Body Language Expert Bill O'Reilly Explains Melania's Hand Slap: She Was Furious With Putin

There's been quite the controversy brewing the past week in the media. First lady Melania Trump appears to have avoided holding her husband's hand on several occasions during their first overseas trip as POTUS and FLOTUS. Friday on radio, Glenn invited weekly guest Bill O'Reilly to address the heated, controversial issue.

"Bill, I hope you take this as seriously as we do, and I know you do --- or will --- because you're a body language expert," Glenn joked.

Expert may be taking it too far.

RELATED: Fun with Bill O’Reilly and Why He’s Upset With Chelsea Clinton

"I'm an observer of your body language, Beck, and it's frightening," O'Reilly chided.

So what did O'Reilly make of Mrs. Trump slapping away the president's hand when they landed in Jerusalem?

"I guess I didn't take it as a slap. It was, look, I can make it down here myself. I try to stay away from that kind of stuff. But, yes, it was amusing to those who don't like the Trumps," O'Reilly said.

What about day two of the brush-off controversy?

"The next day on the tarmac, he reaches for her hand, and she moves her hand and crosses her face to brush back her hair . . . and he doesn't reach for her hand again. Coincidence?" Glenn asked.

Could we infer that FLOTUS is miffed with POTUS based on that?

"I think she's furious with Putin and is transferring," O'Reilly deadpanned.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Bill, I want to ask you this: Because there's been quite a controversy over three events this week. One happened yesterday. One happened I think on Tuesday. And then one happened on Wednesday. Start on Tuesday. He's landing in Jerusalem, President Trump. And he's coming down the red carpet, and there is footage of Melania -- Trump reaching out to hold Melania's hand, and she slaps it away. Did you see it?

BILL: Yeah. I guess. I didn't take it as a slap. It was, look, I can make it down here myself. I try to stay away from that kind of stuff. But, yes, it was amusing to those who don't like the Trumps.

GLENN: No, it wasn't amusing to me because I live that life. My wife has done that to me. And I just didn't know someone who was all hoity-toity actually has that happen to him. And then.

PAT: Next day.

GLENN: The next day on the tarmac, he reaches for her hand, and she moves her hand and crosses her face to brush back her hair, and he doesn't reach for her hand again. Coincidence?

BILL: Yeah, might be mad at him for something. You know how that goes.

PAT: You'll admit that, though. It looks like she's mad at him.

GLENN: It might. It might. Maybe.

PAT: I mean, I know you don't like to connect the dots. But can we infer that she's pissed off at him?

BILL: I think she's furious with Putin and is transferring.

[Laughter]

GLENN: All right. The next one. This has nothing to do with Melania. Did you see the footage from yesterday with Donald Trump at the NATO summit where he took -- if you want to call it a president -- the president of Montenegro and just pushed him out of the way and then stood in front. Like, didn't even have an excuse. Not, like, hey, excuse me, for a second. I have to hear this. You just pushed him out of the way, stood in his place, and then just kind of looked around. Did you see that?

BILL: I did not see that, I have to confess. But I did read about that. But what I read on the progressive websites was he kicked him in the groin.

GLENN: No, no, no.

BILL: No?

GLENN: You're not taking this seriously, Bill.

PAT: Are you sensing that too?

BILL: No, MSNBC.

GLENN: This is real news.

BILL: That didn't happen?

GLENN: No and the Montenegro guy, president or king, or whatever that is, that's important to NATO. I mean, we don't have the fighting --

PAT: We lose Montenegro, and it's over.

GLENN: We don't have the fighting Montys with us, it's over.

BILL: Montenegro is a beautiful country. But there's a tradition perhaps you don't know, beck. As a sign of affection and respect, you shove people.

GLENN: Especially the president.

BILL: Because the more you shove, the more you love them.

GLENN: I like that. I didn't know that. I didn't know that.

BILL: Any international stuff, just run it right by me.

GLENN: So you've been to Montenegro.

BILL: Many times. I have a condo there.

GLENN: Right there by the beach area.

BILL: Good view of Kosovo.

GLENN: Right. It's beautiful. Beautiful. Especially this time of year.

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip below:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.