Greens.

Ruff Greens is not a dog food. But a supplement developed by naturopathic Dr. Dennis Black. You can sprinkle it on the dog food. It's chalked full of vitamins, minerals, probiotics, antioxidants. You name it.

You sprinkle that on, and you will see a difference in your dog.

Now, the folks at Ruff Greens are so confident, that your dog will love it. And you will love seeing what happens with your dog. That they have a deal, just to make sure that your dog will eat it and likes it. They will send you a first trial bag for free. All you do is pay for shipping.

Then if your dog likes it, you get the next bag from Ruff Greens, and you watch, over the coming months. You will see a difference in your dog. RuffGreens.com. R-U-F-FGreens.com. Or call 833-Glenn-33. RuffGreens.com/Beck.
(music)

STU: Now is the time to join up to Blaze TV. Go to BlazeTV.com/Glenn and use the promo code Glenn, to save.
(music)
(OUT AT 8:28 AM)

GLENN: So we have been talking about the national divorce. It's trending again today. And people are arguing, back and forth. You're a traitor if you say that. Well, you're a traitor because you're trying to destroy America. Let's just use some logic and reason here. Okay?

Nobody wants a war. If there's a War Between the States, those don't usually end well. In fact, I think ours is the only one that's ever ended well.

But it won't end the same way this time, because we are not the people our Founders were.

We have to decide, first of all, is there a pattern or a long train of abuses? Is there a pattern all pointing to a design to destroy your freedom, your rights, as outlined in the Bill of Rights, Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence?

If you decide that, then you have a right and responsibility, according to the Declaration of Independence.

So now what do you do? What do you do about that?

Red and blue separate. Okay. What does that even mean?

Because if -- if Texas decided to secede, I would not live under a -- a state, unless it is under the framework, the exact framework of the Constitution and the mission statement of the Declaration of Independence.

So, in other words, I would not tolerate anything being changed, except a reset back to factory settings.

If you want to write a new Constitution, I -- I am not in.

Because I support the Constitution of the United States. Okay?

I will -- I will do everything in my power to protect and defend that. So I don't really see, you know, myself at least, as leaving the United States of America.

I think the United States of America, the of power structures, have left the United States of America.

Not me.

I still believe in the same values, that we've had since the revolution. And the -- and the beginning of the republic.

So what does that mean exactly, the national divorce?

Now, build a dual economy?

This makes sense on so many levels. First of all, we have seen that the economy, our banking system. Our trade with one another, has become weaponized by the United States government, through public/private partnerships.

The things they couldn't do, because they were constitutionally restrained. They have gotten corporations to do.

Well, that's a usurpation of the rights in our Constitution, so no.

I don't want to live that way.

And until they will reestablish the proper role of government, we should do everything we can, to ensure we don't need their corporations.

The government's corporations, to survive.

But this makes sense in -- in so many ways. Look at what COVID taught us.

We are not independent. We are not independent as people. We are not independent as communities.

Or states. We will all perish, if there is a global trade shutdown.

We should be rebuilding our manufacturing, our skills, we should be able to survive locally.

So having, you know, a -- a -- a dual economy, is really smart.

So you have a right to do this. You have a right to discuss this. You have a duty, it says in the Declaration of Independence, to throw off the chains. But what is that duty? What does that mean?

Because remember, there's a comma, not a period.

You have to replace it, with something that you think is going to be better. Now, I can't think of anything better than the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. Can't think of anything better, that would protect them. You just have to actually use those things.

See, it's our duty to not only throw off the chains. And not act as terrorists. Or to become, what we despise.

It's to work together, as a people, to throw off the chains and organizing such powers that will be more likely to protect those rights. So that's not a terror group, from Antifa, to the white supremacists, that -- that offer nothing more than chaos. Slavery.

You have to have a plan, before you follow someone, or you say, let's just shirk off these chains.

You can't. What's your plan for being more safe for individuals and their rights?

I haven't heard that plan. You see, there is that plan, on the other side. They are building the framework of the global community. They are building a global government.

They are building a new currency, that will monitor you. They are building the authoritarian state.

And there's a very well-crafted, well-designed plan, that, quite honestly, is genius.

