Seriously?! Clinton Foundation suddenly finds $26 million in undisclosed donations

Just when you think it couldn’t get worse, it does. No, this isn’t about Benghazi or secret, private e-mails being used to conduct government business - although those are pretty bad too. No, the latest scandal plaguing Hillary Clinton involves her personal charity, the Clinton Foundation. Turns out the Clinton Foundation failed to disclose about $26 million. There’s no way that money came from any sketchy sources, right? Buck Sexton has the story and reaction.

Below is a rough transcript of this segment:

Up to $26 million. That's a lot of money, isn't it? That's pretty much in any context except for government spending. They can spend $26 million for toilet seats on the Pentagon. $26 million is generally speaking a lot of money. That's the kind of number you would think, well, could they really fail to disclose -- could someone just lose $26 million in the couch cushions. I mean, maybe some Saudi royals. But for normal folks. Could 26 million just sort of get lost in the shuffle? No. But for the Clintons apparently -- or the Clinton Foundation, about 26 million bucks, that sort of gets -- no one knows where it is. That's the latest on the information that we're getting about the Clinton Foundation. What they're telling us here that they may have failed to disclose, I don't know, you know, call it a couple of handfuls of cash. I'll go about with 20 to 25 million, maybe 26. Just whoopsie. Never said anything about it. Of course, this is not an isolated incident. They've had to readjust their tax returns. How many charities do you know of, by the way, that say, well, we'll just have to redo our tax returns for a while. How many charities do you know of where that's actually happened recently?

How many charities do you know where there's so many people who seem really intent really serious about making sure that nobody knows that they're giving to the charity? I know there are anonymous donations to some charities. But usually when corporations and major international entities of some kind or another give money to feed the children, promote women's education, stop the spread of malaria, whatever, usually they're really excited about people knowing about this or at least know the PR value of such that they want individuals to know about this. They want people to know that they had given this money. With the Clinton Foundation though, it always like, well, we don't want people to really know about this. We don't people to actually have to go down a list and see all the names.

There's a bunch of things in the latest revelation that I find interesting and a bunch of things that are worthy of a few minutes of our time. There's not much that's new in dealing with Clintons. In the sense, if there's such a thing as corruption, then the Clintons are corrupt. But, somehow, we won't hear very much from the Clintonistas about that. Right? They'll just try to talk about everything else, which is understandable to some degree.

But there's one thing I came across here in this piece in the Washington Post. Who is paying Chelsea Clinton for speeches, by the way? This doesn't not necessarily get thrown in and lumped in with the rest of this. But what are you paying Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of the Clintons, who, I don't know, could be a lovely human being, don't know, but I don't think she really should be giving speeches to major corporations or individuals or organizations, about what exactly? I mean, if it's about how to be successful and get ahead. Well, I suppose the best advice she could give, be really, really lucky and be born really rich and powerful. But they're paying her. Which also feels like another means of buying Clinton influence. Right?

That's what that's about. $600,000 for what was apparently ten minutes of work at MSNBC. That also has to be on the same side as a lot of these other Clinton arrangements. These sort of special Clinton details. Right?

That's something else that should be added in there. But if we'll be fair about this, there's nothing that can really compare to Mr. Bill because he really loves to give speeches. He just wants to hold the world close into his chest. Close into his bosom. I mean, he said bosom, didn't he? Get a little close in there, a little snuggle. It will cost you like half a million dollars. But a Clinton snuggle is the best kind of snuggle. It's getting creepy, I know. But the point is that people pay this guy way too much money for a speech. It's not just for the speech. It's for the access and the influence that comes with writing the check. We all know that, and more of this has come out.

The Clinton Foundation is starting to look like the charity equivalent of Slimer from Ghostbusters. Just trying to get as much money and bring in as much cash as it possibly can. With Slimer, it's hotdogs. With the Clinton Foundation, it's just donations. That's what's going on here. They cannot get enough. $26 million, they've said, over the last year or two?

There's never enough for them. There's one entity that donated -- or, paid a speaking fee of $250,000 to $500,000. I also love the ranges. Because they don't know how much they got paid. Anyway, was the energy minister of Thailand. Okay. If your wife is Secretary of State, you can have a foreign government entity pay you up to half a million dollars to show up and be like, hey, I like energy. Not as much as I like ladies, but I like energy.

