Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Another Logical American—A Journalist!—Converts to Conservatism

March 07, 2017
Staff

WRITER

What could more difficult than coming out as a gay man? Easy. Coming out as a conservative gay man.

Chadwick Moore, a journalist who recently published an article in the New York Post titled, "I'm a gay New Yorker, and I'm coming out as a conservative," says it's the hardest thing he's ever done.

Moore joined The Glenn Beck Program to talk about his conversion to conservatism.

"I've had conservative-leaning Libertarian values for a long time, and they've been growing. And even just a couple years ago, you know, I could get into political discussions with people, and it would be very clear that I have these views. And they might not like it, and they might yell and storm out, but you could still mostly have a debate. And now that is not the case," Moore said.

Moore explained it's not his politics that have changed, but rather the line has shifted beneath his feet.

"It's moved me to the right," he said.

Glenn welcomed the opportunity to close ranks with another American using reason and logic over emotion.

"This is happening," Glenn said. "If we don't open arms [to] those who feel like he does --- left or right --- if we don't close ranks and open arms, right now . . . we have a chance to gather so many people, so many people.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Chadwick Moore, a lifelong liberal and journalist who has now written this line in his op-ed: When I was growing up in the Midwest, coming out to my family at the age of 15 was one of the hardest things I've ever done. Today, it's just as nerve-racking to come out to all of New York as a conservative.

Chadwick, welcome to the program. May I call you Chad, or what do you prefer? Chadwick?

CHADWICK: You can call me anything you would like, Glenn.

GLENN: I know. What do you prefer though? Do you prefer Chadwick?

CHADWICK: Most people call me -- yeah, Chadwick is fine, yeah.

GLENN: So, Chadwick, is this harder than -- are the consequences greater than when you came out, or the same, or less?

CHADWICK: The consequences are definitely greater. You know, when I came out as a teenager, of course, it was scary for all the reasons that everyone hears about. You're worried about being bullied. Worried about your family rejecting you. But I had at that time sort of -- you know, I had a fake ID. I was going out to gay bars. I sort of -- I already had the sort of network of friends, gay friends that I had made, or at least accepting friends who I could sort of secretly tell.

This -- I didn't know -- I didn't have any conservative friends. I didn't know anyone, and I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, which is the epicenter of New York City of sort of the social justice, identity politics brigade.

GLENN: Holy cow.

CHADWICK: Yeah. And -- and so I had -- I was going in completely blind. As we know that coming out as a conservative, you face unemployment discrimination, absolutely, especially in industries like media, which I'm in. We feel this violence in the street. We see people being assaulted and yelled at for no reason. So it was definitely -- definitely more nerve-racking --

GLENN: So, Chadwick, I have a friend who is on the other side of the aisle. I have several of them. And one of them was telling me just the other day that they don't know how to even speak sometimes to their own friends. And they're rock solid liberal. They don't know how to speak to some of their own friends because things are so crazy. And I think it's this way on the right too. That if you're not lockstep against Donald Trump, if you're in a liberal circle, you're -- you're an enemy.

CHADWICK: Oh. 100 percent, yes. You know, I've had conservative-leaning Libertarian values for a long time. And they've been growing. And even just a couple years ago, you know, I could get into political discussions with people, and it would be very clear that I have these views. And they might not like it, and they might yell and storm out. But you could still mostly have a debate. And now that is not the case.

And especially over the last year, if I would start to challenge my friends' political ideas and start to present the other side, you were an enemy. And the next time that person saw you, they would not talk to you.

So it's definitely changed. You know, I'd like to say that my politics has not changed. The line has moved beneath my feet. It's moved me to the right.

GLENN: So what is it -- was it Donald Trump that moved you there? How do you define conservative? Because I'm not sure how to define that anymore.

CHADWICK: Great point. I define -- you know, lots of people can disagree with me on this. I find conservative to be a very useful term, a very useful umbrella term for the sort of diverse political thought that's on the right. So the evangelical Christians, the Tea Partiers, the establishment Republicans, and then people more like me who are the Libertarian classical liberals.

