BLOG

EXCLUSIVE: Jim DeMint Weighs in on Russia and His New Role at Convention of States

Jim DeMint has found the perfect home after being let go by the Heritage Foundation: The Convention of States Project. The former senator joined Glenn in his first post-Heritage interview and the two talked about the movement, as well as recent developments with Russia.

"So, Jim, the Convention of States, I think has new life to it. And a lot of it is coming from places like California, of all places. I think this is a real opportunity... Are you reaching out to the people on the left who are more Libertarian-minded?" Glenn asked on radio Tuesday.

DeMint confirmed the Convention of States (CoS) is beginning to see bi-partisan support.

"They understand that what we're trying to do is not tell people what to do or to tell California they have to do something and South Carolina does something else. What we're talking about is where things are decided," DeMint responded.

Supporting the Tenth Amendment and states' rights in order to limit the scope of federal power has been a key agenda item for CoS.

On the election front and Russian hacking controversy, DeMint laid the blame squarely at Obama's feet.

"Everyone in the Obama administration knew that this was a risk, and the fact that it was not addressed, that more was not done, is a gaping hole in our security," DeMint said.

Enjoy the complimentary clip, listen to the full segment or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: We were really excited when Jim DeMint went to the Heritage Foundation. Jim DeMint, if you remember right, in the day, was the only guy in the Senate. This was before we had Mike Lee. This was before we -- we had Rand Paul. This was before we had anybody. He was the lone guy back in -- in '06, '07, and '08. And then the wave election happened. And then he left. Went to the Heritage Foundation.

I hated losing him in the Senate. But he thought he could make some real difference at the Heritage Foundation. I think he did.

But they didn't like the direction. So he left. Where is he now, and what happened at the Heritage Foundation? His first interview since leaving begins right now.

(music)

GLENN: Let's go to Jim DeMint now. Jim DeMint, formerly the former senator from South Carolina, and then with the Heritage Foundation for I think four years or so and made a real impact there. Jim DeMint, welcome to the program. How are you, sir?

JIM: Glenn, I'm doing really well. And it's good to be back on your show.

GLENN: Thank you, sir. Jim, I know you're such a Southern gentleman, you're not going to want to, you know, say anything bad about anybody, and I'm not looking for the bad stuff. But can you tell us what happened at Heritage? Because there's been these stories that, you know, you were too conservative, that you were -- you were taking it too -- too conservative. I don't know what that means for the Heritage Foundation. But trying to take it too conservative. And they wanted to be more G.O.P.-centric.

JIM: Well, Glenn, frankly, I don't know. And the board just decided they wanted to do something different in the future. And, frankly, I feel like the Lord knows what he's doing. And where I am right now, realize that I'm in a place where I can make a much bigger difference. There are some great people at Heritage. But I'm ready to leave that chapter behind and get back to work on two fronts: I realize -- and I'm sure you see it from where you sit, that we can't just work in one area. It's not just enough to be a senator or elect a senator. We have to do a lot of things, if we're going to stop this out of control federal government. And the two things I need to work with conservatives on the Hill and try to equip them and support them. Because as you mentioned, when you started the show just a minute ago is, a lot of times, it's just one or two people working to try to do the right thing. And the system tries to take them apart.

But I've also realized that no matter what happens, no matter who we elect, Congress is never going to stop spending. That they're going to keep spending and creating debt, until we have some kind of crisis or meltdown. And our Founders knew that that was a possibility, that they gave us the fire alarm on the wall, to break the glass and pull the lever. And that's in Article V of the Constitution, where they've said the states could come together and propose amendments to the Constitution. In this case, we have to get the states to force the federal government to have physical restraint. To limited jurisdiction. And hopefully even to term limit members of Congress and maybe even the judiciary.

GLENN: Okay. So you're now going to the Convention of States. What role of Convention of States Project are you going to play there?

JIM: I'm what they call a senior adviser. I'll be working with Tom Coburn and a good team around the country to work with state legislators. Because the secret here is to get 34 states to pass essentially the same call to convention. This is not a constitutional convention. This is nothing about a free-for-all, to rewrite a Constitution. Article V is clear that states can propose amendments. And we want to propose particular amendments that will help force the federal government to not only balance its budget, but limit taxes. But also limit what it can do. Because the Tenth Amendment is clear, that whatever is not prescribed to the federal government in the Constitution, to be left to the states and the people. And the federal government has just run all over that.

And so I look at my fight -- I'm just fighting on two fronts. I'm not going to give up on helping conservatives. And we've started a new nonprofit to do that. But I'm working with the Convention of States, hoping that the states will call a convention to propose amendments, to limit the power and the spending of the federal government.

GLENN: So, Jim, the convention of the states, I think has new life to it. And a lot of it is coming from places like California, of all places. To where liberal are saying, you know, the government is out of control.

Yeah, because now your guy isn't in control. And California had a real movement to actually secede from the union.

I think this is a real opportunity, but it also could be used to exploit the -- the -- the framework of Article V.

Are you reaching out to the people on the left who are more Libertarian-minded, and are you concerned at all about a hijacking from the traditional left?

