Can Trump Legally Send Troops to Chicago? | 8/25/25

The Conjuring Last Rights

on September 5th!

Hooray!

The Conjuring Last Rites only in theater September 5th.

Richard R.

When you buy a home, you think that the hard part is over.

The bidding wars and the paperwork and the closing table.

But the twist is your biggest battle might actually begin after you move in.

You got to think about your home's title.

This is the legal deed to your house, and it's the crown jewel of your personal kingdom.

Every time you go into this, you know, you look at these situations and you see...

I don't know, these jewels of your crown jewels are sort of stored in a glass case sitting out in the open, and everyone with a laptop can kind of get in there and check them out.

Criminals forge signatures, they fake transfers, they suddenly

take your stuff.

And that is not just an inconvenience, it's a bigger deal than that.

It can drain your finances and throw your whole life into chaos while you still try to prove you own what's yours.

That's why protecting your title is not about paranoia, it's about common sense.

And Home Title Lock can help you with all this.

Home TitleLock.com, HometitleLock.com.

Protect yourself right now, as I do, as Glenn does.

hometitlelock.com Home

the promo code is blaze hometitalock.com promo code is blaze about 10 seconds till the radio show begins lots to talk about today we get there in just a second

hello america you know we've been fighting every single day we push back against the lies the censorship the nonsense of the mainstream media that they're trying to feed you.

We work tirelessly to bring you the unfiltered truth because you deserve it.

But to keep this fight going, we need you.

Right now, would you take a moment and rate and review the Glenn Beck podcast?

Give us five stars and leave a comment because every single review helps us break through big tech's algorithm to reach more Americans who need to hear the truth.

This isn't a podcast.

This is a movement and you're part of it, a big part of it.

So if you believe in what we're doing, you want more people to wake up, help us push this podcast to the top.

Rate, review, share.

Together, we'll make a difference.

And thanks for standing with us.

Now let's get to work.

Down the road where shadows hide, till the dark on every side.

Stand your ground when times get dark.

Gotta face the dark and embrace the fire.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is

the Glen Beck Program.

Hello, America.

Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

We're glad you're here.

There's a lot to talk about today.

I want to start with some questions.

Do the ends justify the means?

And

what can be done?

What can be done?

You know, there's a story out today about how Ronald Reagan wanted to get rid of all of the ballistic missiles.

And he suggested it.

And it was, I think, Cap Weinberger's Weinberger's idea and then everybody dismantled it because that can't be done that can't be done that can't be done I think it could have whether it was a good idea or a bad idea I don't know but

it could have been done but nobody wanted to think out of the box

it's okay to think out of the box I want to be somebody who is looking at the situations dealing with what we have but we have gerrymandering.

What's the right thing to do there?

We have crime in our cities.

The president wants to send in troops to other cities.

What's the best idea there?

He also wants to start taking stock for bailouts.

And the CHIPS Act is one of those things.

We'll talk about that.

What's the right thing to do there?

We'll talk about all these things coming up in 60 seconds first.

Let me start with a sponsor this half hour.

It's the Burna Launcher.

The main thing I worry about in situations where I have to defend myself or my family isn't the danger in front of me, it's hesitation.

Because the second you start thinking, what if I go too far, what if this is a mistake, that is the second you lose time that you may not have.

Now, with a traditional firearm, that split second of doubt can be truly deadly.

But with a burn a launcher, you have a powerful non-lethal option that takes a hesitation out of the equation.

It fires chemical irritant rounds or impact rounds with enough force to stop an attacker in his tracks, giving you the safe and the safety that you need without having to take a life.

Now, it's legal in all 50 states,

no permits,

it's lightweight enough to carry everywhere.

It should be in your children's purse or their backpack, quite honestly.

When the moment comes, they won't be frozen in doubt.

You won't.

You'll be ready, decisive, and able to protect the people you love.

Burna's back to school sale is live right now.

Go to burna.com slash glenn, get 10% off site-wide.

I'm telling you, sending a kid to college, they need one of these.

Go to burna, byrna.com, or you can find it at Sportsman's warehouse find a location near you at byrnaburna.com slash Glenn.

Well, hello, America.

So this weekend, let me start with a couple of cuts here.

Let me start with Vice President Vance over the weekend on crime.

Let's go cut one.

Just to echo something the president said about crime in Washington, D.C., this is the national capital of the greatest nation in the world.

And we had murder rates just a few weeks ago that rivaled some of the worst third world cities anywhere, even in very, very poor regions of the world.

Why did we accept that?

Why did we allow it to happen?

We allowed it to happen because we had broken leadership in Washington, D.C., and unfortunately sitting behind the resolute desk.

What we have shown in just under two weeks of taking law enforcement seriously is that the American people could have their streets back if their leadership is willing to put in the time and the resources.

Mr.

President, you've shown in Washington, D.C.

that we can have safe streets again.

We've just got to have the political willpower to focus on the bad guys and to give the American people back their communities.

We are focused on doing that thanks to the President's leadership.

Okay, now that is really important.

There is one phrase in there that is so critical, and I just want you to file it away, and that is:

we just need to take law enforcement seriously.

Law enforcement seriously.

Just file that away.

I'm going to come back to it here in just a second.

Now, here's what Donald Trump said about other cities.

Listen.

And after we do this, we'll go to another location and we'll make it safe also.

We're going to make our country very safe.

We're going to make our cities very, very safe.

Chicago is a mess.

You have an incompetent mayor, grossly incompetent.

And we'll straighten that one out probably next.

That'll be our next one after this.

And it won't even be tough.

And the people in Chicago, Mr.

Vice President, are screaming for us to come.

They're wearing red hats, just like this one.

But they're wearing red hats.

African-American ladies, beautiful ladies, are saying, please, President Trump, come to Chicago.

Please.

I did great with the black vote, as you know, and they want something to happen.

So I think Chicago will be our next, and then we'll help with

New York, and we're going to help with...

And I think, really, I think a lot of, and a lot of these people that you see on television, they are including the people in this audience, they'll say bad things about me and then they'll say, thank God he's here.

Okay, so now the next after D.C.

is going to be Chicago.

All right.

I'm going to get to that here in just a second.

Now, let me play the Chicago mayor and what the Chicago mayor said when he heard this from Donald Trump.

Here is the incompetent Chicago mayor, cut 13.

And so, you know, look, we're going to remain firm, we'll take legal action, but the people of this city are accustomed to rising up against tyranny.

And if that's necessary, I believe that the people of Chicago will stand firm alongside of me as I work every single day to protect the people of this city.

Okay,

I just want to ask you some questions.

What is tyranny?

What is our Constitution?

What does our Constitution mean?

Are there breaking points?

Are there exceptions?

Do the ends justify the means?

Do you want safer streets?

At what cost do you want those safer streets?

Let me start with

a warning here, at least on the surface.

The president does not have a clear constitutional path to federalize police in Chicago or any other city outside of Washington, D.C.

It just doesn't.

Now, remember, I said a clear path.

Go back and think about what I was saying about J.D.

Vance.

What did he say?

He said, They just have to take law enforcement seriously.

I'm going to come back to this.

But Washington, D.C.

is not a state.

It's a district.

It's a federal territory.

It is completely different than anything else in America.

And the founders designed it that way.

They didn't want the nation's capital dependent

or held hostage by some state.

So this means that the president does have direct authority to bring federal law enforcement in to D.C.,

even the military, to patrol the streets for 30 days.

Then it requires Congress to act and pass a bill that says he can continue to do that.

And crime has gone down dramatically.

In 10 days, there hasn't been a single murder in Washington, D.C.

That's almost a parting of the Red Seas.

Okay?

So let's catalog this.

Washington, D.C.

is different.

He has the right to do it, and it's worked marvelously.

Okay.

Now let's go to the Constitution for a second.

The Constitution is very clear.

Policing is a state power.

It's a 10th Amendment right.

The federal government cannot police our streets.

Now,

the president has some tools.

One, the Insurrection Act of 1807.

What is that?

I think this is what the president is thinking.

That law allows the commander-in-chief to send troops into a state without the governor's permission if there's an actual insurrection.

Now, what does an insurrection mean?

That means, now hear me clearly, if laws are being openly defied on a mass scale

or if constitutional rights are being stripped away.

Okay.

Constitutional rights being stripped away,

that takes us to Johnson, the civil rights era.

It takes us to Kennedy.

The Los Angeles riots in 1992.

That's how George W.

Bush did it.

Civil rights.

But these were extraordinary events, right?

Gang murders.

Do they meet this constitutional threshold?

I'm not sure.

Here's why.

Aren't laws being openly

defied on a mass scale in our cities, especially sanctuary cities?

Aren't our laws being openly defied on a mass scale?

Now, this is something a court is going to decide because, believe me, it's going to go to court.

But I think that's where the president is landing.

Now

my responsibility is

to tell you the truth, not to make you feel better, not to be on somebody's side, but to tell you what I think the truth is.

You may disagree with my opinion, but my opinion means nothing if I don't tell you what I believe is the right thing, what I believe is the wrong thing, and what I believe the truth is.

Let me go a little deeper into the Constitution.

We have posse comitatas.

That's the Act of 1878, and it was written precisely to keep the government, federal government, from sending in the army or the military to become a domestic police force.

It can't.

Why?

Because

even by the late, you know, or mid 1800s,

the country still remembered the Redcoats.

They also still remembered

during the

Civil War.

And people were tired of having the government in their cities by this time.

So posse comitatus came around.

Our founders fought a revolution to rid themselves of a government that used soldiers to enforce its will on its own people.

They weren't using the police.

They were using soldiers.

That's why Alexander Hamilton, who actually believed in a very strong government, still warned of the dangers of a standing army.

That's why up until World War II, we didn't have a standing army.

Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, all of them, terrified of a standing army.

Because once you give the president a precedence to send

troops into one city for crime,

where does it end?

Now you could say, well, it ends with this president.

He's going to do it the right way.

Yes.

But the reason we have laws is not for the exception of the good guy.

We have it for all the bad guys that will follow.

You might think that it's okay for Donald Trump because I don't think Donald Trump is a fascist.

I don't think Donald Trump will abuse us.

I think he will quash crime.

However, what's going to stop stop the next president that's not your guy from doing something where you're like, wait a minute, wait a minute, you can't send in the troops to do that.

Well, yeah, you can, because you already made the exception.

You send somebody into your neighborhood next time, or to a protest, or to a school board meeting that gets out of hand.

What do you do if you don't have the Constitution to rely on?

This is what tyranny is, and this is a slope to tyranny.

It doesn't mean that Donald Trump is a tyrant.

It means these are the things, these are the tools that allow tyrants to grab hold.

So

we know what works.

What works?

Enforcing the laws.

That's what works.

Now, are they going to do it?

No.

Chicago's not going to do it.

You know, going after a small group of repeat offenders who drive most of the shootings, hotspot policing, putting resources in the most dangerous blocks instead of blanketing whole neighborhoods, those are the things that work.

Actually,

actually going in and arresting and then sentencing to a real term in jail for real crimes, that works.

You know, if you want a model for the president,

Chicago has already done this once, and the federal government did send in feds.