So that's how I use the term "conservative." I find that useful.

Donald Trump was definitely a huge -- you know, I feel like his rise -- and a lot of people who identify more Libertarian on the right, their visibility, has really shifted the borders of conservatism and been more welcoming to people like myself who are disaffected liberals who are against the leftists.

And Donald Trump has really sort of -- you know, no longer is this base of conservatism, these kind of Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan types, who I would have just as little in common with I think as I do Hillary Clinton, even though I've held my nose and ticked her box last November.

GLENN: So, Chadwick, so we're probably then in the same category of conservative. I don't relate to the big government people at all. And I want to leave people alone. I was -- you know, I didn't have a problem with gay marriage, you know, long before Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. I just don't think the government has a place in anybody's marriage, left, right, gay, straight -- it doesn't matter. They just don't have a place there.

And so you're more of a Libertarian small government, leave people alone, kind of constitutionalist?

CHADWICK: Absolutely. Yes. Firm, staunch believer in first, Second Amendment. Absolute constitutionalist.

GLENN: Did you have a problem with the Obama administration on the First Amendment?

CHADWICK: You know, they didn't really say anything. With the press, you know, everyone likes to think that Trump is this authoritarian person. But, you know, Obama was going after journalists left and right.

PAT: Uh-huh.

CHADWICK: And, you know, the Democrats are sort of -- his administration, you know, they didn't really get much done. But the sort of liberal base then under his administration seems to have been galvanized in this radical, awful way. And the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton and the DNC have never called them out or try to reprimand them. They've just let them run wild.

So I think in that sense, I think Obama -- yeah, he never tried to stop this, this radical push to the left that his followers have undergone.

GLENN: Talking to Chadwick Moore. He's a journalist out of New York. He was known as a liberal. He's now a conservative. A Libertarian, small government conservative, constitutionalist.

The -- I have said this to my inner circle that I have met with a bunch of people that have, in fact, given lots of money to the Democratic Party who have now woken up for the first time to the fact that, wait a minute, my party is really pretty extreme. They're embracing this authoritarian kind of idea. And they rejected that serious Marxists -- and people who really didn't like the Constitution or didn't like the free market system. You know, had a real serious place at the table. They knew they were in the party. But they didn't have a real serious place at the table.

And they've opened their eyes. Now, many of them haven't been strong enough as you are now. But they have told me behind the scenes, "I'm not with the Democrats either." Do you think there is -- that you're alone. Or do you think that there's a lot of people like this, that are feeling the way you did?

CHADWICK: Oh, Glenn, I know for a fact that there are a lot of people. And the evidence is in my inbox. I've gotten thousands of messages from people since that post ran. And I would say legitimately 50 percent of those messages are conservatives from all walks of life, evangelicals to Libertarians, the other half I would say are disaffected Democrats who have been saying to me, I feel the exact same way you do. I'm scared to come out. I don't agree with this. I consider myself a moderate, but there's no place for me in the party anymore. I'm scared if I speak up, I'll lose my job. That's a big thing. I'll lose clients. You know, I'm an independent contractor. And I don't know what to do. And people have said, like, thank you for being a vessel for this voice of reason. You know, especially coming from the left.

And what you said about -- it's like President Reagan said, if fascism comes to America, it will be in the guise of liberalism. You know, it will be private ownership with absolute government control.

GLENN: Yeah. How do we grow this? Because, Chadwick, this is something that I have been, you know, working towards for a while and felt really alone for a long time, that there would be strange bedfellows, that we're not going to agree on everything, and we're going to come from the left and the right. And we're just going to stand for basic principles. And people will say, what principles would we have in common? We could start with just the Bill of Rights. And if you could give me nine out of the ten of the Bill of Rights, I think we have enough to build strong coalitions. And I don't think it's that hard.

How do we empower the people on both sides that are afraid to come out? Because I've seen it on both sides. It's -- it's bad.

