Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Liberal Constitutional scholar concedes: 'I think there is a case against the President for exceeding his authority'

June 26, 2014
Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program

On Wednesday, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) announced he is planning to file a lawsuit against the Obama Administration on the grounds of executive overreach.

“The Constitution makes it clear that a president’s job is to faithfully execute the laws. In my view, the president has not faithfully executed the laws,” Boehner told reporters. “This is not about impeachment, this is about his faithfully executing the laws of this country.”

The decision has garnered mixed reactions from both the right and the left. On radio this morning, Glenn played audio of Fox News’ Neil Cavuto grilling Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) about the lawsuit and liberal Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley telling MSNBC’s Steve Kornacki the suit may be warranted.

“Now, I saw on Neil Cavuto a clip with Michele Bachmann,” Glenn said. “Neil goes crazy on her. Neil says, ‘What are you doing? John Boehner is suing the President of the United States? That's what he is doing?’ ‘Yes, well, because he's overstepped his authority.’ I don't know object anybody else, but I can't take it.”

Cavuto pressed Bachmann as to why, after more than five years of lawlessness, Boehner finally decided it was time to file a lawsuit. He went so far as to call the stunt a “waste of time.”

For her part, Bachmann maintained President Obama’s attempt to “establish lawlessness in the United States” is a big deal.

Watch the heated exchange below:

Glenn admitted that his reaction to the news was much like Cavuto’s. He views Boehner’s action as a “shallow political trick” that is “sickening.” This morning, however, Glenn awoke to find that liberal law professor and Obama supporter Jonathan Turley believes Congress actually has a chance to win this case.

“Jonathan Turley is a guy who likes the President's policies, a guy who wants all these policies, but he is a Constitutional scholar,” Glenn explained. “On this particular case with the President, he's been ringing the bell for the last two years saying, ‘If Congress doesn't act to curb the President's power, we are losing the Constitution. We are losing the balance of power,’” Glenn explained. “Remember, he is not a guy who, like me, doesn't like the President or his policies… He's just saying the President is being lawless.”

During an appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball on Wednesday, Turley explained that even though he is a fan of the President, he cannot overlook the line that has been crossed.

“I think there is a case against the President for exceeding his authority,” Turley said. “I happen to agree with the President on many of his priorities and policies, but as I testified in Congress, I think that he has crossed the Constitutional line.”

“When the president went to Congress and said he would go it alone, it obviously raises a concern. There's no license for going it alone in our system, and what he's done, is very problematic,” he continued. “He has effectively rewritten laws through the active interpretation that I find very problematic. While I happen to agree with him, I voted for him, I think this is a problem.

Watch Turley’s comments below courtesy of Real Clear Politics:

While Glenn did not elaborate as to whether or not Turley’s remarks swayed his opinion on the issue, he did commend the law professor for speaking so candidly.

“This is the kind of thing that America needs to hear,” Glenn concluded. “These are the kinds of things that my friends on the left need to hear. You don't have to believe me, but you have to start hearing the truth.”

Who is Ryan Wesley Routh, Trump's second would-be Assassin?

- / Contributor | Getty Images

For the second time in two months, Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt.

Fortunately, this time the former president walked away from the incident unharmed, as did everyone else involved. Is anyone surprised that as the election cycle heats up and Democrats and the mainstream media have increased their false and hateful rhetoric against Trump, another assassination attempt should be made against him?

The second would-be assassin, Ryan Wesley Routh, was allegedly deeply affected by the rhetoric and propaganda regurgitated by the media and evidently decided to take matters into his own hands. Delving into the turbulent past of Ryan Routh reveals a violent and unstable man with many radical beliefs and an impressionable mind. How Routh apparently managed to avoid any FBI/terrorist watchlists is just one of the mysteries surrounding the second attempted assassination of President Trump.

Here's what we know about Ryan Wesley Routh so far:

The assassination attempt

Photo of Routh's Sniper Nest

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

At approximately 1:30 p.m. on Sunday, September, 15th, the Secret Service opened fire on a concealed gunman who was hidden in some bushes along the perimeter of Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida. The gunman was in a makeshift sniper's nest on the outside of the perimeter chain-link fence only a couple hundred yards from where Trump was golfing. He had been camping there for over 12 hours. After being fired on, the gunman ran back to his car and was quickly apprehended by the police, where he was identified as Ryan Wesley Routh.

After Routh's arrest, investigators discovered the sniper's nest built within the perimeter fence. Routh had hung two backpacks with bullet-proof ceramic plates inside on the fence with a narrow gap between them for his rifle to poke through. It is clear that Routh had come prepared for a shoot-out and had possibly taken notes from the last would-be Trump assassin, who was taken out by counter-snipers before he could finish his task.

