Everything could change this week if Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage

Your livelihood, the way you work, the way you pray, how you associate with others, could radically change this week. Why? Because the Supreme Court will rule on a gay marriage case, and it has the potential to completely change the country. To help explain just how dire the situation is, Glenn invited Kelly Shackelford from the Liberty Institute onto the program. Once you hear this conversation, you’ll understand why this issue goes far beyond traditional marriage vs. equality.

Listen to the interview from Wednesday’s radio show below:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: When Barack Obama said the fundamental transformation of the United States of America begins in five days, he was five days away from his -- his election in -- in 2008. And we have seen a fundamental transformation of America, but I believe we haven't seen anything yet. I believe everything leads to the Supreme Court decisions. Your -- your livelihood, the way you work, the way you pray, how you associate with others, everything is at stake now. We're talking about the Supreme Court's decision as it comes out probably on Monday. It could come out tomorrow. On gay marriage.

People are talking about this ruling as if, oh, you know, we have to defend traditional marriage. Or, hey, finally equality. They've tried to make this into an argument about, who are you to say if I love somebody else?

I think most Americans are fine with that. I think most Americans are like, look, I don't need to celebrate your marriage. I don't need to agree with your marriage, whether you're straight or gay. And I don't want to be in your bedroom, and I don't want to be talked to you about love. That's none of my business. That's your business.

But also most Americans, because we are tolerant, we feel this way, but we expect tolerance to go the other way. We expect if you're saying, celebrity diversity, that you understand that I might disagree with you.

Our churches are about to come under attack. And I had one of the most sobering conversations I have had in a very long time last night on the TV show. Because I had Kelly Shackelford with me from the Liberty Institute. Kelly joins me on the phone now, and we're going to talk a little about this because you need to wrap your arms around how your country could change in the next five days, dramatically so.

Kelly, welcome to the program. How are you?

KELLY: Great. Thanks for having me, Glenn.

GLENN: Kelly, tell me first of all what your institution does.

KELLY: Liberty Institute is the largest legal organization in the country that exclusively, solely handles religious freedom, you know, First Amendment cases all across the United States, free of charge for people of all faiths.

GLENN: Okay. And you've been doing this for a long, long time. And you've seen all kinds of cases, but you've never seen cases like the cases that are coming across your desk now. And this is only the beginning.

KELLY: Yeah. I think you hit it on the head when you said -- most people look at the case coming up -- let's say on Monday, is when most people think they're going to hand down the same-sex marriage decision, and they just think about it just affecting marriage. They don't think about the impact that it will have on the First Amendment and religious freedom. We filed a brief on behalf of, you know, all kinds of national groups. National religious broadcasters. Big ministries that people would know about. We've seen what happens in other countries when they do this. And the First Amendment -- Canada took no time to have hate speech laws and other things. And now Christian organizations can't even -- can't even come into existence and be like law schools or things like that because they violate the new right.

So I just want people to think about -- and I can run through real quickly -- if there is a new federal constitutional right created by the Court -- and that's two of the three arguments -- that's what they're asking that they do, then this new federal constitutional right for same-sex marriage will be -- you know, immediately, the question will be, well, all right, how does this constitutional right compare to this other constitutional right of freedom of religion or free speech? And we don't have to wonder -- I mean, some of this came out in the oral argument. The solicitor general of the United States was asked, hey, look, if this is a new federal constitutional right and if people are discriminating, in the past, we've taken away tax-exempt status from religious groups, for instance, who discriminated on the basis of race. So won't we have to take away the tax-exempt status of all the nonprofit groups that disagree with this new federal constitutional right. And everybody thought that the solicitor general would say, oh, we're not going that far, et cetera.

His answer was: That will be an issue. So you can start with tax-exempt status of all nonprofits who disagree with this new federal position will be open for discussion. Christian colleges, school accreditation will be under question and attack. Faith-based adoption organizations, foster providers. Federal contractors and grantees, including with those with just loans at religious schools. Religious staffing at faith-based organizations will now be under attack. Those in the military, you don't follow this new agenda will suffer the consequences as well. We're already seeing those cases

PAT: Kelly, are you saying -- are you saying that a student who gets a loan to go to a school like BYU, for instance --

GLENN: Or Liberty University.

PAT: Or Liberty University would not be able to get the loan based on this ruling? Or the school would be under pressure to, what? How does that work?

