Glenn Beck: Healthcare - Where are the lawyers?

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

GLENN: Let me go to Joe who is our, who is our attorney and my chief researcher. Joe?

JOE: Yes, sir.

GLENN: Explain, explain why this is so bad with the deal that they've made with the attorneys, healthcare.

JOE: Wow. You know, the one question that, you know, Glenn, you've always asked me which was, you know, where are the trial lawyers? Why aren't they either coming out supporting this bill or why aren't they coming out against the bill. And you know they're not shy in that regard. If they're for something, they come out and say it. And if they are against it, they spend a lot of money in D.C. on lobbyists and they make their voices known. Well, in healthcare that wasn't the case. So I started looking into that based on our conversation, and the long and short of it is that this bill would provide a windfall to the trial lawyers, and in legal parlance there's something known as an ERISA based plan which most plans are that are provided through your employer, meaning that they meet certain qualifications that the government sets forward and in return for meeting those requirements, they're provided immunity from certain lawsuits. So if I go to my doctor and my doctor says, wow, Joe, you have brain cancer, you need

GLENN: Which quite honestly I'm praying for now because this is really an agonizingly boring don't you think? I mean, it is just

PAT: Joe, it's Joe Kerry, attorney.

GLENN: For the love of Pete, get to the end, will you?

JOE: The end is if you go in to your doctor and you have a particular disease like brain cancer and your doctor says you need surgery and your HMO or PPO won't pay for it I'm going to hang up.

GLENN: Don't hang up. No, go ahead. So anyway, they won't pay for it?

JOE: They won't pay for it and you die as a result of that, the only damages you're entitled to, the only money you get is the cost of the medical

GLENN: The surgery, the brain cancer?

JOE: That was denied, right.

GLENN: Got it.

PAT: Please make him get off the phone.

GLENN: No, no, wait, this is where it's starting to get interesting. Jeez, I mean

JOE: Under the new, under the new legislation, that immunity would be waived for private insurers. So if that surgery was denied, now instead of just getting the cost of the surgery that was denied, you would be entitled to pain and suffering

GLENN: Okay, now listen. So this is what happens. So now the government has said we're going to compete, which, they're not competing. The government can't the government's not competing. They can set any price they want. They're controlling

PAT: They are only doing that.

GLENN: They are controlling everything. So what they've done is they've said now to the trial attorneys, "By the way, just to make it a little tougher for the insurance companies, we're going to let you go after pain and suffering and everything else on anything that those guys deny." So if they deny something, you go ahead and you can get them for all kinds of damages. So in other words, private insurance is going to have to pay a lot more in attorney fees and settlements and everything else.

JOE: And that's going to translate directly into higher premiums.

GLENN: Now, here's the really interesting part of this. Joe, if you have a, say, my policy right now, you are working for me and you're under this policy. If we change anything in this policy, if anything is changed, what happens?

JOE: Yeah. For five years everybody says your plan, you know, you're protected, your employer can keep providing it for five years, you're safe, it's grandfathered in. Well, the fine print says that if your employer makes any changes at all, increases a benefit or decreases a benefit within that five year window

GLENN: Okay, stop.

PAT: They always do. They always do.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Of course they do.

PAT: You have to.

GLENN: Every year my the health insurance coverage goes up to the company.

PAT: Sure.

GLENN: So we do it now as long I mean, our agreement with the employees is we'll do it as long as we can, guys, but I don't know how much longer we can do it. If they start going after these insurance companies, the insurance companies are going to have to raise their rates. They're going to have to pass it on. So, of course, your company is going to change it. What happens, Joe, when they do?

JOE: You lose you're kicked out of the grandfather clause and right then and there your plan becomes susceptible to increased government regulation. You basically are flipped over into the public option.

PAT: This thing could happen so quickly. It could go, it could go single payer within, I think five years.

JOE: Now Glenn, you know we talked about this over the weekend. You know, I had a frank discussion with a member of congress that I believe that you respect, and he came out and his quote was, anybody with any part of a brain knows that this healthcare bill, whether you're Democrat or Republican, knows that this is going to collapse healthcare. Now, that was his language. That was a quote from him. It will collapse the healthcare system and it is designed to do that. The progressives want a single payer system, and this is the only way to get it. They know the American people will not take single payer today. So if they can pass this, it is going to screw up, and there was profanity involved which I'll avoid, but it will screw up the system so badly that people will beg for single payer and government control.

