BLOGAugust 11, 2017

Bill O’Reilly: ‘Profound Change’ Is Disrupting the Way We Watch News — for the Better

News is shifting to a model where people have more control over their own content. On radio Friday, Bill O’Reilly shared an update on his latest project and explained why it’s important for him to bring news to people without “intrusion.”

Glenn remembered starting his own TV network and how people told him to stay locked into the old school model of cable news instead of making TV available on mobile devices.

“Those days are over,” he said of the shift. “We’ve laid the groundwork and the rails.”

O’Reilly talked about a new show prototype where he was in a studio and talked with guests over Skype, giving him far more independence than he would have with a network.

“We don’t want any intrusion: corporate intrusion or Media Matters intrusion or threats,” O’Reilly said to Glenn. “We want to control the product, as you do.”

GLENN: BillO'Reilly.com. Probably one of the more brilliant businesspeople. Definitely one of the more brilliant people when it comes to how to do a show and what people are thinking. Bill O'Reilly. Now at BillO'Reilly.com. He has his own show. It's a half-hour news show every day, and you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com. He started it earlier this week. It's really good. Not a lot has changed with Bill O'Reilly. Just the background has changed. And we'll talk to him about that.

I want to start here, Bill, with something that really bothers me, and that is the firing of -- what's his name? Jeremy Lions? No, what's his name?

STU: Jeffrey Lord.

GLENN: Jeffrey Lord, that's what it is. That's how much I care about this guy.

I actually care about his firing. I think he is horrible. I think he is one of the worst commentators on CNN. I think he's just a total sellout.

However, they fired him because he got into a Twitter spat with Media Matters. And Media Matters is starting to campaign again to get people fired, get them thrown off.

And he said, "What you're doing is fascistic in nature. This is fascism." And they tweeted something back. And he wrote, "Sieg Heil."

CNN fires him almost immediately because they say, "Nazi salutes are absolutely -- we will not tolerate this --

STU: Indefensible.

GLENN: Are you kidding me? So now he's out. Bill.

BILL: Yeah, I mean, look, anybody -- and I mean anybody knows that this firing was political. It wasn't for cause. It wasn't because he did anything outrageous. I mean, you can debate all day long whether Nazi analogies should be used in any kind of discourse. But this clearly falls under freedom of speech. And he was making a contextual point, which is accurate, by the way, that Media Matters is a fascist organization. It is.

And then when the president of Media Matters struck back at him, he, in a wise guy fashion, went, "Sieg Heil." Who does that offend? Media Matters. So, what? So they were looking to dump him. And this gave them the opportunity to do it. That's the only thing I can figure out.

GLENN: Okay. So, Bill, that's maybe a little bit better than what I thought, but not by much.

Are you saying that they only use Media Matters as a cover? Because, I mean, why not cover him because we don't want him around. We don't like him.

BILL: Yeah, if he were a valued employee, they certainly wouldn't have done that. Look, if Jeffrey Lord -- I don't know what his contractual situation is. But he is an actionable violation of contract, sued against CNN.

You can't do that. He didn't do anything out of the ordinary, in the sense of exercising his freedom of speech to slap back at an organization that he feels is fascistic. So it's got to be something else. I don't know whether -- if he even had a contract.

But it looks to me -- and I've been in this business almost since as long as you have, since the War of 1812, Beck, as you mentioned last week on your program. All right? It looks to me like they just want to get rid of the guy, and this was a convenient way to do it.

GLENN: So, Bill, doesn't this not empower Media Matters like crazy?

BILL: Of course, it does. But Media Matters is in bed with all these people. I mean, Media Matters doesn't attack CNN, ever. Media Matters -- well, let me amend that. If CNN put on a conservative like you or me, maybe Media Matters would attack. But they don't attack their editorial posture. They don't attack NBC. They don't very rarely attack the networks. They only attack people with whom they disagree with politically, which is anybody. Moderate or right.

You've got to be a far-left lune to be in there cogering (phonetic).

GLENN: So we found a Media Matters plan of attack. And we're going to be going over it in the next couple of weeks, with our audience. It is their plan.

BILL: Good.

GLENN: We found it on the dark web.

BILL: The dark web.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, who -- who even puts their stuff on the dark web? Seriously, who does that criminals. Evil people. Why are you putting stuff on the dark web?

So in it, it talks about how they're now consulting with Google. They're now consulting with Facebook. They're trying to tell YouTube and Google and Facebook exactly what is offensive, what isn't. They're coming in as these moderate arbiters of --

BILL: Oh, they -- this organization, these are the people that orchestrated the sponsored attacks against me and you.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: They organized the demonstrations in front of Fox. They've got money. They pay people. They're awful. They're anti-democracy. And I hope you guys -- you know, I listen when I can. But when you get stuff, send it to me. Because certainly looking at these people hard, these Media Matters people.

GLENN: I'll send you the stuff that we just pulled up.

BILL: And you know what the worst part about this is? The worst part about it is these people were so closely allied with Hillary Clinton. David Brock, who was the founder of this, was Clinton's consigliere. If Clinton had ever been elected president, these people would be in the White House, these Media Matters. And I can't tell your audience how strongly enough how vicious and vile and anti-democratic they are.

GLENN: Actually I want to correct you on one thing.

BILL: Win after win after win because the media will never take them on because the media sympathizes with their far-left posture.

GLENN: Okay. I want to correct you on one thing: They're absolutely pro-democratic, which in the meaning of, all we want is a popular vote and majority wins. I mean, that is -- you know -- remember, Chavez was also very democratic.

BILL: They don't believe in freedom of speech.

GLENN: Yes, you're right. Correct.

BILL: They don't believe in freedom of speech. They operate in shadows on the dark web. They try to hurt people. They try to destroy people.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: This is not what our democracy is supposed to be about.

GLENN: It's a republic.

