Glenn Beck: Van Jones unhinged



Free audio, click here to listen

GLENN: From high above Times Square, this is the third most listened to show in all of America. Hello, you sick twisted freak. I want to take another look with some new audio now that I swear to you I cannot believe that there is no one in this country that is willing to take on this audio, that is willing to ask the tough questions. I cannot believe that I am alone. I know you are there, too. You must feel the same way. Where is everyone? I want you to hear some new audio from the green jobs czar, specific adviser to the president for green jobs, or whatever they want to call him. What I want you to do is give me ten minutes. I need you to take a good hard look at who Van Jones is. I told you, well, for the last couple of months that this guy is an avowed, self avowed radical revolutionary communist.

In the last few days George Soros and the left have been trying to scrub this guy's image clean to the point where they are actually now claiming that he has totally transformed from communist into raging capitalist. All of a sudden he's a combination of Bill Gates and J. Paul Getty. He's main streamed now. The perfect young go getting entrepreneur to kick job creation into high gear. All he wants to do is create green jobs, right? That's like saying Sonia Sotomayor just wants to make the best decision based on the law. Then what's all this social justice thing? It has nothing to do with the laws. It has nothing to do with the Constitution. It's about social justice. Could the same thing be said about the green jobs? Because that's all he wants to do, remember, just create new green jobs. "Well, I hate to intrude with the facts here." But let's listen to Van Jones' own words. Granted, we do have to go way, way, way back. I mean, I don't even know how old Barack Obama was when this event happened. It was clear way back, time machine before April. Yes, yes. We have to go all the way back into the past to March, to the Power Shift '09 conference. Just before Van Jones was appointed as our president's special advisor, someone that would advise the president of the United States on how to create green jobs, just before that appointment he said this:

VAN JONES: This movement is deeper than a solar panel. Deeper than a solar panel. Don't stop there. Don't stop there. No, we're going to change the whole system. We're going to change the whole thing. We're not going to put a new battery in a broken system. We want a new system. We want a new system.

GLENN: We want a new system. We want a new system. A new system of what? He says he's talking about more than just solar panels. What are you talking about, wind energy? New system of what? Well, let's listen to the entire context of this statement. He is saying that this cannot be only about new forms of energy. Listen carefully, America.



Video: Complete Van Jones speech. Skip to about the 11 min mark...


VAN JONES: All we do is take out the dirty power system, the dirty power generation in a system and just replace it with some clean stuff, put a solar panel on top of this system. We don't deal with how we are consuming water, we don't deal with how we're treating our other sister and other brothers' species, we don't deal with toxins, we don't deal with the way we treat each other, if that's not a part of this movement, let me tell you what you'll have. This is all you'll have. You'll have solar powered bulldozers, solar powered buzz saws, and biofuel bombers and we'll be fighting wars over lithium for the batteries instead of oil for the engines and we'll still have a dead planet. This movement is deeper than a solar panel, deeper than a solar panel. Don't stop there. Don't stop there. No, we're going to change the whole system.

GLENN: When will America wake up? The left has started a revolution. No different than Hugo Chavez. When Hugo Chavez was elected, he was elected by Democratic process. But he did not tell the people when he was running that he was a communist. Can we stop claiming that this man, Van Jones, is an average everyday capitalist America, an American? Is that I mean, did that sound like you, Iowa? Did that sound like you, Nebraska? Did it sound like you, Texas? Did it sound like you, Florida, Georgia, Maryland? Did it sound like you, New Hampshire? It sure sounds like Berkeley, California, San Francisco, California, and now Washington, D.C. We must start having the necessary critical discussion of, do we want communists, radicals, revolutionaries in the United States government as special advisors to the president of the United States? Do we even want communists to have lunch with our president? I wasn't comfortable with Putin having lunch with Barack Obama. We had to do that. Barack Obama did not campaign openly on changing the whole system, or did he? Five days before the election this now tells us much.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.

GLENN: Are we changing the whole system? Very few Americans paid attention then. Are you paying attention now?

You know, I don't want to believe these things about our president. I didn't want to believe the things that I believed about George W. Bush, that he was in bed with gigantic global corporations, that he was harming our security by keeping our border on the south open for some God only knows reason. I didn't want to believe those things. I certainly didn't want to say those things. Those things hurt me financially. Those things hurt me to say. It hurt me in business; it hurts me as an American. Now I'm saying very similar things except the stakes have been raised. If our founding principles are somehow or another no longer relevant, if the system in which this country was founded is somehow unjust or unworkable now and communism, Marxism, socialism is the right and relevant path, then that is the discussion in a republic we have. But to subversively bring in a new system through the back door in the middle of the night and build it piece by piece by overwhelming the system, that is not acceptable. But this goes farther than whether Van Jones is a capitalist or a communist. Listen to what Van Jones said at this same conference.

VAN JONES: And our Native American sisters and brothers who were pushed and bullied and mistreated and shoved into all the land we didn't want, where it was all hot and windy, well, guess what, renewable energy. Guess what, solar industry. Guess what, wind industry. They now own and control 80% of the renewable energy resources. No more broken treaties. No more broken treaties. Give them the wealth. Give them the wealth. Give them the dignity. Give them the respect that they deserve. No justice on stolen land. We owe them a debt.

GLENN: We owe them a debt. Remember when I told you that Barack Obama said that reparations he's against because they don't go far enough. We owe them a debt. Does that rhetoric sound familiar to anyone? Have you heard that before?

REVEREND WRIGHT: We believe God sanctioned the rape and robbery of an entire continent. We believe God ordained African slavery. We believe God makes Europeans superior to Africans and superior to everybody else.

GLENN: Is this Marxism? Is this socialism? Is this racism? Is this freedom of speech? Is this mainstream? What is this, America? History, our children, our grandchildren will demand an answer! No answer is not good enough! You will have to answer. If we lose man's freedom, you will have to answer at the foot of God. You will at least have to answer at the feet of your grandchildren. No answer, putting your head in the sand is no longer good enough. You must pay attention and you must demand an answer! That didn't sound familiar to you, those two things didn't sound alike to you? Let's try it again. Here's more from Van Jones. Again, to be fair, this is from the ancient history catalog from this past March.

VAN JONES: What about our immigrant sisters and brothers? What about our immigrant sisters and brothers? What about people who come here from all around the world, who we're willing to have out in the fields with poison being sprayed on them, poison being sprayed on them because we have the wrong agricultural system and then we're and we're willing to poison them and poison the Earth to put food on our table but we don't want to give them rights and we don't want to give them dignity and we don't want to give them respect?

GLENN: Where do you even begin on that? The wrong agricultural system. Now, this is from an interview he did as the head of the Ella Baker Center.

VAN JONES: The white polluters and the white environmentals are essentially steering poison into the people of colored communities.

GLENN: Have you heard this any has the president ever been around anyone who has ever said anything like that before Van Jones?

REVEREND WRIGHT: The government lied about the Tuskegee experiment. They purposely infected African American men with syphilis.

GLENN: The president of the United States has tried to pass himself off as a guy who just sat in Jeremiah Wright's Black Liberation Theology church for 20 years. A friend. He's like an old uncle. He didn't even notice. He baptized Barack Obama's children. He baptized Barack Obama, but he never heard these things before. And even if he did hear them, he didn't really even notice. Okay, so that's the explanation for the crazy uncle. What is the explanation this time? What is the excuse this time for appointing the same type of radical, saying almost damn exact same words as Jeremiah Wright to an influential position in our government? Is it that you didn't vet these people? Because gee, that sounds like a problem, that our president of the United States didn't vet him enough to know. Is it that the FBI didn't do its job? I mean, we found all of this stuff. Sure, I only have a staff of seven producing books, TV, radio shows, I only have a staff of seven. And all of a sudden we can come up with these things. Gee, you'd think the FBI or the president of the United States would surely be able to find these things.

When I asked the White House to answer, did you know of his radical past, the White House issued a statement. Their response was the green jobs special advisor is very narrowly focused on creating green jobs. As if that was an answer to the question of why this guy is in our government, anywhere near our president. It's not an answer. It's not an answer. And this one's not your crazy uncle. And this one's not way, way, way, way back in the past.

When let me rephrase this. How. How, America. I ask this sincerely. Show me where I have it wrong. I want to be wrong, but I can't find any other way to explain this. The president is wearing a mask. He has surrounded himself with radicals and revolutionaries. He has surrounded himself his whole life with radicals and revolutionaries. How? How? Please, help me. Read it another way. Show me the error of my ways. If you can't do that, show me how I can get this word out to more people. How do we wake people up? How do we wake Democrats up? Democrats, is that who you are? Are you this person? Do you believe those things? If you do, we're in much bigger trouble than I thought. I don't believe that's who the American people are. There are Democrats that I vehemently disagree with. I don't believe they think those things. He's not the only guy in this administration that feels this way!