I mean, half a million dollars for this. You must be joking. You can't be taking this seriously. But people seem to be taking this seriously for whatever reason. Or believe it. They want to believe it. The Clintons have become Santa Claus for Democrats. It's just too painful to think that this is not what they've been told it is. Half a million dollars -- up to half a million dollars from energy ministry in the Thailand.

South Korean energy and chemicals conglomerate Hanwha paid 500,000 to a million dollars for a speech by Clinton. Wow. Well done, South Korean energy conglomerate. I wonder if Hillary will be more favorably disposed towards something that may benefit you in the trade or foreign relations sector in the future. I'm guessing they're putting a yes up there on that one.

A China real estate development corporation paid the foundation from 250 to $500,000 for a speech by Bill Clinton.

Qatar First Investment Bank paid for a speech of around the same cost at around the same time.

The Telmex Foundation, founded by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim provided between 250 and $500,000 for a speech by Hillary Clinton. Hmm.

Massive telecommunications conglomerate in Mexico owned by Carlos Slim and also, I believe, was a major owner of the New York Times, they're going to give money to Hillary. This is a really smart business proposition for people all around the world. Right?

If you're a major conglomerate, international corporation, 250K to buy off the Secretary of State. And it might even just be insurance. There might not be a specific quid pro quo. But, by the way, that's not the standard for corruption. Go talk to Senator Menendez. Go talk to indicted, convicted, and facing prison time Virginia governor Bob McDonnell about quid pro quo corruption, meaning you have to get something in exchange for something in order for it to be real, criminal corruption. That's not the standard.

The standard is looking unseemly. As I said, the Clintons are the global Slimer of looking unseemly when it comes to corruption. More money. More money. Shovel it in all the time. They raise $102 billion. They give out an average of 10 percent to actual charities. They're middlemen. They say, I want to help the starving children of the world. So you say, okay, here's a bunch of food. So they eat most of it and throw an apple core at the people that need it and we're supposed to applaud them and say, oh, well done, Clintons, you're fabulous. This is preposterous. It's a giant slush fund. It's a branding exercise. It's a means for them to fund their lifestyle.

Do you think the Clintons have paid for very much in the way of travel since starting this foundation. They get to fly all over the world in private jets. Do you think they pay for their meals? Or do you think the foundation picks that up? Do you think they can hire whoever they want, whatever cronies they want and pay them with money that they've been able to gather with tax protection, of course. Right?

This is money that people get a tax exemption for. So they can just pay off their buddies. Their giant jobs program. They're almost like a government in exile. They get to fly all over the world and talk about how wonderful they are and raise all this money.

Oh, she made $25 million since January of 2014. Bill Clinton has been paid more than 104 million from 2001 to 2012. Despite all this, Hillary is just a cuddly grandma who wants to sit with you at the dinner table and be your friend. She cares about how hard it is for you to pay your bills. She is a private jet progressive my friend, she doesn't care about you and your bills. She doesn't even know how bills get paid really. I'm sure she could figure it out with a check. But this whole online bill pay thing, that's probably skipped past her because she hasn't had to pay her own bills in a few decades. She certainly hasn't had to pump her own gas. But now she's a populist. Now she's a fighter for the middle class. The richest 1 percent are getting way too much of the benefit. They're terrible. Except for me, I'm awesome. This is the promise she makes you. This is what she tells you.

You know, Bob McDonnell should have just said, 2007 -- remember this is the disgraced, indicted -- they wanted almost a decade in prison for this guy. It was like $150,000 in gifts. I mean, the Clintons, for them, that's like a fancy meal with all their cronies and the people who are buying them off. 150K -- nothing. That's the bar bill for Bill after a few fun nights out there in Davos. It's expensive, man. Those cocktails. The ladies in Davos. They know how to party.