CHADWICK: Yeah. And that is an excellent question and an excellent point. I agree with you that -- that the strongest weapon we have is the Bill of Rights. It is the Constitution.

You know, a few months ago, you know, I was thinking, this country is either on the verge of a bloody civil war or a really radical wonderful political enlightenment and it looks like staunch constitutionalism. And I think that's what you see happening. I think there are tons of people like me, who -- you know, the sort of liberal I was, was what this term -- a lot of people are using now called the "classical liberal," which is a constitutionalist. It's someone who supports free people, free markets, free speech, free thought. And I think that is -- nobody disagrees with that. So I think that you're right, that that is the greatest weapon we have.

And the sort of authoritarian element on the left, I still believe, is so small and so fringe. But they're so violent. And their biggest weapon is their -- is their, you know, racist homophobic Nazi bigot. That's all they can say because they have no argument. And nobody wants to be called of those things. So if you challenge them, they throw those words at you. Shut up! And that's why the media doesn't challenge them because the media doesn't want to be boycotted. They don't want to be this and that. I think most people in the media are terrified of these people too. But I think there are signs that that's no longer working. People see that Donald Trump isn't, you know, a white supremacist. So I think it's beginning to crack. And I think you're right that the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, is the greatest weapon to unite the most patriotic and fair-minded people in this country. Because our country, if you look at Europe, how authoritarian the culture is becoming in Europe, we really are the last hope for the sort of great idea of free people and free markets and individual responsibility.

GLENN: How do you argue with people who will say this to a Republican? They said it under George Bush. And they will say it again because of Donald Trump. And they say it to people like you, who voted for Barack Obama, assuming that you did, voting for Barack Obama, supported or was relatively quiet during Barack Obama. What do you say to those people that say, "Well, where were you as a staunch constitutionalist when X, Y, or Z were happening?" And you could say that to both sides. How do we tell people, "The past is the past, and I'm sincere in standing with the Constitution?"

CHADWICK: That's another great question. Right. So I was thinking about this just the other day. You know, when Obama was president, it was very much like, I'm just going to close my eyes and let him take the wheel. I think a lot -- you know, if I just speak of my own personal experience, people are allowed to make mistakes. I didn't know any better. And also, at the time, I just felt I didn't have -- it's strange because I've been on both sides now. I didn't feel I had a choice. Especially when the religious right was in control of the Republican Party, and as a gay person -- and the sort of very anti-gay, non-Libertarian rules they were trying to enforce, you just feel like you didn't have a choice. So you were like, "Well, these are my people. I'm a Democrat. I have to be a Democrat."

And this is what we were saying earlier about the sort of lines being changed. And Donald Trump -- Donald Trump is the first president to take office being for gay rights, Democrat or Republican.

And so it's -- now that the culture has shifted so rapidly, I think a lot of people don't feel like they have to find blindly with their party affiliation because the other side is evil. Because they're just being told that.

So I think that most people in this country have just been falling into party lines. But now there's such an anti-establishment vigor amongst the people in this country, on the left too.

That's why Bernie would have been the nominee. He was a nationalist. He was anti-establishment. He would have been the nominee if the Democratic Party had not colluded against him and all these other things. And the superdelegates and all this other stuff. So I think most people are on our side. And it's just the misbehavior of the establishment that's finally reached a breaking point where people can actually come together.

GLENN: Chadwick, I'd love to talk to you some more. I think you're fascinating and extraordinarily brave. Extraordinarily brave.

CHADWICK: Thank you.

GLENN: And congratulations on sticking to your principles and come what may. It's -- it's a rare thing.

CHADWICK: The exact same to you, Glenn. Great admirer of yours.

GLENN: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. We'll talk again. Thank you.

STU: It's interesting to hear that --

GLENN: This is happening. I'm telling you, if we -- if we walk together, if we don't open arms, those who feel like he does, left or right, if we don't close ranks and open arms, right now, we have a chance to gather so many people, so many people.

