Steve Deace: Liberals Deconstruct Us Better Than We Construct Ourselves

Steve Deace, host of The Steve Deace Show, joined Glenn in studio Tuesday for an in depth conversation about the future of conservatism.

"I think that we have got to have a time period where there can be some family healing going on, after what's transpired over the last year. And I think I told you yesterday that I didn't really, truly understand how difficult the last six and seven months has been," Deace explained.

Glenn's wide-ranging conversation with Deace covered faith, principles, the media and how conservatives have failed to control their own conversation and identity.

Steve Deace is author of Nefarious Plot, available in bookstores everywhere.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these questions:

• This election was really a repudiation of what?

• Do conservatives have an objective value system?

• Do people think socialism is related to social media?

• Do liberals define diversity by external identities?

• What song did Steve Deace have going through his head the day after the election?

Listen to these segments from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Steve Deace is a talk radio show host. Heard nationwide out of Iowa. And a friend of the program. Author of the new book, Nefarious Plot, which is very C.S. Lewis. I mean, it is a great, great book that everybody should read that is modeled after the Screwtape Letters. And if you like the Screwtape Letters, this is a modern version of it. And I think -- I mean, I hate to say this because it's C.S. Lewis, but I think just, you know, in the same category as good. It is really good, Steve.

STEVE: Wow. That's about the highest praise you can give a theo nerd like me, so I'd like to just walk off now, if that's okay. Send a (inaudible) at the --

GLENN: Yeah, okay. All right. See you later.

That's right. That's right. Welcome to the studios. Glad you're here.

You -- you called together a little get together of some of the people who were Never Trump and reluctantly Trump. And wanted to have a conversation with people of where we go from here. What are you trying to accomplish?

STEVE: Just that. I think that we have got to have a time period where there can be some family healing going on, after what's transpired over the last year. And I think I told you yesterday that I didn't really, truly understand how difficult the last six and seven months has been. Because it's not new necessarily for me. I'm kind of one of those grassroots rabble-rousers anyway.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STEVE: So being on the outside, looking in, of some of my own friends, is almost like a state of being for me. But this took it to a whole new level. And I really wasn't aware until it was over, just what the weight of what the last few months was like, feeling like every day I was arguing with members of my own audience. You know, people who put food on our table, who we support, that support us, that make it possible for us to do things like this.

Arguing with our own peers and our friends. How many tweets I compose that I had to delete to my own friends because I just couldn't handle some of the things I was seeing. And then wondering how often they weren't doing the exact same thing to me. Right?

And when I got up the next morning, I was like, "Holy cow." It was like Katrina and the Waves. That one, I'm Walking on Sunshine song came on. It was like, "This weight is gone."

And I think there needs to be though some time to assess where we're at. Because I think strategically, we're in a place that we've never been before, as a movement. And that is, taking for granted that a conservative movement still exists, which I have my doubts about that. I think we also need to discuss, what does conservatism even mean?

I was on C-SPAN for an hour a week before the election, and I got that question. And I defined it as, I'm a conservative because I'm trying to conserve the things that history has proven are what's best for the human condition.

And a black man from Detroit calls up and says, "I'm a black man from Detroit." And says, "I've never voted Republican in my entire life, but if someone had explained it to me the way you just did, I might have -- I might have looked at this differently."

I think our damage -- our brand has been damaged quite a bit in this race. And I think it's not a victory as much as a reprieve. I think everybody to some extent is ecstatic the Marxists are out of the White House, right?

But that doesn't necessarily mean that Donald Trump had a character transplant because the communists are gone. And I think you're watching his capricious, mercurial, unstable nature play itself out, just in the Courts of Owls that we're seeing get assembled here in the -- in almost this sort of Kremlin-esque intrigue about transition teams and who's in and who's out.

GLENN: This happens to all of them. Why is this a negative? This happens all the time. The transition team -- this seems normal to me.

STEVE: We're on like our third transition team. This thing has been on it for a week, you know, and there's mixed signals everywhere. And I just think that one thing --

PAT: That's how the Trump camp rolls though.

STU: Well, yes.

PAT: This happened the whole campaign.

STEVE: Because that's how he rolls.

PAT: That's how he rolls.

STEVE: No campaign can rise above its own candidate.

PAT: Right.

STEVE: The candidate is always the one responsible for the outcome of a campaign.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: We should say you were a friend and supporter of Donald Trump's for a long time.

STEVE: At first. At first. A long time may be a relative term.

GLENN: Okay.

STEVE: What really changed my mind for good --

PAT: You endorsed Ted, right? The Iowa caucus.

STEVE: Yes, I did. In fact, I remember I called Ted up in early July. And I told him, I said, "You know, I'm thinking about -- I'm leaning going this way. I'm really thinking about it. You know, I do think we need to burn it down. I I think we need something dramatically different." And about a week later, there was an event in Iowa where they had 13 of the candidates show up. It was a leadership summit. And I was the co-MC with Frank Luntz. And I'm sitting there backstage. I'm actually getting ready to meet with Donald Trump again. He's going to come off backstage. We're going to grab a private room, presumably to try to close me as a supporter. And I'm sitting 20 feet from him when he talks about, "I've never asked God for forgiveness because I've never done anything wrong."

PAT: Right.

STEVE: Which was -- to me, that was the biggest thing that stood out to me, even more than the McCain comments, as offensive as those were. That was the thing like, wow, you just walked into a room of 3,000 evangelicals and dropped that bomb. You may not -- you don't understand what you're walking into.

And then he talked about, "Well, I like soldiers who weren't captured." And I knew -- or, I suspected when they walked off of there, that him and his people were going to ask me, "How do you clean up this mess?" I didn't know what the answer was.

So this was not a great -- this was not a real Men of Courage moment, guys. I hit the eject. I just walked out. Because I was like, I wouldn't know how to fix this. It's done. Don't fix it. Go home. Go back to Trump Tower. This is not fixable. Salvage your brand.

GLENN: But it didn't hurt him. It didn't hurt him.

STEVE: You know why it didn't hurt him? Is Sam Nunberg, who is still a friend of mine, who was the guy that helped set up Trump's original campaign -- Sam called me the next day. He had sent me a column that he had ghostwritten for Trump for USA Today in response to this.

And it was -- and he essentially doubled down on it. And Sam -- and the column was, "Hey, look at all the money that I've given to veterans groups. Look at everything I've done. Who are you people to question me?" And Sam to me -- he said, "Hey, Steve, do you like this column?" And I said, "I think it's forceful. I like it." I go, "Why?"

And he said, "Because I took everything that you put in your book, Rules For Patriots: How Conservatives Can Win Again, the previous book I wrote, and I used that to construct this piece." And I am convinced that that is what turned everything around.

The first time the media came at him -- see, this election wasn't a repudiation of Hillary Clinton. I don't even think it was a repudiation of Barack Obama. I think it was a backlash repudiation of the media. And Trump ran against the media the entire time. Ran against them in the primary. Fox tried to kill him in the first debate. They couldn't. And so's they ended up shilling for him after that. I think he beat the media. And I think most people as conservatives, guys, define their conservatism, not by an objective values -- or, set of values, but by opposition to the liberal media.

GLENN: Explain that.

STEVE: Meaning that I think we're so -- we don't -- first of all, we don't have an objective value system. Ask the average conservative, "Why are you a conservative?" And you're probably not going to get a cogent answer.

I mean, I was listening to the roundtable you had before I came on, and you talked about the Declaration of Independence. When I go around the country, if I teach in churches or I speak in churches or I preach in the church where I go to back home, if I ask believers, "What is the foundation of the Christian faith," almost every time they're going to tell me it's the Bible.

No, it's not. Christ is the foundation of the Christian faith. Paul says, "If Christ isn't raised, you're -- then your preaching is in vain. You're all still dead in your sins."

Christianity is about God supernaturally wove his hand into history to roll the stone away and bring a dead man back to life. Did that fact happen or not? If it did, then the Bible is the clarification of how we are -- how we are then to live in light of that fact.

If it didn't happen, then we're free agents to make this up as we go along.

The -- Christianity's foundation is Christ. The clarification is the Bible. That is the relationship, I believe, between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence is the foundation of America. There is a God. Our rights come from him. Government's only responsible is to protect and preserve those rights so we can reach our God-given potential. And that's it. That's all there is. There isn't anymore. That's it.

And then the inevitable questions that come along when we have conflicts: How do we resolve those things? The Constitution clarifies those conflicts, but the Declaration is the foundation. How often is that foundation ever uttered ever by any conservative?

GLENN: You would have loved -- I just gave this speech Sunday. I wish you would have been there, because it was that -- there's six points in the Declaration. And the Declaration of Independence has those six points, and that's all you need to know. That is the spirit of America. The Constitution is the framework on how to protect that idea.

And we missed that. And progressives have tried to destroy the Declaration. And we don't have a Declaration.

The conservatives are supposed to be saying -- what is a conservative? Well, we hold these truths to be self-evident.

DOM: Right.

GLENN: That all men are created. They're endowed by creator with certain rights that are unchangeable. Those rights come from God. The government is established to be able to protect those rights. That is their main duty: Protect those rights.

STEVE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That the laws are all based in natural law and -- the laws of nature and nature's God. So the laws out of the Bible. The Ten Commandments.

STEVE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And what you witness in nature. You can protect yourself because -- a bear can protect itself, so why can't I?

Nature's laws. Nature's God. And the last one is, if a government becomes hostile to that, you have the right to abolish it and reestablish a new government that will protect those rights.

STEVE: Right. That's it.

GLENN: That's the whole idea of America in a nutshell.

STEVE: I know it sounds like we're having a Cleon Skousen class in here. But that's what it is. That's supposed to be what we're conserving. I don't know -- I don't know what most of conservatism is. And it's easy for me to say -- I don't have, you know, one of the ten biggest shows in the country. I haven't written five New York Times best-sellers. But it seems to me that most of conservatism is selling out conferences and selling widgets.

GLENN: Yes.

STEVE: And it's not an advancement of a set of principles, let alone policy.

Does anybody know what the Sam Hill conservative policy actually would be? Forget even defining our principles. Let's see we define those. How would we go about governing accordingly? Has anybody even seen in their lifetime -- except for maybe the first half of Ronald Reagan's first term, before the rigor mortis of Washington set in -- has anybody ever actually seen what governing along those lines would look like, beyond just framing the principles?

GLENN: No. No. No.

And you ask a conservative, "What does it mean to be a conservative?"

Well, I believe in God. And I believe in traditional marriage. And I believe that people should work hard and we should have less, you know, welfare or whatever they want to say.

They make it about the policies.

What does it mean to be a conservative?

STEVE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: There are certain ideas that are universal and everybody knows: That we were created. We were created by a God. That God gave us rights. We've established government to protect those rights. And the minute those rights -- the government starts to abuse those rights, we have a right to abolish it. That is the conservative idea.

And if we can all start to say those things -- because, you know, I was looking -- if you look at the Bill of Rights. Everybody is looking for a place where we can come together now.

Well, what are we going to do on global warming? What are we going to do on Planned Parenthood? What are we going to do about -- we're so far beyond that. We are so -- we have no cornerstone anymore. We have no baseline anymore. So we're just winging it on all of those. There's nothing to be able to say, "Well, our polar star says that we have to do X, Y, and Z --

STEVE: Right. What is the plumb-line of American culture? What is that? --

GLENN: There is none. There is none.

STEVE: There is none. Yeah.

GLENN: And it is the idea of the Declaration of Independence and the framework of the Constitution -- and I know I could go to any college campus -- I could go to Berkeley and say, "Do you believe in freedom of press? That the press shouldn't be restrained?"

