Dinesh D’Souza: Progressives Shift the Blame, Present Themselves as the Remedy

The very dangerous former inmate Dinesh D'Souza joined The Glenn Beck Program on Wednesday to discuss his thoroughly researched bias against Hillary Clinton, revealed in his bestselling book and movie by the same title, Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party. The movie is currently the number one DVD in America on Amazon.

RELATED: Dinesh D’Souza’s ‘Hillary’s America’ Horrifies Critics, Delights Audiences

"I noticed he doesn't particularly think Hillary will be a good president," Co-host Stu Burguiere commented.

Glenn also made an observation.

"I've picked up that he's also critical of the Democratic Party," he said.

Not wanting to put words in the bestselling author's mouth, Stu carefully described D'Souza as "skeptical of their leadership."

"I would say that it's almost as if he's calling them racist," Glenn said, not holding back.

What's the truth about D'Souza's stance on Hillary and the Democratic Party?

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these hardcore questions:

• What's Bill Clinton's type of girl?

• Is Obama a thin-skinned narcissist?

• Was Hillary raised as a Democrat or Republican?

• Did Hillary participate in beauty contests as a young girl?

• How many Republicans owned slaves in 1860?

• What does former attorney general Eric Holder have in common with the movie Casablanca?

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Hello, America. Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. I've heard that there's this woman, Hillary Clinton, and there's this other guy -- he's a jailbreaker. A law breaker.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: This guy has been in prison. So what credibility does he have? He has an axe to grind against this woman called Hillary Clinton. Who is she? What possible scandals could she have in her past? The law breaker himself, Dinesh D'souza is here, and we begin, right now.


GLENN: Hillary's America is the number one DVD in America on Amazon right now. And Hillary's America, the book by Dinesh D'souza has been out and been a number one and top five best-seller for a very long time.

Welcome to the program, Dinesh. How are you?

DINESH: Great to be here.

GLENN: Good to have you.

As you're watching Eric Holder -- he tweeted today, right? As you're watching people talk about putting people in prison because they disagree with them politically --

JEFFY: Which could never happen.

GLENN: -- which could never happen in America -- oh, wait a minute. It happened to you.


When you saw the tweet today from Eric Holder which said...

DINESH: Well, in effect he said, "I am shocked, shocked to hear that there are people talking about putting political dissidents in jail in America."

STU: Right.

DINESH: He seemed to be outraged. It reminded me, of course, that the guy from Casablanca, the lieutenant who was shocked to find gambling going on right under his nose.

GLENN: Right. Right, right.

DINESH: And, my case, look, there are people who have committed campaign finance violations who have gone to prison.


DINESH: But in every single case, there is corruption or witness tampering, or in one case, the guy had done it several times before. In my case, the amount was 20 grand, my own money. And not something I was looking to gain. I was helping a college friend running for the Senate. So no American has been locked up for doing what I did. And the government looked really hard to find a case so they could tell the judge, "Look, we think you should put this guy in prison because this guy went to prison -- they couldn't find a single case.

And so that's the issue, justice at its core isn't just if you do it. Because, you know, you get a speeding ticket and they give you one year in prison, you did it. But it's a penalty that doesn't fit the crime, where other guys who did the same thing aren't going to get remotely like the same penalty.

GLENN: You've been a guy who has been outspoken from the beginning on Barack Obama and now Hillary Clinton.

You're not making any friends with the woman who could quite possibly be the next president of the United States. What have you changed in your life? Or what has changed mentally in you, knowing what they can do, a lot of people would back off. A lot of people would say, "Okay. I'm going to shut up." You didn't. You doubled down.

What are you thinking?

DINESH: Well, I think I've been in some ways radicalized by my own experience. And when I took on Obama, I thought was making kind of an intellectual discovery about him, that he was not so much a civil rights guy, but an anti-colonialist.

And to pursue that story, journalistically, I went to Kenya. But I think the effect of that movie was to get not only -- it kind of got into his head, Obama, and it made him look bad because, you know, there I was with his brother in the Harooma Slums of Nairobi. Here was President Obama talking about, "We are our brother's keeper." So it made him look like a complete hypocrite. And he's a thin-skinned narcissist. So I think this is where the vendetta started.

But I didn't really know what I was getting into. I thought I was, you know, blowing the whistle and showing people a side of Obama they didn't know.

But you take on the US government, they unleash the FBI on you. They've got your bank records in one hand, your tax files in the other hand. You know, you feel the vulnerability of that, United States of America versus Dinesh D'souza.

So my initial reaction was to step back and cower down. And then when I got in the confinement center, all these hoodlums walking around, sleeping on bunk beds, and spitting everywhere and so on.

Again, my initial reaction was to be a hermit, to stay back. And it was only as I began to reflect on this, it kind of took me back to my childhood. I'm an immigrant. I came to America with $500 in my pocket. I've seen the American dream.

Well, this is the other America. And I decided, "I'm not going to do that. I'm actually going to kind of go all in for this country, which has meant everything to me."

GLENN: Does it concern you -- because you and I both know who Hillary Clinton is. She is corrupt to the core. The WikiLeaks is showing that she'll say one thing to -- you know, out in the open. And the 180-degree opposite, you know, behind closed doors. Does it concern you at all for where this country has been, the trouble that is probably on the horizon, economically, et cetera, et cetera. And thank you're dealing with somebody who says, "Never let a good crisis go to waste." Does it concern you at all that you would be targeted again?

DINESH: I'm more concerned for America than I am for myself. In some ways, I feel like there's a certain weird safety being on the front line.


DINESH: In other words, you know, if the guy who writes Hillary's America, makes the movie Hillary's America disappears tomorrow, who is the main suspect. Right?

GLENN: Right.

