RADIO

The UNDENIABLE evidence for a Joe BIden impeachment

The mainstream media fact checkers claim there is ‘no credible evidence’ that Joe BIden played a role in his family’s business activities overseas, but that claim is LUDICROUS, Peter Schweizer tells Glenn. In fact, Schweizer — a Biden family expert and author of ‘Red Handed’ — tells Glenn there is a CLEAR impeachment case against the president because of his involvement. In this clip, Schweizer details to Glenn the undeniable evidence against Joe. Plus, he predicts what could happen to the Republican Party if they take control of Congress next year and STILL fail to hold those involved in the Biden family scandals responsible…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Peter Schweizer is joining us now. He is with the government accountability institute. He's the president. Also, the author of red-handed, and the co-host of the drilldown.

Peter, how are you?

PETER: I'm great, Glenn. Always terrific to be with you. Thanks for having me.

GLENN: You bet. So I don't even know where to begin on this. Can we start with the Tony Bobulinski thing?

PETER: Sure. Absolutely.

GLENN: PolitiFact. We investigated the claims of Tony Bobulinski, a former business partner of Hunter Biden on Fox News this week. There is no credible evidence that Joe Biden played a role in his family foreign business activities.
(laughter)

PETER: Yeah. It's -- it's pretty remarkable. PolitiFact is saying that. When Hunter Biden has acknowledged that his dad played a role. Joe Biden has acknowledged that he played a role. James Biden, who is Joe Biden's brother, acknowledges that his brother played a role. And, of course, you have in black and white, the communications that Tony Bobulinski, released and turned over to the FBI, that shows Joe Biden's playing a role. So this is another example of these fact-checking organizations, digging their own graves.

They have zero credibility. And they're going to die on this hill. Which let them do it. It just means that people take them less seriously, than they do already.

GLENN: So help me out. Give me some -- of give me some of the hard evidence, that shows that Joe was absolutely involved.

PETER: Well, first of all, you have the communications, and the communications specifically say, that Joe Biden was involved. And so what does that mean?

Well, they would make -- they would have conversations, and Hunter would refer to the big guy.

And Tony Bobulinski has released these messages, would contact the other business partners. Would bring them into deal with the Bidens. And in the communications, he would say, who is the big guy?

And they would say, who is the big guy? And they would say, that's Joe Biden. They're very sensitive about it. So it was acknowledged that way.

You have the communications about the so-called SPC deal. This is the Chinese energy company, with Chairman Yi that Tony was brought into.

You have the 10 percent for the big guy. Well, the big guy is the word that was used in all the other communications, for talking about Joe Biden.

So that's all explicit in Tony Bobulinski's communications. You have communications from Hunter Biden on the laptop, that have been released. There's ones where they wanted to do business deals overseas.

And Hunter Biden texted his business partners and said, I run by my dad. And my dad is going to help.

To me, it's patently ludicrous, to even be arguing and discussing about this anymore. You can have a conversational about how deeply he was involved, and I would argue, it's pretty deep.

You could have a conversation, that says, well, I don't think he was really knowing everything that's going on.

But the notion that Joe Biden was ignorant of all of this. That he didn't know anything about it. That he didn't benefit financially.

That's a big settlement. It's not settled by Peter Schweizer or Tony Bobulinski.

It's settled by the actual communications, where there's Hunter's laptop, or the communications, that Tony Bobulinski had with Hunter and with his business partners.

GLENN: Do you think there's enough evidence that it is a clear, almost open-and-shut case, for impeachment?

PETER: I do, yes. And I do think, on a couple of levels.

First of all, let's remember, this is about corruption. But it's about something, I would argue, that is even more troubling and damaging than that.

And this is, I hope, what will be the point number one, if the Republicans take the house and investigate the subpoena Hunter Biden. Point number one needs to be not just that they got this some $31 million from these Chinese entities. But who were the actual businessmen that sent the money.

Chairman Yi of CEFC has direct ties to Chinese intelligence. Again, it's not debatable. You looked at his bio. You look at who you worked for. He was linked to Chinese intelligence. You look at other money that was transferred.

There was a gentleman who transferred $5 million to Hunter Biden. He was at the exact same time, business partners with the vice minister of the ministry of state security, whose job was recruiting foreigners to spy on China.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

PETER: So to me, Glenn, the question is, corruption, absolutely. The question is, explain to me, Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, how your family -- it's not just Hunter. Your family got $31 million from four Chinese businessmen, with links to Chinese intelligence.

You did no discernible service in return. And what did the Chinese get out of the deal? They did not send you $31 million, because they think you're nice guys. That should be issue number one. This is a question of compromise -- kompromat, as they used to say in the Cold War. And that they question foreign intelligence penetration of the First Family of the United States. That's issue number one, as far as I'm concerned.

GLENN: All right. I want to switch topics, and I want to go with what senator -- I mean, what secretary Granholm said. We have to make this happen for our own energy independence and national security. She's talking about getting America off of, quote, Russian nuclear supplies.

I'm going to talk to Peter about that. Give me 60 seconds. We'll be back in the conversation.

JEFFY: American Financing. NMLS 182334. Www.NMLSconsumeraccess.org.

GLENN: All right. If you haven't started, you know, working to make your financial house more resilient. Today is the day. You need to take a look at your high-interest debt. You need to find every way possible you need to save money. The economy will not be forgiving right now. That's just the way it will be right now.

For your sake and the sake of your family, you've got to make sure you've done everything you can. And sometimes, there's some options there, that you maybe don't know about. That's why you need help from people you can trust. I want you to call American Financing today. Don't wait. Do it today.

This is a company that's helping a lot of people just like you, with home loan options, for over two decades.

They actually care about helping you save money. Whether it's refinancing your mortgage for a lower fixed rate, or providing other types of loans, or even just helping you find ways to raise your credit score, which is incredibly important right now.

American Financing will see you through it. Don't take my word for it, find out yourself.

Call them now. AmericanFinancing.net. 800-906-2440. 800-906-2440.

It's AmericanFinancing.net. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: Russia's dominance in the global nuclear fuel market, presents a massive challenge for Washington.

Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm said, President Biden is redoubling his efforts to break the U.S. reliance on Russian nuclear fuel.

Indicating domestic uranium enrichment capacity, could be increased with upcoming key legislation. We're going to get congressional support in a bipartisan way for us to make our own fuel supply cycle chain, independent.

Certainly, independent of Russia.

We have to make this happen for our own independence. And for our national security.

Peter, what's the problem with that story?

What -- what is missing in that story?

PETER: Well, what's missing in that story, Glenn. Is one of the big reasons, that we are so dependent on Russian uranium now.

And let's remember, when the Biden administration said, we're not going to take any Russian oil. Because of their invasion of Ukraine, they excluded cutting off the supply of Russian uranium. Because we're so dependent on it. So how did we get this state?

One of the reasons is this deal, we talked about on your program, several years ago. Uranium one.

This was a nuclear uranium company, that was initially controlled by a Canadian, named Frank Giustra, who was a big Bill Clinton donor.

And they went over to Kazakhstan, to meet with President Nasir, the head of that country.

And said, look, we want to buy all these lucrative minds that you have. Producing uranium in your country. Give them to us. I'm a Canadian. This is a former president of the United States.

And we'll take good care of it. Just to adopt those minds. Purchase them. Paid some hundred million dollars to the Clinton Foundation, for Bill showing up.

Here's the problem: Giustra then flipped and sold those mines, as well as minds that he controlled in the United States. To who?

To Rosatom, the Soviet state-owned uranium company, that now dominates the market. So we have a situation, where part of the reason, that we are so dependent on Russian uranium. Part of the reason, they've been able to almost effectively corner the global market. Is because -- is because Bill Clinton helped facilitate this deal, that gave Russia control over uranium minds in the United States.

But even more importantly, some of the most powerful and lucrative, and proficient uranium minds in Kazakhstan.

And that is why we're over a barrel today.

Frank juster made a lot of money in the deal.

Bill Clinton, and Clinton made a lot of money in the deal. The problem is the American people got screwed, because it enhanced our dependence on Russian uranium. And that's where we are today.

GLENN: And if I'm not mistaken, because it's been a while since I've looked at this story.

It was all kind of done hush, hush. Just kind of rushed through the committees. It should have never gone through.

Because it is a -- a national risk, to put everything there.

And Hillary Clinton said, oh. I didn't. I didn't. I wasn't involved in this at all. I don't know.

I just know that the government found that it wouldn't be putting our government at risk. And our nation at risk. So, you know, we're going to go through with it.

Didn't this story happen something like that?

PETER: Yeah. Yeah. So this deal, the sale of uranium one, which was an American uranium company to the Russian state-owned company. Rosatom, required approval by the federal government body and the Obama administration called CFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.

And you would think, this is a pretty big deal, right?

Are we really going to put Putin in charge of all this uranium?

The deal went through quickly.

Hillary Clinton of course has a seat on CFIUS. She claims she doesn't remember anything about it. And you have all these other actors of the Clinton era. And some currently of the Biden administration, that were involved. Involved, Glenn.

So remember John Podesta, who was an adviser to the Clintons. His brother Tony Podesta, was actually a lobbyist, for uranium one. On these kinds of deals.

You had John Podesta himself, that was involved in energy companies, that were backed by Russian-state owned firms.

Joe Biden's current energy envoy, who is negotiating some of these deals involving oil and uranium. This guy named Amos Hawkseen (phonetic), he was a lobbyist for a Russian company called Tenex.

GLENN: Jeez.

PETER: Which is basically a sister company for Uranium One.

If you look at Jake Sullivan. Jake Sullivan, who, of course, is the current national security advisor, signed off on Bill Clinton.

When all these deals were going down, Russian entities are paying Bill Clinton inflated speaking fees. Half a million dollars a pop. Who was approving those deals?

A guy named Jake Sullivan, who now happens to be a national security adviser for Joe Biden.

So this is a problem, where, it's not just something for the past. It's something that involves decision makers in the present too.

GLENN: I have to tell you, it's so frustrating. And I think it is for the average person.

You know, any of this stuff would happen with me or you. We would all be in jail.

The Clinton Foundation is so incredibly transparent on its corruption. You know, it goes away when Trump is in office. Just goes away. No. We're shutting it down.

And then lo and behold. Biden gets in. We're opening it up again. Open for business.

All of the people -- I mean, you're either committed to helping people, or you're committed to making money.

And brokering deals. And it is so transparent. Is this thing ever going to be taken care of?

PETER: It's hard to know. I mean, part of the problem, Glenn, as you know, you study Washington. All this time, as I have.

There's ways to do corrupt things in Washington, that are profoundly corrupt.

If you do them the wrong way, you're going to jail. If you're doing them the right way, you can get away with it. So we're dealing with very smart people, who hire very high priced lawyers, to dance around and create subterfuge for what they're really doing.

To give it an air, or veneer, in my mind, of legality. So that's part of the problem with you have inherently.

I think the ultimate solution here is shame and exposure.

And the hope that that is going to lead to actual criminal investigation.

And I think look, coming up in November. We're going to have these elections. The balance of the House of Representatives, and Senate, is in question. And my point is, you have to have independent bodies that are prepared to bring out, what information we know. To hold Hunter Biden to account. It's very clear, the FBI is not going to hold Hunter Biden to account. They're not going to investigate Uranium One.

So it means we have to have congressional committees, with subpoena power doing it.

That's only going to happen, if the Republicans have the majority in the House and Senate.

So a lot of these matters hang in the balance, as to who will be controlling Congress. After the November elections.

GLENN: I just hope there's enough in there, that are not corrupt. That, you know -- they're not -- they're not being blackmailed, to not get involved, or just are like, I'm sitting on the sidelines. Because I don't want my name being brought up at all.

You know, I fear that could happen easily.

PETER: Yeah. And, Glenn, here's the thing. A lot of people are talking about this right now. If we retake the House. We're going to investigate X, Y, and Z. If they fail to do that, that to me, will be the dagger in the heart, basically. Of the Republican Party. And of conservatives.

Because people are fed up with the lip service being paid to -- we're going to hold them into account.

So that's really, I think where the stakes are. And you're quite right.

Just because somebody says, they're going to do it in Washington, you're going to pay a price.

If you start dredging up. And start talking about Chinese deals, involving the first family of the United States.

A lot of other stuff is going to come to the fore. And there's a lot of people on powerful positions on the Republican side, who don't want that to happen, either.

So that's why we have to hold their feet to the fire. I know you've done that. That's what I'm hoping to do. And let's hope the people listening, are prepared to do that.

And let the elected officials know. This matters to them. And this is of profound importance.

GLENN: I've told many officials in Washington, DC, that are Republicans.

I said, you guys have one more shot. This is it. This is it.

If you win the House, and especially if you win the House and the Senate and you aren't standing up and protecting the American people and the Constitution and putting bad guys on trial, and then, cleaning up the FBI and Justice Department, so they can actually put them in jail, if you're not doing that, you are absolutely done. Just like you said. The last chance.

I'm glad to hear you believe that too.
(music)

PETER: Absolutely. Thanks, Glenn. It's always good to be with you.

GLENN: Peter Schweizer. The author of red-handed. And the co-host of the podcast, The Drilldown. Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute.

Wouldn't it be nice, if we had government accountability?

We can bring it back. Vote! Get out and vote.

RADIO

"The Most Dangerous Place on Earth Right Now!" - SHOCKING Details of Nigeria's Christian Genocide

Across Nigeria, Christians are being hunted, churches burned, and entire communities wiped out — yet the world remains silent. In this powerful discussion, Glenn Beck and Rep. Riley Moore uncover the horrific truth behind Nigeria’s Christian genocide and the shocking indifference from global leaders. This silent war on faith is one of the greatest humanitarian and moral crises of our time. Will America stand up for its brothers and sisters in Christ before it’s too late?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. Riley, let me talk to you about Nigeria, and what's happening in Nigeria. It's the scariest, most deadly country in the world, if you happen to be a Christian. And nobody seems to -- to be talking about it. And, you know, you have been involved in, you know, urging Secretary Rubio to say Nigeria is a country of particular concern, which I don't what an that means exactly. What doors does that unlock?

RILEY: Yeah. So that is -- that designation actually fits in the U.S. Code. So it does unlock 15 different Levers for the President when a country is designated a country of particular concern. That could be holding development money, that could be going to international institutions to free assistance through there. That could also halt security assistance, which would be arms sales and training and things like that, that have been going on in Nigeria. We could sanction individuals. It gives the President the authority to do a number of different things that can really, I think, leverage the Nigerians to actually start caring about our brothers and sisters in Christ, who are getting murdered for the professions they're facing in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

So I think this is a good first step, and we're going to see how the Nigerians react to this now. I've been having meetings with Departments of State.

We are going to meet with the Nigerians here at some point as well, here in DC.

So we're going to see what they're going to bring to the table. But also the President, who always puts all options on the table, has said, if they don't start fixing this, they're there couldn't potentially be kinetic military actions on -- in Nigeria.

GLENN: What does that mean?

Boots on the ground?

RILEY: No. To me, it does not mean that. To me, you have -- you have complex issues that are going on, over there. Where you have in the middle band of the country. This is where the Fulanis are. And these are herdsmen. And this is where you get this radical strain, obviously. Islamic terrorists, these Fulanis. These are herdsmen, tribes, and they have been attacking Christians in that middle band. In the northern part of the country is mostly Muslim. Southern part of the country is mostly Christian.

So that middle part, where they graze their cattle and all that, is where you see a lot of these flash points and murdering going on. But then in the northern part of the country is where you have ISIS, Boko Haram. They are operating there. And where they're taking over towns and communities, as we saw in Syria, right? Previously. Same type of thing.

GLENN: Yeah.

RILEY: CAIR is enfranchising, going on over there, all through the Lake Chad region, actually. So that's where I think, if it made sense to have some type of military action in forms of an airstrike or something like that, to -- to be able to tamp down some of the leadership and break up some of that structure in there.

That's something that would make sense. But to me, just speaking for myself, I want to try to work with the Nigerians, for them to do the right thing here.

President Trump obviously I mentioned, on Truth Social. Needs to specifically look into this. Which we are doing here in Congress. I want them to do the right thing.

I think the Nigerians actually have the chance right now to actually strengthen their relationship with the United States, if they're going to do the right thing.

But we can't allow to continue the slaughter of Christians where we have over 7,000 just this year, have been killed, for being Christian.
We can't allow that to continue, as a Christian country ourselves, which we are.

I know we're -- you know, some may debate that. I promise you, and nobody knows more about the founding of the country than Glenn Beck. Is that this is a Christian nation, founded on Christian values.

And we have to stand up for these people. Because nobody else is paying attention to this. Other than you, and some folks at Fox news. And that's really about it.

GLENN: Oh, I tell you, you know, I was planning on bringing my cameras with me. And I was going to go to Nigeria in the first quarter. And I have had briefings and warnings from the highest levels. Do not go.

You are not going. And I said, yes, I am. I want to bring this story.

You can't go. I've been to war zones. And this one, they're like, this is the most dangerous place on earth right now!

That's pretty remarkable, that nobody is really talking about it.

RILEY: It really is, and it's this silent genocide, that has just continued on since 2009, where we've had in between 50 to 100,000 Christians murdered for their faith. Our brothers and sisters over there, suffering, and no one has done anything about it. You might remember the bring back our girls movement around 2012ish, '14.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

RILEY: Seventeen of those girls have still never been brought back. People forgot about it. It's fine. Boko Haram just has them. It's not fine.

It's not okay. And there are a lot of Levers that the administration is able to pull here, I think to get the Nigerians on the right course.

It's not that they don't have resources. This is an oil rich country. With a lot of critical minerals.

They have the means to be able to do this, at the end of the day, it's a question of prioritization. And what their goals actually are. And we need them to focus on this. Or the President will start to focus on it.

GLENN: Well, I will tell you, 19,000 churches have been burned.

And yet, from what I'm hearing, there are some in the Nigerian government that are like, no. This is not what's happening. This is not about genocide. It's not about Christians. It's just squabbles.

Really? Fifty to 100,000 people. And 19 thousands of individuals people have been burned in little squabbles, that don't have anything to do with radicalized Islam?

RILEY: Exactly. And this is the excuse I've gotten from people on the ground, look, do terrorists kill other people other than Christians? Yes, of course they do. But we're talking about five to one is the ratio, Christians versus non-Christians are being killed over there right now.

Secondly, I want to point out for everybody, President Trump has a designation in Nigeria. It means his first term.

It was taken off by the Biden administration. Because they claimed the killings had more to do with arable land and herders, and actually the root cause was climate change.

GLENN: Climate change.

RILEY: Yeah. That's why these killings were happening. Because of climate change. Where that's why we saw the murder rate just skyrocket during the Biden administration.

And President Trump, who cares very deeply about these issues, he's not going to allow that to persist anymore.

GLENN: He said, if there is an attack, it will be fast, vicious, and sweet. Just like the terrorist thugs that attack our cherished Christians.

I will tell you, I've -- you know, been reading up on it. And doing our homework.

And, you know, it reminded me of how the Germans went into Poland. Where they would just take whole communities. They would put them in the church. And lock the doors. And burn it to the ground.

That's what's happening in Nigeria. They're doing the same thing. They're burning churches. Not just burning churches. They're gathering Christians up. Putting them in, locking the doors, and then burning it down so that all of these women and children and men die in a fire in their church. And it's horrific. It's horrific.
What does the average person need to do?

RILEY: Yes. The average person needs to call their number of Congress and elevate this. And make this an issue that is on their radar, that they care about.

I'm introducing resolution which would be a sense of Congress, that we support the President. And we support the people and the Christians of Nigeria, and their plight.

And we condemn what the Nigerian government is doing, in action around this. That resolution should be getting introduced here soon.

So that would be something that would be hugely helpful.

GLENN: Wow.

It will be interesting to see who votes for that, and who doesn't.

That would have been -- that would have been a no-brainer 15 years ago. Just a no-brainer.

And now, I wonder if you can even get that passed. That's sad. Sad.

RILEY: It's sad. And I think we need to put it to the test. Put it to the test.

Certainly, if I'm whipping the votes, I don't have Ilhan Omar in my "yes" column.

But, you know, let's -- let's put it to the test here.

RADIO

The TRUTH about Zohran Mamdani and communism

Is New York City’s new mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani a socialist or a communist? Glenn Beck takes a look at history to explain why it doesn’t really matter: BOTH lead down the same road …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, we've been talking about socialism, and Donald Trump is getting pilloried in the press for calling Mamdani a communist. And I find this ritual here, that we're going through is just, you say the word socialist, and, you know, 25 years ago when I said that these people were socialist, everybody said, "Oh, my gosh. You can't call them socialists. That's an outrage." I said, "The mask is going to come off, that they can't wait to tell you they're socialists."

Now Donald Trump said, you know, Mamdani is a Communist. And everybody is like, oh, my gosh. Look at this hysteric from the Cold War. He's just -- he's out of the Cold War radio drama.

So let me just clear this here. Because the difference between the two terms, you know, is really not some great firewall of virtue here. As if one leads to like Scandinavian candles and the other leads to gulags. That's not what's happening.

What we've forgotten here is what always is forgotten. And that is how Karl Marx actually talked and saw the two. He didn't draw, you know, polite little distinctions. He described socialism as the transition. The necessary scaffolding that leads to communism. That's Karl Marx. So socialism for Karl Marx was the road, not the destination.

Communism is the end of that road. He wrote -- he wrote an essay, the Critique of Gotha Program. And Marx said, under socialism, from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution. Under communism, to each according to his needs. The only difference here is timing. It's not philosophy.

It's not goals. It's just how far along the revolution you are, okay?

Socialism is the bridge to communism. According to Karl Marx, don't take it from me. Communism is the completion of socialism. It's -- it's the antithesis of a free market system. Even Lenin called socialism the first and necessary phase of communism. So it's not partisan rhetoric. Okay?

This is the literal architecture of Marxist thought. But can we get out of the theories of all of this?

I mean, history gives us warning. Much more vivid than any theory. You know, we would like to imagine that the worst horrors of the 21st century came from one beast alone.

And we think that's Hitler. But actually, a bigger beast was Stalin. But if you want to look at Germany from 1930 to 1945. You see something really uncomfortable.

A socialist movement that curdled into something monstrous, while it never called itself communist. In fact, the Nazi government. The national socialists. The Nazis were not communists. They were against the communists.

They killed communists!

But they shared the same foundational belief. That the rid is disposable, and that the state defines the truth.

They both believe that rights are not given by God, but administered by political power. And that dissent on any of this, has to be crushed for the good of the collective.

That is the -- that's the definition we should care about!

Socialism doesn't to give full marks communism to become catastrophic. It just has to replace the individual conscience with the will of the state. And don't you see, that's what's happening here? They'll crush you! They'll destroy you. You disagree with them, they'll destroy you. Even if you've been on their side. I am going to share eye story with you, from 1979 that happened. That I don't think most people understand. And in New York, you better understand it.

When a society accepts the premise, that premise, history shows the -- the slide can accelerate from a utopian promise to industrialized cruelty. Horror show.

Like that!

Germany saw it. Russia saw it. China saw it. Cambodia. North Korea.

Cuba. I mean, it's all right there, just different flags. Different slogans. But it's the same structural error.

So can we stop with this mocking of the language?

You know, people laughing. Oh, you said Mamdani is a communist, but he's just merely a socialist. You're missing the point entirely.

The issue is not whether the label is technically perfect. The issue is the philosophical DNA is exactly the same. Collectivism over the individual.

State control over personal agency. Central planning over free will.

And that the belief that human nature can be engineered by a political force. That's where it always goes wrong. It doesn't understand human nature. So you can argue all you want, about where socialism ends and where communism begins, but honestly, that's like, hey, kids, memorize the date of this war.

Why? Why? I'm never going to use that fact again. What difference does it make? The thing we should care about is, why was that war fought? What happened at the end of that war? When communism and socialism, we should be saying, where does that road lead?

I can tell you that the road always begins with the state controlling your choices. Okay?

It will control your choice of energy, money, your children's education. Your speech.

Your job. What you drive. And it always ends with never greater liberty. It always ends the same place. In a society that has forgotten that freedom is fragile.

That power concentrates. That people are the same over and over and over and over again!

Human beings. They go bad! Especially when you give them power, and they're told they're part of a grand collective. Humans are willing to commit horrors they would never do as an individual.

That's the biggest thing. You get these horror shows of 100 million dead, because it's a collective!

We're all doing it. I'm not doing it. Everybody is doing it. That's the warning.

That's historical. And we ignore it at our own peril. Now, the problem here is, is that socialism is on the rise. And communism will be next.

Remember, when I first started talking about Obama, they -- I was -- I was raked across the rolls -- the coals, every day for even suggesting he might kind of like socialism. Now, socialism is fine!

So that road is still going to -- we're going to continue rolling down that road. And any country that goes into socialism -- we're not talking about a capitalist. We're not talking about Sweden anymore.

In fact, we are actually talking about Sweden. Look at the road they're going down now.
I mean, they're going into their own kind of authoritarian rule with Sharia law.

That is coming to Sweden. We are not talking about this friendly socialism. We're talking about the complete abandonment of the free market entirely. We've been this stupid little hybrid, that doesn't work. It only causes misery. We've been this hybrid.

And it doesn't work in a country this large and a country this diverse.

But look if you're -- you know, if you grew up after 9/11, where have you seen capitalism work for you?

Okay? You've seen, I know I've seen it. I've seen the rich get richer. And I don't mean the rich.

I mean the really, really, really rich. The ones that the Democrats never really talk about. They say they hate the rich. The rich have to pay their fair share.

But they're hanging out with George Soros. They're hanging out with the Ford Foundation. They're hanging out with Bezos and all of these other people. Because that's -- that's -- that's real control! Okay?

They don't hate those guys. They never do anything to affect their taxes. They don't pay taxes. Because they have the money to put it into trusts and everything else.

You don't have that!

So when I say, I've seen it happen. I've seen the rich get richer.

You know who the rich are?

Citibank. These banks that have been taking our money through bailouts, when do we get that money back?

When do you get that money back?

You don't!

You don't. That's why this is working. That's why you can say, socialism is neat. Because nobody knows the killing machine that socialism actually is. Nobody has any idea. Look at the killing machine. Look at the killing machine that's being built in socialist Canada right now.

What is it? MAID is the third or fourth biggest killer. It kills one in every 20 Canadians. Why is that happening? That's not out of compassion. That's because they're running out of money for health care. That's what that's about. Get them off the dole! Stop it. Now, if they're earning a lot of money, get them in, because we can still get their money, but let's make sure they're making money. If they're getting old, if they are cripple, if they fought in a war and just can't has come it themselves, if they're super, super young, if they have an expensive cancer, let them die. Help them die!

That's because they're looking at the collective, not the individual. And that's -- that's the beginning of the dark killing machine in a socialist country. And Canada is -- is -- I mean, it has socialized medicine. The problem is, it's all failing. Socialism always fails.

Capitalism has -- has taken people out of poverty. Solved problems. Healed people. Given people heat and houses and cars and airplanes. All of that is because of the free market. All of that is the free market.

You get rid of the free market. You put it in the hands of governments. And you have monsters. Monsters. And we know it, because we've seen it over and over and over again.

But our -- if you're -- if you -- if -- if you don't remember, or barely remember 911, you've never been taught any of this.

You've never been taught what it actually means. So you're seeing this play out, over and over again. Look at that guy, look at, he's not going to have to pay a price. He's just going to get away with it. And he's taking all of our tax dollars. Okay. I hate all of that.

This capitalist system, it's corrupt!

You're seeing that play out in real time. You're not seeing anybody actually go to jail for these things.

Of course, you think that it doesn't. I don't think it works the way it is right now!

But then you're -- you're given this false utopian promise. Without any information.

Read the warning label on socialism!

Where has it ever worked?

Show me where it has worked!

And don't say Sweden. Sweden.

Sweden is falling apart right now. Do you know why?

Because Sweden, everybody was blond hair, blue eyed, they were all related to each other. It was a small, little country.

You can do it when everybody is the same, and it's small. It will work in -- to some degree!

But the minute you start going diverse, the whole thing falls apart. So you want to be Sweden?

Go ahead. Look at Sweden today.

I don't want to be Sweden.

Read the warning label. That's our job, to show that warning label.

It's our job to teach what's not being taught. This is a death cult.

Stay away from it. Warning. Warning.

RADIO

Could Comey FINALLY go to JAIL thanks to this smoking gun?

Is this the 'smoking gun' evidence that could put former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation James Comey behind bars? Just the News CEO John Solomon joined Glenn Beck to reveal some shocking new revelations, including Comey’s own emails allegedly authorizing anonymous leaks to the NYT on the Clinton case, potential handwritten notes proving he KNEW Hillary’s team approved the Russia collusion hoax, and a possible email from Comey referring to Hillary Clinton as “President-elect Clinton." Will a Northern Virginia jury hold the Deep State accountable? Or will politics bury the truth again?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: John Solomon is with us. He is the CEO and editor-in-chief. In chief of Just the News. If you don't check that every day, you're really missing out on a really great news site. Justthenews.com. John, I have made a promise with my audience a long time ago, I do my best not to waste their time.

And as I'm looking through the things I want to talk to you about, I have to start with this question: Is any of this going to mean anything in the end, or is this -- are we just spinning our wheels and wasting our time, talking about how the deep this scandal with James Comey is becoming?

JOHN: That's a great question. And I don't think history has an answer yet. It will really depend on the tenacity and the focus of the Justice Department, the prosecutors, and the jurors that are going to catch these cases. Right? Are they willing to rise above politics and say, "We don't want an FBI that goes after people based on their political color, not the quality of the evidence against them."

And that is what began on 2015 on James Comey's watch, a different type of FBI that seemed to go after Donald Trump and his associates, regardless of evidence, and protect Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden, even though the evidence against them was pretty strong, as we ultimately found out from the IRS whistleblowers. So we don't know yet. Listen, these are going to go to trial if the judge lets them go to trial.

The judge in the Comey case seems to be giving the prosecutors a hard time there already. But that's going to be litigated. I'm going to go up to the Supreme Court. It will be a long battle.

But the question is, is the fight worth it?

I think if you don't punish the people that created this mentality, you have deficits in America for a long time.

Banana republic, prosecution arc. And I think that's not what Americans want. They want to say, the FBI is above politics. It hasn't been in the last texted, until the last few months, under Kash Patel.

GLENN: Okay. So let's talk about what the new evidence is the -- the burn bags.

The hidden rooms. And the evidence that now has been found that -- that shows Comey looks like he was lying. To Congress. When he said, no.

I didn't know anything about it.

JOHN: Yeah. Yeah. So let's remind people what the alleged lie is, what he's been accused of and indicted of. He told Congress in '17, and then reaffirmed, unequivocally in 2020, that he never asked any of his staff to provide information to the news media. The government, Kash Patel found significant documents that go to the contrary. They chose not to go after James Comey. So in the Bill Maher administration, they knew the same evidence, but they didn't go after him. What is the lie?

He told Congress, I didn't -- one, I never authorized anyone to leak to the media anonymously about the Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump cases. And, two, I don't think I knew anything about an intelligence intercept that Hillary Clinton was setting up a fake Russian collusion hoax, that we ended up investigating.

Well, we now know, first, his own emails, with his own top lieutenant, Daniel Richmond. A former lawyer who he brought into the special government. The FBI. There's an FBI employee, showed that James Comey, told him, good job, and make them wiser as he was briefing them on how he was anonymously trying to spin the New York Times and provide information to the New York Times about the Hillary Clinton case.

So directly on point to the testimony he gave. I didn't authorize him to leak about Hillary Clinton in their emails. So this guy was leaking it. He was affirming it, and saying, go ahead. And he was encouraging him to make that reporter wiser. In other words, give them more information anonymously.
So that's the first lie. The second lie -- and, by the way, the grand jury bought that evidence, that we believed he lied.

GLENN: Okay.

JOHN: And that is what we call the Clinton planned intelligence. Was Comey, as John Brennan claimed. And as other evidence -- did Comey know, did he pay attention, did he have some awareness that as the FBI was starting to investigate the Russia collusion ruse, the hoax, that Hillary Clinton had been interpreted, or her people had been intercepted, showing that she approved the plan. He said, it doesn't ring true. I don't think I knew about it.

Well, in a locker, in a burn bag, they found some handwritten notes of James Comey, that appeared to include the briefing from John Brennan where he clearly knew, that Hillary Clinton had been intercepted -- or, her team had been intercepted, saying she approved this plan to hang a fake Russian shingle on Donald Trump's campaign house. Now, those are handwritten notes.

GLENN: Yeah. That is in his handwriting, that he clearly understood. And so now you've got him on -- on two really significant lies. That show that this whole thing was -- was -- they were in collusion with one another. And all of this was bogus.

And they knew it from the beginning.

JOHN: Yeah. That's exactly right. That's why, when you look at this. And then take the third bag of this. Those notes were never produced in earlier subpoenas to Congress or other investigations. They were found in a room, where it appears, according to the government, there is an effort to get rid of or hide this evidence.

So it hadn't been hidden from prior subpoenas, according to the government, according to Lindsey Halligan, the prosecutor. And then, two, it looked like they were in burn bags. Meaning, they would never be there.

