‘They’re scared’ — Allie Beth Stuckey fires back at Hillary Clinton’s hit piece on the biblical movement she helped ignite



Yesterday, the Atlantic ran an op-ed by Hillary Clinton titled “MAGA’s War on Empathy,” in which the former Secretary of State accused the MAGA movement of twisting bedrock Christian values and embracing a worldview where “compassion is weak and cruelty is strong,” connecting specifically “hard-right Christian influencers” to the violence we’ve seen in Minneapolis.

One of the people in Clinton’s crosshairs is Blaze Media’s own Allie Beth Stuckey, host of the Christian podcast “Relatable.”

Among many grievances, the twice-defeated Democrat took issue with Stuckey’s critical analysis of the sermon delivered on January 21 last year by Episcopal Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde during a post-inauguration interfaith Service of Prayer for the Nation. Budde’s preaching was interpreted by many conservatives, including Stuckey, as a politicization of faith to push progressive views on immigration and LGBTQ+ issues.

“The right-wing Christian podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey called the sermon ‘toxic empathy that is in complete opposition to God’s Word and in support of the most satanic, destructive ideas ever conjured up.’ Toxic empathy! What an oxymoron. I don’t know if the phrase reflects moral blindness or moral bankruptcy, but either way it’s appalling,” Clinton wrote, explicitly describing herself as a Christian.

Now Stuckey fires back at the self-proclaimed devout Mrs. Clinton. In this special “Relatable” episode, she dismisses the hit piece as proof progressives are losing their grip, doubles down on biblical truth over “toxic empathy,” and celebrates the attack as a backhanded compliment.

“First, I just want to make an announcement. I want to announce that I love my life. I love living. I’m happy to be here. That is an important declaration to make anytime you get in the crosshairs of the Clintons, which, to my astonishment, I am,” Stuckey quips, alluding to widely circulated conspiracy narratives tying the Clintons to mysterious deaths.

Though character assassinations like Clinton’s are never ideal, Stuckey celebrates them as proof her message is hitting its mark.

“This article might mention me by name, but it is not actually about me,” she says, “because the truth is, if it weren't for all of you, Hillary Clinton would not care about me. It is because of your presence, because of your courage, because of your resolve, your influence over this and future generations that Clinton is writing this article.”

And she’s not the first to shoot an arrow at Stuckey. Since her book “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion” hit the New York Times bestseller list in October 2024, left-wing outlets have been running hit piece after hit piece accusing Stuckey of politically weaponizing the Christian faith.

“The deeper reason [for these attacks] is so incredibly clear to me,” she says, “and that is that we are over the target.”

“We have gotten to the heart of progressive manipulation. We looked at their lies straight in the face that abortion is health care, that trans women are women, that no human being is illegal, and we said, ‘No, I see what you're doing,’” she continues.

“And now they’re afraid,” she declares.

From 2020 until now, this movement that refuses to allow “emotion to paralyze ... critical thinking” has continued to grow, and progressives, realizing that they’re rapidly losing their “monopoly on female compassion,” are in full panic mode, she argues.

“They don't trot out former Secretary of State, former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, unless they are really worried.”

To Clinton — who seemed to reduce Christianity to mere neighborly love — Stuckey sets the record straight on the faith’s highest virtue: “[Love] is inextricably intertwined with the truth.”

“God is love — 1 John 4:8. He gets to define it. And He tells us what it is in 1 Corinthians 13, and in verse 6, we read that love ‘never rejoices in wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth,’” she quotes. “So you cannot have in Christianity love without truth.”

But toxic empathy throws genuine love to the wolves.

“You are so deeply in one person’s feelings that you no longer can think objectively. You no longer consider the person on the other side of the equation, and then you make decisions based on how much you feel for one person rather than on what is true and moral and just,” Stuckey illustrates, giving the example of pro-choicers who, in the name of empathy for the mother, neglect to consider “the existence, the rights, and the pain of the baby inside the womb.”

Love and truth: “This is the dichotomy that Jesus represented. Not unconditional empathy toward every purported victim group,” she clarifies.

Ultimately, Stuckey is grateful for Clinton’s polemic.

