Best of the Program | Guest: Rep. Chris Stewart | 11/11/19

Hey, welcome to the Monday podcast and a good one at that, huh?

As we get ready for our special on Wednesday, you got to tell all your friends about it.

Make sure they're watching.

We've made it free so you can share it with friends, but you know, your subscription to Blaze TV actually is what pays for all of these things, and we can't thank you enough for being a subscriber.

If you are, if you aren't, what are you thinking?

Get 20% off right now.

The promo code is gb20off at blazetv.com so we go through some of the uh some of the transcripts today that have been released we talked to chris stewart who has a a really interesting perspective because he's been in all of the skiff hearings yeah he's seen a lot of this testimony actually happen yeah uh and uh he has a different viewpoint than i've noticed from like the new york times

i did notice that also china course it's the future course it's lovable i mean who doesn't love socialism and communism?

Unless you're a video game player, some of the new rules that could have been ripped off right from the campaign trail of

Michael Bloomberg.

Yeah.

This is why we need Kanye 2024.

Yeah, that's right, which we also talk about.

China's new video game rules, all of that and more on today's podcast.

You're listening to

the best of the blendeck program.

It's Monday, the beginning of Impeachment Week.

Yay!

Oh, I'm so excited about Impeachment Week.

Have you put your tree up yet, your impeachment tree?

Yeah, yeah.

With all of the Trump people that we can lynch on the impeachment tree in our own homes, it's going to be very, very exciting.

Here is my worst nightmare.

My worst nightmare is that everybody makes this just about Donald Trump and the fight with Joe Biden, because that is not what this is about.

It doesn't make sense

that all of a sudden Nancy Pelosi, with all of the things that Trump has done, takes this one Ukrainian phone call.

Something where Joe Biden did exactly the same thing, except Joe Biden, strangely gets credit as this great hero for telling a nation to stop looking in and investigating corruption.

Don't investigate where our $7 billion is.

He gets credit for being a hero for doing that.

And yet, Trump just says, Hey, I want to know where that is.

Go ahead and investigate.

Please investigate.

And he's held for impeachment.

Now,

why

on God's green earth would you bring up impeachment on that?

Certainly not to strengthen your frontrunner because this has not strengthened Joe Biden.

Hasn't really hurt him, though, either, to be honest.

His polling is holding

11 in the last 11.

But are you willing to roll the dice on that as Nancy Pelosi?

Hey, let's bring up the burisma thing.

I don't know.

I mean,

it's a bizarre, it's a bizarre path.

It's a bizarre, because there's been so many things that they

place so much attention on.

I mean, Mueller is the most obvious example, but there's plenty of them where they've spent so much attention on trying to convince the American people that this was

an impeachable situation.

And yet, this came out before anyone even knew any of the details about it, before they even had the transcript of the call.

They were saying it was impeachable.

And why would you bring attention

to

Ukraine and Joe Biden, your frontrunner,

on something that is risky, that you could just avoid and leave alone.

Why would you do that?

Especially when you know two people in Ukraine were convicted of tampering with the United States election on behalf of the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

So you're pointing the cameras toward the scene of the crime.

Now, we know from you know murder investigations the first person that you're supposed to Investigate as the suspect is the one who calls it in Okay, the one who finds the body is the one that you start there.

Okay, you found the body.

How'd you find the body?

Uh-huh.

And then when you rule them out, you can expand.

Well, the ones who found this body is the DNC.

But they believe that they control the media so tightly, they control Google and Facebook and YouTube and everybody else so tightly that they can actually

get a president thrown out of office

and not have to pay for any of their crimes.

And we are talking about crimes here.

This is not high crimes and misdemeanors, which is political.

These are crimes.

So, what is this really about?

Well,

you know, I'm a fan.

Stu is not a fan of Marvel.

I'm a fan of Marvel.

And I'm very excited about

the beginning of Disney Plus

this week because Disney Plus has some new Marvel shows on it that are going to be premiering that I imagine are good, seeing that they spent $25 million per episode.

That's insanity.

Incredible.

I think,

what was it?

Game of Thrones was $15 million an episode.

Okay, most expensive.

$15 million an episode.

The average is about $4 million an episode.

This is $25 million.

It better be damn good.

But I'm a fan of Marvel, and so I'm excited to see Marvel.

And as we were looking into this,

we realized what we're dealing here with is

a reality version of Hydra.

And if you watched

any of the Marvels, you know that Hydra is kind of like Spectre is to James Bond, except Hydra is

looking for a new world order.

And

they're using four different categories to be able to to bring that new world order into play.

