Is Norquist an 'agent of influence'? Here's what the experts have to say

On radio this morning, Glenn welcomed Patrick Poole, national security expert for PJ Media, and Joseph Scmitz, former Inspector General for the Department of Defense, onto the radio show to discuss the connections between Grover Norquist and the Muslim Brotherhood. Grover's on the board of the NRA and has his hand in a number of conservative groups. At the same time, he's got all kinds of questionable connections to radical Islamists and convicted terrorists. What do the experts have to say?

Watch a complimentary highlight below, scroll down for audio of the full hour and a rush transcript of this segment. Don't miss Grover Norquist's response tonight on TheBlaze TV.

The full interview begins 38 minutes into the audio below:

Below is a rush transcript.

GLENN: We're talking a little about Grover Norquist. He is going to be my guest tonight. I'm making this episode free. So you can watch it. Last night, I kind of did the Fox thing. And pulled out my chalkboards and dusted them off and tried to show you the connections and how disturbing these connections really are and how they're all connected to the Muslim Brotherhood. And if you are familiar -- if you buy the line, the Muslim Brotherhood is largely secular, they have Muslim in their name, they're largely secular, and they're a peace group, well, then you're too far gone to save anyway.

If you know who the Muslim Brotherhood is, you know how dangerous these connections are. Grover canceled yesterday. I got a note during the show that he was not going to be on the show. Then he wrote this morning and said, no, I didn't mean that. I meant I wanted to be on the show. So he'll be on tonight. And I will tell you, it will be one of those shows like we've had in the past. I think I know his answers and I think he'll try to make this into race-baiting or smearing other people. This is not about other people. It's not about his family. It's not about him personally. This is about his connections. And I want to get the straight answers on the connections. Period. I have very little tolerance for people that try to grandstand or change the subject. And I'm just not going to play any games. So he'll be on with us at 5 o'clock. It is free. You'll be able to watch it. You'll be able to blog with us during the episode. We will make that available and explain that to you later on in the program today.

But I brought in Joe Schmitz, he is the former Inspector General of the Department of Defense and the guy who literally wrote the textbook on inspector generals. The handbook for inspector generals. A very reasoned and rational guy whose voice needs to be heard more and more. Also, Patrick Poole. National security and terrorism correspondent for PJMedia.com. And a guy who has really helped us over the years. Works closely with For the Record. And tries to get to the bottom of all the connections of Islamic terror.

Patrick, I want to talk to you about where I left off. I'm concerned that Grover is on all these boards. The National Rifle Association is one of them. Because if you know what the Muslim Brotherhood project is, you know their goal was to get agents of influence into the boardrooms of America. Into our culture. Mainstream them and then slowly exert their influence.

This is why we can't say anything anymore. This is why we're so politically correct. Because these agents of influence have tremendous power at the highest levels.

We were talking a little about Grover when he was on the board of directors of CPAC. And he was -- well, you tell the story. Because you know it firsthand. Tell me what his influence on a board means.

PATRICK: One of the reasons he is there is because of the money he brings to the table. That's why he's on all these boards. And that's why largely he was on the board of the American Conservative Union. Both he and his pal, Suhail Khan, was the money that they were helping to keep ACU afloat and CPAC. And not just Grover, but particularly Suhail made a big thing about the fact that the people that were now excluded from speaking at CPAC because they had fallen out of favor and were raising these concerns about the Muslim Brotherhood. You know, we see how well that foreign policy worked out in the Middle East over the past couple of years. Embracing the so-called moderate Muslim Brotherhood. And for -- I've been to the CPAC for the past eight years. I think. And national security was -- was absent for a number of years. I mean, there weren't any panels about the collapse of our foreign policy. And Grover and Suhail were architects of that. Keeping the people out who were raising concerns about our engaging the moderate Islamists, like the Muslim Brotherhood, or us partnering with Abdul Helkein Belhaj (phonetic), the Libyan al-Qaeda figure who we have pictures with, not just Democrats, but with John McCain and Lindsey Graham. The CIA renditioned him back to Libya, and this is the guy we backed to overthrow Muammar Gadhafi. People who were raising concerns about the time, and there was nothing said about it at CPAC.

GLENN: And you believe it's because of Grover's influence?

PATRICK: Well, certainly Suhail went out publicly.

GLENN: Explain the connection to Suhail and who Suhail is.

PATRICK: Well, Suhail is a very close associate of Grover. I mean, there are pictures of -- there was a picture I remember from the National Journal of Grover at one of his Wednesday morning meetings. And you can see Suhail sitting directly behind him. And Grover helped get Suhail his position as the lobbyist for Microsoft. That's currently his position. And, you know, got him the position on the American Conservative Union board. The group that runs CPAC.

GLENN: This is what is so disturbing. These guys have been white-washed so much that they can go work for Microsoft at the highest levels. They can go into these boardrooms. Who is on the board of Seagrams?

GLENN: Certainly, Seagrams was a long-time client of Grover's and sponsored a lot of his events. I think that's part of the question when you raise the topics of these boards and he brings money to the table to these organizations is, where is that money coming from?

GLENN: Correct. This has all been done in the name of tolerance. We're being taught to be tolerant. And that is a good thing. To a point. Isn't it, Joe?

JOE: You know, if you ask any group of people typically if you're in favor of tolerance. Most of the hands will go up. Instinctively we like tolerance. But there's a famous noble laureate by the name of Thomas Mann who escaped Germany in 1928 and became an American. And in one of his books he said, tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil. And if you really think about it. When people who will say instinctively, I'm in favor of tolerance. Then you ask them, do you tolerate human slavery? Well, no, we don't tolerate that.

