Only #BlackLivesMatter? Progressives shut down Democrat who tries to say “All Lives Matter”

Martin O’Malley spoke at the progressive Netroots Nation over the weekend and found himself under fire from Black Lives Matter activists. The activists interrupted the presidential hopeful as he tried to answer questions, was pressed to give specific examples of how he would end police brutality, and - most shockingly - was booed when he tried to say “All Lives Matter”.

TheBlaze reported:

In a raucous scene at the annual Netroots Nation convention of liberal activists, a large group of protesters streamed into the convention hall chanting, “Black lives matter!” as O’Malley was speaking to interviewer Jose Antonio Vargas. One of the group’s leaders took over the stage and addressed the audience as the largely female group of demonstrators railed against police-involved shootings, the treatment of immigrants and Arizona’s racial history.

Watch the video below:

While Pat and Stu enjoyed seeing liberals attack one another, they couldn't believe the vitriol directed at O'Malley for saying "all lives matter".

"Of course, all lives matter," Stu said. "That's the least controversial thing you should be able to say in society. And yet, it is met with with anger as if they came out and started joking about the Holocaust or something. Like it's, how dare you say they all matter! They don't all matter. I mean, that's an incredible moment. I mean, in a rational sane nation, isn't that an amazing moment in human history?"

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

PAT: I've always loved it when liberals eat their own. It's fun to watch. And at the Netroots Convention. The Netroots Nation Convention. They were having this discussion with -- what's-his-face from Maryland.

STU: Martin O'Malley.

PAT: Martin O'Malley. Big discussion on all kinds of issues. Then they start hearing this chanting in the background. It gets louder. So they stop. And they wait. Then they invite them up on stage. Because what the heck. Let's find out what their social justice beef is too. Because you know it's some kind of social justice beef. And this black lives matter woman gets up on stage and starts explaining her beef.

VOICE: -- to work with immigrants of color from Africa, the Caribbean, and other countries, in order to advance a social and economic agenda to build a multiracial democracy. I want to welcome you to Arizona.

PAT: Yeah. Whatever that is. Yes.

STU: I love how this polite tone after they've just bowled themselves up on stage.

PAT: Yeah. After you've acted like children.

STU: You're screaming in the background. This is what kids do when they want something.

PAT: Yes. And, of course, they got it.

STU: When I'm in the middle of a conversation, and my son Zach wants me to fast-forward the commercials on Umizoomi, this is what he does. Daddy, daddy! That's what these protesters do. Unlike Zach, they get rewarded here. They get rewarded and they come on stage --

PAT: So Zach doesn't chant no justice, no peace? He doesn't do that.

STU: He says no justice, no peas. He doesn't like peas.

PAT: I don't blame him. I don't like peas either, unless they're fresh right out of the pot.

STU: Yeah, no. These are frozen.

PAT: Okay. That's not the same.

So she gets what she wants, and now all of a sudden she is super polite. What does this say to everybody who has some kind of issue that they want promoted? All they have to do is interrupt you in the middle of whatever you're doing. Get invited up on stage, and you can babble for however long you want to. And we'll just stand here and look at you while you do. The moderator was standing on one side. O'Malley was on the other. They were just both standing there, letting her do what she did. Really weird. I don't think I've ever seen it before.

VOICE: -- so much. So Netroots Nation being in Arizona is significant for several reasons, right?

PAT: So the Netroots Nation being in Arizona is significant for several reasons. She lists the reasons. You'll be excited.

VOICE: Arizona is indigenous land. We call this Phoenix, Arizona. But really the border was drawn, right, by white supremacists, Manifest Destiny.

JEFFY: Yes. Yes.

PAT: Thank you. It's about time someone finally said it.

STU: Yes.

PAT: They've said it before. But I'm glad she said it again, that the border was drawn by white supremacists.

