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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Do Your Research HuffPo: Washington Had Three Copies of Don Quixote

February 24, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

Unlike Glenn, the Huffington Post is evidently not a student of history --- nor fond of research, for that matter.

Rather than publish with journalistic integrity, HuffPo decided to throw caution to the wind and publish an unsubstantiated hit piece questioning the authenticity of a book Glenn owns and has taken along on the campaign trail. The book in question is George Washington's volume of Don Quixote. The hit piece, titled "Mount Vernon Says It Owns George Washington's Copy Of Don Quixote, Not Glenn Beck," was published yesterday.

"The Huffington Post wrote a story, and it says, you know, Glenn Beck's people didn't respond for comment. Well, we weren't given a chance to comment on a story. They put a phone call in and then pushed print. And they went to press on this story, as they called us. We had no time to respond. And it is the sloppiest journalism I have ever seen," Glenn said Wednesday on The Glenn Beck Program.

So let's fill in the blanks and do HuffPo's work for them.

George Washington owned three copies of Don Quixote --- two in English, one in Spanish. The first English copy and the Spanish version are owned by Mount Vernon. The second English copy is owned by Glenn. That copy was given to Tobias Lear, George Washington's personal secretary, who was at Washington's bedside when he died. He then gave it to his son, Benjamin Lincoln Lear.

"Mount Vernon will not deny that George Washington had three copies, and he gave one to Tobias Lear," Glenn said. "How do I know they won't deny it? Because there are records at Mount Vernon that show it. He was a record keeper."

The Don Quixote copy that Glenn now owns came from the Lear family through an auction in Maine. It first went to the James D. Julia Auction House, a highly respected auction house, and was bought by Bauman Books in New York. Glenn purchased Lear's copy of Don Quixote (that was gifted to him by George Washington) from Bauman Books in New York --- and it's all documented.

"Now, I don't think you care at all about rare book dealers. ...But you know who does care? Me," Glenn said. "And here's why: Because people are now saying I'm dragging out a fake Washington book all around the country. And now they're starting to question the Washington compass, which also has documentation."

When Glenn acquired Washington's compass he was bidding against none other than Mount Vernon. Their response upon losing it to another bidder: "It doesn't matter. Some day we'll get it anyway."

Both relics of Washington's that Glenn has taken on the campaign trail --- the copy of Don Quixote and the compass --- were acquired through the highest ethical standards and from the most reputable antiquities dealers. And there's documentation to prove it.

"If it's fake, I'm going to file a gigantic lawsuit," Glenn said. "It will be a "uge" lawsuit. It will be the most magnificent lawsuit you've ever seen."

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: But while we're here kind of talking about history this half-hour, I just want to address something that came out from the Huffington Post yesterday. And I think outrageous.

The Huffington Post wrote a story, and it says, you know, Glenn Beck's people didn't respond for comment. Well, we weren't given a chance to comment on a story. They put a phone call in and then pushed print. And they went to press on this story, as they called us. We had no time to respond.

And it is the sloppiest journalism I have ever seen. They ran a story. And it's all over Twitter this morning. They ran a story that I have this copy of George Washington's Don Quixote, which I've been taking around and talking about in all of my speeches. And they claim -- they called Mount Vernon to find out if that's George Washington's copy of Don Quixote. And they said -- and Mount Vernon said, "We have George Washington's copy of Don Quixote." So Glenn Beck must be a liar.

Here's the thing, George Washington owned three copies of Don Quixote. An English -- I'm sorry -- two English and one in Spanish. I have the second English version that he bought. In his library, it has his writing in it, it has his book plate in it. My copy was given to Tobias -- what was his name? Tobias Lear. Tobias Lear was the personal secretary that was at the bedside of George Washington when he died. He then gave it to his son, Benjamin Lincoln Lear. This book has -- from the personal library of George Washington book plate over it. Over that book plate is a book plate that says Benjamin Lincoln Lear. It also has George Washington's handwriting in it.

Mount Vernon will not deny that George Washington had three copies, and he gave one to Benjamin -- or, he gave one to Tobias Lear. How -- how do I know they won't deny it? Because there are records at Mount Vernon that show it. He was a record keeper.

This book came from the Lear family, through an auction in Maine. They finally let it go. It went to an auction house called the James D. Julia Auction House. Highly respected. It was bought by Bauman Books in New York. Bauman Books, the reason you would ever pay the price that Bauman pays -- because you're not getting a deal when you go to Bauman, is because you know the provenance. You know that this is -- is impeccably recorded on exactly -- when they say this is what it is, that is exactly what it is. Somebody brought it from Bauman Books, and I bought it from them.

