Bill O'Reilly fires back at absurd attacks from liberal publication Mother Jones

Mother Jones published a brutal attack on "King of Cable News" Bill O'Reilly, claiming he has misled viewers about his role in covering the Falkland War between Argentina and the United Kingdoms. This one is not going to end well for Mother Jones, an already discredited liberal rag that appears heading for another round of hefty discrediting.

"Mother Jones. Bottom rung. Nobody reads it," Bill told Glenn. "Why I'm even bothering with this is because once and for all, I'm going to put a stake through the heart of these irresponsible websites who pick up crap, throw it out there as fact, even though they know it's a lie."

"This is so absurd. We'll be able to prove it because I have all the memos from CBS telling me what a great job I did, covering the Falkland Islands War from Argentina. And, by the way, I never said one time in my life that I was on the Falkland Islands because no Americans were. And so that's the fact there," he continued.

Bill also called out the author of the article, David Corn.

"The big tip off of the article is when David Corn, who is a rank liar and a political assassin, says that I, quote, excoriated Brian Williams, when everybody on earth knows I went out of my way to be compassionate to the man on Jimmy Kimmel," Bill said.

Read the rush transcript of the interview below:

GLENN: Stop the music. Because this is going to be -- this is a very important thing here. I don't ever recall a time -- do you ever recall a time where I sighted with Mother Jones?

PAT: It has never happened. We checked the records.

GLENN: It has never happened. It's a rag not even worth your time even paying attention to or investigating because everything they say is a Marxist lie.

PAT: That's why we were so surprised at what a great job they did on this particular article.

GLENN: Boy, oh, boy. They have hit the mother lode on this one. The number one story on the Blaze today is Bill O'Reilly answering the charges of Mother Jones. Again, a complete rag and discredited rag, I might add, except perhaps in this case. They're saying that Bill O'Reilly is the next Brian Williams and he lies and makes up stuff about his reporting.

STU: It shows how good their reporting must be to win you over.

GLENN: Exactly right.

PAT: It does.

GLENN: We have the horse's mouth on the phone with us now, Brian -- I'm sorry -- Bill, nice to have you.

BILL: I'm glad I'm on that side of the horse, Beck.

[laughter]

GLENN: How are you doing, O'Reilly?

BILL: I'm good. Great intro. You know, so what do you want to know, Beck?

GLENN: Well, I want to know about this lie that you were somehow or another on the beaches in the Falklands, shooting things up.

BILL: I know. Look, you're absolutely right. Mother Jones. Bottom rung. Nobody reads it. But the internet is the big story. So what we're doing tonight and why I'm even bothering with this is because once and for all, I'm going to put a stake through the heart of these irresponsible websites who pick up crap, throw it out there as fact, even though they know it's a lie. This is so absurd -- and we'll be able to prove it because I have all the memos from CBS telling me what a great job I did, covering the Falkland Islands War from Argentina. And, by the way, I never said one time in my life that I was on the Falkland Islands because no Americans were. And so that's the fact there.

GLENN: So hang on just a second. You're also here claiming that you are an American.

BILL: Yeah, that's true. But the big tip off of the article is when David Corn, who is a rank liar and a political assassin, says that I, quote, excoriated Brian Williams, when everybody on earth knows I went out of my way to be compassionate to the man on Jimmy Kimmel. So this guy, I mean, he must think that the folks are as stupid as he is. However, I'll give the Beck listeners all over the country, we are going to show tonight a memo written by CBS News New York and sent to the South American chief in Buenos Aires telling him what a great job Bill O'Reilly did covering the final battle in the Falklands War, which took place in the Argentine capital. We have the memo. Thirty-three years, beck. And I found it last night deep in the basement.

PAT: That's great. That's great.

GLENN: It makes me say, okay, well, maybe Bill O'Reilly is telling the truth, but it also gives me an image of your home being one of those homes with the pack rats that save everything and you live in -- the hoarders --

BILL: I know you're a God-fearing man.

GLENN: So you are saying -- you are saying --

BILL: I found this memo.

GLENN: You're telling me your home is not filled with stacks of papers and you're living within jars of urine. Right?

BILL: What's the matter with you, Beck? What is the problem with you?

GLENN: Hey, by the way, I have to tell you something, when I come to New York, I have something that a friend of mine just -- just purchased that is either going to make your day or will make you weep. I happen to have a friend who just purchased the medical records and the autopsy report from Patton. It includes everything including his toe tag.

BILL: Wow, that's fabulous. It backs up what we wrote in Killing Patton. I can guarantee that. Right?

GLENN: Well, I will bring it to you. And if you would like to peruse, I'm going to give you some gloves. I don't know what you have. Brownies or whatever you have on your hands.

BILL: You know, Beck, that I fought with Patton in the Battle of the Bulge. You know that. Right?

GLENN: So, Bill, what do you think should happen to Brian Williams?

BILL: I think he's punished enough. I don't think I'd give him the Nightly News, but I'd put him somewhere else. You know.

PAT: Do you think there's any chance after a six-month suspension there's any chance they have him back in the anchor chair? Because we don't think that's even possible.

BILL: No, probably that isn't. But, again, I think they can put him somebody else. And maybe Meet the Press, that kind of thing.

GLENN: Should he be the head of NBC News at this point?

PAT: The managing editor?

BILL: Is this a facetious question, Beck?

GLENN: No. I wanted to make sure we were on the same page. Does MSNBC, do you think they will ever see the irony they're letting this guy go, but they have Al Sharpton and all those other clowns on there that lie for a living?

BILL: You know, it will be very interesting to see what happens to the MSNBC network. They're all, what, we call in the business, scratching now. Which means, they don't have any visible audience at all in many of their hours.

GLENN: They're literally being beaten by Al-Jazeera in some hours. I mean, that's impossible.

BILL: But, you know, it shows you that the American people are -- and this goes back to Mother Jones. Once you prove someone to be a liar, all right, which is what Jones accused me of, but now they'll get it rammed right down their throat. Because I have a paper that backs up exactly what I said is true. Once that happens, it's really hard for anybody to deal with you at all. And I think that's what happened at MSNBC. So it will be interesting to see.

GLENN: What do you think will happen with net neutrality?

BILL: I don't know.

PAT: Okay.

GLENN: I'm just letting that hang there. I don't think I've ever heard Bill O'Reilly say that. I don't think I've ever heard you say I don't know.

BILL: I don't know, Beck.

PAT: Is it a topic you're not that interested in, Bill?

BILL: Yeah. Really, I have to try to get these jihadists under control. Can you believe what's happening overseas? I can't believe how bad it's getting.

GLENN: Seeing it was a caliphate and I was the one that was mocked for saying that at Fox, yes, I can believe what's happening over in the Middle East.

BILL: It was the way you said it, Beck.

[laughter]

GLENN: Bill, it's always good to talk to you. Next time I'm in New York, I'll bring you the medical files of Patton.

BILL: I'd be fascinated to see it, thank you.

GLENN: All right, man. Appreciate it.

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.