Now, this is changing, but right now he with still have, "Yeah, press -- there's a freedom of the press. Yes, there's a freedom to assemble peacefully. Yes, there's a freedom to question the government. Yes, there's freedom of religion." That one is beginning to change too. Because we have abused both the press and religion.

STEVE: Right. There is -- there's a fascinating article at FiveThirtyEight today, which is Nate Silver's site.

GLENN: Yep.

STEVE: And it talks about how Americans may be too religious to accept socialism. And if I wasn't down here hanging out with you all today, here's what I would do on my show, if I was on the air on my show today: I would go on the air and ask my audience, "Why is this true? Why is America -- how come if a people are religious, they will reject socialism?" And I will guarantee you, most of my audience, until I explain it to them won't know.

GLENN: Won't know.

STEVE: And it's because, obviously if the state's going to be God, there can't already be a God. That's why socialism either proceeds secularism every single time.

GLENN: Yes. I don't believe we are too religious for socialism.

STEVE: I don't think we are either. But here's what's fascinating -- my point is, how often we had to see because Fox, Infowars, and Drudge wouldn't do it, and so we saw the mainstream media vetting Trump during the primary, according to his lack of conservative orthodoxy. The liberals were doing it.

Now, FiveThirtyEight, a liberal analytical site is now explaining to us essentially conservative apologetics, why we won't accept socialism because we're still too religious. They're making our arguments for us better than we currently make them. By the way, that's not good, guys.

GLENN: No. Because they're making those arguments so they can understand it and dismantle it.

STEVE: Yes. Yeah, they're deconstructing us better than we are constructing ourselves.

PAT: And the fact is I think that most people have been convinced by the left now that socialism and Christianity are one and the same.

GLENN: Yes. This is what the socialist --

PAT: Way too many people believe that Jesus was a socialist. I just read another article about that.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Easy. And the rest of the people think that socialism -- and I'm not making this up -- think socialism has something to do with social media.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: Socialism just means the promotion of Facebook and Twitter.

STEVE: There was a poll a few years ago that found something like six out of ten people that had held elected office felt the electoral college was a place that you went to get trained on how to get elected. So there you go.

[break]

GLENN: Steve Deace is with us. The talk show host and also author of the new book Nefarious Plot, which I can't recommend highly enough. Just a great book.

Steve, so where do we go from here? What happens now?

Because people are hurting. And they are looking for somebody, and they are dismissing people like -- I mean, even those in the conservative movement are dismissing people like Steve Bannon. The media is now saying Steve Bannon is a bad guy. They're absolutely right on this. But the media has such a bad relationship with the American people. By them saying, "He's a bad guy," only makes -- only makes people say, "Well, he must be a good guy."

STEVE: Yeah, I mean, they're doing their best to inoculate Steve Bannon from criticism at this point. And I said this -- PBS called me the day after the election, asked me to come on the round table and discuss from a conservative viewpoint how they missed the Trump phenomenon. And I pointed out to them, "You know, you guys are disconnected from America." And I asked them, "How many people in your newsroom at PBS are pro-life? How many of them go to mass once a week? How many of them go to church? How many of them even considered for voting for Donald Trump? Like a single person. You guys define diversity by external identity. Most of America doesn't. Most of America defines their identity by their value system or what they think they need or want at the time. And so you are literally not talking to most of this country. And that's why you missed that."

And I think -- I think -- I told them, "I think people got the rise of Fox News wrong, that it wasn't that it was G.O.P. TV. That's kind of what it is now. But that they -- they -- they talked about our values without suspicion. You guys do."

GLENN: Yes. Yes. Back in just a second.

[break]

GLENN: The fed is hinting that there might be a rate increase when they meet in December. Stock market looked like it was going to tank when Trump was winning Tuesday night. But after his speech, it rebounded in a uge way. Bigger than Jina. And we're going to talk a little bit about that coming up in a second.

Steve Deace is with us. Steve, what -- tell me, is there the possibility -- because I think we should consider this, that we have been completely wrong. Is there the possibility that Donald Trump becomes Ronald Reagan?

STEVE: I think we should absolutely consider the possibility we've been completely wrong.

Now, I will be -- I will be surprised if we are wrong, and I think what we're seeing in the transition team indicates we're not, that this is --

GLENN: Why?

STEVE: Because it's inconsistent. There is no consistent strain in who is surrounding him, other than, did you help me get to where I'm at?

And if you're a progressive Rudy Giuliani over here and if you're an evangelical pastor's kid Mike Pence over here, you help me get to where I'm at, so find a way to kind of work together.

I mean, Reince Priebus, when he opens his mouth, the Republican machine we all hate comes out in every last syllable. So you're going to go on camera and eat the crap sandwich on TV, and Bannon's going to be my Rasputin in the dark room over calling the Svengali shots. I mean, these two guys have literally nothing in common, other than they both helped Donald Trump get to where he's at.

GLENN: Do you believe that Bannon -- talk radio is saying Bannon is okay.

STEVE: You know, I think I met him once briefly. Been interviewed by him twice on Breitbart radio. All I know is what I've heard from other people. And all I've seen is what I've watched and witnessed Breitbart news become since it essentially become symbiotic with Trump -- and I don't think -- and I'm someone that used to be a regular reader. I don't think I've shared a link or clicked on a link at Breitbart in like nine months. I just got so disgusted by what I saw, that it just -- it literally became dead to me. Same with Drudge. I can't remember the last time I visited Drudge as a website. I just can't handle it. To me, I just look for news in other sources.

PAT: Yeah. That's where we are.

GLENN: So you just don't think there's a chance --

STEVE: I think there's a chance. Listen, my worldview starts with, God raises dead people to life.

GLENN: Right.

STEVE: So to quote the great prophets of Dumb and Dumber, I'm saying there's a chance. There is a chance. But this is why I think we should step back and let it play out. Now, I think the early returns are mixed at best. And the pressures -- the real pressures --

GLENN: What do you disagree with, on his appointments?

STEVE: First of all, I wouldn't have Rudy Giuliani anywhere near my administration.

GLENN: Why is that?

STEVE: Because he's the ultimate progressive Republican. That's why.

GLENN: Well, no, I think Chris Christie is. But he's a close second.

STEVE: He's a close second.

GLENN: Yes.

STEVE: I think that the dynamic between Reince and Bannon is terrible. It strikes me as trying to split the baby in half. And this is often -- as someone that's worked on a lot of campaigns, this is why businessmen are often the worst candidates. Because they think it is like running a company. And it is not.

You know, a CEO can't coin money. A CEO can't command an Army. A CEO can't compel you to do something lawfully or unlawfully against your will. A president can.

And I think that is where -- it's not -- it's not the same. Just because Steve Kerr is a great coach of the Golden State Warriors doesn't mean he can coach the Dallas Cowboys, guys. There's some skills that transcend, but they're totally different pursuits, different personalities, different activities.

You know, and not to mention Trump hasn't always been successful as a manager. He's filed multiple bankruptcies. He's had several failures. It's not the same at all.

And so when I see the Priebus/Bannon thing, this is what it looks like to me: Hey Reince, your reward is you get to go out there and be the guy on camera, and you're going to speak to McConnell and Ryan down there on Capitol Hill. And I'll be Nicholas II over here in a corner dark room while Rasputin is whispering sweet nothings in my ear. And we'll essentially have our own little management team over here, deciding which of your ideas we'll veto and which we won't.

Who is actually in charge? The last thing someone with Donald Trump's temperament needs is to have the people facilitating him in an uncertain chain of command. I mean, when you are as mercurial and capricious as he is, then the people around you have to be ironclad certain.

You know, it's a little like in football. If the head coach is not Mr. Game Manager, then the assistant coaches need to be real X's and O's people. And if the head coach is an X's and O's guy but not Mr. Light You Up In the Room, when he's recruiting athletes, that means the assistant coaches have got to be in there and woo mom and the young -- and her baby boy on the recruiting trip.

Trump is not Mr. X's and O's guy. He's not. So someone else has got to do that. Well, who is that right now? I mean, you kind of have these two towers of Mordor here between -- with Reince -- Reince is Isengard and Bannon is Mordor. They have literally nothing in common, other than they have a common sentiment with Donald Trump.

But you can't run a government that way. Government is not like a business. It's not.

GLENN: But he's going to try to run it -- I mean, one of the most amazing things I saw yesterday -- and I said this wouldn't happen. This couldn't happen. And it's happening. For him to ask for top secret clearance of his children --

STU: They are denying that, by the way, I believe, for what it's worth.

GLENN: Well, that's good. Do you believe it?

STU: Yeah. I don't know.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, it sounds --

JEFFY: I believe it. I don't know that it will last.

STU: The initial source was an unnamed source. There's some reason to doubt it.

STEVE: I think with stories like this, guys, we're going to have to -- I think we're not dealing with a level of, shall we say, prudent communication we've ever seen from people in power before. I think we're going to have to really sit back and wait until the final deed is done. Because if we react to everything these people say, we're all going to have coronaries. We're going to be like, "This is the big one, Alice, by the time we get to 2017."

So I think we need to just sit back. I think we have to wait for them to actually sign the waiver before we react to the story, like this. Because I think they will seriously just throw crap out there all the time, see if they can get away with it, see what the backlash is. And then say, "We never really meant it."

It's been my experience -- again, I've had a lot of experience in politics. I've never seen anybody govern differently than they campaign. Ever. Ever.

GLENN: It is who they are. That's what my problem was with Donald Trump.

He would say, "I'm not this guy." But your whole life shows that you are.

STEVE: Right.

GLENN: You don't generally change.

STEVE: Right. Not unless something transcended.

GLENN: Yeah. Unless there is a pivot point.

STEVE: Yes.

GLENN: Something big happens in your life, and then you're like, "I'm not that guy anymore."

STU: Is there any chance, you know, becoming president of the United States is that moment?

(laughter)

GLENN: It is a possibility.

STEVE: It is.

STU: Right. Unlikely, but possible.

GLENN: There is a possibility. No, I have to tell you -- I think -- you know, I was thinking about that when -- you know, the next morning Donald Trump woke up. And I thought about it, that next morning. What must that be like, to wake up -- and it's one thing to have your wife roll over and say, "Well, good morning, Mr. President-elect." It's another to then have the Secret Service, the apparatus, the -- everything start to change around you. The weight -- I mean, Truman said he felt like the earth -- I'm sorry. That the moon, the sun, and the stars fell on his shoulders when he found out he was president.

There is a chance that that changes you. A big chance.

STEVE: I think there's also a difference, gentlemen, between winning the presidency and being the president. When your life is defined by Maslow's hierarchy of needs, as Trump's entire existence has been -- he has received now the ultimate self-actualization, right?

GLENN: Yes, yes. Yes.

STEVE: But here's the question: Next May, when the headlines are done and the parades are over and the Organization of American States wants a nine-hour meeting with their emissaries in the White House, does he really want to do that?

JEFFY: Not a chance. Not a chance.

STEVE: Or does he want to be down -- does he want to be teeing it high and watching it fly at the Mar-a-Lago with some Hollywood starlet? What would you rather be doing? I think that's -- you know, I had somebody offer me a job in New York City a few years ago. And I tried really hard for it. I really wanted it. It was dry time in New York. I thought it would be the greatest thing for my career.

And then when I got back home and waited for them to make the decision, I recognized that what the commute would be like, the changes would be like, moving my family to New York City, how different the values were.

