RADIOFebruary 12, 2024

Parents REACT to Montana's DENIAL of 'kidnapping' daughter for trans surgery

Montana father Todd Kolstad and stepmother Krista have accused the state of medically kidnapping their 14-year-old daughter after they refused to support her transgender identity. But the state’s Republican governor alleged that their decision had nothing to do with the transgender debate. So, what’s the truth here? Glenn speaks with the Kolstads, who share their side of the story. They discuss why they’re speaking out, what actions they’re taking next, whether their daughter is being sent to Canada, and how the Montana hospital they went to allegedly started suggesting transgender surgery on “day one.” Todd and Krista also claim they were asked to go to marriage counseling to accept their daughter’s transgenderism and accuse Governor Greg Gianforte of not doing enough: “We’re very disappointed in the way this has been handled. He has never reached out to us.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The Krista and Todd Kolstad family in Glasgow, Montana, is accusing the state of Montana, the Child Protective Services of kidnapping their teenage daughter after the girl began to identify as a transgender boy.

The child's stepmother Krista explains the nightmare began August of '23 after they received a call that their 14-year-old daughter Jennifer had expressed suicidal ideations while in school.

Later on in the same evening, a case worker with the Montana Child and Family Services showed up at the Kolstad home, to speak with Jennifer, and do an inspection of the home.

During the interview with CFS, Jennifer claimed to have consumed toilet bowl cleaner and pain killer medications that day, in an effort to commit suicide.

Krista said, that it immediately struck her as being highly unlikely.

Not only did Jennifer not have access to other substances, you know, these kinds of substances unmonitored.

But Jennifer had expressed no symptoms of imminent illness that day. Despite the doubts, Krista and Todd agreed to take Jennifer to the local hospital on an emergency basis. They found in all the blood work and everything else. She had not consumed any of these things.

Copies of the medical paperwork to substantiate their claim. That Jennifer had not consumed any of the dangerous substances, confirms that there are were no abnormalities detected in her system. Her system was good. However, they consistently mentioned that Jennifer identifies as a male and wishes to be called Leo.

Krista says, she and Todd immediately their objections to the hospital staff known.

They're supposed to call her by her birth name.

We were very clear in the emergency room, that this goes against our values, our morals, our religious beliefs.

They told me to call a lawyer, if I have an issue, because they're going to do what the patient tells them to do.

Then she said, we came in, and our -- our daughter was talking about having top surgery. And being nonbinary. She took her complaint to the on-duty doctor. Doctor who dismissed her. He told me, why are you not more concerned that your daughter tried to harm herself, than what the aid is talking about with her?

They then tried to switch her out of state, to Wyoming. There are six facilities in Montana, that she could go to. They had a facility in Wyoming. The family looked it up.

Looked like kids were allowed to have procedures done, and hormones without parental consent.

So when the hospital called, they said, we have an opening in Wyoming. And she needs to go there.

Quote, she has to go. She's not doing any good here.

End quote. The parents said, not on your life. That's when things got ugly.

They showed up, CFS showed up at their home to serve us with papers. To take Jennifer out of our care, according to Krista. They told me, the reason was we were unable or refusing to provide medical care.

That's not true. Now, the Republican governor has come out against the family, and honestly I don't understand this. They keep saying, well, we don't take, you know, children out of the home.

If it's just a transgender thing.

But, yeah. I get that. But I'm looking at the document, immediate threat to danger.

There's nothing checked, except child needs medical attention.

And parents are unwilling to perform parental duties.

So that's the loophole.

Is this an out-of-control state agency, or what's happening?

We have both of the parents on with us, now.

I can't imagine being you guys.

Krista and Todd Kolstad, thank you for coming on the program.

KRISTA: Thank you for having us. We appreciate it.

GLENN: So, Krista, what do you -- why did the governor come out in defense of this?

KRISTA: You know, I don't have an answer for that. There's no reason for him to. It's not hard for him to say, I made a mistake. This shouldn't have happened. And apologize. I really don't know why he's coming out against us.

GLENN: Todd.

Todd, are you there?

TODD: Yes, I am.

GLENN: Is there any idea in your mind, is there anything that is happening or has happened in your home, that we don't know about?

TODD: Absolutely not.

