Glenn Corners Rand Paul on 'Birther' Issue: Is Cruz Qualified to Run for President?

He expected it from Rubio. He expected it from Trump. But Rand Paul jumping on the Ted Cruz "birther" bandwagon? The very thought had Glenn less than excited about inviting Senator Paul back onto The Glenn Beck Program Thursday.

"This is the first time that I've had Rand Paul on that I'm not excited about," Glenn said. "I'm a little---quite honestly---I'm a little nervous about it because I really like Rand Paul an awful lot."

Apologizing for getting Glenn "tied up in knots," Senator Paul took the hot seat to explain why he jokingly said about Cruz, “I think without question he is qualified to make the cut to be prime minister of Canada.”

Glenn challenged the senator about what he'd say in a mano a mano conversation.

"If you weren't running for president of the United States, come on, man. If we were just sitting in a room together, what would you say? Is he qualified to run for president or not?

Senator Paul shared his opinion on how the courts would rule about Senator Cruz's eligibility to be president.

"If I had to say, I would say the courts in all likelihood would say yes," Paul said.

Later in the program Glenn and his co-hosts talked about the true intent behind the president being a natural-born citizen.

"It's to prevent foreign agents," said co-host Pat. "And we know Ted Cruz is not a foreign agent."

In the case of Ted Cruz, you've got a U.S. citizen whose American mother happened to give birth in another country and raised him to honor and revere the U.S. Constitution.

Ironically, in Barack Obama's case, he was born on American soil, but taught the exact opposite of what Ted Cruz was taught.

"[Citizenship] didn't stop Barack Obama," Glenn said. "If he's not a foreign agent---I think he was born in the United States of America, but if he wasn't groomed to be a foreign agent . . ."

Listen to this program segment below.

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

GLENN: I have to tell you, I am -- this is the first time that I've had Rand Paul no that I'm not excited about. I'm a little quite -- quite honestly, I'm a little nervous about it because I really like Rand Paul an awful lot and I really respect Rand Paul and I'd vote for Rand Paul in a heartbeat.

And I could -- I could -- I guess I could save it for a question at the end, but I want to get it off my chest so we can move on and talk about other issues.

Rand, welcome to the program. How are you, sir?

RAND: Good morning, Glenn. I'm sorry I got you tied up in knots.

(chuckling)

GLENN: Well, you do because I have real respect for you. And you are a constitutional expert. I mean, that's why I like you.

And I -- you've done something that I just don't understand, that I just didn't expect. I expected it from Rubio. I expected it from everybody. But I didn't expect it from you. And that's this birther nonsense with Ted Cruz, where you joked -- and I accept the joke at first, "Eh, he might be a good prime minister in Canada." I accept the joke. But then when you're pushed on it, you say, "Well, I'm not a constitutional expert. I don't know." Come on, man. Yes, you do. Yes, you do.

RAND: I think the reason why nobody really knows the answer is, it's never been adjudicated. We've never had a nominee or a president that wasn't born in the United States. I'm not saying that he isn't eligible. I'm saying that Democrats will, of course, bring this up, and it will have to be adjudicated because it's never happened before.

GLENN: Right. Well, McCain was done that. Barry Goldwater was --

RAND: Right, but the court decided in those cases that US territories were part of the US. And Canada is not a US territory.

GLENN: So let me ask you this. Because we talk about things that the courts have adjudicated on and we say the courts are wrong on that. If you're not a constitutional scholar, if you're not a constitutional expert, then what the hell are we voting for you for? So just tell me --

RAND: You know, we have to -- you know, we have to go back --

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

RAND: If we want to debate what a natural-born citizen is, you have to go back to either what the Founding Fathers said or the Constitutional Convention said. And the bottom line is, it is ambiguous. And that when things are ambiguous --

PAT: None of the Founders were natural-born.

GLENN: So let me just ask you this question: What does Rand Paul say? Not what the courts say. You know you've studied this out in your head enough. If you weren't running for president of the United States -- and I understand the politics of it -- I really do. But if you weren't running for president of the United States, come on, man. If we were just sitting in a room together, what would you say? Is he qualified to run for president or not?