DINESH: So in some ways, there's a certain security in being out there in front.

But if she is the gangster that we believe her to be, shouldn't we make every effort to block her? Because once you give her the Oval Office, you give her the accouterments of power -- even as Secretary of State, we saw what she did with that power. But even then, she was under the reign of Obama. However, the Obama people at least were like Hillary: Give us a list of all the foreign donors who are giving you money.

But without that, remove that, and now you have a woman who has the full apparatus of the federal government. The FBI. The CIA at her disposal. It is a terrifying kind of power.

GLENN: You think she ever believed -- you know, I said the other day that the Hillary of the 1960s, if she could come back and meet the Hillary of today, she might punch her in the face. Because she's become everything she claimed she was against.

Was she ever -- was she ever pure in thought and just wanting to do good things? Did she have a turning point in her life where it went really dark?

DINESH: You know, there's only little glimpses of young Hillary that one can get from all the bios of Hillary.

Remarkably, when she was very young, she wanted to be a beauty queen. She entered all these beauty pageants.

JEFFY: That was a tough road.

GLENN: Enough.

DINESH: Well, she wanted to be the classic, you know, the all American girl. That was her original thought. And she was a Goldwater girl in those days. She was a Republican. Her dad was a Republican.

STU: I didn't know that.

DINESH: Oh, yeah. And so her mom was kind of a closet liberal, but the dad was a Republican. I think what happened is when Hillary was late in high school and then on to Wellesley College, she realized, "I don't have the looks, and I don't have the political charm. I don't have that magnetic gregariousness that you need to advance in politics. I actually need to find a partner who does, someone who in a sense can carry me."

GLENN: So do you think that was a political calculation, her relationship, at the beginning?

DINESH: Yeah, I think she knew. See, remember, Bill had had problems with sexual harassment at Oxford, even before he came to Yale Law School. And Hillary knew about that. Hillary knew about Bill from the old days. She knew from the beginning. So she made a decision to go ahead. And there had to be a reason. Just like there had to be a reason for Bill to go for her. She's not his type. He's the opposite of his type.

GLENN: What's his type?

DINESH: His type is Monica Lewinsky.

JEFFY: Yeah.

DINESH: His type is the sort of, you know, high cheek-boned, wide jawed, you know, trailer park girl, if you will.

DINESH: Thick hair.

DINESH: Yeah. He likes that style. Hillary, the hippie. Hillary, the sort of, don't shave your underarms. Hillary, the sort of ideologue. That's just not --

GLENN: You didn't need to bring that up.

JEFFY: Oh, we're back to beauty pageants?


DINESH: No, this is -- I'm just drawing on what was -- yeah, this was all -- this is all in the Hillary biographies.

GLENN: Right, right, right.

DINESH: So they both found something that the other person had, and they made a pact early on. And their marriage has been based on that. So that's why I think it's been so interesting to see the media playing this pageant.

GLENN: So when do you think she went really corrupt and dark? Was -- let me just ask you this: You know, the Travelgate and the Lincoln bedroom, and the selling of access. Was that the beginning -- the training wheels of what became the Clinton Foundation? And if so, what is the Clinton Foundation, the training wheel for, to come?

DINESH: Yeah. So you remember in the Arkansas days, the Clintons would do small-time -- they would do small-time rackets. Hillary puts in a thousand bucks, she makes 100 grand because there's a guy who is essentially sheltering her from risk. And why is he doing that? Because Bill is attorney general.

So they're running small rackets. Then they get to the White House. They can't believe it. They suddenly realize that things like pardons can be sold. And so here's Mark Rich. He's willing to put in millions of dollars into the DNC and to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for a pardon. And they're on their way out the door. Why not? They go for it.

So to them, everything is for sale. Now, when Hillary becomes Secretary of State, now, they've already exited the presidency. And now their schemes become cleverer and bigger. And they realize, "Oh, Bill's speaking fee is $150,000. Why don't we move it up to $600,000?" Obviously, Bill's content isn't going to improve.

GLENN: Right. There's no slide show coming with it.

DINESH: But now they want favors out of Hillary, and so this isn't really paying for a speech. It's a bribe. But it's just guised as payment for a speech. And so the Clintons in that sense are completely unscrupulous. I haven't seen anything like this -- we've seen it with like Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall in New York. But at the national level, I mean, have you heard of a Secretary of State renting out American foreign policy? Never.

GLENN: No. So what does that give us a glimpse into what she is going to be if she wins? What does America -- what does American policy look like?

DINESH: The way I think about it is kind of like this: What did Al Capone want out of Chicago? If you could give him everything he wanted, what did he want? He basically wanted to be the mob boss of Chicago. Right? He wanted to be able to loot the treasury. He wanted all his buddies to be on the payroll. He can give him contracts when he wants. He wanted his critics to be pushed away. Leave the state. I'll throw you off a roof. I'll reduce your influence. I'll get you fired. And the most important thing, he wanted to walk into the big Chicago stadium and have the whole crowd stand up and shout, "Big Al, Big Al, Big Al," with cult-like devotion. That's what Hillary wants from America. She wants to be the --

GLENN: So she's -- we're not talking about Evita. We're talking about an oligarch.

DINESH: Yeah, if you look at Evita -- I mean, Evita was corrupt. Evita wanted to -- Evita was sort of a girl from the wrong side of the tracks who made good and wanted to cash in on her opportunity.

But let's say this: Did Evita care how the ordinary Argentine live his life? Did Evita want to tell you what religion to practice or where you can live or whether you can own a gun? She couldn't care less.

GLENN: Right.

