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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

A Russian hoax culprit now is helping government CENSOR US!play icon
youtu.be
RADIOOctober 12, 2022

A Russian hoax culprit now is helping government CENSOR US!

John Solomon, CEO and Editor-In-Chief of ‘Just The News,’ joins Glenn to expose The Election Integrity Partnership — a coalition of entities that responds to censorship requests by urging social media and Big Tech platforms to throttle certain posts, users, or pages. And, Solomon explains, this is something they’re doing in conjunction with the U.S. State Department: It’s ‘the largest federally sanctioned censorship operation ever uncovered in America,’ he says. But, it gets even worse. One of the players involved in this all is Robbie Mook — former Hillary Clinton campaign manager AND one of the culprit’s in the Russian collusion hoax to take down Donald Trump. Solomon explains the 2 reasons why Mook’s involvement is so significant and what this means for U.S. censorship moving forward…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Our good friend and a serious journalist, John Solomon. Welcome to the program, sir. How are you?

JOHN: Good to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: Can you recap this story for anybody who may have missed it or may have forgotten about it, that you broke three or four weeks ago?

JOHN: Yeah. And there's a big development today I'll get to. But the election integrity partnership, was a three -- four-person, or four-entity -- private entity that came together. Two universities. Cyber community companies. And they formed this sort of left-leaning project that worked with the Homeland Security Department, and the State Department, to create a concierge ticket system, that people could file tickets, saying, I think this information will use the election integrity project. Go on behalf of us. And ask the social media companies to throttle the post, delete the post, or block the post, or flag the post.

And they did this. And they did it with significant reach. According to their own after action report, which we obtained. They impacted 4800 URLs, websites, 4800 of them, 20 journalists. More than two dozen conservative influencers. And by the way, we're one of the news organizations that was censored or blocked by this.

GLENN: Right.

We are too, and I was named as a super spreader.

JOHN: You were.

GLENN: I mean, there's a chart that you obtained, introducing the narrative, mainstreaming it, and then super spreaders. And this was about the Colour Revolution.

Which I don't know any -- I don't know who -- Beattie is. I don't know any of the others who were saying this. We were doing our even independent research.

And then it says -- Darren Beattie appears on Tucker Carlson. The next one is: Significant influencer pickup. Glenn Beck and mass spreading, sharing dynamics, as users post stories, and claims to Facebook groups.

So I'm a super spreader.

JOHN: Yeah. Welcome to the club. It's just amazing. The idea that -- and the country that was founded with the First Amendment. The very first one that our Founding Fathers gave us. Free speech. To see this collaboration, DHS sanctions. The State Department actually sends requests.

Helmuth didn't send any requests to actually censor the State Department. Private groups, including the Democratic National Committee did.

And this partnership itself, did a lot of its own flagging under the name of the government, forwarding it to -- 22 million tweets. Social media posts were impacted by the targeting that this group did.

Thirty-five percent of the time, when the request was maid of Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, and Google, the request was granted by social media.

That's a pretty good batting average. I know some baseball players that would take a batting average. A really, really significant -- the largest federally sanctioned censorship operation ever uncovered in America. And today we have a brand-new development. It turns out that one of the players, who was instructing the Homeland Security department during the 2020 election was a Harvard University entity, traded by Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager, Robbie.

Now, why is that significant? First off, another left-leaning person involved in the machinery. But it was Robbie, in 2016, who testified during the Sussmann trial, recently, he and Hillary Clinton sanctioned the idea of leaking key things about the Russia collusion there. The fake Russian collusion narrative, to the news media, even though they weren't sure it was true.

Think about that, in 2016, he's the perpetrator in one of the largest disinformation campaigns ever pulled out in American electorate history, and four years later, he's advising his group at the developer center, at Harvard University is advising the government on how to fight this information

GLENN: This is craziness. Is there anyone picking this up, to break this up? Or is this just getting worse?

JOHN: Absolutely -- well, it's definitely accelerating.

The group is back in action. They said they got the gang back together in a tweet post just a few days ago.

There are multiple members of Congress that have jumped in. Johnson, the Senate Homeland Committee.

James Comer, likely to be the chairman of the House Oversight Committee. Jim Jordan, likely, to be the chairman of judiciary committee, if Republicans gain control, Chuck Grassley, likely to be Senate judiciary community chairman. They're all asking questions. My understanding is, there may be a preservation letter going out in the next couple of days.

GLENN: What is it? Okay.

So, John, can I ask a question that maybe you're not prepared to answer. But --

JOHN: Sure.

GLENN: You know, just based on my gut, and I could very well be wrong, but this doesn't feel like an election that's going to be close.

And I hope it's not. One way or another, I hope it's not.

Because I don't think people are going to believe, that it wasn't fixed. The -- the Democrats will know that it was fixed. But if they lose, they'll say, it was the other side fixing it. And conservatives are so concerned about the last election. And it feels at least in Texas, it feels like a -- a red wave.

And I'm not suggesting that it feels like a 20-point margin. But it feels like we will win if they are close. We would win.

Could be wrong.

Are these elections safe? Are they secure?

JOHN: Well, listen, they're -- we have a much better handle on the rule changes, that really tipped the election to the favor of Democrats in 2020.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court rulings. Arizona legislation. Georgia legislation. Florida legislation. Texas legislation.

A lot of the states, particularly the red states, and the battle ground states, have attempted to fix the issues, that a lot of people believe hijacked the 2020 election. There are some states where the issues aren't fixed. Pennsylvania is a concern for a lot of people.

There has been some unusual activity in Colorado.

