Best of the Program | Guests: Mollie Hemingway & Josh Hammer | 6/24/22

16 years from today, Greg Gerstner will finally land the perfect cannonball.

Epic Splash, Unsuspecting Friends, a work of art only possible because Greg is already meeting all these same people at AARP volunteer and community events that keep him active and involved and help make sure his happiness lives as long as he does.

That's why the younger you are, the more you need AARP.

Learn more at aarp.org/slash local.

Today's podcast took a surprising turn.

We were not expecting Roe v.

Wade to be overturned today.

We were expecting it last week.

In the middle of an interview,

things went wildly wrong

with the interview and

wildly right with the Supreme Court.

We had a decision come up.

It got a little ugly for a few minutes because the person felt we were colluding, I guess, with the Supreme Court to try to make him look bad.

But it is a great day of hope.

All of your coverage on Roe v.

Wade and the overturning historic moment.

As it happened live during our podcast.

Here it is.

Brought to you by Relief Factor.

If you're one of the millions of Americans who suffer every day from pain, listen up.

There is hope, and it comes in the form of Relief Factor.

I take take this three times a day.

I've been taking it for, gosh, I don't know, five years, and my life has changed.

I got my life back.

Please, don't give up.

Don't give up.

Get out of pain.

We need every single person on deck.

We need every hand that we can get to help save the Republic.

And quite honestly, on days like today, we need every arthritic knee to bend, to give praise.

And

you can't do it sometimes because of pain.

Get out of pain.

Get your life back.

Relief Factor, ReliefFactor.com.

Try the three-week quick start at relieffactor.com.

You can call 800-40.

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

I don't know a single American personally.

I don't know a single American that actually is not involved deeply in Washington, D.C., that doesn't want free and fair elections, that doesn't want every ballot to be counted and wants to make sure that there is no monkey business going on

and that we can count on our elections.

Every American, I don't care who you voted for, I think wants that.

But I don't think anybody in Washington really wants that,

especially the Democrats.

They are already setting up that the the election's going to be stolen, you can't trust it, and now the problems with the voting machines.

They're doing the same thing they always do.

But they're doing something else.

Remember, the key to understanding this administration is the administration.

He is an administrator.

That's it.

All of the agencies are being pushed to the limit to take away

as many rights from you as possible and make the system work in a completely different way than constitutionally.

Molly Hemingway has written a great article.

It came out yesterday.

Biden is hiding his plan to rig the 2022 midterm elections.

Molly is joining us now.

Hello, Molly.

Hello, it's great to be here with you.

Yeah, it's great to have you on.

So

this is they're doing this in every agency, and this one you've tried to look into, and they're hiding everything that they're doing.

Can you take us from the beginning and then show us what they're doing?

Sure.

So in March of 2021, just a few weeks after President Biden took office, he issued an executive order saying that all 600 federal agencies had to come up with a plan to expand voting.

Now, people were immediately alarmed because the Constitution does not give the executive branch authority over our election system.

That's reserved for the states.

There's a very tiny role for Congress.

And so the executive branch has not been given that authority.

And then people are also worried because expanding voting is an inherently political act.

You know, it's

mobilizing voters is a political act.

And so the bureaucracy should not be involved with it.

So people wanted to know, well, what are these plans going to be?

Everyone had 200 days to turn in a plan to Susan Rice, by the way, you know, one of the most political people out there, for approval.

And people started asking what the plans were.

And they have been steadfastly refusing to return those plans ever since then.

Okay, so I want to make sure people understand.

That is 600 federal agencies, 600 had 200 days to show how they were going to expand citizens' opportunities to register to vote and obtain information about, participate in the electoral process.

They had until March 7th, 2021.

You can't find anything about what any one of those 600 agencies turned in.

And congressmen have been asking for it.

You've had the ranking member of every committee in the House asking for the information.

You've had them expressing their concerns.

Congressional committees, good government groups, outside citizens are doing FOIA requests, and they just can't get anything.

And it seems to be that what they're doing is trying to slow walk it until well after the election.

In one case, they said they would respond to the FOIA by May of 2024.

And so it is really difficult to get information, which makes it difficult to even know what's going on.

