Hillary Wants You to Suspend Reality and Live in Her Alternate Universe

September 28, 2016

Writer

Conspiracy theorists came out swinging following the first presidential debate, accusing Hillary of wearing a robotic cough suppressor that also alleviated symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Unfortunately, it was a waste of time. Hillary's alternate reality provides more than enough fodder to prove she's completely unfit for the presidency.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these suppressed questions:

• What illogical reason did Hillary give to prove she has stamina?

• Does Glenn wear a robotic cough suppressor?

• Do women deserve equal pay if they do as good of a job as men?

• How long would it take a person devoid of corruption to testify before Congress?

• Does filing for bankruptcy make you a good businessperson?

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

GLENN: Holy cow. We have to -- can we start at the conspiracy theory of the day?

STU: Of course.

GLENN: Have you seen the conspiracy theory about Hillary Clinton's robotic, anti- -- or her cough suppresser.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Her robotic cough suppresser.

STU: So stupid.

PAT: I haven't seen that.

STU: Isn't it just her microphone?

GLENN: Yeah, it's her microphone. Yeah, it's a -- a hidden device -- a hidden device on the back of Hillary Clinton's clothing.

PAT: What?

GLENN: It was an instrument that sends impulses to the brain to alleviate symptoms of Parkinson's disease.

You'll never guess who came up with this one. I like to call it a battery pack.

(laughter)

STU: For the microphone that she's wearing plainly.

GLENN: Right. Well, that's what it is: A battery pack and transmitter for the microphone. Which you can see, there's the battery pack, and then you can see underneath her like sweater thing is the microphone cable going up. And if you look at the picture of her standing the other direction, which I don't think I have, you see that her microphone is right there.

STU: Right. Which we are all aware of --

GLENN: And show me your battery pack.

STU: Oh, it's right here.

GLENN: Right here. There's your battery pack. Here's my battery pack. But if you're on television, it's always in the back.

STU: And they normally don't want you to see it.

GLENN: Right. And if you're wearing a dress with women, it is usually underneath their dress. And they look like they have a big huge bump right to the center of their back, where -- like, they clip it on the bra usually. Is that the way they do it? Underneath, yeah. So they clip it no their bra, so it looks like they have this big square box. That's why you never see Megyn Kelly from the back.

PAT: All women on television have Parkinson's disease, and that little device helps them control it.

GLENN: Well --

PAT: It's weird.

GLENN: -- it's not Parkinson's only, Pat. It's a cough suppresser.

PAT: Oh, what else is there? Okay.

JEFFY: I mean, if you're going to hide it, what a perfect place that is --

PAT: Cough suppresser. Is there such a thing? Does such a device exist?

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: Then you would think Michael J. Fox would have that at all times. Right?

GLENN: Yes, yes. And he would be fine. Yeah. Why take medicine? Why not just have the Parkinson's --

PAT: The little device that helps you suppress it. I mean, I'd wear that all the time if I had it.

GLENN: I'm wearing it now.

STU: If anything, it proves Hillary is nuts. It's, of course, her incredibly lengthy testimony in front of numerous corruption investigations, which is essentially her excuse.

Oh, yeah. You don't think I have stamina? Well, I sat in front of an investigation for 11 hours and answered questions about how corrupt I am. So that proves you're wrong.

That's not making a point you want to make, Hillary.

JEFFY: Made it pretty good though.

PAT: Yeah, she coughed her brains multiple times on that, if you remember that. She coughed her brains out several times.

JEFFY: Yeah, she did.

STU: That's not a --

GLENN: Her actual brains came out?

PAT: Her brains came out.

GLENN: Wow.

JEFFY: It was ugly.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought that was an amazing moment in the debate that for some reason, Trump missed her excuse for saying how healthy she was, was to say she gets berated through lengthy questioning and testimony in front of Congress. That's not something you want to brag about: I was in front of Congress because people think I'm really corrupt, and I had to answer questions for 11 hours. They couldn't get me out of there in an hour because I'm so corrupt, they kept me 11 times that amount.

GLENN: Well, hang on just a second, his excuse on knowing how to run the country is because he's a good businessman. And to prove that, he's gone bankrupt, what, four or seven times?

PAT: Four times. Uh-huh.

GLENN: And that's just him knowing the laws and knowing how to use it. That's good business. And his defense of being a good businessman is, I go bankrupt. I know how to do it. Oh, and I don't pay taxes because I'm super smart.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: I mean, both of them were using these defenses, that were like, "What?"

PAT: So bad. So bad.

STU: It's sort of a bizarre missed opportunity though. It seems like it happened a lot in the debate.

JEFFY: It sure did.

