Survey: Where do you stand on these conspiracy theories?

Thought Catalog / Unsplash

Have you seen this survey on the most-believed conspiracy theories in America?

It's no surprise the survey has been getting so much attention. The results are actually a pretty disturbing.

Infographic: Belief in Conspiracy Theories in the United States | Statista

I decided to put together a quick survey of my own, with slightly different wording.

Up-vote the ones you agree with and down-vote the ones you disagree with.

I believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK alone. However, I would not be surprised to find out the government sealed evidence that others were involved.

If by "deep state" you mean long-time Washington power brokers who are used to calling the shots and now feel threatened by Donald Trump not listening to their advice or council — yes, I do believe that many people like that are working against him and his administration.

Whether alien bodies are in Area 51 or not, I do believe the government knows more about UFOs than they have told us.

I do not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11, but as we know, NSA advisor Sandy Berger was caught destroying documents from the national archives related to both Bush and Clinton. All U.S. administrations have been to close to the Saudis, and the Saudis were involved in 9/11 at some level.

I believe the climate is always changing — it's natural. I would be willing to accept that man MAY play a role in this. But I do not believe in the solutions currently being discussed, nor do I believe the intention of most political activists are pure.

Any talk of the Illuminati provides the true dangers to man's freedom — like very powerful NGOS and men like George Soros — a perfect cover.

The U.S. government has done some horrible experiments on people and land — I also suspect they will do more things in the future. But I do not believe in the systematic spraying of chemicals using chemtrails.

The moon landing was real, but I see a time coming when people will not be able to trust their eyes due to deep fakes.

What do you think?

Let me know in the comments section below.

These 2 leftist bills will REVERSE Trump's immunity and EMPOWER faceless bureaucrats

JIM WATSON / Contributor, Alex Wong / Staff | Getty Images

The Democrats in Congress have been trying to slip a few dangerous bills under our noses, and Biden and Kamala Harris came out today publicly backing their efforts. These bills are aimed at undoing two landmark Supreme Court cases that significantly reduced the power of the federal government: Trump v. United States and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Here's a brief summary of each of these cases:

Trump v. United States

This case granted presidents immunity from criminal prosecution of official acts in office. This pumped the breaks on the onslaught of lawfare against former president Trump, putting an end to the left's persecution of their political opponent. This ruling also got Trump out of the classified documents case in Florida and has the potential to get his 34 convictions in Manhattan overturned.

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo

This case overturned the longstanding Chevron deference, which has historically empowered federal agencies to make and enforce regulations that aren't explicitly made clear in statutory law. The Chevron deference was first articulated in the 1984 Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council,which required courts to defer to the appropriate federal authority when an ambiguous regulation comes under question. This gave the federal bureaucracy far too much regulatory power and greatly expanded the influence of the administrative state. Fortunately, the Supreme Court overturned this doctrine earlier this month, returning power to lower courts.

Long story short...

Over the summer, the Supreme Court dramatically reduced the power of the Federal government and practically dismantled the administrative state. Naturally, the Left was angry.

Last Wednesday, Democratic Congressman Joseph Morelle proposed a new Constitutional Amendment that would reverse the ruling of Trump v. United States. The proposed amendment would prohibit a president from pardoning themselves and remove "immunity from criminal prosecution for an act on the grounds that such act was within the constitutional authority or official duties of an individual." This amendment has been endorsed by President Biden, who has also called for dramatic changes to the Supreme Court, well overstepping his presidential bounds. Biden wants term limits and an enforceable code of ethics for the high court, which would destroy the delicate system of checks and balances created by our founders. It is clear that the objective behind this unconstitutional escapade is the destruction of Donald Trump, no matter the cost.