It's as simple as that. We keep going back to what the garden ad litem said, when he went to our house. He saw that everything was fine. We have a very nice home. We have a comfortable life. And she flatout told us, she asked if we were going to be willing to raise our daughter as a boy with the transgender care.

And she said, if we aren't, then she said, we're not going to like what she has to say in court. And that's exactly how it went.

GLENN: Now, you've got a call just recently, that she's not in Montana. She's in Canada stop they moved her across state lines.

TODD: Yes.

GLENN: And then out of the country. To her mother, who if I'm not mistaken. And correct me if I'm wrong, there's been some issues with mom, as well in the past, is that true?

KRISTA: That is true. There is some documented -- some documents that we submitted from counselors and what not, supporting our claims.

And also, you know, her birth mom just wasn't really involved in her life, the last seven years. Never called her. Never visited her. Anything like that. So this is really a stranger to her. So we do have some great concerns. That is a fact that I believe that Canada operates on a whole different system, as far as transgender care.

So we have some great concerns about her being there.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Did you have joint custody?

TODD: Yes.

GLENN: You did have joint custody?

TODD: Yes.

GLENN: What were you going to say, Todd?

TODD: There was no custody battle with them.

We were on speaking terms with them. So there was no problem with that. It was CPS who initiated the contact with her in Canada. And then sort of pushed it to send her there.

GLENN: So what do you have remaining to do? What can you do from here?

KRISTA: Well, we're getting more lawyers involved.

We're challenging the gag order, based on our First Amendment freedom of speech rights. And we're continuing to speak out.

We just want other families to be aware, and by bringing light to our situation, we're hoping we can help others. And this doesn't happen to another family.

GLENN: So, you know, we've -- I've seen the documents from the state.

And the state and the governor say, that's not the reason why she was taken out of the house.

So this is -- and, you know, I -- I'm really uncomfortable, because we can't find anything bad on you guys.

And the state kind of -- it feels kind of like they're saying, well, we've got something else here. And we just can't tell you.

And I -- I mean, I -- it makes it hard. Have you -- have you guys tried to engage some of these, you know, law firms that are -- are out there to help parents like you.

Why do you have a public defender still?

KRISTA: Well, we are interviewing lawyers currently.

So, yes. We are engaged with the lawyers. And trying to get different legal representation.

GLENN: Todd.

TODD: So to better answer that. The world has changed drastically when it comes to finding an attorney. When you blindly look, Googling areas, family law. You have to find an attorney that has been practicing in your state.

Almost all of them are scheduling consultations, like eight months out. That's how busy they are.

And then when they hear the state, they don't want to get involved. So it's far --

GLENN: Yeah. But this one is -- I mean, the Thomas Moore Society.

I mean, there are places that you can call. And maybe you just didn't know about them.

But there are big organizations, that take these cases, and they move rapidly when it comes to children. Because, you know, seven months is a long time with a child.

And so I'm wondering, have you been contacted by anybody? Or can -- you know, we'll give you the phone numbers. That that's -- go ahead.

KRISTA: I was going to say, I have not heard of the Thomas Moore Society, so I will definitely look them up, and get in contact with them.

But several agencies have contacted us. And we -- the -- from what I understand. And again, I'm not a lawyer.

From what I understand, the way it works, they don't practice in Montana. They have to find a lawyer that does practice in Montana. They become a cocounsel. The issue is, they are having a hard time finding lawyers that practice in Montana. That are willing to take this on with them.

GLENN: Pat is from the great state of Montana. Pat, what do you know about this governor?

PAT: Almost nothing. You know, I've lived in Montana for 40 some years.

GLENN: Yeah. I didn't know if --

PAT: I don't know virtually anything about him.

But, you know, Montana is perceived to be a Republican state. But they elect Democrats on a fairly regular basis.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

PAT: And so maybe this guy has RINO tendencies. I don't know. How does you guys feel about your governor?

KRISTA: We're very disappointed in the way that this is being handled.

He's never reached out to us. The -- Kyrsten Juris (phonetic), I think her name is. The one that he's tasked into looking into our case, she called me personally. And she said, I am going to look at your case, and then I never heard from her again.

So I don't feel like there's a lot of action on their part.