And they use these four independent sectors.

And

with their players inside of these sectors, they're able to take over the world, or at least that's what they think.

So the Hydra itself is split into four independent sectors.

The international corporations,

and they use legitimate businesses to conceal their illicit activities.

They use government assets.

They use

individuals within the chain of command.

And they like to do it not in the administrations, but they do it in the bureaucracies because there's very little turnover in the bureaucracy.

Then they use global criminal groups.

And those are for the short-term goals, also used to deflect unwanted interest from global law enforcement community.

So

they're in bed with really bad oligarchs and criminals.

And then

intelligence agencies.

They use the government's intelligence agencies to be able to know exactly what's going on all around the world.

Now, why would I bring up Hydra?

What does Hydra have to do with the impeachment hearings this week?

A lot.

A lot.

Because this is revolving around Ukraine.

And as we told you in our last special, when we started looking into Ukraine, we found some things that we didn't expect to find.

Yes, we found corruption.

It's Ukraine.

Yes, we found

barisma and an just implausible story

about Joe Biden and his son, that it was completely innocent, and that Joe Biden knew nothing about this.

Well, Joe Biden didn't need to.

Joe Biden was over there to break up the

national gas and oil companies and restructure.

So all he had to do was just start hammering all of the infrastructure of oil and gas and have his son on the board of directors of one company.

And of course, everybody's going to look at that in a corrupt nation and go, oh, I see how this works.

Okay, so if his son is over on the board of directors of that one, that one is the chosen winner because that's what corrupt governments do.

They pick and choose winners and losers.

So you didn't really have to be in cahoots with anything.

You just have to have your son known to be on that.

board of directors.

And of course, all the government contracts will go there because everybody wants more from the United States.

Because all we were providing were blankets.

They're fighting Russia.

We're providing blankets.

How about some tanks?

How about some, you know, guns, airplanes?

What do you say?

No, no, we'll provide you tanks.

And or we'll provide you blankets.

And maybe more, maybe more, but you've got to do a few things that we say you have to do.

Now,

could be,

could be, that they just,

you know,

America just hates Russia so much

that

we were just going to give them blankets to fight against Russia.

That doesn't work.

It could be, well, no, it really can't be anything else.

It looks like we were trying to infiltrate their government

and set up a government that we could control.

Hmm.

But the American people would find out, and the American people wouldn't like that.

How else could we do it?

Hydra.

On Wednesday, we're going to show you

exactly what this State Department has been building, not just in Ukraine, but all over the world.

We're going to show you a plan that was started by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, oh, and another old familiar face.

And

what they did in our State Department and put it into play that has everyone screaming bloody murder, because whether Trump knew it or not,

he stumbled into something that would expose all of it.

And so the State Department started to say, hey, hey, hey, hey,

he's in this territory.

We don't want him in this territory.

He can't be over here.

He can't stop this.

He can't do anything over here.

So whether Trump was doing it because he wanted all that dirt on Joe Biden, because he clearly never said, hey, by the way, I'm not going to pay you

unless you get my

opponent, you get dirt on him, you take him down.

Otherwise, I'm not going to give you the $400 million.

He never said any of that.

But let's just say that was his desire.

What he actually did was set off a chain of events that was going to expose exactly what the DNC, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the U.S.

Department of State is doing in your name with your money all over the world.

And it ain't pretty.

It's Wednesday.

Don't miss this.

Tell a friend.

We've made it free.

We asked that you would join us at the Blaze.

In fact, you can get

a 20% discount and join the Blaze, which helps us pay for all this research, et cetera, et cetera.

You just go to blazetv.com slash Glenn and use the promo code GB20Off, and you'll be able to sign up.

We really need your support, but we've made this special free so you can take it and you can share it with everyone you know.

It will be on YouTube and it will be on Facebook.

So make sure you're watching 8 p.m.

this Wednesday, the Democrats Hydra.

The best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and you're listening to the Glenn Beck 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, our next president in 2024

could be Kanye West.

Kanye West.

Kanye has come out and he said that he was going to run in 2024.

And then people started to laugh.

And he's like, what are you laughing at?

Yeah, he did not like that they laughed though.

He didn't.

No.

He's not happy about it.

Yeah.

So when I run for president in 2024, we would have created so many jobs.

In fact, I'm going to walk.

What I'm saying is, when y'all read the headlines, Kanye's crazy, this and that and this and that, it's like one in three African Americans are in jail and all the celebrities are in jail also because they can't say nothing.

They've got no opinion.

They're so scared.

