Colbert testifies before Congress

Joke: Colbert testifies before Congress

 


STU: Yes.

GLENN: Stephen Colbert, in something that is-- it's not his fault. It is

Congress making a mockery out of Congress.

STU: It's his fault, too.

PAT: Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Stu. I knew you would be with me.

GLENN: Why is it his fault?

STU: Well, because he didn't have to obviously accept to go to Congress and make

an idiot out of himself in front of it.

PAT: He knows it's a mockery.

GLENN: Did he make it into--

STU: Yes. What it's known by the kiddies as a fail, an epic fail. He went up and

tried to do comedy in front of Congress and he looked like an ass and that's

what happened.

PAT: He's doing it for his show. He's doing it for his show. Look. If this were

you and you were testifying before Congress, what, on the FOX show or the radio

show, you would be vilified by every--

GLENN: Of course I would, but that's a different-- look. Here's the thing. I

mean, you want to see Congress just humiliating themselves where I would have

been humiliated had I done that. Let's say the roles were reversed and the

Republicans were in Congress and they said, we want you to come up and we want

you to testify, I wouldn't have done it because I would have thought it was

wrong. Do you know what I mean? You're not doing comedy in Congress at these

times. It's wrong. It's an insult to the American people.

PAT: You may be at some point to testify in the Goldline thing. I mean, that

could happen in a real way.

GLENN: No, I won't. The-- here it is. He goes up in front of Congress and he's

by invitation of the progressive left, of the chairperson. So, this would be

like me being invited to go speak by the conservatives and then what happens?

And then me being humiliated by the conservatives because that's what's

happened. Can you play the audio here? And Stephen Colbert, he didn't have his

mike on at this time. So, you can't really hear his response until the very end,

but listen to what happened. This is John Conyers now looking at Stephen

Colbert, just a little while ago. Stephen Colbert goes to Congress in character

to, quote, testify, and here's what John Conyers says.

CONYERS: But I would like to recommend that now that we've got all this

attention, that you excuse yourself and that you let us get on with the three

witnesses and all the other members there and we-- we're sure it will be shown

on the show tonight and maybe Monday-- I don't know-- you run your show. We

run the committee, but what do you say to that, Stephen? You didn't hear the

question? You don't understand the question? The question was that-- no, I'm

not asking you not to talk. I'm asking you to leave the committee room

completely and submit your statement, instead.


Video: Stephen Colbert in front of Congress

PAT: Now Colbert is trying to respond, but his mike isn't on.

GLENN: Right. And he looks-- you can see he looks like a regular citizen right

now just like, Wait a minute.

VOICE: I'm wondering if -- Mr. Colbert's microphone is on. He can't be heard,

but whether having posed the question, we could listen to Mr. Lungren and Mr.

Colbert can ponder what you said. I think many are eager to hear his comments.

CONYERS: That's fair enough.

PAT: Now somebody's about to come over and help him turn on a microphone. It's

difficult business.

COLBERT: -- chairwoman and if she would like me to remove myself from the

hearing room, I'm happy to do so. I'm only here at her petition.

VOICE: That is correct.

CONYERS: Thank you very much. That's fair enough.

VOICE: The gentleman's time has expired.

GLENN: Listen to that.

PAT: Okay.

GLENN: That is incredible. I am only here at the chairwoman's invitation. If she

would like me to remove myself, I'm more than willing to do that. That's being

invited over to somebody's house and then the-- you know, other people throwing

the party, the other people at the party, in front of a whole crowd, says, do

you know what? You are so inappropriate to even have you at this party, why

don't you excuse yourself now, in front of everybody and then saying, well,

Okay, I was only invited by this person over here. I mean, thought humiliating.

They have humiliated Stephen--

PAT: Oh, I know. I know

STU: I feel terrible about that.

PAT: It rips my heart out.

GLENN: Guys--

STU: Don't care.

PAT: He's such a good guy.

STU: What a brilliant--

PAT: I hate to see that to a wonderful man like Stephen Colbert.

GLENN: I mean this sincerely. Do you know -- do you know him? Do you know of

him? Do you know his personal life? Is he--

PAT: No.

GLENN: Is he despicable human being?

PAT: I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about what he does. I'm talking

about the charade he does. I'm talking about the viciousness of him. I'm talking

about--

GLENN: Wait, wait, wait.

STU: The boring schtick he does every night, the same thing all the time.

GLENN: His viciousness, his viciousness, you're saying in our time in comedy we

haven't been vicious? When we were doing comedy, Pat, we weren't vicious? Comedy

is ugly.

PAT: Well, but if anything happened to us, we deserved it then. I mean, if--

because of our viciousness, because of the shtick we did and something that

happened and sometimes it did and sometimes it did and sometimes we were set up

and sometimes we were sued by people, then we deserved it. We deserved it.

STU: He's making a mockery of a very serious situation.

PAT: He knows it's a mockery.

STU: He's doing it there to promote his stupid show. He is in character, not

trying to talk about his actual experience. He's in character making jokes to an

audience that isn't laughing, by the way, and it's just a-- it's just pathetic.

It's worse-- yeah. I did watch a good portion of it.

GLENN: What happened?

STU: It was in shtick. All in character and shtick. It was like, oh, it's

really-- he was trying to make jokes about how hard it was to work out there.

It was boring, typical nonsense that he does on his show and being completely

clear, Congress is much worse than him for inviting him. He is--

PAT: Yeah.

STU: I mean, compared to them, he's, you know, a borderline sanity, but, you

know, it's just pathetic for him. He shouldn't have taken it. He looked horrible

doing it. It wasn't funny and Congress is pathetic for allowing that to happen.

