Glenn, you frequently and forcefully critique the institutional credibility of outlets like the NYT, Washington Post, and WSJ — arguing they serve elite interests, suppress inconvenient stories, and function as propaganda arms of the national security state. Yet in your own reporting and commentary, you regularly cite those same outlets as sources. How do you square that? If their editorial judgment is fundamentally corrupt, why should a citation to their reporting carry any evidentiary weight? And isn’t there a risk that selectively citing them when convenient while dismissing them when inconvenient is itself a form of the epistemic cherry-picking you criticize in others?
I agree. To me, the Judith Miller’s September 8, 2002, NYT story, that claimed Iraq was seeking high-strength aluminum tubes, was one of the reasons why I wrote off the NYT as a source of information. That kind of mistakes are inexcusable and irredeemable for a newspaper.
Glenn, just wondering what you think of Tucker saying about his podcast that it "is the most pro-dog show that exists"? Seems a bold claim, especially when he knows you.
Just speculating randomly (and I tend to avoid GG's call-in shows). I think GG's attention is more spread out which keeps him from being outstandingly pro- any one thing. Like Tucker, he opposes a lot of war crimes. Also, GG spends a lot of time tweeting, which occasionally can make a dog of his worry about him. And he has other interests too. As a ridiculous example, if GG has a tendency to revere poets or hold them up as sources of political wisdom, that could easily detract from his other priorities (but if GG did acquire that kind of trait one would hope it doesn't stick).
Hey Glenn, in a recent article in The New Yorker, a former Open AI Executive said of the massive data centers they’re building around the world:
“The truth of this is, we’re building portals from which we’re genuinely summoning aliens…the portals currently exist in the U.S. and China, and Sam has added one in the Middle East.”
He goes on to say how “scary” and “reckless” this is. Do you think these tech oligarchs truly have a sort of mystical, quasi-religious framework for understanding AI? Beyond the ambition of creating a techno-feudal type of system? What do you think their worldview is?
"The Stratos artificial intelligence datacenter footprint will cover more than 40,000 acres (62 sq miles) over three sites in Box Elder county in north-western Utah. The facility will require about 9GW of power, which is more than the entire state of Utah currently consumes..."
Glenn, intellects and activists like Chomsky, Zinn and MLK felt that marches/mass protests are a leading way of instigating change. Would you ever 'take to the streets'? What would it take?
I can't begin to say how deeply this resonates with my thoughts... A growing number of readers are no longer asking whether power is corrupt. That question feels settled. The quieter question now surfacing is whether the traditional forms of resistance, protest, exposure, moral appeal.. retain the capacity to produce change, or whether they have become expressions of dissent without accumulation.
As best I can tell, both the Israelis and the Palestinians perpetrate a number of atrocities and outrages, both lie about their own outrages, and both invent outrages against themselves. Hamas didn't bake up a batch of babies on October 7 but they almost certainly raped and violently killed some women. Israel does either intentionally or recklessly kill Palestinian civilians, but the Palestinians have a history of staging such fake incidents. Is there an easy way for an observer who doesn't want to spend his life sorting through the minutiae to determine truth from fiction? Are there any sources you consider to be neutral and honest?
As the Israeli/US genocide of Palestine nears totality, Mr. Courtade writes of his concern that "the Palestinians have a history of staging such fake incidents." Why does Mr. Courtade believe that such fabrications are necessary when the IDF's own films reveal their horrific crimes, Also, the filmed statements by Netanyau, Ben G'vir, and Smotrich are adequate to result in their executions for genocide.
Hi Glenn, a note and a stat. When you were talking about Russia’s inability to advance as evidence that there not a further threat to Europe, I agree with your conclusion and disagree with your basis. Despite Kamala Harris’s plea to the 535,000 Pennsylvania Poles, there is no evidence that Russia has any designs toward conquering more territory. I think the West is mistaking Russian/Putin discipline and patience for a lack of capacity. I think this is important as the West continues to attack Russia directly, some attacks super important like last June, the attack on the open air nuclear air delivery planes. They legally have to be displayed, US media implied that they’re just dumb for leaving them out in the opened. The international law is designed to prevent a global bbq. Russia has a big incentive to establish deterrence again. I worry what that might look like as the proxy war becomes more transparent and western media cozies up to the idea that the Ukraine “stalemate” is about Russian capability limitations v Russian strategy. Oh yea, the stat. So did some research on civilian to military personnel kill ratio. in Ukraine, 15,000 civilians dead v 250k to 450k Ukrainian military dead. I use deaths v casualties because the stats are harder to manipulate. In Gaza, the ministry of health and Israeli officials recognize 72,000 dead, looks like 20,000 actual Hamas fighters. I have opinions and some alternative numbers I’m not going to share. Not needed for the take away, total civilian dead are about 3x more in Gaza over Ukraine. When each war started Ukraine population was 20x Gaza’s. These wars are very similar except for the extraordinary low civilian death rate in Ukraine and the extraordinary high civilian death rate in Gaza. Both of those stats take military strategy and intention.
