Why did uber-lib Sean Penn have a massive stash of guns?

Yesterday we learned Hollywood mega producer Harvey Weinstein is working on a “big movie” starring Meryl Streep that will make the NRA “wish they weren’t alive.” And now it looks like another uber-leftist from tinsel town is getting in on the gun debate. During his third annual ‘Help Haiti Home’ benefit last weekend, actor Sean Penn auctioned off a sculpture made by artist Jeff Koons from Penn's 65 discarded firearms.

Yes, that’s right – the communist loving, dictator sympathizing actor was once the proud owner of 65 firearms.

So why did he decide to melt them all down into an art piece that Anderson Cooper ended up paying a whopping $1.4 million for? Well, his new girlfriend, fellow actress Charlize Theron, apparently suggested he get rid of them.

“Yeah, these guys are the biggest hypocrites in the world. And that's fine. I mean, look at Sean Penn. Because he wants to climb into the sack with Charlize Theron, he gives up guns,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “Hang on just a second. Now, first of all… why does Sean Penn have [65] guns? Did you get one for every birthday? Now, that is an important question, sure, but the question I really have is: How is this guy getting all the hot babes in Hollywood?”

As caller Andy in Massachusetts pointed out, Theron has a tumultuous history with guns and violence. When she was 17, her mother shot and killed her alcoholic father after he reportedly fired his own gun and threatened to kill the family. Penn explained at his benefit that it was a “strong woman who happens to be from South Africa” who convinced him it give up his guns.

While Pat and Stu couldn’t understand why someone whose life was potentially saved by a firearm would be so against them, Glenn surmised that Theron probably blames her father’s death and the violence in her home on guns. With that logic, however, she should be blaming alcohol as well.

“She's an abused girl whose family had guns. She was saying: If my father wouldn't have had the shotgun, he would still be alive today… Because guns were allowed to be out on the streets, dad went out and bought these guns and mom had one too… We had so much violence in our house because of guns,” Glenn explained. “[But] go after alcohol. Why isn't she going after alcohol? Dad's an alcoholic. Dad would have been responsible with a gun perhaps if he wouldn't have had alcohol. Maybe he wouldn't have been so abusive. Why not just ban alcohol?”

During the Haiti benefit, Penn also described guns as “cowardly killing machines”:

Being provoked by this aforementioned strong woman and considering how liberating of bulls**t and ugliness it would be not only get rid of the guns I have in the continental United States but also to destroy them, Jeff Koons and I had a chat the other day. The highest bidder gets every single one of my guns put in the hands of this iconic artist and sculptor… Koons will decommission [and] render inactive all of my cowardly killing machines.

“Sean Penn said, too, that he had gotten rid of his 65 ‘cowardly killing machines,’ which begs the question: How many people has Sean Penn killed,” Stu joked. “Because if they're killing machines, we assume he's been killing people this entire time. I mean how can we assume anything different? He himself is calling them killing machines.”

Front page image courtesy of the AP

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:


Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.