Did Russia Commit an Act of War?

Is there any doubt what would have happened if Russians hacked into the RNC on Ronald Reagan's watch? It would have been an act of war.

"It would be 20,000 times worse than Watergate. They are trying to influence our election, and no one is asking why." Glenn said.

As usual, the mainstream media focused on the wrong reasons and people.

"They'll go to stupid and silly motivations like, 'Well, they're a fan of Donald Trump because he has investments.' There's no evidence of that. There's no proof of that. Or they'll say, 'Well, because Vladimir Putin doesn't like Hillary Clinton because she embarrassed him on the world stage.' True. But Putin is too smart for that. This is too big of a move just to embarrass somebody," Glenn said.

Glenn laid out the case Wednesday on his TV program and Thursday on radio behind the WikiLeaks release of 20,000 emails on the eve of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) --- and who's behind it.

First things first, it's been confirmed that Russia was behind the hack and, in effect, broke into DNC headquarters. Three separate security firms --- SecureWorks, CrowdStrike and Fidelis Cybersecurity --- have confirmed the Russian military and the new KGB, known as the FSB, were behind the cyber attacks, specifically two cyber units nicknamed Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear.

How did WikiLeaks become involved? How did the company come into possession of the emails? For now, both the Russian government and WikiLeaks have denied the emails were transferred between the two entities.

"If WikiLeaks isn't an apparatus bought and paid for by the Russian intelligence services, it is clearly a preferred partner," Glenn said.

In 2006, Julian Assange founded WikiLeaks in Australia. Previously, he hosted an interview show called the World Tomorrow, which aired on a network called RT. RT used to stand for Russia Today. According to RT's website, it is an international English language network that provides an alternate perspective on major global events and acquaints international audiences with a Russian viewpoint.

"This network is owned by the federal government of Russia. Which means, it is run by Vladimir Putin, a former KGB, FSB agent. It is pure propaganda, which goes against everything that WikiLeaks says they are. Their slogan is, 'We open governments.' Well, you're presenting your view on a government propaganda machine," Glenn said.

Another ominous link between WikiLeaks and the Russian government involves former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

In 2013, Assange reached out to Snowden, brokering the deal to get him to Russia. Snowden took sanctuary in Russia, under the watchful eye of the Russian government. At his own request, Assange now enjoys the protection of the FSB while hiding out in London.

The rabbit hole deepens with Donald Trump's campaign team.

Key members of Trump's campaign managerial team --- Carter Page, Richard Burt, and Paul Manafort --- questionably ties to Russian interests and, arguably, the Russian government. While Trump only appears to be a puppet of Putin's interference in a U.S. presidential campaign, his role helps reveal the true endgame of this latest game of Russian roulette.

"People don't want to hear this, but Russia is playing us. And Russia doesn't give a flying crap about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. They are aiming for chaos and revolution in our streets, and that's why they attacked Hillary Clinton.

The mastermind behind Russia's chaotic goal in the West is Aleksandr Dugin, a key advisor to Putin.

"I want you to understand that Dugin is a very important guy. He believes, in his own words, Hitler didn't go far enough and that we have to cause chaos all over the world to break the system so a greater Hitler can come and play a role, and we will cobble fascists together all over the world. He is the guy in 1999 that said in the international press, 'In the next decade, America will break apart into five parts. It's going to head into revolution. And I know this because we have people in place'" Glenn said.

Putin's ultimate goal is to rebuild the Russian empire following the advice of Aleksandr Dugin, a very dangerous man.

"We'll have more on this next week. This is more important than anything we ever did with George Soros. This is very important," Glenn said.

Get Glenn's complete analysis on this vital story at TheBlaze TV or by listening to the clip below:

Listen to this segment beginning at 1:20:10 from The Glenn Beck Program:

Featured Image: Kremlin.ru/Wikimedia Commons

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN 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 multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:


Use code GLENN 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.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.