Trump 'News Conference' a Spectacle Full of Lies

March 09, 2016

Writer

The crazy train was on full display during Trump's post-election "news conference" thingy-ma-jig. Has a presidential candidate ever held such a spectacle, parading his alleged business products before supporters, the media and the American people? What was that?

Anyone who's ever been to elementary school should recognize Trump's behavior for what it is: A very insecure man trying to prop up his success in response to criticism. Rather than letting the success of his various companies speak for itself, Trump brought out failed product after failed product like an insecure fifth grader.

"I watched all of it. I couldn't believe . . . the incredible lies that he told last night," Glenn said Wednesday on The Glenn Beck Program. "But he revealed something: Don't mess with my businesses."

In response to Mitt Romney's comments about Trump's failed business ventures, the self-proclaimed billionaire spent an excessive amount of energy planning his rebuttal during what should have been a short news conference about election results.

Trump brought out Trump Steaks, Trump Water, Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka --- all failed products no longer available for purchase.

"It's really crazy," Glenn said. "You're going to be president of the United States and you're lying about your fake meat products?"

Tonight on TheBlaze TV, Glenn will air "Clock of Lies," counting down the lies told at Trump's event last night, with the evidence to prove it. Clock of Lies will air at 5:00 PM ET.

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

GLENN: Did you see the crazy town train that Donald Trump was on last night?

STU: For an hour?

PAT: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: It was crazy. Did you actually watch it?

STU: Parts of it. Not all of it.

GLENN: Okay. I watched all of it. I couldn't believe -- we're doing a show on just the Clock of Lies tonight. We're just looking at that hour, and we're just counting the lies and showing you the evidence that it is a lie. The incredible lies that he told last night. But he revealed something: Don't mess with my businesses. He brought out Trump steaks and Trump water and a Trump magazine, all this stuff --

PAT: That all failed.

STU: Not real.

GLENN: No, but here's what he said. Trump water. He cut these lines really, really close. Trump water. I still have Trump water. You know, I use it for all my hotels. No, that's not the same as Trump water.

PAT: No.

GLENN: You had Trump ice, and it was in stores.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: There's a difference between relabeling water and putting it in your hotels.

PAT: That is really pathetic.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. And then when he said the magazine -- my magazine is still out. In fact, I just read it. My hotel still has the magazine. It's called Luxurious Destination or something. No, that wasn't Trump magazine. He's lying.

STU: He's lying. Trump steaks is the worst one though. It went out of business a long time ago. It's a meat company. The meat doesn't hang around for eight years. It would go bad, right? So he comes out and he says, "Here are Trump steaks. Look, they're in business." And a couple of reporters went up and took pictures. They didn't even bother to fully cut off the labels of the other brand the steaks were, which was a place called Bush Brothers in West Palm Beach. You could still the --

GLENN: You've got to be kidding.

PAT: Good golly.

STU: That they just took another steak and put it on a table and didn't even fully cut off the other label. They just don't care.

(laughter)

PAT: That's unbelievable.

STU: And this morning, still with that happening, and it being reported in multiple sources, multiple people saw it, this morning, still people are on, "And Donald Trump had Trump steaks" Wow, he had Trump steaks. I'd like to try one of those Trump steaks.

They don't exist. There are no Trump steaks. He has a restaurant at his hotel in which he's named one of his products Trump steaks. But Trump steaks was a company. He trotted out somebody else's steaks. Lied to his followers. Lied to all of the Trump bots. They still praise him for it.

PAT: And the Trump University thing, you're going to bring that back. You don't know that you're going to bring that back.

GLENN: The judge has said this is Bernie Madoff.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, I watched this last night with my family. We were watching him. And we were just sitting there saying, "What the hell?" America is doomed. If we are this stupid, we're -- it's suicide.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: We are voting for our own destruction. And this is why, you know, Marco Rubio has the little Marco thing. He's been offended, I'm sure. He's put everything into this campaign. But I think beyond being offend because I don't think Marco Rubio is that guy. I think Marco Rubio is a decent guy. I think he's got the wrong advisers. He's got the brokered convention people whispering in his ear. We don't want a brokered convention. That is a really bad idea. It's a really bad idea. And if they all stay in, that's exactly where we're headed. Then you have no choice. Then you have absolutely no choice.

