The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guest: Jon Ronson | 9/2/26

Episode Date: September 2, 2026

A judge ruled that Tyler Robinson, the man accused of killing Charlie Kirk, can stand trial for all counts. Glenn calls out the defense attorney for Robinson, who accused Charlie Kirk of speaking "hatefully" against certain groups of people in his arguments. As AI data centers pop up around the country, many people are apprehensive about them. But are their fears warranted? Glenn goes through the pros and cons and the truth and lies regarding AI data centers. Glenn speaks with journalist Jon Ronson, who joins to discuss the current culture for men and masculinity.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's podcast, there was something that said at the closing arguments for the Charlie Kirk pre-murder trial, and it really stuck out. It was from the defense, and it was the word true. I think we should stop and look at that word in that context for a moment. Also, John Ronson, one of my favorite authors, a guy who did Minsteric Dotes. He's written so many great, great books and movies. He's got a new one called The Castle, that is absolutely outrageous. I started reading it the other day, and it is so good. You're not going to be able to put this book down, and it talks about men who have lost their way and how lost they can be, especially if they follow the algorithm. And we also talk to you about what happened yesterday

in Congress, both left and right, and what we should be measuring against, because this next election is going to be close, or God forbid, it's a blowout for the other side. And we need to talk about that right now. And we do on today's podcast. Being prepared, always a good idea. But as somebody who tries to prepare, I've always been frustrated that nobody had the medical solution on preparedness until Jace Medical. They've just launched the Jace Plus, plus the pocket paramedic.

You know, most people get their over-the-counter medical supplies and hope, you know, they never have to use. them, but preparedness doesn't end with that. Supplies run low when something actually happens. You don't want to be figuring out in real time. How do I get my prescription medication? The Jace Plus is a membership designed to help you stay ready over time. In fact, it was my idea the first time I met with the Jace team.

Plus with Jace Plus membership, you can get 15% off on all products on Jace.com, 50% off replenishment medications, free shipping, insurance, plus so much more. And then there's the pocket paramedic. It's real time guidance for everyday injuries and situations. Live professionals, one call away. It's about responsibility and self-reliance. It's about jace.com. Find out what's available to you now. Jace.com. Use the promo code free month for one month free. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Let me take you now to provo. One of the defense attorneys, the judge said the case can go to trial on every countess for Charlie Kirk, his killer.

and what the defense attorney said out loud with his wife sitting there is, and I want you to think, what is the one word that sticks out to you. This is what he said, what everybody is listening in cameras on. It is true that Mr. Kirk spoke hatefully of certain groups of people. Then he itemized it, you know, people whose gender identity doesn't conform, people who aren't, you know, strictly heterosexual, people, you know, have sex outside of marriage. what word sticks out there? And I have to tell you, Richard Novak, who is the attorney,

he's just making a motive argument, okay? The state says Robinson killed Charlie because of his relationship with his roommate. Novak's point is that the prosecution has exactly one text message and nothing else, nothing on the phone, nothing on the computer, nothing in the apartment, and you can't build a motive out of a single sentence. That's a legitimate argument. and it's his job to make it. And the judge, to be fair, agreed with the standard at this stage is only reasonable, okay?

What's the word, however, that sticks out? Because he didn't build it that way. He could have said the state only has one, you know, text and nothing else. He said that too. But what else did he say? What word carried all the weight? Here it is. It is true that Mr. Kirk spoke hatefully of certain groups of people.

It is true. True? Not the state alleges, not Mr. Robertson may have believed, but true. Stated as a finding on the record in front of the widow about a man who can't stand up and answer for himself in a proceeding where nobody is on the stand to test it. It is true. And you know what? This is such a scumbag move. It's the oldest move there is against a dead man. You don't say he deserved it. You say, well, killing him is explainable. And you put the reason in the victim's mouth and let the jury pool do the arithmetic on its own time. Because this is true. No, it is not. No, it is not. And you know what keeps us arguing with each other? People who are on our own side, the loudest voices insisting that Tyler Robinson didn't do it.

are not on the left. Candice Owens. She has spent a year telling her audience he's innocent. Then, what, last month, month before, she publicly offered her folder of material to his defense team. She says the federal government is lying about everything. She suggested people inside of turning point, including Charlie's widow, is just, you know, perpetrating a cover-up on this. She spent months pointing at Israel. And then in a live-stream debate in August conceded, well, I can't really prove that. I can't say Israel shot him. Okay, wait, what?