Yeah,

I heard the audio of this statement and I could not decipher what he was talking about.

You know, I'm reading it and I can't really decipher what he's talking about.

One of the things he's talking about, though, because, and I know this from his past statement, which is a little more coherent than this, he was talking about the number of African Americans in jail and that this is what they've wrought from supporting Democrats all these years.

This is what has happened to, is that there's very few

fathers

heading the household in black families, that so many African Americans are in prison, so many are hooked on drugs, so many are hooked on the welfare system, and he's fighting against it.

I mean, he really...

He sounds more conservative now than he did when he first started doing the MAGA thing.

It sounds like like he knows what he's talking about now.

Whereas before, he just liked Trump and he didn't really necessarily, it didn't seem to me anyway, like he knew really what Trump stood for or if he supported it.

Now I think he does and he does support it.

The one thing he's been pretty consistent on, I think, is he's offended by the idea that he has to believe a certain way because he's very much.

That part of it.

I love that.

Yeah, I mean, I love that too.

Yeah, I love that.

That's a really, that's a really basic thing.

You know, you're an individual.

You get to make your own choices.

Aren't Aren't you offended by all of the things that you're supposed to believe because you're a conservative?

You are supposed to hate children.

You are supposed to like people dying in front of hospitals without care.

You are supposed to like starving people to death.

You are supposed to just love war in all of its forms.

Oh, I do love that.

I mean, those are great.

Well, I mean,

that in the hospital one.

Yes.

Yeah, there's nothing better than the hospital one, too.

I mean, we're all used to being offended offended because we're supposed to believe these things when that's not what we believe.

The same thing with Kanye.

He's like, wait a minute, just because

I'm a different color, I'm supposed to believe these things?

And as he's telling people, what's more racist than that?

Because I'm black, I have to believe like you do.

Because I'm black, I have to vote for Democrats.

I have to keep voting to stay on the plantation.

There's nothing more racist than that.

Yeah, nothing.

And, you know, look, racism is collectivism.

They are one of the same.

One is just a version of the other.

And, you know, you have, we constantly talk about identity politics and like, oh, well, black voters want this.

And, you know, that is just collectivism.

You're just taking these tiny,

these groups shall work for these groups and these groups should be.

We're all individuals.

And Kanye West is, I think, a powerful force, at least in illustrating that point.

Whether he knows what he's talking about on any of these issues, I don't know.

Okay.

So can I ask you another thing that I'm not sure if he knows what he's talking about, and

I'm sure he does more than I do.

But last week, it came out that he and his wife, Kim, had a disagreement about her Met Gala gown.

Did you hear this?

No.

Okay.

I missed that.

Yeah, no, I didn't.

I've been trying to stay up on her Met Gala gown.

No, I know that.

Dang it.

The only reason why this caught my eye is because

the headline: Kim Kardashian removed fake nipples from her Met Gala dress after Kanye voiced displeasure.

That they were there or that they weren't there?

No, that they were there.

That they were there.

And he said,

Let's see here.

He said, It was actually quite amazing.

I didn't even know that was a thing.

He said, While looking at my wife, oh, my girl needs to be dressed like these other girls, showing her body off, showing this, showing that.

I didn't realize that it was affecting my soul and spirit as someone who's married in love, the father of what's about to be four kids.

A corset is a form of underwear.

It's hot.

It's like, it's hot for who, though.

So

that was my question in this whole thing is, you know, whatever.

I didn't know there was such a thing as fake nipples.

Yeah, I didn't either.

And she apparently removed them.

Where do you buy them?

What do they look like?

I mean, how do you attach them?

Do you attach them to you?

Do you attach them to the dress?

is it something that a woman would want to receive hey honey here's some fake nipples because you're real ones i don't like

right i mean

is it just do you sew them onto the dress so do you have do you buy them in sets i don't know i mean i'm sure you buy them in sets of two but do you buy them in sets of six one would be a weird purchase one singular nipple would be a very odd purchase i think to me i feel like they come in like a almost like an egg crate where you're getting like several pairs and they're disposable

That's how I would envision it.

If that product doesn't exist.

So wait a minute along.

So do the fake nipples, do you wear them?

They're one use.

I think they're one use nipples.

But wait,

like contact lenses.

Right.

But hold it just as

well.

Do you attach them to the dress or you?

I'm going to go with you're going to probably attach.

I would say probably to

the dress, right?

Because if you if you attach them a you and you wear a bra then you're kind of losing the point of the fake nipples.

Correct.

So I think the point of - I'm assuming the point of this is.

The point.

I guess I hadn't really considered what we did.