JIM: Glenn, that is one of the arguments that opponents of this use. But, frankly, it -- there is literally no chance that this -- you can have a chance that proposes some kind of crazy amendment, that in 38 states ratify. I feel much more comfortable in that second balance, than I do with what the courts could do in Washington, or even what Congress can do.

You mentioned something that's very insightful, actually. Because liberals, once they understand this concept, like it -- at least a lot of them do, because they understand that what we're trying to do is not tell people what to do or to tell California they have to do something and South Carolina does something else. What we're talking about is where things are decided.

And that's the difference here that -- the thing that creates disunity all over the country now is you've got so many things being decided in Washington about what we should do and how we should live our lives.

What we need to do is let states and local communities and people themselves make more of their decisions. As long as power keeps gravitating to Washington, the more I think this disunity we're going to have in America.

GLENN: Uh-huh. So let me take this now -- for the liberals, let me take this -- the conservatives. Do you think the conservatives fell asleep on Article V after Trump was elected, and has that changed?

JIM: No, I don't think so. Because I believe that most of what President Trump is trying to do are things that we agree with. But we see that ever since he was elected, that they have made this big deal of Russia. If Russia did anything, that's on Obama. I mean, Obama was supposed to be watching our country and our security systems and stuff like that. But I think what we've seen is despite the strong personality of Trump, he's put some good people in the agencies. They're still making it almost impossible for him to get anything done. And even with Republican majorities, we see in the budgets that they pass, we're going to keep spending and keep growing the government. Hopefully we can have some small successes. But I don't think the country is falling asleep. And I see this as a mission that the grassroots, the folks who are involved with the Tea Party, who are discouraged now, that people can see, this is a very focused idea. If we come together, this is maybe the only way we can restrain an out-of-control federal government.

GLENN: Jim, the -- who are you more disappointed with? Congress or the presidency? Because I have to tell you, Congress is, in my opinion, absolutely shameful. Shameful the way they're acting and spending. And, you know, the way they dealt with Obamacare is just -- is mind-boggling.

JIM: Yeah. I agree. No, I'm disappointed in Congress. I frankly think the Trump administration has done a lot of good things that they can do on their own. But they're in a boxed canyon. Everybody is shooting at them, including Republicans. You go to the White House, it's just surrounded by tents of media people who every day are looking for something they're doing wrong.

But one of the things I want to do on the Hill is work with conservatives to try to make him more effective. Because once you get there, whether you're in the House or the Senate, you're in your own little foxhole. Everybody is firing at you, every time you try to do something right. They try to throw you off a committee or get you back home with your constituents. We can do a lot better uniting and equipping conservatives once they're elected. And that's what I'm going to try to do, along with a small team, is to get them to work more closely together and try to protect those who are trying to do the right thing.

GLENN: More with Jim DeMint, who is now one of the senior advisers of the Convention of States Project, in just a minute.

[break]

GLENN: Former senator Jim DeMint is with us now. He's with the Convention of States. Just left the Heritage Foundation.

Senator, let me ask you a couple of questions. As a former senator, it came out last night in a very weird sort of way, the head of NewsMax left the White House at 5:30. Went over to PBS to do the news hour and said that President Trump is considering letting go of Bob Mueller and shutting down the independent counsel. Paul Ryan said today he has confidence in Mueller. The White House has since denied that that is happening. But has said that he's at least thinking about it.

What would that -- what would your reaction be if -- if you were a senator to something like that?

JIM: Well, I think that now that he's in place, it would probably be a mistake for the president to -- to terminate that. I think it was a mistake to appoint a special prosecutor because if you look at how they worked over the years, they almost have to find something. And if they can't find something that they were supposed to be looking at, they'll look at something else.

And I was hoping, when it happened, that maybe it would settle. The Russia thing. And Trump could go on to leading the country. But apparently they're not going to let that happen. I just think that now that he's in place, they're going to have to ride it out for a while, at least until there's some more testimony that proves that Trump has not only never been under investigation, but there has been no evidence since all this started, that Trump or his team had anything to do with it.

So more testimony like that, I think it would be good if members of Congress, particularly in the Senate, called on a resignation and the termination of a special prosecutor. But the president needs some help with this. So if Republicans are taking cover, it's going to be hard for him to do it himself.

GLENN: Jim, there is evidence that came out today -- we're going to share it in about five to eight minutes -- there is real disturbing evidence now that has nothing to do with Clinton or -- or Donald Trump, that the Russians did target our election in incomprehensible ways. And hit and actually broke into 37 of our states and got into the polling numbers in 37 states. Did not, luckily, affect the election. But that is the one thing that I got out of the testimony last week that I don't think the media or anybody else is paying attention to, because we're so busy playing politics.

JIM: Right.

GLENN: The Russians are not just coming, they're here.

JIM: Exactly, Glenn. We've known for years, Russia has the most sophisticated propaganda machine in the world. And has been interfering with elections for decades. It's one of the problems we've seen in Ukraine and former Soviet republics. They're constantly destabilizing governments and being engaged in elections. Everyone in the Obama administration knew that this was a risk, and the fact that it was not addressed, that more was not done is a gaping hole in our security. So it does concern me that our cyber security for our US government and our country is so weak. We've lost military secrets, and now they're in our election booths.

