Glenn Beck: In the belly of the beast...


Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America's Slide into Socialism


 


 - Buy now from Amazon


 - Buy now from Barnes & Noble


 

GLENN: I know there are times that I feel alone and I get to talk to you all the time. You can write me, and you do and et cetera, et cetera. I know I feel alone. I can't imagine being inside the Beltway in how alone you feel. When I gave the speech to CPAC, it amazed me on how many people that claimed to be my friends turned, how many arrows in the back I received from quote/unquote the same side. I disagree with many things that some Republicans are doing. I agree with some Republicans. I'm not a party guy. I'm a principle guy. Jim DeMint is a principle guy. He's on the phone with us now. Senator, how are you, sir?

SENATOR DeMINT: Glenn, I'm doing great. And I really appreciate your segment on TV yesterday about the association of unions and socialism. Something I researched going all the way back into the 1800s.

GLENN: It's amazing.

SENATOR DeMINT: The collectivist concepts ‑‑

GLENN: Yep.

SENATOR DeMINT: ‑‑ are very consistent. But it relates to Greece and what's happening there.

GLENN: Yes, it is.

SENATOR DeMINT: And it also is going to relate to America because the majority of union members now in our country work for the government.

GLENN: You know, Senator, I have to first of all thank you because there are very few people ‑‑ I really think I can name them and count them on both my hands that that would be where you have a depth of knowledge and you have the spine to be able to stand up for what you know to be true. So I have to thank you on that. But I have to ask you two questions.

SENATOR DeMINT: Sure.

GLENN: First of all, you came out this weekend, and it blew me away about Lindsey Graham. Can you explain to me how a guy who is currently pushing for cap and trade, pushing for identity cards, pushing for immigration reform, for closing Guantanamo, how you are saying right on, Lindsey Graham?

SENATOR DeMINT: Well, I don't agree with those issues, and he hasn't voted for them yet, and that will become a problem. A lot of what he's doing is trying to pull some of the Democrats our way, which I have not seen to work. But what I was saying about Lindsey is one thing he's not short on is courage. And when I've tried to do some major things like Social Security reform or tax reform, he hasn't hesitated to sponsor those things and to speak out. Just like a couple of weeks ago a moratorium on earmarks and a balanced budget amendment, you know, he was the first one to sign up and show up at the press conference. So he and I have had some battles on some pretty big issues but frankly I'd rather deal with someone I disagree with every now and then who has some courage than the problem we have in the Senate right now which is just a lack of vision and courage.

GLENN: Okay.

SENATOR DeMINT: So I'll battle with Lindsey on some of these things, and this would be a terrible time to vote for anything related to cap and trade.

GLENN: Yeah, it does take courage to go into the Republican ‑‑ I mean, you can talk to Lindsey and ask him why would I get a watered down version of cap and trade or, you know, universal healthcare or any of that stuff when I can get the real deal from the other side. But that's a different story.

SENATOR DeMINT: Well, he's been a big help on healthcare. And frankly after the immigration debate, once we stopped the amnesty provisions, he's really helped us with border security. So you've got to wake up every day and find the allies you need that day. And on most days Lindsey Graham is going to work with me on the big things.

GLENN: Okay. I'm glad I'm not in your position because I wouldn't, I wouldn't be able to ‑‑ my head would explode. I wouldn't be able to do that. But that's why I'm not a politician.

SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah.

GLENN: So Senator, here's the second part. The second question is, is it true that you are getting heat from the Republicans because you won't endorse, just blanket endorse and say, hey, you know, these guys are great?

SENATOR DeMINT: Well, that's true. I mean, there's some Republicans frankly that still don't get it and, you know ‑‑ but I really think it's coming down to a few hold‑outs now in the Senate who still think earmarks are a wonderful thing, who will say that debt's a problem but keep voting for spending. That's kind of the core issue of ‑‑ that the American awakening right now is what are we going to do about all this debt. And so I do think that we've got some great candidates out there for the Senate and a few of them are running against incumbents. So I ‑‑

GLENN: If you had to have ‑‑ if you picked one person and you said, oh, please, America, please send this person my way, please send in the Alamo, give me two people. Can you give me two people that you see that are out there that you say, oh, this person would be great?

SENATOR DeMINT: Well, there are several I'm working for. I don't know if I can do just two. But Marco Rubio is a true American in Florida, Pat Toomy in Pennsylvania. Chuck DeVore in California is someone who stood up to the spending in the Republican Party out there.

GLENN: Yeah, I like him.

SENATOR DeMINT: So he's a tough guy. I want somebody who is going to come and not join the club but really join the fight, and I'm optimistic that some of these new guys are going to make it.

GLENN: Well, it looks like Rubio, what was this poll I just saw?

PAT: 60‑28.

GLENN: I mean, he's clobbering Crist.

SENATOR DeMINT: He was 40 points behind when I endorsed him and now he's almost 30 points ahead.

GLENN: Yeah.

SENATOR DeMINT: But the people of Florida are just embracing an American who believes in common sense principles. And Glenn, these aren't far right ideas, you know.

GLENN: No, they're not.

SENATOR DeMINT: And like I tell people, there's nothing moderate about spending more than you are bringing in and bankrupting our country. So ‑‑

GLENN: No. My grandfather was a lifelong Democrat. He was an FDR guy and blah, blah‑blah. He bought into the whole thing. There's no way he would have believed in any of this stuff.

SENATOR DeMINT: No.

GLENN: There's no way he would have believed in spending more than you could, than you could afford. That's just ‑‑ I mean, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah. Well, 35% of the people who go to tea parties are Democrats. They are disillusioned with the radicalization of the party.

GLENN: Hang on. Where did you get that poll? I've never heard that.

SENATOR DeMINT: We got a lot of statistics on the demographics of tea party members. They are a lot of Democrats and independents and some Republicans. They are better educated than the general population. I'll send you that when ‑‑

GLENN: Please do.

SENATOR DeMINT: I'll call my office today and get it to your producer.

GLENN: Please do. One more thing, and I'm going to get into this story on Monday because I find this to be, you know, just another piece of the puzzle. It's one ‑‑ I mean, how long, how many Marxists and ‑‑ how many people do we need to find before we say, okay. You want to talk a little bit about a new nominee that has just been nominated by the president?

SENATOR DeMINT: Well, you are probably talking about Ms. Aponte.

GLENN: Yeah.

SENATOR DeMINT: There seem to be some significant problems, security‑related problems from several years ago.

GLENN: Explain who she is.

SENATOR DeMINT: Well, she's been nominated as the ambassador to El Salvador, and I don't really want to go into too much of the details until I document it all, but the initial things that we got suggested that there were some security issues ten years ago and she withdrew from a nomination that Clinton made. And I'd just ask for another week to look into this and now the Democrats are accusing me of holding up a nominee.

GLENN: What?

SENATOR DeMINT: I mean, we need a little time when there's some real serious questions because the White House is clearly not vetting their nominees very well.

GLENN: Oh, no. No ‑‑ yes, they are. You can ‑‑ see, this is why, this is why, you know, you're in Washington and your head doesn't explode. I can't take it. Van Jones said that he was very open. He let them know exactly what he was, who he was, what he had been involved with. They vet, they know. These people are on the same page as the president of the United States.

SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah.

GLENN: This individual has some ‑‑ and, you know, we'll get into ‑‑ because I'm going to get into this on Monday as well. It is amazing to me what we could send somebody down to El Salvador where there's no problem with communists or Marxists ‑‑

SENATOR DeMINT: Right.

GLENN: ‑‑ down in El Salvador and we have somebody whose credentials have already been questioned once. She withdrew.

SENATOR DeMINT: Right.

GLENN: And now they are trying it again.

SENATOR DeMINT: Either the problem that I have with what they're doing, they are demanding that we pass her unanimous consent essentially and if you ask for more information, they delay it and then they report to the media that I'm holding the nomination.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

SENATOR DeMINT: But I'm going to look at these people closely, particularly when it deals with foreign policy. Because I saw what happened in Honduras when they mishandled that. Fortunately we turned that around, but ‑‑

GLENN: Will you do me a favor. When you're ready with all the information, you bring it here, will you?

SENATOR DeMINT: I will, Glenn.

GLENN: We'll help you expose it because this is a ‑‑ this is just ‑‑ I mean, the arrogance of being able to think that you can put people in place that have nefarious ties or ties with Marxism or out‑and‑out anticapitalist Marxists all through this administration and then continue to do it as it's exposed and you say, oh, it's ridiculous that I might be a Marx ‑‑ it is, the arrogance is going to be the undoing of either them or us.

SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah. Well, I appreciate you exposing this because that gives us an informed electorate that can help us stop it. So you are doing a lot of good work.

GLENN: Senator, I appreciate it. Thank you again.

SENATOR DeMINT: Thanks, Glenn.

GLENN: We'll talk again.

SENATOR DeMINT: Bye‑bye.

The number of people serving life sentences now exceeds the entire prison population in 1970, according to newly-released data from the Sentencing Project. The continued growth of life sentences is largely the result of "tough on crime" policies pushed by legislators in the 1990s, including presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Biden has since apologized for backing those types of policies, but it seems he has yet to learn his lesson. Indeed, Biden is backing yet another criminal justice policy with disastrous consequences—mandatory drug treatment for all drug offenders.

Proponents of this policy argue that forced drug treatment will reduce drug usage and recidivism and save lives. But the evidence simply isn't on their side. Mandatory treatment isn't just patently unethical, it's also ineffective—and dangerous.

Many well-meaning people view mandatory treatment as a positive alternative to incarceration. But there's a reason that mandatory treatment is also known as "compulsory confinement." As author Maya Schenwar asks in The Guardian, "If shepherding live human bodies off to prison to isolate and manipulate them without their permission isn't ethical, why is shipping those bodies off to compulsory rehab an acceptable alternative?" Compulsory treatment isn't an alternative to incarceration. It is incarceration.

Compulsory treatment is also arguably a breach of international human rights agreements and ethical standards. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) have made it clear that the standards of ethical treatment also apply to the treatment of drug dependence—standards that include the right to autonomy and self-determination. Indeed, according to UNODC, "people who use or are dependent on drugs do not automatically lack the capacity to consent to treatment...consent of the patient should be obtained before any treatment intervention." Forced treatment violates a person's right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment.

It's a useless endeavor, anyway, because studies have shown that it doesn't improve outcomes in reducing drug use and criminal recidivism. A review of nine studies, published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, failed to find sufficient evidence that compulsory drug treatment approaches are effective. The results didn't suggest improved outcomes in reducing drug use among drug-dependent individuals enrolled in compulsory treatment. However, some studies did suggest potential harm.

According to one study, 33% of compulsorily-treated participants were reincarcerated, compared to a mere 5% of the non-treatment sample population. Moreover, rates of post-release illicit drug use were higher among those who received compulsory treatment. Even worse, a 2016 report from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health found that people who received involuntary treatment were more than twice as likely to die of an opioid-related overdose than those with a history of only voluntary treatment.

These findings echo studies published in medical journals like Addiction and BMJ. A study in Addiction found that involuntary drug treatment was a risk factor for a non-fatal drug overdose. Similarly, a study in BMJ found that patients who successfully completed inpatient detoxification were more likely than other patients to die within a year. The high rate of overdose deaths by people previously involuntarily treated is likely because most people who are taken involuntarily aren't ready to stop using drugs, authors of the Addiction study reported. That makes sense. People who aren't ready to get clean will likely use again when they are released. For them, the only post-treatment difference will be lower tolerance, thanks to forced detoxification and abstinence. Indeed, a loss of tolerance, combined with the lack of a desire to stop using drugs, likely puts compulsorily-treated patients at a higher risk of overdose.

The UNODC agrees. In their words, compulsory treatment is "expensive, not cost-effective, and neither benefits the individual nor the community." So, then, why would we even try?

Biden is right to look for ways to combat addiction and drug crime outside of the criminal justice system. But forced drug treatment for all drug offenders is a flawed, unethical policy, with deadly consequences. If the goal is to help people and reduce harm, then there are plenty of ways to get there. Mandatory treatment isn't one of them.

Lindsay Marie is a policy analyst for the Lone Star Policy Institute, an independent think tank that promotes freedom and prosperity for all Texans. You can follow her on Twitter @LindsayMarieLP.

President Donald Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani joined Glenn Beck on Tuesday's radio program discuss the Senate's ongoing investigation into former vice president Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, and reveal new bombshell documents he's currently releasing.

Giuliani told Glenn he has evidence of "very, very serious crime at the highest levels of government," that the "corrupt media" is doing everything in their power to discredit.

He also dropped some major, previously unreported news: not only was Hunter Biden under investigation in 2016, when then-Vice President Biden "forced" the firing of Ukraine's prosecutor general Viktor Shokin, but so was the vice president himself.

"Shokin can prove he was investigating Biden and his son. And I now have the prosecutorial documents that show, all during that period of time, not only was Hunter Biden under investigation -- Joe Biden was under investigation," Giuliani explained. "It wasn't just Hunter."

Watch this clip to get a rundown of everything Giuliani has uncovered so far.

Use code GLENN 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.

For most Americans, the 1980s was marked by big hair, epic lightsaber battles, and school-skipping Ferris Bueller dancing his way into the hearts of millions.

