Rand Paul: Trump’s Riyadh speech is historic, but Qatar’s $400M jet is trouble



In his May 13 speech at the Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum in Riyadh, President Donald Trump lauded the Middle East’s transformation. He credited regional leaders and the people for their sovereign development of cities like Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. It was these local efforts that made the difference, he said, not Western interventionists, whom he criticized for failed nation-building efforts in places like Kabul and Baghdad.

He then condemned Western lectures on governance, arguing that the region’s positive transformation was due to embracing local heritage and traditions, not external imposition.

“Peace, prosperity, and progress ultimately came not from a radical rejection of your heritage, but rather from embracing your national traditions and embracing that same heritage that you love so dearly,” he said to a cheering crowd.

Glenn Beck says, “That part of that speech was as significant as the ‘Gorbachev, tear down this wall’ speech.”

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who joined Glenn on a recent episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” agreed: “It’s incredibly significant to say we've developed these relationships not by bossing around the world, not by intervening, but by basically trading.”

However, he wasn’t as enthusiastic about Trump’s decision to accept a $400 million jet from Qatar as a temporary Air Force One.

“The Constitution says you can't take emoluments or gifts unless they're approved by Congress,” Paul told Glenn. Accepting the jet could still “set up the appearance of impropriety,” even with congressional approval, due to Qatar’s arms deals with the U.S.

“There's a potential that the administration's objectiveness will be clouded by a $400 million plane,” he explained.

Instead, he suggested Qatar sell the plane directly to the U.S. government for a negotiated price or return the jet to Boeing, who could then sell it to the U.S. government. Both of these are solutions that reduce scrutiny over Trump’s ties to Qatar.

However, even purchasing the plane poses ‘practical concerns,’ said Paul. For example, if the Boeing-contracted planes ordered in 2018 to replace the dated Air Force One jets were “within six months of being completed,” it might be faster to wait for them than to outfit the Qatari plane, which would need to be “stripped down on the inside [and] completely reconfigured,” potentially taking longer, Paul explained.

“We began our participation in and ended World War II in a quicker time than we have ordered that plane in 2018 to today, so I mean, what is Boeing doing?” asked Glenn.

To hear Paul’s answer, plus why he can’t support Congress’ current version of Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” and what might be in store for Dr. Fauci regarding COVID investigations, watch the clip above.

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.

Trump's NIH closes Fauci's apparent puppy-torture lab after 40 years of sadistic experiments



The Trump administration's National Institutes of Health announced over the weekend that it had shut down the notorious government research labs that were used to conduct brutal and deadly experiments on dogs.

NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya told Fox News on Saturday that the agency had closed the last of its in-house beagle laboratories.

'Mr. Fauci's evil lab has FINALLY been shut down.'

Bhattacharya explained that changing the existing culture within the NIH has been difficult.

"I'll do some policy change, and people try to find the worst possible spin for it," he stated. "I put out a policy to make sure that when we have animals in research, that we look at alternatives."

"It's very easy to cure Alzheimer's in mice, but those things don't transfer to humans," Bhattacharya continued. "So we put forward policy to replace animals in research with other technological advances — AI and other tools — that actually translate better to human health."

"We got rid of all the beagle experiments on the NIH campus," he declared.

Bhattacharya addressed the public's lack of trust in the NIH, noting that he hopes to reverse this sentiment under President Donald Trump.

The White Coat Waste Project celebrated the NIH's move to shut down the last and largest in-house dog lab, where more than 2,000 beagles died from "brutal septic shock experiments."

Under former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci, the NIH likely spent "millions of tax dollars" forcing pneumonia-causing bacteria into dogs' lungs. WCW stated that the bacteria caused the beagles to bleed out and forced them into septic shock.

WCW president and founder Anthony Bellotti stated, "Taxpayers and pet owners shouldn't be forced to pay for the NIH's beagle abuse."

"We applaud the president for cutting this wasteful NIH spending and will keep fighting until we defund all dog labs at home and abroad. The solution is simple: Stop the money. Stop the madness!" Bellotti added.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals also praised the Trump administration's move.

PETA director of science advancement and outreach Dr. Emily Trunell said, "After more than a decade of agitation, tens of thousands of emails to NIH officials from PETA supporters, and a 2021 landmark lawsuit, PETA welcomes the long-overdue news that NIH is canceling at least one of the appalling sepsis experiments that inflicted prolonged suffering on animals in federal and federally funded laboratories."

Bhattacharya told Fox News that PETA thanked him for eliminating the experiments.

He stated, "Normally, I think NIH directors tend to get physical threats, but they sent me flowers."