DINESH: And most dictators are even like that. They don't care about your personal life. As long as they're ensconced in power and you don't molest them, they don't want to molest you. But today's progressivism has such a built-in tyrannical impulse, which Hillary embodies, that you can't say today, "I'm going to go in my little enclave, and I'm going to be sheltered. And I'll just live my life, drive my pickup truck, and I'll go hunting."

No, they're going to come after you, in your church, out on the hunting range. They're not going to leave you alone, and so we can't leave them alone.

GLENN: Okay. Back in just a second with more of Dinesh D'souza. Is the paper book out yet?

DINESH: No, the books are still in hardback, but the movie is out in DVD.

GLENN: The movie is out in DVD. It's Hillary's America. Dinesh D'Souza.


GLENN: Dinesh D'souza is with us. The movie, on DVD, is out now. Hillary's America. Where he really takes you back to the -- the roots of the Democrats and the progressive party, which is as racist as you can get.

DINESH: And -- and many of the rip-off schemes, the rackets, the exploitation, that we see in the Clintons, we find that sordid tradition going back all the way to Andrew Jackson. So the racism wasn't just that I don't like blacks. It was that I found a way to get black people to work for me for free. In other words, that's what slavery was. It's basically a stealing of another man's labor. And in order to steal his labor, you have to steal his whole life.

And the Democrats championed that. And they said it was a good thing. So they're the inventor of the notion of slavery as a positive good.

And then after the Civil War, they came up with new schemes. Segregation, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, and then the whole social Darwinism, forced sterilization, all of which led to sympathy for fascism.

So there's all this stuff. And I think in one of the greatest -- you know, there's the economic heist. You rob Fort Knox. You rob the treasury. But then there's the intellectual heist, which is, you rob the honor of America and the Republican Party, and you blame them for the bad things that you did. That's the genius of the progressives, is to shift the blame on to someone else.

GLENN: It is.

DINESH: And then present themselves as the remedy.

GLENN: How is it that the Klan, which has always been Democrat -- it was a Democratic voting machine. How is it that the Klan has now moved into this alt-right, to where they're -- I mean, they are -- you know, like the neo-Nazis. National socialism. How -- what do they find with the right that they identify with?

DINESH: Well, the -- let's think of what motivated someone to join the Klan in the first place. Like, why would you join the Ku Klux Klan?

The reason was that in the South, what the Democratic Party said to the poor white guy is, "I'm going to make you a member of an aristocracy." Right? You're going to be higher than every black guy in the country. So even if here is a black guy, he's educated, he went to college, he's got a good job, and you don't, but because of your skin color, I'm going to put you on top of him. So whiteness becomes membership in this racial club. And your social status becomes elevated by virtue.

So Democrats were offering that to poor whites in the South. And that was one of the main reasons -- think of why the poor whites thought in the Civil War. They didn't have slaves. What were they fighting for? What was in it for them? The Democrats have always understood the kind of low motives of the human psyche.

Even today, look at the way they tap into avarice, envy, all these secret emotions that people have. And they never do it openly. They never say, "You're an envious man." They go -- they make it seem like you're self-righteous. "You're being denied your fair share." Therefore, you should you know smash into this guy's house and take his stuff because he owes owes you. So the the Democrats know what they're doing. They're playing with fire. They're playing with low human emotions. Now, there is a far right version of doing the same thing. And so you may say that at the extremes, the right and the left tend to converge.

GLENN: But what I don't understand is, for instance, the neo-Nazis, their claim is the far right, but they're national socialists. I mean, the right in America has always been the smallest possible government. You know...

DINESH: No, absolutely.

GLENN: Extreme on the right should be anarchists.

DINESH: Even in Europe, if you think of the right, what's the extreme right in Europe? It was throne and alter.

GLENN: Right.

KELLY: It was the idea of a country run by an alliance between sacred church and the monarchy.


DINESH: And that's gone. That's want ape threat today.

GLENN: Right.

DINESH: What is a threat today is a different kind of different collectivism. Which was now a by the Nazis by the progressives. Most people don't realize all those three movements were on the same side of the aisle.


STU: Can we see the example of what you're talking about in the way they frame things? We've talked about about forever, keeping up with the Joneses, we looked at that as a negative idea, or what everybody else in your town has. Now they frame that as income inequality. And it's the same basic foundational belief, right? That you should be able to get what everyone else has. But now that it's framed as income equality, all of a sudden that's a positive. Isn't that an example of what they're trying to do?

GLENN: Twenty seconds.

DINESH: Yeah, the good side of it is trying to immolate the successful guy, and that's what we believe. Right? The guy starts a business. You should. The Democrat approach is different. And that is to appeal to envy, to appeal to him pulling you down until the two of you are leveled.

GLENN: Yes. So when we come back, I want to talk to you a little about, what does America look like with Hillary Clinton as president of the United States? It can't be good. Dinesh D'souza, next.


GLENN: We're talking to Dinesh D'souza. Hillary's America is out. The book, also the movie. Number one DVD, Amazon. Great movie. A lot of really good research. I am so happy, Dinesh that you did it the way you did it. It's more than a documentary and talking heads. It's almost like a feature film.

DINESH: It's entertaining. And that's why people go to the movies.

GLENN: Yeah.

DINESH: And, you know, I'm thrilled that people love the movie. And I tried to put strong generalizations in the movie and invite the left to go after them. In 1860, the year of the Civil War, no Republican owned a slave. All the slave in the whole country were owned by Democrats. Now, think about that. That's a claim you can refute by simply giving me a list of five Republicans who owned slaves. No one has been able to do it. So it's the kind of unnerving factual claim that you go, "Why didn't someone tell me that in school? Why haven't I seen that in the media?"

DINESH: And part of what gives power to our movie is that the left has been so successful in covering things up, in putting out a false narrative.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, people get angry --

DINESH: Truth becomes incendiary.