PAT: And it's not going to be him. If you get to a brokered convention, it's not going to be any of these guys. They're probably going to find an alternative.

GLENN: I think it's going to be Kasich. Think of this. Think of this. Out of all the people we had last time, who did we get?

PAT: Romney.

GLENN: Out of all the people we had in '08, who did we get?

PAT: McCain.

GLENN: Out of all the people we've had this time, who do you think we're going to get? Kasich.

STU: The worst guy.

GLENN: These guys are going to orchestrate anything. But anybody who challenges their power. And what kills me, Trump is not a challenge to their power. All you have to do is play ball with him. You think he's really going to change things and go for a smaller government. Have you ever heard him talk about smaller government?

PAT: No.

JEFFY: No.

GLENN: Never. He's not going to go for a smaller government. He will increase the government, guarantee. He will increase the size of government.

JEFFY: It will benefit him.

STU: Absolutely no question about it.

GLENN: Yes. No question.

STU: Never has he shown that to be a priority in any way, which is the problem we have with him. Yeah, he says annoying things and he lies all the time. Those are all serious problems I have with Donald Trump. But the one that started the whole ball rolling down the hill is the fact that he's not a freaking conservative and doesn't care about smaller government or the Constitution. Those things are the biggest issues that immediately qualifies you from a Republican primary. Add on all this other stuff where he's going to lose the general election and he is, you know -- he says he has the best words. And he lies about his fake meat products.

(laughter)

STU: I mean, that's all --

GLENN: It's really crazy.

STU: That's all just icing on the cake.

GLENN: It's really crazy. You're going to be president of the United States and you're lying about your fake meat products. It's crazy.

STU: So weird.

GLENN: Just weird. Just weird.

(OUT AT 8:28AM)

GLENN: This is unbelievable. Just looking at the lies -- we're getting ready for the TV show tonight because there was an hour of unbelievable lies that are all verifiable. For instance, in almost all the polls, I beat Hillary Clinton. No, sir.

PAT: No.

GLENN: In almost every poll, you lose to Hillary Clinton. Everybody else beats Hillary Clinton.

But last night, he talked about Trump magazine. And he said, "You know, Romney said I have a failing Trump magazine. I still have a magazine. I thought I read one just two days ago." And he holds it up. And it's called the Jewel of Palm Beach. That's not Trump magazine. Trump magazine folded in 2009. So what is the Jewel of Palm Beach? This is a -- basically a glorified -- a glorified brochure of Mar-a-Lago Club and Trump International Golf Club in the Palm Beaches. And its' not a magazine. It's a brochure. It looks like a magazine. But it's basically a brochure. It's published once a year.

STU: And not for sale. It's just --

GLENN: It's just in your room. It's when you go -- Hilton has those little Hilton San Antonio, you know, magazines. That's what that is.

STU: More lies just constant lies.

GLENN: Just more constant lies. And people still say, "He tells it like it is."

STU: No, he does not.

GLENN: No, he doesn't. Never. Never tells it like it is. What are you teaching this guy? Back in a minute.

Featured Image: A security agent stands near a display of products that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has for guests, including meat, wine and water before a press conference at the Trump National Golf Club Jupiter on March 8, 2016 in Jupiter, Florida. Mr. Trump and other Republican candidates wait for votes to be counted in Michigan, Mississippi, Idaho, and Hawaii. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

How California leadership is to blame for HORRIFIC wildfires

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

California's progressive policies emphasize ideology over lifesaving solutions. The destruction will persist until voters hold their elected officials accountable.

America is no stranger to natural disasters. But it’s not the fires, floods, or earthquakes that are the most devastating — it’s the repeated failures to learn from them, prevent them, and take responsibility for the damage.

My heart goes out to the families who have lost homes, cherished memories, and livelihoods. But if we’re going to help California rebuild and prevent future disasters, we need to confront some uncomfortable truths about leadership, responsibility, and priorities.

California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

While Californians continue to face heart-wrenching losses, those who have the power to enact change are mired in bureaucracy, regulation, and ideologies that do nothing to protect lives or preserve the land. The result? A state that keeps burning, year after year.