STU: I really like the -- his answer to, well, wait a minute. What about when this side did this and this side did this? Well, you know, maybe I made a mistake. I didn't have all the information, and now I do.

GLENN: I really like him a lot.

STU: That sort of attitude is so missing from our society that you can admit that, you know what, maybe I had the wrong perspective back then, and now I have the right one.

GLENN: Yeah, like him a lot.

STU: Yeah.

Who is Ryan Wesley Routh, Trump's second would-be Assassin?

- / Contributor | Getty Images

For the second time in two months, Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt.

Fortunately, this time the former president walked away from the incident unharmed, as did everyone else involved. Is anyone surprised that as the election cycle heats up and Democrats and the mainstream media have increased their false and hateful rhetoric against Trump, another assassination attempt should be made against him?

The second would-be assassin, Ryan Wesley Routh, was allegedly deeply affected by the rhetoric and propaganda regurgitated by the media and evidently decided to take matters into his own hands. Delving into the turbulent past of Ryan Routh reveals a violent and unstable man with many radical beliefs and an impressionable mind. How Routh apparently managed to avoid any FBI/terrorist watchlists is just one of the mysteries surrounding the second attempted assassination of President Trump.

Here's what we know about Ryan Wesley Routh so far:

The assassination attempt

Photo of Routh's Sniper Nest

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

At approximately 1:30 p.m. on Sunday, September, 15th, the Secret Service opened fire on a concealed gunman who was hidden in some bushes along the perimeter of Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida. The gunman was in a makeshift sniper's nest on the outside of the perimeter chain-link fence only a couple hundred yards from where Trump was golfing. He had been camping there for over 12 hours. After being fired on, the gunman ran back to his car and was quickly apprehended by the police, where he was identified as Ryan Wesley Routh.

After Routh's arrest, investigators discovered the sniper's nest built within the perimeter fence. Routh had hung two backpacks with bullet-proof ceramic plates inside on the fence with a narrow gap between them for his rifle to poke through. It is clear that Routh had come prepared for a shoot-out and had possibly taken notes from the last would-be Trump assassin, who was taken out by counter-snipers before he could finish his task.

His background

Routh at a pro-Ukraine rally Kyiv, Ukraine

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Routh is a long-time supporter of the Democrat party and a vehement Trump hater. He has written a multitude of deranged social media posts that express his loathing of the Republican nominee and parrot the rhetoric spewed by the mainstream media. Last year, Routh wrote a book urging Iran to assassinate President Trump for the "tremendous blunder” of leaving the Iran nuclear deal.

Routh is an outspoken advocate for the Ukrainian cause, and many of his social media posts are centered around this interest. He even made a trip to Ukraine with the bizarre mission of recruiting former Afghanistan troopers to fight for the Ukrainian cause. He returned home after six months without accomplishing his goal.

Shortly after the shoot-out, Ryan Routh's son, Oran Routh,, gave some personal information about his father. He claimed that he had no prior knowledge of the planned assassination attempt, and in fact, he had grown distant from his father after a falling-out. Oran did admit to sharing his father's "reasonable" hatred of Trump and claimed that his father was a peaceful, hard-working man. He also claimed that, as far as he knew, his father had only a few speeding tickets on his criminal record and had never even owned a firearm. This claim was quite contrary to reality.

Ryan Wesley Routh has quite the criminal record, which culminated in an arrest in 2002 when he fled the police during a traffic stop and barricaded himself in his roofing business with a machine gun. Routh was later convicted of possessing a weapon of mass destruction, but managed to dodge the 20-plus years in prison typically associated with charges of that nature.

His goals

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

While Routh's exact motives are still unknown, we can infer some things from his background.

It is clear that Routh has an extreme hatred of President Trump that has been brewing for many years, as expressed by his social media posts and deranged book. Routh is also not immune to extreme ideologies, as demonstrated by his strange Ukrainian escapade, and he is clearly no stranger to violence, as evidenced by his criminal record.

