RADIOMarch 27, 2024

The CRAZIEST Baltimore Key Bridge Collapse Theory Yet???

It didn’t take long for people to cry foul when a cargo ship crashed into Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge and knocked it down. But while there’s still no hard evidence of a cyberattack or terrorism, Glenn, Pat, and Stu have another … weirder … theory: Has anyone seen Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg lately? Because there have been A LOT of transportation-related tragedies under his watch …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So the bridge, Stu has a theory on this -- this Baltimore bridge collapse.

STU: I do not. I would not say I have a theory at all. I'm just saying, look, it wouldn't make any sense for this to be a terrorist attack the way it happened. 1:30 in the morning. Like, why would you do it that way?

Maybe you would argue, it was some sort of a test run.

PAT: Or just to disrupt our infrastructure.

STU: I don't know. But it doesn't seem like it will be that serious, in that. These places are able to -- it doesn't seem like. Like all the reporting is, they're able to reroute to other ports.

I mean, it has to affect Baltimore pretty seriously. Obviously, traffic will be affected. If you're going for a major terrorist attack. First of all, 1:30 in the morning is a weird time for it. And, of course, the warnings from the ships and all these other things.

Beyond that, I'm looking at a broader picture here. And I'm -- again, I'm not saying this. What I want you to know, I'm not saying this.

PAT: Okay. What are you not saying?

STU: I'm not saying that Pete Buttigieg individually, is going to each one of these things and -- like unscrewing Boeing doors before the plane takes off. I'm not saying he's doing that.

I'm not saying he's loosening tires off of planes. I'm not saying that. That would be incredibly impossible. What I am saying, should we check his house, to see if he has scuba gears. Let's check it out. Why not go into his garage and see, Pat. Maybe he has a couple of -- you know, a couple of -- I don't know.

Rubber suits. That might be for other use. I'm just saying, can we at least check? We should at least know that.

PAT: Maybe he has a Phillips screwdriver or something.

STU: Right. Does he have -- it would just be interesting to know, what type of --

PAT: It would. Yeah.

STU: Underwater diving gear, the man owns. Like, does he happen to have a mini submarine in his garage? That would be something we should know.

PAT: That would be weird.

GLENN: First of all. First of all.

As I said, they always return to the crazy -- the scene of the crime.

So he never shows up after one of these.

He disappears after this.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Have I noticed that?

We never hear him talking about anything transportation. Have you heard him actually, you know, standing in front of a United airliner going, we're going to shut this thing down, until we figure out why the United Airlines keeps losing doors and wheels. And I heard the steering wheel or something, the other day.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Why? Where is he on that?

So he never shows up at the scene of the crime. So that immediately goes. It's also way too much work for him.

PAT: It's true.

GLENN: He would have to learn things, like how to put the mask on. Which I think is beyond his capability. You know, how do I -- the scuba gear goes where exactly. And you don't want to use it after him. After he tries it. I'm just saying, I don't know.

STU: I think, look, there are a lot of reasons to believe that Pete Buttigieg isn't responsible for each one of these things. It would be insane. It would be a crazy development, by all accounts.

GLENN: Yes, it would. Right.

STU: However, how else do we explain this?

PAT: It would be unprecedented, if it were our transportation secretary.

STU: I would agree, you be precedented.

PAT: Never in history, has a transportation secretary sabotaged so much transportation.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Can we look at the bright side, however?

That would be more than any transportation secretary has done probably in the history of transportation. I never know what they do.

STU: This is a good point.

Who knows the name of any other transportation secretary.

Yet, we all --

GLENN: You have chow.

STU: Yeah, Chow was one. And the other one that popped into my head was LaHood. Because back in the day. But not for, hey, he's screwing up all of our infrastructure.

It was like, oh, well, he's sort of a notable figure that occasionally comes up in policy conversations. This guy has overseen disaster movie sequel, after disaster movie sequels since he has this job.

We have American institutions. Boeing is just like, eh, we can't keep planes in the air anymore.

Like, what?

Why? Why has all of this happened under his watch. It's like he's trying. It's like he's Michelman. He's tied to -- we now have more footage to show in disaster movies, because of this guy. Allegedly. I mean, I don't think he is intentionally derailing trains across the country.

It does seem weird, that ever since -- we should look to see if he has a wedge or tools that would allow him to do it.

GLENN: You know, I would say the fact that everything is being derailed, would lead me to believe, that it's not one man.

STU: It's probably not. It's probably not.

GLENN: This is not bad -- the entire -- the entire country is going into a bridge abutment.

STU: That's true. That's true.

PAT: It would explain why we never see him though. Because he's always off skulking into one of these places, loosening some bolt.

STU: It's probably not him loosening bolts. It's probably not. Probably not.

PAT: Probably not.

STU: But wouldn't it be easy to rule it out. Let's toss that -- let's toss the individual possibility, that Pete Buttigieg is flying around the country, disabling our infrastructure.

Let's just rule that one out. It has to be easy to rule out.

PAT: I would feel a lot better. You know, I would. Even though, I understand, it's a --

GLENN: Call his husband. And find out, was he in bed with you, last night, or the night before, when this thing hit the bridge abutment. Just find out.

STU: Just find out. It's an easy one to rule out.

PAT: It did.

STU: Until we rule it out. He should go back on maternity leave.

That's all I'm saying. He shouldn't be employed on this job, as if it's a possibility.

GLENN: Oh, I see what this is. You just want him out as the transportation secretary. You are such a bad man.

PAT: Could that be it?

GLENN: Is it homophobia? Is that what's happening?

STU: It's definitely not homophobia. He can be as gay as he would like to be, while on paternity leave. In fact, I would encourage it. It would be almost odd if he wasn't, right?