I think 30,000 registrations went out. We just confirmed this, this morning, to noncitizens who aren't supposed to vote in Colorado. So there are still failures and mistakes. We know Iran hacked into the 2020 election. We learned that a year after it occurred.

But I think the system is more insulated against the sort of tactics that the Democrats and liberals and their bureaucratic friends and the election bureaucracy, try to use during the covid-19 are wiser, smarter.

There are more election poll watchers ready to go and train, something that I think Glenn Youngkin did very well. And praised the model for the Republican Party, nationally. So I think people have greater confidence, that the system will be better oiled, less craziness.

And, also, changes to rules that they've done in the name of COVID-19, have been rolled back in a big way.

And I think another important thing happened two weeks ago, Glenn. I don't know if a lot of people paid attention. Because it happened on a Friday night.

But an Obama-era judge, Obama-appointed judge, declared that the whole concept that made Stacey Abrams, the national figure that she is, that Georgia is the epicenter of a 21st century Jim Crow race this voting system, an Obama judge struck down every count of her lawsuit. That sends a pretty powerful message to Americans and Georgians alike, that just asking for someone's ID is not racist. Checking somebody's citizenship is not racist.

Having a court declare that. By the way, a court led by a Democratic judge is I think, probably a very important force, going into this election.

GLENN: Let me switch subjects.

Ukraine. First of all, why is the teacher's union head, Randi Weingarten over on the front lines of Ukraine today?

I mean, I'm not even going to joke about it.

Anyway, why is she over there?

She's assessing the situation. What kind of payoff favors are -- what is happening there?

JOHN: Yeah. It's a mystery for a lot of people. She obviously has been over there. She says that she's trying to help the Ukrainian schools weather and perform the middle of a war. Who knows what's really going on there.

Listen, Ukraine has long been a favor to liberal Democrats. They have championed these causes. And, you know, they're in the middle of a brutal war. Putin's attack on Sunday was a brutal attack, because it targeted civilians.

It killed lots of people, unnecessarily.

I don't know what actually motivates are there. We're trying to find out. We put some FOIAs in at the State Department.

Because the State Department probably would have cleared or been -- we found out beyond what she said, what's there.

But, listen, this is a very dangerous war. It is already -- had enormous consequences on the economy of the European Union. Enormous human consequences to the Ukrainian people.

And Vladimir Putin is acting more and more desperate, and I think a lot of people have to look for, do we have a president? Do we have a leadership in the world, that can find an offramp?

Right now, stop this war, and try to create a negotiated settlement.

GLENN: Does it seem like we're looking for an off-ramp to you?

JOHN: I had an amazing interview with Victoria Coates over the weekend. Former Deputy National Security Adviser. She said, that Joe Biden is missing the opportunity.

He has not defined to the American people, what the endgame is, why we're spending this money.
And, well, he tried to find the exit strategy beyond regime change in Russia. And there's no answer. She said, this is a sign of an extraordinary weak leadership, that Joe Biden has brought before foreign policy.

GLENN: Yesterday, we had our airports, the outward facing websites went down. It looks like the Russians, not the government, but probably a front organization, claimed responsibility, that they are going to start to hassle and make our lives more difficult by hacking into systems here.

JOHN: Yeah. That's -- that's something that we're seeing increasingly -- and including indictments. There was an indictment about three weeks ago, of some Iranian hackers, who were targeting a key infrastructure, particularly energy infrastructure.

You see the airport this week, and we know the Iranians successfully hacked a database. Let's keep this in mind. The guy who went on 60 Minutes, said, we have a completely secure proof election in 2020.

We later found out a year later, because of an indictment, because of the FBI and Justice Department. That wasn't true. That, actually, beginning in the summer of 2020, our homeland security department, the agency knew that we had been penetrated by Iran.

They were able to get into one state's voter database, and steal 150,000 American's identity. That's a really remarkable revelation that was kept from us, during the 2020 election. The infiltration of state-sponsored hackers is growing every day in our infrastructure.

It's way behind being insulated. I think that's one of the concerns. We have hospital systems. Energy systems. Water systems. All being penetrated and tested every day. And this is the next front of warfare. Right?

The digital warfare is -- I remember it about a decade ago, was Leon Podesta, the CIA director said we're going to have a digital Pearl Harbor, one day, because we're just not ready for it.

And I think the efforts to get that digital Pearl Harbor, started by our enemies, are growing by the day.

GLENN: If you could, hang on for one minute. I want to take a one-minute break, and then back in with John Solomon, who is just -- he's one of the guys that I really trust. If you don't read just the news, you should. Justthenews.com.

All right. Tonight, when you climb into bed. You're going to be lying down on excellent sheets with maximum comfortability. Or are you just going to get the average sleep?

I'm something of a sheet snob, or I like to say, aficionado. I could tell you, my favorite sheets, and I mean this, bar none. Are the Giza dream sheets. They're from MyPillow. They're absolutely fantastic. I've been sleeping on them for years. I wouldn't trade them for my life. And you can get them for the lowest price ever, new. 39.99. Really good sheets. Cost a fortune.

Well, these are made with Giza cotton. Best cotton comes from Egypt. These are Giza cotton.

And they're fantastic. I do not know about the thread count. I don't really care. I just know, they're super soft. 39.99. Right now. They're as low as they've ever been. So I want you to go to MyPillow.com. MyPillow.com. Click on the radio listener special square.

Check out the flash sale on the Giza dream sheets, along with limited time offers. Enter the promo code Beck, or call 800-966-3117. 800-966-3117.

