Coburn: The Only Tool America Has That's Big Enough to Fix the Problem Is Article V

Earmarks were supposed to be a thing of the past, but a tone deaf GOP decided to vote today on bringing them back --- that is until the American people got wind of it.

"They were supposed to vote on bringing earmarks back today, but then you heard about it, and Paul Ryan said, Oh, well, we're not going to vote on that right now. Oh, that's good," Glenn said Thursday on his radio program.

Even after the unprecedented election of Donald Trump, establishment politicians failed to receive the message: The American people are fed up with big government and deal-making politicians. If they don't get the message, the only recourse left to the people is a Convention of States, brilliantly added as Article V in the U.S. Constitution.

Former Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn, who spearheaded the effort to stop earmarks and currently serves as a senior advisor to the Convention of States, talked with Glenn about tone deaf career politicians, completely out of step with the American people.

"It's laziness. It's careerism. It's elitism. And it's contemptuous. ...Even having a vote on it tells you that they're totally not connected with the American people and that they're connected with the next election," Sen. Coburn said.

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

• What step would actually make Congress start doing its job?

• Did November 8th give spinal transplants to career politicians in Washington?

• How many more states must come on board before Convention can take place?

• How many billions of dollars does Washington waste annually in duplication and fraud?

• What three areas only are addressed in a Convention of States?

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

GLENN: Welcome. Former Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn to the Glenn Beck Program. How are you, sir?

TOM: Oh, I'm fine, Glenn.

GLENN: When you saw the G.O.P. yesterday starting to go and put earmarks back in as a way to direct pork barrel spending back into their districts, what went through your mind?

TOM: Oh, careerism. Career politicians. You know, it's important people understand how earmarks work: Earmarks work because the city wants something, which is really not in the enumerated powers of the federal government to do in the first place.

They hire a lobbyist, or somebody hires a lobbyist. They give to your campaign. And then they ask -- the city needs this. You'll look good at home. This has got to be a priority for you because you represent these people.

So it's -- it's the old idea that people are -- you know, as soon as you know you can buy -- you can get anything you want from the federal government, you lose your freedom. And so this arrogance of power that says I will supply what my district needs, rather than what's in the best interest of the country -- which is their oath -- has nothing to do with their local district, which is their oath, is the thing that will spell disaster for a country. And it has already.

You know, they -- the career politicians will tell you, we need this to get things through Congress. It greases the skids. You know, so you have to buy somebody's vote by giving them money to spend at home?

Number two is, if we eliminated all earmarks -- which we still haven't, even though they say they have -- if you eliminated all earmarks, actually Congress could start doing their job.

The other thing you hear from members of Congress is, "Well, the administration has the power to do this." No. All you have to do is put in your appropriation bills that they won't do any of this stuff without getting approval from Congress. But they won't do that.

So, you know, it's laziness. It's careerism. It's elitism. And it's contemptuous, in terms of what -- even having a vote on it tells you that they're totally not connected with the American people and that they're connected with the next election.

GLENN: Former US senator Dr. Tom Coburn.

Tom, when you're looking at what's happening now -- I heard Paul Ryan who was not for Donald Trump, now ecstatic -- he said yesterday that this is a new dawn in America. And the Republicans are -- are -- it's a new day for even the Republican Party.

And it sounded pretty excited. A lot of people are really excited. Is this something you would look on and say, "Man, it would be great to be in the Senate right now," or are you expecting more of the same? What do we expect -- what do you think is happening with the Republican Party?

TOM: Oh, I don't think much. I'm hopeful that the president-elect can give the leadership that causes people to make hard decisions, instead of easy ones for their reelection.

But I don't know that anything happened on the 8th of November to do spinal transplants in most of the career politicians in Washington.

You know, what -- what the earmarks vote is, is cowardice. It's about me. And not about our country. That's -- you know, and to me, it is so disappointing -- and, first of all, are they tone-deaf? Did they not hear what this election is all about? Draining the swamp?

GLENN: I don't think anybody did. I really don't. I don't think the media --

TOM: Well, that just tells you why we have to have a Convention of States to offer amendments to limit the scope, the power, and jurisdiction of the federal government.

