Glenn Beck: Where is AIG $$$ going?


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

GLENN: You know what AIG is? It's a money laundering system and the government is -- they're a bunch of gangsters. It's the mob. That's what it is. They're just, they're using AIG to funnel money so you don't really notice. If you would have let AIG collapse, then the government wouldn't have had to bail out all of these other companies. But because AIG didn't collapse, they can funnel money -- we're just giving money to AIG. That one damn company, why are we -- we're saving that company. Why? We shouldn't have saved that insurance company. No, no, no, we're spending money -- how much money have we put into AIG and how much money has gone to American banks? Do you know how much American money has gone to American banks? Take a guess, Stu. To AIG, how much money have gone to American banks? How much of that has gone to American banks?

STU: Half?

GLENN: Okay. 44, $44 billion has gone to American banks. How much has gone to foreign banks?

STU: More than $44 billion?

GLENN: $58 billion.

STU: How did I know that?

GLENN: $58 billion has gone to foreign banks. Now, why isn't America outraged by that? Because America doesn't know that fact. America isn't talking about that fact. If we would have let AIG fail, then these other banks would have had to come to us and said, hey, what are you going to do on these. And we would have then had to have the discussion, do we send money over to France, do we send money over to Germany, do we send money over to England? And that we couldn't have won. The people in Washington, they would have never gotten that past you.

STU: We're not that into stimulating.

GLENN: We're not that into stimulating. We're not into shifting wealth from our continent to other continents.

STU: That's where we draw the line.

GLENN: That's where we draw the line.

STU: Of all the stuff we do, that's where we draw the line.

GLENN: So what do they do? They save AIG. They give $44 billion to American banks, $58 billion to foreign banks. Why do they say they have to do that? Because there are contracts. These are contracts. They had a contract with AIG. They can't break that contract. $58 billion goes to foreign companies in foreign lands. $165 million goes to executives. Now everybody's outraged. How dare these people take a bonus. Well, let's do the genealogy on that bonus, shall we? Let's go back in a time tunnel... tunnel... tunnel... tunnel. How did we get these bonuses? Why do we have them? Why are people paid these outrageous bonuses? Oh, I remember. Because congress said these salaries for some of these executives is outrageous and you shouldn't pay these people this outrageous salary; that's not right. But companies like AIG and CitiBank and everybody else paid, had to, had to pay people or they wouldn't get the best people.

Now, the argument is, "This is the best people." Really? AIG went under? AIG is a gigantic corporation. Most of its divisions were profitable. Most of the divisions were worth a lot of money and making a lot of money. One or two of its divisions failed. Who's running that now? The federal government. Who's running the failed part? Who is now running AIG? Somebody that congress put in. What laws are they living by? They are living by the bailout laws. Who wrote that? Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. Chris Dodd is proud that he wrote it. In it there's a specific date. Bonuses and contracts must be honored if they were signed before this date. These contracts were signed long before that date.

Now, there's a couple of ways we're going to go on this. Barney Frank once again is saying, "This is outrage, there should be some oversight." You wrote that! If you didn't want to pay those bonuses, you shouldn't have written that into the bailout bill. By the way, the Fed has known and has been studying these bonuses for a very long time. Congress has known about these bonuses since the getgo and there's been a debate inside congress and the Fed and the treasury and the White House for months. The Fed has come out and said there's no way -- after studying them, there is absolutely no legal way we can take those bonuses away. They must be paid. Remember, requests this is an outrage. We shouldn't be paying any of these people any of this money." This was said 10 years ago. So congress says, "You can't pay them; it's got to be a certain salary cap, it's got to be all this blah, blah blah.

What happens? Because the companies have to pay people money to be able to be competitive, they come up with a bonus scheme so people are paid very little but then get a bonus at the end of the year. They're not paid like you. It's not like -- it would be like if you were working all year -- let's say you make $50,000 a year. You made $1 for the whole year and at the end of the year they give you $50,000, or $49,999, okay? That's the way it works on the Wall Street and in the banks because... they were trying to avoid all the hassle with congress!

So now imagine you've done your job, you have a contract, and the person that's supposed to pay you $49,999 comes to you now and says, "You're not getting anything but that dollar." Now, I know the numbers are different, but the concept of the principle that we have a deal is not. We have a contract. How is this solved? If you have a contract, how is this solved? This is solved through Chapter 11. When you let a company fail through Chapter -- there's Chapter 7 and there's Chapter 11. Chapter 7 is, "We're closing the doors; we ain't ever opening up again." Chapter 11, "We need to reorganize." Why? Because we have contracts we can't afford.

So then the judge comes in, the bankruptcy judge and says, okay, these contracts, you're going to have to slash this, you're going to have to slash this, you are going to have to put this aside, you're going to pay this one overtime. That way the company can get back on its feet. But no, no, no. Congress doesn't want anyone to file Chapter 11. Chapter 11 is the way that companies reorganize, change their contracts, fix the problem and do it all legally and orderly. But because that just can't happen in today's world, Paulson and Bush and Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, they decide to bail out AIG, and they decide to write in there that contracts will be honored.

So now they're making a big deal out of $165 million in contracts that they knew they were going to have to pay, they left that in there, there's no way out of that unless you allow the government just to make up rules. Contracts are no longer valid, if the congress decides they are not valid.

Let me ask you this: What does that do to contracts? You see the slippery slope? What does that do to contracts? If the government doesn't have to honor my contract, do I have to honor a contract in the other direction? Do we have -- I'm sorry. I seem to remember George Washington and the pesky Constitution, that everybody abides by the law. "Oh, no, we don't do that anymore. We pick and choose around the laws. If one's convenient, one's politically correct, we can just enforce some laws and not others so we become a society where we can enforce this contract but not that contract, we can enforce the GM contracts. Oh, the union contracts? Oh, no, no, we've got to have the union contracts. We could never come in and bust up the union contracts. Of course not, that's crazy. That's an ironclad contract. But the AIG contracts, oh, those people are just evil. They're bankers, you know."

We have become a respecter of people and not of laws. Meanwhile Barack Obama is going to be on the Jay Leno show this week. Why is he on the Jay Leno show this week? He's on the Jay Leno show this week to feed you more cake, to show you another circus. We are facing some of the biggest problems, and the media is right in bed with the government. They are not telling you -- they are not doing their job. There is -- of course, of course the New York Times gets this wrong.

I got up this morning and I thought Grassley, who said the people at AIG should commit Harry Carey, he wasn't joking. He was serious. They should commit Harry Carey because there is no honor. Well, wouldn't it be nice if there was some honor... Senator. There's no honor there. Okay, no honor there. Hmmm. The New York Times says we have to honor these contracts because if we don't, these are the people that can come out and they will know how to dismantle it on the outside and they'll take AIG down and we'll lose all of our investment. Of course the New York Times thinks that we should deal with terrorists. Of course they think that we should give in to the demands of people who are extorting money from us. That's completely consistent for the New York Times. They've made it about extortion instead of the rule of law. How could all of this have been avoided? Chapter 11. Time-tested, mother-approved Chapter 11. And now what they're talking about is going in, just put into either the House or the Senate a bill to tax these bonuses now, 95%, that the -- a special law, a special law just for AIG executives, and there's no outrage on the street at congress. A special law. After you've made the money, they will pass a bill to then go back and reach back into time and take that money from you. You tell me I'm crazy that the government is out of control. You tell me that I'm crazy because there's no common sense whatsoever.

This was one of the first homesteads in the area in the 1880's and was just begging to be brought back to its original glory — with a touch of modern. When we first purchased the property, it was full of old stuff without any running water, central heat or AC, so needless to say, we had a huge project ahead of us. It took some vision and a whole lot of trust, but the mess we started with seven years ago is now a place we hope the original owners would be proud of.

To restore something like this is really does take a village. It doesn't take much money to make it cozy inside, if like me you are willing to take time and gather things here and there from thrift shops and little antique shops in the middle of nowhere.

But finding the right craftsman is a different story.

Matt Jensen and his assistant Rob did this entire job from sketches I made. Because he built this in his off hours it took just over a year, but so worth the wait. It wasn't easy as it was 18"out of square. He had to build around that as the entire thing we felt would collapse. Matt just reinforced the structure and we love its imperfections.

Here are a few pictures of the process and the transformation from where we started to where we are now:

​How it was

It doesn't look like much yet, but just you wait and see!

By request a photo tour of the restored cabin. I start doing the interior design in earnest tomorrow after the show, but all of the construction guys are now done. So I mopped the floors, washed the sheets, some friends helped by washing the windows. And now the unofficial / official tour.

The Property

The views are absolutely stunning and completely peaceful.

The Hong Kong protesters flocking to the streets in opposition to the Chinese government have a new symbol to display their defiance: the Stars and Stripes. Upset over the looming threat to their freedom, the American flag symbolizes everything they cherish and are fighting to preserve.

But it seems our president isn't returning the love.

Trump recently doubled down on the United States' indifference to the conflict, after initially commenting that whatever happens is between Hong Kong and China alone. But he's wrong — what happens is crucial in spreading the liberal values that America wants to accompany us on the world stage. After all, "America First" doesn't mean merely focusing on our own domestic problems. It means supporting liberal democracy everywhere.

The protests have been raging on the streets since April, when the government of Hong Kong proposed an extradition bill that would have allowed them to send accused criminals to be tried in mainland China. Of course, when dealing with a communist regime, that's a terrifying prospect — and one that threatens the judicial independence of the city. Thankfully, the protesters succeeded in getting Hong Kong's leaders to suspend the bill from consideration. But everyone knew that the bill was a blatant attempt by the Chinese government to encroach on Hong Kong's autonomy. And now Hong Kong's people are demanding full-on democratic reforms to halt any similar moves in the future.

After a generation under the "one country, two systems" policy, the people of Hong Kong are accustomed to much greater political and economic freedom relative to the rest of China. For the protesters, it's about more than a single bill. Resisting Xi Jinping and the Communist Party means the survival of a liberal democracy within distance of China's totalitarian grasp — a goal that should be shared by the United States. Instead, President Trump has retreated to his administration's flawed "America First" mindset.

This is an ideal opportunity for the United States to assert our strength by supporting democratic values abroad. In his inaugural address, Trump said he wanted "friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world" while "understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their interests first." But at what point is respecting sovereignty enabling dictatorships? American interests are shaped by the principles of our founding: political freedom, free markets, and human rights. Conversely, the interests of China's Communist Party are the exact opposite. When these values come into conflict, as they have in Hong Kong, it's our responsibility to take a stand for freedom — even if those who need it aren't within our country's borders.

Of course, that's not a call for military action. Putting pressure on Hong Kong is a matter of rhetoric and positioning — vital tenets of effective diplomacy. When it comes to heavy-handed world powers, it's an approach that can really work. When the Solidarity movement began organizing against communism in Poland, President Reagan openly condemned the Soviet military's imposition of martial law. His administration's support for the pro-democracy movement helped the Polish people gain liberal reforms from the Soviet regime. Similarly, President Trump doesn't need to be overly cautious about retribution from Xi Jinping and the Chinese government. Open, strong support for democracy in Hong Kong not only advances America's governing principles, but also weakens China's brand of authoritarianism.

After creating a commission to study the role of human rights in U.S. foreign policy, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo wrote last month that the principles of our Constitution are central "not only to Americans," but to the rest of the world. He was right — putting "America First" means being the first advocate for freedom across the globe. Nothing shows the strength of our country more than when, in crucial moments of their own history, other nations find inspiration in our flag.

Let's join the people of Hong Kong in their defiance of tyranny.

Matt Liles is a writer and Young Voices contributor from Austin, Texas.

Summer is ending and fall is in the air. Before you know it, Christmas will be here, a time when much of the world unites to celebrate the love of family, the generosity of the human spirit, and the birth of the Christ-child in Bethlehem.

For one night only at the Kingsbury Hall in Salt Lake City, on December 7th, join internationally-acclaimed radio host and storyteller Glenn Beck as he walks you through tales of Christmas in the way that only he can. There will be laughs, and there might be a few tears. But at the end of the night, you'll leave with a warm feeling in your heart and a smile on your face.

Reconnect to the true spirit of Christmas with Glenn Beck, in a storytelling tour de force that you won't soon forget.

Get tickets and learn more about the event here.

The general sale period will be Friday, August 16 at 10:00 AM MDT. Stay tuned to for updates. We look forward to sharing in the Christmas spirit with you!