EXCLUSIVE: Proof That Liberals Are Working to Remove Bill O'Reilly From Fox News

George Soros-funded Media Matters has a history of conducting smear campaigns against conservative media figures like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

Their latest target looks to be Bill O'Reilly, host of the wildly popular and number one-rated cable news program The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News. Glenn shared on radio today an email that suggests the liberal watchdog is behind the advertiser exodus from The Factor. The email is from Mary Pat Bonner of The Bonner Group.

RELATED: If Bill O'Reilly Goes, It's the Beginning of the End of Fox News as We Know It

"The Bonner Group, according to the New York Times, was paid $6 million from Hillary For America -- or whatever it was -- and Media Matters to raise money," Glenn said. "They are the largest fundraiser for Media Matters, at least in 2013, and raised $11 million for Media Matters. This is the Hillary super PAC group and the super PAC for Media Matters. That's who Mary Pat Bonner is.

Listen to this segment beginning at mark 19:42 from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: I've only got three or four minutes here. And I don't want to start down this rabbit hole of -- of what happened to us and what's now happening to Bill O'Reilly. And I have the proof. I'll do it after the bottom of the hour break. But I do want to share with you the letter that I have from -- I have 30 seconds? So I can't share it now. I thought I had a little more time. I'm going to share the evidence that I find absolutely astounding, that Bill O'Reilly sent to everybody -- all the papers that I read said, "Well, he has evidence." Well, did you ask for the evidence? Because I know it was really super, super hard. I wrote to Bill and said, "Hey, do you have the evidence?" And then his attorney sent it to me. So I know it was really hard. But nobody's -- nobody's running with this. Why? Because it's a game that works and is being played on you. Next.

[break]

GLENN: All right. I want you to know that you need to write and call the Fox News Channel today, if you buy into what I'm about to tell you, and tell them, "You can lose your advertisers, or you can lose your viewers." But you have to put some spine back into the Murdoch family and the Fox News Channel board because you're about to lose Bill O'Reilly. And this isn't about Bill O'Reilly. This is about Media Matters. And this is about a system that I want to show you, if I have time now -- otherwise, later in the show -- has worked before.

I called Bill last night and said, "Hey, I'm reading that you guys have evidence. Can I see the evidence?" He said, "Let me call my attorney." Calls his attorney. His attorney -- I get up this morning, and I have this.

Now, I've just tweeted this. We've posted it at GlennBeck.com. And I believe a story is going up on TheBlaze soon about it.

It's from Mary Pat Bonner. Now, who is Mary Pat Bonner? Mary Pat Bonner runs what's called the Bonner Group. The Bonner Group, according to the New York Times, was paid $6 million from Hillary For America -- or whatever it was -- and Media Matters to raise money. Another source -- we're not sure. We only have one source on this -- said that Media Matters paid the Bonner Group $1.4 million in 2013 alone, to raise money. They are the largest fundraiser for Media Matters, at least in 2013 and raised $11 million for Media Matters.

This is the Hillary super PAC group and the super PAC for Media Matters. That's who Mary Pat Bonner is. So Mary Pat Bonner who is trying to raise money for Media Matters sends this out: An O'Reilly update call. Subject line. It came out Thursday April 13th, 2:53 p.m.

For years, Bill O'Reilly has been one of the worst purveyors of misinformation on Fox News. A serial misinformer, pushing many of the most extreme, sexist, racist, homophobic, and xenophobic conservative theories on TV.

PAT: Such a lie. Name one. Name one.

And she -- they don't obviously.

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly is -- he's the most moderate of conservative television.

PAT: Completely reasoned.

GLENN: He is -- he never would connect the dots. He never does connect the dots. It's one of the biggest complaints, at least of this audience of Bill O'Reilly. They're like, "Don't worry, Bill will come along once the New York Times is there." I mean, Bill is --

PAT: And he's always said, "I deal in facts. I don't extrapolate. I don't connect dots."

