Video summary
Mike Glover’s Unbelievable Fight Against Provo Police & DCFS – Why We Must Build Our Tribes!
Main summary
Key takeaways
Summary of Video Subtitles (We Are the People Radio)
The hosts open by framing the current U.S. political climate as entering an inevitable period of severe instability (“chaos coming”). They reference the “Fourth Turning” concept—a cyclical historical pattern in which national corruption/disarray leads to major upheaval, sometimes via war or catastrophe. They predict Trump will win, and suggest the broader system may disrupt a normal election timeline.
Mike Glover’s Core Story: Criminal and Civil Targeting by Provo Police and DCFS
The main focus is an extended account from Mike Glover, who says that after a domestic dispute involving his postpartum spouse, he experienced what he describes as coordinated misuse of both the justice and civil systems in Utah County. He makes several key claims:
Alleged May 1 charging and detention conditions
- On May 1, after an argument/blowout, he was charged with multiple felonies, which he says stemmed largely from one statement by his spouse.
- He claims he was mistaken for another person (another “Michael A. Glover”), which he alleges contributed to a worse and longer detention, including:
- No bail
- Solitary confinement
- Being held awaiting trial
Public information leaks and due process concerns
- He alleges Provo police and related actors leaked information publicly (including details such as names and addresses).
- He says his case was treated as if he was guilty before due process.
Continued case-building after recantation
- He claims police/prosecutors continued building a case even after his spouse later recanted.
- He argues that the recantation was not filed or incorporated appropriately by prosecutors/police.
How DCFS (Civil Child-Removal System) Was Used to Pressure Outcomes
A major analytical portion explains how Utah’s DCFS process operates alongside criminal proceedings, which Mike portrays as lacking internal cross-checks (“left and right hand” problem: police/criminal vs. DCFS/civil).
Parallel civil process and reliance on police information
- He claims DCFS relied on information from police affidavits and opened a parallel civil case.
Child removal and disputed medical claims
- He alleges DCFS removed his infant son and controlled custody based on claims he says were false—particularly that he injured his spouse (e.g., “broken wrist/arm”).
- He argues that medical documentation and expert analysis do not support those claims.
Coercion framing
- He says he was told DCFS would proceed through a coercive logic—either:
- “lose the hand,” or
- “lose the arm”
- He interprets this as being designed to force compliance with the system’s demands despite evidence and dismissal of the criminal side.
Allegations of Evidence Errors and Escalation Tactics
Mike adds further claims, including:
- He says his spouse reported postpartum issues, and he believes the system ignored that context.
- He describes conflicts over how medical imaging should be interpreted (from suspected hairline injury to “no break”), comparing what police allegedly wrote in affidavits versus what doctors allegedly documented.
- He alleges issues with:
- phone recording listening practices,
- supplemental paperwork omissions,
- and mishandling of a later waiver signed by his spouse.
- He claims these problems contributed to extra charges, including for contacting his spouse.
Broader Warning: People Without Resources Can Be “Buried by the System”
Both hosts and Mike use the case to argue a wider point: even if Mike believes he had better legal support, many others—especially those without attorneys—may not be able to meaningfully fight these processes.
Mike says he encountered detainees who:
- lacked meaningful access to counsel, and
- couldn’t even reach the right people.
He frames this as a structural barrier that increases the likelihood of wrongful outcomes.
Criminal Dismissal vs. Continued Civil Punishment
Mike emphasizes a split outcome:
- The criminal case was dismissed by the fourth district court (he describes this as rare and suggests the evidence didn’t hold).
- However, he says DCFS continued despite the dismissal, including maintaining a finding related to child neglect (as he describes it).
- Even after dismissal, he reports being required to attend domestic violence counseling for an extended period.
Personal Consequences and “Preparedness / Community”
Mike argues that the outcome destroyed key parts of his personal life and reputation and disrupted his business and relationships, while he maintains he was innocent of the allegations.
He connects the trauma he experienced—such as hypervigilance/paranoia after detention—to the need for preparedness and community resilience.
Hosts’ Mission and Media / Community Plans
The hosts connect his story to their broader mission:
- They emphasize building tribes/communities in Utah—not only individual preparedness (e.g., food storage and tactics), but also:
- social cohesion,
- and mutual defense against institutional or cultural collapse.
- They announce expanded media efforts:
- a fight against what they call biased local media (naming KSL),
- launching multiple channels for different demographics and issues, including youth/Gen Z and education.
Final Message
They conclude with the idea that institutions are “broken,” so people must rebuild basics, including:
- faith/spirituality
- health
- family unity
- local mutual support
They frame the “enemy” as ideological and systemic rather than strictly partisan (Republican vs. Democrat). They also warn that people who expose corruption may face backlash.
Mike closes with a call to prayer and action through:
- preparedness-related resources, and
- local support/community effort in Provo, including his survival/training organization.
Presenters / Contributors
- Jason Preston (host)
- Alexia (guest/host contributor)
- Mike Glover (primary guest)
Referenced counterpart(s) mentioned in the discussion
- Andy Stumpf (referenced as the person in a prior “cleared hot” podcast episode)
- Tom Hazelton (referenced as a future channel/voice)