From Netflix to reality: Glenn Beck connects HS track runner’s murder to Netflix’s ‘Adolescence’



On Wednesday, April 2, Frisco Memorial High School junior Austin Metcalf, 17, was fatally stabbed at a track meet by Frisco Centennial High School’s Karmelo Anthony, 17. According to police and eyewitness accounts, Metcalf confronted Anthony about sitting in a tent designated for Memorial athletes.

Anthony refused to leave and taunted Metcalf by saying, “Touch me and see what happens.” When Metcalf grabbed him to force him out, Anthony then reached inside his bag, pulled out a knife, and stabbed him in the chest in front of his twin brother, Hunter, who held him as he died.

“I grabbed his hand and looked in his eyes. I just saw his soul leave, and it took mine, too,” he told FOX 4.

Glenn Beck is nearly driven to tears by this heartbreaking story. It’s uncannily similar, he says, to “Adolescence” — a four-part British crime drama miniseries that premiered on Netflix mid-March.

The show paints a clear picture of “what students are like, what they're talking about, how callous they are on life,” he says. “You see what school is like and what all of our kids are actually dealing with, and it's terrifying.”

Both the death of Austin Metcalf and the disturbing events in “Adolescence” seem to beg the question: “Is there no value to life anymore?” — especially in youth culture that has grown so ghastly in the digital age.

“Life has become so meaningless that that will get you killed,” says Glenn.

But it’s not just the children he feels sorry for. The parents have it rougher than ever, too.

“It’s so hard to be a parent now,” he admits.

All his kids have “finished adolescence” and thankfully “everybody made it out alive,” but the last 10 years he describes as “relentless.”

Your best efforts to be the perfect parent always fall short, he laments. “You just feel like a horrible parent because you're like, 'I don't know what to do'” — especially when you’re constantly facing one of the most sinister foes there’s ever been: the internet.

“I’ve always hated helicopter parents, but my gosh, if you're not a helicopter parent in your own home,” he trails off, insinuating that overprotectiveness is almost the only hope for parents these days.

“If you want to understand how screwed up our children are” — how something like a seating dispute at a track meet could leave a child dead — “just watch ['Adolescence'].”

To hear more of his analysis, watch the episode 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.

Netflix’s ‘Adolescence’ and the war on white men



Netflix is up to its old feminist tricks with the new show “Adolescence” — a miniseries that initially appears to be a crime thriller but ultimately unfolds into blatant propaganda that paints white men in a negative light.

The story centers around a young white boy accused of murdering one of his female classmates, who cyberbullied the young boy and called him an “incel.” The term, meaning “involuntary celibate,” orbits around the online “manosphere” and red-pill movements.

“I don’t like the demonization of any group based on skin color, and I don’t like the denial that the demonization of white men and white people and particularly white evangelicals is going on globally, and we can see it right here in this miniseries that Netflix has put on,” Jason Whitlock of “Fearless” comments.


While the entire series is clear in its anti-man message, episode two is where Whitlock says, “They play a big card.”

That is, it brings Andrew Tate into the show by name.

“You’ve got this murder of a young teenage girl by a 13-year-old boy, and the next thing you know, halfway through episode two, they’re basically saying, ‘Well, you know what the motive is? He was radicalized by Andrew Tate,’” Whitlock explains, noting that this is where the show quotes the online red-pill accounts that say 80% of women are attracted to only 20% of men.

While Whitlock abhors much of what Tate has done or said in the past, he’s not on board with a “four-part series that basically says Andrew Tate is the driving force of this.”

“This all connects to the demonization of white men, ‘cause that’s what this miniseries is about, that the patriarchal ways of Western civilization have clearly outlived their usefulness, and that the solution to fixing angry young men is bowing, submitting to female leadership and more female involvement in everything,” Whitlock says.

“They’ve set up Andrew Tate as the scapegoat, as the distraction. The manosphere, the red-pill movement, all these angry men that reject feminism, they’re the problem,” he adds, noting that they’ll never go after the real problems plaguing society.

Which is why Whitlock is taking the conversation to one of the greatest conservative voices out there today on Friday, May 2.

“I just want to set the table for a conversation I’m going to have with Tucker Carlson,” Whitlock says. “Because it’s important. The demonization of white men that’s going on in global culture. Netflix, the U.K., everywhere. Everybody’s doing the Macarena on white men.”

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Netflix sounds an alarm with painful 'Adolescence'



Let’s get this out of the way first. The new Netflix limited series “Adolescence” is utterly astonishing.

Astonishing in a good way, as you may never see a more amazingly crafted piece of television.

The four episodes explore Jamie’s initial denial of guilt and his father’s horror at seeing the CCTV footage of his son stabbing the girl over and over again.

The writing, acting, and production are top notch. However, the reason “Adolescence” stands out from other top-tier shows is that each of the four hour-or-so-long episodes is done in one take.

That means the whole one-hour episode is one very long camera shot. It also means the actors — including the young teen playing the lead role — cannot make any mistakes. All of the actors, for a whole hour, are basically performing live theater. No retakes, no catching their breath to refocus on the scene. Just one long camera shot.

And there are four episodes. They did this four times! So yeah, that’s astonishing. They deserve to win all the awards at those insufferable awards shows.

But it’s also an astonishing gut punch, particularly for parents of teens.

Telling it how it is, probably at your kids' school

I understand the story was based on real-life events, but the script seems to have veered off on its own, and this storyline is indeed all too realistic, not to mention incredibly painful to watch.