GLENN: Well, we have asked the governor -- I think we have. He's invited now. And our producers will be reaching out again. We have been in touch with the governor's office.
And, you know, there's a -- there was something here that I was sent, that talks about that you are -- because you guys said no to sending her to Wyoming. Which I think I would have too. Yeah. Well, state of Montana is limited in disclosing the specifics of cases involving minor children in its care, due to the sensitive nature.

Broadly speaking, the state does not remove minors from homes to provide gender transition services or to use taxpayer funds to pay for those services while a minor is in the custody of the state.

But your child is not in the custody of the state. Child Protective Services, furthermore, the governor has asked the Department of Public Health and Human Services to codify a formal policy in developed regulation to clarify and ensure the definition of abuse or neglect does not include a parent's right to refuse to provide gender transition surgeries to his or her minor.

So he's suggesting policy. But we also have, you know -- I have seen the Department of Health.

CFSD. Does not investigate. Nor remove children based solely on allegations that parents oppose, and will not allow their child who has gender dysphoria, to transition genders.

So I think that's very consistent, with what they're telling you, but I feel that that's a massive loophole.

They're leaning on that.

TODD: Yes. You would like me to comment on that?

GLENN: Yes, go ahead.

PAT: Okay. So right from the get-go, day one at the hospital. A nurse in, that kept talking about getting top surgery in front of our daughter. They immediately started calling her a boy. Immediately.

And they started -- we turned and complained, but it was immediate.

And there was -- when they said that they were going to have a bed for her in Billings, we knew immediately, before that, that that was not going to happen.

Because they kept looking at our daughter with an unspoken language, like almost assuring her it was going to be Wyoming. So we knew they would pull that card. And Wyoming allows the transgenderism, not without parental approval on anything. Where Montana, the Dakotas, Idaho, those states do not.

We were able to stand right there and Google that.

GLENN: So let me -- I only have a minute left.

Let me read this statement. This came from the Valley County attorney: Had the motion been granted, Todd Kolstad's legal rights as a parent would have remained fully intact. The state of Montana would have no more involvement in his relationship with his child.

Mr. Kolstad and his wife objected to dismissal and requested the state remain involved.
Any statement made otherwise is false and inaccurate.

KRISTA: Well, if we can respond to that.

When we were in the courtroom that day, we asked that the birth mother call the investigated as a safe place for her -- because they said no matter what, they were going to send her to Canada. And so we had asked they investigate the birth mom, and make sure that's a safe place for a child to go. And we explained our concerns, and we had documentation supporting those concerns. So that's not exactly true. We would love to have children services out of our lives. Our lawyers, our public defender still, at the time said, this is -- let them investigate the birth mom on the record.

And so we were told, that that's all that they were doing. We didn't understand that we were -- you know, hanging out with CPS for another six months.

Further, they've asked us to go to marriage counseling to accept our daughter's transgenderism.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: All right. Guys, we will follow this story. Thank you. We'll probably talk again. Thank you so much. We're praying for you, and especially your daughter. That the right thing happens. Thank you. We'll be in touch.

KRISTA: Thank you.

GLENN: You bet.

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

A new report accuses CAIR Action, the political arm of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, of breaking state laws with its political activism. Glenn Beck reviews this story...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me go over what is -- what's happening with -- with CAIR.

You know, the Founding Fathers were obsessed over accountability.

Because they knew one thing. You know, they did. They must get suggestions from people on, you know, through tweets. They studied every single system of government.

Every single republic that survived. That didn't survive.

Why didn't it survive?

They studied all forms of government. They were trying to come up with something that could -- could set people free.

And they -- they worked really hard on putting our checks and balances in place, because they knew, once power slips into the shadows. They knew, once power slips into the shadows, once influence becomes unmoored from law, what rises is not a republic.

It's a machine. And that's what you're seeing right now. We're not living in a republic. We're living in a machine.

We -- I think we're staring at one of the largest unregulated political machines operating in the United States ever! Okay.

There have been a couple of groups that are doing sweeping investigations, two watchdog groups. One of them is NCRI and the Intelligent Advocacy Network.

And they have concluded now that the political arm of CAIR, he known as CAIR action, has been operating nationwide with no legal authority, to do the things it has been doing for years now.