You know, here you have the party that is in control, wanting to vote to restore one of the corrupt systems there ever was, that only really benefits the politician. Because for any earmark I might have gotten -- I had to give an earmark to 99 other senators, and I had to look the other way to be able to do that. And I never got an earmark once for Oklahoma or my district. I refused to do that. I refused to fall into that. So, you know, to me, it's the corruption of careerism. And when I'm talking about corruption, I'm talking about not upholding your oath to the US Constitution, to understand that there are enumerated powers for the federal government, and those powers are supposed to be limited. There's no reason for a member of Congress or a US Senator to be directing money to be spent in their state. What they should be doing is lessening the tax burden and let the states figure out where they want to spend the money.

GLENN: So you're looking at the Convention of States, and do you believe that the Trump presidency has made this more likely or less likely to happen?

TOM: Well, I don't know, Glenn. I don't think it's less likely because you just saw -- here's the greatest example in the world of why we need it. Here's -- the supposed fiscal conservatives now who want to reintroduce earmarks. So I don't know the answer to that. What I do know is that if, in fact, there's not big change over the next two years in the behavior in Washington and liberty is lost again and money is spent that we don't have that we're barring from future generations, the election two years from now is going to be very difficult for those in charge.

GLENN: Tom, you know, I look at the situation -- you had a story out of Australia today and 12 days ago out of India where Citibank is doing what India just did. And they're limiting cash. And they're getting rid of the, you know -- the 10-dollar bill in India.

Citibank announced yesterday or tomorrow that in Australia, many of their banks will be entirely cashless. And the world seems to be going to a cashless society because, quote, it's good for business and good for the banks and security. I -- I just have this fear, as we -- we start going down this road, all this stuff is going to collapse. And the people are not going to go for another bailout. The banks have already worked it out with the government to have a bail-in. Things can radically, radically change quickly.

Do you agree with that?

TOM: Well, I think they can. The question is, is how do you prevent that? And the way you prevent it is you start right now with the new president and a new Congress not spending money that you don't have on things that you don't need.

And so whether they manipulate whether we have a currency or not, that's a symptom of the underlying problem.

Right now, Glenn, the unfunded liabilities for America is $144 trillion. This grew about 4 trillion last year. That's a million dollars per taxpayer. That's $24 trillion more than the entire worth of the country.

So when people say there's no problem, we can borrow money -- you can borrow money as long as people are willing to loan it to you. But history shows us that both democracies and republics that borrow money at a rate greater than their GDP failed.

And so has every other republic before us failed? Yes. Will we fail? Yes.

If, in fact, we don't have real courageous, moral leadership --

GLENN: Well, we don't have that --

TOM: -- that says you don't spend the future's money.

GLENN: Well, we don't have that. We don't have that. So that's why the project of states is so important -- the Convention of States is so important. The Constitution gives us a way out.

I am a full-fledged backer of this. I can't -- I mean, I think this is the answer. There's a lot of Republicans at least here in Texas that say, "Oh, it's not bad enough to use, you know, Article V."

I don't know what they would be waiting for. But there's a lot of people that are -- you know, the -- the business-as-usual people don't want this to happen.

We are now in a situation where we're one state away from making this happen.

STU: There was a report -- maybe you know this fact, Senator, but we're one state away from having enough Republicans in control of legislatures that if they all passed it -- you could do it essentially without any Democrats stopping it.

TOM: Right. But it really is a bipartisan thing.

GLENN: Yes.

TOM: You know, we have a lot of Democrats supporting what we're doing.

GLENN: Right. And you have a lot of Republicans that are stick in the muds.

TOM: Well, but, again, that's what a grassroots movement is all about, is changing that.

GLENN: Right. Right. Right.

TOM: So here's the point: You have this example, right after Election November 8th, that the status quo, elite careerists in Washington all of a sudden want to bring back a tool of corruption. So they're tone-deaf. So the only thing -- the only tool America has that's big enough to fix the problem that we have is an Article V convention of amendments, where amendments are made that brings power back to the states, that limits the stupidity that's going on in Washington today.

Remember, every year, every year, $500 billion is thrown out the window in Washington. Total waste, total duplication (phonetic), total fraud. That's a half a trillion dollars a year.

GLENN: Jeez.

TOM: Had we had really strong members of Congress -- I don't care what party they're from -- that took their oath seriously, we wouldn't have that. We would have $500 billion more a year that we wouldn't be taxed for or we wouldn't be barring against for our kids.

So the only tool we have is an Article V Convention of States. And the American people have to know that here's the greatest example you can see. Here's the tone-deafness, the elitism, the careerism. We want to enhance our own personal power by using earmarks to look good at home, to collect money for campaigns, to enhance our future as a career politician.