STU: And there's some value to an idiotic the defense like this, that a supposedly mild serious presidential candidate is sitting here with what a lot of these people believe, when it comes to activists that, you know, the country is built on white supremacy and all this stuff. They have to treat it seriously and not just immediately dismiss it. Because they're right there.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And they have to please the audience. But you would think they're also at the same time having to -- you know, extend some sort of rational thought. If they want to win the presidency, they can't win with this point, right? You can't say, hey, by the way, I also believe the borders were drawn by white supremacists and this is indigenous land.

PAT: I hope you can't win the presidency that way. I'm just not positive.

STU: Me either.

PAT: Listen to the response of this. She just said that the border was drawn by white supremacists, Manifest Destiny people. And listen to the response of this crowd.

(applauding)

PAT: Unbelievable.

VOICE: And without the innovations, right, of the indigenous people, right, building the canals, this would be an uninhabitable desert, correct?

PAT: Right? Right? Right?

STU: Right, Pat? Correct, Pat?

PAT: I'm looking for validation. Right? Right?

VOICE: I just want to give a little bit of context about what we're here to do today.

On Monday, that was the July 13th. It's the two-year anniversary of the black lives matter -- creation of the black lives matter hashtag. Right? Political projects.

STU: Wait. Are we celebrating anniversaries of the creation of hashtags? Is that a country that you want to live in?

PAT: No, it isn't. No, it isn't.

STU: Hey, we have now -- by the way, we have that retweet anniversary coming up. I mean, it's just -- it's really sad.

PAT: It's the retweet anniversary of, hey, listen to Pat & Stu. Yeah! It's the three-month anniversary of that, when we did a special show on Net Roots Nation. We'll be celebrating that three months from now.

STU: Wow.

PAT: Yeah. It's a celebration of the hashtag of black lives matter. Yeah!

VOICE: -- that has moved, right, from an online political project to an on-the-ground social justice initiative that has reignited the fight for racial justice, across the globe, right?

STU: Right?

PAT: Right?

VOICE: It's also the one-year anniversary marking the death of -- excuse me -- Eric Garner.

VOICE: Woo!

PAT: She gets a woo out of that.

STU: There's one KKK guy in the crowd. The death of Eric Garner.

PAT: We got that one done too. Yeah!

STU: That's a weird response to that.

PAT: The whole thing is so weird. So weird.

STU: This is the base, by the way. Let's not take this as here's this crazy woman on stage. This is the base of the party.

PAT: Listen to the response of her. They love her.

STU: They love her.

PAT: She's wearing a shirt that says black love or something like that. And she's representing black lives matter. And she's representing all these, I mean, just radical points of view. America hating radical points of view, we started as a white supremacist nation with Manifest Destiny. Which if Glenn were here, he would probably agree with some of these things. The Manifest Destiny thing, none of us are excited about.

And what Andrew Jackson did with the Native Americans and the number of times we lied to them. I mean, nobody is proud of that. But all of these issues for them to support her in them, it tells you a little something about where the Democrat and where the progressives are headed. The Democrat Party is heading down the same road as the progressives are. They're one and the same now. You can't discern between the two anymore.

STU: No. Remember, this is a conference that all the candidates went to -- it was part of the pilgrimage of the campaign.

PAT: They all must pay homage to Net Roots now.

STU: They all must go to the conference that not only apparently has people cheering the death of Eric Garner, which I find completely disturbing, but also celebrates hashtag anniversaries. It's sort of silly. But this woman is saying things that are -- you could find, until recently, only in the Peace and Freedom Party candidate, which is a socialist/communist party in the United States. Very small. You know, the Socialist Party USA. These sort of fringe parties. That's where you would find it. This is sort of the mainstream pilgrimage to the presidency. It's kind of an amazing turn.

PAT: The media never addresses it. It's always the Republicans. It's always the G.O.P. who are so far afield of mainstream America. But here you have Democrats, you know, making this pilgrimage to these radicals. It's never mentioned.

