Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Hope in D.C.? Glenn Interviews Senator Ben Sasse and Arthur Brooks

October 07, 2015
Staff

WRITER

Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska joined Glenn on radio Wednesday to discuss the outrageous idea he had of putting a complete outsider into position as Speaker of the House.

The "outsider" - Arthur Brooks - joined the call as well.

"I don't think anybody is a better storyteller about the meaning of America right now than Arthur Brooks. I said, why wouldn't the House consider him?" Sasse said.

Listen to the conversation or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: Senator Ben Sasse took to Twitter. And he said, I've been thinking about the House Speaker race, Boner -- Boner.

(laughter)

PAT: Freudian.

GLENN: Yeah, Boehner quitting prompted some remarkably boring and lazy analysis on where we are as a nation.

He said, imagine how much -- amazing how much conventional wisdom gets wrong.

Throughout our campaign, we heard from the DC press, but not from Nebraska voters.

This was the dynamic. Media. Everything is Tea Party versus establishment. Leader versus outsiders. Voters yawn.

No real question about vision. Who has it. Who doesn't.

Press obsesses over bickering. Student council races. Who slighted whom. The voters barely care.

Media framing the Speaker's race is reductionalist choice. Small-ball establishment versus wild-eyed Visigoths who want to burn the government to the ground.

It's a 24-hour news cycle of this junk, and it never ends. He goes on -- and he goes page after page after page of tweets.

And he says, I have an idea, let's elect an outsider. I'm going to let the senator speak, and then the outsider is also on the phone as well. Senator Ben Sasse, how are you, sir?

BEN: I'm doing well, Glenn. Thanks for having me on. When you read someone's tweet after the fact, you know, without all the iconographic ways to get it 140 characters, it makes it sound like I can't even type.

GLENN: You haven't read a lot of other people's tweets. So, Ben, tell us what you were thinking here.

BEN: Well, I mean, I think your audience gets this, right? The media is obsessed with the Tea Party versus establishment narrative. But the fact is that this is really a question of vision. I mean, you listen to the DC press Corp write about anything that's happening on Capitol Hill, and we constantly get this choice between small-ball procedural process-obsessed establishment insiders versus supposedly crazy people who want to just burn down the capitol. And I don't think that's the real choice. And it's not what I hear when I travel Nebraska.

You know, there's a reason that Congress' approval rating is at 11 percent. And Nebraskans are sick of the idea that the only way you should talk about politics is as if politics and DC are the center of the world. I think what the people in my state are worried about is whether or not the people are going to be vital and whether or not civil society will be dynamic and whether or not families are strong and their regulatory environment allows small business people to get a foot in the door and build the American dream. The things that the people of America are worried about and obsessed about are big and important questions. And DC tends to get wrapped around the axle around student council race squabbling. And we can do better than that. And we should.

GLENN: Ben, I tell you, you're one of my favorite senators. You really, truly are. You get it. And every time I talk to you, I'm struck with how in touch with the American people you really are. And that's hard to do in your position. Really hard.

BEN: Well, it helps if you live in a place that isn't dominated by the professions and the professionalization of politics. So we -- my wife and I are blessed to have three little kids. Girls are 14 and 11. Son is four. And we live in Nebraska, and we're raising them because we don't know where they would detassel corn and walk beans in DC. So we fly home every weekend. We're doing a family commute. And so our neighbors are actually real people, who if I talked about process of insider DC baseball all the time, anybody at a high school game or at the grocery store is going to look at me like I have two heads. And that's healthy. It keeps you grounded.

GLENN: Okay. So what is your solution? Because honestly I've talked to a few of the people running for the House Speaker. And I'm kind of yawning. I mean, there's nothing -- I don't see anything that I'm excited about.