GLENN: People get angry when they realize that this has all been hidden from them, especially African-Americans. They really feel duped.

DINESH: Who did the Civil Rights movement of the 60s. The leftist claim the full credit --- we did it. So whatever our sins in the past are washed clean because we gave you the civil rights movement. No, in fact, more Republicans voted for it than Democrats; the main opposition came from the Democratic Party.

GLENN: So let me ask you this question: And I said this on the air the other day, and I've actually called a couple of historians and asked them, and they said, "Wow, I don't know, but let me look into it."

You might actually know. Who wrote the Civil Rights Bill and, more importantly, the Great Society bills from LBJ?

Because we just did a deal about the destructive force of those programs, you couldn't have designed them any better to tear the black community apart. And then I started thinking, "Wait. But that's -- I mean, that was the progressive ideal." Were there deep progressives that wrote that -- do you know, were there any real racist progressives that wrote that? Any evidence at all that that may have been an intention of some that wrote that Great Society?

DINESH: Well, you know, going back to FDR and Social Security, FDR knew that it had to be designed -- if he wanted it to work politically, it had to be designed in a way that no one could undo it.

And FDR boasted, I'm going to design it in such a way that it can't be ended. It will go on forever. And the way I do that is I don't have Glenn Beck have a retirement account and Dinesh have a retirement account. I'm going to make it so that the old people today are funded by the young people today.

And that's why, when the young people become old, they're going to demand that the next generation of young people pay for them.

So these people thought of that stuff. They thought -- they weren't just thinking about helping Glenn Beck and Dinesh retire. They were thinking, how do we, the Democrats, get to own this program and own these people for generations?

Same with LBJ. With the LBJ -- they didn't say, let's go destroy the black family.

But they went, "How do we create a whole class of people who need us in order to get by, to pay the mortgage, to get food? Because that way, we got them. And if we can kind of hold them in this dependency -- so this is why, for example, why the left opposed gentrification schemes in the inner city.

You come in and say -- and you're not even a government. You're a private business. You go, listen, I want to bring in Starbucks. I want to bring in all these companies who will create lofts -- high-tech companies. Everyone will have jobs. The real estate values will go up.

The people who live there are better off because their property values will go up. The left will oppose you.

Why? Because they know, we've got 90 percent of these people enthralled to us right now. They're voting for us. If we make them self-reliant, they're going to be like, "Okay. I'm leaving the plantation. Goodbye." And so they don't want that to happen. And so they have a perverse incentive to keep these people enthralled.

GLENN: Into the book is Hillary's America. What does it look like in four years if she wins?

DINESH: Well, I'm from India, a country run by gangs. If you saw Slum Dog Millionaire, you get a feeling for what that's like. Debbie, my wife is from Venezuela. You know what it's like over there. People are eating dogs and cats, and the country is run like one big gang.

So we came to America because in America you don't have to be corrupt in everyday life. You don't to have pay a bribe to a cop. You can live your normal life. There are ladders of opportunity. That America is up for grabs right now, and I think Hillary is the antithesis of that. She's the antithesis of ladders of opportunity. She represents the whole idea that we belong to the government. She controls the government. We belong to her, in effect. That's the America that she's pushing for, if the American people will sign on the dotted line.

GLENN: Will the people sign on the dotted line? Are you saying this election, or will people sign on the dotted line after the election?

DINESH: Well, I think the sad thing about America is that the people who make the difference in the election are the least attuned to what's going on.

They're the people -- and their impulse isn't bad. Their impulse is that in a good country, you should normally be able to mow your lawn and go to work and go to the movies and not worry a whole lot about politics. Just like you should be able to live in a house and sleep on the couch and walk in the hallway without consulting the blueprints every day.

GLENN: Right.

DINESH: But it's when your house begins to shake, then you need the blueprints. And similarly, we are at one of those rare times in American history. I've only known four or five times in US history where this has been the case, where more is being asked of the ordinary citizen. More knowledge. More vigilance. More alertness.

Some of us as immigrants know this instinctively. And so it's a little bit of a waking up process to get the ordinary American who is like, what? What -- what's new? Why do I have to do this now? Well, because this is a different situation than it was in 1980 or even in 1960.

GLENN: Do we make it?

DINESH: You know, I think we do. I'm optimistic. I'm not one of these guys who goes, "The country is finished if Hillary wins." But it is true that when you take a lot of blows on the head, you become a different country. We've gone through a lot with Obama. It's not going to help.

GLENN: We are completely a different country than we were 15 years ago or eight years ago. Completely different country.

In retrospect, Barack Obama, better or worse or the same of what you thought in 2008?

DINESH: I think I had the sense of Obama in 2008 of a twisted pathetic, emotionally deformed person who had been abandoned by his mom and his dad. And out of this had hatched this perverted ideology that he was -- that he believed. And that he was pursuing with dogged determination. He wrapped it up in the bow of hope and change. But it actually was a very concrete set of things. That is still my view of Obama. He's a messed-up guy at the core, but his messed-upness is wrapped up in a kind of false idealism, just like his narcissism springs from deep insecurity. He's a more interesting person than Hillary.

Hillary is a straight-out, you know, Luca Brasi. What makes Hillary interesting is that she's Luca Brasi who tries to pass herself off as wearing a halo, which is a very ugly and kind of ridiculous sight. And that's what makes her comic, as well as tragic. So I don't really -- I'm not interested in Hillary, in the way I am interested -- I would like to have dinner with Obama. I'd find him interesting psychologically.

GLENN: Yes, yes.

DINESH: The same way I'd like to meet Nixon. But Hillary, I'll pass.

GLENN: So, but wait. What I was asking was -- the country weathered him better than I thought we would.

