WATCH: The worst of Al Jazeera

Are you ready to Get TheBlaze on your channel line-up? Contact your TV provider and make they know you want more voices, not less and that you want a network that represents your values. Don't ask them to drop Al Jazeera, but they should add TheBlaze!

The below is a partial transcript of Glenn's monologue tonight exposing Al Jazeera, America's newest news network. 

In the aftermath of 9/11, Al Jazeera was obtaining and airing terror tapes directly from terrorists and protecting their identities. Normally concealing a source is a time-honored tradition in the media, but when your source is responsible for thousands of murders, there’s nothing honorable about protecting them.

When America was wounded, they were giving voice, aid, and comfort to the terrorists. In fact, one of their main sources of revenue aside from oil subsidies was opening up offices in Al Qaeda and Taliban controlled neighborhoods so they could get a foothold and footage from dangerous areas and sell it. There were literally profiting off of terrorists. That’s why some of their offices were damaged during strikes on Al Qaeda hangouts, because they were hanging out with Al Qaeda.

Less than a month after 9/11, Al Jazeera aired an exclusive bin Laden audiotape and a steady stream of propaganda pictures, including dead children and other alleged victims. But oftentimes the footage wasn’t real or from something other than American bombings. In November 2001, they aired another exclusive. Al Jazeera decided they wanted to feature bin Laden’s young sons wielding AK-47s.

The day after Christmas 2001, another bin Laden tape aired in which he praised terrorism efforts against the U.S. They aired footage of a 22-year-old American being beheaded. Not only was it a horrible thing to air, it wasn’t even real. They have consistently aired footage of American hostages being held against their will by terrorists threatening to behead them. This is not a network with opposing views.

Al Jazeera is as close to the enemy of the state as any media can get, and quite honestly, in today’s America, that’s pretty hard to beat. Think about how much faster we could have defeated and killed bin Laden if they just would’ve tipped us off who dropped off the tapes. That’s how we eventually got him, through a courier. Al Jazeera was the closest thing we had a lead on to bin Laden, and instead of helping us, they helped him. They chose to spread his propaganda.

The question that you have to ask is why would a network do this? Why? We know GE, they’re selling wind turbines. Why Al Jazeera? Go back to their birth certificate. They are interested in the promotion and protection of sharia law. In over a decade, they haven’t changed, and the evidence of this is quite stark. In fact, let me give you the latest, what happened in their Egyptian Bureau during the recent violence.

TheBlaze showed the violence and the killing of the Coptic Christians to you just last night; however, Al Jazeera had a different spin. The Egyptian Bureau of Al Jazeera all walked out because their global corporate brass told them to slant their coverage to favor the Muslim Brotherhood. Maybe that’s why the president and Hillary Clinton both praise Al Jazeera.

Below, Glenn lays out some of the worst examples of Al Jazeera's coverage:

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.

President Donald Trump has done a remarkable job of keeping his campaign promises so far. From pulling the US from the Iran Deal and Paris Climate Accord to moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, the president has followed through on his campaign trail vows.

RELATED: The media's derangement over Trump has me wearing a new hat and predicting THIS for 2020

“It's quite remarkable. I don't know if anybody remembers, but I was the guy who was saying he's not gonna do any of those things," joked Glenn on “The News and Why it Matters," adding, “He has taken massive steps, massive movement or completed each of those promises … I am blown away."

Watch the video above to hear Glenn Beck, Sara Gonzales, Doc Thompson, Stu Burguiere and Pat Gray discuss the story.

Rapper Kendrick Lamar brings white fan onstage to sing with him, but here’s the catch

Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for American Express

Rapper Kendrick Lamar asked a fan to come onstage and sing with him, only to condemn her when she failed to censor all of the song's frequent mentions of the “n-word" while singing along.

RELATED: You'll Never Guess Who Wrote the Racist Message Targeting Black Air Force Cadets

“I am so sorry," she apologized when Lamar pointed out that she needed to “bleep" that word. “I'm used to singing it like you wrote it." She was booed at by the crowd of people, many screaming “f*** you" after her mistake.

On Tuesday's show, Pat and Jeffy watched the clip and talked about some of the Twitter reactions.

“This is ridiculous," Pat said. “The situation with this word has become so ludicrous."