GLENN: We were talking about this earlier today. I think in any other time in American history, with what they did -- what I believe they did with WikiLeaks. You know, how they hacked into the DNC. And now we have stark evidence that they hacked into 37 states. I think at any other time in history, that would be akin to an act of war. Am I wrong or right, historically?

JIM: Well, it's definitely the new type of warfare. And we've lost billions of dollars in military secrets, not only to Russia, to China. We need to do a whole -- I know I worked on it some in the Senate, to build a better cyber security system. But the government is always ten years behind. And they've been hesitant to use a lot of the private sector sources, haven't figured out what to do there. But we need to catch up on that because lives are at stake on our intelligence system. And certainly if our whole Democratic system now is in jeopardy, then that's a huge problem.

GLENN: We're in Texas, Jim. I know 12 states now have called for the Convention of States. Thirty-two other states are considering it this year. I didn't think Texas was going to -- I mean, first I thought it was insane that Texas wouldn't pass it. Then I thought, oh, my gosh, the Texas legislature isn't going to do it. They eventually did. How are the other states shaping up? And did Texas make a difference in momentum?

JIM: Texas always makes a difference. That's one of the reasons we're working now with Texas on school choice. The more they -- they set a pattern for the country in a positive way. The opposite of what California opposite does. But it's the grassroots strength of the conservative movement in Texas that made the difference with your legislature there. Because there were a number of people trying to block it or hide from it. And that's what's happening around the country. The Convention of States Project is building a grassroots network of millions of people who have come to understand that this may be the only way to save our country. And so they're engaged in every state. And during the next legislative cycle, you're going to probably see ten or 20 states come play with a lot of grassroots support. So that's what I'm going to do all over the country. Call on people who have been trying to elect good people. Who have worked in the Tea Party. Who have been active, to come help us call this Article V convention of the states.

GLENN: And it's -- it is -- I really, truly believe this is the -- this is the fix. This is the Founders' fix. I wish we would have thought of it when the Tea Party was roaring because we could have really gotten things done. But we need people to be involved in the Convention of States. The things that you want to -- and believe you can get done if the convention is called.

JIM: It's in three categories. The thing that interests me most about how we're doing it, with the convention of state project, is we're not proposing the specific amendments. Because we found, like, for instance, if you're working on term limits, then everybody wants term limits, is going to disagree, whether it's six, eight, or 12 years.

GLENN: Yeah.

JIM: But what we're doing are three areas, that we will pass amendments restrict fiscally what the federal government can do to borrow money. Generally it will deal with a balanced budget. But also tax and spending restrictions. The other is jurisdiction and authorization. It will restrict what the federal government can do on the regulatory front, on what it can do, for instance, controlling education, health care. Give states much more latitude there.

The third subject is to be to put term limits on federal officials. Congressmen. Senators. And perhaps even federal judges.

GLENN: What do you say to people who say -- and I've got about 30 seconds for this answer. What do you say to people who say, you know, you put term limits on, then it's going to be the bureaucrats that are going to be running everything?

JIM: That's just not true. Every time you have a new wave of people coming in, they bring a lot of their own people. They will get something done. They know they have a short period of time, and they're not going to put up much of this, let's do it after the next election. So it's a way to clean the plate up and get people to think about the country rather than a political career.

GLENN: It is always an honor to talk to you, Jim. Thank you so much for your service of the country. Thanks for what you did at Heritage Foundation. And now, joining the Convention of States Project. If you want to get involved with the Convention of States, how do you do it, Jim, quickly?

JIM: Just go to the website. Just Google "Convention of States Project," and you'll be right there on our site. GLENN: Former senator Jim DeMint is with us now. He's with the Convention of States. Just left the Heritage Foundation.

Senator, let me ask you a couple of questions. As a former senator, it came out last night in a very weird sort of way, the head of NewsMax left the White House at 5:30. Went over to PBS to do the news hour and said that President Trump is considering letting go of Bob Mueller and shutting down the independent counsel. Paul Ryan said today he has confidence in Mueller. The White House has since denied that that is happening. But has said that he's at least thinking about it.

What would that -- what would your reaction be if -- if you were a senator to something like that?

JIM: Well, I think that now that he's in place, it would probably be a mistake for the president to -- to terminate that. I think it was a mistake to appoint a special prosecutor because if you look at how they worked over the years, they almost have to find something. And if they can't find something that they were supposed to be looking at, they'll look at something else.

And I was hoping, when it happened, that maybe it would settle. The Russia thing. And Trump could go on to leading the country. But apparently they're not going to let that happen. I just think that now that he's in place, they're going to have to ride it out for a while, at least until there's some more testimony that proves that Trump has not only never been under investigation, but there has been no evidence since all this started, that Trump or his team had anything to do with it.

So more testimony like that, I think it would be good if members of Congress, particularly in the Senate, called on a resignation and the termination of a special prosecutor. But the president needs some help with this. So if Republicans are taking cover, it's going to be hard for him to do it himself.

GLENN: Jim, there is evidence that came out today -- we're going to share it in about five to eight minutes -- there is real disturbing evidence now that has nothing to do with Clinton or -- or Donald Trump, that the Russians did target our election in incomprehensible ways. And hit and actually broke into 37 of our states and got into the polling numbers in 37 states. Did not, luckily, affect the election. But that is the one thing that I got out of the testimony last week that I don't think the media or anybody else is paying attention to, because we're so busy playing politics.

