RADIOApril 19, 2024

Bitcoin Halving EXPLAINED: Will This One Be DIFFERENT?

The Bitcoin halving is here, but what is this event and will it be different from previous ones? Glenn and Stu explain what a Bitcoin halving is, what usually happens, and why some believe there won’t be a spike in Bitcoin value this time around. But are they right? Or is it still a good time to buy?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Hey, today is Bitcoin. What they call the havoc. Right?

STU: Happy havoc day, to those who celebrate. Yes. Ten hours away from now, it looks like.

GLENN: It sounds like something that would maybe happen, in -- what was that?

That film happened in Norway. It was like that summer festival.

It's like the halving, and they're all gathered in some beautiful place.

STU: Yes. What was that movie?

What was that? It was very -- it was one I wouldn't watch.

GLENN: It was creepy.

It could have been called the Halving.

Or, you know, When Magic Goes Bad. David Copperfield stars in the Halving. Now, I have to cut this woman in half. And he can't put her back. Maybe I don't --

STU: That would be a good plot. That's not what the halving is for Bitcoin though.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And you've seen the price go up. There's been various reasons for that over the past year.

The ETFs. Meaning a lot of money is flowing into Bitcoin for the first time, really. That is a big catalyst of it.

The other is the halving, which happens, what? Every four years.

You don't know exactly what will happen. As they get closer and closer, they can specify.

And it will be today, at some point. About ten hours from now.

GLENN: And what does it mean exactly?

STU: Basically, when Bitcoin started. You have to have miners with, who are going to mine the Bitcoin to kind of bring it into availability for everybody.

GLENN: And you knew this would involve minors.

STU: No, it's not like Jeffrey Epstein. Think of a coal miner, except digitally.

GLENN: Different kind of miner. Okay. All right. What are they wearing? Are they wearing pants?

STU: That's not important. That's not important. By the way, Bitcoin miners know they're not wearing pants. They're in their underwear in their mother's basement. At least that's how it started. It was people in their underwear in their mom's basement, basically. And they were mining tons and tons of Bitcoin.

Now, remember, Bitcoin, there will only ever be 21 million of them. They are sort of -- think of them being mined. They are slowly mined, this time, I think we've mined, 2140. I don't know. It's a long way. But the basic idea with the halving, is every four years the reward for the miners gets cut in half. So the reason that's important, is the supply shrinks.

So maybe, you go back years and years and years. There's tons and tons of Bitcoin going on. Getting mined every single day.

Now, that number gets cut in half.

It was like each block, which is about every ten minutes.

Each one of those, it was six Bitcoin. Were freed into the world.

Like released into the world.

Now it's like three. It shrinks every four years. 1.75. 1.5. Or 1.25. It's not exact numbers.

GLENN: Until it gets to zero and there's no more Bitcoin left.

STU: And that's at 21 million Bitcoin. So you are now at -- I think it's six to three, roughly, in this particular halving. And the other part about the halving that has been important to note, is every time, there has been one, over the next six months, there has been a massive increase in the prophesy Bitcoin. Now, will this happen this time? No one knows. Past performance is not indicative of future results, we all know the disclaimer.

GLENN: We really do know that disclaimer. You may not know that disclaimer, but we do.
STU: Yes. Very true.

GLENN: The views of Stu are not necessarily those of the host.

STU: This is not financial advice.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. We don't know. We have also had a very large rise over the past year. So some people theorized, it's already built in.

Right?

This time, the rise we've already had, is basically part of what the halving would bring. However, when you look at the charts over the past three or four or five halvings. We've had massive increases. All those times, where all of a sudden, everyone around you, was talking about Bitcoin. Almost all those periods happened between six months.

Three to nine months after a halving.

GLENN: After. Not before.

STU: Well, you've seen some rises before. Generally, speaking, the real pop has happened after.

GLENN: This has been a real pop. This brought us back to where it was.

STU: There's a reason to believe, there's more here. Again, the last one was in 2020. Do you remember the 2021 phenomenon?

Then you had a drop back down. We are now down back to where we were, 2021.

GLENN: Making a case that somebody should buy, just a fraction of Bitcoin.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: I mean, you know, when it first started, and everybody was on board. Everybody was buying Bitcoin.

