RADIOJanuary 09, 2025

DEBUNKED: Media Says Trump May Take Panama Canal & Greenland by FORCE

Donald Trump is making some big – and unusual – promises before taking office for the second time. Trump has said he will rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America”. He has suggested that Canada should become the 51st state. He said he wants to buy Greenland. And he also wants the Panama Canal back. But recently, the media used a loaded question to make it sound like Trump isn’t ruling out a military invasion of the Panama Canal and Greenland. Glenn debunks the media’s lie and explains what he believes Trump is really doing: Is this imperialism? Or is it “The Art of the Deal”?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. So let me -- let's start with Greenland. Shall we?

Green land, Panama, and Canada.

I -- I have to tell you, well, let's start with his -- Donald Trump's press conference yesterday.

They are always fun.

Cut one.

This is a green landman.

VOICE: So if you could tell Trump anything, what would it be?

VOICE: Buy green land.

VOICE: Why do you Trump to buy green land?

VOICE: We don't want to be colonized by the Danish colony anymore. We get taken our minerals, from Greenland. We are the richest nation in the world, and we don't get to use it. Denmark is using us too much.

VOICE: Do you like America?

VOICE: I love America.

GLENN: Right. Okay. So stop. So here's the thing. Greenland. They've got like 12 people. And Denmark owns it.

And they have no intention of giving it up.

But it's like Alaska. I mean, it is rich with rare earth minerals. As he said, it's the richest nation in the world. But Denmark won't let anything be explored. It is also a strategic place for bases, et cetera, et cetera.

It would -- there's been like four or five presidents that have tried to buy green land in the past. And it's never been done. I will get to why all of this makes sense here, in a second. And how you're supposed to read it.

Because he also went in, yesterday, about Canada and they asked him, would you rule -- would you rule out military strikes to take Alaska?

Here's his response.

VOICE: You're considering military force to acquire Panama and Greenland. Are you also considering military force to annex and acquire?

DONALD: No. Economic force. Because Canada and the United States, that would be really something. You get rid of that artificially drawn line, and you take a look at what that looks like. And it would also be much better for national security. Don't forget, we basically protect Canada.

GLENN: Okay. So he's just -- well, all he's doing is -- well, let me say -- let me give you the third one, and that is Panama.

Before we get to Panama, why not stop at the gulf of America? Cut three.

DONALD: Mexico is really in trouble. A lot of trouble. Very dangerous place. And we're going to be announcing a future date, pretty soon.

We're going to change. Because we do most of the work there, and it's ours. We will be changing. Sort of the opposite of Biden, where he's closing everything up, essentially getting rid of 50 trillion worth of assets.

We will be changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico, to the Gulf of America. Which has a beautiful ring. That covers --

STU: I love this guy.

DONALD: Gulf of America. What a beautiful name. And it's appropriate. And it's appropriate. And Mexico has to stop allowing millions of people to pour into our country. They can stop them.

And we're going to put very serious tariffs on Mexico and Canada. Because Canada, they come through Canada too. And the drugs that are coming through are at record numbers.

GLENN: Okay.

Okay. So now the press is freaking out. This is an imperialist president. He's trying to create new Rome. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Are you -- do you have absolutely no brain cells that work in your head, anymore?

The final one is Panama. And I've told you this. In fact, I'm doing a prediction show tonight.

And I've been telling you the last few weeks. Panama is going to be a problem for the United States.

And there is going to be -- there is going to be some serious things happening in Panama this year. And I will get into that a little later.

But he's also talking about the Panama Canal. Okay. Why is that?

Because he wants to take over all these countries. And these places. He wants war everywhere?

No. No.

The one thing you have to understand about Donald Trump is he's a negotiator. He's merely negotiating.

That's all that's happening here. You speak softly and carry a very large stick.

Hey, Mexico. By the way, you're so irrelevant.

You know, you're going down the tubes. We're even thinking about changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. That's how irrelevant you are, okay?

And you've got some serious problems. It's a very dangerous place.

Well, there goes tourism, if the president keeps saying things like that. And we will have to put some tariffs on it. But, you know.

I just think the gulf of America is just a beautiful, beautiful name. All he's doing is signaling, you -- you're a speed bump to me.

I don't -- I don't need to do anything. I've just got these giant tariffs.

And we'll probably end up owning you, anyway, because you're a failing state. Okay?

He's negotiating. He's setting the table.

On Greenland, the same thing. He's just setting the table. He is saying to Greenland, you know, I think we should take it. Now, is he serious on that one. Yes, not take it, but buy it.

Is he serious?

Yes. And it would be -- I have to use a word that the New York Times has been talking about for a long time. They just used it in a different context.

It would be a huge coup, if Donald Trump could buy Greenland. It would be huge for America.

All the rare earth minerals, and everything else. All the riches of green land. And the strategic placement of Greenland would be a very, very smart move. Again, New York Times. Glenn Beck did say Donald Trump would pull off a coup. I mean it in a different context than you worry about.

That is smart! And if we could buy it, great!

If we could just negotiate to have some bases there and to be able to sell and buy some of their rare earth minerals, that would be very smart and strategic!

Now, Canada, okay. Canada is -- Canada. Being the 51st state. Okay.

Would it be great to have all of us combined?

Greenland. Canada. The United States, combined?

Yes. A 51st state? No. No.

Canada responded with, well, maybe we'll buy Alaska and Minnesota. All right. Let's open up those talks.

How much for Alaska? I'm willing to negotiate.