BILL: This is the most vicious, vile political organization in existence.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: And they have power. And money.

GLENN: So tell me how you feel about what happened with Google this week, with that firing.

BILL: You know, I didn't follow it that much because I'm not really into that world of -- and I know they're super powerful and all of that. But I'm more interested in the political component of this, rather than -- once you get into Google and Facebook and all of these organizations, you get into corporations. They're corporations. I mean, they may not wear ties. And they may give you kale for lunch. But it's a corporation. Okay?

GLENN: That's kind of what I want to talk to you about. As I said earlier this week, look, if Firestone or Goodyear was doing this, I wouldn't care. But this is the gateway to information.

We had this week a report was released that Apple has $58 billion in US Treasury bonds. That's more than most foreign countries will hold.

That gives that corporation real leverage on Capitol Hill. You know what, maybe we should just liquidate our government bonds because that's why we don't -- that's why we worry about foreign countries holding our bonds.

Does -- are these corporations that the left loves, are they becoming worrisome at all to you, Bill?

BILL: That's an interesting question. They are -- they are very, very powerful agents, and they control now most of the information flow. And with the destruction of cable news, and that's coming very, very fast.

GLENN: Very fast.

BILL: Talk radio is pretty much the only counter to the internet information flow, which is not an honest situation.

So, yes, it's dangerous. I'm not so concerned about them holding bonds. Although, yeah, I mean, I guess down the line, they could do a blackmail thing. You better do what we want. Or we'll liquidate or something. I see what you're saying.

GLENN: It's not like it's the top of my concerns. But it is -- it is a part of it.

It's like, wait a minute. These -- these guys are getting really powerful.

BILL: They are very powerful. But there's nothing you can do about that in a capitalistic society. The more successful corporations become, the more powerful they become.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: You can expose it. You can tell folks what's going on. And the information flow they're getting is not honest. That's certainly noble. But you can't stop them from accumulating assets.

GLENN: No. But you can start to say to our representatives, "I don't want you in bed with these people. There are no special favors for these people."

BILL: No, absolutely. Right. Right.

GLENN: So, Bill, I want to take a break. We have a ton to talk about, the news of the week. But I would like to pick your brain, honestly, because I have tremendous respect for you, as you know, on multiple fronts. But one of them is you are a very shrewd businessman. You are very smart.

You took every show. You know, I run on passion and gut and feelings. And you are much more of a scientific kind of guy. And you've made a brilliant move this week in not going -- running to somebody else and saying, "Okay. I'll fall under your umbrella." You're doing it yourself.

I want to talk to you about the future of cable news. I want to talk to you about the future of information.

BILL: Sure. It's fascinating what's happening.

GLENN: It really is. It really is.

BILL: And nobody is talking about it. So your audience is going to get a lot of information fast. After these announcements of interest.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Wow, thank you.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Back in just a second with Bill O'Reilly from BillO'Reilly.com.

GLENN: So let me go to Bill O'Reilly from BillO'Reilly.com, who just started his news program, the No Spin News. Every day you can see it and you can watch it at BillO'Reilly.com.

Bill, let's switch gears. I'd kind of like some advice from you and to pick your brain. What we did six years ago, when I left Fox and I built TheBlaze and the first OTT model around this, everyone said, "Glenn, no one will watch this on the Internet. They're not going to watch it on the phone. They want it on this."

It's why, honestly, we spent as much money as we did to make my network look -- quite honestly, the model was MSNBC. If it -- if it can't look as good as NBC in visuals, then people won't accept it.

Those days are over. We've laid the groundwork and the rails. And now you are the first one to come out as a really big guy and say, "Okay. I'm going to go and do this model, and I'm going to do it by myself. I don't need to join a network or whatever. I'm going to do it by myself." How long before, Bill, this becomes the absolute norm?

BILL: You know, it's hard to say. Our blueprint is that we want to deliver on a daily basis 30 to 40 minutes of honest news analysis, honest in the sense that it's fact-based.

And we're going to do that. And so we did a prototype this week on BillO'Reilly.com, where I was in a studio in a spiffy jacket and tie. And we had guests via Skype. And it went very well. I mean, it looked good. People liked it.

We have it up now, BillO'Reilly.com. Anybody can see the prototype. And it -- and it was tough. It was tough analysis. Talk about North Korea and stuff like that.

Now, we haven't decided exactly when we're going to launch this on a daily basis because we're doing our podcasts from my home office now. And it's working very, very well. But it's going to happen. And even if I decide to come back to cable TV, we'll still do this 30 to 40 minutes per day, because we don't want any -- I'm sorry about that. That's enthusiasm.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

BILL: Enthusiasm from the --

GLENN: That's Bill's head writer.

BILL: From the community.

Anyway, we don't want any intrusion.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: Corporate intrusion or Media Matters intrusion or threats or any of that. We want to control the product, as you do.

GLENN: Right. So you can control --

BILL: And I think this prototype that we put out is going to take root. And I think it's going to be very successful.

GLENN: Right.

BILL: The reason this is necessary, this is the key to it all, is there's been a profound change in cable news. And as we discussed in previous episodes of the Beck program, network news is largely irrelevant now. Remember Scott Pelley, the anchor of CBS News?

GLENN: No. Neither does anybody else.

BILL: Well, Scott packed it in, and nobody even knew.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: I mean, nobody even said a word. It was like, poor Scott. He was there six years on every night. He was taking Walter Cronkite's seat, and he's out of there, and nobody even cares. That's how irrelevant the Nightly News is.

The morning is entertainment. So when cable news starts then to change -- fundamentally change, not into a news service anymore. They're not a news service. They're basically a party apparatus. So MSNBC, CNN, they're a Democrat Party apparatus. And Fox News, to some extent, not to the extent of the others, it reflects a Republican point of view. Well, where do Americans go for the truth? People seeking the truth and not having a vested interest in one political party or one political philosophy. There's nowhere to go.