GLENN: Right. I don't get ahead of the news. So he's not a theorist at all.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: (sighing)

Additionally, recent bombshell New York Times investigation found Fox News and Fox host Bill O'Reilly had paid $13 million to settle with five women who accused the host of repeated sexual harassment or verbal abuse.

No comment on that. I don't know what that is. But if you're going to fire Bill O'Reilly, then you fire him based on that and be transparent. Let everyone know exactly what it was. But I will tell you, again --

PAT: We see no evidence on it. Right? Nobody has recordings. Nobody has photos. We haven't even heard the story.

GLENN: I mean, we haven't heard from Megyn Kelly -- Megyn Kelly isn't shy on what's happening.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: You didn't hit on Megyn Kelly?

PAT: If you're a serial hit-onner, you would think so.

GLENN: Yeah.

Thanks to Media Matters, O'Reilly and Fox News are now being held accountable.

Now, listen to this: Due to our advertiser education campaign, over 80 advertisers have currently dropped O'Reilly's show, and the momentum continues to build.

Stu, based on your past history, is that true or false? Eighty advertisers have already dropped.

STU: Yeah. That's usually not true. Usually not true. It's usually, you know, hey, here's some company that never wanted to be associated with this guy anyway that they've called up to make a statement about it.

GLENN: Wait. I have new information that will blow your mind from Media Matters.

PAT: That's great.

GLENN: It's worse than that. Okay? We are currently at a critical juncture in this campaign, so I hope you can join Media Matters, President Angelo Carusone, to hear about the successes of the campaign so far and our plans moving forward. We're holding an update call next week Thursday April 20th at 2:30. Please RSVP to Doug Farley at DougWalterFarley@Gmail.com. Or call 212-683-2551, and he can send you the dial-in information. I look forward to having you join on one of these critical calls. Regards, Mary Pat.

There is -- there is the evidence that Media Matters, because Bill O'Reilly is a -- what did they say? A sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic conservative.

STU: Here's the ten things that we say about everybody.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: Right. That's why they're doing it. Now, let me show you what they're doing. And I'm not going to speculate at all. I'm going to take it from the horse's mouth himself.

This is -- came out April 6th, 2017. How a veteran of Fox News boycott does it. And this is from the New Yorker magazine, not exactly a right-wing blog.

This week, a number of companies pulled their ads from Bill O'Reilly's Fox News Show after the Times reported the host and his employer paid millions of dollars to settle accusations of sexual harassment and other inappropriate behavior.

Hang on. My screen has just locked up. Please don't do that to me now.

Angelo Carusone -- or whatever you say his name -- he's the president of Media Matters now --

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: -- took the opportunity to begin tweeting from an account he set up in March 2010. Stop O'Reilly.

In 2009, Carusone's Stop Beck account pressured brands to pull the ads from the program of Glenn Beck, the conspiracy-minded conservative commentator who was then hosting on Fox News. It proved an effective tactic, partly in response to Carusone's tweets, advertisers began to disassociate themselves from Beck's show.

Now, we've always said, "That's not true. Mercedes Benz never -- never -- Kraft was never on my show." Just, it didn't happen.

Listen: Beck and Fox News parted ways in 2011, which we're going to talk about later today.

He started working then -- Carusone started working at Media Matters, the left-wing nonprofit that battles what he considers -- what he considers conservative misinformation in the media. What he considers.

Hmm. Do you want a man or one group dictating to sponsors and to media outlets what is misinformation and what is true?

He's now the president of Media Matters. On Tuesday, he spoke by phone about his Beck campaign in light of the ongoing O'Reilly situation. His account has been edited and condensed. I've never known any of this. Listen to this.

Quote, leading up to the summer of 2009, I was a second-year law student. And when you're a second-year law student in the springtime, procrastination becomes something that was the same time that Glenn Beck was on the rise. He was something different for Fox News. He was not the ideologically different, but his presentation, his manner was much more venomous and vitriolic than even the standard Fox News fare. And he was incredibly successful by all measures, in audience size, revenue, and the kinds of advertisers he was attracting.

My fear became that the market would actually create an environment where people who were doing what Glenn Beck was doing became the new norm when they should become an anathema. That's what planted the seed in my brain. Twitter had finally become more of a thing. You could access companies in a different way because your communications were very public and transparent.