Chicago has always been a tough city because it's always been crime-ridden

in the city halls, okay?

It's always been dirty.

So what happened?

Well, during Prohibition, there was a lot of people making an awful lot of money, and they had money to spread around for every politician.

Everybody would just keep their mouths shut, and the guy who was doing it was Al Capone.

Well, they didn't send in the army.

They could have, I guess.

You could have said, well, they're not enforcing the law in Chicago.

Look at what's happening.

Everybody's been bribed.

The president at the time didn't send in the military.

Let me tell you what he did here in 60 seconds.

First, let me tell you about Cozy Earth.

When you think of luxury, maybe you picture a five-star hotel or some high-end spa or, you know, a friend that seems to have everything figured out.

But here's the truth: luxury doesn't have to live out there someplace.

It can be with you, it can be experienced the second you walk through the front door.

Cozy Earth has created bedding and apparel that are so soft, you'll wonder how you ever slept without it.

You have loungewear from Cozy Earth, you have bedding from Cozy Earth.

It's all about temperature, breathability, and the way that their products seem to read your body like a book, keeping you comfortable through the night.

There's a reason Cozy Earth products are in so many homes, including mine, because Cozy Earth isn't just selling sheets or towels or apparel.

Their pants in particular and their shirts are really, really great.

They're selling you a better version of rest, comfort, of life.

And once you've experienced that, you'll never go back.

So go to cozyearth.com, use the promo code Beck for the 40% off the softest bedding bathwear and other apparel it's cozyearth.com promo code beck cozy earth built for real life and made to keep up with yours 10 seconds

so how did the federal government deal with al capone well they didn't send in the army to fight horrible horrible crime and corruption in that city.

They instead use their federal authority in areas where the feds had legitimate space.

Tax evasion, bootlegging, enforcing federal revenue laws.

They beat organized crime by staying inside of the Constitution.

And there are ways inside the Constitution for the President to do things.

Not soldiers in the streets, not a federal police force.

The president's duty is to protect and preserve and defend the Constitution of the United States, not to bend it because a city is in crisis.

Because once you break the Constitution to solve one problem, you unleash a hundred other problems down the line.

I don't know what the right answer is here.

I'm not a constitutional scholar.

I'm not an attorney.

But I would urge the president to make sure he is on strong constitutional founding or footing so he does not open doors for others.

The founders gave us federalism.

That's state power, local control.

And that is a balance and a check to

federal authority.

And let me tell you, we don't have checks and balances anymore.

One of the last ones we have is a check on federal power by our state and local governments.

So yes, by all means, clean up the streets.

You can send in ICE.

You can start arresting people who are breaking the law and who are not enforcing the law.

I think, and I think you can do it constitutionally.

You have to do it through state and local authority, through community, through the communities, through federal agents enforcing the federal laws, but not occupying cities.

If we let that happen,

we might stop the shootings in Chicago, but

we will have lost something even more precious, the limits on government that keep all of us free.

Sometimes the Constitution sucks, doesn't it?

Sometimes it really sucks because it stops you from doing the right thing.

We all know how to stop crime in Chicago.

We all know.

We all know.

And we all know that it's not going to stop in Chicago.

It's not because the system is so unbelievably corrupt.

How do you deal with the people who are living in Chicago that their kids are being shot?

Their kids are being killed.

What do you just say, say, I can't do anything about it?

Is that what you do?

I want to get into next.

I want to talk to you about gerrymandering

because gerrymandering is absolutely out of control.

The left has been doing this forever.

Now the right is jumping in and saying, hey, if you're going to do that, and in that particular case, I think they're right.

That is the way the system is set up.

It is.

I don't like it.

I have a better idea, I think.

And I, you know, unfortunately, the left is now starting to present Congress with better ideas.

And these better ideas are not better ideas.

So we better have a better idea on the table.

And that's all that President Trump, I think, is looking for.

I think he's looking for better ideas.

How do we stop this?

We all know it's a problem.

We all know you don't have to live that way.

He is proving it in Washington, D.C.

All you have to do is arrest people, try them, and put them in jail.

That's all you have to do.

That stops most crime.

What's so hard to figure out?

Well, that won't happen in Philadelphia.

It certainly won't happen in New York.

It won't happen in Chicago.

It won't happen in LA.

Why?

Because of

politics.

That's why.

This is Glenn Beck.

There is a thread that runs through history, unbroken for thousands of years, and it began with the promises that God made to Abraham.

It grew in the Torah, and then it was, you know, filled in the teachings and life.

of Jesus.

And Christians and Jews share that story.

It's a story that really changed the world, faith, struggle, hope.

It shaped the foundation of Western civilization.

And yet throughout history, the Jewish people have been persecuted, attacked, and too often left alone.

Today, Israel faces enemies that seek her destruction, and

families that are there live under constant threat.

If you've not been there, you don't really understand it.

It's quite different from our life.

For Christians, this is not some far-off story.

It is our family.

It's our shared heritage.

Scripture commands us to comfort my people.

Well, the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews does just that.

Food, shelter, aid to those in needs, also while standing as a shield of support for Israel in times of crisis.

Stand with them now.

Would you go and make a donation to ifcj.org?

That's ifcj.org.

Stay on top of what you need to stay on top of with the email newsletter at glennbeck.com.

It's free.

Subscribe now, glennbeck.com.

Glenn Beck program.

So we are, I want to switch gears to gerrymandering because here is a here is another example of what do we do?

What do we do?

And Stu, you ran a poll over the weekend

on gerrymandering.

I love this.

Yeah,

I was thinking of where do we go from here.

So if California does wind up passing, and there's still some steps for that to happen,

to try to get five seats to

respond to Texas's redistricting change, what should we do next?

The three options were, let it be.

This is over.

We each did tit for tat.

Number two.

Nope.

Number two, we respond with one red state.

They did a blue state.

We're going to do a red state.

Like we just keep going.

No.

And then option number three was max out all of our red states.

Let's just go for it right now and cut the cord.

Well,

where I'm at.

You agreed with the audience.

The results were let it be 4%.

Respond in one red state, 2.2%.

Max out all red states, 93.8%.

Okay, so here's why I'm there.

Unlike the Chicago thing, which I think there are paths to fixing this and making Chicago safe.

I just want to be very clear, we must follow the Constitution.

There is a situation I want to fix, and I'm not sure we know how to fix it yet, because we would be violating constitutional norms, and

we can't open that door.

Gerrymandering is, I mean,

that's been happening since like, you know, 1815,

named after Eldridge Gehry,

who was a signer of the Declaration of Independence and I think the Constitution.

And he started gerrymandering.

You know, it's actually Eldridge Gerry.

And he started making things.

And it was named that because the district that he made looked like a salamander.

Okay.

And so he was gerrymandering.

Now that has become norm.

And it has become so obscene that places like Chicago,

where

I think 40%

of people vote in Illinois, 40%

vote for the Republicans, but they only have 17% of

the representation.

How is that possible?

How is that possible?

In Maryland, the president was talking to the governor and saying, hey, look, governor, you got to clean stuff up, et cetera, et cetera.

And the governor responded to him with that and the gerrymandering thing with, I might have to gerrymander to make things more fair.

Currently, there's only one Republican that is in Congress from Maryland.

Now, I know there are Republicans that live, lots of them that live in Maryland.

How is it you're talking about getting rid of the only Republican?

This is out of control.

It's completely out of control.

The reason why the Democrats are upset is because

the GOP has decided to do something about it.

We're not going to put up with this anymore.

Now, is this the right way to do it?

I think so.

At this point, I think so.

Are there better ideas?

I do think so.

And I want to talk about that coming up in a minute.

But I also want to, I want to make sure that I mention Lee Zeldon.

He is our EPA administrator.

And

he has done some remarkable work.

I just did an interview with him on Friday that was a podcast over the weekend.

And let me just give you a couple couple of things.

Let me just give you cut 10 here.

This is Lee Zeldon from the EPA.

Listen to what this guy is doing.

So when we came in, the agency was at 16,155.

We've been going through reorganizations, reductions in force.

We're going down to 12 and a half.

So over the course of the first six months, we were able to reduce the size by 23%,

which aside from the over $29 billion of grants that we canceled, that's $750 million of annual savings to the taxpayer.

And then we're also doing real estate consolidations.

We closed an EPA museum that nobody went to.

That cost a lot of money.

We're canceling media subscriptions that were overpriced.

There's just a lot of ways to save money.

But you're making enemies.

I've heard that there are 400 of your own employees that have turned on you and wrote, you know, some scathing letter about, you know, how you're the Antichrist or whatever and how you're going to kill the environment.

What is it like to be you to walk into an agency where

you're not the most popular?

So

here's the great news.

I would say that a large majority of the employees, a very large majority of the employees I've interacted with, and I engage with the career employees every day here at headquarters.

I've been to 30 states.

So I've engaged with EPA across all 10 of our regions, and they get it.

You do a career inside of a federal agency, 20, 30, 40 years,

and you'll have very different presidents from one administration to the next.

Sometimes it's a president you voted for, sometimes it's not.

To the point that you just raised, we also have exceptions.

And in this case, we had a letter that was drafted where agency employees using their title written as agency employees

were

providing their own very public opinion of where the agency should go on policy, ignoring the will of the American public.

There's a reason why President Trump is now in the Oval Office, that I'm here in this position after being confirmed by the Senate.

You can't, as an employee in an agency doing a 20, 30, 40 year career, just always insist that whatever the policy and ideology is of the furthest left president you support over the course of your term, that whatever they want during those four or eight years, whatever they're pursuing, is treated

etched in stone like it's a commandment.

The pendulum will swing because the American public voted for it.

The American public doesn't want an electric vehicle mandate.

They don't want the coal plants to be shut.

They want energy dominance unleashed here in America.

They want to be able to create jobs.

They want us to be cognizant of their concerns.

I will tell you that

I wish we had the clip of where I said to him, you know, are you going to be able to complete this in four years?

Because we talked about energy, how they are unleashing, unleashing

energy in

power plants that are coal, that are gas,

that are also nuclear.

The things that he talked to me about and how they are moving rapidly on that.

And then also the things that they are doing to get rid of some of the really, really, really bad laws that were brought in by

Barack Obama.

how he is erasing all of those barriers and returning this to a thing that where it's not opposed to industry.

It's for the environment.

It wants to make sure we're all living by the rules.

We have clean air, clean water.

But it is also not against business.

We have to have energy.

We must have energy to be a country that will survive.

He knows that.

When I asked him,

how much can you get done?

Because I asked Donald Trump this question.

I said, can we get this done in four years?

He said, no, we need 12 years.

We need 12.

He said, hopefully, though, we will have a good replacement for me for another eight years and we'll be able to do it.

But we have to

really root this out all the way to 12 years.

Lee Zeldin told me, I thought we were going to need a lot more time.

He said, Glenn, I've got people on the inside, whistleblowers, who are on the inside going, no, no, no, Lee, this, this, this, and this, this is what they've been doing.

He said, I believe we will have the EPA fixed

by early next year.

Fixed.

By early next year.

I found that astounding.

Because that is, Stu, can you name an agency that is more out of control than EPA?

I mean, besides all of them, EPA?