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) reacted to the Bhattacharya's announcement.

"You paid over $2 million so Fauci could inject beagle puppies with cocaine. Real science, they said. For years I've called out this lunacy. Grateful to [Trump], [Bhattacharya], and [Robert F. Kennedy Jr.] for bringing a shred of sanity back to government spending," Paul stated.

He called the shutdown "one of the best things to come out of DOGE."

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) also praised the end of the experimentations.

"Mr. Fauci's evil lab has FINALLY been shut down," she wrote in a post on social media. "Beagles & dog owners across America are celebrating the END of this cruelty."

Greene shared a video with one of the beagles rescued from the dog labs.

"What kind of person would support these terrible experiments??" Greene asked.

WCW stated that “it is 100% confirmed that Fauci’s NIH division funded” the experiments.

When pressed in 2021 about the NIAID’s decision to approve the NIH’s grant funding of the experiments, the agency downplayed Fauci’s role.

“The decision whether to fund a research grant application to NIAID is made through a multi-step peer-review process,” the NIAID told FactCheck.org. “Final funding decisions are made on a group of a few thousand grant applications at a time based on the advice of the Advisory Council and NIAID staff and concurrence by Dr. Fauci. Except in very limited circumstances, Dr. Fauci does not approve funding for grant applications on an individual basis. These limited circumstances did not apply to the research recently highlighted by the White Coat Waste Project.”

The NIAID and the NIH denied funding a study in Tunisia that placed sedated beagles’ heads in cages to allow diseased sand flies to bite them.

“All animals used in NIH-funded research are protected by laws, regulations, and policies to ensure the smallest possible number of subjects and the greatest commitment to their welfare,” the NIAID previously told PolitiFact.

In October 2021, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) sent a letter to Fauci demanding answers about some of the beagle experiments, noting that the “NIAID spent $1.68 million in taxpayer funds on drug tests involving 44 beagle puppies.”

“The dogs were all between six and eight months old. The commissioned tests involved injecting and force-feeding the puppies an experimental drug for several weeks, before killing and dissecting them,” she wrote.

Mace stated in December 2021 that Fauci had not responded to her letter.

During a June 2024 House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic hearing, Greene questioned Fauci about the beagle experiments.

“You did sign off on these so-called scientific experiments, and as a dog lover, I want to tell you this is disgusting and evil what you signed off on. And these experiments that happened to beagles, paid for by the American taxpayer, and I want you to know Americans don’t pay their taxes for animals to be tortured like this,” Greene told Fauci.

“What do dogs have to do with anything that we’re talking about today?” Fauci responded.

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

Rand Paul’s anti-tariff crusade was doomed — and rightly so



Earlier this week, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) launched a short-lived attempt to block President Trump’s new tariffs. Fortunately, in this case, he lost. Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote.

Paul played all of the libertarian greatest hits, from calling tariffs “taxation without representation” to claiming they represent big-government tyranny. He ignored one key fact: Donald Trump ran, and won, on an explicitly pro-tariff platform. The American people voted for this.

If Paul really wants to reduce the size and scope of government, he has no choice but to support Trump’s tariffs.

The reality is that tariffs are the form of taxation most compatible with small government. That’s why America’s founders — and every president on Mount Rushmore — supported them.

How tariffs promote small government

Tariffs shrink the power of government in three ways. First, they reduce foreign demand for U.S. debt, limiting borrowing. Second, they promote full employment, reducing welfare dependency. Third, they protect American businesses from foreign state interference.

America has run trade deficits every year since 1974. The cumulative total, adjusted for inflation, approaches $25 trillion. In 2023 alone, the trade deficit in goods and services neared $920 billion.

We didn't pay for that deficit with domestic production. Instead, we sold off assets — real estate, stocks, and bonds. China and its trading partners ship us goods, then buy up our future in return.

That includes our debt. Foreign demand for Treasury bonds has exploded because countries like China must recycle their trade surpluses somewhere. This artificial demand makes it easier — and cheaper — for Washington to borrow without raising yields.

Foreign entities now hold $8.5 trillion in U.S. public debt, about 29% of the total. The explosion started in 2001 when China joined the World Trade Organization, and our deficits soared.

The result? Washington spends recklessly. And the cost of servicing that debt — over $300 billion in interest payments to foreign creditors — bleeds out the economy. That’s roughly equal to our annual trade deficit with China.

Higher tariffs would shrink the trade deficit and lower foreign demand for American debt. That would limit Washington’s access to cheap credit — exactly what fiscal conservatives should want.