So that this, in a capitalistic society, this Blaze, the Beck Blaze, O'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com, this now presents a very, very attractive alternative to millions of Americans who love their country and want to know about it in a truthful way.

GLENN: Bill.

BILL: You're stunned at that analysis?

GLENN: No, no, no. I was actually --

BILL: You're absolutely stunned. It's so right on. Nobody has ever talked that way to you.

GLENN: I was actually hoping for a deeper insight. Why don't you put the dog on the phone?

(laughter)

All right. When we come back --

BILL: Corgi.

GLENN: When we come back, we're going to have to go over the strategy of North Korea, how Bill thinks that is going, where that ends up, and all the rest of the news of the week with Bill O'Reilly. You can hear him every day at BillO'Reilly.com. That's BillO'Reilly.com. BillO'Reilly.com.

GLENN: So let's bring Bill O'Reilly from Bill O'Reilly back. BillO'Reilly.com. And talk to him a little bit about North Korea.

First of all, Bill, are we going to war with North Korea?

BILL: No.

GLENN: Okay. If -- if it is just between us, we're having a private council, you're the president of the United States, and you've got your council split in half. And half says, "Mr. President, we've got to go. They've crossed too many red lines. It's only going to be a problem down the road. We got to go, and I'd like to recommend a first strike." The other half says, "No first strike and, no, don't go to war because millions will die." Which do you lean towards?

BILL: Okay. You can't do a preemptive strike with nukes on anybody. That's not acceptable in the world we live in. You could do, you know, some bombing like -- like you did in Syria, take out a strategic military target. I mean, that's certainly possible. But I don't see that happening.

What I see happening is this is -- Trump is basically telling the world, "Look, I'm capable of this," which is true. I'm capable of it.

Which Obama was and everybody knew, no matter what you did, Obama wasn't going to do anything drastic. And it was like Merkel today, the German chancellor comes in and says, "Well, there really isn't any military solution to North Korea."

Now, just step back and analyze how stupid that statement is from Angela Merkel. What if North Korea launches a missile at Guam or Japan or South Korea? What if they do that? I mean, that's what this idiot is threatening to do.

And Merkel says there's no military solution to that. So, what, you let them do that? That's exactly the wrong message.

And Trump's message is basically symbolic. It's a symbolic message. I'm capable of this. But will he do it? No. Only if they attack, they being North Korea, one of our allies or any interest that the United States has. Then he will. But I don't see any new component in this. Because that's Armageddon. Once you start with the nukes, then, you know, the stuff kills south Koreans. It kills Chinese. You really can't do that.

GLENN: So here's where I've come down on this, on my understanding of what Donald Trump is doing. And it may be more wishful thinking. But I don't think it is.

As I've watched this game play out and I know, you know, how horrible war with North Korea would be and now especially with China saying, "You do a first strike, we're on their side. You fight back, we're going to leave them to their own business. And you guys can have at them." There's no way we're going for a first strike.

If we do, we turn the whole world against us, I think.

BILL: Yeah. And the generals -- look, Kelly is the guy calling the shots, a lot of the shots now. He's never going to do it.

GLENN: Yep, I agree.

BILL: People got to calm down. And the reason that this has taken on hysteria is because it's August. There's no other news. Cable news is all -- I mean, they're just going crazy. And they're whipping everybody up. And the left wants everybody to think that Trump is Dr. Strangelove. And so that's why it's whipping up.

But if you look at it, it's probably not going to lead to anything. It's going to fizzle out like most of the North Korean missile tests do.

GLENN: So here is the second part of that: If this indeed is strategy and Donald Trump is playing the strong hand because nobody has the United States for a long time and wants to put everybody on notice and does have a little bit of a twitchy eye, he may in the end, if this works, be remembered as Ronald Reagan, when it came to the Cold War. This is exactly the argument we had from the left on Ronald Reagan.

BILL: Yeah. But it's a different situation because you have irrationality in North Korea. I mean, this guy is pretty irrational.

But, you know, I want to personalize it a little. And I can do that by a plug. You know, Killing the Rising Sun is about -- primarily about the atom bomb drop on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the power of those bombs was so horrific -- now, they're 10,000 times as powerful. And if you really want to know what happened -- and kids should know it too. We have a kid's book: The Day the World Went Nuclear, off Killing the Rising Sun. We take you right down, we put you right down at Hiroshima when that bomb dropped, and you can feel what happened. And so that's why the horror of nuclear war, it gets people crazy. I mean, it really does. It gets people crazy.

And all Americans should know what the actual horror is. That you're going to have people vaporized on the spot, that you're going to have fallout that states for 50 to 60 years. Makes Chernobyl look like Disneyland. So I think that when you take that into consideration and then you're President Trump or whatever, you're not going to do that unless you absolutely have to do it. But I can see a surgical, you know, conventional strike on North Korea, if they keep it up.

GLENN: Bill, you were probably, oh, around retirement age back in '82 and '83, when -- when The Day After came out. And that was -- '82 was the year I graduated from high school. So I had a very different look at it then. I just looked it up this week. I was just kind of zipping through it on YouTube. And I remember how scary that was. But because of my age back then, I really didn't see it as really what it was. Nothing's changed. That is Hollywood and the press and the networks trying to make you more afraid of Ronald Reagan's rhetoric than really the Soviet Union. And trying to thwart Ronald Reagan. Would you agree with that?

Did you see that that way?

BILL: Yeah, the left historically never wants to fight for anything. And anybody who counters that is a war-mongering fascist. So even before World War II, there was a big strain of Americans that didn't want to confront Hitler or Tokyo. They didn't want to get involved.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: And some of those were conservative people.

GLENN: Yeah. The America First -- the America First campaign.

