Michele Bachmann responds to attacks after she calls for investigation into Muslim Brotherhood

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann joined The Glenn Beck Radio Program on GBTV (soon to be known as TheBlaze) this morning to discuss the growing influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Washington, DC and the attacks on her in the wake of her calls for an investigation. The full interview is available in the clip above.

Transcript of the interview is below:

GLENN:  There are a few people in Washington D.C. that I trust and tell the truth.  There are a few people that call me every time they turn on a water faucet from Washington D.C. and they say, "I just want you to know I'm holding a press conference today because I turned on a water faucet."  You're like, oh.  And after a while, I don't take those people's phone calls and after a while I stop reading their e‑mails.  And there are a few people that are in it for the wrong reasons.  And then there are a few people ‑‑ Jim DeMint is one of them, Michele Bachmann is one of them, Mike Lee is one of them ‑‑ that do it for the right reasons and are clean.  I mean, we were talking about this with Jim DeMint the other day.  Look what Jim DeMint has done.  Jim DeMint just stopped the Law of the Sea Treaty.  I mean, that's ‑‑ that's a pretty amazing thing to do.  You can't take Jim DeMint out because he's clean.  Does he make mistakes from time to time?  Sure.  Everybody does.  But look at what this guy has done.  Michele Bachmann is the same way.  She's a good, decent person.  May not agree with her all the time, but she's a good, decent woman.  And she is standing and she's on the intelligence committee.  Rarely do I get calls from Michele Bachmann.  But when I do, they're always important.  And she has called me a few times and lately it's been about the Muslim Brotherhood because I've been ‑‑ I've been talking to people in Washington D.C. and saying, "Hey, what's the deal with the Muslim Brotherhood thing?  Are we looking into this?"  Michele called me this morning and she said, "Glenn, there are decent people up on the Hill that are trying to expose the Muslim Brotherhood and it is spreading.  This disease is spreading so rapidly, it is breathtaking."  This goes to a documentary that we did about, what, four months ago, three months ago where we exposed what this president is doing with the Muslim Brotherhood and how it is infiltrating all levels.  And we're at a place now that if we don't stop it, we're approaching a point of no return.  And they are purging everything from our military, from our FBI.  So we're not even teaching what the Muslim Brotherhood stands for.  We're not teaching what radical Islam even is.  So how are you ever going to find it?  How are you ever going to recognize it?  It's out of control.

The inspectors general were asked a few questions by a few members of congress.  Michele Bachmann is here to talk about it and this is important.  I beg you to listen because the elephant media and Drudge, Fox, have come out on the wrong side on this issue.  They are following John McCain's lead.  It's the wrong lead.  And if you're not there to back these people up, they're going to be eaten by CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Michele Bachmann, welcome to the program.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Glenn, thank you so much.  What an important topic, and I have to say that you and the people at The Blaze have been leading the pack on this.  And thank you for the wonderful documentary that you've done because the influence today of the Muslim Brotherhood at the highest levels, from the White House, to the Pentagon, to the FBI, even to our United States military truly is breathless and people have to know about it.

GLENN:  Okay.  So tell me what happened.  You and who else wrote a letter to the inspectors general's office and said, "There are some questions here that need to be addressed."

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  It was three members of the intelligence committee:  Myself, Lynn Westmoreland from Georgia, Tom Rooney from Florida and two members of the judiciary committee, Trent Franks of Arizona and Louie Gohmert of Texas all signed onto a letter.  We asked numerous questions of the federal government because a letter was sent ‑‑ well, let me just back up.  After the Fort Hood tragedy, a report was issued that said the real problem in our government is that we are not teaching FBI agents or our military to recognize radical Islam.  So that's what we need to do.  We need to teach about it.