RAND: If I had to say, I would say the courts in all likelihood would say yes. But I will say that no court has ever decided what it means to be natural-born with regard to eligibility of the president. Whether or not being born outside of the US means naturally being born in the US, I think it's an open question as far as the courts are concerned.

Featured Image: Screenshot from The Glenn Beck Program

PHOTOS: Glenn’s rare tour reveals White House history

Image courtesy of the White House

In honor of Trump's 100th day in office, Glenn was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Naturally, Glenn's visit wasn't solely confined to the interview, and before long, Glenn and Trump were strolling through the majestic halls of the White House, trading interesting historical anecdotes while touring the iconic home. Glenn was blown away by the renovations that Trump and his team have made to the presidential residence and enthralled by the history that practically oozed out of the gleaming walls.

Want to join Glenn on this magical tour? Fortunately, Trump's gracious White House staff was kind enough to provide Glenn with photos of his journey through the historic residence so that he might share the experience with you.

So join Glenn for a stroll through 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with the photo gallery below:

The Oval Office

Image courtesy of the White House

The Roosevelt Room

Image courtesy of the White House

The White House

Image courtesy of the White House

Trump branded a tyrant, but did Obama outdo him on deportations?

Genaro Molina / Contributor | Getty Images

MSNBC and CNN want you to think the president is a new Hitler launching another Holocaust. But the actual deportation numbers are nowhere near what they claim.

Former MSNBC host Chris Matthews, in an interview with CNN’s Jim Acosta, compared Trump’s immigration policies to Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust. He claimed that Hitler didn’t bother with German law — he just hauled people off to death camps in Poland and Hungary. Apparently, that’s what Trump is doing now by deporting MS-13 gang members to El Salvador.

Symone Sanders took it a step further. The MSNBC host suggested that deporting gang-affiliated noncitizens is simply the first step toward deporting black Americans. I’ll wait while you try to do that math.

The debate is about control — weaponizing the courts, twisting language, and using moral panic to silence dissent.

Media mouthpieces like Sanders and Matthews are just the latest examples of the left’s Pavlovian tribalism when it comes to Trump and immigration. Just say the word “Trump,” and people froth at the mouth before they even hear the sentence. While the media cries “Hitler,” the numbers say otherwise. And numbers don’t lie — the narrative does.

Numbers don’t lie

The real “deporter in chief” isn’t Trump. It was President Bill Clinton, who sent back 12.3 million people during his presidency — 11.4 million returns and nearly 900,000 formal removals. President George W. Bush, likewise, presided over 10.3 million deportations — 8.3 million returns and two million removals. Even President Barack Obama, the progressive darling, oversaw 5.5 million deportations, including more than three million formal removals.

So how does Donald Trump stack up? Between 2017 and 2021, Trump deported somewhere between 1.5 million and two million people — dramatically fewer than Obama, Bush, or Clinton. In his current term so far, Trump has deported between 100,000 and 138,000 people. Yes, that’s assertive for a first term — but it's still fewer than Biden was deporting toward the end of his presidency.

The numbers simply don’t support the hysteria.

Who's the “dictator” here? Trump is deporting fewer people, with more legal oversight, and still being compared to history’s most reviled tyrant. Apparently, sending MS-13 gang members — violent criminals — back to their country of origin is now equivalent to genocide.

It’s not about immigration

This debate stopped being about immigration a long time ago. It’s now about control — about weaponizing the courts, twisting language, and using moral panic to silence dissent. It’s about turning Donald Trump into the villain of every story, facts be damned.

If the numbers mattered, we’d be having a very different national conversation. We’d be asking why Bill Clinton deported six times as many people as Trump and never got labeled a fascist. We’d be questioning why Barack Obama’s record-setting removals didn’t spark cries of ethnic cleansing. And we’d be wondering why Trump, whose enforcement was relatively modest by comparison, triggered lawsuits, media hysteria, and endless Nazi analogies.

But facts don’t drive this narrative. The villain does. And in this script, Trump plays the villain — even when he does far less than the so-called heroes who came before him.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Exposed: America’s ancient power grid is a national security disaster

Allan Tannenbaum / Contributor | Getty Images

If America wants to remain a global leader in the coming decades, we need more energy fast.