BEN: When I read the US Constitution, the first position that's referenced is Speaker of the House. It's the most democratic body because it's closest to the people, and every 24 months you have to get reelected or tossed out. The people can fire the politicians because the people are in charge and the politicians are supposed to work for us. And it's a good thing that the people have the power to fire us. And that Speaker of the House should be a voice, not just for one party, but a representation of the will of the American people in our Madisonian, separation of powers system. So I would love to see a conversation in DC be about something bigger than who is caucused with whom and what professional issue people have been fighting about last week. So it seems to me, if you want to think about the direction of the country, which the people in Nebraska and beyond do, if you want to think about the direction of conservatism. If you want to think about the challenges we face five and ten and 15 years in the future, we should think, who is a happy warrior? Who knows how to celebrate earned success? Who knows how to talk about fighting for people, not just against bad programs? How do we cut through, you know, a lazy media portrayal that the fight is between ostensibly a number of obsessed Republicans versus genuinely compassionate Democrats. That's not the right way to frame the problem. And the guy that kept coming to my mind as I was watching Sunday Night Football is Arthur Brooks, the head of AEI. And so I think that the House Republicans should think about going outside the box. There's nothing in the Constitution that requires you to have a Speaker who is an elected member of Congress. And I don't think anybody is a better storyteller about the meaning of America right now than Arthur Brooks. I said, why wouldn't the House consider him?

GLENN: Arthur Brooks is on the phone. Arthur responded, quote, normally I trust Ben Sasse's ideas, but is America ready for a bald Speaker? I think not.

Arthur, welcome to the program. Arthur, are you there? We've lost Arthur. He's down. We've got a man down.

BEN: I think we know what he thinks about the nomination.

ARTHUR: Hey, can you hear me?

GLENN: Yeah, we can hear you now. Hi, Arthur, how are you?

ARTHUR: Hi, I'm doing great. How are you doing, my friend?

GLENN: Good. So tell me, how do you take this? Do you take this seriously?

ARTHUR: Well, look, I mean, it's clear that Ben is drinking too much beer when he watches Sunday night football. I think that much is known at this point. But, look, we love Ben Sasse. Because he's -- look, if he decides to stay in politics, he's the future of the Republican Party. He's not an anger guy. He's not an envy guy. He's an aspiration guy. He's somebody who truly understands what it means to be a happy warrior. He gets into this business because he wants to fight for people.

Look, this is what you've been talking about now for more than ten years, Glenn. You got to fight for people, you don't just fight against things. And, you know, Ben lives that out every day, and his frustration is palpable.

I mean, I saw the tweet stream coming because I look at my Twitter too. And I'm thinking, "What is he getting at? What is he getting at?" Then in the end, "Are you kidding me, man?" But, still, I get the basic idea that what he's after, it's boring the kinds of things we're talking about in DC right now. Right?

GLENN: Oh, we had -- we had one of the candidates on for Speaker of the House yesterday. And he's a friend of ours. And we've known him forever. We hung up the phone, we were like -- I'm not. I don't care. I mean, there was no -- there was nothing there.

STU: He didn't seem like he was really totally into running.

GLENN: Right. It was the same kind of stuff.

STU: And the other guy we talked to was basically -- it was a, he's not super conservative, but there will be a lot of procedural things you won't understand that he'll change and he'll be right on.

GLENN: That he'll get right.

STU: Which is not exciting.

GLENN: And then the third guy is a guy who you're like, you have to be kidding me, right?

STU: He's like, we did the Benghazi thing just to screw Hillary Clinton. Elect me.

GLENN: It's just small thinking. There's nobody -- I'm looking for a candidate that is -- on all fronts, that says, you know what, we're not going to play this game anymore. We're just not going to play it. We don't have to play it anymore. The world is changing. The times are changing. The thinking has changed. We'll think way out of the box. And, quite honestly, Ben, that's what I like about this idea.

BEN: Arthur, we could comment a lot about Arthur's hair and the potential if he had some grafting and a combover.

ARTHUR: That would be interesting, wouldn't it?