STU: I want to know more about this profanity, Joe. Which word was it?

PAT: This was a frank discussion. So what word are we talking about?


GLENN: Joe has absolutely no

PAT: Just dabnabbit?

GLENN: He has absolutely no sense of humor. Joe?

JOE: I'm hanging up now.

GLENN: All right, thank you very much.

STU: Did you guys know that up to 10% of the savings that they're talking about on the healthcare bill has to do with the treatment of insomnia that they're saving? They are just going to use personal phone calls from Joe Kerry which

PAT: (Laughing).

GLENN: (Laughing). All right.

PAT: That will save trillions.

STU: A lot of money, much.

In the final days before the 2020 election, President Donald Trump is gaining among black voters, particularly men, because his record of accomplishments "speaks for itself" and the "façade" that President Trump is a racist "just doesn't ring true," argued sports columnist Jason Whitlock on "The Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday.

Jason, who recently interviewed the president at the White House for, shared his thoughts on why he believes many black Americans — notably celebrities such as Kanye West, Ice Cube, and 50 Cent — are breaking from the "façade" that President Trump is a "flaming racist."

"I really believe the facts are starting to speak for themselves, and that Donald Trump's record of accomplishments, particularly as it relates to African Americans, speaks for itself," Jason told Glenn. "He actually has a record to stand on, unlike even Barack Obama. When [Obama] was president, I don't think he had much of a record to stand on, in terms of, 'Hey, what did he actually deliver for African Americans?' President Trump has things he can stand on and, you know, beyond that I think black people understand when he starts talking about black unemployment rate. And America's unemployment rate. And then, when you add in for black men, the façade we've been putting on [President Trump] … you know, this whole thing that he's some flaming racist, it just doesn't ring true."

Jason suggested that Trump's fearlessness, unabashed masculinity, and record of keeping his promises resonates with men in the black community. He also weighed in on how media and social media's bias plays a huge role in convincing people to hate President Trump while ignoring Antifa and others on the Left.

"I keep explaining to people, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, they're some of the most secular places on earth. And we've reduced everyone to a tweet, that we disagree with," he added.

Watch the video 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.

Megyn Kelly is not happy about the "disgusting" media coverage of President Donald Trump, specifically pointing to Lesley Stahl's "60 Minutes" interview on CBS Sunday.

On the radio program, Megyn told Glenn Beck the media has become so blinded by the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" that they've lost their own credibility — and now they can't get it back.

"It's disgusting. It's stomach-turning," Megyn said of the media's coverage of the president. "But it's just a continuation of what we've seen over the past couple of years. Their 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' has blinded them to what they're doing to their own credibility. They can't get it back. It's too late. They've already sacrificed it. And now no one is listening to them other than the hard partisans for whom they craft their news."

Megyn also discussed how she would have covered the recent stories about Hunter and Joe Biden's alleged corruption. Watch the video 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.

Imagine sometime next year, getting called before HUWAC – the House Un-Woke Activities Committee.

"Are you or have you ever been a member of the un-woke?"

Something like that is not as far-fetched as you might think.

Last week, Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor during the Clinton administration, now a UC Berkeley professor, tweeted this:

Since the 1970s, there have been dozens of "Truth Commissions" around the world like the kind Robert Reich wants in America. Most of these have been set up in Africa and Latin America. Usually it happens in countries after a civil war, or where there's been a regime change – a dictator is finally overthrown, and a commission is set up to address atrocities that happened under the dictator. Or, as in the commissions in East Germany and Czechoslovakia, atrocities under communism. Or, in the most famous example, South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation commission addressed the decades of apartheid that ravaged that nation.

These commissions usually conclude with an official final report. These commissions and reports have served as a means of governments trying to close a dark chapter of their country's history, or provide emotional catharsis, as a way to generally move on. Sometimes it kind of works for people, most of the time it leaves people clamoring for more justice.

