RADIOFebruary 15, 2023

Glenn: UFOs a DECOY away from Nord Stream Pipeline rumors?

It’s shocking how little information the U.S. government has told the American people about the UFOs that we targeted over the weekend, and Senator Mike Lee — who recently attended a briefing about it all — agrees. He joins Glenn to explain why that Senate briefing was so ‘frustrating’ and he questions why these objects were destroyed in the first place. Plus, Glenn and Sen. Lee theorize another possibility behind the federal government's focus on the UFOs: Are they a DISTRACTION or a DECOY away from recent rumors about the U.S.' possible involvement in the Nord Stream Pipeline’s destruction? Because if that's true, Glenn says, we’re heading down a ‘very dark road…’

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We go to Senator Mike Lee. Hello, Senator, how are you, sir?

MIKE: Doing great, thank you very much, Glenn.

GLENN: I want to give you a couple of headlines.

US intercepts four Russian war planes yesterday, near Alaska.

The next headline.

US warns, it will defend the Philippines, after Chinese laser was shot at their Coast Guard.
Let's see here. Norway warns of growing importance of Russian nuclear deterrent. China's President Xi conveyed his support yesterday, for Iran, during a visit from the first visit from the Iranian Prime Minister.

We are -- we are not in good shape.

Do you and members of the intelligence committee, have any idea, what's going on?

MIKE: Well, we know some things are going on. We know certain things are happening. There's a whole lot we don't know. And in particular, there's a whole lot we don't know about the so-called objects, brought down by fighter jets, firing missiles over the weekend.

That was the focus of yesterday's classified briefing.

GLENN: Okay. So, Mike, we hear balloons. We hear that they now -- the Pentagon came out yesterday, after your briefing and said, you know what, it's nothing. These are probably just commercial balloons. But we have the Canadians sending out the HazMat teams, to look for this, and we hear this morning, that they are UAPs. Which I guess could be balloons. But usually, those are, you know, something solid. These were the size of cars.

And they weren't balloons. They were metal.

Is that true?

MIKE: Yeah. So, first of all, we don't really know what they are. I don't know how they claim now, to know what their nature is. Whether they're commercial, military, or from some other origin.

Because they haven't found them. I -- I suspected at this point, that they're theorizing on what it might be. That is what was so frustrating yesterday, they held this classified briefing, to tell us what happened.

And they showed us, to tell us basically what had happened. We had all hoped and expected, based on public statements, that they had covered what was left of these objects.

And that they were studying them. They hadn't found them, at least as of yesterday, when they briefed us. They hadn't found them. Because we don't really know what they are.

GLENN: I don't know what you can and can't say. Come on. We launched missiles. We know we have the video from the cockpits. We know that.

MIKE: Yeah. We repeatedly asked them about that activity. Show us anything about documentation of video footage, anything like that. They said, yeah. We have some that aren't really useful. The object is so small. So far away.

That the resolution doesn't really do anything for us.

GLENN: And why would we shoot them down?

MIKE: It's an excellent question. So we shot them down, not knowing what they were, just based on their altitude. We just knew that they were there.

But I -- I still can't fathom why it made sense to scramble fighter jets, shoot missiles at them.

Bring them down. When we have no idea, what they are.

GLENN: Okay.

MIKE: They're apparently not that concerned about it. Or else, they would be frantic. And they're not that.

GLENN: Okay. We found out last night, that the United States government had been tracking that Chinese balloon, for over a week. Once it was launched from China, we locked on to it, and tracked it. Did they tell you that yesterday?

MIKE: There are things in there, that I probably shouldn't repeat, from what I know. But it's -- it's safe to say, that we did know, before this thing hit the United States, that it was in the air.

We were aware of it. And we knew what was happening.

And so at that moment, it really should have brought the thing down. And at whatever moment they -- they realized, that it was coming on to the United States. And that it had the ability to collect data, they should have brought it down.

We kept hearing last week, about the fact that, well, been safe, to bring it down to the United States.

Nonsense.

GLENN: Bullcrap.

MIKE: Even at 60,000 feet, these things don't have a glide capacity. They're balloons. So if you puncture the balloon, it will head straight down. Yes, there is a debris field. But there's a lot of space, between Alaska. Off the coast of Alaska. To be clear.

And the rest of the United States. Where there are miles and miles around them, where there are no people.

And they should have brought it down. Here's what I think, Glenn. What I suspect was, these were makeup calls. They were compensating last weekend, for what they didn't do the previous week. Which is take bold aggressive action. Only, they took bold aggressive action on the wrong objects, at the wrong time.

