RADIOApril 04, 2025

How Trump Can FIGHT the Democrat Dark Money Resistance

Who’s funding all the massive protests against Elon Musk, DOGE, and President Trump? And, if they’re not grassroots, can Trump do anything to fight back? Glenn speaks with “Bannon’s War Room” co-host Natalie Winters, who makes the case that the same progressive dark money groups that keep popping up, including George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, are the brains behind the operation. She lays out a few ways that Trump and congressional Republicans can push back against these groups and their “color revolution paradigm.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Natalie winters, co-host of Ben's war room.

And also, White House correspondent. Welcome, Natalie. How are you?

NATALIE: Hi, good. Thank you so much for having me.

GLENN: Thank you for all of the hard work on so many stories. But this one in particular is really disturbing.

Because it shows that this is nothing, but the same revolutionaries, and this time, they are pushing into the zone of terrorism.

NATALIE: Kelly. And I think the most concerning thing here, is that sort of proves our worst caricature of the Democratic Party, which is that the last four years, they used tools like censorship, lawfare, overregulations. Political persecutions. To go after not their enemies. But people who disagree with them.

And now that they have effectively been shut out, right? Of their institutional and government levers of power.

They can't impeach President Trump. So what are they doing? I guess what Marxists always do, not just show in a preference for private property and try to destroy Tesla. But they're using violence and intimidation. And I think the way that the left has tried to depict these actions. As organic civil society.

Just, you know, speaking about democracy.

And democratic values.

There's nothing civil about this.

We have terrorism.

And, frankly, there is nothing societal.

These people are being funded by far left donors, like George Soros, like the Tides Foundation. The same state money, dark money interests that funded basically every violent protest, we've seen since Trump really entered the stage.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, literally the oligarchs that they say, that Elon Musk is.

It's --

NATALIE: You're exactly right.

GLENN: So tell me about some of the people that are behind this.

NATALIE: Sure. So Indivisible is sort of the ring leader of all of this. And their biggest refrain that they are always pumping through the airwaves, is that they are a grassroots organization. That they are people-funded and people-powered.

But if you dig into their financials, which as you alluded to, they have essentially erased all of their web pages showing the personnel of their movement, but from the sort of 990 filings where you can see, again, by design.

Not exactly who is funding them.

But overwhelmingly the majority of the funds that support this group come from big dark money type foundations or philanthropic organizations.

The NGOs of the world. That's obviously a euphemism.

But of that, the majority of it, and I'm talking. Seven-plus million dollars, since 2018 alone. It's coming from George Soros' Open Society Foundations. And like I said, when they tell you that they're funded by people in this people power.
It's not true. And in some cases, most recently.
They were doing a whole thing.

I'm sure your audience has seen this apoplectic thing, that House Republicans are not showing up in town wall. Well, Indivisible was behind that.

And they were actually reimbursing their groups. In some cases, $200 to buy all the protests that they needed for that.

And they have a separate program, where they'll reimburse groups up to $1,500 for get out vote operations.

Advocacy and recruitment.

The idea that this is all organic.

And that Trump is just angering Americans so bad by going against waste, fraud, and abuse.

It's not true.

It's the same people who funded the protest outside the DNC. The flag burners.

And frankly, it's the same people who fund inside the DNC.

GLENN: How do we -- how do we reverse this?

Let me see if I can pull this up here. There's a new poll out that shows from Rasputin. Are the attacks on Tesla and Tesla vehicles, justified?

Nineteen percent of Americans said, yes!

Among the respondents, ages 18 to 34, that was 36 percent that said, they are justified!

Among respondents that are Democrats, 31 percent say they are justified.

When asked, is it fair to call the attacks on Tesla and Tesla vehicles a form of domestic terrorism? Overall, only 46 percent say yes, 39 percent say no, 15 percent said, I'm too dumb to have an opinion.

Among the respondents who say they're Republicans, 68 percent said yes. The respondents who say that they're Democrats, 58 percent say they're no.

How do you keep people saying, and a growing number of people saying, no. It's totally cool to shoot that guy in front of a hotel, because he works for an insurance company. And we have burned down the Tesla. And we can find people in our own neighborhood that have them, target them, and destroy their lives, until they take a stand with us. And say, they believe what we're doing. And they sold their Tesla.

How do you get so many Americans to get behind that?

NATALIE: I think there are two key things that the Trump administration could do to push back on that. First and foremost, I think would be provoking the tax-exempt statuses of a lot of these organizations that are organizing these protests because they're essentially all 5O1C3s, which is absolutely insane.

And I think it is continuing to press ahead on the Act Blue investigation.

And just in general, the dark money funding.

But also, a lot of the money for groups, for example, there's a new thing called the resistance lab, which is being spearheaded by Representative Pramila Jayapal in conjunction with Harvard -- in that, they're not a prestigious Kennedy school. And though they have similarly deleted the web pages, some of their top funders are, other than USAID. And the Department of State. And the lady who runs it. Who uses they/them pronouns, so make your own judgment there.

But she herself has been funded extensively by USAID. The United States Institute of Peace. And I think it's important to drill down on this figure. Because this is someone who is not studying protests and nonviolence. This is someone who, their CE reads like a rap sheet. They're studying terrorism and violence versus non-violent protests.