Promo code Beck. Right now, at MyPillow.com. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
John, I don't know if you follow the story. I watched it a couple of times. First, the New York Times came out and said, that's a conspiracy theory. And then the very next day, Gasgon from LA put a warrant out for the arrest of this voting machine company, and he was arrested, I think in Michigan, or she, and brought to California because of the transfer of information to China, which they say was a mistake.

But I'm not sure I believe that. Do you know what this story is really all about?

JOHN: Well, this is a really important story.

First off, it's a far left prosecutor, that has brought it.

But acknowledging that this company, this Michigan-based company appears to have stored valuable data about the election poll workers and election system workers on a server in China.

And that this was not only a breach of the contract according to the district attorney's office. It was a national security risk. And it shows, once again, just like the Iran hacking deal we talked about a few days ago. Our foreign adversaries are looking for any way to steal data. To steal identities in America. To influence elections. To influence corporate business decisions.

And this possibility, this idea that this was sitting on the servers, while they were trying to penetrate or not. The indictment is silent on that issue right now.

But it shows it was -- at the very least, very sloppy. And put, you know, this software. This poll chief software, in a location where it could easily be penetrated by the Chinese.

GLENN: But here's what doesn't make sense to me. That's a violation of a corporate contract. What's the criminality here?

JOHN: False representations in the contract, is basically the -- and if you look at the indictment, right? There's a representation that they weren't doing what they were doing.

But there's also, it says, in the charges that were released by the district attorney. A suspicion of theft of personal identifying information. A suspicion of theft.

We don't know more about that yet. We expect more of that, when the extradition of court hearings begin going on. But a lot of cross-pollination. A Michigan county -- L.A. County working together to unravel this case. And bring in this indictment. A lot of eyes are on this, because it goes against the grain of a lot of narratives of the left. But in this case, one of the left's favorite. Gasgon, he's the one bringing this case, and my understanding is, the FBI has been involved. There's a lot of different pieces of -- different players still trying to figure it out --

GLENN: Yeah. That's one of the reasons why I don't trust.

Oh, it's Gasgon and the FBI. Oh, well, I feel safe now. One last thing. You know, I'm seeing something. And I just can't believe is true. But I think it is. They're not going to do anything about Hunter Biden, are they?

JOHN: We'll see. Listen, I think there was a significant amount of activity before the grand jury this spring, that brought forth the sort of evidence that would support charges for tax evasion, or tax violations.

I think for improper foreign lobbying, is one of the things that I worried about people being asked about in the grand jury. This gun charge came in late. Obviously other people have been charged with lying about using drugs, on their -- on their federal firearms license.

So I think at the end of the day, right after the election, the prosecutors will make a final decision. I think there are three outcomes, right?

One, they could cut a deal. That's the thing -- most likely thing will happen. Although a lawyer for Hunter says, two, there will be an indictment. Or, three, there will be some dispute, between the line U.S. attorney and the main justice, that will freeze this up.

But the evidence is now pouring out into the public. It will be hard for the Justice Department, not to take any action.

GLENN: And if the Democrats control the House and the Senate, will they be able to do anything about this?

JOHN: That's a great question. Right?

There may be less pressure for prosecutors to take a final action, and wrap this up. Because they know the Republicans won't be able to get it. I think one of the things to push this along. Has been the outcome of this election. The idea that Republicans may have one chamber of the Congress throwing -- putting pressure on the Justice Department. Hey, we don't want this out there -- about anything.

GLENN: Right.

JOHN: I think that's been the driving force a lot.

GLENN: Right. John Solomon.

Thank you so much always for all your work. Again, as I've said, if you've not read Just the News, you should start your day with Just the News. Justthenews.com. He is the CEO and editor and chief of John Solomon.

Witnessing a SpaceX Launch & Predicting Elon Musk's Legacy in 50 Yearsplay icon
RADIO

Witnessing a SpaceX Launch & Predicting Elon Musk's Legacy in 50 Years

Glenn Beck recently witnessed a SpaceX rocket launch from hours away, and the raw power of it sent him into a passionate breakdown about the wonder of space travel, the brilliance of Elon Musk, and the insanity of a culture that’s turning on its greatest innovators. From the days of the Space Shuttle to Musk’s Starship and self-driving Tesla vehicles, Glenn argues that Elon isn’t just a tech founder, but rather a once-in-history mind, a modern Edison who revived an American spirit we had forgotten.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Last night, here in Florida, Tania said SpaceX is going to launch another missile. About 15 minutes. Let's go outside and see if we can see it. And we live right on the coast. And all of a sudden, you know, we're watching it, ten, nine, eight, seven, six. And about 45 seconds after the launch. We're like, oh, but we can't see it. Then all of a sudden, over the top of the trees, we just see this flame coming up. And it was absolutely. I posted it on the Instagram last night. On my Instagram page. It was absolutely one of the most amazing things I've seen.

From a distance. I've seen it once before. I've seen the last space shuttle lift off in the middle of the night. And I really close. I was across the water. I was just right across from -- what is it?

Cape Kennedy.

And I could not believe, it was a wonder of the world. 3 o'clock in the morning. All of a sudden, it was just day light.

And now, I'm -- oh, I don't even know.

Three hours away. Two, three hours away?

And it's one of the most incredible things I've ever seen.

It just starts coming up. And then, you know, you see the rocket. The boosters detach.

The -- the first stage rockets go out. They turn blue. Then they go out.

And then you see them. And it just picks up so much speed. And just racing through the sky.

It is incredible. It's incredible.

If you've never seen a rocket launch, I can't wait to see his -- what is the -- that was a falcon.

What's the big, big heavy one that he's working on.

Nobody knows.

VOICE: Falcon Heavy, isn't it?

VOICE: Is it the Falcon Heavy?