I don't know.

I have no idea.

You want to see the point.

You see nipples, you think they're real.

Who knew that they were?

Yeah.

Who knew that they were fake?

Who knew that they were fake?

We've been deceived.

We've deceived way too many ways.

Again, women.

Just so deceitful.

Women.

Wow.

Can't live with them.

Nope.

So anyway,

we'd like to find out.

At least I would.

I'd just like to get to the bottom of some answers.

Yeah.

Because maybe he's crazy.

Maybe he's like, my wife's wearing fake nipples.

And she's like, I don't have fake nipples.

No, he says I have fake nipples.

I know.

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.

All right.

So let's look at the impeachment and what we expect to be happening this week in the next couple of months.

And then we're going to go into some of the transcripts.

We're about to get into the, you know, Thanksgiving is coming up.

We're about to lose ourselves in the holidays.

So let me just plan out your nightmare.

It's wonderful, doesn't it?

Over the past year.

To lose ourselves in the holidays.

I know.

I love that.

I know.

I want to be allowed to lose myself in the holidays.

Me too.

I'm going to.

This comes from CNN, which you might say, oh, I don't have CNN fake news, but they do seem to be

almost like planning the impeachment hearings on the air.

So they have a pretty good sense as to when things are going to happen.

Here's what Nancy Pelosi is going to say today, because we told her.

So far we have

transcripts from the inquiry of about 2,700 pages of transcripts.

We have Fiona Hill, George Kent, Michael McKinley, Gordon Sondland, Bill Taylor, Alexander Vindemann, Colt Volcker, and Mary Jovanovich.

She was the ambassador.

So we still have Christopher Anderson, Laura Cooper, Catherine Croft, David Hale, Tim Morrison, Philip Rieker, Jennifer Williams to be released.

So we just still don't have about half of the transcripts of the behind-the-scenes stuff they've already done.

So that's step one.

At some point, these things will start trickling out, and we'll get all of them.

Wednesday is a big day for a few different reasons.

Number one,

there's a big special on Blaze TV.

You should go to blazetv.com, use the promo code GB20Off, get 20% off your subscription,

helps support these things, and it's about the impeachment.

We'll get into the exact details as to what we're going to cover with this special on Wednesday.

But you can get it for free on YouTube.

You can share it on YouTube and all these other places.

But certainly your subscription is welcome to support all of these efforts.

That is one thing.

On the other side is the first

live testimony.

we're going to get in public.

This is going to come from Kent and Taylor.

Now, Taylor is one of the, he's the former ambassador, top U.S.

diplomat in Ukraine.

He's one of the guys that was texting about basically there was a quid pro quo.

He's one of their star witnesses, I would say.

There's also Kent, who is really critical of the president.

So they're leading with some of their best material here.

This is November 13th, which is Wednesday.

Then on Friday, you're going to get testimony from Yovanovich.

She is the former.

ambassador to Ukraine and was fired basically by the Trump administration.

She's the ambassador that everyone said

was stopping any investigations by the Ukrainians into U.S.

government officials,

into

the Anti-Corruption Bureau,

into anything doing with George Soros.

anything having to do with Burisma, stopping all investigations and stopping any information coming into the United States.

She wouldn't provide visas nor deliver any information from the prosecutor general in Ukraine.

That's pretty significant.

Of course, now they don't

talk about that, but maybe they will.

I mean, this is a chance for Republicans to ask some questions, too.

Now, next week is

another week, they believe, of live testimony.

And what's fascinating to me about this is next week, is next week,

I'm trying to, I'm losing track of my weeks here.

How many weeks until actually Thanksgiving is it?

Two weeks.

So two free weeks before the Thanksgiving week.

You are really bumping up against the holidays here with your live testimony.

It's probably the last week where people are really going to pay all that much attention to this,

at least on the top of their news cycle.

People drift in and out around the holidays.

They're going to Christmas parties.

They're going to Thanksgiving dinners, gatherings, all these things.

News, we know this from years and years and years of experience.

The marketplace for news drifts off a little bit in December.

So it's weird to place things that you want attention on in December if you can help it.

Well, you would make sure that you lead with

the ones that you think are the

safest and the ones that are going to make it through any kind of cross-examination.

You do that this week.

Then you go with your second tier next week.

And then after that, it doesn't matter.

Like eventually they just start, Michael Avenati starts bringing people in and then you know they're almost done.

Yeah, they're almost done.

Then they're like, whatever.

Because the people are like, yeah, yeah.

How many days till Christmas?

I got to get some shopping done.

Right.

