Glenn talks with Congresswoman Bachmann


Congressman Michele Bachmann

GLENN: 888 727 BECK. Congressman Michele Bachmann is with us now. Congressman, how are you?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Good morning, Glenn, good afternoon, good evening, good to see you.

GLENN: How are things?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Well, things are hot on the front lines in Washington, D.C. There's a lot happening, a lot of pots are boiling over and we're very concerned about what we're seeing.

GLENN: I want to talk to you a little bit about Timothy Geithner. Explain to America what is happening with how close are we to having Timothy Geithner be able to shut down private businesses if they feel it's a threat to the economy?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Well, it's very close. That's exactly what was before our committee yesterday. As if there wasn't enough on the treasury secretary's plate, he wants to broaden his power to a level never seen before and it's President Obama that's giving this directive. So this is at his directive that now the treasury secretary would have the authority to come in and essentially nationalize the private business before it's at the point of failure. He would be able to go and nationalize it and then also reset all of the employee wage contracts.

GLENN: Your question was so fantastic. Where in the Constitution do you have the right? How did he answer that?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: He did not give me an answer regarding where in the Constitution it is. So I repeatedly went back to the same question, "Not there. Where." He was saying congress passed a law that said and I said, no, not that; where in the Constitution. Because he raises his right hand and takes an oath to the Constitution as treasury secretary, as I do as a member of congress. Everything that we need to everything we do needs to be in accordance with the Constitution. Congress can pass an unconstitutional law. If we pass an unconstitutional law, then he should not be working to uphold that law.

GLENN: Michele, I am concerned that we are on the verge of transformation that we may never get back.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Yes, I am, too. I share that concern. Glenn, it's that serious. It's almost like radio shows like yours are the committees of correspondence that the Revolutionary War had where we're trying to get the word out to people who still love the fundamental freedoms that our country was founded upon.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: It is that serious that we're about to lose it.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Congressman, here's the problem. The Democrats and the Republicans have done so much damage and played so many games with the American people saying they are for term limits and then never doing them, saying that they are for smaller spending and then not doing it, saying that they are for protecting us in every way possible but then not doing it, saying that they are for border security but then not doing it, saying they are going to enforce our laws but they are not doing it. I mean, the list goes on and on and on and on. We are playing now with nitroglycerin and it is about to explode and there are people like me that believe we are truly in this area, it is we are truly ready to lose our country if we don't do anything and it's not a partisan issue. It is, there are a lot of Republicans that are lining up and doing the give act and everything else. They are right along with them on many cases. So

Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Webcam, an exclusive feature available only to Glenn Beck Insiders. Learn more...

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: It's terrible and I'm glad you brought it up. It's going to come to the house next week. I urge your listeners, make calls today to tell your member of congress, do not vote for that thing. But let me tell you, there's something that's happening this week in congress that could be the eventual unraveling for our freedom and it was this. I have also asked the treasury secretary and Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chair, if they would categorically denounce taking the United States off of the dollar and putting us on an international global currency because as you know, Russia, China, Brazil, India, South Africa, many nations have wind up now and have called for an international global currency, a one world currency and they want to get off of the dollar as the reserve currency.

GLENN: Most people don't understand, Michele, what that means.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: What that means is all of the countries in the world would have a single currency. We would give up the dollar as our currency and we would just go with a one world currency and now for the first time we're seeing major countries like China, India, Russia, countries like that calling for a one world currency and they want this discussion to occur at the G20. So I asked both the treasury secretary and the Federal Reserve chair if they would categorically denounce this. The reason why is because if we give up the dollar as our standard and commingle the value of a dollar with the value of coinage in Zimbabwe, that dilutes our money supply. We lose control over our economy and economic liberty is inextricably entwined with political liberty. Once you lose your economic freedom, you've lost your political freedom and then we are no more as an exceptional nation as we always have been. So this is imperative. Well, what happened, the day after I asked that question for the treasury secretary, secretary Geithner went before the council on foreign relations and the same subject came up. After that meeting after he categorically denounced it to me, he said to the council on foreign relations he would be open to this proposal of a single currency, of expanding the international monetary funds' special drawing down rates. That's what they're called. And this created a huge firestorm which the value of the dollar literally tumbled upon his words when he said that.