Well, in response to that, 50 ‑‑ over 50 Muslim organizations wrote a letter requesting that the White House start a task force to stop that from happening.  Five days after the White House got this letter, this October 19th letter ‑‑ and people can see it on my website, or maybe you have it on The Blaze ‑‑ five days after the White House got this letter from the 50 Muslim groups, they started the purge of the federal government.  Let me tell you, the federal government doesn't do anything in five days.  But they started the purge of the FBI.  So now the FBI, who are supposed to be trained in radical Islam, elements have been purged off their training materials so they are no longer being taught about what radical Islam is in order to be able to truly identify it ahead of time.  This is serious.  This is also happening throughout our United States military, Department of Justice, and Homeland Security.  And the word "purge" isn't my word.  That's the word used by the 50 Muslim organizations.  They demanded that the president purge the training materials and the trainers.  And so already people have been fired who formerly were teaching what radical Islam is.  They've been fired or they've been reassigned.  And they ask that the library be purged.  Americans don't purge libraries, but they demanded that the FBI's library be purged.  All of this was happening and so we wrote a letter to the inspectors general asking the question:  Don't you think you should look into the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and what it is they're seeking to do.

GLENN:  Okay.  So you write this, which is your job.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's our duty.

GLENN:  Your duty to protect and defend the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.

GLENN:  There is no question in any sane person's mind that the Muslim Brotherhood ‑‑ I mean, look at this ‑‑ look at this guy who ran and won the presidency in Egypt.  He says, "Oh, I'm a moderate.  I'm a moderate."  As soon as he wins, it's Sharia law, we're going down, you know, death for Allah is our highest goal.  It's the all the same crap.  So ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  And they call for Jerusalem to become Egypt's capital, not Israel's capital.  They call for the demise of Israel and the demise of the United States.  They believe in civilization, jihad, which is to come into the United States and subvert the United States from within.  I know it sounds like radical stuff, but all you have to do is look ‑‑ right, just look at the Muslim Brotherhood and who they say they are.

GLENN:  Okay.  So when you wrote this letter, then Keith Ellison comes out.  And Keith Ellison is ‑‑ he has a record of being the Mafia hitman.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, he has a long record of being associated with CAIR and with the Muslim Brotherhood.  CAIR is an unindicted co‑conspirator, as stated in the large terrorist financing case that we've had in the United States of America and so he came out and essentially wanted to shut down the inspectors general from even looking into any of the questions that we were asking.  So he wanted to shut it down.  In response I wrote another letter back to Keith Ellison, a 16‑page letter which I would encourage all of your listeners to go and read this letter.  It's what I call a bulletproof letter.  I have 59 footnotes with one example after another of the penetration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the federal government.  One of the most recent is so outrageous, it's hard to believe.  Two weeks ago the State Department broke its own law, like I said, and let a foreign terrorist come into the United States, into the White House, meet with the National Security Council ‑‑

GLENN:  Listen to this.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: ‑‑ and demand the release of the blind Sheik.  This is absolutely outrageous.

GLENN:  There's more to this story that I think is even more outrageous.  Not only did they break their own laws, give this guy a special waiver, bring him into the White House.  This is a guy who is a known ‑‑ part of a known terrorist organization.  He then campaigns to have the blind sheikh released, but who pays for his airline ticket?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  We do.  The taxpayers.  What I want to know is did we upgrade him to first class.  I mean, this is ‑‑ this is outrageous what has happened.  And so then now what's happened is the attack machine has been turned on myself and the other members of congress who have been asking the questions, that somehow we're the Muslim haters, we're the witch‑hunters, we're the new Joe McCarthyites because we're asking these questions.  All the while two weeks ago the Obama administration breaks federal law to bring someone that we list on the State Department as a terrorist organization, a member of that terrorist organization, we bring him into the White House?  You don't get any higher when it comes to intelligence secrets, you don't get any higher than the National Security Council.  He sits down with the National Security Council in our White House and has the guts to demand that we release one of the worst, most violent terrorists that we have behind bars.  He wants us to let him out of prison, to let him go free, the guy who was the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the blind sheikh.

GLENN:  So let's ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  And you don't hear a peep about this.