DINESH: Yeah, he's -- what he's done is he's weakened -- I think his greatest harm is he's weakened American influence in the world.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

JEFFY: Huge.

DINESH: It used to be that nothing could happen in South America, in the Middle East, in the Far East without America having a big say so. He's sort of made us irrelevant, and that was his goal.


DINESH: So that's his greatest --

JEFFY: A lot of help with Hillary Clinton on that in the State Department.

GLENN: Yeah.

DINESH: Yes, but it was his agenda. She was a functionary for his agenda in doing that.

GLENN: What's the difference between his agenda and her agenda?

DINESH: Her agenda essentially has to do with large suitcases of cash. Because I honestly believe that any country can get a meeting with Hillary, if they're willing to pay. Any business can get a meeting with Hillary, if they're willing to pay. And so in that sense, Hillary is above ideology. She has an ideology, and the ideology serves her. But she's perfectly willing to go against it if --

GLENN: Any of the triangulation of Bill Clinton in Hillary?

DINESH: Very little. Only the rhetorical triangulation. When she says things like, "I want to be a president for Republicans too." Now, that is a very interesting statement. Because in our system, the president is supposed to even represent the people who voted against him or her. She has no intention of doing it, but she says it.

JEFFY: Right. Right.

STU: Because that's one of the interesting things that's come out of the Podesta emails coming out, is that Hillary behind closed doors seems to be much better than she is in public. In that, she is saying things that are pro-free trade. She is saying things that are pro-fracking. She's saying these things. And my instinct is, she's saying them because she thinks the audience at that private speech thinks that, so she's playing to that. Is it just a --

GLENN: Which one is she? Is she the private one that is pro-business, pro-fracking if you pay, or is she the radical that wants to shut everything down because she believes in global warming?

DINESH: Well, she's neither. She gains on both fronts. So, for example, let's take a Hillary meeting with Goldman Sachs. Here's what Hillary says to Goldman Sachs.

She says, "Listen, out there, I've got to denounce you guys. Right? So I'm doing it because I have something to gain, which is political. I have to make you look bad because you're the enemy that's going to help rally people to my side. I've got to fool those people into thinking that I'm conspiring with them against you." Right?

And then she tells the Goldman Sachs, "But in reality, I'm conspiring with you against them. In other words, I've got all kinds of deals with you, if you're willing to give me money to the Clinton Foundation and to my causes. I can do business with you."

So she's benefiting at both ends, and that's the common denominator. And she's letting the Goldman Sachs people know, because they're sophisticated enough, that I have to do this.

GLENN: So the only thing she cares about is money?

DINESH: And power. And power. And power is the way the Clintons get money.

Now, usually in American politics, you make money first. FDR was rich when he ran for office. JFK was rich. So in America, people don't go to power to make money. The Clintons do.

GLENN: The Clinton Foundation laid the foundation of something that I think is just horrendous. And it's going to make Barack Obama a very powerful and wealthy man.


GLENN: Does he build a much more powerful Clinton Foundation, and does that continue? Does his influence continue to change and shape the world?

DINESH: I don't see Obama quitting. Like I say, he believes what he does and what he says.

GLENN: Yeah.

DINESH: I totally think he will move in -- he'll learn from the Clinton Foundation. But let's remember what made the Clinton Foundation so perverse is that this -- you know, it's not uncommon for politicians when they quit to go to lobbying firms and make money. So cashing in later is one thing.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

DINESH: It's much worse to cash in while you're the decision-maker. And you go to a group of Indian businessmen. And they go, "Okay. Bill, here's 500,000 to make a speech. Now, we want Hillary to change America's position on the India Nuclear Deal. And if you do that, $20 million or $10 million will come flowing to your foundation."

I mean, that is actually selling US policy. Think about it, if the Clintons have gone from zero to $300 million, what's the product that they've been selling? They haven't made the i Phone. They haven't started a business. Their product is public policy.

Now, public policy belongs to us. It's the American people's product, but they're selling it. And they're cashing in on it. That's what makes them deeply corrupt. That's what, at the end of the day, for all Trump has done this, he has not done that, and they have.

GLENN: Hillary's America. Dinesh D'souza. Available in books and also DVD. Number one best-selling DVD on Amazon right now. Always good to see you and your lovely wife.

DINESH: Pleasure.

GLENN: Talk to you again.

Featured Image: Screenshot of Dinesh D'Souza featured on The Glenn Beck Program.

How prepared are YOU to weather a future crisis? We recently published a brand new quiz so you can find out exactly how prepared you are. Whether you're a "prepper" with a bunker fit for the apocolypse or just want to feel more secure for the future, there is always something more to learn. That's why Glenn wants to give his newsletter subscribers his "Ultimate Preparation Guide," filled with practical tips for building a solid foundation to weather future crises. And let's face it—in our crazy world right now, who couldn't use a bit more peace of mind?

Enter your email below to get "Glenn's Ultimate Preparation Guide" sent straight to your inbox!

Editor's Note: Arizona House Bill HB2770 has since been shut down! AZ Rep. Rachel Jones tweeted that the AZ Freedom Caucus shut down the bill before it could reach the board. It is encouraging to see states stepping to protect the American people from getting one step closer to a Central Bank Digital Currency. Hopefully, Arizona will be a precedent for the other states!

On today's radio broadcast, Glenn warned about dangerous Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) language being smuggled into routine legislation in REPUBLICAN-led states. This is unacceptable, and as Glenn said, we can't let this legislation pass as it now stands.