BEN: It's amazing the stuff -- when you're on Twitter, and you're maybe a little bit promiscuous with your tweeting for a time. The things people send back to me.

Arthur, I got to show you some of the photos after you talked about being bald.

GLENN: Oh, I want to see.

BEN: People Photoshopping everybody else's hair onto you and sending it to me.

GLENN: Arthur, I want to see you with Donald Trump's hair.

BEN: Oh, yeah.

ARTHUR: That's the secret. That's what America needs. But here's why --

GLENN: Let's talk about this -- let's talk about this seriously.

BEN: Yes.

GLENN: Senator, you have bought the domain DraftArthurBrooks.com. Are you serious about this?

BEN: Well, something tells me that Mrs. Brooks isn't too thrilled that I've nominated her husband for the most thankless job in all of Washington.

ARTHUR: Look, Ben, I'll tell you what Mrs. Brooks said. I took it to her on Sunday night. I said, "What do you think, honey?" And she said, "Well, as you know, as Catholics, we don't believe in divorce."

(laughter)

GLENN: That sounds like a yes to me.

(laughter)

PAT: So there's a chance then?

BEN: In all seriousness, I genuinely think that Arthur would be an incredible Speaker of the House because the Speaker of the House should be Congress' chief storyteller. I know that seems provocative to folks because around the Hill, I've heard over the course of the last day and a half, well, that's ridiculous. It isn't the job of the Speaker of the House to cast a grand vision for the American people.

GLENN: Yes, it is.

BEN: The Speaker is supposed to recatalyze (phonetic) us and remind us who we are. The Speaker's job is to sit atop the sausage factory, was a direct quote someone gave me. The Speaker's job is to sit atop the sausage factory, and that's an ugly process. You can't cast a vision from there. Ben, you're confused. You articulated the job of the president.

Well, a couple of things. First of all, in a Madisonian construction of three separate, but equal branches, the article one branch, the legislature is the place that policy is supposed to remain. And that policy should be aligned with a long-term directional sense of where the country is headed. Number two, historically, the founders, a lot of them wanted to conscript Washington and make him into a king even though he didn't want to do it because they weren't sure that a republic would really work.

But to the degree that they decided to make this gamble, they thought a couple of things. One, they didn't even call the guy president in some of their early drafts. Sometimes he was just this presiding officer term. Used to be called the administrator, in some people's terms, because the idea was, anybody who is elected to represent the people is absolutely supposed to have a fundamental sense of the American idea. And the American idea is about the fact that we as a people, we as a nation, are much bigger than the compulsory tools that are the powers of a distant federal government. And so the storytelling aspect a fundamental part of this job. And I just truly think, who could be better at this than Arthur? And if you got somebody, great, nominate them. But let's not start with a passive assumption that whoever has caucused best over the last four months to align themselves for this next career move, that that's the important question. The important question for the people in Nebraska is who has a vision for where the country is headed.

GLENN: So, Arthur, do you --

ARTHUR: I mean, let's think about in a big way of what Ben is really talking about here. Ben is not talking about being Arthur Brooks. Ben is talking about what the leadership should really look like that's a step away from the presidency of the United States.

The Speaker speaks for the American people. What do the American people care about? They care about four things. Faith, family, community, and work. Those are the four things that gives people's lives meaning. Those are the four things that government should be getting out of the way of. We need a Speaker. We need a Congress. By the way, Ben correctly points out that Congress' favorability is at 11 percent. And I will remind our listeners that Kim Jong-un is at 12 percent. 11 percent is not very high. And the reason for that is this whole concept that they're not fighting for me. That doesn't mean they want more free things. That doesn't mean they want more benefits.

They want somebody who says, "Yeah, this Congress, this Speaker, people who want to be president, are warriors for the things that I really about and that I want to pass on to my kids." And let me you, right on this call, if we spent an hour, which we won't, but if we wanted to, we could come up with ten ways that the government in the next year will get out of way of faith and religious freedom. That will make it easier to set up traditional families. That will stop fragmenting communities. And that is going to become warriors for meaningful work for Americans.