So

the next two weeks of live testimony, then we go on to Thanksgiving week, where they're sure to take a break,

vacation time.

Then they come back and there is a funding.

The government needs to be funded, which is your typical debate that would highlight and be the first thing people will be talking about in the news.

Yeah, but again, why did they put it at this time of the year?

Yeah, it disappears, bury it, it disappears.

Uh, then you have, um,

then you have the December, so what the rest of the schedule is.

So, after we get all of these, all this testimony done, the House goes and they come up with you know their charges of impeachment, if there are any, because who knows, maybe they'll decide there aren't, there's nothing you needed, nothing wrong.

I mean, I know this is a fair and open process, and maybe they'll just decide, you know what?

Looks like the president was clean here.

Maybe that will happen, but likely they'll go back and come up with articles of impeachment.

If they do that, they think they will have a committee report

and vote on the first week of December, as early as the first week of December.

And that is, you have the votes then the next week.

So you have the reports, the charges, the hearings, then the vote the next week, which would be

probably December 16th, they think.

Again, you're now

in the middle.

I mean, who is paying attention to the news on December 16th, right?

Like, this is bizarre.

Now, I will say the Clinton test, the Clinton impeachment vote did happen on December 19th, 1998.

So it's not the first time this has happened at this sort of time period.

But it is sort of in the middle of the Christmas holiday, and this would be the type of thing.

Now, they're not committing to that timeline, but that's basically what you're looking at.

They're saying now they think they're going to get a vote done completely by the end of the year.

I mean, it's optimistic, I think, for them.

I mean, you don't think there's going to be twists and turns in this thing.

Here's the thing I'm concerned about.

I'm concerned that the GOP is not going to allow it to proceed to the Senate.

And I think that is a massive, massive mistake.

You cannot.

Are you sure about that?

Yeah.

You can't.

You cannot.

You have to start playing offensively.

This is they're putting us into a defensive mode.

Play offense.

Good.

We've got some things we'd like to introduce to the American people as well.

We've got our own witnesses to call.

We have our own pieces of evidence to bring in.

And they want to do that.

They want to bring people like Hunter Biden in to testify.

Right.

But they think the Democrats are going to block that from happening.

Well, you can do that.

I believe you can do that in the House, but I don't believe you can do that in the Senate because the Senate, the president, has a right.

He has his own attorney, so he has defense.

So he can bring up all of the stuff that he said in the phone call.

Hey, you know, I want to know about the corruption with the election tampering.

I want to know what was happening with Burisma.

I want to know what was happening with our $7 billion.

They do not want that to come up.

And so far, I don't know why, but so far, you don't have a lot of Republicans talking about this.

Yeah, they've got to go on the offense.

I think a lot of Republicans think that's not the offense, though.

They think that giving into a Senate trial is giving it too much credibility.

I tend to agree with you.

Blow it out of the water.

Yeah, because here's what you think, again, these things are tough to predict, but I mean, generalizing here, what's going to happen is the Democrats in the House are going to bring out their best evidence.

And there's not really going to be a chance to push back on other types of related issues in public because that's not the way it's formatted.

So this is why they like it, right?

They get all the bad stuff out.

They don't have to deal with the other stuff.

And it goes to the end of the year.

They get the impeachment vote.

And they can tell all of their people that, yeah, we got that done.

All the senators, you know, and they can all brag about how their party is the one that was able to impeach Donald Trump for the primary.

And then it goes to the Senate.

And if Mitch McConnell says, you know what, this is nothing and this is just political and we're not going to talk about it, then they have that argument of this is the first time in history, which it would be, that the Senate did not take up an impeachment that was done in the House.

It would be one of those things where they would have an argument that say, essentially, the Republicans are just ignoring all the bad things that they're doing.

If

you have the trial, it's not like the Democrats are going to come up with additional information on this.

They're going to blow it all here on this impeachment thing.

So you're going to get a rehash of all the stuff we've already heard and then additional evidence of all the things that the Republicans can talk about that they can't get away with talking about in the House.

Not to mention that it will pull all of the senators that are presidential candidates off of the campaign and they will let him get easier.

I think this is just destruction.

I think if every single senator stands up from the Republican side, this is nothing but a circus.

This is a waste of American time and American money.

But the American people need to know

what the Democrats are willing to do to overthrow a duly elected president.

So I vote, bring it on.

If they approach it that way, and every single one of them, when they are voting, say that.

Don't just say yay.

Don't say yay.

Say,

Damn right, bring it on.

You have to have, because what will happen is

just a vote, they'll say, oh my gosh, 60 Republicans think this should be looked into as well.

