RADIOFebruary 02, 2023

Amazon’s DEEP government partnerships could RUIN YOUR LIFE

Amy Sterner Nelson has experienced firsthand just how dangerous Amazon truly can be. She joined Glenn during his ‘Targets of Tyranny’ special last year to detail how the tech giant used civil asset forfeiture in an attempt to pressure Amy’s husband, Carl, to admit to felony accusations that he did not commit. But, since sharing her story with Glenn’s audience, Amazon’s dark practices seemingly have only gotten worse. She joins Glenn in-studio to detail the latest developments, explaining just how deep Amazon’s partnerships with our federal government run. But it’s not just Amazon, Amy explains. It’s ALL of Big Tech, and their partnerships, their corruption, and their scare tactics are something we should ALL be terrified of.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The founder of the Riveter. She is -- she is really -- I feel stupid sitting in the same room with her. She's a graduate of Emery University.

NYU, School of Law, practice corporate litigation with a focus on high profile First Amendment matters for over a decade in New York and then in Seattle.

Mother of four. Contributor for Ink. The host of iHeart Radio's What's Her Story, with Sam and Amy.

She's raised $30 million in venture capital to grow the Riveter.

She's also been published in the Washington Post, Newsweek, Seattle Times, and she's been all over the world speaking. Fortune's most powerful women. I mean, jeez.

Overachieve much, Amy?

AMY: No.

GLENN: So, Amy, you were on with us -- by the way, welcome. Glad you're here.

AMY: Thank you. Thank you.

GLENN: And you're sitting up, taking nourishment. That's always good. You came in here for the targets of tyranny special. And we had been in correspondence for a while. Because of what happened to you and your husband in Seattle with Amazon. And the feds.

Can you quickly just recap that for anybody who doesn't remember?

AMY: Yeah. So my husband worked for Amazon web services for nearly eight years. If you don't know, AWS is a subsidiary of Amazon.

Where the internet lives, cloud computing lives, and these big data warehouses across the world.

My husband worked in real estate, helped scouting locations that would be good to build data centers and projects along those lines.

He left Amazon in 2019. On April 2nd, 2020, the FBI knocked on our door.

We learned then that my husband was being accused. At the time, we didn't know by who.

Of a crime called private sector honest services fraud, which is depriving your private employer of your honest services. At the time, the FBI did not ask my husband what happened. It was clearly an accusation. And two months later, the government used forfeiture, to seize all of our family's bank accounts.

GLENN: Your bank accounts. Your husband's, your joint. Everything.

AMY: I mean, to the point, Glenn. The DOJ went into our law firm's client trust account. And seized all the money that we had paid our lawyers.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

AMY: And my husband at that point was never charged with a crime. In fact, he was never charged with a crime. Civil forfeiture is something the government did use. It's a tool. And they can seize your money, your home, your safe deposit box.

GLENN: They can squeeze you in every way they possibly can.

And many times, you don't get the money back.

AMY: We really don't. And we were kind of told. Don't expect to get the money back, no matter what.

GLENN: That's craziness.

That's King George. Declaration of Independence-style stuff.

AMY: And the thing is, it's a tool. It's a pressure tool. So my husband had been accused of April 2nd, 2020.

And the prosecutors wanted to plead guilty to a crime. It was all very specific and unclear. The crazy thing is, that largely what my husband was being accused of, depriving Amazon of his honest services, related to actions my husband took after he didn't work at Amazon. But, anyway, we did fight.

And, you know, we -- we had four little girls.

We sold our home. We sold our car. We liquidated our retirement. We borrowed money from family and friends to pay lawyers and to survive.

GLENN: And didn't they go into your family's accounts too? Your dad or something?

AMY: Oh, my gosh. Yeah, so my father was critically ill. He almost died. He also got a life-saving kidney transplant in April of 2020.

And two weeks later, the FBI emptied out his bank accounts. My husband and I had paid for his medical care.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

AMY: So he would have died, if my mother wouldn't have helped him pay his medical bills.

GLENN: So many times, people see this and go, yeah. But there had to be something.

You -- you told the story of what that something is. And it revolved around a very expensive lawsuit from Amazon.

AMY: Yeah. So to preface this, we had no idea what was going on. And the day the FBI showed up at my house, my husband hired criminal defense attorneys and said, please call Amazon, and tell them, I will come in and talk to them. I don't understand what is going on. But I have nothing to hide.

And Amazon's lawyers said, we will only speak to him if he's pleading guilty to a felony. And at the time, we were going, what was going on?

Amazon's lawyers squarely put the DOJ between the company and my husband.

Very few companies have that kind of access to DOJ, and for an institution that's meant to be apolitical, that's wrong. It's just wrong. But what we learned over the course of years, and spending a lot of lawyer money is that, in February of 2020, Amazon broke a contract with a real estate developer. And by the explicit terms of that contract, unless they could improve the developer committed a felony crime, they were going to owe him over $100 million in damages.