It's no secret that Glenn is an advocate for the safe and ethical use of AI, not because he wants it, but because he knows it’s coming whether we like it or not. Our only option is to shape AI on our terms, not those of our adversaries. America has to win the AI Race if we want to maintain our stability and security, and to do that, we need more energy.

AI demands dozens—if not hundreds—of new server farms, each requiring vast amounts of electricity. The problem is, America lacks the power plants to generate the required electricity, nor do we have a power grid capable of handling the added load. We must overcome these hurdles quickly to outpace China and other foreign competitors.

Outdated Power Grid

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Our power grid is ancient, slowly buckling under the stress of our modern machines. AAI’s energy demands could collapse it without a major upgrade. The last significant overhaul occurred under FDR nearly a century ago, when he connected rural America to electricity. Since then, we’ve patched the system piecemeal, but it’s still the same grid from the 1930s. Over 70 percent of the powerlines are 30 years old or older, and circuit breakers and other vital components are in similar condition. Most people wouldn't trust a dishwasher that was 30 years old, and yet much of our grid relies on technology from the era of VHS tapes.

Upgrading the grid would prevent cascading failures, rolling blackouts, and even EMP attacks. It would also enable new AI server farms while ensuring reliable power for all.

A Need for Energy

JONATHAN NACKSTRAND / Stringer | Getty Images

Earlier this month, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt appeared before Congress as part of an AI panel and claimed that by 2030, the U.S. will need to add 96 gigawatts to our national power production to meet AI-driven demand. While some experts question this figure, the message is clear: We must rapidly expand power production. But where will this energy come from?

As much as eco nuts would love to power the world with sunshine and rainbows, we need a much more reliable and significantly more efficient power source if we want to meet our electricity goals. Nuclear power—efficient, powerful, and clean—is the answer. It’s time to shed outdated fears of atomic energy and embrace the superior electricity source. Building and maintaining new nuclear plants, along with upgraded infrastructure, would create thousands of high-paying American jobs. Nuclear energy will fuel AI, boost the economy, and modernize America’s decaying infrastructure.

A Bold Step into the Future

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

This is President Trump’s chance to leave a historic mark on America, restoring our role as global leaders and innovators. Just as FDR’s power grid and plants made America the dominant force of the 20th century, Trump could upgrade our infrastructure to secure dominance in the 21st century. Visionary leadership must cut red tape and spark excitement in the industry. This is how Trump can make America great again.

POLL: Is K2-18b proof of alien LIFE in the cosmos?

Print Collector / Contributor | Getty Images

Are we alone in the universe?

It's no secret that Glenn keeps one eye on the cosmos, searching for any signs of ET. Late last week, a team of astronomers at the University of Cambridge made an exciting discovery that could change how we view the universe. The astronomers were monitoring a distant planet, K2-18b, when the James Webb Space Telescope detected dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide, two atmospheric gases believed only to be generated by living organisms. The planet, which is just over two and a half times larger than Earth, orbits within the "habitable zone" of its star, meaning the presence of liquid water on its surface is possible, further supporting the possibility that life exists on this distant world.

Unfortunately, humans won't be able to visit K2-18b to see for ourselves anytime soon, as the planet is about 124 light-years from Earth. This means that even if we had rockets that could travel at the speed of light, it would still take 124 years to reach the potentially verdant planet. Even if humans made the long trek to K2-18b, they would be faced with an even more intense challenge upon arrival: Gravity. Assuming K2-18b has a similar density to Earth, its increased size would also mean it would have increased gravity, two and a half times as much gravity, to be exact. This would make it very difficult, if not impossible, for humans to live or explore the surface without serious technological support. But who knows, give Elon Musk and SpaceX a few years, and we might be ready to seek out new life (and maybe even new civilizations).

But Glenn wants to know what you think. Could K2-18b harbor life on its distant surface? Could alien astronomers be peering back at us from across the cosmos? Would you be willing to boldly go where no man has gone before? Let us know in the poll below:

Could there be life on K2-18b?

Could there be an alien civilization thriving on K2-18b?

Will humans develop the technology to one day explore distant worlds?

Would you sign up for a trip to an alien world?

Is K2-18b just another cold rock in space?