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

April 19, 2017

WRITER

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.

"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.

The Bonner group/A Super PAC and fundraiser for Hillary & DNC. The Campaign against Bill OReily is orchestrated by MM & BG. #Smearproof pic.twitter.com/fklnDFuv5w
— Glenn Beck (@glennbeck) April 19, 2017

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 Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Glenn's Show Prep