Glenn interviews the cable king, Bill O’Reilly

Bill O’Reilly has a new book out “Killing Kennedy” which was a follow up to his hit success “Killing Lincoln” and prompted Glenn to question Bill’s fascination with ‘killing’ books. The pair also previewed the debate tonight - how should Mitt Romney handle the tough questions? O’Reilly explains on radio today.

Rough transcript of interview below:

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly continues his fascination with presidential assassinations. I don't know what it is. First it was Lincoln. Now it's Kennedy. And I don't know. McKinley is next. I'm not sure what he's working on. Number one best-selling author. The number one book in America. Been on the best-selling list for 53 weeks, I don't know.

STU: 53,000 weeks.

GLENN: His epic book, "Killing Lincoln". Now being followed by "Killing Kennedy", and it is just as good. We have we have Bill O'Reilly on the phone. Hello Bill.

STU: He'll be here in a few minute.

GLENN: What do you mean?

STU: He's apparently decided there's a breakfast emergency. Maybe there's a delicious hash brown he's finishing off.

PAT: He might be finish up the research on killing McKinley.

GLENN: I may not talk about his book now. Here's the truth. I haven't Reddit. I don't like it.

STU: How would you know.

STU: I think he's on now.

GLENN: Bill now that you're late.

CALLER: Wait. Wait. I've been calling you guys.

GLENN: Don't even.

CALLER: Oh.

GLENN: What is the weird thing with your fascination with the deaths of former presidents. Are you working on killing McKinley now.

CALLER: Did you read the book.

GLENN: I have to apologize to you. I haven't.

CALLER: You haven't read it.

GLENN: I know you sent it to me early.

CALLER: Most of this book is when he was alive. The worthiness we knock out all of the myths. All of the garbage, all of the rumor. All of the innuendo.

GLENN: No you don't. You don't knock it out. There was one part of the story I was interested in.

CALLER: Which was?

GLENN: If I would have read the book I would have known. This is the one guy that you couldn't nail down because were you on his track and he committed suicide.

CALLER: Fascinating story. 1976 I'm working at a WFAA in Dallas, Texas. A friend of mine. He calls he's got a call he's a Russian emigre. He was teaching at a college. This guy knows a lot about Oswald. I immediately try to track shield. He runs. He dodges. He knows I'm after him. So I go to his house. A number of times. Finally and this was against the law, I actually broke into his house and nobody knows that. I'm telling the Glenn Beck program.

GLENN: Just hold on a second. Eric Holder let's get him on the phone.

CALLER: I was dressed like a Black Panthers so he's not going to do anything. So.

CALLER: So the back door the backsliding door was open and I opened it, and I stepped into his living room I guess it was. And there was nobody there. I pounded on the door, and so I had a cameraman with me. There's blood on the rug. So I thought this was really strange. Told my assignment editor. Don't ever do that again, and don't tell anybody. We got word that he was visiting his daughter in south palm beach Florida. Where did the blood come from.

CALLER: I don't know.

GLENN: You didn't do anything about that.

CALLER: Because you broke in we don't you want to do anything. I head out to palm beach Florida.

GLENN: I'd like to apologize to the parents of the missing girl in the 1970s who's body was never found. Bill O'Reilly let it happen.

CALLER: My friend is trying to get shield to serve him a subpoena. So we both of us are heading out to the house. I get to the house. And shield blew his brains out second floor of his daughter Alexandra's house.

PAT: While you're there.

CALLER: I'm there. And then the palm beach police drove there. I have not been able to define shield was hanging around Lee Harvey Oswald which was the lowest rung. Now, a sleuthed it. I've done anything. We knew that shield had ties to the C.I.A.. he had ties to the older Bush. That is one of the few things we have not been able to nail down in "Killing Kennedy".

GLENN: So Oswald was a loan shooter.

CALLER: He shot him by himself.

PAT:

GLENN: Was he a Russian agent?

CALLER: There is no evidence of that.

GLENN: Was why did he go over to the Soviet Union.

CALLER: He went over to the Soviet Union because he was a loser and Communist. He thought he was going to have a great life over there. That's where he met his wife in Minsk. The F.B.I. shadowed him. He was a Socialist Communist kook. If he was a Russian agent he wouldn't have had so much trouble getting into Cuba. He went down to Cuba. We traced every bit of him. You learn all of this fascinating.

GLENN: If you're offering to have somebody read it to me I'll take that. I'm trying to create jobs.

CALLER: I'll have somebody come to see you.

GLENN: We're going to the election in a few minute.

CALLER: You're going to love this book. This is right up your alley. Because.

GLENN: Bill.

CALLER: It unmasks the whole government and the C.I.A. what they did the bay of pigs. Kennedy ordering the assassination of DM. This is right where you live.

GLENN: I love Lincoln. I love, and I hate myself for saying it. But I loved your book about Lincoln.

CALLER: All right.