KELLY: Yeah, absolutely. And let me say something. I'm not saying that we will have lost all these. I'm saying, there's like a -- a battle line opens. One way to put it is, it's not that this case will be the end of the battle. It will be the beginning of the battle, and all these things now are going to be attacked. So they, yeah, it could say, we can't allow you to get a federal loan to go to an institution that engages in discrimination.

PAT: Wow.

KELLY: And it goes further. Faith-based businesses, which you've already seen, will certainly be under attack. There's all these federal laws that triggers will into place now when they change the definition of marriage. Things like Title VII, which covers employment of anybody who has 16 or more employees. Housing and Urban Development. Department of Labor. Think of education. The SCC, I mean, there's a lot of people that are thinking about this case that they're not even thinking about, hey, this might impact my minister that I listen to or watch on TV or something. Do you think the FCC will allow a license to people who engage in discrimination against this new federal constitutional right?

GLENN: So, Kelly, let me ask you this. Let's go through a couple of things.

First of all, there already is a case that you guys are handling of a guy who was -- a person who had a scripture taped to the bottom of their monitor of their computer. Tell that story.

KELLY: Yes. This is a marine who was actually court-martialed. And by that, I don't mean they were charged. I mean, they were convicted. Court-martialed for having a scripture verse taped to the bottom of her computer at her workspace. We're now appealing that. We weren't involved. And when we saw it, we immediately jumped in to get involved. Because this kind of precedent will affect everybody in the military. And so we've now appealed to what's called the Court of Military Appeals, which is sort of the military Supreme Court.

But, you know, Glenn, that's just one of many examples. We have a chaplain we're representing who after 19 and a half years of incredible service for our country -- he was not just a chaplain. He was like a chaplain to SEAL Team 6, to Special Forces, and after an impeccable record for 19 years, he's been essentially -- you would call -- it's called detached for cause. But he's essentially been fired because he was asked in 101 Counseling what the biblical answer was to sex outside of marriage and what the Bible would say about that. He answered according to his faith, and that person complained that he was intolerant. And a commander has literally fired him from doing his job. Now they're considering kicked him out of the entire Navy. Losing his pension and everything. So this is the kind of thing that is already happening before the decision -- when it becomes a federal constitutional right, you can imagine how that goes on steroids.

GLENN: Then it's done. Let me ask about the pastor that was fired from I think his second job because somebody went back and looked at sermons that he had online. Can you tell me that story?

KELLY: Yeah, this is a wonderful guy. Eric Walsh. He was the director of public health for the city of Pasadena, California. And the state of Georgia said, hey, we'd like you to come be our director of public health for about a third of the state, an area director. He accepted. Then the next thing he knew, some activist from California called the state of Georgia, said, hey, you need to check out what this guy believes about marriage. And he goes to a church where he's allowed to preach. You need to review his sermons.

We now have the copies of the emails from the Georgia government officials, back and forth, divvying up his sermons to decide which government official is going to review which sermon. The next day they fired him. Again, not for anything he ever did at work, but because of what he said at his own church on a Sunday on issues. So that's an example.

Unfortunately we're having a number of these kind of cases now where people are losing their jobs, not because of what they do at work, but because of what they believe and the intolerance, like you mentioned, that's now coming out against those of faith and not want allowing them to hold their own beliefs.

PAT: That's a lot like the Firefox CEO. Right? The web browser CEO because he contributed to --

GLENN: But that is political pressure being applied. Those are these people -- yeah, this actually will be enforced by law. So, in other words, you want to be a firefighter, you want to be a police officer, you want to be a lawyer, you want to be a doctor, a psychiatrist, any of these things. You're not going to be allowed because you will be defined as somebody who is a bigot. And so you will not -- how are you going to be a doctor if you believe in traditional marriage? You're a bigot. How could you possibly be a -- a lawyer? You're a bigot.

So you will start -- you will see people lose their jobs because of what they believe. The right of conscience is about to go away. Am I overstating this, Kelly?

KELLY: No. This has not only started -- it will happen if what we think the Supreme Court does -- if they do.

But this is the battle line that is opening. I mean, currently what should happen if you lose your job, there are federal laws and state laws that protect religious freedom in the workplace. And those corporations, those entities should not only lose. But they should pay a painful penalty for engaging in that type of religious discrimination. This will be an attempt to now change that.