They didn't collapse us first. They're collapsing us as the power grows.

They start to put an ESG. And as that takes root, they collapse us a little bit more.

And so it's a controlled destruction. Well, you don't just destroy that, and expect everything to go well.

What is the framework?

So when somebody says, we should secede, or we should have a national divorce, what do you mean by that?

What is the framework? What are the states -- what is their government like?

The first thing we have to do, if you believe there are usurpations, and a long train of abuses, that point to despotism, we must first reestablish our first citizenship.

Otherwise -- this is America's cornerstone.

God.

If you live up to those laws first, start with the first, hey. How about this?

How about the Ten Commandments? Are those too difficult?

How about the golden rule?

Okay? Live up to those laws first. Because that will give you reason, clarity, and define inspiration to reestablish this experiment.

And the guardians, to guard those rights.

In the meantime, know that the design is real. The design to destroy this is real.

And so we all have a duty to stand up, but what? We stand up for the restraint on current power. We're not against, we're for the Bill of Rights.

Why are we always saying we're against this. We should be saying, no. That's a violation of the Bill of Rights, and I am for freedom of speech.

We need to stand for people. Like freedom caucuses. There should be a Freedom Caucus in at least 25 states. And they should be powerful.

Texas, doesn't have even have one. How is that possible, in a state, this red?

Because this state, the G.O.P. has gone corrupt.

We need to stand as long as the Freedom Caucus stands for the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

Ohio, stop waiting for the feds.

What are you waiting for?

Why did the governor wait so long?

Wait, the governor has absolutely no power. I mean, I swear, I'm going to get him a little bracelet. That says, what would Ron DeSantis do?

Just look at it every day?

You think he's waiting around? Take care of your own people. You look mousy, and, quite frankly, un-American.

Now, we need to stand up, in all cases, against lies.

Now, that's hard. In all cases, against -- do not tolerate lies. This is the easiest thing you can do.

Do not go along to get along. That doesn't mean agitate. That means, no. I'm sorry. That's not true.

Get involved in -- in your anti-ESG legislation, your -- on your state level.

Work for fair access laws. Which empower you, not the attorney general. But empower you to go after ESG.

Now is the time to support candidates, that will throw the RINOs out. Now is the time to decide, am I supposed to run? Am I supposed to help somebody who is running?

In 2024, there should be strong Bill of Rights and constitutional candidates.

Not radicals. Not crazy people. People who know the Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

And will walk through fire to reestablish that. Mitt Romney should have a challenger right now. Kevin Cramer in North Dakota should have a challenger. Does he have a challenger? Is the G.O.P. or the freedom-loving people there, are you working on this?

Roger Whittaker of Mississippi. These -- Deb Fischer in Nebraska.

These senators can be flipped!

But you better have a good candidate. And you should be working on it, right now!

We don't need to separate. We need to find things that we all pretty much agree on. And this insane march to war, is something that should be universal.

We should stand up against the march towards war. Stand up in your local community. You want to make a difference? Start a farmer's market, if you don't have one already.

You want to make a difference? If you have one already, go shop the farmer's market. Go find a church, that is actually engaged. Not necessarily in politics, but a church that is teaching what our pilgrims knew.

That made them a danger to the king. Which is, there is no king, but God.

I answer to God first. Not men.

And the -- the flow of power, goes God, man, government.

Government is last, and only empowered by man, to protect the rights given to him by God.

This is what we need to do to save our country. But if I boil it down to one thing, it would be getting you and your family right with God.

God is the only answer at this point. If we do not have his favor, we do not survive.

This is a divine and sacred land.

This land -- is it a coincidence that freedom was established here, and all of this land -- we have everything we need -- everything we need to be independent and free. And be a beacon on a hill.

For all the world to see. This is how it can be done.

This is how man can live with one another, in peace. In harmony.

We get it wrong. And sometimes for long periods of time. But as long as the people understand they have the power to correct those wrongs.

And go back to the system, that was divinely inspired. Our Constitution. Our Bill of Rights. Our Declaration of Independence.

It's all of the answers that you need, are in those documents. So should we have a national divorce?

