The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program ｜ 12⧸15⧸21

00:00:00.000 I think the podcast starts, you know, starts off the right way with a government official singing somewhere over the pandemic.

00:00:08.140 It is the most cringeworthy that I think I've experienced.

00:00:13.920 And we've come a very we've come a very long way on cringeworthy things that are coming from the government.

00:00:20.020 Also, what the mayor of San Francisco is doing.

00:00:22.960 And is this a turning point?

00:00:25.000 We talk a little bit about what Elon Musk did to Elizabeth Warren.

00:00:30.000 And John Stossel's attorney to talk about what does Facebook mean that their fact check is protected opinion.

00:00:39.640 All this and more on today's podcast.

00:00:42.160 Don't forget to order your merch at Glenn Beck merch dot com.

00:00:45.440 You can use the promo code Glenn 20 to save 20 percent.

00:00:48.860 Oh, and don't forget to rate and review this podcast as well as heading over to Studos America to do the same.

00:00:55.320 And there we play the song.

00:00:56.760 It's beginning to look a lot like Venezuela on the program today.

00:01:00.300 You can get that and listen as many times as you like.

00:01:02.660 Share it and subscribe at Studos America on this podcast platform.

00:01:06.880 You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.

00:01:21.640 So Elon Musk yesterday, he was named Times the Time magazine's 21 person of the year.

00:01:30.260 So Elizabeth Warren tweets, let's change the rig tax code so the person of the year will actually pay taxes and stop freeloading off everyone else.

00:01:44.600 Musk followed up saying, stop projecting.

00:01:48.940 You remind me of when I was a kid and my friend's angry mom would just randomly yell at everyone for no reason.

00:01:55.540 In another, that is her profile.

00:01:58.640 It is.

00:01:59.400 It is.

00:02:00.080 She's she's angry.

00:02:01.900 She's always angry in that voice.

00:02:05.100 Yeah, I know.

00:02:05.560 I mean, this is why, of course, she didn't even come close to winning the primary.

00:02:09.180 I think she did better than Kamala.

00:02:12.540 Well, that's not a standard.

00:02:14.600 All right.

00:02:15.880 Is that really a standard you're shooting for?

00:02:17.800 In another tweet, he said, oh, please don't call the manager on me, Senator Karen.

00:02:25.540 I love this.

00:02:28.780 And I love this guy because he just he says out loud what a lot of people think.

00:02:34.940 And he is a guy who I have real problems with at times because now he's saying, you know, no subsidies should be available.

00:02:43.140 Well, after he got his subsidy.

00:02:45.040 So is he kicking the door behind him to stop everybody else?

00:02:49.140 Or is he really had a change of heart?

00:02:51.320 Hopefully he's really had a change of heart.

00:02:53.280 But but I don't know.

00:02:55.860 But here's what I want.

00:02:57.600 Here's what I want to talk to you about.

00:02:59.100 I'm not sure if the people that we have, quote unquote, coming over to our side.

00:03:06.760 Have actually really changed.

00:03:12.400 Other than.

00:03:14.440 They realize their side is really dangerous now.

00:03:20.100 So, in other words, are they like Republicans that join the Tea Party that realized I got to be out of this Republican Party because it doesn't they don't stand for anything.

00:03:34.180 And we realize that.

00:03:36.600 And while we torch the Republican Party, many of us will still vote for the Republican Party.

00:03:42.620 Do you understand what I'm saying?

00:03:44.440 So I'm not sure if these guys have had a real awakening to our argument or they're now seeing the people they've been standing in the room with.

00:03:56.160 And they're like, I don't want to be with these people.

00:03:58.240 Well, this is crazy.

00:04:00.640 And so they've revealed themselves as the true, more libertarian liberal that they always have been.

00:04:09.620 Yeah, I see what you see what I mean.

00:04:11.640 Yeah, I think that's I mean, the Overton window is is is hard in effect here.

00:04:16.260 We talked about this with Bob Costas the other day, who, right, you know, he had this call with Jim Garrity, who who I criticized him for some of his monologues about guns and the Washington Redskins team name and said he was, you know, as we did as well, that he was Bob Costas seems like a crazy liberal.

00:04:32.320 And Costas called up and said, hey, I'm not that guy.

00:04:36.400 I'm not far left.

00:04:38.080 And just the fact that he would want to disagree with being outed as someone who is far left indicates he probably isn't far left because AOC never comes up and says, no, I'm really not socialist.

00:04:51.960 That's not what these people do anymore.

00:04:53.920 That's an old era of liberal.