Now, here's the real proof in this pudding. Robinson's own defense lawyers are not touching her file. They filed their motions without one word of what she had. In a court, they went out of their way to put distance between themselves and the theories. The men trying to save the defendant from the death sentence, looked at all the material and went, yeah, there's nothing really. there. That should end the conversation, but it won't, because

there will be people who will take this, and then it'll probably get in front of Candace, and then she'll use it, and I don't really care. I really don't care. Who cares? Because that was never about Charlie. And what I'm talking to is about Charlie. It's about Charlie. Charlie,

Turning Point, the president, the party, the coalition, every one of them have been a target ever since Charlie died. And from our side, And a movement that spends the next 14 months fighting itself over who really did it is a movement that doesn't really have to be beaten in November. It's being handled internally already. Not everybody involved are grifters, okay?

A lot of them are grieving. And a lot of people that don't believe institutions anymore. And I have to tell you, with good reason, I've spent years telling you not to not to, not, to trust certain institutions. Some would good cause. FBI? I think you've earned that. When you've been lied to enough times, they're lying to you about this too,

starts to feel like wisdom instead of the shortcut that it is. But it is a shortcut. A widow with her head in her hands is not a suspect. A father who called the police on his own son is not an actor. And just asking questions, stop being questions the most. you offer to hand your file over to the man's defense. Are we ever going to wake up to see that

there is actual evil in the world and be able to spot it? Are we ever going to be able to look at the same thing ever again and go, that's evil without somebody on our own side that we used to consider friends looking at the same thing and going, no, you're evil? What? there is evil in this story. Some of it is on a rooftop. Some of it is in a lawyer telling a room full of people that hatred, that Charlie had hatred was true. And that that hatred was a fair description of the dead man. And some of it's on our own side of the aisle, on our own platforms, being monetized. While a family waits for a jury, we have to be able to start holding more.

than one thing at a time. There's three things. All those thoughts need to be held at once. And we have to do it. We have to do it. Or we don't make it. Let me tell you about what's happening in Boston. Into the fourth day, the jury in Plymouth sent the judge a note yesterday. They can't reach a decision. Okay. There was a gasp in the courtroom. Judge William Sullivan reminded the trial had run. More than 80 witnesses, more than 300 exhibits and ask, you got to go back out, okay? You got to work on this more. You can't just give up. They work six more hours and then ask to go home. This morning, they're back. Day five, 23 hours of deliberation on this case that took five weeks to try. Three children are dead. Cora was five, Dawson was three, Callan was eight

months old, and their mother has never denied the killing. Now, everyone outside the room is now apparently an expert on what is happening inside. And let me tell you something. Nobody knows anything. I don't know anything. Nobody knows anything. Stop going to these people who are telling you, I know exactly what's going. No, they don't. Are they in the room? Monday, the jurors came dressed up, colored shirts,

one man in a tie, dresses. And there was one outlet that reported that two of the women were wearing pink. Now, that's what her supporters are wearing is pink. And that went everywhere. It was on X within an hour or so. And it's proof the jury is compromised. An NBC reporter, who I don't know NBC is not, you know, a truth teller in my book,

but I don't know. It might be telling the truth this time said there was no juror in pink. So we have an unverified observation assigned a motive that nobody can see, producing a verdict that nobody has heard, and that's where we are. We're reading clothing because clothing is all we're allowed to read right now. And what we're all getting wrong here is the shape of the question. It is not guilty or innocence. The jury has five choices.

First degree, second degree, murder, manslaughter, which the judge added before the very end, before the case went back out, not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility. And not guilty. Okay, so a deadlock doesn't mean six people think she's a murderer and six thinks she's sick. It may mean that 12 people agree she was sick.

but can't agree on how sick. In Massachusetts, the burden runs the other way from most of the country. The defense team doesn't have to prove she was insane. The Commonwealth has to prove she was criminally responsible beyond a reasonable doubt. One juror that can't get there, that's enough, okay? You know how we used to do this? Because you're thinking this is a flawed system. You know how we used to do this?