So what I'm saying, not that we'll lose all these religious freedoms and First Amendment rights overnight, but there will now be a weapon to attempt to lose -- there will be lawsuits in all these things I mentioned. I can guarantee you. It's just a matter of us winning. We have to win these cases. We have to preserve how this country was founded. Which is on the right to dissent. The right to disagree with the government and hold your own conscience and religious beliefs

GLENN: If we -- I'm a Libertarian so I believe you have a right to be married, but you also do not have a right to tell another person how they have to live their life or how they need to worship or what can be done in their church. Libertarians slowly take over the world and then leave everyone alone. But I believe that there is so much hatred out there that people even like me, people like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, all of us will be off the air because we're on federally held license. Our radio stations, they will lose their license if you have a -- a hatemonger or a bigot that is defined now by the Supreme Court as bigotry. We won't be able to broadcast. Would you agree with that?

KELLY: There's no doubt in my mind that that attack will come. That there will be an attempt to get Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh off the air. This is the exact argument they will try to make. These are the kinds of battles that I talk about are coming. I certainly hope and pray for our country that we will win those battles. But nobody can say because, again, this whole group of attacks is about to come into existence. So we haven't all these battles yet, but we're about to. We've seen the rumblings. We've seen the bakers and the florist and all those cases where the government is punishing people because they won't do something that's against their faith with regard to same-sex marriage. We've seen it with chaplains. We've seen it in a lot of different ways. I can give you examples of almost all these things where certain things have happened, certain cases. But this is about to be on a whole new level, and it will be across the country.

GLENN: Kelly Shackelford, he is the president of the Liberty Institute. LibertyInstitute.org. They take on religious freedom cases, pro bono, to try to set things right. I appreciate all of your hard work. We pray for you, Kelly. And we'll talk to you again soon with all these rulings coming down, I'd like to get some more advice from you and insight from you.

KELLY: Glenn, thank you for having me on. I did neglect to mention. Anyone who is a church or nonprofit, we have online things they can put in their policies if they have those beliefs to put themself in a position to be better protected if they are attacked. So I want to make sure that people know about that as well. That many churches are getting calls. They're getting the setup calls, where they'll probably be sued for not marrying two men or two women. They need to have those things about their beliefs and their doctrine in their legal documents that will help them out, if that ever happens.

GLENN: And you can get that at LibertyInstitute.org?

KELLY: Yes. Yes.

GLENN: Thank you very much, Kelly. I appreciate it. I talked to him yesterday for quite some time. We had him on TV for an hour and talked to him about these things. I highly recommend that your church prepares. And I highly recommend that you prepare. We'll have more on that coming up in just a second.

Glenn Beck: Adam Schiff is a LIAR — and we have the proof

Image source: Glenn Beck Program on BlazeTV

On the radio program Wednesday, Glenn Beck didn't hold back when discussing the latest in a long list of lies issued by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) during the Democrats' ongoing endeavor to remove President Donald Trump from office.

"I'm going to just come out and say, Adam Schiff is a liar. And he intentionally lied. And we have the proof. The media being his little lapdog, but I'll explain what's really going on, and call the man a liar to his face," Glenn asserted. "No, I'm not suggesting he's a liar. No, I'm telling you, he's a liar. ... Adam Schiff is a lying dirtbag."

A recent report in Politico claimed Schiff "mischaracterized" the content of a document sent to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) as evidence against President Trump in the Senate impeachment trial. Read more on this here.

"Let me translate [for Politico]," Glenn said. "House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff lied about a text message exchange between two players in the Ukrainian saga. And we know it, because of the documents that were obtained by Politico."

A few of the other lies on Schiff's list include his repeated false claims that there was "significant evidence of collusion" between the Trump campaign and Russia leading up to the 2016 presidential election, his phony version of President Trump's phone call with the president of Ukraine, and his retracted claim that neither he nor his committee ever had contact with the Trump-Ukraine whistleblower. And the list just keeps getting longer.

Watch the video below for more details:

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

On the radio program Tuesday, Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere discussed recent reports that former Vice President Joe Biden's son, Hunter, wasn't the only family member to capitalize on his connections to land an unbelievably lucrative job even though he lacked qualifications or experience.

According to Peter Schweizer's new book, "Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite," Joe Biden's younger brother, Frank, enjoyed the benefit of $54 million in taxpayer loans during the Obama administration to try his hand at an international development venture.

A lawyer by training, Frank Biden teamed up with a developer named Craig Williamson to build a sprawling luxury resort in Costa Rica, which claimed to be on a mission to preserve the country's forests but actually resulted in the decimation of thousands of acres of wilderness.