00:04:57.140 And what's weird is they are now separating themselves.

00:05:01.080 They were the ones who would have said, Glenn Beck's crazy, saying that everybody's a Marxist.

00:05:06.920 You know, we're not Marxist when, you know, Newsweek magazine ran the headline.

00:05:11.840 We're all socialists now.

00:05:14.800 And they were the ones that would jump on the bandwagon defending the people who are on the Democratic side that were truly Marxist.

00:05:25.120 Now.

00:05:26.620 Did they just not believe that?

00:05:29.060 Or have they had a an awakening to Marxism?

00:05:35.900 Were they always part of this kind of Marxist soup?

00:05:39.620 And they've just backed up and said, OK, this is not going to work here.

00:05:44.100 Or were they just truly a blind liberal that were just thought the party is the party and we're not Marxists?

00:05:52.220 Yeah.

00:05:52.380 Maybe they thought it was just overblown.

00:05:54.060 Republicans were saying these things and they're not true.

00:05:57.160 And to be fair, there were a lot more on the left side that weren't Marxist.

00:06:02.240 I mean, Joe Biden used to very much sound like a normal Democrat.

00:06:05.920 If you go back to the 90s, you can go back to the 90s.

00:06:08.400 We were talking about this with San Francisco a little earlier when it comes to crime.

00:06:11.840 There's a version of Joe Biden that could do very well in this country today.

00:06:16.940 The 1994.

00:06:18.200 That's the version that people voted, thought they were, thought they were voting for.

00:06:21.140 And that's why he got elected.

00:06:22.480 And you go back to 1994.

00:06:23.500 He's got the crime bill.

00:06:25.180 He's trying to hold people accountable for criminal actions.

00:06:28.760 Now he's saying that was racist and I apologize for it.

00:06:31.880 When that sort of action is needed most, as we're seeing in San Francisco now.

00:06:36.000 So I think it's come a long way.

00:06:37.540 You know, Elon Musk, I don't know exactly where he comes from on the subsidies sort of thing.

00:06:43.740 He's now saying he doesn't want them for anybody, which I love.

00:06:47.960 I mean, that's what I believe as well.

00:06:50.480 However, obviously, his company was built on them.

00:06:52.540 I mean, Tesla was built on this.

00:06:54.520 That's why I wonder, is he kicking the door closed for everybody else?

00:06:57.800 I don't think so.

00:06:58.840 I don't think that's him.

00:07:00.100 You know, maybe he just, he didn't emphasize it a lot back then.

00:07:06.220 Or maybe he just liked the idea that he could get his company started.

00:07:08.620 I don't know.

00:07:09.420 But you left out, I think, the most important part of this exchange with Elizabeth Warren.

00:07:13.440 When he points out he will pay more taxes than any American in U.S. history this year. 0.96

00:07:19.480 Now, this is, Elizabeth Warren is so dumb that she's actually criticizing a person for not paying taxes. 1.00

00:07:26.000 Who's paying the most taxes of anyone in history? 0.98

00:07:29.280 Has there ever been a bigger miss of a tweet than Elizabeth Warren's?

00:07:34.040 Think about it.

00:07:34.860 Seriously.

00:07:35.400 We're seeing that he's paying more taxes than anyone in history.

00:07:38.680 He's paying more than anyone in history.

00:07:40.040 And she said he paid nothing.

00:07:41.280 There is literally no way to miss more than she missed. 0.88

00:07:45.760 And George Washington never died because he is Satan.

00:07:51.660 I died. 0.73

00:07:53.060 I guess.

00:07:53.900 And that's questionable.

00:07:54.960 You know, you could still question.

00:07:56.080 Maybe.

00:07:56.660 We can't quantify that.

00:07:58.200 We can quantify the Elon Musk situation.

00:08:00.680 And he, of course, followed it up with, don't spend it all at once.

00:08:03.900 Oh, wait.

00:08:04.560 You did already.

00:08:05.900 That's so great.

00:08:07.140 It's true.

00:08:07.920 So great.

00:08:08.200 Now, so the question is, people are waking up, but what are they waking up to?

00:08:14.640 Are they waking up and saying conservatives are right?

00:08:17.820 Or are they just waking up to the things that we've always had in common, where conservatives, the people like us, have said, guys, we didn't change.

00:08:29.660 You changed.

00:08:31.200 You changed.

00:08:31.900 The Democratic Party is no longer fighting for what you say you believe in.

00:08:36.560 They're not built.

00:08:37.640 They're not fighting for the Bill of Rights.

