Buck Has a Field Day Speculating Why Clinton Foundation Donations Plummeted

November 21, 2016

Writer

According to the New York Post, donations to the Clinton Foundation fell by 37 percent in 2014, before Hillary announced her candidacy. They went from $172 million to $108 million. Now why would donations dramatically drop just as Hillary Clinton left the nonprofit to pursue her running for president of the United States.

"Why would the money for the foundation start to go down at that point in time, unless, well, they were concerned that it would look bad. Remember, they said they were going to stop, at a certain point, taking foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation. Which, why stop, if it was always okay? You can't have it both ways," Buck Sexton said, filling in for Glenn Monday on the radio program.

In addition to donations going down, revenues from speeches also dropped from $3.6 million to $357,500.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

BUCK: Buck Sexton in for Glenn today. You can follow me on Facebook at Facebook.com/BuckSexton. Also, go to TheBlaze.com/Buck-Sexton.

Donations to the Clinton Foundation, let's talk about that for a second, just because it will be kind of fun. A lot of us were thinking during the whole election that it was so, so obvious. It was so obvious that the Clinton Foundation was the front of a charity. But, you know, that was the front of the house. But the rest of it was really a giant slush fund for the Clinton brand, to pay Clinton cronies, as a means of creating a sort of giant side business of these Clinton speeches that are all tied into the foundation donors.

The New York Post here has the donations to the Clinton Foundation fell by 37 percent in 2014, before Hillary announced, from 108 million, down from 172 million. So that happened as Hillary Clinton left the nonprofit in 2015 and then went on with her candidacy, which, as we know, did not work. But also revenue the Clintons brought in from speeches went from 357,500 down from 3.6 million.

So there were some drop-offs. But now people would say, "Well, Buck, look, see, she was running for office, and they didn't want there to be conflicts of interest."

Well, why would the money for the foundation start to go down at that point in time, unless, well, they were concerned that it would look bad -- remember, they said they were going to stop -- at a certain point, they were going to stop taking foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation. Which, why stop, if it was always okay? You can't have it both ways.

The real -- the rubber meets the road on this one, you'll have something to talk about when we see -- what would it be? Fiscal 2016 looks like for the Clinton Foundation and for speeches given by the Clintons. Because if all of a sudden Bill is like giving you like 50 percent -- you know, it's like you can get two-for-one, fly me out to wherever. I mean, Pyongyang, I'm here for you.

If it's a two-for-one situation with Bill Clinton speeches and Hillary speeches, if they drop 50 percent in value or even more, won't we all know then -- we already know, but won't that be proof to anybody who is of reasonable sound mind on these issues, won't that be proof that this was all a giant scam, all along? Won't we then know that you don't leave the presidency as Bill Clinton did and then all of a sudden your speeches get dramatically more valuable as your wife becomes Secretary of State just 'cause. Just 'cause.

Quite a coincidence, isn't it? That people were so much more interested and showed that interest with wads of cash. Quite a coincidence that they were able to amass a fortune through giving speeches of over $100 million, some estimate $150 million. That's a lot of money. That's a lot of money without offering a product.

And if all of a sudden, those speeches are much -- they're not going to be zero -- there will still be corporations that will pay -- but you'll see, I think, I'll make a prediction here, it will fall in line with what other former heads of state make, which is still a crazy amount of money for some of these places. But you're not going to get $800,000 a speech, as Bill did.

I mean, it was a really good speech.

You're going to get more like 100 or 150, which to you and me, it's like, this is amazing. I'd give a speech or two a year and call it a day, spend the rest of the time on the beach.

But that would show, wouldn't it? That would prove what we alleged all along. We will see now -- the market will speak in a sense. Because what the market was rewarding before was not how brilliant Hillary and Bill Clinton were, it was rewarding this scheme that they had created, which was really just a giant highway, an avenue of access to the most powerful corridors of government, via the Clinton Foundation as the alibi for all this cash flowing through. It muddied the waters. It made it more difficult. It made it seem like what was going on here was creating a better world for all of us, when in reality, it was creating a vast empire of patronage and of self-enrichment for Hillary, Bill Clinton, and the whole Clinton -- the whole Clinton family.

