The real Khashoggi IS NOT who the media claims

October 22, 2018

TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images

CEO/Founder

I want to talk a little bit about this back and forth with Saudi Arabia. It's important that we get this right and we don't make this about American politics. We should make this about American interests, but not American politics. Right now people are saying, I can't believe Donald Trump would do that. But, George Bush, Bill Clinton, the second George Bush, all the way back to FDR, have been in bed with the Saudis.

I don't like this. I think we're in bed with really bad people. I was asked once if a rattlesnake made a bad pet. The answer is, no. It's a perfectly fine pet. As long as you always remember it is a rattlesnake and not a little puppy dog. It's a rattlesnake. It's not a bad pet. Just don't pet it and don't try to fashion a leash around its neck or take it for a walk. It ain't going to do it.

RELATED: Here's what audio allegedly reveals about murdered, dismembered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi

So how do we handle Saudi Arabia? Well, it should be the same way we handle Turkey. But we're not. Because we're looking at Saudi Arabia and Turkey with American eyes.

Stop it.

These are both Islamic states. Now they're warring with each other. Why? Because one is Muslim Brotherhood and one is a Wahhabiist. They don't like each other. They want death for everybody in the other state. Turkey wants the regime of Saudi Arabia stopped because they're Muslim Brotherhood.

We're being put in the middle of a fight between two Islamists; both of them want the caliphate.

And Saudi Arabia wants Turkey stopped because they're Wahhabiists. We're being put in the middle of a fight between two Islamists; both of them want the caliphate. Both of them want Islamic rule. Both of them want to rule with jihad. And they also want to rule with Sharia law. We don't. We don't want either of those.

So now, let's put this into perspective. Saudi Arabia, horrible place. Horrible, horrible, horrible place. They execute kids. As long as you've shown any kind of signs of purity, you're tried as an adult. They execute through beheading. There was a woman who was raped. Gang raped by seven men. Not sure if one of them was Supreme Court justice Kavanaugh yet. But a Saudi woman was gang raped by seven men.

Those men each got between two and nine years in prison. However, she received six months in prison, and 200 lashings with a whip because she was in the car without her husband. And then she dared to take her story to the media. These are the kind of people that we're dealing with. The crown prince? You and I are not going to like this guy. You can say, oh, look at what he's doing. He's making it easier for women to drive. Sure. Sure. Sure. He's still a Wahhabiist. Let's look at what both sides in this country have done.

We are currently fighting a proxy war with Saudi Arabia. We are involved in their war in Yemen. Did you even know that? President Trump announced 110 billion-dollar arms deal with Saudi Arabia, last year. It was President Obama that vetoed a bill that allowed families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi government. So both sides — everybody is in protecting these guys. When the crown prince came here to America, he met with Donald Trump. Oh my gosh. But he also met with Oprah Winfrey, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson (for some unknown reason), Barack Obama, John Kerry, Condoleezza Rice, Michael Bloomberg, Thomas Friedman from the New York Times, Bill Gates, Madeleine Albright, Jeffrey Goldberg, Tim Cook, Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Alan Gasher from Harvard, and Jeff Bezos. So they all met with him. Let's not pretend we don't know who this guy is.

Now, the guy who went missing — he's a reporter for the Washington Post. Is he, or does he have a point of view that Washington happens to like about Saudi Arabia? And that is, the Muslim Brotherhood perspective. So if you remember, the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1920s, in Egypt. The only reason for its being was to reject the West and establish global Sharia law.

They exported this organization all over the Middle East. Anti-Semitism towards Jews; their biggest and most effective tool at harnessing the Arab rage. Muslim Brotherhood; they're the ones who invented modern day jihadism. They're the ones who inspired obstacles and the other founding members of al-Qaeda. To any administration member from the Obama administration, you cannot call them a largely secular organization. Just read their motto:

The Koran [is] our Constitution. Jihad our plan. And death for the sake of Allah, the lot of these of our wishes.

They're not primarily a sect similar organization. The industry of death. And they mean that in a good way. In their own words:

To a nation that protects the industry of death and which knows how to die nobly, God gives proud life in this world.