But for Bernie Sanders — who, by the way, was at that time the oldest-looking 40-year-old in human history — the 1980s was a period of important personal milestones.

Prior to his successful 1980 campaign to become mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Sanders was mostly known around the Green Mountain State as a crazy, wildly idealistic socialist. (Think Karl Marx meets Don Quixote.) But everything started to change for Sanders when he became famous—or, in the eyes of many, notorious—for being "America's socialist mayor."

As mayor, Sanders' radical ideas were finally given the attention he had always craved but couldn't manage to capture. This makes this period of his career particularly interesting to study. Unlike today, the Bernie Sanders of the 1980s wasn't concerned with winning over an entire nation — just the wave of far-left New York City exiles that flooded Vermont in the 1960s and 1970s — and he was much more willing to openly align himself with local and national socialist and communist parties.


www.youtube.com


Over the past few weeks, I have been reading news reports of Sanders recorded in the 1980s — because, you know, that's how guys like me spend their Saturday nights — and what I've found is pretty remarkable.

For starters, Sanders had (during the height of the Soviet Union) a very cozy relationship with people who openly advocated for Marxism and communism. He was an elector for the Socialist Workers Party and promoted the party's presidential candidates in 1980 and 1984.

To say the Socialist Workers Party was radical would be a tremendous understatement. It was widely known SWP was a communist organization mostly dedicated to the teachings of Marx and Leon Trotsky, one of the leaders of the Russian Revolution.

Among other radical things I've discovered in interviews Sanders conducted with the SWP's newspaper — appropriately named The Militant (seriously, you can't make this stuff up) — is a statement by Sanders published in June 1981 suggesting that some police departments "are dominated by fascists and Nazis," a comment that is just now being rediscovered for the first time in decades.

In 1980, Sanders lauded the Socialist Workers Party's "continued defense of the Cuban revolution." And later in the 1980s, Sanders reportedly endorsed a collection of speeches by the socialist Sandinistas in Nicaragua, even though there had been widespread media reports of the Sandinistas' many human rights violations prior to Sanders' endorsement, including "restrictions on free movement; torture; denial of due process; lack of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; denial of the right of association and of free labor unions."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Comrade Bernie's disturbing Marxist past, which is far more extensive than what can be covered in this short article, shouldn't be treated as a mere historical footnote. It clearly illustrates that Sanders' brand of "democratic socialism" is much more than a $15 minimum wage and calls for single-payer health care. It's full of Marxist philosophy, radical revolutionary thinking, anti-police rhetoric, and even support for authoritarian governments.

Millions of Americans have been tricked into thinking Sanders isn't the radical communist the historical record — and even Sanders' own words — clearly show that he is. But the deeper I have dug into Comrade Bernie's past, the more evident it has become that his thinking is much darker and more dangerous and twisted than many of his followers ever imagined.

Tomorrow night, don't miss Glenn Beck's special exposing the radicals who are running Bernie Sanders' campaign. From top to bottom, his campaign is staffed with hard-left extremists who are eager to burn down the system. The threat to our constitution is very real from Bernie's team, and it's unlike anything we've ever seen before in a U.S. election. Join Glenn on Wednesday, at 9 PM Eastern on BlazeTV's YouTube page, and on BlazeTV.com. And just in case you miss it live, the only way to catch all of Glenn's specials on-demand is by subscribing to Blaze TV.

Justin Haskins (Jhaskins@heartland.org) is editorial director of The Heartland Institute and editor-in-chief of StoppingSocialism.com.

Candace Owens, BLEXIT founder and author of the upcoming book, "Blackout," joined Glenn Beck on Friday's GlennTV for an exclusive interview. available only to BlazeTV subscribers.

Candace dropped a few truth-bombs about the progressive movement and what's happening to the Democratic Party. She said people are practically running away from the left due to their incessant push to dig up dirt on anybody who disagrees with their radical ideology. She explained how -- like China and its "social credit score" -- the left is shaping America into its own nightmarish episode of "Black Mirror."

"This game of making sure that everyone is politically correct is a societal atom bomb. There are no survivors. There's no one that is perfect," Candace said. "The idea that humanity can be perfect is Godless. If you accept that there is something greater than us, then you accept that we a flawed. To be human is to be flawed."

Enjoy this clip from the full episode below:

youtu.be


BlazeTV subscribers can watch the full interview on BlazeTV.com. Use code GLENN to save $10 off one year of your subscription.

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.