Discussing America’s obesity epidemic feels as fresh as a gas-station sushi roll. We’ve had the headlines, the task forces, the Michelle Obama gardens, the lurid rise and fall of Jared-from-Subway. Every few years, medicine rediscovers the problem like a dog finding the same buried bone and acting stunned.

But researchers in Europe recently dug up something new. They studied hundreds of patients and found that obesity doesn’t affect men and women the same way. It may be the same condition, but it runs on a different operating system and has a different damage report.

In short, men carry the problem where a tape measure finds it. Women carry it where only a lab result does.

Gut feeling

Men tend to pack fat deep in the abdomen. I’m talking about visceral fat, the kind that wraps around your organs like a tenant who stopped paying rent and refuses to leave. That fat is clinically nasty. It hammers the liver and wrecks metabolic function; it lays the groundwork for cardiovascular disease and has been convincingly linked to several cancers.

Women, by contrast, carry less of that abdominal load but show higher cholesterol and elevated inflammatory markers. Essentially, immune signals run hotter than they should and the biochemical alarm system never fully shuts off. The damage is systemic rather than structural. It’s less visible, but no less serious.

In short, men carry the problem where a tape measure finds it. Women carry it where only a lab result does.

If that sounds abstract, just picture your last family reunion. Or, if you want a more vivid case study, picture mine.

Family size

Obesity runs deep on both sides of my family. I mean that genetically, medically, and architecturally. Planning any gathering requires a kind of pre-event logistics that most people reserve for moving furniture or evacuating a small country. I have relatives who have single-handedly retired the booth as a viable seating option.

Virtually every family has the same cast, even if the staging varies. There’s the uncle who describes himself as “big-boned” with the confidence of someone who has never once questioned that assessment. He has a belt buckle working well beyond its original job description and a firm belief that his blood pressure is “probably fine.” There’s the aunt who demolished two bowls of pasta, declared herself “stuffed,” and is now on her third glass of wine, eyeing that slice of cake with the focused intensity of someone who has already decided.

His and hers

Conversations about self-respect and restraint matter. So does the fact that American health culture has failed both sexes spectacularly. We have had decades of treating obesity as a single, uniform problem with a single, uniform fix: Eat less. Move more. Have you considered a run? A juice cleanse? Intermittent fasting? Have you tried being less stressed? Have you tried drinking more water? Have you tried just trying harder?

The endless questions and secondhand advice land with the precision of a motivational poster and the clinical usefulness of a fortune cookie, while ignoring what estrogen and testosterone are actually doing to fat distribution and inflammation.

The European researchers make the obvious point that treatment should probably reflect this — targeted clinical approaches rather than the one-size-fits-all pamphlet model that has served us so poorly for so long. Men may need earlier metabolic intervention. Women may need more attention paid to the signals that get waved off as stress, hormones, or simply the price of admission for being female.

RELATED: Sick and tired of the lies? Here are 14 food brands you can trust.

Blaze Media

Heavy going

Today, roughly 43% of American adults are obese. By the end of the decade, that number is expected to climb to nearly half, including close to one in four who will have severe obesity.

The children are worth mentioning. Around one-third of American kids between 6 and 17 are living with obesity or excess weight. Fat children tend to become even fatter adults, and the research on that pipeline is neither new nor ambiguous. These statistics arrive with enormous economic weight. Hundreds of billions in health care costs, lost productivity, and a medical system already struggling to keep pace with demand. This is a genuine crisis, and it deserves a serious response.

The study’s real contribution isn’t discovering that obesity exists, but insisting that obesity has never been one thing. It has always been at least two — running parallel, wearing the same label, causing different problems on different timelines in different bodies.

That distinction matters in the clinic. It matters in the conversation. And it matters every time someone who once lost eight pounds on a juice cleanse corners people at a cookout with personalized nutrition guidance that nobody requested and biology can’t honor. Good intentions and bad information have always made a combustible combination. In this case, they have been making policy for decades.

​Cardiovascular disease, Fat, Lifestyle, Men and women, Metabolic function, Obesity, Visceral fat, Weight loss, Make america healthy again 

An illegal immigrant was able to fool U.S. Border Patrol into thinking he was one of them before they nabbed him for impersonating a federal officer.