“Adolescence” tells the story of a 13-year-old boy named Jamie, who is attracted to an older girl at school who is bullied by someone sharing topless photos she apparently had taken. After Jamie tries to be kind to her, in a self-professed attempt to date her, she rejects him and then mocks him on social media as an “incel” — involuntary celibate.

The mocking escalates, and he responds, one night while he and his friends are out roaming the town, by stabbing her to death.

The four episodes explore Jamie’s initial denial of guilt and his father’s horror at seeing the CCTV footage of his son stabbing the girl over and over again. The second episode has the police interviewing kids at Jamie’s school, where it becomes obvious that these kids are living in a world that the adults are not bothering with; the disrespect shown to the teachers seems to underscore the fact that the teachers are not connecting in any meaningful way with their students.

The third episode aims to reveal what’s in Jamie’s head — it’s a long interview with a psychologist — and we get a pretty clear picture of a 13-year-old who is dealing with adult issues, over-sexualized behaviors, and social media bullying — all without the benefit of any adult intervention.

The most painful television I've ever watched

The fourth episode — quite possibly the most painful I have ever watched — concerns the parents struggling with the guilt that their neighbors and community have already assigned to them. The parents and their 18-year-old daughter endure a highly unpleasant family outing where the father is recognized as the killer’s dad. After the older sister shows love and compassion for her parents despite having just endured said outing, her father asks her mother, “How did we make her?” To which mom replies, “The same way we made him.”

The point being that they did the same things, and one child seems to be coping and well-adjusted and loving ... while the other stabbed a girl multiple times, in uncontrollable rage.

But let’s go back and talk about what is depicted.

  1. A hardworking father running his own plumbing business, who often leaves by 6 a.m., not to return till 8 p.m.
  1. A child trapped, spending all day in an institution where adult order and control has broken down, with rampant disrespectful behavior toward whatever authority does exist but especially among the teens toward each other. Young teens at the school engaging in adult sexualized behavior (nude photos, mocking a 13-year-old for being a virgin), and no adults caring enough to see or intervene.
  1. A 13-year-old who regularly comes home, marches upstairs, and spends the rest of the night on his computer by himself — except when he is out with his friends, fairly late at night with no adult supervision.

We find out about the dad’s long hours and the son’s computer time during the parents’ painful self-examination in episode 4. They rightly surmise that they could have done better, but regarding the computer time, the father points out that all the kids are that way these days.

'All kids are like that' — no excuse

Yes, they are. But they don’t have to be. And “kids being that way” — as well as tired parents working long hours — cannot be an excuse for no communication. Parents have to talk to their kids. A lot. There has to be a relationship.

The unsupervised roaming around at night goes hand in hand with the complete lack of communication. Obviously, parents should know where a 13-year-old is, especially at 10 p.m. That issue is never addressed, nor is the fact that the child’s school is a cesspool of toxic, inappropriate behaviors. Schools bear far too much resemblance to prisons — architecturally and procedurally — and the inmates can be feral in both.

I know. That’s pretty much every middle school, junior high, or high school, right? But if you’re thinking that — why are your kids there, again? Because there are alternatives. The point here is that the older your child gets, they continue to need plenty of time with you. And you have to be the one who makes sure that happens, because they won’t.

Failure of authority

Other reviewers are saying this miniseries is a referendum on “toxic masculinity.”

I guess it is a male child who stabs a female child, and that’s about as toxic as it gets. But it isn't because of his masculinity. It is a lack of masculinity.

We see teachers with no authority to provide a safe and effective learning environment; a father with no time to build trust so that Jamie can bring him his problems; parents caught up in their own problems and pursuits, who have a niggling feeling that all that computer time is not great, but they are willing to tell themselves “all kids are like that” while their son is alone in his room being torn to shreds, his confidence destroyed, his moral compass irretrievably broken.

Should you watch it?

I can’t recommend it, really. It’s peppered with profanity, but that pales in comparison to the emotional pain of watching it unfold. (The acting is exemplary, particularly Owen Cooper as Jamie and "Adolescence" co-creator Stephen Graham as his dad.)

However. If you have a teen in school ... or a teen who spends a lot of time alone in his/her room or on his/her phone or computer ... or a teen who’s out at night, you know not where ... then YES. You should watch all four episodes. In fact, you should go get that teen and have them watch with you. And then you should talk about it. All of it.

What could be a more important use of your time than that?

Another perspective

Dr. Justin Coulson raises some excellent points with his thoughtful review of “Adolescence” that I think are also worth consideration.

Bill Burr’s The View Appearance Betrays His ‘Screw You’ Brand

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Screenshot-2025-03-21-at-3.15.30 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Screenshot-2025-03-21-at-3.15.30%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]Joking with leftists about their favorite political bogeymen, Burr betrays the salt-of-the-earth persona and audience he once crafted.

Peacock announces WNBA sitcom created by female-centric production company: 'Ceilings are being shattered'



NBCUniversal announced a new sitcom focused on the WNBA with hopes to push a future where women "win big" and continue to break barriers.

The new half-hour comedy will follow a WNBA rookie, just a year after Caitlin Clark completed her monumental first season in the league.

While "The W" has yet to be filmed, the story surrounds a new player and her inexperienced agent, a plot that mirrors the life of former WNBA player and producer Chiney Ogwumike, rather than Clark.

Ogwumike is a WNBA All-Star who played in the league from 2014-2023 and is noted for having hired a 24-year-old agent, Allison Galer, upon entering the league.

The story was further described rather generically, focusing on what was described by Deadline as the ups and downs of women's professional basketball and the "glamour and grind" of women's sports.