STU: Yeah. There's a Republican candidate who we spoke about a couple weeks ago, that was -- spoke at a conference in which cockfighting was promoted. So it wasn't -- his speech wasn't about cockfighting. There was no interaction about cockfighting. But there was a candidate who was there and spoke at a conference in which it was promoted and it was a big news story. Here we have every candidate from the Democrat side, going to a conference in which respectfully listen to the opinion that we're just a bunch of white supremacists and that Arizona really isn't the United States. And all of these opinions. And it's like, hmm, that's a very interesting intellectually point. By the way, the hashtag for black lives matter, it's the second anniversary coming up. It's a weird world. If there was any sort of media fairness, you would have people recognizing that this is nut world.

PAT: Yeah. It's nothing like the Democrat Party of the 1960s even, where JFK won the nomination and the presidency. JFK is pretty moderate. JFK was pretty much down the middle. He was not a left-wing guy. He was not a right-wing guy, necessarily. But he's a lot more conservative than any of these Democrats today, that's for sure.

STU: It's not even close.

PAT: When you have an avowed socialist, a Democratic socialist running for the Democrat nomination, that should tell you something. That would be like a Republican from the KKK running in the Republican Party. And everyone is fine with it. Yeah, whatever. They have a member from the KKK running for the party. It's almost that startling. It's almost that radical. It's someone perceived to be so far to the right and you have this socialist so far to the left. And no one is paying attention to it. The Democrats are still considered mainstream. How is that possible? To me, it's not.

STU: As much as we're mocking the one moment where they're saying, hey, it's been one year since the death of Eric Garner, and one person in the crowd went woo. That would be in every news story if it was at a Republican conference. If someone said, gosh, this is sad. You know, it's one year since the death of Eric Garner, and one person in the crowd went, woo!

PAT: The headline would all be G.O.P. cheers --

STU: As murdered black man is remembered.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: It would be the way that it would go down.

PAT: No doubt about it.

STU: We didn't even get to the best part of this Martin O'Malley thing. We didn't even get to the part where he says something really controversial and the crowd takes him down for that. We have to talk about that.

PAT: Yeah, we'll do that next. 877-727-BECK. More Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program coming up.

[BREAK]

PAT: With Pat and Stu. 877-727-BECK. We didn't even get to the most controversial part of -- after the uproar at the Netroots Nation Convention. And something like this happens every year, it seems like. Every year at this thing. It's a radical conference for radicals. And for some reason, the Democrats all play into the radical agenda. They all go. They all pay homage, and they really got caught up in it this time because the black lives matter people were chanting. So they allowed them up on stage. Go ahead. Say your piece. That didn't calm them down because then O'Malley starts talking again and they start yelling at him about black lives matter. Say it. They wanted him to say the names of the people who have been killed. They wanted him to say the name of the woman who had just died in police custody. No one even knows what happened to her yet. But they want him to say the name, as if -- I don't know what that does exactly. I guess it validates their point that the only people being killed by cops are black.

PAT: That's true. Only black people have been killed by police officers.

PAT: Except not. In fact, less black people have been killed by cops than white people.

STU: When you say less, you mean by half.

PAT: I mean less. By less, I mean less.

STU: You mean less than --

PAT: I mean less than half as many. So just -- you know, but that's beside the point.

STU: Okay.

PAT: So O'Malley starts speaking again. Here's what he said. I mean you tell me if you can say this in America today.

MARTIN: Black lives matter. White lives matter. All lives matter.

VOICE: No! Really? How many times people have killed police officers this year? How many?

VOICE: Exactly.

VOICE: How many? Stop saying that bull [bleep].

PAT: Listen -- listen to that. Black lives matter. White lives matter. The audience yells, no.

STU: No. They can't matter apparently.

PAT: No. White lives don't matter.

STU: Did you ever think that you'd be in a country where someone would say all lives matter, that would be disagreed with, with that passion? I mean, that is visceral anger. How dare you say that all lives matter! How dare you say it.

