RADIOJanuary 24, 2023

THIS is why global elites & the WEF want you to OWN NOTHING

Global elites and the World Economic Forum may be trying to hide it now, but they’ve clearly stated in the past that by 2030, they want you to ‘OWN NOTHING.’ And that goal, Glenn explains, run entirely oppositely to the principles on which America was founded. Ownership is a HUGE part of the American experiment, so what happens when it’s taken away from us? In this clip, Glenn is joined by Carol Roth, author of ‘The War On Small Business.’ She says the anti-ownership goal of global elites is making us into ‘indentured servants,’ and that there’s one, huge way we can all peacefully fight back…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, Carol, it's a new year. A new you.

How are you?

CAROL: You know, I'm doing well. I'm just making sure that my private jet is doing okay. Because, you know, there was a climate crisis going on. It was very important for me to go take my private jet to go talk about the climate crisis. And then have steak dinners, while I tell everybody that meat is bad. So just trying to get that all together.

GLENN: It is so crazy. By the way, did you hear today, let me see. It was just approved -- where is it? Where is it?

Yeah. The European Union just approved cricket powder, as a component of flower-based foods.

CAROL: Amazing. Amazing. Sounds tasty. Looking very forward to that.

GLENN: Yeah. I unfortunately have a deep allergy to crickets.

I can't have anything with crickets in it. It's too bad.

CAROL: We're all going to develop cricket allergies, as part of our crisis.

GLENN: Yes, and I want to play this clip. This is from the World Economic Forum, last week. Listen.

VOICE: What is a polycrisis? And how and when could it happen?

VOICE: We're actually in the midst of one at the moment. We have energy crisis and food crisis. And they're all happening at the same time. It's the set of concurrent cascading risks that happen at the same time.

So that's where we are today. That's 2023.

What we're seeing though, that in the two-year time frame. And the ten-year time frame, we're at the risk of more of these polycrises unfolding. Two years out, there's still a concern on the experts that we surveyed, that the cost of living will be number one. But at the same time, a big risk of natural disasters. Ten years out, it's all --

GLENN: It's all natural disasters. Nothing else, but natural disasters. She doesn't seem to find any irony in the fact that we're in an energy crisis and a food crisis and a trust crisis. When all of those come directly from the policies of the World Economic Forum.

CAROL: Yeah. First of all, I have to say it sounds more regal, if you say it with sort of a British accent.

Polycrisis sounds much more terrifying. So I think we should do that. But it is. It's so ironic that they're sitting here, and they're talking about the inflation.

They're talking about the energy issues. They're talking about the mistrust and disinformation that came from the policies, that stemmed from global governments, and the World Economic Forum.

I mean, they are the ones that shut down, and said, we need to have this wonderful Great Reset.

They're the ones. The central banks around the world. That printed trillions of dollars. They're the ones that moved away from traditional energy. Because of the push from the World Economic Forum. So they've caused these crisis. All of them. Except for this global climate emergency, that clearly no one is paying attention to.

So we now have to add into our polycrisis or have Al Gore go on an unhinged rant, to make it extra special.

GLENN: Can you give direct correlation to our inflation from ESG?

CAROL: 100 percent. If you think about what inflation looks like. A large percentage of that was gas. Some of that was shipping costs, related to the cost of gas. And then, you know, fossil fuels have 6,000 derivative products, that all thing up in price, because of the cost. And the cost went up because we didn't have enough supply. And we didn't have enough supply because of ESG policies. ESG policies directed capital away from investments in fossil fuel, to the extent that Saudi Arabia, and OPEC, says that we're underinvested by, like, $12.1 trillion over the next coming decades.

So by doing that, by ensuring that companies, who make the investments in drilling and processing, for fossil fuels. Couldn't do that.

They are directly attributable, to the increase in prices. As well as, you know, the obvious direct correlation to the increased energy prices.

GLENN: So here is something that you're hearing. And you're just hearing the setup, right now.

That the Republicans are going to be so dangerous on this debt ceiling. And we are just going to default on all of our debts. And we will have no credibility.

We have no credibility now. But we're not going to default on our debts. But they are talking about the debt ceiling.

Why should the average person care about this?

CAROL: So the reality is, we shouldn't care about the debt ceiling. We should care about spending.

I mean, the debt ceiling is just saying, we cannot finance our overspending with debt anymore. But they don't do that at the same time that they pass the bill. They do it after the fact. So they've already spent the money. And you have to pay for it.

Short-term, we're not going to default on -- on our debt. It's just stupid. We have plenty of assets, that we could lease or we could sell if we got into a pickle, or things that could be reconfigured around. But in the medium to long-term, the spending is unsustainable.