GLENN: Right. And then somebody said, "I think you want to revisit that again." And he did and he said, "Well, no, I don't mean..." look, Congressman Bachmann, you know and I know with the amount of money that we're printing, the amount of spending that we're doing, there is no way now to pay back what we are now on the hook for. There's no way to do it. So they

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: No, that's why we have to reel back in every commitment that we've made. It hasn't all been spent yet, Glenn.

GLENN: How will you do that? How are you going to Congressman, you are not going to do that unless the people I mean, two million, five million people go to Washington and I don't know I mean, look. You know, I just said

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: I agree, but they need to. The people at this point, they need to be armed with knowledge. People need to be armed with knowledge, which you are giving them and then what they have to do is use that knowledge. They need to use it, band together just like these tea parties people are doing. This is very effective. And come to Washington and let the establishment know, "Look, we love this country. We love it based on freedom. We don't want to go with an international currency and we don't want to yield our freedom and be bankrupt." And unfortunately the current administration really does believe in a social welfare state and they really do believe in economic equivalency which is not America.

GLENN: May I just say the frustration that most Americans have or the same frustration that I have, I don't want to believe that there are people in our country that are intentionally doing these things. I don't want to believe that there are people in our country that would trash our dollar like this. And what's going to happen is if you start to talk about a global currency which I'm telling you there's no way out of what we're doing now besides devaluing the dollar to pay off our debt and then have a new currency. There's just no other way.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: But we can stop that.

GLENN: Wait a minute. Congresswoman, what happens is when you stand up and when you say those things, then you're deemed a kook. Then you're deemed a militia member. And there are too many people in America that will still listen to the mainstream media. They will still listen to, you know, to those in Washington on both sides of the aisle that say, "Oh, no, well, that's never going to happen." And so they sit there and do nothing. And those who do want to do something are afraid because they don't want to be deemed a kook. And they also are tired of being played by politicians in Washington.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: Well, Glenn, I have experienced that throughout my political career being labeled a kook. It just happened again in a big story in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. But all we have to do is point to the treasury secretary on tape, on camera. This is not Michele Bachmann being a kook. This is our treasury secretary on tape and on camera. And also we now have countries across the world asking for this. That's why I went to my fellow colleagues and I dropped a bill day before yesterday that would bind the president's hands, that wouldn't allow him to enter into a treaty or an international agreement to take us off the dollar and put us on an international currency because once that you've exactly stated it right. The president is committing us so much now and congress is committing us to so much spending that the only way out will be for him to continue to print money and have wild inflation. And once that collapses, then it's a global currency. Well, then we are no more as a nation. We cease at that point. So we still are at a point of pulling back but I mean, right now the secondhand is right up to midnight on our freedom and so people have to act. This is not just a radio show call or this is not a gimmick. This is reality now. This is our call to arms. So that's why I dropped this bill so that which means I filed this bill on the floor so that we can get this passed so we can bind the president or his designee so they cannot put us into a global currency.

Confirming Kavanaugh: Welcome to the #MeToo era

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Welcome to the #MeToo era of Supreme Court justice confirmation.

Last Thursday, Senator Dianne Feinstein disclosed the existence of a secret letter, written by an anonymous woman alleging that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were in high school in the 1980s.

Yesterday, there was a major twist in this story that everyone who follows Leftist strategy should've seen coming: the anonymous woman suddenly revealed herself to be Christine Ford, a 51-year-old research psychologist at Palo Alto University in Northern California. She's a registered Democrat and has donated to political organizations. But she pinky-swears that it has nothing to do with her coming forward with this story just one week before the Senate Judiciary Committee votes on Kavanaugh.