In September. in September 1670, 356 years ago, this week at the old Bailey in London, that's their big courthouse, the old courthouse in London. The government had padlocked the Quaker meeting house on Grace Church Street. So the Quakers gathered in the street outside and preached anyway. Two men were arrested. One of them was 25 years old. The charge was unlawful assembly.

And the jury came back and said the men had spoken. in the street, but they wouldn't call the assembly unlawful. So the judge sent him back. They came back with the same answer. So he told him, you know what? No food, no water, no fire, no tobacco. You bring a verdict in this court will accept or you'll starve for it. Two nights locked in a room.

No food. Nothing. The young defendant, the 25-year-old, shouted across the courtroom to them. You're Englishmen. mind your privilege. Give not away your right. One of the jurors, a man named Edward Bushel, called back, Nor shall we ever do. It's pretty dramatic for 1670. Third morning, they came out not guilty. The judge fined every one of them and sent them to prison until they paid. Bushel wouldn't pay. He filed for habeas corpus from a cell. That November, the chief justice of the court of common pleas ruled that the jury

cannot be punished for its verdict. That's where it used to be. A judge may try to open a juror's eyes, but he can't lead him by the nose. The 25-year-old that they refused to convict, he left England. He sailed west. He founded Pennsylvania.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were written in his city, named after him, by men who could meet there because 12 strangers went hungry for two. nights rather than say a thing that they didn't believe. The man was William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania. So Massachusetts has a tool for a jury that won't move because before William Penn, it was starve them out until they come to a conclusion. Everywhere it's called the dynamite charge.

It tells jurors that no future jury will be able to be better equipped than they are. That the evidence will never be clearer than it is, and it's desirable that this case be decided. Judge Sullivan hasn't read it yet, but he might today. That instruction is what you shall starve for it became. Same purpose, better manners. But there's a limit. He can send them back, but not more than twice unless they agree to it. And if they still can't agree, it's a mistrial.

Now, a mistrial is not an acquittal. Turning 65 feels like you've been dropped into a constant stream of mailers and calls and ads telling you something different about Medicare and most of it just makes things more confusing. But because this is not a small decision, it's your health care, you need to know you can see the right doctors, you need to get the care that you have to have and not pay for a plan that doesn't fit your life. This is where chapter comes in. They don't just hand you options. They look at your doctors, your prescriptions, your needs. and they help you find a plan that actually works for you. Over the last year, they have helped people in this audience save $1.5 million just by finding better-fitting plans.

And it's really sometimes not even about the money. I heard about a guy named Mark. Chapter stepped in, helped him get the care he needed. He said they were absolutely spectacular. So give them a call. The call is free. They've helped thousands in my audience, and they can help you too. Dial pound 250.

Say the keyword chapter. It's pound 250, keyword chapter. Now back to the podcast. This is the best of the Glenbeck program. John, always good to talk to you. This is a crazy book. It is right. It's a delight to be here.

Thank you for that fulsome introduction. And yes, this is a crazy-ass story. Hey, you start in, because this is your son. This is your only son, right? Yes. And your son calls you and says, hey, I think if I'm not mistaken, He texts you a location and a picture of him in this location because he's like, just in case you need to find a body later,

I'm a little concern of where we've ended up. And so he tells you the story and you go and investigate. And it's tell the story. This is the opening chapter. Tell the story. Okay, so this is a story that crashed unannounced into my life. I'm asleep and I wake up and it's a series of texts of my son. So I read the last text first, and I guess I can't swear, so I will paraphrase the last text.

He was swearing in fear. He texted something like, it's okay, that was very frightening, but we left and were okay now. So then I frantically read all the other texts. And it turns out that him and three friends have been invited to a party being held by a stranger that one of them had met earlier that week on Tinder. So they drive to the stranger's house. It's in the forests of Connecticut. And they pull up. And this guy's house is a massive newly built castle with towers and turrets, way too many turrets.