I mean, listen, Mitch McConnell, first thing he said after the president-elect said about term limits -- he said, "We're not bringing term limits up." No, he's not going to bring term limits up. He's been there 30 years. Why would he bring term limits up? And he's part of the problem

GLENN: And so the people that say -- well, especially now, the Democrats are freaking out, and they would love to open up the Constitution. What -- what do you --

TOM: Well, they don't have the power to do that. An Article V Convention by law and Supreme Court precedent, has only the power to discuss what's in its application.

So Convention of States has an application for the financial aspects of the federal government; i.e., a balanced budget amendment, using generally accepted accounting principles. Number two, term limits on members of Congress and appointed members of the government. And number three, limiting the scope, power, and jurisdiction of the federal government. So there's only three areas. So you can't open it up. And it's not a constitutional convention. It's a convention for amendments to the Constitution that we have.

GLENN: Right. But we couldn't do what -- let's say what they did in the last Progressive Era. And I'm not suggesting anybody wants to do this. But you couldn't come in and say, "I want prohibition."

TOM: No, you couldn't do any of that because it doesn't have anything to do -- you can only have a meeting by precedent, by history, and by common sense, what is listed in your application. And all the applications have to match. So there's no -- there's no risk whatsoever, zero, nada, of a, quote, runaway convention. And there never has been one.

PAT: I don't think you make that point --

TOM: But that's what people against us always use, oh, well, we'll probably lose some of our rights -- well, that's the elitist power-hungry group that wants to continue things the way it is that have us bankrupt as a nation. You know, look at median family income. Median family income dropped $7,000 under this president.

GLENN: Wow.

TOM: That means 50 percent of the people are making $7,000 in real dollars less a year than they were before he became president.

GLENN: My gosh.

PAT: But it's also a lot of frightened conservatives, Senator because they are worried -- which is why you can't make the application point enough -- because they're worried that they're going to try to, you know, eliminate the Second Amendment. Or --

TOM: Well, here's the thing they ought to worry about, we have a runaway federal government right now. Why don't you worry about that?

PAT: Yeah.

(laughter)

TOM: And the people that are promoting the fear, they lack courage. There is no --

PAT: Uh-huh.

TOM: There is no fear in doing the right thing.

PAT: Yeah.

TOM: There's a lot of fear hunkering down saying, "Oh, I'm afraid. I'm afraid. I'm afraid." And consequently, we go down the tubes.

So you get a choice. You can either stand up and fight for your liberty and fight for your rights and fight for a limited federal government like was intended, or you can continue let the federal government control 70 percent of everything in our economy and in our states.

GLENN: I can't -- I can't recommend highly enough that you get involved with the Convention of States Project. I think this is the answer. This is the way to give the power back to the people. This is what we've been looking for. And time is of the essence. And we're making great progress. If -- we sure need you on the battlefront here in Texas.

If people want to get involved, Tom, how do they do it?

TOM: They go to ConventionofStates.com. They can find out -- they can volunteer there. They can find out -- they can ask any question they want. It's already been answered on that website.

We address all these things that people are worried about and talk about why those can't happen. And they allow you to hook up with somebody locally in both your county, your district, your voting district, your congressional district, or your state House district or your state Senate district. And then become involved so you can actually influence your legislator to vote for this.

GLENN: Tom, thank you very much. Tom Coburn, former senator.

TOM: You're welcome. God bless you, Glenn.

GLENN: God bless you. Have a good Thanksgiving, sir.

It is -- it's critical. You really want to drain the swamp? They're not going to do it in Washington. They will do it this way. ConventionofStates.com.

Featured Image: Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) questions witnesses about military equipment given to local law enforcement departments by the federal government during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing about at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill September 9, 2014 in Washington, DC. In the wake of the Ferguson, MO, police response to peaceful protests, senators on the committee were critical of the federal grant programs that allow local and state law enforcement agencies to buy armored vehicles, assult rifles, body armor and other military equipment. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

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

Image source: Glenn Beck Program on BlazeTV

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

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

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

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

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

Watch the video below for more details:

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

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Ryan: Bernie at the disco

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

"My Spanish — is not so good."

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

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

"Donald Trump is an idiot," he shouted.

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

This was the only Sanders appearance with no protestors.

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

Laughter.

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

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

Did he have a solution?

Tax Wall Street, he shouted.

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

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

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

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

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

He called Trump the worst president in American history.

"The fates are Yuge," he shouted.

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

Photo by Sean Ryan

It was like meeting Jesus for some of the people.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Watch the video below to hear more details:



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

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.