RADIOMarch 03, 2023

Glenn: This TAKE DOWN of a LYING nominee means ’NOTHING’

President Biden’s nominee to be America’s national archivist, Colleen Shogan, has promised to be non-partisan if granted the role. But when she faced the Senate Homeland Security and Governmenting Affairs Committee earlier this week, Senator Josh Hawley proved the opposite may be true. In fact, Senator Hawley, used Shogan's tweets, PROVED before the committee that she was lying to them all — UNDER OATH! The take down was ‘SO SATISFYING,’ Glenn says, but it will likely amount to NOTHING. In this clip, Glenn explains why…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Oh, my goodness. Hello, and welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. We've got a lot to do today. I'm going to show you some things from this week, from a couple of hearings, that I just -- I mean, I cheer.

We are actually starting to find a spine in this country.

And that is so great! So great!

However, we have to do more than cheer and yell at people. And when I say yell at people, I'm going to play some things, where it was insane. Well, let me start here. Let me just start with this.

Because you'll understand how good it feels.

Let's go to cut eight, with Senator Hawley, talking to the person that is going to be the -- our national archivist. Now, remember, the national archives, should just be somebody collecting all of the stuff, and preserving it.

Okay?

I don't want a political ideologue. I don't even -- I don't -- shh. I want somebody that nobody even cares to meet. Okay?

This is like, you know, you'll have to meet the archivist, just to get that paper. Oh, they're so boring.

But just tolerate it, because the stuff in the vault is really cool. Okay?

That's who I want. But that's not who we're getting. Remember, the national archives are now saying, this document here is very triggering.

Yes, if you're King George III, it shouldn't be triggering to you now. But I don't know, the national archives, it's kind of dicey. So who do we have? We have somebody who is a lefty.

And on the second hearing, in the Senate, she was kind of caught in a little trap. Because on her first one, they had some tweets from her, that were like, you know who I just hate? All Republicans.

I mean, just crazy stuff, that she just tweeted out.

And so she made her Twitter feed, private, the day before she went to the hearing.

And they only had a couple of her tweets. And they were going to use them, but they only had a couple of them, that they had printed off. Because she left it all open. Then the night before, she closes it down, so they don't have everything. So Hawley asks her. Can you tell me -- what's on your tweets. I mean, you closed them down.

We have two of them here. What's on your tweets?

She was under oath. Well, she was back. And I would just like to say, Senator Hawley, I -- I mean, whatever you need. Whatever you need. I mean, if you need my wife to make you some lasagna, bring it over, I'll personally put it on the fork and feed it to you. If that's what makes you happy.

This exchange made me very happy.

VOICE: Dr. Shogan, when you were here last year, a number of senators asked you, including me, a series of questions about an article you had written, public statements that you had made on social media, that were pretty grossly partisan, and I thought offensive.

And you and I went back and forth about it. After that, a number of us asked you questions, relating to these statements.

I want to follow up on one of them. I, in particular, asked you to give a full accounting of the public posts that you had made on Twitter. You had locked your Twitter account, before you came before this committee. It previously had been public.

I asked you to provide the public posts, that previously had been made on Twitter. Because the ones we had were pretty disturbing. You responded, as follows. Quote, my personal Twitter account is comprised of posts about my history novels, events at the White House Historical Association, Pittsburgh sports teams, travels, and my dog.

Let's talk a little bit about your Twitter posts then, that I was asking you about. On February 18th, 2022, you posted on Twitter, bemoaning the dropping of mask requirements for children, including those under the age of five. Do you remember that post?

VOICE: No, Senator. Those tweets were in my personal capacity.

VOICE: No, no, no. No.

I asked you, would you give all public posts, that you had made on Twitter. You said no, effectively.

And you said, that your Twitter posts consisted of mystery novels, events at the White House Historical Association, Pittsburgh sports teams, and my dog.

You just told me now under oath, that you stood by that. Now, let's talk about your Twitter post.

On February 18th, 2022, you posted bemoaning the fact that mask requirements for children, under the age of five, one of whom I happen to have by the way, has been dropped. Is that a post about your dog or sports teams?

VOICE: My social media is my personal capacity, sir?

VOICE: Answer my question, please. Because you've testified under oath, that you only posted about your dog, sports teams, and novels. And you also said you wouldn't give this committee, any of your public posts. So is your posts on February 18th, 2022, bemoaning the lifting of mask requirements, for children under the age of five. Who I might just ask, all the data has said, is extremely harmful to children, these mask requirements. We'll leave that aside for now.

Is that a post about your dog or sports teams? Yes or no?

VOICE: My social media is in my personal capacity, Senator.

VOICE: Yes or no, Ms. Shogan.

You are under oath before this committee, and I have to say, you have placed this issue squarely in record by repeatedly refusing to answer. Yes or no?

GLENN: I love you.

VOICE: My personal -- my social media is in my personal capacity, Senator.

VOICE: So you're not answering my question.

Let's talk about another post.