And then I realized, "You know what, I think I wanted to win this job more than I wanted to do the job. I wanted someone to come to me as a guy and give me that helmet sticker and say, "Yeah, you got this accomplishment." But did I really want to do this? When all the trades (phonetic) wrote about it and all the accomplishment stuff was done, did I want to do that job?

And I wonder if Donald Trump has truly considered, does he actually want to be the president? Does he want to do it? And that's why the people around him will I think really run the show. That's why it's so important.

GLENN: That's why -- I have a guy who works here now, John Schreiber, who is brilliant. He runs my company. And he said -- he's been asking people as we restructure everything, "What do you want to do every day?" And people will say, oh -- like me. He asked me. "Well, you know, I want to do the radio show. I want to, you know, be able to talk and make a difference and everything else." He said, "No, no, no. What do you actually want to do every day?"

STEVE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That's very different. And people don't ask themselves that question. They think of the accomplishment. I want to go and do this. I want to be here. That I want job. But they don't necessarily match it with what they actually physically think, "Oh, I'd love to just do this every day."

STEVE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And they're very different things. And I think Donald Trump in May, may find that. He may not. He may love this. But he doesn't strike me as the guy that does like to be sitting in the office at the late-night meetings.

JEFFY: No.

STEVE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But I think that's why people like Bannon are so critical to make sure, good guy, bad guy? Because if indeed Donald Trump is the guy who says, "I don't want to be there all the time," he will put it on the shoulders of Rasputin.

STEVE: Well, and this is why, what is the value system? This goes right back to where we started in the conversation, guys.

I mean, this is not a company. You're not selling widgets. The goal is not to end up in the black on a P&L statement. You are governing a free people, and sometimes that means you're going to make decisions that are unpopular. And so is everybody in on advancing that value system?

I know that we look back now on the Obama years, and we look at over 900 Democrats in the legislative branches across the country who lost their jobs under his presidency because of the voter backlash. I will guarantee you though, almost none of them would ever publicly say they regret it, because even though he did it, by hook or by crook, he did more to advance a progressive worldview into our government than any human being has in the last century.

And so, therefore, that's why they got into government, to advance that value system. They're on board with that. That's why they never ever fought back against him, even though it was costing them seats in their own legislatures.

What is the endgame of the Trump presidency? What is making America great again, what is the vision of what that would be?

GLENN: You think it might be -- you think it might be fascism.

STEVE: I think that -- my fear is that our side is going to embrace authoritarianism. Because they saw Obama get away with it. I think there were -- and I hate to say this, but I think there were a lot of older white people that stayed home and watched Fox News all day, that got really justifiably angry at the last four years and what they saw Obama do. And they said, "You know what, we need to go get our own version of that."

GLENN: Well, then did I help cause this?

STEVE: You know, I think we all have, to some extent, played a role in this.

GLENN: I think so too.

STEVE: We're a self-governing people. So there's no one -- you know, nobody is absolved from it.

I think that -- I've looked at some of the rhetoric I've used, that we have to win right now, or we're on the precipice of history.

And I've wondered, what is a sense of urgency? And when am I actually feeding into the sort of panic that causes people to embrace authoritarianism?

GLENN: Do you think anybody on the left is starting to feel this way? Do you think they're self-examining like we are on the right?

STEVE: They soon will. First, they got to do their fake Tea Party Astroturf, get rid of the electoral college crap, which is just clickbait to raise money basically. When they get done with that here in about six to eight months, we get into year two or three of a Trump presidency, I bet you they'll have a newfound respect for separation of powers and limited governments in some way, yes, I do.

GLENN: It's interesting to me, because the New York Times came out this weekend -- and this is what they expressed to me -- when they invited me up, 19 editors from the New York Times editorial board were there. And they wanted to know who we were, what is really happening, what's caused this. What their role was. They were very, I thought, introspective. And they said at the time, we know we have a problem. We're not connecting with the American people. And we need to change that. They came out this weekend and said that.

I think there is some -- there is some movement in trying to be better.

STEVE: I said to Judy Woodrow on PBS, on the panel I was on this week. I said, "Judy, where I come from, a dad who thinks it's a bad idea to have another creepy dude go into the bathroom next to his young daughter in the women's bathroom, that's called a parent. Not a bigot. There's a whole other country out there. You guys don't even interact to it. You lecture to it."

GLENN: Yes. You look down to it.

STEVE: And so as a result, they said, "Let's go find our own person that can smash these people so that we can at least get our side of the story out there." And I think Trump wisely capitalized on that.

GLENN: Thank you so much, Steve. Steve Deace.

Featured Image: Steve Deace on The Glenn Beck Program.

Editor's Note: You don't want to miss this! To get the whole story, watch this special now. If you like what you see, use promo code GB20OFF to get $20 off a full year of BlazeTV. Help support research like this and get access to more Glenn content with breakdowns issues and complex ideas daily. With a BlazeTV subscription, you're not just paying to watch great pro-free speech, pro-America TV. Your subscription funds the intensive investigations that let BlazeTV tell the stories the liberal media wants to keep in the dark, giving you the unvarnished truth, showing you what the media doesn't want you to see.

"As one falls, two more will take their place."

Democracy does die in darkness and is being strangled in secret, back-door arrangements. In the third part of our special series on the REAL Ukraine scandal, my team's research exposes a much bigger story into what Democrats were doing in Ukraine. Disturbing details and explosive documents reveal how the Obama Deep State allowed the theft of a country and has set the stage for devastating consequences on our democracy today. It's all happening under the nose of the president and, more importantly, without the approval of the American people.

There's a big difference between conspiracy THEORY and conspiracy FACT. A conspiracy THEORY is an attempt to explain or connect the dots on something, but without any hard evidence. Everything in this is backed up with hard evidence. Is it a conspiracy? Absolutely it is, but it's a conspiracy FACT.

Watch the full special here:

As you watch the special, take time to explore the documents below, with all the proof you need to come to your own conclusion about the impeachment inquiry, Soros, and Ukraine.

Here are the facts

The Obama Administration has been working IN TANDEM with George Soros, supporting his NGOs, going all the way back to the months leading up to the Ukrainian Coup in 2014. In 2013, just before the coup, Soros' International Renaissance Foundation was their primary financier, but the U.S. Embassy was also strangely giving them money.

Link: https://antac.org.ua/en/pro-nas/ (Go to finances and mouse over 2013, notice IRS and US Embassy.)

From 2014 through 2017, basically up until Trump became president, the two main sources of funding came from George Soros and the Obama Administration through USAID.

Link: https://antac.org.ua/en/pro-nas/ (Go to finances and mouse over 2014-2017, notice IRS and USAID.)

Now look at 2018. The Trump Administration halted the money from USAID, so look who stepped in to pull the extra weight: Soros doubled down, and then the U.S. Embassy resumed their funding role just as they did BEFORE the 2014 coup.

Link: https://antac.org.ua/en/pro-nas/ (Go to finances and mouse over 2018, notice IRS, Open Society and US Embassy.)

Why is the U.S. Embassy, and by extension the State Department, working with George Soros? What do they have to gain from this relationship? Let me ask you this: have you noticed where all the people that have been called to testify against Donald Trump in the impeachment inquiry have come from? They're ALL career diplomats. They're all privy to what went down in the months leading up to the Ukrainian Coup, and everything that went down from then up until Donald Trump. And this includes, if the rumors are correct, the whistleblower, whom everyone in Washington believes is Eric Ciaramella.

Link: https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2...

Ciaramella is a CIA analyst, and was on the NSC during the Trump Administration as a Ukraine expert. He was later kicked out of the White House for leaking information and pushing Russia collusion hoaxes. He also worked directly with DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa who was tasked with working alongside the Ukrainian Embassy in the U.S. to dig up dirt on Donald Trump. And if all of this isn't enough to discredit him as a witness, he ALSO worked alongside Joe Biden when he was made the “point man" in Ukraine. It's becoming all too painfully obvious why Adam Schiff doesn't want anyone talking to this guy.

Why are all these State Department officials, and CIA/NSC staffers so scared of Donald Trump poking around in Ukraine? I wonder ... does it have anything to do with the financing of some of these groups like the Soros funded NGO? I pointed out in my mega chalkboard that Ukrainian prosecutors claimed to have evidence that over SEVEN BILLION had been misappropriated. Is this part of that, because that's kind of important here. And would it also be important, or relevant, if the people currently involved in impeachment were dealing with these funds that were being given to groups like the Soros NGO? That is an answer we can not find, but that is an answer that Donald Trump was asking for on they July 25th phone call ... and it MUT BE ANSWERED in a Senate trial.

Link: https://foia.state.gov/Search/results.aspx?searchT...

This email chain was released via a Freedom of Information Act request. The first email is from the alleged whistleblower sent to all the heavy weights within the State Department that were working on Ukraine. The entire email has been redacted. Whatever Ciaramella specifically said, the State Department doesn't want us to know about, but the final email in the chain reveals the overall context: Obama Administration dollars, going through the U.S. Embassy via USAID.

And the State Department official that replied with this information, was Christopher Anderson. Now why does that name sound familiar?

Link: https://www.npr.org/2019/10/30/774552056/read-chri...

Oh that's right. He was testifying against Donald Trump at the impeachment inquiry twi weeks ago. They're ALL connected ... and the coup is on

But still, this begs the question: what was really going on in Ukraine and WHY?

Being that U.S. funding to Soros backed groups began in 2013, we started looking beyond our initial timeline. We noticed one name pop up again, and again and again. That name is Alec Ross.

Ross was appointed to the State Department as the Senior Advisor on Innovation to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He first started popping up in Ukraine in late 2011.

This is Ross at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine on a fact finding mission where he was quote:

Learning about the local status of internet freedom and discussing Secretary Clinton's 21st Century Statecraft agenda.

Link: https://usembassykyiv.wordpress.com/tag/alec-ross/

This is Alec Ross addressing the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine in October 2011 (5:03 to 5:23).

Disruptive change. Some might describe this as CHAOS, but ultimately — for those willing to exploit it — the reward is ... POWER.

For most of us, no matter which side of the aisle you're on, we all pretty much agree that regime change and stoking chaos is NOT what the American people want. But this is EXACTLY what was going on under the Obama Administration, and it was all being done in YOUR name.

Hillary's State Department was bastardizing a plan that actually began a few weeks after Obama was elected in November 2008.

Link: https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/us/2008/112605.htm

It was an initiative called Public Diplomacy 2.0, and it's stated goal was to enable people in other countries to combat violent or extreme ideology. More specifically, Islamic radicalism from Al Qaeda.

Link: https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/us/2008/112310.htm

The State Department invited tech savvy people from all over the world to show them how to network and launch Social Media campaigns to counter radical ideology.

Link: https://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/nov/1...

But just a few months later, under the Obama Administration, Clinton changed Public Diplomacy 2.0 to “Civil Society 2.0." Here's Alec Ross on what Civil Society 2.0 was doing, and how they were actively training groups to mobilize through Social Media.

Let's just call a spade a spade here. Civil Society 2.0 was a training ground for the foot soldiers of what began to be known as “indigenous, spontaneous uprisings." And if you're curious as to what “civil society" or “open society" groups should be advocating, here's Hillary Clinton speaking THIS YEAR on civil society organizations (1:00:52 to 1:01:40).

Was that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren or was that Hillary Clinton? Civil Society 2.0 came to Ukraine in 2011. Alec Ross' TechCamps commenced shortly after, teaching native activists and NGOs how to mobilize, and carry their online presence to the streets.

