DNC Wants Radical 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist as Its Chair — Where Is the MSM?

November 17, 2016

Writer

The media has accused Glenn over and over of being a conspiracy theorist. There's just one problem with that. Conspiracies are based on speculation, not fact.

Take the Muslim Brotherhood, for example. Glenn has reported on the radical group's plan to take over America. This is a fact based on a document called The Project, found in Germany by the U.S. government after 9/11. It outlines how to infiltrate the United States government, businesses and turn Americans against Americans.

"When you say something like the Muslim Brotherhood has a plan to take over America, that sounds crazy. But once you look into the sources and you see what it is, well then, it's a different story," Glenn said Thursday on his radio program.

Now take Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the man that Democratic Party leadership want as their next chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Rep. Ellison has been tied to the Nation of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood and holds radical left-wing policy positions. He's also said very troubling things about 9/11.

"A conspiracy theory, to me, is what Keith Ellison said in 2007," Glenn said.

In 2007, Ellison compared 9/11 to the Reichstag fire, an arson attack used by the Nazi Party to further its agenda. The insinuation being that 9/11 was blamed on a specific group so the U.S. government could get citizens riled up and fearful, and pass laws like the Patriot Act.

"Keith Ellison is making the charge that Bush was the one who benefited from 9/11," Glenn said. "Yet, the mainstream media are pretending as if none of that is the least bit controversial."

And that is exactly why Republicans and conservatives don't trust the press.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these questions:

• Do people believe the Nazis started the Reichstag fire?

• Why was the Patriot Act written before 9/11?

• When did Donald Trump realize he might win the presidency?

• Why did Democrats lose so many elected positions at all levels?

• Should we have a plan to invade Iceland?

Listen to this segment, beginning at mark 41:04, from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: I want to talk to the media here for a second. The media has made me into a conspiracy theorist. And they will say, "Made you into one? You made yourself into one." By saying things like the Muslim Brotherhood has a plan to take over America. Yes, it's called The Project. It was found by the US government in, I believe, Germany right after September 11th. It outlines how to infiltrate the United States government, how to infiltrate businesses, how to turn us against ourselves here in America. It's called The Project. You can look it up. It didn't come from me. It came from the United States government. That's who found it. You don't cover those things.

So when you say something like the Muslim Brotherhood has a plan to take over America, that sounds crazy. But once you look into the sources and you see what it is, well, then, it's a different story.

Well, the latest was you're a conspiracy theorist because you've said that George Soros paid for protests.

PAT: I've read story after story on that.

GLENN: Story after story after story on that. That is out there.

Now, I don't remember which protests he paid for. But his organization does that. We know that in other countries absolutely positively, he's on the record saying he does that.

PAT: He's proud of it. Proud of it.

GLENN: He's proud of it. Okay. So it's not a conspiracy theory.

A conspiracy theory, to me, is what Keith Ellison said in 2007.

Listen to the man that may be the head of the DNC and what he said about 9/11.

KEITH: Because remember 9/11, right? You never had all this discrimination against religious minorities but for 9/11. You know, you had it, but you didn't have it to the degree that we have it now.

9/11 is this juggernaut event in American history. It allows -- I mean, it's almost like -- you know, the Reichstag fire kind of reminds me of that. Does anybody know what I'm talking about?

VOICE: Yeah. Who benefited from 9/11?

KEITH: Well, I mean, like you and I both know.

VOICE: Yeah, Bush.

GLENN: Bush.

KEITH: But the thing is, after the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the communist for it. And it put the leader of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted.

GLENN: Okay. So Keith Ellison is making the charge that Bush was the one who benefited from 9/11.

PAT: So he could bring about religious discrimination?

GLENN: And the Patriot Act and everything else.

PAT: Unbelievable.

GLENN: Now, you can say that the Patriot Act was there before there was a 9/11, but that doesn't mean that the Patriot Act -- that 9/11 happened to pass the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act was written before 9/11. And it was going nowhere. Nobody wanted to do it. It was written in Virginia. Do you remember that? Stu, look that up. This is a really old fact from the deep reassesses and cobwebs of my mind. When we were arguing it, we looked back and it was written in Virginia by a couple of guys in Virginia. And they wanted pieces of the Patriot Act. And it didn't go anywhere.

I think Joe Biden was even part of that. So the argument is, is that he's making the argument that 9/11 was blamed on somebody so they could go religious discrimination and they could soup everybody up and make them afraid. Well, that's a conspiracy theory.

Show me the evidence of that. Now, if the press wants to have any credibility, you have called people on the right hateful conspiracy theorists.

Will you call out the person who is now going to be the head of the Democratic National Committee? Will you call him a conspiracy theorist?

