Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Author: Unsealing JFK Assassination Files Is a ‘Gift’ to Many Who Still Have Questions

October 24, 2017
Staff

WRITER

More than half a century after President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, the government is releasing a trove of files about his death. What will be in the unsealed files? Will they actually be released as promised? And most of all, is there a smoking gun?

Gerald Posner, an investigative journalist and the author of “Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK,” talked about what we should expect to find in the documents if they are released as scheduled this Thursday.

“The gift is every word and every document that the CIA and everybody fought for so many years to keep sealed,” he said of the release.

Don’t get too excited though – Posner scoffed at the idea that we’ll discover some huge government conspiracy in the files.

“If there had been a massive plot at the highest government levels, the last place you’re going to find evidence of it is … at the National Archives,” he said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So earlier, Donald Trump came out and said he is going to -- he's going to open up the JFK files, which I think is great.

I have not heard from Rafael Cruz. I believe he has -- he is either in Canada by now, or maybe Argentina, alluding police. Because once those files come out, that show that he was clearly involved in the assassination, I think then you'll know.

But he's -- they're going to release these files, which I think is fantastic and wildly interesting for no reason than fun.

Jared Posner is a friend. An author. Case close. Lee Harvey Oswald and the assassination of JFK.

I have been good friends with one of his good friends for a very, very long time. So when this story came up, I immediately thought, what does Gerald think is in these files?

Welcome to the program, Gerald Posner.

GERALD: Glenn, great to be on with you.

As a matter of fact, our mutual friend, Mike Opelka, said the other day in a tweet that this coming Thursday, the day for the JFK files release is Christmas for all JFK researchers. And I had never thought about it that way before, but I think he's absolutely right. President Trump is giving us all -- those of us who have followed this case, a gift. The gift is every word and every document that the CIA and everybody fought for so many years to keep sealed.

GLENN: So did you think that this would come through this early? Because I thought it was like 2025 or after the next generation had died or something like that.

GERALD: Well, yeah, that's what Oliver Stone -- Kevin Costner addressing the jury saying, 75 years. Your taxpayer money. They're -- you know, they're keeping these things sealed from you.

And so people had -- we never thought we would see it in our lifetime. But here we are, they passed this law back in '92, in response to Stone's film, to say, let's get the files out. They put a 25-year-limit on it, to force these agencies to take a quarter century to get their act together. And said, whoever is president on October 26th, 2017, that's the person who has the final say, if the FBI, the CIA, or anybody else still says we want to hold on to these because there's an identifiable harm to national security, law enforcement, foreign relations. They'll appeal to the president. The president gets the right to say, yay, or nay. Does the harm outweigh the public good? And they could have never have imagined, I assure you, as you know, 25 years ago, you took a poll of their top thousand people they thought would be president, they never thought it would be Donald Trump.

GLENN: No. Running against the guy whose dad was co-assassin.

GERALD: Right. So Trump raises the assassination in the campaign. Now he's sitting as the president.

GLENN: Right.

GERALD: And the interesting thing is, I think, that we will only get these files -- if they really come out Thursday. They don't come in, in the last minute, convince them to hold back a few. Because it is Trump. If this had been Obama, even Bush the younger, Clinton, they were sort of system people, who followed the roles of freedom of information. They would have listened to the agency saying, you can't disclose this name because it's going to embarrass somebody in Mexico. Help the CIA.

When Trump tweeted on Saturday that these files are coming out, it was a great sigh of relief. I think he's the only person who is president since Kennedy who would have actually released them all.

GLENN: So what do you think is in there? For the average person. I mean, don't care if there's somebody in Mexico that the CIA wants to protect that I've never heard of. I --

GERALD: Yeah. No, I get it.

GLENN: What's in there that we would care about?

GERALD: Okay.

So the first thing is. Is there a blockbuster -- to use a bad term for the Kennedy assassination. Is there a smoking gun? Is there some document that shows Jay Edgar Hoover, handwriting the escape route for Oswald? No.

The reason I say that adamantly or with such confidence is -- and you get this completely -- if there had been a massive plot at the highest government levels, the last place you're going to find evidence of it is 25 years later in the national archives.