I’d like to follow up on my question for your last week’s Q&A session. I asked why Iran had never used its incredibly effective bargaining power against the US on the strait of Hormuz for the past 47 years but specifically during the 12-day US bombing in 2025. Thank you for addressing my question last week, but I must admit your explanation about Iran’s not having used its awesome geographically blessed bargaining chip of its ability to close the strait of Hormuz and paralyzing the world economy simply by causing a global energy crisis has been due to Iran’s and Iranian peoples’ being strategically and/or traditionally restraint and calculating the next steps in their process of responding to escalation driven by the US doesn’t sound like it explains what is going on there. Why would Iran not use its leverage on strait of Hormuz to get back at the US during bombing campaign in 2025 and take over the stratit of Homuz and start charging tolls or just ask the US to stop bombing it’s land simply because the entire world would otherwise experience an energy crisis? Please elaborate on this thought and explain why Iran hasn’t been in a better position strategically against the US through straight of Hormuz since 1953 or 1979? You all it takes for Iran to close the strait of Hormuz is shooting a few drones hitting the oil tankers passing through the strait. Why haven’t done that? They sure would have been in a better bargaining position against the us as they are now.
Hi, Glenn. What are your thoughts on the Hondurasgate leaks and their implication for Latin America and the globalist project more broadly? Do you think that as USAID/NED/NGO-type foreign interference operations are becoming less effective (or at least target governments are becoming more aware of them), the effort will shift to these more opaque influence operations, such as the detailed in the leaked audios with the former and current Honduran leaders?
Frank Zappa was once quoted as saying politics is "the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex".
If that's true, then is it possible that the entertainment division and the entire military-industrial complex are stronger than ever under Trump?
With Trump on the scene, almost everyone is socially required to be engaged in politics, and to profess strong opinions on all or most of these distracting topics:
- UFOs
- Artificial Intelligence
- Epstein Mania
- The rise of demons as an explanation for political phenomena
- Russiagate (previously)
- J6
- Favored celebrities (based on the celebrity's supposed political affiliation. Ex.: the answer to "are you a 'Swiftie' or a 'Sweeney' fan" could result in your social exclusion in certain lame circles)
Meanwhile, we're in multiple wars every year. Yet a narrative springs up that the Iran war was used as a distraction FROM Epstein Mania rather than the other way around. Why isn't war sufficiently evil for people to object to it?
Question:
Does the military industrial complex secretly love all the wrestling "heel" behavior that Trump offers us? It's as if the American citizenry is an easily distracted WWE referee, watching everything but the match in the ring.
Assuming Epstein or AIPAC has dirt on or bribes almost everyone of the US's state representatives, and also given the fact that the Epstein files will most likely never see the light of day unredacted, is it safe to say that it would be easier to oust the people they have in their pocket than to extricate the perpetrators of this blackmail ? Protesting at the Representatives place of residence could send a clear message that we are the ones they should worry about rather than Charlie Kirks assassins.
When would be a good time to call it on the analysis of how terrible the deck chairs are arranged on The Titanic--and pivot to just assuming the post-AGI paradigm change iceberg IS coming and start putting bricks down on what we build upon that assumption? Like, make the 2028 election mandate about who has the best plan for the actual inevitable reality, and make ignoring it a liability--starting now. To let policy makers know that we are beyond the softening the blow point and really just need practical ideas for survival.
I am curious about the recent conviction of Desiree Doreen Segari and the indictment of Lucas Nevcherlian. How do these cases overcome the Brandenburg test? Also, in the Segari case, it seemed as if the state's burden of proof was very low; is it enough that her intent was to terrorize; why shouldn't the state need to prove that her statements did invoke fear?
You’ve argued that many activist organizations are structurally incentivized to perpetuate the problems they claim to solve.
If that’s true, doesn’t it follow that protest itself, especially when channeled through these institutions, can become system-compatible rather than system-disruptive?
What could replace protests and fix corrupted NGOs? Could we, individuals, unique creative think tanks, supporters, input our ideas of change and empowerment, or we have to limit to ask questions and advice here??
I hear and read next to nothing about the number of Americans who are part of the IDF destroying Gaza and enabling settlements in the West Bank. Why is this not a more publicized number? Not only are Americans forced to send tax dollars overseas for something practically no American wants, but we are forced to support an even smaller number of Americans who are perpetuating endless war. Your thoughts please?