I wouldn't be against it. But I'm the one that's keeping the kids. I think we're the ones that, you know, need to make sure, we're not the ones that are violating the rules of this marriage.

You are. You're the ones stepping out on us.

I'm living by my marriage vows.

I'm living by the rules of the Constitution.

And if your state is not -- start standing up and demanding that they live by the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the US Constitution.

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.

Shocking twist: Terror label removed in UnitedHealthcare CEO case

A New York judge has dismissed state terrorism and first-degree murder charges against the man who killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Should the charge have been kept? Why is the state only pursuing second-degree murder charges? And will he avoid the death penalty? Former Chief Assistant US Attorney Andrew McCarthy joins Glenn Beck to explain what’s really to blame for these decisions.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We have a good friend, Andy McCarthy who is a Nashville review contributing editor. He's also a former chief assistant US attorney, and a guy who when he speaks, I almost always agree with him. And when I don't, I'm probably wrong. Especially when it comes to things like this, because this was his expertise. He was a former chief assistant US attorney. And he worked on terror most of his career. I mean, he -- he is -- he is well-versed on terror charges and how to try them.

This Luigi Mangione case, the terrorism charges have been dropped. And, Andy, if I remember right, came out with an article I think last year said, this is not going to stand.

These terrorist charges aren't going to stand. And I don't understand why they won't.

And I don't understand how only be charged with second-degree murder.

When it was clear he was stocking the guy. Privy planned on killing him.

He was waiting for him outside.

That's premeditation, which is murder one.

But I know Andy will have all the answers for us.

Can you make sense of this for us, Andy?

ANDY: Yeah. I'm afraid I can, Glenn.

I think to start with the second point first about why it's murder two, rather than murder one. Back in the McCaughey days, which is like the 1990s in New York, when he was governor.

STU: Yeah.

ANDY: They tried to revise the New York capital murder statute. Because they haven't done a death penalty case in New York in decades.

And this was not -- this ultimately was not a successful effort. They still haven't revised the death penalty.

But what they did, they took the things that you could get the death penalty for, which in New York, were only things like killing a police officer or killing a prison guard in the prison.

And they made those the only murder in the first degree. Variety. Homicide, and all other murder.

GLENN: Why?

ANDY: Well, because they were trying to clean up -- their idea was, they were trying to clean the statute in a way that murder one would be revised as capital murder.

GLENN: Death penalty.

ANDY: Right. And all other murder was going to be second-degree murder, so because --

GLENN: That's insane.

ANDY: What we're dealing with Mangione, under New York law, would not have qualified for the death penalty because that would have been very, very narrow, and it's mainly killing police officers or prison guards.

That puts it into the category of second-degree murder. That doesn't mean, by the way, that it's unserious.

It has a -- I think the -- the offense in New York is like 25 years to life. Societies -- it's --

STU: The guy should get -- I mean, you could. You could argue against the death penalty. But guy should get either the death penalty, or life without payroll.

Not 25 years! This guy -- help me out on this one. How is he not a terrorist? He had the intent to terrorize. He said himself, he wanted people to look over their shoulders.

I mean, he is a textbook terrorist. And premeditation. Textbook!

ANDY: Yeah. To -- to prove terrorism, you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, an intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.

And you have to sort of get out of the -- the mindset that murder is terrorizing. I mean, all murder is terrorizing, to the people who are obviously involved in it. And to the extent that it intimidated people. But we can't turn every murder into terrorism.

GLENN: Correct.

ANDY: Terrorism --

GLENN: But he did it for. But isn't terrorism about trying to scare the population to either vote different or change the laws to be so terrorized that they -- in this particular case, he was trying to send a message to the -- the industry, you better watch your back, because there's more of me.

And you'll get it in the end.

That's terrorizing a group of people to get them to act in a way, the terrorists wants them to act.

ANDY: Yes.

GLENN: Isn't that how they define it?

ANDY: It's not terrorizing the government to change policy or terrorizing the whole civilian population. What the judge said, this was very narrowly targeted at the health care industry, and this particular health care executive.

And I --

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Wow.

ANDY: And I just don't think it trivializes the murder to say that it's not a terrorism crime.

GLENN: Okay.

