Glenn lays out Grover Norquist's spooky connections to the Muslim Brotherhood

UPDATE: After initially declining to come on the show, Grover Norquist has now said he will come on 'The Glenn Beck Program'. Glenn is taking down the paywall and opening up TheBlaze TV to anyone who wants to watch - online or on your mobile device - for free at 5pm ET.

Original Story:

Grover Norquist has brushed off claims from conservative critics before - but this time he's not getting off so easy. On Wednesday night, Glenn presented the facts on Norquist's disturbing ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic extremists. Is he an 'agent of influence'? You decide.

Watch a short highlight from last night's show below and scroll down for more. Subscribers to TheBlaze TV can watch the full episode HERE.

"There are many who claim that Grover Norquist is really kind of the right’s version of George Soros without all the money. He is really a power player who has managed to use his influence to evade any real scrutiny over his dangerous connections. That’s why tonight and tomorrow’s show are necessary," Glenn said.

"Politicians listen to him. Many obey him. He has a long list of connections with radical Islamic organizations and in some cases actual terrorists. Others, not just Frank Gaffney, who was on my program, radio program, and we’re not including Frank Gaffney on this program tonight because we went and did our own homework. We wanted to find out ourselves. We called people ourselves. We did our own homework," he said.

Here are just some of the connections Glenn and his team found.

Who is Grover Norquist?

"Well, first of all, we know that he’s a Harvard grad. He’s really, really quite brilliant. He’s politically minded, wanted to be in politics since he was a youth. Even though he believes in the small business and the free market, he skipped, he has no private sector experience at all, and he was the co-architect of the Bush wins," Glenn said. "He led Muslim outreach after 9/11 with Bush. "

"He has weekly D.C. meetings with the top conservatives because he wields an awful lot of power. He is very, very influential. He also founded something called the American Tax Reform Institute in 1985. This is where you get the pledge, that tax pledge that is signed by most Republicans. He is the guy who has really bulldozed and helped get George W. Bush elected in 1999, and he is big on outreach."

What has he done?

"Now, what has he done? Well, he is extremely influential in the GOP circles, and the important thing is to know where the money goes, so does Norquist. With the cost of winning elections skyrocketing, it makes him extremely important, so people play ball with him. So, what has he created? Well, we know he’s created this foundation, and this is really important. About 90% of all Republicans signed his tax pledge, and it’s a good thing, but he’s also created this, the Islamic Institute, which is trying to support the free market within Islam."

"That’s a good goal until you start to see how this thing has come together."

Who does Grover Norquist trust?

1) Karl Rove and the Koch brothers

"Karl Rove gave $26 million to[Norquist's] tax organization in 2012, and here it is, for something called social welfare, $26 million from Karl Rove and the Koch brothers. The other donor the Koch brothers, they are the primary funders of Norquist’s budget for this."

"Okay, is that a good thing? Sure, all right, whatever, because even if you are on the left and you want really high taxes, there’s nothing seemingly nefarious going on here. Okay, because of this, he holds those high-profile conservative groups in his hands, and he threatens his power to campaign against anybody who doesn’t play by his rules. But what other alliances is he making?"

2) Abdul Rahman Al-Amoudi

"This guy is extremely disturbing, al-Amoudi. You might have heard his name before. He was once held up as a moderate Muslim. He founded the Islamic Society of Boston mosque in 1981, and that is the mosque that [the Tsarnaev brothers] came from, you know, the radical marathon bombers."

"In 1993, after the World Trade Center bombing, he campaigned on behalf of Mohammed Salameh, who was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison. In 1994, al-Amoudi also denied that Hamas was a terrorist organization."

"He declared support for radical Hamas leader, Marzouk, saying, and I quote, 'I have known Musa Abu Marzuk before, and I really consider him to be from among the best people in the Islamic movement.' Feds caught him expressing frustration that no Americans died in 1998 in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Kenya. He recommended more operations be conducted there."

"In 2000, he stood across from the White House voicing support for terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah. "

"He declared support for radical Hamas leader, Marzouk, saying, and I quote, “I have known Musa Abu Marzuk before, and I really consider him to be from among the best people in the Islamic movement.” Feds caught him expressing frustration that no Americans died in 1998 in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Kenya. He recommended more operations be conducted there."

"In 2000, he stood across from the White House voicing support for terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah."