00:08:39.640 They are fighting for socialism and communism and a fundamental transformation of America.

00:08:46.740 Well.

00:08:47.340 Well, I hope that they are waking up, especially to the Democratic Party thing, because do you remember, it was racist to say anyone was a Marxist.

00:08:59.640 It was crazy to say somebody in the Democratic Party is a communist.

00:09:04.500 Well, tell me what you think of this story.

00:09:08.600 Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut, one of the worst people in the world, spoke at an awards ceremony over the weekend hosted by a Communist Party affiliate whose leaders use the event to recruit potential members into the Communist Party.

00:09:27.780 Now, he's one of the wealthiest members of the Senate, which let's put that aside, because actually it's it's his wife.

00:09:36.360 I just love a man who never really even created wealth, but is living off of his wife.

00:09:41.260 It's so beautiful.

00:09:42.700 Blumenthal appeared even as Democratic leaders have downplayed allegations that many in the party support socialist or communist policies.

00:09:50.820 So they are still saying, no, we don't support that.

00:09:55.100 But then how do you explain Blumenthal going and speaking at the Communist Party event?

00:10:05.520 Blumenthal was introduced at the event by Lisa Bergman, a Communist Party member who blamed corporations for the imperialism that exists in our world that is undermining the labor and environment movement.

00:10:19.160 And she also had there was another communist emcee, Ben McManus, issued invitations at the ceremony to join the Communist Party.

00:10:29.320 And I quote, if you're not already part of the Communist Party, we invite you to participate and contribute and join.

00:10:36.040 There's more and more people talking about socialism in this country as it becomes more and more clear that capitalism is not going to work for our future.

00:10:46.280 So tell me what's happening there.

00:10:49.160 Democrats, explain this.

00:10:53.720 Can you imagine if somebody said, I am definitely not part of the Klan, but then you're invited to speak at a Klan awards ceremony and you speak.

00:11:07.520 And when you're speaking, everybody's like, and by the way, make sure you join the Klan on the way out. 0.74

00:11:12.300 How would you explain that?

00:11:15.560 Because I think that would be unexplainable.

00:11:18.220 I think anybody who did that, it would be pretty hard to say, oh, yeah, he's not he's not Klan friendly.

00:11:24.460 No way.

00:11:25.580 No way.

00:11:26.100 How is it that the Democrats don't care that they are now having Dick Blumenthal?

00:11:35.400 A guy who's not known in the in, you know, in the media circles as the radical.

00:11:42.360 He's kind of the law enforcement kind of guy.

00:11:46.240 I just, you know, I just want to make sure that everything is running, you know, and really buttoned up.

00:11:52.460 I'm I'm certainly not a communist.

00:11:55.860 Really?

00:11:56.420 Then why are you speaking at the Communist Party award ceremony?

00:12:06.140 We have to wake our our friends and family up.

00:12:10.380 And and this is why I've been saying for a while, our unum has always been the Bill of Rights.

00:12:17.420 When Biden says freedom and we're just talking about you having to get a vaccine.

00:12:23.660 What's the big deal?

00:12:24.820 The big deal is the government doesn't have the right to tell me what to put into my body.

00:12:30.900 That's the big deal.

00:12:33.420 You don't have a right.

00:12:35.060 So stop trying to do it.

00:12:37.120 You don't have a right to force companies to make me do it.

00:12:41.500 You don't have the right to do it.

00:12:46.180 Today is the day that the the the founders enshrined the Bill of Rights.

00:12:51.980 They were very important.

00:12:53.500 They still are.

00:12:55.840 And those were the things that brought us together, not our policies, not who we voted for, not things that we have to tax or not tax.

00:13:05.240 It was the Bill of Rights.

00:13:06.900 And when you have leaders of the Democratic Party speaking at the Communist Party annual awards.

00:13:16.800 You don't have people who believe in the Bill of Rights.

00:13:21.220 You have people who are working with or standing with people who are undermining the Bill of Rights.

00:13:29.500 And that's the one thing we should still all have in common.

00:13:35.460 This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

00:13:41.420 And we really want to thank you for listening.

00:13:43.140 This is the Glenn Beck program.

00:13:53.140 Yesterday, I told you a little bit about Facebook, something that people are not paying attention to.

00:13:58.300 They should.

00:13:58.840 Facebook is in a court battle with John Stossel.

00:14:03.680 I have his attorney on with us at the top of next hour.

00:14:06.560 So just about 25 minutes away.

00:14:08.960 But.

00:14:09.560 They have John Stossel has sued because of a fact check from Facebook that he says defamed him because they said that his facts were false.