I don't know.

I don't think so.

I think -- somebody look this up.

Starship. That's it.

I think it's based on the original Soviet design. The Soviets, the reason why we beat the Soviets up in space, is they had this great design of like 24 rockets.

Where we had like four, big, huge ones for lift.

They had like 24, 25 rockets, at the bottom of it.

But they couldn't synchronize them.

You know, this was when computing was really, really bad.

They couldn't synchronize them.

So they couldn't keep it level.

So it would take off. And spiral out of control and blow up.

That's the reason why we beat them into space.

I saw the bottom end of one of these rockets in a video. And I think -- I think it's the original Soviet design. I'm not sure. Because now we have the ability to synchronize everything. But I can't wait to see that thing. Because it's bigger than a Saturn rocket. Bigger the ones that we send to the moon.

JASON: At some point, I don't know if the wonder of space travel left.

JASON: We get bored with things.

JASON: It's so weird. But Elon Musk just brought it back. I mean, we're doing just amazing stuff.

GLENN: It's like everything.

We did it. We mastered it. We put people on the moon. Everybody was crazed about it. I remember sitting in class and seeing the astronauts, you know, on the moon. We would go in. They would bring in an old TV.

And they would sit the TV. Before these things were even on the little -- you know, wheel, you know, AV kind of things.

It was just a big old TV.

And we all went into the regular -- you know, the gym, and we watched it on a regular TV.

And them walking around, on the moon. And that must have been in the early '70s.

And then after that, everybody was like, yeah. So we've been to the moon. Now, nobody believes we've gone to the moon ever.

Now we're going back up. And, I mean, it's amazing. It's amazing to watch. Because you just think, I just watched it last night. I'm like, my gosh. Look at the power of that thing.

I could -- how far are we away?

Three hours?

Two hours?

You could hear it. You could hear it. It got to a certain place. Where my wife said, you can see it on the tape on Instagram. My wife at one point said, can you hear that?

You could! You could hear the crackle of it. It is -- I mean, it's incredible. Just incredible.

I really want to go see a liftoff in person, again. Just amazing.

STU: Yeah. We should. To be clear, we should excommunicate him out of our society. Because you wore a red hat a few times. That, I think is a smart -- it's a smart move.

GLENN: I know. What a dummy.

STU: Yeah. He's an idiot. And obviously, we don't need him helping our country, right now.

Why?

Because he voted for lower taxes or something.

We -- that's a good way to run our society.

GLENN: Hate that guy. Hate that guy.

STU: Amazing.

GLENN: What a dope.

We have just -- we have just become morons.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: We really -- really have.

History will look back and go, at what point, they just became morons. You know.

STU: Do you find it interesting, Glenn. He was at this turn with the Saudi Arabian, you know, delegation, I guess.

Trump did a turn and invited a bunch of VIPs to it.

I thought a good sign from the perspective of the relationship between Trump and Elon Musk, that he was invited in, was there.

Right?

Remember, they had a total falling out. It was over the Epstein files. If you --

GLENN: No. They made nice at Charlie Kirk's funeral.

STU: Yeah. So that's what you think earlier repaired. Somewhat repaired at this point?

GLENN: Yeah. Somewhat repaired. And, you know, if you're trying to showcase the best of America. Who better to have at the table than Elon Musk?

I mean, he is the Tesla or the Edison of our day. There's nobody -- is there anybody in the world that everybody, with an exception of those who are just so politically, you know -- I don't know.

Pilled. That they just can't stand anybody that votes differently than them.

I mean, be even when he was -- we thought he was a real big lefty.

I still wanted to meet the guy.

I still wanted to be, man, I would give my right arm to sit and listen to that guy in the same room.

You know what I mean?

It would be great.

This is a guy who will be remembered for hundreds of years.

After Jesus comes.

Well, we may not have history books at that point.

But he's going to be remembered for hundreds of years, as one of the greatest human beings ever. When they were still human beings.

So, I mean, who doesn't want to meet that guy?

How is it that we have half of our -- we have half of our country now just hating on that guy?

It's genius. Would you be happier if he was Chinese.

STU: Thank God, he's here.

GLENN: Thank God.

STU: And wants to be here.

And wants to be in this environment.

I think that, you know, you look at everything.

And it's going to be a great biopic.

The movie on Elon Musk's life. Is going to be absolutely incredible. Because he is a somewhat complicated figure at times.

There's a lot to discuss on the Elon Musk front.

GLENN: Oh.

STU: Just think of the fact that this guy has put, I don't know.

You know, hundreds of thousands. Millions of cars on the road right now.

That are, you know, capable and are driving themselves.

Think of -- that's like -- an incredible accomplishment!

This is a guy who is putting cars that are -- you know, have full self-driving. You can sit in there.

The thing will drive itself from point A to point B. Without you touching really anything.

And that is -- think about the fact that that's just being said. That even people are allowed. You know, that governments are just like. Yeah. We trust this guy. To let all these cars drive themselves.

It's an amazing accomplishment. That's just one of many.

It's really an amazing life.

Jasmine Crockett just DEFENDED this Jeffrey Epstein claim?!play icon
RADIO

Jasmine Crockett just DEFENDED this Jeffrey Epstein claim?!

Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett recently claimed on the House floor that Republicans, including EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, had taken money from “somebody named Jeffrey Epstein.” But it wasn’t THE Jeffrey Epstein. Glenn and Stu review this incredibly dumb attempt to smear Republicans and the even more insane excuses she gave to CNN.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's start with Jasmine Crockett. Yesterday, she came out, and she said that Lee Zeldin was receiving money from Jeffrey Epstein!

