RADIOJuly 17, 2024

The ONLY Thing the Left Gets Right About "Project 2025"

Democrats have a new boogeyman: The Heritage Foundation's "Project 2025". They claim that former president Donald Trump has endorsed the program and will use it to turn America into a dystopian fascist dictatorship. But what's actually in Project 2025? The Heritage Foundation's president, Kevin Roberts, joins Glenn to debunk the myths and lies. In fact, he says that the Left has only gotten ONE thing right about Project 2025.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: One of, I believe, the real, true patriots in America.

Is Kevin Roberts. He's the Heritage Foundation president. We have gotten to know each other quite well over the last year or so. And I have tremendous respect for him, his courage, and what he's also doing at the Heritage Foundation. I had a -- a family reunion this weekend, this last weekend. And we had about 30 people -- 35 people here. And, you know, not everybody votes the same way that I do. In fact, some of my family kind of rolls their eyes at some of the things I say. And that's fine.

And we're still family, and we love each other. And we had a great conversation about what was going on, especially after the assassination attempt.

And what came up over and over again, was project 2025. They're making it into a fascistic state, they are going to -- they are going to give the presidency so much more power. And I laughed, and I said, that's not Project 2025. That's -- in fact, that's the opposite of what they're trying to do.

This is something the Heritage Foundation has done every election year for many years, but never to this degree.

And Kevin Roberts is here to tell us about it. Hello, Kevin, how are you?

KEVIN: Glenn, my friend. Great patriot, it's a pleasure to be with you.

GLENN: Thank you. So, Kevin, talk to people who are hearing from the media, that this is nothing, but a way to carve out special exemptions for the president for fascism.

KEVIN: The best way to start. And we'll go into detail. Is to say, it is total projection by the left. I mean, you, perhaps more than anyone in our modern age. Has shown us, that whatever the left has accused our side of. Is actually something they themselves are guilty of.

So project 2025, is actually a corrective to the very thing, the left is accusing us of doing. That is, they are the ones particularly since LBJ's presidency in the 60s take it. Who have accrued all this power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats in DC.

We feel that in every respect. Every industry. Every business. And even in most of us in sort of our everyday lives.

But ultimately, what project 2025 will do is address the problem of the administrative state in DC, being weaponized against the everyday American. It's the biggest threat, as you know, the administrative state, Glenn, to a republic, where citizens vote for a new president, and a new direction. And yet, nothing changes.

In fact, what we will see, is any aspects of project 2025, are implemented. Is finishing of the scope of Washington, DC, and an increase in freedoms. And the presidency and the legislative branch and the judicial branch. All being returned to proper order.

In other words, it really is the -- I think the single best set of policy ideas, about how we go back to the original founding vision as our Founders had it of this constitutional republic.

GLENN: You know, I said to some of my relatives. Look, you and I agree on one thing. I think.

And they did. And that is, no citizen should ever be afraid that the president of the United States, is going to get them.

That this election would put somebody in office, where he could take away freedoms of people he didn't like, or didn't agree with.

That's -- I'm absolutely against that. Because I know it always come to bite whoever did it in the butt. Because they'll eventually get to you. And that's not our system. This ensures that the president, no matter which side they're on, doesn't have that power to get his enemies, or to just rule his way without the consent of Congress and the people.

KEVIN: That's right. And if that kind of abuse and weaponization against the American people, using the administrative state we've seen against the right, the political right, by President Biden, were for some reason to be done by a conservative administration.

We at Project 2025 and to Heritage, to your point, Glenn, would be just as apoplectic. Every one of us, from the far left to the far right, wherever someone is on that political spectrum needs to wake up in this country, and believe that of all entities, the federal government is going to be objective and neutral and fair and just, and equal, in how it treats all of our citizens. And so the real problem that we're trying to address, isn't just the accrual of power since the '60s, in particular.

It is, without getting engaged in hyperbole. Which you know I detest. Addressing the weaponization of the federal government, against individual citizens.

I will give you a quick story. That's a personal reference.

But it's emblematic of how people feel.

I'm as you know, a traditional Roman Catholic. It doesn't mean that people have to agree with that. But that's my religious liberty, and my family's to practice that. We have, over the last few years, those of us in that category. Not just been fearful of, but we know the following has happened.

We know this from the director of the FBI. And the attorney general of Biden's administration. They have targeted faithful, traditional Catholics because we like the Latin mass, as somehow being domestic terrorists.

It's that kind of nonsense, that project 2025 would bring to an end, if the next administration so desires to implement.

GLENN: So has Trump signed on for any of this?

KEVIN: Look, it's informal. The president of course has distanced himself from this, which is I think a smart political move, given how successful the left's mischaracterization of this has been.

Ultimately, though. To your question, great ideas, and great people rise to the top.

And so without it all being presumptuous, which you know I am not, and Project 2025 is sort of designed to sort of be in the background. Those great ideas and those great people, I think are going to be apart of this conversation, once the Trump fans and administration takes office.

So I would, for people trying to make sense of President Trump's comments, his campaign's comments and the project, understand, that we are in the political season right now.

And soon, we will move into the transition, and policy making season.

And I just have great confidence in the policies and people who are a part of it. And think that we will have a great era of good, common sense policy reform. That ultimately, is sort of neither conservative nor liberal. It's just right. And it's just common sense.

GLENN: I will tell you, that I read the website. And we're doing a show on it, tomorrow night.

To go through, what it is. And what it's not.

And if people will read it. I mean, I think the -- I think the media is doing a great service in a way. If people go to the website, and -- and really look up, what project 2025 is. And reads it. I think most Americans will agree with a lot of it. You know, you're -- you're talking about dismantling the -- the -- not the DOJ. But the -- the DHS.