The then-vice president's brother also reportedly earned hundreds of thousands of dollars as the front man of a for-profit charter school company called Mavericks in Education.

The charter schools, which focused on helping at-risk teens, eventually failed after allegations of mismanagement and a series of lawsuits derailed the dubious business venture.

Watch the video below to get Glenn's take on these latest revelations in the Biden family corruption saga:

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

Ryan: Bernie at the disco

Photo by Sean Ryan

Saturday at El Malecón, we waited for the Democratic socialist. He had the wild white hair like a monk and the thick glasses and the booming voice full of hacks and no niceties.

Photo by Sean Ryan

The venue had been redecorated since we visited a few nights before when we chatted with Castro. It didn't even feel like the same place. No bouncy castle this time.

Photo by Sean Ryan

A black curtain blocked the stage, giving the room a much-needed depth.

Behind the podium, two rows of mostly young people, all holding Bernie signs, all so diverse and picturesque and strategic.

Photo by Sean Ryan

Lots of empty seats. Poor showing of Bernie fans for a Saturday afternoon. At one point, someone from Bernie's staff offered us seats in the audience, as if eager to fill up those seats however possible.

There were about 75 people in the dancehall, a place built for reunions and weddings and all those other festivities. But for a few hours on Saturday, August 10, 2019, it turned serious and wild for "Unidos Con Bernie."

Photo by Sean Ryan

People had been murmuring about Sanders' speech from the night before at Wing Ding. By all appearances, he had developed a raving lust to overthrow Trump. He had even promised, with his wife just out of view, that, were he elected, he'd end white nationalism in America. For good.

El Malecón lacked its previous air of celebration. It had undertaken a brooding yet defiant spirit. Media were sparse. Four cameras faced the podium. Three photographers, one of whom had been at nearly all the same events as us. A few of the staffers frowned at an empty row of chairs, because there weren't that many chairs to begin with.

At the entrance, Bernie staff handed out headsets that translated English to Spanish or Spanish to English, depending on who the speaker was. The translators stood behind the bar, 20 feet from the podium, and spoke into a lip-ribbon microphone.

Bernie's staff was probably the coolest, by far. As in, they looked cool and acted stylishly. Jeans. Sandals. Careworn blazers. Tattoos. One lad had a black Levi's shirt with lush crimson roses even though he wasn't a cowboy or a ranch-hand. Mustaches. Quirky hats. A plain green sundress. Some of them wore glasses, big clunking frames.

Photo by Sean Ryan

The outfits were distinctly Bernie. As Bernie as the tie-dyed "BERNIE" shirts for sale outside the club. Or later, at the Hilton, like a Grateful Dead cassette stand.

Immigration was the theme, and everyone in the audience bore some proof of a journey. Because America offers life, freedom, and hope.

Sanders' own father emigrated from Poland to America at 17, a high school dropout who could barely speak English. As a Jew, he'd faced religious persecution.

Within one generation, Bernie Sanders' father contributed to the highest stratum of American society. In one generation, near hopelessness had transformed into Democracy, his son a congressman with a serious chance at the presidency.

Photo by Sean Ryan

That's the beauty of America. Come here broken and empty and gutted and voiceless. And, within your lifetime, you can mend yourself then become a pillar of society. Then, your son can become the President of the United States of America!

Four people gave speeches before Sanders. They took their time, excited and nervous. They putzed. Because how often do you get to introduce a presidential frontrunner?

All the native English speakers jammed their earpieces when the woman with the kind and dark energy took the stage.

Photo by Sean Ryan

She mumbled in Spanish and did not look up and said that, when her parents died, she couldn't go home for the funeral. She fought back tears. She swallowed hard to shock herself calm. And the room engulfed each silence between every word.

It felt more like a therapy session than a political rally. A grueling therapy session at that. Was that what drew people to Bernie Sanders, that deep anguish? That brisk hope? Or, rather, the cessation of it, through Sanders? And, of course, the resultant freedom? Was it what gave Sanders a saintlike ability to lead people into the realm of the confessional? Did he have enough strength to lead a revolution?

Photo by Sean Ryan

While other frontrunners hocked out money for appearances, like the studio lights, Sanders spent money on translators and ear-pieces. The impression I got was that he would gladly speak anywhere. To anyone. He had the transitory energy you can capture in the writings of Gandhi.