I mean, look at what the EPA, the power the EPA has.

Yeah, massive, massive power.

Now, it has been curbed recently with the Supreme Court, which does give you some hope that his optimism is justified.

It feels more optimistic than I ever get about anything.

So I hope

that's right.

You do?

He was, yeah, he was talking about how grants had been going through and they were all just for NGOs and they were used for nefarious things.

He talked about how

he has cut the regulation,

cut the wait time on things.

He said, we can actually build things now and we're still going to have clean air and clean water and we're going to have forests, et cetera, et cetera.

He said, but I'm just cutting all of the garbage out of here.

I was so optimistic when I heard that.

I mean, I think this administration,

I mean, I don't know how they seem to get this many good people, but he's got so many really good people who are really focused on the right things.

I think they are cleaning up this deep state thing.

I feel too, Glenn, and tell me if this is something that you've sensed at all,

is,

you know, I think Zeldon's doing a really good job.

I've been, you know, same way encouraged by everything he's been doing.

You'll love him after you listen to the podcast.

You'll love him.

Go ahead.

I feel like there's a situation where sometimes the stuff that gets highly promoted is not the stuff that winds up being the most successful or the thing you'll remember maybe 20 years later.

Where, you know, like maybe Doge is a good example of this, right?

Like there was a lot of hype around Doge.

They definitely got some stuff done, you know, but is that going to be as impactful as what maybe is going on

at the EPA?

I think maybe not.

I think at the end of the day, we might find out that the EPA is a much more significant

difference for the country in the long term than maybe all the stuff that was talked about with Doge.

And there's a bunch of examples like this.

A lot of times the news focuses is Hazy looking this way.

And there's a bunch of people who are working really hard in agencies that don't make the headlines that are really making the biggest difference.

Aaron Powell, Jr.: So

there were two things that happened with the Obama administration that we covered at the time, but we didn't really stand on, that had huge ramifications.

And one I think we're just starting to figure out now, and that is the propaganda rules, that he changed the rules of propaganda, that we could do propaganda on the American people.

I know we talked about it.

I don't know why we didn't make a bigger deal out of it.

Because now that seems like, oh, well, that's how they're getting away with a lot of things.

That's where the Office Office of, what is it, Internet Engagement or whatever that was called, you know, where they were telling people what you can and can't say online.

All of that stems from that.

And when it comes to the EPA, the Obama endangerment finding where they found that CO2 is dangerous for life.

What?

No, no, it's not.

It's part of it.

It's part of it.

The trees breathe it in, we breathe it out.

They breathe out oxygen, we breathe out CO2.

We both grow because of those things.

And it's remarkable to me that the endangerment finding, do you remember standing on that as hard as we did on like Obamacare and things like that?

I mean, I know we did not cover it as, you know, in as much

as much time for sure.

I do remember being very, very angry about it and worried about it.

But again,

it was one of those things that was just kind of set.

I mean, Obamacare was a law, right?

There was a chance to stop it.

In fact, we did stop it, really.

I mean, we stopped it when Scott Brown got elected in Massachusetts, and then they did it anyway.

So, you know, it was a law.

There was a much more buildup to that.

This was just them doing it.

I mean, once they got elected, we knew that they would take these types of steps.

But you're right.

We didn't.

It wasn't seen at the time as

big a deal.

When it was, that was a massive deal that has cost our country hundreds of billions of dollars at the very least.

And now with Lee Zeldon taking it away and reversing that,

it's just as a big of a deal, but you don't know it because I haven't heard at least a case of what the EPA is doing.

I haven't heard a full case of this.

Lee Zeldon, I mean, he lined it all out.

It's a great podcast.

It came out on Saturday.

You can find it wherever you get your podcasts, but it is the podcast with Lee Zeldon.

All right, back in just a minute.

Let me tell you about Patriot Mobile.

Let's say you're buying a burger and you hand the kid your money, right?

And he hands you your bag and then he turns and punches some guy in the face.

And you'd be like, why did you do that?

He says, comes with a burger.

It's part of what you paid for.

Wait, no, I didn't want you to punch somebody in the face.

You're probably not going to go back to that burger joint again, right?

Right?

I mean, who wants their money going to something that you never asked for?

Well, that is exactly what big cell phone companies do.

This is how they operate.

You pay your bill, and then behind the counter, they find causes that you don't support, and and they do, and they hand them a bag of cash.

I mean, you should be thinking, wait a minute, I just wanted a phone plan, not to finance somebody else's leftist agenda.

Well, Patriot Mobile is different.

They're America's only Christian, conservative, wireless provider, and you still get the same great service, great coverage, and a fair price.

And your money is helping support causes that you believe in.

Switching is easier than ever.

You can activate in minutes from the comfort of your own home, keep your number, your phone, or you can upgrade.

Time to make the switch today.

Go to patriotmobile.com/slash Beck or call 972-Patriot, 972-Patriot.

It's patriotmobile.com/slash Beck.

Use the promo code Beck and you'll get a free month of service.

Patriot Mobile 972 Patriot.

You know, truth makes the left so mad.

And right about now, they're all losing their minds.

We must be doing something right.

Stick around.

Beck will continue right after this.

So if you've ever tried so-called healthy breads and bagels from the grocery store, you know the experience.

They look okay on the shelf, but the moment you bite in, it's like chewing on recycled cardboard.

We've all been there, and it's funny because not long ago, bread was like the hero of the food pyramid.

We were told to pile it high and build every every meal on it and then load up on the carbs.

And then these days, kind of protein is in the spotlight.

Carbs have been exiled to the naughty list.

And suddenly, bread is treated like it's public enemy number one.

But it doesn't have to be that way.

The bakers over at Royo have cracked the code with breads and bagels that are healthy and taste great.

Every loaf has, and every bagel has,

it's baked fresh daily.

It's used clean, minimal ingredients.

You can actually pronounce them.

The higher in fiber, they have protein, they're lower in carbs.

Some of them come in at just like two net carbs, which means you can, you don't have to feel guilty about enjoying the foods you love.

I've been having a sandwich on this bread like every day for two weeks, and it's just great.

It's really, really filling, and it's really something that I think you're going to like.

It's like 30 calories a slice.

That's the magic of Royo.

Eatroyo.com.

Use the promo code Blaze, get 20% off.

The promo code is blaze at eatroyo.com.

I will say, you want to eat healthy, you want to eat lighter, whatever you want to do.

If you're like me, bread's got to be part of it.

It's just,

it needs to be there, and you can do it with Royo.

It's eatroyo, R-O-Y-O, eatroyo.com, promo code blaze.

AI has just found some breaking news here.

Listen to this about John Bolton.

We seem to have breaking news.

Apparently, the FBI has found the USB thumb drive they were looking for.

Mr.

Bolton was reportedly hiding it under his mustache.

This is apparently the same technique he used to smuggle information in and out of the State Department.

Apparently, it was President Trump who alerted the FBI to make sure they checked under his mustache.

He said, and I quote, make sure you look under that son of a b ⁇ 's mustache.

I never trusted that mustache.

I don't know that his mustache is trustworthy, to be honest.

I don't think so.

I don't think so.

And I think it might even be one of those fake ones, a glue-on mustache.

Really?

Yeah, yeah.

I mean, who has a mustache like that, honestly?

You know, there's the, yeah,

I'm still looking into this John Bolton thing because there's so much to

there's so much to this.

And I don't think I've heard anybody really get to the bottom of it yet.

We have time today.

I want to explore that with you just a little bit because there's more to this story, I think.

All right.

next,

gerrymandering.

At Montera Credit Union, we're committed to empowering our members to reach their goals.

Starting with a very powerful offer, get a $150 cash bonus just for opening a premium checking account with no monthly maintenance while earning up to 3.50% APY.

It's a checking account that truly rewards.

Open an account daily at montera.org/slash checking150 and start banking with a credit union that's invested in you.

Montera Credit Union, federally insured by NCUA, Equal opportunity lender.

Conditions and restrictions may apply.

This is Glenn Beck.

Let me tell you about ammo squared.

You remember the great ammo shortage of 2020?

You go go into stores all over the place.

I did, and ammo shelves were pretty much bare.

Even the online options were often wiped out.

Well, there is a company now in Idaho working very hard to make sure that never happens to you again.

It's called Ammo Squared, and they've been helping people, 100,000 members strong, I'm one of them, stockpile ammo automatically.

They've been doing it since 2015, and here's how it works.

First, you sign up, you pick your choices of ammo from 70 different calibers, then you just set an auto-buy budget and choose your shipping trigger.

After that, over time, your ammo accumulates and is stored for free in Ammo Square's climate control warehouse until you say, Ship it, I'm ready for it.

There are no minimums, no extra fees, perfect for small budgets or anyone who wants to build up a stockpile without spending thousands

and the hassle.

It is the easiest way to stay prepared.

I want you to go to ammo squared right now, ammo squared.com.

AmmoSquared.com.

Do it now.

AmmoSquared.com.

Down the road where shadows hide, feel the dark on every side.

Stand your ground when times get dark.

Gotta face the dark and embrace the fire.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is

the Glenbeck Program.

Hello, America.

Welcome to the Glenn Beck program.

I want to ask you, does our system, in our system of government, do people pick the politicians?

Or do our maps pick the people who pick the politicians?

I get to just cut the people out of it.

Do our maps pick the politicians?

We're going to talk about gerrymandering, what is happening, what the choices are in front of us, why it is really, really important on what to do, and I think the best solution out there, but I don't know, it's just me.

Of course, it's my idea, so I love all my ideas.

Anyway, we'll get to that here in 60 seconds.

First, let me tell you about Z Factor.

Everybody talks about how busy their day is, the meetings, the errands, the endless to-do lists, but the truth is, your day isn't won or lost in the afternoon.

It's decided the night before.

If you drag yourself to bed, toss and turn until 2 a.m.

and you wake up feeling like you've been hit by a truck, your day is already shot.

I mean, even before it starts.

That's where Z Z Factor comes in.

From the makers of Relief Factor, Z Factor is formulated to help your body slip into the kind of rest that actually recharges you.

Deep, consistent, restorative sleep that builds you back up instead of leaving you running on empty.

It's not about knocking yourself out, it is about giving your mind and your body the support they need to rest like you mean it.

Because when you wake up refreshed, your whole life looks different.

The energy, the mood, the drive, the confidence to take on whatever comes, it all starts with a better night's sleep.

And Z Z Factor makes that possible.

Now,

first time, Z Factor buyers are going to enjoy 46% off.

It's $19.95 for a 30-day supply.

Visit ReliefFactor.com, ReliefFactor.com, or call 800 for relief.

800, the number four, relief.

Okay, gerrymandering.

Started by...

Stu, can you look this up for me?

Is it Eldridge Jerry or Gary?

I always thought it was Eldridge Gary.

Yeah, you're remembering that right now.

Now that we've been talking about it,

it is?

It is Eldridge Gary.

Yeah, there's a weird quirk, basically, in American history where his name was Eldridge Gary.

It was first called gerrymandering, essentially, in a newspaper at the time.

People read the newspaper, didn't know how to pronounce his name, started saying gerrymandering, and that's what stuck.

