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

Erick Erickson Speaks With Glenn: I Know One of the Sources, and It's Far Worse Than What's Being Reported

May 16, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Erick Erickson, founder and editor-in-chief of TheResurgent.com, recently posted an article, I Know One of the Sources, which describes disturbing details on what's really happening inside the White House in light of the news Trump may have exposed sensitive information during his meetings with Russian officials. Erickson joined Glenn on radio Tuesday to discuss.

"This is worse in the sense that the president's conversations, I'm led to believe, with the Russians, provided them enough information through his bragging that they could identify the location of the source, how the source obtained the information regarding explosives and laptops, and could therefore identify specifically who the source was," Erickson said.

If true, what does that mean for President Trump? Is his job at stake?

RELATED: The Russia Leak Won’t End Trump’s Presidency Unless Republicans Agree It Should

"I don't think it's impeachable, and that's the problem. Gross incompetence is not one of the areas for impeachment in the Constitution. And I think we have to take that literally. If the president wants to release information to the Russians, he legally has the right to do it," Erickson said.

But there is a deeply troubling aspect to the president sharing high-level intelligence.

"The problem is that it undermines our relationships with our allies and our ability to collect intelligence from other sources and could potentially put the life of a source in jeopardy," Erickson said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Let's go right to Erick Erickson, a friend of the program, a friend of the Constitution, and a guy who has just written a pretty intense and explosive article about, "I know one of the sources on the Washington Post story."

And, by the way, Stations, we're still waiting for McMaster to come out and to begin his press conference. We'll join that, if it begins.

Erick.

ERICK: Hi, there.

GLENN: How are you?

ERICK: I'm good. How are you?

GLENN: Well, I've been better. Trying to make sense of this. And I believe McMaster, however, he has been very, very careful with his words. And he was denying things that the Washington Post never even -- never even claimed last night.

ERICK: Right.

GLENN: So it was an odd response, I thought last night. But I believe him. I'm waiting for him to come out. And now I get this story from you, that says, "This is very credible. And it's worse than what is reported."

ERICK: Yes. So I -- I am friends with someone who works for the president, is -- was enough of a pro-Trump supporter last year, that he and I moderated our interactions because we so vehemently disagreed with each other in the election. And he is concerned enough, at this point, as are others within the national security apparatus, that they are under the impression they have to leak these things to the media for the president to pay attention to them because he is extremely defensive when anyone approaches him in person and tries to explain to him why he should not do the things he's done.

Now, someone this morning interacted with me and said, "Well, maybe the president's reaction was, he was upset because they should have told him ahead of time." And that was my reaction as well.

But according to the source, he said, "That's not the president's reaction. The president's reaction is, I'm the president. I can do whatever I want. And that it's not helpful."

This is worse in the sense that the president's conversations, I'm led to believe, with the Russians, provided them enough information through his bragging that they could identify the location of the source, how the source obtained the information regarding explosives and laptops, and could therefore identify specifically who the source was.

GLENN: So how do -- let's say McMaster comes out and says all of that stuff is not true. McMaster is a guy who has written a book on honor and integrity. How do you square that?

ERICK: I don't know that you can. There's clearly something going on inside the White House, leading to this disparity.

The information last night from McMaster, I thought, was most interesting in that he denied a lot of the rumors and speculation surrounding the Washington Post report, but did not actually deny what the Post, the New York Times now, and other outlets have actually reported. So I'm going to be very interesting to see how he parses his words in this press conference.

GLENN: So if he says -- you know, if he verifies -- I can't imagine he's going to, but if he would verify what you just said or based on what you know -- I mean, I don't know who your source was, that was in the room? They were in the room?

ERICK: No. Was not in the room. There were very few people in the room. Was out of the room and in the post-meeting briefings about what took place in the room.

GLENN: Okay. So if -- McMaster was in the room. If he says -- let's just say he verifies what your source says, should President Trump step down or be impeached?

ERICK: I don't think it's impeachable. And that's the problem. Gross incompetence is not one of the areas for impeachment in the Constitution. And I think we have to take that literally. If the president wants to release information to the Russians, he legally has the right to do it.

The problem is that it undermines our relationships with our allies and our ability to collect intelligence from other sources and could potentially put the life of a source in jeopardy. But it's perfectly legal for him to do it. That's the problem here. And that, I suspect, would be General McMaster's answer here, is that everything the president did was legal. And he's absolutely right.

STU: I mean, Erick, you have to think, if he's getting this venue and making this statement, there's no way he's going to say anything other than completely back the president.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: Now, I believe McMaster is a really honorable guy, but, I mean, he would not have this venue to come out and theoretically clarify all the things that he kind of left hanging in his previous statement, if he wasn't going to say something supportive of the president. Am I wrong on that?

ERICK: That would be my reaction as well, which is why I'm very interested to hear what he has to say.

GLENN: So, Erick, you didn't really answer the question. You did answer -- here comes McMaster.

