BLOGMay 22, 2017

Sen. Mike Lee Explains Why a Portrait in the Capitol Rotunda Sends Chills Down His Spine

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) joined Glenn on radio Monday to talk about the news of the day and his new book, Written Out of History: The Forgotten Founders Who Fought Big Government.

"In this book, I outline the stories of a number of Americans --- who were neither rich nor white nor male, in some cases --- people who made a profound contribution to the early days of the American republic. But their narrative, their story didn't fit with our modern narrative of what happened at the American founding," Sen. Lee said.

The narrative taught in schools is, of course, that America was founded by rich, white slaveowners who did little to end the practice of slavery.

"You could go to George Washington University now and study history, and you don't to have take more than one semester of American history," Glenn said. "So there's a good chance that you go to George Washington University, and you're never taught about George Washington."

One person covered in the senator's book is Mum Bett, a slave in Massachusetts, who fought for and won her freedom in court.

"She made an early contribution to the abolition movement in America. The discussion of slavery was not just something that sort of bubbled up around or in the immediate lead-in to the Civil War. This was something that was actively debated and discussed at the time of the Revolution," Sen. Lee said.

With respect to George Washington, the senator shared a personal anecdote.

"One of the many paintings that hangs in the Capitol rotunda is one of George Washington surrendering his commission to the Continental Congress after winning the Revolutionary War. It sends chills down my spine every time I see it, every time I think about it, every time I talk about it," he shared.

Written Out of History: The Forgotten Founders Who Fought Big Government is available in bookstores everywhere.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: Welcome back to the program, Mike Lee, senator from Utah is with us. He's got a new book. A book that everybody should have on their shelf, especially if you are looking to teach your kids American history. This is written out of history by Mike Lee. These are all the heroes of the American Revolution that had been written out of history because it just didn't jive with what the story everybody wants to tell. Where do you want to start?

MIKE: You know, my interest in writing this book came about in part as a result of my work on my last book, called Our Last Constitution. I told some stories about. The formation of the republic. It came out about the same time as this certain Broadway play, a certain Broadway play that kind of lit a match with some very dry tinder.

GLENN: Hamilton. Have you seen it?

MIKE: Hamilton, exactly.

I haven't seen it. I know the soundtrack well. I've listened to it over and over again. I hope to see it at some point. But have not been able to get in so far.

That kindled something in the American people. It got them excited. It made them realize, "There is a lot to learn from our founding generation. And if we study our founding generation, we can discover some things about ourself."

GLENN: So what did you discover about us?

MIKE: What I discovered about us is that we didn't start out the way a lot of people assume we started out.

GLENN: Wait. Rich, white people that are just interested in slavery and business?

MIKE: That's the narrative. That's the narrative. Those were the only people. Everyone else in America was silent or silenced. Had nothing to say. No contribution to make to public discourse.

And in this book, I outline the stories of a number of Americans, who were neither rich nor white nor male, in some cases. People who made a profound contribution to the early days of the American republic.

But their narrative, their story didn't fit with our modern narrative of what happened at the American founding.

GLENN: Give me -- give me a couple of your favorite examples.

MIKE: Mum Bett. Mum Bett was a slave in early America in Massachusetts. She discovered that with the revolution and with the Massachusetts state constitution, as it came out, guaranteed individuals with certain rights, that all men -- and including women -- were protected by these rights. And she fought for and won her slavery in court, as a result of that.

She made an early contribution to the abolition movement in America. The -- the discussion of slavery was not just something that sort of bubbled up around or in the immediate lead-in to the Civil War. This was something that was actively debated and discussed at the time of the Revolution.

PAT: What year was this?

MIKE: This was in the late 1700s. So about the time we became our own country, but --

PAT: Wow.

MIKE: -- long before -- long before anything close to the Civil War happened. So as a result of that, she fought for and won her freedom. She had a very significant role in -- and an understanding in this country that we as individuals have certain rights given to us by God. But she was a black woman. She was a black woman who won her freedom. She didn't fit that narrative. She's been written out of history.

GLENN: When did you find -- was she ever prominent in history in America? Did we ever learn about her? Or had she always been written out?

