RADIONovember 19, 2024

Will Russia declare WAR on America after Biden let Ukraine fire ATACMS missiles?

President Biden - or whoever is calling the shots - has authorized Ukraine to fire American-made ATACMS missiles into Russia. This happened even after Vladimir Putin said that crossing this red line would mean war with whoever supplied the missiles! So, why would Biden push us closer to World War III just 62 days before Donald Trump takes office? "What Joe Biden did is impeachable," Glenn declares. But will World War III break out? Or will Russia just attack Ukraine even harder, possibly with a tactical nuclear weapon on the battlefield? Glenn's head researcher, Jason Buttrill, joins to discuss.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. So we have Jason Buttrill in with us. And Stu, of course, the executive producer of the program.

And I am your congenial host, Glenn Beck.

Last night, Ukraine did exactly what Putin said, don't do. Two days ago, he signs in a doctrine, saying you use any of these kinds of missiles that are coming from -- even conventional missiles. Coming from, you know, a nuclear-powered nation. We'll consider that an act of war.

And between us, Ukraine, and whichever country that is specifically. Meaning us. It seems like had madness, I think on our side.

And it seems like madness that he would use nukes and respond.

It doesn't say it's a guaranteed use of nukes.

But this gives him reason to believe that this is a NATO strike now.

And so he could strike NATO.

My guess is, he's just going to pound Ukraine.

In some place, where it really hurts them.

That's kind of where I hope the best-case scenario is.

Is just a pounding in Ukraine. Which would be horrible, and horrendous.

However, it's better than striking into a NATO country.

Which we would have to respond then.

I mean, Biden has put us on the brink of World War III. And we might go how this goes in the next 24 hours. We might have a very good idea of whether we'll be in World War III in the next 24 hours.

Jason, do you agree? Disagree? Where am I wrong?

JASON: What's dangerous is that the threat of that is obviously a lot higher this morning.

I think Putin's response will probably be to take out those missiles as quickly as possible.

We know that Russia was planning a larger, deeper attack into Ukraine. Building up troops.

The North Korean troops, allows him to do that.

Because the North Koreans can now guard the lines of communication in the rear. They can guard the facilities in the rear.

The ammo. Depots, all that stuff.

Freeing up the Russian troops, to get to the border.

That's what the establishment defense people on our side have seen. And that's probably why they've said, let's go ahead and fire these missiles. And start taking out those rear areas as quickly as possible to stop that buildup.

That's how they're looking at it. Putin right now is figuring out how to respond. Because now they've green lit that.

We are striking in Russia. The lines behind the border.

Now he's looking at, well, okay. So what would be like an act -- a good response?

Well, the threat of a nuclear weapon is there. That's always been their thing. That's been their thing since the start of the war.

It's a real threat.

GLENN: But it's still madness.

I mean, you would hope there's enough people.

Some people in Russia. And some people in the United States and our own Pentagon would use it. They were thinking. You know what, let's just get it out of the way. But I -- I don't think Putin would nuke a city. Do you?

JASON: No, no, no. Putin is not going to nuke a city. I think a nuclear threat, and the biggest threat will be a tactical nuclear weapon.

GLENN: And what's the difference?

JASON: So tactical nuclear weapon is a low-yield weapon made specifically for the battlefield.

So let's say there's one of them, as you're calling them the ATACMS. I'm going to steal that, by the way, it's awesome.

Let's say there's some ATACMS, surrounded by several battalions of Ukrainian troops. Well, the only way to be for sure they take it out, is to use a tactical low-yield nuclear weapon, that will take out that entire battle space, including the ATACMS. That's probably the more likely scenario, if a nuclear weapon is used.

GLENN: Nobody has ever used a low yield nuclear weapon, have they?

On a battlefield?

JASON: That's a good question. I'm not exactly sure of that. We probably use something very close to the same yield.

GLENN: Close. But we've used them for bunker busters.

But I don't believe they were nuclear.

That were the strongest bunker buster penetrating bomb that we had, but I don't think it was low-yield nuclear.

JASON: Right.

And that would still be a big international faux pas, if they did something like that. That would be escalatory.

And we would see that. We would probably get word that something like that is about to happen. Because those are heavily monitored. We're seeing them transported to wherever they're being stored.

To launchers, and then the entire world will kind of hold their breath. Well then the question is, how do we respond?