Here's how one professor described truth commissions in an article in The Conversation last year. He wrote:

The goal of a truth commission… is to hold public hearings to establish the scale and impact of a past injustice, typically involving wide-scale human rights abuses, and make it part of the permanent, unassailable public record. Truth commissions also officially recognize victims and perpetrators in an effort to move beyond the painful past… Some have been used cynically as tools for governments to legitimize themselves by pretending they have dealt with painful history when they have only kicked the can down the road.

See, this is the problem with a lot of "Truth" commissions – they are inherently political. Even if you trust your government and give them all the benefit of the doubt in the world that their Truth commission is trying to do the right thing, it is ALWAYS going to be political. Because these truth commissions are never set up by those who have LOST power in government. They're always established by those who have WON power.

The Deputy Executive Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice says one of the main points in these Truth commissions is that "the victims become protagonists."

A Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility.

So, who are the victims in Robert Reich's America? People like him, members of the far-Left who had to endure the atrocities of four years of a president with different political ideas. What an injustice. I mean, the left's suffering during the Trump administration is almost on the level of apartheid or genocide – so we totally need a Truth commission.

There have been lots of calls for the U.S. to have its own Truth and Reconciliation commission, especially around racial injustice.

This past June, Democratic Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California introduced legislation to establish the " United States Commission on Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation."

Ibram X. Kendi – the high priest of anti-racism, and author of Target's current favorite book " Antiracist Baby" – proposes a Constitutional anti-racism amendment. This amendment would:

establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for pre-clearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.

If you think that is far-fetched, you haven't been paying attention to the Left's growing radicalism. In a Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration, a Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility. And of course, such a DOA would never stop at policing government.

We're in a dangerous, precarious moment in our history. Given the events of 2020, should Democrats gain the White House, the Senate, and the House, how many commissions will be in our future? They will suddenly have plenty of political capital to drag the nation through years of commission hearings.

And the Left's form of justice is never satisfied. You think it will stop at a T&R commission on race? MSNBC's Chris Hayes tweeted this month about the need for a commission to deal with Americans who are skeptical about wearing masks:

Or what about a Truth commission on religion? I mean, look at those reckless churches spreading Covid this year. Or this would be a big one – a T&R commission on climate change deniers.

The Left is highly selective when it comes to truth. That's why they are the very last group you want in charge of anything with "Truth and Reconciliation" in the title.

This is one of the most incredibly frustrating things about the Left in America today. The Left insists there is no such thing as absolute truth, while simultaneously insisting there are certain approved truths that are undeniable.

So, you can't question "Science" – even though that's pretty much what every great scientist in history did.

You can't question racism as the explanation for all of existence – because, well, just because.

You can't question third-party "Fact-checkers" – because the powers that be, mainly Big Tech right now, have decided they are the Truth referees and you have to trust what they say because they're using certified external fact-checkers. They just forgot to tell you that they actually fund these third-party fact-checkers. It's like if McDonald's told you to trust third-party health inspectors that they were paying for.

The Left thinks it has a monopoly on Truth. They're the enlightened ones, because they've had the correct instruction, they're privy to the actual facts. It's psychotic arrogance. If you don't buy what they're selling, even if you're just skeptical of it, it's because you either don't have the facts, you willingly deny the facts, or you're simply incapable of grasping the truth because you're blinded by your raging racism problem. It's most likely the racism problem.

The Left never learns from its own preaching. For the past 60-plus years they've decried the House Un-American Activities Committee for trying to root out communists, getting people canceled, ruining Hollywood careers, etcetera. But a HUAC-type committee is precisely what Robert Reich is describing and many on the Left want. It's not enough for Trump to be voted out of office. Americans who helped put him there must be punished. They don't want reconciliation, they want retribution. Because the Left doesn't simply loathe Donald Trump, the Left loathes YOU.

President Donald Trump's performance at last night's final presidential debate was "brilliant" and "the best he's ever done," Glenn Beck said on the radio program Friday.

Glenn described the moments he thought President Trump came across as "sincere," "kind," and "well-informed," as well as Joe Biden's biggest downfalls for of the night — from his big statement on wanting to eliminate the oil industry to his unsurprising gaffes as the debate neared the end. But, the question remains: was Trump's "brilliant performance" enough to win the election?

Watch the video be low to get Glenn's take on the final debate before the November 3 election:

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.