GLENN:  No, of course not.  Let me ‑‑ let me take you here because one of the more controversial things is you say Anthony Weiner's wife will is ‑‑ has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.  Now, this is important because she works for Hillary Clinton.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  She is the chief aid for the ‑‑ to the Secretary of State, and we quoted from a document, and this has been well reported all across Arab media, that her father ‑‑ her late father who's now deceased was a part of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Her brother was a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, and her mother was a part of what's called the Muslim Sisterhood.  It would be, we have requirements to get a high level security clearance.  One thing that the government looks at are your associations, and in particular your family associations.  And this applies to everyone.  It would be the same that is true with me.  If my family members were associated with Hamas, a terrorist organization, that alone could be sufficient to disqualify me from getting a security clearance.  So all we did is ask, did the federal government look into her family associations before she got a high level security clearance.

GLENN:  And it's not an unreasonable thing to ask seeing that this president and this administration has ‑‑ didn't know ‑‑ apparently didn't know that Van Jones was the founding ‑‑ one of the founding members of a radical revolutionary, anti‑American, Communist organization, and he's in the White House.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  That's right, and it's not ‑‑

GLENN:  So something is ‑‑ somebody's dropping the ball some place, or somebody knows.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  And somebody has been dropping the ball since the beginning of the Obama administration.  And this isn't intent to be partisan or out to get the president.  I mean, quite honestly on the intelligence committee I'm happy to report we are the most bipartisan committee I've ever been a part of, and with all of these unprecedented leaks that have been coming out from our federal government, all of which, by the way, undermine Israel, and Israel's ability to defend herself against a nuclear Iran, we are with one voice, Democrat and Republican, outraged by these leaks that are coming out of the administration.  Never before in the history of the country have we seen this level of leaks coming out, but at the same time there's also a parallel track of influence from the Muslim Brotherhood in the highest levels of the federal government, and we think that we need to get answers to these questions.  And that's the purpose of our letters.  We're asking that the inspectors general answer these questions, and Keith Ellison is trying to shut this, these questions down from getting addressed.

GLENN:  I'm really tight on time and I want to hit a couple of other things.  Stu's got ‑‑ Stu's been going over all of this information, and he's got one question for you.

STU:  Well, I see here that you did like, too, the actual military document that talks about what is a potentially disqualifying condition for security clearance.  It says, quote:  Contact with a foreign family member, if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure or coercion.  Then goes on to say the subject's closest and most frequent contacts are the ones most likely to present a security risk.  And you're talking about both her father, who's now deceased, her mother and her brother.  So I think the media seems to be holding you to this standard that you have to have this case completely proven when it seems like what you're saying is, is there a legitimate process question:  Are they actually asking these questions before handing out these clearances.

GLENN:  Right.  This has been ‑‑ I mean, your links and your footnotes ‑‑ and they're down, by the way.  I don't know if you know that, Michele.  But the Al‑Jazeera links that you put in and you said, here, go link ‑‑ go find the story on Al‑Jazeera.  We can't get to them this morning.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Oh, really?

GLENN:  Oh, yeah.  We're going to need ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Gosh.  Maybe we can go ‑‑ maybe we can go in the past and dig them up so that we can resurrect them.

GLENN:  Yeah, we're going to have to get them because they've either been scrubbed or they're being hammered, you know, by so much traffic which I highly doubt.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Heavens.

GLENN:  So that's ‑‑ I mean, you have links showing that in Al‑Jazeera's own coverage.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, these links were up as of last Friday.

GLENN:  Yeah, well, they're not ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  I wrote the letter and we got it out by midnight last Friday night and the links were up last Friday.  So they've taken them down.  Gee.

GLENN:  I will tell you that that's not unusual.  As we've followed these stories like this, that's really not unusual anymore.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's even more reason why we should be looking into this.

GLENN:  Yeah.  Let me just say this to you and then one more quick question.  I just wrote a letter to the president of my company for The Blaze and he's in charge of all content.  He's kind of our news, you know, our uber news director, if you will, he's the president of content.  And I just said we know the truth on this story.  We've had this for a while.  I do not want this company to sit down on this.  So we are going to cover this and continue to cover this to make sure that people hear this story because, Michele, you guys are absolutely right and it is a matter of national survival.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.