“She’s put more eyes on [“Toxic Empathy”],” she says.

But for her, it’s never been about selling books.

“It is about getting Christian women to see what is logically and factually and, most importantly, biblically true about some of the biggest issues of our day and to be able to stand confidently in that,” she says.

She concludes by encouraging Christians to take heart when the Enemy assaults them, reading from Luke 6:22: “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and when they revile you and spurn your name as evil on account of the Son of Man!”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Hillary Clinton baselessly attacks Allie Beth Stuckey in desperate op-ed — accuses MAGA Christians of 'war on empathy'



Failed presidential candidate and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote an op-ed in the Atlantic on Thursday, claiming to be a devout follower of Jesus Christ and accusing BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey of promoting a distorted version of Christianity that, Clinton asserted, has led to violence in Minneapolis.

The desperate op-ed demonstrated that Stuckey's warnings about "toxic empathy" are pushing through left-wing efforts to guilt-trip Christians — which Stuckey made a point of in a special episode of her "Relatable" podcast. The reason Hillary Clinton attacked her, Stuckey said, "is so incredibly clear to me, and that is that we are over the target. We have gotten to the heart of progressive manipulation."

'When Hillary Clinton is writing 6,000 word op-eds in the Atlantic attacking warnings against toxic empathy, you know you’re over the target. Keep. Going.'

Clinton claimed that “hard-right ‘Christian influencers’” have waged a “war on empathy” and rejected bedrock values, including “dignity, mercy, and compassion.” She appeared to depict true Christian faith as nothing more than “love thy neighbor.”

The former secretary of state contended that President Donald Trump and his allies have altogether abandoned empathy, instead aiming to “spread fear,” particularly among “undocumented immigrants,” through “inhumane” treatment.

Clinton called out recent events in Minneapolis, claiming that Trump’s federal agents killed Alex Pretti while he was trying “help a woman they had thrown to the ground and pepper-sprayed.”

“Christian nationalism” is threatening to “replace democracy with theocracy in America,” according to Clinton.

She criticized Stuckey for calling a sermon by Mariann Edgar Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, “toxic empathy that is in complete opposition to God’s Word and in support of the most satanic, destructive ideas ever conjured up.”

RELATED: Anti-ICE influencers explained: How women get radicalized

Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

Clinton mentioned Stuckey’s book, “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion,” and mocked the concept that empathy could ever be “toxic,” calling it an “oxymoron.”

“I don’t know if the phrase reflects moral blindness or moral bankruptcy, but either way it’s appalling,” she wrote.

Clinton argued that the “mainstream Christian view” of welcoming illegal immigrants “enrages” Stuckey.

“The author of Toxic Empathy, who styles herself a voice for Christian women, has more than a million followers on social media. In between lifestyle pitter-patter and her demonization of IVF treatments, she warns women not to listen to their soft hearts,” Clinton continued. “This commissar of MAGA morality targets other evangelicals whose empathy, she warns, has left them open to manipulation. Maybe they recognize the humanity of an undocumented immigrant family and decide that mass deportation has gone too far. Or they make space in their heart for a young rape survivor forced to carry a pregnancy to term and start questioning the wisdom and morality of total abortion bans. It’s all toxic to Stuckey.”

RELATED: 'Conflicts of interest': Democrat-led federal agencies allegedly blocked efforts to investigate Clinton Foundation

Photo by ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images

Clinton’s call to action to her Christian supporters was to “follow the example of courageous faith leaders standing up to the Trump administration’s abuses.” She urged Democrats to fill the gaps of “compassion and community” that conservatives “give up.”

“I hope grassroots faith leaders across the country who are appalled by what they see from an immoral administration and an extremist political right also find their voice. It is understandable that some stay silent out of fear. Influencers like Stuckey are zealously policing any deviation from the party line. But speaking truth to power has been part of the Christian tradition since the very beginning. The Christian community — and the country — would be stronger and healthier if we heard these voices,” Clinton said.

Stuckey responded to the hit piece in a post on X, writing, "When Hillary Clinton is writing 6,000 word op-eds in the Atlantic attacking warnings against toxic empathy, you know you’re over the target. Keep. Going."