00:14:24.200 And John says, no, I've been in the fact checking business, you know, most of my life.

00:14:32.200 And I know the difference between fact and false.

00:14:35.820 And this isn't false.

00:14:37.420 Well, he fought this.

00:14:40.340 And in court now, Facebook has issued something in their defense.

00:14:47.300 They say opinions are not subject to defamation claims, while false assertions of fact can be subject to defamation.

00:14:57.480 So they're saying fact check articles.

00:14:59.880 This is a quote.

00:15:00.740 Fact check articles are not the labels affixed through Facebook platform.

00:15:05.980 The labels themselves are nearly near neither false nor defamatory.

00:15:10.620 To the contrary, they constitute protected opinion.

00:15:16.360 Now, the way I read that is fact check doesn't have to be based in facts.

00:15:23.400 They can if they have an opinion that says, no, that's not right, then they can claim that our facts are wrong trumped by their opinion, which is the case we have been making the whole time.

00:15:41.880 Where is the line for your opinion and facts?

00:15:47.400 Because we know what the facts are.

00:15:49.940 Here, you can then go in and say, we disagree.

00:15:54.220 But who are you to say we disagree on our opinion?

00:16:00.080 We're arguing facts.

00:16:01.820 As John points out, they can pretty much do what they want on their website.

00:16:07.380 However, it's a terrible way of doing business, especially for somebody who claims they want to be the source of the public square conversation.

00:16:16.940 I don't they don't seem to act that way.

00:16:19.600 And, you know, they, you know, Twitter is doing something today where they are penalizing users who claim vaccinated people can spread COVID-19.

00:16:28.120 Now, every every study, every study from the literal beginning has said that if you have if you are vaccinated, you have a chance, a lower chance, but a chance of spreading COVID-19.

00:16:40.340 There's never been a study that has said it's going to prevent every single case of spread.

00:16:44.280 It's never occurred.

00:16:45.260 So what so how are they so and they're saying that if you say, hey, you know what?

00:16:50.500 I think, you know, you can spread it if you have if you are vaccinated, which is true by literally every scientific report, including the scientists who work at Pfizer.

00:17:01.420 OK, that doesn't mean that they are they're terrible and they're the worst thing in the world doesn't mean anything like that.

00:17:06.380 But it does mean that, of course, some facts, some people are the facts.

00:17:09.480 You know, this is from the CDC website.

00:17:11.900 If you are fully vaccinated and become infected with the Delta variant, you can spread the virus to others.

00:17:16.840 Infections happen only in a small proportion of people who are fully vaccinated, even with a Delta variant as compared to people who are not vaccinated.

00:17:23.620 But that does say both of those things say you can get it and you can spread it.

00:17:28.060 It can happen.

00:17:28.640 So and it seems to be even worse when it comes to Omicron.

00:17:32.580 If that thing catches on here, which it looks like it may.

00:17:35.720 So to punish the like you are punishing people for saying things that are on the CDC website.

00:17:43.280 Hurry while they last on the website.

00:17:45.780 Poynter.org has just fact checked my recent covid special a more specifically.

00:17:52.720 The question, does the government co-own the vaccine, the covid-19 vaccine?

00:17:59.740 They also questioned my question on whether the government may have ulterior motives in mandating the vaccine.

00:18:08.680 And here's their fact check.

00:18:10.500 Is it true the government and it should be co-owns the vaccine?

00:18:14.960 But is it true the government owns the vaccine?

00:18:17.500 As Beck said, in short, no.

00:18:22.620 OK, in short, no.

00:18:24.700 How about we look at the long form then?

00:18:27.880 I mean, why add in short?

00:18:29.580 It's a yes or no question.

00:18:31.640 Well, this is a topic that requires a short explanation.

00:18:36.000 I guess I would personally say no, as the covid origin story and the vaccine origin story are the biggest topics in the world right now.

00:18:44.780 It's not even close, but it kind of seems like this fact check agrees because they follow up in their little in short, no remark with this little tidbit.

00:18:54.560 And I quote, but as the New York Times reported, November 9th, there is a long brewing disagreement between Moderna and the National Institute of Health over who developed a crucial part of the covid-19 vaccine known as the mRNA sequence.

00:19:13.560 And that could have implications for ownership of important patents related to the vaccine.

00:19:21.500 So, in other words, no, no, they don't co-own it.

00:19:26.540 No, in fact, to prove it, there is a court battle right now going on between the government and Moderna and they're battling out in court to see who owns it or not.