His background

Routh at a pro-Ukraine rally Kyiv, Ukraine

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Routh is a long-time supporter of the Democrat party and a vehement Trump hater. He has written a multitude of deranged social media posts that express his loathing of the Republican nominee and parrot the rhetoric spewed by the mainstream media. Last year, Routh wrote a book urging Iran to assassinate President Trump for the "tremendous blunder” of leaving the Iran nuclear deal.

Routh is an outspoken advocate for the Ukrainian cause, and many of his social media posts are centered around this interest. He even made a trip to Ukraine with the bizarre mission of recruiting former Afghanistan troopers to fight for the Ukrainian cause. He returned home after six months without accomplishing his goal.

Shortly after the shoot-out, Ryan Routh's son, Oran Routh,, gave some personal information about his father. He claimed that he had no prior knowledge of the planned assassination attempt, and in fact, he had grown distant from his father after a falling-out. Oran did admit to sharing his father's "reasonable" hatred of Trump and claimed that his father was a peaceful, hard-working man. He also claimed that, as far as he knew, his father had only a few speeding tickets on his criminal record and had never even owned a firearm. This claim was quite contrary to reality.

Ryan Wesley Routh has quite the criminal record, which culminated in an arrest in 2002 when he fled the police during a traffic stop and barricaded himself in his roofing business with a machine gun. Routh was later convicted of possessing a weapon of mass destruction, but managed to dodge the 20-plus years in prison typically associated with charges of that nature.

His goals

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

While Routh's exact motives are still unknown, we can infer some things from his background.

It is clear that Routh has an extreme hatred of President Trump that has been brewing for many years, as expressed by his social media posts and deranged book. Routh is also not immune to extreme ideologies, as demonstrated by his strange Ukrainian escapade, and he is clearly no stranger to violence, as evidenced by his criminal record.

There is also the matter of his weapon of mass destruction conviction, along with many other crimes. How did he manage to avoid the lengthy prison sentence typical of convictions of such magnitude?

One thing is clear: Routh is clearly a disturbed individual who has been exposed to the onslaught of anti-Trump propaganda that has portrayed him as an embodiment of evil and an existential threat to the country and the world.


Presidential debate recap: The good, the bad and the ugly

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The second presidential debate was many things--some good, some bad, but one thing was made clear: this election is far from over.

If you were watching the debate with Glenn during the BlazeTV exclusive debate coverage, then you already know how the debate went: Kamala lied through her teeth and Trump faced a three-pronged attack from Harris and the two ABC moderators. This was not the debate performance we were hoping for, but it could have gone far worse. If you didn't get the chance to watch the debate or can't bring yourself to watch it again and are looking for a recap, we got you covered. Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly from the second presidential debate:

The Good

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Let's start with what went well.

While there was certainly room for improvement, Trump's performance wasn't terrible, especially compared to his performance in other debates. He showed restraint, kept himself from being too brash, and maintained the name-calling to a minimum. In comparison, Kamala Harris was struggling to maintain her composure. Harris was visibly emotional and continued to make obnoxious facial expressions, which included several infuriating eye-rolls and patronizing smirks.

The Bad

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite all that, the debate could have gone much better...

While Trump was able to keep his cool during the debate, he was not able to stay on track. Kamala kept making inflammatory comments meant to derail Trump, and every time, he took the bait. Trump spent far too long defending his career and other extraneous issues instead of discussing issues relevant to the American people and revealing Kamala's failures as Vice President.

Trump's biggest blunder during the debate was his failure to prevent Kamala from leaving that debate looking like a credible option as president. Kamala was fairly unknown to the American people and had remained that way on purpose, giving only one interview after Biden stepped down from the campaign. This is because every time Kamala opens her mouth, she typically makes a fool of herself. Trump needed to give Kamala more time to stick her foot in her mouth and to press Kamala on the Biden administration's failures over the past four years. Instead, he took her bait and let her run down the clock, and by the end of the debate, she left looking far more competent than she actually is.

The Ugly

If anything, the debate reminded us that this election is far from over, and it's more important now than ever for Trump to win.

The most noteworthy occurrence of the debate was the blatantly obvious bias of the ABC debate moderators against Trump. Many people have described the debate as a "three vs. one dogpile," with the moderators actively participating in debating Trump. If you didn't believe that the media was in the back pocket of the Democrats before, it's hard to deny it now. Kamala stood on stage and lied repeatedly with impunity knowing that the moderators and the mainstream media at large would cover for her.

The stakes have never been higher. With so many forces arrayed against Trump, it's clear to see that the Left cannot afford to let Trump win this November. The shape of America as we know it is on the line. Kamala represents the final push by the globalist movement to take root and assimilate America into the growing global hivemind.

The election is far from over. This is our sign to stand up and fight for our nation and our values and save America.

Glenn: Illegal aliens could swing the 2024 election, and it spells trouble for Trump

ELIZABETH RUIZ / Stringer | Getty Images

Either Congress must pass the SAVE Act, or states must protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Progressives rely on three main talking points about illegal aliens voting in our elections.

The first is one of cynical acceptance. They admit that illegal immigrants are already voting but argue that there is nothing we can do to stop it, suggesting that it’s just another factor we should expect in future elections. This position shows no respect for our electoral system or the rule of law and doesn’t warrant further attention.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches.

The second talking point targets the right. Progressives question why Republicans care, asking why they assume illegal immigrants voting would only benefit the other side. They suggest that some of these voters might also support the GOP.

On this point, the data says otherwise.

Across the board, immigrants vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, regardless of what state they’re in. The vast majority of migrants are coming up from South America, a region that is undergoing a current “left-wing” experiment by voting for far-left candidates practically across the board. Ninety-two percent of South America’s population favors the radical left, and they’re pouring over our border in record numbers — and, according to the data, they’re not changing their voting habits.

The third main talking point concedes that illegal immigrants are voting but not enough to make a significant dent in our elections — that their effect is minuscule.

That isn’t what the numbers show either.

Texas just audited its voter rolls and had to remove more than 1 million ineligible voters. The SAVE Act would mandate all states conduct such audits, but the left in Congress is currently trying to stop its passage. Dare I say that the left's pushback is because illegal immigration actually plays in Democrats' favor on Election Day?

Out of the 6,500 noncitizens removed from the voter rolls, nearly 2,000 had prior voting history, proving that illegal aliens are voting. But do the numbers matter, or are they “minuscule,” as the left claims? Let’s examine whether these illegal voting trends can make a dent in the states that matter the most on Election Day.

The corporate legacy media agree that Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will swing the election in November. By Election Day, an estimated 8 million illegal aliens will be living in the United States. Can these 8 million illegal immigrants change the course of the 2024 election? Let’s look at the election data from each of these seven swing states:

These are the numbers being sold to us as “insignificant” and “not enough to make a difference.” Arizona and Georgia were won in 2020 by a razor-thin margin of approximately 10,000 votes, and they have the most illegal immigrants — besides North Carolina — of all the swing states.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches. The progressives are importing an electorate to extend their ground by feet, yards, and often miles.

This is why Democrats in Congress oppose the SAVE Act, why the Justice Department has ignored cases of illegal voting in the past, and why the corporate left-wing media is gaslighting the entire country on its significance. This is a power play, and the entire Western world is under the same assault.

If things stay the status quo, these numbers prove the very real possibility of an election swing by illegal immigrants, and it will not favor our side of the aisle. Congress must pass the SAVE Act. If it fails, states must step up to protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Hunter pleads GUILTY, but did he get a pass on these 3 GLARING crimes?

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Last week, Hunter Biden made the shocking decision to suddenly plead guilty to all nine charges of tax-related crimes after claiming innocence since 2018.

Hunter first tried an "Alford plead" in which a defendant maintains their innocence while accepting the sentencing, typically due to the overwhelming evidence against them. Hunter's Alford plead was not accepted after the prosecutors objected to the suggestion, and Hunter quickly pleaded guilty.

Glenn could not believe just how disrespectful this situation was to the justice system and the American people. After years of lying about his innocence, which only served to deepen the divide in our country, Hunter decided to change his tune at the last minute and admit his guilt. Moreover, many expect Joe Biden will swoop in after the election and bail his son out with a presidential pardon.

This isn't the first time Hunter's crimes have turned out to be more than just a "right-wing conspiracy theory," and, odds are, it won't be the last. Here are three crimes Hunter may or may not be guilty of:

Gun charges: Found guilty

This June, Hunter Biden was found guilty of three federal gun charges, which could possibly land him up to 25 years in prison. Hunter purchased a revolver in 2018 while addicted to crack, and lied to the gun dealer about his addiction. While Hunter could face up to 25 years in prison, it's unlikely to be the case as first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum sentence. That's assuming Joe even lets it go that far.

Tax evasion: Plead guilty

Last week, Hunter changed his plea to "guilty" after years of pleading innocent to federal tax evasion charges. Since 2018, Delaware attorneys have been working on Hunter's case, and just before the trial was set to begin, Hunter changed his plea. According to the investigation, Hunter owed upwards of $1.4 million in federal taxes that he avoided by writing them off as fraudulent business deductions. Instead, Hunter spent this money on strippers, escorts, luxury cars, hotels, and, undoubtedly, crack.

Joe's involvement with Hunter's foreign dealings: Yet to be proven

Despite repeated claims against it, there is ample evidence supporting the theory Joe Biden was aware of Hunter's business dealings and even had a hand in them. This includes testimony from Devon Archer, one of Hunter's business partners, confirming Joe joined several business calls. Despite the mounting evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's overseas business dealings and was using his influence to Hunter's benefit, the Bidens still maintain their innocence.