Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

IRS admits targeting TEA Party...one year after TheBlaze broke the story

May 13, 2013
Wilson

Writer

Last Friday, the IRS came out and admitted to "inappropriately flagging" conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating tax-exempt status.

While this was breaking news to the mainstream media, the only thing that was surprising to Glenn was the admission from the IRS. Glenn and TheBlaze had been reporting on the issue for over a year.

In a statement Glenn released on TheBlaze over the weekend, Glenn noted, "as early as February 14, 2012, TheBlaze’s Mike Opelka published a story titled: “Is Obama Using the IRS to Silence Opposition Voices?”

In it, Opelka detailed the emails TheBlaze has received from conservative groups “alerting us to the oppressive demands being sent to them from the IRS.”  Among other things, the IRS apparently wanted hard copies of every social media post; the name, address, and corporate federal ID of members; and the time, location and content schedule of each event, including printouts of the text of every speech given."

This morning on radio, Glenn reminded listeners that, a year ago, when TheBlaze first reported on the issue, he was called a ' right-wing, crazy conspiracy theorist'.

Glenn also replayed audio from March of 2012 of IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman answering a question addressing the accusation that the IRS was targeting right-wing groups. Shulman denied the claims, stating the IRS 'prides itself on being non-partisan'.

"Thanks for bringing this up. Because there's been a lot of press about this and a lot of moving information, so I appreciate the opportunity to clarify it. First let me start out by saying yes, I can give you assurances. As you know, we pride ourselves on being a nonpolitical, nonpartisan organization. I'm the only — me and our Chief Counsel are the only presidential appointees…"

"You want to check your calendar?" Glenn interjected during the clip.

"Documents now obtained by the Washington Post from a congressional aide with knowledge of the findings show that on June 29th, 2011, IRS staffers held a briefing with senior agency officials in which they described giving special attention to instances where statements in the case file criticized how the government ‑‑ hold it.  Where statements in the case file criticize how the country is being run.  Lerner oversees tax‑exempt groups for the agency raise objections and the agency revised its criteria a week later.  But six months later the IRS applied a new political test to groups that applied for tax‑exempt status as social welfare groups.  The document says that on January 15th, 2012 ‑‑ is that before or after this testimony?" Glenn asked.

"That's before," Pat responded.

Glenn continued, "January 15th, 2012, the agency decided to target, quote, political action type organizations involving in limiting expanded government educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights."

Along with conservative, grass-roots, and Constitution-based groups being targeted, pro-Israel Jewish groups were also singled out.

"This is just what the Jewish groups were asked to file, when they were filing and saying, "We want to be a tax‑exempt status," they had to file out all these questions," Glenn said. "I'll give you some of the questions, but here are the ones to the Jewish groups:  Does your Jewish group support the existence of the land of Israel?"

"Why do you have to know that at the IRS?" Glenn asked.

"What is the difference there?" Glenn asked. "Also, it demanded the Jewish organizations describe its religious belief system toward the land of Israel."

Think those are bad? Here's a sample at what some of the 9/12 & TEA Party groups were also dealing with. The San Fernando Valley Patriots received 12 pages, 35 questions — 80 different sub questions in total.

Here's a sample:

  • Provide details regarding all of your activity on Facebook and Twitter.

  • Provide details regarding all of your advertising you have conducted using social media outlets.

  • Provide a list of all issues that are important to your organization.

  • Indicate your position regarding each issue.  If associated with any other IRC 501(c)(3), provide the name,

  • The federal employee identification number and address of each organization.  Describe the nature of all context with all other organizations.

  • Candidate forms:  Please provide details including the nature of the forums and the issues discussed.

  • You attempt to influence the outcome of specific legislation, please answer the following:  Provide copies of all communications, all pamphlets, all advertisements, and other material distributed by your organization regarding legislation.

  • Provide details regarding your relationship with the TEA Party patriots and the Sacramento Patriot movement. 

"It's impossible to do this," Glenn said.

Here's a question posed to Ohio Liberty, Kentucky 9/12, Waco TEA Party, Richmond TEA Party, Unite in Action, San Fernando Valley Patriots:

  • Political affiliation of any organization that provided educational services to you.

  • Any candidates for public office that happened to speak at any function they have ever had.  Please provide written transcripts of those speeches.

  • All activities with the news media providing articles, news transcripts, items aired.  Provide the resume of every past and present director, officer, and employee. 

…and that's just one small sample of what was being asked of these groups by the Internal Revenue Service.

Glenn went on to explain that the ACLJ is going to be litigating this case.

"And sue this government and they should. This is a violation of your civil rights," Glenn told listeners. "This is a Civil Rights Movement. As I have been saying for a while, this is a Civil Rights Movement, and if anybody in the press cares to show the slightest bit of interest, you're welcome to all of the copies of all of the letters that we had and posted in 2011."

"Now, I also, I could provide classes for you on what happened in Benghazi if you'd like to ‑‑ you'd like to pick up the Benghazi ball.  If you'd like to understand what happened with Benghazi, I can help you on that as well, seeing that you are now reporting the things that we reported a week into Benghazi.  And you had.  Because I'm the our gang comedies of news compared to the worldwide global resources of ABC News you.  So I know you had the same information.  The question is why didn't you report it?  CBS, the same with you.  CNN, the same with you.  Same for all of these news organizations:  Where were you?  We reported it.  You didn't.  Why?" Glenn asked.

"So I can give you a schooling on that.  And if you'd like, I could also give you the schooling on the Muslim Brotherhood and its infiltration.  I can show you again the documents that you have, that you verified and that many of your organizations have spiked after your top journalists went after the Libyan ‑‑ not the Libyan but the Saudi Arabian connection to Boston.  You've spiked the story.  So you already have it.  Your top journalists in two of the networks did multiple filings on stories and they were spiked.  So that's the next thing.  I suggest you guys start coming clean."

It wasn't until Friday that the media really started to take these stories seriously — right about the moment that the White House called a private meeting with 15 journalists.

"They called 15 or 17 journalists in to the White House on Friday to have a private conference with them on Benghazi.  And then everybody said, "Oh, this is a really important thing."  So the White House is going to start throwing midlevel staffers and low‑level staffers underneath the bus.  Do not accept it, America.  Do not accept it.  This goes all the way to the top.  You ask yourself ‑‑ you ask yourself this one question:  Why exactly did the president, why was he ‑‑ why was he completely invisible on a day that we had an ambassador killed?  He made a political calculation to say, "I went to bed.  I didn't know.  The Pentagon ran the whole thing.  Everybody ran it but me.  They just told me, and I'm still, I'm still ‑‑ I don't know.  I'm out of it."  Why?  Why, during an election, would a president want to look like he was completely disconnected?  That was our first tip something was wrong.  Because the president came out and said something, and we should find the tape, where I came out and said, "Look, something's wrong here."  Why is the president making himself look not presidential?"

"Something's very wrong," Glenn said. "Now, if you're going to take a low‑level staffer when the President of the United States behaved in a way I've never seen a President behave before, you are still covering for this White House."

The great switch: Gates trades climate control for digital dominion

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.