RADIOJanuary 31, 2025

Why Tulsi Gabbard Faces a TOUGH Battle to Get Confirmed as DNI

Tulsi Gabbard faced tons of hostility in her congressional hearing as President Trump’s DNI nominee. Glenn speaks with The Federalist National Correspondent Tristan Justice, who argues that the Deep State will go after her, even if she’s confirmed. “She can’t afford to lose a single vote on the committee,” he says, and there are quite a few Republican senators on this committee who are questionable. Tristan also touches on Kash Patel's nomination hearing and RFK Jr.’s hearing, in which nearly every Democrat was hostile towards him.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: One of my favorite guests is Tristan Justice. The Federalist national correspondent. Coauthor of Fat and Unhappy.

Welcome, Tristan. How are you?

TRISTAN: Good. How are you?

GLENN: So I read your story in the Federalist, and I think it tells everything people need to know about what Tulsi Gabbard is facing. Can you -- can you relay it, your main points here for the audience?

TRISTAN: Yeah. Of course, the New York Times came out with a story that Tulsi Gabbard came under scrutiny from the Deep State for her overseas travel.

That includes intelligence that she apparently met with this leader of Hezbollah. And that is based on two anonymous terrorist sources.

And so this is really just kind of the same playbook, that they always use, whenever there's been a disruptor, threatening to change the status quo. The Deep State can and will make up, and do anything it really wants, to topple that political opponent.

The same thing they do with Donald Trump.

And now it's the same thing they do with Tulsi Gabbard, as she threatens to take over the director of National Intelligence.

GLENN: I think she has the most dangerous job. I mean, the president obviously.

But when you get into the Deep State and Intelligence, you've got spooks everywhere.

And, you know, I -- I wouldn't be -- I wouldn't be sleeping well at night.

Knowing that I was going in to take down black ops.

Take down things that nobody wants to have the light of day come on.

Even people in your own party. Would you agree with that assessment?

TRISTAN: Yeah, I mean, I think out of any of Trump's nominees, I think the one who probably has -- is probably Tulsi Gabbard.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

TRISTAN: But it's not too hard to imagine, because what she is up against.

She is running as the disruptor of the status quo that has been in Washington for decades at this point. You saw how hard the Deep State went after Donald Trump for eight years. You know, it didn't stop once the Russiagate hoax fell apart in 2018, after the Mueller Report.

So you saw host after host after host, culminating in 91 state and federal charges trying to bankrupt their political opponent.

And so I think whenever these cabinet nominees, whenever these politicians raise their hands and threaten to disrupt, that regime in Washington, you know, the nail that sticks up, gets knocked down.

That's exactly what's happening, against the Deep State.

GLENN: Right.

I mean, the church commission happened in the '70s. And it exposed all kinds of things that America didn't understand.

What her job is, as I understand it, you know, the DNI was created after 9/11.

So it is responsible for all of the agencies talking to each other. So she has access to all of the agencies.

And Trump has said to her, I want you to go in and find all the bodies that have been buried. I want to find out exactly what's going on. What's corrupt. What's not. And we will shut it down.

This is -- if people think, well, what about the CIA?

She's going to be the one leading -- how many is it?

How many agencies are there? Like 118?

No. Eighteen. Good, not 118. Eighteen intelligence agencies and bureaus.

That's a lot.

TRISTAN: Can you imagine if there would be 118 agencies and bureaus?

So we just created this massive government, Washington has just been out of control.

And when we think, that, oh, Americans might be safer with someone like Tulsi Gabbard, taking the role of DNI. And making the DNI. And the intelligence community do what it's supposed to do.

And that is protect our national security to the highest standards, while protecting our civil liberties of Americans.

And so, but, you know, Tulsi is about to go into this hearing. It probably will be a hostile hearing.

There should be no surprise on fireworks, that I think people are about to see. Hear in a couple of moments.

But I would just say this about Tulsi. She should not be going into this hearing, guns blazing as the destructor and reformer that she has campaigned on.

Because she has to convince them, that is reluctant to reform that status quo, that her top interest in running the nation's intelligence agencies is protecting our national security while safeguarding American civil liberties.

If she goes in there, guns blazing as the disruptor, and she will not score points to the very senators she has to convince with their vote.

Especially for the secret vote like this one.

GLENN: So Tristan, tell me about the Republicans that are on this committee.

How many of them do you think are interested in reform?

TRISTAN: Well, she can't afford to lose a single vote on the committee. Or else, she won't pass the committee.