But like, what I'm saying is, ever since this guy took this job, we have done show after show after show, out of --

PAT: About disasters.

STU: About transportation infrastructure collapse. What is happening -- like, why not just, either he's individually doing it himself.

Or maybe another possibility, is everything this man touches, gets destroyed like he's Ivan Drago. Maybe that's the thing.

GLENN: I have to tell you. I don't even know if he -- I think this is just -- this is just now four years of absolute incompetence.

The companies are all being distracted. From what they have to do. So they can meet new governmental mandates on bullcrap that mean nothing to any of us.

And this guy. This guy, I don't think he knows what his job is. I really don't.

STU: He seems to be terrible at it.

GLENN: Do you? This has and whenever he's involved in something, tragedies ensue. Again, we talk about these problems. With the border.

I don't know. What do you do? You have to make sure you're closing the border to illegal immigration. Before you're worrying about the immigrants that already cross.

You have to stop the flow. There's a leak. You have to stop the leak. Turn the water off. Then fix. With this. Shouldn't we turn the water off here?

Get this guy away from this thing first.

And then we'll figure out some of the other tails.

Whatever he's bringing to the table, is weighing down the table, and the table is collapsing. Can we do something about it?

GLENN: This is the best entertaining conspiracy theory, that I've heard in the last 24 hours. This is good. This is good.

STU: I don't think -- it would be absurd to picture Pete bite judge in a scuba outfit.

I mean, like, if somebody were to Photoshop that, and give it to us, and put it on Twitter.

That would be silly.

PAT: Irresponsible. Irresponsible.

STU: Irresponsible. He can't possibly do it. Let's confirm he doesn't have the equipment to make it possible.

Let's rule it out now!

GLENN: Have we seen close-up pictures of the American Airlines flight. When it was taking off, losing the tire. Was there a parachute after? Was he up in the wheel of -- as they took off?

Just, you know, like one of those poor Afghans, that were just like, I'm going to go to America. And he's like, wait. I'm not done.

I'll unloose the bolts here. I would like to see a close-up. Was he driving a tanker up Dr. Truck, last June 11th, and left it on I-95, in Philadelphia.

That bridge. When that caught fire.

PAT: Let's see who the driver was.

STU: Let's look. If you have the CCTV footage. You see a little guy scampering from the bridge right after. I would like to know, who is that?

Is that a leprechaun, or is that Pete Buttigieg? I want to know who that is. These are basic questions, we can ask, honestly.

And my goal here is to exonerate Pete Buttigieg.

PAT: Clear! Clear the air.

STU: That's my goal.

GLENN: Well, I don't think -- before you said this, I don't think Pete Buttigieg came up as a suspect.

STU: Hell. It would be so outlandish, right?

PAT: People were afraid to say it. Thank you.

STU: It was.

GLENN: Is that what it was?

PAT: We're saying what everybody was thinking, stupidly.

STU: But other people would say --

GLENN: As Jon Stewart said, saying the things that nobody is thinking. That's what he's doing now.

STU: Right. It could be. It could be. But then other people might say, it's the most logical explanation, that he's just going around and doing it himself. Why else would all of this happen. And that's why I just want to exonerate him. And let him get back to his wonderful family.

PAT: Real considerate of you.

STU: Yeah. And I think too, we should consider. For this particular role, whether paternity leave should only happen after the birth of a child. Maybe it should be like a constant thing.

Like a, whenever you need it, you take it.
Just go ahead. Go on leave. Right now. And maybe take eight to 12 years off.

GLENN: That would be good. Okay.

STU: Just in case, you know.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: These are just possibilities.

GLENN: Pat, thanks for standing and watching the whole thing burn with me. It's been fun.

Should people CELEBRATING Charlie Kirk’s death be fired?

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

Shocking train video: Passengers wait while woman bleeds out

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?

STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Max Lucado on Overcoming Grief in Dark Times | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 266

Disclaimer: This episode was filmed prior to the assassination of Charlie Kirk. But Glenn believes Max's message is needed now more than ever.
The political world is divided, constantly at war with itself. In many ways, our own lives are not much different. Why do we constantly focus on the negative? Why are we in pain? Where is God amid our anxiety and fear? Why can’t we ever seem to change? Pastor Max Lucado has found the solution: Stop thinking like that! It may seem easier said than done, but Max joins Glenn Beck to unpack the three tools he describes in his new book, “Tame Your Thoughts,” that make it easy for us to reset the way we think back to God’s factory settings. In this much-needed conversation, Max and Glenn tackle everything from feeling doubt as a parent to facing unfair hardships to ... UFOs?! Plus, Max shares what he recently got tattooed on his arm.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Are Demonic Forces to Blame for Charlie Kirk, Minnesota & Charlotte Killings?

This week has seen some of the most heinous actions in recent memory. Glenn has been discussing the growth of evil in our society, and with the assassination of civil rights leader Charlie Kirk, the recent transgender shooter who took the lives of two children at a Catholic school, and the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska, how can we make sense of all this evil? On today's Friday Exclusive, Glenn speaks with BlazeTV host of "Strange Encounters" Rick Burgess to discuss the demon-possessed transgender shooter and the horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk. Rick breaks down the reality of demon possession and how individuals wind up possessed. Rick and Glenn also discuss the dangers of the grotesque things we see online and in movies, TV shows, and video games on a daily basis. Rick warns that when we allow our minds to be altered by substances like drugs or alcohol, it opens a door for the enemy to take control. A supernatural war is waging in our society, and it’s a Christian’s job to fight this war. Glenn and Rick remind Christians of what their first citizenship is.