GLENN: Right. I mean, what's his name, Sandy Berger took those out in his underpants long ago.

GERALD: Absolutely. I mean, it's just fantastic to think they pulled off the perfect crime in Dallas 54 years ago, but somebody who was responsible for burning the documents forgot and left them in the backyard.

GLENN: Right. Right.

GERALD: So we're not going to get that. But what we will find that I think will be of interest is Oswald visited Mexico City, only seven weeks before the assassination. And not just as a tourist to have -- you know, stop by and have some Mexican food. He visited to get to Cuba because he convinced that was where the real revolution was taking place. He was sick of America, sick of Russia, where he had defected. And he went to the Soviet mission twice. Pulled a gun. They threw him out at one point. They thought he was a little odd, to say the least. And he went to the Cuban mission.

Now, Mexico city was a nest of spies. This was the Cold War. '63. We had the missile standoff just the year before. So the CIA was spying heavily on the Cuban and Soviet missions.

What did they learn about Oswald? Castro later boasted to somebody for the American Communist Party, that Oswald said he was going to kill Kennedy. True? I don't know. But it might be in the files.

So I do think we will find out what the CIA had learned about Oswald in Mexico City, and then what they didn't share with anybody else. Their typical MO.

GLENN: Your -- Gerald, it's been years since I've seen your book. Your theory on Oswald was, what?

GERALD: My theory on Oswald is that he is the only shooter at Dealey Plaza that day who hits anybody. So if you had five other shooters, the forensics show that the only place that Kennedy got hit was from behind. I'm convinced that that's Oswald. The tougher question, Glenn, is always, did he do it for himself, or did he do it for part of a larger conspiracy?

GLENN: Okay. So wait a minute. I want to make sure I understand the first part first. You said he's the only one that fired a shot that hit somebody. So are you saying, I don't know if there was anybody there, but if there was, it didn't matter.

GERALD: That's right. It didn't matter. That's exactly right.

So when I say Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone, that's what the evidence shows to me.

GLENN: That there's only -- he was the only shooter there?

GERALD: Yeah, that's right.

GLENN: Okay.

GERALD: Yeah. And, you know, people say -- they always say, oh, I saw somebody in the grassy knoll. And I go through all of that. Or, I saw somebody out in the text building or underneath the sewer, as Garrison, the new ordinance district attorney thought there were sewer shooters, until he went to Dallas and found out the sewer area was too small to fit somebody into the manhole cover. So, you know, the -- in the beginning, this -- the country has never believed under 50 percent, that it was a conspiracy. Meaning that even within a year of the assassination, within months of the assassination, the Gallup took a poll. I think 60 percent thought it was a conspiracy. It dropped to 50, at one point after the Warren commission. And then started to head up. It was at 90, 95 percent thought it was a conspiracy after the Stone film. And a last poll done in 2013 showed two-thirds of the American public still thought it was a conspiracy.

GLENN: So -- so I -- so we're alone? Because I don't think it was a conspiracy. Do you?

GERALD: I don't. But I do, Glenn, and I think you get this, why people believe it was -- two major factors: The first modern assassination with a rifle, from a long-distance. So people immediately conjure up Day of the Jackal.

Spy novels. You know, we're used to someone running up with a pistol, shooting at a site like with Wallace or later with -- you know who the shooter is at least.

GLENN: Sure. Sure.

GERALD: So you have a rifle assassination. The shooter gets away in the immediate aftermath. Then they pick him up. He's a 24-year-old kid who has been to Russia, trying to get to Cuba. He took a posh job at General Walker, this right-wing general who is running for the governorship of Texas. And he's killed two days later, by a guy out of Central Casting. The Dallas nightclub owner, Jack Ruby, who has potential ties to the mob, you're guaranteed you're never going to end the conspiracy theorizing on it.

GLENN: And do you expect to find anything in this about the mob?

GERALD: Yes. I do. There's as a matter of fact a file that's being held about an attorney for Carlos Marcello, who was the godfather of New Orleans. Many people think the mob was involved. Think that Marcello was kicked out of the country by Bobby Kennedy. He certainly wanted Jack Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy dead, no doubt. I just think that Oswald beat the mob to Kennedy, essentially. They would have patted him on the back and given him a medal, but he just wasn't their boy. And that attorney's file will be interesting.