And Lee Zeldin is like, what?

No, I didn't!

Now, he knows that he did get money from Jeffrey Epstein. Just not the Jeffrey Epstein. Another Jeffrey Epstein.

Here is -- here is Jasmine Crockett trying to spin her mistake, on CNN last night.

Listen to this.

VOICE: Senate Democrat, who has been on defense over Jeffrey Epstein is Stacey Plaskett. She represents the Virgin Islands. She was texting with Jeffrey Epstein the day of Michael Cohen's hearing. Her questions pretty closely followed the text messages between the two of them to ask about Rhona Graff, Trump's long-time assistant. You were defending her today and in recent days, yesterday. And you talked about Republicans taking money from a Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what you said.

VOICE: Who also took money from somebody named Jeffrey Epstein, as I had my team dig in very quickly. Mitt Romney, the NRCC. Lee Zeldin. George Bush. When (inaudible). McCain/Palin. Rick Lazio.

VOICE: You mentioned Lee Zeldin there. He's now a cabinet secretary. He responded and said, it was actually Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, who is a doctor that doesn't have any relation to the convicted sex trafficker. Unfortunate for that doctor. But that is who donated to a prior campaign of his.

And do you want to correct the record on --

VOICE: I never said that it was that Jeffrey Epstein. Just so the people understand when you make a donation, your future is not there. And because they decided to spring this on us, in real time. I wanted the Republicans to think about what could potentially happen.

Because I knew that they didn't even try to go through FEC. So my team, what they did was they Googled. And that is specifically why I said agent, because unlike Republicans, I at least don't go out and just tell lies.

Because it was -- when Lee Zeldin had something to say, all he had to say was it was a different Jeffrey Epstein. He knew he did receive donations from a Jeffrey Epstein. So at least I wasn't trying to mislead people. To find out who this doctor was --

GLENN: Can we stop for a second. There's so much to digest.

We have to stop for just a second.

You weren't misleading people. Because you didn't see it was the Jeffrey Epstein.

You said it was a Jeffrey Epstein. What is the problem with getting money from Jeffrey Epstein?

There's no problem. That would be like, and Stu Burguiere has been taking money from Bob Stevenson. And?

What's the problem?

He's been working for Bob Stevenson for years. He was delivering papers as a kid to Bob Stevenson's front door! Who is Bob Stevenson?

There's not a problem with that. Why would you go out and say -- if she had come out and said, you know what, Lee Zeldin was also taking money from Bob Stevenson and Jim Furstenbergersteinberg.

I mean, then it would be fine.

You clearly were smearing. Not misleading? Not misleading?

STU: Oh. I --

GLENN: What's the problem from taking it from -- other than poor Dr. Jeffrey Epstein. Oh, my gosh.

STU: First of all.

GLENN: I feel bad for that guy.

STU: That life sucks.

If you're Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, you got to think about a name-change.

But there's hundreds of Dr. -- not doctor, but hundreds of Jeffrey Epsteins across the country.

GLENN: Hundreds.

STU: And I -- I mean, she was designed in a lab to make me happy. Jasmine Crockett.

I -- I love her so much.

GLENN: True. I do too. I do too.

STU: If you could formulate the perfect Democrat. I think I would just have to put her out there.

She just says the dumbest.

Like, she can't even get her bad defense right over this.

Like, she's trying to say, well, I didn't lie. Like, that's your defense in theory. I threw this in here. I noticed it, at the time. We talked about it, I think yesterday.

That she said -- yeah. She did.

She knew -- which actually makes it worse. She knew she was lying. She knew there was a good chance this wasn't Jeffrey Epstein.

But the last thing in the world --

GLENN: It's not a problem if you would have said -- it wouldn't be a problem if you would say, look!

All of these people have taken money from a Jeffrey Epstein.

Doubt that it's the same Jeffrey Epstein. Might be.

Might not be.

STU: I mean -- what value would be that?

GLENN: I know. I know.

It would be no value. But at least you can say, I'm not trying to mislead people.

STU: Right.

GLENN: I am trying to create doubt in people's minds.

But I'm not saying he's taking money from Jeffrey Epstein.

You know, when she just lists all of these people.

I mean, let's look at her donation. Let's see if she's ever taken money from a Charlie Manson.
(laughter)

You know what I mean? She's taken money from a John Wayne Gacy.

Hello!

A Ted Bundy has been seen around her house.

I mean, it's crazy! It's crazy!

And she knew exactly what she was doing.

And I hope that she continues. I hope that she continues to gain power.

STU: Yes!

GLENN: And love and respect from the Democrats. Because she is insane.

She's insane? She's so reckless. She's insane.

STU: She is. And, by the way, this is the person that we are told that should be the face of the party, that they should lean into the way she talks.

Because she's such a good communicator.

And she gets on all these shows, Glenn. This is a massive problem in our politics. And it affects the left more than the right.

It affects both sides to some degree. We're incentivized. The entire system is set up to reward people like her.

Who just say the dumbest things possible. And the most irresponsible and reckless things possible. And get all the clicks.

This woman has been on Colbert. Why?

She has been a complete nobody who is wrong all the time. She's getting on all these massive shows. She's getting booked everywhere. She's living the ultimate life of today's modern congressman.

And what is going to stop her?

The incentives are right there for her to continue.

GLENN: Do you think she doesn't know that she's dead.

Because didn't a Crockett die at the Alamo. Is that her?

I think that's her.

I know a Crockett died at the Alamo.

I'm not really sure. I'm not really sure.

I mean, just, what a dope.

JASON: Can I just point out? It's like, I'm a part of her research team, because she put her team on this.