ANDY: You know, the federal government, Glenn, just so we're clear on this part of it. There were two charges brought here. There's a -- the federal charges and the state charges.

So Alvin Bragg, the -- the New York DA, brought the terrorism charge.

GLENN: What a joke.

ANDY: I said, at the time, I thought he was bringing it because he knew the Justice Department wanted to charge this guy. So he wanted to make a splash. Like the Justice Department wanted to make a splash.

When the Justice Department indicted it, even though Biden is against the death penalty, and the Democratic administration was against the death penalty. They indicted it as a death penalty case.
Because they wanted to make a big to-do over it. Even though, you know, if you look at the fine print, they would never impose the death penalty.

They had a moratorium on the death penalty. So in order not to be outsplashed, what Bragg turned around and did was indict this -- what he -- like ten times out of ten, indict only as a murder case.

If you could get Bragg to indict something that was actually a crime. And he decided to make it a terrorism murder case, so that they could compete for the headlines in the press.

Unfortunately, this is kind of what happens in these -- in these cases.

But to your point about stalking and all of that stuff.

The federal charges. Which are the death penalty charges, include exactly what you're talking about.

The fact that this guy was stalked.

That it was done in a very cold-blooded way.

And actually, if he gets convicted in the federal -- can in the federal system, now that Trump is running the Justice Department, rather than Biden, he gets convicted on the death penalty charge, he's going to get the death penalty.

GLENN: Okay. So it's not like he's getting murder in the second degree, and he'll be out in 25 years. The federal government is also trying him. Will it be the same trial?

ANDY: No. No.

In fact, the interesting thing, Glenn. Just from a political standpoint, I hate having to get political on this stuff.

GLENN: I know. Me too.

ANDY: If we can avoid it. The Biden Justice Department was working cooperative with Bragg. I don't think the Trump Justice Department is going to work cooperative with Bragg.

GLENN: No.

ANDY: And the interesting thing about that is under New York law, they have a very forgiving double jeopardy provision. Which basically means, if the Feds go first, that will probably block New York state from going at all.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

ANDY: Because of their expansive protection. And I think what Biden's Justice Department was willing to let Bragg go first.

So that they would go second. And then everybody would have --

GLENN: Trump won't do that.

ANDY: I'm not sure the Trump guys will play ball with that.

GLENN: No. Okay.

So are you confident the justice will be served in this. Oh.

ANDY: Well, I think -- you know, look, I think if your idea of justice served. Are this guy be convicted of a severe murder charge and never see the light of day again?

I am confident in that.

GLENN: Yes.

ANDY: If you believe as I do, that if you're going to have a -- a death penalty in the law, which our Constitution permits.

GLENN: He deserves it.

ANDY: If you're going to have it, he deserves it. And if he doesn't get it. He would be among a long line of people, who probably didn't deserve it and must get it.

Though, I guess it depends on what your idea of justice is. But I guess if we could agree that justice is this guy never sees the light of day again, I think justice will happen here.

GLENN: Right. Okay.

Can I switch to Charlie Kirk?

ANDY: Of course.

GLENN: How is this unfolding? What are your thoughts on this. What are your thoughts on -- you know, I really want to make sure I don't want to go too far. I don't want another Patriot Act kind of thing.

But I do believe, you know, the -- it appears as though, there may have been many people involved. At least in knowing.

What does that mean to you? And what should happen?

What should we be doing? What are we doing that is right and wrong?

ANDY: Well, to the extent -- I'm sorry -- I do -- I do think, Glenn. That this is being very aggressively investigated by both the state authorities and continuing by the federal authorities.

I heard Kash Patel, because I happened to be on television this morning. And they -- they broadcasted that while I was on.

And he was talking about how they are going through all of the social media stuff.

To see, who may have had an inkling about this beforehand. And if there was any conspiratorial activity, they're going to go after it.

Now, the chats that have come out so far, that have been reported in the last couple of days are chats in which Robinson admitted to committing homicide and told the people that he was chatting with -- that he had already arranged his surrender.

If that's all these people knew, that is to say, he had --

GLENN: Then there's nothing there.

ANDY: And he was turning himself in. Well, they might be good witnesses in terms of what his state of mind was at the trial of Robinson.