GLENN: I'll read another one.

CALLER: Good. You're the man for it.

GLENN: Let me ask you the one other question. You say there was a turning point in Kennedy's life, and it was the death of his son.

CALLER: Almost like your story. It's almost like the Glenn Beck story. Here's Kennedy.

GLENN: He started the network.

CALLER: Whatever Kennedy wants to do, whatever babe he wants to go after, whatever.

GLENN: If it moves he's interested.

CALLER: So Kennedy is one of the most popular men in the world. He's doing whatever he wants to do. It doesn't matter if it hurts his wife his children whatever, he does it.

GLENN: Tell me when it gets to the story like me.

CALLER: Remember your days your in Connecticut.

CALLER: Something happens to JFK. What happens is his baby dies Patrick. And we spend a lot of time in the book on that.

GLENN: Did you think about naming the book killing Patrick.

CALLER: No. Because with this there are a lot the other things. Thank you for the suggestion. So the poor baby.

GLENN: You know --

CALLER: Dies, and JFK is profoundly, and I mean profoundly affected. He changes. He changes -- he doesn't become a saint overnight like you did. But his whole outlook changes and his presidency changes.

GLENN: So did he become a Republican.

CALLER: Almost. He wanted to cut taxes. He wanted to limit government. But you'll see in the book how what happens there.

GLENN: So Bill, we're going to talk about the election in a second. The name of the book is "Killing Kennedy", and killing McKinley is coming up, and shooting but missing Truman. I'm sure will be the follow up.

PAT: Stabbing Caesar is down the roads.

GLENN: We'll get to the election.

CALLER: . You done making fun of me.

GLENN: You're a machine.

CALLER: "Killing Kennedy" is number one. "Killing Lincoln" is still number 4.

BREAK

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly, you play Mitt Romney here for a second.

CALLER: All right.

GLENN: Mr. Romney you were recorded as saying 47% of the people are basically lazy and you don't care about them. How do you explain that?

CALLER: What I was saying to a group of my supporters was that there is a certain mindset among people who support my opponent President Obama of entitlement. They want free stuff. Now, 47% probably too high. I was just speaking off-the-cuff. But there is no question that many Americans right now want a nanny state, and there is the poster boy for -- you can't say the poster guy for the nanny state President Obama. And these people would never vote for me because I am someone who believes in competition, who believes in capitalism and self-reliance. Those are the things that I stand on, and that's what has made America great, and that's why President Obama's administration has weakened the economy, and take away from that.

GLENN: What you just said appeals to me. We used to be self-reliance. But 47%, and that is probably too high. 47% are on the government Dole in some way or another. And they're not paying taxes, and that number is growing every single day, and I'd say I'll bet that there is at least 10% maybe as high as 20% who're just like I don't want to pay taxes. I don't want to do any work. I'm totally cool with this system.

CALLER: I think one out of five think they are owed something. I want to do my Internet stuff. I want to flounce around. I'm not going to study in school. I'm not going to work hard. I'm not going to learn a trade, and so give me my house. Give me my food, and give me, give me, give me, and that's growing. That's a growing part of our population.

GLENN: You have been doing television since 1884. And.

CALLER: Since Rutherford B. Hayes.

GLENN: You've seen these elections over and over again. The spin of the polls is remarkable. I happen to believe that the model is wrong. All of the polls in the last three or four years have been six points wrong minimum. Six points.

CALLER: Well. In a month we'll know whether you're correct or not.

GLENN: Hold on hold on.

CALLER: All right.

GLENN: Mr. O'Reilly this is the no twirling around zone. What I want to know from you is take the polls as they are. They're all within the margin of error. They're 47-45. 45-45. Whatever. So it's a dead-heat. A. Have you ever seen an election this close for this long where it is just locked pretty much locked-in a dead-heat, and B, why isn't the media saying this is the closest election that they've seen. It's never this close. Why are they saying it is Obama.

CALLER: That's not anything new. So the national media and the urban newspapers are rooting for the President. So I think that's established beyond a reasonable doubt. And dimmest Americans know that. The problem is that you have if you are not a fan of the President's is that Mitt Romney has not taken the fight to him. And that's what everybody is hoping to see tonight in the debates. They're hoping to see Mitt Romney on fire coming out say look I don't want to be disrespectful but the President is ruining the country not just in the short-term but in the long-term, and the culture of entitlement that he embraces the attitude of where's mine. I don't care about the country. I want my stuff and I want it now, and I want other people to give it to me, is taking root. And we have to confront the fact that our President is exploiting people who don't want or can't provide for themselves. If Mitt Romney would do that tonight and bring it right to his doorstep, and back it up with facts. Look at the expenditures, look at the spending, look at the waste. Look what's coming down the road.

GLENN: He wins if he does it. This weekend George Washington O'Reilly and Stewart the debate. "Killing Kennedy" the book is on sale now.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.