Do we allow them to press the button on it and fire that missile, or do we send actual US assets in, to take out the areas inside Russia, so they don't even have time to press the button.

Then it escalates to a completely different kind of level.

GLENN: Yeah, we're going in the wrong direction. We're going the wrong direction, which is very concerning.

Why would we do this, two days after he said, this will -- even if it's a -- if it's a -- a foreign missile system.

Even if it's nonnuclear.

It will be war, between us and the United States.

He didn't say United States. He said, us and that foreign nuclear power!

Why would we do this? Right after that.

JASON: I still think, I go back to regime survival.

GLENN: Our regime.

JASON: Our regime.

And as far as the DOD, security, military complex. That's how I see this.

I think they are terrified of any change in the status quo over the Trump administration. I think that they would love to see us pushed to a point of no return.

Where, no.

We can't do the things that Trump said he was going to do.

We can't alter, you know, the -- the diplomacy.

And the security posture in that area.

We can't go for a deal. We are locked into this position.

That's how they see it.

And I think they are driving us to this point of no return. Where Trump and his cabinet has no choice. But to continue with business as usual. How it's been the past four years.

That's the way I see it. That's the only way it makes sense.

Two months before they take power.

That's the only thing!

GLENN: So do we expect a response today?

I mean, it would seem natural that they would respond today.

JASON: I think the Russians have to make moves on the ATACMS as soon as possible. Because now you're targeting everything they were planning for an offensive and amassing troops and moving on Ukraine, which is what they're planning to do.

I think you have to take out the immediate threat, which is the ATACMS.

I think you have to do that. So I'm sure they're planning right now, well, how do we get that done?

It's not going to be easy. Because we have some air defense assets.

We put some things in place so they can't do that. So it's not going to be easy. That's when you have the generals over Putin's shoulder.

Saying, well, you know, it doesn't matter if we miss with five conventional missiles, if we get one tactical nuke in there.

Then we make sure that we take out the entire area. That's when things start escalating.

I know -- I personally do not think Putin is stupid enough to go that direction. And that's actually what the old regime is -- our regime is planning on as well.

He's threatened. He knows he can't do it. He's a madman if he does it. They know he's not a madman. He's a bad man. But he's not a madman.

They think he won't do it. So they will continue to push that red line.

There is a point, where as I said, a point of no return. Where they have no choice, and then you're locked into a much deeper conflict.

The question is: Where is that?

GLENN: So, you know, I think the regime change or the regime survival is absolutely valid.

I think -- this is why I said, you know, back when?

September. Whenever, when we were talking about what could happen if Trump won.

Assassination. There could be terrorist strikes here in the United States.

But they also had the war option.

Just embroil us into a war. And collapse it.

I have been worried about that -- that moment, where all of our enemies would say, get them! Now!

Now would be that last time.

As Trump comes into office. Especially with things turning around, where he's kind of the popular guy, where he's starting to turn everybody kind of around.

End this nonsense.

It -- it strikes me as, if I'm the enemy of the United States, we're most vulnerable right now.

But you've got to knock us out.

You better kill the king. Okay?

So wouldn't it be in the bricks nations. You know, this new -- I mean, they are planning on collapsing our economy, anyway.

Wouldn't it be kind of in their -- their -- advantage, to start, embroil us in a war.

Not a nuclear war. But a war.

JASON: Yeah. Wanting to do it. And being able to do it are two entirely different things.

I don't see. It makes perfect sense for them to goad us into a war in the Middle East.

Or goad us into a war let's say in Taiwan or something like that.

Getting us more involved in the Ukraine/Russia world.

Seems way too crazy for them to try to really push. And get us more involved.

I personally don't see that happening. I see them wanting to avoid that as much as possible.

But getting us stuck in another war, in a the different part of the globe. That we will waste, you know, billions and billions. And trillions of dollars on.

I absolutely see that as a strategy. I see them thinking more long-term.

They've been very methodical and careful about it so far. And you're talking about the Chinese, who are probably even higher at the table than the Russians are.

GLENN: Who look like they just cut communication cables.

JASON: That is wild to me.

I don't --

GLENN: Explain what happened, if you don't know.

JASON: So there's multiple communications, cables, that go through that -- what?

GLENN: Finland.

JASON: Sweden. Norway. That area.

GLENN: And Lithuania.

JASON: Yeah.

GLENN: They cut those cables. Now, Lithuania and Finland are Cold War Soviet states.