00:19:38.500 Right. Well, wait a minute. I showed you the document with the signature and said, what's this all about?

00:19:48.120 Did you know? Did you know that they co-owned? Did you know this was happening?

00:19:52.900 Don't you think? Because if they're getting money or anyone in the NIH is getting money, we should know about it because that might be an ulterior motive.

00:20:04.320 And by the way, we had conversations before the special even aired off the air.

00:20:09.260 Yes. Talking about all of the points they bring up here and making sure that we included the nuance that existed.

00:20:16.080 And then they, instead of fact checking the special, they didn't fact check the special.

00:20:19.160 They fact check TikTok. They fact checked what part of the special went viral on TikTok.

00:20:25.420 Yeah. Which is pretty frustrating. I don't know how we're supposed to control that.

00:20:28.580 Yeah. Pointer also points this out. Quote, a lot of money is at stake as well as a big say in the distribution of vaccines worldwide.

00:20:39.780 If the NIH scientists were named as inventors on the sequence patent, that would enable the government to collect royalties on the patent and to license it as it sees fit, including some have noted to other vaccine manufacturers besides Moderna.

00:20:56.440 The result could have long term consequences for global vaccine access.

00:21:01.700 Well, now, maybe it's just me, but a lot of money is at stake at stake.

00:21:08.100 Kind of sounds like maybe we should look for artillery motives.

00:21:12.840 It's interesting how they point out royalties to be paid to the government, because if you go down to page 125 on the agreement that we showed you between Moderna and the government, you'll find an interesting appendix called royalties appendix.

00:21:31.100 Now, if there's no co-ownership, why is there a royalties appendix?

00:21:35.980 It says if any vaccine is produced based off their collaborative research, then Moderna would owe the government an initial sum 60 days after the signing of this agreement, October 2019.

00:21:49.140 And then every year annually, if you scroll down to page 127, the government instructs how those royalties would be paid.

00:22:00.640 Now, why would Moderna be paying the federal government?

00:22:05.780 In fact, there's even an account number on page 127 that shows that the money should be directed to the Federal Reserve Bank.

00:22:14.760 I don't know, that kind of sounds like money is changing hands or could change hands if they co-owned this, if they developed it and they said, no, we developed this all by ourselves, then no money changes hands.

00:22:32.360 No, we have a co-ownership and we gave you the MRNA mechanics and you added this so we're partners on it.

00:22:43.680 That's what it says.

00:22:46.920 How is Poynter doing this?

00:22:48.740 They found also no suspicion at all that Dr. Barak was included in the collaboration between Moderna and the NIH.

00:22:57.080 Not even a little suspect that the government and Moderna were working on a coronavirus MRNA vaccine and that they were sending research back and forth with the man, Barak, who was working with Dr. Xi in Wuhan on coronavirus.

00:23:12.180 There's no interest in that.

00:23:15.980 This is the same Wuhan where the pandemic began.

00:23:20.240 It's not worthy of a question, I guess.

00:23:23.740 And by the way, I have questions.

00:23:25.640 We all should have questions.

00:23:27.120 The facts are this.

00:23:29.400 The government and Moderna have been collaborating on a coronavirus vaccine since 2015.

00:23:37.820 The contract specifically states co-ownership of vaccine candidates.

00:23:43.740 And on page 24, all data and material produced along the way.

00:23:48.780 Royalties have been negotiated.

00:23:51.500 Royalties are in the contract.

00:23:54.080 Dr. Barak, the man who had been working on coronavirus research with Dr. Xi, was included.

00:24:00.040 And now there's a dispute between the government and Moderna on who owns what.

00:24:05.360 That's the fact, Poynter.

00:24:08.360 But don't worry.

00:24:09.360 Nothing to see here.

00:24:10.220 Poynter's got it.

00:24:11.020 They're smarter than you.

00:24:12.580 You know, just the it's just the government trying to mandate a vaccine that they're currently fighting on how much of it they were involved with inventing.

00:24:20.220 And then the contract that states in black and white, the royalties that should be paid to the federal bank, if anything, is produced based off of their collaboration.

00:24:30.220 Nothing to see here.

00:24:31.180 There's no ulterior motive.

00:24:33.500 There's no co-ownership at all.

00:24:35.400 So what the hell does this even mean?

00:24:39.560 That's why I'm asking.

00:24:41.780 There is no precedent for this.

00:24:44.000 And if the government or government employees are going to benefit even a little off of a federal policy that contributes to that benefit, we should be asking these questions.

00:24:58.820 That's what the media used to do. 0.78

00:25:01.400 That's what Poynter says their whole mission is.