Look, just with those four things. If that's what the vision is for a better Congress -- if that's what the vision is for a better state, imagine the happiness of the people. Imagine what we could do. And that's Ben's point. It's not about me. It's about actual leadership.

GLENN: You know, you would think that actually the Republicans would kind of like this, except that they're all camera hogs. You would think they would actually like this because you could actually go outside and hire somebody who is just great at articulating a vision. That's not elected -- doesn't have to worry about being elected again. Doesn't have to worry about any of the game playing. Can just be somebody who is telling the vision of America and keeping -- and really -- I mean, it's almost like a PR guy. Is it not?

ARTHUR: Marketing is a lot of it, guys. Marketing is a lot of what the president does. And there's nothing wrong with that. See, the actual work of making America work -- that's not the government's job. That's the citizen's job when they take care of their kids, when they go to church, and they go to Little League, and especially when they go to work every day.

But the government's job is making sure that basic functions function, that we have a safety net for people, and that we get out of the way when they're trying to live their lives. That's the vision of what it's supposed to be. And that's exactly what we're not doing.

GLENN: So, Arthur, because you do what you do at the American Enterprise Institute, you're following this game. Is there somebody -- we have really been at a loss for telling people who they should get behind. Who should they get behind? Is there somebody that you see? Is there some plan that you see? I just see small vision after small vision after small vision, and it's killing me.

ARTHUR: Well, it's an iron cage is what it is. So it's a competition of relatively small visions. Because it's almost as if break out with something bigger, it gives you a competitive disadvantage.

And here's the good news, Glenn. The good news is the Republican Party is a better ecosystem than it's been in a long time. I know there's a lot of infighting. I know there's a lot of bad blood. I got that.

But if the Republican Party, if they can get somebody like Ben Sasse to run for Senate and win on a walk, I might add, and a few other guys like Cory Gardner and Tom Cotton and the new generation, James Lankford, the new generation of guys who are in the Senate, that's a Republican Party that's a pretty healthy ecosystem. What that means, the people who are running can be really good. We don't actually have to find the new bald think tank president guy. We need to urge the people who are really running to talk in terms of the bigger vision. To use the metaphor of Sunday night football, to throw a long ball.

GLENN: Ben, in your own -- in your own circle with the Senate, what do you say, you know, you slip a roofie of some sort with Mitch McConnell and --

STU: This is not a good direction.

BEN: I don't even know what that means. I'm sure I'm not -- I don't even know what that means.

(laughter)

GLENN: I have to wrap it up, so we'll leave it at the roofies you'll slip Mitch McConnell.

(laughter)

God bless you, both of you. Thank you very much for having the conversation. And, Ben, please hang on to your soul because you're really, truly the good guys, as are you Arthur Brooks. Appreciate it. Thank you. Buh-bye.

Glenn: The most important warning of your lifetime—AI is coming for you

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Artificial intelligence isn’t coming. It’s here. The future we once speculated about is no longer science fiction—it’s reality. Every aspect of our lives, from how we work to how we think, is about to change forever. And if you’re not ready for it, you’re already behind. This isn’t just another technological leap. This is the biggest shift humanity has ever faced.

The last call before the singularity

I've been ringing this bell for 30 years. Thirty years warning you about what’s coming. And now, here we are. This isn’t a drill. This isn’t some distant future. It’s happening now. If you don’t understand what’s at stake, you need to wake up—because we have officially crossed the event horizon of artificial intelligence.

What’s an event horizon? It’s the edge of a black hole—the point where you can’t escape, no matter how hard you try. AI is that black hole. The current is too strong. The waterfall is too close. If you haven’t been paying attention, you need to start right now. Because once we reach Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI), there is no turning back.

