Glenn Beck: Illegal Immigrants rally

GLENN: What's happening in Arizona is amazing to me because you had a riot in Arizona. In fact, play just some of the audio, please, from the sound. We'll show you the pictures tonight.

PAT: Might want to start after they say F'ing racist. Start just

GLENN: Start that, yeah. All right, go ahead, Sarah. Play the this is just the sound of what was happening in Arizona over the weekend.

(Audio clip plays)

PAT: This is where some of the anti illegal immigration law protestors


PAT: Are throwing bottles at the police because they are trying to escort some white guy who is there in support of the law out so he wouldn't be, you know, beaten or killed. They were afraid for his safety and they are trying to sort him out and so the protestors are throwing rocks and bottles at the police officers.

GLENN: Now, this sounds to me an awful lot like a tea party.

PAT: Oh, because of the

GLENN: Oh, no, it doesn't.

PAT: The horrible violence?

GLENN: The only time that we have had violence in this country so far has been from the left.

PAT: That's it. And you are not seeing this video over and over.

GLENN: Over and over again.

PAT: Ms. NBC on this? NBC, CBS, ABC?

GLENN: Anybody? Quite honestly where is Fox today on this? We have this audio because I asked for it yesterday to be fed to me from Phoenix. So where is this video? You want to talk about violence, here is the violence. You want to talk about protestors engaging in hate, here it is. You know, they always say that the tea parties, you know, they hate the government. We're never throwing bottles at police officers. Never, not once. Never, not once. I don't know a single tea party member that doesn't like the police, that doesn't trust the police. I don't know a single person that has a problem with the Secret Service. I don't know a single person that has a problem with the FBI. I do know people who have a problem with the people running the FBI. I know there are people that have problems with the head of the Department of Justice because it's becoming the department of social justice. I do know people that have a problem with the people making decisions in New York. I don't know anybody that has a problem with the border patrol. I do know people who have problems with the people running the border patrol. I've never thrown anything at a police officer, nor would I even think about it. Nor would I even think about it.

Play the audio again from Phoenix, Arizona. You'll see the video tonight. Probably for the first time.

(Audio clip plays)

GLENN: Now, who is the racist? This guy who is standing up in favor who has to be escorted out by police, or those who are throwing things at him and the police. Calling him a racist. For what? For standing up for the rule of law? Do you see what's happening? And by the way, Al Sharpton is now going down to Phoenix, Arizona. Al Sharpton.

PAT: That won't stir things up at all.

GLENN: No, it won't stir it up at all.

PAT: That won't stir it up at all.