Now, I don't think you care at all about rare book dealers, you know, previously had a book from George Washington. But you know who does care? Me. And here's why: Because people are now saying I'm dragging out a fake Washington book all around the country. And now they're starting to question the Washington compass, which also has documentation.

And, you know what, let me tell you something. I paid a fortune for these things. And these people who are printing these things are hurting the monetary value of those items. And they're only trying to do it because it's the same group of people that try to discredit any kind of history that is coming from a conservative. They have their own political motives for doing it.

HuffPo. When we called the HuffPo and said, "Hey, what's the deal?" Guy said everybody else was going to run with it, so I just had to run with it. You didn't even talk to us. So that excuses you for sloppy journalism? I paid a fortune for this. I have all of the documentation. It's solid documentation. And documentation that Mount Vernon will back.

And you know who was bidding against me for the compass? Mount Vernon. You know what they said when they lost, "It doesn't matter. Some day we'll get it anyway."

So if it's fake, I'm going to file a gigantic lawsuit -- it will be a uge lawsuit. It will be the most magnificent lawsuit you've ever seen.

PAT: And how long --

GLENN: The documentation is there. Hang on just a second.

And if these people are right, then I'm suing for enough money to put my name in gold on every building in New York and then maybe I'll be angry enough to run for president.

(chuckling)

PAT: And it took you a long time with that compass to scrape off the Made in China stamp on the back of it.

GLENN: Yes, it did.

JEFFY: It doesn't just come off.

GLENN: No.

PAT: So it just pisses me that they're doing this to you now. Because that wasn't easy.

GLENN: Yeah. I know it was very difficult to get the Made in China off. Just amazing.

PAT: You literally paid a fortune for that compass. And wasn't that part two of their investigative series --

GLENN: Yes. Tomorrow. Tomorrow, we question the compass.

PAT: Yeah. So, I mean --

GLENN: Jeez. If I need to drag around the documentation for everything -- so when I was on the road and said, "This is George Washington's." And we went back and checked the tape. There were times that I said, this is the one that he got on that day, and that wasn't the one he got on that day. He had three copies.

So that wasn't the one that he got on that day. But usually I said, "This was George Washington's copy of Don Quixote." And they're questioning that this was George washington's copy. And the only reason why they said that it wasn't was because they went on record because people were calling Mount Vernon saying, "Glenn Beck is lying, isn't he?"

And they said, "No, we have George Washington's copy of Don Quixote."

Yes, you have two of two them. He had three of them. I have the other one. But nobody cares to listen to that.

And so it's just sloppy journalism, at best.

STU: Obviously, no one -- they don't care --

GLENN: Nobody cares about that. Nobody cares about this.

STU: What's the reason they're doing this? The point you're making with the book, is that what they're attacking?

GLENN: No. No. The reason I brought the book out was how was it George Washington -- on the day they signed the Constitution, what he said was, in his diary, "Signed the Constitution today. I pick up my copy of Don Quixote."

So how -- that book has always bothered me. I look at it, and I'm like, "Okay. What was he trying to say? What was Don Quixote speaking to him about? Why was this book so important?"

It really isn't that. Because to me that's like somebody saying, "I save the world today, and I'm going to Barnes & Noble." What is that? And so what it was, was he finished the Constitution with purity, with exactness. He did exactly what he was supposed to do. And as he said at the end of the Constitutional Convention, the event is in the hand of God.

So he did exactly what he was supposed to do. He knew that that a future generation would see the Constitution. They would be faced with -- he didn't know what it would be, but totalitarian, socialism, you know, or the status quo. And people wouldn't know which way to run. And they -- because they did the right thing, in his words, they raised the standard to which the wise and the honest would run to. And so that allowed him to, when he finished say, "Yeah. And I get to go read a good book. I've heard these great things from this ambassador about this story. I've got that book coming in. I can sit under my tree on my farm and read."

The point I'm trying to make with the book is: When you do the right thing, you can sleep at night.

And George Washington saw this time, and he gave us the -- he gave us where we should be going. We shouldn't be going to socialism. We shouldn't be going to a strongman. We shouldn't be looking for the status quo. We should run to the Constitution. Because it was done with exactness and they could sleep at night, and we'll be able to sleep at night because our answers are all contained there. Our problems are because we didn't adhere to the Constitution. America, run to the Constitution. The event is in the hand of God.

Featured Image: American television personality and radio host Glenn Beck holds a copy of a Don Quixote book as he talks about Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz during a campaign event at the Johnson County Fairgrounds January 31, 2016 inIowa City, Iowa. Cruz is campaigning across the state on the eve of the Iowa caucuses. (Photo by Joshua Lott/Getty Images)

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.