GLENN: But quickly. But quickly.

JASON: Yeah. I always thought, especially Congress research would have these amazing tools.

GLENN: No, they don't.

JASON: And we, like -- our team struggles over this. We're constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve.

GLENN: And the last thing we do is Google. Google.

JASON: Google searches. That's what you do in Congress.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. That is what you do. That is what you do.

STU: Don't you have to fire your whole team after this.

GLENN: I would. I would. No. But she -- I don't think.

I have a feeling that her team briefed her.

It's why she did say, A, Jeffrey Epstein.

They briefed her, and said, this is probably not the same guy.

It might have even said, if you're Googling, it might have said, Dr. Jeffrey Epstein.

Why wouldn't it?

If that's who gave that money, it most likely said, Dr. Jeffrey Epstein.

And so they would say, it's not the Jeffrey Epstein. Yes, but that's okay.

I mean, she clearly knew. So who is she going to fire? This is what she wanted. Just the smear.

STU: Do we have time to play the rest of this clip? Because there's more to this. It's amazing.

GLENN: Yeah. Go ahead.

VOICE: So I will trust and take what he says. Is that it wasn't that Jeffrey Epstein. But I wasn't attempting to mislead anybody. I literally had maybe 20 minutes before I had to do that debate.

STU: So good.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop. Stop.

So you don't say it!

I literally had 20 minutes. So I -- I didn't know, that the sky wasn't on fire, that that was actually the sun.

I only had 20 minutes before I said, my God, the whole sky is on fire!

STU: This is why I love her.

GLENN: What were you thinking?

STU: She had no idea whether the accusations she was making was true.

And she didn't even consider not saying it. The only thing that she could come up with in her brain, whatever information that comes in, in this rushed time period, just go with it.

And it's like --

GLENN: Do you know why?

STU: Why?

GLENN: Do you know why?

And I don't know if she's smart enough to know this. But you can say whatever you want as a congressman on the floor of Congress, and you cannot be held liable.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: You could say the worst thing. You could say, he was having sex with 4-year-old with his Jeffrey Epstein.

And it could be a complete lie. And you could not be held responsible because you said it, on the floor of the house.

That's why the standards are so low.

The standards are absolutely so low for these Congress -- she could say whatever she wants. If she would have said, not on the floor of the house. Lee Zeldin would sue her.

You could say, you knew what were you doing. You were smearing me and my reputation, intentionally. You knew exactly what you were doing so you couldn't sue.

She could have said, and he was having sex with a 4-year-old.

As long as he said it on the floor of the House, not a problem.

STU: This is the --

GLENN: Yeah. That is how bad our Congress is out of control.

They've you written all these laws for themselves to protect them. So they can be completely irresponsible, and it's fine.

STU: Yeah. I mean, I don't know if it's that, or if she's just a dunce.

It's hard to know with her.

GLENN: She's just dishonest. She's just dishonest.

STU: Yeah. She's dishonest and bad at it. And that's one of the things that I love about it.

There's no wool being pulled over anyone's eyes. It's just pathetic.
GLENN: No. No.

Is there more to this?

Play the rest of it out.

VOICE: Make it sound like he took money --
VOICE: I did not know. I just heard registered sex offender.
VOICE: I literally did not know.

When you search FEC files, and that's what I had my team to do. I texted my team and said, listen. We're going up. They're saying the sheets --
VOICE: Similar to saying, well, your team should have done the homework to make sure it wasn't the convicted sex trafficker.

VOICE: Within 20 minutes, you couldn't find that out. The search on FEC. So number one, I made sure that I was clear, that it was a Jeffrey Epstein.

But I never said it was specifically that Jeffrey Epstein. Because I knew that we would need more time to dig in.

VOICE: Well, Stacey Plaskett was texting the Jeffrey Epstein, talking about -- you voted against the censure for her, to remove her from her committees. You know, we pressed the -- the minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries on this last night.

Maybe you don't think she should be removed from her committees. Why do so many Democrats seem unwilling to say, it's inappropriate to be texting with a registered sex offender about what you're going to ask a witness at a Congressional hearing?

VOICE: So I'm not going to say that was necessarily the case. Now, this was someone who was a former prosecutor. Now, I haven't sat down and talked about all the specifics of why Stacey was doing what she was doing.

I know that when she got up, and she spoke. She talked about the fact that this is one of her constituents. At the end of the day, what I know with prosectors, is that they are typically talking to codefendants. They're typically talking to the people who had the best information.

What you had was the former attorney for the president that was sitting there. And honestly, we knew. Or she knew or at least Jeffrey Epstein presented that he was very cozy with the president.

He had more information, registered sex offend or not. The bigger question is why is it that the president was so cozy with a sex offender. Even if he after ultimately ended up with some of his convictions.

And seemingly he absolutely was on the plane with him. We know about the birthday card. The bigger question is why is the president of the United States not the one in the hot seat for his relationship instead of us saying, oh, you know what, we're going to take her off of her committee.

Because he decided to text her.

GLENN: Stop. Stop.

I can't take this. I can't.

STU: Literally, none of the stuff she said was true.

GLENN: None of it is true. And she's presenting it as absolute fact.

CNN is presenting it as absolute fact. And the latest is the smear last week on the Epstein stuff.

It shows that Epstein that the reason he was going to jail or going through all of the problem is because Donald Trump was the whistle-blower!

I mean, it's -- it's incredible, what they can get away with.

It's absolutely incredible.

STU: All of those happened before this conviction happened. I don't know that she doesn't know that happened. It's so fascinating to watch CNN's response to that.

GLENN: Which is nothing.

STU: How many times they said, Donald Trump said this without evidence.

