Best of the Program | Guests: Rafer Weigel, Ben Sasse, Daniel Di Martinio & Eric Early | 2/21/19

Welcome to my TP.

It doesn't take an awful lot of wumpum to be able to

be able to join this.

In fact, no wum-pum at all, unless you'd like to subscribe to the white man's internet.

Well, I was going to say, join the tribe.

This is going to be mildly offensive to some, but you should think about who started this with Elizabeth Warren.

Maybe to me.

It'll be to you.

Because you're 1.3% Native American.

Blazetv.com slash Beck is the place to go.

Blazetv.com slash Beck.

Join the tribe.

Get $10 off your fee to join the tribe if you use the promo code Beck.

Yeah, 10%.

10% wumpum off.

Right now.

Sure.

Okay, well,

you don't, you know, you don't, as we discuss in today's show, I am 1.3%

Native American.

I found out from my 23andMe test, which is the greatest thing I've ever done.

I'm not part of any tribe that you know of.

I am part of the, I believe, Grand Cherokee tribe, the one that the Jeep was named after.

But that could be, you know, that could be wrong.

Today, we talk a lot about the different things that are really concerning.

If one of these things would have come up 10 years ago, we would have been freaking out about.

Civil asset forfeiture.

Supreme Court made a good move on that, but it's just the beginning.

Also,

Jussie Smollett, we talked to the guy, the reporter, who is the brave enough guy to actually break this story and follow it from the beginning.

We have Ben Sass, who is on Monday putting a bill in front of the Senate, and it's going to be an on-record vote.

The, what is it, Don't Kill Our Babies After They're Born Vote.

I know it has a happier name than that, but that's basically what it is.

Also, a guy from Venezuela.

He graduated high school in Venezuela.

He came here.

He's now at the University of Indiana in Purdue.

And he is

majoring in economics.

He has quite the story to tell about Venezuela, about socialism, the Democratic Party, and an amazing story of a group of families that are just trying not to have their children indoctrinated into all white people are bad.

Wait until you hear this lawsuit.

All this and so much more in today's podcast.

You're listening to the best of the blend back program.

You did take a DNA test.

I did.

And actually, I want to talk to you seriously about this.

This is one of the coolest things I've ever done.

And not because I believe I, well, I am, you know, 1.3% Native American, but I do have perspective on that, that that doesn't mean that I'm Native American or part of a tribe or anything else.

You're going to include it on federal levels.

Oh, my gosh, I'm going for grants.

I'm going for grants.

You've got to get some grants.

I've got to get some grants.

You should get 13 times more grants than Elizabeth Woods

has received.

That's exactly right.

I'm going to, you know, I've already gone to Yale, so I'm going to now

apply to Harvard, and I'm going to mark Native American.

This was the plot of Soulman, the movie from 1986, where they did.

No, but did he have a DNA test?

He did not.

He just went in blackface, and everyone in the New York Times cheered it as a hilarious romp.

Yeah.

In 1986.

Now, here's the good thing is, the good thing, I found out that I'm not a carrier for any kind of genetic diseases, which is great.

It's also shocking.

I mean, you seem to have every disease I've ever heard of.

Yeah, no, I mean,

I did look at it and go, I think this,

not because of the Native American thing, because that's absolutely real.

But the disease thing, you know,

no real problems genetically.

I don't believe that.

I don't believe that for a second.

So you believe the things that you want to believe out of the DNA report.

Maybe.

Maybe.

OJ did the same thing.

He was like, yeah, no, that's not my blood.

Sure, that's what the DNA says, but that's not my blood.

It worked for him for a while.

Maybe that's why my people

have a problem with alcoholism.

Maybe it is because of the oppression of the white man and you giving us fire water that that we can't handle.

Maybe that.

Oh my gosh, I've got to...

Is there a civil rights attorney?

Is there some?

I don't even know who to go.

Because the white man has oppressed me so much, I don't even know who to reach out to that I could get special status because of the white man's firewater.

It wrecked my life.

That's probably why I'm an alcoholic.

This is now you achieving the American dream, the new American dream.

Of being a victim.

Of being a victim.

You've achieved it.

Yeah, now it might be a little offensive to

some people.

White people?

Somebody.

There's probably somebody out there that would be offended by this.

I don't know.

Do you really?

They're not in my tribe.

Right.

By the way, I am not Cherokee.

I want you to know I am not.

I don't know what tribe I am.

I suspect, I suspect only because I come from such a noble line that I am Grand Cherokee,

which either we were named after the Jeep or the Jeep was named after us.

I'm not sure, but

I believe I am not Cherokee.

I want to make that very clear.

I am not part of any Native American tribe just because you have a little blood in you does not make you Elizabeth Warren, does not make you a member of a tribe.

But I do believe I'm part of the Grand Cherokee tribe.

Is that above the normal Cherokee tribe?

I don't know.

I don't want to say that.

I wouldn't say that.

Some people.

It has more features.

Some people would say it has more features.

It has more features.

It has air conditioning.

It has air conditioning, and that's, you know, that's an important thing.

In our sweat lodges, we don't sweat.

We have air conditioning and automatic windows.

I don't think it's a sweat lodge if you have air conditioning.

Well, it's a sweat lodge because it used to be.

You know, everybody used to go in there.

But then the grand Cherokee, you know, when Chief, when Chief Big Bones got in there,

he said, you know what we should do?

The Great Spirit told me air conditioning and automatic windows.

And so we installed electric windows that just go down.

You push a button.

You're sitting in your seat, really comfortable.

Some come with massage features.