This would be ostentatious even by Count Dracula standard. I looked it up, man. I saw the, it's crazy. It is nuts. Yeah. Yeah. Think, you know, think ostentatious Gothic castle. but then times that by 10.

And it's in a normal neighborhood, if I'm not mistaken, you're driving down the road and it's generally normal and then this appears. It's like ranch home, ranch home, unbelievable castle, ranch home. And they can't figure out why they can't sell the place. But anyway, I disagree. So they cross the drawbridge and enter the grand banqueting hall to discover that there's no part. There's just a small number of equally bewildered looking young people standing awkwardly around.

So the castle owner comes out and they say to him, I'm sorry, but where's the party? And he said, oh no, I've invited you here for another reason. I want you all to take part in my reality show. So they said, what's the name of your reality show? He said, it's called 101 princesses. So they said, what's the core concept? He said, I'm the king. I'm looking for my queen.

got 101 princesses to choose from. And then he said, go downstairs to my basement costume room, put on some princess costumes. He said this to the women in my son's party, and then come back upstairs. So they went downstairs. Stop, stop, stop, stop. Did you have a son, at this point, I'm looking at my son and saying, what the hell is wrong with you and your friends? That's when you turn around and you leave.

What's happening? Definitely poor chill. And I was asleep and oblivious while all of this happened. I was unable to help. Right, right, right. So, yeah. So I guess poor choice number one was not turning around when they got to the Great Iron Gates. Right.

Poor choice number two was going down to the basement and dressing up as princesses. I've got to say, though, if they had turned around, I wouldn't have a book to write about. So in a way, his recklessness at least gave me. And in fact, that becomes part of the story about how, hopefully I'll get on to that in a second. So they go downstairs, the women put on princess outfits, they go back upstairs, a videographer appears, filming begins, but they become,

it becomes pretty clear, pretty quickly, that this isn't a real reality show. Partly because the videographer was also, had this other duty, which was cutting up meat for the castle owner, had this huge slab of meat, which is giving it pieces to the castle owner. And known of the meat was offered to the princesses. So they were kicked out after they refused to participate in 101 princesses. But it's not a good idea to invite a journalist's son.

In fairness, my son was the plus one. But still, it's not a great idea to invite a journalist's son to your forbidden castle of mysteries. Right. By the way, he's leaving an awful lot of color out. but this is again just the first chapter. He, in the same chapter, he now goes. And it's like, hey, dude, what's the deal? And this is when it really, again, first chapter when it really gets weird. Yes.

So I go to the castle. By the way, I'm just out of hospital. I think part of the reason why I went to the castle was because I just had major surgery. And I thought, you know what? You know, I felt like life was passing me by. Like, oh, you know, I only have purpose in my life when I tell stories. So I felt desperate to go to this castle and, you know, fill my life with storytelling because that's better than major surgery. Which meant that I was like, every time I moved in the wrong way, it would tear at my surgery scar.

And I'd like let out a shriek down his castle corridors like quasi-modo at Notre Dame. So I'm like walking around the castle, moving in the wrong way, kind of go, ah! And asking him to explain. what was going on. So he says a couple of unwise things about how he brings women to the castle and adapts them to his lifestyle and so on. Then he clearly regrets saying unwise things to a journalist because he gets out a piece of paper for me to sign and it's an NDA. So I say no. And so he puts the NDA back. And I notice he has a whole pile of NDAs in his kitchen. So who else was he getting to sign them and why.

So then I leave, and he starts sending me very ominous messages. He says he's going to sue me. He has a team of investigators investigating everything about my life. He says he has two murderers on his payroll called Carlos and Brandon. And if I ever run, and they're just out of prison for killing someone, even he's afraid of Carlos and Brandon. And if I ever write anything negative about the castle, Carlos and Brandon will be very the unhappy. Right.

And then you, well, wait, you, you forgot one part in the chapter. You, you are called by, I guess, a friend of his who's not really a friend of his, who's trying to solve things, who's this older guy who's like, I just want to protect him, and you don't really know. I mean, John, you have, you've been to the Bohemian Grove, okay? You were like, this is all nonsense. And you go and you're watching it.