You're returning the component parts to other agencies. You're talking about eliminating harmful regulations that have stifled innovation and small businesses.

More oil and gas leases. Less climate extremism.

No more overregulation of dish washers and gas stoves and everything else, that they said they definitely weren't doing.

I think, Kevin, the idea here is the administrative state has been made into something that can do all the things that they know they can't get past into laws. And that's what's got to stop. These people -- these elites are running these organizations, and they decide what's best. And it never comes to us.

And if we want to change, then we'll change. You can't force us to do that, especially as an unelected official.

KEVIN: That's the key issue. That Congress, of course, is complicit in this by not being forceful enough over the last decades.

GLENN: Big time.

KEVIN: And what it's done, frankly under both Democrat and Republican administrations is create this yo-yo effect of the Democrats and the Republicans issuing these executive orders.

I'm still hopeful enough about this country, Glenn, to believe that maybe a vast majority of us across the political spectrum.

Understand, that's not how we ought to make law. And so what we're trying to do with the proposals that we have in Project 2025, in addition to what you've said, is call for an end to DEI and CRT.

This is something that is vastly supported. Unfortunately, we probably see in addition to all of the aspects of the failure, on Saturday's near assassination.

The effects of that. That that was a higher goal.

DEI for the Secret Service director. Than real competence.

This is the point. Americans understand what is going on. Which is that a small group of people, have concentrated power. They are not elected.

They might be good people. We don't have to get into the personal side of this. But they are people who do not want those of us who are regular, normal people, to go about our lives. It's imperative that people understand, that the very reason the left has spent more money demonizing project 2025, than we've spent putting it together, tells you, it is a threat to their power.

And that ought to excite us, about the possibilities ahead.

GLENN: You know, you talk about in project 2025, something that I haven't heard for a long time.

And that's a flatter and fairer tax code with a 15 percent bracket and a 30 percent bracket. They, of course, will say, this is tax cuts for the rich, et cetera.

But it has shown, math does not lie. It has been shown over and over and over again. No matter what you do with the tax code. The government brings in about 18 percent, total.

And if you bring the tax code and bring it up to 95, people find loopholes. Don't pay their taxes, et cetera, et cetera.

And they still get about 17 to 18 percent, going into the Treasury. So why not do a flat tax, where everybody pays, you know, what's appropriate.

And you don't have all of these loopholes. That would be fantastic!

Chance that that happens?

KEVIN: I think there's a chance. In fact, in some recent interview. The last a couple of weeks.

President Trump has even hinted at that.

Obviously, we will have to deal as I country with tax policy. Because the Trump taxes are up for renewal.

And I think there's an opportunity, depending on the president, the Vice President of course will want to do. We will be of service to that.

Is to insert into that, a flatter system. I mean, I'm old enough to remember, when as a country, ten or so years ago. We were on the cusp of implementing that kind of thing.

This is an excellent example of something that is in Project 2025. That is wildly supported by a majority of people. And it leads me to the following connected point, Glenn. You touched on this, just a minute ago.

Project 2025 covers, literally, every policy issue known to man. It is a menu of policy options. I have not met one fellow conservative whether that's my wife or one of my siblings. Or my dad. All staunch conservatives who agree with 100 percent of what's in there.

The point is not to seek unanimity. The point is to provide a menu of options that represent the popular will, that if President Trump and vice president Vance so choose, there's actually a substantive plan behind that political impulse.

And that actually, I would like to think, for people who are more objective in the political center, or the political left.

Give people a little bit of comfort. That actually what we're trying to do here is have a governing agenda, following the lead of the people who make these decisions. And I think as time goes on, to sum up here, the more we understand that's actually what this project is about. The more we're not only telling the truth. But we're actually kneecapping what has been a last ditch desperation attempt by the left, which can't run on the record.

GLENN: Can you do me a favor? I have about 60 seconds. I just want to run through some true and false. Because these are the things that are being said it. I just want to know if it's true or false. In Project 2025, there is a call to end no fault divorce. True or false?

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Complete ban on abortions without exceptions, true or false?

KEVIN: Extraordinarily false.

GLENN: Ban contraceptions, true or false?

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Higher taxes for the working class?

KEVIN: False. The exact opposite.

GLENN: Additional tax breaks for corporations and the 1 percent?

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Elimination of unions and worker protections? My gosh, look at what they're saying.

KEVIN: I know. So false.

GLENN: Cut Social Security.

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Raise the retirement age.

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: End the Affordable Care Act.

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Raise prescription drug prices.

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Eliminate the Department of Education.

KEVIN: True, my friend. That's the one thing they get right.

GLENN: Love that. Use public taxpayer money for private religious schools, true or false?

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools.

KEVIN: False. We understand it's a pluralistic country. We love those schools. But that's up for people to decide.

GLENN: End civil rights. And DEI protections in government.

KEVIN: Well, we definitely want to end DEI nonsense. But obviously the great thing about project 2025, we're restoring civil rights, if anything.

GLENN: Ban books and curriculum about slavery?

KEVIN: False.

GLENN: Ending climate projections. Or protections.

KEVIN: Well, the ones that aren't based on science, will come to an end. But we certainly understand the value of science, and protecting the environment.

GLENN: I have to tell you, this is why we're doing a whole show on it.

What they're saying about this is incredible.

What it is, it's not. You can find it at heritage.org.

Or go to project 2025. I believe that's project 2025.org.

Kevin, great to talk to you. We'll talk to you again.

KEVIN: Thanks, Glenn. Take care.

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.