RADIOMarch 15, 2024

How the Government’s “ORWELLIAN” Social Media Censorship Campaign Could Soon be DEFEATED

On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear the case Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden), which could decide the fate of the federal government’s massive campaign to force social media companies into censoring Americans. “It’s the most important free speech case in the country,” Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) tells Glenn. Sen. Schmitt, who filed the case while he was Attorney General of Missouri, describes the “Orwellian” things this lawsuit has uncovered: “The full power of the federal government was being used to silence Americans.” But will this be enough to stop our power-out-of-control government?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Give me -- give me some good news, will you?

ERIC: Well, I will. So Monday, Missouri versus Biden is being argued at the Supreme Court.

And it is this -- we've talked about before. It's the most important free speech case in the history of the country.

Certainly in a generation. Because it deals with the federal government, and its vast censorship enterprise, coercing, colluding, cajoling these social media giants to censor speech. And what the judge found in the lower court, when I filed it, when I was attorney general in Missouri.

What the judge found at the lower court, was that this was almost exclusively conservatives being censored. It reeks of viewpoint discrimination, which violates the First Amendment.

And it was Orwellian. What was uncovered, Glenn. Was tens of thousands of emails and text messages from hiring government officials, to social media giants, saying, take it down.

Or we will launch an investigation. Or we will sue you under anti-trust -- I mean, really, really, the full power of the federal government was to suppress defense, to silence Americans.

So that's been shown in the case. So that now has been appealed by the government.

They want to continue to censor people, and the Supreme Court will hear arguments on that on Monday.

And how do you think it will go?

KEN: I'm hopeful. I'm hopeful.

I just think, the case, a lot of it will come down to, what is the government, actually, doing. And were they, in fact, coercing?

Right? Were they using the power of the federal government to get these social media giants, to do the things that they can't legally do themselves?

What makes this case unique is, typically, social media companies are sued by people who are then de-platformed, or their posts have been taken down.

And those go to the Northern District of California, and they're never seen again.

But what's unique in our case, is that we've sued the federal government, themselves.

In the -- and the actors like Jen Psaki and Anthony Psaki.

Anthony Fauci's deposition, to Elvis Chan's deposition, who was, of course, the FBI agent in charge.

Who was pre-bunking the Hunter Biden story, calling a Russian disinformation a hack and leak operation.

Even though, they had the laptop already. They are pre-bunking this you know, getting ready for 2020.

The COVID -- the -- the efficacy of mass.

You know, they were suppressing that speech.

Vaccine issues. Origins of COVID. Where they were shutting anybody down, that were talking about this, coming from the lab in Wuhan. So all that is uncovered in this law.

And if it wasn't for this lawsuit, Glenn, and then later, Elon Musk buying Twitter with the Twitter files.

And then later, some of the Congressional hearings, this stuff would still be in the dark.
You know, it would still be a conspiracy theory. But it was happening. You know, we referred to it in the lawsuit, is a vast censorship enterprise.

The number of agencies and people involved here, is breathtaking.

And the -- you know, sometimes willing behavior of social media companies to comply and de-platform and censor people. But in some instances, they didn't want to, actually, do it. And they changed their rules.

GLENN: Right. That's what I wanted to ask you about.

How much of this do you think this is willing? And how much of it was fear of the government?

ERIC: Both. So, yeah.

I mean, these social media platforms, typically were very aligned with the left.

GLENN: Right.

ERIC: I think in many instances, Facebook, for example, after 2016, and Donald Trump won, they made it clear, publicly. They were never going to let that happen again.

Right, they were never going to let that happen again.

So I think some of this was overtly political on their part. And they were willing participants. But there are -- there are documents, to uncover. Where they were pushing back.

It was not -- it didn't violate their length of service.

As one judge said in the previous argument. That's a nice social media company you have there, right?

It would be a shame if something happens to us, almost like a mothball, coming from the government.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, that is.

KEN: So this is, again, the -- the -- all the power that the federal government has, exerting that on these social media companies. To do what they can't legally do themselves.

Which is to censor.