GLENN: Are we going to know? Do you think we'll ever know this?

MIKE: I certainly hope so. It seems almost unbelievable to me. That we shut down three of these things over the weekend. We didn't cover any of them.

And if there was no immediate threat, as there apparently was -- in the explanation we've heard. Enter space, where aviation happens. You know, okay. Fine.

That's understandable. Sometimes you need to bring things down. But there was no immediate threat.

If that being the case, why can't they use a different kind of aircraft, one that could have surveyed up close, before shooting it down.

You can't really do that. We have a fighter jet, traveling at the speed of sound.

GLENN: Correct. I got to -- it is like our government is being run by, you know, Mrs. Hoffelmeyer's fourth grade class.

It is. I mean, and just the boys.

Because the girls would be a little smarter.

The boys, is just like, let's blow it up out of the sky. This is crazy talk.

There is another possibility here. That they are using this -- whatever it is. That they're using this, to get people off of the Nord Stream pipeline story, from Seymour Hersh.

And I don't know how much you can talk about it, or -- or what. What you know.

But, Mike, I find this extraordinarily concerning. Because there's only a few countries that could do it. None of them really had the incentive, or they would have let us know. If it was another country, would you have gotten a briefing on that?

Do you think, if they would have told us?

MIKE: It's -- it's hard to say.

I -- we don't necessarily get those briefings, just because they feel like it. Usually, it's because a member is asking.

Or because there's been national news about something. And they decide to brief all members. I tell you, I haven't gotten a briefing on this. I'm trying to get one.

All this, of course, goes back to this report published by Journalist Seymour Hersh, last week, indicating that according to his story, there were specialized US Navy teams that planted explosives there. And that the United States was responsible. I don't know whether this is true. I'm trying to ascertain whether it's true.

But I will say this, we need to approach a near peer nuclear-armed geopolitical adversary, with extreme caution.

And so I would like to think, that if we were going to do something like this, this would be some kind of clear authorization from Congress.

You, the chief executive. The president of the United States, commander-in-chief doesn't have the ability to take us to war.

I don't think it's a stretch to say, that doing this, not just to Russia -- a nuclear arms near geopolitical adversaries.

GLENN: All of Europe.

MIKE: It's also an attack on France and on Germany, and it affects a lot of Europe.

It's also an attack on France and Germany, and it affects a lot of Germany. I would like to think, it gets congressional authorization of some sort, before doing that.

GLENN: Well, he said, that there was a way around that. Because obviously, they should have done that, if we were involved.

I just don't believe that we -- that all of the allies, with all of our technology, and everything else.

We can't figure out, okay.

It looks like it's probably these people. I -- I personally, because they're so zipped up about it. It's got to come from the West. And the only ones that can do it really, are France and us. Or Great Britain.

And those guys won't do it. But, you know, you look at -- you look at this, Mike.

And if -- even if that's not true, can we find out if anything is true? As far as, there's these secret SEAL teams, that can be trained off the books, so Congress doesn't know about it?

MIKE: Yeah. Look, I think there are a lot of details, at least enough details, in the Seymour Hersh piece. That there should be fairly amenable for being proven or disproven.

Because either certain things match up, or they don't. It may be easier to disprove than to prove. But I think that can get us a lot of the way there. And there are a lot of others that could have done it. In theory, it could be China. Perhaps China wanted to make sure it had access to more of Russia's natural gas, and that it could get it at a lower price. In theory, it could have been China.

But -- and there are a handful of others, who there could have been. But this is worrisome for me, Glenn. For the simple reason.

Look, I don't know Seymour Hersh. I'm not familiar with any of the facts, alleged in his report.

But there are a couple of things that worry. Number one, on February 9th, 2022. President Biden during a press conference, said that if -- if Russia attacks Ukraine, that there will no longer be a Nord Stream two.

The journalists who had asked him the questions, about what he meant, was doing her job. And followed up with, what do you mean by that?

That pipeline is not under our control. And he reassured her. Believe me, we have the means to do it. And it will be done.

It will not exist.

GLENN: Well, what --

MIKE: So when you cut the fact with the fact that in this country, we have for a long time, seen overreaches from the executives, to the point where a lot of people accept now, that in the name of a clandestine operation, the United States can effectively wage war with them -- an act of Congress, authoring it. That really does concern me.

Not that I'm certain, that we did this. Because it's certainly not. It's not that I could verify the Hersh article. I can't. It really troubles me, that I can't really rule it out.

