Glenn Beck: Global warming, global government?

Why Global Warming is not a global crisis. Learn more...

GLENN: From high above Times Square in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America. Hello, you sick twisted freak. Welcome to the program. We go to Christopher monk con, otherwise known as Lord Monckton. I mean, call him Christopher or do I have to call him Lord? I can't remember what we decided last time we spoke. Lord Monckton

LORD MONCKTON: It's very simple.

GLENN: How are you, sir?

LORD MONCKTON: I am fine. Are you on one knee and wearing white gloves and touching your forearm?

GLENN: Of course I am, my lege.

LORD MONCKTON: In that case you may carry on.

GLENN: So you are quite the hot topic on Twitter and on the Internet. If we could just find a way to control the Internet oh, I remember. Net neutrality. We'll get to that Thursday. Anyway, you are quite the topic because of this new global climate treaty that is coming in December.

LORD MONCKTON: Yes.

GLENN: Tell me about it.

LORD MONCKTON: This is the conference of the state's parties to the United Nations framework convention on climate change, which is a hell of a mouthful, I know. But this has been in the planning for two years, ever since the same conference met in Barley. They always meet somewhere nice. This time it's going to be Copenhagen. And at Barley it was planned. As soon as they had got George Bush out of the way, they would push through a climate treaty which would involve the vast transfer of wealth from the west to poorer countries, in the name of what is called reparations for climate debt. Now, the extraordinary thing about the draft treaty which I have now seen is that it goes far further than anything that was planned at any previous session. What they're now going to do is to set up a world government, and the word "Government" actually appears in the treaty. But you heard it here first. The word "Election, democracy, vote, or ballot" does not appear anywhere in the 200 pages of the treaty.

GLENN: All right, you are talking hold on just a second. You are talking about Paragraph 36 and 38 from what I understand.

LORD MONCKTON: That's absolutely right. The word "Government" appears in there.

GLENN: Do you have it in front of you?

LORD MONCKTON: I don't have it in front of me but I can remember it quite well.

GLENN: All right. Of course you can.

LORD MONCKTON: And what it says is this: There will be a new vast interlocking bureaucratic entity created at huge expense to you and me and that bureaucratic entity will have three purposes, the first of which is twice stated to be government. The second purpose is stated to be the transfer or redistribution of wealth from countries like ours to third world countries in reparation for what is described in the treaty as climate debt. In other words, we've been burning CO2 in huge quantities. They say that's altering the climate. Actually we now know it isn't, but they say it is. And therefore they say we have to pay, get this, anything up to 2% of GDP every year to poorer countries. Now, the third element in the task of this new government will be what is called enforcement. In other words, the power of the new government to make Democratic countries hand over their cash, whether they like it or not. But more than that, there will be an interlocking series of so called technical panels which will have the right directly to intervene in the economies and in the environment of individual countries over the heads of their elected governments. So what we are talking about is a fledgling world government and because it's not elected, it's essentially a communist world government.

GLENN: May I where are you now?

LORD MONCKTON: I am at the moment in Texas. I'm speaking at Texas A&M tonight. But I will be in D.C. or New York for the whole of the next week because I'm trying to make sure that your congress does not allow any of this to happen.

GLENN: All right. You don't stick out at all in Texas, do you?

LORD MONCKTON: No, I fit in just fine. I'm tall, I wear snakeskin cowboy boots.

GLENN: Right.

LORD MONCKTON: And, of course, my Texan accent is famous.

GLENN: Yes. You can just say, howdy, y'all. Go ahead.

LORD MONCKTON: Howdy, y'all.

GLENN: See? You fit right in. All right. So what I'd like to do is I'd like to, I'd like to spend an hour with you, quite honestly, Lord Monckton, and have you on the TV show and maybe bring in ambassador John Bolton about this as well.

LORD MONCKTON: He would be a wonderful man. It would be an honor to take part with you and him in such a program.

GLENN: Now, does he I mean, does I mean, have you ever met before?

LORD MONCKTON: I have met him briefly, but it would be really good to have a proper chance to talk to him on this.

GLENN: All right.

LORD MONCKTON: Because he would certainly, with his vast experience, be able to put this in context far better than I could.

GLENN: Well, now here's what now, this is the global climate treaty that we are expected to sign, right?

LORD MONCKTON: That's right.

GLENN: And this is something that the president has made a priority, et cetera, et cetera.