They're not allowed to raise money. They've been raising money. Coordinating political campaigns.

Not allowed to do it. Endorsing candidates. Not allowed to do it, they're doing it. Mobilizing voters, shaping policy, functioning as a national advocacy network.

They don't have the legal authority to do any of it. And no one has said anything.

Now, according to the report, CAIR action doesn't just have a paperwork problem.

Investigators found, state by state, that it lacks the license, the registrations. The charitable authorizations, required to legally solicit money.

Excuse me. Or conduct political activity, in any of the 22 states in which it operates. Think of that!

I know how serious this is, because I remember what it took to get the license in each and every state, for Mercury One.

So we could operate. We could raise money. We could do things in those states. It's a lot of work. And if you don't do it, you go to jail. And they find out pretty quickly.

Okay?

22 states, they operate not one, zero legal authorization.

In Washington, DC, the city where CAIR action is incorporated, the department of licensing and consumer protection told investigators, they have no record of CAIR action ever obtaining the basic business license required to solicit funds or to operate.

Imagine how long would you last in business, especially if you were controversial.

How long would you remain in business, if you never had a business license?

You think somebody would figure that out?

In a sooner time than I don't know. A couple of decades!

This report means, that the organization if true, is engaging in unlicensed inner state solicitation.

It has exposed itself to allegations as serious as deceptive solicitation. Wire fraud and false statements to the IRS. These are big things.

And this is not political rhetoric.

Are these phrases written in black and white. In the law.

And by investigators. In California, one of CAIR's most active hubs. The state attorney general has said, the state attorney general of California has said, same pattern here!

The state of California, to say, yep. That's what's happening here.

CAIR action has never registered with California's charitable registry.

Never filed the required CT1 form. And has no authorization whatsoever to request donations. But they've been doing it in California anyway.

Fundraising, selling memberships. Issuing endorsements. Mobilizing voters. All of that has been done by CAIR action. There's no record of any license. Any permission, ever. Going to CAIR. From California. That's according to their attorney general.

Wow!

That's pretty remarkable, huh? How does that happen?

It's not just the coast. It is also happening to the Midwest, the South, the Mountain West. Every state hosting its own CAIR action fundraising page, complete with the donate now and become a member portal, despite no trace of the legal filings required to operate. That's bad!

Now, here's where the stakes rise.

Because CAIR action presents itself openly, as the political arm of CAIR National.

Investigators are now warning that any unauthorized fundraising or political activity.

Could become CAIR's national responsibility as well.

So, in other words, the parent, CAIR itself, might be held responsible.

Meaning, this is want just a rogue subdivision.

This could implicate the entire National Organization of CAIR.

Now, this is happening at the same time it's coming under national scrutiny. It's also Texas.

And I think Florida have designated the group a foreign terrorist organization. Members of Congress are now asking the IRS, the Treasury, the Department of Education to investigate all of its partnerships, all of its financing, all of its influence operations. I mean, I think they're going to be in trouble.

How long have we been saying this?

But every time, I have pointed out anything about CAIR, I have been called an Islamophobe, which shuts everything down. That is a word, developed by people like CAIR, to shut people down, so you'll never look into them.

So what happens next?

First of all, the reports have to hold up.

Regulators now have an obligation. Not a choice. An obligation to act!

State attorneys general in these 22 states, they might pursue fines, injunctions, criminal referrals.

All of them need to take action!

The IRS, needs to take action. Investigate tax exempt fraud. Treasury Department may review foreign influence or money flow violations.

Anything coming from overseas.

Oh, I can't imagine it. They're so buttoned up, right now.

DC regulators may determine whether CAIR actions entire fundraising operation has been unlawful from the beginning.

But here's the deeper question. And it's not bureaucratic. This one is constitutional.

Can the United States tolerate an influence machine, that operates outside of the legal framework, designed to prevent corruption, foreign leverage, and untraceable money?

If I hear one more time, talking about how AIPAC has just got to be investigated. Fine. Investigate.

I'm not against it.

Investigate.

Why aren't you saying anything about CAIR?

It feels like it might be a tool in the hands of a foreign operation.

Why aren't you saying anything about this?

Because here it is! It's not like, hey. I wonder why.