Real quick. You didn't answer the question. Should he be -- should he be asked to resign?

ERICK: You know, if everything about this story that I'm being told is true, I think the president needs to consider the good of the country and not necessarily the good of him liking the phone system in the White House.

GLENN: Okay. Erick, thank you very much. Erick Erickson from theresurgent.com.

How Anti-Trump Media Rhetoric to Blame for New Assassination Attempt

Spencer Platt / Staff, - / Contributor | Getty Images

Ryan Routh was the second person to be tipped over the edge by the corporate media’s propaganda, convinced that he would be saving democracy by taking out Trump.

We are just about 50 days away from the presidential election. Can we take the next seven weeks and try to refrain from assassinating Donald Trump? If you were wondering if we are living in a banana republic, rest assured: We are officially here.

Here is what reportedly happened during the second assassination attempt against Trump in Florida on Sunday. Early reports said that police recovered an AK-47 from the bushes outside the golf course where the president was golfing, as well as a GoPro recording device attached to the fence pointed out at the putting green. Why would you have a GoPro recording device unless you were planning on recording the assassination attempt so that your deeds would live forever?

If this doesn’t reveal the dangerous game our political elites are playing, I don’t know what will.

Is anything else recorded on that GoPro? Did the would-be assassin make a statement? Why would you record your deeds without recording a message for all to hear? I would like to know what was on the GoPro, if anything, because this guy obviously had an agenda.

A Secret Service agent was eagle-eyed enough to spot the barrel of a gun poking out from the bushes in the perimeter of the golf course. The suspected gunman was later identified as Ryan Wesley Routh. He had taken two backpacks and tied them to the fence on each side of where he would have been sitting. The barrel of the gun would have been right between them.

The media merely reported that he had ceramic tiles in his backpack and didn’t go into further detail. Perhaps they didn’t want to report on the fact that ceramic tile is what you put inside a bulletproof vest if you are expecting a chest shot. A bulletproof vest will not stop a high-powered rifle. However, ceramic tile will. That’s why he put ceramic tile in his backpacks, right where he would have been crouched with the gun. He was expecting a shoot-out.

How did the Secret Service agent see the gun? I don’t know, but I want to take it at face value and believe he was doing his job. The reason I say this is that I was with Trump on Saturday, and I posted on X that this was the very first time in 15 years that I have seen the Secret Service actually do its job. I've been railing about this for 15 years, and Saturday was the first time I thought the Secret Service was taking it seriously. There was no way you were getting into the event unless you were an invited guest, and there was absolutely no way you were getting close to the president unless you were supposed to.

So what happened?

I want to believe that the Secret Service was doing its job. The agent was allegedly scoping the perimeter a hole or two ahead of Trump when he noticed the gun barrel poking out of the bushes. The agent fired on Routh. Routh reportedly fled rather than return fire. He did not get a shot off at the president.

Somebody saw Routh run from the bushes and get into his car and had the wherewithal to write down the plate number and remember the car’s make and model. The witness called police immediately and relayed this information, and law enforcement captured Routh quickly.

Who exactly is Trump’s second wannabe assassin, Ryan Routh? His son, Oran, said his father hates Donald Trump as “every reasonable person does.” It’s quite telling that this comment was his immediate response after hearing that his father tried to kill the president. Yet Oran insisted his dad was a hardworking, decent, nonviolent person and that he’s never known him to own a gun.

Well, I don't think you know your dad, Oran, but you might be interested to know that in 2002, Ryan Routh barricaded himself into his office with a fully automatic machine gun and had a three-hour standoff with police. The FBI said Routh was in possession of "a weapon of mass destruction.” He went to jail — not prison. If you're caught with an automatic weapon without the proper permits, you would typically be sentenced to between 10 and 20 years in prison. Why was his sentence so short, and why didn’t he even go to prison?

His son also said his dad is a peaceful person. Did he know that he flew to Ukraine to recruit Afghan soldiers to join the Ukrainian war effort?

After he learned of his dad’s attempt on Trump’s life, Oran offered a revealing comment:

I hate this game every four years, and think that we all do, and if my father wants to be a martyr to how broken and disassociated the process has become from the real problems and practical solutions, then that’s his choice.

He went on:

"South Park" said it best. Every four years, we’re forced to choose between a turd sandwich and a giant douche, and it all stays f***ed in the same ways by different degrees, and we’re exhausted and embarrassed by it all.

So the ends justifies the means? That’s what I’m hearing here.

The media has been peddling this dangerous rhetoric depicting Trump as a dictator and an imminent threat to democracy. Ryan Routh was the second person to be tipped over the edge by this propaganda, convinced that he would be saving democracy by taking out Trump. His own son’s visceral reaction to hearing the news about his father was one of justification and understanding rather than outright condemnation. If this doesn’t reveal the dangerous game our political elites are playing, I don’t know what will.

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

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.