BLOG

Did Reagan's Assassination Attempt Thwart an Invasion of Poland and Nuclear War?

Paul Kengor, political science professor and author of the new book A Pope and a President: John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and the Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century, joined Glenn on radio for a fascinating discussion about the bond between Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II. Both men survived assassination attempts in an age when the Soviet Union met its end. Kengor revealed incredible details about the lives of these two great leaders and how divine intervention may have prevented a geopolitical disaster.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: Paul Kengor, professor at Grove City College, author of numerous books. He has a new one out about Ronald Reagan, The Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century. I don't want to tell you the name of the book because it will spoil the surprise. I would have thought that the best friend -- that someone Ronald Reagan would have said was my best friend would be Nancy. That's not what Paul found. Paul, welcome to the program.

PAUL: Hey, Glenn, thanks so much.

GLENN: So how did you find this about Ronald Reagan? Where did you find this? And -- and were you shocked by it? Not shocked, but just shocked that you didn't know it.

PAUL: Yeah, I'd say both, really. And, in fact, Nancy Reagan -- and here's the giveaway, said that John Paul II was her husband's closest friend, which is an amazing thing to say. So you had Ronald Reagan referring to John Paul II as his best friend, and then Nancy said that John Paul II was her husband's closest friend.

GLENN: Isn't that amazing? I've never heard that. Never known that.

PAUL: That's right.

GLENN: That -- in many ways, that completely changes my view in a positive way of Ronald Reagan and who he was. To be John Paul's closest and best friend is remarkable.

PAUL: It is. And I think, look, to be sure, I think there's probably a little bit of a kind of genial overstatement, right? On the part of Reagan in saying that. But the first time that I heard it, it was about ten years ago. And somebody from the Polish Solidarity Movement told me about him and three other members of the Polish Solidarity Movement.

They were visiting with Reagan. This would have been the spring of 1989. And Reagan was no longer president. He was at his Century City office. They were about to hold these historic elections in Poland that would really -- I mean, that's what really took down the Communist bloc, those elections in Poland, even before the Berlin wall fell.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

PAUL: And he said, you won't believe this conversation. We're talking to Reagan. The old campaigner who won 49 out of 50 states. And we asked him for some campaign advice. And he looked at us and he said, "Yeah, listen to your conscience because that's where the Holy Spirit speaks to you." What? What was that?

And they gave him a sort of puzzled look. And then he turned, and he gestured to a picture on his office wall of Pope John Paul II. And he said, "He's my best friend." Said, "Yes, you know I'm Protestant. He's obviously Catholic. "But he's my best friend." And when I started asking people about this, including Nancy Reagan, who was great. Every time I had a question for Nancy, I usually sent it by email or phone call, and she would respond to all of these. She was wonderful because she loved John Paul II herself.

She said that John Paul II was her favorite leader among everybody that Ronnie met with. And I think, Glenn, what they both mean by that is it's not like the two were calling each other up and talking about the ball game or going fishing.

GLENN: Sure. Sure.

PAUL: Or -- but I think what Reagan meant was, in terms of this kind of historical and spiritual -- he and John Paul II both thought this way, this historical, spiritual struggle to take down and defeat this evil empire, atheistic Soviet communism, Reagan felt that there was no better friend or no closer friend that he had in that endeavor than Pope John Paul II.

GLENN: We're talking to Dr. Paul Kengor. A professor and a great author. Written several books. One of them is -- that he did with Mercury, Inc. The Communist, which was about Barack Obama's mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. Great researcher on history. His new book is A Pope and A President: John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and The Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century.

Paul, they had this -- they had this connection of not only bringing things down. But I think they also had -- and you talk about it in the book -- this connection because they both felt that they were men of destiny, and they both had an assassination attempt against them. And they both survived, which I think hardened that man of destiny, we're on God's side kind of feeling.

PAUL: Yeah, that's exactly right. People forget this now. Everybody remembers that they were both shot. But, I mean, they were shot only six weeks apart.

GLENN: I did not remember that.