GLENN: No, no. They talk about I have to reduce my rhetoric because tensions are high, and I'm stirring things up. But Al Sharpton is now going to Phoenix, Arizona. I warn you, they are doing everything they can to make it seem as though this is the civil rights movement all over again. Everything is a civil right. There are no responsibilities in this country anymore. There's not a responsibility to work, there's not a responsibility to pay your taxes if you are the right person, there's not a responsibility to do the right thing if you're too big to fail, there's not a responsibility to come here legally, if you're the right minority. There's not a there's not equal justice. The tea party needs to change their tune. It's not about high taxes. It's not just about unsustainable spending. It is about equal justice. Equal justice. Not social or economic or ecological justice. Equal. Because that's what's happening to us. You want to talk about high taxes, why are the high taxes there? It's not because of the unsustainable spending. Why is the unsustainable spending there? The unsustainable spending is there to spread the wealth, to take it from the wealthy and give it to the poor. It is called social and economic justice. If you correct social, economic and ecological justice and say those three terms as defined by the leaders in Washington are nonsense and they go against our Constitution, if you correct those three things, everything else will correct itself. Faith has become social justice. The government will make amends. The government will equalize your hardship. Only Jesus can do that. Hope, hope has been replaced by regulation. They will regulate fairness. They will regulate your way into hope. Not a problem, don't worry. You don't want another, you don't want another failure? Let me tell you the story about economic failure. You see, the United States had just come out of a really bad failure, and the banks had started to fail. And the United States government actually failed. The United States government was on the gold standard. It was in the 1890s. We were on the gold standard. We didn't have enough gold to be able to keep the doors open and so we had to borrow money. We had to borrow gold from J.P. Morgan. Well, people didn't like that. People didn't like that. Didn't like being beholden to somebody like J.P. Morgan. And we had just come out of a bad depression in early 1890s. And then there was another one in, like, 1908. Well, it took a while, and it took a fearless leader like Woodrow Wilson to be able to say we're going to stop all of these swings; it's just too much. We should have some stability here. We've got to be able to make sure that these crashes never happen again. And so we invented the Federal Reserve to make sure that there were no more crashes. There was a crash in 1920. There was a crash in 1929. There was just a crash and there's another crash coming. Regulation doesn't work. Crashes, failures are a part of life. We have to just tell people that there are going to be crashes. You should save for a rainy day because we don't all live in San Diego. And even people who live in San Diego will tell you sometimes it rains in San Diego; you should have an umbrella. Don't buy a convertible, move to San Diego and then rip the soft top off because occasionally you are going to need the soft top. Now what they are trying to do is first they gave us the Federal Reserve. But that's not enough. Now they need regulation for the entire globe. It is the cornerstone of the new world order. All you need is the finances. Once you have a global tax where is that global tax going? Where is all that money going? Who's going to oversee that money? How are you going to spend it? How are you going to make sure it's fair? Now there's a new global tax. Well, once you have a global tax, you certainly need somebody to run it. And once you have a little global tax, surely you are going to need a little more global tax. Surely once you crack that door open, it's not a problem. Just a little global regulation. Where are the people that understand the new world order? Where are the people that understand what was conspiracy theory is quickly becoming conspiracy fact? There is a global order being assembled. The first step to that is taxes and regulation done by people that you don't they don't answer to you. You think it's bad now in Washington? You've got an election coming up in November. You put a global regulation and global tax; who do you vote out? Who answers to you? Who are we sending this money to? How do we get them out? How do we know if they're corrupt? Who are they? And yet the Republicans and the Democrats are just willing to do it because there's a bad guy, a boogeyman. We got to get that boogeyman. And global framework will be the only way to do it. Let's put things in order. Let's put things in order. Al Sharpton is going down. Al Sharpton is going down to make sure that you understand. And mark my words; it is coming. That what's happening in Arizona, Jim Crow laws. What's happening in Arizona is exactly what happened in the 1960s, in the civil rights movement. And I'll show you the only reason why it's happening, next.

Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley


Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?


How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?


And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?


Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.

Here's a question unique to our times: "Should I tell my father 'Happy Father's Day,' even though he (she?) is now one of my mothers?"

Father's Day was four days ago, yes, but this story is just weird enough to report on. One enjoyable line to read was this gem from Hollywood Gossip: "Cait is a woman and a transgender icon, but she is also and will always be the father of her six children."

RELATED: If Bruce was never a he and always a she, who won the men's Olympic gold in 1976?

Imagine reading that to someone ten — even five — years ago. And, honestly, there's something nice about it. But the strangeness of its having ever been written overpowers any emotional impact it might bring.

"So lucky to have you," wrote Kylie Jenner, in the Instagram caption under pre-transition pictures of Bruce Jenner.

Look. I risk sounding like a tabloid by mere dint of having even mentioned this story, but the important element is the cultural sway that's occurring. The original story was that a band of disgruntled Twitter users got outraged about the supposed "transphobic" remarks by Jenner's daughter.

But, what we should be saying is, "who the hell cares?" Who cares what one Jenner says to another — and more importantly and on a far deeper level — who cares what some anonymous Twitter user has to say?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob? Because, at the moment, they've got it pretty good. They have a nifty relationship with the mainstream media: One or two Twitter users get outraged by any given thing — in this case Jenner and supposed transphobia. In return, the mainstream media use the Twitter comment as a source.

Then, a larger Twitter audience points to the article itself as proof that there's some kind of systemic justice at play. It's a closed-market currency, where the negative feedback loop of proof and evidence is composed of faulty accusations. Isn't it a hell of a time to be alive?