BILL: Yeah, just stay away. We got two oceans protecting us. Well, now we don't have any oceans. Okay? So it is an emotional issue, but people should know, this isn't like Iraq or Afghanistan. You know, sending in the Special Forces to track down ISIS. It's nothing like that.

This guy is playing with something that could obliterate millions of people. And so I -- I have, you know, confidence in the American system that we're not going to do anything irresponsible. That's the key word. The rhetoric is the rhetoric, all right? Trump is definitely sending a message to the world that he's capable, like Reagan. Okay? But I don't think anything more will come of this, at this point.

GLENN: Okay. Let me give you just some quick hits here and just get your comments on. Chelsea Manning being described as an American beauty in a woman's swimsuit on the beach in Vanity Fair. Comments?

BILL: What do you want me to say about it?

GLENN: Just any comment on --

BILL: I mean, look, if she wants to be in a bathing suit and on a beach, she has the perfect right to do that. If Vanity Fair wants to make a deal about it, I don't care.

GLENN: It's not that. It's that she's an American traitor. How many people lost their lives because of her?

BILL: Oh, I see. Okay. Yeah.

GLENN: And now we're being spoon-fed, that, no, she's just a beautiful woman.

BILL: And if I could just remind everybody, President Obama commuted her sentence. Okay. So that's why she's in the bikini. Now, maybe that was part of the deal. I'll let you out, if you go into a bikini in Vanity Fair. That's the deal.

PAT: That's a weird deal.

GLENN: That's a weird deal.

PAT: But okay.

BILL: It could have happened.

PAT: It could have.

GLENN: Paul Manafort, the raid of his residence by the FBI.

BILL: You know, not since Eliot Ness and the Untouchables has there been a crime drama at this level.

You know, Manafort, I've always said this from the very beginning: If there's one Trump person that's got a deficit in this whole thing, it's him. Because he made some big money representing pro-Russian interests in the Ukraine situation. He had the contacts. He knew the guys.

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

BILL: He knew Boris and Natasha. And so, you know, they went in. They try to find out what he has, and I'm glad I'm not Paul Manafort.

GLENN: Mitch McConnell said the reason why the G.O.P. is getting a bad brand or bad name is because Donald Trump and others had excessive expectations.

BILL: I just think this guy is such a dweeb. I hate to be -- you know, I just think McConnell is such a dweeb. D-W-E-E-B. Word of the day.

GLENN: Yeah. Word of the day.

BILL: I mean, this guy, when I was very close to getting Kate's Law on the floor of the Senate, it was him who sabotaged it. Because he wanted to attach all kinds of stuff that he knew wasn't going to pass it.

I just think this guy is just -- I don't know him. I don't -- he never came on my program. He was always afraid to do that.

I just don't have any use for him at all. So I wish -- I wish there was more dynamic leadership on both sides. On the Democratic side, you have Chucky Schumer threatening all of his people.

If you don't do what I say, we're going to run somebody against you in the primary and cut off your money. That's why he's got all these Democrats, you know, voting against their country's best interests.

And on the other side, you've got Mitch McConnell playing whatever game he's playing. So it's just really -- and I think Americans have got it. It's disgusting. It really is.

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly, writing some great history books and books now for your kids as well. You can hear his commentary every day at BillO'Reilly.com.

You can get his podcast and his members also are chiming in now on, how do we make this internet newscast work for you? And he's taking your comments on it. And you can watch it now at BillO'Reilly.com. Thanks, Bill, appreciate it.

BILL: Now, Beck, one more thing before you dump me here, if I send you an advanced copy of Killing England: The Brutal Struggle for American Independence, will you read it, Beck? Will you read the book if I send it to you in advance? It's out September 19th.

GLENN: Are there some things in the pages that maybe might fall out?

BILL: You're going to find out what Franklin, Washington, and Jefferson were really like.

GLENN: I only care about Benjamin. If Benjamin happens to be in those papers and it slips out of the book, I might read it.

BILL: All right!

GLENN: But I'm interested in the Benjamins. Thank you very much, Bill. Appreciate it. God bless. BillO'Reilly.com. BillO'Reilly.com.

What Glenn Beck Never Got to Say to Charlie Kirk | Glenn TV | Ep 456

Charlie Kirk would have been president. Political violence robbed him of fulfilling that destiny, so now his friends, colleagues, and supporters throughout the world must figure out how to pick up the pieces and ensure that his legacy never ends. On a special episode of "Glenn TV," Glenn replays the most powerful, touching, and inspirational moments from his time guest-hosting "The Charlie Kirk Show" on Wednesday morning, one week after Charlie’s death. In a touching tribute to his friend, Glenn places Rush Limbaugh’s golden microphone next to Charlie’s — a symbol of Charlie’s longtime dream and the influence he has had throughout the world. Plus, Glenn speaks to "The Charlie Kirk Show" executive producer Andrew Kolvet and Turning Point USA COO Tyler Bowyer about who their dear friend was behind the scenes, the influence he’s had on America and the MAGA movement, and how Charlie’s fingerprints will still be present on future elections. Also, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Glenn discuss how Charlie Kirk helped launched her career, and Research Center Investigative Researcher Ryan Mauro shares how he has the smoking gun President Trump needs to take on George Soros’ network. These are the voices who knew Charlie well, but the number of people he indirectly touched and influenced is spread far and wide. Glenn ends with a beautiful song tribute by David Osmond and Cheyenne Grace, depicting just how mournful the entire world truly is. Rest in peace, Charlie.

RADIO

Debunking the 5 BIGGEST LIES about Charlie Kirk

In the first week after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, some in the media and on the Left have tried to either justify or dismiss his death by spreading lies about what he said. Glenn Beck reviews an article by The Federalist, which debunks the 5 biggest lies.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We were just talking about the five lies that are going around, about Charlie Kirk.

And it is -- it's reprehensible about what's going on.

Because people who are saying these things. Who are starting these things. They really need -- I mean, they know. They know.