Fifty-two-year-old Jaime Ernesto Alvarez-Gonzalez is a Mexican national who overstayed his tourist visa decades ago, but he dressed up to appear like a federal agent and drove a truck that was taken to be the real deal.

He ‘shouted obscenities and demanded agents leave …’ before other cars arrived to chase and harass agents.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California said that on January 8, Alvarez-Gonzalez followed a Border Patrol agent in San Diego, which led to disruption of the mission.

The legitimate BP agent falsely believed the truck behind him was being driven by other federal officers, but Alvarez-Gonzalez was actually driving it.

After Alvarez-Gonzalez was confronted by legitimate officers, he “shouted obscenities and demanded agents leave the community of Linda Vista” before other cars arrived to chase and harass agents, the attorney’s office press release said.

Alvarez-Gonzalez admitted on video what he had done and claimed to have called in his “reinforcements.”

Prosecutors said he had an FBI badge and had outfitted his black F-150 truck with a fake antenna, handcuffs dangling from the rearview mirror, and a Border Patrol sticker in the windshield. The license plate frame also could have tipped off the real officers because it read, “Ferderal Truck.”

A week after the incident, he was arrested over his illegal immigration status and pleaded guilty on Tuesday to numerous charges related to the incident.

He was found to be illegally in possession of two pistols and an AR-style rifle.

Alvarez-Gonzalez pleaded guilty to three charges of illegally possessing firearms and one count of impersonating a federal agent. He faces a fine of up to $500,000 as well as 18 years in prison.

RELATED: Church worker pretended to be ICE agent to extort $500 from massage therapist, police say

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protesters have been organizing to interrupt federal immigration operations, but in two cases in Minnesota, the ultimate outcomes were lethal.

Alex Pretti and Renee Good were shot and killed by agents in separate incidents when they tried to interfere with immigration operations. The incidents led to an agreement between local officials and the Trump administration to end the federal surge in the state.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Impersonating federal officer, Ferderal truck, Border patrol impersonation, Jaime alvarez-gonzalez, Politics 

A battle over America’s roads is unfolding in the Supreme Court, where demands for accountability clash with efforts to deregulate the industry, as the national spotlight remains on accidents caused by non-domiciled, non-English-speaking truck drivers.

The court’s ruling could have major implications for the more than 150,000 Americans injured and the over 5,000 killed in large truck accidents each year, by potentially stripping or safeguarding the legal recourse available to victims and their families.

‘Remove any legal accountability for brokers, and you remove the incentive for them to care.’

SCOTUS heard oral arguments on March 4 in the case of Shawn Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, which involves a December 2017 collision between two semi-trucks: one operated by the plaintiff, Shawn Montgomery, and the other by an individual employed by Caribe Transport II, a small motor carrier hired by broker C.H. Robinson Worldwide.

The complaint explains that Montgomery was parked on the shoulder of Interstate Highway 70 in Cumberland County, Illinois, when another truck rear-ended his vehicle at high speed, resulting in severe and permanent injuries, including the amputation of Montgomery’s leg.

Montgomery’s lawsuit was filed against the driver, the carrier, and C.H. Robinson. He accused C.H. Robinson of “negligent hiring,” citing Illinois common law. His case reached the Supreme Court after a lower court moved to dismiss it, arguing that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act bars state-level negligence suits against brokers — third-party providers that connect shippers with carriers without owning trucks or hauling freight themselves — for their carrier selections.

The ongoing case has caught the attention of those in the trucking industry who are concerned that a SCOTUS ruling in favor of C.H. Robinson would set a precedent that prevents crash victims and their families from seeking legal recourse against brokers.

While President Donald Trump’s administration has been receptive to concerns about reforming the nation’s broken trucking industry, the U.S. position in the Montgomery v. Caribe case indicates a potential shift.