JIM: Right.

GLENN: The Russians are not just coming, they're here.

JIM: Exactly, Glenn. We've known for years, Russia has the most sophisticated propaganda machine in the world. And has been interfering with elections for decades. It's one of the problems we've seen in Ukraine and former Soviet republics. They're constantly destabilizing governments and being engaged in elections. Everyone in the Obama administration knew that this was a risk, and the fact that it was not addressed, that more was not done is a gaping hole in our security. So it does concern me that our cyber security for our US government and our country is so weak. We've lost military secrets, and now they're in our election booths.

GLENN: We were talking about this earlier today. I think in any other time in American history, with what they did -- what I believe they did with WikiLeaks. You know, how they hacked into the DNC. And now we have stark evidence that they hacked into 37 states. I think at any other time in history, that would be akin to an act of war. Am I wrong or right, historically?

JIM: Well, it's definitely the new type of warfare. And we've lost billions of dollars in military secrets, not only to Russia, to China. We need to do a whole -- I know I worked on it some in the Senate, to build a better cyber security system. But the government is always ten years behind. And they've been hesitant to use a lot of the private sector sources, haven't figured out what to do there. But we need to catch up on that because lives are at stake on our intelligence system. And certainly if our whole Democratic system now is in jeopardy, then that's a huge problem.

GLENN: We're in Texas, Jim. I know 12 states now have called for the Convention of States. Thirty-two other states are considering it this year. I didn't think Texas was going to -- I mean, first I thought it was insane that Texas wouldn't pass it. Then I thought, oh, my gosh, the Texas legislature isn't going to do it. They eventually did. How are the other states shaping up? And did Texas make a difference in momentum?

JIM: Texas always makes a difference. That's one of the reasons we're working now with Texas on school choice. The more they -- they set a pattern for the country in a positive way. The opposite of what California opposite does. But it's the grassroots strength of the conservative movement in Texas that made the difference with your legislature there. Because there were a number of people trying to block it or hide from it. And that's what's happening around the country. The Convention of States Project is building a grassroots network of millions of people who have come to understand that this may be the only way to save our country. And so they're engaged in every state. And during the next legislative cycle, you're going to probably see ten or 20 states come play with a lot of grassroots support. So that's what I'm going to do all over the country. Call on people who have been trying to elect good people. Who have worked in the Tea Party. Who have been active, to come help us call this Article V convention of the states.

GLENN: And it's -- it is -- I really, truly believe this is the -- this is the fix. This is the Founders' fix. I wish we would have thought of it when the Tea Party was roaring because we could have really gotten things done. But we need people to be involved in the Convention of States. The things that you want to -- and believe you can get done if the convention is called.

JIM: It's in three categories. The thing that interests me most about how we're doing it, with the convention of state project, is we're not proposing the specific amendments. Because we found, like, for instance, if you're working on term limits, then everybody wants term limits, is going to disagree, whether it's six, eight, or 12 years.

GLENN: Yeah.

JIM: But what we're doing are three areas, that we will pass amendments restrict fiscally what the federal government can do to borrow money. Generally it will deal with a balanced budget. But also tax and spending restrictions. The other is jurisdiction and authorization. It will restrict what the federal government can do on the regulatory front, on what it can do, for instance, controlling education, health care. Give states much more latitude there.

The third subject is to be to put term limits on federal officials. Congressmen. Senators. And perhaps even federal judges.

GLENN: What do you say to people who say -- and I've got about 30 seconds for this answer. What do you say to people who say, you know, you put term limits on, then it's going to be the bureaucrats that are going to be running everything?

JIM: That's just not true. Every time you have a new wave of people coming in, they bring a lot of their own people. They will get something done. They know they have a short period of time, and they're not going to put up much of this, let's do it after the next election. So it's a way to clean the plate up and get people to think about the country rather than a political career.

GLENN: It is always an honor to talk to you, Jim. Thank you so much for your service of the country. Thanks for what you did at Heritage Foundation. And now, joining the Convention of States Project. If you want to get involved with the Convention of States, how do you do it, Jim, quickly?

JIM: Just go to the website. Just Google "Convention of States Project," and you'll be right there on our site.

RADIO

Magna Carta under threat: UK's dangerous shift AWAY from freedom

The United Kingdom is now arresting over 12,000 people a year for "speech crimes" and is debating doing away with trial by jury for many crimes. Glenn Beck warns that if this can be done in the birthplace of these principles (under the Magna Carta), it can happen to the entire West if we don't END this insanity now!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me just start here. Because there is -- there is another story that is out in our newsletter today, that talks about how people of college age are freaking out, after Charlie Kirk's death. They don't want anything controversial on campus.

I mean, that's the reason why colleges and universities had protection of free speech, in the first place.

Was to be controversial. To be able to say the things that nobody wants you to say.

And it's really important.

But let me -- let me first remind people of what the Magna Carta is.

It's 1215? The Magna Carta is Latin for the great chart.

Had it not some magnanimous gift from the king.