And I just want to be clear, these are inherently political acts, like choosing who you reach out to

to mobilize, get out the vote operations, that's what political parties do.

And it's particularly dangerous because we're talking about federal agencies that hand out benefits.

And And so, if people are told, hey, we could really use you voting, Mr.

Person who's getting this federal benefit, you can see why that would be viewed as improper and unethical compulsion regarding voting, which is something that is very dangerous and which we have previously had strict laws against.

So, tell me what's happening with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid

with their voter turnout, the Department of Labor, what are they doing, Department of Education.

Right.

So each of them are choosing to respond to this executive order in different ways.

And we are getting these indications that they're complying with this executive order, even if they're refusing to say what exactly they're doing.

But you're seeing these public-facing things where they'll say that they're turning their health centers into vote.

vote places, you know, where they're focusing their efforts that should be focused on job training, you during a labor crisis on get out-the-vote operations at Department of Education centers.

Or the federal work study program, which is part of the Department of Education, had previously said, of course, you can't use federal work study

monies to engage in electioneering or election activity.

And now they're saying you can use these monies to help run get out-the-vote operations.

And I just think it's important to remember the context here, too, is that we just had this election in 2020 twenty, where we had Mark Zuckerberg finance the widespread takeover of government election offices with partisan left leaning activists, and they ran get out the vote operations in the blue areas of swing states.

So the context here is really troubling too, because we just saw in twenty twenty how this type of operation can have severely partisan repercussions and why people should be on guard if they want to trust their elections and if they want to have confidence in their elections.

Molly,

what do we do?

We have no press that will do it.

The congressman not getting responded to.

The Justice Department is absolutely corrupt.

What do we do?

So I do think that raising an outcry over the refusal to find out information is key.

And there are lawsuits that are ongoing.

Two groups have sued to get the information.

These agencies are clearly in violation of federal law.

And so hopefully we would have enough pressure that those lawsuits can be responded to as soon as possible so that the public can know what's going on.

And people should not despair.

I mean, fighting over election administration is something that has been going on in this country for centuries.

And despair is not an appropriate response because, you know, you had even a few decades ago, the Democrat Party had disenfranchised like an entire race of people in the South, and people didn't despair.

They just fought to make sure that the voting system was fair.

And so, I think the most important thing people can do is get involved at the local level.

Find out what's going on in how elections are administered in your state and make sure that they're being done properly and that there are no shenanigans going on.

And you're not going to be able to know that unless you're deeply involved in the process.

So, start now.

We have widespread mail-in balloting and an election season.

So, it's not just election day, which is frankly when Republicans go vote.

It's those two months prior or even many years prior where they're setting up the system by which everyone else is voting or by which the system is so insecure that it can be exploited.

And you really have to just find out what the rules are in your area, find out what's going on and get involved, do election observation, research, and everybody should do that if they care about the Republic.

Because if we don't have elections we can trust, you you know, you don't really have a country.

But don't, you know, it's not the end of the world.

It just requires people to get involved and pay attention.

So, Molly, it's really interesting to me because I look at the things that they do and I'm like, who has time for this?

But you have time if you think that you should be in charge of everything and everybody.

That is their full-time job to figure out ways to control everything.

The conservatives, we have just been, you know, asleep at the switch.

We're like, no, everybody thinks like this.

No, they don't.

No, they don't.

There's probably 15% of very, very active Americans that are intent on taking the Republic and destroying it.

We just have to wake up and start realizing it's really our fault that this is happening because we've just been expecting somebody else to take care of it for us.

So I wrote a book on the 2020 election called Rigged, How the Media, Big Tech, and Democrats Seized Our Election.

And I go through all sorts of things, including this Mark Zuckerberg operation.

That was a $450 million operation.

It was more than anyone had ever conceived of spending on something to take over the government administration of elections.

But that is what I worry about.

The federal government, you know, they spend $450 million

in a blink of an eye.

They have so much money to throw at this that it is really worrisome.

You know, and the Constitution does not authorize it.

Congress has not authorized it.

And yet they're still doing it.

But you're absolutely right that a lot of people have just been asleep and not thinking about election integrity for decades.

But in my book, I actually tell the story about how there was this court order that kept Republicans from doing any Election Day oversight for nearly 40 years.