This is it! This is it! This isn't about silencing CAIR. Muslim Americans are -- that are full citizens, they have every right to speak. Every right to vote. Every right to organize. Participate in public life. No question! They can disagree with me, all they want.

But no organization. None! Not mine. Not yours. Not theirs. None. Should operate a nationwide political network, in the shadows and be immune from all of the guardrails that every other group must follow!

That's called a fourth branch of government!

That's how a fourth branch goes.

By the way, CAIR has placed all kinds of people in our Department of Homeland Security. Et cetera, et cetera. This organization has done it!

This is -- you cannot have a fourth branch of government.

They must abide by the laws.

No -- you can't have a branch that nobody elected. Nobody oversees.

Nobody holds accountable.

We talked about this yesterday, on yesterday's podcast. So what needs to happen is total transparency. CAIR action has to release its filings. Its donor structure. Its compliance records, if they exist. Equal enforcement under the law. I don't want them prosecuted in special ways.

Look, if AIPAC is doing the same thing. AIPAC should be prosecuted exactly the same way.
I want it equal. I want constitutional rule.

If conservatives, if Catholics, pro-Israel, environmental, Second Amendment groups, if they have to comply by the state law, so does CAIR action.

And if CAIR action has to do it, so do the Second Amendment groups and environmentalists, and pro-Israel and conservative groups. The law cannot be selective. It can't be!

I don't know how that's controversial in today's world. But somehow or another, they will find a way.

The Feds have to review all of this. If the report is accurate, the IRS and the Treasury have to determine whether false statements or unlicensed interstate solicitations have occurred.

Americans deserve to know what exactly, who is influencing our elections. Who is shaping our policy? Who is raising money in their state?

Especially physical the organization claims political authority, that it doesn't legally possess.

Because history will teach us one unchanging lesson. When a republic stops enforcing its own laws, someone else will always step in to fill that vacuum because power abhors a vacuum!

Unregulated, political power abhors a free people. So while it's about CAIR, it's not about Muslim Americans. It's not about religion.

As always, at least on this program, we try to make it about the rule of law.

One standard for everyone or no standard at all!

And that more than anything, will determine whether or not our institutions remain worthy of the freedom and responsibility that we have entrusted to them.

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

America is entering a year of historic upheaval from Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the spiritual shock that followed, to Trump’s tariff revolution, China’s rare-earth war, collapsing energy grids, AI displacement, and the looming fights over Taiwan and Venezuela. Glenn sits down with BlazeTV hosts ‪@deaceshow‬ and ‪@lizwheeler‬ along with his head researcher Jason Buttrill, to break down the biggest stories of 2025. Plus, they each give their most explosive prediction for 2026 that could shape our politics, economy, national security, and civil rights in ways Americans have never experienced before.

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

For nearly a century, Washington DC has been ruled by an unelected “expert class” operating as an unconstitutional fourth branch of government — accountable to no one, removable by no president, and shielded from all consequences. Glenn breaks down why Trump’s firing of the Federal Trade Commissioner could finally dismantle the 1935 precedent that empowered technocrats, how Ketanji Brown Jackson exposed the Supreme Court’s embrace of expert rule, and why America cannot survive a government run by people who never face the voters and never pay for their failures.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So President Donald Trump fired the federal trade commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. Federal Trade Commission is an administrative position. I mean, this is under -- the head of the federal trade commission is a cabinet member.

And if the justices uphold Trump's firing of Slaughter, that will overturn a precedent that was horrible, that was set in 1935. Remember, 1935, we're flirting with fascism. You know, everybody thinks. Because they haven't seen the horrors of fascism yet.

Everybody thinks fascism is neat, blah, blah. So what they do is they say that this is an independent person. And the president can't fire them. Because they're, you know, an independent agency.

Well, wait. That would make a fourth branch of government. Our Constitution is really clear.

There is no such thing as a fourth branch of government. Right?

So that's what they're deciding. Now, here is Ketanji Brown Jackson, who is talking about how we really need to listen to the experts. Cut four.

VOICE: Because presidents have accepted that there could be both an understanding of Congress and the presidency. That it is in the best interest of the American people to have certain kinds of issues, handled by experts. Who, and I think you -- in your colloquy, Justice Kagan, have identified the fact that these boards are not only experts, but they're also nonpartisan. So the -- the seats are actually distributed in such a way, that we are presumably eliminating political influence because we're trying to get to science and data and actual facts, related to how these decisions are made.