The king. King John from England. He was -- he was losing a battle. France was just cleaning England's clock.

The baryons and all the lords and the ladies. Said, you know, this king sucks a lot. This king sucks a lot.

And we've got to stop him. Because he's destroying everything.

And he -- he had lost most of the land, to France. And then he started just imposing huge taxes on everybody. And -- and because nobody in the lower class had any -- this all happened with the lords and the ladies. And they were like, enough. Enough. Enough.

You're abusing your royal power.

Well, nobody had ever said that before. That just didn't happen. He had a divine right. He's the king. But in England, they said, no.

You still have to be moral. You have certain laws, and you can't just do these things.

And so what they did, is they got him to agree to the great charter, the Magna Carta. And it placed the king under the law. Before that, the king was the law. So now the king is under the law: It created the principle of due process. Never before did we have that.

You can't be imprisoned, punishment or stripped of property, except by the lawful judgment of your peers or the law of the land. So this creates jury trials. It creates habeas corpus. Protection from arbitrary arrests. All of these things. The government now has to justify itself in a court of law.

That's revolutionary, okay? It also limited taxation without consent. Which we interpreted later as no taxation without representation. Rule of law. Jury trials. Rights of the accused.

Limits on government. Protection of property. Accountability of leaders. All of that comes from the Magna Carta. Okay?

That gave birth, 500 years later, to us and our ideas. Okay?

Now, England, the birthplace of the Magna Carta is now thinking about getting rid of jury trials and arresting more than 12,000 people every year for what they call speech crimes. 12,000!
Now, I want you to think about that.

In Russia, in the same year this stat came out. The latest year that we have, 2023. In 2023, Russia arrested 4,000 people for speech crimes against the Russian military for Ukraine.

4,000 in Russia, 12,000 in England.

The number I saw. We don't have all the numbers. But the number I saw that were arrested for speech crimes in China was 120.

Okay?

Not for violence. Not for theft.

Not for treason.

12,000 in England for words.

Okay. Now, well, that's going on, now the Prime Minister is floating the idea of eliminating, if not most, many jury trials.

It will only be for murder, manslaughter, oh, and something else like that.

Okay?

So, in other words, if you're like, I believe you should be able to read the Bible in your own language, in your own home, Tisdale.

You don't get any hope. You don't get a jury trial. You get the court. You get the king trying you, not a jury of your peers.

This goes against the Magna Carta, the lawful judgment of your peers. Okay?

That's the safeguard that stands between you and an out-of-control state. This is the first and ancient firewall against tyranny. It is what makes England, England.

And if England of all places, tosses that aside, what does the word "free" mean anymore?

Okay? What does it mean? You can't speak, and then you have no jury -- trial of your peers. Wait. What? First of all, understand this: A nation that polices speech is not free!

A nation that dissolves juries is not just unfree, it's prepping for something worse!

Because the entire architecture of the western world, the liberty that we have, rests on a single radical belief.

The truth does not need a king. The truth shall set you free. Who? Is it not what. Who is the truth? Okay.

No king, but Christ. Because Christ is the truth. That's the Western world!

A person's conscience does not need a permit. Speech does not need a bureaucrat's approval before it leaves your lips! That's the West.

That's what built the world. What took it from darkness, to today.

Freedom is not granted we the state. Freedom preexists government.

Government's only legitimate job is to protect it!

Now, here's the dark little secret, that every single tyrant, and every politician knows today. If you control speech, you control thought. If you control thought, you control people.

If you control people, you don't ever have to worry about controlling the government because no one will ever challenge you again!

This is why it is so essential for any side to go, you can't talk to them.

Don't talk to them. Don't listen. Don't question.

You can't hear that. No. They can say whatever they want. But I have a right to refute it. That's why free speech has to be absolute. Not mostly free.

Not free unless it makes Billy over there cry and uncomfortable.

No. I'm sorry, Billy. You don't like it. Refute it.

Freedom that depends on somebody else's freedoms is not freedom!

Freedom that requires government approval is not freedom! Freedom that can be revoked because a bureaucrat doesn't like your tone is not freedom. Once speech becomes conditional, everything become conditional. Your rights, your property, your conscience, your place in society. Because you only live by permission! Never by principle!

We live by principles. Not people!

Who is actually free?

Who is actually free?

The England that once declared the king himself to be subject of law, or the England that now arrests a man because he's posted the wrong meme?

12,000 people!

Can't find one in 2023 that was arrested for that in America. Not one. The England that gave us John Locke, the philosopher of natural rights. Is that person free?

Or the England that now warns citizens that context doesn't matter, if their words cause someone, anyone, emotional harm.

Britain is about loss. But this is not just a British problem. This is the canary in the coal mine for the entire west.

Because these are the people that came up with it. When the mother country forgets its own legacy, jury trials and freedom of speech. When the random that once stared down monarchs now cowers before hashtags and activists and speech tribunals, than somewhere deep inside the Western soul, a light is flickering.

We must remember here, before that same darkness reaches our shores. Because it's already coming on to our beaches. It's already there. There is no such thing as partial liberty. Freedom of speech is the First Amendment for a reason!

It is the guardrail for every other right!