And you sit there and you push a little button and the windows go down.

We don't want to run the air conditioning because we know better than you, white man,

about the environment.

We care.

So we first just rolled on the windows with our electric windows.

And then in our Grand Cherokee sweat lodge, we'll turn on the air conditioning conditioning if it really gets bad, but we will roll the windows back up.

Seems to be a little wasteful of energy for someone that loves the earth so much, where you'd open up the windows and run the air conditioning at the same time.

Well, we're using green energy.

Okay.

We're using the

power of

fire.

We're using fire.

Firepower?

Firepower.

Okay.

Yeah.

Can I, and I don't want to be insulting to you and your

newly discovered Native American.

36 hours.

I wouldn't say say that's new.

I say that is a tradition.

I say that is a

you're calling my ancestors young?

They weren't young.

This has been coming for thousands of years, perhaps 80 years.

We don't know, but it's been a lot longer.

But 36 hours is not just yesterday.

Well, but when 20 of them were spent sleeping.

I mean, that's really not.

Well, 36 hours isn't yesterday.

You want to claim that 36 hours is yesterday?

No, you were...

You were not born yesterday.

You were born the day before yesterday in this particular example.

Whatever.

But did you, was there ever any sign

of this heritage before you got the results from this DNA test?

Was there ever anything that in your past?

No, because the white man took away my way of life.

I mean, look, they took the whole Grand Cherokee nation

and they put us on this reservation and they took away our way of life.

They took away our tomahawk.

They took away our bow and knife.

They took away my native tongue.

Yeah.

And then they taught the English to our young.

And

all the beads we made in, you know, by hand, they're all now made in Japan.

You've never made a bead in your life.

Cherokee people,

Cherokee tribe.

I mean, it's.

You mean Grand Cherokee people?

Grand Cherokee people?

You could say that.

I like to shorten it sometimes.

It's a little more lyrical.

But whatever.

I mean, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, you know,

you know, so proud to live and so proud to die.

I mean, taking advantage of the results of a.

You know, they took the entire whole Indian nation and they locked us on this reservation.

And though I wear a shirt and tie, I'm still part red man deep inside.

I'm 1.3 red man deep inside.

I just want you to know that.

Grand Cherokee people.

Grand Cherokee tribe.

So proud to live.

So proud to die.

So your reservation is Irving, Texas?

That was the reservation you've been doing.

You know, maybe someday, maybe someday, when you learn?

The Grand Cherokee Nation will return.

We'll return.

We'll return.

We'll return.

We'll return.

Maybe.

Now, that's

a powerful tale that you tell.

Thank you.

However, it does seem reminiscent of a song that your people stole?

Paul Revere and the Raiders?

Yeah.

Yeah, it might.

It might sound a little familiar.

Because they stole it.

Why don't you just, you know what?

I'm going to take a 60-second break.

You just wallow in your guilt.

Look at.

Oh, my gosh.

Look at it.

Hang on.

If I could blow in.

What are you doing to your eye?

I was just thinking about trash.

And I

think about what you've done to my nation.

You're blowing into your own eyes.

It's not working yet.

It will.

See, I'm only

1.3%

native.

So if you were a good 2.5% Victir would just come right down to the fire.

It would come right down and trash.

Every time I thought of trash, it would just come right down off my face.

The best of the Glenn Beck program.

Rafer Weigel is

a journalist, a reporter from Fox 32 in Chicago.

He was brave enough to do the work and actually report on the things that, it's my understanding, most journalists felt in Chicago, most police felt in Chicago, but no one was willing to really step up and pursue it because it was such a political hot potato.

Rafer, welcome to the program.

How are you, sir?

Mr.

Beck, thank you so much for having me on.

And I heard what you said earlier, and I just wanted to tell you that this is

personal sign a personal coup for me having me on your show because um my girlfriend's family they are huge fans of you and given the fact that i work for the mainstream media as it were they've always been kind of looking at me with a side eye so this is giving me a lot of street cred that's great and the clan so thank you that's great so rafer please tell me

what

what it was like reporting on this story and what the things were that started really early on and you couldn't have been the only one who said, something's not right here.

No, I mean, all of my colleagues in Chicago, the second we heard it, said, this doesn't sound right.

You know, look, at the end of the day, you know, our job as journalists is to be skeptical, and it's the police's job to be skeptical.

And, you know, we work with the Chicago police on a daily basis.

We know these guys personally.

And from the get-go, it did not sound right.

I mean, for one, you know, the area of the Streeterville with guys in red hats and rope and bleach and the fact that nobody would have stepped in, There would have been no witnesses.

Nobody would have pulled out a cell phone and taken some videos.

So very early on, police went on the record with saying this doesn't sound right.

And we at Spox 32 were very careful to report that the headline was Jesse Smollett says he was attacked.

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

We weren't there.

So for anybody who went with the headline, Jesse Smollett was attacked.

I mean, I...

you know, I'm no partisan as a journalist.

We're supposed to keep it right down the middle.

But, I mean, I did replete at Joe Biden, who said, said, you know, I just said, hey, it might be best to tone down the outrage and tell me, no, this actually happened.

Because very early on, police said, you know, we've got no evidence that this actually happened.

And given that location, I mean, you do have to give credit to the Chicago Police Department and the tech report that they did on it, you know, to now have this guy in custody.

But, but no, from right from the get-go, we were skeptical.