So it was actually different than the way his name was pronounced, even though it was named after him.

Yeah, well, that's why you spell your name G-A-R-Y, not G-E-R-R-Y.

I mean, hello.

Lesson learned.

Yes.

So gerrymandering is when a salamander-shaped district gave America a new word

and a new really bad habit.

Okay.

And we have perfected this really bad habit.

It started about 18, yeah, about 1818, 1815, someplace around there.

And it wasn't known as gerrymandering until the mid-1800s when everybody was doing it.

Now, here's how bad it has gotten.

Today in Massachusetts, one-third of the voters choose a Republican,

but not one of the nine House seats.

They can choose for president,

but they one-third vote for Republicans, but because the way they have the map set up,

you don't get any House seats.

So a third of the population has zero representation.

And not because they didn't show up, but because the lines chose first.

In Illinois, pretty much the same situation.

47% of voters cast a ballot for Republicans in 2024.

47%.

Now, why do we all think that Illinois is so far left in Congress?

Why?

Because 47%, they didn't get their choice.

47% of the voters cast a ballot for Republicans in 2024, and they got 17% of the seats.

Now

that's magical.

There's some magical forces making that happen.

Okay?

Now you see competition.

Poof.

Now you don't.

Maryland.

The courts called one map an extreme partisan gerrymander.

Why?

Well, because there's only one Republican serving in Maryland.

Only one.

Now, how is that possible?

Because you know there are people that live in Maryland.

Only one of the House seats go to a Republican.

One?

Come on.

Now,

here's the latest.

The governor now says all options are on the table.

This is the governor of Maryland.

We just played this clip.

Can you play it again, please?

Are you actively looking at it now?

Yeah, because and I think and I think we have to.

Yes, and I think and I think we have to.

Because I think what's happened is this is what people hate about politics in the first place, the fact that the president of the United States, very similar to what he did in Georgia, where he called up a series of voter registrants and said, I need you to find me more votes.

We're watching the same thing now where he's calling up legislatures around the country and saying, I need you to find me more congressional districts.

He's doing it.

That may be different.

Democrats redistrict.

You know this.

But Gavin Newsom's doing it right now.

A few years ago in New York, we saw this.

This can backfire.

Do you really really want to go down this road?

I want to make sure that we have fair lines and fair seats, where we don't have situations where politicians are choosing voters, but that voters actually have a chance to choose their elected officials.

We need to be able to have fair maps.

And we also need to make sure that if the President of the United States is putting his finger on the scale to try to manipulate elections because he knows that his policies cannot win in a ballot box.

If you don't know anything about Maryland, you would be like, well, that's reasonable.

And most people don't know anything about Maryland.

Well, that's reasonable.

He just wants fair maps and fair lines.

Okay.

If you really wanted the people to pick,

you wouldn't, it's mathematically impossible in Illinois.

It's mathematically impossible in Massachusetts and in Maryland to have

the representation for the GOP

that they have.

It's mathematical.

Massachusetts has zero Republicans in the House.

Zero.

In the whole state, zero.

Maryland only has one.

And then he says, well, I might have to redistrict.

To get rid of the one?

One, one place where a Republican won, and you want to redistrict that out of existence.

That doesn't seem fair to me, right?

Okay.

This isn't a blue problem.

It's not a red problem.

It is a power problem.

And it has been happening almost since the founding of the country.

And it's got to stop.

Now, in 2019, the Supreme Court had a decision, said the courts are not going to interfere and they won't referee partisan gerrymandering.

Well, that was a message that was sent to everybody, very clear.

Do what you want.

Draw what you can.

Draw what you can get away with.

And so they did.

Now,

in Texas, this all started because Texas,

which, by the way, the

census, these are all based on the census, or they're supposed to be.

But for the very first time, the 2020 census was rigged.

And

it was not fair.

When you have Texas, think of this.

I just want you to think about this logically.

Texas

in,

what was it, 2020?

Texas in 2020 2020 had lost people or had not gained any citizens?

What planet are you living in?

Texas is growing by leaps and bounds as it was in 2015, 2010.

You're telling me nothing, nothing, no new growth.

Wow, that's amazing.

So Texas is trying to

correct this problem where they fix the census.

Okay.

Now, the left is shouting, outrage, this is crazy.

I can't believe they're doing it.

It's an arms race of hypocrisy.

It really is.

It really is.

Which one could launch the biggest hypocritical missile?

I'm not sure.

I can just tell you, this ends.

It ends where legitimacy ends.

When somebody will look up in one of these states and say, this is, and with real

facts on their side,

that's not representative of me.

The House of Representatives, that's not representative of my district, of my state.

You can draw a district any way you want.

You know, cut us all apart so

you can't have a Republican in.

You've been doing that forever.

Here's the thing.

Safe seats.

That's what everybody wants.

A safe seat.

Safe seats do not create better leaders.

They create unaccountable leaders.

Let me say it again.

Safe seats do not create better leaders.

They create unaccountable leaders.

Why?

Because a safe seat doesn't reward persuasion.

You don't have to persuade anybody.

They reward purity tests.

This is why we have become so incredibly extreme.

It's why everybody wonders why the center feels like it's collapsing, you know.

Every compromise feels like a betrayal because you're not dealing with people,

you're dealing with people who are extremes, okay?

So what do we do?

Well, there's a couple of solutions.

One, independent map making.

Yeah, that's going to work.

Put the pens in the citizens' hands.

Oh, good.

michigan arizona california they have shown independent or court drawn maps reduce extremes and increase competition okay

maybe

california has an independent committee this was passed by the people voted for people were like you know what we want fair we want fair districts okay But at the first time of trouble, don't worry, they'll violate that, as you're seeing with California.

You have the governor of California coming out and we're going to redraw all of them because they don't care about the voices of the people in those districts.

They care about the Democrat voice in Congress.

So the governor is going around it.

And it'll only be stopped if the people of California stand up.

Are they going to?

I don't know.

Now,

if we don't solve this at the local and state level, Believe me, there are going to be people in Congress that want to change the rules, and the left is already working on it.

It's called the Fair Representation Act.

Stu,

they already have an act.

It's the Fair Representation Act.

I like

representation.

Right?

It's about representation and it's going to be fair.

See what could go wrong with this.

They just reintroduced it this summer.

It would use independent commissions, multi-member districts, and ranked choice voting for the House.

Oh,

ranked choice voting?

What could possibly go wrong with ranked choice voting?

Why is that a problem, Stu?

Well, currently the Democrats really love ranked choice voting because it's benefited them mostly.

And that's just a small part, of course, of that particular act.

But basically, you know, if you...

you know, unless

the other team is smart enough to actually understand the rules of it, which so far far the Republicans have not been.

They will nominate people that will split their own vote, and you'll wind up with someone who is not the majority candidate winning the seat.

Yeah, really bad idea.

Really bad idea.

So may I make a suggestion on how we fix this?

And I would like to base this on Moses.

Moses already did this.

Okay.

He divided people in hundreds and fifties and tens.

Let me call, let me, let me just, I want you to think of the United States under one big tent, okay?

One big tent.

Let's say we look at the United States as a big block,

and we want to put everybody under a tent, but we can't put them under one big, big tent.

So let's say we put them in tents of 100 or 1,000.

or 5,000.

And we think of the map as you have to have

a tent over these people.

All right.

Well, I know we have four corners, and we put a stake in the ground, and those four corners, we build a tent.

And then we build a tent right next to that one that holds the same amount of people, and we put four stakes in the ground, and we build another tent.

In other words,

Each district has to have four straight lines, just like a tent, just a box.

Okay, it could be a rectangle, however you want to design it, that is fine, but it is just a box.

And when that box becomes too full, you split it in half.

And now it becomes two boxes.

And you keep splitting them until there are more and more boxes.

The more the population grows, the more boxes there are.

Okay?

It's really easy.

Do you know what that would do?

It could mean that in some districts, a couple of apartment buildings, not snaked all the way around the city and into the countryside, but a few apartment buildings in New York City, right in a four-block

area, that might be a district.

What does that do?

That means the people who are representing the people in that apartment complex,

the four-block,

He has to know that four-block area.

That's his deal.

He's not snaking around, going around everywhere else.

He knows those people.

He represents just those people, not people five blocks away, just maybe four blocks away.

And four blocks in each direction.

That way you don't have these people who don't have any idea.

They don't look like you.

I mean, far as the way you vote, they don't look.

vote like you do.

They don't

they they they're they're not some sort of foreigner from a different area of town.

They know what your issues are.

If we did that and we made everything in just squares,

you would localize much more in a much better way, but you would also stop all the extremes.

Because unless everybody in that four-block radius is an extremist, an extremist isn't going to win.

An extremist Republican, extremist Democrat, extremists aren't going to win because most people aren't like that.

That's why the gerrymandering thing happens.

Because you can have people on one side of the street in one district,

people on the other side of the street in another district, and then it snakes up four blocks and then it turns, makes a hard left, then it goes straight up for another street.

Then there's a big bubble at the top of it where a whole bunch of blocks are included.

That makes no sense.

That's making a safe seat.

Again,

safe seats

do not reward

anything.

They create extremism.

All right, more in just a second.

First, let me tell you about Lyric Capital.

I don't know about you, but I've started to think

about the economy kind of like a game of musical chairs.

Everybody's running around, music's playing, everything is fine, it's wonderful, market's jumping, stocks crashing.

Sooner or later, the music's going to stop.

The question is,

are you going to have a chair to sit in when the music stops?

Are you going to be left standing with nothing?

This is why people turn to gold and silver with leer capital.

They're just, you know, not just pretty coins that you tuck away in a box.

They're your seat at the table.

So when paper dollars in your wallet can shrink, precious metals have a way of holding their value because they're not a promise printed by a government saying, trust us, full faith and credit.

No, no.

This is a resource that has been valued by citizens all over the world for thousands of years.

So you can keep hoping the music never stops or you can get ahead of it.

You can make sure that you have a safe place to land.

Lear Capital makes it really easy.

Call Lear Capital today.

The number is 800-957-GOLD.

Get your free $4,200 gold report.

And when you call 800-957-GOLD, ask about getting up to $15,000 in free gold or silver with a qualifying purchase.

Call 800-957-GOLD.

That's 800-957-GOL.

10 seconds, station ID.

Stu

We are dealing with so many weird things today.

We're dealing with the possibility of the president now saying, I'm going to go into Chicago and then maybe L.A.

and then maybe Baltimore and solve the crime problem.

I would say let's hold on there.

Let's hold back the horses just a minute.

Let's find the constitutional way to do these things.

We have the left going crazy on gerrymandering.

Like crazy.

And I don't know if these states are going to stand up.

Do you think people in Maryland are going to stand up and go, hey, now, wait a minute.

We're not

California, Illinois.

Is anybody going to stand up?

Is there going to be any organized resistance to this that could actually stop it in the states?

It's interesting.

The voters can do it in California, which is different than most of these states.

The voters can just stand up and say no.

And the polling,

polling by Gavin Newsom's people has said it's going to pass.

Independent polling has showed, at least at the beginning of this, that the California voters opposed it.

They didn't want him to do this.

And now.

What's changed?