RELATED: THIS is the man plotting to stand in Brett Kavanaugh's way of the Supreme Court

Christine Ford spilled the exclusive beans to The Washington Post because they believe that "Democracy dies in darkness." And of course, if there's anything that Kavanaugh hopes to accomplish on the Supreme Court, it's murdering democracy.

Ford told The Post that during a high school party, a drunk Brett Kavanaugh pinned her on a bed, groped her, and covered her mouth to keep her from screaming.

She said:

I thought he might inadvertently kill me. He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.

There is no indication that she reported such a harrowing attack to the police.

Kavanaugh unequivocally denies the accusations. The White House released a letter signed by 65 women who say they knew Kavanaugh in high school and vouch for his character. But it won't matter. The Democrats will get their circus this week and Kamala Harris and Cory "Spartacus" Booker will get their chance to remind everyone to vote for them for president in 2020 because only Democrats like women.

It's virtually impossible to prove or disprove her claim. But the political timing of the story drains its credibility.

Christine Ford might be telling the absolute truth about this incident with Kavanaugh. She might also be making up the whole thing for politics sake. Problem is, it's virtually impossible to prove or disprove her claim. But the political timing of the story drains its credibility. Kavanaugh was confirmed to the federal bench by the Senate in 2006. Where was Ford's dramatic story then?

Last year this worked to de-rail Roy Moore's senate campaign, so why not try the same tactic with Kavanaugh? Especially since it perfectly serves the Left's narrative that Kavanaugh plans to destroy women's rights.

Truth doesn't stand a chance when it's up against this kind of hysteria.

Unprecedented: You'll never believe who just snubbed Obama

JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

Somewhere, in some dark newsroom, an age-old editor is levitating, eyes glowing like radioactive soil. Because an unprecedented event has taken place, right in front of our eyes, a puzzling miracle, something never before seen in journalism: The Associated Press criticized Barack Obama.

Yes, friends, you read that right. The AP guard has turned against their wizard leader. The army has mutinied against their commander... you get the point. The AP has always loved Obama, like they have a crush on him. It's more of an obsession, really.

RELATED: The AP's love affair with Antifa is partisanship cloaked as news

They've always stored up their animus and directed it at one person: President Trump—well, Trump and everyone around him—going so far as to mock First Lady Melania's hat on one occasion. They blatantly insulted her fashion and appearance, all the while championing social justice, immigration and women's rights, but that's another conversation for another day.

Even the article's title is salty: "AP FACT CHECK: Obama doesn't always tell the straight story." We'd all just gotten used to headlines like "AP FACT CHECK: Trump ruins America" or "AP FACT CHECK: Reality star embarrasses country again" or "AP FACT CHECK: Orange man bad."

Here's the opening line of the article:

Former President Barack Obama's recent denunciation of President Donald Trump's treatment of the press overlooks the aggressive steps the Justice Department took to keep information from the public during his administration. Obama also made a problematic claim that Republican "sabotage" has cost 3 million people their health insurance.

Then they break down all the lies Obama has committed. It's truly unbelievable.

OBAMA: "It shouldn't be Democratic or Republican to say that we don't threaten the freedom of the press because they say things or publish stories we don't like. I complained plenty about Fox News, but you never heard me threaten to shut them down or call them enemies of the people." — rally Friday at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

THE FACTS: Trump may use extraordinary rhetoric to undermine trust in the press, but Obama arguably went farther — using extraordinary actions to block the flow of information to the public.

Did they just say that Obama went farther than Trump? In undermining the press?

They actually said Obama's rhetoric to the press was worse than Trump's.

Overall, this is a great thing—a sign that the AP might even be regaining its ability to do actual journalism. But, man, it is still a shock. They actually said Obama's rhetoric to the press was worse than Trump's. Good heavens, this must be the last day on earth!