And, you know, Russia has said, they're ours. They're ours. And they're ours.

And Russia has been saying, no. We will make them NATO countries. Congratulations. They're on our side.

And they've been freaked out by this war. Well, the Chinese ship, we believe it was Chinese.

Went over these cables, right at the same time they were cut. So did the Chinese cut these cables?

Somebody -- I mean, they were cut, by somebody.

Is it a coincidence that they went out, the moment those ships went over those cables?

I don't know. But there's something going on, and then British Airways.

British Airways lost all of their ability to communicate in any way, shape, or form, with the planes and the towers. It was an IT glitch, and grounded planes all over the world.

And, you know, luckily they weren't in the sky, when this glitch happened. But, I mean, Putin has always said, it's not going to be fought with nuclear war.

It will be fought with ones and zeros.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

J6 Prisoner's Insane Story of Being Arrested & Imprisoned by Feds

Former January 6th prisoner John Strand recounts how his door was broken down by a battering ram and arrested in a chilling raid without warning by the Feds for being at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Strand goes on to tell Glenn Beck about how he was then thrown into prison and not allowed to make a phone call for four days in this shocking story.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with John Strand HERE

Kristi Noem reveals INSANE spike in anti-ICE attacks

“Attacks on ICE officers are up by OVER 1000%,” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem tells Glenn Beck. Sec. Noem tells Glenn who she thinks is to blame. Plus, she comments on removing the age cap for joining ICE, whether she would respect the Supreme Court’s ruling on Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order, and what’s to come at the TSA. Glenn also gets her reaction to her recent portrayal on South Park.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Kristi Noem, welcome to the program, how are you?

KRISTI: Oh, Glenn. Thank you, I'm doing great. Thank you for inviting me.

GLENN: No, it's great. First of all, thank you for the shoe thing.

Thank you. I feel like a human being again.

KRISTI: Oh, that was like the first thing when I got here to the TSA.

I was like, I think the shoe thing is made up. I'm not sure our technology hasn't devolved enough, where we don't have to take our shoes off anymore.

So they ran the security protocols, and made sense. And we're continuing to evaluate everything TSA does. And hospitality needs to be a part of this equation too.

I see so many people that encounter our security checkpoints wonder, just wonder, is this necessary? And why is everybody yelling at us?

GLENN: Yeah. I don't think a lot of it is necessary. At least the way we are doing it.

I know you've seen the numbers. What is it?

Seattle or San Francisco, one of them that has the private security, is better. Than the government-run security.

KRISTI: Yeah. So we've got I think 16 or 18 airports that have private security, that we have contracted with for those measures. So we're continuing to evaluate that, at every location and implement it where we can. If we think it's more -- better protocols for security, but also works better for the traveler.

My vision is that at some point, we get to, you walk in the door at the airport with your carry-on suitcase, you walk through a scanner, pulling your suitcase, and go right to your gate. And that technology is available and out there. But we just need to get it updated and get it implemented.

GLENN: Good.

I want to talk to you about ICE.

First of all, you're removing the age limits for new applications to join ICE.

I mean, I'm only 61. Does that mean somebody like me, I could have the velcro shoes?

I'm sure I have a bad back. I could barely walk. But can I be a part of ICE?

KRISTI: They will still have to pass a physical test, sorry, Glenn. There will be a physical exam and training. Yes, we do want.

We want some of these folks that retired from law enforcement, under the Biden administration.

Get frustrated. Maybe former Border Patrol.

Former federal officers, that weren't allowed to do their jobs before, to come back. And to be a part of literally saving America, and saving these communities and cities that have been so victimized by the crime. And drugs of these illegal criminals that have been out there, attacking their families. So it has been amazing. We have 10,000 new officers, that we received funding from, in the big, beautiful bill.

That to hire for ICE, and we have already had over 80,000 applicants for those 10,000 positions.

So we're -- we're rolling through that, and getting them through the process, to see if they can qualify. To give them final offers. But what I like about that, the most, Glenn, is that the media and the socialists and Marxists have done nothing more than try to demonize our ICE officers. And to see that kind of response in less than a week, just shows that the American people stand with the rule of law. That they want to help. And they want to be a part of this.

So that in itself has been so encouraging to ICE, just to see if people want to join the team and be they're excited about it.

GLENN: Yeah. Now people on the left are saying, you're turning ICE into a teenage Army for deportations.

KRISTI: We're not. Nothing is changing. You know, I'm shocked every day by the amount of stories that we have to refute, that just are completely false.

There will be so many stories shared. So many things said. So many narratives. That we spend half of our time, over here at the department of security, saying, that's not true.

No, we didn't.

That's not a fact. You know, just even -- anecdotal stories about families.

That just never even happened.

GLENN: Right. I am amazed. When you're talking about somebody like Mamdani.

And they're accusing ICE now of kidnapping people.

KRISTI: Yes. Yes.

GLENN: Kidnapping.

When you start planting things like they're pulling up in unmarked trucks. And they're wearing masks.

Because they're Nazis.

And they're just kidnapping people off the treat.

You are telling people, you have a reason and a license to stop these people with any means necessary.

It is so dangerous. So dangerous.

KRISTI: It's so dangerous.

Well, and we just got this morning, the notifications that a tax on ICE officers is up by over a thousand percent.

Than what it was, six months ago.

GLENN: Jeez.

KRISTI: So, you know, because those politicians and those, you know, extremists talk that way.

I mean, I've told people, I've said this my whole life.

Words have consequences. What you say matters.

And the consequences of using dangerous language like that is people take action on them.

Anybody who has a tendency to be unstable or be violent. That almost gives them permission to go out there and take action against these individuals. Who all -- these guys, they're not picking and choosing winners or deciding who the law applies to.

They're just doing their job. Upholding the job. And they want to go home at night to their families too.

GLENN: So this is what amazes me that you're getting 80 or 90,000 applicants.

When you have these radicals putting wanted posters up of people in their own neighborhoods.

I mean, just as -- I mean, as a dad, I don't know if I could put my family in danger.

KRISTI: No.

GLENN: And, I mean, how are we?

What are we going to do to stop this kind of stuff?

KRISTI: Well, we are going to keep doing our job, no matter what.

And we are building special operations teams to handle go to positions we face out on the streets. One of the things when we're in these communities. And that's why I've spent so much time with our agents and officers. Because I want to know what they go through when they run these ops.

And it's amazing to me, when we're out on the street, in New York City. Or in the Bronx. Or in LA. You're running -- you're doing an operation in an apartment. Where you have a warrant.

And you're -- but people are walking by. Taking their kids to school.

Or they're walking to work. And they are saying thank you.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you. We have lived with this for years. And our mayor. Our won't do anything.

Thank you for being here.

So people are overwhelming. And that's what I tell our ICE officers all the time. You're not all over the country, like I am. Or out of these communities so much. With different components all over the street.

But overwhelmingly, people say thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So I think what happens so much in this country, is the extremists are allowed. And the normal people just go to work and keep their head down.

GLENN: Go ahead.

KRISTI: We just have to be vocal about our support. Like, guys, I'm encouraging people that our hard-working, everyday Americans to be bold about saying, I support our law enforcement officers. I support what they're doing to arrest these rapists. And these murderers.

I mean, just these last couple of days, we've arrested dozens and dozens of sexual predators, pedophiles.

You should see these the chases we built, to get these individuals from Honduras and from Mexico.

They're here illegally. Some from Ukraine. They're -- and they're raping people. And murdering them.

We had ones that have been arrested two or three times and released by their city. They don't honor -- and then we end up. Killing someone, in a drunk driving accident, or assaulting someone, and then we finally get the chance to incarcerate them when we pick them up before the locals do.

Because if the locals do in their sanctuary city, they don't honor our detainers. They just turn them loose again.

GLENN: So let me ask you this.

This might be unfair. I don't know if this falls under Homeland Security at all. You know, we had Delia Ramirez.

And Ilhan Omar has done it too.

Declare that they are more -- you know, they feel more akin to Somalia, or to Guatemala, than America.

And they're serving in Congress.

KRISTI: Right. Right.

GLENN: Do we enforce the oath of office?

KRISTI: The Department of Justice would make that determination.

But that is alarming to me.

GLENN: If you -- if you had an officer that said that, I mean, I'm assuming with, your ICE officers take an oath to the Constitution.

If -- if -- if they had -- would you consider that a fireable offense?

KRISTI: Yes. Absolutely.

And we do take action on that.

And when we -- I've used every authority.

There's expansive authority. This is a national security position.

And I tell people, consistently, Department of Homeland Security. I have the authority over every person in this country, that leaves this country or comes into this country.

We have the authority over every product or good that is in this country, or leaves this country or comes in.