But I don't think that implicates them in criminal misconduct.

On the other hand, the feds are going to keep digging.

And I assume Utah is going to keep digging.

And if they find out that someone was involved in planning it, I think those people will be pursued.

GLENN: You know, there's probably Texas would be a bad place to commit this crime.

Utah, however, they have the death penalty. And they used the death penalty.

And the governor who I'm not a big fan of this governor.

But, boy, he has been very strong, and I think right on top of this whole thing.

And he said, day one, you will get the death penalty. We catch you. We prove it in a court of law. You do get the death penalty. And I think that's coming from this guy.

ANDY: Well, it's deserving. Because if it's ever indicative of premeditation and repulsive intent, I would say, this is a textbook case of that.

GLENN: The idea that Trump is now going to go after -- possibly RICO charges for people like George Soros and, you know, organizations like that, that are -- are pushing for a lot of the -- the -- the Antifa kind of stuff. Do you see any problems with that. Or is this a -- a good idea?

ANDY: I just think the first thing, before you get into RICO. And all these. You know, RICO is a very complicated statute, even when it obviously applies. So I think the bedrock thing they have to establish, is that you are crossing the line. From protected speech. A lot of which can be obnoxious speech. And actual incite meant to violence. And if you can get invite meant to violence.

You know, I didn't need RICO to prosecute the Blind Sheikh, right? I was able to do it on incitements of violence and that kind of stuff. Those are less complicated charges than Rico.

But the big challenges in those cases, Glenn, is getting across the line into violent action. As opposed to constitutionally protected rhetoric.

GLENN: Is there anything to the subversion of our -- of our nation. That you are -- you are intentionally subverting the United States of America.

You are pushing for revolutionary acts?

VOICE: You know, there's a lot of let allegation that arose out of that, in connection with the Cold War and the McCarran Act. And, you know, you remember all the stuff from the -- from the '40s and '50s, forward.

GLENN: Yeah. I know.

ANDY: And I think when that stuff was initially enacted, the country was in a different place.

I think when the McCarran Act was enacted, it was a consensus in the country, that if someone was a member of the Communist Party.

Hadn't actually done anything active to seek the violent overthrow of the US, but mere membership in the party. I think if you asked the question in 1950, most people would have thought that was a crime.

And by 1980, most people would have thought, it wasn't a crime. Based on the Supreme Court --

GLENN: Yeah. I don't.

Look, if you're a member of the Communist Party, you can be a member of the Communist Party.

But if you are actively subverting and pushing for revolution, in our country, I think that's a different -- I think that's a different cat, all -- entirely.

ANDY: Yeah, that's exactly right. But if you had that evidence of purposeful activity, and look, if you had a conspiratorial agreement between two people that contemplates the use of force, you don't need much more than that. You don't need an act of violence. If you have a strong evidence of conspiracy. But you do have to establish that they get over that line and to the use of force, at least the potential use of force.

STU: Yeah, okay.

Andy, as always, thank you so much. Appreciate your insight. Appreciate it.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

How to Find God in a Divided World | Max Lucado & Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck sits down with beloved pastor and author Max Lucado for a deep conversation about faith, humility, and finding unity in a divided world. Together, they reflect on the importance of principles over politics, why humility opens the door to true dialogue, and how centering life on God brings clarity and peace. Lucado shares stories of faith, the dangers of a “prosperity gospel,” and the powerful reminder that life is not about making a big deal of ourselves, but about making a big deal of God. This uplifting conversation will inspire you to re-center your life, strengthen your faith, and see how humility and love can transform even the most divided times.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Max Lucado HERE

Bill O'Reilly predicts THIS will be Charlie Kirk's legacy

Bill O’Reilly joins Glenn Beck with a powerful prediction about Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Evil tried to destroy his movement, Bill says, but – as his new book, “Confronting Evil,” lays out – evil will just end up destroying itself once more…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Bill O'Reilly, welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

BILL: Good, Beck, thanks for having me back. I appreciate it. How have you been?

GLENN: Last week was really tough. I know it was tough for you and everybody else.

But, you know -- I haven't -- I haven't seen anything.

BILL: Family okay? All of that?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Family is okay. Family is okay.

