MNSBC Town Hall Highlights Media's Softball Treatment of Trump

February 19, 2016

Writer

The media has all the ammo needed to take down Donald Trump. They're holding back for ratings.

The Context

MSNBC's lightweight treatment of Donald Trump at their town hall is just another in a long line of softball questions to the real estate mogul -- but don't think for a minute they don’t have all the ammo needed to derail his candidacy. In an election cycle that has seen a lot of "look at me" moments, the media is the one cashing in on ratings as they watch Trump rise to the top. But once he is the nominee, the ratings game changes to "watch him burn" mode.

The Build-Up

At first glance, it might appear the media actually likes Trump – and why not? His ideas do line up more with the liberal mindset than with conservatives. But make no mistake, they are biting their tongues just hoping he becomes the nominee that will go up against either Hillary or Bernie.

“And I want you to know -- here's why -- it works two ways for the mainstream media. First, they get their ratings. They get their ratings on the buildup, all the way to the summer,” Glenn explained on radio Friday. “Then when he gets to the election, it's that tension and that anticipation. And is he going to win? Is he not going to win? What's going to happen?”

The Take-Down

Just when the ratings hit a fever pitch and you think it can’t get any more crazy, that’s when the media will unleash all the info they have on the Donald to watch him burn to the ground.

“And then once that happens, then they get all of the ratings of the beatdown. And then the tension of, who is going to win? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? So they win twice on this story. That's what's happening. They're taking a win two times. The ratings up and then the ratings down,” Glenn said.

Trump might think he’s made out of Teflon, but he probably doesn’t even see what’s coming.

“The media beatdown that's coming is going to be of biblical proportions because he's going to escalate it,” Glenn said.

The Huffington Post Isn’t Playing Along

In an article posted on The Huffington Post written by Slate.com, what could have happened during the town hall forum was juxtaposed to what actually occurred.

Here is what was written:

Is Donald Trump in trouble? After facing hostile questions from Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski Wednesday night—they comprehensively laid out his flip-flops, presented him with damning videotape, and asked him to explain the inconsistencies in detail—Trump was confronted by hostile audience members at MSNBC’s televised town-hall forum. When a Muslim questioner got up to ask why he had said such bigoted things about minorities, Trump seemed to struggle while Scarborough forced him to respond. The candidate looked uncomfortable, unhappy, and somewhat lost. It could be a turning point.

If only. Of course, none of this actually occurred Wednesday night, just like it hasn’t occurred once this entire campaign season. Instead, Scarborough and Brzezinski hosted what appeared to be a rehearsed and “safe” town hall, in which American voters asked the candidate such hard-hitting questions as “Why did you decide to run for president?” and “how will you set yourself apart” from other Republicans? It was completely worthless television, except in one sense: The program highlighted the many ways in which the media’s coverage of Trump has been soft, insufficient, and without substance.

Glenn explained why The Huffington Post is one of the only media outlets that have decided not to play along, because they know the truth about Trump.

“And it's only because Arianna Huffington has said, 'He's a fraud. He's a total and complete fraud. We're not playing this game.' Assuming -- just like we did -- that others on our own side would also say the same thing because they know,” Glenn said.

Common Sense Bottom Line

Donald Trump himself has said he can change to be whatever he needs to be, meaning he doesn’t have any deep-seated beliefs that can’t change to be what is best for Donald at the moment. So far The Huffington Post stands alone, but the media knows who Trump is and it’s only a matter of time before they go after him.

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

GLENN: MSNBC town hall with Donald Trump. This is from The Huffington Post. It was disgraceful.

STU: Well, they think everything is disgraceful.

GLENN: No, well, they're the ones coming out against Donald Trump. They're the only media outlet on the left that's telling the truth.

STU: Yeah, I mean, one of them. They found a lot of the stuff, I will say, and they get beat up a lot for the list of -- the 47 things you should never say to your plumber. But Buzzfeed has done a lot of the work to find these clips --

PAT: Buzzfeed.

STU: They have.

PAT: 89 things Donald Trump has said to his interior decorator about gold lame.

STU: They deserve credit for it though. They're the ones going back and listening to these interviews. Of course, the mainstream media will do all this work. They probably have done it.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: But they're waiting to release it until afterwards.