The next day after they broke the contract, they had the first meeting with the Department of Justice. They meant with the Department of Justice over 100 times trying to lobby for criminal charges.

The government spent countless FBI hours and prosecutor's hours. Essentially doing Amazon's bidding. And what we do know, is despite all the things that Amazon told the government. They never told the government, that they broke a contract and needed a felony. Or they would be liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

GLENN: So you decided to fight this.

AMY: Yes.

GLENN: You guys are fighters. You decided to fight. It has cost you a great deal. Your husband, nor you, nor anybody else has ever been charged. You thought this was kind of wrapping up.

And then you came on the special. And I think I may have said, are you sure you want to come on?

And I know I said, I hope nothing happens because of this.

The day after. Coincidence?

AMY: I don't really believe in coincidences anymore. But the day after, the Department of Justice subpoenaed Amazon for all the documents that Amazon had, that had been produced in the civil litigation. Because after Amazon failed to get criminal charges, they sued my husband.

And I'll note something about that, that I think Amazon didn't anticipate. But usually, when you're accused of a crime, you never get to see the communications, between your accuser and the Department of Justice.

And in this civil case, because Amazon sued my husband, my husband was able to see all those communications. And they're very shocking.

And I mean, to me, as a lawyer, I was floored. By the things that had been made public, that I had been able to see.

GLENN: Why?

What was seen?

ADAM: Amazon hired a former federal prosecutor from the Eastern District of Virginia. They paid him millions of dollars to lobby his former colleagues, for criminal charges.

The former -- the current prosecutors of Virginia, immediately ushered in Amazon for a meeting.

They set up a meeting with the prosecutor's press office.

Because this was clearly going to be such a sexy and scandalous case.

They never checked anything Amazon said.

They never asked to see my husband's terms of employment or his non-compete. Like, they just didn't ask to see it.

Amazon said they had paid this real estate developer, $16 million.

Amazon had paid the real estate developer $0.

So nobody ever checked anything. They just went for it.

GLENN: Because it was really, literally, an old boy's network.

I know you, you know me. This is a problem.

AMY: I mean, we have an email that's now in the public docket in Virginia, where Patrick Stokes, Amazon's lawyer, asked his former colleague, Jessica Aber, who is now the US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia, who just sued Amazon's main rival, Google. And Pat (inaudible) said to Jess Aber, we want to talk to you about civil asset forfeiture.

Prosecutors in the eastern district of Virginia have not used civil asset forfeiture, outside of a drug case, in 30 years, that I can find.

GLENN: So this is now building looked at again for the second time?

AMY: You know, I really think that Amazon keeps pushing DOJ to try to do something. And DOJ isn't doing anything, except kind of -- the investigation just kind of hangs out there. Because it was a threat, right?

Unless Amazon can get a felony conviction as a real estate developer, they are going to be liable for damages.

GLENN: All right. So the reason -- and we talked about this. You mentioned this. But I have been seeing more and more stories. About people from the DOJ, going to work, right directly to the Pentagon.

And people from the intelligence agencies.

This is terrifying, because there is a public had she private partnership, that you should be very aware of.

Our DOJ, our national security agencies, all of them are using Amazon. Amazon, as their cloud bank.

When you have that, you have control of the government, or the government has control of you.

At best -- at best, if one doesn't have something over the head of the other, they're partners in everything.

That is extraordinarily dangerous.

AMY: It's incredibly dangerous. I mean, and the thing that kind of blows my mind is that no one is really even paying attention to it.

I mean, on Amazon's board, they have the former head of the NSA, Keith Alexander. That's not a person with business experience, that should be on the board of a business company.

I mean, why else would he be there, other than to get contracts with the NSA?

And sure enough, in 2021, the NSA quietly awarded Amazon web services, a 10 billion-dollar contract.

Like, it's something that we should all be very frightened of. It's happening across big tech.

It's happening -- you've read the Twitter files.

You see it everywhere. And Amazon is hiring hundreds, hundreds of CIA, FBI, former federal prosecutors.

GLENN: And what -- just having those guys in a high-tech company that has the information on each of us with be that Amazon does, that's not good. There's no wall between that company and the government.

TAYLOR: Absolutely not. There's no wall at all. And you look at things. Amazon is now getting into Pharma. Right?

Amazon just launched a five dollar subscription to get your pills. Now you're going to give all your health data to Amazon. It's terrifying.

And Jeff Bezos is an oligarch. Right?

If you looked at the indictment of the FBI agent, Charles McGonigal, it described an oligarch, Dara Paska (phonetic), as a man of vast wealth with close ties to the government. That is exactly what Jeff Bezos is.

GLENN: So what's next in this?

Have you written off ever getting your money back?

AMY: So we actually got our money back. So we pulled off what people thought would be impossible.