Long term, if tariffs replaced the income tax as the government’s primary revenue source, federal borrowing would face a hard cap. Unlike the income tax, tariffs are avoidable. If rates rise too high, people buy domestic. That reality places a natural limit on tax revenue and borrowing capacity.

In short: Tariffs enforce fiscal restraint.

Tariffs favor work over welfare

Since 2001, the U.S. has lost more than 5 million manufacturing jobs — along with the service jobs that depended on them.

Offshoring gutted labor’s bargaining power. When employers can threaten to send jobs to China, wages stagnate. Productivity no longer guarantees compensation. Workers take what they can get, or they’re replaced.

This “race to the bottom” helped erode middle-class wages and drive up welfare dependency. Over 10 million Americans now qualify as chronically unemployed, with many dropped from the labor force entirely.

As I explain in my book “Reshore,” mass job loss carries political consequences. Unemployed citizens are more likely to vote for higher taxes, expanded social programs, and even socialist policies. Poverty breeds dependency — and dependency fuels government growth.

Even if you buy the libertarian argument that tariffs “distort” markets, the result still favors liberty. The jobs tariffs protect are real. They preserve dignity, reduce welfare rolls, and shrink government.

Work is cheaper — and better — than welfare.

Good fences make good neighbors

Paul argues that tariffs let government “pick winners and losers.” He wants the market to decide.

Well, sure. That would make sense — if America competed on equal footing. But we don’t. Chinese businesses don’t operate under free market conditions. They’re backed by the Chinese Communist Party, which props them up with subsidies, below-market financing, land-use preferences, and outright theft — up to $600 billion per year in American intellectual property.

U.S. small businesses can’t compete with state-sponsored enterprises. That’s why entire American industries, towns, and families have disappeared.

Tariffs serve as economic fences. They shield American firms from foreign governments — not just foreign competitors. That protection restores actual market competition inside the United States, where private companies can go head-to-head without facing a communist superstate.

And economic competition isn't just about firms. It happens at every level: workers vying for jobs, companies for customers, nations for global influence. Globalism collapses these layers into a single, rigged marketplace where the biggest government wins — and right now, that’s Beijing.

Tariffs restore order by separating national economies enough to maintain fair play. They enhance domestic competition while preserving international boundaries. Most importantly, they keep the CCP — the world’s largest and most authoritarian government — from dominating American markets.

If Rand Paul really wants to reduce the size and scope of government, he has no choice but to support President Trump’s tariffs.

Vance casts tiebreaking Senate vote after Republicans join Democrats to tank Trump's tariffs



The Senate failed to pass a resolution Wednesday night that would have halted President Donald Trump's tariffs after Vice President JD Vance cast the tiebreaking vote.

Three Republicans, Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Rand Paul of Kentucky, bucked their party and sided with 46 Democrats in favor of passing the resolution. The remaining 49 Republicans voted against it, resulting in a 49-49 tie that Vance broke.

Murkowski and Paul, who have defied their party in the past, argued that Trump did not have the constitutional authority to impose these tariffs.

'Trump's ongoing trade war has been a focal point for his critics over the last few weeks.'

"Bilateral trade deficits do not constitute a national emergency, nor do they qualify as an 'unusual and extraordinary' circumstance needed to unlock authorities under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act," Murkowski said in a statement. "We have a lot more work to do to reclaim Congress's constitutional power over tariffs, but this resolution is a step in the right direction."

"The Constitution clearly states that Congress, not the president, has the power of the purse," Paul said in a statement. "All new taxes (which is what a tariff is) are supposed to originate in the House of Representatives before going to the Senate for approval."

Trump's ongoing trade war has been a focal point for his critics over the last few weeks. With market uncertainty and ongoing trade negotiations, the GDP experienced a contraction in the first quarter.

Although the latest GDP report may have some warning signs on its face, former Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Richard Clarida argued that the figures were distorted by tariffs, and the administration pointed to several positive economic indicators in the report.

"It's no surprise the leftovers of Biden's economic disaster have been a drag on economic growth, but the underlying numbers tell the real story of the strong momentum President Trump is delivering," press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement Wednesday.

"Robust core GDP, the highest gross domestic investment in four years, job growth, and trillions of dollars in new investments secured by President Trump are fueling an economic boom and setting the stage for unprecedented growth as President Trump ushers in the new golden age," Leavitt said.

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

Bipartisan Effort To Terminate Trump’s Global Tariffs Ends In Defeat

'Let the White House play this thing out'

Dogs shouldn’t have to die for new medications



Modern medications have transformed health care, turning once-fatal diseases into manageable conditions. Statins have significantly reduced heart disease deaths. GLP-1 drugs are revolutionizing obesity treatment.