Twenty-sixth of May, 2022, you talk about an assaults weapon ban. Retweet a post, ban assault weapons now. You say you agree this idea, you have to be a certain age to buy assault weapons in America. Is that a post about sports teams and your dog or mystery novels?

VOICE: My social media is in my personal capacity, Senator.

VOICE: I have to say, I have been here for four years. I have never seen a witness stonewall like this before. Never. I've seen a lot. This is extraordinary.

I mean, this is unbelievable. And you want to be the archives of the United States. You lied to us, under oath.

You lied to us in your QFRs. You just lied to me a second ago under oath. And now you're sitting here stonewalling, not answering questions about public posts that you made.

Dr. Shogan, I will ask you again: Will you give to this committee your public posts on Twitter? Will you make them available?

VOICE: My social media is in my personal capacity.

VOICE: Mr. Chairman, I have to tell you, this is the most extraordinary thing I have seen in my brief time in the Senate. I have never seen a witness blatantly lie under oath, like Dr. Shogan has just done to this committee, stonewalled this committee, and just repeatedly just refused to answer my questions about her own posts that are in public. For these reasons, I will oppose your nomination. And I strongly, strongly urge this committee, to take action on this, and own up to the fact that she's misleading us, right before our eyes, Mr. Chairman.

GLENN: I mean, don't you love him?

Now, here's the thing that I want to point out.

That was a shortened version. The long version is like eight minutes. And it is so satisfying. It is so satisfying.

He's the first person that I have heard. I shouldn't say that. There's -- this has been a good week for this kind of stuff. That were actually holding people's feet to the fire!

Now, it makes no difference, if it's all just words. And let me tell you why: There is a great McIntire piece on the Blaze today. Media acceptance of the lab leak theory is the turning of the COVID ratchet.

This is the most important opinion piece, that I have read, on why the COVID leak is coming out.

And what does it all mean?

They -- he writes, if you thought this monumental collapse of credibility, this sudden implosion of certainty of the science, would give the media moments of hesitation, you were sadly mistaken.

The progressive chattering class spent their days forcing the American public to pretend that men could become women, at cultural gunpoint. Science was never the lodestone of truth. They are not undergoing some sort of dramatic crisis here.

While some would expect a little more coordination between the regime and its media arm to create a smoother narrative transition, this trailing dialectic serves its own purpose.

Our ruling elite secure power through constant invocation of the state of exception.

In theory, we live in a democracy, where the power of the government is constrained through the structure of the Constitution, and the will of the people.

In practice, however, both limiting factors can be removed in the case of an emergency. A cunning leader knows that power once granted, is rarely returned. And it is very difficult for the public to hold anyone accountable, after the fact.

When an emergency presents the opportunity to achieve power, under the state of exception, it is always best to manufacture the narrative, to secure that power as quickly as possible.

And then make the adjustments later, after the power is firmly in hand. The pandemic, allowed for the creation of an indefinite state of exception. During which, the regime could lock down its political opponents, unleash its own supporters, to those who opposed them. Churches, gyms, were shuttered, abortion clinics, Walmarts were deemed essential. Leftist corporate allies like Amazon required near -- acquired near monopoly on -- on commerce. While their local retail competition was driven into bankruptcy.

Trump supporters were forced to attend the funerals of their loved ones on Zoom. While Joe Biden voters, drank champagne in the streets, to celebrate his election.

Politics, after all, is about rewarding your friends and punishing your enemies.

He goes on to Trump and The View, et cetera, et cetera. But what we are now observing is the process by which our ruling elite consolidate the power they gained, by reconciling their narrative to something that more closely resembles reality. Bit by bit, the powers have had to admit the truth behind most of the conspiracy theories, that they so violently attacked. This slow drip of truth, is not some admission of failure or culpability. It is instead, designed to turn the political ratchet.

Conservatives and COVID spectics -- skeptics get to feel vindicated. We have a moment of, a-ha! I told you so!

Yet, nothing changes. The power isn't taken back. No one serves a punishment, for the crime.

We must understand, that what holly just did there, is so satisfying. What Ted Cruz and Holly did this week, to Merrick Garland is just -- I mean, it was almost -- I mean, you could rate that as a porn.

STU: We should go through that at some point again.

GLENN: It was so -- it was so good.

STU: Mahauck (phonetic) incident. Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

I mean, we'll play this. We'll play a cut, if you haven't heard it yet. But it was so good. But it means nothing without teeth. They trust -- who was it?

I want to say it was Biggs. Was it the Biggs amendment that was trying to go after Mayorkas. And all of the Republicans have all said, this is out of control. This is crazy.

Well, there are two bills to impeach him. In a Republican House.

And they are a long way from getting anybody to sign on. There's like 41 sponsors.

That's it.

Wait. Excuse me?

Someone must pay the price, for what is happening in our society. Or nothing changes.

You can feel vindicated, you can feel good. You can yell at people, but it doesn't change anything.

That woman should not be in the -- as the archivist for multiple reasons.

But she should pay some price, for lying under oath.

They're all doing it.

If they don't punish those people, why would you care?

Why would you care? What meaning does your testimony even have?

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.