Glenn, you frequently and forcefully critique the institutional credibility of outlets like the NYT, Washington Post, and WSJ — arguing they serve elite interests, suppress inconvenient stories, and function as propaganda arms of the national security state. Yet in your own reporting and commentary, you regularly cite those same outlets as sources. How do you square that? If their editorial judgment is fundamentally corrupt, why should a citation to their reporting carry any evidentiary weight? And isn’t there a risk that selectively citing them when convenient while dismissing them when inconvenient is itself a form of the epistemic cherry-picking you criticize in others?
I agree. To me, the Judith Miller’s September 8, 2002, NYT story, that claimed Iraq was seeking high-strength aluminum tubes, was one of the reasons why I wrote off the NYT as a source of information. That kind of mistakes are inexcusable and irredeemable for a newspaper.
Glenn, just wondering what you think of Tucker saying about his podcast that it "is the most pro-dog show that exists"? Seems a bold claim, especially when he knows you.
Just speculating randomly (and I tend to avoid GG's call-in shows). I think GG's attention is more spread out which keeps him from being outstandingly pro- any one thing. Like Tucker, he opposes a lot of war crimes. Also, GG spends a lot of time tweeting, which occasionally can make a dog of his worry about him. And he has other interests too. As a ridiculous example, if GG has a tendency to revere poets or hold them up as sources of political wisdom, that could easily detract from his other priorities (but if GG did acquire that kind of trait one would hope it doesn't stick).
Hey Glenn, in a recent article in The New Yorker, a former Open AI Executive said of the massive data centers they’re building around the world:
“The truth of this is, we’re building portals from which we’re genuinely summoning aliens…the portals currently exist in the U.S. and China, and Sam has added one in the Middle East.”
He goes on to say how “scary” and “reckless” this is. Do you think these tech oligarchs truly have a sort of mystical, quasi-religious framework for understanding AI? Beyond the ambition of creating a techno-feudal type of system? What do you think their worldview is?
‘Irresponsible’: backlash as Utah approves datacenter twice the size of Manhattan https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/13/utah-approves-datacenter-backlash?CMP=share_btn_url
"The Stratos artificial intelligence datacenter footprint will cover more than 40,000 acres (62 sq miles) over three sites in Box Elder county in north-western Utah. The facility will require about 9GW of power, which is more than the entire state of Utah currently consumes..."
Tucker did a good interview with Kevin O’Leary. check it out.
Glenn, intellects and activists like Chomsky, Zinn and MLK felt that marches/mass protests are a leading way of instigating change. Would you ever 'take to the streets'? What would it take?
I can't begin to say how deeply this resonates with my thoughts... A growing number of readers are no longer asking whether power is corrupt. That question feels settled. The quieter question now surfacing is whether the traditional forms of resistance, protest, exposure, moral appeal.. retain the capacity to produce change, or whether they have become expressions of dissent without accumulation.
Glenn, if the comments of Helen Thomas back in 2010 about Israel were said today do you think anyone would stand up for her freedom of expression?
Glenn,
As best I can tell, both the Israelis and the Palestinians perpetrate a number of atrocities and outrages, both lie about their own outrages, and both invent outrages against themselves. Hamas didn't bake up a batch of babies on October 7 but they almost certainly raped and violently killed some women. Israel does either intentionally or recklessly kill Palestinian civilians, but the Palestinians have a history of staging such fake incidents. Is there an easy way for an observer who doesn't want to spend his life sorting through the minutiae to determine truth from fiction? Are there any sources you consider to be neutral and honest?
Best regards.
As the Israeli/US genocide of Palestine nears totality, Mr. Courtade writes of his concern that "the Palestinians have a history of staging such fake incidents." Why does Mr. Courtade believe that such fabrications are necessary when the IDF's own films reveal their horrific crimes, Also, the filmed statements by Netanyau, Ben G'vir, and Smotrich are adequate to result in their executions for genocide.
Hi Glenn, a note and a stat. When you were talking about Russia’s inability to advance as evidence that there not a further threat to Europe, I agree with your conclusion and disagree with your basis. Despite Kamala Harris’s plea to the 535,000 Pennsylvania Poles, there is no evidence that Russia has any designs toward conquering more territory. I think the West is mistaking Russian/Putin discipline and patience for a lack of capacity. I think this is important as the West continues to attack Russia directly, some attacks super important like last June, the attack on the open air nuclear air delivery planes. They legally have to be displayed, US media implied that they’re just dumb for leaving them out in the opened. The international law is designed to prevent a global bbq. Russia has a big incentive to establish deterrence again. I worry what that might look like as the proxy war becomes more transparent and western media cozies up to the idea that the Ukraine “stalemate” is about Russian capability limitations v Russian strategy. Oh yea, the stat. So did some research on civilian to military personnel kill ratio. in Ukraine, 15,000 civilians dead v 250k to 450k Ukrainian military dead. I use deaths v casualties because the stats are harder to manipulate. In Gaza, the ministry of health and Israeli officials recognize 72,000 dead, looks like 20,000 actual Hamas fighters. I have opinions and some alternative numbers I’m not going to share. Not needed for the take away, total civilian dead are about 3x more in Gaza over Ukraine. When each war started Ukraine population was 20x Gaza’s. These wars are very similar except for the extraordinary low civilian death rate in Ukraine and the extraordinary high civilian death rate in Gaza. Both of those stats take military strategy and intention.