And you had to think to yourself, this is crazy. when you're watching it. You've done so many crazy things. What was going through your mind with this thing? I mean, this is one of the weirdest stories I've ever heard. And again, it's chapter one. Yeah, no, I was kind of freaking out because I've never had a death threat before. He did temper down the death threats after a while. At one point he texted me to say, if you take my murder friends out for dinner, I'll Venmo you the money.

so he was softening his threats at that point. But I was just thinking about what the hell is going on. And I started talking to some of the women had been to the castle. And I pieced together the story. It seemed that this guy wanted to be Hugh Hefner at what is the worst moments in human history to be Hugh Hefner. You can't lord over your princesses in your castle. It's never really been a good thing. thing to be Hugh Hefner, but this is the absolute, you were right, the wrong time to try.

Yeah, because all the women just immediately spoke to me, you know, it was all, and, you know, he was constantly getting thwarted. My son and his friends would take part in 101 princesses. I heard he would like chase women around the castle for sex and would constantly be getting thwarted. So I just thought, this is kind of funny, actually. Like, on one level, there's nothing immediately resonant about his story, being a story about the difficulties of luring women to a harrow in your castle in the post-Me2 age. But then I thought, you know what, there's some weird resonances that he's a man out of time. He's a man who's finding out that he can't do the things that he used to do. And I thought, you know what, there's a lot of men like that now,

more sympathetic men, men who used to enjoy, you know, derive structure and meaning from factory work or office work, and now all of those old structures are crumbling. Instead, they're being forced to become content creators, because that's like the only option open to them. So the book becomes about other stories about people out of that, while I continue to investigate life at the castle, which is very weird. Very weird. But you write about Greg Chisholm, who was a top lawn care influencer on YouTube, that even that world just fell apart and flew apart. Yeah, because he was chasing the algorithms like so many people do.

He was the lawn care goat. He was YouTube's first and greatest your lawn care influencer. He would turn up at lawn care conventions, and it was like Rihanna had turned up. People would like, oh, my God, it's great chasm. But unfortunately, he decided to chase the algorithm. more and more. YouTube were encouraging him to make more and more

what they called WTF content. So he started bringing his young daughters into the videos and he was doing these skits with his young daughters and it just got weirder and weirder and weirder. All he was doing was following YouTube's incentive structure, but it ended up to cut a long story short

with him and his two daughters doing skits where they're all dressed as babies and eating pacifies. This is a kind of story. story that if you come to it at the end and you see a guy and his two daughters dressed as babies with pacifies in the mouse, you're thinking, what the hell? But what I love about this story is that I'm with him every step of the way and every decision he makes. You can disagree with some of them, but they make perfect sense.

At the time. At the time, yeah. But in following YouTube's incentive structure, he ends up in this extreme place which ended up ruining his life. So that's a look at the sort of false promise of these new structures that men are trying to fill their lives with. So, I mean, we've gone from the Marlborough man to, you know, a guy with his daughters dressed as a baby with pacifiers in his mouth. Speaking of the Marlborough man, by the way, I interviewed a guy. I interviewed a guy who specializes in playing duffices and TV ads. I'm sure you've noticed that when you turn on the TV these days, the ads are full of men who can't do anything right and have to be

constantly bailed up by their exasperated wives. And I interviewed an actor who specialises in in playing dufuses on TV. He's one of the only men in my book is actually thriving. He said to me he said to me that he had to do an advert for shoal, the insoles people. And he's walking down the street and he puts on a very comfortable pair of insoles. And then he starts galloping like a horse down the street. And he had to look duffeasy for that. So I said to him 50 years ago, you had the Moabre Man being stoical and masculine on a horse, and now you have to be the horse? And he was like, yep. Truth is under attack in our culture.

People are embracing lies about gender. They're rejecting the sanctity of every human life. And the government is even punishing people for saying what's true and right. Or worse, the woke mob is doxing them and slandering them with no due process. Just an angry mob making their lives miserable or worse, putting families in real danger. But the biblical principles on which our country was founded still matter. Real patriots and Christians are beginning to stand up. They're showing real courage without a safety net of a big bank account.