Photo by Sean Ryan

I'm not saying he's right or wrong — I will never make that claim, about any of the candidates, because that's not the point of this, not the point of journalism, amen — what I'm saying is he has the brutal energy of someone who can take the subway after a soiree or rant about life by a tractor or chuck it up with Sarah Silverman, surrounded wherever he goes.

Without the slightest fanfare, Sanders emerged from behind the black curtain. The woman at the podium gasped a little. The room suctioned forward when he entered. In part because he was so nonchalant. And, again. That magnetism to a room when a famous or powerful or charming person enters. Not many people have it. Not many can keep it. Even fewer know how to brace it, to cull it on demand. But several of the candidates did. One or two even had something greater.

Photo by Sean Ryan

I'll only say that Bernie had it with a bohemian fervor, like he was a monk stranded in a big city that he slowly brings to God.

"We have a President who, for the first time in my lifetime, who is a President who is a racist," he shouted. "Who is a xenophobe and anti-immigrant. Who is a sexist. Who is a religious bigot. And who, is a homophobe. And, what is very disappointing is that, when we have a President, we do not necessarily expect to agree with him, or her, on every issue. But we do believe that one of the obligations is to bring people to-geth-ah. As Americans."

Photo by Sean Ryan

After listening silently for several minutes, the audience clapped. Their sweet response felt cultish. But, then again, what doesn't feel cultish these days? So this was cultish like memes are cultish, in a striving-to-understand kind of way.

"The essence of our campaign is in fact to bring people together," he said. "Whether they're black, or white, or latino, or Native American, or Asian-American. We understand that we are Americans."

At times, this meant sharing a common humanity. Others, it had a slightly more disruptive feel. Which worked. Sometimes all we want is revolution. To be wild without recourse. To overthrow. To pass through the constraints of each day. To survive. The kind of rowdy stuff that makes for good poetry but destroys credit lines. Sanders radiated with this intensity, like a reclusive philosopher returning to society, from his cave to homes and beds and fences and maybe electricity.

Photo by Sean Ryan

But, as he says, his revolution would involve healthcare and wages and tuition, not beheadings and purges and starvation.

Seeing the Presidential candidates improvise was amazing. They did it constantly. They would turn any of their beliefs into a universal statement. And Sanders did this without trying. So he avoided doing the unbearably arrogant thing of pretending to speak like a native Guatemalan, and he looked at the group of people, and he mumbled in his cloudy accent:

"My Spanish — is not so good."

Photo by Sean Ryan

This is the same and the opposite of President Trump's Everyman way of speaking English like an American. Of speaking American.

Often, you know what Sanders will say next. You can feel it. And, anytime this happened, it brought comfort to the room.

Like, it surprised no one when he said that he would reinstate DACA on his first day in office. It still drew applause.

But other times, he expressed wild ideas with poetic clarity. And his conclusions arrived at unusual junctures. Not just in comparison to Republicans. To all of them. Bernie was the Tupac of the 2020 election. And, to him, President Trump was Suge Knight, the evil force behind it all.

"Donald Trump is an idiot," he shouted.

Photo by Sean Ryan

Everybody loved that. Everybody clapped and whooped and some even whistled like they were outside and not in a linoleum-floor dancehall.

"Go get 'em, Bernie," someone in the back shouted.

This was the only Sanders appearance with no protestors.

"Let me say this about the border," he shouted. And everybody listened to every thunking syllable. He probably could have spoken without a mic. Booming voice. Loud and clear. Huddling into that heavy Vermont slug accent.

They'll say many many things about Bernie. One being, you never had to lean forward to hear him. In person, even more so. He's less frail. More dynamic.

Photo by Sean Ryan

Despite the shoddiness of the venue, there was a sign language interpreter. Most of the rallies had a designated interpreter.

"If you work 40 hours a week you shouldn't be living in poverty," he shouted, provoking chants and applause from the audience, as if he were talking about them. Maybe he was.

An anecdote about the people at an emergency food shelf blended into the livable wage of $15 an hour. He shifted into his spiel about tuition-free college and pointed at the audience, "You're not doing well," then at the kids behind him, "they are." He craned his head sideways and back. "Do your homework," he told said.

Laughter.

Half of the kids looked like they hadn't eaten in days. Maybe it was their unusual situation, a few feet from Bernie Sanders at a stucco community center.

Before the room could settle, Sanders wove through a plan for how to cancel debt.

Did he have a solution?

Tax Wall Street, he shouted.

Photo by Sean Ryan

And he made it sound easy. "Uno dos trey," he said. "That's my Spanish for today."