Because it was like, I have three Bitcoin. You know.

STU: Yep.

GLENN: And now, most people cannot afford to buy -- no.

STU: Of course not. Let me put it this way.

Right now, you would say, Bitcoin, $60,000. Basically, it's only for a millionaire.

Someone who wants tons of money, who will throw into a Bitcoin.

You might say only millionaires can afford that.

You might say something like that. Think of it this way, there are 24.5 million millionaires just in the United States.

GLENN: 24.5 million millionaires.

STU: Yes. Right. Right now, there will never be enough Bitcoin for every millionaire in the United States to own one. That doesn't include millionaires around the world. There are already too many millionaires for just millionaires to get one of these things.

GLENN: How much of it do you think is lost? Permanently, forever, lost.

STU: Permanently. Like, for example, we know the Satoshi's account. Which, the guy who invented Bitcoin. We don't know who it is. Group of people. Or if he's dead. I think they're dead. That's my opinion. He has an account with 1 million of it, in it, that's never moved.

So we basically know, unless this guy reveals himself somehow in the future. Which is not likely, that a million of them are lost. We also know, early on, people were mining these things and getting thousands and tens of thousands of them. And just losing -- turning their computer off. And not thinking they were worth anything.

The estimates are that probably something like a third of them are lost forever. So instead of 21 million, maybe it's 14 million. Maybe it's 15 million.

Somewhere in that vicinity. Now that they're valuable, people are not losing them, of course. At least as often. It's still happening every day.

People screw it up. They lose it.

They send it to the wrong account. That stuff still happens. But you're probably talking about, let's say 15 million, that actually will exist.

You have 24.5 millionaires in the United States. In the world, you have about 60 million millionaires. So if you split up all the Bitcoin in the world, just among millionaires, they can only get a quarter of one each.

Now, if you can put some in there. The idea that these things will go down in value.

Over the very long-term. To me, is unlikely.

And part of that is, at the beginning of this, nobody knew. Right?

Like when I first invested in Bitcoin. And I don't have a lot of money in Bitcoin. But when I first started in Bitcoin. My thought was, I'm going to throw some money in this, let's see what happens.

I have absolutely no idea.

My thought was, there's a good chance. I said this to you, at the time. There's a good chance it goes to zero. It was a total gamble. I had no idea.

I liked the concept of money that can't be inflated and printed. Right?

I like that concept. That's why I was interested in it.

But, I mean, how many multi-trillion dollar industries can you remember going to zero?

I mean, is there any example of this?

GLENN: White star line. This has I don't think they were worth trillions. Right?

Enron was a big company, right?

Don't remember it being worth trillions. Bitcoin's market cap is over a trillion dollars.

GLENN: No. I can't see it going to zero. Unless all the central banks in the world say, not --

STU: It's so resistant to that right now. Though.

GLENN: I know.

STU: We're seeing countries open up. And start accepting it. You know, the United States of America, has now accepted Bitcoin ETFs. That's a huge embrace of this technology.

And look, I don't know. I can't tell you, it won't go down in the future. I would be surprised if it never goes down below these levels again. It probably will.

So you might buy today. And at some point, be down.

A lot of people bought in 2021. And thought, oh, my gosh, I've lost all my money.

Except, now pretty much every person who has ever bought Bitcoin in its history, if they held on to it, is either about even or up.

GLENN: Everybody. Even the people who bought at the very peak.

STU: Everybody. Yeah, unless you bought like a couple of months ago, when it hit 69-70 for a couple of days. There's a few people.

But generally speaking, almost no one who has ever purchased this and kept it, has lost money.

And that's that's quite a statement. Again, what other investments can you point to, that has that type of record?

There's almost none. So I don't know. You don't know what the future holds, but man, this is a technology that has proved itself incredibly resilient.

GLENN: I get really pissed at you, every time we talk about this. Every time.

STU: You get pissed at me.

Why are you pissed at me?

GLENN: Yes, I do. I blame you for bad decisions. Blame you.

STU: Why?

GLENN: I was with Marc Andreessen.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: It might have even been a fraction of a cent.