No.

PAT: Not in a million years.

GLENN: And if they don't, it, again, will just play into more resentment and more dissent and more -- Donald Trump did not beat Hillary Clinton. He beat the press. He was running against the press. That's what he said.

Now, you guys haven't even addressed why Hillary Clinton lost. I haven't seen one autopsy on Hillary Clinton and why she was the worst candidate of all time. The Republicans have known this for a long time. She was the most beatable candidate you could have run.

PAT: Which is what we said from the beginning. That was the one thing during this election cycle we were right, was how bad Hillary --

GLENN: Yes. Yeah, anyone -- I said my shoe could beat Hillary Clinton.

PAT: Yes. Yeah.

GLENN: She was the most beatable candidate. I haven't heard that from the media. They're not doing the autopsy there. All they're doing is they're talked about Donald Trump and what a horrible disarray his cabinet picks are. First of all, he's ahead of every other president in his cabinet picks.

It, of course, is messy. Can you imagine how many picks you have to make in, what? Sixty days? Yes, it's a mess. I'm sure it is. He didn't expect to be president -- and I have this on good authority -- until I think it was 4:30 in the afternoon.

They thought they were going to lose. And at 4:30, somebody came to him and said, "You know what, things are actually in play." He didn't believe it, until North Carolina came in and Florida. And when North Carolina and Florida came in and they were waiting so long on Connecticut and Pennsylvania, he looked at one of his aides and said, "We might win."

They weren't -- they were putting the -- the -- the pathway down for Trump TV, not the presidency. And he's still ahead of every other president, appointing their cabinet members now. And what is the press doing? All they're saying is what a disarray it's in.

What are you talking about? What are you talking about?

Why don't you talk at all about the disarray the Democrats are in? What are the Democrats going to do? The Democrats have lost so many people in local, state, and federal locations, they've lost so much power because the popularity was Barack Obama, not his policies. They also -- even people who voted for Hillary Clinton, 34 percent of those who voted for Hillary Clinton don't believe the press. They think the press was in the bag for Hillary Clinton. And they don't like it. Seventy-four percent of the American people don't trust the press.

PAT: The only thing left Democrats have is Richard Gephardt. That's all they've got left.

STU: Wow. That's what America has left.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: For 2020, we look forward to Richard Gephardt. And what is he going to be? Eighty-nine? 106?

JEFFY: That's not important.

PAT: It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. That's what we have left.

STU: By the way, yeah, there's a -- so Biden wrote something after his -- after the Oklahoma City bombing that had several of the pieces that would later go into the Patriot Act. It was a 1995 bill. CNET referred to it as its cousin. The Patriot Act's cousin. So it was similar.

GLENN: And this was the one that was written in Virginia with a group of governors or something like that?

STU: I don't -- I was looking for the Biden part. I don't have that. Whatever.

GLENN: Okay. So there was -- and I'm not saying it was the same one.

STU: Right. And that makes sense, right?

GLENN: But there was the framework of the Patriot Act, ready to go.

STU: Right. You have --

GLENN: That doesn't -- that doesn't mean that they were like, let's blow something up so we can get this through.

STU: Right. Which is where a lot of people take that.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: It means that they had a terrorist attack. They thought of a way to address it. They didn't necessarily get that through. But when another terrorist attack had, they had the framework.

GLENN: Yeah. And they said, "Let's try this now."

STU: Yeah, "Let's try it now. It would work."

GLENN: Yes.

STU: That's not a nefarious conspiracy.

GLENN: FDR did not trust the Japanese. He did not trust the Japanese.

He sent people out to find out if we needed to do internment camps before December 7th. Do we need to do internment camps for the Japanese? Find out.

The general came back and said, "Nope. They're good Americans. We don't need to do it."

He didn't have the political capital to do it. September -- I mean, December 7th, 1941, that gave him the political capital to be able to say, "We're going to do this because of that," even though he had that idea before December 7th.

Was it a conspiracy that December 7th -- yeah, there are those people who say, "See, he caused it. He knew it was going to happen." No, he didn't

PAT: Well, he may have known it was going to happen, but I don't know that he -- he let it happen --

GLENN: Yeah. He knew a strike --

PAT: -- for internment camps --

GLENN: He knew a strike was coming.

PAT: Yeah, he did.

GLENN: He didn't know and say, "Everybody look over here."

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And in a way --

GLENN: And neither did --

STU: -- this can be a positive, right? You wouldn't necessarily want a tragedy to happen and then just say, "All right. Let's start thinking of new ideas right now in the midst of this and pass them." You would want it to be a little bit more thought out than that. You would hope that --

GLENN: It is their job. It is their job.