I couldn't believe it when I first learned about it, but in the early 70s, a judge in New Jersey put them under a consent decree where they couldn't get involved in any litigation, Election Day litigation.

And for nearly 40 years, they were kept under this.

It took the judge dying and being replaced by an Obama-appointed judge who said, this is ridiculous.

Like, let the Republicans out.

And it was so sensitive that during the 2020 or 2016 election, Sean Spicer was on the wrong floor of Trump Tower, and they almost kept him under the consent decree for another few years.

Like, because he was, you know, he was supposed to be on floor four instead of floor five.

and that's how sensitive it was.

And it kept Republicans from really focusing on this for a very long time.

But they're kind of liberated now, and so they are doing much more to do Election Day oversight, and there are many more resources in play now.

Real quick, any thoughts on the Supreme Court and what's coming here again tomorrow or today in just a few minutes?

Well, I think everyone's, but there are so many important decisions, and yesterday's decision was a huge victory for the Constitution.

And it really does speak to the importance of having solid originalist judges or justices on the court.

Everyone's, of course, anxious for the Dobbs decision, the abortion-related decision.

And a lot of people thought it should have been out earlier because of these death threats that the justices are facing.

So, hopefully, it will, you know, it'll come out this week or next week.

But it's been, I think, an overall pretty good term for people who care about the Constitution.

Yeah, I think it's been very good.

Molly, great to have you on.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Take care.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program, and we really want to thank you for listening.

What has happened with the Dobbs case?

We have Roe versus Wade overruled, as well as Casey.

Oh my gosh.

I don't think I ever thought I would see this day, to be honest with you.

But it's a a good day.

We have talked about this.

We have been together for

25 years, and we both said never in our lifetime would this happen.

Nope.

I didn't.

Oh

my gosh.

It's

being wiped.

Please hear

the voice of your people.

We are trying to mend our ways.

we are sorry it has taken us this long, but please hear your people.

Please

forgive us for what we have done.

My gosh,

is the ruling, does it look to be the same as the original Alito ruling?

I'm just going through it now.

It does seem to be a 6-3 decision,

which is,

you know, there was a question of whether Roberts

would come on board for this.

Looks like he has.

So

it does seem to be a 6-3 decision.

Just let that sink in, America.

What Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg said

that this is

this was

unjustly

and

decided, Roe versus Wade.

She thought it was flawed,

and it was.

The idea that

abortion is covered in the Constitution is not true.

It is not true.

And everything that is not in the Constitution doesn't make it unconstitutional.

It just means it goes to the states to decide.

That is the law of the land and has been forever.

Even Justice Ginsburg said that.

The

relevant portion here at the end of the opinion, we end this opinion where we began.

Abortion presents a profound moral question.

The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting abortion.

Roe and Casey arrogated that authority.

We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives.

The judgment of the Fifth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remitted for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

Okay.

We please, our producers need to be watching the White House

and all others who are going to come out in a statement.

This means

Jane's revenge

is going to be

at least

what they say is they are going to be lighting cities on fire tonight.

I'm prayerful that that doesn't happen, but I wouldn't doubt it.

The media is going to stir things up like there is no tomorrow.

But we can

beg the Lord for peace and protection on all sides.

You know,

I think it is so important to know that we have to be on God's side because He's not picking

sides.

He doesn't.

He loves all of His children equally.

And

we just try to do what He wants us to to do.

So pray for all of those who are

terrified about what this means, all those who are,

I think, misguided,

and pray for peace to wash over us.

I doubt, well, I'm not going to.

I have no idea what the Lord wants.

Whatever the Lord wants,

we'll deal with it.

All right.

Would you make sure that we have talked to Levitt's office?

And if we can, we'll do it on the bottom of the hour.

My apologies to him.

I don't mean to be rude, but

sorry.

I hope we can fulfill his local race over the Dobbs decision.

Glenn, I don't understand why you didn't do that.

That was really rude of you to cut him off in the middle of that.

I mean, what could you possibly be talking about?

Only

tens of millions of children potentially are on the road to living instead of not being alive.

But I want to make sure he gets his words in here because I know that was a high priority to him.

So we'll get back to him as soon as possible.

I'm glad he prioritized that.

It's a really important moment for him to make that personal argument and I'm glad he made it.

I don't care.

Can we get

let me?

I'm sorry, but we don't have another.

We don't have a break long enough.

Can we get analysis on bottom of this hour?

Because if we can get analysis on this hour, if they have time to read it, get analysis on, and then move David to the next hour.

If we can't get analysis because they haven't had time to read it yet, then

let's...

I'm sorry, I'm just shocked that this came out.

We were just having this conversation before we went on the air.

And Stu said, what are you going to do if the Dobbs case comes out?

And I said, it's not going to come out.

And he said, but if it comes out.

And I said, it's not going to come out.

But if it does, we have to take that.

And so I'm just shocked because I did not expect that to happen.

Yeah, Glenn, we can read one excerpt here from the ruling.

We do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today's decision overruling

Roe and Casey.

And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision.

Gosh, if that is not the central problem with the Supreme Court so often.

So glad they pointed that out.

We can only do our job, which is to interpret the law, apply long-standing principles of star decisis, and decide this case accordingly.

We therefore hold that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion, period.

Rowan Casey must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion must be returned to the people and their elected representatives.

It is the best of times.

It is the worst of times.

We're going to see miracles in our lifetime, and I think we just saw one.

The court writes, the precedents should be respected, but sometimes the court errors.

And occasionally the court issues an important decision that is egregiously wrong.

When that happens, Stari Decisis is not a straitjacket.

This is something, of course, we've been arguing for decades and seemingly as obvious as you point out.

I mean, even Ruth Bader Ginsburg supported this at one point in her career.

Many liberal

court watchers feel the same way.

This is not a conservative.

There's a lot of passion for conservatives on the pro-life side of this, and there's very little appetite for that on the left.

However, there is appetite for this being a terrible law and an egregiously made, egregiously poor decision made when Roe versus Wade was initially

decided.

And so the left has been

on board with this, not to say we shouldn't have abortion, which again, this is not what this does.

And it's important to remember that overturning Roe versus Wade

does very little to stop abortion in this country.

It's a very important first step.

It won't.

But anyone who wants to get an abortion in this country will still be able to get them.

This is why the work that we've talked about some of these organizations we've worked with is so important.

It's about still changing hearts and minds.

This will not do it on its own, but it is an important step.

So, do you remember when I was at Fox and I was talking about why it was so important

to be good, be steady, don't fight back the way they want you to fight back.

Because Martin Luther King was right.

When you put good versus evil side by side, the American people will know it and they will recognize it and they will see it.

A lot of Americans have been duped, and a lot of Americans,

you know, it's very, very difficult.

You learn this from the history of Germany and other places.

Once you decide and you've gone so far mentally down the road, it takes a huge amount of courage to say, holy cow, I was wrong about this, and switch sides.

But I think you're going to see states, California, New York, they are going to become abortion mills.

They are going to do abortion vacations.

They are going to push the limits as far as they're going to say, if it's up to the state, you will see,

you will see laws in some states that say after a baby is born, you can kill it.

They've done it already in Chicago.

They've done it illegally in Chicago.

They talked about it in Virginia.

They're going to do it in New York.

They're going to do it in California.

Believe me.

And this will be the place where I think a lot of Americans will have to decide:

can I live in a state like that?

Can I be part of that?

This is so far, this will become so far over the edge

that most Americans will be appalled by what is happening.

Even those who believe that

they want to have reasonable limits to abortion,

they will not find it reasonable what these death states will do.

You're listening to the best of the Glendeck program.

Josh Hammer, he is the opinion editor of Newsweek.

He is the host of the Josh Hammer Show.

He is really quite brilliant, one of the leading minds in the conservative movement.

I think Josh Hammer joins us now to tell us

what did you find in this decision?

Glenn, great to be back with you on such a momentous and really this emotionally powerful day, honestly.

So, you know, look, as you said, this dropped recently.

Funny enough, I was in the middle of giving a guest lecture for an organization.

I'm on the advisory board of when it drops.

So I barely had any time time to kind of skim through here, let alone get to the concurring and dissenting opinions.

