The left hates Trump so much, even THIS can't gain their support

Zach Gibson/Getty Images

Take a time machine ride back ten years and survey a thousand Americans. Ask them to identify whether the following politician is a conservative or a liberal: The first President to enter the White House as openly pro-LGBT, awarded multiple humanitarian awards beside people like Muhammed Ali and Maya Angelou, has made strides to remove the U.S. from wars in the Middle East, has brokered peace deals with multiple countries including North/South Korea. And at every stage, his opponents have lashed out viciously.

Somehow, the left hates Donald Trump so much, that they'll spite every single action he takes, even if it's in line with what they claim to believe, what they claim to have always believed. The examples of this keep getting more and more shocking.

RELATED: The 'Masterpiece Cakeshop' ruling is actually a win for LGBT rights

Most recently he announced policy to decriminalize homosexuality worldwide. Who on the left could ever have a problem with that? They've spent years jamming that very idea into our faces, demanding that we take action. What could they possibly object to?

"Racism!"

Yes, that's what they're saying. They're accusing Donald Trump of racism for trying to decriminalize homosexuality worldwide. You know, in those parts of the world where it's punishable by death.

One article in particular rose to the top of the proverbial Twitter sewage troth.

Let's start with the title: "Trump's Plan to Decriminalize Homosexuality Is an Old Racist Tactic."

The author has written other gems such as "Trump can't end an HIV/AIDS epidemic he doesn't understand" and "Heteros Are Now Making Gender Reveal Lasagna." Pretty great, huh? Want a few more? He also wrote: "After Porn Debut, This Quadriplegic Man Opens Up About Ableist Stigma" and "The Critical Difference Between Ellen Page and Ellen DeGeneres" and "Bros, Are You Obsessed with Your Girl's Butt? That's Gay, Says Blogger."

I hope the Pulitzer committee is keeping an eye on this brilliant journalist, because he's delivering some real hard-hitting, truth-seeking news. It shouldn't surprise you that he also wrote multiple article defending Jussie Smollett, but that's another story, for another day.

Here are the opening lines:

The Trump administration is set to launch a global campaign to decriminalize homosexuality in dozens of nations where anti-gay laws are still on the books, NBC News reported Monday. While on its surface, the move looks like an atypically benevolent decision by the Trump administration, the details of the campaign belie a different story. Rather than actually being about helping queer people around the world, the campaign looks more like another instance of the right using queer people as a pawn to amass power and enact its own agenda.

Uh, what?

Well, hopefully the writer clarifies and doesn't just jam in a bunch of self-serving, "look at how cultured I am and how dumb you are" references, and actually makes a coherent argument from this mess of a story. Nope:

In her essay, 'Can the Subaltern Speak?' postcolonial theorist Gayatri Spivak coined the term 'White men saving brown womenfrom brown men' to describe the racist, paternalistic process by which colonizing powers would decry the way men in power treated oppressed groups, like women, to justify attacking them. Spivak was referencing the British colonial agenda in India. But Grennell's attack might be a case of white men trying to save brown gay men from brown straight men, to the same end.'

Claire Lehmann gave a more succinct conclusion of the article, which she re-posted along with the comment:

Holy s--t, this article (in an LGBT magazine no less) actually argues that it's racist and colonialist for Trump to put pressure on Iran to decriminalise homosexuality and that Iran is actually 'not that bad' when it comes to homosexuality anyway.

The comments section on Twitter can often be hellish and defeating. But, for some reason, this time that's exactly what we needed.

Daily Caller writer Amber Athey commented:

Wow you'd really rather gay people continue to be killed for their sexuality than give Trump credit for anything.

Gregory T. Angelo, of Log Cabin Republicans, wrote: "In which a liberal gay blog actually argues *against* the decriminalization of homosexuality — because, Trump!"

Then there was Chadwick Moore, who worked as editor-at-large for Out Magazine, also took to Twitter:

Yes, this is the same magazine I worked for as Editor-at-Large before they fired me, almost two years ago to the day, for saying 'I don't hate Trump, I like free speech, journalism is in the gutter, and the left is a little crazy'

In the end, Donald Trump Jr. said it best, though.

Yup, no matter what he does they find a way to somehow make it bad. You can't make this stuff up anymore.

And he's right. No rational human being could ever dream this nonsense up.

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

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

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:


Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

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

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.