MIKE: There was times when she was well-known. She was relatively known at the time of the revolution. And she continued to be well-known throughout the abolition effort. But overtime, her memory faded because people assumed, you know, we got a lot of rich white guys to talk about. That's all we're going to talk about.

GLENN: We also have this belief -- and it's so wrong, that women didn't -- they didn't have the vote. That's not exactly right. You had to own property. So if -- if you were a woman and your husband died and you had property, you got the vote. And it was more of a family kind of vote. It wasn't against a woman. It was about, who is the owner of property, correct?

MIKE: Yes.

GLENN: And a lot of women played a very important role in the American founding.

MIKE: Including Mercy Otis Warren, another American who was very prominent at the time of the revolution, but who we've written out. Who has been forgotten.

She was well educated. She was an author. She was constantly involved in public discourse. She had some grave concerns about what our federal government might become under the new Constitution.

She was good friends with John Adams, but it became a sort of love/hate relationship. They had this back-and-forth exchange of letters, over the course of many years, in which she would raise concerns about the new government. And these discussions became increasingly heated.

She ended up having a real voice in speaking out for freedom, speaking out about the fact that, you know, when government acts, it does so at the expense of individual liberty. We have to constrain government power. But that too conflicts with the modern narrative.

So what I'm trying to do in assembling these stories is remember some of the comments that I received in connection with my last book.

On Our Last Constitution, I've gone through and read the reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. Over and over and over again, some different themes developed. People would say, in that story -- these are great stories, but these are stories I've never heard. These are stories that are not discussed in civics class or in history class, even in AP or college-level history classes. Some of these stories have been left out.

So I've tried in this book, Written Out of History, to find more of those stories. More of the people who contributed to our founding.

GLENN: You could go to George Washington University now and study history, and you don't to have take more than one semester of American history. So there's a good chance that you go to George Washington University, and you're never taught about George Washington. I mean, we're leaving George Washington out of our history now.

MIKE: And my guess is, Glenn, if you did study George Washington, it might not be the more noble aspects of George Washington's life that would be first discovered.

GLENN: Yes.

PAT: Well, he was a rich, white slave owner.

MIKE: He was indeed that. He was indeed that. He was also many other things.

PAT: Yeah, he was a guy with white privilege. We didn't establish that, but that's for sure. Right? White privilege.

GLENN: Thank you, Pat. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

MIKE: And with respect to George Washington, one of my favorite things to show people on the capitol is the portrait -- one of the many paintings that hangs in the capitol rotunda is one of George Washington surrendering his commission to the Continental Congress after winning the Revolutionary War. It sends chills down my spine every time I see it, every time I think about it, every time I talk about it.

The fact that --

GLENN: You don't have to name him. But do you see anyone that is or could be the next George Washington?

MIKE: Oh, sure. Look, I see a lot of people who have liberty in their veins, who long for liberty, who yearn for it.

Anybody who yearns for liberty has the ability to be that person.

GLENN: Yeah.

MIKE: And all they have to do is speak about it. Do something about it. Talk about it. Push back against the narrative that says that anything we do that's important has to be through government. And anything we do through government that's important must be done through the federal government and never through states and localities. Push back against that narrative, and you will help restore the spirit of America's founding.

GLENN: You talk about George Mason -- you tell the story of George Mason as being kind of a forgotten founder. Tell the story that you have in the book.

MIKE: George Mason was a remarkable human being. He was a reluctant statesman. One who was a man of business. He just wanted to live his own life, without undue interference. He got involved in government. He ended up going to the constitutional convention. He ended up having some grave concerns with the Constitution, which he ultimately couldn't support, in part because he could see that the powers created by it would one day be abused. That's one of the things that we have to remember and one of the understandings we have to restore in this country.

We talk a lot in our US history courses in school about the Federalists, about the fact that those pushing the Constitution pointed out that there were all these protections in place. We don't talk as much about the anti-Federalists. Those who warned about how this government power could be abused. Those who understood that based on human nature, human beings are by nature redeemable, but flawed. And when they get power, they tend to abuse it, unless that power is kept in check.