Where is that on the Jasmine Crockett allegations here?

GLENN: Right.

STU: How about the situation with Caitlin Collins, who at least -- I would say at least kind of asks questions here.

But she can't even take responsibility for them. She's like, oh, well, some people are saying, you shouldn't blurt out obvious lies in the middle of a House session.

Like, what do you mean some people are saying? You never say that when it's the president of the United States.

From Anthony Weiner Intern to Media Royalty... The Scandal-Ridden Rise of "Reporter" Olivia Nuzziplay icon
RADIO

From Anthony Weiner Intern to Media Royalty... The Scandal-Ridden Rise of "Reporter" Olivia Nuzzi

Reporter Olivia Nuzzi’s career is one of the strangest success stories in modern journalism. From volunteering on Anthony Weiner’s collapsing mayoral campaign to becoming a 24-year-old Washington correspondent with jobs created specifically for her... Nuzzi's rise through the media ranks defies every norm of the industry. Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere explore how an unknown college student was elevated into a media celebrity overnight, why institutions continued to protect her even after major ethical scandals, and what her story reveals about how power truly works inside the press. Is this talent, luck, or something far more engineered?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Yes. And I will begin the story at the very, very start, Glenn. And I will start it with a question for you.

And this is a question that I think sets the scene for the entire journey we're about to go on.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: Journalist.

GLENN: Let me get my boots on.

STU: Let's do it. She starts her career, very first job, she volunteers as an intern for what campaign? Volunteers as an intern for what campaign?

GLENN: Just -- it just has to be Bill Clinton. Has to be.

STU: It's a good guess. However, timing wise --

GLENN: Oh, Anthony Wiener.

STU: Anthony Wiener is the answer.

GLENN: Yes. Yes! Yes!

STU: She volunteers for the failed mayoral campaign.

GLENN: Fascinating. Fascinating.

STU: Of Anthony Wiener. So this is how this story starts.

GLENN: Oh, Anthony Wiener. So she starts covering Wieners.

STU: Yes. She starts covering Wieners. And the whole story is her doing more of that. We'll get into that as we go.

GLENN: All right.

STU: She starts with the Wiener campaign. It's a disaster. It's kind of a legendary catastrophe. They have a documentary about to go. We talked about that at the time. You know, totally the whole thing flames apart.

GLENN: By the way. By the way. I'm just sitting here thinking, I don't think I was technically wrong when I said it was a Clinton campaign.

Because remember, Hillary Clinton is all over the Wiener.

STU: But that's -- please, don't say it like that.

But, yes. That is accurate.

GLENN: Yeah. Because if I say it like that. It leads you to believe. And that is absolutely not true.

I don't think she's ever --
(laughter)

STU: I think, yes. Because if you remember Huma Abedin, at this time is married to Anthony Wiener.

GLENN: Can you use air quotes? Air quotes on that?

STU: Yes. On her wonderful path to marry a Soros. She's at that time, married to Wiener. And she is helping out Hillary Clinton as her top dog main assistant.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: That's ongoing. That's the first thing. Almost has nothing to do with the story.

GLENN: Did you use air quotes for the word assistant there, as well.

STU: I did not. So how does Olivia Nuzzi get into our lives? She goes to -- she goes from the Wiener campaign and leaves, and writes basically a tell-all, you know, scandal log of what was going on during the Wiener campaign. Basically, this thing was a catastrophe. She tells the inside story. And releases it to the Daily News. Who prints this column, from at this point a 20-year-old aspiring journalist. And, you know, she's pretty. She's glamorous. She's kind of like the New York elite journalist that you would exactly picture in this situation.

So she gets this, and turns that one column into a job, while she's still in college. She's at Fordham. She's still at college.

GLENN: Oh, she's in Fordham.

STU: Fordham, of course. I thought you would like that detail.

GLENN: Yeah, sorry.

STU: For multiple reasons.

GLENN: My daughter went to Fordham. They actually -- they actually had the balls to -- they held rallies against me on the Fordham campus, and then they had the balls to come and ask my wife and I to come in to meet with the dean, because they wanted to know if we would help them build a library.

STU: No.

GLENN: There were words that started with F that were not fruit!

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: As we left that meeting.

STU: Was it Fordham? Was the F-word Fordham? You Fordham!

GLENN: No. Fordham you!

STU: Yeah. That's the university.

GLENN: That's what I mean. Fordham University. Fordham you! Anyway, go ahead.

STU: Okay. So she gets hired from one that column, as one of the main presidential campaign correspondence for the Daily Beast, which tells you yet again, something about the standards of the Daily Beast when it comes to journalism, which are exactly zero. They have higher standards at Fordham.
(laughter)

GLENN: And those are pretty low.

STU: Those are low.

She is going to cover the Chris Christie campaign. The Rand Paul campaign. And some of the early bubbling beginnings of the Donald Trump campaign. This is back in 2014, '15, and there. She -- in 2015, as you note, as she's in this job. She does that tweet about House of Cards. And how women should not -- or Hollywood should not misportray the journalists that are females. Because they're always saying that they sleep with their sources. And that's a terrible thing -- point that out.

Which is an amazing thing for multiple reasons, Glenn. Because, well, I'll get into that here in a second.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

STU: So she see that. She then gets named by Politico one of the 16 breakout media stars of the presidential election. This is November 2016.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: She then in February 2017 parlays that into a job, as the Washington correspondent of New York magazine.

She's 24 years old. Twenty-four years old, Washington correspondent, at New York magazine. You're saying, wow. That's a prestigious position. Who held it before her?

No one. They literally create this job for her, which is incredible. Again, she's 24 years old.