Okay, so

why were you the, you know, one of the very few, if not the only one, that was really on this story, telling the truth

well i can't speak for my colleagues i can tell you that you know my managing editor also has a lot of contacts with police and so do i and we cross referenced our our sources you know she would talk to her guys i would talk to my guys and then we would you know that we would compare notes and then we'd say you know do you feel comfortable going with this she said look they're going you know they're they're giving me solid information that they're not buying this so uh you know i did go with it it was um

i don't know some would have said it was a risk but i didn't consider it a risk because,

you know, my sources are solid.

I mean, they've never burned me before.

So,

you know, I think there was other skepticism in the media here in Chicago.

I didn't read as much from my colleagues, but early on, you know, they were emphatic with me at PV My Sources that, look, this is, we're not buying this.

And, you know, they said, I can, you know, you can go on the record with me, but just, you know, quote me anonymously.

And, you know, we've always heard the debate about anonymous sources, but at the end of the day, anonymous sources are the backbone of journalism and you know there's a lot of criticism from both the right and the left when there's an article coming out quoting anonymous sources but it works both ways and in this case my sources you know are reliable so i felt comfortable sourcing them i never said jesse smiletten made it up i never said he was a liar i just said hey police are are are skeptical and you know right now there's no evidence to suggest it actually happened and that was and that was an accurate statement it wasn't a partisan statement it's just at this point there's no evidence to suggest this actually happened.

Isn't that what we're supposed to do, not just as journalists, but also as human beings?

We're supposed to say

innocent until proven guilty

and say,

he has alleged this.

He says he was.

If it is true, it's a horrible thing.

But let the police do their work.

And when charges are filed

and we hear all the details, then maybe we'll be able to come to a conclusion.

But

we're not those people anymore.

You're just automatically

either innocent or guilty.

And the phrase is, you have a right to be believed.

No, you have a right to be taken seriously.

You don't have a right to be believed.

Right.

And especially, you know, when you're talking about, you know, something very detailed as this.

I mean, yeah, I mean, I agree.

I mean, it's, you know, a lot of people, this has been a very politicized story.

And I think initially on, because, you know, I look at, I'm in the trenches in the foxhole here.

You know, I'm just looking at the specifics.

You know, I have no partisan motivation in terms of dissecting a story.

I would have done this if it was, you know, anybody else and police were giving me the same information.

And I think maybe I personally underestimated the degree at how much this is going to be politicized on both sides.

But a lot of people, you know, now they just, they want the narrative.

You know, I was attacked by a...

a Black Lives Matter activist for saying I was giving out misinformation.

I just politely said, hey, well, what are your sources?

What do you know?

If you know what I'm saying is true, I'd like to hear it.

You know, so yeah, a lot of people wanted this story to fill in a specific narrative on both the right and the left, in my opinion.

And all I did was stick to the facts.

And

I got to say, it's a little bit odd to be, and I'm so grateful to be on your show, Glenn.

And I've been doing Hannity and Laura Ingram, but for just doing my job is all I did.

And I don't know if that's a sad state of my profession, that all I did was my job.

And, you know, good people like yourself are acknowledging me for that.

You know, I mean, to me, this was nothing more than going in and punching a clock and going to work.

But, you know, I'm an old school journalist.

I grew up in a journalism household.

You know, the old adage, you know, if your mother says she loves you, check it out.

I mean, that's just how we're supposed to do our job.

Yeah, but we don't.

Are you surprised at how the media has ignored you and this story?

I wouldn't say that.

I mean, I know that I work for a Fox Fox station.

Perhaps that had something to do with why other outlets didn't reach out to me.

You know, I'm been reached out to by conservative outlets and, you know, mostly on Fox News.

They are my parent company, so I think that makes sense.

But no, certainly had CNN called or MSNBC called, I would have, you know, gone on with them as well.

You know, so I think the biggest thing I'm more concerned about is, I hope this is a little bit of a wake-up call just because, you know, so many people went with the headline that this was true early on without getting more information on the national media.

And that surprised me.

I'll be honest.

I'm usually a huge defender of my profession.

We're constantly under siege.

And

I used to say the media's not liberal.

It's just lazy.

And I don't know if this is an example of that

or political bias, but it was incorrect.

So, I mean,

I just felt that, you know, other of my colleagues, and I'm not trying to get on a soapbox here and act like I'm, you know, I feel bad even talking this way but you know at the end of the day you gotta you gotta check the facts before you run to the headline trying to refer weigel fox 32 chicago rafer i think is there a possibility that

i mean this combined with several other cases in recent memory where the the the initial narrative uh had changed changed so quickly and we see something that couldn't possibly be a hoax turn into a hoax potentially here i think there was a there's been a pattern over the past few years where we've we've used that you know journalists always will use the word allegedly, or at least are supposed to in a case like this.

But it almost becomes like a disclaimer.

It's like you throw it in there because, you know, you have to.

Shouldn't we be approaching every story?

This is whether a conservative says it, whether a liberal says it, white or black, anything, with a real sense of skepticism or at least an inquisitive sense?

Because if we don't, we can get burned like so many in the media did.

This is journalism 101, what you described.

I mean,

and that's the journalism that I was taught is you have to be skeptical.

So, I mean, yeah, the Covington boys, I mean, that was another example.

And, you know, I mean, it's like we don't need any more knocks on my profession for being perceived as being, you know, biased when things like this happen.

You know, yeah, you have to show restraint.

You just have to stick with the who, what, when, where, why.

I don't know if it's because now there's so many different media outlets and with social media and so forth that people are, I don't know, maybe they're fishing for clicks.

I'm not sure.

But at the end of the the day, yes, you're 100% right.

I hope this is.

I mean, my journalism professor, you know, who's probably very liberal, was the one who instilled these values in me.