PAT: Yeah. And they don't even let him get to all lives matter before they start yelling at the white lives matter. How dare you say white lives matter. They don't I guess. In the scope of this movement --

JEFFY: Especially on the anniversary.

PAT: Oh, of the hashtag.

JEFFY: Of black lives matter.

STU: How is that controversial? It's the least controversial thing that's possible to say. All lives matter. It's not -- you know, we talk about it on the air. I think it's important to say apparently at this point and apparently we were on the mark with saying it because it's apparently important to point out. But in reality, it should just be the most meaningless, rainbow, sugar and spice thing you could say. Of course, all lives matter. That's the least controversial thing you should be able to say in society. And yet, it is met with --

PAT: Yes. That's what logic tells you.

STU: -- with anger as if they came out and started joking about the Holocaust or something. Like it's, how dare you say they all matter! They don't all matter. I mean, that's an incredible moment. I mean, in a rational sane nation, isn't that an amazing moment in human history?

PAT: It is. It is.

STU: Where you have people out there -- think of the times in history where that hasn't been true. There have been many cases where countries have decided that, you know what, not all lives matter. There have been many cases in history and we don't need to run through them. But have any of those turned out well?

PAT: No. I'm going to say no.

STU: I'll go with no. When you make a decision as a society that all life doesn't matter, you wind up really regretting that. It never turns out well. And to see visceral anger -- and you say, you know what, good for Martin O'Malley. Here's a guy that comes up. He's a Democrat. He takes a stand.

PAT: Hillary said it too. She was equally booed.

STU: Here's people taking a stand. But the update on Martin O'Malley, he apologized.

PAT: I'm so sorry I said white lives matter. I don't know what came over me. I got caught up in the moment. I shouldn't have said that. I know I'm white, and I was thinking for a second that maybe my own life matters. It doesn't. And neither do any of the whities I know. No whities. No crackers matter. Okay. I'm really sorry about that. He actually apologized for saying white lives matter. All lives matter.

STU: Uh-huh.

PAT: And black lives matter, by the way.

STU: That was the first one. He led with that.

PAT: And then, by the way, with this activist yelling and screaming at the end of this. Listen to it again.

MARTIN: Black lives matter. White lives matter. All lives matter.

VOICE: No! Really? How many times have people killed police officers this year? How many? Stop it. Stop saying that bull [bleep].

PAT: How many white people were killed by police officers this year? I thought so. Well, you didn't listen for the answer, hun.

STU: The actual answer to that, of course, 49 percent of people killed by police officers are white and 30 percent are black.

PAT: So it's not quite double. But it's close to double.

STU: Although, that is how I heard the question when we played the first time. Listen back, she actually asked another question, which was how many black people have killed police officers this year? As if a black person has never killed a police officer. I'll go out on a limb and say that's not true either.

PAT: Recently. It happened several times recently.

STU: We'll have to look at the numbers on that. But I guess they're not flattering.

PAT: Wow. Unbelievable.

STU: Of course, it will be more than zero. I can promise you that one.

PAT: More of the Glenn Beck Program with Pat and Stu coming up.

[BREAK]

PAT: With Pat and Stu. 877-727-BECK. 877-727-BECK.

Yeah. We mentioned that Martin O'Malley apologized for saying that black lives matter or white lives matter. All lives matter. And he got booed. As soon as he said white lives matter at the Net Roots Nation Convention. And he later apologized. I think it was the same day. He went over and -- but you -- and we mentioned he apologized. But you have to hear the apology. It's pretty amazing.

STU: Yeah. And the other thing too, as we're pulling that audio up. Not only did they -- they didn't boo when they said white lives matter, they said no.

PAT: That's true.

STU: It wasn't like, oh, come on. You're saying the wrong phrase. It was no! They don't matter! How dare you! And then he comes out and he has to apologize for it.