The legislation being used to smuggle in this CBDC language is the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), a routine piece of legislation passed on the state level that helps standardize commercial and business transactions. However, a new round of UCCs being deliberated RIGHT NOW amongst a swath of Republican-led states anticipate the use of "electronic money." In a public letter sent to the Republican states currently deliberating this legislation, the Pro-Family Legislative Network said this can only refer to the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) under consideration and testing by the Federal Reserve. Biden's Executive Order 14067 issued in March of 2022 started the push for CBDC, and now these states, knowingly or unknowingly, are laying the legislative groundwork for making CBDC a reality.

There is absolutely no reason why Republican-led states should aid in laying the foundation for CBDC, yet 12 of them are deliberating it RIGHT NOW, with one UCC bill already on one GOP governor's desk! We have to act NOW to stop these UCCs in their tracks and demand our lawmakers amend the bills without the "electronic money" language.

If your state is listed below, contact your representative NOW to put an end to CBDC language.

1. North Dakota

North Dakota House Bill HB1082 passed BOTH chambers and is now sitting on Governor Burgum's desk. Burgun has 3 DAYS to veto this bill once it's placed on his desk—if not, it will pass automatically. If you are a North Dakota resident, it is absolutely CRUCIAL that you contact Governor Burgum's office NOW and demand that he veto this bill and re-introduce it without the "electronic money" language.

2. Arizona

Arizona House Bill HB2770 has been SHUT DOWN! See the above editor's note for more details.

Arizona House Bill HB2770 passed the House majority and minority caucuses. Arizona residents, contact your representative's office NOW so that they amend this bill without the "electronic money" language.

3. Arkansas

Arkansas House Bill HB1588 is in committee, and if passed, will head to the House floor. Though the bill is only in its beginning stages, it's important for Arkansas residents to stop this bill in its tracks and amend it without the "electronic money" language.

4. Missouri

Missouri House Bill HB1165 is also in its beginning stages in committee. That means it's important to contact your representative as soon as possible to amend it without the "electronic money" language.

5. Oklahoma

Oklahoma House Bill HB 2776 passed the House Committee and will go to a chamber vote soon. If passed, it will go to the Senate, then the governor's desk. If you are an Indiana resident, contact your representative's office NOW to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

6. Indiana

Indiana Senate Bill SB0486 passed the Senate and is headed to the House. Republicans control Indiana's executive office and BOTH chambers of the legislature. There is no excuse for this bill to pass. If you are an Indiana resident, it's vital you contact your representative NOW and demand they amend this bill without the "electronic money" language.

7. Kentucky

Kentucky Senate Bill SB64 passed the Senate and is now being deliberated in the House. If you live in Kentucky, contact your representative's office to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

8. Montana

Montana Senate Bill SB370 passed the Senate and was sent to the House on March 3rd. If you are a Montana resident, contact your representative's office NOW so that the bill doesn't without changing the "electronic money" language.

9. Nebraska

Nebraska's Legislative Bill LB94 passed committee and the first floor vote. As Nebraska only has one legislative chamber, this bill is dangerously close to passing the legislature and being sent to the governor's desk. If you are a Nebraska resident, contact your representative's office NOW and demand they amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

10. New Hampshire

New Hampshire House Bill HB584 is currently in House committee deliberations and has not yet reached the House floor. If you are a New Hampshire resident, contact your representative's office NOW to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

11. Tennessee

Tennessee House Bill HB0640 didn't successfully pass the House. However, it was deferred to a Senate committee and has now taken the form of Senate Bill SB0479, which is now in committee. This bill is still alive, and it's important for you, Tennessee residents, to stop it before it reaches the floor! Contact your representative to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

12. Texas

Texas House Bill HB5011 was filed and is ready to be taken up by committee. Fellow Texans, let's not let this bill progress any further! Contact your representative and demand they amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

6 things you NEED to know about the Silicon Valley Bank collapse

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Silicon Valley Bank's collapse is sparking traumatic memories of the 2008 financial crash. Should we be worried SVB is signaling a similar economic catastrophe, or is everyone overreacting to the media's hype? Glenn told his listeners to be "healthily terrified." This event is sure to have ripple effects throughout the economy, but the more you are informed about it, the more you can prepare. Here are 6 things you need to know about Silicon Valley Bank's crash—explained in simple words.

1. The short answer to what happened: SVB didn't have enough money to pay its depositors.

Remember the scene from It's a Wonderful Life when all of the residents make a run on George Bailey's bank demanding their money? Fortunately for them, their money was in the altruistic hands of George Bailey, who used his honeymoon savings to give the depositors the money they demanded.

Silicon Valley Bank's depositors weren't so lucky.

In short, the depositors made a run on Silicon Valley Bank, demanding the withdrawal of their money. But SVB simply didn't have the liquid money available to give their depositors, causing regulators to shut down the bank shortly afterward.

2. It all started with COVID...

Why didn't SVB have enough money for its depositors? To explain this, we have to go back to the pandemic era.

The pandemic saw a rapid decrease in spending and a massive increase in bank deposits. Due to the uncertainty of the future and lockdowns limiting ways to spend money on recreational activities, like restaurants, bars, and other outlets, many Americans stocked up money in their accounts. In fact, SVB's deposits doubled in 2021 alone, bringing in more money than they could lend out to their clients.

To make a return on their available cash, SVB wanted to invest it, as many banks do. Since they had reached their lending limit, they decided to invest it in U.S. Treasury Securities, which are the government's means of funding itself without using taxation (in a nutshell). These are considered "ultra-safe" investments because they are backed by the "full faith and credit of the federal government."

Unlike other forms of investments, investing in Treasuries means the government will do everything within its legal power to pay back the money used to fund itself. In other words, it is typically very safe... so what happened?