00:25:07.760 I fact check Poynter. 0.99

00:25:10.660 They're liars. 0.99

00:25:12.040 They are liars specifically here. 1.00

00:25:17.880 They're liars. 0.99

00:25:20.460 Fact check that opinion pointer. 0.92

00:25:25.600 This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

00:25:37.040 If you are ready for some really great news, keep listening.

00:25:41.280 Built Bar is back, and it is unbelievable.

00:25:45.080 If you've been listening to my show this year, I love Built Bars.

00:25:48.760 It's an all-American story.

00:25:50.000 This is a client I asked to be on the show because I didn't listen to my wife again, and she's been telling me about it.

00:25:54.420 But it has a protein bar on it, and those always taste like a doormat.

00:25:58.920 This is unbelievable.

00:26:00.900 The mint brownie flavor?

00:26:02.540 Oh, yes, baby.

00:26:03.380 It is life-changing.

00:26:04.620 The new bars taste better than ever.

00:26:07.280 In addition to the 12 original flavors, Built Bar just added cookies and cream, carrot cake, caramel brownie, lemon almond cheesecake, apple almond crisp.

00:26:16.320 I mean, it's great.

00:26:18.460 Built Bar.

00:26:19.240 Delicious, nutritious, high-protein, low-calorie, high-fiber, low-carbs, 100% real chocolate, and 100% really good.

00:26:27.080 Plus, they've reset the code for this new launch.

00:26:30.200 Right now, go to BuiltBar.com, use the promo code Beck, get $10 off your first order.

00:26:34.700 Promo code Beck, BuiltBar.com.

00:26:37.400 Nationally recognized civil rights lawyer, named as one of the best lawyers under 40 in 2007.

00:26:46.220 She is the founder and chief executive officer for the Center for American Liberty.

00:26:52.540 We welcome Harmeet Dillon to the program.

00:26:55.920 Hi, Harmeet.

00:26:56.540 Yes.

00:26:57.660 Hi, thanks for having me.

00:26:59.400 So, I can't wrap my arms around this crazy Facebook defense that their fact checks are protected opinions.

00:27:12.780 And so, we can't push back on them while they say we're liars.

00:27:18.940 How's that work?

00:27:21.500 Well, I don't think it works.

00:27:22.880 You know, we've seen this phenomenon now for several years.

00:27:27.100 I've seen it with various clients of my firm where they're respected journalists or writers,

00:27:32.140 and they put up material on Twitter, on Facebook, on Instagram, on other platforms.

00:27:37.560 YouTube is another.

00:27:39.400 And, you know, these companies have been sued many times.

00:27:42.020 I've sued various of these companies many times on different theories.

00:27:45.140 And because of a law called Communications of Decency Act, Section 230, these companies have basically been allowed a government protection from the type of defamation that you or I would be liable for if we said false things about people in other forums.

00:28:02.600 And so, in this case, as many of your viewers may know, when you're reading an article, maybe an article you like, and you go to share it, or even without going to share it, a label pops up that warns you that, you know, this article that you're reading and you're about to share is false, partly false, you know, fake news, basically.

00:28:25.460 And then sometimes even getting into some details as to what's false about it.

00:28:29.320 And that's what happened here with John Stossel, who's a respected journalist with decades of experience.

00:28:35.300 And he's creating independent content now.

00:28:38.380 And on his Facebook page, he posted a couple of videos about two different climate change topics.

00:28:44.500 And one was about the forest fires that have consumed California over recent years in 2020 and what caused them.

00:28:52.420 And he was interviewing experts on forest fires.

00:28:57.380 And then in the other one, he's talking about a variety of claims by, you know, climate activists about everything being caused by climate change, you know, hurricanes, fires, you name it.

00:29:10.220 And so how these companies try to get around them being called defamers, Facebook, and these other big companies is they hire and I imagine my air quotes here, they hire independent fact checkers, who are really activists themselves, of course, they, they let loose the hounds of independent fact checkers on helpless users of these platforms who are not allowed to fight back.

00:29:38.980 And they rip them to shreds, and they rip them to shreds, as if it's some kind of a blood sport.

00:29:44.060 And there's no appeal process.

00:29:46.520 And so, you know, this climate change group that was tasked with reviewing this one is some French outfit, very biased.

00:29:54.520 A review of their reviews of people's posts shows that in the case of authors who are perceived as conservative, they routinely rate them as false or mostly false.

00:30:07.240 Lacking context is another nice one that they like to use.

00:30:11.060 But in this case, you know, they really got it wrong here.