I want to show you a video taken within the Ukrainian Parliament in November 2013. This was BEFORE the Ukrainian uprising ousted the former regime (0:20 to 1:07).

It's important to point out that this lawmaker was very pro-Russia, and he was being shouted down because of that. But it's also important to point out that everything he just said, WE KNOW was actually happening.

As we analyzed Ukraine, we started to break down the left's strategy in tearing down an entire country, and molding it in line with their political ideology. The founders of the Fabian Society would be impressed.

It's a four part strategy, and — since Ukraine was so successful for them — we'll use it as the case study. I want you to know that I'm only using Ukraine as an example, but this is happening all over the world.

Step one: The U.S. State Department - and their proxies like the National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House - identifies, trains and funds “Civil Society" groups to mobilize.

This is Civil Society 2.0 and operations like Alec Ross' “TechCamps."

Link: https://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/09/19...

It all began in Ukraine — eerily enough — on September 11, 2012.

And make no mistake ... these programs are designed for one thing: REVOLUTION. They operate to nurture chaos and collapse regimes. They're not even trying to hide that fact. Check out this quote from Alec Ross:

Some of the things that I spoke about when I came into the department — things like leaderless revolution or virtual organizations — might have been really edgy or a little off-center. But after Tunisia and Egypt, nobody is questioning the abstraction of leaderless revolutions, and after WikiLeaks, certainly everybody understands the power of virtual, globally distributed organizations.

Link: https://mashable.com/2011/08/22/alec-ross-tech-int...

Leaderless revolutions ... kind of sounds familiar doesn't it? “You can't ban or go after ANTIFA. They're just a leaderless activist group." “We can't shut down Occupy Wall Street ... there's no leadership."

No administration in their right mind — outside of Obama and Hillary — would condone something like this. That's why they built it to run separately within already established organizations like the State Department. These policies are being pursued RIGHT NOW, and they could give a flying crap who the president is. Again, from Alec Ross:

Instead of trying to create a new bureau, what we wanted to do was build a long-term institutional capacity. I leave feeling that the work has been fully institutionalized and that the programs will live on.

Link: https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/03/14/tech-guru-ale...

A little tip for Alec and Hillary: Hydra from Captain America ... they're the BAD GUYS. Maybe you should stop talking and acting like them.

Is it starting to become clear now why the U.S. Ambassador in Ukraine was telling Ukrainian lawmakers to keep their hands off of Soros NGOs? One fo the satr witnesses for Adam Schiff in the impeachment is the former ukrainian ambassador that trump and the new president of ukraine spoke about in the Jukly 25th call. Multiple sources verify that she told the prosecutor general in uktraine to keep their hands off of the soros ngos, and various others. Is it now a littl emore lcr]ear why should would have said that? Because Soros is working with the State Dpearmtnet. Its not criminal to them… its the plan. And why a CIA analyst was involved in USAID money going into Ukraine, and now is a whistleblower against a president that was looking into it? Or maybe why the main witnesses in the impeachment are all from the State Department and diplomatic corps? And also how the intelligence community and FBI has seemingly been operating on their own to bring down Trump. It's because, as Alec Ross said, this operation has now been quote, “institutionalized and will live on.'' This House impeachment trial is why Elliot Ness had to switch jurys. Because Al Capone had paid off the jury, press, judges and was controlling who was testifying.

Step 2: When opportunity emerges, U.S. trained activists go into action.

I'll talk about the Arab Spring more in a bit, but the opportunity in the Middle East and North Africa was a Tunisian fruit vendor setting himself on fire. For Ukraine, it was when the former president decided to side with Russia over the European Union. That's when all the people that Alec Ross and the State Department trained went into action.

Step 3: The State Department, and their proxies, actively support the opposition.

Under Obama, this was actual Administration policy, but now this happens REGARDLESS of the elected administration's policy by the “INSTITUTIONALIZED" Deep State. This institutionalized policy is what all witnesses were talking about in the impeachment trial. Trump is a threat to the policy they have going, and they will NOT STOP doing this policy no matter what the president says.

As activists, protesters and riots began to overtake the streets in Ukraine, Victoria Nuland — the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs — travel to Ukraine 3 separate times. In December 2013, she was even seen handing out cookies to activists in the streets!

Link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john...

That same month, John McCain showed that Obama's regime change policy was a bipartisan effort when he went to Ukraine to meet with the Ukrainian opposition. But lets not forget, it was the same John McCain that went over to Syria to meet with the terrorists who later became ISIS. When the administration used this very revolutionary system to try and overthrow Assad.

The National Endowment for Democracy, which I just showed you in our little history lesson a few minutes ago, reported that it spent over 3 million of YOUR tax dollars in Ukraine.

Link: https://web.archive.org/web/20140831044648/http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/eurasia/ukraine

Question: Why has this report has been scrubbed from their official website? And when will people learn the internet is forever?

Their funding included more than thirty thousand dollars to George Soros' Open Society Foundation. Again, this begs the question: why was the U.S. Government helping George Soros? What was their ultimate goal here?

The answer to those questions lies in the final stage of this plan.

Step 4: Once regime change has occurred, infiltrate the new government with hand picked “Civil Society" leaders.

Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland was caught red-handed in a leaked phone conversation, discussing how they were manipulating who would become the next Ukrainian Prime Minister. And — surprise surprise — their man ended up getting the job.

But even though they'd been publicly outed, manipulating the affairs of a sovereign nation, they didn't stop ... they doubled down.

We already know that the State Department, and the Obama Administration as a whole, were working to protect a George Soros funded NGO called the Anti-Corruption Action Center. Soros and the Obama Admin were specifically using them to target Ukraine's criminal justice system. But their coordination didn't stop there. Newly released emails, obtained by Freedom of Information Act requests, shows near weekly communication between Nuland and Soros.

Link: https://www.scribd.com/document/421081817/SorosNul... (See last line in paragraph on first email at bottom.)

This email chain from June 1st 2016 shows Soros setting up a call with Nuland for one of their scheduled “updates."

Link: https://www.scribd.com/document/421081036/SorosNul...

This next email chain just one week later, initiated by Soros' organization, details how the State Department and Soros were actively working together on projects relating to Ukraine's criminal justice system.

Do you recognize any of these names? Wait ... is that the whistleblower? Crazy ... it's almost like this guy had his hands into EVERYTHING. The State Department, the NSC, CIA, DNC operatives, Joe Biden, and now George Soros. This is the REAL reason why Adam Schiff and the Democrats are so scared of naming the whistleblower. There's no way they want him testifying in an open forum, and they'll do everything in their power to make sure it doesn't happen.

What I'm about to show you is absolutely insane. This is the final piece that shows you the full extent of how embedded the State Department and George Soros were in the Ukrainian Government. This right here is how they sealed the deal on the theft of an entire country.

Link: https://www.scribd.com/document/421078499/Soros-Uk...

This is a leaked document that was actually written by George Soros personally, entitled: "Comprehensive Strategy For The New Ukraine"

In this paper, Soros identifies the institutions that need to either be set up or targeted.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau needed to be established.

They got this done right from the beginning. It's also relevant to point out that this relationship bore fruit for the Obama Administration after they pressured the Bureau to investigate Manafort. They later hit a home run when they illegally released information implicating Manafort in the “Black Ledger," and that kicked the Russia Investigation into overdrive. And why did I say “illegally" released the information? Because a Ukrainian court convicted the head of the Anti-Corruption Bureau for doing this, and interfering in the U.S. 2016 election.

Isn't it interesting that the establishment of the Bureau was all part of Soros' plan who was coordinating DIRECTLY with the Obama Administration. And it was the head of this very organization that was caught on tape bragging how he worked to discredit Trump on behalf of Hillary Clinton. By the way ... convicted in a court of law for interfering in the U.S. election.

Judiciary Reform, including the appointment of a new High Council of justice.

Rewrite the Constitution.

That's game, set and match. Control those three areas, along with an ally in the Presidency — which they had — and the country was now THEIRS.

But Soros had a problem. As he notes, the newly elected Parliament (the rada) was slowing down his master plan by having the audacity of insisting on that pesky little thing called “transparency." But, not to worry, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

(See end of page 3 and 4.)

Soros notes that after a year of preparation, all the pieces were finally in place for quote “radical reform." His plan called for the creation of the National Reform Council that would bring together the president's administration, the cabinet of ministers, Parliament and — get this — civil society. Which basically means the government — ALL OF IT — would be linked directly to HIM.

And this shows the insane hypocrisy of Soros and all these other organizations, supported by the State Department and Obama Administration, that claim to be spreading Democracy. The NSC had the power to completely bypass Parliament. It was designed to fast track “radical reform" by completely subverting the will of the people. That doesn't sound very Democracy-ish.

(See page 4 paragraph 5.)

Now here's the best part. If you wanna know who REALLY pulls the strings in what had now become the most powerful entity in the “New Ukraine", all you have to do is read paragraph 5 on page 4.

The sole financer for the National Reform Council was the International Renaissance Foundation. Also known as, the Ukrainian branch of the George Soros Foundation. Oh but never mind, it's ok. Soros points out that a Ukrainian department would later take over the funding for the Reform Council… so there's that. The “Project Management Office" would eventually fill Soros' funding role, and lead the charge on implementing reform projects. But where would THEY get their funding?

(See page 4 paragraph 5, particularly “International Renaissance Foundation" and “will be one of the main supporters of the PMO.")

Oh ... George Soros.

(See page 6.)

And he was standing by with one billion of his own money to invest in various Ukrainian businesses. Because why settle with just bending a country to your Leftist policies when you can also make billions to boot? Oh, but he wants to make it clear that he's going to reinvest all of that money into his Civil Society programs. Obama was right: sometimes you have enough money. Soros doesn't want more money. If I can quote Alec Ross: he wants more POWER.

It's really hard to grasp the concept that someone could just start revolutions, collapse countries — as Soros has. He's considered a criminal in many countries in Asia for what he's done. But this is what he's about. As I reminded you in his own words, this is fun for him.

Ukraine became the crown jewel for the now “institutionalized" U.S. Deep State and their like minded partners such as George Soros. And we might not have ever truly known the full extent of how bad it has become if not for that July 25th phone call between Trump and Zelesnky. Hydra mobilized, and they revealed themselves. But Ukraine is just the tip of the iceberg.

When Clinton's Civil Society 2.0 first came to Ukraine, consider the state of the world at the time.

The revolutions going on in the Middle East that he's talking about were more commonly known as ... The Arab Spring. At this point in time, November 2011, revolutions had broken out in Tunisia, Oman, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Libya and Morocco. TWO regimes — Egypt and Libya — had already fully collapsed.

Now for parts of the Arab Spring, the Obama Administration was much more overt in their participation. Remember this from Hillary Clinton?

Everytime I hear that, I think of the video of the barely alive Gadaffi.

Not a good guy. But can you imagine being responsbile for that and laughing about it? Its almost as if this is “fun" for those involved. Clinton, the State Department ... who do they answer to? Certainly not you.

Libya still hasn't recovered, and would eventually become the country with the largest ISIS presence outside Syria. Libya and Syria are absolute dumpster fires, and Alec Ross' “shop" within the State Department were at ground zero right from the beginning.

Link: https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/03/14/tech-guru-ale...

They were training NGOs and rebels in both countries, and actually providing communications technology to enable them to coordinate.

This was going down WHILE the Arab Spring was in full swing, but the meddling began long BEFORE.

Link: https://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/nov/1...

Civil Society 2.0 began in November 2009, and it's no coincidence where they chose to kick it off… North Africa.