You’ve heard me talk about this for decades. AI isn’t just a fancy Siri. It isn’t just ChatGPT. We are on the verge of machines that will outthink every human who has ever lived—combined. ASI won’t just process information—it will anticipate, decide, and act faster than any of us can comprehend. It will change everything about our world, about our lives.

And yet, the conversation around AI has been wrong. People think the real dangers are coming later—some distant dystopian nightmare. But we are already in it. We’ve passed the point where AI is just a tool. It’s becoming the master. And the people who don’t learn to use it now—who don’t understand it, who don’t prepare for it—are going to be swallowed whole.

I know what some of you are thinking: "Glenn, you’ve spent years warning us about AI, about how dangerous it is. And now you’re telling us to embrace it?" Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. Because if you don’t use this tool—if you don’t learn to master it—then you will be at its mercy.

This is not an option anymore. This is survival.

How you must prepare—today

I need you to take AI seriously—right now. Not next year, not five years from now. This weekend.

Here’s what I want you to do: Open up one of these AI tools—Grok 3, ChatGPT, anything advanced—and start using it. If you’re a CEO, have it analyze your competitors. If you’re an artist, let it critique your work. If you’re a stay-at-home parent, have it optimize your budget. Ask it questions. Push it to its limits. Learn what it can do—because if you don’t, you will be left behind.

Let me be crystal clear: AI is not your friend. It’s not your partner. It’s not something to trust. AI is a shovel—an extremely powerful shovel, but still just a tool. And if you don’t understand that, you’re in trouble.

We’ve already seen what happens when we surrender to technology without thinking. Social media rewired our brains. Smartphones reshaped our culture. AI will do all that—and more. If you don’t take control now, AI will control you.

Ask yourself: When AI makes decisions for you—when it anticipates your needs before you even know them—at what point do you stop being the one in charge? At what point does AI stop being a tool and start being your master?

And that’s not even the worst of it. The next step—transhumanism—is coming. It will start with good intentions. Elon Musk is already developing implants to help people walk again. And that’s great. But where does it stop? What happens when people start “upgrading” themselves? What happens when people choose to merge with AI?

I know my answer. I won’t cross that line. But you’re going to have to decide for yourself. And if you don’t start preparing now, that decision will be made for you.

The final warning—act now or be left behind

I need you to hear me. This is not optional. This is not something you can ignore. AI is here. And if you don’t act now, you will be lost.

The next 18 months will change everything. People who don’t prepare—who don’t learn to use AI—will be scrambling to catch up. And they won’t catch up. The gap will be too wide. You’ll either be leading, or you’ll be swallowed whole.

So start this weekend. Learn it. Test it. Push it. Master it. Because the people who don’t? They will be the tools.

The decision is yours. But time is running out.

The coming AI economy and the collapse of traditional jobs

Think back to past technological revolutions. The industrial revolution put countless blacksmiths, carriage makers, and farmhands out of business. The internet wiped out entire industries, from travel agencies to brick-and-mortar retail. AI is bigger than all of those combined. This isn’t just about job automation—it’s about job obliteration.

Doctors, lawyers, engineers—people who thought their jobs were untouchable—will find themselves replaced by AI. A machine that can diagnose disease with greater accuracy, draft legal documents in seconds, or design infrastructure faster than an entire team of engineers will be cheaper, faster, and better than human labor. If you’re not preparing for that reality, you’re already falling behind.

What does this mean for you? It means constant adaptation. Every three to five years, you will need to redefine your role, retrain, and retool. The only people who survive this AI revolution will be the ones who understand its capabilities and learn to work with it, not against it.

The moral dilemma: When do you stop being human?

The real danger of AI isn’t just economic—it’s existential. When AI merges with humans, we will face an unprecedented question: At what point do we stop being human?

Think about it. If you implant a neural chip that gives you access to the entire internet in your mind, are you still the same person? If your thoughts are intertwined with AI-generated responses, where do you end and AI begins? This is the future we are hurtling toward, and few people are even asking the right questions.