RELATED: DOT’s Duffy earns high praise from American truckers for turning industry concerns into real policy wins

Luke Sharrett/Getty Images

Trump’s Department of Justice submitted an amicus brief supporting C.H. Robinson, arguing that the FAAAA preempts any state law related to the “price, route, or service” of a broker. This, the DOJ claimed, includes how brokers select carriers. Although the rule carves out a safety exception allowing states to enforce such laws, the U.S. government contended that the exception does not apply to this case.

The U.S. argues that brokers are already required to select an authorized motor carrier, which means that the carrier has met the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s “rigorous safety standards.” Allowing such lawsuits against freight brokers would “require brokers to second-guess federal registration decisions and independently evaluate the safety history of the carriers they select.”

“A judgment for petitioner on that claim would thus necessarily impugn Caribe’s overall operations, thereby undermining FMCSA’s determination that Caribe satisfies federal registration requirements, including rigorous safety requirements,” the U.S. amicus brief reads.

American Truckers United, an advocacy group, warned that if SCOTUS agreed with the U.S. government’s argument and ruled in favor of the respondent, it could allow freight brokers to have “blanket immunity” when selecting unsafe and high-risk carriers, leading to a “race to the bottom.”

ATU filed its own amicus brief, urging SCOTUS to side with Montgomery.

“If brokers are immunized from tort liability, they will have an unrestrained incentive to hire the cheapest motor carriers available for every load, regardless of poor safety records, regulatory non-compliance, defective equipment, and other red flags. Low-cost, low-quality carriers will completely displace safe carriers in the market,” ATU wrote.

ATU noted that many carriers maintain only the minimum required liability insurance, which covers just a small portion of the cost for crash victims and their families. The group also pointed out the FMCSA’s lack of resources to keep up with the “chameleon carrier” crisis, explaining that when carriers lose their operating authority due to noncompliance, they “dissolve, reincarnate themselves under new identities, and reenter the market.”

A separate amicus brief filed by the Institute for Safer Trucking on behalf of Montgomery wrote, “The reality of the compliance-review scheme is bleak. FMCSA is apparently unable to conduct compliance reviews of carriers within a reasonable time. More than ninety-four percent of all active interstate freight carriers remain ‘unrated’ as of 2023.”

The FMCSA has previously admitted its limitations. In a 2023 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FMCSA stated that it “has resources to issue safety ratings to only a small percentage of motor carriers each year,” adding that the agency’s rating “does not necessarily reflect the current safety posture of a motor carrier.”

FMCSA officials said that “they do not have the resources to vet all for-hire carriers that apply for new operating authority,” according to a 2012 Government Accountability Office report.

The Truck Safety Coalition, a network of victim and survivor volunteers, also filed an amicus brief supporting Montgomery that referred to freight brokers as “gatekeepers in determining who hauls freight on the roadways and who doesn’t.” The TSC stated that the industry has exploded in recent decades, from just 70 brokers in 1975 to over 28,000 today.

Rena Leizerman, from the Law Firm for Truck Safety and co-counsel for Montgomery, told Blaze News in a statement, “Broker negligence lawsuits aren’t filed in every crash. They get filed when there’s evidence that a broker hired someone with a known, serious safety history and chose to look the other way.”

“C.H. Robinson argued to the court that it should be completely off the hook for negligence. No exceptions. Not even if it knowingly hires a carrier with no insurance. Not even if the carrier isn’t legally registered to operate. Not even if it already knows the carrier has a dangerous record. Zero accountability, no matter what,” Leizerman’s statement continued.

“Brokers make money on the gap between what shippers pay them and what they pay the carrier. The wider the gap, the more profit. So they push carrier rates down, and carriers survive by cutting costs — driver screening, safety training, equipment upkeep, insurance — until the day everything goes wrong.

“Remove any legal accountability for brokers, and you remove the incentive for them to care. Safe carriers, the ones who invest in doing things right, end up getting underbid by carriers who skip basic safety. It’s a race to the bottom, and it’s the rest of us sharing the road who pay the price,” she added.

Dorothy Capers, chief legal officer at C.H. Robinson, also provided a statement to Blaze News.

“A single, uniform federal framework is essential to keeping interstate commerce safe, efficient, and consistent with Congress’ design,” Capers said. “Allowing a patchwork of state tort laws to regulate broker services would undermine that system, increase uncertainty, and disrupt the flow of goods Americans rely on every day.”