And remember what this program is intended for… what it's designed to nurture: revolution and regime change. As they did in Ukraine, they identify “Civil Society" groups, train them, fund them and show them how to mobilize.

Just a few months later, the White House initiated secret meetings with officials from the State Department and CIA. The meetings were led by Dennis Ross, the senior advisor on the Middle East; Samantha Power, from the National Security Council; and Gayle Smith, the director for global development.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/world/middleeas...

They developed an 18 page classified report which the Obama Administration dubbed Presidential Study Directive 11.

Link: https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/psd/index.html

Now, the Obama Admin issued 11 Study Directives in total, and the vast majority have been declassified. But all we know about PSD 11 is that it had to do with quote: “political reform in the Middle East and North Africa."

An official with knowledge of the classified report told this to the New York Times:

"Whether it was Yemen or other countries in the region, you saw a set of trends" — a big youth population, threadbare education systems, stagnant economies and NEW SOCIAL NETWORK TECHNOLOGIES LIKE FACEBOOK AND TWITTER — that was a "real prescription for trouble."

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/world/middleeas...

Could I just ask: Is this why Facebook, Twitter and Google have hired so many democrats specifically form HC's State Department office? Are they an expansion of the SD? You do know that the original seed money for google came form the CIA. What had the gov asked for in return. By the way ... that's a question, not a theory. And not a conspiracy fact as of yet.

Why is this report still classified? I'll just throw this out there ... maybe because there was an office in the State Department that was traveling the world training these “big youth populations" in revolution and regime change, in the months BEFORE the Arab Spring began?

Civil Society 2.0 arrived in the Middle East and North Africa in November 2009. Presidential Study Directive 11 occurred in August 2010. The Arab Spring kicked off just FOUR MONTHS LATER.

I want to make a personal plea to President Trump. If you want to know how institutionalized Hydra is, and why they're coning after you so hard you might want to declassify directive 11. If you want to see how deep the Ukrainian rabbit whole REALLY goes ... declassify PSD 11. You have the power to do it. I have a feeling that the strategy they used to take over Ukraine is probably described IN DETAIL in PSD 11.

Everything that was happening in Ukraine, was being done during the Arab Spring. Civil Society 2.0 had been on the ground a full year before the Arab Spring kicked off.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/world/15aid.html

U.S. dollars then began to flow to the protestors on the streets. They did this through funding from Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy.

Remember that State Department meeting in 2008 a few months after Obama was elected? The Egyptian activists that brought down their countries regime ... were at that conference. They were:

Taught to use social networking and mobile technologies to promote democracy.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/world/15aid.html

This is a leaked State Department diplomatic cable where they confirm the participation of the Egyptian activists at the 2008 meeting in New York.

Link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaa...

It also reveals that the U.S. Embassy in Egypt was putting pressure on the Egyptian government in support of the street protestors.

And, just as in Ukraine, the Egyptian Regime buckled under the weight of these new tech savvy global community organizers.

All three stages that would later be used in Ukraine, were pulled off to perfection in toppling the regime in Egypt. But what about stage 4?

Infiltrating the criminal justice system was harder in Egypt because the military had an iron grasp on the government. So how did they plan on getting around that? Exactly what George Soros proposed in Ukraine ... just rewrite the Constitution.

Link: https://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE71F0...

This Reuters article, written right after the regime fell, describes who was involved in rewriting Egypt's Constitution. Look who was in charge:

“CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS had already produced several drafts and a new constitution could be ready in a month."

The main group in charge was the Arabic Network for Human Rights. You'll never guess who funds them.

Link: http://www.anhri.net/en/reports/net2004/thank.shtml (Specifically, “HRINFO gratefully acknowledges the Open Society Institute (OSI) for its financial support.")

And while Soros funded NGOs went to work rewriting the Constitution, he then moved to get his guys into top level positions within the government.

Link: https://www.npr.org/2011/01/31/133307779/could-egy...

Mohammed ElBaradei emerged out of nowhere as the de facto leader of the “revolution." He's also a trustee of an organization called the International Crisis Group.

Link: https://www.crisisgroup.org/

They're a ThinkTank that claims to be:

Working to prevent wars and shape policies that will build a more peaceful world.

They're also founded AND FUNDED by George Soros.

Everything was in place for a Ukraine level theft of a country, but the Egyptian military stepped in and put a stop to it.

What began 10 years ago in North Africa and the Middle East, and then later perfected in Ukraine in 2014 ... still goes on to this very day. We have a new president, a new administration, new lawmakers in Congress ... but Hydra marches on.

But to be fair, you could say that they're only trying to foment revolution in bad countries. Ok, but thats not the case.

A few months after Civil Society 2.0 began in Ukraine, a near identical project popped up in Macedonia.

Link: https://www.usaid.gov/macedonia/fact-sheets/civil-...

In February 2012, the U.S. Government gave George Soros nearly $5 million to carry out a quote “Civil Society Program." According to the financial disclosure, Soros was involved in training and funding Macedonians on freedom of association, youth policies, citizen initiatives, persuasive argumentation and use of new media. So, in other words, they wanted a Macedonian Spring.

The money flowed through the State Department and was facilitated by U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia Jess Baily. Now, at this point, this isn't surprising coming from the Obama Administration, but after Trump was elected in 2016 an additional $9.5 million was allocated to keep the operation going.

Judicial Watch has done some digging on this, and they've interviewed several Macedonian officials to find out what the State Department and Soros are up to. See if this sounds familiar:

The groups organize youth movements, create influential media outlets and organize violent protests to undermine the institutions and policies implemented by the government. One of the Soros' groups funded the translation and publication of Saul Alinsky's “Rules for Radicals" into Macedonian.

Link: https://www.judicialwatch.org/corruption-chronicle...

I wonder ... what did Hydra have against the Macedonian Government at the time? Could it be because they had one of the more conservative governments in all of Europe? They had the lowest flat tax on the continent, close ties with Israel and were strongly pro-life. They had also recently built a border fence to try and deal with the immigration crisis.

The State Department was attacking this government, through George Soros, with YOUR money.

Link: https://www.scribd.com/document/338904121/Senator-...

It prompted Mike Lee to write an official letter to Ambassador Baily, asking him what the heck was going on. This wasn't the official policy of the U.S. Government, this was someone else's SHADOW policy.

Link: https://www.newsweek.com/crisis-macedonia-protests...

And, as it has happened time and time again since this all began, violence, riots and chaos were the consequences of that shadow policy.

The U.S. Ambassador remained in Macedonia up until a few months ago. There was never any explanation as to why he left. There's no entry on the official embassy website. He just suddenly ... wasn't there anymore. I talked to Mike Lee before this broadcast. He told me that he received what the State Department might classify as answers. But Mike says that his questions were NEVER satisfactorily answered.

“Spontaneous, indigenous popular uprisings" continue to break out TO THIS DAY, and the fingerprints of Civil Society 2.0 and George Soros are all over it. They're following their 4 part plan country by country.

I challenge you —everywhere the violence is erupting — try and find one that isn't related to the programs, groups and people that I've shown you here.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/20/world/americas/...

Violence in Chile continues to boil over. Chile ... the one country in South America that has actually seen economic growth by adhering to open and free markets, is now spiraling out of control. More than 15 people have died. And you know what sparked all the chaos? It wasn't self immolation like the Arab Spring. No ... “Civil Society" groups hit the streets in Chile due to a three cent cost in public transportation. THREE PENNIES.

Chile's free market government has been a target of Hydra for a long time.

Link: https://2009-2017.state.gov/statecraft/cs20/index.htm

Civil Society 2.0 began setting up TechCamps in Chile in November 2010. From the press release:

Goals of the program include increasing regional civil society organizations' digital literacy, sharing information, building networks and matchmaking like-minded individuals to organizations.

It always reads the same, and regime change and chaos in the streets always follows. And those “like minded organizations and individuals" included people like this woman (Javiera Lopez).

Link: https://twitter.com/japalola?lang=en

She's one of the lead organizers out in the streets. She's also the National Political Counselor for a far-left Socialist political party called Democratic Revolution. Their top demands, as seen in this tweet, is to force the rewriting of the Chilean Constitution:

Hmm, where have we seen that before? The State Department and Soros, the Hydra that is called Civil Society 2.0.

A year after Civil Society 2.0 began training activists in Chile, Democratic Revolution formed to organize the quote “activities of the student movement." Today, they're leading the charge in the same way Egyptian activists overthrew the Mubarak regime. But none of it would have been possible without the financing of George Soros and his Open Society Foundation.

Link: https://www.biobiochile.cl/noticias/nacional/chile...

Soros was there from the beginning and continued funding through, AT LEAST, 2015. Now they're poised to overthrow one of the most free market economies in South America.

They're taking down country by country, one at a time. The strategies of progressive leaders in the past of establishing large governing bodies such as the League of Nations or the UN, and bending continents under their ideological boots is largely over. Why start from the top, when you can conquer fragile regimes one by one?

And if you think this is happening purely beyond our own borders ... I've got some REALLY bad news for you. Countries like Ukraine, Macedonia, Egypt, Yemen and even Chile are much easier to heat up, destabilize and then cast into your image. You can place allies in the criminal justice system, and do deals with their leaders to fast track legislation. You can't really do that here.

However, is it a coincidence that leftists are being trained here in the U.S. by Soros groups? That our DOJ, FBI CIA, all of it has been so badly damaged in reputation? That corruption is at a level I've never seen in our country before? And our Constitution is constantly discredited and no one really knows it anymore. How far-fetched is it to believe that in the next 5 years you could get America to call for an ACB — some outside force that would rat our corruption? How hard is it to believe that protesters —leaderless organizations — could rise up to create instability and demand that a few changes to be made to our constitution?

Make no mistake, Hydra is active here in the United States. They're skipping the federal government and going state by state, county by county ... city by city. The same tactics they've been employing all over the world have come, and are coming, to main street USA. We are currently in contact with multiple state officials who have been investigating the infiltration of Soros in key positions. It is well organized and well financed and way beyond anything you might have heard before.

You're likely to see a barrage of people on left instantly labeling this entire program a conspiracy THEORY. We're already seeing that in the impeachment proceedings. In her testimony, Fiona Hill said the words conspiracy theory at least twice, and at one point specifically mentions George Soros. But I'll challenge every single one of the naysayers: try and refute any single one of the FACTS I'm about to show you. Just try. I'll bring you on the show and we can talk about, but you better bring facts because I'll be holding all of mine.

And why is it so taboo to call out Soros' involvement in the Ukraine scandal? Why is Soros "the name that shall not be named"? What are they so afraid of? I've been highlighting FOR YEARS how he plays with entire countries. He's already brought several of those countries down.

Crashing economies and bringing countries to their knees is fun for him, but the question has always been: how does he do it, and — possibly more important — are nation states colluding with him to pull it off?

Ever since Mia Love lost her seat to Ben McAdams in Utah's 4th congressional district, Republicans have been wondering who would be the person to step-up and take back the seat.

I bet you nobody saw this guy coming. And that's just the way he likes it.

When I got the call from a friend of mine who was tapped to be Burgess Owens Communications director, I was excited and couldn't wait to visit with him. Owens hadn't even announced yet and as a long-time listener of Glenn, I've heard Burgess in his many interviews and thought I knew what I was in for. But as I made the winding drive up the mountain at sunset over the south end of Salt Lake valley, there was one thought that wouldn't get out of my head — why would he want to get into politics?

I've heard many answers to this question and rarely do I believe their canned responses, but his answer rang true to me.