VOICE: But I want to ask something specifically. Because towards the end in your explanation, you said the phrase all lives matter. You said the phrase white lives matter.

PAT: Oh, no.

VOICE: But I want to ask you, do you understand the difference in responding in that conversation in that context with all lives matter or white lives matter, when we're specifically talking about black death? That is not all-inclusive.

MARTIN: I certainly do. In fact, I believe what I first said was black lives matter before those other two phrases.

STU: Stop. Stop.

PAT: Before those two other phrases which I can't even mention.

STU: He can't even say the phrases. He can't come out with the phrase. Even quoting himself, that all lives matter, first of all, I prioritize black people over white people. I want to be clear about that. I said black lives matter first. And then I did say those other phrases.

PAT: Then I did say ALM.

STU: And WLM. Which I will not -- the WLM phrase, white lives matter, you can't even say it. He's editing himself because he doesn't want to be on camera again saying the phrase all lives matter.

This is one of the two main political parties in the country. This is not -- this is not some crazy --

PAT: I'm just stunned.

STU: Group of -- I mean, it is a crazy group. But this is supposed to mainstream. And they can't -- he can't bring himself to say all lives matter?

PAT: No. Not in this context. For some reason, we can only speak of black lives now. Even though white people are dying and have died at the hands of cop at a higher rate than black.

STU: Yeah, 49 percent of people killed by officers are white. 30 percent are black.

PAT: And, by the way, in the past several years, it's been about double. In the past like -- I think it was since 2009, it's close to double the number of white people dead by cop compared to white people dead by cop. Or black -- white people to black people. It's almost twice as many.

STU: The argument against that will be, well, white people are a higher part of the population. They will probably be a higher amount. Which is fair. If you want to use the rate, that's fair. However, you have to also use the rate and apply it to the questions she actually asked. Which was, hey, when was the last time a black person killed a police officer? Interesting question. Are you ready for the answer? Blacks make up 13 percent of the population. Are responsible for 42 percent of all cop killers.

PAT: Wow.

STU: So while you would say, okay, look the rate is significantly higher, you can't not use the rate in one and use the rate in the other. Of course, that's what the left tries to do. The bottom line is, these numbers aren't flattering. These numbers aren't flattering. You don't want to get into a numbers conversation. You could say there are justifications for those numbers. There are a lot of -- there are longer nuanced arguments that we've had many times on this program as to why those numbers occur. But the numbers aren't flattering. This cause does not have statistics they want to quote.

PAT: The numbers aren't on their side. That's for sure.

STU: Which is why, by the way, they attach to -- these activists attach to high-profile cases like Eric Garner where it looks like something actually was wrong that was done.

PAT: Which we said, by the way. Over and over again.

STU: Yeah. Let's see. I do have the number off the top of my head. It's 200 or so reported killings of blacks by police officers.

The vast majority of those, however, were justified. There wasn't even really a controversy. You know, there are criminals that do things. That doesn't mean all black people are criminals by any means. It just means that sometimes criminals happen to be black and these things happen. And cops shoot someone who happens to be black, the person dies, and it was actually completely justified. And we see that in most of these cases, even the ones that were controversial. Michael Brown comes to mind. There was this huge controversy. Until you actually saw the report, until you learned that he was potentially wanted for a crime just moments before. He had an altercation inside the car, all these details come out. Then you find out, well, maybe it was justified. The vast majority of them justified. Those are controversial cases. You don't hear about the one where the guy is pointing a gun at an officer and he shoots him after being shot at. No one brings those cases to light because they don't advance anyone's agenda. But those happen all the time to good officers who are sitting there defending their lives trying to get home to their kids. Happens all the time.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And those are never promoted. Al Sharpton never shows up in those towns.

PAT: That's for sure. Meanwhile, the O'Malley apology continues.

MARTIN: I said those other two phrases, I meant no disrespect to the point which I understand and that black lives matter is making.