Look, I know this is the hard truth. I don't want to believe them, either. But these statements from Van Jones are from this last spring. I have more that I'm not prepared to release yet because it paints even a bigger, more terrifying picture, and I'm not going to release them until I can fill in all of the dots on this picture. But why am I the only one bringing you this? Why will no one bring this information? The answers that I can come up with, either they are afraid and I understand that or because they think it just doesn't matter. Am I the only American, just you and me? Is it just us? Are we the only one left that think that this might be important, the guy who is creating the green jobs is doing it to repay for smallpox blankets?

Let me just leave you one more time with the words of the special advisor to the president of the United States.

VAN JONES: This movement is deeper than a solar panel, deeper than a solar panel. Don't stop there. Don't stop there. No, we're going to change the whole system. We're going to change the whole thing. We're not going to put a new battery in a broken system. We want a new system. We want a new system.

The FEC is bad. The House of Representatives isn't doing anything to make it better.

When it passed H.R. 1 by a vote of 234-193 on Monday, Congress attempted to address a laundry list of nationwide problems: rampant gerrymandering, voting rights, and the vulnerability of elections to foreign interference, among other concerns. But H.R. 1, billed as the "For the People Act," also takes a shot at reforming the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It fails.

The FEC isn't good at enforcing the nation's campaign finance laws, and, when it is does, it's often an entire election cycle after the given offense. As it is, candidates don't have much difficulty circumventing campaign finance laws, undermining the fairness of elections and opening the door to further corruption.

RELATED: Lawmakers are putting the death penalty on trial

The FEC was created by the Federal Election Campaign Act following the Watergate scandal, as Congress sought a better way to police federal campaign laws and prevent future presidents from interfering with investigations as Nixon had. The FEC has six commissioners, and no more than three can be of the same party. Four votes are required for most actions taken by the agency, and that hasn't been an issue for most of its history. But since 2008, the frequency of 3-3 tie votes has increased dramatically. It's why the FEC is slow to investigate cases and even slower to prosecute offenses. Supporters of H.R. 1 complain, with good reason, that the FEC has become toothless. But H.R. 1's reforms introduce new and potentially volatile problems.

FEC's rampant dysfunction won't be fixed by H.R. 1— the bill doesn't get at what actually went wrong. Since its inception, the FEC has been able to operate without excessive gridlock, and, for the most part, it still does. At the height of FEC turmoil in 2014, the FEC only had a tied vote 14 percent of the time (historically, it has been closer to one to four percent of the time) on substantive matters, although many of these tie votes occur on matters that are particularly contentious. The greater problem afflicting the FEC is touched upon by NBC Washington's findings that the Republican and Democratic commissioners of the FEC almost always vote as blocs. At various times, both Republican and Democratic commissioners have put party interests ahead of their agency's responsibilities.

At various times, both Republican and Democratic commissioners have put party interests ahead of their agency's responsibilities.

H.R. 1's Democratic supporters instead believe the FEC's six-commissioner structure makes it dysfunctional. H.R. 1 introduces a new system of five commissioners —two from each party and one independent, eliminating tie votes. But that independent commissioner's de facto role as a tiebreaker would grant them far too much power. Save for Senate approval, there's nothing preventing a president from appointing an "independent" like Bernie Sanders or Angus King.

The bill's proponents are aware of this problem, creating a Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel that will help inform the president's decisions. But this panel has problems of its own. The Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel's decisions are non-binding and not public, a result of its exemption from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which ensures the transparency of advisory committees. There are arguments against FACA's necessity, the panel's deliberate exemption from the law undermines the idea that its goal is to ensure non-partisanship. Instead, H.R. 1 will allow future presidents to tilt the scales of the FEC in their favor, a fate the post-Watergate creators of the FEC were so desperate to avoid they originally had members of Congress picking commissioners before the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional. Apparently, the solution to excessive gridlock is one-party control.

H.R. 1 also seeks to grant unilateral powers to the Chair of the commission in the name of expediency, again giving leverage to the Chair's party, and allows the General Counsel to take actions independent of commission votes. While some of the FEC's problems, such as its notoriously slow pace and the delayed appointment of commissioners under Presidents Obama and Trump, might be solved with legislation, the consolidation of power in the hands of a few at the expense of the FEC's integrity is not a winning strategy.

The FEC is afflicted by the same problem that has afflicted governments for as long as they have existed – governments are made up of people, and people can be bad. The Founders, in their wisdom, sought to limit the harm bad actors could do once in power, and the FEC's current structure adheres to this principle. Currently, the consequences of bad actors in the FEC is dysfunction and frustration. But under H.R. 1's reforms, those consequences could be blatant corruption.

Michael Rieger is a contributor for Young Voices. Follow him on Twitter at @EagerRieger.

On Monday's radio program, Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere discussed former Starbucks CEO and progressive Howard Schultz, a lifelong Democrat who has not only been disowned by the Democrat Party but he can no longer set foot inside of a Starbucks store because of his success in business.

In this clip, Stu explained how at one time Starbucks only sold coffee in bags until Schultz, an employee at the time, convinced the company to open a Starbucks cafe.

Click here to watch the full episode.

At one point, the owners came close to closing down the cafe, but Schultz eventually managed to purchase the company and transform it into the empire that it is today.

Stu continued, describing how Schultz, a lifelong Democrat, went on to implement liberal corporate policies that earned the company a reputation for being a "beacon" of liberalism across the country.

"And now he (Schultz) can't even get into the Democrat Party," Stu said."That is craziness," Glenn replied.

Citing a "60 Minutes" interview, Glenn highlighted the journey that Schultz traveled, which started in the New York City projects and evolved, later becoming the CEO of a coffee empire.

"This guy is so American, so everything in business that we want to be, he has taken his beliefs and made it into who he is which is very liberal," Glenn explained.

Catch more of the conversation in the video below.


This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

This weekend, March 17, Rep. Rashida Tlaib will be speaking at (Council on American Islamic Relations) CAIR-Michigan's 19th annual "Faith-Led, Justice Driven" banquet.

Who knows what to expect. But here are some excerpts from a speech she gave last month, at CAIR-Chicago's 15th annual banquet.

RELATED: CLOSER LOOK: Who is Rep. Ilhan Omar?

You know the speech is going to be good when it begins like this:


CAIR-Chicago 15th Annual Banquet: Rashida Tlaib youtu.be


It's important to remember CAIR's ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Think of CAIR as a spinoff of HAMAS, who its two founders originally worked for via a Hamas offshoot organization (the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP)).

A 2009 article in Politico says feds "designated CAIR a co-conspirator with the Holy Land Foundation, a group that was eventually convicted for financing terrorism."

The United Arab Emirates has designated CAIR a terrorist organization.

In 1993, CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper told a reporter for the Minneapolis Star Tribune:

I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.

In 1998, CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad said:

Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.

Notice the slight underhanded jab at Israel. It's just one of many in her speech, and is indicative of the growing anti-Semitism among Democrats, especially Tlaib and Omar.

Most of the speech, as you might expect, is a long rant about the evil Donald Trump.

I wonder if she realizes that the Birth of Jesus pre-dates her religion, and her "country." The earliest founding of Palestine is 1988, so maybe she's a little confused.

Then there's this heartwarming story about advice she received from Congressman John Dingell:

When I was a state legislator, I came in to serve on a panel with him on immigration rights, and Congressman Dingell was sitting there and he had his cane, if you knew him, he always had this cane and he held it in front of him. And I was so tired, I had driven an hour and a half to the panel discussion at the University of Michigan Ann Arbor campus. And I sit down, my hair is all messed up, and I said, 'Oh, my God, I'm so tired of this. I don't know how you've been doing it so long Congressman. They all lie.' And he looks at me and he goes. (She nods yes.) I said, 'You know who I'm talking about, these lobbyists, these special interest [groups], they're all lying to me.' … And he looks at me, and he goes, 'Young lady, there's a saying in India that if you stand still enough on a riverbank, you will watch your enemies float by dead.'

What the hell does that mean? That she wants to see her enemies dead? Who are her enemies? And how does that relate to her opening statement? How does it relate to the "oppression" her family faced at the hand of Israel?

Glenn Beck on Wednesday called out Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) for their blatantly anti-Semitic rhetoric, which has largely been excused by Democratic leadership. He noted the sharp contrast between the progressive principles the freshmen congresswomen claim to uphold and the anti-LGBTQ, anti-feminist, anti-Israel groups they align themselves with.

Later this month, both congresswomen are scheduled to speak at fundraisers for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a pro-Palestinian organization with ties to Islamic terror groups including Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and the Islamic State.

Rep. Tlaib will be speaking at CAIR-Michigan's 19th Annual Banquet on March 17 in Livonia, Michigan, alongside keynote speaker Omar Suleiman, a self-described student of Malcolm X with links to the Muslim Brotherhood. Suleiman has regularly espoused notably "un-progressive" ideas, such as "honor killings" for allegedly promiscuous women, mandatory Hijabs for women, death as a punishment for homosexuality, and men having the right to "sex slaves," Glenn explained.

Rep. Omar is the keynote speaker at a CAIR event on March 23 in Los Angeles and will be joined by Hassan Shibly, who claims Hezbollah and Hamas are not terrorist organizations, and Hussam Ayloush, who is known for referring to U.S. armed forces as radical terrorists.

Watch the clip below for more:


This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.