"I've never thought about it. It's been brought up a few times over the years but it never crossed my mind. I'd never seen politics as the answer," Owens said. "I started a nonprofit called Second Chance 4 Youth and the mission is to help kids stay out of the juvenile system. If we don't win back the house, keep the senate and the presidency, those kids don't have a ghost of a chance to make it. Because the leftists will continue the process to do what they've done in the past."

Over the course of our conversation, he was very passionate about the black community but his call to serve isn't about race or one community over the other.

It's the marxists and socialists that have destroyed my community and they're now trying to do the same thing to our country.

"This isn't a black or white issue, it's ideology. It's the marxists and socialists that have destroyed my community and they're now trying to do the same thing to our country," Owens said.

"If we don't keep power away from these leftists, it doesn't matter what I'm doing with these kids, it's just a pebble in a big ocean. But if I'm able to be in a position to not only empower our party, but empower our president who is actually one of the best friends the black community has ever had, hopefully I can be a part of making lasting change for these kids."

I've had the opportunity to interview quite a few politicians over the years and I can count on one hand the number I can stand and the number drops off greatly when I get to the ones I feel like I can actually trust. But this message strikes deep at the core of what the real problem facing our nation and his solutions are simple and make sense.

It is a 4 pronged approach: Head, heart, hands and home. Education, God, industry and family.

"It's simple, something we can teach our kids without debate. Every policy will be tied to this message. You take those things away and you get what have now. No hope, no education, no dreaming, anger and no belief in God."

Growing up in the deep south in the 50's and 60's, there was chaos all around. It was the height of Jim Crow laws and integration of the school systems and Burgess lived the real life scenario portrayed in Remember the Titans as one of four black football players on his team. But despite the hate and bigotry surrounding him, his black community was strong, patriotic and loved the country. He believes the four tenants listed above are the foundation that made that possible and they are what can bring our country back from the brink.

The only thing that rivaled his passion for our country and the solutions to fix it, was his unbridled support for President Trump. Many believe Mia Love lost her seat because of her spat with the President, but his support is no political stunt. He flat out loves the guy — warts and all.

"Anyone who has had a family or heritage that's gone through unfairness or persecution where you've seen the type of carnage we have in the black community then you have somebody come on board and for the first time in the history say this is what I'm going to do to resolve the misery and issues in the black community and then does it — personally, I don't care how he speaks," Owens said.

It comes to a point where we have to decide if our feelings are more important or the lives of other people.

"If people are living their lives with hope again, with vision, we should all be on board with that. It comes to a point where we have to decide if our feelings are more important or the lives of other people. President Trump has been the greatest friend the black community has ever had, President Obama was the worst. The black guy who was articulate and spoke so well, but he brought so much misery to our race. Who would I choose, someone of my same race who is terrible or someone of another race but gets results? I'm all about results. I don't put any distance between myself and President Trump."

As the conversation moved along, I had to ask Glenn's favorite question — what's the state of his soul?

"As I think about my approach as candidate and getting into politics, it has never been attractive to me, the power and prestige, all the stuff that goes along with it," Owens said.

I've heard that one before too. But it's what he said next that made me believe him.

"As a football player, I know what it is to be the center of attention and I also know how pride steps in, because I've experienced it. I'm at a point in my life now, where there are three things that are most important: God, country and family. If it's not embracing those, I don't have time for it now. The family unit has been put into place by divine law. Heavenly Father has a plan for the family, he put it in place so we can be happy and produce and nothing we do can change that," Owens said.

He also said "now is not the time to be squeamish about God" and putting Him first is the "key to becoming who we were meant to be." It was his closing statement that should speak to the souls of patriotic Americans of any creed or color: "When America wakes up, we win."

Have you had enough winning yet?

A whale in a raincoat turns to a starfish.

“Why do you need a raincoat when we're surrounded by water?" asks the starfish.

The whale laughs, “Water? I don't see any water."

We are the starfish in this situation. There's something suspicious happening. We can sense it. But it's often hard to prove. The media tells us that we're delusional. That all this Ukraine business is a conspiracy theory.

Only it's not.

And we have proof.

Something wasn't right. Something smelled fishy.

I was talking about Biden's shady connection to Ukraine months before anyone else. (Perhaps you watched our candidate profile on Joe Biden from April of this year.)

My team and I knew, even then, that something wasn't right. Something smelled fishy.

Then we discovered the truth. We couldn't believe it. The evidence kept piling on. And, thanks to cavalier journalists like John Solomon at the Hill, many of the documents and recordings and videos rose to the surface.

Yet, for the most part, the media ignored this glaring story, a story full of shady dealings and deep corruption, corruption that went all the way to the Oval Office. So why weren't the media leaping to cover it? Why were journalists so focused on Biden's creepy issues with personal space, and not the unexplained loss of $1.3 billion? That's roughly the GDP of Gambia.

amp only placement

We made it our mission to expose the truth.

When the news broke about the Trump impeachment, we were ready. Here I am in September, explaining the Ukraine scandal:

The misdeeds that took place with Ukraine are far more serious than one of Trump's phone calls. This runs deep.

If there's any semblance of justice left, this scandal will go down as the Watergate of our time. Sort of. Because, despite what the media insists, the guilty parties are all attached to the Obama Administration.

We refuse to stand by and remain silent.

We've spent many days and nights working on this, on bringing you the truth. And we've tried to make it as approachable as possible. Because it's enough to make your head spin.

Our months of grueling research paid off. People loved our special, Ukraine: The Democrats' Russia.

It exploded. Went viral. For that week, it was all over social media. People were talking about it.

"We punish a man for his ignorance if he is thought to be responsible for his ignorance."

The special is there for you. But, as I said in the special, the important part of this whole debacle is education. In the words of Aristotle, “We punish a man for his ignorance if he is thought to be responsible for his ignorance."

We are all responsible for our ignorance. Anymore, with all the information in the world available to us at all times, there is no excuse.

I get it. All of this Ukraine business is daunting and complex. All the more reason to understand its intricacies.

We want to make it as easy as possible for you to see the sequence of events that led up to Trump's phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. What better way than to give you an interactive chalkboard?

Explore the timeline at your own pace. The truth is in your hands. You have all the power now.

FEB 2014

New President in Ukraine

It all began with the appointment of a new President in Ukraine. Petro Porochenko.

The pro-Russian regime in Ukraine officially collapsed as President Yanukovych was forced to flee to Russia. After three months of demonstrations, the protesters seized control of Kiev, and new elections for the brand new government were set up for just a few months later.

This would lay the foundation for systematic corruption by the Democrats.


Within a couple years, the Obama Administration will become the biggest advocate for the new regime in Ukraine, and high-level Democrat political influencers will take root in Ukraine. This is just a few of the many:

  • Greg Craig: former Obama White House counsel
  • Tad Devine: Chief Strategist for Bernie Sanders
  • Tony Podesta: Brother to John Podesta
  • Mark Penn: Chief Strategist for Hillary Clinton
  • John Alazone: Obama campaign pollster
  • Joel Benenson: the Obama campaign LEAD pollster

An overwhelming show of force in a country with crucial ties to one of our enemies. But it evolved into so much more than that.

Here's Obama meeting with Porochenko later that year:

MAR 2014

Obama Makes Biden Point-man in Ukraine

Then-President Obama wanted to prove his devotion to Ukraine. So he appointed then-Vice President Joe Biden to be the new point-man in the country.

Here's what author Peter Schweizer had to say about this decision:

APR 2014

Biden Flies to Ukraine, Hunter Tags Along

As I pointed out in our Candidate profile on Biden, April 2014 was a crucial moment in the Ukraine scandal.

In April 2014, roughly a month after the Russian invasion, Devon Archer visited Joe Biden at the White House. Remember, Archer is one of Hunter Biden's two partners in Rosemont Seneca. We don't know what the meeting was about — maybe they were just exchanging cookie recipes. But five days later, Joe Biden landed in Kiev for high-level meetings with Ukrainian government officials.

He brought with him specific plans for a program to assist the Ukrainian natural gas industry, as well as details of over $1 billion in U.S. assistance and loans. Part of the energy portion of the program reads:

U.S. technical experts will ... help Ukraine develop a public-private investment initiative to increase conventional gas production from existing fields to boost domestic energy supply.

MAY 2014

Hunter Biden, Devon Archer Become Burisma Board Members

The day after Biden arrived in Ukraine, Devon Archer was named to the board of Burisma, the gas company run by Kolomoisky, the oligarch who was banned from entering the U.S.

In 2016, Foreign Policy magazine reported:

No one in the U.S. government has wielded more influence over Ukraine than Vice President Joe Biden.

Three weeks later, Hunter Biden also joined Burisma's board.

And he's still on the board. Burisma announced these appointments publicly. U.S. media reported on it. Check out these headlines:

This wasn't a secret. But no one really noticed or cared, because hey — this was the Obama White House.

This was a pattern with Biden. Whether it was meetings with foreign leaders in Washington, or traveling to foreign capitals, business opportunities and deals magically materialized for Hunter Biden's company. Need proof? Just take a glance at this interview with Joe and Hunter Biden in Popular Mechanics.

NOV 2014

U.S. Aid to Ukraine Increases

The Obama Administration ratcheted up their monetary support of Ukraine. U.S. aid to Ukraine included:

  • $1 billion sovereign loan guarantee
  • $320 million in general assistance
  • $118 million in equipment and training for their security forces
  • $20 million for law enforcement reform
  • And a fleet of advisors in banking, politics, energy, media, and human rights.

APR 2015

Obama Admin. Mandates Setup of NACB

In April 2015, the Obama Administration helped set up — actually they mandated it through the IMF — the establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, whose purpose was to seek out and eradicate government corruption.

A man named Artem Sytnyk was tapped to be the first Director of the Bureau.

The following month, George Soros released the following strategy memo for dealing with Ukraine.

A year later, the Anti-Corruption Bureau signed an official Memorandum of Understanding with the FBI, giving the Obama Administration a direct line into whatever dark secrets the Ukrainians might dig up.

??? 2015

Owner of Burisma Loses $1.8 Billion from the U.S.

What's the most money you ever lost? And I mean lost. Not misplaced. Or spent. Or were swindled out of. Or had picket-pocketed. I mean lost. You had the money and it vanished.

For most of us, the answer is probably under $100. Maybe you lost a $20 bill at the State Fair.

I'm going to take a guess and say that absolutely none of you have lost a billion dollars.

A billion. The number one followed by 9 zeros. 1,000,000,000. The total value of Apple, the most valuable brand in the world.

It seems that putting a Ukrainian oligarch in charge of $1.8 billion isn't a great idea.

Well, in March 2016, this is exactly what happened. Oh, and it wasn't one billion dollars. Actually, it was $1.8 billion. I forgot about that extra $800 million.

Lesson of the story: It seems that putting a Ukrainian oligarch in charge of $1.8 billion isn't a great idea. An oligarch named Ihor Kolomoisky, head of Burisma — the largest private natural gas company in Ukraine.

As pointed out in an article for Ukranian newspaper Kyiv Post:

Court filings reveal that Kolomoisky was divvying up and fighting over the rusting U.S. steel mills with other Ukrainian oligarchs — in the same way that they fought over Ukraine's Soviet-built industrial plants in the 1990s and 2000s. One deal, involving Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, bled into the sale of a Warren, Ohio steel mill.

JUN 2015

Trump Announces Presidential Run

I can picture it so clearly. Trump descending the golden escalator as “Keep Rockin' in the Free World" played loudly in the background.

At the time, most people shrugged Trump off and focused on other candidates. He would prove to be a far more formidable opponent than anyone expected.