STU: Right. It's their job. It's the same thing with the Iraq War. They're like, "Well, they drew up plans for the Iraq War before 9/11." It's like, well, yeah, they should have a plan to invade everywhere, just in case the idea comes up and they need to put it into effect.

GLENN: It's their job.

PAT: Especially countries that are shooting at our aircraft.

GLENN: Should we have a plan to invade Canada? No. If I find out there's a plan to invade Canada for no reason, well, no. But the minute Canada becomes hostile to us, is there a plan to say, "What do we do in case the border becomes a place of unrest?"

PAT: There better be.

GLENN: Okay. There better be something there. Because that's a possibility.

PAT: What about just taking care of the curling problem? What about just --

STU: You got to stop --

GLENN: You got to stop curling.

PAT: Stop the curling problem.

GLENN: Yeah. It's a stone and ice. Get over it. And it's a broom. Stop it.

PAT: And sweeping the ice. Stop it.

STU: But with the military budget we have, I would argue that there should be, I don't know, a few people sitting around thinking about, "What if we have to invade Iceland?" We should have that plan somewhere in a drawer just in case we have to do it. Why -- we have the resources for that.

PAT: That might be our biggest problem that nobody talks about.

GLENN: I will tell you, there's not a plan to invade Iceland. But I can tell you, there's an expert on Iceland whose job is to only think about Iceland, that he would be the first one we would call if something happened. And he would be like, "You know what, that's crazy. I've been thinking about this. I've been thinking about this." Because that's all you do, you're just focused on Iceland.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: That's what should happen. This is not what Keith Ellison is saying.

STU: No. He seems to be thinking that -- it's weird. Because he doesn't -- he's smart enough to know that he's in front of a bunch of people. So he doesn't actually --

GLENN: Plat it again.

PAT: However, he walked up to that line many times. It wasn't just this time.

GLENN: Play that again.

KEITH: Because remember 9/11. Right? You never had all these discrimination against religious minorities but for 9/11. I mean, you know, you had it, but you didn't have it to the degree that we have it now.

9/11 is this juggernaut event in American history. It allows -- I mean, it's almost like, you know, the Reichstag fire -- kind of reminds me of that. Does anybody know what I'm talking about?

VOICE: Yeah. Benefited --

GLENN: So 9/11 is the Reichstag fire. Well, if you know anything about the Reichstag fire -- and he's about to explain that -- that was a total setup. The Reichstag fire, we believe, was started by the Nazis.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: Of course. Yeah, that's what he's obviously insinuating.

GLENN: That's what he's insinuating.

STU: I mean, he would probably argue, what I was trying to say is they took advantage of it like the Nazis took advantage of that. Not necessarily that they caused it.

GLENN: Right. Do we think -- so what you're saying is -- you want to talk about a conspiracy theory, what you're saying is replace Bush with Obama. That a tragedy happened and Barack Obama said, "I can finally get control of everybody's email. I can finally get control of everybody's phone calls. I can get rid of warrants, where I don't want to. I can stop dropping drones on people. I'll have control of everything. I'll be able to take the NSA." That -- you think the press would accept someone saying that about Barack Obama?

STU: No.

GLENN: You would be the biggest conspiracy theorist on the planet. And this isn't just a commentator. This is the guy they want to run the DNC.

STU: Yes.

PAT: He's a US congressman.

STU: Uh-huh. And to be fair to Keith Ellison, to give him a little bit of a break here, the man is saying things that were mainstream Democrat positions at that time.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: You go back to polling through that era, you'll find 40, 50 percent of Democrats believed just that. And sometimes the majority of Democrats believed those things, that Bush did 9/11, and he was responsible for it. Or at the very least overlooked it.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Katrina, took advantage of it. Didn't care. He hates black people.

There were a million of these conspiracies that were mainstream Democratic positions for the typical voter. And while he might be a little bit out of step with what they want in the press at that time, he was not out of step with the people who were voting for him.

GLENN: Now, the -- the press wonders why Republicans and conservatives don't trust them and feel the way we feel. Because of that. And this is why I said, we have a third time at bat. First time happened with George Bush. And the Democrats went off the rails. And we stopped listening to them. And then, Barack Obama got in. And we went off the rails. And they stopped listening to us.

It's time to get it right this time. It's time to get it right. But you must call each play equally. If you don't, it's going to get much worse.

Featured Image: Keith Ellison (D-MN) holds a news conference about what he calls 'the rhetorice attacking Muslims and the Islamophobia' in the 2016 presidential election at the National Press Club May 24, 2016 in Washington, DC. Highlighting remarks by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, Ellison and fellow Muslim Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN) said the issue of Islamophobia is not isolated to just one candidate or one election. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep