CNN’s Erin Burnett destroys her last shred of credibility with blatant smear of Glenn Beck

Over the weekend, Glenn tweeted out that the actor who plays Satan in History Channel’s The Bible bears a striking resemblance to President Barack Obama. Yesterday, Glenn spent some time talking about how the media overreacted to the tweet and he was saying nothing more than the actor, under all his makeup, and the President could have been separated at birth. But no one went further into the gutter with their attacks than CNN host Erin Burnett, who used the tweet to smear Glenn by selectively editing years old footage and comparing Glenn to a genocidal, anti-Semitic dictator.

On her show, CNN host Erin Burnett said:

“Today, Beck took to Twitter again and not to clarify. He said this: ‘Media, relax. Actor has been in similar roles before. Funny, nothing more. For different reasons, 'The Bible' is one of my fave shows. Keep watching.’

Actor has been in similar roles before. In the world of Glenn Beck, that means he's definitely a ringer for the president because this isn't the first time he's made that comparison.”

Well, that certainly is a stretch. Burnett couldn’t go with the simplest explanation (two people look alike in photos), but rather made the extreme leap in logic that because the actor has played similar roles before he must be a ringer for the President.

Sorry Erin, it was simply his looks, not his IMBD.com resume that led to the comparison.

But spinning Glenn’s tweet wasn’t the real issue. After all, the media has made a habit out of taking Glenn out of context for ratings. No, the real issue comes from the fact that Erin Burnett and the producers of OutFront on CNN selectively edited footage of Glenn from his time at CNN Headline News to carry out their smear attack.

During her attack, Burnett aired a montage of Glenn clips supposedly showing his “ugly history” of comparing President Obama to Satan.

Stu explained what Burnett and her team were trying to do. “Remember what she's trying to create here: The fact that Glenn Beck has an ugly history of calling the president Satan. This happens all the time: Look at all the clips we found. They're trying to show a giant pattern of behavior with her clips,” he explained.

Here are a few of the clips Burnett used to make her point:

1. GLENN: “Some of the "Book of Revelation" crazies out there actually believe that Barack Obama is the Antichrist.”

2. GLENN: “And there are people -- and they said this about Bill Clinton -- that actually believe he might be the Antichrist.”

3. GLENN: “Odds that Barack Obama is the Antichrist?”

Wow, that certainly seems like several different occasions of Glenn bringing up Obama and Satan or the Anti-Christ.

But in actuality, Burnett selectively edited one segment. Not only did she take these clips out of context, she and her producers selectively edited the video package to make it appear that these three sound bites were from three different occasions.

In reality, all three clips came from one HLN episode of Glenn’s show when he was recapping an interview he had with Pastor John Hagee.

Glenn explained, “This was a news story. It was in the news cycle, and CNN was reporting on it. CNN, not my show. I was on CNN Headline, but CNN proper was also reporting on this story. So the next day I'm recapping, I talked about it, and they make it look like again a separate time I'm bringing it up.”

Here is the full transcript of the CNN segment from March 10, 2008:

GLENN: I was speaking with evangelical pastor John Hagee. We were headed on into a break. And I asked the self-professed end of days expert about the fact that some of the "Book of Revelation" crazies out there actually believe that Barack Obama is the Antichrist. (Clip 1)

Here it is.

BECK: Let me ask you -- and this is -- because I got -- I get so much e-mail on this, and I think a lot of people do. And I`ve only got a couple of seconds. And they say, Glenn, you in the media, you`ve got to wake up. Barack Obama is making people faint and cry and everything else, and he`s drawing people in. And there are people -- and they said this about Bill Clinton -- that actually believe he might be the Antichrist. (Clip 2)

Odds that Barack Obama is the Antichrist? (Clip 3)

JOHN HAGEE, EVANGELICAL PASTOR: No chance.

Not only did they selectively edit one segment from Glenn's days at CNN to make it look like three separate instances, they also removed the context where Glenn was disproving the argument that Barack Obama was the Anti-Christ. Did Erin Burnett and her producers just elevate unethical smear jobs into an art form?

How about one of their other "devastating" clips? The selectively edited portions are in bold:

(RADIO SEPTEMBER 30, 2011)

GLENN: Yeah. Speaking of nice abs, is it possible that Barack Obama is the anti Christ?

STU: No, wait.

PAT: I think it's more likely

STU: We can confirm that it's not true. That's on the other side of the sign, George Soros, anti Christ; Barack Obama, puppet socialist incompetent economy wrecker. So

GLENN: Well, you know what? Can I tell you something? That's true.

Yeah, any segment with “nice abs” is going to be serious. For the record, the radio guys were mocking a sign that someone was carrying, not calling the President “Satan”.

When did CNN fall so far from being the most trusted name in news?

“Now, this is really important. This is not about me or us or anything else. This is to show you how easily it is to fool people with creative editing. If you thought NBC was bad with creative editing, wait until we show you this. This again is not about us. This is really about who can you trust to tell you the truth?” Glenn said.

Sadly, selective editing isn’t the only smear Erin Burnett and her producers carried out against Glenn. They went the extra mile and compared Glenn to anti-Semitic Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“Real quick I just want to add the last part because this is really the important part: She then takes, after all of this propaganda, she then compares me to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. She then compares me in saying that, ‘You know who else has called him the Antichrist? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.’ So she plays Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”

Of course, it was only a week ago that Erin Burnett asked Former First Lady Laura Bush “…anti Semitic, anti American, does the U.S. need to accept that when we want to make change?”

More on that story HERE.

“It's bad for you (Glenn) to compare the appearance of an actor and the president but it's okay for her (Erin Burnett) to say you're (Glenn) the same as a vicious brutal murdering dictator,” Stu said.

Despite the attacks, Glenn had a sincere word of caution for Burnett, whose show has been struggling in the ratings and consistently losing to competitors on other news networks.

“Erin is and I say this sincerely - Erin, I know what it's like to be on the verge of being fired. I know what it's like to have horrible ratings. I've had them,” Glenn said.

“I mean it sincerely: It is sad what's happening to you and what you're allowing. And it's hard, and I understand that. It's I do understand that. But don't lose yourself,” he said.

Even though Glenn empathized with the struggling Erin Burnett, he does want CNN to issue a statement either rejecting the unethical practices used in the attack or acknowledging that this was just part of the new CNN.

“I'd like a statement either rejecting this kind of journalism or letting the American people know that's what CNN is now going to do because apparently they are desperate for ratings,” Glenn said.

If anyone out there needed another excuse to call their cable operator and demand that they offer TheBlaze as an alternative to networks like CNN, here you go.

Watch Burnett and CNN’s blatant smear below:

And here is the video where they selectively edited one segment to appear as three separate instances:

The Woodrow Wilson Mother's Day loophole

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.