LATE 2015

Research: Alexandra Chalupa

Donald Trump was already surging in the polls. Still not a word about the Russia meddling. There was nothing out on Manafort yet. There was no Steele Dossier. George Papadapolous wasn't on the campaign yet. There was no FISA request for Carter Page.

Yet, an American lawyer named Alexandra Chalupa — the daughter of Ukrainian immigrants — began doing opposition research on Trump. And her employer had a lot of influence in Ukraine. Her employer? None other than the Democrat National Committee.

The DNC paid her over seventy-one thousand dollars for her work during the 2016 election alone, but her work with the DNC goes all the way back to 2004.

In January 2016, Chalupa approached an official at the DNC and told them, regarding Trump's campaign:

I felt there was a Russia connection.

Chalupa concentrated most of her research on Paul Manafort and his work with the — now exiled — President of Ukraine (Yanukovich). Interestingly enough, all of her energy was focused on Manafort and NOT on his partners in helping get the Russian backed Yanukovych re-elected. Those partners were Tony Podesta and Tad Devine. I guess the fact that both Podesta and Devine were Democrats made everything ok ... just not for Manafort.

The same month Chalupa was telling the DNC that there was a Russia connection between Manafort and Trump, the Obama White House summoned Ukrainian prosecutors to the White House.

Here's a hacked DNC email, that was released on Wikileaks, between Chalupa and the former DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda. In that email, Chalupa checks in, reporting that she will speak at the Library of Congress specifically about Manafort.

Source: WikiLeaks

Source: WikiLeaks

MAR 2016

Biden Replaces Shokin with Lutsenko

During a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, Vice President Joe Biden made his now infamous statement about his role in getting Ukraine Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin fired, bragging that he had withheld $1 billion in loan guarantees for Ukraine.

"I looked at them and said: 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time," he said.

At the time, Shokin was investigating a Ukrainian company that Biden's son was involved with. Biden has claimed that what he did was based purely on Shokin's corrupt conduct, and nothing to do with his son's business dealings.

Here's a sworn statement of from Shokin:

This intimidation by the Obama administration was also used against Shokin's succesor, Yuriy Lutsenko. Here's his statement to the Hill detailing corruption from Obama-appointed Marie Yovanovitch to U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine:

Here's the kicker:

The truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine, and Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors. I assume Burisma, which was connected with gas extraction, had the support of the Vice President Joe Biden because his son was on the Board of Directors.

Shokin detailed Obama's systematic control of Ukraine, noting that Obama was “telling the heads of the Ukraine law-enforcement system how to investigate and whom to investigate."

Shokin had another unforgivable sin on his record. He had launched an investigation on the actions of an NGO called the Anti Corruption Action Centre.

Shokin alleged that the NGO might have improperly diverted, or even embezzled, millions of dollars. So why would this be an unforgivable sin to Obama and Biden?

See for yourself (scroll down to the finances section of their website and mouse over 2016 to see the funders).

Source: Screenshot from Anti Corruption Action Centre website

If you look at the top two financiers for that year, the top two are the International Renaissance Foundation and the U.S. Government. The International Renaissance Foundation is yet another group headed by ... George Soros.

MAR 2016

Bank Loses $2.2M and $1.8B in IMF Loans

James Stafford, a journalist who covers the energy industry wrote:

Burisma fails to pass the most basic due diligence check. Its registration documents are impossible to run down. It publishes no asset information or financial records, nor does it release any audited financial statements. The complete lack of transparency means that anyone interested — including potential investors — must rely solely on press releases about Burisma's future plans and intentions.

Here's part one of my chalkboard exposé on the underhanded deals that took place in Ukraine.

After Hunter Biden joined the Burisma board, the company's owner, Kolomoisky was suddenly taken off the U.S.' entry-ban list. Kolomoisky's ban wasn't the only thing that disappeared. Remember that $1.8 billion loan the U.S. promised to Ukraine?

Most of that money flowed through PrivatBank, Ukraine's largest bank, owned by who else? Kolomoisky. $1.8 billion simply vanished.

Where did it go? A Ukrainian watchdog group traced the money by researching a series of court decisions. Basically, the billion dollars from the U.S. was laundered through Kolomoisky's network of offshore entities.

Ultimately, the Ukrainian government took control of Kolomoisky's bank, but the $1.8 billion was never recovered.

MAR 2016

Chalupa Begins to Work Directly with Ukraine Embassy

Around the time Manafort joined the Trump campaign, Chalupa began working with embassy staff to raise the alarm bells regarding Manafort to the Ukrainian president. She said the embassy "worked directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions."

In other words, the Ukrainian Embassy, right here in the United States, was working directly with a DNC operative to damage a Republican candidate for president to influence the U.S. election.

Chalupa and the DNC deny this, but a Ukrainian Embassy political officer who worked there at the time, stated that the Ukrainians were working with Chalupa.

They were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa.

At the end of March, 2016, the Ukranian Head of a Department of the Prosecutor General's Office met with representatives of the BlueStar Strategies. Here's a translated memo of that meeting:

APR 2016

Pillow Talk with the Ohrs

Bruce Ohr led a double life. He worked for the Department of Justice associate deputy attorney general, but he also played a part in starting the Russian meddling accusations against Trump.

As I mentioned earlier, the DNC and the Clinton Campaign hired Fusion GPS to write the Steele Dossier, which was supposed to crush Trump. Then Fusion GPS hired Bruce Ohr's wife Nellie Ohr, a Russian specialist, to “research" Donald Trump.

(Check out these reports from the FBI's investigation into Ohr.)

Trump has been pretty open about his opinion of Ohr.

MAY 2016

Isikoff Memo: Chalupa Embassy Press

Investigative journalist Michael Isikoff has been probing around this whole time, and in 2018, he compiled all his findings in his book, Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump.

Within a few months, Federal authorities would use this article by Isikoff for a FISA warrant application in order to justify surveillance of Carter Page.

In late May, these State Department memos were sent, revealing contacts between George Soros' firm and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland.

JUN 2016

FBI & National Anti-Corruption Bureau

Remember the Ukranian National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NACB)? The supposed anti-corruption agency created with the help of Obama and the DNC. It hadn't even been in operation for a year when the FBI instituted a “Memorandum of Understanding" between the FBI and the NACB.

As noted on the NABU website:

This document establishes the parties' joint work on crimes related to international money laundering, international asset recovery, and Ukrainian high-level officials' bribery and corruption.

In the words of then the FBI Acting Deputy Assistant Director Mathew S. Moon:

If, for instance, your criminal proceeding has the accordant proceedings in the US, you [NABU] can give us the numbers of the bank accounts and it will be the reason for us to issue a notice of suspicion for a person and receive the necessary information much faster.

Another important legal proceeding that will receive very little attention is Citizens United v. The U.S. Department of State. Here is an FBI agent's affidavit in Citizens United FOIA lawsuit, including the declaration of Michael Seidel:

The FBI will play a crucial role in this whole thing. As recently as July of 2019, members of Congress were sounding the alarm about questionable activity:

JUN 2016

Obama Appoints New Ambassador

Without much ado, then-President Barack Obama appointed Marie Yovanovitch to U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine. Yovanovitch is a big supporter of Artyom Sytnik, head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau.

The following State Department memos reveal that, a few weeks before Obama appointed Yovanovitch, George Soros and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland discussed Ukraine:

JUN 2016

Manafort Sentenced

In June of 2016, with the election just months away, Donald Trump fired campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and promoted Manafort to the position. Suddenly, Manafort was in charge of Trump's entire campaign.

Around that same time, Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power sent this email reacting to Donald Trump UN plan:

Half-a-year later, Power gave this speech about Russia:

And here she is discussion the Russia Trump speech in an email:

LATE 2016

No Visas for Ukrainian Prosecutors

The Deputy Director for Ukraine's Prosecutor General's International Cooperation Department stated that she didn't grant his delegation visas to travel to the United States. They wanted to come to deliver information to the U.S. Attorney General evidence of Ukraine's misdeeds during the 2016 election.

This evidence included:

  • Sworn statements from Ukrainian officials admitting that their agency tried to influence the 2016 election. (This must be whistleblowers inside the Anti-Corruption Bureau regarding the Manafort “Ledger.")
  • Contacts between Democrat figures in Washington and Ukrainian officials involved in gathering dirt on Donald Trump. (This is probably the DNC, Chalupa and the Ukraine Embassy.)
  • Financial records showing a Ukrainian natural gas company routed more than $3 million to Hunter Biden.
  • Records showing Joe Biden pressured Ukrainian officials to fire Shokin.
  • Correspondence that proves the State Department and U.S. Embassy in Ukraine interfered in criminal cases on Ukrainain soil.
  • Disbursements of as much as $7 billion that may have been misappropriated and taken out of the country.

Two other important events happened in late 2016. Obama appointed a new Ambassador in Ukraine, and the Manafort “Black Ledger" was released by Ukraine's Anti-Corruption Bureau.

But the Presidential election was in full swing. It took up all the time and space in the news. So these two crucial moments passed by mostly unseen.

A member of the Ukrainian Parliament named Leshchenko and the Anti-Corruption Bureau Director, Sytnik — who had just signed a memorandum of understanding with the FBI just a month prior — jointly released pages in the Ledger that showed illegal payments given to Paul Manafort.

Were the Ukrainians trying to influence the election? Check out this article from the Financial Times.

(If you're unable to access the article, the headline is a good summary of it: “Ukraine's leaders campaign against 'pro-Putin' Trump")

The article actually states direct quotes from the Member of Parliament (Leshchenko) that disclosed Manafort's name in the ledger:

A Trump presidency would change the pro-Ukrainian agenda in American foreign policy. For me it was important to show not only the corruption aspect, but that he is a pro-Russian candidate who can break the geopolitical balance in the world.

In other words, the Ukrainian government actively tried to sink Donald Trump's campaign for President.

NOV 2016

Trump Wins the Election

November 8, 2016. The day everything changed.

The day that shattered so many news anchors and Hillary supporters. It wasn't supposed to happen. According to the media, Trump wasn't supposed to win. But he did.

Hillary was so upset that she refused to concede.

From that moment, Democrats made up their mind. They decided that they were going to get Trump out of office however they could. No rules. Anything goes.

Within hours of Trump's win, journalists were calling for his impeachment.

He was still months away from being sworn in, barely into his first day in his Presidential legacy, and the left wanted him out.

A Change.org petition to Congress titled “ Impeach Donald J. Trump" raised nearly $500,000.

Down the line, a former British intelligence Officer will compile a dossier — a 35-page compilation of 16 reports supposedly offering evidence of conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government — an accusation that will haunt Trump for years. But it ultimately proved to be a dud.

Most importantly, it was the DNC and the Clinton Campaign that contracted Steele to write the dossier.

Steele leaked the dossier to journalist Michael Isikoff, who had been working with DNC-operative Alexandra Chalupa. Isikoff wrote an article for Yahoo News detailing parts of the Steele Dossier.

Note that the email was sent in May 2016, exactly one month after the DNC hired Fusion GPS to work on the dossier.

The last line of this email is significant:

... there is a big Trump component you and Lauren need to be aware of that will hit in next few weeks and something I'm working on you should be aware of.

The FBI used the leak as corroborating evidence to justify a FISA warrant for Carter Page.