You know, so, and so did my parents.

I'm, you know, I just hope that people are a little more responsible kind of going forward, you know, as far as this stuff goes.

So, Rafer,

let me ask you one quick question.

I'd take a break, and then I'd like to get an update on the other side on what the latest is.

But

is there any truth to the idea that that the police knew who these two guys were

and they either they were waiting for Jesse to

walk into the trap or they were going to just kind of let this go until he went on Good Morning America and said, yes, that's them.

And I don't know why everybody's calling me liar, but we have heard that Rahm Emanuel was outraged by that and everybody in Chicago was outraged by that that really were just going to kind of be cool about it.

And that changed things.

We've also heard that they knew who these guys were, and they were waiting for him to make a positive ID.

And the minute he did, that's when the case broke.

Are either of those true?

Well, it's actually just a coincidence.

They didn't know he was going to go on Good Morning America.

And apparently, that interview cannot be, according to my detectives, that cannot be used as evidence.

It's only what he tells them in a police interview.

The police slow-rolled this, but it wasn't because they wanted to let Smola hang himself.

They did it because they knew who these two guys were:

the brothers of Nigerian descent.

They are from Chicago, so I want to be clear on that.

They left town hours after this incident, and they went to Nigeria for two weeks.

So, the real motivation behind police going slowly on this is they waited for these guys to get back in town.

They were at O'Hare airport waiting for them when they got off the plane.

So, that's why, and it happened to be the same day he was on Good Morning America.

Yes.

What a coincidence.

That's amazing.

Wow.

Okay.

Be back with Rafer Weigel.

I want to get the update because he has now been arrested.

Has he been arrested?

Yeah.

Jussie?

Fox 32 reporter from Chicago, Rafer Weigel,

the guy who really broke this story and refused to give up on it

and the reason

why we pretty much know it and was questioning from the beginning.

Tell us what is happening with the Jesse Smollett case now.

What's happened in the last 24 hours?

Well, it was an interesting day yesterday.

So in the morning, Jesse Smollett's lawyers went in to talk with police.

They tried to negotiate some kind of an agreement.

No agreement was made.

And so the grand jury was put in play by the state's assistant state's attorney.

What kind of a deal were they looking for?

I have no idea.

I have no idea what they could have been possibly been trying to

maybe clean down, perhaps.

know, it would just be speculation.

But once the grand jury was put in play, they brought in the two brothers.

They testified for two and a half hours, according to their attorney.

And then they got the warrant issued for his arrest.

He turned himself in this morning with his attorneys.

They spoke with his attorneys last night.

They negotiated his surrender.

He came in at 5 o'clock this morning, was processed, fingerprinted, and now is being held

at the Cook County Courthouse by the Cook County Sheriff.

He's in a separate detention area.

As they said, that's common for high-profile detainees.

The Chicago police are coming down really hard on this guy.

I mean, the Superintendent Eddie Johnson just says, you know, what the guy did essentially was shameful.

The police are describing how, I mean, these two men who allegedly, you know, or whatever, these two Nigerian brothers who were in on this or somehow, you know, met with Millette at the time, they were able to track their every move on security cameras to the cab they got into, and they were able to follow the cab to their home.

I mean, they combed through every single hour of video and tracked a cab.

And this was a good two-mile ride for this cab.

And they got it.

I mean, that's how they found out where these guys live.

That's how they found out who they were.

So, I mean, they have an amount of evidence

against Jesse Smollett.

Now, what they don't have is the attack.

That's the thing.

I mean, that's the irony of it is that, you know, if he did do this and he wanted to get it on camera, they did it in the one place where there was no video surveillance of it so at this point smollette is not disputing that there was an attack he um you because of the leaks in the chicago pd he knows his defense he knows what he needs to be going against and it's his word against theirs now they're saying you know that he put them up to this that he orchestrated this hoax he's saying no these guys just randomly attacked me and i didn't put them up to anything so that's kind of where where things are going to go and and smollette's legal team you know they they released a statement they're mounting an aggressive defense they're going to fight this thing uh you know and go 12 rounds I think they have to.

I mean, the police, you have to put a stop to this or the police are going to spend all of their time chasing down fake claims.

There has to be a heavy penalty paid for this kind of stuff.

And too many times people are just let go or they pay a fine.

This is, I personally, I think this is a hate crime.

He obviously hated people so much that he wanted to smear them, whether that was Donald Trump or whatever.

But is there any any truth to the fact that this was motivated by his career, that he wrote the letter, that original letter that

was hateful towards him?

And I read last night that he was upset that there wasn't more of an outcry just on that letter that he allegedly had sent.

Are they looking into that?

Absolutely.

Now, I mean, I couldn't begin to speculate into Jesse Smollett's motivation.

If he did orchestrate this whole thing, why he would have done it.

You know, obviously it was an attention grabbing um you know

if in fact he did orchestrate this hoax it was obviously an attention grabbing thing as far as the letter though that's key and a lot of people are losing sight of that see the fbi and the u.s postal service they are investigating that separately that is federal time that is potential terrorism charges and uh mail fraud and there are no leaks coming onto that investigation so chicago police right now they're doing this it's a class four felony he's being charged with for filing a police report, and that's also disorderly conduct.

That's one to three years in prison, potentially.

This letter is where the real trouble could come in.

Yeah, you know,

shockingly, the one thing you don't mess with is the post office.

Hang on, there is breaking news on this, too.

Yeah, this is just coming down from the Associated Press and Washington Post, among others, that the police are saying that Jesse Smollett did send himself the racist and homophobic letter because he was dissatisfied with his salary on Empire.