00:30:13.860 They're factually wrong.

00:30:15.120 You know, they, they attributed to John a statement that he didn't make, namely that he said that climate played no role in forest fires.

00:30:25.880 And in fact, he actually said that climate very well may play a role in fires, but it certainly doesn't explain California's fires.

00:30:32.960 And there are other explanations that have to do with government, government behavior and choices.

00:30:38.260 And then in the other one, similarly, they, they basically smear him with, with lack, misleading, lacking context.

00:30:47.380 Partially false contains factual inaccuracy.

00:30:51.000 So, so that's the label on the more general video.

00:30:55.000 Now, if you're a journalist who's devoted his whole career to getting it right and elucidating the truth to the public, labeling somebody's post as partly false contains factual inaccuracies is devastating.

00:31:11.000 It would be like telling the world, fixing a label to lawsuits that I filed that they're, you know, that, that, that they're sanctioned, that, that they've been sanctioned when they haven't.

00:31:22.160 Well, honestly, it is like, instead of taking the, all the news fit to print and changing the subtitle to, of the New York times to contains factual inaccuracies.

00:31:35.180 Right.

00:31:35.960 Or lacking context.

00:31:37.180 A lot lacking.

00:31:38.320 Yeah.

00:31:38.800 You would, the New York times would never become the New York times.

00:31:41.860 If that had to be printed on the front page of every newspaper.

00:31:45.840 And it's true about the New York times.

00:31:48.840 It's true about the New York times.

00:31:50.420 And, you know, so the, what, what, so, so now these guys are playing a shell game.

00:31:55.200 So we sued them, but we didn't just sue them.

00:31:57.580 We wrote them letters first, the French, you know, climate change outfits. 0.99

00:32:03.760 And we, and, and Facebook now meta, and they changed their name in the middle of this case.

00:32:10.860 And, and, and, you know, they wrote back saying, oh, no, no, this is, this is, you know, infotainment.

00:32:17.200 Basically, this is, this is our opinion.

00:32:18.960 It isn't fact checking at all.

00:32:20.720 Although it says fact checkers and fact checking on it.

00:32:24.500 And we didn't buy it.

00:32:26.520 I mean, this was devastating to John.

00:32:28.340 It drove his viewership down hugely.

00:32:31.420 And for social media writers, that's, that's, that's revenue.

00:32:36.220 That's credibility.

00:32:37.640 That's your professional reputation.

00:32:39.060 That's, you know, what, what you're labeled maliciously with in Wikipedia when you die.

00:32:44.180 You know, purveyor of false videos.

00:32:46.840 Oh, yeah.

00:32:47.400 Climate, you know, so it, that's a stench that doesn't wash off and there's no place to wash it off.

00:32:53.120 So he sued as a last resort over this issue.

00:32:57.800 And Facebook responded, you know, this is just, this is, this is just our opinion.

00:33:03.980 This isn't, this isn't meant to be fact.

00:33:05.920 You aren't meant to take it literally when we say fact checkers.

00:33:08.280 So it's kind of an Orwellian, almost ridiculous situation.

00:33:13.520 But where does this go from, where does this go from here?

00:33:18.640 Well, there'll be an argument in front of the judge.

00:33:20.680 Um, interestingly, our case has bounced around so far amongst two judges.

00:33:25.540 Uh, the second judge just got appointed to the, just got, you know, nominated and confirmed

00:33:30.240 to the ninth circuit last week.

00:33:31.860 So we're probably going to be awaiting hearing in front of a third judge, uh, to see, you

00:33:37.480 know, what happens with this case.

00:33:38.680 And, and look, Facebook has, oh, sorry, Meta has overwhelming resources and, you know, they

00:33:47.040 just brush these claims aside.

00:33:49.040 And I've dealt with their quote unquote fact checkers before.

00:33:52.240 And, and Glenn, you're, you're, you're listeners may not know what this industry of fact checkers

00:33:58.060 is they're again, air quotes, nonprofits.

00:34:02.700 They usually employ washed up or, you know, sort of journalists who don't want to work

00:34:08.160 that hard anymore or activists or both.

00:34:11.120 Some from the New York times, the wall street journal.

00:34:13.800 I've dealt with some very esteemed former journalists who now work for these outfits and

00:34:19.000 all day, all day long, their job is, you know, slap false labels on as many of your enemies

00:34:25.320 and opponents that people who disagree with you as possible, laugh quietly and go out for

00:34:30.540 a cocktail.

00:34:31.040 That's, that's the deal.

00:34:32.420 And, and it's, it's not right.

