Oprah doubles down on the Emmett Till comparison

It’s been quite a controversial few days for Oprah Winfrey and considering she’s pushing a new movie it’s probably by design. She turned heads last week by comparing Trayvon Martin’s death to Emmett Till, two very very different killings. She doubled down on that story today - Glenn offered a stern rebuke and a recent killing ignored by the media that more closely resembles what happened to Emmett Till.

During an appearance on promoting her new movie, Oprah said, “ The truth of the matter is Emmett Till became a symbol for those times, as Trayvon Martin has become a symbol for this time."

Needless to say, Glenn felt like the comparison was way out of line, and he delivered a scathing monologue on the matter during radio.

" Here's what Oprah Winfrey doesn't understand. That is a made‑up symbol. All of the facts, all of the facts show that Trayvon Martin is not Emmett Till. All of the facts show that race played no role in this... at all."

"So only the people who are trying to hype their shows on MSNBC or to hype their position as a race‑baiter like Al Sharpton, only those who are trying to make sure that their policies are never questioned because they need the race card, and they actually believe the things that Jeremiah Wright said, like the president, and those who are trying to sell and hock their movie. Those people need to have Trayvon Martin as Emmett Till."

Glenn said that instead the icons of race today should be Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian.

"Those names most likely you've never even heard of but because of a listener of this program who called me and challenged me to tell the story, I did earlier this week on television. This will be a little easier because I don't have the pictures to show you on radio. Newsom was 23, former standout baseball player working as a carpenter. Christian was 21, student at the University of Tennessee. They had been dating for about two months, and on the night of January 6th, 2007, they planned to watch a movie at a friend's apartment. When Janet didn't show up the next day, concerned family reported them both missing. It turns out the couple had made it to dinner, but when they arrived to the apartment complex where Christian's best friend lived, they were carjacked by multiple assailants. What followed was one of the most heinous, gruesome, and senseless hate crimes ever. Christian Newsom's evening started with a wonderful date with his new girlfriend, and now here he was, just a few minutes later, gagged with a sock in his mouth. His ankles were bound with his own belt. His hands were tied behind his back, and his face was wrapped with a bandana. His head was covered with a sweatshirt tied around his neck and then he was violently raped with an object and beaten."

"I can only imagine the horror that Christopher experienced when he was forced to walk barefoot on the nearby railroad tracks. There he was shot in the neck and in the back. But the first shots didn't kill him. He fell to the ground where he laid paralyzed. That's after the rape. The assailants stood over him, placed a gun against his covered head and fired, killing him execution‑style. But then they wanted to make sure that they mutilated the body. So they poured gasoline on his body and set him ablaze."

"But... the boyfriend was actually the lucky one. Because they came back for her. Channon Christian, who was taken back to the home of the assailants, where she was forced into a back room of the house. She was hogtied with strips of fabric from a bedding set and for several hours she endured brutal sexual assaults, repeatedly raped in just about every possible way imaginable. This story is so much worse if you go out and actually seek the courtroom documents. But you don't need to know more than raped in every way possible. She was kicked and beaten with several objects, including a broken chair leg. She suffered major wounds to her genital area. She had two major blows to the head. She was still alive and still conscious. Can you imagine what she was thinking? Bleeding, she was finally dragged out of the back room and into the living room. But the assailants realized that they had left DNA on the victim. So they tried to cover their tracks by pouring bleach all over her. Then, realizing that they had left DNA inside of her, they poured bleach down her throat. She was still alive. They then wrapped her body in a black garbage bag, her head in a white plastic grocery bag. They then dumped her body in a garbage can in the kitchen of the house, all of this while she was still alive. This woman who started hours before, just going out to have dinner with her boyfriend and over to her friend's house to watch a movie, now was upside down in a garbage can, her throat burning from bleach, and rape, beaten within an inch of her life, suffocating in a garbage can."

"There was no Al Sharpton on this case. Much to my shame, there was not even a Glenn Beck on this case. This happened in 2007. I had never heard of this story until a listener phoned in last week. There was no one, and still there is no one calling for social justice on this case. The suspects had all been convicted but then the original judge was discovered to have a drug addiction, which got him disbarred, which meant that the dirtbag attorneys went back and said, 'You know what? We can open your case again, open the door for the killers to try to abuse the justice system.' But one have been repeatedly pursuing retrials and appeals"

"It wasn't just guys that did this. There was a girl involved as well. The family has been dragged into court and had to relive this since 2007 over and over and over again."

"The killers were four black men and one black woman. Why is it nobody talked about this case? Do we have to have an Al Sharpton? Do we have to have a Jesse Jackson? Do we actually have to go and protest? Do we have to go and strong‑arm? Do we have to go to the media companies and say, why aren't you doing this, and we'll boycott you if you don't report on this story? Why is it you're not reporting on this story? Is it because it doesn't fit? Is it because it doesn't work to your advantage? I thought we were a country about equal justice. I thought we were a country about being fair. I thought we were a country that was trying to do the right thing."

"We're not the country that's trying to do the right thing. We are not that country. But the good news is we are those people."

"Oprah Winfrey, you disgust me. As a woman who has gone through hell and back and made it, and pulled yourself out by the bootstraps. You made it. You made it. You grew up with hate from your own race, you grew up with rape in your own race and you pulled yourself out. And the American people, both black and white, yellow and red, it doesn't matter the color, they saw you make it! They saw you overcome everything that you had faced, and we celebrated that! So much so that you make $70 million a year! So much so you're the most famous and most accomplished black woman in the history of America! You have your own network because we celebrated that you made it. You disgust me. Why are you telling everybody else they can't make it? Why are you telling us that white people are the problem?"

"Oprah, I'm sorry to point out to you, people are the problem. Doesn't matter what color they come in. Scumbags come in all colors. The scumbags in the 1950s that did that to Emmett Till, I don't think there's a dark enough, hot enough hell for those people."

"You tell the Emmett Till story and it breaks your heart. You tell the Emmett Till story and the thought of his mother opening up that coffin and part of his head falling out because insult upon injury when they put him in, they put lye in there with him to destroy his body. You can't be a functioning human being and not feel that."

"But vengeance belongs to the Lord alone. Justice will never be done here on Earth. But we can strive for it. And I weep for my country because I know God is just. And I weep for my country because we are on the verge and the precipice of just an unbelievable bright dawn. The whole world is starting to understand not politics, not bankers, not power, not houses, not cars, not fame, not stuff, but love. The whole world is on the verge of understanding true freedom, and just leave me alone. Just leave me alone and let me worship God in my own understanding."

"There are bad guys out there, but race has nothing to do with it."

"Oprah, I choose to be the person that America thought you were. I choose to be the person that will overcome the bad things in my life. Nobody's going to tell me what I can and can't do and who I am. I know who I am, and I will not be beaten down by the system, and I will hold those people up that feel the same way, no matter what color. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free. Give me the ones that you have told 'You'll never make it,' send them to me, the tempest tossed. Because I hold my lamp beside a golden door."

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.