GLENN: Wow. You should do a podcast just on how to do that. I know lots of people who just driving through town, they had cash, the sheriff pulls them over. The cop pulls them over.

That's ours. I mean, you never get it back. How did that happen?

AMY: So the government -- it's such a strange process. It goes back to the time of pirates.

But when the government seizes your money, and they don't charge you with a crime. They then have to sue your asset. So they sue your bank account. It's like US versus $4,000 at Wells Fargo.

And they do that, because your assets don't have due process. So they can just avoid all due process.

So the government here, sued our bank accounts, went to the court, paused the case for six months.

Went to the court again. Asked to pause it for six months.

Judge said you only get four months this time. They wanted a deposit again, and it wasn't going to happen. So it was time to litigate, and it was time for the government to prove their case against the bank accounts.

And instead of opting to prove their case, the government gave us the money back.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

STU: How long was that from beginning to end, when you lost the money to when you finally received it again?

AMY: It was 22 months.

GLENN: You had nothing.

AMY: We had nothing.

We had to figure out how to feed our four daughters.

My mother, who was amazing. My mother who was a public school teacher, worked her whole life. And my mother kept asking, don't they care about your daughters? You have a baby.

And I said, mom. They don't care. She said, this is our government. And I said, they don't care. They care about Jeff Bezos and Amazon. They do not care that we have children to feed.

They did say, when they seized our money, that if my husband pled guilty to a crime, they would give some of it back.

It's such a transparent tool of corruption. It should be gone. It should be abolished.

GLENN: It's unbelievable.

STU: You mean that threat, where they can say, hey, just say you're guilty, and then we can make it all better.

Therefore, getting the guilty plea out of you. And it's really kind of your only option at that point.

GLENN: Yeah, and they held everything.

Including, if this goes on, and you arrest your husband, we will do it in front of your children.

AMY: My husband asked his lawyers -- his lawyers asked the prosecutors over and over again, who were saying in 2020, we're charging him. We're coming.

They never charged him. But they threatened you.

And my husband's lawyers asked the prosecutors. Can he turn himself in, if you're going to indict him? And the prosecutor said, no. We will arrest him in front of your home, in front of your kids.

GLENN: Isn't that crazy?

Knowing that that was a big fear of theirs.

STU: So wrong.

GLENN: This is so corrupt and so bad. Amy, thank you for telling the story.

We'll get some closing thoughts from you in just a second. It's Amy Nelson. And her website is TheRiveter.co or is it .com? Dot-co.

Okay. Let me tell you a little bit about Legacybox.

Part of my calling in life, I believe is to preserve American history. And to make sure that it is safe, and not destroyed. And doesn't fall apart.

We are in restoration on all kinds of things right now.

We just got. Did you know that there was another kind of so-called Zapruder film?

STU: No.

GLENN: It's just been released. And given to our museum. To -- to hold on.

I haven't even seen it yet. But we're holding on to it. One of the things I'll do with Legacybox. Is I'll hand deliver that to them. And say, can you please preserve this?

I mean, it's amazing. Some of the things that are going on. That's what I do, in my off hours.

Your job is to preserve your American history. The history of your family. What life was really like, back in the old days. And I mean the old days like the 1980s.

You have spent a lot of money and time and -- on videotapes and everything else. All that stuff is going away. All your photos are going away.

Get a Legacybox right now. And secure, safeguard all of those family stories.

Don't let your photos continue to fade. Become your family's hero. The one that rescues the story of your life. Legacybox.com/Beck.

Shop, you'll get an exclusive offer. And save a buttload of money right now. LegacyBox.com/Beck. Do it now.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)
Amy Nelson is with us. Final thoughts or advice?
AMY: Well, as you know, Glenn, I've been a progressive my entire life. And one thing that has really surprised me in all this is that progressives see things in black and white.

The right side sees things in black and white. But really, this is about our rights, and we should all be fighting for the same rights, including due process. And so I just hope that the Department of Justice could try to be more fair and transparent.

GLENN: Is it over? It's not.

AMY: It not over. But it will be some day. That's what my husband says. It can't last forever.

GLENN: That's just crazy. Do you still consider yourself a progressive?

AMY: I consider myself politically homeless.

GLENN: I think a lot of people feel that way.

AMY: I think so too.

GLENN: And it's weird because if you're a classic liberal. You know, I call myself more of a Libertarian. But it's also classic liberal.

It's the same thing. I believe in the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

That's -- that's -- that's all that's important. The rest of it is nonsense.

AMY: It is. And there's so much ink spilled distracting us from those things.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Nobody talks about those things.

Your story and stories like you, that should be everywhere. And that's something that Republicans and Democrats and independents should all be standing up and saying, this has got to stop. Because if they'll do it to you. They'll do it to anybody.

AMY: They truly will.

GLENN: Yeah. Thank you so much. My best to your family. How are your kids?

AMY: They're great. They're amazing. They're kids. They're resilient.

GLENN: Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

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.

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.

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.