And so the real risk, I think, of allowing non- -- of allowing these kinds of decisions to be made by the president, of saying, everybody can just be removed when I come in, is that we will get away from those very important policy considerations.

VOICE: We will get away from US policy considerations, and it will create opportunities for all kinds of problems that Congress and prior presidents wanted to avoid, risks that flow inevitably, just given human nature, the realities of the world that we live in.

GLENN: Okay.

Now, remember, what she's saying here is, we have to have experts.

We have to have experts. We have to have experts that don't really answer to anybody. Okay?

They're appointed. And then they're just there. This from a, quote, judicial expert, who cannot define a woman, because she's not a doctor.
She's not a scientist.

She needs an expert to define a woman.
That's how insane her thinking is. Okay?

Now, I would just like to ask the Supreme Court, when you want things run by experts, do you mean things like the State Department, or the counsel of foreign relations, that have gotten us into these endless war wars for 100 years?

Because these are the things that Woodrow Wilson wanted. He wanted the country run by experts.

Okay. So is it like the Council of Foreign Relations, that keep getting us into these endless wars.

Or is it more like the Fed, that directs our fiscal policy, that has driven us into $38 trillion of at the time. We have all powerful banks. That strangely all belong to the fed. And endless bailouts for those banks. Are those the experts that you're talking about?

Or are you talking about the experts that are doctors, that gave the country sterilizations, lobotomies, transgender surgeries. You know, or should we listen to the experts, like the ones that are now speaking in Illinois, to get us death on demand like Canada has, with their MAID assisted suicide, which is now the third largest killer in Canada. MAID, assisted suicide, third largest killer in Canada. Experts are saying, we now need it here, and they're pushing for it in Illinois. Or should we listen to the experts? And I think many of them are the same experts strangely, that brought us COVID. Yeah. That was an expert thing. They were trying to protect us. Because they need to do this for our protection. So direct from the labs in China with the help of the American experts like Fauci. We almost put the world out.

Should we listen to those guys?

Or the experts that brought us masking, and Home Depot is absolutely safe. But Ace Hardware wants to kill grandma. Which are the experts that we want? That we want to make sure that we have in our lives? That they don't answer, or can't be fired by anybody. Because I'm pretty full up on the experts, myself. I don't know.

But you're right. These experts would keep the president in check, and they would keep Congress in check. And you in check!

And the Supreme Court, which would be really great. You know, and you know who else they would keep in check? The people.

So, wow, it seems like we would just be a nation run by experts, and our Constitution would be out the window, because that's a fourth branch!

And if you don't believe me, that, you know, these experts never pay a price. Can you name a single expert?

Give me a name of an expert, that gave us any of the things that I just told you about.

Give me the name. I mean, give me the name of one of them. Give me the name of one of them that went to jail. Give me the name of one expert that has been discredited.

You know, where your name will be mud in this town. Do you know where that came from?

Your name is going to be mud. It's not M-U-D. It's M-U-D-D, that comes from Dr. Samuel Mudd. Okay? He was a docks man. He was an expert. He was that set John Wilkes Booth' broken leg. He made crutches. He let him stay there for a while. He claimed he didn't know him, but he did know him.

In fact, one of the reasons they proved it.

Is because when he pulled the boots off -- when he pulled both of his boots off, right there, in the back, you couldn't have missed it. It said "John Wilkes Booth."

He's like, I have no idea who he was.

Yeah. Well, you knew him in advance. This was a predetermined outpost where he could stay. It's clear you could know him.

The guy was still discredited, we still use his name today. Your name will be mud in this town.

And we think that it's like dirt, mixed with water kind of mud. No, it's M-U-D-D, Dr. Mudd. The expert that was so discredited, went to jail, paid for his part of the assassination of -- of Lincoln.

Give me the name of one of the experts in the last 100 years, that has brought us any of the trials and the tribulations. The things that have almost brought us to our knees. Give me the name of one of them. Can't!

Because once an expert class, they don't answer to anyone. So they never go to jail.

Wow! Doesn't that sound familiar. People never going to jail!