There is also the matter of his weapon of mass destruction conviction, along with many other crimes. How did he manage to avoid the lengthy prison sentence typical of convictions of such magnitude?

One thing is clear: Routh is clearly a disturbed individual who has been exposed to the onslaught of anti-Trump propaganda that has portrayed him as an embodiment of evil and an existential threat to the country and the world.


Presidential debate recap: The good, the bad and the ugly

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The second presidential debate was many things--some good, some bad, but one thing was made clear: this election is far from over.

If you were watching the debate with Glenn during the BlazeTV exclusive debate coverage, then you already know how the debate went: Kamala lied through her teeth and Trump faced a three-pronged attack from Harris and the two ABC moderators. This was not the debate performance we were hoping for, but it could have gone far worse. If you didn't get the chance to watch the debate or can't bring yourself to watch it again and are looking for a recap, we got you covered. Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly from the second presidential debate:

The Good

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Let's start with what went well.

While there was certainly room for improvement, Trump's performance wasn't terrible, especially compared to his performance in other debates. He showed restraint, kept himself from being too brash, and maintained the name-calling to a minimum. In comparison, Kamala Harris was struggling to maintain her composure. Harris was visibly emotional and continued to make obnoxious facial expressions, which included several infuriating eye-rolls and patronizing smirks.

The Bad

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite all that, the debate could have gone much better...

While Trump was able to keep his cool during the debate, he was not able to stay on track. Kamala kept making inflammatory comments meant to derail Trump, and every time, he took the bait. Trump spent far too long defending his career and other extraneous issues instead of discussing issues relevant to the American people and revealing Kamala's failures as Vice President.

Trump's biggest blunder during the debate was his failure to prevent Kamala from leaving that debate looking like a credible option as president. Kamala was fairly unknown to the American people and had remained that way on purpose, giving only one interview after Biden stepped down from the campaign. This is because every time Kamala opens her mouth, she typically makes a fool of herself. Trump needed to give Kamala more time to stick her foot in her mouth and to press Kamala on the Biden administration's failures over the past four years. Instead, he took her bait and let her run down the clock, and by the end of the debate, she left looking far more competent than she actually is.

The Ugly

If anything, the debate reminded us that this election is far from over, and it's more important now than ever for Trump to win.

The most noteworthy occurrence of the debate was the blatantly obvious bias of the ABC debate moderators against Trump. Many people have described the debate as a "three vs. one dogpile," with the moderators actively participating in debating Trump. If you didn't believe that the media was in the back pocket of the Democrats before, it's hard to deny it now. Kamala stood on stage and lied repeatedly with impunity knowing that the moderators and the mainstream media at large would cover for her.

The stakes have never been higher. With so many forces arrayed against Trump, it's clear to see that the Left cannot afford to let Trump win this November. The shape of America as we know it is on the line. Kamala represents the final push by the globalist movement to take root and assimilate America into the growing global hivemind.

The election is far from over. This is our sign to stand up and fight for our nation and our values and save America.

Glenn: Illegal aliens could swing the 2024 election, and it spells trouble for Trump

ELIZABETH RUIZ / Stringer | Getty Images

Either Congress must pass the SAVE Act, or states must protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Progressives rely on three main talking points about illegal aliens voting in our elections.

The first is one of cynical acceptance. They admit that illegal immigrants are already voting but argue that there is nothing we can do to stop it, suggesting that it’s just another factor we should expect in future elections. This position shows no respect for our electoral system or the rule of law and doesn’t warrant further attention.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches.

The second talking point targets the right. Progressives question why Republicans care, asking why they assume illegal immigrants voting would only benefit the other side. They suggest that some of these voters might also support the GOP.

On this point, the data says otherwise.

Across the board, immigrants vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, regardless of what state they’re in. The vast majority of migrants are coming up from South America, a region that is undergoing a current “left-wing” experiment by voting for far-left candidates practically across the board. Ninety-two percent of South America’s population favors the radical left, and they’re pouring over our border in record numbers — and, according to the data, they’re not changing their voting habits.

