CNN’s Erin Burnett destroys her last shred of credibility with blatant smear of Glenn Beck

March 20, 2013

Writer

Over the weekend, Glenn tweeted out that the actor who plays Satan in History Channel’s The Bible bears a striking resemblance to President Barack Obama. Yesterday, Glenn spent some time talking about how the media overreacted to the tweet and he was saying nothing more than the actor, under all his makeup, and the President could have been separated at birth. But no one went further into the gutter with their attacks than CNN host Erin Burnett, who used the tweet to smear Glenn by selectively editing years old footage and comparing Glenn to a genocidal, anti-Semitic dictator.

On her show, CNN host Erin Burnett said:

“Today, Beck took to Twitter again and not to clarify. He said this: ‘Media, relax. Actor has been in similar roles before. Funny, nothing more. For different reasons, 'The Bible' is one of my fave shows. Keep watching.’
Actor has been in similar roles before. In the world of Glenn Beck, that means he's definitely a ringer for the president because this isn't the first time he's made that comparison.”

Well, that certainly is a stretch. Burnett couldn’t go with the simplest explanation (two people look alike in photos), but rather made the extreme leap in logic that because the actor has played similar roles before he must be a ringer for the President.

Sorry Erin, it was simply his looks, not his IMBD.com resume that led to the comparison.

But spinning Glenn’s tweet wasn’t the real issue. After all, the media has made a habit out of taking Glenn out of context for ratings. No, the real issue comes from the fact that Erin Burnett and the producers of OutFront on CNN selectively edited footage of Glenn from his time at CNN Headline News to carry out their smear attack.

During her attack, Burnett aired a montage of Glenn clips supposedly showing his “ugly history” of comparing President Obama to Satan.

Stu explained what Burnett and her team were trying to do. “Remember what she's trying to create here: The fact that Glenn Beck has an ugly history of calling the president Satan. This happens all the time: Look at all the clips we found. They're trying to show a giant pattern of behavior with her clips,” he explained.

Here are a few of the clips Burnett used to make her point:

1. GLENN: “Some of the "Book of Revelation" crazies out there actually believe that Barack Obama is the Antichrist.”
2. GLENN: “And there are people -- and they said this about Bill Clinton -- that actually believe he might be the Antichrist.”
3. GLENN: “Odds that Barack Obama is the Antichrist?”

Wow, that certainly seems like several different occasions of Glenn bringing up Obama and Satan or the Anti-Christ.

But in actuality, Burnett selectively edited one segment. Not only did she take these clips out of context, she and her producers selectively edited the video package to make it appear that these three sound bites were from three different occasions.

In reality, all three clips came from one HLN episode of Glenn’s show when he was recapping an interview he had with Pastor John Hagee.

Glenn explained, “This was a news story. It was in the news cycle, and CNN was reporting on it. CNN, not my show. I was on CNN Headline, but CNN proper was also reporting on this story. So the next day I'm recapping, I talked about it, and they make it look like again a separate time I'm bringing it up.”

Here is the full transcript of the CNN segment from March 10, 2008:

GLENN: I was speaking with evangelical pastor John Hagee. We were headed on into a break. And I asked the self-professed end of days expert about the fact that some of the "Book of Revelation" crazies out there actually believe that Barack Obama is the Antichrist. (Clip 1)
Here it is.
BECK: Let me ask you -- and this is -- because I got -- I get so much e-mail on this, and I think a lot of people do. And I`ve only got a couple of seconds. And they say, Glenn, you in the media, you`ve got to wake up. Barack Obama is making people faint and cry and everything else, and he`s drawing people in. And there are people -- and they said this about Bill Clinton -- that actually believe he might be the Antichrist. (Clip 2)
Odds that Barack Obama is the Antichrist? (Clip 3)
JOHN HAGEE, EVANGELICAL PASTOR: No chance.

Not only did they selectively edit one segment from Glenn's days at CNN to make it look like three separate instances, they also removed the context where Glenn was disproving the argument that Barack Obama was the Anti-Christ. Did Erin Burnett and her producers just elevate unethical smear jobs into an art form?

How about one of their other "devastating" clips? The selectively edited portions are in bold:

(RADIO SEPTEMBER 30, 2011)
GLENN: Yeah. Speaking of nice abs, is it possible that Barack Obama is the anti Christ?
STU: No, wait.
PAT: I think it's more likely
STU: We can confirm that it's not true. That's on the other side of the sign, George Soros, anti Christ; Barack Obama, puppet socialist incompetent economy wrecker. So
GLENN: Well, you know what? Can I tell you something? That's true.

Yeah, any segment with “nice abs” is going to be serious. For the record, the radio guys were mocking a sign that someone was carrying, not calling the President “Satan”.

When did CNN fall so far from being the most trusted name in news?

“Now, this is really important. This is not about me or us or anything else. This is to show you how easily it is to fool people with creative editing. If you thought NBC was bad with creative editing, wait until we show you this. This again is not about us. This is really about who can you trust to tell you the truth?” Glenn said.

Sadly, selective editing isn’t the only smear Erin Burnett and her producers carried out against Glenn. They went the extra mile and compared Glenn to anti-Semitic Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“Real quick I just want to add the last part because this is really the important part: She then takes, after all of this propaganda, she then compares me to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. She then compares me in saying that, ‘You know who else has called him the Antichrist? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.’ So she plays Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”

Of course, it was only a week ago that Erin Burnett asked Former First Lady Laura Bush “…anti Semitic, anti American, does the U.S. need to accept that when we want to make change?”

More on that story HERE.

“It's bad for you (Glenn) to compare the appearance of an actor and the president but it's okay for her (Erin Burnett) to say you're (Glenn) the same as a vicious brutal murdering dictator,” Stu said.

Despite the attacks, Glenn had a sincere word of caution for Burnett, whose show has been struggling in the ratings and consistently losing to competitors on other news networks.

“Erin is and I say this sincerely - Erin, I know what it's like to be on the verge of being fired. I know what it's like to have horrible ratings. I've had them,” Glenn said.

“I mean it sincerely: It is sad what's happening to you and what you're allowing. And it's hard, and I understand that. It's I do understand that. But don't lose yourself,” he said.

Even though Glenn empathized with the struggling Erin Burnett, he does want CNN to issue a statement either rejecting the unethical practices used in the attack or acknowledging that this was just part of the new CNN.

“I'd like a statement either rejecting this kind of journalism or letting the American people know that's what CNN is now going to do because apparently they are desperate for ratings,” Glenn said.

If anyone out there needed another excuse to call their cable operator and demand that they offer TheBlaze as an alternative to networks like CNN, here you go.

Watch Burnett and CNN’s blatant smear below:

And here is the video where they selectively edited one segment to appear as three separate instances:

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep