Best of the Program | Guest: Sharyl Attkisson | 11/21/19

Holy great podcast, Batman.

It's a great podcast today.

I thought yesterday was the big show.

Today may be the big show.

It may be a big show double whammy this week because we have Cheryl Atkinson on.

Rudy Giuliani is

in an exclusive interview that kind of takes down and breaks the whole thing up of what's happening on Capitol Hill.

I I about lose my wig.

Honestly,

my head almost exploded during the impeachment hearings.

You'll understand when you hear it.

All on today's podcast.

You're listening to the best of the Blenbeck Program.

Oh, I cannot look at Adam Schiff anymore.

I can't do it.

I look at him and I'm freaked out by his goo-goo-googly eyes.

And please, I'm just asking, for the love of heaven, do not let him have children with Alexandria Casio-Cortez because the child will look like Mike

from Monsters Inc.

So please.

Don't let that happen.

It'd just be one eyeball that is just...

All right.

Today,

we are going to learn from the committee how

Russia's the only one who is trying to affect us.

There's no way anybody could possibly do that in Ukraine.

They're all good.

Uh-huh.

Uh-huh.

I thought the whole story was that they weren't, that everyone in Ukraine was incredibly corrupt.

Oh.

Oh, no, but not about the election.

They're good.

They're Boy Scouts on the election.

Even though two of them were sentenced to prison.

And do we have the tape?

Could we just play the.

I just want to.

Oh, here's the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, which was set up by the Obama administration and the Soros people

to root out corruption.

So their hand-picked guy is Artem Stinyk.

And

how do I say what's his name?

Steinik Sitnik.

Sitnik.

Okay, Sitnik, whatever.

Artem.

His first name is Artem.

Do I care about his second name?

By the way,

he's the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.

Started by us!

And what's he talking about here?

That he actually helped the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Oh, yeah, that's right.

He's bragging about how he was working to throw the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Now, if you don't think that they had any reason, you think that was just bribery or whatever, no, no, no.

All of these people, because they are all George Soros people, all these people felt that Donald Trump was just going to be the worst guy ever for Ukraine because he's

too pro-Russia.

So their country, they believed, was at stake because he was just not going to do anything.

We're only getting blankets from the Obama administration.

We need bombs and weapons.

He'll never do that.

That's exactly what he did.

He went in and gave them the weapons that Obama wouldn't give them.

That's just how pro-Russia he is.

So they were all motivated to make sure that Hillary Clinton

was the next president.

Here he is admitting it, the head of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, that he's the guy who did it.

And we're now going to be told by who?

Who?

Dr.

Hill?

Dr.

Hill.

Okay, I insist that you call me Dr.

as well.

Okay?

I'm Dr.

Beck.

So Dr.

Hill is going to tell us how there is nothing going on in Ukraine today.

Jason.

Welcome to the program.

Thank you.

Jason is our head researcher

and has been absolutely brilliant on putting this story together.

We have another,

you know, I can't call them specials anymore because really every show that you're watching, because this is so fast and furious,

every show you're watching, if you missed it last night, you missed Rudy Giuliani.

We're going to go through that.

phone call from him yesterday on the TV show.

It was

jaw-dropping.

Now, Now, of course, all the people who didn't listen to it just saw me doing it with Rudy Giuliani were like, oh, he's just a conspiracy theory and you don't have any facts.

And okay, whatever.

Anybody who is actually cares what the truth is, anybody who says, yes, Dr.

Franklin, Dr.

Franklin,

I know we have a republic and I know what it takes to keep it.

I actually have to be well informed and look at all of the evidence to keep a republic.

Those people, they actually watch.

Tonight, you need to watch.

Tonight, what are we exposing?

Well, we initially were just going to talk about George Kent because his name kept popping up.

He testified last week.

The media coverage was absolutely ridiculous.

That's kind of what first put him on my radar.

They were talking about the guy's bow tie in the New York Times.

They wrote an entire column about the guy's bow tie.

They wrote an entire column about the guy's water bottle in the Post.

I was like, what are they doing with this guy?

They're setting him up to be a star.

Why?

Well, they were making him out to be this ultimate debunker of all these, you know, lunis, all this lunacy, all these conspiracy theories.

And the more we dug into him, the more this became less just, again, focusing on one single thing in George Kent, but everything surrounding the man.

And then everything that was updated from our special last week.

It was moving rapidly.

Glenn, while you were on the stage, I know something was happening towards Soros's grand strategy while you were on stage.

And while I believe I either either asked before we went on the special, or I asked off the top of my head during the special, what is it that Soros is going to buy?

What is it that he's doing with this money?

He says,

the spooky dude's going to write big checks, and I'll write checks

in Ukraine.

I prefer write checks to Czech Republic because I think it's funny, but I'm going to disrupt here.

And he said he's going to write checks, and he's going to buy into their free market.

Are you going to expose this tonight or can I talk about this now?

No, we're going to expose this tonight.

Okay.

So

this is crazy.

It's crazy.

And all the documentation is there.

And people in Ukraine are standing up going, help us.

Yeah, you've got to watch every single show that we do in the afternoons because don't think of them how they were.

Every single show is like a special now because we are so deep into this.

We're following it real time.

The things that they hatched back in 2015, if you watched the special last week,

the parts of the plan are still happening

day by day, day by day.

I will tell you, I haven't even told you this yet.

I need you to shore this up with evidence, but I can tell you what the end game is of the Democrats.

I asked this question on the air.

yesterday of myself.

What is the end game?

What are they going to do?

How are the Democrats going to use it?

I know it, and I know Soros

will have his fingers all over it, and I need you to look into certain places, and I'll tell you off the air, but I'm going to tell you on the air today what I think the end game is.

I'm going to tell you what the next year, in the next 18 months, what's going to happen with the Democrats and

Donald Trump, the election, all of it.

I will tell you exactly where we're headed.

Anyway, if you used to watch us on Fox and you were like, oh, this,

when the chalkboard is out, it's the best.

When he's trying to break things down, I'm telling you,

I'm doing the best work I've ever done in my career.

And we are spot on.

I know it.

We've got him.

We've got them.

Hang on just a sec.

Mike in Florida said he just watched the Ukrainian special.

Hi, Mike.

Hi, Glenn.

How are you?

I'm good.

How are you?

I'm very well.

I watched that special, and obviously it makes your head spin.

I mean, you did a great job of piecing it all together, and I feel like I need to watch it like five more times to really get a handle on what you said there.

But my question is,

since you put that out, have you been contacted by any politicians to question the

validity of your information?

And are there any plans to get you to testify when the Republicans ever get the opportunity to call anybody forward?

No, and I wouldn't, I wouldn't, you shouldn't call me.

I would be discredited immediately as a conspiracy theorist and everything else.

I would be a bad witness, a bad choice for the Republicans to call, but I can tell you the names of people they should call that have actual first-hand knowledge of all of this stuff.

There have been two Republicans that have reached out to me and asked me for information.

I sent them all the original documents, and then I have not heard anything back.

I have talked to friends on Capitol Hill and said,

what the EFF is wrong with you guys?

What is wrong with you?

And the story that I get back is, Glenn, it's so complex, it's going to look like a crazy, crazy conspiracy theory.

How do we go on television and lay this out?

And I learned something from Rudy Giuliani last night.

Did you happen to see last night's night's show, Mike?

I did not.

Okay.

Go to YouTube.

Are you a subscriber to the Blaze?

I am not.

Oh, my gosh.

What is wrong with you?

I mean, seriously,

we're here

pouring our heart out.

Okay, look, Mike, don't hang up the phone after I'm done.

Producers, get him set up for a year subscription to the Blaze.

I want you to watch last night's show.

You can see

most of it on

YouTube because we streamed it live on YouTube and then I ran out of time for the 22 minutes and so we went extra and you can find all the extra on Blaze, but it's only on the on the Blaze.

But

watch Rudy Giuliani.

One thing that everybody says about Rudy Giuliani lately is the guy's gone nuts.

The guy's gone nuts.

He's like flailing and yelling and screaming, right?

That's what everybody, that's what everybody says.

He's not Rudy Giuliani anymore.

What's happened to him?

I can tell you what's happened to him because the real Rudy Giuliani, the one I know from the past, America's neighbor, a mayor, he showed up last night and I figured out what happened to Rudy Giuliani.

I'll tell you about that in one minute.

All right.

So, Stu, as you were watching this show unfold yesterday with Rudy Giuliani, did you notice a difference in his demeanor?

Yeah,

he seemed very focused.

Right.

He wasn't scattered.

He wasn't...

Yeah, it seemed like he knows the details of this very well.

Okay.

Now,

if you have spent

two years of your life and you're doing the detective detective work, okay?

And you're going in and

you're gathering all of the information, and you're having to deal with dirtbags, liars, thieves, trying to figure out what's true, what's not.

You've put your whole life into it for a two-year period, 18-month period, and you're getting hammered.

And you knew you're going to get hammered, but you're a prosecutor.

You're one of the, you're the guy who put the Gambino crime family away.

So you've got credibility.

And you're like, okay, but if I get the evidence,

they're going to listen to it.

I'll be able to get it out.

And then

no one listens to it.

Everyone calls you a kook.

No one will look at the actual facts.

They'll talk about the hearsay of this person, but they won't look at actual

paper documents and court records that totally shift this narrative.

Okay.

And now you're on TV and you know you have four minutes.

And the person is like, Yeah, yeah, yeah, but why are you bringing out the whistleblower?

Why are you trying to do that?

You know, you're in bed with all these really bad people, and you're like, Look, I am

at some point, you go nuts.

Yesterday,

Ricky, who is the executive producer of the show, she came in afterwards and she stood there and she looked at me and she shook her head and she said, I just witnessed,

I just witnessed a therapy session with two people

who are

so close to the edge because they have the facts and no one will listen and the country is at stake.

And it seems that we all know it's corrupt in Ukraine, but it's just as corrupt here.

And you really didn't think it would be that way.

And no one, even the people supporting the president, are really interested in the truth.

She said the two of you were like, right, right?

And he would say something to me, and I'm like, I know, and then this.

And

it was a chance for him to not have three minutes that he had to jam in this big, complex thing and try to convince someone he could lay the facts out.

He knew, he knew instantaneously because he had watched the specials.

He said that.

And he said, you're spot on.

You're right on.

And

that gave him the opportunity to be the prosecutor that he's always been.

Rudy hasn't gone nuts.

The press

has just,

and this is my opinion, has frustrated him to the level of

just exploding on them.

Just exploding.

Okay, the hearing is about to begin with Fiona Hill, who's got some really exciting stuff to tell us that it's Russia and Ukraine didn't do anything in 2016.

The best of the Glenbeck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and you're listening to the Glenbeck program.

If you like what you're hearing on this show, make sure you check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

It's available wherever you download your favorite podcasts.

So, yesterday, and we are going to break in if they're saying anything important on Capitol Hill today.

In fact, let's break in.

Can we break in real quick now?

Vice President Pat Gray.

Okay, that's enough.

That's enough.

One, I think, actually, interesting thing is we were talking about this last hour.

It's been widely reported that Holmes was a big note-taker.

This is the guy that overheard the call with Ambassador Sanlin

where Trump was kind of screaming into the phone, and he heard it at the table.

And then they talked about this afterwards.

We were told he took notes, apparently did not take notes about that call.

Oh, he's a big note taker.

But did not take notes about that call.

Did not take notes about that call.

He did take notes about a meeting he was at with Zelensky the day after the call with Trump, in which Zelensky apparently said reportedly, according to Holmes, during the meeting, President Zelensky stated during the 25th of July call, President Trump had three times raised some very sensitive issues, and it's a quote, but he would have to follow up on those issues when he and President Trump met in person.

Of course, Holmes had no idea what those sensitive issues were because he was not on the actual call, but that is the only thing.

Well, I have an update on President Zelensky and that phone call.

I have additional insight about that phone call July 25th on something the president was worried about.

I'm going to show you the president was right.

Zelensky was wrong on that phone call.

I will show you the actual evidence of it tonight at 5 o'clock.

You don't want to miss tonight's show.

It is, it's like a mini special.

It's full of facts tonight that you need to know, especially about the bow tie wearing Kent.

Wait until you find out about that guy.

All right.

Let me go over what happened last night on Blaze TV with me and Rudy Giuliani.

I

talked to him about a lot of stuff, but I wanted to get a few things out at the beginning.

For instance,

the Democrats are saying you're running a shadow foreign policy.

Is that what's happening?

Listen.

The testimony today was that you were communicating with the Ukrainians without anybody's knowledge in the state.

You were running a shadow foreign policy.

So

I take it by your laugh that that's not true.

No.

I wasn't running a shadow.

What was your mandate?

What did the president ask you to do in Ukraine?

What were you doing?

We got two parts.

Glenn, we have two parts to what I did.

Part one was my investigation as a defense lawyer to gather exculpatory evidence, evidence that would help to make him innocent.

So remember, this began while Moa was still investigating Russian collusion.

November 2018.

It happened to be at a very sensitive time.

They were seeking answers from us on Russian collusion.

Also, Mr.

Weissman, who is a completely out-of-control, unethical prosecutor, who worked for Mueller, had been questioning Manafort in what I consider to be a horrific manner.

He had him in solitary confinement.

He would take him out every couple of days, and he would say to him, weren't you the link between Trump and the Russians?

And then when he said no, he put him back in solitary confinement, basically telling Manafort, if if you'd like to, you know, stop being locked up for 23 hours a day, just lie to me.

So I knew they were hot and heavy on this Russian collusion thing, even though I knew 100% it was false.

So when I got this evidence about Ukrainian collusion, in which they mentioned that Joe Biden was involved in developing some of the collusion, I jumped on it.

And I started to find people in Ukraine that were willing to come over and to talk to me about it.

People who told me that they had been blocked from coming here by the American embassy, specifically by the ambassador Jovanovich,

because she and her embassy were involved in collecting the dirty information.

There was

a particular FBI agent named Greenaway, who they said was very involved in collecting not only the dirty information, but fraudulent information on Manafort.

She had since gone to work for George Soros,

which gave it its own interesting flavor.

And she was working at the Anti-Corruption Bureau, was she not?

She was working at what the Anti-Corruption Bureau is a contradiction.

The Anti-Corruption Bureau was set up by George Kent, who was one of the witnesses here.

Yep.

I mean, when I was looking at him, I was like in shock that he's still at the State Department.

But George Kent set up this bureau.

They took all the corruption cases away from the Prosecutor General.

They gave it to the Anti-Corruption Bureau.

And they got rid of all the cases that offended Soros, Soros, and they included all the cases against Soros's enemies.

One of the first cases they dismissed was a case in which his NGO, Antac,

was supposed to have embezzled a lot of money, but not only that, collected dirty information on Republicans to be transmitted, gotten by Ukrainians, to be transmitted to this woman, Alexandra Shalupa, and other people who worked for the Democratic National Committee.

Okay, a couple of things that

you learned there.

If you've watched our specials,

you really learned, I think, one new thing.

And that is something that I have said.

I have to talk to Rudy Giuliani to know.

I mean,

I don't understand what he was doing there.

I pressed him about the two bad guys that they're smearing him with.

His answer to me makes sense.

We'll play it in a minute.

But

we've said, in fact, Stu and I talked about this just the other day.

Why wouldn't Trump just make him the head of the State Department?

He wanted it, reportedly.

I mean, that was the big thing.

He wanted to get the job right at the beginning of the administration.

So look at how this has been framed.

This has been framed that Rudy Giuliani was going over to do something with foreign policy.

He wasn't.

He was going over during the Mueller camp, the Mueller investigation, to,

as the president's personal attorney,

to show

he didn't do this.

So he was going over because he knew that the steel dossier

was connected to Ukraine.

So he's going over and trying to build a case that, no, none of this stuff in the steel dossier is true.

He wasn't involved with Russia.

And here's how they gathered the information.

It has nothing to do with the State Department.

And

while you may agree or disagree, I'm sure the media would be like, oh, well, I disagree with what he thinks he found in Ukraine.

The bottom line is it's a very understandable role for a personal attorney.

Your job as a personal attorney is to find the best defense possible for your clients.

Correct.

So now that clears things up to where, like, why was he even over there?

What was he doing?

Yeah.

Why didn't they?

He was being the president's personal attorney.

He was building a case against Mueller's case, which ended up being nothing.

But in that journey, he found all these things and was bringing those things to the president as a personal attorney.

That makes 100% sense.

And it also shows

that

the State Department, by saying he's running a shadow

policy,

It shows they need you to believe,

they need you to believe that he was over there meddling in State Department affairs and he was just this wild hand grenade.

No,

nope, he wasn't.

Yeah, he might have been a wild hand grenade for you because you were covering additional things up.

But they've spun this to make it seem like, yep, he's the guy.

He's the guy.

He definitely seems to be the target of a lot of the witnesses.

Yes.

Especially at the State Department who are saying we are very frustrated because, you know, Rudy, whatever he's doing, it's different than what we're doing.

And the Ukrainians are confused, which seems to be

the point they keep coming back to.

Which is, again, you can argue that it's a bad idea, but you can't argue it's impeachable.

It's not impeachable conduct.

Okay, I'm going to take a quick break because Hill is a Dr.

Hill is giving her testimony right now.

And I think this is important to hear because this will be the testimony where she is trying to make the

The case that Russia was the only one that was interfering in 2016 and that's everything else Trump is bringing up is just a conspiracy theory.

So we have to take that She's getting they're getting ready to ask her some questions here So we will take a one-minute break and then write to the testimony you might have heard the other day when Stu challenged me to a race in our cars.

Oh, and it's on brother.

Oh, that's fine.

Absolutely.

That's fine.

Yeah.

As soon as it starts to warm up, we got to make sure there's no ice or anything on the

78 degrees today.

I know today it is, but we can't.

We're in the middle of doing a lot of things, and Christmas is coming.

Oh, you can avoid it all you want.

So, in January and February, it gets cold, but we are on.

So, you better practice.

All right.

Anyway,

Mr.

Big Talk says,

you know,

we'll get it all set up.

And then I hear him conspiring

yesterday with somebody going,

I'm thinking about souping up my car.

No, no, no, no.

Stock.

Stock.

I can't focus on this.

I have to go practice driving

at a very high speed because I'm going to whoop your butt.

If you missed, by the way, America, I just, I'm, for the first time in my career, I have to tell you something.

I can't take the impeachment hearings anymore today.

I can't.

It's not good for me.

It's, I mean, it's just, my head will explode.

And it's, what that is, is nothing but disinformation.

I refuse to carry it because it is,

you know, you're talking about the Russians.

This is American disinformation, and I won't carry it.

I can't do it without correcting every sentence they have because the facts are out.

There's too much in your head about this story to even to break this down.

Well, we can go through the important parts of it.

it but i mean just to hear them run their mouths no i'm not going to do it you're not going to do it um tonight's show you don't want to miss five o'clock please don't miss tonight tonight's show almost every show we're doing now on tv because we i'm doing the best work of my career um and we are on this we are on it and if you liked those shows where we were showing you connecting all the dots if you like those shows we used to do on fox right now every episode is like a special.

So make sure you join the Blaze, watch it,

and join us every night at 5 o'clock because we are on it like white on rice.

What a racist.

There's brown rice, too.

Why would you only point out the white rice?

I want to tell you what we did last night.

This is available on YouTube.

You can watch it for free.

We ran out of time, so I had to shoot some extra things, and that's on the blaze blaze behind the paywall.

But I'm going to take you through some of it.

Here's what Rudy Giuliani said to me yesterday when we were talking about Russian collusion.

Listen to this.

In November of 2018,

this is before Biden was running for president.

It's while Mobile was still investigating.

A former colleague of mine called me with information.

The information was,

just to shorten it a bit, that you won't believe it, there's a lot of

so-called collusion that went on in Ukraine, not in Russia.

That what they say was going on in Russia looks like it was really going on in Ukraine.

It included not just a server issue and the hiding of the server.

It included specific information that was developed by the Ukrainians.

that was turned over to the Democratic National Committee, and that was used to try to

stop Trump from getting elected, used in mid-2016.

It also included

very strong evidence that a lot of the steel dossier

was produced in

Ukraine, in Kiev,

and also things I didn't know, like Glenn Simpson spent a fair amount of time there.

during the time that the dossier was being written

and that the document that reopened the Manafort investigation went through the Glenn Simpson company, and that there were real questions about whether it wasn't a fraud,

and also no question at all that it had been improperly used and leaked to the press in May of 2016 so the New York Times could write a story basically saying Trump has crooked campaign manager.

Correct.

So when I got all that evidence as a defense lawyer, I said to myself, hallelujah.

I now have what a defense lawyer always wants.

I can go prove somebody else committed this crime.

Okay, I want to take you to the section where I asked him about the whistleblower.

He didn't play along with me, but

as I asked him a follow-up question,

it's important that you hear his response.

Listen.

Do you know the name of the whistleblower?

And if it's Eric Caramella, just cough.

I won't say if I do or I don't know the name of the whistleblower.

I don't know all the facts that I would like to know about the whistleblower.

But what I do know is I no longer call him a whistleblower.

When I write op-ed pieces or give lectures or talks on this, I refer to him as the anonymous informant.

Well, he is, if it is the guy, Eric Caramella, who we think it is, his fingerprints are all over a deep state, the throwing of the election,

the stopping of

prosecution.

I mean, he's in the middle of almost all of this stuff.

So if Eric Caramella is not the whistleblower, are you aware of Eric Caramella's role?

I don't know if I can comment on this.

Okay, I think

I don't know if responsibly I can comment on this part of it.

I can tell you, without being able to back this part up with facts right now, that I am entirely convinced that this whole episode is just, you know,

one chapter in at least a three or four chapter plan,

which I guess was best described by Strzok to prevent him from being president.

And then should he become president, the insurance policy to remove

And this Ukrainian stage also had a pre-election stage

because the black ledger against Manafort,

which turns out to be a fraud.

Well, wait, hang on before you.

Before you say that.

Delivered to the New York Times to hurt him during the election.

This was really important.

Is that true?

Yes.

The black ledger is a fraud.

Okay, so you're ready for this one?

In fact, I think he, I think, play this cut.

I think it explains it in this cut.

Go ahead.

The FBI had a case that was two years old on Manafort.

Went back to 2014.

The FBI had dismissed the case.

This rogue FBI agent, Greenway, who's now working for Soros, wanted to reopen it.

In order to reopen it, they needed newly discovered evidence.

And

when this meeting took place in January of 2016 at the NSC, what the Obama people were asking the Ukrainians to do is to go get us bad information on Manafort so we can reopen the investigation.

And lo and behold,

this black ledger shows up on the doorstep of a parliamentarian who then brings it to the prosecutor, but also doesn't forget to bring it to the New York Times first.

And that's what they got convicted for in Ukraine, those two people, right?

Weren't they involved in leaking the black ledger?

Okay, so here's

this is amazing.

And we haven't revealed this yet on the chalkboard.

It's a fact we found out about a week ago or two weeks ago.

And we were going to include it on a Soros section.

So the Anti-Corruption Bureau, this is something that they're all like, we've got to talk about corruption.

They're pursuing cases that had nothing to do with anything.

This is a Soros Obama plan,

and it's very well documented.

We have all of it.

The State Department, the Obama administration, and George Soros worked together to form this anti-corruption bureau.

It was a shadow prosecutor's office, and they would decide what's worth pursuing and what's not.

Now, if you're doing criminal activity or you want investigations on people, it's good to have your own little

shadow justice department, isn't it?

So they have this anti-corruption thing.

Um, the new name that you heard was uh Greenaway.

She is an FBI agent that was assigned to this anti-corruption bureau, so she was going over to help teach them all about corruption and how to look into cases.

Okay, she went over there, she was working there with the Ukrainians.

She's the one that went and helped gather the information on

the ledger along with the guy who is the head of the anti-corruption Bureau.

All right.

So she has the connection back to the DOJ and says, we have information that he has not paid taxes on all of this money, and we could open a case on him if we could get any kind of evidence.

on taxes.

Okay.

Because there was already an old case that had been dismissed, but they could reopen it if there was any new evidence.

And they screwed up the first one.

So they had the evidence they felt to convict him.

They just needed a reason to reopen it.

So she tells Sitnik, the guy who's the head of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, he goes and he finds information in this black ledger.

The black ledger is then dropped off at the New York Times and given to the Justice Department and the FBI.

Now, so you know, Greenaway has since left and she works for the George Soros organization.

The guy who discovered the black ledger and then dropped it off went to court and was convicted of interfering in a U.S.

election because of the black ledger.

All right.

He gave the black ledger to the justice and to the New York Times with the intent of discrediting Donald Trump.

The Ukrainian DNC reason for that was to discredit Donald Trump.

Look, he's working with crazy people who love Russia.

Okay, they're corrupt.

That was their intent.

The FBI agent said, we can open up a case and nail him.

When they went to court, you didn't hear any of this.

The prosecution didn't use a single word from the Black Ledger.

Not one word.

It wasn't credible.

They got him on income tax evasion on an old case that they had already had of $12 million.

That case had already been dismissed.

They blew it.

They needed something to reopen it.

The Black Ledger reopened it.

When they got to trial, they threw the Black Ledger out because it was not true, or at least so sketchy that they couldn't, they didn't want to use it because they thought it could be picked apart by the defense,

and then the whole case would be thrown out.

I feel like I'm like jumping into like Godfather 3, and I don't understand any of the characters.

It's like there's just so much crap going on.

You know, there's so many different people.

But which direction is it going?

To hurt the president's case or to help the president's case?

Which direction is it going?

If you listen to them, they keep focusing on, like, I was at the table.

I heard it.

I heard that phone call.

Well, I don't think that's what happened, but he's a great note-taker.

Okay, well, I didn't take any notes, but I'm pretty sure that's what happened.

They're focusing on this little stuff.

We're talking about the throwing of an election and our government

paying for it, our State Department involved in revolution in Ukraine.

We are the ones that trained all the people for the Maidan revolution.

Now, you can agree and say, well, that's a good thing or a bad thing.

Doesn't matter.

Is that what you want your government doing?

Training these people to do revolution?

Because it's happening all over the world.

And we have the evidence of it.

I think there's a fundamental issue here, which is

the argument you're making is that we should be looking into these things because they're important for America in a big-time way.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn.

And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

Hi, it's Glenn.

If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do us a favor and rate us on iTunes?

If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time.

You can subscribe on iTunes.

Thanks.

For 30 years, Cheryl Atkinson was a, um,

was a correspondent and an anchor at CBS News, PBS, CNN.

I mean,

boy, and then they found out she wasn't crazy progressive.

She was actually looking for the truth no matter where the chips fell.

Yeah.

So they had to run her out on a rail.

Good thing for us, there is something called the interwebs.

The information super highway really gave her a home.

Now, she also has her

own show with Sinclair called Full Measure, and she

actually looks for the truth.

Cheryl Atkinson, how are you?

I am terrific.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

How are you?

I'm very good.

I'm interested

in hearing your theory and what you found

with the State Department in shadow diplomacy.

Well, let me just say that I typically, without trying to be sort of a contrarian, I see something entirely different than what I think even some of the Republicans see when I listen to these hearings, and it is sort of the last gasp of the persistent bureaucracy within the State Department

speaking against a president who came in and did exactly what he said he was going to do.

Yes.

Change business as usual, take charge.

They didn't like it.

And I would go so far as to say there have been some key admissions by our diplomats that they took actions contrary to what they understood the president's foreign policy desires were, which I believe is extra-constitutional and perhaps worse.

But

they seem to think, we've now heard it stated explicitly, they think the bureaucrats, they run the show and the president works for them.

And they're out of their mind when he didn't see things the way they wanted him to see them.

Well, they have a lot.

The State Department has a lot invested in Ukraine and

a policy called Civil Society 2.0 that was designed by Hillary Clinton when she was at the State Department, Barack Obama,

and

some other figures that

usually only belong in conspiracy theories like George Soros.

And they have set this course up as a matter of policy.

And they spoke about it at the time, Cheryl,

with people who were in the room helping design it, that they needed it to be institutionalized.

So it wouldn't matter what presidents would do when they came and went.

That's not what the State Department is supposed to do.

The State Department works for the President, not for themselves, unelected officials.

And I think that's one of the revelations.

This is them explicitly saying otherwise.

And I would also point out, I looked at the disclosures the other day for the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

This is where foreign countries disclose the lobbying the foreign agents they're hiring here in the U.S.

to lobby for their interests.

Most countries have in this congressional summary maybe a page of people they've hired

to do certain things.

Ukraine is by far the biggest.

It has pages and pages of people it's hired in the last few years to lobby journalists and members of Congress to make contributions, all kinds of things.

And I don't think that's any coincidence that everybody is advocating.

It looks to me like these State Department officials, it sounds to me like they're advocating for Ukraine and trying to change the President's mind rather than the other way around.

Right.

I mean,

here's the thing that is lost on me, why people can't connect here.

Quid pro quo is a way of life.

I mean,

it's commerce, it's free market, it's our marriage.

Everything is quid pro quo.

You cheat on me, and I'm probably not going to hang around.

I might add that it's controversial when there is not a precondition.

for foreign aid or a white

yes controversial at times if there haven't been conditions set that's expected to have conditions set.

Why would we just give money away, especially to a country that all sides, even Ukrainians say corrupt as hell?

Why wouldn't we have conditions on that money?

And something new has arisen the last day and a half, at least in my mind.

There is such an effort.

by these diplomats to make sure no one would commit in Ukraine to a corruption investigation or look into election meddling in 2016.

Why?

What is the harm?

I mean, they may be right.

They may be wrong that there wasn't any.

There's good evidence that there was some.

Left-leading Politico concluded there was based on first-hand interviews.

But let's just say

there wasn't any.

What's the harm of having the investigation that would show that?

Why are they so hell-bent on keeping the president of Ukraine from committing to any investigation into corruption or 2016 or barisma?

I think it's strange.

Cheryl, I would love to have your brain around this.

May I send you a box of documents from the State Department,

from the court system in Ukraine, along with videotape of what we have on officials admitting to these things?

Because the facts are all there.

No one is willing to go there.

And it is,

if this becomes just about Donald Trump, my opinion, Cheryl, on this whole thing is if Donald Trump was doing something wrong, illegal, then he should pay the price.

If the Democrats were doing something wrong or illegal, they should pay the price.

But we need to overturn every stone because our republic is at stake.

Just like with Russia, if Donald Trump was colluding with Russia, he should have been impeached.

I don't care who's right or wrong.

I want to know the truth.

Well, and I'm concerned that the persistent bureaucracy has been quite effective in punishing anybody around President Trump so far that has gone off script of what they want to happen.

And if they're able to make it where a president can't institute foreign policy, can't call for investigations into corruption, can't condition aid, I mean, we've then given up any notion that the Constitution that says the president determines foreign policy is at play.

We've basically then said, no, today the bureaucracy decides these things.

The president just has to go along with them.

Cheryl, can I tell you something that President Bush told me in the Oval Office?

I was there the day that Barack Obama, who was then trailing Hillary Clinton,

he said that, you know, if I had charge,

I would send our jets.

I don't care about their airspace.

If I want to find, you know, the bad guys and they're in Afghanistan, I'll just send the jets over.

And this is at the time where we kind of thought that maybe Afghanistan was kind of an ally.

and I said, Mr.

President, I mean, can we do that?

It's an ally.

What would that mean?

And he looked at me and he tried to comfort me, and it spooked the hell out of me.

He said, Clenn, don't worry.

I don't care who sits in this chair.

When they do, they will be advised by exactly the same people.

They'll see the same facts and they'll realize the president's hands are pretty tied.

It's just going to stay the same.

Well, can you imagine being an outsider like Trump who comes in to change that, who understands that and thinks it's harmful to the nation?

Right.

Or your Jeff Sessions, and I have good authority that says he whispered in his own office when he met with certain people because other people were listening who worked for him he didn't trust.

And you want to do things, but nobody around you supports it.

How are you going to implement anything?

This is what I think, you know, term limits are so important, but I think service limits are important.

These institutions, if you've been there and you've seen five presidents come and go, what do you care what the president said?

I've outlasted all of you guys.

And the arrogance grows, and the programs, again,

please, I'll send you the information.

Look up Civil Society 2.0 and what they were really doing and what they still are doing in Chile.

They

institutionalized this so it just runs under the radar.

And the president may or may not even know it, but that is truly what they're covering here.

And every single one of these

people that have been testifying, they're all involved in it.

I mean, like deeply.

I have emails that through FOIA requests that have come from them.

And I have the money.

I have the State Department connections we we have all of it it it's it's not a hidden secret it's just that no one will look into it in the press and i think that's because they've made it about trump

and i think um i did an interview with an author named thomas cranowitter he wrote a book called save the swamp and he touches upon what you're saying but he goes back historically and says this was designed, the swamp as we know it.

Yes.

By design was thought that there will be bureaucrats, the permanent government, they called themselves, that despite what the elections found, and we'd be distracted by the elections, the permanent government would be the ones running the show.

And I think it's exactly what we're seeing today.

It really grew out of Woodrow Wilson's frustration with the League of Nations.

He just knew that was right.

And so we just have to get this done.

And between him and FDR, it just grew into

this hydra that now is, I think, beyond most people's comprehension because they don't hear about it ever by design.

According to, I just looked up a quick quote from this book, and Cranoita, the author, said, early social scientists sketching out the plan of what an administrative state would look like often used the phrase permanent government.

and said, we'll still have elections, and they're useful because they distract citizens.

But what's going to happen is we will be the Leviathan of a permanent government in no way affected by the results of the election.

And that's exactly where we are.

I've been doing my research on this Ukraine thing for about a year.

And

what we started to find about a year ago was disturbing.

And the more we look into it, and it is, it's truly terrifying.

If

the Senate doesn't pick this up and expose what's what's going on, if they make this just about Donald Trump,

all of this stuff is just a show.

It's just a show, and nothing's going to really change.

The Senate, in the midst of all this in 2015 or 2016, started a Ukrainian caucus.

That's not a coincidence.

I'm sure that was a result of lobbying and contributions.

And I think a lot of them, I'm talking about Republicans, are tied up in this.

in the Ukrainian interest in a way we don't understand.

And they are not doing much to counter this false narrative that there was no Ukrainian interference in the election.

They're kind of sitting silently by, with maybe a couple of exceptions.

They're not holding hearings they could hold.

They're not counterpointing some of these things that are not true.

So I'm not really confident they're going to do a strong and great job if you're looking at them for a counterpoint.

Cheryl, may I have off-air, may I have one of my researchers send you

a bunch of raw information, and we can give you the outline on it.

But I would love for you to see these documents because you are absolutely right.

And I think we have proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt with official documents.

But there's so much more work to be done on it, and it has to be exposed.

May I reach out to you after the show?

Yes, of course.

I'd love to look at it.

Cheryl, thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

God bless.

You bet.

She's the host of Full Measure with Cheryl Eckson

and just a really, a really very bright woman.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.