The third main talking point concedes that illegal immigrants are voting but not enough to make a significant dent in our elections — that their effect is minuscule.

That isn’t what the numbers show either.

Texas just audited its voter rolls and had to remove more than 1 million ineligible voters. The SAVE Act would mandate all states conduct such audits, but the left in Congress is currently trying to stop its passage. Dare I say that the left's pushback is because illegal immigration actually plays in Democrats' favor on Election Day?

Out of the 6,500 noncitizens removed from the voter rolls, nearly 2,000 had prior voting history, proving that illegal aliens are voting. But do the numbers matter, or are they “minuscule,” as the left claims? Let’s examine whether these illegal voting trends can make a dent in the states that matter the most on Election Day.

The corporate legacy media agree that Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will swing the election in November. By Election Day, an estimated 8 million illegal aliens will be living in the United States. Can these 8 million illegal immigrants change the course of the 2024 election? Let’s look at the election data from each of these seven swing states:

These are the numbers being sold to us as “insignificant” and “not enough to make a difference.” Arizona and Georgia were won in 2020 by a razor-thin margin of approximately 10,000 votes, and they have the most illegal immigrants — besides North Carolina — of all the swing states.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches. The progressives are importing an electorate to extend their ground by feet, yards, and often miles.

This is why Democrats in Congress oppose the SAVE Act, why the Justice Department has ignored cases of illegal voting in the past, and why the corporate left-wing media is gaslighting the entire country on its significance. This is a power play, and the entire Western world is under the same assault.

If things stay the status quo, these numbers prove the very real possibility of an election swing by illegal immigrants, and it will not favor our side of the aisle. Congress must pass the SAVE Act. If it fails, states must step up to protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

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

Hunter pleads GUILTY, but did he get a pass on these 3 GLARING crimes?

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Last week, Hunter Biden made the shocking decision to suddenly plead guilty to all nine charges of tax-related crimes after claiming innocence since 2018.

Hunter first tried an "Alford plead" in which a defendant maintains their innocence while accepting the sentencing, typically due to the overwhelming evidence against them. Hunter's Alford plead was not accepted after the prosecutors objected to the suggestion, and Hunter quickly pleaded guilty.

Glenn could not believe just how disrespectful this situation was to the justice system and the American people. After years of lying about his innocence, which only served to deepen the divide in our country, Hunter decided to change his tune at the last minute and admit his guilt. Moreover, many expect Joe Biden will swoop in after the election and bail his son out with a presidential pardon.

This isn't the first time Hunter's crimes have turned out to be more than just a "right-wing conspiracy theory," and, odds are, it won't be the last. Here are three crimes Hunter may or may not be guilty of:

Gun charges: Found guilty

This June, Hunter Biden was found guilty of three federal gun charges, which could possibly land him up to 25 years in prison. Hunter purchased a revolver in 2018 while addicted to crack, and lied to the gun dealer about his addiction. While Hunter could face up to 25 years in prison, it's unlikely to be the case as first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum sentence. That's assuming Joe even lets it go that far.

Tax evasion: Plead guilty

Last week, Hunter changed his plea to "guilty" after years of pleading innocent to federal tax evasion charges. Since 2018, Delaware attorneys have been working on Hunter's case, and just before the trial was set to begin, Hunter changed his plea. According to the investigation, Hunter owed upwards of $1.4 million in federal taxes that he avoided by writing them off as fraudulent business deductions. Instead, Hunter spent this money on strippers, escorts, luxury cars, hotels, and, undoubtedly, crack.

Joe's involvement with Hunter's foreign dealings: Yet to be proven

Despite repeated claims against it, there is ample evidence supporting the theory Joe Biden was aware of Hunter's business dealings and even had a hand in them. This includes testimony from Devon Archer, one of Hunter's business partners, confirming Joe joined several business calls. Despite the mounting evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's overseas business dealings and was using his influence to Hunter's benefit, the Bidens still maintain their innocence.