I don't want to lose sight of that, because I think given this election -- given that so many of us were wrong about who was going to win and where all of this was going, I think it's fair for you and for me to look at what happens with the Clinton Foundation and say, "At least we saw that for what it was." Because I would be willing to he make quite a a bet that you will see a market drop-off in vast donations to the Clinton Foundation, from certain individuals. There will still be money coming in. There will still be some charity. I get it. But it will drop real fast.

But the speeches -- I want to know when the next Bill Clinton $800,000 30-minute engagement is. I want to see when that happens. I think they may even decide they're not giving speeches for money period, because it would be so obvious that once they start giving these speeches, the price drops dramatically. They were really running a huge scam, selling the Secretary of State's office. What a surprise.

Featured Image: Clinton Foundation Vice Chair Chelsea Clinton speaks during the Plenary Session: Girl, Uninterrupted: Increasing Opportunity During Adolescence at the Clinton Global Initiative September, 20, 2016 in New York. (Photo Credit: BRYAN R. SMITH/AFP/Getty Images)

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

When did Americans start cheering for chaos?

MATHIEU LEWIS-ROLLAND / Contributor | Getty Images

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Chicago, Portland, and other American cities are showing us what happens when the rule of law breaks down. These cities have become openly lawless — and that’s not hyperbole.

When a governor declares she doesn’t believe federal agents about a credible threat to their lives, when Chicago orders its police not to assist federal officers, and when cartels print wanted posters offering bounties for the deaths of U.S. immigration agents, you’re looking at a country flirting with anarchy.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. The struggle we’re watching now is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between good and evil, right and wrong, self‑government and chaos.

Moral erosion

For generations, Americans have inherited a republic based on law, liberty, and moral responsibility. That legacy is now under assault by extremists who openly seek to collapse the system and replace it with something darker.

Antifa, well‑financed by the left, isn’t an isolated fringe any more than Occupy Wall Street was. As with Occupy, big money and global interests are quietly aligned with “anti‑establishment” radicals. The goal is disruption, not reform.

And they’ve learned how to condition us. Twenty‑five years ago, few Americans would have supported drag shows in elementary schools, biological males in women’s sports, forced vaccinations, or government partnerships with mega‑corporations to decide which businesses live or die. Few would have tolerated cartels threatening federal agents or tolerated mobs doxxing political opponents. Yet today, many shrug — or cheer.

How did we get here? What evidence convinced so many people to reverse themselves on fundamental questions of morality, liberty, and law? Those long laboring to disrupt our republic have sought to condition people to believe that the ends justify the means.

Promoting “tolerance” justifies women losing to biological men in sports. “Compassion” justifies harboring illegal immigrants, even violent criminals. Whatever deluded ideals Antifa espouses is supposed to somehow justify targeting federal agents and overturning the rule of law. Our culture has been conditioned for this moment.

The buck stops with us

That’s why the debate over using troops to restore order in American cities matters so much. I’ve never supported soldiers executing civilian law, and I still don’t. But we need to speak honestly about what the Constitution allows and why. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits the use of the military for domestic policing. The Insurrection Act, however, exists for rare emergencies — when federal law truly can’t be enforced by ordinary means and when mobs, cartels, or coordinated violence block the courts.

Even then, the Constitution demands limits: a public proclamation ordering offenders to disperse, transparency about the mission, a narrow scope, temporary duration, and judicial oversight.

Soldiers fight wars. Cops enforce laws. We blur that line at our peril.

But we also cannot allow intimidation of federal officers or tolerate local officials who openly obstruct federal enforcement. Both extremes — lawlessness on one side and militarization on the other — endanger the republic.

The only way out is the Constitution itself. Protect civil liberty. Enforce the rule of law. Demand transparency. Reject the temptation to justify any tactic because “our side” is winning. We’ve already seen how fear after 9/11 led to the Patriot Act and years of surveillance.

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic. The left cannot be allowed to shut down enforcement, and the right cannot be allowed to abandon constitutional restraint.

The real threat to the republic isn’t just the mobs or the cartels. It’s us — citizens who stop caring about truth and constitutional limits. Anything can be justified when fear takes over. Everything collapses when enough people decide “the ends justify the means.”