So this case, it's hard -- for me, as somebody who believes deeply in the right to free speech. And what that means for a country. And freedom.

This is, in my view, one of the most important cases. In general, the courts heard in a very, very long time. But certainly, as it relates to the First Amendment. That's the most important.

Because we're dealing with the virtual town square now, Glenn.

GLENN: How is this going to affect the -- the new systems that they're putting in, for mis and disinformation? And the governments, you know, work with Five Eyes and with social media and the rest of the media.

Where they are just training them. And guiding them through mis and disinformation.

Will this case have anything to do with that? Because that's upon us, right now.

ERIC: Absolutely.

And so that is the intention of this, to bust that up. Because there are agencies like CISA that most people have never heard of.

GLENN: Right. Right.

ERIC: But, yeah, was very involved, Glenn.

GLENN: Explain what -- explain to the audience, what CISA is.

ERIC: It's basically the agency that was created, not that long ago. The deal was sort of cyber security. Okay?

GLENN: Right.

ERIC: And what it found itself doing. In -- you know, during COVID. In particular.

Was under the guise of disinformation and misinformation, as you clearly articulate, that's -- look, that is -- that's a ploy, by one of the tyrants to control speech.

GLENN: Yes.

ERIC: The truth of the matter is, you get to say your opinion. Even if someone else thinks it's wrong.

The government doesn't get to shut that down. The government doesn't get to tell you, what you can say and what you can hear.

It's up to the individual, how they want to move forward.

And as they analyze facts, and what their decisions are. Right?

It was sort of like with the mandates. With mask mandates.

People can make their own decisions. They can judge if this is a good thing or not for their families. Same with the vaccine.

So all of this was about command and control, for these sprawling agencies. The other thing that was exposed in this too, Glenn. Is there were universities. University of Washington, Stanford were involved with helping, you know, sort of determine what the disinformation. And misinformation was.

GLENN: Right.

KEN: So, again, they're outsourcing this to their sort of web of allies. To censor Americans.

And this case would prevent that. This case, if the court rules the right way, and I hope that they do. It would essentially, it would be an injunction on all these agencies from engaging in that kind of activity.

It would be a huge win. Now, no matter what happens, the case, of course, stands for exposing all of this.

But the remedy that hopefully will play out. Is preventing this.

But as we talked about before, I've got legislation, in the Senate. That would empower individuals, to sue individual government actors. If they -- if they're right to be --

GLENN: I would --

ERIC: It would -- you can then sue. Yeah, it would. Because in stead of the AG and the state suing, you would have an army of citizens, being able to stand up for their First Amendment rights.

GLENN: You know, the Treasury, I think in cooperation -- I would have to look this up.
I think it was the World Bank. I don't know. Some world organization, got together and ran a -- kind of a war game with the central banks around the world.

And one of the things that came out of that was, we have got to shut down voices.

And this -- this is an exact quote. We have to shut down voices, that disagree, in the case of an emergency. A financial emergency.

That disagree with the actions of the central banks. Even if they are correct, because they could further the collapse of the system.

And I've been saying on the air, for a while now. I know I'm not going to agree with the -- with the global central banks on whatever it is they're planning to do.

The people who created the problem, I don't want designing a new system or anything else. And that snuffs out freedom of speech, quickly. Quickly.

ERIC: It does. It does. And what I think you're seeing play out in realtime, is the -- the broad diffusion of information, which is good.

That's good. Is the democratization of how people get information. You're sort of on the front lines of all this, a long time ago.

What they really fear is that individuals will then take different inputs and make up their own minds.

Free networks, that tell you everything they want you to hear.

And, again, I just think that we ought to be unafraid, I think, as conservatives, to talk about.

This is about -- this is before B freedom. This is about liberty. This is about making up your own mind. And they know how powerful that idea is.

They absolutely -- so what's the game plan?

You saw it play out in COVID. Which is create a crisis. Have a -- in other words, real or manufactured, right?

GLENN: Yep.

KEN: And then you consolidate power. You fearmonger. You other, the othering of those who are dissenting.

I mean, think about it.

Go back in time just a little bit. They were -- in Australia, which we thought was kind of like us, but with cute apples. They had camps.