A serious man, he shoved through his speech like a tank hurtling into dense jungle. He avoided many of the typical politician gimmicks. Proof that he did not practice every expression in front of a mirror. That he did not hide his accent. That he did not preen his hair. That he did not smile for a precise amount of time, depending on the audience. That he did not pretend to laugh.

Photo by Sean Ryan

He laughed when humor overtook him. But it was genuine. With none of the throaty recoil you hear in forced laughter.

"I want everyone to take a deep breath," he said. And a palpable lightness spread through the room, because a deep breath can solve a lot of problems.

Photo by Sean Ryan

Then he roused some more. "Healthcare is a human right," he shouted. "A human privilege," he shouted. He told them that he lives 50 miles from the Canadian border in Burlington, Vermont, and healthcare works better up north.

Each candidate had a bad word, and Sanders' was "corporate."

Photo by Sean Ryan

At every speech, he mentioned "corporate media" with the same distrust and unpleasantness that conservatives derive from the term "mainstream media." Another would be "fake news," as popularized by Sanders' sworn enemy. Either way it's the same media. Just different motivations that irk different people.

But the discrepancies varied. Meaning two opposing political movements disliked the same thing, but for opposite reasons.
It sounded odd, Sanders' accusation that the media were against him. The media love Bernie. I can confirm this both anecdotally and judiciously. Yes, okay, in 2016, the media appeared to have sided with Hillary Clinton. As a result, Sanders was publicly humiliated. Because Clinton took a mafioso approach to dealing with opponents, and Sanders was her only roadblock.

Imagine if a major political organization devoted part of each day to agitating your downfall. And then you fail. And who's fault is it?

Sanders wanted to know: those negative ads targeting him, who paid for them?

Photo by Sean Ryan

Corporations, of course. Corporations that hated radicals like him. And really was he so radical? He listed off the possibilities: Big pharma, insurance companies, oil companies.

Because he had become a revolutionary, to them. To many.

He said it with certainty, although he often didn't have to say it at all. This spirit of rebellion had become his brand. He would lead the wild Americans into a utopia.

But just as quickly, he would attack. Trump, as always, was the target.

He called Trump the worst president in American history.

"The fates are Yuge," he shouted.

The speech ended as informally as it had begun. And Sanders' trance over the audience evaporated, replaced by that suction energy. Everyone rushed closer and closer to the man as Neil Young's "Keep on Rockin in the Free World" blared. Sanders leaned into the podium and said, "If anyone wants to form a line, we can do some selfies."

Photo by Sean Ryan

It was like meeting Jesus for some of the people.

There he was, at El Malecón. No stage lights, no makeup, no stylist behind the curtain. Just him and his ideas and his erratic hand commotion.

Then a man holding a baby leaned in for a photo. He and Sanders chatted. And, I kid you not, the whole time the baby is staring at Bernie Sanders like he's the image of God, looking right up at him, with this glow, this understanding.

Bernie, if you're reading this, I'd like to suggest that — if this election doesn't work for you — you could be the next Pope.

New installments come Mondays and Thursdays. Check out my Twitter. Email me at kryan@blazemedia.com

On the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Monday, Harvard Law professor and lawyer on President Donald Trump's impeachment defense team Alan Dershowitz explains the history of impeachment and its process, why the framers did not include abuse of power as criteria for a Constitutional impeachment, why the Democrats are framing their case the way they are, and what to look for in the upcoming Senate trial.

Dershowitz argued that "abuse of power" -- one of two articles of impeachment against Trump approved by House Democrats last month -- is not an impeachable act.

"There are two articles of impeachment. The second is 'obstruction of Congress.' That's just a false accusation," said Dershowitz. "But they also charge him, in the Ukraine matter, with abuse of power. But abuse of power was discussed by the framers (of the U.S. Constitution) ... the framers refused to include abuse of power because it was too broad, too open-ended.

"In the words of James Madison, the father of our Constitution, it would lead presidents to serve at the will of Congress. And that's exactly what the framers didn't want, which is why they were very specific and said a president can be impeached only for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors," he added.

"What's alleged against President Trump is not criminal," added Dershowitz. "If they had criminal issues to allege, you can be sure they would have done it. If they could establish bribery or treason, they would have done it already. But they didn't do it. They instead used this concept of abuse of power, which is so broad and general ... any president could be charged with it."

Watch the video below to hear more details:



Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.