GLENN:  Let me ask you ‑‑

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  National security.

GLENN:  Let me ask you one quick question.  John McCain and all of the elephant media are falling right in line with the Muslim Brotherhood.  Bullcrap.  What did John McCain do yesterday?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  He went on the Senate floor and he gave a spirited defense of Huma Abedin, who is a friend of his.  And so that's what he did and I think ‑‑

GLENN:  But you're not saying that she is compromised?  You're saying have we looked into this, right?

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  That's right.  That's all we're saying because we did not infer that she is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood or that she's working on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood.

GLENN:  Right.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Our point was regarding the security clearance.

GLENN:  Right.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  And did she have to go through the same sort of process that anyone else has to go to.  Did they check the boxes.  Because if the State Department breaks American law to bring a terrorist into the White House, a member of a terrorist organization, it certainly is conceivable that maybe they looked the other way on issuing the security clearance.  That's all we're doing is asking a question.

GLENN:  I have to tell you, we're at war.  We're at war with people in the Middle East, and her ‑‑ she's compromised ‑‑ forget about the Muslim thing.  She's compromised or could have been compromised.  Her husband was sending dirty photos of himself.  I mean, you know, in a wartime, you would never put that person in a delicate situation because the family has already been compromised.  But I digress.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, and ‑‑

GLENN:  Thank you very much.  Go ahead.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  I was just going to say the Muslim Brotherhood elements have declared war against the United States.

GLENN:  All right.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN: ‑‑ and Israel.  And we need to recognize that they are at war, even if we don't fully, are onto this.  And we've got to, but I thank you and everyone at The Blaze for taking this on because the media has a completely different view of it.  So thank you.

GLENN:  Well, they're always ‑‑ they're almost always wrong, especially when it comes to these things.  Michele, thank you very much and keep up the fight.  Never sit down.  We've got your back.

It's time for our April 29, 2019 edition of our Candidate Power Rankings. We get to add two new candidates, write about a bunch of people that have little to no chance of winning, and thank the heavens we are one day closer to the end of all of this.

In case you're new here, read our explainer about how all of this works:

The 2020 Democratic primary power rankings are an attempt to make sense out of the chaos of the largest field of candidates in global history.

Each candidate gets a unique score in at least thirty categories, measuring data like polling, prediction markets, fundraising, fundamentals, media coverage, and more. The result is a candidate score between 0-100. These numbers will change from week to week as the race changes.

The power rankings are less a prediction on who will win the nomination, and more a snapshot of the state of the race at any given time. However, early on, the model gives more weight to fundamentals and potentials, and later will begin to prioritize polling and realities on the ground.

These power rankings include only announced candidates. So, when you say "WAIT!! WHERE'S XXXXX????" Read the earlier sentence again.

If you're like me, when you read power rankings about sports, you've already skipped ahead to the list. So, here we go.

See previous editions here.

20. Wayne Messam: 13.4 (Last week: 18th / 13.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

A former staffer of Wayne Messam is accusing his wife of hoarding the campaign's money.

First, how does this guy have "former" staffers? He's been running for approximately twelve minutes.

Second, he finished dead last in the field in fundraising with $44,000 for the quarter. Perhaps hoarding whatever money the campaign has is not the worst idea.

His best shot at the nomination continues to be something out of the series "Designated Survivor."

Other headlines:

19. Marianne Williamson: 17.1 (Last week: 17th / 17.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Marianne Williamson would like you to pay for the sins of someone else's great, great, great grandparents. Lucky you!

Williamson is on the reparations train like most of the field, trying to separate herself from the pack by sheer monetary force.

How much of your cash does she want to spend? "Anything less than $100 billion is an insult." This is what I told the guy who showed up to buy my 1989 Ford Tempo. It didn't work then either.

Other headlines:

18. John Delaney: 19.7 (Last week: 15th / 20.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Good news: John Delaney brought in $12.1 million in the first quarter, enough for fifth in the entire Democratic field!

Bad news: 97% of the money came from his own bank account.