You know, they have camps!

People were being arrested in parks, for not wearing masks. I mean, we can't memory hole all this stuff.

That is a glimpse of the kind of world that some of these folks want to live in, if you disagree with the regime. And we have to fight that with everything we have, to make sure that doesn't happen.

And also, it depends on us, defending somebody else's rights to say something that we disagree with.

That's their hallmark of it.

They want to bulldoze all of that, Glenn. To have a regime there, and anybody that stands in the way is othered, marginalized, called all sorts of names, lose their jobs, de-platformed.

I mean, that is -- so this whole lecture we get from Joe Biden, on threats to democracy.

We have seen the threats. We have seen the threats. And it is Joe Biden's administration which is censorship enterprise, and trying to throw political opponents in jail.

So I think people are waking up to this. And I think we just have to stand up to this.

GLENN: Good. Thank you, Eric. I appreciate it.

We'll be watching Monday. Maybe you'll come back Monday or Tuesday. And tell us highway it went.

And -- and dissect the arguments, back and forth, between the two.

Thank you, Eric. Appreciate it.

Senator Eric Schmitt, from Missouri.

For a Night, We Were Human | The Christmas Truce Music Video

In the frozen trenches of World War I along the Lys River in 1914, amidst the relentless thunder of artillery, a miraculous unofficial truce unfolded on Christmas Day. British and German soldiers, weary enemies, emerged from the mud and wire to share gifts, songs, and stories of home together in the ruins. Produced by Glenn Beck in collaboration with AI, this poignant music video and original song recapture the true story of the Christmas Truce, reminding us that even in the darkest times, a single brave act or small light can awaken our shared humanity, allowing soldiers to lay down their weapons and remember they are human... just for a night.

Stay tuned at GlennBeck.com for more musical storytelling inspired by Glenn’s artifacts next year on Torch.

The HIDDEN history behind Trump’s controversial Rob Reiner comments

President Trump recently received heat from his own party over his comments about the allegedly murdered actor Rob Reiner. Glenn Beck explains why he believes Trump’s comments were not a good move, but also tells of a meeting he had with Trump that he believes explains why Trump hates TDS so much…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I don't -- I don't -- I don't want to get into -- into the mix with everybody and personalities. I like -- my goal is to make things about right and wrong, and not about personalities.

But I do want to spend just a second on President Trump's post yesterday about Rob Reiner. It made me sad. It made me really sad. Because I like the president.

And -- and he doesn't help himself when he does things like this. But I think I understand this in a different way.

You know, the President has said, you know, all kinds of things about me at times when I disagree with him. He'll say, "Oh, he's just a failing fat blob," or whatever. And that's just him. That's just the way -- when he's in a fight, he is a -- he's a knife fighter. And I get it. I don't like it. But I get it. This was different. This was different.
And this was -- you know, you can say a lot of stuff politically about Rob Reiner. But politics didn't matter yesterday. We weren't -- I mean, that's not -- it just didn't matter. It didn't matter.

But I think to the President, it does. I saw a change in the President -- I've seen two changes in the President. I've seen a change in him when they started going after him and his family. After 2020. And they really started going after his family. And we know this because we showed you the documents. What they -- they had a plan. Take him down.

Take his family down to stop MAGA at all costs. Put them in jail. I mean, those are their words.

And it's -- it was frightening to read.

And I talked to the president, I don't know. Maybe six months after, you know, we were in 2021. Maybe six months. Eight months.

And I said, how are you holding up?

And he had talked a little about how he felt. He had really let people down because he had things going in the right direction. And now, look at it, and look how screwed up things are going to get. And how the economy is going to be damn near impossible to fix. It will take us time. But we can't fix it. Pragmatism, but they've just destroyed it. And I said, how are you personally.

How are you holding up?

And this is the first change I saw. He -- his body changed. And he said, they're going after my damn children!

And it was this Dad. All of a sudden, he wasn't the president or former president, he wasn't Donald Trump. He was a Dad. And it was every Dad response in him. And he said, "You don't go after our children."

