Glenn Beck - Bill Maher: Conservatives 'made' McVeigh do it


Related Video

GLENN: So don't think about me when you listen to this audio. Think about what this means to you. Here's Bill Maher.

MAHER: Listening to people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck these days, I cannot figure out whether these right-wingers are more dangerous when they're in power or when they're out of power because when they're out of power, you know, their paranoia goes off the charts. This Glenn Beck guy, I wouldn't even give him the time of day except he's a big star now on Fox and a lot of people believe, and he's talking about FEMA concentration camps.

GLENN: Okay, I just want you to know this isn't accurate at all. I did mention the Internet conspiracy theory of FEMA concentration camps, particularly in relation to a segment in which we are going to debunk Internet conspiracy theories. I said on the air the day -- I snapped. Did anybody hear it? I snapped: "Can we just set the record straight on this. Stop looking at things that are on the Internet." But Bill Maher, isn't he also talking about FEMA concentration camps? Maybe he's just paranoid as well. I'm not really sure. Let's listen in.

MAHER: He says we are headed toward socialism, totalitarianism beyond your wildest imagination but apparently not beyond his wildest.

GLENN: Okay. Apparently I'm incredibly paranoid about being headed toward socialism. I wish you could see the picture of who was on the panel because on the panel, and I kid you not, is a U.S. Senator who is an avowed socialist. Bernie Sanders from Vermont, a socialist, was sitting there on the panel. You know, I don't mean socialist like "I think his policies lean social." I mean he's a card-carrying socialist! And just to show you the solid balance of the panel, you have Bill Maher on the panel, you have Keith Olbermann, you have a guy from the New York Times, somebody described as an actress, an activist sitting next to him, and Bernie Sanders, the avowed socialist. So I believe you could make the argument that the admitted socialist is actually the fifth most liberal on the panel out of five, but I'm not really sure. And saying that I am paranoid for warning that we might go down the road to totalitarianism while sitting with Keith Olbermann is particularly funny and here's why. Because Keith Olbermann is a guy who didn't warn that we might be on the road to something. He's been saying that we were already there for years, and nobody in the media even lifted an eyebrow.

VOICE: If you believe in the seamless mutuality of government and big business, come out and say it. There is a dictionary definition, one word that describes that toxic blend. You're a fascist. Get them to print you a T-shirt with fascist on it. What else is this but fascism?

GLENN: Okay, is he saying this now? Is he saying this about Barack Obama? He was saying that about George Bush! We are mixing these two together. I was saying it when Bush was doing it, he was saying it when Bush was doing it but he's stopped saying it now that Bush is gone, except I wasn't saying that we were fascist. We were headed towards fascism. He's apparently not worried about that anymore. He's totally fine with that. And let's also not forget about this little quip.

VOICE: As recently, though, as 2006 we spoke words like these with trepidation, the idea that even the most cynical and untrustworthy of the politicians in our history, George W. Bush, would use the literal form of terrorism against his own people was dangerous territory. It seemed to tempt fate, to heighten fear. We will not fear any longer. We will not fear the international terrorists. We will thwart them. We will not fear the recognition of the manipulation of our yearning for safety. We will call that what it is: Terrorism.

GLENN: Hang on. I just -- Stu, am I clear here? He's not only called George W. Bush a fascist but a terrorist.

STU: Yeah, same monologue, too, pretty efficient.

GLENN: None, getting her done. The segment from Bill Maher this weekend went on with Andrew Ross Sorkin from the New York Times.

VOICE: Did you see what he said about that? He said, I can't prove these FEMA concentration camps but let me tell you about them anyway. It's, you'd think it would be the opposite.

GLENN: That's not what I said. I never talked about trying to prove them. I talked about an Internet conspiracy theory and then we talked about debunking it, if they could be debunked. Well, we started to debunk them and there's a lot more to it that we wanted to make sure we pinned down. More to come on that and so much more very, very soon. But as I've said a million times before, it's important to catch these things before they spread like some sort of venereal disease. I said it about the 9/11 Truthers: We didn't blow up the World Trade Center. I said it about Barack Obama's birth certificate: Get over the birth certificate thing. But can we get to the New York Times guy again?

VOICE: Did you see what he said about that? He said, I can't prove these FEMA concentration camps but let me tell you about them anyway.