'We are in an era where barriers are being broken.'

Ogwumike and Galer will serve as two of a whopping seven executive producers through Ogwumike's production company, Victorious. The former basketball player described her company's mission as wanting to "build a future where women in sports can win big."

The Texas-born athlete then pointed to the idea that women are still breaking barriers, which her project would further help facilitate.

"One of the most invaluable lessons that I have learned as a professional athlete, broadcaster, and ambassador is that we no longer have to wait for opportunities, we can create them. We are in an era where barriers are being broken, ceilings are being shattered and the world is finally taking notice. And with our groundbreaking first project, we will bring the main topic to the mainstream. In that spirit, Victorious is a purpose-driven platform that will forge new pathways for us to celebrate our own wins."

Chiney Ogwumike was the WNBA Rookie of the Year in 2014. Photo by Meg Oliphant/Getty Images

Galer described the new company as a way to create "meaningful opportunities that show women in sports winning at the highest levels."

The sports agent continued to describe the new endeavor in a way that is typically coupled with political activism, claiming that women's sports have an "exceptional ability to capture hearts and minds."

Galer added, "Victorious will be the go-to vehicle for women’s sports stories to reach and captivate global audiences."

While the new show is the first project for Victorious, Ogwumike and Galer previously produced a documentary for ESPN Films that followed the 2020 WNBA season during the COVID lockdowns.

Carly Mensch and Liz Flahive were announced as the writers for "The W." The pair are most known for their Netflix show focused on female wrestlers in the 1980s; "GLOW" ran for three seasons between 2017 and 2019.

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

Gospel of woke: 'Love Is Blind' exposes the ugly truth about progressive politics



If you need any more evidence that progressive politics is a pseudo-religion, then look no further than "Love Is Blind" on Netflix.

The conclusion of the show's eighth season became the subject of controversy after contestant Sara Carton rejected her partner, Ben Mezzenga, at the altar. After walking away, Sara cited irreconcilable differences in political values and what she believed was Ben's failure to wrestle with progressive social activism.

There is no mercy for those unwilling to give their total and complete devotion to the progressive doctrines and creeds.

This is what Sara told her family after dumping Ben:

I remember I asked him about Black Lives Matter, and I’m no expert, but when I asked him about it, he’s like, "I guess I never really thought too much about it." That affected me. Especially in our own city, like how could it not? How could it not make you think about something?

I asked him, too, what his church's views are [on LGBTQ ideology], and he said he didn't know. And I watched a sermon online ... about sexual identity, and it was traditional. I told that to Ben. ... [But] he doesn't really have much to say about it.

The climactic moment was not exactly surprising.

While dating in the "pods" — the part of the show where singles "date" and become engaged without ever seeing their partner — Sara pledged allegiance to the LGBTQ movement and Black Lives Matter. Ben, on the other hand, attends church and clearly felt uncomfortable talking about his political and religious values, probably because he sensed that his did not align with Sara's.

That Sara ultimately decided to reject Ben over different views of "equality, religion, the vaccine" references an ugly truth: Progressive ideology today largely functions as a pseudo-religion.

Progressivism as a worldview even has a clear religious framework: It demands strict adherence to its doctrines and dogmas — like LGBTQ advocacy, DEI, anti-racism, woke worldview, social justice and climate activism, identity primacy, and government-as-messiah — and threatens to punish heretics with excommunication.

What happened between Sara and Ben even resembles a popular Christian teaching on relationships. Drawn from 2 Corinthians 6:14, Christians talk about not being "unequally yoked" in a relationship. Though Paul likely has a broader application in mind, the power of his agricultural metaphor highlights an important truth about relationships: Two parties with different purposes cannot advance together.

Sara's decision to leave Ben at the altar is a textbook secular example of this wisdom principle in action.

Clearly, Sara believed that she should not be yoked to someone who did not wholeheartedly share her ideology. Perhaps this is wise, generally speaking. But political differences haven't always required the end of a relationship or marriage. Not long ago, most people considered them to be minor obstacles that were easy to overcome. Today, they are tantamount to fundamental religious incompatibilities, and disunity in political convictions is viewed as righteous justification for severing relationships and divorce.

In fact, Sara was not the only woman on "Love Is Blind" season eight to cite political differences as a reason not to marry her fiancé.

At the "Love Is Blind" reunion, Virginia Miller admitted that she chose not to marry Devin Buckley, in part, because they did not align politically.

"Devin told me a lot about his core values, something that he did not want to talk about on camera. I still to this day don't feel really comfortable telling you Devin's views. But I will be very clear about mine. I 100% support the LGBTQ community. I also believe that women should have the decision to choose if they want to have an abortion or not. I also believe different religions should be valued," Miller said. "This was an important part of this decision."

The tragic reality is that, for many progressives, politics is more than a tangental facet of civic life. It's now a purity system that divides between the righteous and the heretics. Absolute adherence is required. Dissent demands repentance. And for the unrepentant who refuse to submit, exile awaits.

The contrast between progressivism as a pseudo-religion and Christianity could not be more glaring. Whereas progressive politics draws boundaries around orthodoxy and orthopraxy much like Christianity, progressivism as a faith system lacks grace, redemption, and reconciliation — principles central to Christianity.

In progressivism, there is no mercy for those unwilling to give their complete devotion to progressive doctrines and creeds.

The real irony of pseudo-religious progressivism is that many of its adherents have rejected Christianity and organized religion altogether — only to construct a new religion to fill the vacuum. And as Sara demonstrated, its adherents are perfectly willing to sacrifice relationships on the altar.