Oh, my God.

Now, this is just an accusation.

He has, as far as I know, has not admitted this, but this is just coming down in the last couple minutes.

Do you have any idea, Rafer, what that would add to a sentence if the post office got involved?

Oh, man.

I mean, that's, I mean,

that's, again, that's federal.

Yeah.

I mean, you'd have to ask a legal expert on that.

That's real time.

I mean, that's not something you're going to negotiate down.

And I think that's, you know, I think that's going to be, you know, we'll see where this one plays out in terms of Chicago Police and the false police report.

What your colleague just said with the Associated Press is reporting, you know, as my guys at PD have told me, that's the real problem for Jesus,

potentially.

Rafer, thank you so much.

Great job.

Great job.

And please keep us informed and up to date on any new developments.

Appreciate it.

Rafer Weigel from Fox 32 in Chicago.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

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.

This weekend is the first day of mourning, and I think we should have more of these.

I want you to go to dayofmourning.org, morning spelled with a U, morning and asking for forgiveness for all of the deaths that have been caused through abortion and all of us who have sat by idly and not said anything, in my case, because

to my shame, I'm carrying enough water, I can't carry that one too.

I wish I would have never said those things

because things on life, revolving around life, are getting worse and worse, and it seems daily.

We have Senator Ben Sass with us, representing the great state of Nebraska.

He has

the Democrats blocked him when he said, I want just an up or down vote on

whether we kill children after they have been born.

One of the senators blocked that from happening.

So he got together and put together the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.

It comes up for a vote on Monday.

Welcome to the program, Ben Sasse.

Glenn, good to be with you.

Thanks for the invite.

You bet.

So

tell me what this prevents and what you think is going to happen.

Well, so first of all, I'm as pro-life as anybody comes in the U.S.

Senate.

I'm an original co-sponsor of all of the pro-life legislation, but this really isn't about that.

This is about babies that survive an abortion.

This is really a vote Monday night about infanticide.

So I've been the lead sponsor for three years of the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.

There's this phenomenon where when babies survive an abortion, doctors don't proactively kill them, but they passively back away from the table and allow the babies to die of exposure.

I mean, it is clear infanticide.

I remember your point about it.

I'm sorry, I remember a story a few years ago in Chicago where they were putting babies in the closet.

Yeah.

Yeah, some of these places have a room for this where they just move the baby to die as she's on a cold table struggling for life.

I mean,

if equality and

an American belief in universal human dignity mean anything, they surely mean that a baby that's fighting for life has rights and dignity and is an image bearer, and we have a moral obligation to provide some care.

So that's really all this is about: is once a baby has already survived debauched abortion, do you have to provide care for it, the same level of care you'd provide for any other baby at that stage?

Or can you kill it by exposure?

And bizarrely, there are states that are actively having this as a debate right now.

So you say you've sponsored this for three years.

Has it been rejected or has it never gotten a vote?

It hadn't gotten a vote before.

And then after what has happened in New York and Virginia over the last month, I pushed to get it more floor time.

I've been pushing in the past to get a recorded vote.

But as you know, the vast majority of whatever gets accomplished in the U.S.

Senate gets accomplished 100 to zero by unanimous consent.

Senators work out their disagreements for weeks or months or years in private.

And then you bring something to the floor and you say, you know, Mr.

President, Madam President, I believe we have unanimous consent.

Everybody agrees we should pass this.

Condemning infanticide should be done that way.

It shouldn't need a recorded vote, but we need one now because a Democrat from Washington state has decided to block us from a unanimous consent passage.

But this is sort of triggered in the public mind by what happened in New York and Virginia over the last month, where in New York, Governor Cuomo, lit up the World Trade Center site in pink to celebrate pro-abortion legislation that repealed protections for an infant that had been born alive during an abortion.

So at the moment of birth, they were stripping away protections.

And New York decides to celebrate it by lighting up the World Trade Center area in pink, which has historically been the color to celebrate the persistence and grit of women who beat breast cancer.

I mean, literally, the color was a symbolic color celebrating life, and now they decided to reverse it and use it to celebrate death.

It's really perverse.

And then in Virginia, the disgraced governor there, Northam, obviously has massive problems with human dignity across a whole bunch of dimensions.

He's been on the radio defending infanticide.

And so it became an opportunity to try to focus the public mind a little bit.

And happily, we've been able to get through all the procedural hurdles that we get a floor vote next Monday night.

So what do you think is going to happen?

I think that the

abortion zealotry industry has decided to try to intimidate a bunch of Democratic senators.

And I honestly don't know what the vote's going to be.

I know we're going to have a bunch of people opposing it now.

A number of quasi-public health organizations, many of them really just abortion advocacy groups, have put out a letter condemning this Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act as getting in the way of

private health care decisions.

We're talking about babies that have actually been born alive and are on a table fighting for life, trying to cry and breathe and want food and warmth.

And they're saying that's a private decision, which is truly bizarre.

So I can't tell you what the cause

is.

But the decision you made was to kill it.

Okay, now it's no longer in your body.

If you don't want that baby, because you said kill it, that is an individual now that should be mandated to go to an adoption agency.

I mean,

you have to preserve that life.

It's no longer connected to mom.

So mom has no right to that baby if she said she wanted it killed.

I mean, does she?

We're talking about something pretty basic here.

I mean, everybody, this shouldn't be politics.

This shouldn't be right versus left.

We're talking about, do you have a heart?

And I mean, I think it's important to have some historical memory on this.

Infanticide has been a practice through lots of human history.