No, no, no.

All of them need to be in lockstep.

This is a trial that is going to reveal the truth, not about what happened on that phone call, because we all know that's a farce.

We are only voting yes, so the president has a right to defend himself to show exactly what the DNC has been doing, what Hillary Clinton's role was in collusion with Ukraine.

You want to bring it up?

You want to expose?

You want to have an honest conversation, Democrats?

Bring it on.

And what are the Democrats going to bring to the table there?

They're going to be able to bring up the third time we've heard testimony from Taylor?

Yeah.

What are you going to go to there?

Right.

Stu, when when you see what the special is this Wednesday,

the evidence that we have, look at just the evidence that we have.

We have two people that were convicted for working with the DNC and Hillary Clinton in collusion with the Ukrainian government to thwart our election.

They've already been convicted.

We have the tape of them admitting it.

You're not seeing that anywhere, are you?

It's high time the American people see it.

And the president can use it in his defense because it's not unrelated.

It's not unrelated.

That's what he was talking about in the phone call.

And all of those people, when he says, look, there are some people that were involved here, and I think they're still around you.

All of the names that we have on the chalkboard, fair game.

If they're making it about the phone call, it opens up the door for all of it to be exposed.

And on Wednesday, you'll see how deep this thing goes.

We thought this was about Ukraine until we were doing the special, the last special, and we were doing research, and we came across a name, and it popped up in one of the hearings.

And we're like, oh my gosh.

Wait until you see.

I like to call it the Democrats Hydra.

That's Wednesday, 8 p.m.

Don't miss it.

You can save 20 bucks by using the promo code

GB20Off by going to blazetv.com/slash back.

Use the promo code GB20Off.

You'll save 20 bucks.

We ask you to subscribe because it helps us pay for these kind of investigations, which are extraordinarily time-consuming and extraordinarily expensive.

So we're asking that you would subscribe, but I want you to know we're making it free on YouTube and Facebook so everyone can see it.

So you now have to do your work and tell all of your friends, you gotta watch Wednesday, watch Wednesday, the Democrats Hydra, what's really happening and why the president should go on the offensive, because it's not gonna just take down Joe Biden.

Oh, no, no, no.

Oh, no.

This takes down all of it, including things that people who voted for Barack Obama wanted to stop.

This one opens up the entire can of worms.

Join us Wednesday.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Like listening to this podcast?

If you're not a subscriber, become one now on iTunes.

And while you're there, do us a favor and rate the show.

It's Monday.

The impeachment hearings begin.

And Chris Stewart has been kind enough to be able to make time in his schedule.

He's a congressman from Utah that has been in the skiff.

Have you not been, you've been, you have first-hand experience in the skiff, do you not?

First-hand experience on more than one occasion, Glenn.

And before we get into that, let me say happy Veterans Day to all our veterans.

God bless bless them all out there if you would let me.

Absolutely.

I know you're a veteran, so happy Veterans Day to you, and your family is just riddled with heroes, and

I'm grateful for everything that they've done, along with all the other veterans.

So, Chris, first of all, just side note, you're in on these impeachment hearings.

You've been sitting there and listening to this in the skiff?

Yeah, yeah, Glenn, and not just for the last six weeks, by the way.

This goes back really three years.

I mean, for three years, the Intelligence Committee, which is one of the most important committees in Congress, the work we do really matters.

We've been diverted for years now on first Russian collusion, the Mueller report, you know, obstruction of justice, and then they

ran out of ammunition there.

So now we're doing impeachment on Ukraine.

So why not?

Yeah, I've been there day after day.

I've been doing that.

Can you tell me, first of all, just

for casual interest, what's the skiff like?

Is it a regular room?

Is it like in the movies where there's a glass box in the room?

Yeah.

Is it like that?

Not as mysterious as it may sound.

I mean, it's a secure facility.

You have obvious heightened security around it.

You go down the hallway through a very heavy, it's not really a blast door, but it's a door that will contain any electronic emissions or any sound.

And then you go through another inner door, and after that, it's much like any other kind of office space.

There's a couple of hearing rooms, some conference rooms, a library.

That's kind of disappointing.

And

yeah, yeah.

Kind of disappointing.

I like the movie Skiff better.

Okay, so Chris,

we now have from Schiff

what is going to happen.

He says, as we move to open hearings, it's important to underscore that the impeachment inquiry and the committee will not serve as vehicles for any member to carry out the same sham investigations into the Bidens or debunked conspiracies about a 2016 U.S.

election interference that President Trump pressed Ukraine to conduct for his own political benefit.