GLENN: Correct.

JOE: Do you tolerate child abuse? No, we don't tolerate that. So tolerance has its limits. And, you know, the idea of agents of influence in our society is not new. We had British agents of influence literally spying on our forefathers during the American Revolutionary War. During the second war, leading up, literally at the same time when Thomas Mann was escaping what became Nazi Germany, we had the Bruderbund (phonetic). Which was very active in trying to influence American public policy.

GLENN: Right.

JOE: You know, during the Cold War, we have documented time after time agents of influence from the Soviet Communist Party trying to influence American foreign policy.

GLENN: You have Alger Hiss. What's fascinating about Alger Hiss. It's so striking with agents of influence. And the way Grover Norquist -- Alger Hiss, when another -- another guy who knew said, no, no, let me tell you who he is. I know because I'm on that side. He is a bad, bad guy. Everybody laughed it off because Alger Hiss had so much power and influence. The State Department continued to laugh it off up until Alger Hiss' death. And even when he died, NBC reported, not the facts, because we did prove later in life -- he was convicted, went to prison and proved, went to prison. And even after death, that's the only time that the State Department came out and said, yes, and we knew at the time. But NBC, when they reported his death, Tom Brokaw came on and said, a guy who a lot of people believed was an agent for the Soviet Union. He went to prison for it. And they're still trying to cover those tracks. So those agents of influence have been with us forever. It's not a new deal.

JOE: We know from the Venona transcripts, released in the '90s, how deep the US intelligence agencies knew the penetration was. And we know from some of the terrorism trials like the Holy Land Foundation trial, the United States government knows how deep the penetration of these Islamist organizations are into our own government right now. I mean, we have the absolutely bizarre situation of the Department of Justice going into federal court saying these organizations and individuals are bad guys, leaving federal court, going to an outreach meeting. Putting their arms around the same organizations and individuals and saying, these are our outreach partners. That's how utterly insane it is.

PAT: That's what's disturbing about this whole thing is, because we know the Democrats are lost to us. I mean, they've been radicalized infiltrated. Who knows what all has happened in the Democrat Party. But here we have a guy, a big-time conservative operative who everybody thinks is just this small government, lower tax guy. Bouncing around in conservative circles and really influencing people all over the place who also then influenced other people and have influence at the highest levels of government. How do you get the American people to understand who he is? Because we've known a lot of these connections for a long time. And nothing ever sticks to them.

GLENN: They're always just dismissed.

PAT: How do you get the American people to stand up and recognize what's going on here?

JOE: Well, what I try to do when I talk around the country. Is I try to -- what resonates with the American people. In my experience is sort of American first things. You know, you talk about the Constitution. You talk about the first amendment. You talk about the fact that Americans will literally die for religious liberty. So that's -- we're not -- we're not out to get some religious sect. That's exactly the opposite of what we're out to.

PAT: Yeah.

JOE: And you just try to bring home the issues. The facts. I think the American people are frankly very good at recognizing facts when they see them.

GLENN: Yes.

JOE: The problem is -- and this is classic military strategy, if you were trying to engage in a civilization jihad as the North American Muslim Brotherhood Explanatory Memorandum says that is what their plan. Is. You would want to infiltrate the Republicans at this time more than you would want to infiltrate the Democrats because that's how you're more affected.

GLENN: Yes. How is -- and I only have about two minutes. How is Karl Rove connected to this? I mean, $26 million from Crossroads going to the American Tax Reform. Karl Rove was there the whole time. He had to know -- these guys aren't stupid. So they know who is being brought into the White House.

PATRICK: We have pictures of Karl Rove at the Texas governor's mansion with some of these characters.

GLENN: Right. After they were giving the speech. Who is with Hamas, who is with Hezbollah. And it has been exposed. They all know. What role does Karl Rove play in this? How much does the G.O.P. know?

PATRICK: I think the establishment G.O.P. doesn't want to know. Because they -- they know -- they lift up that lid and then suddenly --

PAT: Does that include Karl Rove or is he a knowing participant in this?

PATRICK: Well, I don't know. But certainly we know he's participated in it. It's been reported a number of times that Rove took these meetings with these extremists --

GLENN: So it's a convenient lie to themselves. That if they don't know, they have every reason to know, it's all around them. It's not like we're informing them. They're just dismissing it because they get a lot of money from these guys.

PATRICK: And it's precisely that attitude that has us in the position we are with respect to our foreign policy where we are --

GLENN: Yeah, it's interest over principles. Their interest is the money and a win. Their principles would say, no, you can't do this with these guys.

JOE: Well, stated differently, it's very, very important second things over first things. CS Lewis coined this principle, says if you're always focusing on second things. Classic second things are money and survival. But if that's what you're always focusing on and you're ignoring those first things, the core values that you would literally die for, in the end, you don't achieve your second things. You don't get your money and you lose the first things in the process.

GLENN: That's where we are.

JOE: So Karl Rove may be a great money guy. That's very important in the overall equation. But we have to focus on things other than money if in the end we'll succeed.

GLENN: And, boy, that explains everything in the G.O.P. They're only concerned about second things. They're concerned about winning and money and power. And the American people are. The American people are concerned about first things because we know we're about to lose everything. And it's the first things that made us who we are. And if we lose the first things, we're done. We're done.

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.


UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

UPDATED: On Friday, July 26th Barack and Michelle Obama officially threw their support behind Harris over a phone call with the current VP:

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.”

The fact that it took nearly a week for the former president to endorse Kamala, along with his original statement, gives the endorsement a begrudging tone.

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

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?