If that polling is right for Gavin Newsom, I'm not sure it is.

Yeah, I'm not sure.

What has changed?

I don't trust him, obviously, at all, or anyone who would associate with him, especially, you know, I mean, he's very likely to sleep with your wife.

You should note that.

Whenever you get involved with Gavin Newsom, as his best friend probably still knows to this day.

But I will say,

it is, I think, if he can can successfully turn this into

what Wes Moore was attempting to do there, we're just trying to respond to them, and it's only the fair thing to do.

If it gets to that, then it probably will pass because Democrats will believe that argument, and it unleashes the all-out war that probably is going to happen.

Probably going to have every red state maxing out and every blue state maxing out, and we'll see where we land.

Republicans will probably do pretty well in that scenario.

But I think it's the right thing to do if they're going to go nuclear war, you got to do it.

I think at least.

Somewhere in your house, there's probably it's in a closet or a box in the attic.

There's a time machine.

I found one this weekend.

We have been moving and going through boxes and stuff, and I found this time machine, really.

It was a box of VHS tapes, reels of films.

We had photo after photo that I hadn't seen in years.

Those are the moments that take you back instantly to all of the memories.

I mean,

Tanya and I, we brought it into the house and we could have spent all day looking just at that box.

You remember things about your parents, your grandparents, your childhood, things that you'd never thought you'd see again or remember, you know, because they're faded for you.

Now,

these will fade, they'll crack, they'll get lost,

and they'll be gone forever if you wait too long.

This is why I would like to suggest that you get Legacy Box.

You just send Legacy Box a box of all those tapes and films and pictures, and their team of experts handles everything with care, all done here in the United States.

They

digitize it and they preserve your family's history forever.

So go to legacybox.com right now.

Legacybox.com/slash records.

Legacybox.com/slash records and save 50%.

Welcome to the Glenbeck program.

Stu, there's got to be a way to do, you know, a constitutional amendment where we get rid of gerrymandering.

I, you know, I don't think the people in Washington will do it, and the party certainly won't do it.

It has to be led by the people.

But just cut everything in squares.

Cut everything in squares.

Or even if you just did four straight lines.

Of any shape, four straight lines.

Go for it.

Four straight lines.

You want to try to gerrymander that?

You can.

You could do little parallelograms that will have a funky shape, and you can slice through and add a little bit.

You know, I don't think so.

I don't think so.

I think it should be squares.

I think it should be

based on the numbers.

I don't know what the number needs to be in each tent.

But you have a square, and in that square, let's just say for

purposes, it would not be this number, but let's just say there's 100 people in that square.

And when that square hits 101, you cut it in half.

And now there's two squares.

And when either one of those squares inside that square hit 101, you cut it in half again.

So there's always less than 100 in each square.

But you just keep making new districts in those those squares.

Don't they have to be the same size?

So you couldn't have a bunch of

100 seat squared and a bunch of 50s.

Well,

it would grow into 50.

I mean, it would grow into 100.

I mean,

I don't know.

Maybe when it hits 200, you cut it.

So it's 100.

But again, then you're having 150.

I don't know, but I just know

I want the people closest around me to be in my voting district because we're talking about the same things.

We're living under the same conditions.

And most likely we know each other.

And so we'll pick somebody who's from our group.

I don't want somebody that

is from

miles and miles and miles and miles away because there's a snake that runs across the state.

What do you know about my neighborhood?

What do you know about my area?

And if you're forced to be in that box, however that box is, however big that box is, you might be miles away in that box, but you at least have a better idea because you haven't been selected by

one party or the other just to say the party things and to get the party in.

You know what I mean?

Sure.

And I mean, I think those are the two directions, right?

Like in theory, we could go to squares and straight lines and fairly drawn districts and people that live around you, which is quite clearly what the founders wanted, right?

That type of thing.

Or you could go the other direction, which is basically all-out war.

And

I think, you know, oddly, you necessarily come back and you say, okay, well, we don't want all-out war.

That's not the right way to go.

In this case, it probably is.

It's probably the only pragmatic way to go.

Because if you stay with what what we have now, which is Democrats heavily redistricting their states to their benefit, not to mention getting incredible benefits out of the most recent census that they should not have had,

which is a whole nother problem that we really do need to address.

But you have those two things going on.

Well, I mean, Republicans are

actually pretty well positioned in an all-out war to

do some positive damage on, you know, for the balance.

I mean, I think that because they're pretty much maxed out in those other states.

They're maxed out.

Like, as you point out, could you figure out a way to get rid of the one in Maryland?

Probably.

They'll find improvements, but every red state will find them as well.

I think the New York Times had a story last week basically warning Democrats.

Of course, they weren't looking at it from a news perspective.

They were looking at it from a, hey, watch out, Democrats.

If you go all out here,

Republicans are likely to add about seven seats.

So

they don't want that.

Of course, I would prefer it.

And you go into an election here.

And I think

this is a little bit off the beaten path of this particular story, but it's an interesting

study in the way Trump version one and Trump version two are acting.

Trump version one, we talked about this at the 2020 election.

There are lots of things, lots of signs, lots of rule changes, lots of important things that happened before the 2020 election occurred that the Trump administration did not act on.

I mean, Pennsylvania is a good example of it.

They basically changed the rules in a way that was not constitutional.

And

Trump didn't sue until after he lost.

He wasn't out in front of those changes.

He wasn't saying, hey, I see what you're doing and we're going to stop it.

Trump 2.0,

realizing that most sitting presidents lose the midterm elections in the House, usually they lose control, is out in front of this in advance and saying, number one, you guys kind of screwed us in this last

census, but number two, we can do something about this now.

Where can we go?

We can go to Texas, we can get five seats there.

We can go to Indiana, we can get a couple seats there.

Let's do our best to improve our chances going forward.

Now, I know a lot of people don't like those tactics, but when you're talking about strategy and pure politics here, it's not an afterthought.

It's not after we lose, what do we do?

It's, hey, let's prevent the loss in the first place.

And that is not.

This is not changing the system.

This is just using the system the way it has been for almost 200 years.

You just use the system.

We've never, I mean, we've used it in some places, but not like the Democrats have used it.

No.

And so, can we get better at it?

Yeah, but you're already playing that game.

You're already playing that game.

Yeah.

So

you're not compromising morally.

You're just playing the game that you're already playing better yeah, I was thinking about it in that

in relation to the way our legal system works right like you watch a defense attorney go up and he's defending this

murderer and You know, he's a murderer.

Everyone knows he's a murderer.

He's on film murdering.

There's a lot of he's writing online about all the murders he wants to commit.

There's a lot of murder going on in this guy's life and everyone knows he's a murderer.

And yet

our system still says,

give this guy an attorney and give him the best possible defense, even though, you know, probably the attorney himself knows this guy is a murdering murderer.

And we can kind of go, you know, we can go to this system.

The system we have now is like, well, why don't we just let the

defense attorneys be honest about what they know?

Right.

And like, let's have them kind of come out and admit that, yeah, their guy probably did murder, but, you know,

let's be nice to him or whatever.

That's kind of the way that, you know, the system kind of works now, where everyone acts as if they're not being partisan when they're redistricting.

You know, maybe the best system is everyone goes as hard as they can on either side and we see what happens at the end, which is kind of what our legislation does.

It is.

It is.

I'm not sure that that would be the best thing for us to do because we're

a little shaky right now.

It's not the best thing, Glenn, but I think it might be the second best thing.

It might be better than what we have.

That I think is the issue.

It might be

an improvement.

I don't love it.

It doesn't make me feel like I don't want to necessarily walk out and sing the Star Spangled Banner and expect fireworks to go off because of this process.

It's an ugly political process.

But at the end of the day,

we can't sit here and just get rolled over.

It's within the law.

The Supreme Court has ruled on this.

You can use politics to redistrict.

It's within the rules of the game.

And sometimes you just have to push those rules to the limit to get fairness, which is a weird thing to say, but I think it is true in this case.

All right, let me go to Carl in North Carolina.

Hi, Carl.

Hey, Gwen.

As much as I like your proposal for redistricting, and well, in fact, I'd like nine-tenths of what you say most of the time,

Here's one that thousands of people are getting pretty enthusiastic about, and that is that

we need 27 more state legislatures to

finish ratifying what was originally supposed to be our First Amendment, and that's one representative for every 50,000 citizens.

And

George Washington, having been a president, during that whole four-month Constitutional Convention, he was reluctant to speak up about anything.

But on the next to last day, he stood to speak passionately.

He said he couldn't restrain himself anymore and that was uh one rep per 50 000 and that's going to solve a lot of problems

we'd have a lot of representatives yes uh over 1600 and they'll live in our small districts rather than up in the district of corruption

i like that I like that.

Instead of building something, that breaks up the,

of the

groups that are up trying to convince everybody with money and dinners and everything else that their way is the right way to

vote.

Yeah.

Special interests.

Yep, they won't be as tempted to be bribed.

There's just

a half a dozen tremendous benefits that will result from that.

There's a pretty big movement in the nerd circle.

On this one.

And it seems like, Carl, you might be part of that circle.

But it is, I think, an interesting thing.

All right, Carl.

I think I am too.

Yeah, it's like

we look at it and we're like, oh, there's only there's 435 now.

1,600 sounds like a lot.

But does 1,600 representatives sound like a lot for 330 million people?

Doesn't really to me.

I mean, and, you know, and as long as you keep them at home, I really like that.

I really like that.

Because everything can be done from home.

It cuts down on so much,

so much.

You know, you're not in the halls of Congress.

You're closer to the people that, you know, voted for you, and they can see when you're going wrong quickly.

I really like, that's my favorite part of it.

Because I think you could take, if you did 50,000 people, you know, per district, you can cut them in four straight lines.

And it's kind of the tent idea and your idea.

But the best part of it is it keeps them all at home.

I like that.

Like that a lot.

All right, back in just a second.

Let me tell you about American financing.

You know, most Americans think of debt exactly the same way that, you know, they think of it the same way the garage needs to be cleaned out.

You know, I'll deal with it.

I'll deal with it.

I'll deal with it.

I'll do it.

You know, next weekend, next week, I'm going to, it just sits there getting dirtier and more cluttered in your mind.

And, you know, meanwhile, the interest just keeps piling up.

Credit cards, car loans, student loans, maybe even your mortgage, all of it just starts to feel like you're carrying a backpack full of bricks uphill all the time.

American Financing says, let's get in the garage right now.

Let's sort it out.

Let's clear the space.

They are a family-owned lender that specializes in helping you consolidate debt, lower your interest rates, create a plan that works, and they're not trying to stuff more things into the garage or stuff you into a cookie cutter solution.

Their salaried mortgage consultants work with you to build a strategy that fits your life, not just their bottom line.

Imagine taking that backpack of bricks off.

Get it off your shoulders, drop it onto the ground, start breathing again.

It's what financial freedom feels like, and it's what American Financing helps you find.

So call American Financing now at 800-906-2440.

That's 800-906-2440 or go to AmericanFinancing.net.

NMLS 182334, NMLS Consumer Access.org.

APR for Rates in the Five starts at 6.799% for well-qualified borrowers.