PAT: And I understand that white lives don't matter. I don't know why I said they did when they don't. And all lives don't matter either. Only black lives matter. And I understand that now.

STU: The guy is white.

PAT: I get it.

STU: He can't say his own life matters? He can't even bring himself to admit that his own life matters?

PAT: Not in this context, Stu. Not in this context.

MARTIN: For many years -- many years ago, when I ran for mayor of Baltimore -- a majority African-American city, when we had allowed ourselves to become the most violent, part of what I called us to as a people was to the justice of realizing that, yes, black lives matter. And when we allow ourselves to assume that every year as a city we just to have accept that 300 young black men will die violent deaths --

PAT: And, by the way, different issue here. It's a separate issue. 300 black men dying violent deaths is almost always at the hand of another black man.

STU: Uh-huh.

PAT: That is a completely different issue. You're mixing apples with oranges here. You're not talking about cops killing blacks anymore.

STU: Right. It's embarrassing when you're analyzing what he's saying. He's saying, well, we're the most violent city in the country. Was that because of white cops killing blacks? Was that the reason for that?

PAT: No, it's a total separate issue. It's black-on-black crime, the same problem they have in Chicago and elsewhere. The same problem that nobody wants to deal with. Nobody wants to talk about that. Nobody wants to discuss any other reasons that might lead to that. And search for real solutions to those problems, nobody wants to deal with it.

STU: Give you a rough estimate of these numbers. About 200 or so killings of blacks by white police officers -- or by police officers in general. Some of them are black police officers. 200 nationwide police officers killing blacks, the vast majority were justified and not even really questioned highly.

There were 30 times that amount of blacks killed by blacks. 6,000.

PAT: Wow. Wow.

STU: What do you do with that?

PAT: Yeah, what do you do with that? That's the problem he's talking about with Baltimore.

STU: He's mixing these issues to make him seem like he's tough on them. At the same time, he's trying to act tough while he's saying things like, those other two phrases. Those other two phrases, you can't bring yourself to say that people's lives matter?

PAT: So bad. Really bad.

MARTIN: We have to do a checkup from the neck up and realize as a people --

PAT: That's a nice phrase. Checkup from the neck up.

STU: Wait. Take that phrase and stop saying it. How about that? What year is it? It's 2015.

PAT: We have to do a checkup from the neck up is what --

STU: Unfortunately I used the phrase checkup from the neck up. I will no longer be using that phrase. That would be a positive for your campaign, Martin.

MARTIN: We would have a different reaction to this as a state and as a metro area and as a city. So I meant that as a mistake on my part. And I meant no disrespect. And I didn't mean to be insensitive in any way or to communicate that I did not understand the tremendous passion, commitment, and -- and feeling -- and depth of feeling that all of us should be attaching to this issue.

PAT: Wow.

STU: I feel like he should drop the mic and run because he's just embarrassing himself. He just said it was a mistake -- the word mistake was used when describing the phrase all lives matter.

I mean, what kind of insane group of people is this? You can't say that people's lives matter comfortably anymore.

PAT: It's an insane group of people who have been running this country for six years now. Going on seven.

STU: I guess this is what you get.

PAT: We're getting what we voted for sadly. We specifically didn't. But the nation as a whole did. When we put him in office. We're reaping the benefits right now. I don't know how else to put it. And if we vote -- if this nation chooses Hillary or God forbid, Bernie Sanders or Martin O'Malley, a guy who apologizes saying black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter, we're -- how do you survive that? Another four to eight years? I really don't know. 877-727-BECK. 877-727-BECK. More of the Glenn Beck Program with Pat and Stu coming up.

Featured Image: PHOENIX, AZ - JULY 18: Former Gov. Martin O'Malley (D-MD) (R), and moderator Jose Antonio Vargas (R), listen to Tia Oso, the National Coordinator for the Black Immigration Network, during an interruption to O'Malley's speech, at the Netroots Nation 2015 Presidential Town Hall with at the Phoenix Convention Center July 18, 2015 in Phoenix, Arizona. The Democratic presidential candidate was challenged on his record of criminal injustice during his time as mayor and governor. (Photo by Charlie Leight/Getty Images)

Soros is trying to elect MORE TEXAS RINOs. Here's how YOU can stop him.