I’m asking them now. And you should be too. Because that line—between human and machine—is coming fast. You need to decide now where you stand. Because once we cross it, there is no going back.

Final thoughts: Be a leader, not a follower

AI isn’t a passing trend. It’s not a gadget or a convenience. It is the most powerful force humanity has ever created. And if you don’t take the time to understand it now, you will be at its mercy.

This is the defining moment of our time. Will you be a master of AI? Or will you be mastered by it? The choice is yours. But if you wait too long, you won’t have a choice at all.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Trump's Zelenskyy deal falls apart: What happened and what's next?

SAUL LOEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump offered Zelenskyy a deal he couldn’t refuse—but Zelenskyy rejected it outright.

Last Friday, President Donald Trump welcomed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Washington to sign a historic agreement aimed at ending the brutal war ravaging Ukraine. Joined by Vice President J.D. Vance, Trump met with Zelenskyy and the press before the leaders were set to retreat behind closed doors to finalize the deal. Acting as a gracious host, Trump opened the meeting by praising Zelenskyy and the bravery of Ukrainian soldiers. He expressed enthusiasm for the proposed agreement, emphasizing its benefits—such as access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals for the U.S.—and publicly pledged continued American aid in exchange.

Zelenskyy, however, didn’t share Trump’s optimism. Throughout the meeting, he interrupted repeatedly and openly criticized both Trump and Vance in front of reporters. Tensions escalated until Vance, visibly frustrated, fired back. The exchange turned the meeting hostile, and by its conclusion, Trump withdrew his offer. Rather than staying in Washington to resolve the conflict, Zelenskyy promptly left for Europe to seek support from the European Union.

As Glenn pointed out, Trump had carefully crafted this deal to benefit all parties, including Russia. Zelenskyy’s rejection was a major misstep.

Trump's generous offer to Zelenskyy

Glenn took to his whiteboard—swapping out his usual chalkboard—to break down Trump’s remarkable deal for Zelenskyy. He explained how it aligned with several of Trump’s goals: cutting spending, advancing technology and AI, and restoring America’s position as the dominant world power without military action. The deal would have also benefited the EU by preventing another war, revitalizing their economy, and restoring Europe’s global relevance. Ukraine and Russia would have gained as well, with the war—already claiming over 250,000 lives—finally coming to an end.

The media has portrayed last week’s fiasco as an ambush orchestrated by Trump to humiliate Zelenskyy, but that’s far from the truth. Zelenskyy was only in Washington because he had already rejected the deal twice—first refusing Vice President Vance and then Secretary of State Marco Rubio. It was Zelenskyy who insisted on traveling to America to sign the deal at the White House. If anyone set an ambush, it was him.

The EU can't help Ukraine

JUSTIN TALLIS / Contributor | Getty Images

After clashing with Trump and Vance, Zelenskyy wasted no time leaving D.C. The Ukrainian president should have stayed, apologized to Trump, and signed the deal. Given Trump’s enthusiasm and a later comment on Truth Social—where he wrote, “Zelenskyy can come back when he is ready for peace”—the deal could likely have been revived.

Meanwhile, in London, over a dozen European leaders, joined by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, convened an emergency meeting dubbed the “coalition of the willing” to ensure peace in Ukraine. This coalition emerged as Europe’s response to Trump’s withdrawal from the deal. By the meeting’s end, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a four-point plan to secure Ukrainian independence.

Zelenskyy, however, appears less than confident in the coalition’s plan. Recently, he has shifted his stance toward the U.S., apologizing to Trump and Vance and expressing gratitude for the generous military support America has already provided. Zelenskyy now says he wants to sign Trump’s deal and work under his leadership.

This is shaping up to be another Trump victory.

Glenn: No more money for the war machine, Senator McConnell

Tom Williams / Contributor | Getty Images

Senator McConnell, your call for more Pentagon spending is as tone-deaf as it is reckless. The United States already spends more on its military than the next nine countries combined — over $877 billion in 2023 alone, dwarfing China ($292 billion), Russia ($86 billion), and the entire EU’s collective defense budgets. And yet here you are, clamoring for more, as if throwing cash at an outdated war machine will somehow secure our future.