If you lose the First Amendment, you've lost freedom. And if you lose the Second Amendment, you've lost the ability to defend that first freedom.
It's number one for a reason!

You must be allowed to speak, to gather.

To have a free press!

To question your government. You must have those abilities. You must be able to say, especially about government, the worst things about your government! And question them.

And demand answers. To petition them.

That's all in the First Amendment.

It is the pressure valve that prevents so it's from blowing itself up.

The more we contain speech. The more we say, don't talk about. Don't talk about. Can't say that. Can't say that.

The more the pressure builds up. The more likely we blow ourselves up.

It's the mechanism where the powerless can speak to the powerful.

It's the shield that protects dissenters. Unpopular thinkers, prophets, reformers. And, yes, even the offensive.

Look, there are, quote, unquote, historians now who are getting all kinds of bullcrap about Hitler and everything else.

None of that is true. I don't want to silence them. They have a right to say it.

I have a right to say you're wrong! And show you the evidence of what makes them wrong.

That's the way it works. England is about to forget all of this!

They are truly the birthplace of these kinds of ideas, and those ideas led to our idea of real freedom!

No king!

If they forget this, we cannot -- we believe so -- because there won't be anywhere else in the world to go.

The lesson of history, the lesson that history whispers quietly at first. Then louder. And then finally. And we're about at this point, with a scream!

Is that when a state describes which words are allowed, it will eventually decide which thoughts are allowed. Which beliefs are allowed.

Which citizens are allowed.

In the end, in the end, the prisons don't need bars.

The cell will be in your own mind!

Do you understand that, America?
Do your kids understand that?

We don't even know what it means to be free. I thought this weekend, a lot about as opposed to truth shall set you free.

Thought about a lot. In fact, maybe I'll talk to you about it in a minute or so.

Because I don't think people understand what it means to be free.

We think everybody in the world is free. They're not!

And you're about to really find that out!

You want to be tree, or do you want to be safe? Because you cannot have both.

When safety is defined by those who fear your liberty. It's over!

We used to be people who would explore. We were people that crossed the oceans when everyone said we couldn't. We -- we went to space when everyone said, it's impossible. We crossed mountains that no one had ever crossed. We forged -- we forged a nation of really different people. And lived side by side for so long, yes. With bloodshed from time to time. But generally, in ways that nobody had ever done before. Freedom. Freedom is grand. But it's really dangerous. It's messy. Freedom offends you, a lot. Get over it.

Real freedom, real freedom is the only thing that has ever allowed the human spirit to rise above a king. Above a tyrant. Above the mob. Above the bureaucrats. Real freedom that belongs to you. Given to you by God. And that's what they're about to lose in England. The Magna Carta. The simple idea. No man. Not even a king. No man is above the law. Do we have that here?

Do you think no man is above the law? Or do you think there is a class up in the political range, somewhere, that if you're on the right side, don't worry about jail. That's what the Magna Carta tried to stop. That's what we have forgotten even, and they're about to get rid of it entirely.

The modern west is drifting into far more -- far more sinister creed. No man is above offense.

And that is how civilizations fall.

BLOG

Puttin' the Christ Back in Christmas (Lyric Video)

This song was produced by Glenn Beck using his AI tools.

Lyrics:

Verse 1:

Well, the season's here, and the lights are bright, but they tell me, I can't say Merry Christmas tonight.

They want RamaHanuKwanzMas all in one breath.

Buddy, that phrase is gonna bore me to death.

So, grab some Coco. Let's reclaim this place.

It's the birthday of the baby.

Yeah, remember who that is.

Chorus:

So, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

No microaggression here.

My friend, if words can break you, I'll bless your heart, because that's a battle we can't defend.

Yeah, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

Let common sense unfold. Out with the new, in with the old.

Merry Christmas. Let the truth be told.

Verse 2:

And hey baby, it's cold outside, relax.

It's flirting, not a federal crime.

We used to laugh and dance in snow.

Now they fact-check mistletoe.

They say intent don't matter.

Well, sure it does, ask Santa.

He's judging hearts, not Twitter buzz.

Chorus:

So I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

You can keep your outrage warm.

If every jingle is problematic, buddy, that's the real snowstorm.

Yeah, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

Not buying what they sold.

Out with the new, in with the old.

Merry Christmas. Let the truth be told.

Bridge:

They say that greeting is oppressive.

Well, bless my soul.

Who knew if Merry Christmas makes you tremble, the problem ain't the phrase, it's you.

I'll question with boldness. I'll reason with grace, but don't rewrite my holiday to make it a safe space.

So, here's to the manger.

The star in the sky.

The angels who sang up that holy night.

Here's to the story that still brings hope

Even when cultures lost the remote.

Raise your voice, let the bells all ring.

This season was always about one king.

Chorus:

Yeah, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

Let the real good news unfold.

The world may chase the wrapping paper, but the manger holds the gold.

So, I put the Christ back in Christmas from the young to the gray and old.

Out with the new, in with the old.

Merry Christmas. Let the truth be told.

RADIO

Is Europe’s Future ALREADY Decided... Or is a Civil War Coming?