GLENN: And I want you to know -- here's why -- it works two ways for the mainstream media. First, the -- they get their ratings. They get their ratings on the buildup, all the way to the summer. Then when he gets to the election, it's that tension and that anticipation. And is he going to win? Is he not going to win? What's going to happen? And then once that happens, then they get all of the ratings of the beatdown. And then the tension of, who is going to win? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? So they win twice on this story. That's what's happening. They're taking a win two times. The ratings up and then the ratings down.

STU: And you know who doesn't lose in the situation no matter what the outcome is, is Donald Trump. He's going to come out of this and say, "Oh, well, the media beat me up and I'm still worth billions and billions of dollars. And I have deals all over the world."

GLENN: I think the media beatdown that's coming towards him, I don't know if he does as well. He's no longer on TV. I really don't think so. The media beatdown that's coming is going to be of biblical proportions because he's going to escalate it.

STU: So odd. I mean, think about this. I was watching MSNBC. It was my day. I was assigned to watch it. And what is MSNBC doing? That was two days maybe. They're running a countdown clock to an interview with Donald Trump.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

STU: Now, when is the last time they did something like that for a Republican candidate?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: When is the last time MSNBC bent over backward to promote to their audience an interview with a Republican? The answer is, never a clock. It doesn't happen. They don't do it because they don't like Republicans. They like Donald Trump. And that should make you question that whole thing.

JEFFY: Which is why he got sucked into the Mika question on socialism. Right?

STU: Did you see this, Glenn?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: If you missed it, Mika went through a list of descriptive items of a particular candidate. Do you have it, Pat?

PAT: Yeah, I have it here somewhere.

MIKA: I wanted to describe a candidate to you: The candidate is considered a political outsider by all the pundits. He's tapping into the anger of the voters, delivers a populist message. He believes everyone in the country should have health care. He advocates for hedge fund managers to have higher taxes. He's drawing thousands of people at his rallies and bringing in a lot of new voters to the political process. And he's not beholden to any super PAC. Who am I describing?

DONALD: Or any special interest or any donors, you're describing Donald Trump.

MIKA: Actually I was describing Bernie Sanders.

DONALD: Well, that's good.

PAT: Oh, that's good.

STU: And, Glenn, why does he fall for that? Donald Trump, as much as he's not necessarily to me informed on a lot of these issues, he's not an idiot. He knows the media. He knows what they're trying to do to him.

If you asked him that question, the exact same way, there's no way he's falling for it. Because he's thinking you're coming at him skeptically. He's so sure that MSNBC is a friend of his, that he's going down this road and falls for that, which she didn't even really deliver it convincingly.

GLENN: Listen to this: Is Donald Trump in trouble? After facing hostile questions from Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski Wednesday night, they comprehensively laid out his flip-flops, presented him with damning videotape, asked him to explain the inconsistencies in detail. Trump was confronted by a hostile audience of MSNBC's televised town hall forum. When a Muslim questioner got up and asked why he said such bigoted things about minorities, trump seemed to struggle while Scarborough forced him to respond. The candidate looked uncomfortable, unhappy, and somewhat lost. It could be a turning point.

Of course, none of this actually occurred Wednesday night. This is The Huffington Post. Of course, none of this occurred Wednesday night, just like it hasn't occurred once this entire campaign season.

JEFFY: Think about it.

GLENN: Instead Scarborough and Brzezinski hosted what appeared to be a rehearsed and safe town hall, in which American voters asked the candidate such hard-hitting questions as, why did you decide to run for president? And, how will you set yourself apart from other Republicans? It was completely worthless television, except in one sense: The program highlighted in many ways in which the media's coverage of Trump has been soft, insufficient, and without substance.

JEFFY: Wow.

GLENN: This is the left.

And it's only because Arianna Huffington has said, "He's a fraud. He's a total and complete fraud. We're not playing this game." Assuming, just like we did that others in our own -- on our own side would also say the same thing because they know.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: We know -- Pat, any doubt in your mind that everybody on our side knows, I mean, --

PAT: No.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: No.

GLENN: In positions that we are in, they all know.

PAT: They absolutely know.

GLENN: Stu.

JEFFY: Absolutely.

GLENN: They all know. Every one of them. They're not doing it. Why? I don't know why. I don't know why.

Arianna Huffington is the same way. She knows the media knows. She went out and said, "We're going to call this guy who he is. This is a joke. We're going to call who he is." So they've actually been doing reporting like this every time their side gives him a softball. They're like, "What the hell is wrong with you?"

Scarborough began the evening by noting that he and his cohost were prepared to debrief Trump and ask him important questions. Instead, the questions were mild. Follow-ups, nonexistent.