The world is changing, Senator, and your priorities are stuck in a bygone era.

Aircraft carriers — those floating behemoths you and the Pentagon so dearly love — are relics of the past. In the next real conflict, they’ll be as useless as horses were in World War I. Speaking of which, Europe entered that war with roughly 25 million horses; by 1918, fewer than 10 million remained, slaughtered by machine guns and artillery they couldn’t outrun.

That’s the fate awaiting your precious carriers against modern threats — sunk by hypersonic missiles or swarms of AI-driven drones before they can even launch a jet. The 1950s called, Senator — they want their war plans back.

The future isn’t in steel and jet fuel; it’s in artificial intelligence and artificial superintelligence. Every dollar spent on yesterday’s hardware is a dollar wasted in three years when AI upends everything we know about warfare. Worse, with the Pentagon’s track record, every dollar spent today could balloon into two or three dollars of inflation tomorrow, thanks to the House and Senate’s obscene spending spree.

We’re drowning in $34 trillion of national debt — 128% of GDP, a level unseen since World War II. Annual deficits hit $1.7 trillion in 2023, and interest payments alone are projected to top $1 trillion by 2026.

This isn’t sustainable; it’s a fiscal time bomb.

And yet you want to shovel more taxpayer money into a Pentagon that hasn’t passed a single audit in its history? Six attempts since 2018, six failures — trillions unaccounted for, waste so rampant that it defies comprehension. It’s irresponsible — bordering on criminal — to suggest more spending when the DOD can’t even count the cash it’s got.

The real threat isn’t just from abroad, though those dangers are profound. It’s from within. The call is coming from inside the house, Senator — and not just the House, but the Senate too. Your refusal to adapt is jeopardizing our security more than any foreign adversary.

Look at China’s drone shows — thousands of synchronized lights painting the sky. Now imagine those aren’t fireworks but weaponized drones, each one cheap, precise, and networked by AI. A single swarm could cripple our planes, ships, tanks, and troops before we fire a shot. Ukraine’s drone wars have already shown this reality: $500 drones taking out $10 million tanks. That’s the future staring us down, and we’re still polishing Cold War relics.

Freeze every bloated project.

Redirect everything — every dime, every mind — toward winning the AI/ASI race. That’s the only battlefield that matters. We’ve got enough stockpiles to handle any foreseeable war in the next three years and a president fighting to end conflicts, not start them. Your plea for more spending isn’t just misguided — it’s a betrayal of the American people sinking under debt and inflation while you chase ghosts of wars past.

Or is it even that senator? Perhaps I have buried the lede, but I am not sure if the following stats will help people understand why this op-ed might have been written by someone in your office.

Your state, Kentucky is:

  • 45th in GDP Per Capita
  • 44th in Employment
  • 42nd in High School Diplomas

And 11th in Defense-related defense contract spending

Who are you actually concerned about, Senator? The safety of the American people or your war machine buddies?

Thanks, but no thanks.

'MAD AS HELL': Here's what happened with the Epstein Files and what's next

Andrew Harnik / Staff, SAUL LOEB / Contributor, Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Jeffery Epstein's despicable low-life clients escape justice yet another day.

If you followed last week's commotion surrounding the release of the Epstein Files closely, you likely came away from the situation feeling frustrated and confused. Many anticipated the full release of Epstein's damning evidence, with names and details that would bring the hammer of justice down on those who indulged their wicked desires on that infamous island. Instead, we were dealt another disappointment, vexed once more by the swamp creatures Trump swore to destroy.

Many have turned their frustration towards the ensemble of new media representatives, including Glenn's friend and BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler, who was among those chosen to break the story. But don't shoot the messenger, if you take a moment to hear Wheeler's side of the story as Glenn did on radio, it's clear that the party at fault is the same enemy we've been fighting the whole time: the Deep State.