I started the Stop Beck campaign right at the beginning of July saying, I'm just going to try to contact advertisers and say, "Hey, this is what Glenn Beck said today. This is what your ads are appearing next to," so that they would be able to see the association, what they were actually paying for.

That's how it started. I listened to his program every day. I tweeted out everything he was saying. Copied in sponsors. At the end of a month, Glenn Beck called President Obama a racist and said he had a deep-seated hatred of white people and the white culture. That caused a firestorm.

So you're already after -- you have nothing -- you just are looking for something to cause a firestorm. In Bill O'Reilly's case, a settlement that happened how many years ago?

Because of Roger Ailes, that was drug up again. Now we can make something of that. Big organizations got involved, which I was never ever conceived of. Who are the big organizations? People like Media Matters, George Soros. We told you this was being funded by big people, and big people were involved, including Van Jones' Color For Change. Oh, wait. Quote, I was just the Twitter guy, but Color of Change and other activist groups sent out petitions. I got a ton of new followers and new participants in my effort. And then all of a sudden, I had a blog. And Kraft, the cheese company, replied to one of my posts saying, "Hey, we're pulling our ads from the Glenn Beck Show," literally in just a comment. And that's how it all started for me.

About three months in, I was like, "Okay. Now I have a theory, but I need a strategy. What's the actual strategy for holding him accountable?" Because clearly, he was not off the air.

You'd think that if you would get X-number of big companies to leave that it's just magic he'll go away. He won't. I needed something bigger. So this is what I started to do.

Now, I want you to listen very carefully to this because it explains an awful lot. I've never known this. This is not some conspiracy theorist. This is his own words in the New Yorker last month.

You better make a decision, America. Because you're about to lose a big conservative ally and voice. And it's not just Bill O'Reilly. I'm telling you, Sean Hannity will be next. Then Tucker Carlson will be next. Until everyone complies with what they say is not misinformation, they will continue to go -- and once you have the big bear of Fox News out of the way, then they come for TheBlaze. Then they come for The Daily Wire. Then they come for all of us. I didn't say anything because I wasn't Bill O'Reilly, until they came for me, and there was no one left.

No one wants to say anything because they don't know if Bill O'Reilly is innocent or guilty on sexual harassment. I don't either. And if that's true, that's a different story.

But you need to understand there is something else going on. They're only using that.

Now, just like me, when I said that, I was thinking out loud. I'm trying -- I'm reading the -- excuse me. I was reading Obama's book where he said, "That's just the way white people will do you." Where he talked about his grandmother, you know, having a white attitude. And she was bred to not trust blacks.

Well, as I'm reading that, I'm thinking out loud, "I think this guy has a real problem with white people." Okay. That's not unreasonable to think out loud and say that, but not on television as if it's a statement. Stupid.

What happened? I gave them ammunition. What happened? O'Reilly may -- may have given them ammunition.

We've never seen it. But this is a game-changer. And I'll tell you exactly how he did it last time and how you're being played, when we come back.

[break]

GLENN: I believe we have Bill O'Reilly's attorney on. And I want to ask him about these -- about these accusations from these women because I don't want to discredit the women by any stretch of the imagination. I do not know what's happening there. But I want to tell you about what Media Matters and the Hillary campaign is doing, or I should say the Bonner group is doing to raise money and to get Bill O'Reilly off the air.

Okay. So this is how I started. This is according to the head of Media Matters. I listened to his program every day. I tweeted out everything he said to the sponsors. Blah, blah.

Hey, we're pulling our ads from the Glenn Beck show, literally in a comment.

About three months in, I said, okay. Now I have a theory. But I need a strategy. If you think you can get X-number of big companies to leave and it's magic, he goes away. But I needed something bigger. So what I actually started to do is I found a guy in the UK. Glenn Beck's show was simulcast there. He would watch the show and give me the advertisers list for the United Kingdom. Some of them were big advertisers that were never advertising on Glenn Beck's show here.