LORD MONCKTON: That's right. The danger is that now that he's been given his Nobel Peace Prize, if he goes to Copenhagen with Al Gore at one elbow and Jim Hansen at the other in front of the teeming zombies in their tens of thousands, he will sign anything. And he won't read the small print. Nobody seems to have read the small print until I picked it up. It's quite extraordinary that this has got as far as it has with nobody noticing that what they're going to do is what Maurice Strong who originally, he's a Canadian bureaucrat who originally set up the structure of the UN's intergovernmental panel on climate change 20 odd years ago, he has always wanted this to transmogrify into a world government and he is now going to get his way far faster than any of us had realized unless we can stop him. And we only have weeks to stop this.

GLENN: Well, I do know that if you look at the transnationalism and the transnationalists, you know, that the New York Times has denied, you know, that Barack Obama is surrounding himself with.

LORD MONCKTON: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, this is the direction they're going. Now, here's the concern.

LORD MONCKTON: Yeah.

GLENN: The concern is that President Obama would sign this and then it would be ratified by congress.

LORD MONCKTON: Well, now I'll tell you what has to happen. Under your Constitution, I think it's Article VI, there has to be a 2/3 majority of the Senate in order to ratify it. Now, I don't think that he'll get a 2/3 majority in the Senate. I'm reasonably sure there are enough senators including blue dog senators who will realize that if they hand over your democracy and your Constitution and make it subject to this new treaty because that's how your Constitution works, Article VI taken with the Vienna convention on the interpretation of international treaties means that an international treaty prevails over your Constitution. And so if he signs away your Constitution, he is signing away for the first time your democracy to an alien bureaucratic entity that you don't elect. That's the danger. Now, if he can't get it through the Senate, during his election campaign he and his staff began saying that they didn't like that part of the Constitution but meant they had to get 2/3 of the Senate to agree. And the way that he is proposing to do it and this was announced during his campaign is to get a simple majority in both houses, which he can of course get because he has a reasonable majority in both houses so that the treaty will be enacted into your domestic law. Now, that is slightly less drastic than if the Senate were to ratify it because at least in theory you can repeal a domestic law, whereas you can't resolve from a treaty and once you sign a treaty, the only way you can get out of that officially is by getting all the other states parties to let you go. And since you'll be the country that's big most in the way of reparations, there's no way they will let you go once they've got you into it.

GLENN: Right. And here's also the other problem

LORD MONCKTON: Yeah.

GLENN: that we have. When you can't get the Senate to ratify it, what they do is they get the states to join in and the cities to join in and then have it contested in court. And what they do is then the Supreme Court looks for the movement of law.

LORD MONCKTON: Yes.

GLENN: They look and say, well, which direction is the country and the world moving.

LORD MONCKTON: Yes.

GLENN: And if the country and the world is moving into, well, yeah, there's several cities, several states, several countries that are moving in this direction, well, then it's okay.

LORD MONCKTON: Aha. There is one obstacle that they are going to face this they go down that route and they know it. It's this: That we now know for certain by measurement that the effect of CO2 and all greenhouse gases on temperature globally is less than 1/6th of what the UN says it is. This was a paper published just last month by the gallant professor Richard Lindzen of MIT who I'm sure you've heard of. He's the Alfred piece professor of planetary and atmospheric sciences.

GLENN: We've had him on the program before, yes.

LORD MONCKTON: He is a lovely man and he is the guy who really understands what's happening in the atmosphere. He has done a dazzlingly simple but dazzlingly careful measurement that was taken in 20 years, he's been accumulating the data so that he could do it. And he's just published the result. The amount of outgoing radiation escaping into space is supposed to reduce enormously as the temperature warms down here. That's the official theory because of all the greenhouse gases getting in the way. What is actually happening is that nearly all of it is getting out into space just as before. So the warming effect of CO2 over the whole of the next 100 years is going to be well below 2 Fahrenheit degrees, just negligible, it might even be 1 Fahrenheit degrees. And now that that is known by measurement, all of the UN's report on which this treaty is based are out of date, and the Supreme Court's own judgment in Massachusetts V. EPA where they said CO2 was a pollutant because it might cause warming are now also out of date. Because the facts have changed, and it's now been a measured result. There's no argument with it. Nobody's dared to argue with this paper.

GLENN: How does anybody argue with the fact that when sunspot activity was at its highest, the Earth was the warmest; and when solar activity is now at literally zero

LORD MONCKTON: Yes.

GLENN: It's cold.

LORD MONCKTON: That's right. You've had your first snow in Pennsylvania in October since records began.

GLENN: Oh, we haven't had snow in Connecticut we had snow last week.

LORD MONCKTON: Yeah.

GLENN: We haven't had that kind of the last time we had snow this early or this kind of weather, we had 15 feet of snow that winter.

