Glenn Beck: Left Strangely Silent on Petrobras



The Overton Window by Glenn Beck

All I could think about this weekend was one word: Halliburton.

Everyone in the universe knows what Halliburton is. It's Dick Cheney's evil oil company. Yup, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, they're just puppets of the big oil companies like Halliburton. So, getting in bed with Big Oil is a touchy subject with the left. They won't stand for anyone with any sort of a connection with an oil company. Oil is evil!

Yet no one knows the word "Petrobras." Suddenly the left's concerns with politicians and Big Oil seem to have dissipated.

But you've heard George Soros' name before. He's the billionaire progressive activist who doesn't mind throwing his money around. His seemingly unending quest for big government control is kind of strange, considering he was born in Budapest, Hungary and his dad was a Hungarian Jew who was a prisoner of war in World War I. Soros eventually found his way to New York City in 1956 and, by 1970, had set up his hedge funds that would make his fortune. Yet he spends millions of that fortune on things like a progressive blog site called Media Matters, where bloggers earn six-figure salaries to sit around and distort conservatives' words all day long.

Soros started the Open Society Institute (which seeks "fairness" and "justice") and the Tides Foundation, which among its many classics created the anti-capitalist "Story of Stuff" indoctrination video that was shown in schools across America.

Soros is globalist and is one of those power players trying to establish a new world financial order:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE SOROS, BILLIONAIRE INVESTOR: You really need to bring China into the creation of a new — world order, a financial world order.... So I think you need a new world order that China has to be part of the process of creating it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

He's also doing his best to implement the Cloward and Piven strategy of collapsing the system, so that a new one can replace it:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SOROS: I believe that basically the system is broke and needs to be reconstituted.... The system we have now has actually broken down, only we haven't quite recognized it and so you need to create a new one and this is the time to do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

He's pointed out the "bankruptcy" of market fundamentalists:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SOROS: I mean, it is effectively a bankruptcy — of the — of this market fundamentalist belief, which really came in with Reagan and Thatcher. Now, Reagan is still in the panoply of — of saints in — in this country. And — and we — we just have to recognize that we — something went very wrong and we need to reformulate our view of what — how financial markets work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

But perhaps his most effective creation is the Center for American Progress. When the group formed in 2003, he promised $3 million, but that number could be higher as Soros admits to spending $500 million a year on his various foundations.

Back in 2003, Democrats were floundering and on the verge of irrelevance. They needed an "intellectual coup" just like the conservative Heritage Foundation achieved in the '80s. Center for American Progress provided just that; it's a progressive policy think tank that believes in "government that champions the common good over narrow self-interest" and they have heavy influence on this administration.

Bloomberg reported that the Center for American Progress "helped build the platform that triumphed in the 2008 campaign" and Time Magazine noted that "not since the Heritage Foundation helped guide Ronald Reagan's transition in 1981 has a single outside group held so much sway."

At the head of Obama's transition team was John Podesta. He's also the founder of Center for American Progress, a former Clinton administration official and the guy who not only laid out the plan for how the Obama team would be put together, he staffed the senior levels of the White House, Cabinet members and the top layer at government agencies.

With that kind of influence — and we'll show you more evidence of that influence coming up — it's important to look at what Soros is investing in. Could there possibly be any, what do they call them, conflicts of interest?

Through his Soros Fund Management hedge fund, Soros is heavily invested in many different things. But one that caught my attention (and seemingly no one else's) recently is Petrobras. What is that? It's Brazil's state-controlled oil behemoth. It's Brazil's version of Big Oil. They've netted $15 billion in profits during the last year. As of March 31 this year, SEC filings show Soros Fund has $637 million vested in Petrobras. Last December, the fund had $900 million invested in the company, making Petrobras one of its two largest stakes.