Europe’s future isn’t being shaped by politics or ideology... it’s being shaped by math. Glenn Beck and UK insider Peter McIlvenna break down the explosive demographic shift transforming Britain and Europe, where Muslim population growth has surged 111% in 15 years while native birthrates continue to collapse. The result is a predictable, unstoppable replacement of cultural and political power, created not by conquest but by birthrates and the West’s loss of confidence in its own heritage. And the same demographic pattern is now emerging in the United States.

RADIO

Sharia Courts & Demographic Takeover - America's Growing Problem with Political Islam

Political Islam is expanding into the West through demographic pressure, parallel legal systems, exclusive community structures, and a belief that Western nations are too naïve to stop it — and Glenn Beck breaks down the evidence. From Marco Rubio’s warning that Islamic political movements openly seek dominance over the United States, to a Texas developer boasting about “manipulating kafirs,” to archived footage of imams defending Sharia punishments on American soil, the signs are no longer subtle. Many Muslims reject political Islam and flee from these systems — but by ignoring what is happening in our own backyard, America risks repeating Europe’s collapse. The question isn’t whether Political Islam exists; it’s whether we’re willing to confront what it demands.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me start first. Interview yesterday with Sean Hannity. Here's Rubio, talking about the dangers of radicalized Islam.

VOICE: Ultimately, armed radical Islamic movements in the world, identify the West at large, but the United States in particular, as the greatest evil on earth. And every chance they have -- the notion that somehow radical Islam would be comfortable with simple controls and progress in Iraq and Syria is not born out by history.

Radical Islam has shown that their desire is not simply to occupy one part of the world and be happy with their own little caliphate. They want to expand. It's revolutionary in its nature. It seeks to expand and control more territories and more people. And radical Islam has designs openly on the West, on the United States, on Europe. We've seen that for the rest there as well, and they are prepared to conduct acts of terrorism. In the case of Iran, nation state actions, assassinations, murders, you name it.

Whatever it takes for them to gain their influence, and ultimately, their domination in different cultures and societies.

That's a clear and eminent threat to the world and to the broader west, especially to the United States who they identify as the chief source of evil on the planet. Okay?

The reason why they hate the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the leadership of the UAE and Bahrain, is because they've allowed the United States to partner with them. That's why they hate them. They consider them infidels for it. They hate Israel.

But they also hate America. And they hate anyone in the world, that we have influence, they seek to attack, including here in the homeland.

If you look at the domestic terrorists, the attacks that have happened here domestically, the overwhelming majority of them have been inspired by radical Islamic viewpoints. That includes the shooting in the Pulse Night Club in Orlando, Florida. That includes the Saudi pilot in Pensacola, my home state. Two attacks.

GLENN: Okay.

So I -- I would like to propose we stop calling it radical Islam. Because it's not radical Islam. It's political Islam. There is religious Islam, and I know a lot of religious Muslims that are good people. Okay? I don't put them in the same category because I don't want Sharia law.

That's political Islam. It's not radical. It's what happens all over the world.

It's not radical, it's political.

You remember, if you're my age. When the wall came down. And we finally got to converse with Russians.

And we always thought -- me growing up. I always thought the Russians.

It's Vladimir. Vladimir. Look, he's spying.

Natasha. He's spying.

Okay. That's what we thought when we were kids.

That's not who the Russians were. The Russians were good people. They were decent people.

They wanted the same kind of things we wanted. We don't agree on everything.

They want to be left alone. Raise their kids. Have a chance at some success and retirement.

Just leave me alone.

Most of us are like that. What happens is, our politicians get in the way. The politicians. The political systems are the ones that are the problem. We don't call it radicalized communism.
It's communism. Okay? It's a political philosophy.
This is a political philosophy.

Political Islam -- it's not radical.

It's just a political philosophy, and that political philosophy, just like communism, wants to dominate the world. Unlike communism, political Islam is so incredibly arrogant. It's inevitable to them. Why? Birthrates.

That's why! Birthrates. And they think we're stupid. And, you know what, so do I! I think we're stupid too. Come on, man. Right? Are we not stupid? We look over at Europe. Are the grand Europeans, that colonized the whole world and are abusing everyone, because they're so sophisticated and so powerful, and everything else. Really are they?

Because look at how dumb they are being right now with their own countries in Europe. They're committing suicide. And so are we.

Now, there's this development that is happening in Texas. Let me -- let me give you an interview, a piece of an interview done by a Muslim developer, of Muslim communities, and -- and how -- and how it actually works.

Listen to these 35 seconds of this interview.

VOICE: The way -- like, you can't make it exclusive, like non-Muslims are not allowed. What we're doing, there's something called a secession fee. I don't know what it's called in Dubai. Like your maintenance fee -- the service fee, to cut the grass, to remove the snow, and whatnot. So that service fee will put that 75 percent of the service fee you're paying, close to (another language).

VOICE: Automatically, if you are a practicing Christian, I would advise you, why help the Muslims? You know. They do their own thing.

Right? So this is the way we're going to put the costs, and our attorney already put it in there.

GLENN: This is the way they manipulate the kafirs. The kafirs are you. The non-Muslim people. The infidels.