I’d like to follow up on my question for your last week’s Q&A session. I asked why Iran had never used its incredibly effective bargaining power against the US on the strait of Hormuz for the past 47 years but specifically during the 12-day US bombing in 2025. Thank you for addressing my question last week, but I must admit your explanation about Iran’s not having used its awesome geographically blessed bargaining chip of its ability to close the strait of Hormuz and paralyzing the world economy simply by causing a global energy crisis has been due to Iran’s and Iranian peoples’ being strategically and/or traditionally restraint and calculating the next steps in their process of responding to escalation driven by the US doesn’t sound like it explains what is going on there. Why would Iran not use its leverage on strait of Hormuz to get back at the US during bombing campaign in 2025 and take over the stratit of Homuz and start charging tolls or just ask the US to stop bombing it’s land simply because the entire world would otherwise experience an energy crisis? Please elaborate on this thought and explain why Iran hasn’t been in a better position strategically against the US through straight of Hormuz since 1953 or 1979? You all it takes for Iran to close the strait of Hormuz is shooting a few drones hitting the oil tankers passing through the strait. Why haven’t done that? They sure would have been in a better bargaining position against the us as they are now.
Hi, Glenn. What are your thoughts on the Hondurasgate leaks and their implication for Latin America and the globalist project more broadly? Do you think that as USAID/NED/NGO-type foreign interference operations are becoming less effective (or at least target governments are becoming more aware of them), the effort will shift to these more opaque influence operations, such as the detailed in the leaked audios with the former and current Honduran leaders?
Frank Zappa was once quoted as saying politics is "the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex".
If that's true, then is it possible that the entertainment division and the entire military-industrial complex are stronger than ever under Trump?
With Trump on the scene, almost everyone is socially required to be engaged in politics, and to profess strong opinions on all or most of these distracting topics:
- UFOs
- Artificial Intelligence
- Epstein Mania
- The rise of demons as an explanation for political phenomena
- Russiagate (previously)
- J6
- Favored celebrities (based on the celebrity's supposed political affiliation. Ex.: the answer to "are you a 'Swiftie' or a 'Sweeney' fan" could result in your social exclusion in certain lame circles)
Meanwhile, we're in multiple wars every year. Yet a narrative springs up that the Iran war was used as a distraction FROM Epstein Mania rather than the other way around. Why isn't war sufficiently evil for people to object to it?
Question:
Does the military industrial complex secretly love all the wrestling "heel" behavior that Trump offers us? It's as if the American citizenry is an easily distracted WWE referee, watching everything but the match in the ring.
Assuming Epstein or AIPAC has dirt on or bribes almost everyone of the US's state representatives, and also given the fact that the Epstein files will most likely never see the light of day unredacted, is it safe to say that it would be easier to oust the people they have in their pocket than to extricate the perpetrators of this blackmail ? Protesting at the Representatives place of residence could send a clear message that we are the ones they should worry about rather than Charlie Kirks assassins.
https://jeffrylamontesanford.substack.com/p/xis-warning-was-not-about-china?r=beqtw&utm_medium=ios
When would be a good time to call it on the analysis of how terrible the deck chairs are arranged on The Titanic--and pivot to just assuming the post-AGI paradigm change iceberg IS coming and start putting bricks down on what we build upon that assumption? Like, make the 2028 election mandate about who has the best plan for the actual inevitable reality, and make ignoring it a liability--starting now. To let policy makers know that we are beyond the softening the blow point and really just need practical ideas for survival.
I am curious about the recent conviction of Desiree Doreen Segari and the indictment of Lucas Nevcherlian. How do these cases overcome the Brandenburg test? Also, in the Segari case, it seemed as if the state's burden of proof was very low; is it enough that her intent was to terrorize; why shouldn't the state need to prove that her statements did invoke fear?
You’ve argued that many activist organizations are structurally incentivized to perpetuate the problems they claim to solve.
If that’s true, doesn’t it follow that protest itself, especially when channeled through these institutions, can become system-compatible rather than system-disruptive?
What could replace protests and fix corrupted NGOs? Could we, individuals, unique creative think tanks, supporters, input our ideas of change and empowerment, or we have to limit to ask questions and advice here??
I hear and read next to nothing about the number of Americans who are part of the IDF destroying Gaza and enabling settlements in the West Bank. Why is this not a more publicized number? Not only are Americans forced to send tax dollars overseas for something practically no American wants, but we are forced to support an even smaller number of Americans who are perpetuating endless war. Your thoughts please?