Glenn interviews Texas Senatorial hopeful Ted Cruz

Glenn has said before that he think Ted Cruz understands what the country is facing economically and, if elected, will help put a stop to some of the big spenders in Congress. Cruz joined Glenn on radio to discuss his campaign - as well as some attack ads targeting him that are so bad they seem like an SNL parody.

Transcript of interview:

GLENN: We're just listening to these amazing Ted Cruz, anti‑Ted Cruz commercials.

PAT: Oh, they're horrible.

GLENN: Here in Texas. You have to hear just one of them.

PAT: Here's one of them.

GLENN: See if one word sticks out.

VOICE: The competition Ted Cruz is also lawyer Ted Cruz. Cruz is helping this Chinese company put this American manufacturer out of business. Cruz's Chinese client stole American blueprints.

VOICE: The jury found them liable for stealing our blueprints.

VOICE: But with lawyer Ted Cruz's help, the Chinese keep counterfeiting and Ted Cruz keeps getting paid.

VOICE: There's too many people like Ted Cruz.

PAT: That's because he's a lawyer. Have you ever noticed how closely lawyer and liar sound?

GLENN: Many of the same letters in "lawyer" and "liar."

STU: (Laughing.)

PAT: Quite a few, in fact.

GLENN: Is it a coincidence that not only lawyer, but trial lawyer politician Ted Cruz.

PAT: Following in the footsteps of other trial lawyers like John Adams.

GLENN: John Adams was a lawyer.

PAT: Who tried to overthrow the U.S. Government.

STU: Traitor.

PAT: Call Ted Cruz and ask him why he's a traitor lawyer, lawyer traitor.

GLENN: Lawyer, politician trial lawyer.

PAT: Lawyer.

GLENN: Revolutionary lawyer.

PAT: Lawyer.

GLENN: (Laughing.) And this is all done by Dewhurst who is just ‑‑

PAT: A nightmare.

GLENN: ‑‑ a nightmare. Texas, come on, come on, you're better than this. Ted Cruz is on the ‑‑ lawyer Ted Cruz.

PAT: Thank you, Glenn. Lawyer. Ted Cruz, who's a lawyer.

GLENN: Have you noticed, Ted, how many letters in "lawyer" are also in "liar"?

PAT: And liar?

CRUZ: I've got to say y'all have a future in comedy and attack ads.

GLENN: Really?

CRUZ: That is right in front of you.

GLENN: Will you defend us when we're in court trying to put American companies out of business?

PAT: Call Ted's office and ask him, why do you defend people? Why?

STU: (Laughing.)

GLENN: Why do you defend?

PAT: Is it because you're a defense lawyer?

GLENN: (Laughing.)

CRUZ: Well, we know it's silly season when we're 19 days out from the election.

STU: Yeah, we probably think this is a lot more funny than Ted does.

PAT: Probably.

GLENN: Ted Cruz isn't laughing when we call him lawyer.

PAT: So Ted, tell us about the Chinese company, the Chinese company and why you defended them.

CRUZ: Look, the ad that you played is filled with lies, and Dewhurst is spending $3 million saturating the airwaves with it.

PAT: Yep.

CRUZ: It's a lie.

PAT: I hear it every day, several times a day.

STU: All the time.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I have to tell you I've met with people in Texas, I was for Ted Cruz but have you heard he's a lawyer?

PAT: He's a lawyer?

GLENN: He's a lawyer politician.

CRUZ: It is filled with lots of lies, the biggest one of which is they tell you that the opposing party in this lawsuit is, quote, an American manufacturer.

PAT: Mmm‑hmmm.

GLENN: What they don't tell you is 20 years ago, he moved his factory to China.

PAT: Oh, my gosh.

CRUZ: This is, in fact, a lawsuit between two Chinese tire factories.

PAT: Really?

CRUZ: Really.

PAT: That is conveniently missing from the ad.

CRUZ: They just omitted, he incorporated his company in the Channel Islands, a notorious tax haven, and he spends eight months a year in China running his factory there.

PAT: What was the underhanded technique that was used supposedly? Because one of them, one of them is that supposedly some underhanded technique was used to defend them?

CRUZ: Which is that the company filed an appeal, and there are actually three tire companies in the case. All three appealed, including the plaintiff, including the fellow in the ad. He appealed.

PAT: Wow.

STU: Wow, he used the same underhanded technique?

PAT: As lawyer Ted Cruz?

GLENN: There's too many people like you, Ted Cruz.

CRUZ: Well, and you know what's interesting, he also doesn't tell people that I didn't argue the case. I wasn't the lead lawyer. And if you look at a case I did argue last year in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Chinese counterfeiting. I represented a major manufacturer against a Chinese company that stole a U.S. patent.