Call 800-906-2440 for details about credit costs and terms.

Back.

We'll be right back.

Stu, have you heard about Volkswagen now introducing a subscription in the UK to increase the power of your electric car?

Hmm.

It's an interesting road to go down.

I know.

I know.

I don't like it.

I don't like it.

Even though most people don't ever own their cars, I don't like the idea that I have to rent options from you.

You know, it's again, it goes back to,

maybe it's unreasonable, but it goes back to my, and you will own nothing.

Yeah, and

I guess you could maybe own the car, but you wouldn't own the performance.

You'd have to keep paying for that, and they could turn it off if you don't pay and your car is slower.

I mean, it's a weird concept.

I mean, some people just don't like it, too.

It's like one of those airlines that has the lower ticket prices, but you have to pay for everything, right?

Like you have to pay for a carry-on.

You have to pay for

every single little additional option.

And people don't like that.

But there's a charm, I think, to being able to say, well, I rather would pay less and I don't need it to go zero to 60 any faster.

I mean, having that option for people who want it, I suppose, isn't bad.

It just would be nice.

Like, I know Tesla does a bunch of options like that that you could upgrade but they're not like as far as i understand ongoing forever charges like full self-driving something i don't know eight thousand dollars but you pay it and once you pay it you have it um you don't have to have it if you don't want the full self-driving but you have to upgrade um but i think there is you know there's an option to do a monthly fee as well so i don't know i mean i do feel like the car is going to be a subscription at some point you're just going to be paying

forever i don't like it we're an owner society.

I don't like it.

And I don't know why.

And I, you know, I think it's a bad idea that Volkswagen is the one, you know, Volkswagen, you should learn from your own history.

Subscriptions aren't really good for you guys.

Saying,

you remember the subscription plan that Volkswagen had under, well, when they first started and they were, you know, the People's Wagon, the Volkswagen.

Yeah.

And it was the People's Card, and it was Hitler.

And he was like, you know, this is a People's Card.

You want one.

And you could, for five Reichmarks, I think it was, you could buy a stamp and you'd get a stamp and you'd fill out this little book with all the little stamps.

You could buy one a month.

And once you filled the book with stamps, you get a new car.

Guess what?

Guess what happened?

Nobody got the cars.

Nobody got the cars because he was not using it.

He wasn't building cars.

He was building tanks and airplanes and everything else.

And by the time the people figured it out, he's like, oh, and there is war.

And so they went to war and they sued and sued and sued and sued because Volkswagen survived.

Volkswagen went to, I think, West Germany.

And, you know, they were picking up the pieces.

And

people didn't get their money back until like the 60s, I think.

They were like, could we get our car, Volkswagen?

And I'm like, I don't know what you're saying for this people's car.

What are you saying here?

Yeah.

So finally, justice was done.

But Volkswagen, you might want to kind of think of those subscription things and maybe realize they're not the best for you to bring up.

I'm just saying, I'm just saying, people always bring up that World War II thing, you again with that World War II thing.

I know, it's just

so all these companies they just went out there and just did a lot of stuff that was questionable at that time, and you just keep bringing it back up.

Yeah, like IB Farmer, which I think now is bare.

You know, they just made the Cyclon beats.

That's all they did.

What?

What?

You got to hold that over our head forever?

Yeah.

Kind of.

Yeah, kind of.

Yeah.

This is Glenn Beck.

Let me tell you about Jace Medical.

Have you ever noticed that we tend to plan for everything except the things we can't imagine?

You've got insurance for your car, a password manager for your email, maybe even a generator in case the power goes out.

Those things are at top of everybody's list.

But what happens if the supply chain breaks and your pharmacy shelves go bare?

What happens if it's a storm or a strike or a global crisis and it cuts off your access to prescriptions that you need?

We don't think about it.

ever until it's too late, usually because I think because at least I looked years ago for a solution, there wasn't one until Jace Medical.

They make sure that you're not standing in line hoping the pharmacist has what you need.

Instead, they put the power back in your hands with an emergency supply of critical prescriptions and antibiotics that are doctor-approved, legit, and ready whenever the world gets chaotic.

Because the best time to prepare for a crisis is before the crisis starts, and the best way to avoid panic is to have a plan and the medicine to back it up.

So go to jace.com, enter the promo code Beck, B-E-C-K at j-as-e.com.

Jace.com.

You'll get a discount on your order by using the promo code Beck at jace.com.

15 step levels.

This episode is brought to you by US Cellular.

With a variety of options, US Cellular Prepaid makes finding the right wireless plan for you easy.

That means you can get what you need at a price you can afford all while staying connected.

Like two lines of unlimited data for just $60 a month and a free device like the Samsung Galaxy A165G.

US Cellular Prepaid.

Terms apply.

See USCellular.com for details.

Down the road where shadows hide, feel the dark on every side.

Stand your ground when times get dark.

Gotta face the dark and embrace the fire.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is

the Glenbeck Program.

Hello, America.

Welcome to the Glenbeck Program.

There's a couple of policies that are coming to the fore today that I would love to support.

One of them is this CHIPS Act thing, where we're going to own pieces of companies.

I

what?

I mean,

I like the intent behind it i'm wildly uncomfortable with it and i want to think it through with you and stu maybe you can help me think this through uh we'll get to that here in just a second first our sponsor is real estate agents i trust this my company you know it amazes me um how people they they don't believe that i use any of the you know products i guess it's because nobody ever does usually but i use all of the products that i talk about if i don't like the products i'm not going to talk about the products one of them is real estate agents and it's my company.

And somebody asked me the other day,

you bought a new house.

Did you use Real Estate Agents I Trust?

Yeah, of course I did.

Of course I did.

Lisa True

is the one who

helped us buy a house after years of working for it.

She's everything that I've ever said.

We have another guy who's trying to sell our house,

Real Estate Agents I Trust,

in Dallas.

Love this guy.

He's great.

Now

let's get the house sold, and i'll love you even more but he's doing absolutely everything he can and i know i watch him we vetted him a long time ago he's one of the best one of the best realestate agents i trust.com one of the best in your neighborhood find out who it is realestate agents i trust.com a free service to you get your home sold uh on time for the most amount of money and purchase your next house the one you really want realestate agentsitrust.com all right, so Stu,

I'd love to openly embrace the, you know, on the surface, there's a new deal with Intel, and it sounds really smart, and it sounds like, yeah, that's the way we should do business.

It sounds capitalist,

it sounds patriotic, but then again, so did the Patriot Act.

So here's what's happening.

Donald Trump is taking $8.9 billion, money already set aside by the CHIPS Act, and instead of handing it to Intel as a grant,

he bought stock in Intel.

Now that sounds really smart, right?

Sounds like what a businessman would do.

Really smart.

I'm not going to just give them the money.

We'll invest.

And that way we get some profits when they succeed.

So we now own 10% of the company, non-voting shares.

We got a discount.

And we have $2 billion now worth of paper gains.

I love that, right?

It sounds really good.

Why aren't we running this place more like a business?

It's pro-capitalist, right?

No more government giveaways.

Taxpayers are investors.

And we benefit when Intel rebounds.

Okay.

Any other things?

Well, yeah, it's really important for national security.

We're keeping chip manufacturing at home.

We stabilize the economy without running it.

We reassure the markets and attract other private investors.

On paper, it's really good.

It's clean.

It's efficient.

It's savvy.

Now,

what is it that's bothering me?

Well, it's not exactly the American system.

In fact, it might be everything we're not supposed to do.

You know, we were never, the government was never supposed to use our taxpayer dollars to be a shareholder in private enterprise.

But again, we're doing all kinds of things that we've already gone there, haven't we?

Hasn't the government picked winners and losers now forever?

Haven't they been wasting your money?

I'd rather, instead of a grant, I'd rather have it in stock.

So if we win, we win.

We all win.

But that's actually the model of

state capitalism in China.

It's not the free market in the United States.

Intel is vital, absolutely vital.

Chips are the lifeblood of anything that's going to happen for national security and our economy.

But we cannot get into the habit of,

we can't normalize in any way, Washington, D.C., buying stock in struggling companies.

You know, because what's next?

Ford, Boeing?

How about your grocery stores?

I mean, that's Mamdani, isn't it?

And once that door opens, government no longer just regulates the market.

They own a piece of it.

Now, what happens after we own a piece of that?

So in 2008, I had a big sponsor.

It was a sponsor that Premier Radio Networks had worked 20 years to get.

We finally landed them, and I had a good working relationship with them.

It was General Motors.

And

then the government

bailed them out in 2008.

And they promised it was temporary.

And I said, great,

call me back once you've paid them off.

I don't like this.

The government should not be involved.

And they said, well, they're not going to be involved.

But they were because the first thing they did was they canceled the hydrogen car, something they really believed in right before the election.

I know because I was talking to them about it all the time.

And then after the election, Barack Obama cancels all hydrogen products.

And GM is like, yeah, that stupid hydrogen thing.

We're with them.

And the precedent was set and I was out.

I was out.

I canceled General Motors.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Business-wise, stupid.

Ethically, the right thing to do.

And ever since, whenever there's a crisis, that temptation is there.

Why not just buy a slice of the company?

Why not stabilize it?

Make a little profit on it.

And that's how you slip from capitalism to corporatism.

You know, free markets backed by government winners and losers.

You do not want to go down this road, you know, when

we are both the investor and the regulator, which one wins?

Come on, not a hard question to answer.

Which one wins?

Not the regulator.

The investor wins.

If the investor is also the regulator, look, if we do this, we're going to make a lot of money.

You're going to make a lot of money.

You'll have more money for all these projects you want.

Okay, all right, okay.

It's not

the taxpayers aren't the one.

The company, the politicians, who really wins?

What happens when an administration leans on its own company for political purposes?

You know what?

I think you're going to get rid of that hydrogen car.

We love the hydrogen car.

You know what?

I think you're going to get rid of that hydrogen car.

We hate that hydrogen car.

Boy, we hate it.

Donald Trump looks at Intel losing $8.8 billion last year, lays off 20,000 workers, chokehold of Taiwan, South Korea on semiconductors.

He wants America protected.

He wants taxpayers to share in the upside.

He doesn't want just to bear the cost.

We should get the upside.

All of those things are good, right?

It's really tempting.

But is it what we are supposed to do?

Is it the right thing?

I don't like it when Washington holds stock certificates.

Not a good thing.

It should be reforming taxes, cutting red tape, letting capital flow to strong ideas, making sure national security is secured through policy, but not ownership of these things.

Are you comfortable if the United States just took over AI or just took it over and said, we're just going to own 10%.

Oh, they need another bailout.

We're going to just own 20%.

Oh, they need another bailout.

Okay, we're going to own 40% of that.

Do you think that that company wouldn't become beholden to the United States government?

And who are they beholden to?

The Defense Department?

The Deep State?

The President?

Or you?

I think you know the answer to that one.

Stu, how do you work around this one?

Because I love this idea.

I love the fact that we're running things like a business.

And if we're going to give people loans, why not take a stake?

Why not?

Well,

first of all, can we step up back, step back

one little bit and just acknowledge that the original sin here in the first place was the CHIPS Act?