But the path to these breakthroughs has come at a callous cost — thanks to outdated, unnecessary regulations from the Food and Drug Administration.

Images of week-old puppies convulsing from drug overdoses may finally become a thing of the past.

Each year, U.S. labs use roughly 50 million animals in drug testing, including rodents, monkeys, dogs, and cats. Much of this often cruel experimentation stems from FDA mandates that require animal testing for drug approval.

At last, that’s beginning to change.

Thanks to the bipartisan efforts of Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Congress passed the FDA Modernization Act 3.0 in December. The bill allows sponsors to use alternative testing methods that don’t harm living things. The FDA has proven remarkably receptive to these efforts, recently announcing measures to phase out animal testing requirements. With continued momentum, animal testing may soon be gone for good.

Recent reforms have reignited a fierce and emotional debate over the role of animal testing in medical innovation. Many researchers still defend the practice. Jim Newman, communications director for Americans for Medical Progress, argues that alternatives remain in their infancy and won’t become fully reliable “for many, many years.”

While some animal testing may still serve a purpose, the FDA has long abused the practice, imposing requirements that are often cruel, costly, and slow-moving.

Take the case of Vanda Pharmaceuticals. The company pushed back when the FDA ordered it to euthanize dogs after testing its gastroparesis drug, Tradipitant. Vanda had already run extensive tests on rats and dogs, including prolonged exposure at doses up to 300 times higher than those intended for humans. No safety concerns emerged. The FDA had even approved human trials.

But when Vanda sought to extend treatment beyond three months, regulators demanded yet another round of dog testing — this time with mandatory euthanasia. The agency offered no scientific rationale, no public justification — only a bureaucratic decree.

The real cost wasn’t just animal lives. An estimated 1.5 million Americans suffer from gastroparesis and face delayed access to treatment. Yet the FDA prevailed in court, thanks to its unchecked power to require animal testing with no meaningful oversight.

Paul and Booker aim to disrupt the FDA’s outdated, inhumane testing regime. Their bipartisan reform would give companies like Vanda the power to reject animal testing when safer, more advanced alternatives exist.

One such alternative uses microchips that simulate the human body’s biological systems. These “organ-on-a-chip” technologies allow researchers to see how drugs affect human tissue — without harming a single animal.

Wider adoption of chip-based testing could cut research and development costs between 10% and 26%, while sparing countless animals from needless pain and death. Images of week-old puppies convulsing from drug overdoses may finally become a thing of the past.

These alternatives may also produce better science. A report from the National Institutes of Health found that animal models often fail to accurately replicate human disease or predict drug responses — delaying breakthroughs and wasting money while patients wait.

With the right pressure from Congress, the FDA can move away from a system rooted in cruelty and toward one grounded in modern science. The status quo is not just outdated. It’s indefensible.

Trump, Senate Leadership Urge GOP Senators To Think Twice Before Aiding Dem Effort To Tank Canada Tariffs

'What is wrong with them'

GOP Senators Propose Bill To Deal Fatal Blow To Department Gutted By Trump

'Decline in academic achievement'

House GOP insists on Senate cooperation as reconciliation talks resume: 'We must act'



House Republican leadership members are applying pressure on the Senate GOP to take up their reconciliation budget blueprint as negotiations resume on Capitol Hill.

While both the Senate and the House passed their respective budget resolutions, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) are set to meet Tuesday to discuss a path forward. House Republicans are set on advancing their "big, beautiful bill," which President Donald Trump has endorsed, and they're putting the Senate on notice.

'We encourage our Senate colleagues to take up the House budget resolution when they return to Washington.'

"The House is determined to send the president one big, beautiful bill that secures our border, keeps taxes low for families and job creators, grows our economy, restores American energy dominance, brings back peace through strength, and makes government more efficient and more accountable to the American people," the statement reads.

"We took the first step to accomplish that by passing a budget resolution weeks ago, and we look forward to the Senate joining us in this commitment to ensure we enact President Trump's full agenda as quickly as possible," the statement continued. "The American people gave us a mandate, and we must act on it."

Despite the public push for the House resolution, Republican leadership remains divided on the competing blueprints. While the GOP is still hammering out the fine print on issues like tax policy and budget cuts, House Republicans insist that their version will be the best option to implement Trump's agenda.

"We encourage our Senate colleagues to take up the House budget resolution when they return to Washington," the statement reads. "This is our opportunity to deliver what will be one of the most consequential pieces of legislation in the history of our nation. Working together, we will get it done."