So what Bob McDonnell should have done was that his wife was a world class artist or something. Then all the people who happened to get influence -- wanted to buy influence with Governor McDonnell. If you wanted to be corrupt Clinton style and get away with it. Usually this would be overpayment fraud and you would be investigated. But, I mean, the Clintons would get away with this. Because they've been overpaid for speeches very obviously. Bill Clinton got paid more for speeches the further away from the presidency he got because his wife was Secretary of State. It's very obvious. There's an increase in his speaking fees. That doesn't happen. He's not more relevant the further away from the presidency he gets. And, by the way, this whole notion of cashing in, how much have you seen W. walking around passing the hat? No. You don't have to cash in. The presidency should be the height of your service, of your career, of your life. There shouldn't be some afterwards. Let's make this a giant ATM machine. Let's let it ride. Let's have fun. No, that's not how this is supposed to go. Public service is not supposed to be a springboard to vast riches. But Governor McDonnell, he should have said his wife was a world class artist. Anybody who wanted to get some influence with the governor could have just paid, you know, 100, 200, let's call it a half a mil for whatever parent she throws together in the backyard. What? She's an amazing artist. It's the free market, man. People are allowed to buy her paintings. How is that different of Bill -- do you think the speech is worth a million dollars? Of course, you don't. It's ridiculous.

But this is the problem. The Clintons are so corrupt, that they overwhelm us with how slimy and gross they are. As I said, just like when we're dealing with Slime, we're all standing in the hallway saying, leave us alone. You're so gross.

Soros is trying to elect MORE TEXAS RINOs. Here's how YOU can stop him.

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

Texas is under threat of a George Soros-backed takeover.

Soros-funded RINO judges have been elected in some of the highest courts in Texas. These judges implemented restrictions that have blocked nearly a thousand cases of voter fraud from being investigated or prosecuted from across the state. These new restrictions are similar to ones in place in states like George, Arizona, and Wisconsin, leaving Texas more susceptible to election corruption than ever. If Texas falls to corruption, America will lose its largest bastion of conservative electoral power in the nation. Without Texas, Republicans WILL NOT be able to win national elections and liberal corruption will go unchecked across the country.

Fortunately, there is a way to stop this: YOU.

If you live in Texas you have a chance to stand up against corruption and to fight back! Starting Tuesday, February 20th, early voting for the primaries begins, where three of these judges are up for election. Go out and vote. If the right people are voted in, there's a good chance the restrictions will be lifted and election fraud can once again be prosecuted.

But remember, you can't just go in and vote for anyone who has an "R" next to their name. Sorors knows that a registered Democrat would never stand a chance in Texas, so his lackeys register as Republicans and ride the little "R" right into office. So who do you vote for?

Fortunately, Glenn had Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on his show today and Ken gave us his list of judges that he vouches for. His list is as follows:

  • Gina Parker
  • Lee Finley
  • David Schenck
The Primary Election runs from February 20th to March 5th. This is your chance to get out there and make a difference. It might be the most important election you ever participate in. If you need to know where your nearest polling location is, or any other information regarding the election, you can go to votetexas.gov to find out more.
It's time to stand up.

Hypocrisy EXPOSED: The 'Amazon Files' and what WE are doing about it

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Who is really banning books?

For years now, Conservatives have been taking flak from the left for supposed "book bans." The left likes to compare these "bans" to Nazi book burnings, accusing the right of sweeping authoritarian decrees designed to suppress information. In reality, this is a movement largely motivated by parents, who want to remove inappropriate books from children's libraries.

But if you want to discuss authoritarian book bans, look no further than the White House. As Glenn recently covered, the Biden administration has been pressuring the world's largest bookseller, Amazon, into suppressing books they disagree with.

On February 5th, 2024, Ohio Representative Jim Jordan released a slew of subpoenaed documents that exposed pressure placed on Amazon by the Biden Administration. The documents, which Jordan dubbed "The Amazon Files" after Elon Musk's "The Twitter Files," revealed an email conversation between Andrew Slavitt, a former White House senior adviser, and Amazon employees. In these emails, Slavitt complained that the top search results for books on "vaccines" were "concerning" and then requested that Amazon intervene. Amazon initially refused, not out of some altruistic concern for the free exchange of information. They thought any action taken would be "too visible" and would further exasperate the “Harry/Sally narrative,” referring to the outrage that followed Amazon's removal of Ryan T. Anderson’s book When Harry Became Sally.

Despite this initial refusal, Amazon agreed to meet with the White House a few days later. The number one item on their agenda was removing books from the website. An Amazon employee even admitted that the reason they even took this meeting was due to the pressure being placed on them by the Biden Administration.

What was the result of this meeting? Amazon caved. They began to implement ways of limiting the outreach of books that challenged the mainstream vaccine narrative and other books the White House might not like.