3. Then came the magic cocktail—record-high inflation and rising interest rates...

Interest rates ruined the typically "ultra-safe" investment. Due to 40-year record-high inflation, the Fed lifted rates eight times by a total of 4.25 percentage points in 2022, raising interest rates from 0.25 percent to 4.375 percent. This means the value of U.S. Treasuries investments plummeted rapidly. SVB reported that it lost $1.8 billion due to the decreased value of its Treasuries investments after a year of rising interest rates.

This raises the following question: why didn't SVB just weather the storm and wait for interest rates to decrease? There are two issues with this. The first is that, with so many of their assets held up in Treasuries investments, SVB still wouldn't have enough liquid assets to give their depositors during the bank run.

The second issue is that Treasuries investments have a ten-year limit. In 2021 during the Trump administration, interest rates were at an all-time low of 0.125 percent.

The record-fast increase of interest rates in 2022 caused very little chance for rates to go back down to their historic 2021 lows within ten years for banks to make their money back on their investments.

To avoid this, SVB planned to sell their investments at a loss and re-purchase Treasuries investments at the decreased value, giving them an extra ten years to bet on decreased interest rates in the future.

But people caught on to SVB's plan and didn't want to ride with the risk.

4. Account holders withdrew their money... FAST.

As aforementioned, SVP lost $1.8 billion when it sold its depleted Treasuries investments. While they were betting on being able to re-purchase the devalued securities, hoping that they would go up in value in the future with lowered interest rates, investors were worried about the risk.

Once they made the announcement of their $1.8 billion loss, their stocks began to drop, and venture capitalists warned the companies they invest in to pull out of SVB. This had a snowball effect, leading to a "bank run" of depositors demanding to withdraw their money from their SVB accounts.

This led to the perfect storm: SVB's investment losses coupled with the influx of withdrawals were so immense that regulators had to step in and shut the bank down to protect depositors. The government currently "running" SVB, for all practical purposes, is the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The FDIC closed SVB on Friday and reopened the bank on Monday, March 13th as the Deposit Insurance Bank of Santa Clara.

5. Some people may lose their money. 

Banks insure accounts with $250,000 or less with FDIC insurance. That means, in cases of bank failure, exactly like this one, the FDIC covers all accounts less than $250,000. The FDIC said SVB customers who had less than $250,000 in their accounts will have access to all of their money when the bank reopens. Since it reopened this week, they should have access to their funds.

However, many of SVB's depositors had more than $250,000 in their accounts—it is Silicon Valley after all. Therefore, their accounts were not covered by FDIC insurance. Will they get their money back? There is a chance that they will not.

It is unclear how much SVB currently has to cover uninsured deposits. It is likely not enough. The FDIC has issued a "Receiver's Certificate" to the uninsured account holders with the amount in their account that is not covered by FDIC insurance.

The FDIC said it will pay some of the uninsured deposits by next week by liquidating any additional assets held by SVB. However, if the liquidated assets are not enough, many of SVB's uninsured account holders could lose their money for good.

6. Is this 2008 all over again?

SVB's collapse was the largest bank failure since 2008, when Washington Mutual failed with $307 billion in assets. Its failure, along with the collapse of the Lehman Brother's investment bank, triggered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Are we in danger of repeating 2008?

Some argue that we are not in danger of another economic catastrophe, simply because SVB holds less than 1 percent of the nation's assets. However, as Glenn warns, there is a danger of banks repeating the same mistakes as SVP.

SVP wasn't the only bank to use its surplus deposits to invest in U.S. Treasuries, which means that other banks are wrestling with the depleted value of their securities investments due to rising interest rates.

Bank of America, for example, lost $109 billion in their securities investments due to rising interest rates, the most among its peers—and Bank of America is no small fish in the ocean of assets.

Other major banks recorded other massive losses in their securities investments due to rising interest rates. JP Morgan Chase lost $36 billion, Wells Fargo lost $41 billion, Citigroup lost $25 billion, and Goldman Sachs lost $1 billion. If the little banks collapse, will they get the same effort and attention from the federal government as the "big guys?"

The critic may argue that these are still small values given the incredibly large amount of assets held in banks nationwide. However, this is missing the point. Major banks have majorly invested in securities since the pandemic-era skyrocketing rate of deposits. Now those investments are depleted in value.

They can either sell those investments at a loss, or they can wait and hope that they will recover over time. However, if those investments are no longer liquid, what happens when their depositors come knocking? Will they have enough liquid assets to cover a massive bank run? These are the lingering questions that our banks need to address.

As Glenn says, this will impact you—it is only a matter of time. What will you do to prepare?

Glenn just purchased the entire historical Roe v. Wade archive as a solemn reminder of our nation's past and the vital importance of honoring the sacredness of life. Since Roe was overturned in 2022, many states have been stepping up to protect both their unborn citizens AND the mothers carrying them.

Which states are doing the most to protect their most vulnerable? Here are the top 12 states with the strictest laws against abortion.

1. Alabama

​Alabama has some of the nation's most protective pro-life measures, banning all abortions in the case of life-threatening circumstances for the mother. That means abortion is banned at every ​stage of pregnancy. Health care providers found guilty of performing abortions face a class-A felony, the most serious charge besides Capitol Murder, with the potential of carrying a life sentence in prison. However, the pill, Plan B, is classified as "contraception" rather than abortion. Taxpayer-funded Medicaid does not cover abortion procedures except in very limited circumstances.

Alabama is one of the few states to add protections within its state constitution for the unborn. The state:

Acknowledges, declares, and affirms that it is the public policy of this state to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life.

2. Arkansas

Like Alabama, Arkansas bans abortion at every stage of pregnancy except in life-threatening situations for the mother. However, Plan B is still considered "contraception" and is legal. Taxpayer-funded Medicaid does not cover abortion procedures except in very limited circumstances. Additionally, Arkansas added the amendment to its state constitution, declaring:

The policy of Arkansas is to protect the life of every unborn child from conception until birth, to the extent permitted by the Federal Constitution.