And we also have jurisdiction over the internet.

So what is said and done, was a security concern.

And what is communicated in protecting our critical infrastructure.

But also, how bad actors would wish to do us harm.

So the authority is there.

I have -- and I have been using -- when these specific situations, where we have people who don't love America.

I will use polygraphs.

I will use the authority I have. To find out. If you are going to be in this federal government. Where our mission and our oath is to protect this country. You're not going to be allowed to be here, if that is not trillion where your efforts go every single day.

So those members of Congress, I was -- you know, I don't sleep much.

And when I'm laying there, thinking about it at night.

I just think, they must -- it's our poor education system, that we didn't spend enough time, in -- in our schools, teaching the Constitution.

Teaching the Declaration of Independence. The fact that how hard this country was fought for, and why it was established.

And that we facilitate, where someone can actually get elected to a high office like that. And say something like that.

And we would have people nod their heads.

That -- that is the ripple affect, I think of many years of neglect.

GLENN: Yeah. I think -- I used to believe, it was just neglect.

And that might have been at first. But it was what they were actively being you taught.

It's not what is just being left out.

They're actively being taught to hate this country, at this point.

Let me ask you a couple of quick questions.

SCOTUS.

If they rule against birthright citizenship. President Trump's order.

Will you aspect the ruling of the Supreme Court?

KRISTI: We have always respected the federal rulings, and will do so. I think that would -- I don't know when that ruling is expected, for sure.

GLENN: Yeah.

KRISTI: But that would be a very consequential ruling, that we would have to figure out how to handle and deal with.

GLENN: Yeah. Do you agree with SCOTUS, that illegal aliens have some due process rights? And why or why not?

KRISTI: I do.

But I do believe due process looks different, according to the law. And according to what's afforded to them.

Most people, when they think of Tuesdays, they don't do their homework. And research. To truly understand, it's not a guaranteeing of a hearing. On in persons. Presentation in front of a judge.

Or the due process looks very different for an illegal alien that's in our country. Than it does for US citizen.

And that's appropriate. I think that's entirely appropriate.

And we have always afforded every single illegal that's within this country, due process. Before they are removed.

There has not been an instance, where ICE or immigration officials haven't done so.

GLENN: Tom Homan told me months ago, he said, there are several phases of this. What phase are we in?

And how many phases do we have?

Or where are we in the process of really getting this done?

KRISTI: Well, I asked President Trump for this job, because I knew he was going to have to have someone that was actually tough enough to do it.

But tough enough to do it for a long period of time.

That wasn't going to say, you know, this is a six-month operation. And then we're going to soften, and get ready for midterms.

You know, I knew he needed somebody that could sustain this.

But what -- what Joe Biden broke by allowing this invasion.

Can't be undone overnight.

So it will be an ongoing efforts.

We have funding, through the reconciliation bill.

To sustain it, for the next four years. And we will.

And it will only get stronger and stronger.
And bigger. We intend to grow it, not shrink it.

And we are going after the worst of the worst. And those criminals that are killing Americans, and victimizing Americans.

As well. But, I mean, overwhelmingly, I've been to, I think 11 or 12 different countries in Central and South America. In negotiating security agreements, and sharing of information on criminals and people that they think are in our country.

And talking about those presidents of those countries. And sitting down with their leadership.

It's amazing.

They're telling me that hundreds and hundreds of thousands of their people have already come home voluntarily. That just because we've been so strong on the messaging, the commercials, the CECOT videos have convinced people that were in this country illegally, you know what, I will leave now. And then I will have a chance to go back to America, the right way.

And I think the President of Mexico and her team were telling me, they believed that 500,000 Mexicans have just voluntarily came home, that may not even be on our radar. That we haven't counted, because they didn't come home through our app and our systems.

And I was just in Ecuador, and Chile, and Argentina. The same conversations. So I do believe we're making a big difference. Even in just our message being people that were here illegally, understand that they should go on their own first.

And then we need to figure out, if they're given the advantage to go back to this country, how do we do that?

GLENN: Well, I don't know about you, I imagine you were -- you're far more busy than I ever have been.

But I remember when I -- when South Park did an episode, and Cartman played me the whole time.

KRISTI: Oh, really?

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

It took me about a year before I -- I didn't even know it happened, until maybe a year later. I was so busy.

And I ended up years later, watching it with my son. And we both laughed over it.

KRISTI: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But welcome to the club.