00:34:34.500 And if you or I did this and called a journalist's work false, partly false, uh, you know, lacking

00:34:42.680 context, that would be harmful and you or I could get sued.

00:34:46.480 So the same should be true of Facebook and communications decency act section two 30 is

00:34:52.120 not as these big tech companies repeatedly claim a license to lie, smear, defame, and

00:35:00.060 devastate users.

00:35:02.600 But that's exactly, uh, what it, what it does over and over and over again.

00:35:08.760 We have had fact checks from the same people.

00:35:11.920 We've had fact checks where they claimed, uh, that something we said was false because it

00:35:18.000 comes from, uh, a study that on page 435 made another claim that we weren't making that was

00:35:27.800 proven false.

00:35:28.720 Right.

00:35:29.480 But because the part that wasn't false was also in that same study was something that

00:35:35.600 it was, we, we were, we were fact checked as wrong.

00:35:40.000 And it's like, wait, right.

00:35:42.620 And when you look at the label, I'm just reading from it, from, from our complaint, um, the label,

00:35:48.160 big, big box missing context.

00:35:51.180 And then it says from independent fact checkers.

00:35:55.100 And then there's another little label fact check, uh, science, climate change, et cetera.

00:36:01.360 And then it says about this notice, independent fact checkers say this information is missing

00:36:06.560 context and could mislead people.

00:36:08.680 And then it says, learn more about how Facebook works with independent fact checkers to stop

00:36:16.080 the spread of false information.

00:36:18.760 So it goes on to say, this is false.

00:36:21.900 So, I mean, I don't know how much more clear you can be.

00:36:24.400 So claiming it's now it's news to me.

00:36:28.020 And, and, and by the way, they're asking every user of Facebook to somehow guess that their

00:36:34.720 fact check is simply an opinion, their opinion commentary.

00:36:39.720 Right.

00:36:40.260 And on top of it, they not only, uh, label you with that, but they also, then the algorithm

00:36:46.440 shoves you down. 0.85

00:36:48.240 Uh, and on top of that, now I've noticed some of them are not even letting you share

00:36:53.740 the story.

00:36:54.400 It won't, it, you can't, you, it's there, it'll say it's false.

00:36:59.540 But if you try to share the story because you disagree with their opinion, you can't

00:37:04.300 even share the story.

00:37:05.340 I mean, it's, it's, it's a gulag system, uh, at, uh, Facebook, uh, what can the average

00:37:12.620 person do?

00:37:16.140 Well, um, you know, the average person can, can follow this lawsuit, talk about it, mock

00:37:23.180 Facebook.

00:37:23.680 I don't know.

00:37:24.760 And, you know, we have to eventually, hopefully find some platforms that don't lie, defame,

00:37:32.180 steal our information and play games.

00:37:35.420 But ultimately, Glenn, the only remedy for this, for the, for the citizens, for the users

00:37:40.140 of social media around the world is our members of Congress and our president, when they are

00:37:47.500 right thinking people need to change communications decency act section 230 to make it clear that

00:37:54.180 it is no longer appropriate for these companies to use its protections as a complete carte blanche

00:38:01.160 for doing whatever they want.

00:38:03.620 There have to be some norms and some rules.

00:38:06.120 There should be a user's bill of rights.

00:38:08.320 There needs to be an appeals process for this.

00:38:11.020 And these companies have to face some form of liability because so far court after court

00:38:15.960 after court has let them out scot-free and, and frankly, even conservative think tanks.

00:38:21.880 And I'm using those air quotes again, and conservative nonprofits and conservative lawmakers have

00:38:28.540 all bought the big tech lobbyist propaganda that these types of quote unquote protections

00:38:34.460 for these trillion dollar corporations are necessary to ensure free speech.

00:38:39.280 Yeah, they are.

00:38:39.920 They're no more necessary to ensure free speech than a taking away defamation liability is

00:38:44.420 necessary for you or I or the New York Times to stop defaming people.

00:38:48.340 It is in fact, that liability that reigns people in from going too far.

00:38:54.340 So we all know the difference between a fact check and an opinion, and nobody's suing

00:38:58.360 over an opinion here.

00:38:59.320 They're suing over a false accusation of lying in an article.

00:39:04.720 Exactly right.

00:39:05.260 Thank you so much, Harmeet Dillon.

00:39:07.860 We'll be watching this and our best to John Stossel and everybody on your team.

00:39:13.380 Thank you.

The Glenn Beck Program - December 15, 2021

Best of the Program ｜ 12⧸15⧸21

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript