The French Vote Only Delayed the Coming Storm

The citizens of France elected centrist Emmanuel Macron in a landslide victory. In doing so, they voted to maintain the status quo and delayed the coming storm.

"A poll a couple of years ago found that 94 percent of the Czech Republic favor closing the borders completely --- but they're not. They're standing by the EU. What are the people doing? They're starting to become anti-immigrant," Glenn said Monday on radio.

RELATED: French Candidate Macron Claims Massive Hack as Emails Leaked

That's exactly what's happening around the world as elected officials pander to the politically correct and refuse to deliver what people want.

"I'm not a xenophobe. I'm not a racist. I'm not any of these things. But, guys, we have got to protect and know who is coming in," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: The French people had two choices: Delay the coming storm and maintain the status quo, which is probably what -- well, definitely what I would have voted for. Or I probably would have sat it out because I wouldn't have liked either candidate. Or given into the old world, you know, European nationalism.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: That was their choice. They didn't have a good option. And what they did was delay the inevitable. The status quo is what got them to this place in the first -- in the first place. And so they've just sealed their fate for another five years.

Now, here is what is really fascinating.

The Russians know this, I think, better than anybody else. A couple of hours before France entered their 48-hour media blackout, before the election, a massive leak of Macron's campaign and financial dirty laundry hit the internet. Now, why would you do it just before the media blackout? Because you would know that no media is going to be able to pick this up. So you'll only have the internet. And that could work to your advantage or disadvantage. But you'd only have the internet. The way to really affect it would be to release it a little bit earlier, perhaps. Perhaps.

STU: Well, they thought that the media would fight back against it.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: So they had no opposition against it because of the ban.

GLENN: Right. Perhaps. Perhaps.

STU: At least I think that was their theory.

GLENN: Perhaps it was their theory.

So 48 hours before France has a media blackout and nobody can say anything about the election or anything, and they release this. Now, it was a -- it was almost a carbon copy of the DNC Podesta hack. Investigators over in France have traced it back. Exactly the same group, Fancy Bear, who is a surrogate for the Russian military intelligence. Why wouldn't you hide that? Why would you use the same people, the same DNS -- why? Why would you do it so late in the game? Perhaps as Stu said, it is because they wouldn't have any opposition.

But I believe it's because they knew just like the rest of the pollsters, that there was a massive trouncing coming to Le Pen no matter what. And 11.4 million people are probably going to sit out. Can we lead to more people sitting out and being disenfranchised and just saying, "I don't care who wins anymore." Not to help Le Pen win, but to add to the discontent. Releasing the information pours gasoline on a bonfire. The French already feel like I've got to settle for the status quo. But now this guy's coming in -- he's facing a lame duck five-year presidency. The French and the global media going to have a field day now, exposing Macron and his party's dirty secrets.

You'll notice -- did you hear much fanfare that the Clinton Global Initiative closed on April 15th. Yeah, right? Right? Look that up.

STU: This would be the time that you would want to turn it on.

GLENN: Look that up. They had problems with donations, apparently. Apparently, all of the big countries --

JEFFY: I bet.

GLENN: -- like Saudi Arabia and Qatar and everybody else, they decided that they didn't want to do anymore goodwill. Or, they decided that there was no access to be purchased.

STU: It's not shutting down.

GLENN: No.

STU: They've -- I think what you're referring to is a report that they were downsizing.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: Uh-huh. Which you think would be the opposite.

GLENN: Would be the opposite. You're now out of the --

STU: Worry about the elections.

GLENN: Right. How can the Clinton Foundation make this move and nobody notice? Nobody in the press is even noticing about their donations from -- from these countries. That they're starting to dry up. Kind of interesting.

If she were president, I can guarantee you, WikiLeaks would be exposing all kinds of things. And I believe the Russians will eventually expose Trump for all kinds of things as well. Why? What do they want? They want public distrust and angst. That's what they want.

If Hillary Clinton would have won, I think they would have done the same thing here. The hacks would have kept coming because they're playing the long game. The leftists, the Islamists, the alt-right are playing that game as well. What do they want? An insurrection. They want to burn the whole thing down.

France just took a massive step toward burning the whole thing down. And one more thought on this. Next, the Czech Republic -- the Czech Republic is taking in refugees, and they oppose it. A poll a couple of years ago found that 94 percent of the Czech Republic favor closing the borders completely. They're not. They're standing by the EU. What are the people doing? They're starting to become anti-immigrant. Germany is also becoming hostile to the EU.

What is happening around the world? Is that people feel -- and see if you feel this way -- nobody is listening to me. Nobody is -- I'm not a xenophobe. I'm not a racist. I'm not any of these things. But, guys, we have got to protect and know who is coming in. I want the best and the brightest to come in. And I also will take those from war-torn countries, but I want to make sure, just like we would have done in Germany, I want to make sure they're not Nazis. I want to make sure they're not actual enemies of the United States. Nobody is listening to me about my job and my pay. And they're playing games with health care. And they've promised us one thing. And our health care costs as a family went through the roof. And I couldn't keep my doctor. I don't even know what's happening. I don't know if I'm going to be able to get insurance anymore.

And then the right does it. And the right was lying to us. The G.O.P. -- is somebody listening to me?

The answer is no, far too often -- far too oftentimes. Nobody is listening to me. I have no levers to pull. There's nothing I can do to get somebody to turn around and listen to me. I can't effect change. I can't even control my own life.