KRISTI: Well, I guess so. I didn't get to see it.

I was -- I was going over budget numbers and stuff.

But, you know, I think it's -- yeah. It -- it never ends.

But it's so lazy, to constantly make fun of women for how they look. Only the liberals and the extremists do that. If they wanted to criticize my job, go ahead and do that. But clearly, they can't. They just pick something petty like that.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Kristi, thank you so much. God bless.

KRISTI: Yeah, thanks, Glenn. You too. Absolutely. Thank you. Keep praying. We're doing good.

Jon Stewart just revealed EXACTLY how the Left works

"The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart recently tried to dunk on Glenn Beck by claiming he flip-flopped on the Epstein Files. But Glenn reveals how Stewart inadvertently exposed exactly how the Left's spin machine works.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, let me take you to another thing that Jon Stewart.

Because Jon Stewart has been mocking me for years.

And that's fine.

Here he is, on Epstein.

And he's taking me on.

But it -- I just want to -- the only reason why I want to play this. Because it's really not worth it.

Other than for somebody who doesn't know how the left works. What they do, is they take everything I forgot context.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And they twist it, to make it look, as though I'm saying something that I'm not.

Or -- or making it look like, that is the conclusion.

So watch Jon Stewart here.

VOICE: I honestly think my favorite thing about this is watching conspiracy theorists have to unravel the red string, that they themselves originally strung out.

Here's the OG conspiracy theorist Glenn Beck at his excitement for Trump's beginning of the second term.

GLENN: The only thing I care about is the -- the scandal of the pedophiles and in the next ten days, you will see the Epstein file released. Day number one, Kash Patel walks in. By the end of the day, it will be released.

VOICE: Day one!
(laughter)

VOICE: Deep State exposed. Oh, I'm sorry.

Trump is in the rough?

I'll get right on that ball drop.

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Stop for a second. Stop. So what did he do here?

PAT: He switched the person, from Kash Patel to Donald Trump. He didn't say Trump was going to release it day one. He didn't say that.

GLENN: Exactly right.

No. Kash Patel was going to release that. And I have that on very, very good authority.

Trust me, very good authority on that.

I can't help that that -- that person told me that was wrong.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: It was hard to be wrong.

But they were wrong.

And so I looked like, I was just out there on a limb.

I don't really care. I don't care.

But it was -- it was not Donald Trump that said that.

And that was a prediction, that I made.

And based on, some information that somebody -- that was very reliable, at least at the time.

Or I thought was very reliable. Told me, that that was what was going to happen on day one.

It didn't!

Now he immediately jumps to me, in a chalkboard, what?

Six months later. 70 pounds different.

Okay?

You can tell, some time has gone. Because Glenn has lost 70 pounds.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: So watch -- watch what he says next.

VOICE: What the left is saying. And EMS people are now saying.

He's in the report, with 15-year-old's. Really?

Do you actually believe that?

VOICE: Yes!

VOICE: I have seen some clips that would be consistent with --

PAT: No. You haven't.

VOICE: With teenage --

GLENN: Stop. Okay. Stop for just a second.

So he brings up. He bought a teenage, you know, what do you call it?

You know, Miss Teen USA. He bought that. That doesn't make you a pedophile.

PAT: Oh, jeez. Oh, my gosh. Talking about the beauty pageant?

GLENN: Yeah. He's talking about the beauty pageant.

PAT: Oh, good golly.

GLENN: And, again, so that doesn't make you a pedophile. There's a difference, you know, between a teenage beauty pageant and a pedophile.

And I would like to know what clips you've seen?

And notice it's clips. The same thing that he's doing here.

He's taking a clip, and he's formatting it in a way, where you can't see, that what I'm talking about, I'm going to the chalkboard.

And there is one option up there, that Trump was on the tape. It doesn't show that there were five different options up on there.

And I am -- I am -- what I'm doing, is I'm laying out all of the options. And saying, which is the most likely? Now, if you hate Donald Trump, and you just expect the worst of Donald Trump, of course, you're going to say no to that.

But I wasn't talking to Jon Stewart's audience.

I wasn't talking to the people who hate Donald Trump. I was talking to the people who will at least give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt.

Does Donald Trump -- I mean, if he was with -- well, go on, because he plays this.

Now, listen to this.

VOICE: You die a teenage beauty pageant. Now, listen, Beck, you're the master at making connections, so let's see you unconnect it.

PAT: Oh, jeez.