GLENN: Okay. So he's saying I'm being hypocritical here, like I said one thing and then disagreed with myself just seconds later. Now let's advance in the interview here to no more than 30 seconds after he said, "He's saying one thing and then 30 seconds later saying the exact opposite. What a hypocrite." Here's Bill Maher.

MAHER: You know, look, I would never be the person who says that you have to watch what you say because -- no, really. I'm not for that.

GLENN: He's not for it, but...

MAHER: You can say this because a borderline person might take it and then do this. I'm sorry, that's the price of living in a free speech country, and I do want to live in one because I make my living at it. Okay. But, you know, I must say Tim McVeigh in 1995, if you recall, this was the same kind of talking that made him blow up that building.

GLENN: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. "I would never say you can't say something because a crazy person might take action, but I'm going to talk about the right-wingers and Timothy McVeigh." You've got to be kidding me.

What did you say, Stu?

STU: My favorite word I think maybe in this entire thing is that --

GLENN: This is kind of talk that made him.

STU: Made him blow up that building.

GLENN: Yeah, made him. Then Keith Olbermann goes on to blame a spree shooting on Bernie Goldberg. And again I don't point this out because Bill Maher is criticizing me because I don't really care. I'm used to it. But look at what these people are doing to you. Look how they're positioning all of this. They are waiting, literally waiting. If this guy in Oakland, California somehow or another turns out to be a conservative, this whole news on him is going to change and it will quadruple in coverage. If he is a dirt bag that, you know, is, "Yeah, I'm all for Obama," it's going to disappear. The truth is he's probably just a dirt bag that doesn't have anything to do with politics whatsoever, but I guarantee you anybody who grabs a gun, criminal, insane, whatever and starts shooting people, if they've even watched Fox News, look out. They're just waiting for some nut job, that way they can take what you believe and twist it into, well, see, I mean, look at what these people believe. I mean, they're doing horrible things with it and they're going to blame it on those beliefs. They are going to blame it on the people who talk about those beliefs, who listen to those beliefs. That is me and that is you. They have been doing it forever with religion. They have been doing it forever with the Second Amendment. It's not the gun. It's the people who use the gun. "No, no, no. No, no, you've got to get the gun away. Got to get the guns off the..." but if there's politics involved, then it is the person using the gun. And now the fact that you think the government is spending too much, taxing too much, gathering too much power, now that's coming under attack. And as if his Timothy McVeigh reference was obvious enough for you, here's Bill Maher -- I'm telling you, this gave me a sleepless night, blaming me, blaming you for another possible potential, might be, if it happens, maybe crime.

MAHER: Do you remember when Obama said that the people out there who are bitter and cling to their guns? Yeah, he was way off about that. It's those people who I worry about. I do think that this increases the chance for people, you know, to take horrible action. I mean, you know, already Obama has more threats than any president, ever.

GLENN: Okay. Did anybody say that about Michael Moore and George W. Bush? Did anyone say that about Keith Olbermann and George W. Bush? Did anyone worry about that with George W. Bush? It's only the right that could possibly do something crazy like that, and you might find this a tad ridiculous coming from a guy who said this on the air.

MAHER: I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow.

[ APPLAUSE ]

MAHER: If somebody on this panel said they wish that Dick Cheney had been blown up and you didn't say any --

VOICE: I think he did. Did you say it?

MAHER: No, I quoted that. No, I'm just saying that if he didn't, other people, more people would live.

GLENN: I'm just saying if he did die, more people would live. Just to be clear what he was saying here, Bill Maher wasn't saying that a crazy person might internalize an then go try to take out Dick Cheney. He was expressing regret that no one had done it yet. By the way, Barney Frank was on the panel that day cracking jokes. He's so funny. Of course, this is no worse than the comment that actually got him fired from his last job about the 9/11 hijackers. He said -- and surprisingly enough there's no audio to be found on this: Look what they did. First of all, you have a whole bunch of guys who are willing to give their life. None of them backed out. All of them slammed themselves into pieces of concrete. These are warriors. Maher according to the transcript of the show then responded by saying, "We the United States have been cowards, lobbying cruise missiles from 2000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want but that's not cowardly." First of all, I'm shocked that I didn't do well with this panel.

STU: (Laughing).

GLENN: But do you think you're going to do well with people like this, you bitter gun-clingers? This story isn't about me. This story is, prepare yourself, know what you believe, have your arguments. Know the principles in your life. Know the principles of our founding.