That's just a disgrace. It's boring and it's a disgrace.

PAT: He's a willing participant in this kabuki circus. He's a willing

participant in it. So, for him to get humiliated, I don't have an ounce, not an

ounce of sympathy for him, not oneounce. Sorry. I just can't--

STU: I know. I think Conyers comes off looking good there. At least--

PAT: Conyers does.

GLENN: You know, Conyers once in awhile is surprising.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Conyers once in awhile is surprising. I disagree with a lot that he says

but once in awhile, the man has some dignity.

STU: He does.

PAT: Isn't he the read the bill? Yeah. Same guy.

GLENN: I get a kick out of these people who say read the bill, but once in a

while, he'll say something -- well, for instance, what was it with the ACORN

thing? Remember, he was, like, do you know what? Maybe we should have this, we

should have this hearing. Don't shut this down. Let's listen to this.

PAT: They shut him down.

GLENN: They shut him down big time.

PAT: But he was right at the beginning saying, yeah, let's look into it. He

didn't do it.

GLENN: No, he didn't. He didn't follow through. Who is the woman who came in and

saved Stephen?

PAT: I don't know. She was the committee chair. I don't know who that is.

GLENN: You know, I think that-- you know, look. We are just in a--

everything's being-- everything's changing. Everything is changing and no one

knows what anything is anymore. Congress is being made a joke. There's no way

Stephen Colbert would have done that five years ago. Would he have done that?

PAT: I don't know. Again, I--

GLENN: I don't know him.

PAT: I don't know him.

GLENN: But, I mean, you know, you don't-- you don't make Congress into a

mockery more than they already are. The institution of Congress, you don't do

that. Congress wouldn't have invited five years ago and if they were wrong--

they would have invited me-- it would have been wrong. It was wrong to take it.

STU: It would have been bad if you were doing character. I mean, you know, if

you were--

GLENN: No, no. Yeah, if you're invited-- if he did that and he was, like, you

know, go and work and then testify because you're a star or whatever --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- you know, that's like bringing--

PAT: That's different.

Glenn: Yeah. That's bringing George Clooney, who I thinkGeorge --

PAT: Any of those guys.

GLENN: George Clooney actually believes in the horrors of Darfur and Rwanda.

PAT: And fighting against it.

GLENN: Yeah. He believes that -- no. He believes in--

PAT: I just wanted to make that clear.

GLENN: He believes deeply in it. He is sincere about that. He is. I've talked to

him personally. He is sincere about that and I respect him for that. I disagree

with his answers, but he is sincere about it. So, to have somebody like George

Clooney or somebody like that come and speak on something, you can understand

it. In character, no, and then beyond that, I mean, I just-- I guess I feel bad

for Stephen Colbert because he was invited into their house.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And it wasn't an opposition member who said this is a mockery. It was

their own team. The people who invited him embarrassed him.

STU: Yeah, but he is going to get on there and he is going to get all sorts of

coverage for this. Everyone is going to watch it and, of course, the media is

going to blindly praise him for being funny when he wasn't, because he always

gets that and, you know, for him it's all upside. The only thing he was supposed

to do there was actually be funny which he was unsuccessful with, but that's

fine. He's going to get praised for it, anyway.

GLENN: I haven't seen it and you have a thing with these two. You have been done

with them for about a year on-- you just-- I mean, you used to think they were

funny.

STU: I never was a big Colbert guy, I will say. I still think Stewart is

occasionally funny. It's a little boring after all these years, but, still,

Colbert is the same shtick every day. As you said, it's the dragon cat every

night for a half an hour. It's a Saturday Night Live sketch.

GLENN: Okay. Hang on just a second, though. Isn't-- David Letterman's top 10

list, I mean, how-- that started in 1985.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: But that's only one little segment in his show. It doesn't hurt that much.

When you're doing-- is it half an hour or an hour?

STU: Half an hour, I think.

PAT: Half an hour every day of the same stupid, inane thing. Okay. , we get it.

We got it five years ago. It's still not working. Move on. Do you know what it

worked as? It worked as a segment-- didn't it start as a segment on Stewart's

show? Isn't that what the deal was?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: He was an investigative reporter and he was very funny.

STU: It was funny then. It was funny then, but, I mean, -- and everyone treats

him like he's this big success. He comes out. He does an interview for a few

minutes. He has, you know, a couple of bits here and there and he drops off,

what, 40% of Jon Stewart's ratings. Congratulations. What a miracle success

story. Oh, wow. We should all surround him and praise him and call him in front

of Congress. It's just a boring sketch. It's a sketch every night. I mean, it's

not-- he's dropping 40% of Stewart's ratings, 40%. How is that a success?!

GLENN: Stu loses sleep over this.

STU: No. I don't care. I just think it's funny. It's one of those things that

he's built up as we are supposed to take his nonsense seriously. Okay. Maybe if

you wanted to have-- when all the Republicans were in control, maybe it was

ballsy to have this character that's making fun of the right. Have you noticed?

You have control of the entire government. If you were going to be a bad ass and

go against the grain, you would have someone out there parroting liberals, but

you don't because it's the same shtick over and over and over again. Amen

 

The Biden administration is now doing everything it can to censor what it has decided is COVID-19 "misinformation." But Glenn Beck isn't confident that the silencing of voices will stop there.

Yeonmi Park grew up in North Korea, where there is no freedom of speech, and she joined Glenn to warn that America must not let this freedom go.

"Whenever authoritarianism rises, the first thing they go after is freedom of speech," she said.

Watch the video clip below from "The Glenn Beck Podcast" or find the full episode with Yeonmi Park here:

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.

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip below:


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.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip below:

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.