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

Texas is under threat of a George Soros-backed takeover.

Soros-funded RINO judges have been elected in some of the highest courts in Texas. These judges implemented restrictions that have blocked nearly a thousand cases of voter fraud from being investigated or prosecuted from across the state. These new restrictions are similar to ones in place in states like George, Arizona, and Wisconsin, leaving Texas more susceptible to election corruption than ever. If Texas falls to corruption, America will lose its largest bastion of conservative electoral power in the nation. Without Texas, Republicans WILL NOT be able to win national elections and liberal corruption will go unchecked across the country.

Fortunately, there is a way to stop this: YOU.

If you live in Texas you have a chance to stand up against corruption and to fight back! Starting Tuesday, February 20th, early voting for the primaries begins, where three of these judges are up for election. Go out and vote. If the right people are voted in, there's a good chance the restrictions will be lifted and election fraud can once again be prosecuted.

But remember, you can't just go in and vote for anyone who has an "R" next to their name. Sorors knows that a registered Democrat would never stand a chance in Texas, so his lackeys register as Republicans and ride the little "R" right into office. So who do you vote for?

Fortunately, Glenn had Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on his show today and Ken gave us his list of judges that he vouches for. His list is as follows:

  • Gina Parker
  • Lee Finley
  • David Schenck
The Primary Election runs from February 20th to March 5th. This is your chance to get out there and make a difference. It might be the most important election you ever participate in. If you need to know where your nearest polling location is, or any other information regarding the election, you can go to votetexas.gov to find out more.
It's time to stand up.

Hypocrisy EXPOSED: The 'Amazon Files' and what WE are doing about it

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Who is really banning books?

For years now, Conservatives have been taking flak from the left for supposed "book bans." The left likes to compare these "bans" to Nazi book burnings, accusing the right of sweeping authoritarian decrees designed to suppress information. In reality, this is a movement largely motivated by parents, who want to remove inappropriate books from children's libraries.

But if you want to discuss authoritarian book bans, look no further than the White House. As Glenn recently covered, the Biden administration has been pressuring the world's largest bookseller, Amazon, into suppressing books they disagree with.

On February 5th, 2024, Ohio Representative Jim Jordan released a slew of subpoenaed documents that exposed pressure placed on Amazon by the Biden Administration. The documents, which Jordan dubbed "The Amazon Files" after Elon Musk's "The Twitter Files," revealed an email conversation between Andrew Slavitt, a former White House senior adviser, and Amazon employees. In these emails, Slavitt complained that the top search results for books on "vaccines" were "concerning" and then requested that Amazon intervene. Amazon initially refused, not out of some altruistic concern for the free exchange of information. They thought any action taken would be "too visible" and would further exasperate the “Harry/Sally narrative,” referring to the outrage that followed Amazon's removal of Ryan T. Anderson’s book When Harry Became Sally.

Despite this initial refusal, Amazon agreed to meet with the White House a few days later. The number one item on their agenda was removing books from the website. An Amazon employee even admitted that the reason they even took this meeting was due to the pressure being placed on them by the Biden Administration.

What was the result of this meeting? Amazon caved. They began to implement ways of limiting the outreach of books that challenged the mainstream vaccine narrative and other books the White House might not like.

The White House was caught red-handed pressuring the world's largest bookseller to restrict the sale of books they consider in opposition to their narrative, and they have the gall to accuse conservatives of information suppression. This is just ONE of many actions committed by the Biden Administration that are more characteristic of a dictator than a president.