BILL: Good question good. That's the most important thing.

GLENN: It is.

So, Bill, what do you make of this whole Charlie Kirk thing. What happened, and where are we headed?

BILL: So my analysis is different for everybody else, and those that know me for so long. About a year ago, I was looking for a topic -- it was a contract to do another book. And I said, you know what's happening in America, and around the world. Was a rise in evil. It takes a year to research and write these books.

And not since the 1930s, had I seen that happen, to this extent. And in the 1930s, of course, you would have Tojo and Hitler and Mussolini and Franco and all these guys. And it led to 100 million dead in World War II. The same thing, not to the extent.

But the same thing was --
GLENN: Yet.
BILL: -- bubbling in the world, and in the United States.

I decided to write a book. The book comes out last Tuesday. And on Wednesday, Putin lobs missiles into Poland.

Ultra dangerous.

And a few hours later, Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

And one of the interviewers said to me last week, your -- your book is haunting. Is haunting.

And I think that's extremely accurate. Because that's what evil does.

And in the United States, we have so many distractions. The social media.

People create around their own lives.

Sports. Whatever it may be. That we look away.

Now, Charlie Kirk was an interesting fellow. Because at a very young age, he was mature enough to understand that he wanted to take a stand in favor of traditional America and Judeo Christian philosophy.

He decided that he wanted to do that.

You know, and when I was 31 or whatever, I was lucky I wasn't in the penitentiary. And I believe you were in the penitentiary.
(laughter)
So he was light years ahead of us.

GLENN: Yes, he was.

BILL: And he put it into motion. All right? Now, most good people, even if you disagree with what Mr. Kirk says on occasion, you admire that. That's the spirit of America. That you have a belief system, that you go out and try to promote that belief system, for the greater good of the country. That's what it is.

That's what Charlie Kirk did.

And he lost his life.

By doing it!

So when you essentially break all of this down. You take the emotion away, all right?

Which I have to do, in my job. You see it as another victory for evil.

But it really isn't.

And this is the ongoing story.

This is the most important story. So when you read my book, Confronting Evil, you'll see that all of these heinous individuals, Putin's on the cover. Mao. Hitler.

Ayatollah Khomeini. And then there are 14 others inside the book. They all destroy themselves.

Evil always destroys itself. But it takes so many people with it. So this shooter destroyed his own family.

And -- and Donald Trump, I talked to him about it last week in Yankee stadium. And Trump is a much different guy than most people think.

GLENN: He is.

JASON: He destroyed his own mother and father and his two brothers.

That's what he did. In addition to the Kirk family!

So evil spreads. Now, if Americans pay attention and come to the conclusion that I just stated, it will be much more difficult for evil to operate openly.

And that's what I think is going to happen.

There's going to be a ferocious backlash against the progressive left in particular.

To stop it, and I believe that is what Mr. Kirk's legacy is going to be.

GLENN: I -- I agree with you on all of these fronts.

I wonder though, you know, it took three, or if you count JFK, four assassinations in the '60s, to confront the evil if you will.

Before people really woke up and said, enough is enough!

And then you have the big Jesus revolution after that.

Is -- I hate to say this. But is -- as far gone as we are, is one assassination enough to wake people up?

JOHN: Some people. Some people will never wake up.

They just don't want to live in the real world, Beck. And it's never been easier to do that with the social media and the phones and the computers.

And you're never going to get them back.

But you don't need them. So let's just be very realistic here on the Glenn Beck show.

Let's run it down.

The corporate media is finished.

In America. It's over.

And you will see that play out the next five years.

Because the corporate media invested so much of its credibility into hating Donald Trump.

And the hate is the key word.

You will find this interesting, Beck. For the first time in ten years, I've been invited to do a major thing on CBS, today.

I will do it GE today. With major Garrett.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: Now, that only happened because Skydance bought CBS. And Skydance understands the brand CBS is over, and they will have to rehabilitate the whole thing. NBC has not come to that conclusion yet, but it will have to.

And ABC just does the weather. I mean, that's all they care about. Is it snowing in Montana? Okay? The cables are all finished. Even Fox.

Once Trump leaves the stage, there's nowhere for FNC to go. Because they've invested so much in Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.