Now, some other people said, oh, well, there's electronic records of it.

It turns out according to the government, there was no electronic record of the note. Meaning, if they had been burned or destroyed, it would have never happened.

Now, why would James Comey want to lie about this? Because as we see in these same emails, it appears he had a motive.

His motive, as he wrote, his colleague is, I fully expect to be working for president-elect Hillary Clinton. She's talking this way, before the election in 2016.

He thought Hillary was going to be his boss. And as he wrote Dan Richmond, he said, I think Hillary Clinton will be, quote, unquote, pleased by the way I handled her email chase. In other words, he reopened it and cleared her a second time.

And when the smoke cleared, Hillary would like to keep him out as FBI director. That's the insinuation of those notes. So --

GLENN: Yeah. I want to get the exact. I want to give the exact phrase he wrote. A president-elect Clinton will be very greatly.

JOHN: Yeah. Grateful, I'm sorry.

GLENN: Wow.

JOHN: Yeah. Grateful. So he expected it -- that's his mindset in the fall of 2016.

And he opens up an investigation on Hillary Clinton, what we now know to be a ruse. Bad evidence. An agency had to lie to the FISA courts to get the FISA warrants. If his motive was that, or his thinking was that. He probably does not want to admit that I was warned, that maybe this was all a joke before I allowed this investigation to go forward. Before I affixed my name to a FISA warrant that the courts have now said was misleading, false, and violated the law. So that is the context at which the prosecutors are going to try to bring this -- bring this case. Now, it's going to be in northern Virginia, where there are a lot of federal workers and a lot of anti-Trump sentiment.

Can they get a conviction? We don't know. But is it worth trying to do it? Most people I talk to said yes, because the alternative is you have by inaction a sanction, which is what Bill Maher and John Durham did by not bringing this in 2020.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. All right. Can I switch topics. There's something that came out today. James Comey's daughter, and the Epstein case. Apparently, James Comey's daughter sent a message to Epstein, that if you don't have to prove it. But if you can show us anything that ties Donald Trump to this, it's going to go a lot easier for you.

Can you give me this story?

JOHN: Yeah. I've seen it. I've not been able to corroborate it. In this world of media today. I've been super careful. It's hard to know if things are true. I haven't found anyone yet who seems to know the proof on it.

It's possible. Who knows? I mean, prosecutors make these sort of deals all the time. And as we know, it seems in the last decade or two, I think when you have to go back to the era of the Ted Stevens prosecution. The IRS pursuit of conservative groups. And maybe the prosecution which turned out to be malicious and wrong of Virginia governor McDonald.

There is a culture that began at the beginning or around the time of the Obama era. Where winning for prosecutors is more important than winning fairly or on the face of the evidence.

And that's why these cases ultimately got overturned. That mentality exists in the Justice Department.

And then when you add the nature of politics, the Trump Derangement Syndrome that seems to come in, in 2015. You have a very dangerous prosecutorial and law enforcement system that's easily weaponized and can easily cheat.

And unless you got multi-million lawyers, you probably will get hosed, because very few people will find the grounds to overturn this.

And that it is crushing power of the state, that Jim Jordan talks about. Chuck Grassley talks about. That Donald Trump wants to reform.

And I don't know, in this case, whether Mr. Comey did this or not.

Because I can't confirm it yet. But if I knew, I'll come back to you.

GLENN: Right.

JOHN: The scenario does go on. And we've seen it. And it's very, very troubling.

There's a case coming up in New York, where the FCC has to admit that there were journalists writing fake stories that were then used to justify investigations of companies.

A system of cheating to get a consequence regardless of whether it's warranted, is something we all have to take a deep breath. We have to fix it. Or we won't be any the different than rectangles and Iran.

GLENN: I will tell you, that I am so glad to say, that you said, I can't confirm this.

I haven't found a source to confirm it.

Because when I read that story, it looks as though one of the people that is telling this story is the guy who was in jail, with Epstein, who would also have motive for making something like this up. So, you know, I don't want to exonerate her.

And I don't want to condemn her. I just want the truth.

And he doesn't seem like a reliable source.

JOHN: Yeah. I think we have to get the evidence, and try to -- listen if the lead is something -- let's check it out and true -- find out if it's true.

We learned that Russia collusion wasn't true. I think we'll learn that most of Ukraine impeachment wasn't true.

And I think today, we just have to dig in first. Get the facts.

But we will -- we will do that. I promise, I'll get back to you, as soon as I know what I can find out for the government.

GLENN: Yeah. Thank you, John. I appreciate all your hard work.

John Solomon from Just the News. Go to JusttheNews.com. Follow him. John Solomon. JSolomonReports on X. But he is an old school journalist. Investigative reporter. Has worked for everybody, until everybody was like, you can't say those things. That's our side!

And then he just left and did his own thing. And I'm very grateful for it.

Editor-in-chief of Just the News. John Solomon