Glenn Beck: Comrade Schumer?


Get your free Comrade wallpaper...

SCHUMER: You -- there are people who feel that you should leave Burma, there are people who feel you shouldn't be dealing with such a harsh dictatorship. So my question is what is Chevron's future plans in Burma, in the wake of the massive popular opposition to the military junta and its initial refusal to accept disaster aid? Have you weighed in with the Burmese government about accepting disaster aid?

GLENN: Stop. Can you go back to the beginning? Remember I thought this was about why is gas so expensive. Now he's asking, because Chevron has gone into Burma and they are -- Stu, what is it? They are building -- they are helping pull oil out of Burma, but it is not an exclusive deal? They are working with Burma to get some of the oil? And the question now is, I guess, why are you there? Play it again, please.

SCHUMER: There are people who feel you shouldn't be dealing with such a harsh dictatorship. So my question is what is Chevron's future plans in Burma in the wake of the massive popular opposition to the military junta.

GLENN: Stop. Let me just answer that, senator. To get oil. That's our job, to get oil.

SCHUMER: And its initial refusal to accept disaster aid. Have you weighed in with the Burmese government about accepting the disaster aid and, more generally, does your presence in Burma not bolster the military junta?

GLENN: Stop. Have I asked about aid? I mean, my first initial reaction is have I asked them about aid? Yeah, we're in there. I've asked them about aid. I mean, what am I -- I'm an oil company. What am I supposed to do? And has it bolstered their credibility? Excuse me. Chuck Schumer, aren't you the one that says it's cool to meet with Syria? Aren't you the one that says it's cool to meet with Iran? Aren't you the one that says we should be sitting down at the table? Aren't you the one that says we should be engaged with these people? The opposition to you, sir, and the opposition to Barack Obama is that you bolster their credibility. You say that that's meaningless, we should be engaged. I'm sorry. Does it only apply to oil companies and conservatives?

VOICE: Well, thank you. We just in the last two days have committed $2 million to the aid in Burma. The agencies that we're working with, some of them have matched it. So it's $3 million. I have some photographs in my file here of aid being delivered to people in Burma. So I know it's happening, when we're saying it. So we are activities of daily living aid. Even though a lot of others cannot, we are. So that's an advantage, I think.

SCHUMER: Do you think they could use a lot more than $2 million?

VOICE: Of course they could.

GLENN: Stop. Who the hell are you to say that? "Don't you think they can use a lot more than $2 million?" I'm a private company. I'm a private company. And out of the charity of my own heart, I'm giving $2 million. Who the hell are you to say that to me? I and affiliated corporations are giving $3 million total. Our aid, and I have pictures here, sir, to show that it is being delivered. Do you have any pictures of your aid being delivered? Oh, no. You can't. You can't get yours through. Oh, by the way, how much have you given, sir? How much has the united -- the entire United States government of America given to Burma? The answer? $5.5 million. $5.5 million. I'm sorry. My company -- and we picked up the phone and we called some other people. We got $3 million. So private industry, one company, $2 million. Our friends, another million. The entire United States government, $5 million? Don't you think that they could use a little bit more than $5 million? After all, the United States as a people, the people of United States have given $12.1 million. Shouldn't they give more, Mr. Schumer? What an outrage. Aren't we here to talk about the price of gasoline and why it's so high? You want to know why it's so high? Because instead of going out and finding oil right now, I'm sitting here answering questions on did I give enough charity this year. How much charity am I going to have to give, Senator, when you've taken all of my profits. You know, that's another crazy thing about profits. If I've got profits, I can give to charity. Or, I cannot give to charity, just pay you more in taxes and you can pay $5.5 million instead of me adding on top of it $2 million.

I mean, if this doesn't prove that -- these are the McCarthy hearings. These are the McCarthy hearings. You notice -- I want you to listen to this and notice how they keep changing things. First it was, tell me about the aid, tell me about -- we gave $2 million. Do you really think that's enough?

Are you now or have you ever been the president of an oil company? These people, I'm not saying that oil companies are the greatest thing since sliced bread. I'm saying that oil is our lifeblood right now. Do I want to get off it? You bet I do. Do I want new technology? You bet. Do I want natural gas? You bet, natural gas would be great. Natural gas burns cleaner. Natural gas -- we have a ton of natural gas. We have enough natural gas in the ground. If we pulled it up underneath our territory, we would pull the natural gas, we can heat every home in America for the next 100 years and we don't have to keep the thermometer at 72. But congress will not allow us to get it. So we go to really bad places like Burma.

VOICE: I'm saying what Chevron can do, we're doing and we're doing a significant amount, and that goes a long way in Burma. Our plan is to stay in Burma. I've been there and I've seen the people that live in the area where we operate along our pipeline system. I know for a fact that they are better off by us being there than by anybody else being there. So I know we're doing the right thing in Burma. The Burmese government is benefitting from the fact that natural gas is being produced in Burma, but the fact is that if we were there or anybody else was there, that gas will still be being produced. It's been developed and so the only thing we can do by leaving is enhancing the value to the Burmese government. They will get our -- they would get our interest. If we sell our interest, we would pay a large capital gains tax to them. Any way of extracting us would be a benefit, a windfall benefit for the Burmese government. And I know the people there are better by us --

GLENN: Stop. Listen to this. What Schumer is saying is we shouldn't be in bed with Burma because they're bad people. Okay, let's just be consistent on that and we'll get back to that in a second. If we leave, do you think that oil and that gas is just going to go no place? "Oh, the United States doesn't want it. Shoot, they were our only buyer." Or, does that go to somebody else to enrich some other company in some other country? And, in the end, make us more vulnerable. We are talking about strategic defense because we are talking about -- why did Hitler almost lose the war? Hitler almost lost the war. What were our biggest targets? Our biggest targets were his oil refineries. Anything to do with petroleum. We tried to take it out over and over and over again. We knew if we could get his oil, he would be done. Why do you think he was in Africa? Why do you think he was down in the Middle East? Oil. If they can shut off your oil, you're done. And yet let's just bypass Burma. But there's a bigger point. Listen.

SCHUMER: Are you trying to pressure the military government to let in more aid right now in addition to the $2 million you are giving?

GLENN: Stop just a second. Senator, are we here to talk about higher gas prices or are we here to talk about somehow or another some rogue diplomacy? Am I now a -- are you making me an ambassador for the United States? Is that what you're doing? Because I accept. Am I applying pressure? Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I thought I was the head of an oil company.

VOICE: I don't think we could have much effect on that. I can tell you that I am working with the United Nations ambassador who's Mr. Gabari (ph), ambassador Gabari (ph) who is working with the Burmese, we are working with the EU ambassador that's working with the Burmese. So we are doing everything we can.

GLENN: Stop. You notice we're not working with the U.S. ambassador. I wonder why. I wonder why we're not working with -- we're working with the EU and we're working with the UN but we're not working with the American ambassador.

VOICE: But I can assure you I don't think that us as a nonoperating partner in Operation Burma could have much personal effect on the Burmese government.

GLENN: Yeah, what we would like to do is, would you please, Mr. Chevron, could you just stick to the topic? We're here to talk about why gas prices are so high and we want to continue to talk about where you shouldn't be getting oil and gas from. First of all, if you want to play that game, you know, this is what he should have said. You want to play that game, Chuck Schumer, then we should get out of Saudi Arabia. There's a dictatorship. Women can't even drive. 15 of the 19 terrorists in 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia. They also told us, stick it up your yahoo when we asked them to pump some more out. You want to talk about an oppressive regime, you want to talk about being in bed with the devil himself, we're in Saudi Arabia. Are you also going to make a policy to get out of Saudi Arabia, sir? How about Nigeria? I'm just going down here the top oil producing countries, the ones that we import the most oil from. It's Canada. Okay, I'm cool with Canada. Saudi Arabia. Not really cool with that one. Mexico. I've got some issues there. Nigeria, run by warlords. Venezuela. Well, I guess Hugo Chavez isn't too bad. I mean, if you discount that he called Bush the devil right here in New York City, then kicked out American oil companies who couldn't agree to his corporate windfall profits tax, kind of like the one you are going for now which meant more of our companies had to give money to stabilize people and destabilize South America and, by the way, all the government computer disks related to funding a farct, the rebels raping and plunger South America. Yeah, we probably shouldn't get any oil from them, either. And Iraq, oh, well, you'll get into Iraq here in just a second. Colombia, whoa, I mean, these guys seem to be moving in the right direction, you know? I mean, I'm not a senator but, you know, the Democrats don't think that Colombia's doing enough to fight the narcoterrorist and death squads. At least that's what Nancy Pelosi said when she decided not to bring up the bilateral trade agreement for a vote. And I'm sure that decision had absolutely nothing to do with the presidential campaign and not wanting to force legislation that would require Obama and Hillary to take a stand on an issue like that, which splits the Democrats. I'm sure that had nothing -- oh, and Russia. We don't want to take any oil at all from Russia. I mean, that would be crazy talk. I mean, they just threaten another Cold War over the missile shields. They're poisoning their political enemies. They have Viktor Yushchenko, the president of the Ukraine who's all pockmarked and -- why? Because he was standing up against Vladimir Putin. They've arrested capitalists, they've arrested people in oil companies and then they made the president of Russia, appointed him because he's the head of an oil company. Of course, let's not forget about the plutonium 210 that was used to kill also enemies of Vladimir Putin. Oh, and the fact that they keep dropping missiles accidentally on Georgia. Let's not worry about that. We shouldn't take oil from them, either.

Where do we get oil? Here's an idea. How about off our shores? How about in the ANWR? How about from shale? How about in the Gulf of Mexico? Now, we've got to hurry because China is signing 100 year leases on the oil fields in the Gulf. Colombia is signing 100-year leases in the Gulf. We better hurry or we'll miss all those 100-year leases in the Gulf because we want to protect the Gulf, we want to protect our shores, we want to make sure that there's no environmental damage. And when it comes to doing that, I know we would do such, just a poor job in comparison to China and Colombia. Why are gas prices so high. I wonder.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) joined the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" to explain how mail-in ballots are typically disqualified during recounts at a far higher rate than in-person, Election Day ballots, and why this is "good news" for President Donald Trump's legal battle over the election.

"One of the things that gives the greatest cause for optimism is, this election ... there's a pretty marked disparity in terms of how the votes were distributed. On Election Day, with in-person voting, Donald Trump won a significant majority of the votes cast on in-person voting on Election Day. Of mail-in voting, Joe Biden won a significant majority of the votes cast early on mail-in voting," Cruz explained.

"Now, here's the good news: If you look historically to recounts, if you look historically to election litigation, the votes cast in person on Election Day tend to stand. It's sort of hard to screw that up. Those votes are generally legal, and they're not set aside. Mail-in votes historically have a much higher rate of rejection … when they're examined, there are a whole series of legal requirements that vary state by state, but mail-in votes consistently have a higher rate of rejection, which suggests that as these votes begin being examined and subjected to scrutiny, that you're going to see Joe Biden's vote tallies go down. That's a good thing," he added. "The challenge is, for President Trump to prevail, he's got to run the table. He's got to win, not just in one state but in several states. That makes it a lot harder to prevail in the litigation. I hope that he does so, but it is a real challenge and we shouldn't try to convince ourselves otherwise."

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:

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.

Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.

Fox News senior meteorologist Janice Dean is perhaps even more disgusted with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) for his coronavirus response than BlazeTV's Stu Burguiere (read what Stu has to say on the subject here), and for a good reason.

She lost both of her in-laws to COVID-19 in New York's nursing homes after Gov. Cuomo's infamous nursing home mandate, which Cuomo has since had scrubbed from the state's website and blamed everyone from the New York Post to nursing care workers to (every leftist's favorite scapegoat) President Donald Trump.

Janice joined Glenn and Stu on the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday to ask why mainstream media is not holding Gov. Cuomo — who recently published a book about his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic — accountable?

"I'm vocal because I have not seen the mainstream media ask these questions or demand accountability of their leaders. [Cuomo] really has been ruling with an iron fist, and every time he does get asked a question, he blames everybody else except the person that signed that order," Janice said.

"In my mind, he's profiting off the over 30 thousand New Yorkers, including my in-laws, that died by publishing a book on 'leadership' of New York," she added. "His order has helped kill thousands of relatives of New York state. And this is not political, Glenn. This is not about Republican or Democrat. My in-laws were registered Democrats. This is not about politics. This is about accountability for something that went wrong, and it's because of your [Cuomo's] leadership that we're put into this situation."

Watch the video excerpt from the show below:

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.

As America grows divided and afraid to disagree with the Democrats' woke plan for America, Megyn Kelly is ready to fight back for the truth. For nearly two decades, she navigated the volatile and broken world of the media. But as America leans on independent voices more than ever, she's breaking new ground with "The Megyn Kelly Show."

She joined the latest Glenn Beck Podcast to break down what's coming next after the election: Black Lives Matter is mainstream, leftists are making lists of Trump supporters, and the Hunter Biden scandal is on the back burner.

Megyn and Glenn reminisce about their cable news days (including her infamous run-in with then-presidential candidate Donald Trump) and to look into the chaotic and shady world of journalism and the growing entitlement it's bred. For example, many conservatives have been shocked by how Fox News handled the election.

Megyn defended Fox News, saying she believes Fox News' mission "is a good one," but also didn't hold back on hosts like Neil Cavuto, who cut off a White House briefing to fact check it — something she never would have done, even while covering President Obama.

Megyn also shared this insightful takeaway from her time at NBC: "Jane Fonda was an ass."

Watch the full podcast here:

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Glenn Beck has had enough of exposing scandal after scandal, just to have everyone look the other way: Benghazi, Hillary Clinton's emails, Joe and Hunter Biden's dealings in Ukraine and China … the list goes on, but no consequences are paid. Now, the media have called the election for Joe Biden and insist no one can question it. But for many of the more than 71 million people who voted for President Trump, our search for the truth isn't over yet.

On his Wednesday night special this week, Glenn called out the left's long list of alleged corruption that has gone unchecked and stressed that Donald Trump's legal team must be allowed to go through the process of investigating the multiple allegations of election fraud to ensure our voting systems are fair.

"I don't know about you, but I'm tired. I am worn out. I am fed up!" Glenn said during his opening monologue. "I've had enough. I am tired of exposing corruption, doing our homework, even going overseas and having documents translated to make sure they're exactly right, [and] presenting the evidence ... except, once we expose it, nothing happens. Nobody goes to jail. Nobody pays for a damn thing any more!"

Watch the short video clip from the full show below:


Because the content of this show is sure to set off the Big Tech censors, the full episode is only be available on BlazeTV. The election and its aftermath are the most important stories in America, so we're offering our most timely discount ever: $30 off a one-year subscription to BlazeTV with code "GLENN."