Did you see that Amazon.com, 5,000 Year Leap, still number one? Still number one. It is -- there is a movement in America and it has nothing to do with Barack Obama. It has nothing to do with Bill Maher. It has nothing to do with anything other than people say, "I think I better learn our own history. I think I better figure out what's going on here because I'm being lied to all around." Know what you need to know because you're going to be a leader. You're going to be the voice in the wilderness because other voices are going to be taken down one at a time and if you don't think -- I mean, understand this: This is coming from the media. The media is circling right now. They are circling. They don't know exactly what's going on. They are so far removed from you, they have no idea what you're doing, what you're thinking. They're up to no good, I'll tell you that. It's almost too quiet, they think. They don't understand, and at the same time they're confused, they are also in collapse. Nobody believes them anymore. Nobody's purchasing their stupid newspapers anymore and it's not because, just because we don't want to get ink all over our hands. We can get that online. It's also because we don't believe what they're telling us. They have so removed themselves from not only reality but the reality of your life that it doesn't make any difference to you anymore what they say. They don't understand you. They're up to no good, I'll bet. They have not been just ambivalent. They almost assault you every day. So they've got to convince you that somehow or another they're relevant, they're doing their job. They're the fourth branch of government. They're standing up. Look out because they are going to stand up. Look out. And you're going to need to know what you know. You are going to need to know what principles and you're going to need to lead because it could get very quiet on the airwaves.

I think we can all agree, both on the Left and the Right, that children who have been caught up in illegal immigration is an awful situation. But apparently what no one can agree on is when it matters to them. This past weekend, it suddenly — and even a little magically — began to matter to the Left. Seemingly out of nowhere, they all collectively realized this was a problem and all rushed to blame the Trump administration.

RELATED: These 3 things need to happen before we can fix our border problem

Here's Rachel Maddow yesterday:

I seem to remember getting mocked by the Left for showing emotion on TV, but I'll give her a pass here. This is an emotional situation. But this is what I can't give her a pass on: where the heck was this outrage and emotion back in 2014? Because the same situation going on today — that stuff Maddow and the rest of the Left have only just now woken up to — was going on back in July 2014! And it was arguably worse back then.

I practically begged and pleaded for people to wake up to what was going on. We had to shed light on how our immigration system was being manipulated by people breaking our laws, and they were using kids as pawns to get it done. But unlike the gusto the Left is using now to report this story, let's take a look at what Rachel Maddow thought was more important back in 2014.

On July 1, 2014, Maddow opened her show with a riveting monologue on how President Obama was hosting a World Cup viewing party. That's hard-hitting stuff right there.

On July 2, 2014, Maddow actually acknowledged kids were at the border, but she referenced Health and Human Services only briefly and completely rushed through what was actually happening to these kids. She made a vague statement about a "policy" stating where kids were being taken after their arrival. She also blamed Congress for not acting.

See any difference in reporting there from today? That "policy" she referenced has suddenly become Trump's "new" policy, and it isn't Congress's fault… it's all on the President.

She goes on throughout the week.

On July 7, 2014, her top story was something on the Koch brothers. Immigration was only briefly mentioned at the end of the show. This trend continued all the way through the week. I went to the border on July 19. Did she cover it? Nope. In fact, she didn't mention kids at the border for the rest of the month. NOT AT ALL.

Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not?

Make up your minds. Is this an important issue or not? Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not? Do you even care to fix it, or is this what it looks like — just another phony, addicted-to-outrage political stunt?

UPDATE: Here's how this discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Glenn gives Rachel Maddow the benefit of the doubt

Rachel Maddow broke down in tears live on her MSNBC show over border crisis.

Progressives think the Obamas are a gift to the world. But their gift is apparently more of the metaphorical kind. It doesn't extend to helpful, tangible things like saving taxpayers money. Illinois has approved $224 million to pay for street and transportation upgrades around the planned site of the Obama Presidential Center. The catch is that Illinois taxpayers will have to cover $200 million of that cost. For a presidential museum.

Eight years of multiplying the national debt wasn't enough for Barack Obama. Old fleecing habits die hard. What's another $200 million here and there, especially for something as important as an Obama tribute center?

RELATED: Want to cure millennials' financial woes? Reform the payroll tax.

