10/23/17 - 'The Evil Genius'? (Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly & Julie Belshe join Glenn )

The Blaze Radio Network

on demand

Love

Courage

Truth Glenn Battle It was Christmas Day 2009.

A man smuggled chemicals onto a Northwest Airlines flight with 289 passengers aboard.

Now this feat required the precision of a master technician and the stealth of a magician.

One doesn't just simply waltz onto a plane with a carry-on full of deadly flammable liquids, too obvious.

You might be mistaken for a terrorist.

Now,

this top-secret mission required months or even minutes of careful planning.

It also took a steady hand, sometimes two steady hands, for the chemicals would have to be concealed where no government agent would ever go.

The man made it through airport security with his concealed chemicals intact.

Too easy, he thought.

He then thought of Richard Reed, the failed shoe bomber.

Amateur.

The flight from Amsterdam to Detroit seemed to last forever.

His nether regions were cramped and uncomfortable.

He had stashed the secret chemicals within the cotton confines of his underpants.

Brilliant, he thought to himself.

Finally, the plane is beginning to descend toward Detroit.

The man covered himself with a blanket and tried to light his skivvies on fire.

At first, just smoke, no fruit of the boom, just a burning sensation where you never want to feel a burning sensation.

Before he knew it, Umar Farouk and his singed underpants landed in maximum security federal prison with a life sentence for his brief attempt at mass murder.

Well now he has a new burning sensation, a burning desire to communicate with the fellow citizens of the world.

Except, he says, the United States government is keeping him down, violating his first, fifth, and eighth amendment rights, because now he cares so deeply about stuff like freedom and American constitutional rights.

Last week, he sued Uncle Sam for prohibiting him from having any communication whatsoever with more more than 7.5 billion people, quoting the vast

majority of people on the planet, end quote.

He also now says solitary confinement is inhumane and he's not allowed to pray with his fellow Muslims.

Apparently, life in prison is proving to be even more restrictive than his tidy whities were.

Monday, October 23rd.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

There is a lot to talk about today, but I want to start with a personal note.

Over the weekend,

I had to call Bill O'Reilly and say, Bill, I want to talk to you personally

about what I'm reading in the New York Times.

Full disclosure, he had called me two nights before to tell me that the New York Times was going to be publishing something that he had spent the day at the New York Times, or

he or his

counsel had spent the day, and that they had presented them with evidence that he said, I know they're never going to print.

Another smear job is coming.

So on Saturday, the Times came out, and it's a pretty bloody story.

Yeah, they say last January, six months after Fox News ousted its chairman, Roger Ailes, amid a sexual harassment scandal, the network's top-rated host at the time, Bill O'Reilly, struck a $32 million agreement with longtime network analyst, that's Liz Wheel,

to settle new sexual harassment allegations according to two people briefed on the matter.

An extraordinarily large amount for such cases included allegations of repeated harassment, a non-consensual sexual relationship, which is a term I don't think I've ever heard before.

Non-consensual relationships.

It's not a relationship.

It's non-consensual, but a non-consensual sexual relationship and the sending of gay pornography and other sexually explicit material to her, according to the people briefed on the matter.

It was at least the sixth agreement and by far the largest made by either O'Reilly or the company to settle harassment allegations against him.

Despite that record, 21st Century Fox began contract negotiations with O'Reilly and in February granted him a four-year extension that paid him $25 million a year.

So it's kind of a double hit here: they're going after O'Reilly and saying here's another allegation on him.

In addition, they're saying Fox, while telling everyone they cared about sexual harassment, knew this went on and signed Bill O'Reilly anyway.

Correct.

Now, here is:

I'm going to let Bill speak for himself.

He's coming on in hour number three today, and I am going to ask him the $32 million

question.

And

he will answer to the best of his ability.

He is under

a legal restraint, but he will answer to the best of his ability.

I will tell you that

I have an affidavit from Liz Wheel.

She says, I have known Bill O'Reilly for 18 years.

We have worked together.

We have socialized, and on occasion I gave him legal advice.

At the end of 2016, I hired counsel who prepared a draft complaint asserting claims against Bill O'Reilly.

We have since resolved all of our issues.

I will no longer make

allegations contained in the draft complaint.

Additionally, over the years, while I was acting as Bill O'Reilly's counsel, he forwarded me certain explicit emails that were sent to him.

And any advice sought or rendered is attorney-client privilege, confidential, and private.

I have no claims against Bill O'Reilly concerning any of those emails or any of the allegations in the draft complaint.

I have reached an accommodation with Fox News regarding the termination of my employment.

I have no claims against Fox News, Liz Wheel.

Now, Bill

has not only the affidavit, but he also has

what would be described as love letters from Liz to Bill.

Now,

how is there, was somebody forcing her to write those things?

Right, that's why I thought that term non-consensual sexual relationship was so bizarre.

Because, you know, look, if you're in a relationship with someone, you can still violate them.

You can still do terrible things.

That's not necessarily, you know, it's not what they're saying here.

But just, I mean, you could theoretically, right?

You're in a relationship.

These things happen all the time where someone does something they're not supposed to inside of a relationship.

However, a non-consensual sexual relationship

sounds to me like rape, but

over and over and over again.

Right.

And in the terms of a relationship, it's a strange wording.

Yes, it is.

So I don't think it makes any sense.

I mean,

if there are these love letters, which I have not seen myself.

I have not seen them either.

But if they exist, and I don't know if these were presented to the Times or not.

It is my understanding that, and I'm going to let Bill talk about this, that he went and

offered evidence and said that this is not true.

The way that it is being presented is absolutely not true.

And he said they were not interested in any of that.

It is

my belief that there are those that do not want Bill O'Reilly to return.

And I believe, honestly, that some of those people are the Murdochs.

And the Murdochs do not want Bill O'Reilly back on the Fox News.

So they want to keep him, they want to keep him out.

I think it is

interesting

that everything was dead and buried with Bill until he went back on Sean Hannity's show and made Fox number one for the first time in months and months, that all of a sudden people realized he's still a threat.

And now it's being pushed again.

This is not new.

These are things that have already been out in the paper.

Now here's my problem.

This is why I say I want to start with a personal note.

I come from a family of abuse

and I know what abuse is like.

I know how abuse plays on people.

I know how abuse destroys people.

I have

no place in my life for abusers.

None.

I have no place in my life for men who treat women with anything but respect.

I also have no place in my life for women who don't treat men with respect.

We are now in a place

that is starting to resemble the crucible.

This is starting to look like a witch hunt.

And we have to decide, are you guilty until proven innocent or are you innocent until proven guilty?

Which is it in America?

We can each make our own personal judgments on this, but on

speculation and on complaint, does this mean that you are driven from society and can never work again?

Bill maintains that he made mistakes, but they are not these kinds of mistakes.

His mistakes were trusting people.

His mistakes were dating at work.

His mistakes were settling.

He has spoken to me and said, Glenn, I did not want my children exposed to any of this.

It's worth that for me.

I think I understand that.

Now, I don't think I understand $32 million,

if that indeed is the settlement amount.

However, I do understand that.

And I think we all understand.

We've all worked for companies that settled things that you knew were wrong.

How many times, at least in my life, I don't know, maybe people are different, but in my life, I've seen companies and people settle things that they should have never settled, but they did because it made it go away.

It made it just stop.

And

we have been a society that has given these lawsuits so much power

that we settle.

And then what do we do?

We put a stupid label on a snowblower that says snowblowers shouldn't be used on the roof.

So you didn't have another stupid lawsuit.

Lawsuits are important.

And the system is important.

And if we're we're going to settle these cases

then

then the affidavit needs to mean something

the the the

privacy needs to mean something

if you can say to somebody hey they did this and then you're sitting at the table now let's just let's just assume that this is not about sexual harassment this is about something else i used a snowblower on the roof and i'm gonna take you to court and i'm gonna i'm gonna get you for for half a billion dollars.

And you know as the company, they're not going to win half a billion dollars.

And it's absolutely no jury in the world is going to believe this.

However, it's going to cost us X, Y, and Z.

It's going to cost us putting all of our company time into this.

We're going to have to fight it in the press.

There are going to be people who are against us because the other snowblower company is all against us and they're going to use this against us.

And they're going to say, we built our snowblowers to never go on the roof.

Just settle the damn thing.

You settle it to make it go away.

Now, can that be used against you?

Because what did you just pay for?

And if the person who signed the affidavit has said, Okay, so we've settled, and these things aren't true, and I've had a good relationship with this snowblower,

if everyone just says, Well, they only signed that because of money,

well,

wait, then what good was the affidavit?

Why would I have them sign it?

Why would I ever settle?

So we're going to do a couple of things.

We're going to destroy settlements because nobody will ever settle.

Nobody will ever, ever settle.

And then on to and is that good for victims?

No, because you don't have the money that the corporation does.

So,

they're not settling.

And then, on top of it,

if they do settle, then what happens?

You do settle, they come out,

and they can say whatever they want.

Now, the company is screwed.

So,

where's justice?

Does everything now have to go to a court of law?

And are we going to decide everything and destroy people's lives

based on things we do not have first-hand knowledge on?

This is something we have to decide.

And I find myself here.

I believe Bill.

I don't have all the evidence, but I believe him.

So what do I do?

Do I kowtow to the people who say, you can't have this going to really hurt you?

Or do I stand and say, well, when evidence is presented that I believe,

then I'll make my own personal decision on that.

But right now, I'm not willing to throw somebody to the pack of wolves.

There were people at Fox that I do believe were doing this.

Roger Ailes, I do believe.