Progressives may preach a gospel of inclusion. But as Ben learned, only the converted are accepted at the altar.

Blaze News original: When the mainstream media's left-wing bias costs them credibility



The mainstream media's left-wing bias is far from a brand-new topic.

Blaze News readers may recall a fairly big story in the fall of 2021 when Netflix employees staged protests in Hollywood against their company's decision to stream Dave Chappelle's comedy special "The Closer" due to what they characterized as his "transphobic comments" in it.

'The Fake News losers at CNN tried to fact check President Trump saying Biden spent $8 million on "making mice transgender," but President Trump was right (as usual).'

Amid the outrage, a prominent Netflix showrunner quit in protest; the company suspended three employees — including a queer trans worker — for crashing an executive meeting focused on Chappelle; and Netflix fired the organizer of a planned walkout for leaking confidential data related to Chappelle's special.

But during that very walkout, a big surprise took place: One guy showed up amid the furor to defend Chappelle. He's pictured below:

Al Seib / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

As you might guess, the protesting militants tried to intimidate him and shut down his free speech, but it didn't work.

Not so surprising was that the Associated Press got the idea that the Chappelle supporter was the one screaming profanities at protesters — and Variety actually called him the aggressor. Well, both outlets eventually admitted their reporting errors and walked things back.

Fast-forward to President Donald Trump's March 4 address to a joint session of Congress and his eye-popping claim that among the long and still-growing list of governmental waste is "$8 million for making mice transgender."

On cue, CNN initially said Trump's claim was false, adding that it couldn't determine where the president came up with the $8 million figure. Soon, though, the article was corrected to say the claim "needed context" and deleted the content calling it false.

"An earlier version of this item incorrectly characterized as false Trump's claim about federal money being spent for 'making mice transgender.' The article has been updated with context about the spending, which was for research students on the potential human health impacts of treatments used in gender-affirming care," the article read.

The two versions were posted to social media by the popular Libs of TikTok account, and many mocked CNN over the error — and then the White House joined in on its official social media account: "The Fake News losers at CNN tried to fact check President Trump saying Biden spent $8 million on 'making mice transgender,' but President Trump was right (as usual)."

The same left-wing media bias and the same result.

The following are a number of other recent examples of when the mainstream media's left-wing bias costs them credibility:

Joe Rogan torches MSNBC for 'deceptively' editing video clip to appear he praised Kamala Harris when he actually was talking about Tulsi Gabbard


Joe Rogan slammed MSNBC for “deceptively editing” a video clip that made it appear that the massively popular podcaster was praising then-Vice President Kamala Harris when he actually was talking about Tulsi Gabbard.

Here's how it went down: During an episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" podcast with guest Michael Malice that aired July 30, Rogan torched Democrats for not embracing Gabbard as a presidential candidate, and he touted Gabbard as "a strong woman." MSNBC posted the clip on its TikTok page and edited it to make it appear that Rogan was referring to Harris rather than to Gabbard.

Gabbard on Aug. 2 posted the MSNBC clip on her X with the caption: "MSNBC is again EXPOSED as a propaganda machine for the Democrat Elite, and how they will brazenly try to deceive the American people." She described the MSNBC clip as "completely false."

MSNBC has since replaced the questionable clip and issued a correction: "We have removed an earlier version of this post that incorrectly implied Joe Rogan was talking more about Vice President Kamala Harris. He was referring to Tulsi Gabbard."

Rogan also commented on the edited MSNBC clip during a podcast episode, saying the news network "took a clip of me talking about Tulsi Gabbard, and they edited it up and made it look like I was saying great things about Kamala Harris." Rogan added, "They just deceptively edited the things I was saying."

Rogan blasted MSNBC: "They don’t care about the truth; they just want a narrative to get out there amongst enough people because most people are just surface readers."

“We’re in a very weird time with media, and I think truth is super important," he continued. "I think someone that’s willing to do something like that — that’s a real offense. It's a real offense. It's not a small thing. It's a real lie, and it’s a lie that changes other people's opinions."

Elon Musk joins chorus of critics dumping on the Associated Press over its trifecta of laughably bad hot takes — all committed on a single day


The Associated Press on Jan. 3, 2024, took plenty of heat for three tidbits it published.

Elon Musk, among the AP's many critics, responded to one of the awkward instances, writing on X that "the @AP has the woke mind virus growing out of its head like a giant mushroom!"

Blaze News detailed the first instance, noting the AP covered the resignation of Harvard President Claudine Gay with the following headline: "Harvard president's resignation highlights new conservative weapon against colleges: plagiarism."

But the AP's corresponding post on X was flagged with Community Notes emphasizing the absurdity of the title and the article's premise. Later in the day, the AP changed the headline to "Plagiarism charges downed Harvard's president. A conservative attack helped to fan the outrage." This alteration was executed without an editorial note.

The AP ultimately told Blaze News why it had made the change: "The initial story didn't meet our standards, so we updated it."

Also in its article about Gay, the AP's Collin Binkley and Moriah Balingit highlighted a tweet from Christopher Rufo that reads, "SCALPED," in response to the news that Gay had resigned. The AP claimed Rufo's tweet was written "as if Gay was a trophy of violence, invoking a gruesome practice taken up by white colonists who sought to eradicate Native Americans."

But Musk opined, "Woe, the @AP hasn't merely drunk the woke Kool-Aid, they are swimming in it!" He added, "Somehow, indigenous peoples went from being referred to almost exclusively as baby-killing savages to almost exclusively being referred to as noble, peace-loving ecologists! In reality, all peoples back then did terrible things by modern western standards. Slavery, for example, was standard practice worldwide, including within Africa, until a few hundred years ago and was stamped out by force primarily by the British."

Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' press secretary Jeremy Redfern asked Balingit and Binkley for a response after sharing an image of a white man who had been scalped as a boy by Sioux Indians. Finally, the AP edited the paragraph about Rufo — without an editorial note — to read: "On X, formerly Twitter, he wrote 'SCALPED,' as if Gay was a trophy of violence, invoking a gruesome practice taken up by white colonists who sought to eradicate Native Americans and also used by some tribes against their enemies."

The AP also on that day published an article titled, "Things to know about Minnesota's new, non-racist state flag and seal," which concerns the final decision on a new state flag from the Minnesota Emblems Redesign Commission. The AP apparently concluded that the old flag — which depicts an Indian riding a horse and a farmer plowing his field — is racist. The new flag by 24-year-old white designer Andrew Prekker is a minimalist, starred tricolor. Facing additional criticism, the AP changed the headline to "Things to know about Minnesota's new state flag and seal."

Blaze News staff writer Joseph MacKinnon noted: "The AP is evidently cognizant of its embarrassing errors, granted it has been desperately attempting to correct them. However, this corrective effort has been made all the more difficult by the fact that myriad publications across the nation routinely regurgitate the AP's articles — meaning those errors continue to live on coast to coast despite the agency's centralized efforts to make stealth edits and title changes."

Esquire article blasting Republicans contains falsehood so egregious that a correction and an apology aren't enough to save it


Esquire magazine published an article late last year that ripped Republicans' criticism of then-President Joe Biden for pardoning his son Hunter because, the piece said, former Republican President George H.W. Bush pardoned his own son Neil.

"Nobody defines Poppy Bush's presidency by his son's struggles or the pardons he issued on his way out of the White House," read the subheading of Dec. 3 article by Charles P. Pierce. "The moral: Shut the f**k up about Hunter Biden, please."

The problem? Bush never issued such a pardon. Soon, the humiliating falsehood was discovered, and Esquire issued a correction: "Editor's note: This story has been updated. An earlier version stated incorrectly that George H.W. Bush gave a presidential pardon to his son, Neil Bush. Esquire regrets the error." Before long, the magazine deleted the story altogether — but the publication was raked over the coals:

  • "Esquire Magazine is literally making stuff up to try to defend Joe Biden's pardon of Hunter Biden. The people who scream about misinformation are doing it to cover for Joe," said radio talk show host Erick Erickson.
  • "Even given the lengths to which some journalists will go to advance the approved narrative, this is unreal," responded Boston Globe op-ed editor Jeff Jacoby.
  • "How many people does an article have to pass through at @esquire, from idea to completion, before being published? 4? 5? Not one of them thought to check if the concept on which the article was based was true or not?" asked columnist Derek Hunter.
  • "How in God’s name did you get the George H W Bush/Neil Bush so completely wrong? Doesn’t Esquire have fact checkers anymore?" read another tweet.

Marco Rubio and JD Vance — on three occasions between them — get the better of CBS News anchor Margaret Brennan after she peddles false narratives during televised interviews


In early November 2024, CBS News anchor Margaret Brennan repeated false accusations suggesting that then-presidential candidate Donald Trump threatened former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wy.), prompting then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) to correct the record.

It all started after Rubio argued that Trump would promote safety and security in the U.S. and abroad, after which Brennan said Trump spoke of "training guns on the face of Liz Cheney." Rubio shot back, "That's not what he said."

Brennan initially defended her assertion because, according to her, CBS producers had played a "sound bite" of Trump accusing Cheney of being a so-called chicken hawk. But CBS played only a sound-bite of Trump's remarks — not the full context.

"Donald Trump doesn't talk like someone who's been in Washington for 30 years," Rubio defended. "Training guns on her face?" Brennan replied, after which Rubio shot back, "He doesn't say it the way I would have said it, no, but that's not what he said, Margaret. You guys know that. Come on. I mean, everybody knows exactly what he was saying."

Brennan wouldn't concede, telling Rubio, "We played the sound-bite." But Rubio answered her with the facts: "No, you played a piece of the sound-bite, because, in another piece of it, he said he would give her a gun to go stand in conflict as well. You don't normally give a gun to someone that is going to be facing a firing squad, which is what much of the media made it sound like. The point he was making is not a new point. It is a point that has been made by people in both parties for decades. And that is: You're all for war, and it's easy to be for war when you're in some fancy building, and you're safe and sound in Washington, D.C." Only after that did Brennan give up defending her faulty point.

In late January, Brennan tried her tactics with newly elected Vice President JD Vance, trying to corner him over the Trump administration's immigration policy and suggesting that removing illegal aliens and ending birthright citizenship is anti-American. "This is a country founded by immigrants," she declared.

Vance shot back, saying, "Just because we were founded by immigrants doesn't mean that 240 years later, we have to have the dumbest immigration policy in the world" and that "America should actually look out for the interests of our citizens first."

Brennan changed course and pressed Vance on the administration's moratorium on refugee admissions, insinuating hypocrisy on the part of the vice president. After more of her attempts to poke holes in Trump's immigration policies, Vance cut off Brennan and famously said, "I don't really care, Margaret. I don't want that person in my country, and I think most Americans agree with me."

Finally, Brennan was back interviewing Rubio last month and actually suggested that free speech set the stage for the Holocaust. Of course, Rubio wasn't having any of it, and he eventually told Brennan, "I have to disagree with you. Free speech was not used to conduct a genocide. The genocide was conducted by an authoritarian Nazi regime that happened to also be genocidal because they hated Jews, and they hated minorities, and they hated those that they — they had a list of people they hated, but primarily the Jews."

Newsweek annihilated on social media over its bizarre framing of Trump's campaign stunt when he handed out Big Macs and fries at McDonald's: 'The Pulitzer Prize is on the way'


Remember when then-presidential candidate Donald Trump put on a McDonald's apron and handed out french fries from a drive-thru window last October? Remember when Newsweek tried to "debunk" Trump's obvious stunt, designed to mock his opponent, Kamala Harris, for claiming without evidence that she once worked at a McDonald's?

Newsweek's headline actually read, "Rumors have been circulating on social media that former President Donald Trump's visit to the popular fast-food chain was staged." You don't say!

As you might guess, critics mocked Newsweek's article into oblivion:

  • "I’m gonna have to spend some time contemplating the possibility that this was not a completely organic event featuring a former president taking a side gig at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s while he’s running for president," commentator Mary Katharine Ham sarcastically noted.
  • "Wait, you’re telling me that Trump didn’t fill out an application and organically start working at a PA McDonald’s where a film crew spontaneously showed up with SS vetted customers, he staged it all? It wasn’t for the $25 in wages??" responded blogger Courtney O'Dell with tongue firmly in cheek.
  • "Dust off the mantle, the Pulitzer Prize is on the way," joked satirist David Burge.
  • "Woodward and Bernstein who? Looks like @Newsweek just wrapped up the Pulitzer for investigative journalism. Next up. Rumors Santa may not be real," said Barstool founder David Portnoy.

Newsweek, again? Yes, indeed — and this time magazine claims Tucker Carlson 'launches' show on Russian-state TV. Uh, not so much.


A mere five months prior to Newsweek's mock-worthy piece on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump working the drive-thru window at a McDonald's, the magazine published a story claiming Tucker Carlson had launched a show on Russia 24 — a state-controlled Russian media outlet. Newsweek cited as its source a newspaper owned and controlled by the Russian government.

The story quickly spread online, leading to accusations that Carlson was "quite literally, a mouthpiece of the Russian state" and that Carlson "has now embraced his master," a reference to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Of course, Newsweek's report was shown to be false, and the magazine updated and corrected its story. The false claim appears to have originated from Ukraine’s Institute of Mass Information and Ukraine Pravda.

New York Times columnist resoundingly ridiculed for regurgitating bizarre NPR claim against Israel amid its war with Hamas: '30 THOUSAND trucks?'


In March 2024, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof posted a bizarre claim from an NPR report against Israel amid its war with Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip — and both NPR and Kristof were mercilessly ridiculed for it on social media.

Kristof reposted an outlandish detail from the NPR report — that there were an impossibly large number of relief trucks that Israel was holding up: "[Jane Arraf] of @NPR quotes a Jordanian official as saying that 30,000 aid trucks are stuck at the Egypt/Gaza border, waiting for Israeli approval to enter Gaza, with some Jordanian trucks stuck there for the last two months. Meanwhile Gaza kids starve."

Critics on social media immediately took Kristof and NPR to task for circulating such a ridiculous figure.

"Nick, I realize you’re an idiot, but does that sound right to you? 30 THOUSAND trucks?" responded Jonathan Greenburg, who went on to calculate that 30,000 trucks would take up 271 miles of street space. He added, "That’s twice the distance from Kerem Shalom to Amman, where @janearraf’s idiot source is feeding her fake statistics because he knows hacks like you are dumb and malicious enough to believe anything you’re fed." Greenburg also said, "They don’t even try to make their propaganda believable and the all stars in the Western media lap it up because OF COURSE the Jews have kept a line of trucks visible from Mars waiting at the Gaza border!"

Other responses:

  • "30,000 trucks? LOL. People with an anti-Israel mindset will believe anything. Where are all these truck drivers sleeping? Who is feeding them? Where are the satellite photos of these trucks? Why hasn't this huge line of trucks at the border received any attention before now? I mean, some basic questions that anyone with common sense would be asking," David Bernstein replied.
  • "That’s what happens when your fervent conviction that Israel is to blame for everything addles your ability to think reasonably," replied Eylon Levy.
  • "30,000 trucks stuck at the Egyptian border? You want people to believe that trucks are lined up for 300 miles awaiting inspection by Israel? Reporters from the NY Times repeat other people's lies because it's easier than making up their own," responded Joel Petlin.
  • "Imagine pretending there are *30,000* trucks just sitting there at the border just to bash Israel. They don’t even try to make the propaganda believable," said radio host Jason Rantz.

Kristof eventually deleted the tweet.

NPR on April 17 issued the following "clarification" at the bottom of its story: "On March 27, NPR quoted a Jordanian official claiming there were as many as 30,000 aid trucks held up at the Rafah crossing with Egypt to enter Gaza. We were subsequently unable to confirm this figure and no longer believe it is accurate. Ahmed Naimat, spokesman for Jordan's National Center for Security and Crisis Management, said he based the number on satellite images but did not provide them. NPR's own analysis of later satellite images does not support that figure. Most aid groups currently estimate that as of early April 2024 there were generally between 3,000 and 7,000 trucks waiting to be allowed into the Gaza Strip pending Israeli security-related inspections."

NBC News tries to covertly revise article that originally contradicted Biden White House claim that it wasn't given choice between bringing home WNBA's Brittney Griner and former Marine Paul Whelan, both held hostage by Russia


NBC News issued a December 2022 report contradicting the official narrative of then-President Joe Biden concerning the government's prisoner swap with Russia — then the news network changed its original story without saying it had done so. Only after being met with online criticism and a request for comment from Blaze News did NBC News publish a correction.

In its Dec. 8 prisoner swap with Russia, the Biden administration exchanged Viktor Bout, who conspired to kill Americans, for pro basketball player Brittney Griner.

The White House suggested the Biden administration never had a choice to bring home former Marine Paul Whelan from Russia — that "the choice became to either bring Brittany home or no one." But NBC News, citing a senior U.S. official, first reported that the "Kremlin gave the White House the choice of either Griner or Whelan — or none."

Rikki Ratliff-Fellman, director of programming at Blaze Media, noted a significant discrepancy between NBC News' original report and its revised article. Without issuing an editorial note, NBC News made a stealthy change to the article, such that it now reads, "The Kremlin ultimately gave the White House the choice of either Griner or no one after different options were proposed."

Some food for thought: then-White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Griner is "an important role model; an inspiration to millions of Americans particularly the LGBTQI+ Americans and women of color."

What's more, a paragraph was added to the NBC News article concerning Whelan's notification in prison about the "outcome of the negotiations" — and without an editorial note.

Blaze News reached out to NBC News, asking why it originally failed to highlight the change with an editorial note, whether someone at the White House asked for the change, whether its original source had recanted or stood by its initial claim, and whether it continues to stand by its source.

NBC News then issued a correction saying that "an earlier version of this article misstated the choice the Biden administration was given over hostages. It was to swap for Griner or no one, not a choice between Griner or Whelan."

Still, Whelan's lawyer Vladimir Zherebenkov indicated that the deal involved a choice and implied that it was between his client and Griner. The lawyer said the exchange was a "one to one" and that "choosing Griner appeared 'more humane' because she is a woman and an Olympic champion, while Whelan was in the military and it is 'easier for him to be in custody.'"

After the beginning of his detention in Russia in 2018 and his espionage conviction by a Moscow court in 2020, Whelan finally was set free Aug. 1, 2024. Griner — who refused to stand for the American national anthem during home openers in 2020 — was arrested in February 2022 on smuggling charges after traveling to Russia with cannabis oil in her luggage.

Leftist media outlets walk back false reports that conservative host Michael Knowles at CPAC said transgender people 'must be eradicated'


Daily Wire host Michael Knowles during his 2023 CPAC speech stated, "For the good of society ... transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely — the whole preposterous ideology, at every level."

Knowles also said, "There can be no middle way in dealing with transgenderism. It is all or nothing. If transgenderism is true, if men really can become women, then it's true for everybody of all ages. If transgenderism is false, as it is, if men really can't become women, as they cannot, then it's false for everybody, too. And if it’s false, then we should not indulge it."

However, multiple left-leaning media outlets ran false reports saying Knowles called for the eradication of transgender people.

The Huffington Post published a piece originally titled, "At CPAC, A Call For Trans People To Be 'Eradicated' Gets Big Cheers." The Daily Beast ran a story originally titled, "Michael Knowles Says Transgender Community Must Be 'Eradicated' at CPAC." Rolling Stone — which has paid out millions for false reporting and defamation — ran a piece with the headline, "CPAC Speaker Calls for Transgender People to Be 'Eradicated.'"

Knowles immediately called out the leftist outlets and demanded retractions.

The Huffington Post changed its headline to read, "CPAC Speaker’s Trans Comments About ‘Eradication’ Sound Downright Genocidal." The story itself had claimed, "There are an estimated 1.6 million trans people in the United States. Knowles told the CPAC crowd that these people should not have a right to exist." The word "essentially" was added so that the sentence reads, "Knowles essentially told the CPAC crowd that these people should not have a right to exist."

The Daily Beast changed the headline of its article to "Michael Knowles Says Transgenderism Must Be 'Eradicated' at CPAC."

Rolling Stone changed its headline to "CPAC Speaker Calls for Eradication of ‘Transgenderism’ — and Somehow Claims He’s Not Calling for Elimination of Transgender People" and provided an editorial note stating, "This post has been updated to include statements from transgender rights activists and additional comments from Knowles."

The augmented Rolling Stone piece contains commentary by Erin Reed, a male transgender activist, on Knowles' demand for a retraction, suggesting that it's "an absurd distinction. There is no difference between a ban on 'transgenderism' and an attack on transgender people." Reed also claimed, "They are one and the same, and there's no separation between them."

Following the changes, Knowles tweeted, "I’m pleased to see that both @thedailybeast and @RollingStone have at least partially admitted their dishonesty by changing their libelous headlines. I look forward to seeing the other outlets that are defaming me follow suit!"

U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) commented, "It is indeed libelous. It’s an example of how a bad Supreme Court ruling from 1964 (NY Times v. Sullivan) has created a monster—giving the news media a license to lie about any public figure who can’t prove that the reporter acted with 'actual malice,' which is nearly impossible."

Canadian Press issues 3 embarrassing retractions after publishing 'hit piece' against Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre


The Canadian Press issued three retractions after publishing an October 2023 story saying Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre blamed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for poor relations with India.

"BREAKING: Canadian Press forced to retract three separate 'erroneous statements' from one story alone," Poilievre wrote on his X page. "It was another false hit piece now thoroughly discredited. Remember that next time they attack me."

The Canadian Press issued a retraction at the bottom of its story two days after the piece was first published admitting that the headline included comments attributed to Poilievre that he didn't say: "Note to readers: This is a corrected story. In a headline on an earlier version of the story, The Canadian Press erroneously reported that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre cited Sikh aggression toward Indian envoys when blaming Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for Canada's poor relations with India. In fact, Poilievre did not mention Sikhs during his interview with Namaste Radio Toronto, which was the basis for the story."

The retraction continued: "The Canadian Press also erroneously reported that Poilievre blamed Trudeau for 'aggression shown to ... Indian diplomats at public events.' In fact, Poilievre did not link those remarks to Trudeau." In addition, the retraction stated, that "the story erroneously reported the World Sikh Organization of Canada had argued that Poilievre was indirectly pointing the finger at Sikhs. In fact, the group's lawyer Balpreet Singh had argued that Poilievre was wrong to point the finger at anyone other than the Indian government."

Readers of Blaze News likely will recall a viral story just a week earlier about Poilievre casually eating an apple while giving simple answers to a reporter's dubious line of questioning. The reporter noted that "a lot of people" had accused Poilievre of "taking a page out of the Donald Trump book," after which Poilievre asked, "Which people would say that?" The reporter replied, "Well, I'm sure a great many Canadians, but ..." after which Poiliere shot back, "Like who?" The reporter soon changed his line of questioning.

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

SPOILER ALERT: De Niro’s 'Zero Day' is actually CONSERVATIVE?



Conservatives have had a hard time finding television shows that don’t beat viewers over the head with left-wing propaganda — which is why most were anticipating that Robert De Niro’s new Netflix series, “Zero Day,” would be more of the same.

De Niro himself has an extreme case of Trump derangement syndrome, but after bingeing the show, Glenn Beck of “The Glenn Beck Program” shockingly has no complaints.

“He’s lost it,” Glenn says. “I mean, I think the guy has really, truly gone over the edge on his Trump derangement syndrome.”

However, according to Glenn, the show didn’t even come close to reflecting De Niro’s severely misguided views.


“At first, he’s given this commission, which suspended the Constitution for this committee, you know, habeas corpus, and he can scoop up anyone he wants; he can question them without lawyers; he can use enhanced interrogation; whatever he wants,” Glenn explains.

“He was put on the committee because he’d never do those things, and then he does all of those things,” he continues.

“At the end he gives this speech; he finds out who was responsible for it; and it was, surprise, surprise, Big Tech. Big Tech in cahoots with big money and people on both sides of the aisle in Washington D.C.,” he says.

The show makes it a point to put these people on blast, people who Glenn notes are the “deep-state people that think they should control everything.”

“And I’m thinking,” Glenn says, “I think, Bob, that we agree on the bad guy here. Because that’s what’s happening. People on both sides of the aisle have got into this deep-state thing; they think they know better than the average person; they know better than the Constitution.”

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.

'Is Tiger as good as they say?' Bodycam footage from Scottie Scheffler arrest shows police asking about drinking, Tiger Woods



Footage from the arrest of PGA Tour star Scottie Scheffler revealed strange conversations between the golfer and police, including an officer asking how good Tiger Woods really is.

Scheffler, the world's No.1-ranked golfer, was arrested in May 2024 and charged with felony assault after refusing to stop at the scene of an accident near the entrance of the Valhalla Golf Club in Louisville, Kentucky. Scheffler was trying to get into the PGA Championship tournament, but police said at the time that he was trying to drive around the crash scene despite an officer telling him to stop.

Scheffler apparently kept driving until a cop attached himself to the side of Scheffler's car, an ESPN report stated.

The charges were dropped nearly two weeks later.

'Nothing to drink this morning at all?'

Bodycam footage from the Louisville Metro Police Department has since been released by "Full Swing," a golf docuseries on Netflix.

The previously unseen footage starts with commentary from No. 26 golfer Tom Kim, who says, "I'm warming up, and all I see is my friend handcuffed, walking to a police car."

The video then cuts to Scheffler being handcuffed by police as he provides his own recollection of the events.

"First of all, I was freaking out because I somehow went from driving into the golf course to a jail cell, and I still don't really know how that happened exactly," Scheffler explains. "I don't think it ever really felt real."

Speaking to an officer from the back of a police car, Scheffler is shown telling an officer, "I'll be honest. I didn't think this was ever a position I'd be in."

The officer replied, "Usually, people never do."

Other contentious points in the footage showed presumably the same arresting officer having an exchange with Scheffler about whether or not he had been drinking.

"Nothing to drink this morning at all?" the officer asked.

"Mouthwash," Scheffler bluntly replied. "I try not to drink too much before I go play golf at 8:00 a.m."

With the officer seemingly having no idea who the golfer was — despite being just feet from the entrance to the tournament — he noted that Scheffler must be "pretty good" if he plays in the PGA.

"I'm all right, yeah," Scheffler answered.

The officer then asked, "Is Tiger [Woods] as good as they say he is? Or is that ..."

Scheffler cut him off: "He's pretty dang good."

Aside from the untimely arrest, Scheffler had an outstanding 2024, winning the PGA Tour championship and even a gold medal at the Summer Olympics in Paris.

In 2025, he remains the world No. 1 golfer but sits 13th on the money list with $1.8 million. Sweden's Ludvig Aberg tops that list with $4.8 million.

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

EXCLUSIVE: Joni Ernst Introduces Bill To Scale Back Taxpayer-Funded Perks For Ex-Presidents Who Are Rolling In Dough

'This commonsense bill flips Washington on its head'