RELATED: ‘Use my daughter as an example’: Trump DHS cheers as bill to stop illegal alien truck drivers crosses major hurdle

Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Real-world impact

The stakes of the pending Montgomery case are already playing out in the nation’s courtrooms.

On May 24, 2024, a semi-truck driver allegedly blew through a stop sign on U.S. 84 in Texas, killing 28-year-old Tiana Moore and her mother, Tanya Maria King. Moore’s family sued the driver, the carrier, and the freight broker that had hired the carrier.

When the case was about to go to trial, the broker, citing the ongoing Montgomery case before the Supreme Court, requested and received a stay, leaving the family in limbo.

Moore’s father, David Moore, spoke to Blaze News about the tragic accident. He expressed his goal of raising awareness to inspire policy changes and help the American public understand how regulations affecting the trucking industry impact lives nationwide.

“The impact that it’s really had on our lives, and even this ongoing process, it’s been, obviously, the most difficult thing that I’ve ever had to deal with — and not just me, but my family,” David Moore said.

Ultimately, the Moore case was closed a short time later when the parties reached a confidential settlement. While in this instance the family was able to reach an agreement outside the courtroom, the Supreme Court’s decision in the Montgomery case will determine whether crash victims and their families retain or lose a major avenue for accountability in the future.

SCOTUS is expected to give a decision in the Montgomery case by June.

The Department of Transportation deferred comment to the Department of Justice, which stated it had no further remarks beyond its amicus brief.

Legal counsel for Caribe Transport II did not respond to requests for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, Department of transportation, Dot, American trucking industry, American trucking, Trucking industry, Trucking, Shawn montgomery v caribe transport ii, Montgomery v caribe, Ch robinson, C.h. robinson, Scotus, Supreme court, Federal aviation administration authorization act, Faaaa, Donald trump, Trump, Trump administration, Trump admin, Federal motor carrier safety administration, Fmcsa, American truckers united, Atu, Department of justice, Doj, Institute for safer trucking, Tiana moore, Tanya maria king, Leader transport, Scotlynn, Louie cook, Politics 

The Senate race in Maine just got a surprise shakeup as election season draws near.

Incumbent Maine Democratic Gov. Janet Mills announced on Thursday that she will be dropping out of the Senate race.

‘I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources.’

Mills announced that she will be suspending her campaign while touting her achievements, which she said have ultimately been frustrated “by a Republican administration that is blind to science, deaf to the cries of those in need of medical care, and ignorant of the needs of regular families.”

In her statement, she continued: “While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else — the fight — to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources. That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate.”

RELATED: 2 more staffers ditch Graham Platner’s troubled Senate campaign amid Nazi, communism scandals

Graham PlatnerSophie Park/Getty Images

Janet Mills is currently 78 years old. Had she been elected, she would have been one of the oldest freshman senators in history.

Despite being a favorite at the beginning of the race, Mills fell behind in the polls and in fundraising compared to her Democratic primary opponent, far-left progressive candidate Graham Platner. The Maine primary election is scheduled for June 9.

Mills stepping away from the race likely sets up Platner to face Republican incumbent Sen. Susan Collins in the general election.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Campaign suspension, Election season, General election, Incumbent senator, Janet mills, Maine governor, Politics, Senate race, Susan collins, Trump, United states senate, Troubled senate campaign, Financial resources 

Fights erupted and sheriff’s deputies were hurt after more than 1,000 teenagers over the weekend descended upon a Florida amusement park in a planned “takeover.”

The location of the takeover was ICON Park in Orlando, and it occurred Saturday evening, WOFL-TV reported. As is often the case with such teenage takeovers of public places, word spread online about the ICON Park takeover.

‘Massive amount of teenagers just flooding the streets.’

The Orange County Sheriff’s Office told the station that numerous fights broke out among the teens and deputies had to step in and break them up.

Nine teenagers between the ages of 13 and 16 were arrested on charges ranging from trespassing and resisting to battery on a law enforcement officer, WOFL said.