It's gross and repugnant, and we should be well better than that.

But the ancient Aztecs, the ancient Greeks, they would kill kids that were regarded as undesirable um by exposure you'd you'd take a 12-month-old baby and decide we don't want this one anymore she's got x problem or y problem let's go leave them on the mountainside in the cold to die that is really the practice we're talking about here and uh

i'm sorry to interrupt it's one of the main things that happened with with the romans and the christians the christians looked so bizarre because romans would have babies and they'd throw them on a garbage barge and they would just die from exposure and the christians felt that was wrong and they would go get those children out of the garbage barges and take them and care for them.

Yeah, we have a culture that claims to believe in universal human dignity.

We believe kids are image bearers.

We believe they have worth and value.

And, you know, the Senate is a weird place.

I'm one of eight people out of the hundred there.

There's never been a politician before.

There isn't a piece of legislation that'll be introduced where somebody won't claim you have to be for it because you're fighting for the poorest and the most vulnerable among us.

And it feels like half of the Senate Democratic caucus is running for president right now.

And they're constantly out there telling people they fight for the little guy.

Well, here's a chance to actually prove it.

Fight for the little guy and the little gal.

I mean, we are literally talking about the poorest and weakest and most vulnerable among us.

When these babies are fighting for life on a cold table, you don't back away.

You provide care and comfort.

Senator, we have about one minute.

Is there any way that Democrats could say, well, this does more than just save babies that have been born?

There's a slippery slope here, and we see what they're trying to do.

Is there any legitimate complaint that they can have over this bill?

Or is it clear?

No.

No, it's clear.

There's no legitimate complaint, but the distinction they're trying to draw is that you don't need a bill to prohibit infanticide because we already have laws to prohibit murder.

And so the distinction they're trying to weasel around is saying nobody is taking a baby that survives an abortion and taking a pillow and putting it over her face and actively suffocating her to death.

we're just backing away from the table and allowing the baby to die on her own.

Under this logic, you could kill 12-month-olds the same way.

And you can also kill people like Terry Shiva the same way.

We're not killing her, we're just not giving her any food, we're just letting her die.

I mean, it always happens on both ends of the spectrum, and we're seeing the result of this evil, evil practice.

And doctors that are not living their oath.

Senator Ben Sash.

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

A contributor to Young Voices and a Venezuela expatriate.

His name is Daniel D.

Martino.

He was born and raised in Venezuela, where he went to high school and saw the wonderful experiences and consequences of socialism.

In 2016, he left Venezuela to go to college at Indiana University Purdue in Indianapolis.

He is a junior majoring in quantitative economics.

He writes and talks about economics and politics, specifically the importance of freedom, taxes, regulations, and internal affairs.

Welcome to the program, Daniel D.

Martino.

Hi, everybody.

Thank you for having me.

You bet.

First of all, how is your family?

You still have family back in Venezuela?

I do have a lot of extended family and friends.

My parents and my grandparents, they thankfully left at the end of 2017 and now they live in Spain.

What is life like now in Venezuela?

It is very, very terrible.

You can hear it, you can look at it on videos, and I can tell it to you from first-hand experience that I suffered constant blackouts.

I had to make lines for hours of food.

I had to, well, don't even think about getting sick.

Thankfully, I was young and healthy.

But many of my friends who got sick, then they got terrible treatment in the hospitals because there was just no medicine to treat them with.

Now, people will say that this is just Maduro because he's not doing socialism right, that things were different under Chavez.

He did it right.

True or false?

Well,

completely false.

I suffer from blackouts and water shortages and food shortages from way before Maduro, Maduro, definitely with Chavez.

And it is Chavez who implemented the policies that took us here, of course, and that have accumulated in their mistakes.

Chavez was the one who took away the electricity, water, oil industries from the private hands and nationalized them.

He's the one who hired masses and masses of government employees just to get their votes.

And he's also the person who,

with all this government control, started using it to bribe people, to steal money.

It was just terrible.

So, as you hear our politicians here talk about socialism, they always try to tell us,

we want Sweden.

But Sweden is not a socialist country.

It's a capitalist country with a giant welfare net.

Tell me the difference, and tell me what you feel when you watch

the Democratic Party and half of America start to embrace socialism.

Is what they're saying different than what you heard politicians in Venezuela say?

It is not different at all, Glenn.

And let me tell you what is a very, very key difference between what would be Sweden's and their proposals of the Democrat Socialists here.

They want to expand the welfare state in America, yes, but they want to expand it even beyond what Sweden has.

They want to increase taxes even beyond what Sweden has.

And even worse, they're not even going to be able to raise enough tax revenue for all the proposals.

Sweden is a very fiscally responsible country, client.

Like their debt is under control.

They don't have a large budget deficit like the United States.

So if the Democrats really don't want to turn the United States into Venezuela by having to print money and create hyperinflation, then they will have to tell Americans the truth.

They want to tax poor people at 50, 60, and 70% rates, not just the rich.

You are going to college now.

You're a junior in college.

I imagine that you meet a lot of young socialists.

That's the rage right now.

Can you tell us what the attraction is to people your age, to socialism?

And when you talk to them, what is the aha moment?

What is the thing that you say or start to discuss where they listen and go, oh, wait a minute?

Yeah, they they do understand what's going on in Venezuela once they hear from somebody who's actually from Venezuela, in my experience.

I think that they believe that,

you know, the Chavez, like you were saying, was a good person, Maduro was not.

But when you actually explain them what's going on, they do change their minds.

Most of them, some of them are just, I would say, lost.