GLENN: I mean, let's be honest, 20 years ago, if this was like, hey, he was on an island with 25-year-old models, I -- I would be going, probably.

Okay? Fifteen, 16-year-olds? That's not Donald Trump. It's not Donald Trump.

I don't believe that. Do you?

VOICE: Yes!

GLENN: I say that's -- no way that's true.
(laughter)

VOICE: No! Do not -- there's no magic X.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. So stop for just a second. Notice what he did there.

I said, do you believe that? I don't believe that. Do you?

Then I said, I didn't believe that. And I put an X over that. I don't believe that.

But I asked, do you believe that?

Leaving it open for you to say, yes, I do believe that!

But remember, this whole chalkboard was, what do I feel is most likely?

Not what happened. What do I feel is most likely, to have happened?

Why?

I wasn't excusing no release.

I was saying, why wasn't there a release?

Why didn't it happen.

But, again, you'll notice, he doesn't cover that.

This is exactly the way the left works.

And especially with people like Jon Stewart, who are doing comedy.

You take it out of context.

And you -- you take it out of context, so you can make it funny.

Because you make it the most extreme.

Instead of showing the entire conversation, which he can't do.

Because he's a comedian. But then, he goes and says serious things afterward, like he's just a crazy man.

He believes all these crazy things.

Well, no, Jon.

They look crazy to you, because you're not paying attention. You're not seeing the entire context.

You're not giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, of -- of having a different opinion.

And being sincere about it.

So I give you the benefit of the doubt.

I know you're doing comedy.

I disagree with -- with your point of view on many things.

But I've also seen you do things that I believe in. That I think, okay. Well, he's got something there.

When you were questioning the pentagon?

Wait a minute. How can you keep failing all of these audits. That doesn't make any sense.

I cheered for you.

But I also watched it in context, not the thing that Jon Stewart has done, and they have perfected this smear on me, and everybody else.

I don't really care about me. I mean, honestly, we've had this conversation before we went on the air today. And we were just talking about, how it's not worth playing this.

Because, you know, it doesn't matter to me, anymore. It doesn't matter -- I don't think it matters to you, the audience.

But it should matter to you, to be able to see how it works. If you don't know yet.

See how it works. And how they take things out of context.

Why Jim Acosta’s AI Parkland victim “interview” is GROTESQUE

Former CNN host Jim Acosta recently “interviewed” an AI-generated depiction of Parkland shooting victim Joaquin Oliver. Glenn Beck calls the stunt dystopian and sick, asking: “What does it truly mean to be alive if, in death, you’re more useful?”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So here's a story that I think, if we don't stop and pay attention to right now, just one small story, it may seem like something small. But if we don't pay attention to it right now. I don't think we recognize what it means to be human in a generation, from now, if that long. Journalist. I shouldn't say journalist.

Publicity hound Jim Acosta just did an interview -- I can't even say that. Just did -- I don't even know what you would call it.

Did a publicity stunt, not with a witness.
Not a grieving parent. He sat down with an AI ghost.

It's an AI recreation of a 17-year-old kid, named Joaquin Oliver. He was murdered in the Parkland Massacre.

And then he called it journalism. He called it a conversation, but it wasn't.

It was neither!

It was -- it wasn't even human. Let me play this grotesque pantomime for you. Listen.

VOICE: Joaquin, I would like to know, what your solution would be for gun violence.

VOICE: Great question. I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support, and community engagement. We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard.

It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding; what do you think about that?

VOICE: I think that's a great idea, Joaquin.
(laughter)

STU: That is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life. I had -- I had seen all the headlines. I hadn't actually seen the...
(laughter)

GLENN: Now, it is so --

STU: Sorry.

GLENN: It's so bad, it's funny, at this point. Right? It's just horrible.

I want to put this into perspective: This is a digital ventriloquist act. He's a puppet. It's the image of a dead kid, long buried, animated. Like a puppet, for the politics of those who are still living.

Now, let me ask you something, that, you know, we haven't dared to ask out loud yet.

And that is, what does it mean?

What his it truly mean to be alive?

In death, you're more useful.

What are the Republicans saying. Or sorry, the Democrats saying right now to some of the people in Congress.

They're saying, you need to take a bullet. Why?

Because you're more useful, if you're dead.

If somebody assassinates you. So what does it mean to be alive, if in death, you're more useful?