The White House was caught red-handed pressuring the world's largest bookseller to restrict the sale of books they consider in opposition to their narrative, and they have the gall to accuse conservatives of information suppression. This is just ONE of many actions committed by the Biden Administration that are more characteristic of a dictator than a president.

What can you do about it? Fortunately, you are not dependent on Amazon and its corrupted algorithm to help you find books. Every week right here on GlennBeck.com, we highlight books that Glenn is reading or talking about in our "Glenn's Bookshelf" series. Here you can find a wide selection of books free from Amazon's filters. Be sure to sign up for Glenn's newsletter to find out about new additions to "Glenn's Bookshelf" every week.

10 times Biden has acted like a DICTATOR

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The left-wing media's most recent tirade is accusing Trump of being a dictator. But, as Glenn said, "Everything they're accusing us of, they're doing."

Since day one, the Biden administration has overstepped the bounds placed on the executive branch set by the Constitution. In Glenn's most recent TV Special, he examined ten times Biden acted like a dictator, NOT a president. Here are 10 of Biden's Dictator Moves, and click HERE to get ALL of the research that went into this week's Glenn TV special:

5 ways to protect your First Amendment rights. Number 4 will surprise you.

Buyenlarge / Contributor | Getty Images

Every day it seems Glenn covers another story revealing how people across the world at all levels of power DESPISE the fact that YOU have rights, and they are actively trying to curtail them. Recently, there has been a string of attacks against the rights outlined in the First Amendment: the freedom of religion, the freedom of speech, the freedom of press, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom to petition.

As a refresher, the First Amendment reads as follows:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is powerful stuff, there is a good reason the Founding Fathers made it the FIRST Amendment. It's also the reason why power-hungry elites are attacking it. These attacks are designed to control the way you think, speak, and believe, vote, what you read, and who holds your representatives responsible. The First Amendment is our strongest weapon against tyrants, and they know it.

So what can you do about it? Hope that some wig in Washinton will eventually do something? We know how well that works. The best thing to do is to stay active, engage in the issues you care about, and exercise your rights.

So where to start? Here are a few things YOU can do to protect your First Amendment rights:

Religion

The best way to flex your Freedom of Religion is to—you guessed it—practice your faith. Become an active member in your place of worship, go to scripture studies, invite your friends to that late afternoon event, and walk the life. This can impact the way you spend money as well. Shop the businesses and brands that share your values, and don't shop at the ones that scorn them. Keeping the community alive and healthy is the best way to ensure that generations to come will be able to experience the freedom you enjoy.

Speech

Much like religion, the best way to protect your freedom of speech is... to speak. Engage your friends and family in polite, civil conversation. Stand up for what you believe in, and make your case to your peers. Just remember to keep it friendly. No one ever won an argument by shouting down their opponent. The civil exchange of ideas is the cornerstone of our republic, and a dialogue where the participants are well-informed, considerate, compassionate, and open-minded can have permanent impacts on all involved.

Press

Freedom of the Press seems a little tricky at first. Unless you work for the media, what are you supposed to do? Quit your job and go work for the local newspaper? The good news is that exercising this right is not nearly that difficult. In fact, you are currently doing it. The best thing you can do is to read from outlets that produce informative content. Want to know what Glenn consumes to stay informed every day? Sign up for Glenn's Morning Brief newsletter to get all the stories Glenn gets sent to his desk every day sent straight to your inbox.

Assembly

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Freedom of assembly is one of the more impactful yet underutilized freedoms in the First Amendment. Peaceably assembling and protesting with like-minded individuals can hugely influence politicians and policies while simultaneously creating community and fellowship between attendees. It's understandable why more people don't turn out. We're all busy people with busy schedules, and flying out to D.C. for the weekend seems like a daunting task to many. Thankfully, you don't have to go out all the way to D.C. to make a difference. Gather some like-minded people in your town and bring awareness to issues that impact your community. Big change starts locally, and exercising your freedom to assemble can be the catalyst to lasting impact.

Petition

If you've been a long-time listener of Glenn, then you will have heard a few of his calls to action where he asks his audience to contact their representatives about a particular piece of policy. There is a good reason Glenn keeps on doing those: they work. Whether it's your local mayor or your senator, a call and an email go a long way. If you really want to make a change, convince your friends and family to reach out as well.