What did Soros see in these guys that the rest of the world didn't? Is he just that much smarter than everyone else? Or is it possible because of Center for American Progress and all the other connections Soros has at the White House, he knew that the administration would be making a $2 billion "preliminary commitment" to Petrobras for "exploration," just days after he strengthened his investment? Or was that just another one of those bad luck situations for Obama? Because it certainly doesn't seem to pass the smell test: A billionaire investor dumps money into state-controlled Brazilian oil company and days later administration dumps $2 billion dollars into the same exact company? Now the administration is crippling the American competitors and the biggest winner in this is Petrobras.

Mind you, this is a multi-billion dollar company that rakes in tens of billions in profits each year. Why in the world would these guys need a loan? And why are we investing in another country's offshore drilling while banning ours?

— Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

Science did it again. It only took 270 million years, but this week, scientists finally solved the mystery that has kept the world up at night. We finally know where octopuses come from: outer space. That explains why they look like the aliens in just about every alien movie ever made.

RELATED: Changes in technology can be cause for concern, but THIS is amazing

It turns out octopuses were aliens that evolved on another planet. Scientists haven't determined which one yet, but they've definitely narrowed it down to one of the planets in one of the galaxies. Hundreds of millions of years ago (give or take a hundred), these evolved octopus aliens arrived on Earth in the form of cryopreserved eggs. Now, this part is just speculation, but it's possible their alien planet was on the verge of destruction, so Mom and Dad Octopus self-sacrificially placed Junior in one of these cryopreserved eggs and blasted him off the planet to save their kind.

This alien-octopus research, co-authored by a group of 33 scientists, was published in the Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology journal. I'm sure you keep that on your nightstand like I do.

Anyway, these scientists say octopuses evolved very rapidly over 270 million years. Which sounds slow, but in evolutionary terms, 270 million years is like light speed. And the only explanation for their breakneck evolution is that they're aliens. The report says, “The genome of the Octopus shows a staggering level of complexity with 33,000 protein-coding genes — more than is present in Homo sapiens."

Lucky for us, they landed in the water. Otherwise, we might be octopus pets.

They mention that the octopus' large brain, sophisticated nervous system, camera-like eyes, flexible bodies and ability to change color and shape all point to its alien nature. Octopuses developed those capabilities rather suddenly in evolution, whereas we're still trying to figure out the TV remote.

These biological enhancements are so far ahead of regular evolution that the octopuses must have either time-traveled from the future, or “more realistically" according to scientists, crash-landed on earth in those cryopreserved egg thingies. The report says the eggs arrived here in “icy bolides." I had to look up what a “bolide" is, and turns out it's a fancy word for a meteor.

So, to recap: a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, an alien race of octopuses packed their sperm-bank samples in some meteors and shot them toward Earth. Lucky for us, they landed in the water. Otherwise, we might be octopus pets.

President Trump's approval rating is rising, and Democrats — hilariously — can't seem to figure out what's going on. A few months ago Democrats enjoyed a sixteen point lead over Republicans, but now — according to CNN's recent national survey — that lead is down to just THREE points. National data from Reuters shows it as being even worse.

The Democratic advantage moving towards the halfway mark into 2018 shows that Republicans are only ONE point behind. The president's public approval rating is rising, and Democrats are nervously looking at each other like… “umm guys, what are we doing wrong here?"

I'm going to give Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi a little hint. We know that the Left has enjoyed a “special relationship" with the media, but they might want to have a sit down with their propaganda machine. The mainstream media is completely out of control, and Americans are sick of it. We're DONE with the media.

RELATED: The mainstream media wants you to believe Trump is waging war on immigrants — here's the truth

Look what has been going on just this week. The president called MS-13 gang members animals, but that's not the story the media jumped on. They thought it was more clickable to say that Trump was calling all immigrants animals instead. In the Middle East, the media rushed to vilify Israel instead of Hamas. They chose to defend a terror organization rather than one of our oldest allies.

Think about that. The media is so anti-Trump that they've chosen a violent street gang AND A GLOBAL TERROR ORGANIZATION as their torch-bearing heroes. Come on, Democrats. Are you seriously baffled why the American people are turning their backs on you?