Like Stephen King, really?

You really think that Stephen King.

You really think that Charlie Kirk is for the stoning of gay people?

I --

STU: I do think, though. A lot of these people have an image of everyone on the right, that --

GLENN: But it shows how unbelievably isolated you are.

STU: Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Now, king, in particular, I think -- like, I don't think Stephen King was lying on that.

I think he's -- and I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the -- in the drawer.

GLENN: He ought to be. You can't write like he does.

STU: He's not an idiot, right? He can form thoughts. But I think he's so completely isolated in his bubble. Like, if someone says something terrible, about a person like Charlie Kirk, and your image of him is he's basically Hitler.

Well, you don't -- you don't spend time fact-checking it.

Of course, that guy -- he's that terrible human being. Of course, he said something like that. You don't even bother to check it.

You know, it's like, if I -- if you ran into a quote from Hitler, you've never seen, that was negative from Jews. As a journalist, you should probably check it.

You might think. That was probably true. He said a lot of things like that. That's how they think about people who are normal conservatives who want lower taxes and less regulation. And that is really, really disturbing.

So these lies are really prominent. People really believe these things.

GLENN: So there's a couple of -- here are the five. The first one is Charlie Kirk said black people were better off in slavery.

How big of an idiot, do you have to be, to believe that?

Okay?

Unless you're Crockett. Unless your last name is Crockett.

And I don't mean Davey. Black Americans were better off than slavery. No. That's absolutely no true -- not true. He never said anything like that. Now, what he -- what you're probably getting this from, and I'm going -- searching. I am on -- way metal detector on the beach with board shorts, sandals, and socks, looking for anything that even kind of sounds like that. But Charlie Kirk did say that, you know, they were talking about Jim Crow and how evil Jim Crow was. But he said with be, but if you look at the family, the black family before the passage of the civil rights act, which ended the Jim Crow laws, he said, the family was thriving.

And it was!

It was. Blacks had a lower divorce rate than whites did in I think 1961. They -- their families were stronger. Dads were in the homes. They had lower crime rates. I mean, it -- something happened around the time of the Civil Rights Act.

Now, my theory is, the Civil Rights Act was a -- was done by progressives. I mean, these are the guys who said no to the Civil Rights Act, just four years before. And -- and worked hard to stop the Civil Rights Act.

So what changed in those four years?

The assassination of President Kennedy. That changed your mind. Not even. Not even.

I mean, Johnson was the biggest racist up until he -- up until he died. Why would he create the great society?

My theory, this is just a theory. But my theory is, is because finally, the progressives had a way to keep blacks under their thumb and destroy the family. And destroy them, as people.

I mean, the Civil Rights Act, and more the Great Society.

The Great Society did more damage to the black family than -- than anybody could have done outside of Margaret Sanger. I think that's what he meant by that. It was evil.

You know, Jim Crow, et cetera, et cetera.

But if you look at the numbers on specifics, family, et cetera, et cetera. Blacks were doing better as families, before the Great Society.

And I think that undoing is absolutely -- is absolutely tied to it. And it was intentional, myself, I believe that.

Also, the next claim is that -- that Charlie Kirk said, black women have inferior intelligence. No, that's not what he said.

Now, they're quoting him saying that black women don't have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.

How -- how bad does your image have to be of people on the other side to believe that they could say that?

That Charlie Kirk could say that?

STU: Like, if you were to -- you know, I think about this a lot of times. When I think about how we react to crazy statements on the left.

My reaction a lot of times, when I hear someone saying that is wait a minute.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Even if they believed that, they wouldn't just blurt it out. What is the context of this? I want to know. I want to understand. That should be your first question when you run into a quote like that.

GLENN: Well, go to Snopes. They rate this one true.

STU: This is true.

GLENN: They rate it absolutely true.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Until you get to the last paragraph, when they say, well, we should point out, he wasn't talking about all black women. He was talking about four specific black women.

STU: Oh. Oh.

GLENN: So he's talking about Joy Reid, absolutely true. Sheila Jackson Lee, absolutely true.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Ketanji Brown Jackson. Jackson Brown, absolutely true.

STU: Well, she's not a biologist, Glenn.

GLENN: No. She doesn't know what a woman is. I'm not a biologist. Yeah.

And Michelle Obama, which I don't think is true. I think Michelle Obama is actually rather smart and conniving and just flatout evil.

STU: Yeah. There's a mix there. Ketanji Brown Jackson, for all the flaws that would happen. There's a Supreme Court justice, obviously isn't a moron.

GLENN: Well.

STU: I would say Sotomayor, I would be more confident saying she is a moron.

Though, I am -- for the job that she has, Ketanji Brown Jackson is a moron. You know, Joy Reid is a complete idiot. Wasn't Sheila Jackson Lee, those two follow the same category? You're right. Michelle Obama, I would not call an idiot.

Again, criticizing four members of a group does not mean you're criticizing the group.

GLENN: And he was criticizing people he thought were unqualified to make statements of -- of any intelligence on whatever topic it was that he was talking about.

And what they did, is they said, he thinks that all black women are just dumb.

I mean, that is so incredibly dishonest.

Charlie Kirk said, gun deaths are worth it to keep the Second Amendment.

STU: This is one I heard a lot.

This is one that a lot of people on the left are using as justification for their celebration.

He said, you know, well, you just have to deal with the deaths if you want to have a Second Amendment.

And, you know, I don't know if you have the context --

GLENN: I have it -- I have his answer right here.

You ready? You will never live in a society where you have an armed citizenry. And you won't have a single gun death.

That's nonsense.

It's drivel.

But I am -- I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year.

So you can have the Second Amendment right to protect your other God-given rights.

It's a prudent deal. It is rational to think that way.

STU: I mean, and obviously -- every time -- if you have a free society, you take risks with it.