We must choose differently. Uphold the rule of law. Guard civil liberties. And remember that the only way to preserve a government of, by, and for the people is to act like the people still want it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Stand with Voddie Baucham’s family in this time of loss

In the quiet aftermath of a profound loss, the Christian community mourns the unexpected passing of Dr. Voddie Baucham, a towering figure in evangelical circles. Known for his defense of biblical truth, Baucham, a pastor, author, and theologian, left a legacy on family, faith, and opposing "woke" ideologies in the church. His book Fault Lines challenged believers to prioritize Scripture over cultural trends. Glenn had Voddie on the show several times, where they discussed progressive influences in Christianity, debunked myths of “Christian nationalism,” and urged hope amid hostility.

The shock of Baucham's death has deeply affected his family. Grieving, they remain hopeful in Christ, with his wife, Bridget, now facing the task of resettling in the US without him. Their planned move from Lusaka, Zambia, was disrupted when their home sale fell through last December, resulting in temporary Airbnb accommodations, but they have since secured a new home in Cape Coral that requires renovations. To ensure Voddie's family is taken care of, a fundraiser is being held to raise $2 million, which will be invested for ongoing support, allowing Bridget to focus on her family.

We invite readers to contribute prayerfully. If you feel called to support the Bauchams in this time of need, you can click here to donate.

We grieve and pray with hope for the Bauchams.

May Voddie's example inspire us.

Overcoming loneliness: Connecting in a disconnected world

Loneliness isn’t just being alone — it’s feeling unseen, unheard, and unimportant, even amid crowds and constant digital chatter.

Loneliness has become an epidemic in America. Millions of people, even when surrounded by others, feel invisible. In tragic irony, we live in an age of unparalleled connectivity, yet too many sit in silence, unseen and unheard.

I’ve been experiencing this firsthand. My children have grown up and moved out. The house that once overflowed with life now echoes with quiet. Moments that once held laughter now hold silence. And in that silence, the mind can play cruel games. It whispers, “You’re forgotten. Your story doesn’t matter.”

We are unique in our gifts, but not in our humanity. Recognizing this shared struggle is how we overcome loneliness.

It’s a lie.

I’ve seen it in others. I remember sitting at Rockefeller Center one winter, watching a woman lace up her ice skates. Her clothing was worn, her bag battered. Yet on the ice, she transformed — elegant, alive, radiant.

Minutes later, she returned to her shoes, merged into the crowd, unnoticed. I’ve thought of her often. She was not alone in her experience. Millions of Americans live unseen, performing acts of quiet heroism every day.

Shared pain makes us human

Loneliness convinces us to retreat, to stay silent, to stop reaching out to others. But connection is essential. Even small gestures — a word of encouragement, a listening ear, a shared meal — are radical acts against isolation.

I’ve learned this personally. Years ago, a caller called me “Mr. Perfect.” I could have deflected, but I chose honesty. I spoke of my alcoholism, my failed marriage, my brokenness. I expected judgment. Instead, I found resonance. People whispered back, “I’m going through the same thing. Thank you for saying it.”

Our pain is universal. Everyone struggles with self-doubt and fear. Everyone feels, at times, like a fraud. We are unique in our gifts, but not in our humanity. Recognizing this shared struggle is how we overcome loneliness.

We were made for connection. We were built for community — for conversation, for touch, for shared purpose. Every time we reach out, every act of courage and compassion punches a hole in the wall of isolation.

You’re not alone

If you’re feeling alone, know this: You are not invisible. You are seen. You matter. And if you’re not struggling, someone you know is. It’s your responsibility to reach out.

Loneliness is not proof of brokenness. It is proof of humanity. It is a call to engage, to bear witness, to connect. The world is different because of the people who choose to act. It is brighter when we refuse to be isolated.

We cannot let silence win. We cannot allow loneliness to dictate our lives. Speak. Reach out. Connect. Share your gifts. By doing so, we remind one another: We are all alike, and yet each of us matters profoundly.

In this moment, in this country, in this world, what we do matters. Loneliness is real, but so is hope. And hope begins with connection.