Okay. That doesn't sound secular. Doesn't sound like someone we should be in bed with. But the Muslim Brotherhood ran up against what we found as a problem. That was one of them, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Because it was backed by the West. Many of these kingdoms in the Middle East have been backed by the West. Jordan will be next. Anyone who stands in their way, they had to destroy. These are democracies, so how are we going to do it?

Well, the Muslim Brotherhood decided to switch tactics and weaponize democracy. Enter the Arab spring. The Arab spring praised by everyone. We told you their goal is a caliphate. Well, it never materialized. Did it? Not there. It materialized from the chain of events, with ISIS. Well, you were talking about the Muslim Brotherhood. Right. And what happened to the Muslim Brotherhood? Did they just choose not to do a caliphate? Oh, no, no. They were overthrown. The Muslim Brotherhood still wants their caliphate. So now you have two of our allies, Turkey; Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudis; Wahhabiists, who are both chasing the exact same dream.

The Muslim Brotherhood decided to switch tactics and weaponize democracy.

A Middle East and a world dominated by Sharia law. Both of them using jihadism as a means to their ends. So Khashoggi, you're calling him today, now we look at him. He is a guy who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. I want to say this; no one deserves this kind of death. This is not to excuse the Saudis. They're bad guys. But so is Turkey. And so was he. Everybody here says he's a Saudi progressive fighting for democracy. No. No. No. No. He was fighting for the Muslim Brotherhood. In the 1980s and '90s, he was one of the king's main allies.

He edited several Saudi newspapers. He was basically Winston Smith sitting in the Saudi version of the ministry of truth, editing out all thought crime. Making sure that there was never anything hostile said about Wahhabiism or the king. During this time, he scored several interviews with al-Qaeda as they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. Saudi intelligence employed him to be the middleman between Bin Laden but in 2003 he fell out of favor with the Saudi royals. He had allowed to be published an article critical to the Wahhabiist movement. Why did he do that? Because he's a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. And they were at odds with the Wahhabiists.

Khashoggi was cast aside. And that's when the Western media fell in love with him. An active member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Not a smear or a conspiracy theory. In his own word:.

Yes, I joined the Muslim Brotherhood organization, and I was not alone.

His Muslim Brotherhood friends and clerics were all imprisoned in Saudi Arabia, during the Arab spring. He got out. He came to the US. He established a political party while in exile called "Democracies for the Arab World Now" party.

The liberals, the progressives and the press loved him because they heard the word democracy. It's the Muslim Brotherhood plan to subvert democracy by turning it against itself. He wanted to establish Sharia law in the region. He was also a wicked anti-Semite, who wrote, outside the context of history and logic, that Jews will have to die by force. Israel is outside the context of history and logic so we're going to have to kill all of them. This is not a smear campaign. When you hear somebody say that, you make sure you ask them, where are you doing your homework? Where are you getting that? Why is it a smear campaign to say he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood?

He was clear in his own words.

So why is that a smear campaign? I thought the Muslim Brotherhood was largely secular. Ask people. How much do you know about the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood? How much do you really know about what this man really wrote? This man wrote that it was a mistake to think that you could have any kind of state in the Middle East without some form of Islamist. Now, that's different, remember, than Islam. An Islamist believes you have to use Sharia law.

That's the concept — wow does it sounds like the Muslim Brotherhood. That's our Constitution. That is our law. Sharia law. So let's just begin to tell each other the truth.

And here's the truth: Turkey is not a friend of ours. Turkey is in with the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia is a huge exporter of Wahhabism and has done it here in the United States. Has spent money building mosques that are very dangerous, here in the United States. It's true. They killed him. Could be. Probably. Seems like it. I don't trust the Muslim Brotherhood in Turkey. But I also don't trust those guys. One of them killed him. Probably Saudi Arabia. Did he deserve it? No.

Does he deserve to be called a freedom fighter? Only by either really uneducated progressives, or just liars.

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

THE FACTS - Who was Jamal Khashoggi and what ties did he have to the Muslim Brotherhood?youtu.be

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

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.

5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven'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."

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

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."

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.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November?

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?