And so if you overspend, and you have a deficit, there are only so many ways to find it. And we're probably not selling off all our assets at this point in time.

So that means, we're going to finance it with debt. And it's just going to become by and large, and bigger. To the point, that it becomes unsustainable, from a tax standpoint. From a money printing and erosion of your wealth and value standpoint.

And so that's really the area that -- this whole debt thing is kind of the sideshow at the circus. We need to be focusing on the main act. And that is the spending.

And I said this before, Glenn. If we just rolled back, like, five years.

If we went back to 2018 spending, which, you know, two years before the pandemic. Or even the year before the pandemic, we would be running a surplus, we would be paying down debt.

Or 2018, we would be about breaking even. So it's not like we would have to change that much, to get this under control. And they refused to do it.

GLENN: Okay. There was a call last week, for a windfall tax on food companies.

I've never heard anything more dangerous and stupid than that.

CAROL: So there's a legendary investor named Charlie Munger. He's Warren Buffett's partner in Brookshire Hathaway, one of the best.

And he has this famous saying that says, show me the incentive, and I will show you the outcome.

The reality is that taxes influence behavior. And if you don't want something, you tax it. That's what you do. Right?

GLENN: Right. A tax on SUVs.

CAROL: Right. A tax on Sim products. Alcohol. We don't want them.

We tax those things. By the way, the things we want. We get tax credits.

GLENN: Marriage, kids. All of it. Yeah.

CAROL: So here's what you're saying. We're going to tax food. And it's saying, we do not want you to produce food.

Who says that, other than utterly nefarious, and crazy people, who want people to starve.

It is utter insanity. And the fact that people are like, oh, yeah. That makes a lot of sense.

We should definitely put a tax on food!

It's -- I mean --

GLENN: First of all, that -- that does not hurt anybody at Davos. But it hurts the very poorest among us, in the world.

And I'm not even talking about America. I mean the poor of the poor. And they're already in a food shortage. These people are so anti-human, they do want people to starve.

They also, you know, said that they are raising, I think it's $3 trillion, privately, and with the help of governments. To buy farmland. To buy up 30 percent of the land eventually, 50 percent, on the entire planet.

CAROL: Yeah.

GLENN: And they're talking about 30 percent by the end of this decade. And they're going to do it with fundraising. I mean, the guy who was talking about it, was -- was John Kerry.

I mean, it's insanity.

They -- when will people understand, they mean you will own nothing.

CAROL: Perhaps when they read my next book, which you have been instrumental in helping shape.

Which ironically, is called You Will Owe Nothing.

And connect the dots between all of these things that they are saying, and the destruction of our property rights and freedom.

I mean, when they come out and say, oh, you know, we -- you owe nothing. That's a right-wing conspiracy.

It's not. It was on their website. In an article in 2016, which now they -- I think they have pulled. So we --

GLENN: Yeah, they have. They have.

CAROL: We can use the wayback machine to resource it. Then they made a video that they put their logo on, that it was their first prediction.

So they're predicting the end of private property. This is not a coincidence. And, by the way, it's not like a cute little Jetsons fantasy. It's not Rosie the Robot folding your laundry. Like, these are scary things. But they're going, oh, this is going to be great for you.

This is not great. And so going through all the different things. That we've been talking about, ESG. The purchase of land by private individuals.

It is scary how much has been purchased by a small group of people, and as you said, the government is now paying to take some of that farmland, out of commission.

There are reasons for this. There are sort of empire cycle reasons for this. And there is a jockeying of the elite to put themselves in positions to rule.

GLENN: What do you mean an empire building process? What do you mean?

CAROL: End of empire. So basically, we are where the Romans were at one point in time. Where the British were. Where the Dutch were. And here's this sort of disconnect between high debt loads and power. And when we're in a high debt situation like the US is, and frankly a number of other countries, the people in charge get desperate. And they start doing desperate things. They never cut back on services.

They never try to salvage it. They just kind of run straight into that cliff. This has happened many, many times in history.

And we're moving in that direction. The elites see this.

So all these things we're seeing is basically them trying to reshape the outcome and put themselves up on top, by having you owe nothing.

GLENN: Correct.

I'm going to go back to owning nothing.

And the -- what that does to a nation, that was built around ownership.

That is a total reversal of the basic foundation of America, and most of the western world now.

More with Carol Roth. I'm sure you can -- can you order the -- the book yet?

CAROL: No. But you can sign up for more information at CarolRoth.com/Glenn.

And we'll let you know.

GLENN: Yeah. It will be a good book. I have seen the outlines. And it's really -- she's good.

All right. Donald wrote in about his dog's experience with Ruff Greens. He says, I've never seen my dog lick the bowl clean. I mean, she's licking the bowl clean all the time now.