Other headlines:

17. Eric Swalwell: 20.2 (Last week: 16th / 20.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

The Eric Swalwell formula:

  • Identify news cycle
  • Identify typical left-wing reaction
  • Add steroids

Democrats said there was obstruction in the Mueller report. Swalwell said there “certainly" was collusion.

Democrats said surveillance of the Trump campaign was no big deal. Swalwell said there was no need to apologize even if it was.

Democrats said William Barr mishandled the release of the Mueller report. Swalwell said he must resign.

Democrats say they want gun restrictions. Swalwell wants them all melted down and the liquid metal to be poured on the heads of NRA members. (Probably.)

16. Seth Moulton: 20.6 (NEW)

Who is Seth Moulton?

No, I'm asking.

Moulton falls into the category of congressman looking to raise his profile and make his future fundraising easier— not someone who is actually competing for the presidency.

He tried to block Nancy Pelosi as speaker, so whatever help he could get from the establishment is as dry as Pelosi's eyes when the Botox holds them open for too long.

Moulton is a veteran, and his military service alone is enough to tell you that he's done more with his life than I'll ever do with mine. But it's hard to see the road to the White House for a complete unknown in a large field of knowns.

Don't take my word for it, instead read this depressing story that he's actually telling people on purpose:

"I said, you know, part of my job is take tough questions," Moulton told the gathered business and political leaders. "You can ask even really difficult questions. And there was still silence. And then finally, someone in the way back of the room raised her hand, and she said, 'Who are you?' "

Yeah. Who are you?

15. Tim Ryan: 21.6 (Last week: 14th / 20.7)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When you're talking to less than sixteen people in Iowa one week after your launch, you don't have too much to be excited about.

Ryan did get an interview on CNN, where he also talked to less than sixteen people.

He discussed his passion for the Dave Matthews Band, solidifying a key constituency in the year 1995.

Other headlines:

14. Tulsi Gabbard: 25.2 (Last week: 14th / 25.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Tulsi Gabbard torched Kamala Harris in fundraising!!!!! (Among Indian-American donors.)

No word on who won the coveted handi-capable gender-neutral sodium-sensitive sub-demographic.

She received a mostly false rating for her attack on the Trump administration regarding its new policy on pork inspections, a topic not exactly leading the news cycle. Being from Hawaii, the state which leads the nation in Spam consumption, she was probably surprised when this didn't go mega viral.

Other headlines:

13. Andrew Yang: 27.2 (Last week: 12th / 27.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Yang has a few go-to lines when he's on the campaign trail, such as: "The opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math." Another is apparently the Jeb-esque "Chant my name! Chant my name!"

Yang continues to be one of the more interesting candidates in this race, essentially running a remix of the "One Tough Nerd" formula that worked for Michigan Governor Rick Snyder.

I highly recommend listening to his interview with Ben Shapiro, where Yang earns respect as the only Democratic presidential candidate in modern history to actually show up to a challenging and in-depth interview with a knowledgeable conservative.

But hidden in the Shapiro interview is the nasty little secret of the Yang campaign. His policy prescriptions, while still very liberal, come off as far too sane for him to compete in this Stalin look-alike contest.

Other headlines:

12. Jay Inslee: 30.4 (Last week: 11th / 30.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If you read the Inslee candidate profile, I said he was running a one-issue climate campaign. This week, he called for a climate change-only debate, and blamed Donald Trump for flooding in Iowa.

He also may sign the nation's first "human composting" legalization bill. He can start by composting his presidential campaign.

Other headlines:

11. John Hickenlooper: 32.2 (Last week: 10th / 32.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

John Hickenlooper was sick of being asked if he would put a woman on the ticket, in the 0.032% chance he actually won the nomination.

So he wondered why the female candidates weren't being asked if they would name a male VP if they won?

Seems like a logical question, but only someone who is high on tailpipe fumes would think it was okay to ask in a Democratic primary. Hickenlooper would be better served by just transitioning to a female and demanding other candidates are asked why they don't have a transgendered VP.