The CHIPS Act was not a good bill in the first place, and that's not the president, the current president's fault.

But he has to live under that law and he's trying to improve it.

But that was a disaster in the first place and should not have been something that we did, certainly in the way that we did it.

With buying into this, I mean, look, I understand it is better to

have some of this money that, by the way, we're just borrowing and printing anyway, right?

Like these are taxpayer dollars that we don't really have, that we're spending on something,

that it's good that potentially would have a return.

I mean, this was the argument under TARP as well, right?

Where we would go and we would do all this and we would take control of some of these banks and companies and they would eventually pay us back.

And many of them did, by the way.

Many of of them did.

Yes, they did.

With interest.

With interest.

Yeah, exactly.

And so, why not?

Why don't we do that?

We have done it from time to time.

Normally, it's been in extreme circumstances, right?

When there's an emergency going on.

And I will acknowledge,

and I think you were on this as well, Glenn, like these were not things that we supported at the time, but they were things that the government did at the time in what they saw as a time of financial crisis and reached in and took ownership of a bunch of these companies.

I would say we we went further than not being for them.

I would agree with that analysis.

And the reason for that is very much against them.

Very much against them.

The reason for that is we don't want the government involved in

jumping into companies and micromanaging companies.

Now, they'll say they have no voting rights.

They'll say all sorts of things.

But we now have a situation where the president of the United States has an interest in Intel's stock price.

And I don't know if that's a talk, it screams.

It's a bad idea.

It's a bad idea.

Once the government becomes your partner in business, they're always your partner.

Always.

And I understand where the president's coming from because at some level, it really is important to acknowledge he's been put in this position to try to make the best out of a bad thing.

Now, I know

the president does really care about the chips and he does care about these industries being here in the United States.

That is

something that actually is legitimately important.

I'm not denying that.

Right.

He also cares about America doing well financially.

He's tired of America getting screwed, the taxpayers getting screwed every time.

But on that point, because I get what he's saying there, it would be great.

Like, we're up a couple billion dollars.

Let's say we double our profit.

Let's say we make $10 billion off the deal.

Nothing wrong with making $10 billion.

Let's acknowledge what this is, though.

We have $37 trillion of debt.

Making $10 billion does absolutely nothing to this.

Nothing.

We're going to waste that.

Like, we could just instead be,

we could have someone actually look at the next spending bill we have and just cut a few things around the corner and easily save $10 billion.

The only way that this makes any impact, and this is what makes me nervous, is if you do it at scale.

If you start doing this in every single company you can think of that is having problems or is in an industry of interest to the United States of America, then you start getting to a place place where the government is in bed with lots of businesses, and maybe you could make a financial impact.

And if we accept this argument now, I'm afraid we accept it then, too.

But haven't we already accepted it when America embraced public-private partnerships?

I haven't accepted that.

I don't, I'm, I'm dead set against public, but isn't this a public-private partnership that the left is already, I mean, this is what they were pushing.

Well, and this is the concern, right?

Who's who is cheering this on?

Bernie Sanders.

Bernie Sanders put that he actually had this idea as an amendment in the CHIPS Act.

This was his proposal.

He's cheering it on right now.

That doesn't mean that

everything a Democrat brings up is the wrong idea.

Maybe this is a good one.

I mean, you could make that argument.

Is he a Democrat or is he a socialist?

He's a socialist.

Yeah, so everything a socialist brings up.

Probably good bet.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Again, this is, it's just a, it's, it's a road we should really, really be careful going down.

I would argue we shouldn't go down it because it does lead to bad things.

And it leads to bad things, by the way, when this president's long gone, right?

It's not just, it's not just him.

I mean, you know,

I know we say this all the time.

What are Democrats going to do with this newfound ability to invest in companies?

And by the way, we should note, Intel doesn't need to accept this, this, right?

This is the CHIPS Act doesn't require them to sell part of the company.

What's happening here is we're pressuring them into this.

And, you know,

I

understand the reasoning for that.

You brought up a really, you know, really good argument on this front.

We're already suckered into giving

these companies money because of the Chips Act.

Why not make the situation better?

And Intel is saying, well, they can make our lives miserable in 25 different ways.

Let's partner with them.

I get it on both sides.

It doesn't mean it should be a foundational part of our economy going forward.

And, you know, if this is a one-time thing, it's probably not going to be that big of a deal.

If this is a precedent that goes on, it can be.

It will be.

Once you start this, once you start this, and we have how long, my whole life, I've said, I wish we had a businessman as the president.

I wish we had somebody that would look at the country.

and look at everything and go, how can we make money?

How can we, you know, save money?

Let's run this a tighter ship.

Well, he's doing that, although we're spending more money.

And he's here, here he's like, well, let's just offset.

Let's, you know, let's get, yeah.

And he might pick the winner.

I don't know if he will or not, but he might pick the, but tell me the last president that we had that ever said anything about industry.

They're like, oh, you know what?

That was a really good stock tip.

No.

I mean, he'd be the guy.

No.

He'd be the one that you would trust.

He would be the one,

I think, in my lifetime for sure, maybe the lifetime of the country.

All right, let me tell you about PragerU.

PragerU,

developing these five-minute videos now, they're powerful courses, and now even the content is made, you know,

just for kids.

But it's for everybody, but there is kids-only content now, and it's all built around the timeless principles, freedom, responsibility, truth.

And they're giving the next generation something more than just the facts.

They're giving them a foundation.

And they don't just talk about America's values.

They show them.

They teach them.

They preserve them.

And because

they know if we don't pass these principles on, what kind of America will we be leaving behind?

They won't be prepared to create the America that will be better than this one.

If you want to make an impact on the next generation, this month is the best time to support PragerU.

Every

single dollar that you give this month will be matched.

My foundation, Mercury One, has already donated.

Tanya and I have donated.

I've volunteered my time to help them with some of these videos.

I'm actually doing something with PragerU,

where we are teaching history of the United States.

And believe me, it is vetted six ways to Sunday.

It is actual history.

It's not slanted one way or another.

It is actual history of the country.

And it'll be in all schools for AP history classes.

And they'll have access to it.

Who made that happen?

PragerU.

PragerU.com slash Glenn.

Be a part of it.

PragerU.com slash Glenn and donate today.

10 Second Station.

But Stu,

if we would have invested instead of just

letting these companies take all of this technology when we went to the moon, we would have had all that tang money.

really

we'd still be living off of tang money yeah that's that's a great

a great point that and and astronaut ice cream cash that would be flowing right now that astronaut ice cream i don't know astronaut ice cream you don't know astronaut that's the freeze-dried ice cream uh they used to call it astronauts like dip and dot like dip and dots dip and dots is a i i remember it as more of a bar right it was it was like a bar or like a yeah like an ice cream sandwich that's freeze-dried, if you picture that.

Astronaut ice cream.

Freeze-dried, so it's not cold.

Right.

You've had this before.

You've had that.

I don't think so.

It's actually.

I mean, it's not ice cream.

I mean, it is ice cream, but it's not as delicious and satisfying as the cold ice cream we're all accustomed to, though it has its charm.

They've been doing that with Skittles lately.

Have you had those?

Have you had freeze-dried Skittles?

No, why would you freeze-dried Skittles?

They're incredible.

They're incredible.

Freeze-dried Skittles are amazing.

You have to sell them?

Is that like a

you?

I got the good Skittles over here.

Let's put it this way: I got a guy.

Okay.

I got a guy.

No, it's it is.

They keep them under the counter.

You have to ask for them.

You have to know they're there.

Oh, yeah.

They don't display them.

But no, you, at first, I had heard it from like some specialty shops, and now I think Skittles actually sells them.

But they sort of in the freeze-drying process sort of kind of explode and they get larger and they and I got to try these things.

I can't even tell you how addicting they are.

You get started.

Oh, it's really weird, but you get a problem.

I have found the same thing to happen that happens with me.

When I eat them, they kind of explode and I get larger.

Yes.

Yes.

This is not a path to health I'm describing.

Yeah, it's not a path to pain.

This is not Make America Healthy Again material

at all.

Regardless of how many artificial colors in there, it's not going to help your waistline.

But

they are freaking good.

I don't know what it is about them.

They're just delicious, and I can't recommend them highly enough.

If we want to take 10% of Skittles, I'm for it.

That's fine.

I ate my Skittles.

This is starting to be uncomfortable, really.

But now you want Skittles, don't you?

You want to try the freeze-dried Skittles.

Look, they're still.

Well, I want to try them because I am a, like, you know, I'm not like you as a food scientist, but I'm on on the road to being a food scientist.

Oh, you've, you've gotten, I've had many of your prepared meals before, and some of them feel like science, I will say.

Yeah.

I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but

usually really good.

It's not like you're cutting on butter and cheese and

the types of things that you make.

Who would do that?

No, no.

Who would do that?

No, extra butter, extra cheese.

Can we get some bacon fat into that?

You know what I mean?

Ooh, bacon fat ice cream.

All right.

More in just a second.

Stand by.

This is Glenn Beck.

Do you know how many miles the average grocery store steak travels before it hits your plate?

Thousands of miles.

Think about that.

Your dinner may have more frequent flyer miles than you do.

It may have crossed an ocean.

And after all that travel, you still don't know exactly where it came from, how it was raised, what kind of quality you're going to get.

Good Ranchers changes all of that.

Every steak, every cut of their steak, their chicken, their seafood, it's born, raised, and harvested right here in America.

So when you open a box from Good Ranchers, you're not just getting dinner, you're getting a promise.

This is meat that you can feel proud to serve your family.

And if you use the, you know, if you use the

rolling of the dice at the store, you go ahead, buy that.

Wait until you taste

what will give you real American flavor every single time.

Wait until you taste Good Ranchers.

Good Ranchers, it's not just better meat, it's American meat delivered.

Visit goodranchers.com, see what all the excitement is about, and shop American meat you can trust.

Use the promo code Beck, you'll get $40 off plus free meat for life.

Promo code Beck, $40 off, it's

goodranchers.com.

The Gladbeck email newsletter is free.

How?

It's brought to you by Skittles Popped.

Crispy and Crunchy Freeze Dried Candy, only from Skittles.

Wait.

Holy cow.

Wow, Stu.

That bloated debacle of light rail in California, they're still going.

They're still going for it, man.

They're just not giving up.

Well, they're making lots of progress.

Of course, they're not going to give up now.

This is

put a bridge in, right?

Yeah, they finished.

Well, they finished a bridge.

Now,

they finished a bridge.

What the bridge is going to do

is another question, you know, but it's finished.

In case you don't know, in 2008,

there was an estimate of $33 billion.

They were going to complete a light rail system in California by 2020.

And it was supposed to go from San Francisco to Los Angeles to Anaheim.

Then it would go all the way to San Diego in the south and north all the way to Sacramento.

Well, now

it's changed a little since then, since all the money was approved.

It's gone from $33 billion to $128 billion,

quote, or more.

And they're a little behind on their target of 2020 for

completion.

Are we sure they can't get it done by 2020, though?

I mean,

you got to give them the best.

I'm pretty sure they might be able to do that.

No, I'm pretty sure.

No, I'm pretty sure.

I'm pretty sure.