And I tell you what, negotiate for Alaska, I would give you Minnesota for a sandwich.

So I'm good. All he's doing there, is, again, throwing out a big idea. Negotiating, because you're not paying for your own defense.

We're paying for your defense.

What are we getting in -- in -- in return?

Well, right now, we're getting open borders from you, and Canada.

And we're getting a lot of crap from you too. So we're still friends. We still like Canada.

We're not going to take military action, to take Canada. It's not what he's doing. He is, again, negotiating. If you forget, that Donald Trump is possibly the greatest negotiator to be in our lifetime, you might begin to understand what he's doing here. But if you forget that he's a deal maker, that's what he does, walks in and says, you know what, I will vaporize that little dude over. And then they end up having tea in a Communist country!

That's negotiation. What is he doing with Russia? What is he doing right now? The only place I think he's absolutely clear. I mean, he doesn't -- he doesn't make threats.

He makes promises. And he's not threatening anything, but Panama, which we'll get into here in just a second.

Panama is a problem. A real problem.

And we need to talk about that. The other real problem is Hamas. And yesterday, he said about Hamas. That there's going to be hell to be paid.

Hamas doesn't release those hostages. The gates of hell are going to open up. And I believe him.

The -- the thing is, with a negotiator, you have to be able to see -- I mean, Trump always kind of means things. He's the -- you don't win. You don't become a good negotiator, if the people on the other side, always think you're bluffing, because you always are.

That's why America is in the Dumpster fire we're in right now. Because the rest of the world, just thinks that, you know, oh. You know what, well, don't do this.

Or we will give you a strongly worded letter. If the world or anybody sitting across the negotiating table from you, whether this is in your life or global politics, if they believe you're someone who will do what they say, you have all the negotiating power.

Because, you know what, I -- I would love to work here. But I can't work here. And I won't work here, unless these things happen.

He's just negotiating. Really? Watch me walk out, and I will. And no offense. No problems. I don't hate you. You shouldn't hate me.

I'm not trying to hold a gun to your head. I'm just saying, I can do better. And these things are a requirement for me.

When Donald Trump says, look, you're going to have to close the border.

He means that. Now, when he says, we also will -- you know what, we might just annex Mexico or Canada.

That's part of the negotiation process. Because honestly, he just might do it! This is the kind of president we've always wanted, one that is a hard negotiator on our side! On our side!

When he says, America first, he means it.

Which brings me back to Panama. When you understand Panama, you'll understand Donald Trump entirely. And you will look at Donald Trump in a completely different way.

GLENN: All right.

Panama. We know of Panama Canal as the place that we built.

It was the biggest undertaking. It was probably the biggest human achievement, at the time. Making the canal, so you didn't have to go all the way down, to South America, to the tip of South America.

Almost to Antarctica. And come back to get to the -- to get to the Pacific Ocean. Or to get to the Atlantic, if you're going the other direction.

We made the Panama Canal. Teddy Roosevelt was the one who did it. Jimmy Carter sold it to Panama for a dollar.

Now, when you make a deal like that, you don't expect to be screwed after his. You know, you kind of have, hey, favored nation.

You know, you will be our pal. Well, Panama has been palling up with China.

And the president of Panama had just said with be there are -- there are no Chinese, at the canal. Nobody is -- no. No. There are no Chinese soldiers in the canal.

Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

So Donald Trump, on Christmas, sent a message, again, negotiating, letting everyone know where he stands. Merry Christmas to all.

Including the wonderful soldiers of China, who are lovingly, but illegally operating the Panama Canal.

Now, if you don't know anything about the Panama Canal. You might think this is crazy. This is -- this shows how much homework Donald Trump has done. This shows -- this is the first time I have seen since maybe Reagan, where we are actually talking about our national security.

Not in a reactive way. We have now a president who is looking at real national -- our national security is not in Ukraine!

Our national security is here at the home front.

And why -- why is he so obsessed with Panama?

It's just not that we're having our eyes pushed into our his and being gouged.

It is also because China has -- has purchased a lot of the Panama Canal operating permits.

So, in other words, the -- the one that is the last, I think lock.

I don't know enough about it.

But the last area of the Panama Canal. Going into the Pacific. It's now run by a Chinese company.

Now, is that honestly Chinese soldiers?

No!

No.

But it is the People's Liberation Army, that can take over that business because that's the deal.

Do you really think all of these investors just got together, on their own. Which doesn't happen in China.

And went, you know what, we should buy up all the land surrounding the Panama Canal? It would be a good idea. But good investment for us. No!

STU: And, Glenn, clarification on that. We were okay with Hong Kong taking it over. Not China. It was before that transition happened. So we were like, okay. Hong Kong, we're working with them all the time.

Okay. And then China basically takes over Hong Kong.

And now China has it.

We weren't okay with China having that, even back then.

GLENN: Yeah. You cannot have -- this is a huge strategic asset.

If our fleet. Our Atlantic fleet needs to get over to the other side, and into the Pacific, you want them to get there as quickly as possible. And that's why we build the Panama Canal.

This is a Cuban missile crisis moment. And this is -- honestly, it might even go back to JFK. To where you have a president, who is forward thinking enough, to go, this is a real threat to our national curate.

And an actual threat to our national security.

All they have to do is close the Panama Canal. Or cause trouble at the Panama Canal. And the United States is in real, real trouble.

So the one that you should pay attention to, that is actually trouble, is the Panama Canal.

The rest of it, negotiation.

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.