Where did all the water go?

We all know that water is essential to life. When NASA searches for signs of life on other planets, it looks for water. Yet, California has spent decades neglecting its water infrastructure. The state hasn’t built a new major reservoir since 1979 — over 40 years ago. Back then, California’s population was roughly half what it is today. Despite massive population growth, the state’s water storage capacity has remained frozen in time, woefully inadequate for current needs.

Moreover, billions of gallons of rainwater flow straight into the ocean every year because no infrastructure exists to capture and store it. Imagine how different things could be if California had built reservoirs, aqueducts, and desalination plants to secure water for its dry seasons.

Water is life, but the state’s failure to prioritize this essential resource has put lives and ecosystems at risk.

Misplaced priorities and critical leadership failure

This neglect of critical infrastructure is part of a larger failure of vision, and in California, the consequences of that failure are on full display.

Consider the progressive leadership in Los Angeles, where the mayor cut the fire department’s budget to fund programs for the homeless, funneling money to NGOs with little oversight. While helping the homeless is a worthy cause, it cannot come at the expense of protecting lives and property from catastrophic fires. Leadership must put safety and well-being over political agendas, and that’s not happening in Los Angeles.

The same misplaced priorities extend to environmental policies. Progressive leaders have blocked sensible forest management practices, prioritizing dead trees over living creatures. They reject controlled burns, forest thinning, and other commonsense measures, bowing to the demands of activists rather than considering real solutions that would protect those they govern.

California’s wildfire crisis is, in many ways, a man-made disaster. Yes, factors like Southern California’s dry climate, strong Santa Ana winds, and little rain play a role, but the biggest contributing factor is poor land management.

The forests are choked with dry brush, dead trees, and vegetation that turn every spark into a potential inferno. The crisis could have been mitigated — if only the state had made forest management and fire prevention a higher priority.

Finland and Sweden, for example, understand the importance of maintaining healthy forests. These countries have perfected the art of clearing underbrush and thinning trees sustainably, turning potential fire fuel into biomass energy. This approach not only reduces the risk of wildfires, but it also creates jobs, boosts the economy, and improves the ecosystem. And yet, California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore these solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

We need to stop pretending that something as devastating as the Palisades and Eaton fires are just “part of life” and hold leaders accountable.

Insurance rules put California residents at risk

California faces another major and often overlooked liability when it comes to natural disasters: insurance.

California’s ongoing disasters make the state an uninsurable risk. Insurance companies are pulling out because the odds of widespread devastation are just too high. This creates a vicious cycle: With private insurers gone, the government steps in to subsidize high-risk areas. This enables people to rebuild in fire-prone zones, perpetuating the destruction. The solution isn’t more government intervention; it’s better decision-making.

This doesn’t mean abandoning people to their fate, but we must address the root of the problem: California’s inadequate disaster preparedness and poor land management. If the state continues to resist commonsense solutions like forest thinning, controlled burns, and better zoning laws, no amount of insurance or government assistance will ever be enough to mitigate the losses. The cycle will repeat until the costs — financial and human — become unbearable. It’s time to stop pretending the risk isn’t real and start making decisions that reflect the reality of California’s landscape.

What’s the solution? California’s government needs to put its people over harmful political agendas that put its residents at risk. Start by managing your forests. Implement controlled burns, remove dead trees, and clear underbrush.

But how you vote matters. California’s progressive policies have focused on political correctness and ideology instead of practical, lifesaving solutions. Until voters hold leaders accountable, the cycle of destruction will persist.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Crazy enough to be true? The connection between the Cybertruck bomber and cryptic drones

WADE VANDERVORT / Contributor | Getty Images

Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation.

A chilling story has emerged: A whistleblower, claiming to possess knowledge of advanced military technologies and covert operations, took his own life in a shocking explosion outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas. He left behind a manifesto filled with claims so extraordinary they sound like science fiction. Yet if even a fraction of them prove true, the implications are staggering and demand immediate attention.