But it looks like this looks very similar to the draft opinion that was leaked by the Politico story a month and a half ago in early May.

And I think those of us who were praying that the five justices from this leaked draft majority opinion would have the fortitude to stiffen their spines against this unprecedented assault now know that our prayers were answered, Glenn.

That's really my takeaway right now.

This looks a lot like the leaked opinion.

Justice Thomas and Justice Kavanaugh have some brief concurring opinions, but

unbelievable.

And really, just holding aside the constitutional law stuff for a second here, just speaking as pro-lifers,

on a day like today, I think we really just need to pause.

And I tweeted this out earlier.

We need to just be grateful for our half-century of pro-life activist forebears who, you know, this, Glenn, this issue could have gone away after 1973.

That was a long time ago, 1973.

I mean, this issue could have just gone away.

We owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the pro-life moral activists, political activists, and of course, yes, the legal activists who fought day in and day out to make sure that this grave injustice stayed front and center of our national political conscience.

And in many days, today is the culmination of a half century of fighting for truth and justice.

But in many ways, it's also a new beginning for the pro-life fight as well, interestingly.

How do you mean a new beginning for the fight?

I think it's going to turn - I think we're going to see abortion turn even darker in those states that

allow it.

Is that what you're meaning by this?

Well, look, I mean, for a half century now, Roe v.

Wade and its progeny, specifically the Planned Parenthood versus Casey case of 1992, they took away from the states, obviously, they arrogated authority away from the states the ability to attempt to nationally codify one view of the morality of abortion.

It happened to be a profoundly immoral view.

So the fight now shifts to the states and the pro-life activists in all the 50 states, especially obviously in red states, purple states.

I mean, admittedly, some blue states like New York and California probably won't be able to touch them there.

But we have to make sure that our side is well positioned in the state capitals for every red, purplish, and probably even light blue state to make sure that we fight for successful, cogent, and morally consistent pro-life legislation.

The state of Oklahoma, actually, just north of Texas, where I know you are, Glenn, they've been leading on this, actually.

Governor Kevin Stitt signed into law a fantastic pro-life bill there in Oklahoma a few weeks ago, maybe a month ago or so at this point, that basically just bans abortion straightforward from conception.

And there are some, you know, obviously life and the mother exceptions and so forth, but we really need to start thinking about trying to craft legislation now at the state level.

But to your point, yes, I do fear, of course, that blue states will only double down in their radicalism.

And unfortunately, that's probably only going to lead to an ever greater divide in our country than we currently have today.

But obviously, we're going to save, at the end of the day, here, we're going to save millions and millions of unborn children.

We are going to save human beings who can grow up to cure cancer, who can win Nobel Prizes.

I mean, this is just a tremendous win for the human species.

I don't really know how to say it than that.

I tell you, I saw the stat that I think it was last year, the year before, 20% of all pregnancies ended in abortion.

20%.

That is

a shocking

number.

And

we do have our work cut out for us because I think that these states are going to double down.

But I think,

you know,

God doesn't waste anything.

You know, there is no waste with God.

Even the worst things that could possibly happen turn out to be

something good.

You know what I mean?

You're like, holy cow, how did that just happen?

And I think that

evil is going to fully come unmasked.

I mean, I'm telling you, Josh, I don't know how you feel about this.

I think this could be the day

of America's crystal knock.

I can see these pro-life centers being burned to the ground today.

They're calling for a night of rage around the country.

I mean, I think evil is going to show itself, and that'll scare the American people, hopefully.

You know, I've been thinking about this a lot this week, actually, because I've been bracing for kind of a new George Floyd Summer of Love kind of thing happening this summer, coming to a city or a suburb near you, unfortunately myself.

Look, I live in Florida, Glenn, I know you live in Texas.

It is a moment like this where I do think that where you live matters, and who your mayor is, who your governor is matters.

Because law and order and rioting and anarchy is not really a federal issue.

I mean, it is to a limited extent.

I mean, in June 2020, Tom Connen wrote this op-ed that was pretty controversial at the time.

I happen to agree with it, where he said, quote unquote, send in the troops.

And there is some federal legislation from the Reconstruction era that would justify that.

But most kind of quelling and quashing of anarchy does happen, constitutionally speaking, at the state and local level.