Two deputies were hurt, taken to the hospital, and released, the station said, adding that the sheriff’s office said the deputies are expected to be OK.

The sheriff’s office said that it was “aware” that some sort of event had been planned for Saturday evening at ICON Park and that several deputies were assigned there in anticipation of it, WOFL reported in a separate story.

RELATED: ‘We was bored!’ Hundreds of teens rampage Bronx mall, tangle with cops in planned Presidents’ Day ‘takeover’

Witness Virgil Goodson told the station he saw a “massive amount of teenagers just flooding the streets. The sheriff’s office chasing some down, seemed chaotic in some areas; other areas, teens just walking around aimlessly.”

Goodson told WOFL he noticed at one point hundreds of teens running away from the park, and he said he “didn’t know if it was an active shooter.” Others were unnerved, he told the station, and took cover and ran inside businesses.

Another consequence stemming from the teen takeover is a new ICON Park chaperone policy requiring adult supervision for minors, the station said.

Park attendees 17 and younger must have a parent or guardian who is at least 21 years old with them to enter and stay at ICON Park, WOFL said. One chaperone can accompany up to six kids into the park and must stay with them during the entire visit, the station said.

What’s more, ICON Park warned parents and guardians that they may be held legally liable for what minors do while under their supervision, WOFL said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Teen takeover, Florida, Icon park, Arrests, Deputies hurt, Orlando, Orange county sheriff’s office, Fights, Quality of life, Crime 

Christians were told in the first century that the world that hated and persecuted their Savior would similarly hate and persecute them. This divine counsel certainly holds up two millennia later.

‘The Biden administration was willing to tolerate Christians up to a point.’

According to the watchdog group Open Doors, over 315 million Christians today face very high or extreme persecution, with thousands murdered yearly over their faith. While the top 10 worst countries for Christians are all in Africa, Asia, and the Indian subcontinent, Christians are also routinely subjected to violent attacks, discrimination, and state suppression in purportedly civilized Western nations.

In America, for instance, hostility toward Christians, their faith, and their institutions came to a head during the Biden administration, which not only turned a blind eye to a rash of anti-Christian attacks but adopted policies that formalized the underlying animus.

Seeking to “end the anti-Christian weaponization of government and unlawful conduct targeting Christians” and rectify the wrongs committed by his predecessor’s government, President Donald Trump established the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias last year.

Camille Varone, senior counsel at the Justice Department, gave Allie Beth Stuckey, host of BlazeTV’s “Relatable,” an exclusive look this week at the culmination of the task force’s efforts to date: a damning report detailing both the anti-Christian bias propagated by the federal government during the Biden administration and what the Trump administration has done and is doing to protect Americans’ religious liberties.

“The Biden administration used transgenderism as an excuse, as a justification, for discriminating against Christian doctors, medical facilities, against churches, against Catholic schools, specifically,” Stuckey said in summary. “And then, of course, there was the targeting of the pro-lifers. Even within the DOJ, there was an attitude of anti-Christian discrimination and the feeling that Christians really didn’t count as a protected class, and that manifested itself in very real, illegal prejudice against Christians.”

RELATED: The anti-Christian myth of First Amendment ‘neutrality’

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

“What we found is that across the board, the Biden administration was willing to tolerate Christians up to a point, and that was when they held their views privately or in the four walls of their churches,” Varone told Stuckey.

“When Christians were trying to live out their faith — to see where the Bible, where religious tradition should inform how they actually, you know, went to school, went to work — that’s where they ran into policy issues.”