There will always be people. Horrible, horrible human beings that all seem to donate to Democrat causes, that will do things, like we saw one week ago today.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And that is -- you know, I -- again, you can't speak for Charlie Kirk.

He spoke for himself so eloquently.

But he -- even what occurred last week, would not change his mind on that.

Even -- now that something terrible has happened to me and my family, we should overturn the Second Amendment. And people shouldn't have the right to defend themselves.

You know that's how he would feel about it. And this is, if anything, pointing to his incredible consistency on the rights that we have, in this country. You know, it is a sad -- sad, unfortunate fact about so many things.

Sad, unfortunate fact about automobile travel.

That you do have to deal with some automobile accidents.

When you have highways where you can drive 55, 65, 75 miles an hour, we all understand that to be true.

GLENN: It's unreasonable to think that you can live in a society with automobiles, and not have some automobile accidents.

STU: It's absolutely true.

GLENN: It's exactly what he said about guns.

STU: And, frankly, the other thing that is important to understand, if you did eliminate all guns, you would not eliminate all murders.

GLENN: No. They did in England.

STU: Oh, they did. We're all set?

GLENN: There's no murder there.

STU: No violent crimes there.

I keep reading about them. Is that all false?

GLENN: Yeah. That's Donald Trump. You know what I mean?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And he's -- last one, Charlie used an Asian slur. Now, I'm not going to use the slur, obviously. I'm just going to say, it's what happens sometimes with armor. There's a very famous saying with armor, that has nothing to do with the Chinese or Asian at all. But I'm not even going to put those together in this context now, you you'll have to figure it out.

The thing is going around, he used that slur to yell at an Asian woman in the audience.

Now, again, what kind of monster -- or how --

STU: You should know on its face, that's false. You should know that's false.

GLENN: Yeah. How stupid would Charlie Kirk have to be, okay?

So, you know, there's nothing. There's nothing like that. Well, I'm sorry.

He was screaming something at a woman when they were talking about capitalism, and he was yelling, Cenk, not the other word. Okay? And who is that? From the Young Turks --

STU: The guys from the Young Turks.

GLENN: That's what he was saying.

STU: Oh, gosh, that's just so bad. You know, the other one was the Stephen King situation, where he quoted some horrible thing that Charlie Kirk said.

And, again, he knitted eventually, that -- that it was false.

But it was -- it was -- he was quoting someone else, in an incident, and critiquing that position.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Yes.

STU: Which was a bad position. But he was bringing it up to quote him and critique him, which is a very standard thing they did on the left. This is a standard tactic of Media Matters when you're quoting someone else or saying something.

They'll act as if I say it.

GLENN: You repeat a lie often enough, and the public will remember it. Glenn Beck is quoting Hitler. Glenn Beck loves Hitler.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Yeah. Hitler said that, but that's not what I was saying. That had nothing to do with the conversation, for the love of Pete.

STU: Yeah, again, if you had something against Charlie Kirk, you wouldn't need to go to this stuff. If our opinion of Kirk, which was a guy who worked hard to debate people.

Who tried to practice politics and civic life the right way. Who tried to be a shining light for his faith, which was vitally important to him and his family. If that vision of Charlie Kirk was false, you wouldn't need to go to these things.

GLENN: No.

STU: You could come up with 50 different things he said that were really offensive. Instead, what you come up with are lies. Because that's what you're in the business of.

GLENN: Yeah. And there is a problem.

The -- we now know. And we'll have more on this later today. On the Charlie Kirk show.

And then on tomorrow.

But we now know that the Chinese and Russia are involved with disinformation campaigns.

Based on Charlie Kirk, trying to get us to push us into Civil War. And we know it for a fact now.

So just be very careful what you read online.

And don't necessarily repeat everything that you see.

The Far-Left Attacks in 2025 Prior to the Assassination of Charlie Kirk

In the aftermath of the assassination of Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk, it is important to realize that a chilling pattern of far-left radical attacks had already emerged in 2025. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to lay out the timeline, connect the dots, and explain why what looks like a “protest” on one day can turn into an actual attack on the next. Glenn walks through each high-profile incident, the groups and ideologies involved, and the national implications for safety, free speech, and public order.

Watch This FULL Episode of 'Glenn TV' HERE

RADIO

Glenn Beck warns of dangerous government powers in proposed Charlie Kirk act

President Trump and others have posted in support of a proposed Charlie Kirk Act. But Glenn Beck gives a warning: there are 2 versions of this going around. One, proposed by Sen. Mike Lee, would stop the government from using propaganda against Americans. The other would go further, giving the government dangerous powers over truth. Glenn Beck explains the differences as well as what the Smith-Mundt Act was and why an Obama-era decision may be connected to the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. I want you to just spend a couple of minutes with me, and switch everything that you've been thinking on, off for a minute. This is very important. I want to take you back to the world in 1948, okay?

The ashes of World War II are still warm. The Cold War is already beginning to chill in the air, and the Soviet Union has a propaganda machine that is in full swing.

Radio Moscow, Pravda, endless streams of anti-American stories are pouring into the homes of men and women, all across the globe.

And Congress looked at this. And said, we need a counterbalance on this.

America needs to tell her story to the world about liberty and about her finding ideals.

And we need to tell it to the rest of the world.

This is the birth of the Smith-Mundt Act. Okay? We needed to launch things, at that time. Like the Voice of America, and radio-free Europe, and Radio Liberty.

These were not just radio stations. For many who were behind the curtain, these were lifelines.

A Polish dissident in the 1970s or a Hungarian who lived through the 1956 uprising, they'll tell you, they're huddled in the dark, and they have that dial of that radio.

And they can tune it. They carefully tune it, listening to an American voice break through the static and break through the darkness. That says, freedom is real. And the world hasn't forgotten you. They remember that as being very important.