Other headlines:

10. Julian Castro: 35.7 (Last week: 9th / 36.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Lowering expectations is a useful strategy when your wife asks you to put together an Ikea end table, or when you've successfully convinced Charlize Theron to come home with you. But is it a successful campaign strategy?

Julian Castro is about to find out. He thinks the fact that everyone thinks he's crashing and burning on the campaign trail so far is an "advantage." Perhaps he can take the rest of the field by surprise on Super Tuesday when they finally realize he's actually running.

Other headlines:

9. Kirsten Gillibrand: 38.1 (Last week: 8th / 37.8)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Gillibrand wants you to know that the reason her campaign has been such a miserable failure so far, is because she called for a certain senator to step down. The problem might also be that another certain senator isn't a good presidential candidate.

She also spent the week arm wrestling, and dancing at a gay bar called Blazing Saddle. In this time of division, one thing we can all agree on: Blazing Saddle is a really solid name for a gay bar.

Other headlines:

8. Amy Klobuchar: 45.1 (Last week: 7th / 45.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Klobuchar is attempting a run in the moderate wing of the Democratic primary, which would be a better idea if such a wing existed.

She hasn't committed to impeaching Donald Trump and has actually voted to confirm over half of his judicial nominees. My guess is this will not be ignored by her primary opponents.

She also wants to resolve an ongoing TPS issue, which I assume means going by Peter Gibbons' desk every morning and making sure he got the memo about the new cover sheets.

Other headlines:

7. Elizabeth Warren: 45.3 (Last week: 6th / 46.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Elizabeth Warren is bad at everything she does while she's campaigning. I don't really even watch Game of Thrones, and the idea that Warren would write a story about how the show proves we need more powerful women makes me cringe.

Of course, more powerful people of all the 39,343 genders are welcome, but it's such a transparent attempt at jumping on the back of a pop-culture event to pander to female voters, it's sickening.

We can only hope that when she's watching Game of Thrones, she's gonna grab her a beer.

Other headlines:

6. Cory Booker: 54.9 (Last week: 5th / 55.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Booker is tied with Kamala Harris for the most missed Senate votes of the campaign so far. He gets criticized for this, but I think he should miss even more votes.

Booker is also pushing a national day off on Election Day—because the approximately six months of early voting allowed in every state just isn't enough.

Of course, making it easier to vote doesn't mean people are going to vote for Booker. So he's throwing trillions of dollars in bribes (my word, not his) to seal the deal.

Bookermania is in full effect, with 40 whole people showing up to his appearance in Nevada. Local press noted that the people were of "varying ages," an important distinction to most other crowds, which are entirely comprised of people with the same birthday.

Other headlines:

5. Robert Francis O’Rourke: 60.2 (Last week: 4th /62.6)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Kirsten Gillibrand gave less than 2% of her income to charity. The good news is that she gave about seven times as much as Beto O'Rourke. Robert Francis, or Bob Frank, also happens to be one of the wealthiest candidates in the race. His late seventies father-in-law has been estimated to be worth as much as $20 billion, though the number is more likely to be a paltry $500 million.

He's made millions from a family company investing in fossil fuels and pharmaceutical stocks, underpaid his taxes for multiple years, and is suing the government to lower property taxes on a family-owned shopping center.

He's also all but disappeared. It's a long race, and you don't win a nomination in April of the year before election day. If he's being frugal and figuring out what he believes, it might be a good move.

But it's notable that all the "pretty boy" hype that Bob Frank owned going into this race has been handed over to Mayor Pete. Perhaps Beto is spending his time working on curbing the sweating, the hand gestures, and the issues with jumping on counters like a feline.

Other headlines:

4. Pete Buttigieg: 62.9 (Last week: 3rd / 62.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When we first put candidates in tiers earlier this year, we broke everyone into five categories from "Front Runners" to "Eh, no." In the middle is a category called "Maybe, if everything goes right," and that's where we put Pete Buttigieg.

Well, everything has gone right so far. But Mayor Pete will be interested to learn that the other 19 candidates in this race are not going to hand him this nomination. Eventually, they will start saying negative things about him (they've started the opposition research process already), and it will be interesting to see how Petey deals with the pressure. We've already seen how it has affected Beto in a similar situation.