Here is the FBI Human Source Validation Report on Christopher Steele:

JUL 2017

First Mention of Ukraine by White House

Then-Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders first mentioned Democrat corruption in Ukraine during an off-camera briefing on July 12, 2017, alleging that the DNC had colluded with the Ukrainian Government and targeted people within the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

Sanders said:

I think if there's been any evidence of collusion in 2016 that's come out at all or been discussed that's actually happened, it would be between the DNC and the Ukrainian government. I don't often quote the New York Times, but even one of their reporters tweeted earlier today that — why this example provides evidence of collusion: "Cooperation was between DNC officials and officials from the Ukrainian government, not just some associate."

Ukrainian actions to coordinate with the DNC was actually successful, unlike anything shown by Don Jr.'s emails. Information passed to the DNC from the Ukrainian government directly targeted members of the Trump campaign in an attempt to undermine it. And that was just Ukraine. The other big news was the foreign intelligence dossier that the President's political opponents funded and disseminated widely, and was based on discredited opposition research from foreign intelligence sources. The only collusion I've seen, and that's certainly been proven, would be between those people.

Then, President Trump mentioned Ukraine on Twitter:

Later that month, Senator Chuck Grassley wrote a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, outlining shady activity among the Ukrainians, the DNC, and Alexandra Chalupa.

Nothing ever came of it.

OCT 2017

Two Ukrainians Found Guilty, Secret Audio Released

Ukraninan People's Deputy Borislav Rosenblatt filed a claim charging both Leshchenko and Sytnik with interfering in the U.S. election by publicly disclosing the information on Manafort. The Ukrainian court agreed. After Leshchenko appealed the decision, Rosenblatt leaked the audio recording.

In April of 2019, former Prosecutor General Lutsenko gave an interview with the Ukrainian media. In that interview he makes a stunning comment:

I don't know how, but the Americans got an audio recording of Mr. Sytnik's conversation: he is resting with his family and friends and discussing how he would like to help Hillary.

Sytnik is the Director of the Bureau that the Obama Administration mandated they set up. He then made public information directly to influence the U.S. election.

Here's that audio:

We'd rushed around looking for a Ukrainian translator. It was pure chaos here at the studios. But we knew it was important. Eventually, we got it. And we were absolutely floored. We had our smoking gun.

Mercury Radio Arts Inc | October 02, 2019 | Transcript by TransPerfect

KOLYA: Did they … those Russians … help him? Your people?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: I think they did.

KOLYA: Oh, did they?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: Yep. I helped him, too. Not him, but Hilary. I helped her.

KOLYA: Yeah, right. Then her position tottered, right.

ARTYOM SYTNYK: Well, this is how they write about it. Right.

IVAN: Hilary's humanitarian aid [INDISCERNIBLE] America?

KOLYA: Well, I am about … the commentaries. At that time, we were not in [INDISCERNIBLE].

IVAN: No, there it was …

ARTYOM SYTNYK: Trump … His purely inner problem … issue… They dominate over the external matters. While Hilary … she is – how shall I put it? She belongs to the cohort of politicians who comprise the hegemony in the US. Both in the US and in the entire world. Right. For us, it is …sort of … better. For the Americans … what Trump is doing is better for them.

KOLYA: Well, we have lots of those American experts here now... [INDISCERNIBLE].

ARTYOM SYTNYK: A woman. Masha.

KOLYA: How do you find her?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: They don't keep any different people.

KOLYA: They - who?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: As our Ambassador in Germany once told me… He said: in order to get to the Ambassador's post to a foreign country in Germany – it seems easier to win the Noble Prize, than to get the position of Ambassador.

ARTYOM SYTNYK: There is a very tough selection process there. Unlike in our country. See, we sent Lytvyn to … so to say… Now the entire borer is open. We sent him to the position of the Ambassador. And then he disappeared there.

KOLYA: Well, not quite so… It was done via the system, of course…

IVAN: Come on, what are you talking about?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: Well, there, you see. Why Hilary lost the elections? I was in charge of investigation of their “black accounting" records.

ARTYOM SYTNYK: We made the Manafort's data available to general public.

KOLYA: So what?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: He was imprisoned. Manafort then was the head of the Supreme Headquarter of Trump. Right. Then he was dismissed, too. Including due to the “black accounting". After that, he was sentenced to 80 years of imprisonment term. How about Trump? He did not give a shit. They have their system working there, and it works smoothly.

KOLYA: Everybody works smoothly there.

ARTYOM SYTNYK: And when they carried out the elections. A week before the elections, FBI reopened the investigation in respect of Hilary. So her rating dropped for 7%, and that is why Trump managed to win the elections at a pinch. I am still unable to understand why he is fighting with FBI? They try to catch him on the hand. If it were not the FBI, he would not have won the elections. They torpedoed Hilary's rating for 7 %.

KOLYA: I say... Is FBI - ФБР?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: Yes. Of course, it is a solid structure there.

KOLYA: The solid one, right?

ARTYOM SYTNYK: You bet! A real stronghold!

APR 2018

Mueller Report Finds Nothing

The Mueller Report. I'm sure you remember exactly where you were the day it was released.

In December of 2016, exactly a month after Trump was elected President, academic Joseph Mifsud, with links to Trump advisor George Papadopoulos, sent this:

Here's an email from Mifsud to Papadopoulos:

And another, from February 2017, to the FBI:

Mifsud regularly attended meetings of the Valdai Discussion Club, which often included Russian President Vladimir Putin. Here's Mifsud's deposition testimony on Vladimir Putin:

Several months later, in June, Mueller charged Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian-Ukrainian political operative, with alleged ties to Russian Intelligence and a Manafort business partner, with witness tampering. Kilimnik was once described as “Manafort's Manafort," his contact in Kiev.

MAY 2018

Trump Boots U.S. Ambassador

President Trump recalled Obama-appointed Marie Yovanovitch from her post as U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine.

In October of 2019, Yovanovitch will give a closed-door testimony before the House Committees on Oversight and Reform, Foreign Affairs and Intelligence. Here is her opening statement.

She wrote:

Understanding Ukraine's recent history, including the significant tension between those who seek to transform the country and those who wish to continue profiting from the old ways, is of critical importance to understanding the events you asked me here today to describe. Many of those events — and the false narratives that emerged from them — resulted from an unfortunate alliance between Ukrainians who continue to operate within a corrupt system, and Americans who either did not understand that corrupt system, or who may have chosen, for their own purposes, to ignore it.

JUL 2019

Donald Trump Makes Phone Call to Volodymyr Zelenskiy

Then, the fateful phone call. If you haven't heard or read the call transcript yet, here's my reenactment of it:

President Donald J. Trump has released a declassified, un-redacted transcript of his telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy from July 25th, 2019.

The media swiftly and uniformly sided with the unknown whistleblower.

Even when Trump responded, they stuck to their guns.

After months of resisting calls for impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced her support for an impeachment inquiry.

Here's a notice of suspicion signed by the Ukraine general prosecutor on March 28, 2019, announcing the opening of a new investigation against Burisma Holdings Founder Zolchevsky:

Here's Ambassador Kurt Volker, Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, giving testimony before the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs on October 3, 2019:

In yet another bizarre twist, the man who beat Poroshenko in the Ukraine Presidential election this year was Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian.

OCT 2019

What's Next?

Which brings us to now. What's next, you ask?

Well, you've seen all the evidence. What do you think? Do we have a case or what?

Without a doubt.

But that's not enough. It's not enough to know the truth. Not anymore.

So now, we've got to get the facts out there, in the open, so that everyone can see them, and decide for themselves. It's imperative that we reveal the truth. To shrug this off would be a disservice to our nation.

Good luck and godspeed.

My fellow supporters,

It is with a heavy heart that I must make a sad announcement today. The time has come to press pause on the dream of Beto for president. It's not the end of the Beto dream. It's just pressing pause for a while, like pausing a Foss CD. The dream will keep right on spinning, until we return to it and press play again. I mean, look at Bernie Sanders. That guy's almost twice my age and he's still running for president. That means you can look forward to Beto running for office for decades to come. I have found there is tremendous joy and freedom in running for office and never winning. All the travel, Vanity Fair cover stories, food and free beer, with none of the hassle or responsibility of having an actual job in elected office (or any job at all). It's really great.

With the exception of myself, no one has supported Beto more faithfully and true than you, the fans. I'd also like to thank my wife Amy for continually raising our children so that I can travel this great land in my never-ending quest to find myself (and also to connect with you, the fans). From attending my very hip and not-at-all contrived jogging town halls, to slapping those trendy Beto bumper stickers on your hybrid-SUVs, to steadying tables all over America so I could jump on top of them and yell and jab the air, to clicking "like" on all those Facebook videos of my dentist visits – you perpetuated this Beto dream way longer than it had any right to be perpetuated.

So, I'm sure you're now wondering – what's next for Beto?

Other than pursuing my career as a solo rock recording artist, I believe the best way I can serve America and bring true justice to this great land of ours is by stealing from the rich and giving to those who fall in the sweet spot on the intersectionality charts. Except I won't steal from my billionaire father-in-law, only because getting my family cut out of the will would not be in America's best interest. You need a Beto who is independently wealthy via his wife and so do I. Plus, as you know by now, from following the 2020 presidential campaign so closely, the only acceptable status quo in America is leaving the wealth of Progressive elites alone. Everyone else's wealth is fair game, including the middle class. It's the right thing to do.

You need a Beto who is independently wealthy via his wife and so do I.

Therefore, from this day forward I will henceforth be known as Beto Hood. You will be able to join the cause by purchasing official Beto Hood merch soon at Beto Hood dot com. Together, with my band of merry men, who will be known as "merry non-binaries", we will roam the land, righting all the wrongs and bringing about all the social justice that Donald Trump refuses to let you have.

Beto Hood and his Merry Non-Binaries will live on the road. And in the woods (in eco-friendly, fully sustainable treehouse yurts). And in the shadows. We will skateboard and learn archery and rappelling. We will become proficient in hand-to-hand combat. We will become experts in all weaponry except guns, since guns are the evilest weapons. We will care for all the animals of the forest. You already know my affinity for squirrels. Not only will we continue to rescue all the orphan squirrels, we will train them in petty thievery and nimble sabotage. We will affix tiny helmets on them, fitted with tiny Go Pro cameras to live stream their heroic exploits on Facebook. Side note: my colonoscopy next week will also be live streamed on Facebook and available to rent on iTunes.

Using the skills I honed as a college graduate scaling the gates of UTEP, Beto Hood and his Merry Non-Binaries will scale the gates of America's richest and steal from their grotesque wealth. Jewelry, high-end electronics, precious antiques, art, women's shoes – nothing of value will be off-limits. Drawing on my experience while my father was a county judge, we will live above the law. It will be dangerous work, the Lord's work as some people say. But totally worth the risk.

Also, we will not wait for Constitutional amendments nor judicial overreach to get rid of America's AR-15s. We will steal those too. One by one. Using very large versions of those stretchy sticky hands that come in cereal boxes, we will literally be able to snatch these vile guns right out from under the noses of the monsters who own them. Then, with our literal mountain of confiscated AR-15s, we will melt them down and use the metal to build a flotilla of sturdy watercraft, called Beto Boats (trademark pending). Families will be able to use these Beto Boats to save themselves and others when the rising waters of climate change overtake our cities in exactly ten years.

Who needs the presidency? I have big, bold plans for a bright future as an outlaw hero.

Who needs the presidency? I have big, bold plans for a bright future as an outlaw hero. So, don't cry for me, America. Beto will be just fine. Dropping out of this race is nothing that another months-long, head-clearing road trip won't cure. And after that, I'll start shopping for some tights.



[NOTE: The preceding Memo was a parody written by MRA writer Nathan Nipper – not Beto O'Rourke.]