What can you do about it? Fortunately, you are not dependent on Amazon and its corrupted algorithm to help you find books. Every week right here on GlennBeck.com, we highlight books that Glenn is reading or talking about in our "Glenn's Bookshelf" series. Here you can find a wide selection of books free from Amazon's filters. Be sure to sign up for Glenn's newsletter to find out about new additions to "Glenn's Bookshelf" every week.

10 times Biden has acted like a DICTATOR

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The left-wing media's most recent tirade is accusing Trump of being a dictator. But, as Glenn said, "Everything they're accusing us of, they're doing."

Since day one, the Biden administration has overstepped the bounds placed on the executive branch set by the Constitution. In Glenn's most recent TV Special, he examined ten times Biden acted like a dictator, NOT a president. Here are 10 of Biden's Dictator Moves, and click HERE to get ALL of the research that went into this week's Glenn TV special:

5 ways to protect your First Amendment rights. Number 4 will surprise you.

Buyenlarge / Contributor | Getty Images

Every day it seems Glenn covers another story revealing how people across the world at all levels of power DESPISE the fact that YOU have rights, and they are actively trying to curtail them. Recently, there has been a string of attacks against the rights outlined in the First Amendment: the freedom of religion, the freedom of speech, the freedom of press, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom to petition.

As a refresher, the First Amendment reads as follows:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is powerful stuff, there is a good reason the Founding Fathers made it the FIRST Amendment. It's also the reason why power-hungry elites are attacking it. These attacks are designed to control the way you think, speak, and believe, vote, what you read, and who holds your representatives responsible. The First Amendment is our strongest weapon against tyrants, and they know it.

So what can you do about it? Hope that some wig in Washinton will eventually do something? We know how well that works. The best thing to do is to stay active, engage in the issues you care about, and exercise your rights.

So where to start? Here are a few things YOU can do to protect your First Amendment rights:

Religion

The best way to flex your Freedom of Religion is to—you guessed it—practice your faith. Become an active member in your place of worship, go to scripture studies, invite your friends to that late afternoon event, and walk the life. This can impact the way you spend money as well. Shop the businesses and brands that share your values, and don't shop at the ones that scorn them. Keeping the community alive and healthy is the best way to ensure that generations to come will be able to experience the freedom you enjoy.

Speech

Much like religion, the best way to protect your freedom of speech is... to speak. Engage your friends and family in polite, civil conversation. Stand up for what you believe in, and make your case to your peers. Just remember to keep it friendly. No one ever won an argument by shouting down their opponent. The civil exchange of ideas is the cornerstone of our republic, and a dialogue where the participants are well-informed, considerate, compassionate, and open-minded can have permanent impacts on all involved.

Press

Freedom of the Press seems a little tricky at first. Unless you work for the media, what are you supposed to do? Quit your job and go work for the local newspaper? The good news is that exercising this right is not nearly that difficult. In fact, you are currently doing it. The best thing you can do is to read from outlets that produce informative content. Want to know what Glenn consumes to stay informed every day? Sign up for Glenn's Morning Brief newsletter to get all the stories Glenn gets sent to his desk every day sent straight to your inbox.

Assembly

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Freedom of assembly is one of the more impactful yet underutilized freedoms in the First Amendment. Peaceably assembling and protesting with like-minded individuals can hugely influence politicians and policies while simultaneously creating community and fellowship between attendees. It's understandable why more people don't turn out. We're all busy people with busy schedules, and flying out to D.C. for the weekend seems like a daunting task to many. Thankfully, you don't have to go out all the way to D.C. to make a difference. Gather some like-minded people in your town and bring awareness to issues that impact your community. Big change starts locally, and exercising your freedom to assemble can be the catalyst to lasting impact.

Petition

If you've been a long-time listener of Glenn, then you will have heard a few of his calls to action where he asks his audience to contact their representatives about a particular piece of policy. There is a good reason Glenn keeps on doing those: they work. Whether it's your local mayor or your senator, a call and an email go a long way. If you really want to make a change, convince your friends and family to reach out as well.