Not because violent protests are immoral or unethical. But because they think at this moment, non-violent protests are more effective in bringing out their sort of utopian Democratic world view, and I use democracy, not in its true sense.

But these people are extremely, extremely radical. And I think what it goes back to, is what we started this interview on.

They have always used this color revolution paradigm to institute change, and to oppose President Trump. It's why they take him as an autocratic, as an authoritarian.

Right? Because then they can justify their outside the system regime change tactics that they've used abroad. And since they usually rely on impeachment proceedings, or contested election results, they can't do that. Right? They didn't take the House. President Trump won the popular vote, overwhelmingly.

So they're relying on this narrative, that what he's doing is so unpopular. And they sort of AstroTurfed outrage and protest and intimidation tactics.

To really this one myth they can't be President Trump is a dictator that must be opposed at all costs.

GLENN: What is -- I mean, I agree with you that Trump needs to go after the 5O1C3s.

I mean, I'm a little disappointed in Pam Bondi.

However, I say that, realizing, she doesn't even have her full team around her.

It's taking so long.

But I'm hoping that the justice departments starts to move a little quicker on things. Because this is -- this is clearly terrorism.

It is clearly, these -- these organizations, that, as you've said, have been taking money from the taxpayer. To do all of these things.

And the only way to stop them, I think, is to not just call them out.

But if they're breaking any kind of law. Which they clearly are.

Go after them with everything we have.

NATALIE: Yeah. And I think these radical judges have been stepping in at every point. It's a continuation of the lawfare.

And I think the fundamental issue. Look, you had all these Republicans talking tough about how they're so difficult. Where were they on the USAID front? All this waste fraud that was uncovered for decades. They did absolutely nothing.

Now the best we can get, is not even a full committee hearing but a subcommittee hearing that's been postponed on judges with some experts to tell us and confirm what we know.

That these people are radical targets and activists.

It's so unfortunate. Because our side. Our grassroots are fueled by patriotism. Not dark money. Not George Soros money.

And they have such amazing investigative reporters. You go on X now.

People are the ones exposing these groups.

And elected Republicans that should be enforcing. We're not even telling them to go after the groups in an autocratic, no despotic way. We're just saying, enforce the laws, enforce the facts that we should not be receiving tax exempt statuses or 5O1C3 statuses. Or go after the election billionaires. I mean, the case that they've been unable to make against right-wing billionaires, who are trying to root out waste, fraud, and abuse.

We need to juxtapose them to actual, I will argue criminal cases that you could bring against a ton of Western billionaires who are clandestinely and covertly funding terror operations here in the United States. Not just since January 20th. But for years on end, the issue I think starts with the weak faculty at the Congressional Republicans, who just have continually showed that they are unwilling to do anything.

GLENN: When is Trump going after them?

I would love Trump to give a speech today on a few things. One, okay. I just did the tariffs. The tariffs are not going to work by themselves.

I need actual tax reforms. Tax cuts. And a tax cut is not renewing the Trump taxes that are going to be raised. That's not a tax cut. That is a tax cut eight years ago. Give us a significant tax cut Congress. And also, I'm taking a hatchet to the regulations beginning right now. And anybody who wants it to stand around with their hands in their pocket, that's fine. But we cannot stand around and wait.

The time is too short to stand around and wait.

I'm looking for him to start, really pushing, you know, eyes into people's heads just a little bit.

Saying, excuse me.

The pressure is on me.

The pressure is on the population of the United States.

Do your damn job, Congress. Right now.

NATALIE: Well, and it's quite interesting, right?

Because you hear President Trump get criticized for "flooding the zone." They say, it pejoratively. But flooding the zone is just a response to the absolute disarray and chaos that President Biden left this country in.

We have to flood the zone with executive orders and action after action and tariffs after tariffs because of what happened in Afghanistan, at the Southern border, cost this country with Chinese spy balloons.

Right? It's such a double standard. And Congressional Republicans, the same people who were joining the DOGE caucus, and posting all their pictures, and talking their tough game on Twitter. They're voting to continue spending levels. At the very same -- and the Senate is already moving to try to make so President Trump can unilaterally oppose tariffs.

You know, the Senate is the people who have been there probably than I've been alive, who allowed the Chinese Communist Party, who allowed these Third World countries to overtake our manufacturing jobs, to seize essentially our means of production.

And they did nothing about it. Because their donors, the people who have been funding them. Got rich off of it, and enjoy it. And their constituents, the people who knock on the doors for them, donated to them small-dollar amounts, they have nothing, but contempt for them.

And you can see it on display. And, frankly, it's insulting to the intelligence. Your audience, abandoned war room audience when they think that just some tweet, or some strongly-worded letter.

Or some, you know, halfhearted hearted hearing against the judge, who has no really enforcement power.

It will be enough to satisfy us.

The MAGA movement is about shifting the goalposts for accountability.

And I think our audience has been very clear, that it's found in prison sentences. And in investigations for people who have committed crimes. And not just strongly worded letters. Or, you know, Fox news segments where people are going off.

And did nice spicy rants. And these criminals keep getting away with it.

GLENN: Yep. Natalie, thank you so much. We'll talk to you again. Thank you for all the hard work you do. Sincerely, thank you.

NATALIE: Likewise, thank you.

GLENN: You bet. That's Natalie Winters, White House correspondent, and also co-host of Steve Bannon's War Room.

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.