If you could get the UK division to say, "We're going to pull the ads from Glenn's," it would filter over to the states, and people would say, "Mercedes has cancelled." It became a shot in the arm for the campaign. Within a few months, every single advertiser on Glenn Beck's show in the United Kingdom had been cut off.

He didn't have anymore ads. No ads at all. They would run promos during the breaks.

What I wanted to do was make sure there was enough of an effect so if Glenn Beck was still on the air during the next shareholder conversation, Rupert would have to say there was a problem in the United Kingdom. I'll bet you the same thing is happening here.

The themes of healing and redemption appear throughout the Bible.

Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. — 1 Corinthians 15:43
It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. — Mark 2:17.

So, for many Christians, it's no surprise to hear that people of faith live longer lives.

Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved, for you are my praise. — Jeremiah 17:14.

But it is certainly lovely to hear, and a recent study by a doctoral student at Ohio State University is just one more example of empirical evidence confirming the healing benefits of faith and religious belief.

RELATED: MEDIA BIGOTRY: The New Yorker hates on Chick-fil-A over 'pervasive Christian traditionalism'

Moreover, the study finds that religious belief can lengthen a person's life.

A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones. — Proverbs 17:22
Lord, your discipline is good, for it leads to life and health. You restore my health and allow me to live! — Isaiah 38:16

The study analyzed over 1,000 obituaries nationwide and found that people of faith lived longer than people who were not religious. Laura Wallace, lead author of the study, noted that "religious affiliation had nearly as strong an effect on longevity as gender does, which is a matter of years of life."

The study notes that, "people whose obits mentioned a religious affiliation lived an average of 5.64 years longer than those whose obits did not, which shrunk to 3.82 years after gender and marital status were considered."

And He called to Him His twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction. — Matthew 10:1

"The researchers found that part of the reason for the boost in longevity came from the fact that many religiously affiliated people also volunteered and belonged to social organizations, which previous research has linked to living longer. The study provides persuasive evidence that there is a relationship between religious participation and how long a person lives," said Baldwin Way, co-author of the study and associate professor of psychology at Ohio State.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

In addition, the study showed how the effects of religion on longevity might depend in part on the personality and average religiosity of the cities where people live, Way said.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

And the power of the Lord was with him to heal. — Luke 5:17
Heal the sick in it and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to you. — Luke 10:9.

In early June, the Social Security and Medicare trustees released their annual report on the fiscal health of these programs, and the situation looks dire. Medicare is scheduled to run out of money in 2026 (three years sooner than anticipated), while Social Security is expected to run out in 2034. The rising national debt is only one of the well-known financial struggles the millennial generation faces. The burdens of student loan debt, high housing prices (thanks to zoning restrictions), stagnant wage growth, the rising cost of healthcare and lingering aftershocks of the Great Recession are among the biggest sources of economic anxiety millennials feel.

Progressive politicians have been very successful at courting the youth vote, partly because they actually promote policy ideas that address many of these concerns. As unrealistic or counterproductive as Senator Bernie Sanders' proposals for single-payer health care or a $15 an hour minimum wage might be, they feel in theory like they would provide the economic stability and prosperity millennials want.

RELATED: Time to reverse course: America is being corrupted by its own power

Republicans, on the other hand, have struggled to craft a message to address these concerns. Fiscal conservatives recognize, correctly, that the burden of the $20 trillion national debt and over $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities will fall on millennials. Some conservatives have even written books about that fact. But the need to reform entitlements hasn't exactly caught millennials' attention. Pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson, in her book The Selfie Vote, notes that millennials generally view protecting the safety net as more important than reducing the deficit.

Clearly, Republicans have a problem. They need to craft solutions that address the millennial generation's struggles, but they can't seem to sell entitlement reform, their biggest policy preference that addresses those problems. The Republican approach to wooing millennials on policy is failing because talking about stopping the debt from reaching an unsustainable level is long-term and abstract, and offers few immediate tangible benefits. A new approach to both pave the way for entitlement reform and give millennials an immediate financial boost is to first reform not entitlement spending, but the payroll tax: specifically, by partially (or wholly) replacing it with a value-added tax.