So the fact of the matter is, the corporate media is over in America. That takes a huge cudgel out of the hands of the progressive movement.

Because the progressive movement was dependent on the corporate media to advance its cause. That's going to end, Beck.

GLENN: Well, I would hope that you're right.

Let me ask you about --

BILL: When am I wrong?

When am I wrong?

You've known me for 55 years. When have I been wrong?

GLENN: Okay. All right. All right. We're not here to argue things like that.

So tell me about Skydance. Because isn't Skydance Chinese?

BILL: No! It's Ellison. Larry Ellison, the second richest guy in the world. He owns Lanai and Hawaii, the big tech guy and his son is running it.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

I though Skydance. I thought that was -- you know them.

BILL: Yeah.

And they -- they're not ideological, but they were as appalled as most of us who pay attention at the deterioration of the network presentations.

So --

GLENN: You think that they could.

BILL: 60 Minutes used to be the gold standard.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: And it just -- it -- you know, you know, I don't know if you watch it anymore.

GLENN: I don't either.

So do you think they can actually turn CBS around, or is it just over?

BILL: I don't know. It's very hard to predict, because so many people now bail. I've got a daughter 26, and a son, 22.

They never, ever watched network television.

And you've got -- it's true. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

They don't watch --

BILL: They're not going to watch The Voice. The dancing with this. The juggling with that. You know, I think they could do a much better job in their news presentations.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

BILL: Because what they did, is banish people like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.

Same voices, with huge followings.

Huge!

All right?

We couldn't get on there.

That's why Colbert got fired. Because Colbert wouldn't -- refused to put on any non-progressive voice, when they were talking about the country.

GLENN: I know.

BILL: Well, it's not -- I'm censoring it.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's not that he was fired because he wouldn't do that. He was fired because that led to horrible ratings. Horrible ratings.

BILL: Yes, it was his defiance.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: Fallon has terrible ratings and so does Kimmel. But Colbert was in your face, F you, to the people who were signing his paycheck.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: Look, evil can only exist if the mechanisms of power are behind it.

And that's when you read the front -- I take them one by one. And Putin is the most important chapter by far.

GLENN: Why?

BILL: Because Putin would use nuclear weapon.

He wouldn't. He's a psychopath.

And I'm -- on Thursday night, I got a call from the president's people saying, would I meet the president at Yankee stadium for the 9/11 game?

And I said, when a president calls and asks you to meet them, sure.

GLENN: I'll be there. What time?

BILL: It will take me three days to get into Yankee stadium, on Long Island. But I'll start now.

GLENN: Especially because the president is coming. But go ahead.

BILL: Anyway, that was a very, I think that Mr. Trump values my opinion. And it was -- we did talk about Putin.

And the change in Putin. And I had warned him, that Putin had changed from the first administration, where Trump controlled Putin to some extent.

Now he's out of control. Because that's what always happens.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: It happened with Hitler. It happened with Mao. It happened with the ayatollah. It happened with Stalin. Right now. They get worse and worse and worse and worse. And then they blow up.

And that's where Putin is! But he couldn't do any of that, without the assent of the Russian people. They are allowing him to do this, to kill women and children. A million Russian casualties for what! For what! Okay?

So that's why this book is just in the stratosphere. And I was thinking object, oh. Because people want to understand evil, finally. Finally.

They're taking a hard look at it, and the Charlie Kirk assassination was an impetus to do that.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think it's also an impetus to look at the good side.

I mean, I think Charlie was just not a neutral -- a neutral character. He was a force for good. And for God.

And I think that -- that combination is almost the Martin Luther King combination. Where you have a guy who is speaking up for civil rights.

But then also, speaking up for God. And speaking truth, Scripturally.

And I think that combination still, strangely, I wouldn't have predicted it. But strangely still works here in America, and I think it's changed everything.

Bill, it's always food to talk to you. Thank you so much for being on. I appreciate it.

It's Bill O'Reilly. The name of the book, you don't want to miss. Is confronting evil. And he takes all of these really, really bad guys on. One by one. And shows you, what happens if you don't do something about it. Confronting evil. Bill O'Reilly.

And you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com.