The committee also will not facilitate efforts by President Trump and his allies in Congress to threaten, intimidate, retaliate against the whistleblower who courageously raised the initial alarm.

It remains the duty of the Intelligence Committee to protect whistleblowers, and until recently, this was a bipartisan priority.

The whistleblower has rights under laws championed by the committee to remain anonymous and be protected from harm.

The impeachment inquiry, moreover, has gathered an ever-growing body of evidence from witnesses and documents, including President's own words on his July 25th phone call, that not only confirms but exceeds the initial information from the whistleblower's complaint.

The whistleblower testimony is therefore redundant and unnecessary.

Wow.

Wow.

I mean, it's just nonsense, Glenn.

There's so much in that that is just nonsense.

But that's the way this investigation has been conducted from the very beginning.

You know, that letter is in response to our request for six additional witnesses.

And, you know, they write up the resolution that governs this impeachment inquiry in such a way that we can't even call our own witnesses.

We can't ask the questions that we want to ask.

Everything we do is subject to the approval of the chair, and he won't approve any of it.

Imagine a defense.

Can you imagine a defense where you're actually at trial and the judge says, well, you can't call any defense witnesses, or your defense attorney can't make certain arguments.

That's what we're in the middle of here and that's what Adam Schiff is doing.

But Glenn, no one is surprised about this.

I mean, truly, we're not surprised.

It's the way this has been conducted from the beginning, and it's the only way they can conduct it and have the narrative that they want that the press will then go out and mimic to try to convince the American people.

So you, what is the plan then?

Because you're not facing a hearing.

You're facing an inquisition.

And Adam Schiff Schiff is the grand inquisitor.

If he makes all of the rules and they don't apply to any kind of natural American rules,

what do you have here besides an inquisition?

Well, I think there's a couple things.

Number one is just like with the Kavanaugh hearings, where they took the presumption of innocence, the idea that you've got to face your accuser, we took these principles that we've supported and defended for a thousand years and threw them out the window.

The American people are offended by it, and they are offended by this as well.

So part of the argument is we point out how unfair it is, how just unfair it is not to be able to call our own witnesses and make our own arguments.

But I don't think we win on that, Glenn.

I think the biggest thing is what you've been saying for the last week, and that is point out the absurdity of the argument at its core.

Of course, American intelligence or American law enforcement agencies investigate and work with foreign governments to investigate crime and corruption.

Of course we do.

Has anyone ever heard of Interpol?

We do that all the time.

And the second thing is, of course, we do.

Of course, we withhold aid.

I mean, we had a president who came to power in Ukraine that none of us knew.

He came out of nowhere.

We didn't know if he was corrupt or not.

And it would be perfectly legal and perfectly within the realm of not just legality, but common sense to say, hey, we should understand this individual.

He even says we can trust.

He even says in the phone call, look,

our intelligence shows that some of the corrupt people are still around you.

And he says, no, I know who they are.

And he says, no, Mr.

President, I don't think you do know who they are, but we believe they're still around you and influencing you.

So the president is questioning the guy's credibility and saying, look, we don't know if you're corrupt or not.

And you have to show us that you're not.

Exactly.

I mean, this is from the president.

Again, we didn't know anything about.

We knew that he was supported by some oligarchs.

Now, some of these oligarchs are claiming that they're going to fight corruption, but that's a difficult argument to accept on its face.

And so, the president was saying we need to understand him.

And by the way, Glenn, this is important for those of us who work in national security intelligence.

We had heard early in the spring when this election first took place, that there would likely be a hold on some of the military aid that we were going to provide to Ukraine while we evaluated the new president and the new administration.

Again, that's perfectly understandable.

In fact, it's expected.

And I think the last thing on this is

another core argument people are making is: yeah, you can investigate people, but you can't investigate politicians.

If you're running for office, you can't be investigated.

I think that's an absurd argument to make.

If you want to have American people talk about the elites in Washington, go ahead and make the argument that you can investigate anyone except for someone running for office like Vice President Biden was.

They're beyond an investigation.

It's improper to ask questions about them.

I think that's a nutty argument to make.

So, Chris,

do you believe that you guys are just going to be shouted down?

I mean, you know, when you say the Kavanaugh hearing, the Kavanaugh hearing was made because we heard from the two sides.

If you can't call the right witnesses and you can't ask questions, it was the Republicans that were asking those questions that revealed who she was.

And then it was Kavanaugh's opening statement.

Where do you, what do you have and what tools do you have to be able to

have those people make the case?