Under the current Social Security model, workers pay for the benefits of current retirees through the payroll tax. This system creates the illusion of a pension program, in which what you put in is what you get out, but in reality Social Security is a universal safety net program for the elderly paid for by taxes. The payroll tax falls on workers and is a tax on labor, while the value-added tax (VAT) is a tax on consumption imposed at every part of the production process. Assuming that this policy change is revenue-neutral, switching to a VAT will shift the responsibility for funding Social Security and Medicare away from workers, disproportionately poorer and younger, and onto everyone participating in the economy as a whole. Furthermore, uncoupling Social Security funding from payroll taxes would pave the way for fiscal reforms to transform the program from a universal benefit program to one geared specifically to eliminating old-age poverty, such as means-testing benefits for high-income beneficiaries, indexing benefits to prices rather than wages or changing the retirement age.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences. As the Tax Policy Center notes, the change would actually make the tax system more progressive. The current payroll tax is regressive, meaning that people with lower incomes tend to pay a higher effective tax rate than people with higher incomes. On the other hand, the value-added tax is much closer to proportional than the payroll tax, meaning that each income group pays closer to the same effective tax rate.

For Republicans, such a change would fit conservative economic ideas about the long-run causes of economic growth. A value-added tax has a much broader base than the payroll tax, and therefore would allow for much lower marginal tax rates, and lower marginal tax rates mean smaller disincentives to economic activity. According to the Tax Foundation's analysis of a value-added tax, the VAT would be a more economically efficient revenue source than most other taxes currently in the tax code.

Not only would replacing part or all of the payroll tax provide an immediate benefit to millennial taxpayers, it would also open the door for the much-needed entitlement reforms that have been so politically elusive. Furthermore, it would make the tax code both more pro-growth and less regressive. In order to even begin to address the entitlement crisis, win millennial support and stimulate the economy in a fiscally responsible manner, Republicans must propose moving from the payroll tax to the VAT.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate. His writing has appeared in Townhall and The Federalist. He is a federal policy intern at the Tax Foundation. Opinions expressed here are his only and not the views of the Tax Foundation. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Glenn was joined by Alanna Sarabia from "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios on Thursday for an exclusive look at Mercury Museum's new "Rights & Responsibilities" exhibit. Open through Father's Day, the temporary museum features artifacts from pop culture, America's founding, World Ward II and more, focusing on the rights and responsibilities America's citizens.

Get tickets and more information here.

Watch as Glenn gives a sneak peek at some of the unique artifacts on display below.

History at the Mercury Museum

Alanna Sarabia interviews Glenn Beck for "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios.

Several months ago, at the Miss Universe competition, two women took a selfie, then posted it on Instagram. The caption read, "Peace and love." As a result of that selfie, both women faced death threats, and one of the women, along with her entire family, had to flee her home country. The occasion was the 2017 Miss Universe competition, and the women were Miss Iraq and Miss Israel. Miss Iraq is no longer welcome in her own country. The government threatened to strip her of her crown. Of course, she was also badgered for wearing a bikini during the competition.

RELATED: Media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam bias sweeps THIS fact under the rug

In an interview, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, said:

When I posted the picture I didn't think for a second there would be blowback. I woke up to calls from my family and the Miss Iraq Organization going insane. The death threats I got online were so scary. The director of the Miss Iraq Organization called me and said they're getting heat from the ministry. He said I have to take the picture down or they will strip me of my title.

Yesterday, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, posted another selfie with Miss Israel, during a visit to Jerusalem.

In an interview, she said that:

I don't think Iraq and Israel are enemies; I think maybe the governments are enemies with each other. There's a lot of Iraqi people that don't have a problem with Israelis.

This is, of course, quite an understatement: Iraq, home to roughly 15,000 Palestinians, refuses to acknowledge Israel as a legitimate country, as it is technically at war with Israel. The adages says that a picture is worth a thousand words. What are we to do when many of those words are hateful or deadly? And how can we find the goodness in such bad situations?