And I saw him really, truly mad for the very first time, and it was righteous indignation.

Then after he was shot, I saw another change. I saw him recognize that God existed. I mean, I know he believed that in God. I don't know that he believed that God was actually part of, you know, the story. The everyday story. You know, I don't know how he views God in that way.

But I know that he recognized that God was in his -- in the story of America now.

Firsthand, he witnessed it. The reason why I said this made me sad yesterday, is because -- I don't agree with what he said. I feel -- it was -- it was sad.

Because he is -- he has been kicked in the head over and over and over again by some of these people, that he -- Christmas is about the baby Jesus coming again.

And what he can do in your life. And the biggest thing that he taught was, love your enemies. Don't hate them. But that's really, really hard to do. And the President isn't there yet. On this. And it -- it made me sad. How did you feel about it, Stu?

STU: I didn't like it at all. I think maybe the same as you. You know, one of the things that bothered me about it.

Because you hit many of the points that I had on it without the personal insight that is illustrative of -- of -- of what he's going through. I think there is something to understand there. You know, obviously I --

GLENN: Big time.

STU: One of the things that is difficult about life in your attempt to master it is to try to act the right way, even when you're faced with circumstances like that. And, you know, I get it. I get why he's angry and doesn't like the guy. The man -- you used a phrase, I think in there, where you said, he's a knife fighter. This guy was actually just in a legitimate knife fight and was murdered. It was a -- it was -- this actually really happened.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: And, look, my honest opinion is, it's indefensible. You know, I like President Trump. I think he does a lot of great things for the country. We've defended him on a lot of different things. A lot of times when he's being attacked, I think he deserves defense. In this case, you know, it is -- you know, it is what it is.

It is priced in to everyone's understanding of who Donald Trump is. And everything I heard about him in personal situations where he cares about the person. Is that he's very generous. He's very likable.

He's very -- he's one of those people that you like being around. You know, that is something that I've heard from tons of people. This part of him is really hard for me to square with what I've heard from -- from other -- from everybody that I've talked to, and has been on the inside with him.

And so I don't -- I don't have a defense for it. I think it's really bad. And I will say one more thing on this real quickly, Glenn.

I know a part of this that I think is difficult. In that, one of the things I took from the aftermath of that immediately was -- I don't know if pride is the right word. But like, I really liked the way conservatives responded to it.

We didn't do what they did, after Charlie Kirk.

We didn't do what they did after they shot the president. Right?

Like we -- they celebrated it. They -- they were horrible human beings, and I enjoyed the high ground, that we had there.

GLENN: Yeah. Me too.

STU: And it's difficult to make the argument that we have the high ground. When, you know, the President of the Republican Party. The Republican President of the United States, the most high profile person on, quote, unquote, our side, whatever that means these days, is a guy who, you know, kind of did some of the things that they did.

You know, so I don't -- I don't like that. I understand as part of Donald Trump. And I think if we're all adults here, we're able to kind of price that in and judge him on everything that he's doing. And when I mean pricing in. I think that's a negative part of him. Overall, you have to take everything into context.

GLENN: Right. And if we're all adults here, you know, we should be able to say, to those we love and respect, bad move. I didn't like that. Don't do that.

And I think, you know, I think because the left always says, well, you never take on your own.

Yes, we do. We take on our own, all the time. All the time. And I think it's important that we say, didn't like that. Thought that was a bad move. It didn't look good. It just wasn't right.

He's -- I wish -- and, again, though, I -- I'm not excusing it, but I am tempering it with none of us have gone through what he has gone through.

STU: So true.

GLENN: His family, somebody is shooting at him. He's being called fascist Hitler all the time. I mean, that wears on you and changes you.

And, you know, he's having a hard time forgiving that. And I kind of understand that. I wish he would take that on and take on the forgiveness, so he could be more a peacemaker in all of those things. But that is his own personal journey.

But --

STU: Yeah. And I think when we talk about like a terrible crime that's occurred.

GLENN: Sad.

STU: Like, I don't know. If there was -- think about some awful situation and at times you'll see -- he'll hear family members say the worst possible thing.