They're bolstered only by the truths that are self-evident. But these people must be defended. Alliance defending freedom is on the front lines of this fight, and they're standing in courtrooms across the country upholding truth, and your right to speak it. Your gift to ADF will be matched by a special grant while the funds last. Visit join ADF.com slash Beck or text Beck to 83-848. Visit join ADF.com slash Beck or text Beck to 83-848.

You're streaming the best of Glenn Beck. To hear more of this interview and others, download the full show podcasts wherever you get podcasts. Welcome to the Glenn Beck program. I want to talk to you about something that happened last night. The House passed a resolution denouncing socialism. 200 to 20 to 192. But the vote that mattered came hours earlier, and it was procedural. And almost nobody outside of the building noticed.

Five Republicans angry about how their own leadership handled a shutdown deal voted against the rule. The housekeeping measure that lets a bill reach the floor, okay? The rule was going to fail. then two Democrats voted for it. Jared Golden of Maine, Marie, I think it's Glusen Camp, Perez of Washington. 210 to 208. Now, the Democratic leader,

he put out a joint statement along with his whip in the caucus chair, calling this a significant breach of trust that necessitates serious responses and referred the two of them to the caucus rules committee. A congressman from California told Axios, he loves it that they have to draw a bright line and kick some ass or this will become the new norm. So in other words, fall in line.

Fall in line. This is such a grotesque day in Washington. Understand what this punishment is for. This is not for the socialism vote. Golden and Glusencamp Perez, which was the weirdest damn. hyphenated name I've ever heard. Both say they voted for the rule because it carried a bill that Golden wrote to protect Maine Lobsterman. She has fishermen in her district and Golden is

retiring in a seat that he was never supposed to hold. He said it would be absurd for leadership to expect him to vote against his own bill. But you know what? It's happened before. The party has an argument. Rules votes are team votes and both parties enforce that. well, should they, honestly? I'm so tired of this game. So the resolution was a messaging exercise with a Republican voter ID build stapled to it, which is what most Democrats say they were voting against, a non-binding resolution that doesn't change one law in the country.

They, I suspect they didn't want to be on the record to have to vote against socialism. So all of that is true, however. And 192 members of Congress still could not find a way to say no to socialism. That's pretty amazing. Now, put that next to what everybody in Washington already assumes about November. I assume it's not going to go well. Democrats need three seats to take the House. The generic ballot that's been running six or seven points their way has been running that way most of the summer.

but it's generic. You know, when you actually have to look at people and when you say, you know, I want to change and I'd rather have a generic Democrat, you could go, okay, I'd like the, but when you put a name in a face to it, you're like, not that one. I like the generic one. Okay, and that happens on both sides. The Senate is harder because, you know, the math is different, but it is on the table. And the reason is not socialism. Pew just asked voters in July what they would most want to hear about, and it was prices. People ask which party they trust on the economy, and it's 37 to 36.

So it's a coin flip. A coin flip is a catastrophe if you're in power. People are tired, and they want normal. I read that from Ben Shapiro, and he's right. They want normal, and I thought, oh, my gosh, are we in trouble? Let me tell you a story. We've been here before. 1920, this country was wrung out in a way that makes us look coddled right now. A war than a flu that killed more than the war strikes, bombs in the mail, riots, prices that were eating a paycheck alive, you know, socialism and progressivism gone wild.

So a newspaper man from Ohio runs for president. He sits on the front porch in Marion. and he let the country come to him. And he gave him a word. And he said, look, here's what Americans are looking for. They're not looking for heroics right now. They're looking for healing. They're looking for normalcy.

Now, everybody made fun of him at the time. They're like, you're making that word up. There's no such word as normalcy. And there is. I mean, it's, you know, it's a mass. word, honestly. He said, I looked it up in my dictionary and it's there and it is. Normalcy is not a political word. It's a math word. It shows up in a dictionary of mathematics in 1850s. And in geometry, normal is a line standing at a right angle. Normalcy meant the state of being square, as in square.