In fact, the early operating segment of this, now, this is what it was supposed to do.

San Francisco, Millbrae, San Jose, Gilroy, Merced, Madera, Fresno, King, Tulare.

Wow, none of these cities.

Bakersfield, Palmdale, Burbank, Los Angeles, and Anaheim.

That was the rail that was supposed to be done in 2020.

They've got some of it that is going to be ready from Merced to Bakersfield.

Now, I know the people in Merced are thinking, I got to get to Bakersfield.

And I know the people in Bakersfield are like, if I could just get to Merced,

you know,

it would just save me a whole bunch of trouble on the road because that's just,

but that won't be available.

I don't mean to get people in merced or madeira or fresno or kings toler excited

uh about that because it's not going to happen until 2031

ah well actually between 2031 and 2033 it might be a little later than that might be that part of it which by the way i'm just you know eyeballing the map here

certainly less than half

Considerably less than half of the distance that, by the way, they were legally required.

This was in the law.

The law said it had to be built and it had to get people there from, I think it was San Francisco to LA in like two hours.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

That's not going to happen, Glenn.

I hate to say.

Do you really think so?

Now, wait a minute.

Now, hear me out.

Hear me out.

So, by

2031 to 2033, you'll be able to go from Merced to Bakersfield.

But by 2038,

you're going to add Gilroy

to the north, which is the next city.

People are like, Merced to Gilroy?

Are you kidding me?

And you're going to add Palmdale on the south.

So you'll be able to go all the way from Palmdale to Gilroy on one train.

Boom, you're there.

I'm looking at the

Gilroy, not that far.

Not that far from Merced.

And then

Palmdale?

Yeah, Palmdale from Bakersfield.

Wow,

that's not a lot either.

That's not a lot of distance there.

And you're not to Los Angeles yet.

Of course, the only reason that anyone would ever want this is to go theoretically from, let's say, San Francisco to LA or San Diego to Sacramento, right?

No, no, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

Do not discount Gilroy to Madeira.

Don't.

Don't do it.

Don't do it?

If I could

hop on a high-speed speed rail in Gilroy and not have to worry about Merced and boom, I'm in Madeira.

I mean, that's a dream come true for many people in California.

Well, you would have to worry about Merced in that journey, right?

It would still stop at Merced.

Well, not for a very long time.

That's true.

You wouldn't have to, you wouldn't, and you wouldn't have to look out the window.

And you wouldn't be able to Merced.

You would be able to skip a lot of that Gilroy traffic.

That famous

Gilroy and Merced traffic.

It's bad.

It's really bad.

Really bad.

My favorite quote of all time about this story comes from a 2022 New York Times story

about it.

And again, this has been such a catastrophe that even the New York Times has given up trying to defend it.

Like, that's how bad this has been.

Every year or two, they write a new 4,000-word story about how horrible this is with all new details.

I mean, they should just take all of them and put it in a book.

I would buy it.

They're that crazy.

But this is my favorite quote.

SNCF, the French National Railroad, was among bullet trade operators from Europe.

I know this quote.

I love this.

I love this.

This is probably my favorite thing on this trade, too.

Go ahead.

I'm sorry to interrupt.

No problem.

SNCF, the French National Railroad, was among bullet train operators from Europe and Japan that came to California in the early 2000s with hopes of getting a contract to help develop the system.

The company pulled out in 2011.

That's three years after it passed.

SNCF was very angry.

They told the state they were leaving for North Africa, which was less politically dysfunctional.

By the way, again, that's the French.

The French.

The French are saying that about California.

They got to get to some place more politically functioning, and it's in North Africa.

In this case, they went to Morocco and helped them build a rail system.

Morocco's bullet train started service in 2018.

And they left California in 2011?

Yeah.

Unbelievable.

Unbelievable.

So in a much shorter window, they were able to get a bullet train in Morocco built, which is just incredible.

And, you know, they made all sorts of mistakes with this thing.

They were way over budget.

They didn't go on the land that they owned, which was, you know, on the main highways.

They could have just worked with that land.

Instead, they tried to reroute it through all these cities, had to buy land from farmers.

They were dividing, the train line was dividing people's farms.

So one side of their farm would be on one side of the train line, one would be the other.

They would have places that there were no roads.

You'd have to drive down,

you know, miles away to go through a bridge to come back down the other side just to leave your own place of

your home or your farm.

They just made mistake after mistake after mistake after mistake.

And we now know that they're not even going to come close to getting this done in the timeline or with the restrictions as far as the speed that it was supposed to take or anywhere close, of course, to the budget, which was laughable from the beginning, but has become so much worse than even skeptics were complaining about.

They were saying maybe it'll double, maybe it'll triple.

We're already at about about five times the cost, and they're not even going to be doing half of the railroad.

Could you do me a favor?

Look up how long did it take for San Francisco to build

and open the Golden Gate Bridge?

I mean, that's a wonder of the world, the Golden Gate Bridge at the time.

It was a wonder of the world, and it's a massive project.

Okay,

how long did it take him to build that?

Let's see, it started in January 1933, opened to traffic

in May 1937.

Four years.

Over schedule and under budget.

Okay.

A little different these days.

How long did it take to build the Empire State Building?

The largest, tallest building in the world at the time, by far.

How long did it take him?

This doesn't even, I pretend to read this.

It's 11 years.

It can't be possible.

What I see is construction starting March 1930 opened May 1st, 1931.

So a little over that,

just over a year.

Yeah.

I mean,

they were putting furniture into the base floors before they were finishing the top of the building.

I mean,

that thing was...

It was amazing how they did that.

Okay.

Now,

Golden Gate Bridge, four years under time, under budget, California, with all of the technology that you now possess, you started this project in 2008.

You were in the odds when you started this.

Okay, we started this railroad in odd eight, okay?

I just asked ChatGPT, what is the estimate

of a finished product?

You ready?

2040

to 2046.

Optimistic?

I don't know.

I don't have very optimistic.

I don't know if they realize that's 25 years late.

But just a quarter of a century.

Yeah, just a quarter of a century late on this project.

And Gavin Newsome and everybody else, they're still defending this thing.

That's what the stories were today.

The stories were all about, you know, that rail, we shouldn't give up on that yet.

We shouldn't give up.

Who's making money on this?

Because

this is not in the interest of the people of California anymore.

It's not.

They voted for us.

What is there?

There's your direct democracy in action.

It's another whole sideshow.

It's not just government inefficiencies, but this idea that you should be able to vote in $100 billion projects by a 50.1% vote of people who never paid attention to the issue the entire time is a bad, bad formula.

Does not work.

It traps cities and states and future governments.

I mean, even if Gavin Newsom hated this, what would he do?

It's already law.

What are you going to repeal half the railroad?

I mean, it's, at this point, you know, I mean, first of all, that's what I would do.

But secondly, at this point, you can make the argument, okay, there's so much invested in this, we should at least get something something out of it.

These poor people from Merced should be able to make it to Gilroy.

And

we're not even going to get that.

We're not even going to get that.

It's unbelievable.

Okay, I got a couple of stories that I think are astounding that came out of the news today.

We'll give those to you here in just a second.

First, let me tell you about Relief Factor, our sponsor this half hour, Relief Factor.

You know, life has two speeds.

There's speed where you're doing things, mowing the lawn, fixing something around the house, you know, playing ball with the grandkids.

And then there's the speed where you're sitting on the couch, staring at the ceiling, thinking, why does everything hurt all of a sudden?

All the things that you want to do, be doing, need to get done, they're still out there and you're stuck in low gear.

Relief Factor is a daily supplement that is designed to help your body fight inflammation naturally.

And for many people, that means less pain and more freedom to get back into faster speed, back to movement, back to energy, back to life.

It's not about masking the pain or tricking your body, it's about giving your body what it needs to help heal.

Imagine your life without the orange cones and the closed-a-head signs, just back in motion, moving forward.

That is exactly what Relief Factor offers, and you can give their three-week quick start a try for only $19.95.

So, visit relief factor.com now.

Call 800 for Relief.

That's 800, the number four: Relief.

ReliefFactor.com.

This

is

Glenn Beck.

Collaprap here.

Two big things are coming this fall: Borderlands 4 and Spotify Raft.

So stop listening to that one playlist that reminds you of your ex who only made you cry.

Talking about you, Veronica, and pre-order Borderlands 4 coming out September 12th.

Rated mature.

Stu, I don't know if you saw this.

There's a couple of stories in today's show prep that I thought was really, I thought was telling.

First one was from CNN.

Did you see the one from CNN today that talked about Gislane Maxwell and

how she was

how she was part of the Clinton Foundation, you know, how she was invited to these big things that only the elites were invited to.

They knew.

In fact, one of the CNN, sorry, one of the Clinton people said, you can't have her here.

She's, you know,

she's grooming people.

That's what the charges are, that she's grooming people for Jeffrey Epstein to rape and Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton just okayed her to come.

In fact, invited her to come.

Why is that story important?

That CNN having the balls balls to turn against the Clintons.

That CNN opening the door to the Clinton Foundation may have been dirty.

Bill and Hillary Clinton may have been dirty.

They may have been involved with the Epstein stuff.

Whether he did anything with young girls or not, I don't know.

But I found that fascinating.

There was another story today from the WAPO,

the Washington Post, about Reagan.

And I immediately see why he's dead.

Why are you dancing on his grave?

Instead, it wasn't a dancing on his grave story.

You need to get it.

You can get all these stories at Glennbeck.com and get our free daily newsletter.

These stories are in today's newsletter, as is everything else that we talked about on the show today.

But

in the Washington Post, it was this fascinating story.

coming now from more released documents, this time during the Reagan administration.

They have just been released, and it shows that Ronald Reagan wanted to take all of our nuclear missiles, you know, the ones in silos and everything else, anything that was a missile, and destroy it and throw the missiles in the bottom of the sea.

I mean, take the, you know, nukes out, but throw the missiles at the bottom of the sea.

Make sure that we didn't have any missiles, no.

No guided missile systems in America.

And he said that to Gorbachev, and Gorbachev said, no.

And he said, but we can end all of this madness because they can't be recalled.

Our airplanes can be recalled.

Those cannot be recalled.

Let's end it.

Then when Gorbachev said no, he went back to the National Security Council and he said, I want to do this.

I want to plan to do this.

In case they change their mind, I want to do this.

Then the CIA got involved.

The NSA got involved, State Department, and all of them started telling Ronald Reagan, no, you can't do that.

And he said, I want it done.

And then they went around him

and thwarted him as long as they could until finally the CIA had convinced everybody, no,

we can't do that.

And they just said, Mr.

President, you can't do it.

So he stopped it.

And then they buried all of that information.

Remember, Ronald Reagan was made to look like a war wonger.

He was made to look like he just wanted nuclear war, right?

Here's the Washington Post releasing something that is not just

verifying that they were wrong about ronald reagan and his warmongering at the time but they're verifying a deep state something that they said did not exist

i think the movement from washington po post and the uh

and cnn those two stories are remarkable

in seeing that they both are doing things they would have never ever done before.

Is that a change or a one-off?

I don't know, but it's worth noting.

All right, we'll see you tomorrow.

This is Glenn Beck.