So

at a moment like this, where I fear that you are probably not wrong,

I take some solace that Governor DeSantis is my governor.

I think Texans should take some solace that they are represented by

a Republican governor and state legislature there as well.

So

I fear that you are right.

I pray, obviously, that no one

is harmed.

I mean, I fear, though, that

something bad is happening.

And at the end of the day, of course, that does not mean the justices cannot do what they are supposed to do.

So thank God they did that.

So Josh, have you looked into what the White House has been saying?

The White House yesterday, in fact, I think, do we have a clip of

this, what the White House said yesterday about the guns and then they were turned to the

SCOTUS ruling for Roe versus Wade?

Do we have that, please?

Will the President accept this decision as legitimate, even if he disagrees with it?

It's going to come from the Supreme Court, so it's going to be a decision that we're certainly going to respond to.

So I'll leave it at me.

It's just like any other Supreme Court decision, just like the one that they did today on guns.

So the White House won't say that they're going to accept it, which I don't think they will.

They're talking now about taking

doctors and moving them into places like Oklahoma or Texas where abortions will be outlawed and putting doctors on our military bases to perform abortions.

I mean, where does this go when you have a government that is in defiance of

one branch of the government?

So there's a lot to unpack here.

So

we should start from first principles.

The idea of judicial supremacy, and this is a peculiar thing to say on a day like today where such a pro-light victory has happened in Italy.

But if we're going to be intellectually consistent here, the idea of judicial supremacy, the idea that the justices have the sole and exclusive ability to interpret the Constitution for themselves and no other constitutional actor in Article I or Article II, let alone the States, has the ability to independently interpret it, that is erroneous.

In fact, actually, it was really Abraham Lincoln, actually, who in the Dred Scott case famously opposed judicial supremacy and flouted the Dred Scott ruling, at least as it pertained to everyone other than Dred Scott himself.

So I have actually argued in formal legal scholarship and a law review article actually that the Lincolnian view of how each branch of government should interpret the Constitution for itself in its own ambit is correct.

Having said that,

having said that, there is a thing called prudence and there is a thing called comedy.

And

in a moment like today, when it really does look like, and I agree with you, that we are now bracing for riots through the streets, when the political rhetoric is at DEF CON one, when people are trying to assassinate Supreme Court justices.

I think it would be, at a bare minimum, a profoundly imprudent act

for the Biden administration to try to undermine this ruling.

Now, what they might do is they might try to kind of issue some kind of limp executive orders or issue some regulations that might try to kind of undermine it at the edges here.

But at the end of the day, the idea that this returns to the states, there's not really a whole lot they can do about that.

I mean, basically, at this point, if red states throughout the country, Kentucky, West Virginia, Kansas, whatever, if they want to go ahead and ban abortion, what can the Biden administration literally do about that?

I mean, short of sending in the National Guard to protect Planned Parenthood if the state legislature of Kentucky goes ahead and bans it, there's really not a whole lot they can do.

And it's very difficult to envision a world in which the Biden administration literally sends in troops to red states to protect Planned Parenthood if that state legislature goes ahead and bans it.

So, practically speaking, this is like a lot of tough talk and rhetoric.

This obviously is a campaign year in 2022.

So, there's really not a whole lot that, practically speaking, they can do to actually prevent red and purple states from enacting pro-life legislation.

I'm

glad to hear that.

I know that they have been

working on things.

I mean, he has said, you know, there's executive orders that I can employ, there are things that I can do.

He's talked about a national public health emergency,

which I think is just crazy.

But I would hope that the president would come out today and say we strongly disagree with this.

And you're right.

The court is not the end-all.

But the court did not

end abortion.

It just said the people should decide.

I think that's the best kind of court ruling on any of it.

The people should decide what this is

and send it back to the states.

Josh, I thank you very much.

Appreciate your time.

There was another ruling that came out today.

Was it important?

Oh, no.

I mean,

in comparison to this,

total nothing burger was like a 5-4 decision on something Medicare reimbursement related.

So it's

a real nothing burger, honestly.

Great.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it, Josh.

Josh Hammer, opinion editor for Newsweek and the host of the Josh Hammer Show.