That's all well and good except Illinois can't even fund its pension system. The state has a $137 billion funding shortfall. That means every person in Illinois owes $11,000 for pensions, and there is no plan to fix the mess. Unless Illinois progressives have discovered a new kind of math, this doesn't really add up. You can't fund pensions, but you're going to figure out a way to milk the public for another $200 million to help cover the cost of a library?

It's hard to imagine who in their right mind would think this will be money well spent. Well, except for maybe Chicago Mayor and former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who said, "The state's… investment in infrastructure improvements near the Obama Center on the South Side of Chicago is money well spent."

Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

The spending has already been signed into law, even though the Obama library has not received construction approval yet. Part of the holdup is that the proposed site is on public land in historic Jackson Park. That doesn't seem very progressive of the Obamas, but, you know, for certain presidents, you go above and beyond. It's just what you do. Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

Here's the thing about taxing the peasants so the king can build a fancy monument to himself – it's wrong. And completely unnecessary. The Obamas have the richest friends on the planet who could fund this project in their sleep. If the world simply must have a tricked-out Obama museum, then let private citizens take out their wallets voluntarily.

As the Mercury Museum proved this weekend, it is possible to build an exhibit with amazing artifacts that attracts a ton of visitors – and it cost taxpayers approximately zero dollars.

'The fool builds walls': China blasts Trump over tariffs

NICOLAS ASFOURI/AFP/Getty Images

I can picture it now: Thousands of years ago, Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of China, standing before hordes of his followers, in the Qin Dynasty, with a bright red bamboo hat on, and chanting, "Build that wall!"

It took a couple centuries to build the thing, but it got built. And it has been carefully maintained over the last 2,000 years, but, today, the Great Wall of China is so massive that astronauts can see it during good weather conditions from the lower part of low Earth orbit. The wall boasts over 3,000 miles of towers and brick embankments, with over 1,200 miles of natural defensive barriers. It's worth mentioning that the Chinese government is also exceptionally good at imposing digital walls, so much so that China ranks worst in the world for internet freedom.

RELATED: Trump is following through on his campaign promises. Here are the top 10.

So it's a little strange to hear an editorial run by a major news network in China criticized President Trump for his proposal to build a large wall along the southern border of America.

"Following the path of expanding and opening up is China's best response to the trade dispute between China and the United States, and is also the responsibility that major countries should have to the world," the author wrote. "The wise man builds bridges, the fool builds walls."

Similarly, the Pope told reporters in 2016, "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel."

Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

If you've been to the Vatican, you know that it is surrounded by enormous walls. The same goes for all the celebrities who live in heavily walled compounds—a safety measure—but who have also vehemently criticized President Trump's plans to build a wall.

You know the adage: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at other people's glass houses." Perhaps the phrase needs an update: Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

An immaculate Nazi doctor hovers over newborn. He probes and sneers at it. "Take it away," he says. This is the very real process that Nazi doctors undertook during the era of Nazi Germany: Nazi eugenics, the studious, sterile search to find children who would define a pure breed for the German lineage. The Übermensch.

RELATED: Glenn responds to advocates of aborting Down syndrome babies: 'No better than Nazi Germans'

During a speech to a delegation of Italy's Family Association in Rome on Saturday, Pope Francis referred to this cruel Nazi practice, which he used as a comparison to the increasingly popular process throughout Europe of "ending" birth defects, by offering abortions to women who have babies with chromosomal defects.

Here are two passages from the Pope's remarks:

I have heard that it's fashionable, or at least usual, that when in the first months of pregnancy they do studies to see if the child is healthy or has something, the first offer is: let's send it away.

And:

I say this with pain. In the last century the whole world was scandalized about what the Nazis did to purify the race. Today we do the same, but now with white gloves.

When CNN got the quote, and it shocked them so much that they had to verify the quote with the Vatican—in other words, it didn't fit the usual narrative.

It didn't fit the usual narrative.

The Pope also addressed claims that he has dedicated himself to LGBTQ causes:

Today, it is hard to say this, we speak of "diversified" families: different types of families. It is true that the word "family" is an analogical word, because we speak of the "family" of stars, family" of trees, "family" of animals ... it is an analogical word. But the human family in the image of God, man and woman, is the only one. It is the only one. A man and woman can be non-believers: but if they love each other and unite in marriage, they are in the image of God even if they don't believe.

The media have largely seen Pope Francis as the cool Pope, as the Obama of Catholicism. It'll be interesting to see how abruptly and severely that perspective changes.