GLENN: And you can't get a briefing on it. All right. Hang on just a second.

Because when we come back, I want to ask you, do we want to know.

Stu and I were talking about this, this morning. And we were like, you know, the blue pill might be the one to take on this.

MIKE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Because this is an impeachable. Maybe worse. It's an act of war.

It's -- I don't know anybody that is going to fight against Russia, because -- if they attack us. Because we -- we blew up the pipeline. Europe -- I mean, the world will hate us.

And it means war. So I don't know -- do we want to know? And we'll come back with Mike Lee for that answer in a minute.

If pain is a part of your life, you may have got to the point, where you believe, you have to take it lying down, sometimes literally.

I'm here to tell you, I understand that. Because I was right at the point, where I'm just going to lay down.

Thank God I have a wife, that is -- woman. She gets tired of listening me gripe about things. Because I gripe about a lot of stuff.

But if it wasn't for her, I might never have tried Relief Factor and got it my life back. Listen, please. Please. Just try it.

If it doesn't work, yes, you're out $20. But $20. What is that? If you can get your life back. 70 percent of the people who try it, find the relief. And go on to order, month after month. So please, just try it. I didn't believe it would work for me either.

ReliefFactor.com. ReliefFactor.com. Or call 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief. 19.95. ReliefFactor.com.

Feel the difference.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: All right. Mike Lee. Do we want to know?

MIKE: Look, I think the American people do deserve to be in charge with their government.

GLENN: I agree with that.

MIKE: It's very much a mixed bag. Because as you alluded to before the break, the answer to this question, it turns out the United States was responsible, has very dire consequences.

And I don't -- I'm not even talking yet about what happens within our government.

What the consequences there might be.

GLENN: Is this -- does this rise -- does this rise to more than an impeachable offense.

MIKE: Quite possibly, yes.

I believe it does.

Because if you go to such great lengths, to engage in an attack. A provocative offensive attack, on a a nuclear armed geopolitical adversary, and you do so in a manner that violates our Constitution.

Because that's how I see it anyway. It seems to me like an act of war, last I checked.

War can't be just declared, just decided by our president.

And sure, I know clandestine operations have. Discreet military strikes are something different, than something provocative on this scale. That inevitably lead to and, in fact, are war.

GLENN: Yeah. So if we would find out, that this is even a real possibility, what happens?

What do we do?

How do we tell our allies? How do we tell Russia, so we can kind of -- before we say, I'm going to tell you something. But you have to promise not to be mad.

I mean, we've got to -- you know, in that case. Yeah. We have to promos, that you're not going to launch a nuclear strike.

How do we tell them this?

MIKE: I -- I don't know.

That's part of what makes this such a difficult thing.

But one thing I do know is that ignorance is never something that will put us in a position of strength.

I do think it's important if we get answers on this. I -- I would like to know.

And -- and whether we end up finding out or not, whether this thing is buried so far, so deep by the military intelligence industrial complex in Washington, that we can't get to it. Whether we find out or not, whether we did it or not, I think it's very important for us to have this national conversation.

GLENN: It is.

MIKE: Because for decades, we've seen this gradual accretion of power, within the executive branch, when it comes to the war powers.

And increasingly, Glenn, the way wars are fought these days, they don't typically have soldiers lined up in a battlefield, in corresponding parallel columns.

No. You've got -- you've got stuff like this. This is war.

In the 21st century.

And so we need to have a national conversation about the fact, that today, as -- at the time of the founding, we need our greatest, the people's representatives, to make the decision about going to war.

And clandestine operations need to be reined in to something truly discreet. This one wasn't.

GLENN: Mike Lee, thank you so much for everything you're doing.

And we pray for you. And we'll keep you in our prayers for your safety. As you continue to go down this road.

Thank you. You bet. Buh-bye.

Do you want to know?

It's like

it's almost as if, if we don't -- if it did happen. And we don't expose it. Then we get what we deserve.

STU: Yeah. I mean, of course, I want to know.

But there's that feeling of -- you know, of course, Russia knows, if our media is starting to know. Then Russia knows too. The question is: If it becomes public. And it becomes obvious to everybody. Then Russia has to respond to -- to do something for their own people.

GLENN: They have to.

STU: And that response, even if it is, you know --

GLENN: But maybe the people can temper our response to theirs.

STU: Right.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

Like, okay. We deserve that.

STU: It's a dark road though.

GLENN: It's a very dark road. Very dark road.

STU: Look, the blue pill was the right one to take. Just take the freaking blue pill, get along with everyone else.

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.