You know, if your kid is murdered. And by some -- somewhat of a particular area or group or whatever.

And they might react with just an awful thing about that group or area.

And you just. We all have a bit of understanding. Right?

A person going through a massively emotional thing.

And lashing out.

You want -- you know, the example you bring up all the time, Glenn.

Of the maybe -- the ultimate example of being able to have restraint was the Amish situation from years ago. Where, you know, you were talking about mass murder. And they were to the family's house that night, right?

And saying, we --

GLENN: Not that night. That afternoon.

I mean, within an hour. The kids were not even out of the schools yet. Their bodies were still laying in the school. And the Amish went, oh, my gosh. The killer is dead too.

He was a member of our community. His wife lives here.

What is she feeling? She's feeling completely alone. My gosh. What an example. I couldn't do that.

STU: Right. I don't even think I come close to that standard in that moment.

GLENN: No. But I would like to.

STU: That's the range. Some people act -- react really well. Some people react really poorly.

And I think we all understand the emotion and everything that takes over in a situation like that. And that has to be factored in, I think, to Trump. Of course, Rob Reiner wasn't responsible to the shooting. He was just a liberal who said bad things about Trump. And look, he's a very unique person. And a very unique situation, that I don't think anyone in the world has ever experienced.

You know, what happened with him over his life.

But may I just say, you still haven't forgiven RFK Jr for what he said about me.
(laughter)
Okay?

STU: As I said, I'm not Amish. You know, I like technology. I don't have any wagons. I didn't say I'm perfect.

GLENN: Right.

STU: No. I have -- I have -- I have absolutely forgiven RFK Jr for what he said. And if you didn't know, he accused Glenn of being a traitor. He said, he should be charged with treason. The penalty of which is death.

So, you know, I don't like that. And RFK Jr. I don't like for a lot of his policies. Some of them, by the way, I do really like. Some of them, I think are really positive. I could give you a list of some of the negative things he's done as well.

GLENN: I can too.

STU: That doesn't mean -- I certainly was find that to be an appropriate context, when the embrace of RFK Jr is occurring.

I think we need to understand what people are, and what they're doing. If he's apologetic about that, I do forgive him in that sense. Do I want him on the show and promoting all his books and his candidacy?

No. I did not -- I did not like that. But, you know, a lot of people do. I will say is, you're right, though.

We all have our hang-ups.

GLENN: I do. I certainly was.

STU: I will say this, though.

And, you know, again, all the context here. I know people are really defensive of Donald Trump, appropriately.

Because of the fact that he's targeted unfairly. I understand why people are defensive of him. I can tell you this. I really don't like RFK Jr.

He's one of my least favorite people in politics. I'm just not a fan. I could give you other names of people. Most of them revolve around Olivia Nuzzi, who whatever. I don't have feelings about her. But the story was packed with people.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Cuomos for sure.
GLENN: Yeah.

STU: God forbid, one of these people that I really don't like, was murdered and his family and his spouse.

I can promise you. I can promise you, I will not be tweeting anything like what Donald Trump tweeted.

That is just a -- is a -- is a situation where I understand -- I understand the context around it, that we just discussed.

I don't think there's a defense to it. I think there's something, I really hope he has an awakening to at some point.

GLENN: I think that is enough to be said on that.

Now maybe we should examine ourselves, and say, where do we have that hardness in our heart that we should learn from and remove this holiday season?

Why America's "Surveillance State" Has Proven to be a TOTAL Failure

America is facing a shocking security breakdown—from a mass shooting at one of the most heavily surveilled campuses in the United States to a deadly ISIS attack in Syria that exposes the cracks in U.S. intelligence and foreign-policy strategy. As surveillance systems fail, former extremists gain power abroad, and radical Islamist networks globalize their reach, the West is confronting a threat both inside and outside its borders. This episode uncovers the uncomfortable truth behind Brown University’s unanswered questions, Syria’s escalating instability, and why the West may be running out of time to get its own house in order.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I wanted to bring Jason in -- I wanted to bring Jason in because the news that we talked about a minute ago in Australia, then Brown.