And they -- they are manipulating. Because, ha, ha, ha. And why would you do that? That's how they make it an exclusive Muslim community. Okay. And what do you get in those Muslim communities? I want to take you back to 2015.
I had been in Irving, Texas. My studios are in Irving, Texas. And I had been there for maybe three years. And it is the most diverse ZIP code in all of America. Which is a great thing. Except, it's also becoming very, very Islamic.

And that is totally fine, as long as we're not talking political Islam.

Unfortunately, we are. And the religion teaches that you can lie, to an infidel. You can lie if it helps Islam.

Okay.

So I had a couple of imams from the Dallas area, come in, from -- from, you know, where all of this is happening. And I just -- I sat them down. And we just had a great conversation.

I want you to listen to this, what finally came out of the mouth of one of the imams. Listen to this.

VOICE: I'm here. I'm sorry to say, back to the first point. I'm here to discuss an issue with the Islamic Tribunal.

So please, don't -- allow us to have a situation. Maybe, we are ready for any discussion.

VOICE: No. I know that.

VOICE: We are ready for any point to lead the discussion. But the main point here, we are -- the reason we are here to discuss this issue. What kind of cases, Islam tribunal have.

And we start with the Sharia.

And why the people are afraid from Sharia.

I'm sorry to say, at one point related to this.

It's not just in Sharia law. Not just in Islamic law. It's everywhere.

Who said that just in Islamic law?

That's even Sharia, in Jewish Sharia, in Christian Sharia. In America here, we cut -- we -- we -- we cut it for some reason. So I'm asking you an easy question.

If anyone kill another, he should have got killed by a law, by Islamic law, by -- by -- by governor. By -- he should have got killed.

What is wrong with that?

If a thief, jump to go back house. Scare your wife. Scare your children. Scare your neighbor.

And they did that with our stores, this is the law. The law to cut his head.

Because if he feels my hands were cut because of that. He will think about this 100 times. He will never do it.

And if you do that one time, they will never do it again.

Look at how many millions of dollars Americans here or other states or other -- outside has been for the -- to keep, the criminal in -- in jail. A lot of millions of -- we can see that just -- that's it. Because he did something good in the whole community. And they scare the whole community.

Why not. Back please to the point. Islamic tribunal.

Yes. We never deal with anything of that. We don't have authority for that. We don't have power for that.


GLENN: But you're okay. You seem to be okay with that. If you had the power for that happen.

No. You don't --

JASON: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. We -- as imam said, we have system. We are very organized people.

GLENN: Right.

VOICE: Sorry, for this example. Somebody can -- might add. I should have killed him.

GLENN: Right.

VOICE: I had to take this case to the judge, and the judge have to -- to the governor. There's a system, a procedure, that I have to follow.

So it's not like this -- this guy gets killed. No, no. We have -- I -- I give you just an easy example for leader. This is after prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him. He sent one to Yemen. And he told him, before he leaves, he ask him, almost as a habit. What did you do if the people bring a thief for you?

He said, I will cut his hand. Okay. He said, you do that. Okay. He said, after -- after -- he said, okay. If one person came with me, without work, and I blew it. And I blew it. I will cut your head. Because he has no job. So he -- if you run from the sword or grab something from here, to eat. Nothing happened to you. So but if you have your job and enough income, and you took -- a bunch of children and you have house and you have car. And you -- or a thief from here or there. So this is the law. Not to please, the point with Sharia. I ask people. We are not here to do that at all.

It is not our authority. It's not our power. It's not our job. We have --

GLENN: You've got to stop. You've got to stop. Okay. This is amazing to me. Because you hear how passionate he is, about how logical that is. Okay? I mean, you just have to do it, it just makes sense to everybody, we just cut your hands off.

And the Prophet Muhammad, peace upon him, and he he's preached this forever. I mean, it just works. It just works.

Of course, we wouldn't want to do that. But it just works. I mean, let me tell you about it again. Really?

Really? You don't want that to happen. Because you're in the United States, but you're cool with it everywhere else. Everywhere else.

But here it's different!

But my religion, which requires me to say, peace upon him, after I mention the prophet Muhammad, my religion, which is extraordinarily well-defined.

It has these raise. In political Islam.

That must be done. Because the Koran requires it, in political Islam.

But we're not going -- yeah. We've got our own little laws going on now.

We have our courts.

Who we're never going to go that far. Wait. Wait. You believe in political Islam? Of course I do. But you're not going to do it?

Of course not. But the Koran commands you to do it?

Of course it does.

You follow every dictate in the Koran? Of course I do.

But not that one? Come on. Come on. Does anybody really believe that?

Now, that does not mean Muslims believe that. Many do. Many do not. The ones who do not are the ones who have lived under it, and have escaped here. And want a different kind of Islam.

And by just turning a blind eye to this, because they know how it happens. They saw it in their company. They don't want it happening here.

You know, we just take care of things like marriages. Oh, so when a guy says, I divorce you. I divorce you. I divorce you. You're divorced, and she loses everything. Oh, you mean the kind, if she wants to testify against her husband on adultery, she has to have two witnesses, plus her, because her voice and one other person as a witness does not equal him, because she's not equal to a man. Oh. Okay. All right.

But you have that one. And that's okay. No. It's not okay. It's not okay.

It shouldn't be okay in any western country, period. Should not be okay.

Unfortunately, we're all turning a blind eye to it.