Media ignores new threats of violence from NBPs & shooting at FRC

August 16, 2012

Writer

Wednesday morning, TheBlaze reported that a a security guard was shot and wounded at the conservative Family Research Council headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C.

It was reported that the gunman walked into the building’s lobby around 10:45AM and was confronted by the security guard asking him where he was going. D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier told the Washington Post that the gunman then pulled out a firearm and opened fire on the guard before being wrestled to the ground, disarmed, and later taken into FBI custody.

The man was later identified as Floyd Corkins, a 28-year-old from Virginia. The shooter reported posed as an intern and was carrying a Chick-fil-A bag during the attack, and, after being disarmed, told the guard, “Don’t shoot me, it was not about you, it was what this place stands for.” Corkins had been volunteering at a LGBT community center.

This morning on radio, Glenn reacted to the shooting and the media coverage (or lack thereof) that it has been given.

Glenn pointed out that this was a “terrorist shooting," making sure to differentiating it from a workplace shooting.

“Let’s be very clear, an LGBT supporter and volunteer goes in and shoots someone because of their viewpoint,” Glenn said.

Glenn explained that, of course, the responsibility of an act like this falls on the shooter, but those that are excusing it also hold a responsibility to tell the truth and expose these acts of violence and why they occur.

“The media, our government, no one is paying attention to these things and it will only compound,” he said transitioning to how the Justice Department is dropping the case against the New Black Panthers despite the increasing number of threats they’re making.

It’s not simply that the media ignores things like this shooting or the racist, violent threats that come from the New Black Panthers, while magnifying groups like the KKK, trying to pin violent acts on the Tea Party that they are completely unassociated with, and their continued attempts to paint the right in a violent, racist light. It’s that they’re ignoring these threats, or worse, mocking those who expose them – it’s dangerous.

“We told you for the last few months about the Black Panthers, you can dismiss the Black Panthers all you want. I hope we can all laugh at them, but I don't hear the same attitude on the KKK. I don't think the KKK is funny. I don't think they're just a silly group of people. I think the KKK is a dangerous group of haters. I think the KKK should be watched. I want to know who the members of the KKK are, if they live around me, and I don't want them hiding in the darkness. I want to know who they are because I think they're dangerous,” Glenn said.

Glenn shared an article from the Business Insider, written by Jeffrey Ingersoll. The article basically mocked, Glenn, Breitbart.com, and other conservative organizations for reporting the threats from the New Black Panthers.

“The Black Panthers, a militant black power group from the 1960's, are regrouping and they claim they want to murder as many Caucasian Americans as possible, according to a video on Breitbart.”

“Yeah, a video on Breitbart with their voices on it and them saying it,” Stu sniped backed. “It’s not someone accusing them.”

Here is the latest audio from the NBPs that the BI article is referring to:

Glenn went on to read more of what Ingersoll wrote about their coverage of the NBPs and this viscous audio:

“A handful of popular political pundits, like Michelle Malkin, the Breitbart.com gang, and Glenn Beck's crew at The Blaze, are attempting to stoke the flames of fear over the enthusiastic YouTube musings of a few individuals who've forgotten it's no longer the '60s. The pundits also took a turn toward race as they quickly, and predictably, accused Obama of 'looking the other way.'
These are the same people who fiercely advocate for bombing Muslim countries willy nilly and say "10 percent of Muslims are terrorists," but then get mad when a guy with a few screws loose is a bit more hawkish than them”."

Stu quickly pointed out that, “They say 10% of Muslims are terrorists. No. Actually polling shows that. We actually have all the backup documented on the website. Polling from actually left leaning organizations and opinion makers show that between – I think it's 4 and 57% of Muslim countries, depending on which one you're talking about, is – supports the actions of Osama Bin Laden.”

Glenn continued reading the piece:

“The host of Right-Wing blogs exploded recently following the epic rants by New Black Party elements calling for a militarization of their little club. Granted, his language was colorful”.”

Now, after reading that piece poking at prominent conservative figures for their coverage of the New Black Panthers, it would be hard to believe that the Southern Poverty Law Center designated them a ‘right wing hate group.’

Keeping in mind that the mainstream media will spend weeks obsessing over motives of terrorists and criminals, Glenn points out that it’s the job of the media to pay attention to these things, not mock them. Glenn shed light on the words and warnings of Osama bin Laden in 1999. He explained that, “You do that so you warn people, so they pay attention, but nobody paid attention then. Nobody's paying attention now and the press is doing worse than not paying attention.”

The same people that mock conservatives for trying to expose threats against Americans are accusing conservatives and the Tea Party of being terrorists, claiming their anti-big government rants will lead to terrorism.

“Here you have a group of people saying, “Let's go kill babies”. Here you have a group of people that say “let's go drag people out in the streets and beat them to death,” and we have no problem with that?” Glenn questioned.

What makes the words of the New Black Panther’s laughable and those of someone else more dangerous? Especially after such a violent past couple of weeks where there has been a shooting in a movie theater and another in a Temple. It only takes one crazy person, and here we have a group of people discussing brutal violence out in the open.

“We live in a crazy world and the people who are currently in their ivory towers will be out in the parking lot one day kicking rocks, asking themselves what the hell happened. They're putting themselves out of business,” Glenn said. “They're putting themselves into disrepute. They're destroying themselves.”

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

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.

Glenn's Show Prep