PAT: Yeah, what was the other thing that we noticed about Hillary --

STU: I like this one. First of all, she said during the debate -- this is a quote -- because she's going through this litany of things that Trump has said that is bad about women. One he said -- Donald Trump said then women don't deserve equal pay, unless they do as good a job as men.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: If they don't do as good a job, they probably shouldn't make the same amount of money.

STU: That's exactly --

GLENN: But I think --

PAT: But when they do as good a job, they should.

GLENN: Right. And if men don't do as good a job as a woman would do, then we probably shouldn't have to pay the man the same that the woman is paid.

STU: Exactly. That is an exact quote: Women don't deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Yeah! Is anyone standing up against that?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And in the same sort of litany, she said something to the effect of, you know, Donald Trump called pregnancy an inconvenience for a business. Now, Trump's response to that --

PAT: And?

STU: -- I never said that. Of course, he did say it. So, you know, typical -- like horrible response. However, what if he were to go down the road of, "Look, we can be honest here. It is an inconvenience for a business to lose some of its most valuable workers for an extended amount of time."

JEFFY: And that's what he said -- I mean, that's what he originally said.

STU: Right.

The point here though is that, who cares? We have decided, and I have decided that it's more important -- human life is more important than how it affects a business. We believe in people who come -- and this would be awesome if he would go down this road. But it's like, I'm not going to sit here and be lectured about the value of pregnancy from a person who worships at the altar of Margaret Sanger.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: I mean, what a ridiculous thing to bring up. Yet, I didn't say that, was his response.

GLENN: Well, here's the other thing. And it goes kind of in this, where she's asking you to deny reality. He can't defend. He's worthless and incapable of defending principles. Incapable.

That would have been a great answer. Great answer. But he's incapable of doing it.

Let me give you -- oh, shoot. Now I just lost it. There was another one that she brought up. You're going to have to go to something else. Because I can't remember now. It will come to me as soon as I stop talking.

STU: You know why? Because that Parkinson's device you're wearing is screwing with your brain. That's why.

GLENN: It is. (coughing).

STU: He's turned it off. He's turned it off.

PAT: Oh, no.

GLENN: There was something else that she said -- oh, oh, I remember what it was.

They are so disconnected -- they're asking you to -- to deny reality. And if he would have said that, it would have been great. Look, are you kidding me?

I think even a woman would say, having a baby is a pretty big inconvenience in my life.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Being pregnant for nine months is a pretty big inconvenience. So let's not argue about inconvenience. Look at what you're trying to do, Hillary. You're trying to take something and have us deny the very reality that we know is true.

You have done that with al-Qaeda and ISIS, denying the reality. Denying the reality of people who are bombing things here in the United States, blowing us up, going into Fort Hood and shooting people. Has nothing to do with Islam.

This is one of the problems. Here's another one, Hillary, that you just said: I just said one of the bravest and most true statements that has been uttered by an American politician on the plight of the African-American in inner cities, that has been spoken since possibly Booker T. Washington. And that is this: The African-Americans that is living in places like Chicago, where their kids and their relatives are being shot in the street, are living in hell.

And you responded with, "Oh, but you forget about all the great wonderful churches." Yes, and I've also left out that I'm sure there's a few cold stone creameries in Chicago as well. I'm sure I've left out there's some other really great things that happen. But it's also a living hell. And for you to ask the American people -- no, forget the American people. For you to ask African-Americans to deny the reality that they're living in some sort of hell -- and, quite honestly, Hillary, one you would never allow your children to live in. Never. You would never move in.

Well, I'm sorry. You moved into Harlem because you have presidential security.

PAT: Well, they -- she didn't.

GLENN: Yeah, she didn't.

PAT: He moved his office there.

GLENN: Yeah. And Harlem isn't the inner city of Philadelphia or the inner city of Chicago.

STU: It's actually pretty nice at this point.

GLENN: Yes. It's very nice.

STU: Many areas of it are very nice.

GLENN: So she just -- that was the craziest thing is both of them were asking us to deny reality. I've never seen it like this before. I've never seen it this obvious before.

PAT: Had he responded with those -- in that way, he would have destroyed her.

GLENN: Destroy her.

PAT: She would be absolutely destroyed. This thing would be over. It would be a runaway.

Featured Image: Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton speaks during the first presidential debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York on September 26, 2016. (Photo Credit: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

Breaking point: Will America stand up to the mob?

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.

Glenn's Show Prep

Hillary Wants You to Suspend Reality and Live in Her Alternate Universe

Breaking point: Will America stand up to the mob?

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

A history of violence

Dismember the dragon

Colorado counselor fights back after faith declared “illegal”

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

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

One‑sided freedom

Censored belief

Faith on trial

The real test

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

What our response to Israel reveals about us

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

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.

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

But that’s not what we hear.