And I don't recognize this anymore. I don't feel like I belong even to polite society. It was one thing when I said, you know, I don't really recognize my country. And the left laughed. And now the left is saying, "I don't recognize my country." And the right is laughing. I'm not laughing. I didn't laugh then. I'm not laughing now. I don't recognize my country. But more importantly, I don't recognize the truth in anything.

I mean, they're now expecting me to believe that a man can say he's a woman. Just say it. I'm identifying as a woman. And I have to accept that? That a woman can identify as a black person. And blacks have to accept that?

I don't even recognize the truth anymore. And I know the rich are getting richer. And I've never been a guy who has had a problem with rich getting rich. The reason why I have a problem with rich getting rich now is because far too many times, it's because they have access to banks and loans and interest rates that I could never get my hands on. Or they have enough lobbyists to rig the game their way. That's not fair.

And they're telling me that I can't hold sacred the things I have always held sacred, things about God, things about my country. I'm told that that has no meaning. Or if it does have meaning, it's all bad meaning. That's how people are feeling.

And when you increase the stress of money, when you increase the stress of losing a job, not being able to make ends meet, people will listen to anybody who says, "I got a plan. It's those people over there. We just get rid of those people." Whoever they are -- left, right, in the middle -- it doesn't matter. Atheist, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, it doesn't matter. People will round people up when they're afraid.

Thank God the French rejected that kind of thinking this weekend. But unfortunately, as the press celebrates -- because the press doesn't get it -- it's not that they're intentionally -- they just don't get it. They don't hear you. They don't hear Europe. And because they don't hear, they celebrate. Ooh. Dodged a bullet there. Victory for us. France isn't as racist as America. No. No. You really don't get it.

Top THREE reasons we NEED the Panama Canal

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Is Trump seriously planning a military conquest of the Panama Canal?

In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, Donald Trump launched the Panama Canal into the national spotlight. The canal is one of the most important passages in the world, and its continued operation has been critical for both the U.S. military and economy since its construction.

Since America relinquished sovereignty of the canal, China has asserted its authority in the region. The Chinese Communist Party has been growing its influence in Panama and neighboring Latin American countries, convincing them to join their "Belt and Road Initiative," an effort to poise China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. Panama in particular is quickly becoming a Chinese puppet state. There are currently over 200,000 Chinese living in Panama, a Chinese company runs two of the canal's five major ports, and another Chinese company provides telecommunication service for a large portion of the canal. The government of Panama has even gone as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

It's clear that the Panama Canal is under serious threat of falling into Chinese hands, but President Trump doesn't intend to let them move in. Here are the top three reasons we need the Panama Canal:

1. The canal was built by the U.S.

Hulton Archive / Stringer | Getty Images

Without the United States, neither Panama nor the Panama Canal would exist. In 1903, after Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, President Teddy Roosevelt devised a controversial plan. He supported a Panamanian independence movement, which swiftly overthrew the local Colombian government. Meanwhile, he stationed a U.S. warship off the coast, preventing Colombia from sending military forces to retake Panama.

The moment Panama declared its independence, the U.S. recognized it and struck a deal with the new government: the U.S. would control the Canal Zone, while Panama would receive $10 million and an annual payment of $250,000. Construction of the canal took over a decade, cost $375 million, and resulted in thousands of American casualties, making it the most expensive U.S. construction project of its time.

Fast forward to 1964 when tensions between the U.S. and Panama over the canal erupted into a riot. President Lyndon B. Johnson decided it was time to transfer control of the canal to Panama. However, this proved more complicated than expected. In 1968, General Omar Torrijos, a known ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, seized control of Panama in a coup. Negotiations over the Canal stalled, as many Americans opposed giving such an important asset to a controversial figure. It wasn’t until 1999, following the deployment of 27,000 U.S. troops to facilitate yet another change in power, that the Canal was officially handed over to Panama.

2. The canal is vital for the U.S. economy

IVAN PISARENKO / Contributor | Getty Images

The U.S. relies heavily on the Panama Canal for commercial shipping. Between 13 and 14 thousand ships use the Panama Canal every year, which is roughly 40 percent of the global cargo ship traffic. Additionally, 72 percent of ships traversing the canal are either heading toward or leaving a U.S. port.

The time ships save using the Panama Canal reduces shipping costs massively. For example, when the canal first opened in 1922, it was estimated that a ship’s journey from Oregon to the UK, was shortened by 42 percent, reducing costs by 31 percent. If the Panama Canal was blocked or destroyed, or if American merchant vessels were denied passage, the effects on the U.S. economy would be tremendous.

3. The canal is a key defense point for the U.S. military

Historical / Contributor | Getty Images

Similarly, the canal is key to the U.S. military and national security. The canal shaves off approximately 8,000 miles of the voyage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. If U.S. Navy ships were denied access in a time of crisis, the extra time required to bypass the canal would be disastrous. Conversely, if the U.S. can keep the Panama Canal from being used by foreign aggressors, it would provide a massive advantage in future conflicts.

A foreign enemy could easily exploit the canal's current vulnerability. This was proven in 2021 when a cargo ship accidentally blocked the Suez Canal for a week, paralyzing global trade. Imagine China intentionally sabotaging the Panama Canal, considering it controls ports on both ends, owns a bridge that spans the Canal, provides its telecom services, and has the second-largest fleet of ships using the route.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.