STU: It was before -- well before I bought it. That's for sure.

Because I remember the conversation.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

And he's going to start some new thing with this new currency.

STU: Yeah. I remember you telling me this, at the time. I fortunately, did not listen.

GLENN: Yeah. Neither did I. Neither did I.

And we could have put hundred dollars in it, at this point.

STU: Oh, my gosh.

$100. Do you know how much that would be worth?

GLENN: It was a fraction of a cent. Wasn't it?

STU: I don't remember if it was that low, but it was really early.

GLENN: It was right as he started the digital wallet.

Coinbase. It was right as he started it.

STU: Gosh. This makes me physically ill.

GLENN: I think he actually told me that before he started it.

Or he may have --

STU: In the middle of making money or whatever.

GLENN: Yeah. He said, do you know anything about Bitcoin. You should invest.

Just take $5,000. And just throw it in this. And I'm like, uh-huh.

And I -- at the time, $5,000 was -- you know.

STU: You would probably be a billionaire.

GLENN: I would be.

STU: I can't imagine how many you would have -- I love this story.

GLENN: Well, look it up. Look it up.

Look up when they opened Coinbase.

And what the price of Bitcoin was. $5,000.

All right. Back in just a second. First, let me tell you about Ruff Greens. It's hard to know what to feed your dog these days. If you walk down the dog food aisle. You'll see hundred different types. Most of them are variations of the same thing.

The majority of dog food is kibble food. That means everything has been sterilized. All the good stuff. All the stuff that your dog really needs, because it has to have a long shelf life. They've cooked all that stuff out.

Your food. You need the same kind of nutrients, many of them that your dog needs.

And so naturopathic Dr. Dennis Black. Came up with this formula. Just for your dog. It has all of the vitamins, minerals, and probiotics, that your to go needs every day. Folks at Ruff Greens are so confident, that your dog will love it. They have a special deal for you. Just go to Ruff Greens. R-U-F-FGreens.com/Beck.

Or call 833-Glenn-33. They'll give you the first trial bag for free. All you pay for is shipping. 833-Glenn-33. Do it now.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So go ahead.

STU: What?

GLENN: Why he didn't you invest in it? You're always -- you're that kind of guy. You know, I just threw some money in it. Why didn't you --

STU: I mean, I think I did. I just didn't do it as early as that.

Again, I wish I had invested more. Then I wouldn't have to be sitting here with you every day. It would be a dream.

GLENN: If I had a time machine, that's the only thing I would change. And for that reason. I would go back in time.

STU: You would make me -- you actually wouldn't mind making me a billionaire, just so I wouldn't have to be here every day?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. That's the kind of guy I am.

STU: How about this, I'll it do for 10 mil right now. Get some financing.

So it depends. It's hard to know exactly when you talk to him. The Coinbase started in 2012. Coinbase is a little later, when you're talking a fraction of a cent, so it was about ten bucks in 2020 -- when it actually started selling Bitcoin. When Coinbase began that process, it was about ten bucks.

If you spent $5,000 then, you would have had about 500 Bitcoin, which would be worth $32.5 million. Which would be incredibly nice. However, my remembrance of this story was, it was before -- before that. When it was sort of being dreamt up.

So it could have been.

GLENN: It was one of the first times I've ever heard of Bitcoin. And I think I came back to you. And I said, what is Bitcoin?

And you were like, well, people buy pizzas with it.

STU: This is ridiculous history.

GLENN: That's exactly what he said.
STU: I don't think I knew much of anything. I had heard of it. But I didn't know anything about it at that time -- I definitely was not discouraging you in investing $5,000. That's exactly how you remember it.

GLENN: That's exactly how I remember it, Your Honor.

STU: And one fascinating thing I think that really hasn't fully taken -- taken root yet when it comes to the Bitcoin phenomenon.

GLENN: By the way, hang on just a second. I just have to say something. I said at the time. I said that, on the air too.

STU: Oh, really?

We should go back and find it.

We can probably find it.

GLENN: Marc Andreessen. He's at Bitcoin.

Blah, blah, blah. But Warren Buffett. He says, if you don't understand it, you shouldn't invest in it.