Varone — drawing from the findings of the 200-page written report, which is accompanied by over 300 pages of receipts plus thousands of footnotes — highlighted in her conversation with Stuckey numerous anti-Christian governmental abuses and policies advanced under President Joe Biden, who professes to be Catholic, including how Biden’s

DOJ pursued aggressive prosecutions against nonviolent, pro-life Christian demonstrators under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act while taking a markedly less enthusiastic approach to holding leftists, such as members of Jane’s Revenge, responsible for attacks against pregnancy resource centers;Internal Revenue Service apparently targeted churches and Christian organizations whose religious values aligned with conservative political views but did not similarly hound churches where progressive views and Democratic causes were championed; administration, working off a liberal reading of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, sought to mandate the adoption of its views on sexual preferences and gender ideology; andadministration ran roughshod over “sincere religious objections” to the COVID-19 vaccines.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission implemented a rule requiring employers — including Christian organizations — to accommodate workers’ efforts to abort their unborn children; FBI investigated, surveilled, and stigmatized law-abiding traditional Catholics, in part due to bogus claims from the scandal-plagued Southern Poverty Law Center; andDepartment of Health and Human Services attempted to bar Christian providers and would-be parents who hold biblical and scientifically grounded views about sex and marriage from the foster-care system.

The task force reached the conclusion that “in its zealous pursuit of its preferred policies and constituents, the Biden administration engaged in anti-Christian bias, seeking to limit Christians’ ability to act in concert with their sincerely held beliefs in their homes, in the workplace, and in the public square. At times, it went still further, leading Christians to reportedly choose between their beliefs and compliance with federal law.”

Stuckey asserted that “this should really disturb everyone” regardless of whether they’re a Christian.

Varone agreed, reiterating, “What we found here really should disturb everyone who holds religious beliefs because if the government can do that against a majority group, nobody’s rights are safe under that kind of system.”

“No American should live in fear that the federal government will punish them for their faith,” acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, chair of the task force, said in a statement.

“As our report lays out, the Biden administration’s actions devastated the lives of many Christian Americans,” continued Blanche. “That devastation ended with President Trump. The Department of Justice will continue to expose bad actors who targeted Christians and work tirelessly to restore religious liberty for all Americans of faith.”

Stuckey expressed gratitude that people are being “aware that things like this are happening,” in part because it “encourages us to know our constitutional rights, and that can only be a win.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​American christians, Biden administration, Christians, Clinic entrances act, Discrimination, Freedom of access, Hostility, Persecution, Religious liberties, Peaceful christians, Justice department, Allie beth stuckey, Camille varone, Task force, Anti-christian, Bias, Christian, Christianity, Conservative, Biden, Joe biden, Merrick garland, Politics 

When NewsNation anchor Katie Pavlich sat down at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, she was not expecting to end up on the ground as yet another would-be assassin attempted to take the president out.

And looking back on the events of that night, Pavlich tells Glenn Beck on “The Glenn Beck Program” that she’s feeling “anger and frustration that this continues to happen.”

“Being in the room and watching Karoline Leavitt, who’s nine months pregnant, have to be taken out of the room because there’s someone outside trying to assassinate her boss and the people she works with and … it’s just infuriating that this continues to be something that is acceptable,” she explains.

Pavlich also notes that the security surrounding the dinner was not nearly strong enough.

“I thought going into the night that security was going to be tough, that it would take me an hour to get into the hotel. It was not tough at all,” she tells Glenn. “I walked by those same protesters … with their Palestinian flags, and they were screaming that they hoped our dresses were ruined, that our night was ruined, that we were fascists.”

While security was lacking, Pavlich did notice that the president was evacuated “very quickly” and the situation seemed to be under control moments after it began.

“When I heard the shots, to me, it sounded like a controlled situation, because it ended quickly. There was not a real exchange of gunfire. It was not something that continued. There were five shots, when you listened to the audio, and it was over,” Pavlich explains.

“So, to me, that indicated that Secret Service or some other law enforcement agency that was there had handled the situation and it was not in the room,” she continues, pointing out that there was also some “sporadic” Wi-Fi access.

“When the president is in the room, they usually shut all of that stuff down so nobody can activate a bomb using cell service,” Glenn chimes in.

“There’s so many questions here about the security,” Pavlich agrees.

“I just think it’s a miracle that he was an amateur,” she adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Amateur shooter, Cell service, Controlled situation, Exchange of gunfire, Glenn beck program, Karoline leavitt, Law enforcement agency, Newsnation anchor, Nine months pregnant, Palestinian flags, Secret service, Security questions, Security surrounding dinner, White house correspondents, Wifi access, The glenn beck program