You know this so well. The mob and the CIA were partners in the early '60s, trying to kill a head of state. But it was Castro. It wasn't Kennedy.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

GERALD: And they couldn't even wound Castro. They wanted him out. I mean, we didn't want a communist 90 miles from the American shores. And the mob wanted their casinos back. Seven times, they tried to get them. The poisoned swimsuit, the exploding cigar. They can't pull it off. And how these Keystone Cops who couldn't get rid of Castro supposedly pulled off the perfect crime in Dallas, I have my doubts.

GLENN: So these come out on Thursday, Gerald? Can we have you back on, on Friday, after you've looked at all of them and tell us what you found?

GERALD: Now, there could be -- Glenn, I would love that.

They believe that although there are 3100 files, it could add up to several hundred thousand pages. But, not only am I speed reader, but I will be able to go through these files and look for the names that I know are key. So on Friday, I will give you what I call the first brush look at what comes out, of the equivalent of Al Capone's safe.

GLENN: And, hopefully, it will be a little more interesting that Al Capone's safe.

GERALD: I hope so as well.

GLENN: Gerald Posner from GeraldPosner.com. He's an investigative journalist and author of Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and The Assassination of JFK. We'll talk to you Thursday, Gerald. Thanks a lot.

GERALD: Thank you so much. Bye.

STU: I don't know. The death of a president, maybe read the 100,000 pages in a day. Maybe just get it done. That's my recommendation.

GLENN: He thanks you for that.

STU: Am I asking too much? I mean, we're talking about presidential assassination.

GLENN: Easy for you to say.

STU: Get to work.

Civics isn’t optional—America's survival depends on it

JEFF KOWALSKY / Contributor | Getty Images

Every vote, jury duty, and act of engagement is civics in action, not theory. The republic survives only when citizens embrace responsibility.

I slept through high school civics class. I memorized the three branches of government, promptly forgot them, and never thought of that word again. Civics seemed abstract, disconnected from real life. And yet, it is critical to maintaining our republic.

Civics is not a class. It is a responsibility. A set of habits, disciplines, and values that make a country possible. Without it, no country survives.

We assume America will survive automatically, but every generation must learn to carry the weight of freedom.

Civics happens every time you speak freely, worship openly, question your government, serve on a jury, or cast a ballot. It’s not a theory or just another entry in a textbook. It’s action — the acts we perform every day to be a positive force in society.

Many of us recoil at “civic responsibility.” “I pay my taxes. I follow the law. I do my civic duty.” That’s not civics. That’s a scam, in my opinion.

Taking up the torch

The founders knew a republic could never run on autopilot. And yet, that’s exactly what we do now. We assume it will work, then complain when it doesn’t. Meanwhile, the people steering the country are driving it straight into a mountain — and they know it.

Our founders gave us tools: separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, elections. But they also warned us: It won’t work unless we are educated, engaged, and moral.

Are we educated, engaged, and moral? Most Americans cannot even define a republic, never mind “keep one,” as Benjamin Franklin urged us to do after the Constitutional Convention.

We fought and died for the republic. Gaining it was the easy part. Keeping it is hard. And keeping it is done through civics.

Start small and local

In our homes, civics means teaching our children the Constitution, our history, and that liberty is not license — it is the space to do what is right. In our communities, civics means volunteering, showing up, knowing your sheriff, attending school board meetings, and understanding the laws you live under. When necessary, it means challenging them.

How involved are you in your local community? Most people would admit: not really.

Civics is learned in practice. And it starts small. Be honest in your business dealings. Speak respectfully in disagreement. Vote in every election, not just the presidential ones. Model citizenship for your children. Liberty is passed down by teaching and example.

Samuel Corum / Stringer | Getty Images

We assume America will survive automatically, but every generation must learn to carry the weight of freedom.

Start with yourself. Study the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and state laws. Study, act, serve, question, and teach. Only then can we hope to save the republic. The next election will not fix us. The nation will rise or fall based on how each of us lives civics every day.

Civics isn’t a class. It’s the way we protect freedom, empower our communities, and pass down liberty to the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

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.