PAUL: It was March 30th, 1981, that Reagan was shot by John Hinckley. And then John Paul II was shot on May 13th, 1981. And immediately after Reagan was shot, the pope sent his prayers to Reagan, you know, wishing him well for a speedy recovery. And then Reagan, right after John Paul II was shot, immediately tried to call the Vatican. He called Cardinal Cook, Cardinal Krol in New York and Philadelphia. Sent a letter off to the pope saying that he was horrified by this, telling him that he was praying for him. Had a personal letter delivered to him by Congressman Peter Rodino, a Democrat from New Jersey. Had it taken all the way to Rome. And, I mean, they -- they already had wanted to meet with each other, Glenn, at least since early 1981 when Reagan was president.

And actually for Reagan, he wanted to meet with John Paul II from the moment that he saw footage of the pope going to his homeland in June 1979. Reagan said we got to get elected, and we got to reach out to him and the Vatican and make him an ally. So now with the two of them being shot -- and people didn't know this then either. They both very nearly bled to death.

GLENN: Right.

PAUL: They should have died. The pope needed 6 pints transfused of blood. Reagan needed eight. They both should have bled to death on their respective ways to the hospital. And then when they finally got together for the first time at the Vatican in June 19832, they met for about an hour alone, and they confided to one another their mutual beliefs that they believed that God had spared their lives for a special purpose, to take down atheistic Soviet communism.

STU: Hmm. Talking to Paul Kengor. Paul, this is I think new. I've never heard this before. Reagan being shot may have prevented the Soviet Union from invading Poland. Is that true?

PAUL: Right. It's incredible. It's an incredible story. It was told to me by someone who was at the Berlin station at the time in the late '70s and early 1980s. And I first heard this about five years ago. And I was blown away by the -- by the possibility. I spent a summer at the Reagan Library, looking into this. And it pretty much checks out. And, I mean, look, here's what we know: Between about November 1980 and the time that the Soviets declared -- helped declare martial law in Poland. This would have been December 1981.

Everybody was on pins and needles that the Soviet Union was going to invade Poland. I mean, we thought it was possible. We were hoping it wouldn't happen. Thought it was possible.

I was told by my source that -- he said, "You have no idea how close this was." He was -- he was decrypting information from the Soviets, throughout March 1989. And he said that he had information that they were literally ready to march into Poland on March 30th, 1981. On that exact -- that exact date March 30th, 1981. And you say, well, why is that so profound? Because of course Reagan was shot on March 30th, 1981.

And he -- he claims that because Reagan was shot and the US military went on full nuclear alert, highest level of DEFCON --

GLENN: Wow.

PAUL: Al Hague, you know, stomped into the White House. Said, "I'm in charge here." It's funny because everybody made fun of Hague for that. But the Soviets saw that, and they said, Al Hague, you know, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. He's no one to mess around with.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Wow.

PAUL: And they sent a DEFCON alert. And my source told me they were ready to go. And then when Reagan was shot, that's what called off the whole thing.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: So --

PAUL: And I think --

GLENN: Go ahead.

PAUL: I think it's accurate.

GLENN: Let me go back to the assassination on the pope.

You have in your book, New Details, that the KGB was involved in the pope's assassination.

PAUL: That's right. And we've long suspected that the Soviets were involved. John Paul II, Glenn, fought it as early as July 1981. In fact, when he got to the hospital, before he passed out, he said to the nurse, "How could they do it? How could they do it?" They meaning who? The one guy that lifted his gun? Mehmet Agca. And shot him.

I mean, he suspected right away that something was going on. He was telling people by late '81 -- his aides and confidants -- that he thought Moscow ordered it.

Reagan, Bill Casey at the CIA -- Casey called a very tight meeting of the National Foreign Intelligence Board on F Street in Washington, the very next morning, May 14. Wanted to know what Moscow was up to.

Bill Clark, the National Security Council. So they all suspected Moscow. Then when the word got out that the Bulgarians were involved. And you and Pat and Stu knowing your Cold War history, I mean, you know what the Bulgarians were like. They were stooges of the Soviet Union. Some people called Bulgaria the 16th Soviet Republic.

So when they heard that Bulgaria was involved and was behind Mehmet Agca, that immediately raised red flags, pun intended.

And, you know, they -- when they heard Bulgaria, they thought, "Okay. Moscow had to have been involved." But they kept all of this quiet until Casey ordered a truly super secret investigation at the CIA. And this is really kind of the blockbuster thing that I broke in this book.