Although, I can say that it's not, because, if it were, the New York Times would be reporting all about it: "Trump causes apocalypse, is racist," endorsed by the whole editorial board, all foaming at the mouths like they're possessed by demons—or worse, deranged Antifa protestors who slept through their noon session of yoga.

By now, thanks to the incessant fear-mongering by Democrats, you're probably aware that American women will lose all their rights if Brett Kavanaugh becomes a Supreme Court justice. Technically, there's not any truth to that idea whatsoever of course, but it hasn't stopped the hysterics.

Now, this anti-Kavanaugh hysteria has inspired Democrats in Maine to get creative. Because one of their senators, sort-of-Republican Susan Collins, is considered a potential deciding vote in Kavanaugh's confirmation, they are threatening to donate $1 million to her 2020 Democratic opponent, unless Collins votes "no" on Kavanaugh.

RELATED: PROGRESSIVE PANIC: No, Kavanaugh is not 'a death sentence for thousands of women in the U.S.'

Using a crowd-funding site called Crowdpac, two groups called "Maine People's Alliance" and "Mainers for Accountable Leadership" posted a listing that says:

The people of Maine are asking you to be a hero, Senator Collins… If you fail to stand up for the people of Maine and for Americans across the country, every dollar donated to this campaign will go to your eventual Democratic opponent in 2020. We will get you out of office.

The project has already received pledges from 37,000 people, totaling over a million dollars. In a weird way, they're basically attempting to buy her vote. In some circles, this is known as bribery. Senator Collins released a statement calling it extortion, and then one of the groups behind this effort called her response, "politics at its worst."

The Maine groups' twist is that if Collins votes "no" on Kavanaugh, they supposedly won't collect the pledges from their 37,000 donors. But they're still using the pledged money to try to induce Collins to vote the way they want, they're just not offering the money directly to Collins like your typical, old-fashioned bribe.

Like many poorly conceived schemes in our social media age, Maine Democrats didn't really think this one through.

Like many poorly conceived schemes in our social media age, Maine Democrats didn't really think this one through. Because bribery is a federal crime. And just because this is a kind of hipster, inverse bribe, several legal experts think it's still technically a bribe.

Could these groups be shooting themselves in the foot with this strategy? What if, by trying to force Collins to vote no on Kavanaugh, they inadvertently cause her to vote yes, simply to avoid looking like she was influenced by their scare tactic?

And just when you thought politics couldn't get any weirder.

It's bad enough that bigoted scientists have assumed the gender of Hurricane Florence, now President Trump is stepping in to make the hurricane more powerful.

Remember a time when sentences like that one would be laughed at? Not anymore. Yes, a massive storm is about to make landfall on the East coast and The Washington Post is blaming President Trump for the hurricane. For a hurricane.

RELATED: Hurricane Florence is bearing down on the East Coast and YOU have to be the first responders

And this is not an op-ed. This is straight from the editorial board of the Washington Post.

"When it comes to extreme weather," they write, "Mr. Trump is complicit. He plays down humans' role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks. It is hard to attribute any single weather event to climate change. But there is no reasonable doubt that humans are priming the Earth's systems to produce disasters."

Meanwhile, Obama is hailing angelic rainbows down from Heaven, LGBTQ only of course, and sheltering woke transgender infants from tornados in Nebraska. Linda Sarsour and Colin Kaepernick only need to wave their hands and earthquakes will stop.

The Washington Post editorial again:

With depressingly ironic timing, the Trump administration announced Tuesday a plan to roll back federal rules on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that is the main component in natural gas. Drillers and transporters of the fuel were supposed to be more careful about letting it waft into the atmosphere, which is nothing more than rank resource waste that also harms the environment. The Trump administration has now attacked all three pillars of President Barack Obama's climate-change plan.

The piece concludes:

The president has cemented the GOP's legacy as one of reaction and reality denial. Sadly, few in his party appear to care.

In other news, the Russians have meddled with a tsunami in Southeast Asia, which will have catastrophic effects on the mid-term elections here in America.