STU: Where did you find that?

GLENN: I wonder if anybody. If anybody did it.

What our earliest time was, when we said. Hey, maybe you should throw some money into it.

I don't know if I will do it. If anybody in the audience. Of course, there was somebody that was in the audience.

They're not now.

STU: Showing, they're billionaires.

GLENN: On a yacht someplace.

STU: I think that's one of the things that's most interesting in a societal sense.

That we had a lot of people. Because the early people into Bitcoin. Not like the people necessarily today.

But the early people into Bitcoin. Were people who generally speaking, were ideologically let's say Libertarian.

Or somewhat close to that.

GLENN: Yes. Correct.

STU: And there are now massive amounts of people, who became insanely wealthy over this process. And continue probably to get even wealthier.

And those people who would have probably been marginalized in society, at some level.

Maybe they would of been successful. But would never have that sort of power.

GLENN: No. They're the losers. Loaners. And creeps.

STU: And we've seen.

I mean, Libertarians, will describe themselves this way.

So we've seen now, that many of these people have made an impact. Right?

We've seen a lot of them. Marc Andreessen. Not necessarily, an ideological Libertarian. A lot of these people have risen.

Two of the richest people in the world. Are the Winklevoss twins. The people who had Facebook stolen from them.

GLENN: I think they're fictional characters.

STU: They may be. They were in a movie once. So I don't know.

GLENN: Sure. Anybody can play them. But I think anybody with Winklevoss as their name. And they're twins. I think it's too magical to be real.

STU: It's hard to believe.

GLENN: It is. It is.

Oh, let's call on the Winklevoss twins.

STU: For everything --

GLENN: Show up. Say their names three times.

Hi, we're here to grant any wish, with our magical Bitcoin.

STU: Right. Consider that they basically had Facebook -- in my opinion, Facebook stolen from them. They wound up getting thrown out.

Got some money for it. Were not insanely wealthy.

Wound up not with one, but two giant revolutions of the world.

They were at the founding of almost -- they invested a fortune in Bitcoin, right after that.

And now were multi-billionaires because of it. It's a weird people that wouldn't have normally been at the top of our society. Are now there. And hopefully, they've kept some of these small government routes, through that process.

And maybe they can Friday the country, in a way --

GLENN: No. No. Because when you get that wealthy. What you do, you know, I can get somebody on the phone.

I can make this happen. I don't want a stop sign here.

And I think we should also kill the poor. I will get both of those done. I will call my council member. And, you know, my master at the WEF.

You know what you know I mean?

You start protecting it, and then that all goes to hell.

STU: Maybe. Who knows?

GLENN: We should do what Star Trek did, and abolish all money. Learn how to live in harmony.

STU: That worked out well for them. They were poor in episode.

What are you talking about?

GLENN: How did they pay for those starships? How ridiculous was that?

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Max Lucado & Glenn Beck: Finding unity in faith

Glenn Beck sits down with beloved pastor and author Max Lucado for a deep conversation about faith, humility, and finding unity in a divided world. Together, they reflect on the importance of principles over politics, why humility opens the door to true dialogue, and how centering life on God brings clarity and peace. Lucado shares stories of faith, the dangers of a “prosperity gospel,” and the powerful reminder that life is not about making a big deal of ourselves, but about making a big deal of God. This uplifting conversation will inspire you to re-center your life, strengthen your faith, and see how humility and love can transform even the most divided times.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Max Lucado HERE

Bill O'Reilly predicts THIS will be Charlie Kirk's legacy

Bill O’Reilly joins Glenn Beck with a powerful prediction about Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Evil tried to destroy his movement, Bill says, but – as his new book, “Confronting Evil,” lays out – evil will just end up destroying itself once more…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Bill O'Reilly, welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

BILL: Good, Beck, thanks for having me back. I appreciate it. How have you been?

GLENN: Last week was really tough. I know it was tough for you and everybody else.

But, you know -- I haven't -- I haven't seen anything.

BILL: Family okay? All of that?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Family is okay. Family is okay.

BILL: Good question good. That's the most important thing.

GLENN: It is.

So, Bill, what do you make of this whole Charlie Kirk thing. What happened, and where are we headed?