And Casey -- this was a very tight investigation. I was told it was spearheaded by two young women, one of them in her late 20s, early 30s. Another in her early 40s. And they came to the conclusion that Moscow did, in fact, order the hit on the pope. And, specifically, it was through the Soviet GRU -- military intelligence -- they're the ones that organized it. But they did it with the go ahead and the approval of Yuri Andropov at the KGB.

GLENN: How much -- and I'm trying to keep of the timing here. I think it was after the assassination. How much did this play a role in Ronald Reagan having zero doubt or fear of labeling the Soviet Union an evil empire?

PAUL: Well, that's a good question. Reagan said that in March of '83.

GLENN: Right.

PAUL: And I think for Reagan, I mean, he had always known they were evil.

GLENN: But, I mean, if you knew they were evil -- but even the pope said, "How could they do this?"

PAUL: Right.

GLENN: To go and try to assassinate the pope. And a guy who sees a black and white world already, that just pushes you into a whole new level of evil.

PAUL: That's right. It really does. And, I mean, it doesn't surprise me. Knowing the way that -- the Soviet Union, they had been killing priests and bishops, Russian Orthodox Church rabbis, Roman Catholic priests, Protestant priests. They had been doing this since 1917. I mean, they killed hundreds, if not thousands. They were blowing up churches. Reagan knew that history. John Paul II knew that from being in Poland, where they harassed him since the 1950s. So really I think the answer to your question, Glenn, whereas a lot of the establishmentarians in the State Department and the CIA couldn't imagine that the Soviets would descend to that level, Reagan and Bill Casey and John Paul II and guys like Bill Clark, they had no problem at all imagining that the Soviets --

GLENN: So I want to go -- I have to take a break. But I want to come back and talk to you -- we're talking to Paul Kengor. His new book is called A Pope and A President. You get into something that I wasn't aware of, and maybe others are, that the pope was a big scholar or big fan -- I don't know how you would describe it -- of the secrets of Fatima, which I would like you to describe what those secrets of Fatima are. How the Vatican has the last parts of the secrets of Fatima. Did Reagan know any of that? And the role that those secrets played with Russia. Something that nobody would have wanted to know about the president at the time. The press would have had a field day with that.

But I'd like to hear about his connections with the secrets of Fatima and the pope coming up in just a second.

PAUL: Sure.

GLENN: The name of the book again is A Pope and A President. Fascinating and new material on Ronald Reagan and the pope. Sponsor this half-hour is My Patriot Supply. Yesterday, two US B-1 bombers departed Anderson Air Force Base in Guam. And they conducted a joint drill with South Korea and Japan. They flew over the North Korean peninsula. And they flew close to the 39th parallel. Why? The reason why is they are showing -- they showed off our stealth and our -- our B-1 bombers, saying to North Korea -- they flew close enough to the zone for them to know what they were, to say, "We can knock out all of your infrastructure."

PAT: Does the 39th parallel scare them as much as the 38th does?

GLENN: I'm sorry. The 38th parallel. Thank you. No, it doesn't. It doesn't.

PAT: Okay.

[break]

GLENN: We're talking to Dr. Paul Kengor. Great friend of the show and a great brilliant historian and writer. A Pope and A President is his new book. And before we move into the secrets of Fatima, Paul, I want to go back to what you said about the Soviets planning on invading Poland the day of Ronald Reagan's shooting. And if it wasn't that Ronald Reagan was shot that day, they were going to invade.

A couple of things on that: If they would have invaded, even without Al Hague, America would have immediately assumed it was the Soviet Union that was behind this assassination attempt, which would have been false. But we would have immediately assumed that that was not a coincidence.

PAUL: That's right.

GLENN: And even if it wasn't for the shooting, if they would have invaded, we may have gone to nuclear war over that.

PAUL: That's right. You know, that would have been absolutely and ultra devastating. And I think one of the reasons why they pulled back, Glenn, is because people might have linked it to the shooting.

GLENN: Sure.

PAUL: The shooting of Reagan. It turns out, of course, it was John Hinckley and he was trying to get the attention of Jodi Foster. He wasn't involved in any kind of international conspiracy whatsoever, but people would have definitely thought of that.

RADIO

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.

TV

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.

RADIO

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.

RADIO

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.