But most of them do change their minds, and they're not radicals.

And I don't think most Americans are radicals.

But that's why we need to spread the word this way.

And, you know, that's why I think that Venezuelans and victims of communism around the world are playing a very key role in the United States to fight against these lies of the Democrats.

If we didn't have people who experience socialism, how would we be able to fight it here, you know?

But are you making a difference in your age group?

I mean, what are the things that you say that, and if there are any, teach us how to speak to a millennial about socialism?

I tell them

about the facts in Venezuela.

That socialism doesn't lead us to equality, which is what they want.

And you have to speak to people relating to their goals.

It's going to be basically impossible to change somebody's values or inherent goals for their society, so for their perfect ideal society.

But the reality is that socialist societies are not equal at all.

They're even more unequal than capitalist societies.

Right.

But, Daniel, you have to understand, at least in my opinion, that capitalism has never been about equality.

It's not.

It's about the free market.

It's about each individual.

So it does create an unequal society.

However,

socialism, as you just pointed out, also creates, but they always say, well, that's because it wasn't done right.

But it also always creates

an unequal standard of living.

Even if it was run honestly, it would the equality would be misery.

It is true.

It is true that capitalism's goal is not equality, and I'm not saying that that's my goal either.

But I'm saying that it's very hard to persuade somebody on one conversation and tell them that

they need to change completely the worldview.

I think it's basically impossible.

So, what I do think is that you can persuade millennials, and that's what I've done by telling them the truth.

Nobody will ever implement your ideas perfectly, just like there are still subsidies, just like there's still government intervention in free market societies like the US or Hong Kong and any other country.

So, if we want to live in a mere

livable world, then we need to live with a country in a country of freedom and that still allows for inequality.

What does this mean to you and to your family when you see America

teetering this close.

We have never, ever been this close to losing the free market

from the inside.

Yes.

It is scary.

It is scary, Glenn.

I came to the United States specifically because of my university that sponsored me, of course.

But

I could have gone to

Spain with my parents, but I didn't because I think that the United States is a country where I thought, and I still think though, that it is less likely for socialism to be implemented in the U.S.

than in any other country in the world.

It is like Ronald Reagan said at the Shining City on a Hill.

And

the only way to keep it that way is for us to fight against this murderous ideology, not just here in the United States, but everywhere around the world, because Venezuela is exporting this ideology by funding socialist movements abroad, in Europe specifically.

You have several Dallas Cowboy stadiums full of people listening to you right now.

What should Americans know that you think maybe we don't know or understand?

That

the only

no country is safe from false promises and the lure of false promises.

And that

not every measure that the left will propose will take us to Venezuela, but little by little, taking away our freedoms, they are going to eventually lead us into a terrible society, a society that is stagnated like in Europe, or even worse, a society that is in decline like in Venezuela.

So we need to do everything we can to vote, to protect, to speak out in favor of freedom that means lower taxes, that means responsible government, that means freedom to immigrate, freedom to trade, all these freedoms that are necessary for a country to stay free.

When you hear people talk about in America oppression and, oh, my life has been so tough,

is that hard for you to sit through and listen to?

It's a little laughable, to be honest.

I understand that some people, like everyone goes through very difficult things.

But I've had people, I've had even college professors tell me that what's going on in Venezuela is not worse than what

the low-income individuals in the United States go through.

And it's really laughable because the United States, yes, it has poverty, but poor people in the United States even have internet, electricity, water.

That's not what happens in Venezuela, right?

Right.

People are starving in Venezuela.

How can we help the people of Venezuela?

What's the best thing we can do?

The best thing the United States can do is, in part, what it's currently doing.

President Trump is taking the right actions by leading the world in pressuring Madru to get out.

And what's the best thing that we can do as individuals?

As individuals, we need to advocate first for that not to be implemented in the United States, but also we need to advocate for so that and support President Trump's actions.

There are congress people in the United States such as Ilan Omar, Tulsi Gobard, who are spreading lies about Venezuela, Glenn.

They're saying that we, the opposition, are some kind of far-right armed group, like if we were terrorists, when in reality we have a regime that is killing us and starving us purposefully, a genocide.

So what we need to do is support the change of regime in Venezuela with our democratic president, who is Juan Guaido, and push the countries in the region to take even more forceful action so that Maduro can get out.

Daniel DiMartino, thank you so much.

I'm glad you're here in America.

I'm glad your family is safe.

We pray

for

your country of Venezuela.

Thank you, and I hope to talk to you again.

Daniel D.

Martino, he is a contributor from Young Voices and a Venezuelan expatriate.

You can follow him on Twitter at Daniel D.

Martino.

You can also find him at Young,

I mean, Young-Voices.com.

That's young-voices.com.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Eric Early, he is an attorney.

He is actually a managing partner at his firm that is usually involved in really complex litigation matters focusing on business, entertainment, real estate, title, escrow-related litigation, yada, yada, yada.

But he also is

involved in a case in California that everyone should be paying attention to.

Very clear-cut on the outset, but he is fighting Hydra.

His clients are suing to block

inclusivity teaching in the schools in California.

And Eric joins us to tell about it right now.

Hello, Eric.

How are you?

I'm good, Glenn.

Thanks for having me.

You bet.

All right.

So the parents, they don't want to be inclusive.

How hate-mongering of them.

Yeah, they are so hate-mongering.

This outfit, I was contacted about a couple months ago by a group of concerned citizens in Santa Barbara, California.

They knew that I had run for California Attorney General as a Republican.

I had gotten almost a million votes.

I had never run for public office before.