BILL: So my analysis is different for everybody else, and those that know me for so long. About a year ago, I was looking for a topic -- it was a contract to do another book. And I said, you know what's happening in America, and around the world. Was a rise in evil. It takes a year to research and write these books.

And not since the 1930s, had I seen that happen, to this extent. And in the 1930s, of course, you would have Tojo and Hitler and Mussolini and Franco and all these guys. And it led to 100 million dead in World War II. The same thing, not to the extent.

But the same thing was --
GLENN: Yet.
BILL: -- bubbling in the world, and in the United States.

I decided to write a book. The book comes out last Tuesday. And on Wednesday, Putin lobs missiles into Poland.

Ultra dangerous.

And a few hours later, Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

And one of the interviewers said to me last week, your -- your book is haunting. Is haunting.

And I think that's extremely accurate. Because that's what evil does.

And in the United States, we have so many distractions. The social media.

People create around their own lives.

Sports. Whatever it may be. That we look away.

Now, Charlie Kirk was an interesting fellow. Because at a very young age, he was mature enough to understand that he wanted to take a stand in favor of traditional America and Judeo Christian philosophy.

He decided that he wanted to do that.

You know, and when I was 31 or whatever, I was lucky I wasn't in the penitentiary. And I believe you were in the penitentiary.
(laughter)
So he was light years ahead of us.

GLENN: Yes, he was.

BILL: And he put it into motion. All right? Now, most good people, even if you disagree with what Mr. Kirk says on occasion, you admire that. That's the spirit of America. That you have a belief system, that you go out and try to promote that belief system, for the greater good of the country. That's what it is.

That's what Charlie Kirk did.

And he lost his life.

By doing it!

So when you essentially break all of this down. You take the emotion away, all right?

Which I have to do, in my job. You see it as another victory for evil.

But it really isn't.

And this is the ongoing story.

This is the most important story. So when you read my book, Confronting Evil, you'll see that all of these heinous individuals, Putin's on the cover. Mao. Hitler.

Ayatollah Khomeini. And then there are 14 others inside the book. They all destroy themselves.

Evil always destroys itself. But it takes so many people with it. So this shooter destroyed his own family.

And -- and Donald Trump, I talked to him about it last week in Yankee stadium. And Trump is a much different guy than most people think.

GLENN: He is.

JASON: He destroyed his own mother and father and his two brothers.

That's what he did. In addition to the Kirk family!

So evil spreads. Now, if Americans pay attention and come to the conclusion that I just stated, it will be much more difficult for evil to operate openly.

And that's what I think is going to happen.

There's going to be a ferocious backlash against the progressive left in particular.

To stop it, and I believe that is what Mr. Kirk's legacy is going to be.

GLENN: I -- I agree with you on all of these fronts.

I wonder though, you know, it took three, or if you count JFK, four assassinations in the '60s, to confront the evil if you will.

Before people really woke up and said, enough is enough!

And then you have the big Jesus revolution after that.

Is -- I hate to say this. But is -- as far gone as we are, is one assassination enough to wake people up?

JOHN: Some people. Some people will never wake up.

They just don't want to live in the real world, Beck. And it's never been easier to do that with the social media and the phones and the computers.

And you're never going to get them back.

But you don't need them. So let's just be very realistic here on the Glenn Beck show.

Let's run it down.

The corporate media is finished.

In America. It's over.

And you will see that play out the next five years.

Because the corporate media invested so much of its credibility into hating Donald Trump.

And the hate is the key word.

You will find this interesting, Beck. For the first time in ten years, I've been invited to do a major thing on CBS, today.

I will do it GE today. With major Garrett.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: Now, that only happened because Skydance bought CBS. And Skydance understands the brand CBS is over, and they will have to rehabilitate the whole thing. NBC has not come to that conclusion yet, but it will have to.

And ABC just does the weather. I mean, that's all they care about. Is it snowing in Montana? Okay? The cables are all finished. Even Fox.

Once Trump leaves the stage, there's nowhere for FNC to go. Because they've invested so much in Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.

So the fact of the matter is, the corporate media is over in America. That takes a huge cudgel out of the hands of the progressive movement.