It remained shocking that after months of bigoted comments and almost a pathological dishonesty, Trump still lands these types of interviews. Wednesday night, there was no mention of his racist comments towards Mexicans, his praise for Vladimir Putin, his stigmatization of Muslims. He wasn't pressed hard for any policy detail or challenged about his well-cataloged dislike of the truth.

Scarborough began asking what else but about the polls, before ostensibly turning to the Supreme Court. After asking one question about the Second Amendment, which Trump dodged, Scarborough moved on. Scarborough's constant grinning at Trump's laughable dishonesty was the only suggestion that the host recognized the nonsense Trump was spewing. He simply didn't care.

When Scarborough had a chance to follow up on Trump's nonsensical answers, guns, health care, et cetera, he usually changed the subject.

Featured Image: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks to the media in the spin room after the Fox Business Network Republican presidential debate at the North Charleston Coliseum and Performing Arts Center on January 14, 2016 in North Charleston, South Carolina. The sixth Republican debate is held in two parts, one main debate for the top seven candidates, and another for three other candidates lower in the current polls. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Colorado counselor fights back after faith declared “illegal”

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

When did Americans start cheering for chaos?

MATHIEU LEWIS-ROLLAND / Contributor | Getty Images

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Chicago, Portland, and other American cities are showing us what happens when the rule of law breaks down. These cities have become openly lawless — and that’s not hyperbole.

When a governor declares she doesn’t believe federal agents about a credible threat to their lives, when Chicago orders its police not to assist federal officers, and when cartels print wanted posters offering bounties for the deaths of U.S. immigration agents, you’re looking at a country flirting with anarchy.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. The struggle we’re watching now is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between good and evil, right and wrong, self‑government and chaos.

Moral erosion

For generations, Americans have inherited a republic based on law, liberty, and moral responsibility. That legacy is now under assault by extremists who openly seek to collapse the system and replace it with something darker.

Antifa, well‑financed by the left, isn’t an isolated fringe any more than Occupy Wall Street was. As with Occupy, big money and global interests are quietly aligned with “anti‑establishment” radicals. The goal is disruption, not reform.

And they’ve learned how to condition us. Twenty‑five years ago, few Americans would have supported drag shows in elementary schools, biological males in women’s sports, forced vaccinations, or government partnerships with mega‑corporations to decide which businesses live or die. Few would have tolerated cartels threatening federal agents or tolerated mobs doxxing political opponents. Yet today, many shrug — or cheer.

How did we get here? What evidence convinced so many people to reverse themselves on fundamental questions of morality, liberty, and law? Those long laboring to disrupt our republic have sought to condition people to believe that the ends justify the means.

Promoting “tolerance” justifies women losing to biological men in sports. “Compassion” justifies harboring illegal immigrants, even violent criminals. Whatever deluded ideals Antifa espouses is supposed to somehow justify targeting federal agents and overturning the rule of law. Our culture has been conditioned for this moment.

The buck stops with us

That’s why the debate over using troops to restore order in American cities matters so much. I’ve never supported soldiers executing civilian law, and I still don’t. But we need to speak honestly about what the Constitution allows and why. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits the use of the military for domestic policing. The Insurrection Act, however, exists for rare emergencies — when federal law truly can’t be enforced by ordinary means and when mobs, cartels, or coordinated violence block the courts.

Even then, the Constitution demands limits: a public proclamation ordering offenders to disperse, transparency about the mission, a narrow scope, temporary duration, and judicial oversight.

Soldiers fight wars. Cops enforce laws. We blur that line at our peril.

But we also cannot allow intimidation of federal officers or tolerate local officials who openly obstruct federal enforcement. Both extremes — lawlessness on one side and militarization on the other — endanger the republic.

The only way out is the Constitution itself. Protect civil liberty. Enforce the rule of law. Demand transparency. Reject the temptation to justify any tactic because “our side” is winning. We’ve already seen how fear after 9/11 led to the Patriot Act and years of surveillance.

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic. The left cannot be allowed to shut down enforcement, and the right cannot be allowed to abandon constitutional restraint.

The real threat to the republic isn’t just the mobs or the cartels. It’s us — citizens who stop caring about truth and constitutional limits. Anything can be justified when fear takes over. Everything collapses when enough people decide “the ends justify the means.”

We must choose differently. Uphold the rule of law. Guard civil liberties. And remember that the only way to preserve a government of, by, and for the people is to act like the people still want it.