GLENN: So let me translate. He was using his tricks again in a courtroom, as a lawyer.

STU: On the same topic.

PAT: Again, with China being involved.

CRUZ: It IS hard to argue with that.

GLENN: We can turn it against you any way you throw it at us.

GLENN: And you know what? If I were Dewhurst and I had millions and millions and millions of dollars, I would turn it against you every single way. I mean, it wouldn't matter anymore. "Do we have enough lawyers? Don't we have enough Dewhursts in Washington already"?

PAT: Boy, that's for sure.

GLENN: We do.

PAT: We do have more than enough Dewhursts in Washington already.

GLENN: Tell me about ‑‑ tell me why you should be there, Ted.

CRUZ: Because our nation is in crisis and we've got too many go‑along‑to‑get‑along establishment politicians to Washington. We need conservatives and with he need fighters.

GLENN: Are you a Club For Growth guy?

CRUZ: Club For Growth has endorsed me, Freedom Works has endorsed me, the five strongest conservatives in the U.S. Senate, Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, Rand, Paul and Pat Toomey, and Tom Coburn have endorsed me. And just an hour ago, you may not have seen the news, Governor Sarah Palin endorsed me.

PAT: Wow, that's nice.

GLENN: Now let me ask you this: Texas, what the hell is wrong with you! How are the poll numbers doing?

CRUZ: The poll numbers are great. It is a two‑man race between me and David Dewhurst. He is the moderate establishment. He is a tax‑and‑spend Republican.

PAT: Mmm‑hmmm.

CRUZ: And our numbers are surging because conservatives are uniting behind Tea Party activists, Republican women. And I'll tell you the Dewhurst campaign is terrified, after Mourdock's win in Indiana.

GLENN: They should be.

CRUZ: Because as you know, all the pundits said that the moderate incumbent there was unbeatable and the people rose up and said, look, we're tired of these spineless jellyfish that don't believe anything.

GLENN: But how do you honestly, how do you combat somebody who has unlimited funds that are running ad campaigns? I mean, these ad campaigns make you ‑‑ Ted, I don't know you well but I've met you several times. You're not a monster and you're certainly not the guy that is portrayed in these ads.

CRUZ: Right.

GLENN: And, you know, if I didn't know you and I was just kind of a casual person, I'd think... he's a lawyer.

PAT: A Chinese operative.

GLENN: I mean, I would think you were the worst monster on the planet. How do you fight this without a lot of money against a guy who has an unlimited amount of cash?

CRUZ: Yeah, he's putting a million bucks of his own money in. You know the answer is support from the people all over Texas and all over the country. We've raised over $5.2 million from 19,000 people. Every time I'm on your show, Glenn, I've got to tell you hundreds and hundreds of people all over Texas and all over the country come to our website, TedCruz.org. They contribute. And it's how we're keeping up because this is conservatives all over the country.

GLENN: But here ‑‑ hang on. Here's something interesting. I mean, here's a guy who's running for the Senate seat from Texas and again one of his dirty tricks: He doesn't spell "Cruz" the way you would normally spell "cruise." Another dirty underhanded trick. So if you're going the Website and you're trying to find "cruise" ‑‑

PAT: Yeah. TedCruz.org, you would spell it Ted Cruz, C‑r‑u‑z, if I'm not mistaken.

CRUZ: That is exactly right.

PAT: Isn't that the underhanded trick you're using?

GLENN: Underhanded trick.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: It's not "cruise" like, hey, I'm putting it in cruise control.

PAT: No.

GLENN: It's that kind of underhanded stuff ‑‑

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: ‑‑ that we've had enough of.

PAT: Tell us, what's the biggest difference between you and David Dewhurst? Why should Texas vote for you as opposed to him, the guy everybody knows?

CRUZ: I'm a conservative and I'm a fighter. I've spent my entire life fighting for the Constitution and fighting for freedom. As the solicitor general for Texas for five and a half years serving under Greg Abbott, we led the nation fighting for conservative opinions, we defended the Ten Commandments and won, defended the "Pledge of Allegiance" and won, defended the Second Amendment and won. And we stood up and fought the world court and the United Nations and the president of the United States defended U.S. sovereignty and won.

PAT: Against Mexico, right?

CRUZ: Mexico and actually 90 nations against us. Mexico sued the United States and the world court.

GLENN: You did that as a lawyer.

PAT: As a lawyer. Tell us about that case because that ‑‑

GLENN: I didn't know you were the guy who did that.

PAT: Yeah, that was an important case. Tell us about that one.

CRUZ: Well, it was a case that began tragically in Houston. Two teenage girls were gang‑raped and murdered.

PAT: 1993?

CRUZ: Yeah.

PAT: Yeah.