3. Idaho

Idaho bans abortions at every stage of pregnancy with the exceptions of life-threatening situations to the mother and instances of rape and incest. The health care practitioner who gave an abortion must prove "affirmative defense," which means they have to prove in court why the abortion is necessary and meets the legal criteria. Patients approved for abortion must wait 24 hours after counseling to receive the procedure. Anyone who performs an abortion unless it's in one of the approved cases will face felony charges. Like Alabama and Arkansas, taxpayer-funded Medicaid does not cover abortion procedures.

Unlike Alabama and Arkansas, Idaho law does not include explicit constitutional or statutory protections for abortion.

4. Kentucky

Kentucky has also banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy except in life-threatening situations for the mother. There are no exceptions for rape or incest. However, abortion providers are fighting the all-out ban on abortion through appealing to the state's previous abortion ban after six weeks of pregnancy. The appeal is ongoing.

Though Kentucky voters voted down a proposal to add an amendment to the state constitution banning abortion, the state adopted the following policy towards abortion in 2018:

Children, whether born or unborn, are the greatest natural resource in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

5. Louisiana

Louisiana also banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy with no exceptions for rape or incest. However there is an appeal to allow abortions in the case of rape and incest. Healthcare practitioners who violate this ban are subject to criminal prosecution. Moreover, Louisiana adopted an amendment in their state constitution—specifically, the Louisiana Declaration of Rights, banning the construction of any constitutional right to abortion:

To protect human life, nothing in present constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion.

6. Mississippi

Mississippi bans all abortions except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest that have been reported to law enforcement. Though Mississippi did not adopt a constitutional amendment to ban abortion as a right, the Mississippi Code says:

Abortion carries significant physical and psychological risks to the maternal patient, and these physical and psychological risks increase with gestational age.

Moreover, doctors who perform illegal abortions face civil and criminal charges.

7. Missouri

Missouri bans all abortions except in the case of a medical emergency concerning the mother, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Those seeking to get an abortion must prove "affirmative defense," which means they have to prove in court why the abortion is necessary and meets the legal criteria. Minors seeking an abortion through "affirmative defense" must do so with parental consent. Moreover, those seeking an abortion must be offered an ultrasound.

Moreover, Missouri adopted the following statute protecting the unborn:

It is the intention of the general assembly of the state of Missouri to: (1) [d]efend the right to life of all humans, born and unborn; (2) [d]eclare that the state and all of its political subdivisions are a ‘sanctuary of life’ that protects pregnant women and their unborn children; and (3) [r]egulate abortion to the full extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States, decisions of the United States Supreme Court, and federal statutes.

8. Oklahoma

Oklahoma was the first state to successfully ban all abortions after conception following the overturn of Roe v. Wade and continues to lead the way as one of the toughest states on abortion. Exceptions include life-saving procedures for the mother or pregnancies resulting from "rape, sexual assault, or incest." Those who perform legal abortions can be reported and prosecuted criminally under state law HB427 and be charged at least $10,000 per illegal abortion procedure. Violations also include insurance companies or private citizens caught funding abortions.

Though Oklahoma has not adopted a state constitutional amendment concerning abortion, its Public Health Code states that it cannot be “construed as creating or recognizing right to abortion."

9. South Dakota

South Dakota bans all abortions except in life-threatening cases for the mother. There are no exceptions for rape and incest. However, it is legal to travel out of state to get an abortion. There are no state constitutional provisions protecting against abortion.

10. Tennessee

Tennessee bans all abortions except in life-threatening cases for the mother. There is currently a movement in the Tennessee state legislature to enact exceptions for rape and incest. Like Idaho and Missouri, healthcare practitioners who gave an abortion must prove "affirmative defense," which means they have to prove in court why the abortion is necessary and meets the legal criteria. Those who provide abortions illegally can be criminally prosecuted.

Tennessee's state constitution was amended to supersede a 2000 Tennessee supreme court case, which held:

A woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy is a vital part of the right to privacy guaranteed by the Tennessee Constitution [and that] the right is inherent in the concept of ordered liberty embodied in our constitution and is therefore fundamental.

The new state constitutional amendment reads as follows:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion.

11. Texas

Texas bans all abortions except in life-threatening cases concerning the mother. There is a movement in the Texas state legislature to provide exemptions for rape and incest.

Moreover, Texas received a lot of heat for its law not only criminalizing providing illegal abortions but enabled citizens to report illegal abortions. However, several cities in Texas are pushing back against the abortion ban. After Dobbs, Texas increased the penalties for performing an abortion up to life in prison, including a civil penalty of no less than $100,000 per abortion performed.

Attorney General Ken Paxton said the following:

Now that the Supreme Court has finally overturned Roe, I will do everything in my power to protect mothers, families, and unborn children, and to uphold the state laws duly enacted by the Texas Legislature.

The cities of Austin and San Antonio passed ordinances preventing city funds from being used to investigate the provision or receipt of abortion care.

12. West Virginia

West Virginia bans abortion at all stages of pregnancy, except in the case of a “nonmedically viable fetus”, ectopic pregnancy, or medical emergency. According to the West Virginia state legislature, "Nonmedically viable fetus" means:

A fetus that contains sufficient lethal fetal anomalies so as to render the fetus medically futile or incompatible with life outside the womb in the reasonable medical judgment of a reasonably prudent physician.

Victims of rape and incest can obtain abortions up to eight weeks after conception, but only if they report to law enforcement first.

In 2018, West Virginians voted to add the following language to the state constitution:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of abortion.