Because the progressive movement was dependent on the corporate media to advance its cause. That's going to end, Beck.

GLENN: Well, I would hope that you're right.

Let me ask you about --

BILL: When am I wrong?

When am I wrong?

You've known me for 55 years. When have I been wrong?

GLENN: Okay. All right. All right. We're not here to argue things like that.

So tell me about Skydance. Because isn't Skydance Chinese?

BILL: No! It's Ellison. Larry Ellison, the second richest guy in the world. He owns Lanai and Hawaii, the big tech guy and his son is running it.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

I though Skydance. I thought that was -- you know them.

BILL: Yeah.

And they -- they're not ideological, but they were as appalled as most of us who pay attention at the deterioration of the network presentations.

So --

GLENN: You think that they could.

BILL: 60 Minutes used to be the gold standard.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: And it just -- it -- you know, you know, I don't know if you watch it anymore.

GLENN: I don't either.

So do you think they can actually turn CBS around, or is it just over?

BILL: I don't know. It's very hard to predict, because so many people now bail. I've got a daughter 26, and a son, 22.

They never, ever watched network television.

And you've got -- it's true. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

They don't watch --

BILL: They're not going to watch The Voice. The dancing with this. The juggling with that. You know, I think they could do a much better job in their news presentations.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

BILL: Because what they did, is banish people like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.

Same voices, with huge followings.

Huge!

All right?

We couldn't get on there.

That's why Colbert got fired. Because Colbert wouldn't -- refused to put on any non-progressive voice, when they were talking about the country.

GLENN: I know.

BILL: Well, it's not -- I'm censoring it.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's not that he was fired because he wouldn't do that. He was fired because that led to horrible ratings. Horrible ratings.

BILL: Yes, it was his defiance.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: Fallon has terrible ratings and so does Kimmel. But Colbert was in your face, F you, to the people who were signing his paycheck.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: Look, evil can only exist if the mechanisms of power are behind it.

And that's when you read the front -- I take them one by one. And Putin is the most important chapter by far.

GLENN: Why?

BILL: Because Putin would use nuclear weapon.

He wouldn't. He's a psychopath.

And I'm -- on Thursday night, I got a call from the president's people saying, would I meet the president at Yankee stadium for the 9/11 game?

And I said, when a president calls and asks you to meet them, sure.

GLENN: I'll be there. What time?

BILL: It will take me three days to get into Yankee stadium, on Long Island. But I'll start now.

GLENN: Especially because the president is coming. But go ahead.

BILL: Anyway, that was a very, I think that Mr. Trump values my opinion. And it was -- we did talk about Putin.

And the change in Putin. And I had warned him, that Putin had changed from the first administration, where Trump controlled Putin to some extent.

Now he's out of control. Because that's what always happens.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: It happened with Hitler. It happened with Mao. It happened with the ayatollah. It happened with Stalin. Right now. They get worse and worse and worse and worse. And then they blow up.

And that's where Putin is! But he couldn't do any of that, without the assent of the Russian people. They are allowing him to do this, to kill women and children. A million Russian casualties for what! For what! Okay?

So that's why this book is just in the stratosphere. And I was thinking object, oh. Because people want to understand evil, finally. Finally.

They're taking a hard look at it, and the Charlie Kirk assassination was an impetus to do that.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think it's also an impetus to look at the good side.

I mean, I think Charlie was just not a neutral -- a neutral character. He was a force for good. And for God.

And I think that -- that combination is almost the Martin Luther King combination. Where you have a guy who is speaking up for civil rights.

But then also, speaking up for God. And speaking truth, Scripturally.

And I think that combination still, strangely, I wouldn't have predicted it. But strangely still works here in America, and I think it's changed everything.

Bill, it's always food to talk to you. Thank you so much for being on. I appreciate it.

It's Bill O'Reilly. The name of the book, you don't want to miss. Is confronting evil. And he takes all of these really, really bad guys on. One by one. And shows you, what happens if you don't do something about it. Confronting evil. Bill O'Reilly.

And you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com.

The difference between debate and celebrating death

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

Shocking train video: Passengers wait while woman bleeds out

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?

STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.