Congress has about two weeks to make progress on reconciliation talks if Republicans want to pass a final budget by April 7, an ambitious goal set by Johnson. Although Congress typically operates at a glacial pace, negotiations are set to resume Tuesday.

Some Republicans, like Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, are less optimistic than the leadership.

“Probably what we are going to do is talk each other to death, stare at each other, and then eventually, you know, confuse the issue so much that it takes two months to unravel what we agree to,” Paul said.

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

Rand Paul schools Margaret Brennan on Education Department's utility — or lack thereof



President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday to start the elimination of the Education Department, then indicated Friday that some of the department's remaining functions would immediately be offloaded onto the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services.

These decisions have enraged various radical groups, including the teachers' unions that demanded the devastating closure of schools during the pandemic. The liberal media appears to be reflexively keen to join American Federation of Teachers boss Randi Weingarten and other leftists in defending the moribund institution, CBS News' Margaret Brennan included.

In conversation Sunday with Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (R), Brennan concern-mongered about the closure of the Education Department, suggesting federal funding for schools in his state might be at risk. The senator questioned the talking head's presumptions, particularly about the value of those federal funds, and proposed a possible innovation, namely that an A-team of better-paid and higher-caliber teachers could teach American students en masse.

Rather than fight for a guarantee of more federal funding, Paul underscored that he would prefer to secure "a guarantee that my kids can read and write and do math."

'Why do two-thirds of the kids not read at proficiency?'

Brennan began by suggesting that federal funds for students in high-poverty Kentucky schools through Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act might be threatened by the Education Department's closure.

"[Kentucky has] over 900 schools that have these Title I programs, which are low-income schools who need that federal subsidy to continue to operate. How are schools going to get that money if the president closes the Education Department?" asked Brennan.

Rather than identify a way of retaining such funding, Paul pointed out that this and other streams of federal funding aimed at improving student achievement don't actually appear to helping.

"I think the bigger question if we're sending all this money to Kentucky and all the other states [is] why are our scores abysmal?" said the Republican senator. "Why do two-thirds of the kids not read at proficiency? Why do two-thirds of the kids or more not have math proficiency?"

The Education Data Initiative indicated that as of February, federal, state, and local governments were blowing $857.2 billion on K-12 education annually. This works out to $17,277 per pupil. Federal tax dollars account for 13.6% of public K-12 funding nationwide.

In Kentucky, K-12 schools blow on average $15,337 per pupil, $3,195 of which is apparently from the federal government.

'The number of dollars has gone up exponentially, and our scores have gone the other way.'

According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, only 31% of fourth-grade students and 30% of eighth-grade students nationwide performed at or above the "NAEP Proficient" level on the reading assessment in 2024.

Last year, only 39% of fourth-grade students and 28% of eighth-grade students were found to be proficient in math.

The 2019 NAEP assessment of fourth- and eighth-grade proficiency levels found that only 35% and 33% made the grade, respectively.

Scores were better in Paul's state but still far from stellar.

In Kentucky, standardized test results indicated last year that 47% of elementary students were proficient in reading, 42% of students were proficient in math, and 34% were proficient in science, reported the Louisville Courier Journal.

The assessment conducted in May found that at the middle school level, 45% of students were proficient in reading, 39% were proficient in math, and 22% were proficient in science. At the high school level, 45% were proficient in reading, 35% in math, and 6% in science.

"It's an utter failure," added Paul.

Brennan countered by intimating the problem might be that the programs receiving oodles of federal cash may have been poorly administered by regional administrators — prompting Paul to question the federal mediation of taxpayer funds intended for education in the first place.

"Look, the number of dollars has gone up exponentially, and our scores have gone the other way. So dollars are not proportional to educational success," said Paul.

"It has always been a position, a very mainstream Republican position, to have control of the schools by the states," said Paul. "Send the money back to the states, or better yet — never take it from the states. About half of our budget in Kentucky goes to education, and that's the same in a lot of states. I think we can handle it much better."

"When I talk to teachers, they chafe at the national mandates on testing they think are not appropriate for their kids," continued the senator. "They think they waste too much time teaching to national testing. The teachers would like more autonomy, and I think the teachers deserve more autonomy."

In addition to suggesting that states are better equipped to handle local education and that national educational mandates interfere with regional education efforts, Paul indicated that radical, outside-the-box thinking might be the way forward. He proposed, for instance, the rollout of online instruction by "an NBA or NFL of teachers — the most extraordinary teachers teach the entire country, if not the entire world."

This proposed A-team of teachers "might teach 10 million kids at a time because it would be presented to the internet with local teachers reinforcing the lessons," said Paul.

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