But and here is the key: We, as a society, drew a very bright red line, none of this could ever be used in the United States. Congress rightfully was terrified of unleashing a government propaganda machine on its own citizens. Now, I want you to remember. 1948, Congress is still Democrat.

Okay?

You just had 20 years of the same president, FDR.

They're about to say, no president can serve that long.

The Democrats said, no Democrat president. No Republican president can ever serve that long. Because we were so close to fascism.

So the Democrats are very concerned about the government going fascistic.

And they should know about it. Because they remembered the control commission.

Now, let me take you back to World War I. The Creel Commission is something that nobody remembers, and everyone should.

Because it's what whipped America up in a frenzy, to get us to go into World War I.

You know it, because you remember the I want you Uncle Sam poster. And I've always hated that Uncle Sam poster because of the Creel Commission. I love it. I think it's really beautiful. It was created by an artist, that he didn't create it for the Creel Commission. So, you know, he was innocent. But it was the Creel machine that plastered it on every wall, every post office, every train station.

And suddenly Uncle Sam's finger was pointing at you. It wasn't just a poster. It was a summons. It was you. We need you to go to war. Americans did not want to go to World War I. In fact, Woodrow Wilson said, the other side, he will put you into war. I will keep I out of war. He knew that wasn't true.

Within three months after his reelection, we're at war. But he had to bring the country along. So the Creel Commission, through films and songs, films like the Kaiser, the Beast of Berlin, it turned the -- it turned Germany into a cartoon villain. George Cohan, he wrote songs, over there. Over there.

All of these things were done by the government, as propaganda to get Americans to go over there.

And fight. Then the government went even further. And they started hiring these, what were called Four Minute Men.

Now, imagine this, you're sitting in a movie theater.

The film. You're watching maybe the -- the newsreel. And as they're changing the reels, some guy who just in the audience, stands up, walks to the front. Clears his throat. And he delivers this really well-thought out and rousing four minute speech about patriotism. And liberty.

And crushing Germany.

The government had 75,000 volunteers. They gave millions of speeches, when anybody would pause in churches and schools. In parks.

In theaters. They were called Four Minute Men.

This was social media before social media. They were short bursts. And they seemingly were everywhere, and always on message.

Because the message was crafted by the government. Then the Creel group, through our government, published booklets, official bulletins. They planted stories in the press. This is when we really started really getting into the press, and information was -- had one goal. All of the information. And that was rallies for the -- rally support for the war, and drown out anybody that was disagreeing with that. Okay?

The government actually encouraged kids to spy on their neighbors.

That you were encouraged and post -- post men did this.

To go through the mail, if they saw -- if they saw letters that were coming in. Ask they wanted to know, who it was. And are you a German spy. Are you somebody who is going to be against the war?

Postal workers went through your mail. And it was legal at the time!

You were encouraged, operators were encouraged to listen to people's phone calls, and to report if they were on the other side.

This is Germany.

In fact, because of the Creel Commission, Germans, and what's his name?

The head of the German propaganda, oh, what's his name? The German douche bag. I can't remember his name. Anyway, what was his name?

STU: Goebbels, is that who you're talking about?

GLENN: Goebbels.

STU: Although, I like your name for it, frankly.

GLENN: Yeah. Goebbels, the douche bag.

Anyway, he said, we lost World War I because of American propaganda. But we learned how Americans did it.

And that's what Goebbels did in World War II. All of this propaganda. Okay?

By the way, American advertising, up until World War II, it was called propaganda.

What I heard, I wouldn't have said, now a message from our advertiser.

I was delivering literally and it was cool at the time, to call it propaganda.

Because that's what it was. Paid for propaganda.

Bit after Goebbels took it. And did what he did with it. We were like, oh, propaganda is bad!

Okay?

So here's what -- here's what happened because of the Creel Commission. They were pushing uniformity of thought. They did that by making sure Americans were hearing the same slogans. The same images. The same stories from every direction. Which created the illusion of unanimous consent. I want you to think about life today.

I want you to think about life during COVID.

What was the goal of the government.

To crush any dissent, and to control all of the messages that were going out, to make sure that you were hearing the same slogans, the same images. The same stories from every direction, to give you the illusion that it was unanimous consent.

What about the global warming? It's exactly the same.

Then on top of it, the Creel Commission demonized dissent. Okay? German Americans were part of this country forever.

In fact, we were I think two votes away from making German our official language, as the United States, not English. But they were all of a sudden, branded as traitors.

You couldn't -- a priest went to jail, because he gave the last rites to a German who fell down in front of him on the streets and was dying. And a priest spoke German and gave him the last rites in German. That priest went to jail! Okay??

Okay? So they demonized dissent. Then they suppressed free speech. The propaganda campaign dovetailed with the Espionage Act of 1917. The Sedition Act of 1918. If you criticized the draft, if you questioned the war, you could be fined. You would be ostracized, and you would go to jail.

This is Woodrow Wilson, gang. Does any of it sound familiar?

Now, here's what the aftermath was, after the war. When the war ended, the mask came off. Millions were dead, and Americans felt absolutely duped. They felt that they were tricked into going into a war that they were manipulated into. They didn't even understand it. And that's why we were such isolationists, in the 1920s and our 1930s, because our own government had manipulated the population to go in to fight this war, and they felt so manipulated and so betrayed by their own government. They were like, I don't want anything to do with foreign wars, okay?

So why did this -- why did this happen in 1948?

Well, because in 1948, all of this stuff is happening, and we're saying, okay. We need to have some sort of -- some sort of boundary.

Because we're going to start all of this propaganda, for the United States. And it cannot be ever turned on the people of the United States. Okay?

So then why -- why was it repealed?

It was repealed without any really kind of conversation. Because it was slipped in, called the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act.

It was slipped in to a defense authorization bill. Just like it's happening right now, the government didn't pay its bills.

They couldn't come up with the -- with a way to actually fund everything. Because we have to act as an emergency, otherwise all of our war machine. And it's all going to stop. And the world is going to die. And panic and all of that.