LORD MONCKTON: That's right. And the one thing I think we can very safely say is that that is not consistent with a story of global warming. But now that we've got this measured result, all the previous UN reports were based on computer models. Now, computer models are another word for guesswork. They were just guessing. And their guesses were wildly implausible. I'm actually feeling very smart because a year ago in the Journal of Physics and Society, I published a long paper which established by theoretical need that the warming for a doubling of CO2 this century would be less than 2 degrees Fahrenheit. And I published that result a year before Dick Lindzen did it by measurement. But it's Dick's paper with his formidable authority behind it and because he's done it by straightforward measurement of the comparison between changes in surface temperature and changes in outgoing radiation, that is the paper that will bring this scare finally to an end.

GLENN: Well, I know you are the 3rd viscount Monckton of Brenchley, but what the hell does that even mean? Who are you really? I mean, you sound honestly, a lot of people listening right now, Lord Monckton, he sounds like Dr. Bombay.

LORD MONCKTON: Well, how very kind of you. My

GLENN: (Laughing).

LORD MONCKTON: I am a hereditary peer. In other words, I did not achieve anything I achieved by merit. I had it thrust upon me, you know, as Winston Churchill used to say, some are born great, some achieve greatness, some have greatness thrust upon them. I had nobility thrust upon me by having very carefully chosen the right parents.

GLENN: Right, right.

LORD MONCKTON: So it's only a matter of luck. I therefore can't claim any special brilliance just because I am a Lord. On the other hand, the title does fascinate people, and I'm afraid I do exploit it quite shamelessly.

GLENN: Right, but what is your background?

LORD MONCKTON: My background is as an advisor to Margaret Thatcher on scientific questions including this one. I spent four years in her office when she was prime minister of the United Kingdom at 10 Downing Street. Mine was the office if you go two floors up just above the door and two windows to the right, those are the ones where I was. She was furious one Christmas when she was taking a picture of the Christmas tree outside Downing Street and the only two windows that weren't lit in the whole building were mine because I had gone home. But I worked there for four years and I gave her advice on all manner of policy but particularly science policy. Not because I'm a scientist. I am not. I don't pretend to be. I am a classical architect by training. So I do have a certain amount of mathematical knowledge. I've made a very good fortune out of mathematics over the years.

GLENN: As the guy who did this for Margaret Thatcher, what do you think of John Holdren, our science czar?

LORD MONCKTON: Well, I'll tell you what I think of him. He was the guy who predicted 30 years ago that there was going to be an enormous ice age and so much ice would build up on Antarctica that there would be a tidal wave of enormous proportions when the ice fell into the sea and half of humanity would be wiped out by it. Now, that was the guy who was saying that 30 years ago and saying we must therefore close down everything. And he said we must have population police to tell you and me how many children, how many little honorable Moncktons there can be. He wanted to do that, worldwide population police. That's the kind of guy he is. And if you ask me whether I like the sound of that, the answer is no.

GLENN: Well, it's amazing that, you know, what country that sounds like is China. And there are so many people now that are in our administration that are revolutionaries and Marxist or Maoists.

LORD MONCKTON: Well, Glenn, can I say that you have been doing your country an enormous service by exposing who these people are, how they are connected and the unpleasant organizations who do not mean the West well with whom this administration seems to have far too many close connections. And I think had it not been for you, none of us would ever have known any of this. And I do congratulate you on having picked it up.

GLENN: Well, thank you very much, sir. I appreciate it and, you know, I just wish I could be knighted or something, but we don't do that here. I think I get a Slurpee at the end of it.

LORD MONCKTON: Well, I'll tell you one thing you get. President Obama has decided he doesn't like Fox News on which you appear so splendidly.

GLENN: Yes.

LORD MONCKTON: And I dare say that you are part of that.

GLENN: Yes. I'm very well aware of that.

LORD MONCKTON: So take that as a compliment.

GLENN: All right, I tell you what, Lord Monckton, let me get together and see if I can get a time when you can be on and also Ambassador Bolton. There's no bad blood between the two of you, right?

LORD MONCKTON: Not in the least. I should be enormously honored to appear with him, yeah.

GLENN: Okay. Then let me see if I can arrange that and then we'll take that and get people on this right away because, you know, these people will do it if people don't wake up.

LORD MONCKTON: They will. And if you get that on the television for an hour, that will frighten them off. I think it will be enough.

GLENN: You got it, sir. Thank you very much.

LORD MONCKTON: Bless you.

GLENN: You bet, bye bye. Lord Monckton. So Stu, see if you can line that up.

STU: Sure, absolutely.

GLENN: Thank you. Splendid, isn't it? Doesn't he sound like Dr. Bombay from the old Bewitched?

STU: I think he's funny, too.

GLENN: Yeah, he is. I like him.

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.