GLENN: Again, it's probably not the only position created for her.

STU: She may have several that she's documented in -- in a book or two, that we could go over later. Okay. So -- and you wonder. And this is a time to pause.

GLENN: Jesus would not be doing this segment, I just want to let you know, right here and now.

STU: Right. That's true. That's true.

GLENN: Go ahead.

STU: You think about what a meteoric rise this is.

Glenn, you know this. This is not how media operates. You don't do what she's done here.

Like, incredible. It's like, she -- someone who never played basketball before, and is in the NBA three years later. It's legitimately an incredible rise. You wonder how that rise occurred. Those questions may be answered later on.

GLENN: Stop using the word "rise." You're making me uncomfortable.
(laughter)

STU: 2018, she's included in the Forbes 30 under 30 list.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Which is a very prestigious list. October 2018, as a member of -- working for the New York magazine. She's invited for an exclusive interview in the Oval Office to interview Donald Trump. Again, she's 25 at this point.

Very prestigious. She's awarded a next award by the American Society of Magazine editors. She gets a documentary on MSNBC. She portrays herself on the show time show Billions. In 2022.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STU: Again, this is someone who is a massive celebrity in that world. You may not know her name. But she is a massive celebrity.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: She gets a six-part interview from Bloomberg. And then she does a profile of RFK Jr, the candidate who you may remember running for president as a Democrat.

Okay. I can't remember if the profile happened when he was running as a Democrat, or he had kind of flipped to an independent. But it's before he's endorsing Trump, or there's MAHA or any of that stuff. Right? It's in that period.

GLENN: Sure. Sure. Sure.

STU: And she does this profile of him that I guess goes pretty well. And it comes out much more favorable, I would say than many of the other previews. Profiles of RFK Jr in this period.

But, again, has some criticism. And some quirkiness in it. And her style of writing has all sorts of weird details. You know, sometimes it's kind of -- I think it's actually pretty good. I think her reporting was regulated. She did have some really fascinating stories that she wrote over this period.

But like, the celebrities seemed to overextend past maybe what she had achieved in her career so far. So she writes this profile of RFK Jr.

And then it is -- the news breaks that RFK Jr and Olivia Nuzzi are having what they call an emotional affair, which seems to be lots of very detailed loving text messages back and forth. Promises about --

GLENN: When you say loving. Is it like, you know, you are a child of God. And I just love you and want to help you in any way. Is that what you mean by loving? Or do you know do you mean like Barry White loving?

STU: Well, to put it in another word, we're talking about a Kennedy. So I'm talking about Kennedy style loving.

GLENN: Okay. Ding-dong, pizza delivery.

STU: It's important to note that Olivia Nuzzi is engaged to another journalist, Ryan Lizza at this time. And so she's engaged to somebody. RFK Jr.

Not that this makes seemingly any difference to him whatsoever, is married at the time, and is still currently married to an actress in Hollywood. So he's doing this. She's doing this.

This is suboptimal not only for a marriage, but also a presidential campaign. This goes on, the news finally breaks this is happening. This is a problem for a bunch of reasons. Number one, you're -- you have a fiancé. Number two, the person you're texting with is married.

Number three, though, a really serious journalist problem, right?

Like, you're profiling someone and having an affair with them at the same time. That's frowned upon, at least in theory, in the world of journalism.

Now, in practice, God only knows. But in theory, you're not supposed to do that, Glenn. This is something they tell you relatively early on in journalism school, I assume.

And so he --

GLENN: I've got to apologize to all those people that I've been sleeping with that I've been on the show.

STU: How many people have you profiled, Glenn? You just profiled the Great Mufti. Have you ever had any relations --

GLENN: Yeah, have you ever had the relations with the Mufti? I've got to tell you the truth, Stu. Yep. Yep. Back in 1942.

STU: Oh, no.

So all of this comes out in the -- in the media. And she sort of goes -- she gets fired from the New York magazine because of this journalistic lapse. And she sort of goes into hiding.

Okay? She goes into hiding. She moves. She is -- not saying word one about this. And, you know, she talks a lot.

So that's notable.

In this period, Ryan Lizza, her ex-fiancé now, they broke up. Ex-fiancé and her are -- are negotiating according to him, a do not -- what is it?

A non-disclosure. Don't talk about this. Don't talk about this. Don't disparage. Let's just let this be over.

He also gets a message, according to him, from an intermediate friend that says, "Hey. She never wants to talk about this again. She hopes you'll never talk about this again. Can we just move past this?" And he according to him says, "You know what, I'm on board with that. Let's just never let this go."

So a little bit of time goes on. What we learn is, her time in exile has actually been spent writing a book, which is called American Canto. It's coming out in a couple of weeks from today, or from yesterday.

Two weeks from yesterday.

And it's a book --

GLENN: Is this one -- does the book include her time with governor Mark Sanford?

STU: Well, we're getting to that.

GLENN: 2019, 2020.

I mean, was she sleeping with him, too, before the JFK thing.

STU: That's a big part of the story we're getting to. At this point in the story, we have no idea about that. We only know about the RFK Jr. thing. So she releases this book, and in it, is all these details about the RFK Jr thing.

Now, you would think the way the media would handle this woman who they've just ejected from their society for massive journalistic and immoral lapses would be hammering her over her activity here.

GLENN: No.

STU: Instead, she gets a glowing profile in the New York Times with, like, her -- with an incredible -- you have to seat footage, Glenn. You would love it. It's her, she's driving in a convertible. Hair in the wind. Like, Chanel glasses. She looks spectacular, as she's going down. This is how the New York Times rolls this out for her.