Still not enough evidence? Here's the New York Times just yesterday. Charles Blow wrote a piece called "A Blue Wave of Moral Restoration" where he tried to make the case that the president and Republicans were the enemy, but — fear not — Democrat morality was here to save the day.

Here are some of these cases Blow tries to make for why Trump is unfit to be President:

No person who treats women the way Trump does and brags on tape about sexually assaulting them should be president.

Ok, fine. You can make that argument if you want to, but why weren't you making this same argument for Bill Clinton? Never mind, I actually know the reason. Because you were too busy trying to bury the Juanita Broaddrick story.

Let's move on:

No person who has demonstrated himself to be a pathological liar should be president.

Do the words, “You can keep your doctor" mean anything to the New York Times or Charles Blow? I might have saved the best for last:

No person enveloped by a cloud of corruption should be president.

I can only think of three words for a response to this: Hillary Frigging Clinton.

Try displaying a little consistency.

If the media really wants Donald Trump gone and the Democrats to take over, they might want to try displaying a little consistency. But hey, maybe that's just too much to ask.

How about starting with not glorifying terrorist organizations and murderous street gangs. Could we at least begin there?

If not… good luck in the midterms.

In the weeks following President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, the mainstream media was quick to criticize the president's pro-Israel stance and make dire predictions of violent backlash in the Middle East. Fast forward to this week's opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem and the simultaneous Palestinian “protests" in Gaza.

RELATED: Just another day in Iran: Parliment chants death to America after Trump pulls out of nuclear deal

Predictably, the mainstream media chastised Israel for what they called “state-sanctioned terrorism" when the IDF stepped in to protect their country from so-called peaceful Palestinian protesters. Hamas leaders later admitted that at least 50 of the 62 Palestinians killed in the clashes were Hamas terrorists.

“In our post-modern media age, there is no truth and nobody even seems to be looking for it …. This is shamefully clear in the media especially this week with their coverage of the conflict between the border of Israel and the Gaza strip," said Glenn on today's show. He added, “The main media narrative this week is about how the IDF is just killing innocent protesters, while Hamas officials have confirmed on TV that 50 of the 62 people killed were working for Hamas."

The mainstream media views the Palestinians as the oppressed people who just want to share the land and peacefully coexist with the people of Israel. “They can't seem to comprehend that in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, only one side is actively trying to destroy the other," surmised Glenn.

Watch the video above to hear Glenn debunk the “peaceful Palestinian protest" fallacy.

Here are a few headlines regarding the protests in Israel: 'Global protests grow after Israeli killing of Palestinian demonstrators,' the Guardian. 'Israel kills dozens at Gaza Border,' the New York Times. 'Palestinians mourn dead in Gaza as protests continue,' CNN. 'Over 50 Palestinians in massive protest are killed by Israeli military, bloodiest day in Gaza since 2014 war,' ABC News. 'Gaza begins to bury its dead after deadliest day in years,' BBC.

RELATED: Here's why Israel used lethal force during mass protests in Gaza yesterday

In each, the spoken or unspoken subject of the sentence and villain of the story is Israel. Innocent Palestinians murdered by the cruel Israelis. This is the narrative that the mainstream media has promulgated. Few have mentioned that the majority of the “protestors" that died were members of Hamas, the militant (and highly anti-Semetic) Sunni-Islamist organization that has been labeled a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the U.S. State Department.

A senior Hamas official told reporters that 50 of the 59 people killed in Monday's protests were members of Hamas, and the remainder were “from the people." So…they were all Hamas.

As usual, mention of such membership has been left out of the mainstream media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam narrative.

As usual, mention of such membership has been left out of the mainstream media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam narrative. Maybe they think of Palestinians as underdogs and they love a good scrap. Well, they aren't underdogs. But their outburst have been glorified for so long that it's near impossible to disagree with that narrative.