Because she's looking for any remaining traces of Ruff Greens.

My dog does that too. And I'm like, dude, it's not soaking into the metal. You're done. You're done. And man, lick and lick and lick.

You really need to check out what Ruff Greens can do. It's not a dog food. It's a supplement. Developed by naturopathic Dr. Dennis Black. You sprinkle it on the dog's food. And it's chalked full of vitamins, minerals, probiotics, antioxidants. You name it.

If it's healthy for your dog, it's probably in Ruff Greens. I want you to see the special deal, where you can get the first bag free. It's just a trial bag that you can just test, to make sure your dog likes it.

They don't want to you pay for anything, if your dog doesn't like it. But if your dog likes it, then start on Ruff Greens.

And feed Ruff Greens -- put it on the food, every single day, twice a day.

And over the months, you'll see a huge difference in your dog, at least I have.

And so has everybody here, that's tried it. The first trial bag is free.

You just pay for shipping at Ruff Greens. R-U-F-FGreens.com/Beck. That's RuffGreens.com/Beck. Or you can call 833-Glenn-33. 833-Glenn-33. RuffGreens.com/Beck. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So what does this mean, Carol, the -- the idea that you will own nothing, in a country that's whole identity and whole theory is that you can become wealthy. You can change your station by even landownership. Just being able to own something and call it yours, is fundamental to the American experiment.

What does that do to us?

CAROL: I mean, if you owe nothing, then the powers that be, own you.

It completely changes everything. It crushes the American dream. And it makes basically -- basically makes people indentured servants to the government.

And, you know, to some extent, big tech as well. I mean, that's really -- if you think about all these things that are being put out there, they sort of want to take your life and rent it back to you. Whether it be through a terms of service, or through, you know, dependence on the government. But that is the goal. They want that intradependence. They want you to not have freedom. Not to have agency. Not to make your own choice.

They want to control everything you do.

And it's coming from a wealth standpoint. It's coming from a technology standpoint. It's coming from a cultural standpoint.

Social credit. So, you know, really, this is -- this is a war. And this is one that you're going to have to fight, on multiple fronts. And at the end of the day, we need people to own everything.

We need you to have that ownership, so that you can fight back, and not be at their whim.

And not be an indentured servant to big technology, to big business, and to the global elites.

GLENN: If we don't stop the regulatory state, the unelected officials from just being able to introduce new rules on things.

If we don't stop that, you -- you won't own anything.

Because they will make it so onerous, that there's no way you could afford to own it. They don't have to take it. If you're so broke, there's nothing else you can do, but sell it.

CAROL: Yeah. It used to be when they were looking for riches, they would go out and invade another land. And they would take those riches. And obviously that's somewhat politically unpopular. But for whatever reason, this legal plunder, the idea that they're stealing our wealth and doing it in a legal way, because they're passing the rules and the regulations that we have to deal with, somehow is more palatable to people. And it shouldn't be. This is your wealth.

GLENN: That's the sheriff of Nottingham story. I mean, all the king did was just say, hey, what's yours is now mine.

CAROL: Right.

GLENN: Go, sheriff, go out and take it. And he would take it.

That's Robin Hood. This is the part they always get wrong. They think Robin Hood worked for the government.

No. Robin Hood was against the government. Because they were doing exactly what they were proposing to do, to the entire world now.

CAROL: Yeah. And if you look at just a case study, like Venezuela, who, you know, mid-last century was the fourth wealthiest nation in the world, and they used this rhetoric. They said, things are unequal. And we wanted to make it more fair.

So us and the government, we'll just nationalize everything.

We'll take it over, and you'll be so much better off. And with that, they went from the fourth wealthiest country in the world, to, you know, a recent study, showed that the median net worth of a person in Venezuela was zero! Literally zero.

So that is, you know, a very clear case study on how quickly it can happen.

To say, it will never happen here in America. Ten years ago, 15 years ago, maybe I agree with you, Glenn. But look at what just happened over the past few years. Look at the level of compliance, with these COVID rules and regulations. They took away people's jobs and livelihood. Of course, they're going to continue down.

GLENN: I remember saying in 2008. We stay on this path, we will be Venezuela.

Venezuela had just really collapsed. And I realized at the time. And I said it at the time. It took 20 years, to take that strong state, that was the fourth wealthiest, and destroy it.

Well, we are now approaching a 20-year mark, where we have been doing it.

It's not out of the realm of possibility. In fact, every day we continue down this road, it becomes more likely. All right. Her new book coming out soon. You will own nothing.

CarolRoth.com/Glenn. Will get you all the information. CarolRoth.com/Glenn.
(music)
Carol, talk to you again.

CAROL: Thanks, Glenn.

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.