There's a rant that's going around right now, that I did in 2020. And everybody is like, see. He's talking about Pam Bondi.

No, no. I got to play this for you, a little later on in the program. But I want to get to the experts and what the Constitution actually says about that. Because you don't need my opinion. What you need are the actual facts. So you can stand up and say, yeah. I think Ketanji Brown Jackson is an idiot. Okay?

And she's really not an expert on anything. Especially the Constitution. You need the facts, on what the Founders said. Because the Founders would be absolutely against what they did in 1935.

Because that just -- what does it do?

It just sets up a fourth branch of government.

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

The biggest media merger in modern history is unfolding, and Glenn Beck warns it’s the most dangerous consolidation of power America has faced in decades. With six corporations already controlling 90% of the nation’s news and entertainment, a Warner-Netflix or Warner-Paramount megacorporation would create an unstoppable information cartel. Glenn exposes how “too big to fail” thinking is repeating itself, how global elites and “experts” are tightening their grip, and why handing our entire cultural narrative to a handful of companies is a direct threat to freedom. The hour is late — and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: By the way, it's never good when you consolidate power. It's never good.

And what is going on now, with this Netflix Warner Brothers paramount stuff, I don't care if Larry Ellison is a conservative or not.

No one should have that much power.

I did a show, gosh, four years ago. I don't even remember when I did it.

We looked it up. In the 1980s. 19 percent of American media was owned by over 50 companies.

Forty years later, 90 percent of the media is watched and controlled by six companies.

National Amusements, the Red Stone Family controls CBS, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon, gaming and internet. Simon & Schuster Books. That's all one.

Disney, ABC, ESPN, History Channel, Marvel, Star Wars, video games and print.

TimeWarner controls CNN, Warner Brothers, HBO, Turner, video games, internet, and print media like TIME. Comcast, MSNBC, NBC.

CNBC, Telemundo, the Internet.

New Corp. Fox. National Geographic. Ton of others. Sony, with a ton of movies, music and more. The big six. They're valued at nearly $500 billion.

Now, this is something I put together five years ago. So I don't even know. This is probably not even valid even today.

And now we're talking about Netflix, Warner Brothers. Paramount, into all of these one giant corporation. It's wrong! It's wrong!

We can't keep putting all -- everything into the hands of just a few! It's what's killing us!

We've got to spread this around. We can't -- the government cannot okay mergers like this.

They're big enough he has

What happened -- what happened when the banks went under, or almost went under in '08. What did they say the problem was?

They said the banks are too big to fail.

Too big to fail.

Because they were providing all of the services, everybody needs. All the time. And there's only a handful of them.

So if they fall, then everything falls.

Right?

That was the problem. So what did we do to fix it?

We made them bigger!

We let them merge with other banks, and gobble up other things!

And started taking on the local banks.

And so now, your banks that were too big to fail. Are now even bigger. And their failure would be even worse!

What is wrong with us?

Seriously, we're not this stupid.

We're not this stupid.

I think we're just this comfortable.

We just think the experts have a plan. No. The experts don't have a plan.

Their plan is stupid. Their plan is to make it bigger.

Every time it fails. Make it bigger. Push it up.

Make it more global.

No. Haven't you seen what the entire world is like?

The entire world is over-leveraged. The entire world is on the edge.

The entire world is being redesigned.
So what do we do? We don't allow them to make things bigger! We need to start taking more individual and local control of things. They're making it bigger. Which will make the problem bigger. And make the problem so big, you won't be able to do anything about it, because all the experts. All of the heads. They'll all -- there will be six of them. And they will all be sitting in one room.

And they will all be making the instigations. And with them, making those decisions will be all the heads of all the countries around the world, that you're not going to have a say in any of that. They're already trying to do it with the WEF.

But if -- if the Supreme Court says, no, experts matter. And the president can't fire them. You will not have any control over anything!

We're at this place, where we can back out. We can turn around.

We can do it.

It's not too late. But the hour is growing very late.

I don't know about you, I don't like being this.

Up to the edge, you know what I mean?

I would rather have lots of breathing room, between me and the edge of the cliff.

But we don't have that anymore.

Everything has to be done right.

And we have to pay attention.

And the worst thing we can do is make things bigger.

Dream big, think small.