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

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:

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

What we DO and DON'T know about Thomas Matthew Crooks

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

It has been over a week since 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks narrowly failed to assassinate President Trump while the president gave a speech at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennslyvania. Despite the ongoing investigations, we still know very little about the would-be assassin, which has left many wondering if the agencies involved are limiting the information that Congress and the public are receiving.

As Glenn has pointed out, there are still major questions about the shooter that are unanswered, and the American people are left at the whim of unreliable federal agencies. Here is everything we know—and everything we don't know—about Thomas Matthew Crooks:

Who was he?

What we know:Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Parks, Pennsylvania, approximately an hour south of Butler. Crooks went to high school in Bethel Parks, where he would graduate in 2022. Teachers and classmates described him as a loner and as nerdy, but generally nice, friendly, and intelligent. Crooks tried out for the school rifle team but was rejected due to his poor aim, and reports indicate that Crooks was often bullied for his nerdy demeanor and for wearing camo hunting gear to school.

After high school, Crooks began work at Bethel Park Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center as a dietary aide. In fact, he was scheduled to work on the day of the rally but requested the day off. He passed a background check to work at the facility and was reportedly an unproblematic employee. Crooks was also a member of a local gun club where he practiced shooting the day before the rally.

It was recently revealed that sometime before his attempted assassination, Crooks posted the following message on Steam, a popular computer application used for playing video games: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds." Aside from this, Crooks posted no warning or manifesto regarding his attack, and little other relevant information is known about him.

What we don't know:It is unclear what Crook's political affiliations or views were, or if he was aligned with any extremist organizations. Crooks was a registered Republican, and his classmates recall him defending conservative ideas and viewpoints in class. On the other hand, the Federal Election Commission has revealed he donated to a progressive PAC on the day Biden was inaugurated. He also reportedly wore a COVID mask to school much longer than was required.

Clearly, we are missing the full picture. Why would a Republican attempt to assassinate the Republican presidential nominee? What is to gain? And why would he donate to a progressive organization as a conservative? This doesn't add up, and so far the federal agencies investigating the attack have yet to reveal anything more.

What were his goals?

What we know: Obviously we know he was trying to assassinate President Trump—and came very close to succeeding, but beyond that, Crooks' goals are unknown. He left no manifesto or any sort of written motive behind, or if he did, the authorities haven't published it yet. We have frustratingly little to go off of.

What we don't know: As stated before, we don't know anything about the movies behind Crooks' heinous actions. We are left with disjointed pieces that make it difficult to paint a cohesive picture of this man. There is also the matter that he left explosives, ammo, and a bulletproof vest in his car. Why? Did he assume he was going to make it back to his car? Or were those supplies meant for an accomplice that never showed up?

The shocking lack of information on Crooks' motives makes it seem likely that we are not being let on to the whole truth.

Did he work alone?

What we know: Reportedly, Crooks was the only gunman on the site, and as of now, no other suspects have been identified. The rifle used during the assassination attempt was purchased and registered by Crooks' father. However, it is unlikely that the father was involved as he reported both his son and rifle missing the night of the assassination attempt. Crooks' former classmates described him as a "loner," which seems to corroborate the narrative that he worked alone.

What we don't know: We know how Crooks acquired his rifle, but what about the rest of his equipment? He reportedly had nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bulletproof vest, and several homemade bombs in his car. Could these have been meant for a co-conspirator who didn't show? Did Crooks acquire all of this equipment himself, or did he have help?

There's also the matter of the message Crooks left on the video game platform Steam that served as his only warning of the attack. Who was the message for? Are there people out there who were aware of the attack before it occurred? Why didn't they alert authorities?

We know authorities have access to Crooks' laptop and cellphone that probably contain the answers to these pertinent questions. Why haven't we heard any clarity from the authorities? It seems we are again at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy, which begs one more question: Will we ever know the whole truth?