This whistleblower alleges that the United States and China developed “gravitic propulsion systems,” technologies that manipulate gravity itself to enable silent, undetectable flight at unimaginable speeds. According to his claims, these systems are not theoretical — they are operational, deployed both in the United States and China. If true, this would render conventional defense systems obsolete, fundamentally altering the global balance of power.

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever.

Imagine aircraft that defy radar, heat signatures, and missile defense systems. They carry massive payloads, conduct surveillance, and operate without a sound. If such technologies exist, they pose a national security threat unlike any we’ve faced.

But why haven’t we been told? If these claims are false, they must be debunked transparently. If true, the public has a right to know how such technologies are being used and safeguarded.

The whistleblower’s manifesto goes farther, claiming that with this technology, the United States and China developed and deployed the infamous drones that were seen across the United States starting late last year. He alleged that China launched them from submarines along the U.S. East Coast, calling them “the most dangerous threat to national security” because of their stealth, ability to evade detection, and unlimited payload capacity. He ties this advanced technology to other surveillance systems, creating a network so advanced it makes our current intelligence capabilities look primitive.

These claims may sound far-fetched, but they highlight a deeper issue: the cost of government secrecy. Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation. Without transparency, these incidents dangerously erode public confidence in our leaders and institutions.

The cost of secrecy

Beyond technology, the manifesto also alleges moral failures, including war crimes and deliberate cover-ups during U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan. In one particularly harrowing claim, the whistleblower describes attacks in Afghanistan’s Nimroz Province in 2019. He alleges that 125 buildings were targeted, with 65 struck, resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths in a single day. Even after civilians were spotted, he claims, the strikes continued knowingly and deliberately.

The United Nations investigated similar incidents and confirmed civilian casualties during these operations. However, the whistleblower’s accusations go farther, implicating high-ranking officials, the Department of Defense, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Central Intelligence Agency, and even top military generals in a broader pattern of deceit, eroding the moral integrity of our military and government.

Whether these specific claims hold up, they underscore a larger issue: Secrecy breeds corruption. When people in power hide their actions and evade accountability, they break trust — and everyone pays the price, not just those at the top but also the citizens and soldiers they serve.

Transparency is an imperative

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever. From the COVID-19 pandemic to the Capitol riot on January 6 to the potential misuse of advanced technologies, the American people have been kept in the dark for too long.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and sunlight is coming. Transparency must become our rallying cry. As we look to the future, we must demand accountability — not just from those we oppose politically but from all leaders entrusted with power. This isn’t about partisanship; it’s about preserving our nation from self-destruction.

As we enter a new chapter in our nation’s history, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Whether it’s uncovering the truth about advanced technology, holding perpetrators of corruption accountable, or seeking justice for war crimes, we must act. This isn’t just a call to action — it’s a moral imperative.

Our strength lies in our unity and our resolve. The powerful fear an informed and vocal citizenry. Let’s prove them right. By demanding transparency and accountability, we can restore trust and ensure that the government serves the people — not the other way around.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Has Zuckerberg REALLY changed?

Mark Zuckerberg's recent announcement to lift content moderation policies across all of Meta's platforms and end the company's reliance on third-party fact-checkers, at first glance, is an incredible left turn given the platform's long-term participation in online censorship. However, does their shift signal a genuine change of heart, or are there more selfish motivations at play?

On the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn and Stu looked at both perspectives. On the one hand, Zuckerberg's announcement, adding UFC President and avid Trump supporter Dana White to Meta's board of directors indicates major progress in America's pushback against online censorship. However, Glenn also posited that Zuckerberg's intentions are chiefly to win the good graces of the incoming Trump administration in order to maintain Meta's controversial work in virtual and augmented reality technologies (VR/AR).

There is evidence for both perspectives, and we lay it all out for you below:

Did Zuck have a genuine change of heart?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Zuckerberg’s bombshell announcement, at face value, suggests that Meta recognizes the greater demand for free speech on online platforms and growing discontent against content moderation that has censored non-mainstream political opinions, including Glenn and Blaze Media. Zuckerberg described this shift as an authentic attempt to return to the company’s roots of promoting free expression, acknowledging past mistakes in suppressing voices and content deemed politically controversial. Moreover, Meta's new adoption of community-driven content flags similar to X positions itself as a platform that values user input rather than the biased perspective of any single third-party "fact-checker."