There's some weird stuff happening with the Brown shooting. And we -- we don't know much about that. And also, Syria. So let me start with Brown University, Jason. Why is this one weird, as our chief researcher, why is this one weird?

JASON: Well, there comes a point where, you know, as a society, we just end up getting used to the massive surveillance state we live in. And I think we're just like, okay. Fine.

We're never not going to be surveilled 24/7. Maybe there's some benefits to it.

Well, no!

It doesn't seem that way. Because the people were asking the people at Brown. Like, how is it that you have not fully identified the shooter yet? And that's a very good question. Because if you go back to around 2021, there were people writing about how Brown University was one of the most surveilled campuses of the United States.

GLENN: How is it we only have one picture of this guy from the back?

JASON: Right!

GLENN: Apparently the one thing that will help you get away with any crime is a hoodie.

JASON: Yeah. Wear something over your head and a coat.

Apparently, that foils the entire surveillance state. Also, we have nothing to worry about with surveillance. I don't know.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

JASON: And on top of that, Kash Patel, the FBI director said that they sprung into action. And they activated their cellular monitoring system to help identify the person that has now been let go. Again, that's another layer of this surveillance state that I think a lot of us have been worried about.

And that didn't do anything either. That helped give us the wrong suspect? What is all this stuff for?

It's not keeping us safe, that's for sure.

GLENN: Hmm. I don't want to jump to any conclusions on, you know, what we have, what we don't have. I'm assuming that they have more. They just haven't shown it.

I would like to -- you know, we could help. You show us some pictures.

I think it's odd.

What happened in Syria over the weekend with al-Qaeda.

JASON: Yeah. In Syria.

There's a ton of news, especially involving ISIS, who is very much active and still very much planning attacks.

GLENN: So wait. Wait. Wait. Was this ISIS, or was this al-Qaeda?

JASON: This is ISIS. That's what they're saying. They're saying it's a lone ISIS perpetrator. The location was symbolic as well. The location as in or around Palmyra. Which, I don't know if you remember, that was a scene of a gruesome ISIS video back at the height of their caliphate, where they behead a lot of people in that area.

GLENN: Right. Right. Yes. That's where they lined them up in the orange jumpsuits. Remember everybody was kneeling down in the sand. And they started beheading people. Yes, I remember.

JASON: It was one of those UNESCO sites with ruins all around. And it was very crazy. Brutal video. But another brutal attack. I believe it was three US service members that were killed in this attack. There's a lot of speculation about to go, on if this person was working. I think he was actually at a time working with the security services that are in Syria right now, under the new president. He -- he could have been, you know, a sleeper in that organization. Who knows? But for -- the one thing I do know. And I don't understand the direction we're moving in Syria. I don't understand how a former al-Qaeda guy suddenly is an all right guy because he puts a suit on. And now he's the president of Syria. And he's our ally.

I don't understand that. The Trump administration, maybe they have more information, that I don't know.

I would love to get more of an explanation on this.

As of now, I don't see this going any direction other than a whole lot worse.

You look around that entire area. You have a former al-Qaeda guy now the president of Syria.

You have the rest of Syria, an absolute Dumpster fire. You have Iraq. I hesitate to call these countries.

They're so far down the sectarian, you know, spiral that this is.

But I don't see how this is going to go anywhere, but south, from here on out.

We're in an absolute war with these radical Islamists. And it's not just in the Middle East. It's globalize the intifada has landed on shores all over the world. And while there are politicians that will not denounce that. That is exactly what's happening. Sorry!

GLENN: So I think that's where -- I think that's what -- that explains Trump's thinking. That Trump does not want these everlasting wars to go on.

He does not want to be fighting in the Middle East. He doesn't want to really be fighting anywhere. He will, if he has to. But he's focused more on the American homeland. And the American hemisphere.

And so I think he is -- I think he's letting the Middle East take care of itself.

And as long as they can all get along with each other and Israel.

And recognize that, you know, Iran and the -- the -- the al-Qaeda, the, you know, Muslim Brotherhood. Et cetera, et cetera.

Trying to coax them all into. Hey. These are kind of your enemies here.