Because nobody's going to listen to the people giving speeches up by the committee.

Yeah, well, Glenn, I think there's a couple of things.

One thing, the rules of engagement with the closed hearings are going to have to open up.

You're not going to have instances like there was with me and others where Chairman Schiff actually wouldn't let me ask a question or phrase a question the way that I wanted to, although I insisted and didn't change my question, and the witness wouldn't answer.

But they're not going to be able to do that in open session like they have been able to do it in closed session.

And the second thing is, even if we're not able to call our witnesses, which is incredibly destructive to the sense of fairness about this, once again, we can go point out to the American people how absurd that is if you're interested in a fair

a fair process, fair to both sides.

And then I think the third thing is this, and it's not something that we've talked about much, but that is this has to go to the Senate.

And the Senate will operate by their own rules.

And the Senate, I think, if they wanted to hear from some of these other individuals, they'd have an opportunity to do that.

So I think at the end of the day, the Senate may wash out some of this, you know, other things that we're seeing here in the House.

Why should this whistleblower be, quote unquote, exposed?

Yeah, you know, the law on that is very clear, and it's been contorted.

And that's not surprising.

It's not the only thing that has been.

But there's been this contortion saying that it's illegal to expose him.

It's not.

It's illegal or inappropriate for the inspector general who is conducting the investigation to expose him or to reveal who he is.

The point being is you wouldn't want to have reprisals from his coworkers or his supervisors to fall down upon him.

But this is something quite different.

You can't initiate the impeachment of the President of the United States and expect to remain unanimous and not have to answer any questions.

And there are meaningful questions that we want to ask this whistleblower and we want to do it in person such that we can evaluate him, so that we can see his response.

That's an important part of any hearing.

That's why you have court where you bring the witnesses before the jury.

You don't just have them sit in a back room and answer questions in writing.

And we really hope we have a chance to talk with this whistleblower face to face.

The American people deserve to hear from him face to face.

Chris, I have to tell you,

I don't know if you've seen the chalkboards specials that I've done, but

they have his fingerprints.

I mean, he is

like Capone's accountant.

His fingerprints are in and around all of the things

that have transpired with Biden, with the ambassador, with Chalupa.

I mean, he's there.

Yeah, he's there at the scene of the crime the whole time.

The whole time.

Well, it's him and

other friends.

He's not the only one.

No, no, I know that.

Yep, yep.

Well, and again, those are great examples, as you've pointed out now for a couple of weeks, Glenn.

Those are great examples of fair questions that the American people should have a response to.

Chris Stewart, what do you do now today and tomorrow?

When should we start seeing things?

What should we be looking for?

How's this play out in the next couple of days?

Well, you you know i'm actually here in southern utah today flying back to dc tonight and we're going to have some strategy meetings tomorrow where we're going to have opportunities to kind of sit down as a republican caucus and sit and kind of work out how we think we'll handle these open hearings i got to tell you glenn i don't think they're going to be very compelling i don't think there's any surprises that are coming either way there's not going to be any groundbreaking moment where you think oh man the president is in a lot of trouble and on the other hand there's not going to be anything where you think oh this is exculpatory there's nothing there it just is what it is.

But I guess we'll just jump into the first hearing on Wednesday and see how that first one goes and then maybe evaluate what changes we might make in our strategy after that.

Wow.

So

are you, because I said this morning, I think the president needs to, I think the Senate needs to take this and start playing offense

and take this up.

Because if you're not going to get anywhere with it, and you're just going to have, you know,

a tie in the end.

Nobody's mind has changed, and nothing's really been exposed.

It's got to go to the Senate, and they've got to start playing offense.

Is that

kind of where you think it might go?

No, I agree with you, and I alluded to that earlier: that the Senate won't have her hands tied like we have in the House.

But is that a personal belief of yours, like it is a personal belief of mine, or is it something that has a chance of really happening?

Oh, I think absolutely has a chance of happening.

When you talk with some of the senators who are going to be involved with this and their approach to this process, I think it's now look, I'm not in the U.S.

Senate and I don't want to speak for them, but I think it's more than likely.

Oh, that's great.

Okay, good.

I'm glad to hear that because

there's a lot to uncover.

There's a lot to uncover.

Chris, thank you so much.

I'm Glenn.

Thank you, sir.

You bet.

That's Representative Chris Stewart

from the state of Utah, who has been in in the hearings

and I've been dying to talk to him, but he's in the skiff, and so he can't say anything.

But on the public hearings, he can.

And we're also going to be talking to some other people along the way to

get their viewpoint on what is coming.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.