While Trump has won back-to-back victories during his first few weeks in office, he hasn't even been president for two months yet. It should come as no surprise that the swamp is still full of monsters, and they are starting to fight back. The events surrounding the release of the Epstein Filesprove there is still a lot of work left to do.

What happened?

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

To fully understand last week's events, we need to go back to an interview Trump's new attorney general, Pam Bondi, did with Fox on Wednesday, February 26th. On the night of the 26th, Bondi sat down with Fox News host, Jesse Watters, where she first announced that the next day, Thursday the 27th, she would be releasing the long-awaited Epstein Files, and even made hints that the contents would be of interest, saying they would "make you sick."

The next morning, Liz Wheeler and other "new" media hosts were summoned to the White House, though they did not know why at the time. No mainstream reporters were present and Wheeler speculates that the purpose behind that was to deny them this story in retribution for Trump's poor coverage. Then Bondi and Kash Patel, the new director of the FBI, came in with the now-infamous binders, along with a letter Bondi had written to Patel and informed the reporters of the bad news. They told them that the binders contained what they had previously believed to be the full Epstein Files, until Bondi received information from a FBI whistleblower. This allegedly happened after her interview on Fox, and revealed that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and the FBI had withheld large portions of the Epstein Files from both Bondi and Patel.

After this meeting, the reporters were let out of the White House where they were ambushed by the mainstream media. Believing that they were going to immediately break the news, the new media reporters smiled and waved, gloating their exclusive access to the story while their antiquated counterparts took photos. Then the new media reporters learned that the White House forbade them from breaking the news until 3:30 pm EST, to avoid Trump's conference with the UK Prime Minister from being focused solely on the Epstein Files story. This explains why Liz Wheeler and her fellow media representatives were silent for so long. It was a bait-and-switch that they never intended.

What did we learn?

SAUL LOEB / Contributor | Getty Images

While initially this seems like a complete bust, there is new information we learned from this fiasco.

First, there was some new information in the binders, although a large portion of it was information we already knew. There was a copy of Epstein's Rolodex, essentially his contact list, which contained many of the same names we already knew had associated with Epstein in some capacity, though it's certainly not proof of any wrongdoing. The biggest reveal was a long list of known victims of Epstein and his degenerate client, although it was entirely redacted to protect the privacy of those on the list. This list was, allegedly, what Bondi was referring to on the Wednesday Fox interview, although Bondi's exact timeline is unclear and potentially suspicious.

The real takeaway from yesterday came from the letter Bondi sent Patel in response to the FBI leak. Not only did it prove our suspicions right, that this story is much deeper than we are being led to believe, but it reveals blatant betrayal within the government. The letter from Bondi orders Patel to knock some heads, get the real files, and compile a report highlighting who is hiding these files from Trump, Bondi, Patel, and the American people.

There are Deep State swamp creatures that are actively working against President Trump and his administration. Glenn likened this to aninternal Civil Warand encouraged Trump to take an axe to the whole system. We need to pull out this corruption root and stem.

What needs to happen next?

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The next step is learning what Kash Patel found when he started knocking heads. According to Bondi's letter, the full Epstein Files and Patel's report were due on her desk by 8:00 AM February the 28th. The American people need to know what he found and soon. We have waited long enough.

There also needs to be immediate and hard-hitting action taken against SDNY, the corrupt FBI agents, and whoever else seeks to undermine Trump's presidency. Really, this should not come as a surprise, Trump has been in office for less than two months. That is a very short time to completely uproot the Deep State which has been twisting its corruption around every branch of our government for the better part of a century.

This is the first major hiccup of Trump's second term, amid nearly two months of victory after victory, and if anything proves the validity of DOGE's work gutting the government. While we can't let this slide, now is not the time to abandon hope, now is the time to double down and demand answers.