And they contacted me and they said, listen, we have a problem problem up here and we need some help.

And they told me the story that they had learned right about that time.

A parent and a teacher had gone to one of these programs where they were supposed to learn about implicit bias training.

And they were told they were they soon were separated out because they were white.

They were separated out into a group separate from all the other parents there.

And they started being told how they were racist.

Meanwhile, the people teaching this class had never seen them before, didn't know them.

The parents said, what are you talking about?

We're not racist.

The more they try and fight back, the more they were attacked by these people

so-called doing the teaching.

So, what this has amounted to is that the Santa Barbara Unified School District has hired a group called Just Communities Central Coast.

And they've been working with this Just Communities group for several years now, paid them more than a million dollars in taxpayer funds.

And this group goes in and indoctrinates the teachers and the students, and their programming is just outrageous.

So,

a nonprofit called Fair Education Santa Barbara was formed by these concerned parents, and we recently filed a lawsuit on their behalf in federal court here in Los Angeles against both the school district and this just communities outfit.

It is amazing, Eric, is it not, how things have flipped.

It's like we're back in in the 1950s, except white is black and black is white.

I mean,

that's a very good point.

And things have totally flipped.

And one of the ironies of our cases

is that we are bringing the case based on constitutional or statutes based on the U.S.

Constitution that were put in place to protect minorities such as blacks, Hispanics, Asians, et cetera.

Now we're relying on those statutes to protect white people.

When you talk about inclusivity training, what exactly are they teaching?

Because they would make the argument, well, of course it's good to be inclusive.

Of course, these things are okay.

What exactly are they teaching here?

Well,

just stepping back a second, this...

This so-called implicit bias training is being taught all over the place now.

It's required

sort of education for federal workers ever since sort of an executive order came down during the Obama administration, and it's being taught more and more in schools.

So implicit bias training in and of itself

is basically becoming the norm whether you like it or not.

The problem with this group is it goes way beyond the pale of your standard implicit bias training.

And is here, let me read you something right from one of the documents that these parents gave us, which we've attached to our complaint.

It's called forms of oppression and it's a it's a chart and in the left column it says form of oppression and it uses and it says underneath that racism and then just to the right of that there's a column that says privilege group.

It says white people.

In the target group it says it says people of color.

Go back to the form of oppression column.

It says religious oppression, privilege group, Christian people, target group, all others.

So

this is the kind of insanity that's being taught to the kids of the Santa Barbara Unified School District.

And most of the parents out there we've spoken to had no clue this was going on in the schools.

How?

Your kid would have to come back.

If you're talking to your kid, they would have to come back and say some of this stuff to you.

Well, that's how some of these people have been finding out about it.

And I've spoken to one parent, and he had, I thought it was a great suggestion.

He said,

you know we have to sign a permission slip for our kids to go on a field trip and we should have to sign a permission slip if we want our kids our young kids to sit through this kind of training

but of course the school district basically keeps it under wraps they'll say they don't keep it under wraps but but they basically do

and and so now thanks to our lawsuit and thanks to the attention this is getting in santa barbara

people are becoming aware of it.

Another thing that we learned in this case that people are also becoming aware of is the the school board up there, which

hires this group and is so enamored with this Just Communities group,

is made up mostly of the same what I call

alt-left social warrior types.

It's really, really

troubling.

And this is just another example of how this creeping, you know, Alinsky-esque kind of programming has been going through the schools.

And

this is what the kids are learning growing up.

Eric, it would be bad enough if this stuff was just being taught to kids in school.

But this is actually costing the taxpayers a lot of cash, too, isn't it?

That's correct.

Over the course of the last several years, this school district has authorized the payment of more than a million dollars to Just Community Center Coast of taxpayer funds.

And the latest contract that was just entered in October is for another $300,000 for the next school year.

And, you know, it's remarkable.

And all of this is being brought to the attention of the federal court.

So,

you know, we've got some really important claims.

It's a strong case, and we just hope we get the right ruling.

Who is that group?

Who makes up that group?

Who sponsored that group?

Who created that group?

This Just Community Central Coast?

Yes.

You know, it it started, I believe, in St.

Louis

and it spre uh

these these sort of social justice types,

very left wing, and

basically like a it can't like a cancer, it it has spread out to California and they created a base in the Santa Barbara area, and now they're trying to spread this orthodoxy throughout the state of California.

It's very troubling and you know, one thing about one one thing you learn about people on the left is they are great at organizing.

They're much better at organizing than the conservative folks I know.

Conservative people I know are much more independent, believe in liberty, believe in free speech, and want the government out of our lives.

But these groups on the other side are just the opposite.

They want the government to take over everything, and they're just passionately organized to do what they're seeking to do.

So, you know, they're putting up a fight.

They're using their

typical tactics have started to try and silence us, but we won't be silenced.

And

along those lines, we have a few people that started this Fair Education Santa Barbara that are really brave people.

Because in this day and age, if you make these kind of arguments, I'm sure most of your listeners know the kind of attacks that we become subject to.

How can we help?

Well, www.faireducation.org

is the website that's been set up by Fair Education.

And I would ask your listeners to go to faireducation.org and

read about what's going on and donate to the cause.

It's a tax-deductible donation and support us in any other way that you can think of.

Are you confident you're going to win?

Well,

our lawsuit is very strong.

And,

you know, in this day and age, in California,

in the court system, you don't know what's going to happen.

But if the court follows the law and the facts, we should win this case.

Big F, but good luck.

Good luck, Eric.

And stay in touch with us.

Let us know what happens, okay?

Great.

Thank you very much.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.