But it's not unprecedented for a nominee to be voted on for the full Senate vote. While not passing the committee.

One lawmaker that people are watching here, is Senator (inaudible) called -- she had just voted against Trump's pick for the Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth last week.

She's not -- she never was intimidated to reject nominees from President Trump. There's also a number of other senators on the committee, who are questionable. Senator Todd Young, who did not support Trump.

People are saying, he -- so I think Collins and Young are the two primary senators to watch this process, continues to unfold.

GLENN: Are we going to find out. It's my understanding.

DNI. The committee vote is always a secret vote.

You will know the number. And you won't know who voted what.

But I think is an abomination. Are we going to have that vote out in the open?

Are we going to know?

TRISTAN: Well, I certainly hope it will be public and transparent. I think Americans deserve that, especially after elections where President Trump was given such a mandate.

Right?

I think his nominees should enjoy that same mandate, unless something is abjectly disqualifying, that were issued to keep them from a power position. Democrats have often picked their battles. Some of their other nominees made it through, no problem.

Sean Duffy, transportation. Doug Burgum can confirm. And these other nominees have gone through with very little drama.

Obviously, honed in on unsurprisingly the two nominees who were former Democrats, prior to this last election. Robert F Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. It seems one of their biggest defenses to Democrats, is meeting the party in the first place.

So I'm a little surprised, Democrats honed in on details in particular.

GLENN: Right. Right.

So let's talk about the other nominations.
How do you think RFK did yesterday?

TRISTAN: Well, Robert F. Kennedy as big Pharma and the chief antagonist is no surprise.

He went into another hostile hearing yesterday.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. It was insane. It was insane.

TRISTAN: But I do think there was some surprise as to how hostile Democrats were in that hearing yesterday. The hostility was near unanimous among every Democrat on that panel. And I think there was some -- at least some hope from the Trump transition team and the Kennedy's team, that they might pull a Democrat or two. But I think those hopes probably faded. And right from the getgo, when the first thing Ron Wyden did once they opened the questioning period was, enter into the Congressional Record, a letter sent from Kennedy's cousin, Carolyn Kennedy, the former ambassador to Australia with still personal hysterical attacks that Robert F. Kennedy that he has predators as pets, and putting chickens in the blender.

I mean, the fact that the Democrat-ranking member on the Senate finance committee would enter a letter full of personal attacks from a family member, said all you needed to know about how the rest of those three and a half members went for the Democrats and Kennedy.

GLENN: Is he going to make it, do you think?

TRISTAN: I think Kennedy is up in the air. I think Republicans largely showed, that they're not too willing to resist Trump's wish for this pick for Health and Human Services. I think if Republicans are going to reject Trump's pick on any of these nominees, it will probably be Tulsi Gabbard after they pose -- oppose Pete Hegseth for McConnell.

But I -- I'm not sure Kennedy is a sure thing. And I don't think Kennedy thinks he's sure in a confirmation bill either.

So I think a lot hinges on this next hearing here in a couple of moments.

GLENN: So tell me about Kash Patel.

TRISTAN: Hmm. Well, Kash Patel is running against the same apparatus of Tulsi Gabbard, of course. He hasn't faced the same level of attacks with anonymous sources, leaking to the New York Times. These terrorists are claiming, that he met with -- overseas.

GLENN: Right. Right. No pictures of him with Hitler. Yet!

So it's good.

TRISTAN: But Kash Patel, he's been a conservative media personnel for the past four years.

He's blown the whistle on some of the lies of the January 6 committee, claiming that he was formerly the chief of staff, the Department of Defense at the end of Trump's first term, and he blew the whistle on, no.

Trump did actually demand 10,000 national guard troops to the Democrats, both to the Democrats, both within the Department of Defense and running Washington, DC.

And running House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's death, reduce the president's request at every opportunity they had. And so Kash Patel, Democrats, and probably some of the Republicans, with someone more in the role of Christopher Wray.

Who was perfectly weathering to weaponize the agency, to -- to prosecute political dissidents.

And I think it's -- it's -- but Kash Patel, what Tulsi has to do today.

And that is, convince what the senator, what his top priority is.

Returning the FBI to its intended purpose. Which is to keep Americans safe, while protecting civil liberties.

GLENN: Tristan, thank you.

I'm a big fan of your writing.

And thank you for being on the program. I appreciate it.

TRISTAN: Thank you for having me.

GLENN: The Federalist National Correspondent Tristan Justice.

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.