You know, ISIS is a big enemy to us and to peace.

And I think he's hoping that they will start to take care of themselves. Whether they will or not, I don't know. You know, it's never happened were. But it's worth trying. We've been playing this other game of us getting involved in everything for 100 years. We know that doesn't work.

So I'm guessing what Trump is thinking is, we know that doesn't work. We're not going to do that. Let's try to give peace a chance, and help them stomp this out, because it will be prosperous for all of them and plant those seeds as deeply as you can to see what happens. But we're not getting involved in any of that. I have a feeling, but there will be a military response to this, I'm sure. Won't you agree?

JASON: Oh, one hundred percent, and to tack on to what you're saying, I would hope that the President would go with his gut on this.

Because the previous ways this has been handled with Islamists, especially in this area. They've screwed it up.

They don't know what they're doing. Although, they think they know what they're doing. I'll go back to history. The Iran and Iraq War. We supported both size on that. In a similar -- in a similar strategy. So we're like, okay. We don't like either one of these groups. Sectarian groups to get too large. Let's fund this country at the same time we fund this country. We'll arm them. They'll fight each other, and they'll be fine. We do that all the time.

So now, the only thing I can think of is that's what they're thinking with the Syria president, this former al-Qaeda guy. Okay. Well, fine. They'll be anti-Iran, so they can counter Iran.

It's literally the same exact strategy, that they're going for. And I get it. That means that we don't have to get involved. I guess in the initial point.

But we always end up having to get involved after the fire erupts and --

GLENN: We know -- look, I think he's trying to buy time, quite honestly. Get us out of that.

Let us recover, and hopefully not go back to it. Try to buy hopefully some real peace.

But we all know how this will end. It's never going to work in the long-term. Because we as the West have to concentrate on our own homelands. You're seeing that with what happened in Australia. We have let the barbarian into the gates. And we've got to focus on that. We've got to get this cancer, cut out of our own societies. Because it's not good.

'Life is FAR Bigger Than Politics' - Glenn Beck's Spot-On Reaction to Rob Reiner's Death

Hollywood is mourning after the shocking and heartbreaking deaths of Rob Reiner and his wife—an iconic creative force whose films shaped generations. Glenn Beck reflects on Reiner’s extraordinary legacy, the tragedy surrounding his final moments, and the humanity he showed even toward those he disagreed with politically. This emotional tribute explores Reiner’s impact, the devastating circumstances of his passing, and why his work—and his character—left a mark far beyond Hollywood.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: it's so sad that Rob Reiner thing is so sad.

I mean, I don't -- I think -- Stu, correct me if I'm wrong. If he hadn't have done This Is Spinal Tap -- A Mighty Wind, Best of Show, for your consideration, any of those would have been able to have even been made. Because this is Spinal Tap. Rob Reiner directed, but it was still Christopher Guest. I think it was Harry Shearer that wrote it.

STU: And Michael McKean, yeah. Yeah, so theoretically, those movies could have been made, but I don't think any of them get made without Spinal Tap. And I don't think Spinal Tap gets made without Rob Reiner. Because they needed somebody attached to it that would be able to bring that to life.

GLENN: I mean, what a legacy he and his father brought to television.

I mean, think, Carl Reiner did your show of shows, which was Mel Brooks and Woody Allen with Carl Reiner writing that. Imagine That. Then he bought the Dick Van Dyke show and a million -- a million other TV shows and movies he was responsible for. And then his son starts with All In the family, and brings us all these classic movies, and the way they died this weekend, is just horribly, horribly tragic. Horribly tragic.

STU: Yeah. And it's not just Spinal Tap, which is a big one. Princes Bride.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

STU: Some of the movies --

GLENN: Harry Met Sally. Gosh, so good. So good.
STU: So many things.
GLENN: Stand By Me. One of my favorite movies.
STU: Oh, yeah. Jeez.
GLENN: Just great moves. Just great movies.

GLENN: So Rob Reiner met his wife in 1989. They have been together ever since. They live in Brentwood, which is a suburb of Los Angeles. It's -- their house is 2 miles away from where Nicole Simpson Brown was -- was discovered and killed.

Officers were called to Brentwood, to their home. All they said at first was, a man and a woman found with stab wounds. That's what came out over the radio. They were dead. And then friends started to show up. Billy Crystal was there. He came into the house. Reporters say he left looking horribly shaken. Larry David, who is a neighbor, he came in. Same story. It was confirmed that Rob Reiner and his wife were killed and brutally murdered: stab wounds.

We knew early this morning that the guy who might have done it is their 32-year-old son. His name is Nick Reiner. He's a screenwriter and also -- he's a guy who has battled drugs and alcohol and homelessness. He said at one point, I was homeless in Maine. I was homeless in New Jersey. I was homeless in Texas. I spent nights on the street. I spent weeks on the street, and it wasn't fun. That's what he said to People magazine in 2016. I don't know the latest on him.

But he has been just arrested for the murder of his mother and father. Just horrible!

Just horrible. I mean, Rob Reiner was one of those guys that I was always sad that, you know, we disagreed. And -- I'll be kind to him here.

Neither of us could ever find our way to talk to one another.

Because I really admired him.

I really liked him.

I didn't like him politically.

That's such a small part of life. I mean, gosh. He did When Harry Met Sally. He did the Princess Bride. This is Spinal Tap. He did A Few Good Men.

Stu, look up -- look up his work. He's responsible for some of the best movies ever. His father was a genius. It is so sad that Carl Reiner, Rob Reiner, and then now that is broken by the third generation. The son!

And it ends this way. He brought so much joy -- to just me. I'll speak for me. His movies have brought me so much joy, just the Princess Bride alone. But so sad. So incredibly sad.

And to be killed by your -- it's one thing I guess to be killed by your stranger, and that's bad. But to be killed by your own son. Oh!

STU: Glenn, listen to this -- late '80s. Early '90s. Quickly.

1984, this is Spinal Tap. '85, The Sure Thing. '86, Stand By Me. '87, The Princess Bride. '89, When Harry Met Sally. 1990, Misery. 1992, A Few Good Men. I mean, that is -- that is a run!

GLENN: Wow! Wow! Just -- just brilliant, brilliant guy from a brilliant family.

I'm glad his father isn't here. I mean, his father just died, what?

A year ago. Two years ago.

Mel Brooks is still alive, which this has just got to kill Mel Brooks.

Gosh, poor Mel Brooks. The tragedy.
By the way, I want to show you how Rob Reiner for as politically different as we were, and we were extraordinarily politically different. I want you to listen to how he handled the death of Charlie Kirk.

VOICE: When you first heard about the murder of Charlie Kirk, what was your immediate gut reaction to it?

VOICE: Well, horror, absolute horror.

And I unfortunately saw the video of it. And it's -- it's -- it's beyond belief. The -- what happened to him, and that should never happen to anybody.

I don't care what your political beliefs are. That's not acceptable! That's not a solution to solving problems. And I felt like what his wife said at the service -- at the memorial they had. Was exactly right.

And totally, I believe, you know, I'm Jewish. But I believe in the teachings of Jesus, and I believe in do unto others. And I believe in forgiveness. And what she said was beautiful. And absolutely -- she -- she forgave his -- his assassin.
And I think that -- that is admirable.

GLENN: I mean, how many -- how many other people did that? Especially for as vehemently as he disagrees with the right.

He was a human being. And I think that's why his -- I think that's why his films lasted and connected with us. You know, I mean, in a lot of ways, his films were a little like John Hughes' movies.

John Hughes was -- I mean, he was lightning in a bottle.

And there was something. And I think that something in many ways, was John Candy.

But there was something about the John Hughes movie, that connected to us on a basic level.

You know. That -- that spoke to us, deeper than just a movie! Or a script.

You know, it -- it came from a place that was real.

And I -- I think of Peter fall. And

What's his name?

I can't remember. He used to be in the wonder years. It was the little kid on Princess Bride, that -- that just those scenes alone -- just those scenes alone were so real! So real. When Peter Falk turns around and says, as you wish. It -- by the end of the movie, you felt that deeply.