Additionally, Zuckerberg’s evolving views on Donald Trump strengthen the argument that his "change of heart" is genuine. Before the 2024 election, Zuckerberg expressed admiration for Trump, even calling him a "badass" after the first assassination attempt, noting how the event changed his perspective on the then-presidential candidate. Moreover, his embrace of new board members, such as UFC President Dana White, a staunch Trump supporter, further suggests that Meta may be diversifying its leadership and welcoming a more inclusive approach to varied political opinions. In this context, Meta’s move away from fact-checking can be interpreted as a commitment to fostering an environment where free speech and diverse political perspectives are genuinely valued.

Or is it about self-preservation?

DREW ANGERER / Contributor | Getty Images

While it is tempting to view Meta’s policy change as a sincere commitment to free speech, there is also a compelling argument that the company’s motivations are rooted in self-preservation. Glenn suggested Meta’s financial interests, particularly in virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) technologies, indicate its pivot may be less about principle and more about ensuring continued government contracts and capital flow. Zuckerberg’s significant investments in VR/AR technology, which has already cost the company billions, may be driving his need to align Meta’s policies with the political climate to safeguard future funding from both the government and private sectors.

Moreover, the company’s financial projections for the coming years show a sharp increase in advertising revenue, driven primarily by Facebook’s dominance in social media. This revenue helps sustain Meta’s ambitions in the VR/AR space, where it faces significant losses. The government’s involvement in funding military and tech projects tied to VR/AR underscores the importance of maintaining favorable political relationships. For these reasons, many view Zuckerberg's policy change as an attempt to position Meta for maximum political and financial benefit.

POLL: Is GLOBAL WARMING responsible for the fires in L.A.?

Apu Gomes / Stringer | Getty Images

As wildfires sweep across California and threaten to swallow up entire neighborhoods in Los Angeles, one question is on everyone's mind: What went wrong?

So far over 45 square miles of the city have been scorched, while the intense smoke is choking out the rest of L.A. Thousands of structures, including many family homes, have been destroyed, and many more are at risk as firefighters battle the flames. Many on the left, including Senator Bernie Sanders, have been quick to point to climate change as the cause of the devastating fires, citing the chronic lack of rain in L.A.

Others, including Glenn, have pointed out another potential cause: the severe mismanagement of the forests and water supply of Los Angeles and California in general. Unlike many other states and most other forested countries, California does not clear out the dead trees and dry vegetation that builds up on the forest floor and acts as kindling, fueling the fire as it whips through the trees.

On top of this, California has neglected its water supply for decades despite its crucial role in combating fires. The state of California has not built a new major water reservoir to store and capture water since the 1970s, leading to repeat water shortages in Southern California. To top it off, Gavin Newsom personally derailed a 2020 Trump order to divert water from areas of the state with excess water to parched Southern California. Why? To save an already functionally extinct fish. Now firefighters in L.A. are running out of water as the city is engulfed in flames. At least the fish are okay...

But what do you think? Are the wildfires a product of years of mismanagement? Or a symptom of a changing climate? Let us know in the poll below:

Glenn's Show Prep

Trump 'News Conference' a Spectacle Full of Lies

How California leadership is to blame for HORRIFIC wildfires

California's progressive policies emphasize ideology over lifesaving solutions. The destruction will persist until voters hold their elected officials accountable.

California — ironically, in the name of environmentalism — continues to ignore solutions that would protect both the environment and its residents.

Where did all the water go?

Misplaced priorities and critical leadership failure

Insurance rules put California residents at risk

Crazy enough to be true? The connection between the Cybertruck bomber and cryptic drones

Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation.

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever.

The cost of secrecy

Transparency is an imperative

Has Zuckerberg REALLY changed?

Did Zuck have a genuine change of heart?

Or is it about self-preservation?

POLL: Is GLOBAL WARMING responsible for the fires in L.A.?

Is climate change responsible for the fires in L.A.?

Are the L.A. fires a product of years of mismanagement?

Do you think controlled burns are an effective way to prevent wildfires?