Additionally, the Democrats have just introduced a bill into the Senate that would codify the Chevron deference into law, restoring the power of the regulatory federal agencies. Sponsored by Elizabeth Warren and 10 other Democrats, the Stop Corporate Capture Act seeks to take the power to interpret regulations from the lower courts and give it back to the federal government. This is all in line with the progressives' larger goal to centralize power and keep Americans poor and reliant on the government.

The progressives have taken a major blow this summer, their authoritarian grip has been loosened, and they are desperately trying to gain it back. While neither of these bills is likely to pass, it shows that we have to keep up the fight. This election is FAR from won, and it is more important now than ever to take to the polls and vote!

3 facts the Left wishes you forgot about Kamala's track record

Nathan Howard / Stringer | Getty Images

Every day it seems more and more likely that Vice President Kamala Harris is bound to become the Democratic nominee. Maybe there will be some switch-out at the DNC, but for now, we should prepare ourselves for a Trump-Harris faceoff in November.

Most people know Kamala for her awkward demeanor, her tendency to cackle at inappropriate times, and her deep love for yellow school buses. But Glenn has reminded us that behind those cringe-worthy speeches is possibly the most extremely progressive nominee America has ever had. You might see some people calling Kalmala a "moderate" Democrat, but these 3 facts Glenn brought up on his radio show blow that idea out of the water:

1. Her Green New Deal Endorsement

Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Harris was one of 14 people who endorsed the Green New Deal, which is a plan designed to fight climate change by any means necessary. Other people who endorsed the Green New Deal include radical progressives such as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and AOC.

The plan includes switching to renewable energy sources as fast as possible, never mind the effects that will have on the economy, the power grid, or the price of electricity. The Green New Deal purports to aid communities who would feel the impact of such a dramatic switch, namely poor Americans who already struggle to pay the electric bill, and oil and gas workers who would be out of a job. But let's be realistic. The government would not be capable of supporting the millions of affected families by such a dramatic switch, and neither would the taxpayers be able to afford it.

This is what Kamala has in store for us if she were to be elected.

2. Her Radical Progressive Platform

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

Kamala has also proposed a radical socialist agenda that would dramatically reshape our country. One such proposal is for government-backed healthcare. Sometimes referred to as "Medicare for All," Kamala's plan would enable every American to sign up for "free" government-sponsored health insurance. Now, of course, nothing is ever "free," and MASSIVE tax hikes would accompany this sort of plan to generate the funding to pay for such a program.

Kamala is also an abortion activist and has been an outspoken critic of the Dobbs decision, which saw the overturning of Roe v Wade. She famously went on a "reproductive freedoms tour" across multiple states in 2023. If elected, Kamala would be the most vocal pro-abortion president in our nation's history.

3.Her Hypocrisy As California AG

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has a troubled record as the attorney general of California that the Left would love for us to forget. Harris was caught multiple times hiding evidence that proved to be crucial for their respective cases. She also locked up more than 1,560 people for minor marijuana charges, which is extra ironic now considering she has changed her tune and is now pro-marijuana. Kamala has even gone on-air and joked about smoking pot in a radio interview during which she was asked if she had ever tried the substance. She responded, "Half my family’s from Jamaica. Are you kidding me?” Later in the interview, she elaborated that she had smoked at least once in college — before she went on her pot prosecution spree as California's AG.

This shows just how flimsy Kamala really is. She'll bend to whatever pressure the Democrats put on her, which is clearly why so many Democrats jumped at the chance to back her after Biden stepped out of the campaign. Conservatives need to be careful. Trump has looked stronger than ever these past few weeks, but we can't get lazy. As unlikely as it seems, there is still a real chance Kamala could win this November, and a Kamala presidency would be every bit as bad as a second Biden term, if not worse. You NEED to get out and VOTE this fall.

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.


UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

UPDATED: On Friday, July 26th Barack and Michelle Obama officially threw their support behind Harris over a phone call with the current VP:

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.”

The fact that it took nearly a week for the former president to endorse Kamala, along with his original statement, gives the endorsement a begrudging tone.

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”