Glenn Beck: More unsettled settled science

VOICE: The Glenn Beck program presents spotlight object on science.

OBAMA: We'll restore science to its rightful place.

VOICE: A series dedicated to President Obama's passion for everything science.

GLENN: I know, this isn't a science update but I want to get a science update on this. Can you check with all of our scientists on the Neckline Slimmer?

STU: Oh, that's very scientific, yes.

GLENN: Have you seen that?

STU: Yes.

GLENN: It's available only through this TV offer and you just move your neck up and down and push the little spring down and it tightens your skin and your muscles.

STU: You are saying it does more than tighten your skin? Because that would be enough for me.

GLENN: Oh, no, it tightens your skin and your muscles. I didn't know you could tighten your skin but apparently you can. If that's all it would take to get rid of that fourth chin.

STU: Just nodding a lot?

GLENN: I'm just sayin'.

STU: You got it.

GLENN: As you may have heard, I have recently ridden on Amtrak. Now, who I did or didn't introduce myself to in this story isn't important. What is is my green choice of transportation. Since the global warming crisis has reared its ugly head, being green is inevitable. Well, I shouldn't say that. Being green is absolutely avoidable. I still refuse to use fluorescent light bulbs and I always will. But the green message is unavoidable. The message is use public transportation, right? But the science appears not to be settled according to the rightwing group Britain's Institute of Physics. Boy, I hate those fascists, huh? As it turns out, scientists didn't take into account the production and maintenance of said buses, trains and planes. Government policy his historically relied on emission and analysis of automobiles, buses and trains and aircraft at their tailpipe, ignoring vehicle production and maintenance, infrastructure provision and fuel production requirements to support these modes. Wait a minute. Hold it. So in other words, when people like me have asked the question, "Okay, so we have an electric car, we have to plug it in at our house, we get our electricity from coal fire plants. Aren't we just using more coal to provide the electricity?" Nobody actually looked into that? Just me? Science has only published specific data to support one side of an issue? Who would have seen this coming?

For example, Boston's rail system compared to San Francisco's rail system. Boston has a metro system with high energy efficiency. The trouble is 82% of the energy to drive it comes from dirty fossil fuels. Coal plants. By comparison, San Francisco's local railway is less energy efficient who would have seen that one coming, California, less efficient than Boston's. But it turns out to be greener, as only 49% of the electricity comes from fossil fuel. The paper points out that the tailpipe quotient does not include emissions that come from building transport infrastructure, railways, airport terminals, roads, so on, so on, nor the emissions that come from maintaining this operational infrastructure over its lifetime. They also overlooked the issue of capacity.

Stu, where were we? We were in a city last week that had one of the clean rail systems and they were like, right, it's green, it's going to save the Earth, blah, blah blah. Every time we saw it, it was completely empty and the highway was packed. The train was empty. And I thought, think how much energy that train is saving by running completely empty! So science has decided to only pay attention to one aspect of the situation to favor the green agenda. Is it safe to say that perhaps, perhaps they are only sharing specific data in other areas to further an agenda? No, that was a trick question. I mean, what am I, nuts? Questioning settled science again? Oh, it's just me, that flat earther again.

VOICE: You've been listening to Spotlight on Science, exclusively heard on the Glenn Beck program, America's number one source for science and science related items.

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.

On Friday's radio program, Bill O'Reilly joins Glenn Beck discuss the possible outcomes for the Democrats in 2020.

Why are former President Barack and First Lady Michelle Obama working overtime to convince Americans they're more moderate than most of the far-left Democratic presidential candidates? Is there a chance of a Michelle Obama vs. Donald Trump race this fall?

O'Reilly surmised that a post-primary nomination would probably be more of a "Bloomberg play." He said Michael Bloomberg might actually stand a chance at the Democratic nomination if there is a brokered convention, as many Democratic leaders are fearfully anticipating.

"Bloomberg knows he doesn't really have a chance to get enough delegates to win," O'Reilly said. "He's doing two things: If there's a brokered convention, there he is. And even if there is a nominee, it will probably be Biden, and Biden will give [him] Secretary of State or Secretary of Treasury. That's what Bloomberg wants."

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

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 "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Friday, award-winning investigative reporter John Solomon, a central figure in the impeachment proceedings, explained his newly filed lawsuit, which seeks the records of contact between Ukraine prosecutors and the U.S. Embassy officials in Kiev during the 2016 election.

The records would provide valuable information on what really happened in Ukraine, including what then-Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter were doing with Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings, Solomon explained.

The documents, which the State Department has withheld thus far despite repeated requests for release by Solomon, would likely shed light on the alleged corruption that President Donald Trump requested to be investigated during his phone call with the president of Ukraine last year.

With the help of Southeastern Legal Foundation, Solomon's lawsuit seeks to compel the State Department to release the critical records. Once released, the records are expected to reveal, once and for all, exactly why President Trump wanted to investigate the dealings in Ukraine, and finally expose the side of the story that Democrats are trying to hide in their push for impeachment.

"It's been a one-sided story so far, just like the beginning of the Russia collusion story, right? Everybody was certain on Jan. 9 of 2017 that the Christopher Steele dossier was gospel. And our president was an agent of Russia. Three years later, we learned that all of that turned out to be bunk, " Solomon said.

"The most important thing about politics, and about investigations, is that there are two sides to a story. There are two pieces of evidence. And right now, we've only seen one side of it," he continued. "I think we'll learn a lot about what the intelligence community, what the economic and Treasury Department community was telling the president. And I bet the story was way more complicated than the narrative that [House Intelligence Committee Chairman] Adam Schiff [D-Calif.] has woven so far."

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

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.

Carter Page, a former advisor to Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, found himself at the center of the Russia probe and had his reputation and career destroyed by what we now know were lies from our own intelligence system and the media.

On the TV show Thursday, Page joined Glenn Beck to speak out about how he became the subject of illegal electronic surveillance by the FBI for more than two years, and revealed the extent of the corruption that has infiltrated our legal systems and our country as a whole.

"To me, the bigger issue is how much damage this has done to our country," Page told Glenn. "I've been very patient in trying to ... find help with finding solutions and correcting this terrible thing which has happened to our country, our judicial system, DOJ, FBI -- these once-great institutions. And my bigger concern is the fact that, although we keep taking these steps forward in terms of these important findings, it really remains the tip of the iceberg."

Page was referencing the report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, which revealed that the FBI made "at least 17 significant errors or omissions" in its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) applications for warrants to spy on Page, a U.S. citizen.

"I think this needs to be attacked from all angles," Glenn said. "The one angle I'm interested in from you is, please tell me you have the biggest badass attorneys that are hungry, starving, maybe are a little low to pay their Mercedes payments right now, and are just gearing up to come after the government and the media. Are they?"

I can confirm that that is the case," Page replied.

Watch the video clip below for a preview of the full-length interview:

The full interview will air on January 30th for Blaze TV subscribers, and February 1st on YouTube and wherever you get your podcast.

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.

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.