What does it mean when your image. Your voice. Your soul as captured by a memory or photograph, can be summoned back again.

Not by God. But by algorithms and agenda.

I hate to go all religious on you. But I have to tell you, if this isn't the making of a graven image, I don't know what is.

Thou shall not making a graven image.

You don't make for yourself an idol or any likeness of what is in heaven, above, or on earth beneath.

You know, the Native Americans used to -- they would never let you take your picture.

Some of them. Some tribes.

They would never let you take your picture. Because they thought it would steal your soul.

This doesn't have a soul. This is taking your image, bringing you back to life, without a soul.

When man starts creating a likeness, to wield power or emotion, we stop serving God. And we start serving ourselves.

And I'm going to be generous here. And say, don't blame the parents.

I don't -- I don't question their grief, in any way, shape, or form.

But this -- this -- this is no longer theirs.

This is not their son. This is a political puppet.

The minute Joaquin's AI avatar spoke political opinions into a camera, it stopped being about grief, and became propaganda!

And this, my friend, is only the beginning.

What happens when governments use AI resurrected faces for propaganda?

What happens when terrorists Use Deepfake hostages?

Hostages who are already dead? Pleading for help?

You don't think that could happen with Hamas?

You don't think that Hamas couldn't have made an image, in fact, the video that we say last week, could have very well been AI.

And the kid could be dead.

Now, it's not. But that's what's coming.

What happens when we begin to trust synthetic testimony, over human -- actual human experience?

This isn't just immoral.

This is very, very dangerous. This is soul-erasing.

This is post-human.

You are entering a world now, that is -- it's post-human!

This is the dystopian world. And we're just beginning to step into it. We're entering an age, where the dead can be programmed, to speak the words of the living.

Where the brief is nothing more than a marketing tool.

Where death is not your end!

But just the data set now, to be parsed and projected. And used politically.

And here's the real sick part of this: The more meaningful your death, the more valuable your ghost.

If that doesn't shake to you your core, nothing is going to.

If this doesn't wake you up to the dangers of AI, nothing will.

If this doesn't wake you up to go, oh, dear God, I've got to get back to the basics, I have to start asking the questions, what does it mean to be human? Nothing will!

We -- we have to draw really strong, ethical hard lines in the sand, on the use of AI. The use of likeness of the dead. It should be codified into law, internationally. And I'm not saying, you know, you're not bringing characters back. You know, you're not bringing -- you're not bringing things back to, you know, show them in movies, or for entertainment or whatever.

But when you're bringing dead children back, I don't know. I think there's a problem here.

There's a problem. We -- and we also have to teach our kids discernment here. Critical thinking.

You know, and more than critical thinking. Moral reasoning has got to be taught.

We need a generation that knows the difference between the real and the artificial.

Between the sacred and the synthetic.

Because that's going to be blurred.

All of it is blurred. How long before a Jim Acosta clown isn't the one doing it, but somebody serious? Transparency, from media. From tech.

Not after the fact. But before the images even appear on the screen.

Now, to his credit, he did say, this was AI. Of course. But it's a ghost!

We have to reawaken the soul, the concept of the soul. This is why I've said for years, that Ray Kurzweil is one of the scariest guys I have ever met. Because he doesn't believe in the soul.

He believes that that -- what you just saw, is just as real, as the real kid.

Some -- the soul can't be copied. It can't be coded.

It can't be commodified.

Because we lose our soul, in our culture.

If we lose it in our -- in our culture, in our politics. In our mourning. In our journalism.

Then you've got nothing left.

And doesn't Joaquin Oliver deserve dignity in life? Everybody knows he deserves peace in death.
Right?

What he didn't deserve, is to be animated by code, to deliver a political message like a branded mascot.

I'm sorry, but if this is the parents' doing, the parents -- the parents, shame on you. Shame on you.

I -- I understand your grief as much as a person can, that hasn't lost a child. I understand your grief, but this is sick.

You know where this road leads? It lees to a future where grief can be licensed.

Where every dead child becomes a campaign.

And where being alive, no longer requires a pulse.

Just a well-trained AI model.

You never die!

That's not compassion. That is not progress. That is hell, wearing the mask of empathy.

Shame on you, Jim Acosta!

Because out of all the people that could have done this, you're only doing it for PR. You're only doing it because you need the attention.

It's sick. And Americans have to stand up and say, no more. You have to at least, in your personal life, make a decision, what is life?

And what is death worth?