3) Khaled Saffuri

"Now, the next one on the board is Khaled Saffuri. Who is that? Well, he is al-Amoudi’s right-hand man. He was a deputy at the American Muslim Council, one of the Brotherhood front organizations. He was founder of the Islamic Institute. He was very influential in the Bush administration. He led talks with the administration in opposition of Operation Green Quest, which we’ll talk a little bit about later. That was basically trying to go get the front groups. He didn’t want that to happen."

"Karl Rove tapped him for Muslim outreach. He voiced displeasure after the decision to shut down the Holy Land Foundation for funding Hamas. So, after the trial and they were proven to be a terrorist front group, he was upset at that decision."

4) Sami Al-Arian

" Then we go to Sami Al-Arian. I think everybody pretty much knows who he is, former member of the Muslim Brotherhood, former professor at USF, campaigned against secret evidence method. He was caught soliciting donations for a Palestinian terrorist to kill an Israeli Jew. He paid respects to 'the march of the martyrs and to the river of blood that gushes forth and does not extinguish.' I don’t know about you, but I want to hang out with him. He also said, 'Let us damn America to death.'"

5) Suhail Khan

"Then we go to Suhail Khan. Suhail Khan is probably the cleanest of Grover Norquist’s friends. He campaigned against the DOJ’s secret evidence. His parents are really the trouble spot. They were prominent leaders in the Brotherhood front groups. At the annual award at ISNA, it is given every year in his father’s name. The mosque founded by his dad hosted the Blind Sheikh just a couple of months before he bombed the World Trade Center. He has a network of terror friendly organizations, and he made it possible for Osama bin Laden’s number two, Al-Zawahiri, to actually covertly visit the United States undetected in 1995. He played a key role in founding CAIR. He was praised by al-Amoudi at an award ceremony."

6) Jamal al-Barzinji

"This one is Jamal al-Barzinji. He is the founder, the founding father, he’s the George Washington of the Muslim Brotherhood of the U.S. He played a crucial role in creating and organizing the web of Brotherhood front groups that followed, ISNA, Muslim American Society, IIIT. He founded the radical mosque in Virginia. He’s known for ties to Islamic terrorists from Hamas to Al Qaeda. He’s officer of SAAR Foundation which is suspected of funding terrorist groups."

What does it mean?

"I don’t know what Grover’s motivations are for working with people that range from Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer all the way to full-blown terrorists. It can only be one of two things, he is the most unlucky and naïve guy next to the President of the United States, and I hope it’s that, because the only other option is that he strongly agrees enough with the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission or they’re just paying him enough cash to subvert America."

"Either way, somebody with this much power inside the Republican Party and inside the NRA with these connections is absolutely unacceptable. No person with any shred of integrity whatsoever would be within the same ZIP Code of some of these people, let alone at the same office or exchanging money with them. So far, the explanations given for the connections are completely unacceptable as well."

Watch a short highlight from last night's show below and scroll down for more. Subscribers to TheBlaze TV can watch the full episode HERE.

Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?

Zero.

How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?

Zero.

And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?

Zero.

Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.

Here's a question unique to our times: "Should I tell my father 'Happy Father's Day,' even though he (she?) is now one of my mothers?"

Father's Day was four days ago, yes, but this story is just weird enough to report on. One enjoyable line to read was this gem from Hollywood Gossip: "Cait is a woman and a transgender icon, but she is also and will always be the father of her six children."

RELATED: If Bruce was never a he and always a she, who won the men's Olympic gold in 1976?

Imagine reading that to someone ten — even five — years ago. And, honestly, there's something nice about it. But the strangeness of its having ever been written overpowers any emotional impact it might bring.

"So lucky to have you," wrote Kylie Jenner, in the Instagram caption under pre-transition pictures of Bruce Jenner.

Look. I risk sounding like a tabloid by mere dint of having even mentioned this story, but the important element is the cultural sway that's occurring. The original story was that a band of disgruntled Twitter users got outraged about the supposed "transphobic" remarks by Jenner's daughter.

But, what we should be saying is, "who the hell cares?" Who cares what one Jenner says to another — and more importantly and on a far deeper level — who cares what some anonymous Twitter user has to say?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob? Because, at the moment, they've got it pretty good. They have a nifty relationship with the mainstream media: One or two Twitter users get outraged by any given thing — in this case Jenner and supposed transphobia. In return, the mainstream media use the Twitter comment as a source.

Then, a larger Twitter audience points to the article itself as proof that there's some kind of systemic justice at play. It's a closed-market currency, where the negative feedback loop of proof and evidence is composed of faulty accusations. Isn't it a hell of a time to be alive?