CRUZ: And one of the gang rapists and murderers was named José Medellin. He was an illegal alien. And he was convicted and what happened was Mexico sued the United States and the world court, and the world court issued an order to the United States to reopen the convictions of 51 murderers across the country.

PAT: And in my final straw with George W. Bush, he actually sided with Mexico on this.

CRUZ: It was heartbreaking. I think he received some very, very poor advice.

PAT: Yep.

CRUZ: And he signed an order that attempted to order the state courts to obey the world court.

GLENN: This is ‑‑

PAT: Unbelievable.

GLENN: This is ‑‑

PAT: That was unbelievable.

GLENN: This is where I really lost it with George Bush.

PAT: Me, too.

GLENN: When this stuff was starting to happen, this was when I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

PAT: What?

GLENN: What the hell was George Bush doing? And you're the guy who fought it and argued it in the Supreme Court?

CRUZ: Yeah, I argued it twice. And as you know, one of the things we need ‑‑

PAT: And won, by the way.

GLENN: Yes.

CRUZ: Is we need leaders who have the backbone to stand up not just to Democrats but to fellow Republicans when they go off the reservation and they are not honoring the Constitution.

GLENN: Thank you.

PAT: Exactly.

GLENN: Thank you. Okay, now look. Last Tuesday Indiana, the Tea Party and Freedom Works and everybody else got together and they got Dick Lugar out.

CRUZ: Yep.

GLENN: We're not fighting the Democrats. We're fighting the Republicans. Got Dick Lugar out. Now the eyes are going to turn to Texas. Can the Tea Party, can freedom lovers, can constitutionalists, can real conservatives stand and make it past somebody who has millions of dollars and deep pockets to smear this guy left and right? This guy doesn't have deep pockets.

PAT: An established, moderate establishment candidate in David Dewhurst.

GLENN: Big time. Big time.

PAT: That's who that guy is. I mean, "moderate" is giving him the benefit of the doubt.

GLENN: Big time. This is ‑‑ you know, this is another one of those RINOs, this is one of those GOP "I'll play whatever game they want me to play" and Ted Cruz is not. Running for U.S. Senate out of Texas. If you want to donate, if you want to help him, go to TedCruz.org, C‑r‑u‑z‑e. TedCruz.org.

PAT: C‑r‑u‑z.

GLENN: What did I say?

PAT: No E.

GLENN: Okay. Another dirty trick?

PAT: Yes. Still another one.

GLENN: Oh, my goodness. I don't know if I can ‑‑

PAT: It's a long U sound without the E at the end. How did he pull that off?

GLENN: He's being outspent 9‑1. Early voting starts on Monday all over Texas. Dewhurst needs 50% of the vote to avoid a runoff which would most likely be with Ted. Concentrate your efforts one at a time. We've got to take the Senate back and that means even taking it back from the Republicans. We've got to have people who understand what we're facing, and Ted is one of those guys. Thank you, Ted. I appreciate it, man.

CRUZ: It's always a pleasure. You guys are fighting for freedom and making a difference. And you know what? A lot of the media said the Tea Party was dead. Tuesday proved that wrong. And on May 29th, 19 days from today, Texas is going to prove it wrong. We're going to send a strong conservative and a fighter to the Senate. And you have my word: Texas will lead the fight to stop the Obama agenda, to defend free market principles, and to restore the Constitution.

GLENN: And you have my word that if you don't hold that up, you will... you'll receive the wrath, the wrath of this program and everybody who voted for ya.

CRUZ: And Glenn, I am asking you, hold me accountable.

GLENN: Oh, we will. You don't have to ask. It's our pleasure.

CRUZ: Because if I am anything other than leading the fight with arrows up and down my torso.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

CRUZ: I mean, Glenn, as you know my dad fled oppression in Cuba. I mean, he was imprisoned. He was tortured. Freedom for me is not an abstract concept in a book.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah. Is your dad still alive?

CRUZ: He is. He's a pastor ‑‑

GLENN: We'll get him on a plane and we'll personally have him punch you in the face if you start screwing around in Washington. No, I mean it. It will be your worst nightmare. I mean it.

CRUZ: I'm much more scared of my dad than I am of you.

GLENN: You should be.

CRUZ: Because I'd have to look him in the eyes if I didn't fight for freedom and help turn this around.

GLENN: All right. Ted, thanks a lot. I appreciate it, man.

PAT: TedCruz.org.

GLENN: Again is lawyer Ted Cruz.

PAT: TedCruz.org.

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.


UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

UPDATED: On Friday, July 26th Barack and Michelle Obama officially threw their support behind Harris over a phone call with the current VP:

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.”

The fact that it took nearly a week for the former president to endorse Kamala, along with his original statement, gives the endorsement a begrudging tone.

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?