George Mason was one who really understood that. And he fought hard to make sure that his fellow beings, his fellow patriots would be protected. And he didn't want them to be subjects --

GLENN: Wasn't he against the Constitution as written?

MIKE: Yeah.

GLENN: But didn't he help -- he helped write it, didn't he?

MIKE: Yes. Yes. One of his -- he was very concerned that unless it outlined more areas that were out of bounds for the government. Unless there were more protections, like those ultimately provided through the Bill of Rights, for example.

GLENN: And those weren't included at the beginning. In fact, every state voted against them.

MIKE: Those were not included at the beginning. But the Bill of Rights came about in part because of the efforts of men like George Mason, who said, "We've got to constrain this government. We've got to identify a number of things that government just cannot do. Otherwise, government will do those things because people will come forward and say, look, this is important. Therefore, it must be done. And it must be done in the most efficient manner possible."

GLENN: Mike, I was talking to somebody the other day, and I said, "With the exception of maybe a couple -- you know, like the vice president or removal of office of the president and the taxes and prohibition, pretty much everything else in there, past the first ten, I feel like are covered by the first ten. And it's just Congress going, no, dummy, what part didn't you understand? Black people are men who are born to be free. Women are -- you know, when we said men, we meant everybody. Men, women. We meant everybody." And so it's just a reiteration of the first ten because they're so well written.

MIKE: In many respects, yes. And that's one of the things I love about the first ten amendments is they're written so carefully, elegantly, and with this simplicity that allows them to stand the test of time.

GLENN: Right.

Except for the quartering of soldiers. I mean, that's the only one. That's the only one --

MIKE: Hey, you never know when that might come in handy.

GLENN: I know.

MIKE: The day may come, Glenn, when you might --

GLENN: What do you think of the idea that in some ways, they have quartered soldiers in our home through NSA being able to listen and snoop and -- and record everything that we have. Our government is in our home all the time.

MIKE: Yes. And in that respect, I've got several chapters in my book that would interest you about that issue. James Otis, for example, would have been very concerned about that.

He pushed back on the abuse of writs of assistance, which were these roving warrants, roving commissions that could be used by the king's officers, to kick down doors, to go after any contraband goods. Pursuant to efforts to enforce laws that were themselves put in place to protect British subjects in America from counterfeit non-British approved goods.

This is not really a quartering of troops problem that you're describing. It's a Fourth Amendment problem.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, in their papers, in their homes, from unreasonable intrusive searches and seizures is what protects us, both in letter and in spirit, from the NSA undertaking surveillance on the American people without a warrant.

GLENN: It amazes me, there was a new study out that shows that I think it's 49 percent of conservative millennials say that freedom of speech, freedom of religion, yada, yada, it's all absolute, except the government has to decide what speech is okay.

Forty-nine percent of conservatives think the government has to put limits on speech and press and everything else.

MIKE: Yeah. And if you understand freedom of speech that way, what you're really saying is, "There's no such thing as freedom of speech." That's what freedom of speech is there for, is to say, "Government must stay out."

GLENN: Mike Lee, he'll be joining me soon on the television program at 5 o'clock. TheBlaze. You don't want to miss that. Mike Lee, the author of the book Written Out of History: The Forgotten Fathers Who Fought Big Government. Written Out of History. Something that should be on everybody's bookshelf. If you're trying to teach history to your kids, it's a great read. Easy to read. And stories you've never heard before. Written Out of History by Mike Lee. It's available everywhere now.

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.

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.

Glenn's Show Prep

Sen. Mike Lee Explains Why a Portrait in the Capitol Rotunda Sends Chills Down His Spine

Has THIS Islamist organization BROKEN state laws for YEARS?!

Transcript

Glenn Beck WARNS Democrats Will Return with VENGEANCE in 2026 | Glenn TV | Ep 473

Trump Just SHATTERED the “Expert Class” - And the Deep State is in Total Panic

Transcript

EXPLAINED: Why the Warner-Netflix/Paramount Merger is DANGEROUS for All of Us

Transcript