“I’m not being sarcastic when I say I’m glad to hear that Hillary Clinton identifies as a Christian,” Stuckey stated on her podcast. “I did not know that we had that in common, sincerely, but for her to position herself as someone who is an authority on faith, when she admits here that she’s never been public about her faith, that’s a problem. That’s actually not something that’s an option within Christianity.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Saint Hillary Is Here To Tell You You’re A Terrible Christian

Hillary speaks, but she doesn’t listen. She half-absorbs events and the lives of other people, and coughs out a kind of instinctive Reader’s Digest annotated version, but mangles all the details as efficiently as bad AI.

Hillary Clinton Pops Her Head Out To Wag Her Finger About Christianity … Or Something

'Not in Donald Trump’s America'
How You Can Help Investigate Visa Fraud
play icon

How You Can Help Investigate Visa Fraud

Double standard no more? Clintons face Congress over Epstein subpoenas



The House of Representative’s Oversight Committee has formally brought articles against the Clintons for contempt of Congress, and BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler believes it’s what the Clintons deserve.

“If anyone’s in a position to know whether Jeffrey Epstein was, in fact, belonging to intelligence as is reported ... it would be the Clintons in a position to testify, and they defied that subpoena, which is a crime. It is a crime,” Wheeler says.

“The Clintons’ testimony is critical to understanding Epstein’s sex trafficking network and the ways he sought to curry favor and influence to shield himself from scrutiny. Their testimony may also inform how Congress can strengthen laws to better combat human trafficking,” Comer said.


“Since issuing the subpoenas, this committee has acted in good faith. We’ve offered flexibility on scheduling. The response we received was not cooperation, but defiance marked by repeated delays, excuses, and obstruction,” he continued, noting that the Clintons have claimed to have been treated “unfairly.”

Comer also pointed out that photographs, flight log records, wedding invitations, and other materials serve as evidence of the couple’s well-documented relationship with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

“Remember, to defy a congressional subpoena is a crime. When two Republicans committed this crime, [Steve] Bannon and Peter Navarro, what happened to them? [Steve] Bannon was sentenced to federal prison. Peter Navarro was sentenced to federal prison,” Wheeler comments.

“Why should Hillary Clinton be treated any differently? Why should there be a double standard of justice that holds Republicans to account when crimes are committed and lets Democrats off the hook?” she asks.

While some critics of the move against the Clintons are warning that this might open the floor for Democrats to target Republicans politically when they’re in power, Wheeler couldn’t disagree more.

“That’s nonsense. The Democrats have been targeting us already. We’ve spent the last decade being targeted by Democrats. It’s not going to suddenly give them permission and they’re going to start targeting us,” she says. “They already have.”

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Clintons found to be in contempt of Congress — but Bannon-treatment far from certain



The House Oversight Committee issued deposition subpoenas on Aug. 5 to failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton requiring their testimony "related to horrific crimes perpetrated by Jeffrey Epstein."

Evidently the Clintons didn't feel that they should be held to the same standard to which Democrats previously held President Donald Trump's former adviser Steve Bannon and current trade adviser Peter Navarro, who were both jailed for defying subpoenas issued by the Jan. 6 committee.

'The Clintons were legally required to appear and instead responded to our good-faith negotiations with defiance.'

After repeated warnings that the Clintons risked criminal exposure by failing to comply with the subpoenas, the committee advanced two resolutions on Wednesday recommending that the House of Representatives find them in contempt of Congress.

The resolution finding Hillary Clinton in contempt passed in a 28-15 vote. The three Democratic lawmakers who joined Republicans in supporting the resolution were Reps. Summer Lee (Pa.), Melanie Stansbury (N.M.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.).

The resolution finding Bill Clinton in contempt passed in a 34-8 vote with the help of Lee, Stansbury, Tlaib, and six other Democrats: Maxwell Frost (Fla.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Stephen Lynch (Mass.), Emily Randall (Wash.), and Lateefah Simon (Calif.).

"By voting to hold the Clintons in contempt, the Committee sent a clear message: No one is above the law, and justice must be applied equally — regardless of position, pedigree, or prestige," Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said in the wake of the votes. "The Clintons were legally required to appear and instead responded to our good-faith negotiations with defiance, delay, and obstruction."

RELATED: Ghislaine Maxwell scheduled to testify before House Oversight Committee

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Photo by Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images.

The Clintons' lawyers, apparently aware that the other shoe was about to drop, proposed that Comer travel to New York for a conversation with Bill Clinton where "no official transcript would be recorded and other Members of Congress would be barred from participating," Comer indicated on Tuesday.

Comer noted both that the "Clintons' latest demands make clear they believe their last name entitles them to special treatment" and that the proposal for a transcript-free interview was unworkable because "Clinton has a documented history of parsing language to evade questions, responded falsely under oath, and was impeached and suspended from the practice of law as a result."

Angel Urena, deputy chief of staff to Bill Clinton, denied Comer's framing and stated hours ahead of the votes that "we have offered to help, we have helped, and to this very moment we are ready to help. But the Republicans REFUSE to say yes."

Urena suggested that the dealbreaker was ultimately lawmakers' alleged refusal to "keep their questions about the Epstein investigation to questions about Jeffrey Epstein."

House GOP leaders are reportedly not expected to vote on whether to refer the contempt findings to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution until lawmakers return in February. The Washington Post suggested that the delay will afford the Clintons time to talk their way out of hot water and into an arrangement with the committee.

Democrats have a history of evading consequence for defying congressional subpoenas.

Eric Holder, former President Barack Obama's attorney general, was held in contempt of Congress in a decisive 255-67 vote in 2012 for refusing to turn over documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal.

The Obama Justice Department rewarded Holder for keeping Obama's documents from the American people's elected representatives by refusing to prosecute.

In 2024, House Republicans voted to hold former Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas for audio recordings of former President Joe Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

The Biden Department of Justice revealed on June 14, 2024, that it would not bother prosecuting the Democratic official.

House Republicans talked a big game in early 2024 about possible repercussions after Hunter Biden defied a congressional subpoena. Biden managed to get out unscathed as lawmakers dropped their proposed contempt resolution to give the pardoned felon's attorneys more time.

Republican allies have not been so lucky.

After the Democrat-controlled House voted 229-202 in 2021 to hold him in contempt of Congress, the Biden DOJ energetically prosecuted Steve Bannon, securing a conviction and recommending that he serve at least six months in prison and pay a $200,000 fine. He ultimately served four.

Navarro received a similar treatment and ended up serving a four-month prison sentence as well.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Clintons Get One Step Closer To Potential Jail Time After House Contempt Vote

'They believe their last name entitles them to special treatment'

Ghislaine Maxwell scheduled to testify before House Oversight Committee



The House Oversight Committee revealed Wednesday that it plans to depose Ghislaine Maxwell next month as part of the committee’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation.

Maxwell, who is serving 20 years in a Texas prison for conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse children, is scheduled to testify virtually on February 9 in a closed session.

'Ms. Maxwell will invoke her privilege against self-incrimination.'

Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) stated during a Wednesday hearing, “We need to hear from Ghislaine Maxwell. We’ve been trying to get her in for a deposition, and her lawyers have been saying that she’s going to plead the Fifth. But we have nailed down a date, February 9, where Ghislaine Maxwell will be deposed by this committee.”

Comer stated that he hopes Maxwell changes her mind about invoking the Fifth Amendment.

David Oscar Markus, Maxwell's attorney, wrote in a Tuesday letter to Comer, “Ms. Maxwell will invoke her privilege against self-incrimination and decline to answer questions.”

Markus claimed moving forward with deposition would serve “no other purpose than pure political theater and a complete waste of taxpayer monies.”

RELATED: Clintons defy Epstein subpoenas — but Glenn Beck says DON’T jail them. Here’s his shocking reason why.

James Comer. Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

“That is not a negotiating position or a tactical choice; it is a legal necessity,” Markus stated. He claimed that his client’s "post-conviction litigation is far from over,” referring to a pending habeas petition seeking to vacate her conviction.

Maxwell filed the petition in December, arguing that her conviction must be voided because a juror gave false answers during the selection process, “concealing a history of sexual abuse directly relevant to ‘issues at trial.’” She also claimed that prosecutors concealed a detective’s grand jury testimony that “conflicted with his trial testimony.”

RELATED: 'We need no such protection': Clinton accuses Trump of selectively releasing Epstein files — and calls for complete release

Ghislaine Maxwell. Photo by Paul Zimmerman/WireImage

Democrats on the committee accused Comer of treating Bill and Hillary Clinton differently from Maxwell, claiming he was allowing Maxwell to avoid answering to lawmakers.

Comer disputed that claim, arguing that Maxwell has been willing to appear before the committee, while the Clintons have “refused to appear,” altogether ignoring the committee’s subpoenas.

“One of the proposals that Clinton made was, if we would let Hillary Clinton off, then Mr. Garcia and I could travel to Mr. Clinton’s house and bring one staffer and take notes, but no transcript,” Comer said, referring to the committee’s ranking member, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.). “That’s not even a thing, and you all know that.”

“What few counterproposals that the Clintons’ massive legal team has made aren’t acceptable,” Comer stated.

Comer noted that the committee has been negotiating with the Clintons’ lawyers for five months.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Clintons defy Epstein subpoenas — but Glenn Beck says DON’T jail them. Here’s his shocking reason why.



Both Bill and Hillary Clinton refused to appear after the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed them for closed-door depositions regarding Jeffrey Epstein and the federal government's handling of his crimes. The slippery duo even sent letters to Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) in advance of their scheduled dates, calling the subpoenas invalid and nothing more than political retribution.

Now the committee is seeking to hold both Clintons in contempt of Congress, which could result in jail time if they’re found guilty.

Many conservatives are elated at the prospect of seeing Washington’s most scandal-laden couple behind bars, but Glenn Beck says jailing the Clintons for this particular crime would be a huge mistake.

He equates incarcerating the Clintons over contempt of Congress to giving an arsonist a book of matches.

“We now have all of these scandals, all of these NGOs making all kinds of money on your tax dollars, funding the destruction of America as we know it. We're all in bed with giant corporations and the WEF — the Clinton Foundation is all lined up in it,” he says.

This insidious network is behind all the violent anti-ICE protests, the death-to-America-style riots, and the push for socialism that is destroying the country from the inside. But all the while, these elites have been quietly building an elite-controlled system that will be implemented when the old system has been successfully burned to the ground.

The Clintons, Glenn explains, have their finger on the red button that could set off chaos like we have never seen before and usher in the Great Reset he has been warning about for years. To tempt them to push it — especially at a time when Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) is hinting at civil war — is insane.

It’s not that prosecuting and jailing the Clintons are completely off the table, but to use your ace card on the Epstein case, which Glenn insists will never go anywhere, is stupid.

“Are we going to find out what really happened with Epstein? I don't think so — ever. Why? Because all of the evidence has been in the hands of the Republicans and the Democrats and the Republicans and the Democrats over and over and over again for years. … [The evidence] has all been destroyed. It's all gone,” he says.

It’s no secret — even to the Democrats — that the Clintons “are very bad people. … They have spooked everybody because they're so good at being very bad people. Even the people in the press who used to be for them are now just so scared of them,” Glenn continues.

“You don't try to kill the king unless you can kill the king. You don't try to take out the Clintons and wound them, because they'll kill you. And I don't mean that literally. Or do I?” he winks.

If you really want to take out the Clinton empire, “you better come prepared with the goods,” and unfortunately, to the utter dismay of all, the Epstein case isn’t the “goods” we were told it was.

Even so, there are plenty of “goods” on the Clintons, says Glenn. “We have it all,” he says, referring to the long list of documented scandals the Clintons have been central in.

While Glenn would “love” to see Bill and Hillary perp-walked for committing the same crime that landed former Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro behind bars, he knows that it would only cause more chaos in America’s streets.

“Remember, they're the arsonist. You don't want to hand them matches. And it's not because they're above the law, not because they're untouchable, but because this specific path leads to nowhere good. You don't have anything on them. And they will use it for all that it is worth,” he warns.

To hear more of Glenn’s commentary, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.