I've been with Bill O'Reilly in

many situations, work situations.

The guy keeps to himself.

He's the most buttoned-up guy I've ever met.

Could he be this guy?

Yeah, but I have seen no evidence of it.

You know,

Gretchen Carlson is now saying, you know, she was quoted as saying, we have to believe the accusers, yada, yada.

No, we have to listen to them, but we don't have to believe them, especially when politics or vast amounts of money is involved.

We don't have to believe people, we do have to listen to them

and not automatically discount them.

But when politics are involved, it's important that we listen to both sides and we fix reason firmly in her seat.

I'm gonna open up the phones.

I'd really like to hear from you.

I like to.

What do we do?

Bill O'Reilly will be joining us in hour three today.

Coupons and promotions only go so far when it comes to saving you money.

It's not like you find a 20% off coupon for the home that you're eyeing to buy, but there are ways to keep your mortgage payments really low, and they apply to both new homebuyers and those with existing mortgages.

Homebuyers may want to consider buying a cheaper home or increase your down payment, while homeowners may want to get rid of the private mortgage insurance or refi for a better rate.

No matter what your situation is, you can trust the salary-based mortgage consultants at American Financing.

They're going to listen to your needs and they're going to come up with a customized loan program that allows for the most savings for you.

They don't work for the bank, they work for you.

You could be looking at $500 or $1,000 of extra money in your budget every single month.

And with American Financing, you get a straightforward and effortless mortgage experience.

It's American Financing.

They're now doing reverse mortgages as well.

They're a good way to increase your monthly cash flow with no mortgage payment while still retaining ownership of your home, but you need to look into that.

Call their number 1-800-906-2440.

That's 800-906-2440 or online at AmericanFinancing.net.

AmericanFinancing.net.

American Financing Corporation, NMLS 182334, www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org.

Glenn back.

Glenn back.

So you have a choice to make here, I believe.

As we were speaking about this particular topic, the O'Reilly situation, it looks like Megan Kelly has spoken out about this topic on the O'Reilly.

She's made accusations against him?

I don't know yet if she spoke on the Today show.

Oh, dear God.

Oh, Megan.

No, I'm not.

I absolutely believe Megan Kelly.

Megan is

top shelf.

I'm not saying that.

By the way, I'm not saying that

she's accusing him of anything yet.

We have to actually hear the...

Should we play that?

We have the audio?

Yes, we have the audio.

We're pulling it now, but it's not ready.

Okay, so was this on her TV show this morning?

It appears to be on the Today show.

So her show has not aired today, right?

Yet,

depending on where you're listening, but they have,

I think she came on the Today show a special appearance to talk about this.

And she's on, she's going to be talking about this today

with Juliet Huddy, who I also really like.

I don't know Juliet, but I like her.

I've always heard good things about her.

But she's on

today talking about the sexual harassment at Fox.

Yeah, I mean,

again, accusations are accusations, and you need to take, as you pointed out, take them seriously.

Every time there's an accusation, it should be taken seriously,

and then it should be looked into.

So I think this will give, I'm sure Bill will want to respond to this,

you know,

depending on the details.

I know he's somewhat restricted legally, but I mean, I think it's a,

he's going to probably want to address this.

I'm sure it's going to be a very high-profile thing today.

Yeah.

So,

we will have him on in hour three.

We'll play that.

Hopefully, we'll have that pulled by the next break.

Give us about five minutes to pull that, and we'll pull that audio and

play it.

But I really want to hear from you:

are we still innocent until proven guilty in America, or do we just go over the cliff with the rest of humanity?

Glenn, back.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I find myself in a really weird place today.

I am standing in between two friends,

both of whom I trust and adore.

Megan Kelly, I adore her.

I think she is one of the smartest

women on television.

She, I think,

is kind and brave, and I support her.

I'm one of the few on either side that support her.

On the other hand, Bill O'Reilly is also

one of the smartest

and

miscast characters, and one of the only people in television that I think was truly gracious and helpful to me

and

was always transparent with me.

There's a spat

going on between the two of them,

and

I believe both of them are right

in some regard.

Bill O'Reilly is under attack again for

sexual harassment.

This is not a new suit.

This is just the New York Times bringing up old stuff that has already been out.

And Megan Kelly spoke about it on the the Today Show.

We're getting that tape and we'll have it in just a second.

First let me go to Chris in California.

Chris,

I don't want to give

lip service to sexual harassment but I also don't want to be a part of anything where we're just

gathering up witches.

What do I do with this Bill O'Reilly situation?

I happen to believe him.

Well, you know, in this scenario, and as I explained to the gentleman before, you know, that's why we have the whole process, right?

We have evidence and reasonable doubt.

We have to look at the evidence.

But the problem is, and like we're talking about, it is it is guilty until proven innocent because the accusations have been made, okay, character has been tarnished, loss of job has happened, okay, there's emotional things that go on not only, you know, with yourself and within, but also with the family.

Okay,

and who ends up paying for that?

Ultimately, he does, right?

So even in the long run, if he is innocent, he's still going to be looked at in a different light.

And there's going to be people out there that no matter what are going to say that, well, you know, they just

whatever, you know, they found in his favor because he's rich or because he's this or because he's that.

You know what I'm saying?

So

it's a process that really, from the beginning, is just totally,

it just doesn't work.

Chris, thank you for your call.

Frank in Pennsylvania, go ahead.

Good morning, Glenn.

I look at it, Glenn, as God's still in control.

And, you know, I look at this as a humbling effect for Bill.

Not that he needed it.

Oh, yes, he did.

Yes, he did.

But, you know, you look at Kim David in the Bible and the effect it had on him.

You know, and I still love Bill, and I'm praying that he comes back stronger and more righteous than ever.

You know, he's more, he's a powerful man, and he has a lot to bring to the table.

And, you know, look, Glenn, I'm keeping the faith.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thanks, Frank.

I, um, uh, it has humbled him.

It has humbled him a great deal.

Bill is not the same man that I knew at Fox.

And

I could be wrong.

I could be wrong.

But I believe him that mistakes were made, but they're not Harvey Weinstein mistakes.

And,

you know, people

settle for all kinds of reasons.

And I know that I have gone kicking and screaming to the settlement table a couple of times because it was wrong.

But you settle.

There's a serious and sort of thinly veiled accusation by the New York Times against Liz Wheel as well, which is basically they're saying this attorney filed a false affidavit lying about what actually happened to collect money.

If that's true, she should be disbarred.

And I don't, like, it's a weird thing.

And like, everyone's just kind of assuming because the reported number is large that, oh, of course she would lie to get that.

But I mean, she's an attorney filing a legal document.

Like, that's

regardless of the amount of money, that's not something that is

normally just dismissed.

So, I think it seems like, and maybe we can ask Bill about this, but I mean, I, you know, that's an odd thing because Liz is saying she has no claims against them and that these things are settled, and she would not make these claims if asked today.

That's what the affidavit said that she signed.

So, I mean, like, the legal system takes that seriously as well, right?

Yes.

Yes.

So, you know, so if something is settled, it's not settled anymore.

That's what I was saying in the open.

It's just not settled.

You can't settle anything anymore because even the affidavit means nothing now.

And that's what these settlements are set for.

People will say, well, wait a minute.

I want these things to be prosecuted or whatever.

There shouldn't be these settlements.

It shouldn't be about money.

It's not your choice.

It's the victim's choice.

If the victim comes to a settlement hearing and decides to take the settlement, they are saying, I would rather have this settlement than go through that procedure.

They are saying it.

It's their right to do that in our legal system.

Obviously, there's a lot of reasons for that.

It takes burden off of the legal system for one.

It does a lot of these things.

But if this is, you're right, and you kind of mentioned this earlier.

If these things just leak out every time there's a settlement, then no powerful person is ever going to settle one of these things.

And then you're going to wind up with

the other side of that, which is the powerful people who are guilty are going to use every dime that they would have settled with to attack the person who's claiming it.

Bill said to me, My biggest mistake is settling.

He said, I listened to attorneys and I listened to Fox, and they said, just make it go away, settle, settle, settle.

And he said, I did it for my children.

And he said, that's my biggest mistake, is I settled.

And now look at it.

He said,

there was no reason to settle.

And that's true.

So if it just, I want you to be aware of of the society that we're entering in.

If someone makes a claim, you can settle,

but it won't matter if you don't settle.

And it's one thing to say, well, I would never settle.

Believe me, you will.

You will.

When you're talking about bankruptcy or settling it and just making it go away, you'll settle.

And it's your right to settle.

But if settlement means nothing anymore, well, then what do you have?

What do you have?

You have to fight them, and it will be whoever has the most money.

And there's no secrets anymore.

Believe me, they will,

if somebody has a lot of money, they are going to find out whatever it is you don't want out there.

And it's just going to be tit for tat.

And this is not good.

This adds to chaos.

All right, we have the Megan audio.

We're going to get to.

This is, I have not heard this yet, but this is Megan Kelly today on the Today Show.

And

I like and respect Megan.

So if she's coming out with something on Bill O'Reilly, this is going to be a problem.

Here's Megan Kelly today.

that is true.

Fox News was not exactly a friendly environment for harassment victims who wanted to report in my experience.

However, O'Reilly's suggestion that no one ever complained about his behavior is false.

I know because I complained.

Oh, boy.

It was November of 2016, the day my memoir was released.

In it, I included a chapter on AILS and the sexual harassment scandal at Fox News, something the Murdochs knew I was doing and, to their credit, approved.

O'Reilly happened to be on CBS News that morning.

They asked him about my book and about Ailes, who by this time had been forced out in disgrace.

O'Reilly's response?

You're not interested in this.

No?

No, I mean it's all.

Sexual harassment?

You're not interested in sexual harassment.

I'm not interested in basically litigating something that is finished that makes my network look bad.

Okay?

I'm not interested in making my network look bad at all.

That doesn't interest me one bit.

I did something that day I've never done before.

I wrote an email to the co-presidents of Fox News, Bill Schein and Jack Abernathy.

An email I have never made public, but I'm sharing now because I think it speaks volumes about powerful men and the roadblocks one can face in taking them on.

I wrote in part, perhaps he didn't realize the kind of message his criticism sends to young women across this country about how men continue to view the issue of speaking out about sexual harassment.

Perhaps he didn't realize that his exact attitude of shaming women into shutting the hell up about harassment on grounds that it will disgrace the company is in part how Fox News got into the decade-long ALES mess to begin with.

Perhaps it's his own history of harassment of women, which has, as you both know, resulted in payouts to more than one woman, including recently, that blinded him to the folly of saying anything other than, I am just so sorry for the women of this company who never should have had to go through that.

Bill Schein called me in response to my email promising to deal with O'Reilly.

By 8 p.m.

that night, O'Reilly had apparently been dealt with.

And by that, I mean he was permitted with management's advance notice and blessing to go on the air and attack the company's harassment victims yet again.

If somebody is paying you a wage, you owe that person or company allegiance.

If you don't like what's happening in the workplace, go to human human resources or leave.

I've done that.

And then take the action you need to take afterward if you feel aggrieved.

There are labor laws in this country, but don't run down the concern that supports you by trying to undermine it.

Okay, stop for a second.

This is different.

This is different.

This is an allegation.

You don't like the way he responded to you.

And, Megan, I happen to agree with you.

I didn't like it either.

This is a critique of his public speech on top of the house.

Yeah, this is not about sexual harassment.

This is about what he said

about coworkers.

And I happen to disagree with him on this.

I think that it was brave of the women at Fox News to stand up.

Roger Ailes was an extraordinarily powerful man.

He was the Harvey Weinstein, I would say, light

in comparison to what Harvey really is.

But

he was just as powerful on the right.

And nobody wanted to take him on.

And it took great courage to take him on.

And I put Megan Kelly in

that camp.

But you have to remember something else that was going on at the time.

A political campaign had just been waged.

And

this whole campaign pitted Fox News against Megan Kelly.

Megan Kelly was the darling of the company until she stopped, started asking questions of Donald Trump that I thought were completely fair.

And Roger Ailes wanted to teach Megan a lesson and knock her down a notch.

And I know this because I worked there

and knock her down a notch and let the political system do his dirty work.

That's what this was about.

There was an internal war going on, and it was all about politics.

But that's separate from the accusations, right?

Yes, it's separate.

And so I think the headline here on the Megan thing is: obviously, she felt really strongly about this and did not like, she saw the O'Reilly statements publicly as

a microcosm of the way the company treated these things.

And she is not making a specific accusation of harassment by Bill O'Reilly against.

And I will tell you that I happen to agree.

I happen to agree.

This is the way Fox News dealt with things.

They would have approved that.

And

Bill's intent may have been different than the leadership's intent.

I don't know.

But

I will tell you, there is a lot more going on in that particular story at that particular time than

just standing up and saying sexual harassment.

You know,

and I have to say, while I disagree with the way he handled it,

and I agree with Megan Kelly,

I also don't want to work for a place where they're going to tell me I have to or I cannot say something on my own program.

If I were working at Fox and they told me not to, I wouldn't appreciate it.

If they told me to say something, I wouldn't appreciate it.

I would read the statement and make it clear that my company wanted me to say these things.

But you don't stay silent.

You don't have to quit a company that you like to make a charge against the company that you like.

If you like it and you think it can be fixed, and you know what is going on is wrong and illegal, you have a duty to stick it out and stand up.

The world is becoming more and more unpredictable.

And that's putting it mildly.

None of us have any guarantees on what tomorrow will bring.

I mean, honestly, I could come to you on the air tomorrow, and I'll bet you that a vast majority of the audience would go, huh?

If I said to you, you know what, the federal government has come out and said that aliens do exist.

We had contact with them, you know, 40 years ago, and, you know,

we've been talking to them, and they're going to come out later today with evidence of alien life.

I think all of us would go, huh, wow.

Where 10, 15 years ago, that would have changed the world.

Yes, it would still change the world, but we're not shocked by anything.

That shows you how unstable things are.

Please ensure that feeding your family never becomes dependent upon the response of the government officials or FEMA.

Having food storage or emergency situations means that

you never have to deal with not being able to eat during a crisis.

And My Patriot Supply gets that.

They are the solution.

You can get their 102-serving survival food kit now at a special price of less than a dollar per serving.

You have to call this number 800-200-7163 or order online at preparewickglenn.com.

It's dependable emergency food storage.

And you can trust the people.

They are seasoned experts at MyPatriot Supply.

Call them right now, 800-200-7163 or preparewithglen.com.

Glenn back.

Glenn back.

Why do we have to question everything that anyone says, especially in authority?

We are going to tell you the story next hour of what could happen to you or your parents.

It is a shocking,

shocking story

of how people can just

suddenly be deemed irresponsible and lose everything,

including contact with their own children.

Truly remarkable a story you must hear from a person who went through it

in a minute.

Glenn back

love

courage truth Glenn back 48 hours that is how long the president of Zimbabwe Robert Mugabe held the position of goodwill ambassador at the UN

The World Health Organization chose Mugabe because they thought he'd be an advocate for fighting diseases such as cancer and diabetes in Africa.

Well, thankfully, someone at the World Health Organization returned to sanity and rescinded the appointment when two days later they remembered, oh yeah, that's right, he's a despot, a tyrant, a killer.

To think that somebody who helped spread a raging cholera epidemic in his own country would fight diseases is insane.

This is a man who has killed thousands of his own people for political dissent.

He destroyed Zimbabwe's health care program.

He eviscerated the agricultural system.

He forced seizure of white-owned farms, collapsed the economy, and has led to devastating poverty and mass starvation all across his country.

Robert Mugabe?

He's single-handedly responsible for reducing the life expectancy in Zimbabwe from 62 years to 36 years.

That's the lowest

in the entire

Believe me when I say, this man is incapable of doing anything good.

This is a guy who aspired to be like Adolf Hitler.

I'm going to quote Mugabe, quote, I am still the Hitler of my time.

Hitler has only one objective, justice for his people, sovereignty for his people, recognition of the independence of his people, and their rights over resources.

If that's Hitler, then let me be Hitler tenfold.

Ten times, that's what we stand for.

End quote.

Who in their right mind at the World Health Organization could be this stupid?

By the way, not the first time the United Nations honored Mugabe.

In 2012, the UN endorsed him as a tourism ambassador.

Oh.

That title's kind of ironic because Mugabe has been banned from traveling to most parts of the world because of his atrocious human rights violations, not to mention there is nothing to tour in his country except devastation, poverty, disease, and

I don't know, cemeteries.

If our intergovernmental organization insists on appointing Mugabe to something, it should be to appoint him as the ambassador to the deepest, darkest recesses of hell.

That

is an appointment I can get behind, and that would be the only reason I would send another dime to the UN.

Monday, October 23rd.

This is the Glenn Beck Program.

We are going to tell you a story that is

truly hard to believe, and it could happen to you.

It could happen to your parents.

I want to introduce you to Julie Lynn Belshi.

She is a woman whose parents, Rudy and Rennie North, were legally kidnapped.

This happened in the state of Nevada, and this is not the only case.

It is

it all stems from these guardians.

Strangers can become the guardian of your parents.

It doesn't matter if you're there.

They can go to court and become a guardian for your parent.

And when that happens,

they just disappear.

Julie, welcome to the program.

Thank you, Glenn, for having me.

I'm reading this story from The New Yorker, and it is hard to believe at first.

It sounds

like something that would have happened in Nazi Germany.

Well, that's pretty much what I've compared it to because I didn't know anything about guardianship.

And when I started looking on the computer and finding the first video I came across was Dorothy Wilson, Diane Wilson was going in and interviewing her mother.

in an assisted living facility and her mom was devastated.

She was like, get me out of here.

I'm not going to eat.

I'm not going to read.

I want to go home.

And I didn't know what I stepped into.

And the more I started investigating the computer, the social media helped me tremendously.

I knew I had to do something for my parents because they're confident.

There was nothing wrong with them.

They needed a little bit of help.

They lived on the golf course.

They had somebody come in and help them and take care of them.

I assisted them.

My mom had suffered for years and years from CLL.

But we had it all under control.

And

the minute anybody finds out that you have any assets, money, stocks, bonds,

that you're worth value, you no longer are a human being.

Once the guardian takes you, you are now a ward, and you have less rights than a prisoner.

This is truly shocking, and I want to set this up right so people can really understand it.

Your folks lived in Las Vegas, so people understand.

You would go over to see your mom and dad.

They lived on this golf course.

You would go over and see your mom and dad once a day.

You would stop in.

Is that correct?

I would stop in once a day, and then the last couple of months before they got taken,

we would call each other.

And my husband and I have a business, so I was pretty busy.

I have three young boys,

but I would talk to them every day, not three or four times a day, make sure they were okay, see them once a week.

At first I was helping them for six months, just run errands, take them to the doctor.

But it's not that your folks were confused.

Your father was reading,

I'm trying to remember here,

he was reading Freud, he was reading Plato, Nietzsche.

Your mom was

a very intelligent man.

Yeah.

Very articulate.

Right.

This is collusion.

Okay.

It doesn't, this doesn't start with just the guardian.

Okay.

That's the guardian that now we have finally got indicted.

Okay, hang on.

Wait, wait, wait.

Before you go into this, I have to explain to people what happened.

So

your folks are living on the golf course.

They've lived a good life.

They've put their money away.

They've saved for their retirement.

Your mom is getting ill, but your dad is taking care of her.

She's fine.

He's fine, both mentally there.

You're in the area, so if there's any problems, it's not like these people were just left alone.

And one day, somebody comes to the door and claims to be their guardian.

Is that right?

You pretty much have it right.

What happened was it was on a Memorial Day of 2013, and I had plans to go see my parents on that Friday.

And

in walks,

hospice care worker, the owners actually from hospice care, my parents, were drinking coffee and having breakfast

to pretty much condense this.

There was another knock on the door about 20 minutes later.

and it was April Parks, the private professional guardian.

I like to call them the private for-profit guardian, because that's what all they're in it for.

And she walked in and presented herself.

And my parents had six people in their home and told them they had three choices.

One,

they could

go with them willingly and go to an assisted living facility.

Two, they could call the fire department and the police.

They had a chance they could go to jail or they could be taken out of the home in a gurney.

three, they could go to a psych ward.

Your parents chose option number one because they were confused, and a neighbor came out and said, What's going on?

And they said,

We're just going to look at this like a vacation, nothing to worry about.

Well,

that's not correct.

What really happened was

all of these

April Parks, first of all, presented herself as an officer of the court, which she's not.

And one of her co-workers told my mom and dad, just look at this as a mini vacation, as a respite.

You'll be coming back home.

Okay.

And my mom was crying and crying and said, this is my home.

Get out of my home.

Leave us alone.

They were told to pack a suitcase.

And pretty much whatever they put in the suitcase is all that was left in the end.

They got a few items back, but this guardian then took them

across the state, up way up north,

if I'm not mistaken.

Well, she took them by Lake Mead, which from our house is about 45 minutes.

It's right on close to the

border of Arizona.

Okay.

Oh, yeah.

I'm sorry.

I was thinking that this was Sun City, Arizona.

This was actually in Nevada, wasn't it?

Correct.

And so

they take her there.

They take them there.

This is a retirement community.

When you finally get in touch with your parents, how many days have gone by?

Four days.

And no one

there was no sign, nothing on the door until the fourth day, until after the Memorial Day weekend, until she got temporary guardianship of them.

And she was now their temporary guardianship because it was deemed an emergency situation.

If something is such an emergency, she was handed the papers two weeks prior, then why didn't she go and get them there?

And it's a law that if your parents or your loved one is going to be taken by law, the court is supposed to notify you so that you can step in and say what's going on and you can file the proper paperwork.

The law here is just incredible.

We could probably spend an hour just on that.

But what about the moment when you go, because you just went to visit them, your normal visit, and they just were gone?

It was Friday.

What is this?

Were you panicked?

What did you go through as that happened?

I was mortified.

I mean, the newspaper was in the front.

The windows in their kitchen are usually open a little bit.

The blinds are open a certain way.

The house was just closed down.

I just knew right there and then something was terribly wrong.

I went to the Sun City Aliante, the country club, the little house where they would go and have coffee, and I looked around for them.

And then I pulled myself together and I drove home and told my husband, my parents have been kidnapped.

That was just my gut reaction.

Something is terribly wrong here.

And

you called police?

You know, hindsight's always 20-20.

I called hospitals first.

And

the emotions that run with this are so high and low, the gamut of emotions, that

my thing was: I wanted to get to an attorney.

I want to know what's going on, how people can walk in your home and take you and not notify a relative that lives 15 minutes away from you.

So, your parents, you see them, and your dad is in the fetal position on the couch, and your mom is crying.

And how long does it take you to fight to get your parents out?

Well,

let me put it this way: it took me approximately two years,

and that only came after speaking out publicly to the commissioners, to speaking out publicly and getting two new legislative laws passed here.

One is that if you have a loved one that you can, and you live out of state, you can now become their guardian.

Before that was not legal.

And the other one is that if you are going to be a private guardian, you you have to be licensed, insured, and bonded, and you can only have so many wards.

This woman that took my parents was spiraling out of control.

It's not enough for them to be greedy about it, but they are sociopaths.

They hurt people.

They isolate.

They trespass the family away from their loved ones on purpose.

because they're getting bed sores, bruises, broken limbs.

They're getting inserted feeding tubes.

It's cheaper to, you know,

they save money that way.

They are accelerating the death, in my opinion, of the elderly because they want their full estate.

So when they become a guardian, it's just somebody,

this is a business, really,

in Nevada.

This is a business all over the nation, and they're making billions of dollars.

And right now, the statistics say they have 1.5 million people

under guardianship.

No matter how perfect your family is, or your estate documents were prepared, anyone can be involuntarily placed into guardianship.

This happens all the time nationwide.

Okay, I'm going to take a break, and then when you come back,

I want you to explain

who are these people?

How do they become a guardian?

And

how does this happen when we come back?

if you go to at Glenbeck or at World of Sewer and tweet this story from the New Yorker.

It's lengthy, but it goes through all of it.

It is one of the most insane stories I've ever seen.

You will not believe it's happening.

You just won't believe it.

All right, I want to tell you about Jim Rogers.

He

spoke out here recently about gold, and he said,

Every single person needs to have coins, physical coins, as an insurance policy, as an emergency, if nothing else.

Hope you never need them, but you have to start by owning gold coins because they are recognized over the entire world.

Now, here's the thing:

you can invest in things like Bitcoin, and you might make a lot of money, you could lose a lot of money.

You invest in gold,

whatever.

You might make some money, you might lose some money.

It's probably not going to be a lot either way.

I don't buy gold for investment, I buy it in case of financial calamity.

It is an insurance policy because

when it's all said and done,

what's worth anything?

Learn from history.

The world always returns to gold.

Goldline, the only place that I buy gold and the only people I trust is Goldline.

Hear about their price guarantee specials this month.

Call 866Goldline, 1-866-465-3546.

Read their important risk information.

Find out if buying gold or silver is right for you.

866 Goldline, 1-866-GoldLine or goldline.com.

Glenn back.

Glenn back.

Bill O'Reilly joins us in about

40 to 45 minutes to answer the, you know, $32 million question.

You don't want to miss that.

We have to be able to have something we believe in.

We have to know what the truth is.

Otherwise, things

that happen to our guest now,

Julie Belshi, and her parents, will happen to you or your parents.

There is a guardian

system that is happening all around the country.

And her experience was happening in Nevada.

She says that it happens all over the country.

Who are these guardians that can

all of a sudden

lay claim to

your parents or to you?

These guardians are people that don't have to have any formal education.

They can take a course that I believe is just maybe a week long,

and then they become a guardian.

These people are trained by the masterminds behind this.

Like I said before, this is collusion.

We have somebody here that's a mastermind.

His name is Jared Schaefer.

He is

the head of it.

So they take them under their wings and they train them how to go in and open all the drawers and take everything and deem these people, these elderly people, disabled people, or whoever they want, incompetent.

Is the concept here, looking at from in a theoretical perspective, are they basically saying

the elderly people can't take care of themselves, so we're going to go in, we're going to take their stuff, we're going to use that stuff to pay for their care because they're being neglected?

Is that essentially what they're trying to say they're doing?

That's what they're trying to say they're doing, but they are failing.

They keep saying it's in the best interest of the Lord.

Nothing's in the best interest of the Lord when you have a private guardian.

We've gone from having several private guardians since I've gotten into this four years ago to now there's only two private guardians, I believe, and the public guardian.

So we've essentially gone full circle and given the power back to the government, which they love.

So it's gone full circle.

So what happens is these people come in and with your parents, they had a house on the golf course, they had a new car, they had their money.

And in a two-year period,

this woman came in, claimed to be their guardian because she just went to court and claimed to be the guardian, and then she liquidated all of those assets.

Within two years, your parents had nothing.

Correct.

And the thing is, it's so easy for the private guardians.

It was so easy.

But now I believe, in my opinion, that they've reverted back to doing it again.

The family courts, okay?

They're all working together.

I want to go there when we come back.

I want want to go there, and I want to talk about the court because the court seemed to be,

I think, from the way the story reads at least, knowingly colluding.

But that's quite a charge to make, and I'd like to get your opinion on that and see where the court stood, at least in Nevada.

Glenn, back.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Julie Belshee, her parents, Rudy and Rennie North, were legally kidnapped.

They were put into the care of a court-appointed guardian who was a total stranger.

Julie lived just 15 minutes away, saw her parents regularly.

When they were kidnapped, she did go to police.

Police said that there's nothing they can do.

This is not a police matter.

This is a court situation.

And

she went, finally, after four days, she found her parents.

They were moved to a

rest home, if you will.

And

they, over the two years that they were there, they were prescribed all kinds of drugs, Valium, Prozac, sedatives, oxycodone, fentanyl.

You don't give fentanyl unless that's an end-of-life drug.

And her parents started to slip.

She finally was

able to see her parents.

She was supposed to.

Can you help me out on this part, Julie?

You were supposed to go in

and see your parents, I think, at one point.

And you got there at 9 o'clock.

They were supposed to move someplace.

You got there at 9 o'clock, and these guardians had moved several people, some of them screaming as they were thrown into a van in the middle of the night?

Yes, I can help you out on that.

When

I had brought light to this with the help of Vegas Voice, which is a small senior paper here, I had to go to places because nobody would open the door for me.

If somebody had opened a door for me, Glenn, I wouldn't be talking to you today, okay?

I had to go vocal.

And what happened was once this came out and I was going to court pro per se and representing my parents,

April Parks, his private guardian, started moving people out of the assisted living facility

and taking their animals and what we've heard, rumor has it, is putting them to sleep.

This is the only thing these people had.

I knew the majority of them, and the majority of them are no longer with us.

They were moved, they were screaming, they were told they were taking one lady, they were taking her to the beauty salon, they put her in a van.

She was screaming and yelling.

Another one was a chiropractor doctor from Carmel, California.

We don't know if he's alive or dead.

I can't get the information.

She was just taking them, and she was threatening the director there that if she didn't go along with it, she's going to lose her job too because she can have her arrested.

You have to understand these are people that are walking around on earth that think they are these mini-gods.

They are sociopathic people.

Money is not enough, but then they have to hurt you and they hurt the family along with this.

This is a family affair.

So, this is in reading this article, at least, it appears as though this judge was either

incompetent or was turning a blind eye to to what was going on or part of it in some way.

I mean, the way this is, the way I understand it is you can go and get the financial statements of people

and find out who has money, who doesn't.

Then she would go to, correct me if I'm wrong, she would go to doctors and she would target people and say, look, sign this because they're not paying or they're going to cost you a lot of money or whatever, and I'll take care of this.

And the doctors pretty much would sign anything to move on from a patient.

Is that true?

That is true.

That's correct.

This is collusion, and this is RICO.

This is human trafficking, okay?

This is

if you, this article, The New Yorker, is great, but it just touched on the tip of the iceberg, which is what we're doing today.

It goes so much deeper and so much more in depth that it really makes you fix your stomach.

I mean, I've been hospitalized two times.

I had surgery surgery on my stomach.

This gets under your skin.

It really does feel like a modern-day Holocaust.

And you can't believe what you're reading.

You're like, what?

And your parents, now they are afraid to tell the doctors anything because they're afraid the doctor is going to put them back into some sort of a guardianship.

Yes and no.

We have a great doctor now.

I just think that

after you've gone through a trauma, as our whole family has,

that it comes with leaving you with post-traumatic stress syndrome.

So you are looking at every corner.

You're scared sometimes.

And

one time my dad woke up in the middle of the night and he said, I've got to get my stuff ready, my stuff ready.

And I said, Dad, what are you doing?

And he said, she's coming, she's coming.

And I'm like, who's coming?

And he said, April Parks.

And I said, no, she's not.

But I really want to mention that what this took for me to get in the public eye was so tremendous.

I mean, it started off with the Vegas Voice with Dan Roberts and Ronna Goodman.

There's a small paper here that they have a senior community paper.

And then I went and did seminars.

And then I got ABC, finally, an investigative producer, Keene Bowman, Darcy Spears, Oscar Paloma.

And then Al Jazeera came out.

Sheila McVeigh Kirk,

David Martin, yes, American Al Jazeera.

And I did a documentary for two and a half years that will be coming out this year.

Right now, we just submitted it to the Sundown Festival.

Billy Mintz was the director.

J.B.

Sugar, the producer.

We've worked on that for two and a half years.

I went to the Review Journal.

I'm now working with Casem Cares Foundation, Carrie Casem, and Kathleen Reich Brown.

We've teamed up with AAAPG, Rick Black, and Sam Sugar.

This is what I do now.

I'm a guardian reform advocate, and I'm a grief support counselor.

So I get the calls from people that are so traumatized they don't know what to do.

They can't see their loved ones.

They've been trespassed.

And Case and Cares, what we're doing is we're passing visitation bills from state to state so that the adult children are allowed to see their loved ones.

Okay, so what I would like to do is, first of all,

your Twitter handle is at Julie Belshi, B-E-L-S-H-E-1, Julie Belshi1.

I guess that's what it is.

I'm new to Twitter.

That's all right.

What is the one thing after you've gone through all of this?

What is the one thing that if you were worried it's going to happen to you or to your parents that you can do to make sure that it doesn't?

Okay, well, what you can do is in January, we've come up with

a guardianship nomination

form.

It's going to be in the Secretary's State lockbox.

So if you went to the hospital, as opposed to them giving you to a guardian, now you can list who you want

for your family or a friend to come, and that's your guardian.

What I can tell you is that to stay out of the court, stay out of probate court and make sure no one ever gets close enough to your loved ones or you

to drag you into their clutches.

And the elder law attorneys, they have three priorities.

They make money.

They build a network to help them make money.

They find clients to pay their bills.

Satisfying customers isn't their priority.

Satisfying judges and fellow elder law attorneys is their network and their state bar formalizes it.

No elder law attorney ever benefits from challenging a judge.

They go along to get along.

It ensures their career security.

Okay?

Now you have

to take care of your family, stay close to them, call your family members, the will, the estate, all the power of attorney, get those all taken care of

immediately and talk to your legislative, your politicians and bring these subjects up and go to the meetings and find out what's going on.

I'm not doing this just for the elderly and the wards.

I have children.

I don't want this to happen to my children.

I mean, I don't want this to happen to anybody.

That's the only reason I'm speaking out about this.

Julie Belshi.

Thank you so much.

A guardian reform advocate whose parents, after two years of being kidnapped, have finally come home.

Wow.

You got to read this story, too.

It's how the elderly lose their rights from the New Yorker Elbow.

As she's pointed out, she's got a documentary coming out.

She's got

attention on this.

You just won't believe it.

And fundamentally, for us, as we talk about these things, this is a government issue, right?

Like, this is not something that should be, the government should have a power to work with any private organization to take away your rights as a citizen without even informing the family.

I mean, as you've talked about, she went for a normal visit to find her, to go visit her parents.

They were gone.

And it took her days to find them.

And this person...

They were dead.

By the way, this person is in jail now.

The person who did this is in jail now.

But

it's phenomenal because it's not, at least in Nevada, it wasn't.

Now it is, but it's unregulated in many states.

You can just sign up.

You can go someplace and just sign up to be a guardian.

And the reason why it was so bad in Nevada, and I'll bet you it's bad in Arizona as well.

All these retirement communities.

So these bad people come from all over the country and like, I'm going to be a guardian.

And they just find find out who has money, who has a family that is not living in state.

And they can come in and just get guardianship without you even knowing it.

They just go to court and say, this person is having these troubles and I need to be the guardian.

And the court appoints them the guardian and then they just, they have control of everything.

It's insane.

We'll have that story up at Glembeck.com and all the information that you need to make sure it doesn't happen to you or to a loved one.

We all know that, you know, there's somebody who's excited, some would say, I don't know, obsessed

with the fall colors.

Oh, the pumpkin spice and the cinnamon.

Oh, geez.

Pro Flowers has the perfect gift for the lover of fall, long-lasting bouquet in their favorite fall colors.

The best-selling cinnamon cider roses are a great option for birthday, anniversary, or any fall occasion.

Or you can go to one of the classics like 100 autumn blooms or a dozen autumn roses.

and you can't lose because no matter which bouquet you send, you're going to receive 20% off any Pro Flowers unique bouquet of $29 or more.

Pro Flowers, the bouquets are guaranteed to stay fresh for at least seven days or your money back, and you control the delivery date.

Pro Flowers gives you more bloom for your buck, big, beautiful flowers, more stems for your money, and long-lasting freshness.

It's 20% off of all bouquets of $29 or more.

All you have to do is go to proflowers.com and use my code GLEN at checkout.

That's proflowers.com, promo code GLEN.

Glenn back.

Glenn back.

So Bill O'Reilly is joining us here in a few minutes.

I am, uh,

I don't know.

I

talked to Bill over the weekend and had a good conversation with him, and I believe Bill.

And,

you know, I've dealt with this now with people.

I mean, Roger Ailes was a hero of mine until I started to figure out who Roger Ailes really was.

And I've come out against Roger Ailes.

I have no problem in, I have loyalty only to the truth.

And I am also

a

somebody who grew up with abuse

and

without getting into all of the details, stood in my own family against abuse.

And

I've paid a high price for standing in my family against abuse.

And I am

not afraid of standing up

against abusers.

And I think it is important, and I think it is important that we listen to the accusers,

but no one has a right to be believed.

You have a right to make a case, and we have a responsibility to listen.

Bill O'Reilly

has had the New York Times come out and do an article with things that I think we already knew all of this, did we not, Stu?

The big thing, I guess, is just the number on the settlement, which is probably the biggest part of that accusation.

They're saying he paid 30.

And the way the Times story is written, it seems like Bill just like pulled out $32 million from his wallet and handed it to Lise Wheel

in this harassment suit.

And I,

and I, and I think it was Gretchen Carlson who wrote, nobody pays $32 million to dismiss a false accusation.

And that is, I would say, the overwhelming

complaint right now about Bill.

Like everyone's saying, like, yeah, you might be, I mean, it's not, he could be theoretically innocent, but he would never pay that much money if he was innocent.

That is what they're saying.

And I think that's the big question that he's going to, I don't know how much of it he can answer, of course.

I mean, the way you could also take it the way it's written is that it was multiple people that she had accused, and it was the Fox News channel.

Now, the Fox News channel settles for, it would still be a large number in a settlement.

But still, if the Fox News channel is settling this, they want this to go away, it makes sense that the Fox News channel would settle for a huge number.

And if it was multiple people and all of these other things.

So I don't know.

I mean, I think that's a really important question.

And

it's kind of strange, I guess, because all we're saying is, because I think everyone would say if it was $32,000,

people would say, well, it could have happened, but I can understand he wanted to get it, make it go away.

It was $32,000.

It was $320,000, probably the same thing.

Probably the same thing at his pay level of $3 million.

$3 million.

It's, you know,

it's a lot.

But, okay, you know, these things do, those sorts of celebrities.

You're going to lose $20 million a year for $3 million?

No.

$32 million is just so so much money.

I think people are saying, well, it's so much money he must be guilty, which is another part of why settlements aren't supposed to come out like this.

These things aren't supposed to come out.

Now, the way the Times story is written is we have this number based on people who have been briefed.

So that's not people who had the documents in front of them.

Those are people who were briefed on the documents telling the Times, which seems potentially third-hand,

fourth-hand information.

So again, who knows?

And I don't know how much he can say about this.

And one of Bill's complaints in the story, and I'm sure he'll outline this, is they know I can't fight it because

he's legally bound not to talk about it.

So

here's the problem.

He can't talk about it because he's legally bound.

Juliet Huddy was on today.

She was on Megan Kelly.

She was talking about something.

And

she's not allowed to talk about a settlement that she made.

And yet

she

kind of did.

Without talking about anything specifically she did talk about it and and you you kind of wonder well wait if you're paid uh for a settlement the time to talk was before the settlement if you accept the settlement and the non-disclosure well then what is that worth i mean when do i believe you when you took the money and said okay i'm going to sign this piece of paper or now that you've signed that paper and you have the money and you say oh and i also i want my cake and i and i'll eat it too i mean

what happens to us and business and the courts glenn back

love

courage

truth glenn back there is no safe space from partisan politics anymore not even a cub scout den 11-year-old cub scout ames mayfield from broomfield colorado been kicked out of his den now.

According to his mother, Lori, he was asked to move to another den because of the questions that he asked a state senator, a Republican, who was speaking to his den.

Ames asked the Republican, Vicki Marble, why she won't, quote, support common sense gun laws.

There is something wrong in our country where Republicans believe it's a right to own a gun, but a privilege to have health care, end quote.

Now, I don't know about you, but that sounds like every 11-year-old boy I've I've ever been around.

They all speak just like that.

Ames read his questions and

had lots of stats for the state senator from staple documents.

He read for two and a half minutes before the senator was able to respond.

Naturally, Ames' mom captured the whole thing on video.

Now,

if this is what you want to teach your kid, and that's fine, and you know, whatever, but we know this is coming from mom and dad.

and then she went and she posted it on social media now none of us are perfect parents but perhaps misses Mayfield could have thought ahead a little bit that posting these videos online might stir up controversy and get the local media involved and the other kids in the scout troop don't want to be a part of a political nightmare maybe she could have predicted that this whole thing might rub some cub scout leaders the wrong way

Unless all of this attention is precisely what you hoped for.

For young Ames and perhaps herself.

After all, people might be more inclined to let a child finish their ridiculously long essay on a pro-gun control question and a pro-government health care than they would be inclined to listen to a middle-aged mom with an axe to grind.

But I have to ask Mrs.

Mayfield this:

Is this worth

what what you've done is deny your child his experience at Cub Scouts.

Is that

worth it?

Is he better off for being your political mouthpiece?

Now, I'm no expert,

but I know 11-year-old kids, and I'm pretty sure they'd rather be with their friends at Scouts than memorizing liberal talking points with you.

Monday, October 23rd.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Friend of the program and a friend of mine, Bill O'Reilly.

Welcome, sir.

How are you?

Taking a beating,

but still standing.

So, Bill, you and I spoke over the weekend, and I said to you that I wanted to ask you some honest questions and

just personal for me because I, you know, I don't know, and anybody can lie to anybody, but you would be,

I mean, you would be one of the greatest liars ever because of the consistency of your lies if you were lying to me, and the consistency of your behavior around me and my staff, which we have toured together.

I have seen you on Friday nights.

I have seen you in hotels.

My staff has, and I have women that work for me, and we've never had any problem whatsoever or an inkling that you might be one of those guys.

Yeah, well, I was in the,

I have been in the broadcast business for 43 years, 12 different companies.

Never one time was there any

complaint filed against me with human resources or anybody's legal team and nothing, zero.

Megan Kelly.

So I think the track record speaks for itself, and I think that people,

when they look at the statement that we have posted on billorilly.com, when they look at the affidavit, and now the three letters that I sent you, did you get the letters from Gretchen Cross,

I wanted to know

if I was allowed to publish them.

Oh, yeah, sure.

So what I'm trying to get across by coming on with you today are two things.

Number one, I want the story to go away because it's brutalizing my family.

And number two, I'm not going to run and hide because I didn't do anything wrong.

And I think that the evidence that we've put forth is very strong, very compelling, that the New York Times

wants to take me out of the marketplace.

This is the second time they've attacked me.

And the article on Sunday regurgitated the first article.

That was like 75% of it.

They had to run it twice in case you didn't get it last April.

And they know that I'm in a disadvantage because I can't comment specifically

on any case

that has been resolved.

That's

one of the

legal

compelling

things that when you resolve something, it is always done in a nobody says anything.

And you know who knows that best?

The New York Times, because they've settled a number of harassment complaints in a confidential way.

Yet, in their article on page one today, screaming about, well, we shouldn't have this kind of

provision,

they don't mention that.

And they don't mention a lot of things.

So I think...

Go ahead.

So Bill, I want to ask you a couple of questions.

The biggest question that is on everybody's mind is, okay, you can settle, but $32 million coming out of your own pocket, nobody does that.

Right.

So what do you want me to say?

I'm not

the only comment I could make on that issue without getting the thing

back into a legal arena would be the first article that the New York Times wrote, quoted figures, and added them up, and it was wildly wrong.

But I can't confirm or deny anything because once I do that, then it goes back into the legal arena, which you don't want.

And they know that.

So they could say whatever they want to say.

They know that.

They know where Hamstrun, my attorneys and investigative team,

We can't.

Was this settlement by you alone, or was Fox advised?

I can't.

Beck, as I told you off the camera, I know you have to ask some questions for your audience.

I can't comment on any specific case at all.

If I could, I would, but I cannot.

Can you

tell me about the relationship that you had with Lee's will?

I have.

No, I cannot.

What we had,

what we have posted, is an affidavit from Miss Wheel.

Sworn affidavit.

Okay?

That's posted on billorilly.com.

That's it.

That was, we could post.

We did.

There it is.

And I can't speak to anything other than that.

I know it's frustrating.

It's really frustrating because.

It's very frustrating for me.

You can imagine me sitting here

being accused of everything under the sun.

And the end game is let's link O'Reilly with Harvey Weinstein.

Let's make him that.

That's what we want to do.

And so we take him out of the marketplace forever.

He never gets to give his opinion on issues.

Again, we take him out because we hate him.

And the New York Times obviously hates me.

It's dishonest in the extreme.

And it's frustrating for me.

But unless I want another seven or eight years of constant litigation that puts my children in a kill zone, I have to maintain my discipline.

The only reason I can tell you this, Beck, in 20 years plus at the Fox News channel, how long did you work there, by the way?

Four years, three years.

Okay, I was

20 years.

Ten minutes.

I don't remember.

All right.

20 years and six months.

I resolved three things.

That's all I resolved in 20 years and six months.

I resolved three things.

And the only reason I did resolve them was to keep my children safe.

So I can tell you that.

Okay.

So

let me go one more place.

On the point out though, that's smaller than the reported number, Bill.

Are you saying that the reported number is inaccurate?

All I'm telling you is the truth.

20 years, six months, Fox News channel.

I resolved three things.

That is the truth.

Bill,

on the wheel affidavit,

the New York Times fails to recognize here that this is a legal document

and she is a member of the bar, and that if she signs something that was not true, she should be disbarred.

She's not.

It's worse than that.

And I'm not impugning or saying anything.

I'm talking in a general sense now.

She's not saying any of this, but the New York Times

are speaking for her.

Go ahead.

If any American citizen signs an affidavit that's notarized,

it's under the perjury law.

So you can be prosecuted if what you're saying is not true, which is why the affidavit becomes so vitally important.

And here's the kicker.

We gave that to the New York Times.

They had that.

They did not print it.

Then their weasel reporter, the most dishonest man on the face of the earth, tweets out, oh, O'Reilly says we didn't mention

the affidavit, and we did.

I didn't say you didn't mention it.

I said you didn't print it, and you should have printed it up top because that's the story.

But they didn't want that to be out because that wrecked their story, which they already had written, no matter what I said or gave them.

And we gave them an unbelievable amount of stuff from day one of my tenure with Fox News.

They know, but they don't care because this was a hit job to get me out of the marketplace.

And then you'll have the left go, oh, this is paranoid.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

Okay, get back that up fifty different ways.

Media Matters is involved.

CNN is involved.

I mean, and it's beyond any doubt.

So again, I will tell everybody, we've got our statement posted on billorilly.com.

We've got the affidavit posted.

We've got letters from Gretchen Carlson and Megan Kelly to me posted.

Everything is there.

Okay.

If you still want to think I'm a bad guy, go ahead.

Okay.

Hang on.

The truth is the truth.

All right.

Hang on.

I have to take a break.

And then I want to come back and talk to you about what Megan said today because this is a very separate issue, but I think you should address that as well.

Coming up in a second:

Nothing is more essential than protecting your home, but traditional home security can be punishing and really expensive.

And there is a better way.

Protect your home with SimplySafe.

Ask anybody who has been locked into a long-term security contract and, you know, you're on the hook for three years.

Plus, the installation alone can cost you a fortune, not to mention the hardwired system tearing up the walls.

So, SimplySafe came up with something entirely new.

It's a wireless security system that doesn't have any long-term contracts.

Your home is going to be protected 24-7 around the clock.

There's no contracts, no hidden fees, and the cost is $15 a month.

That's three times less than the other guys with no hidden fees.

The name of the place is SimplySafe.

Go to simply safebeck.com.

That's simplysafebeck.com.

You get a 10% discount when you order today.

If you want your security system tonight, you know, you're afraid somebody's going to come get you tonight, go to your local Best Buy.

You'll have your home protected by tonight.

But if you you want to save that extra 10%, I recommend going to simply safebeck.com.

SimplySafeBeck.com.

Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck.

This is Megan Kelly

on today's broadcast.

A malicious smear claiming that no woman in 20 years ever complained to human resources or legal about him.

Maybe that is true.

Fox News was not exactly a friendly environment for harassment victims who wanted to report in my experience.

However, O'Reilly's suggestion that no one ever complained about his behavior is false.

I know because I complained.

It was November of 2016, the day my memoir was released.

In it, I included a chapter on ALES and the sexual harassment scandal at Fox News, something the Murdochs knew I was doing and, to their credit approved.

O'Reilly happened to be on CBS News that morning.

They asked him about my book and about Ailes, who by this time had been forced out in disgrace.

O'Reilly's response?

You're not interested in this.

No?

No, I mean it's all.

Sexual harassment?

You're not interested in sexual harassment?

I'm not interested in basically litigating something that is finished that makes my network look bad.

Okay?

I'm not interested in making my network look bad at all.

That doesn't interest me one bit.

So her complaint, Bill, that she filed was that you made it tough for people to come out against the network because of statements like that.

Number one, she didn't file a complaint.

Not that I know of.

It never brought to our attention that Megan Kelly did anything.

All right, so I'd like to see it because I don't believe that's true at all.

Number two,

what she does not say is that there's an anonymous hotline, and there had been for years at Fox News where anybody could have called up and said so-and-so is doing something to me, and you better stop it.

All right, that's anonymous.

Doesn't mention it.

Number three, I'd like you to read the notes that I gave you back to your audience from Megan Kelly to me, the personal notes.

Do you happen to have them in front of you?

Because my iPad just went down.

Convenient.

Hang on.

So Megan Kelly wrote to you, Dear Bill, what a class act you are.

Something to my baby.

Please come to my baby shower.

No, no, no.

What a class act you are.

Coming to my baby.

Thank you for coming to my baby shower.

I was truly touched.

I know how busy you are, especially that time of the day.

It meant a lot to me.

And Dory, thank you for the darling bodysuits and snuglies.

It's kind,

no, it's hard to believe,

soon have a little human being in our lives to fit into those.

You've become a dear friend,

no matter what they say, and I am grateful to have you in my life, Megan Kelly.

Just so letter number one,

letter number two.

Letter number two, thank you for the

something on Dory's book.

Thank you for the mention on Doug's book.

Doug is her husband.

Doug's book.

Okay.

I realize you didn't have to do that, especially after mentioning it already.

I appreciate how supportive you have been to me over the years here at Fox News.

You're a true friend and mentor.

And I want to give one more letter.

This is the one, and these are going to be published up at the Blaze and Glenbeck.com.

This one is from Gretchen Carlson.

Bill, thank you for being the calm in the sea.

Thank you so much for supporting me.

Thank you for being my friend.

It means the world to me.

GC.

Yep.

So look, I think that anybody, any fair-minded person, and I really appreciate you reading those to your listeners,

I think that they can now start to formulate a picture here.

Because the behavior that you pointed out at the beginning of the 11 o'clock hour, Eastern Time, is on the record.

43 years,

no complaints, complaints, 12 different companies.

And then you, Glenn Beck, know me now for what, 10 years, 12 years?

Yeah, some of them.

You've been with me on the road.

You know what I am.

You know what I do.

And now, with the statement we provided on billoreilly.com, with the affidavit, the sworn affidavit, and with these three letters, two by Megan Kelly and one by Gretchen Carlson,

a picture should start to emerge

for any fair-minded person.

And that's all I can hope for, that the American American people will see that this

is

an

attack on an American citizen, me,

for political purposes.

And you know what?

It's done enormous damage to me and to my family.

And it is a horror and should never happen in our country.

Bill,

what happens if companies settle lawsuits and then the affidavits and the non-disclosures don't mean anything.

Well, it's over now.

Anybody who would be settling anything now is insane.

Because

in my case, all the confidentiality stuff was violated.

You told me about a year ago the biggest mistake you made was settling.

So is this a good thing?

Is this a good thing or not?

No, if I had to do it all over again, I never would have done it.

But you've got to understand how much pain this brings children.

And I thought I could spare my children that.

I'd do anything for my children, anything to protect them.

I'd give up my life for my children.

And that's why I did it.

But

we actually thought that people would uphold

their oath

and what they agreed to, and they haven't.

But let me get back to Megan Kelly for a moment.

I never had any problem with Megan Kelly.

In fact, when she was getting hammered earlier this year, I wrote a column sticking up for her.

You know, I don't know why Megan Kelly is doing what she's doing.

I don't know why.

I have helped her dramatically in her career.

I gave her the name of her show, The Kelly File.

She actually did a charity event for me.

I mean, it is just incomprehensible.

Bill O'Reilly from BillO'Reilly.com.

We'll talk to you again, Bill.

Try to have a better day.

God bless.

Back in a minute.

Glenn back.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

I am so torn on this.

Welcome to Pat Gray,

who does the program following my radio broadcast on the Blaze radio network.

I'm really torn here because I do not want to enable a bad guy.

I respect Megan Kelly.

I respect Gretchen Carlson.

I do not stand with Roger Ailes, who you know, Pat, was a hero of mine for a while.

I mean, I thought this guy was one of the greatest guys since sliced bread.

Yeah.

He was a great con man.

And he was really a smart businessman, and he knew, he knew broadcasting inside and out.

Yeah.

And I, once I found, once the con was revealed, I was like, oh, my gosh.

Oh, my gosh.

This guy is, as I have put it before, the most most disappointing human being in my life.

He's kind of an evil genius.

Yeah, he was.

So,

and

I'm glad to see that it is now being shown that there are women involved in this cover-up at Fox.

Some really bad names at Fox have come to light today.

And I agree with exposing those people.

I just don't think Bill is one of those people.

Neither do I.

I mean, based on everything we know of him and have seen of him, we toured with him how many times?

We must have done four or five different tours with him

all over the country.

All over the country, in hotels.

Never once saw any indication of that kind of behavior.

None.

None.

Like the most polite, old-school gentleman, like doesn't hug people.

Like, you know, I'm the guy everybody comes up and hugs, and I hug back.

And he just looked at me like, what are you doing?

I mean, doesn't he just not?

He is an old school kind of guy.

Yeah, very much so.

And I, I can't help but believe him now

because of what we know of him.

Uh, and he's pretty adamant, and he's got some good evidence backing him up, like what he just read from Megan.

Now, if you've sexually harassed somebody or aided somebody else in harassing somebody, they don't usually write to you about what a good friend you are.

And Megan is not alleging that, by the way.

I mean, she's not saying that she was harassed by Bill.

No, she was kind of saying Roger Ailes, right?

And

yeah, she did say she was harassed by Roger Ailes.

She said that,

you know, after her memoir came out, that Bill made it harder for people to come out and defend because

he was, you know, saying, hey, don't trash the company.

Yeah.

What are you doing?

And I kind of see, while I don't agree with him, I can see it from his point of view because Fox was always under attack.

And so you never knew what's real, what's not.

You have to be really careful because sometimes the attack is real.

Sometimes the attack is not, but it's almost always politically motivated.

Right.

And the letters don't prove that nothing, he never did anything wrong.

I mean, it proves that they had a decent relationship at one point, seemingly.

But, you know, who knows with that stuff?

Because I'm sure their complaint on that would be, well, well, he was powerful.

And these people are not.

Why do you hate Phil O'Reilly's too?

I don't.

I don't.

No, no, but Gretchen,

here's the key.

The ones that are making the rounds today, Gretchen Carlson and Megan Kelly, they're not accusing him of anything, nor have they ever accused him of anything.

That's true.

You know, she's saying what Gretchen is saying now, who, I mean, let me read this, let me read this letter again.

And this, I think, this is an exclusive.

You can find up on the Blaze.

If it's not there yet, it will be soon.

Let's see here.

Hang on just a second.

She wrote, Gretchen wrote, Bill, thank you for being the calm in the sea.

Thank you so much for supporting me.

Thank you for being my friend.

It means the world to me.

Now,

how do you go from that to now on television saying, well, you know what?

If he was settling this case, then, you know,

you got to be doing something.

Well, no, that's not the standard.

Companies settle cases all the time.

And sometimes they settle them and they're guilty.

Sometimes they settle them and they're absolutely not guilty.

You know, I don't know the ins and outs of this case.

Bill can't tell you the ins and outs of this case because otherwise Bill

is violating confidentiality.

So

suspend the confidentiality and return the money, but suspend the confidentiality or let him suspend the confidentiality and you keep the money.

I mean, it's wrong.

The guy can't answer for anything.

He can't say what he knows to defend himself.

That throws the entire court system out.

It throws everything out the window.

Yeah, and we know that they're good at leaking information.

They're good at

getting stuff out there that they want to have out there and still claiming innocence.

Fox did that all the time.

Are they doing that with Lee's Wheel now?

I don't know.

Well, I will tell you that I think that the Murdochs do not like Bill O'Reilly, the Murdoch kids.

They never have.

Yeah.

When they saw him, when they saw him, this is

my guess, when they saw him on

Sean Hannity and he made them number one again for the first time since he left, I think he and others realized, holy cow, this guy still has clout.

You know, when he's number one on the New York Times bestseller list for three weeks in a row, holy cow, this guy still has clout.

He didn't go anywhere.

He's just off of our front page.

And I think that scared a lot of people.

Look, the two things here, I think, that are pretty interesting coming out of that.

One,

the big question everyone has is, why would anybody spend $32 million to get rid of a false claim?

That seems completely ridiculous.

Now, Exxon might do it, right?

Like Exxon might have some chemical, you know, oil leak somewhere and they just push $32 million because they don't care.

But a person would never do that.

And that's an understandable thing.

He is claiming that some of the numbers in the New York Times articles are incorrect.

Now, I don't know if that means that if it's because of the money came from Fox News, who is a huge corporation, right?

A news corp and would maybe settle something like that.

Or if it was multiple people.

Or if the numbers are just completely wrong, I don't know.

He said he couldn't explain it.

At some point, we have to get to the bottom of that.

And by the way, we should point out: the New York Times, in their story, says this is according to two people briefed on the matter.

Yeah, it is not a corporate.

She signed an affidavit.

It wasn't true.

Yeah, and she signed an affidavit that was true.

She said it wasn't true.

Now, here's the affidavit.

I have the affidavit.

Here's the affidavit.

Now,

she's an attorney, Pat.

Right.

She's an attorney.

She should be disparred.

Right.

Yes.

If this is a lie.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, you can't lie under oath on the read.

Lise Wheel, being duly sworn, deposes and states under the penalty of perjury.

Yeah, it's bigger than just

getting disbarred.

Number one, I've known Bill O'Reilly for over 18 years.

We've worked together.

We've socialized.

And on occasion, I gave him legal advice.

Number two, at the end of 2016, I hired a counsel who prepared a draft complaint asserting claims against Bill O'Reilly.

We have since resolved all of our issues.

I would no longer make the allegations contained in the draft complaint.

Additionally, over the years, while I was acting as Bill O'Reilly's counsel, he forwarded to me certain explicit emails that were sent to him, and any advice sought or rendered is attorney client-privileged, confidential, and private.

I have no claims against Bill O'Reilly concerning any of those emails or any of the allegations in the draft complaint.

So that goes to, you know, he sent me gay porn, et cetera, et cetera.

She was the attorney.

Wow.

He said, what do I do with this?

Right.

He was saying he was getting harassment.

I will tell you.

And he was forwarding it to his attorneys.

I will tell you, I have done that.

You have done that, Pat.

You didn't send it to your attorney, but you have sent it, or at least you've brought it up to me and said, I'm getting all of this bad stuff.

What do I do?

I don't know about gay porn, but it was a threat certainly pour into this place.

And porn.

Remember, porn.

You were attacked by porn.

Oh, yeah, one of your old websites, right?

Yes, actually.

Two million websites were placed on on my old site.

Just the two million.

Just two million.

Which of the two million was the best?

Did you find?

No, I didn't.

I can't speak to all two million.

Just the ones I went over with a fine-tooth color.

So first of all, he's saying, everyone's saying, like, walk, you can't believe him.

He's $32 million.

Well,

he's saying the numbers were wrong, although he can't be specific.

So I don't know what the truth is on that one.

So that's part one.

Part two is

he said specifically, this is why I pushed him on this.

He said he had settled three cases in his entire time.

The New York Times story says it was at least the sixth agreement.

So I don't, again, like, this is a very specific fact that theoretically they could,

I mean, you'd think the New York Times would have to have evidence of all of those, and maybe they do.

I mean, you know, I'm concerned about the wording of this.

And let's just take the best case from the New York Times for a second.

They think Bill O'Reilly is a terrible guy.

They totally believe all of his claims.

They're outing him.

Okay.

They say struck a $32 million agreement with a longtime network analyst to settle new sexual harassment allegations.

That's from last year.

According to two people briefed on the matter.

Seemingly, the way that information came to them would indicate that the possibility that maybe that sort of nuance gets erased if it's multiple people, if it's from the company, instead of just Bill O'Reilly's pocket.

Again, like they're talking about people who have been briefed on it.

They're not even people holding the documents in their hands reading.

The New York Times has not seen it.

At least the way that's written, it doesn't seem like they've seen it, right?

According to two people briefed on the matter, I mean,

that's a different standard.

So even with the best intentions, the New York Times might not have that exact thing right, which I would say is the biggest thing in the article.

The rest of it, we knew that these cases had been going on.

But if

we knew he had settled, but the thing that's really, I think, convincing people off of this of Bill's guilt is the fact that he would take $32 million out of his own bank account and hand it to this one person.

Which I don't even think that's possible.

That's a lot of money.

Bill makes a lot of money, but.

But $32 million to give to one.

Come on.

Do you think Bill O'Reilly was touring with me because

he had $32 million in the bank that he didn't squander?

Squander $32 million?

No.

No.

I don't know.

I think that's an interesting part.

And again, that is a factual, I mean,

he wasn't calling out the New York Times.

He wasn't saying specifically these people are lying, but this is the sentence.

It was at least the sixth agreement, and by far the largest, made by Mr.

O'Reilly or the company to settle harassment allegations against him.

So again, unless they're lumping other things in.

So he said we should call the New York Times for a comment.

Bill O'Reilly said unequivocally that he has only settled three

in 20 years.

And those are the three that we have known about.

And are those the 13 million figures we keep hearing about?

I guess.

I don't know what that is.

I don't know.

I don't know.

Because 32 million jacks that up a lot.

Yeah.

And there's no, I don't think there's any way that came out of Bill's own account.

No way.

Yeah, they said it was

publicly known harassment settlements involving Mr.

Riley have been $45 million total.

And that's $32 million from this one case company.

There's no way.

No way.

There's no way.

It's just, it's hard to know because there's so many things that you can't hear.

You can't hear details from the person involved.

The New York Times isn't exactly outlining this in a way that seems like they have all the detail either.

And yet, what are we doing?

We're destroying people's lives.

We're destroying his life, his children's life.

We're destroying

their life.

Liz, if she's not a part of this, if she's not doing this,

then her life is going to be wrecked.

And apparently she's not.

This is pretty compelling proof right here.

I think Niana David's pretty powerful.

She would be disparred.

Yeah.

If she is involved in this at all, she'd be disparred.

Perjury.

You could go to jail.

Rucky could be some associate of hers who had access to the documents because we don't know how they got to the New York Times.

Again, we don't know.

It's a really,

it's a weird case.

And I think all of us would agree that if Bill O'Reilly is this terrible person, we want his life destroyed.

I mean, if he is this terrible person, I want him to pay the price.

I don't want anyone's life destroyed.

I don't want Harvey Weinstein's life destroyed.

I want him to pay.

If he did those things, if he's a rapist, you know what?

His life is going to wind up behind bars and it should be.

Right?

At the end of time,

I want him to receive the consequences.

Well, I mean, if you're parsing the difference between life in prison and life being destroyed, I get it.

But yes, I mean, maybe he could.

What I'm emphasizing, because we seem to be a vigilante society right now.

I'm trying to emphasize: I want the justice system to work.

We cannot be.

I mean, I'm sitting here today, and, you know, Stu keeps looking at me like, relax, relax.

And I'm like, this is really important.

This is really important.

I'm between two friends.

Not that you're trying to stop me or anything like that.

But I'm between two friends.

Man, I'm having

deja vu like crazy.

Having two friends that I'm between right now.

Megan Kelly, who I love and respect, Bill O'Reilly, who I love and respect.

One is imaging the other like a total dirtbag.

If that's true, I don't want to be a part of a dirtbag and furthering this.

I am somebody who have paid a personal, high,

very high cost for my stance against abuse in my own life.

The last thing I want to do is forward abuse on the radio and in my work.

But I don't know what to do, and I'm not qualified to do it because no one can talk to me about what the truth is.

So what do we do?

Yeah.

All right.

Thanks, Pat.

We'll talk to you in a little while.

The Equifax breach impacted roughly 143 million consumers, and

it just got bigger.

They've added 2.5 million people to that list.

And if that's not bad enough, Yahoo announced that their 2013 breach impacted 3 billion user accounts.

That's triple the original estimate.

You should know your personal information.

you should know it's probably been exposed, and once it's been exposed, it doesn't go away.

Identity thieves can buy your information on the dark web for months, even years after the breach, and they can use it to commit crimes in your name, even steal from your 401k.

So now is the time to get protection.

Sign up for Life Lock today.

LifeLock uses proprietary technology.

They'll help you detect a wide range of identity threats and theft.

And if there is a problem, a U.S.-based identity restoration specialist is going to work to fix it.

Now, nobody can prevent all identity theft or

monitor all transactions at all businesses, but LifeLock will see the threats better than anybody else.

So go to lifelock.com, call 1-800-Lifelock.

Use the promo code back, and you'll get 10% off your Life Lock membership.

1-800-LifeLock or Lifelock.com promo code BECK

GLENN BACK

Glenn Back

We will have more on this and so much more, including the latest on the Trump Gold Star scandal

coming up today at 5 p.m.

on the Glenn Beck Television Show.

Back on the air tonight, 5 only on the Blaze TV.

Back race next.

Glenn back.