;And so somebody has slipped the bill in. And we modernized it.

Why did we modernize?

Well, because don't you like transparency?

I mean, we're doing this overseas. We're doing this propaganda overseas. Do you know -- taxpayer. You're paying for it. Shouldn't you see it?

There was a Congressman Max Thornberry. He was one of the sponsors. And he said, quote, today the law prevents the American people from seeing or hearing the same things we broadcast overseas, and that doesn't make any sense.

We paid for it. Okay. Then they switched that from transparency to, and it's helping fight terrorism. It will let the Department of Defense and the State Department share counter radicalization material both abroad and at home, because we have to modernize this. The internet is everywhere, okay?
So who doesn't want to fight terrorists? Who doesn't want transparency?

Now, here's what actually happened. I'll tell you in 60 seconds. First, Stu.

STU: Yeah. Let me tell you about Prize Picks. You know, we're talking about daily fantasy sports, which is a nice escape, honestly from where we've been over the past three weeks.

If you remember fantasy sports and you're like, oh, gosh.

Yeah, that's a lot of work. I have to be on there, every single day. You don't have to do it that way. Prize Picks brings it back to what it was meant to be. Simple and quick and actually enjoyable.

No drafts. No leagues. No season-long commitments. You just look at the player projections for the day, decide if they'll do more or less than what is listed, build your lineup. And then you're in.

It takes less than a minute to play. And you can mix or match players across different sports, football, baseball. Basketball.

Whatever -- whatever you want.

You don't have to be a stat wizard. You don't have to be a sports insider. You just got instincts, and you have an opinion.

You can win Prize Picks. It's daily fantasy, the way it should be. Fun, flexible, and easy to fit into real life and a nice escape. No stress. Just sports your way.

Download the app today. Use the code Stu.

Get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup. The code is Stu, to get 50 bucks instantly when you play your first 5-dollar lineup. It's Prize Picks. And it's good to be right. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So in 2012, the left decides, we have to get rid of this propaganda thing.

Okay?

Once the firewall was gone, and it's just a blip, no one even really noticed it. Suddenly, the government agencies could circulate diplomacy campaigns, inside of the United States.

And we saw this. This is where you get your USAID. The NGOs. Doing all the things here in the United States.

Because they can all do it. During COVID, you saw this.

You saw government-funded messaging, quietly merging with the media campaigns and big tech content moderation. Narratives weren't debated. They were handed out by the government. And then they were enforced. Then take the DHS disinformation governance board.

This is a direct descendent from this shift. Okay?

It was the government openly declaring it had a role in policing speech at home.

Look at the 2016 aftermath of the elections. Reports now confirm that the US government funds originally intended for overseas information campaigns that had filtered into domestic projects that fact-checked, flagged, and suppressed certain narratives online. The line between foreign propaganda and domestic persuasion was completely gone. Everything they worried about in 1948, was now happening after 2012. Okay. So why am I bringing this up today?

Because after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, we have been asking for this to be reinstated.

This Smith-Mundt Act has to be reinstated. But after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, there is a new wave of enthusiasm for this as there should be.

But some people on our side, are now demanding more than just a firewall.

You go to change.org. And there's petitions for a Charlie Kirk act.

And it will not only stop government propaganda. But it goes further than that. It starts to punish private media. Educators. Social media platforms. For spreading what they call false narratives. So this is -- this is our side saying, yeah, well, now we want the power to do what they did. Okay? Hear me clearly.

Accountability matters! Lives are destroyed, reputations are smeared. And that matters.

But we have systems in place for that.

What this proposal opens is a new door. A terror where government decides, what is and isn't falsehood.

And the government cannot do that. History teaches us. Once the government claims the authority to define truth.

Liberty is gone. Okay?

Now, enter Mike Lee.

Mike Lee has another proposal. Mike Lee has a version. That he is submitting to Congress. And trying to get it passed. And every American should be for this.

Right or left.

Every American should be for this. He's not going to reinvent the wheel. He just wants the old firewall put back. That's it.

Period.

The government must not, and cannot propagandize its own people. Restore the very bright red line that was attacked in 1948.

It's not about silencing speech. It's about preventing the most powerful institution on earth, with the endless resources of that institution, the government.

And the endless reach, from turning its firehose of influence in on the American people.

This is why it matters. I want you to think of -- I want you to think of football.

Oh, boy. Dangerous.

You wouldn't let the referee this a football game, put on a jersey, and join one of the teams. Okay?

But that's what the repeal did. It let the government be both the referee and the player in the arena of ideas. Mike Lee is saying, put the stripes back on their jerseys. Make sure they're in black and white stripes. So we know exactly who they are!

Change.org and some people on our side want to make the ref not only a player, but the judge, the jury, and the executioner. It cannot happen.

This is -- I'm telling you, if this goes through, Mike Lee is proposing something that is clean. Doesn't have any of this in.

So support the Mike Lee Mundt Act. But if you're hearing people talk about, we have to go further, that is the Patriot Act of our day. We're standing at a fork in the road.

Reinstating the Smith-Mundt protections. They're not going to solve all the problems of misinformation, but it reestablishes the ground rules. And tells Washington, you cannot propagandize us, period.
(music)

Once truth belongs to the state, truth itself ceases to exist. Support Mike Lee's bill.

Restore the Smith-Mundt Act.

Glenn's Show Prep

Bill O’Reilly: ‘Profound Change’ Is Disrupting the Way We Watch News — for the Better

What Glenn Beck Never Got to Say to Charlie Kirk | Glenn TV | Ep 456

Debunking the 5 BIGGEST LIES about Charlie Kirk

Transcript

The Far-Left Attacks in 2025 Prior to the Assassination of Charlie Kirk

Glenn Beck warns of dangerous government powers in proposed Charlie Kirk act

Transcript