Latin root means carpenter square So the most famous political promise of the 20th century came out of a toolbox normalcy It's a square He won 60% Biggest landslide anyone had ever seen

In that same November Nearly a million Americans One voter in 30 cast a ballot for a socialist And that socialist was sitting in federal prison in Atlanta serving 10 years for giving a speech. He couldn't campaign, you know, his campaign buttons had his convict number on them, printed on the campaign, you know, same country, same election, largest landslide in American history

for calm and a million votes go for a man in prison denim. Here's what we need to take from this. Exhaustion is not moderation. and I think that's what we keep getting wrong. A tired country does not move to the center. It just moves away, and it moves away in any direction that's open. That's the problem. That's 2020.

You're sick of the noise, you were sick of the politics, the back and forth, blah, blah, blah. So you voted in the quiet man in the basement. You know, I'm tired of all of this stuff. I just want normalcy. Just want to go back to normal. So you voted for the guy in the basement and you got mandates and closures in a school year that never came back, a border you didn't recognize. Then we were exhausted again. 2024.

Same voters, same exhaustion, opposite door because it was the open. And I fear it's going to be the same thing in 2026 unless something changes. Because they're not going for philosophy or ideology. They're going for rest. You know, when a man doing math in a grocery store, when he's doing the math in the grocery store, he's not being, that's not propaganda. He's not being propagandized, okay?

He's doing math and his arithmetic is right. And no microphone, no propaganda beats arithmetic. tick, not mine, not a cable news networks, not the presidents, nobody. You can be entirely right about the direction of the country and still lose to a receipt from the grocery store. And I think that's what's happening. What you can argue with is the assumption that the vote only registers the receipt. It doesn't.

It doesn't. It hands over the calendar. It hands the gavels, the committees, the judges. and those who don't come back for two years and sometimes 20 years. Because you're voting for normalcy just like you did with Joe Biden. And we all said that's not normal. And then we voted for normalcy with Donald Trump. And it hasn't been normal.

I've liked it, but it hasn't been normal. Now you're going to do the same thing and you're going to vote for normalcy, which have you looked at the candidates? They're Marxists. That's not normal? You're not voting normal back in. Normal isn't a mood. You're voting in a program.

The gender fights in your daughter's locker room. The masks and the closures and the men who told you six feet was science and then told you in meeting notes that were classified. No, that's not science at all. DEI written into the hiring of the company where your son just applied. That's what you're getting. That's not normal. A foreign policy where important decisions get made at a conference in Davos by people who have never stood for an election anywhere on the planet.

That's not a warning about the future. It's a receipt from five years ago. And it's still in the drawer. Do you remember it? Do you remember it? And Republicans, you don't get a pass. Five Republicans nearly killed your own anti-socialism vote on Tuesday because you were angry about a shutdown of negotiation.

You can't tell the country that the stakes are civilizational and then hold your own vote hostage over a scheduling grievance. Everybody's listening, and they're listening to hear anyone who is saying what they actually believe. And then I'm listening to see, are they doing it? Are they still saying that behind closed doors? And that vote said you don't. Harding was the president. He became president after saying they're voting for normalcy, and they did.

normalcy came off a carpenter's square. But a square is not a place. You can't go back to a place. And any man who promises you, you know, that he's going to take you back to that place is selling you something. And he's selling you something he doesn't have. Nobody does. Harding was dead in two years. His administration became synonymous for corruption.

A square is a tool. You hold the work up against the square and you find out is that level and is that true. We have one. It's a few pages long. And it starts with all men are created equal and endowed by their creator. The other square we have starts with we the people. That's our square. Nobody's holding it up to see if it's normal.

if there's normalcy there. Is it square? Is it true? Nobody's doing that. Every one of these fights, the resolution, the punishment, the vote in November is a piece of work. Someone is holding up to the light and telling you, it looks straight to me.

It looks straight. I know it because I feel it every day. God, I'd love to go back to normal. I don't even know what that is anymore. We're never going back there. We can't. We can't. And the reason we can't is because we won't get our square out and check to see what's true and what's not.