The media has spoken endlessly about the sexual orientation of Buttigieg, but not every Democratic activist is impressed. Barney Frank thinks the main reason he's getting this amount of attention is because he is gay. And for some, being a gay man just means you're a man, which isn't good enough.

When you base your vote on a candidate's genitals, things can get confusing.

Other headlines:

3. Kamala Harris: 68.6 (Last week: 1st / 69.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

There are a couple of ways to view the Harris candidacy so far.

#1 - Harris launched with much fanfare and an adoring media. She has since lost her momentum. Mayor Pete and former Mayor Bernie have the hype, and Kamala is fading.

#2 - Harris is playing the long game. She showed she can make an impact with her launch, but realizes that a media "win" ten months before an important primary means nothing. She's working behind the scenes and cleaning up with donations, prominent supporters, and loads of celebrities to execute an Obama style onslaught.

I tend to be in category 2, but I admit that's somewhat speculative. Harris seems to be well positioned to make a serious run, locking up more than double the amount of big Clinton and Obama fundraisers than any other candidate.

One interesting policy development for Harris that may hurt her in the primary is her lack of utter disgust for the nation of Israel. There's basically one acceptable position in a Democratic primary when it comes to Israel, which is that it's a racist and terrorist state, existing only to torture innocent Palestinians.

Certainly no one is going to mistake Harris for Donald Trump, but a paragraph like this is poison to the modern Democratic primary voter:

"Her support for Israel is central to who she is," Harris' campaign communications director, Lily Adams, told McClatchy. "She is firm in her belief that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, including against rocket attacks from Gaza."

Just portraying the rocket attacks as "attacks" is controversial these days for Democrats, and claiming they are responses to attacks indicates you think the Jeeeewwwwwwwws aren't the ones responsible for the start of every hostility. Heresy!

Someone get Kamala a copy of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' before she blows her chance to run the free world.

2. Bernie Sanders: 69.2 (Last week: 2nd / 68.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If Bernie Sanders hates millionaires as much as he claims, he must hate the mirror. As a millionaire, it might surprise some that he donated only 1% to charity. But it shouldn't.

It's entirely consistent with Sandersism to avoid giving to private charity. Why would you? Sanders believes the government does everything better than the private sector. He should be giving his money to the government.

Of course, he doesn't. He takes the tax breaks from the evil Trump tax plan he derides. He spends his money on fabulous vacation homes. He believes in socialism for thee, not for me.

Yes, this is enough to convince the Cardi B's of the world, all but guaranteeing a lock on the rapper-and-former-stripper-that-drugged-and-stole-from-her-prostitution-clients demographic. But can that lack of consistency hold up in front of general election voters?

If Bernie reads this and would like a path to credibility, clear out your bank account and send it here:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Funds Management Branch
P.O. Box 1328
Parkersburg, WV 26106-1328


Other headlines:

1. Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.: 78.8 (NEW)

Joe has run for president 113 times during his illustrious career, successfully capturing the presidency in approximately zero of his campaigns.

However, when the eternally woke Barack Obama had a chance to elevate a person of color, woman, or anything from the rainbow colored QUILTBAG, he instead chose the oldest, straightest, whitest guy he could find, and our man Robinette was the beneficiary.

Biden has been through a lot, much of it of his own making. Forget about his plagiarism and propensity to get a nostril full of each passing females' hair, his dealings while vice president in both Ukraine and China are a major general election vulnerability— not to mention a legal vulnerability for his children. But hey, win the presidency and you can pardon everyone, right?

His supposed appeal to rust belt voters makes him, on paper, a great candidate to take on Trump. The Clinton loss hinged on about 40,000 voters changing their mind from Hillary to Donald in a few states—the exact areas where victory could possibly be secured by someone named "Middle Class Joe" (as he alone calls himself.)

No one loves Joe Biden more than Joe Biden, and there's a relatively convincing case for his candidacy. But we must remember this unquestionable truth: Joe Biden is not good at running for president.

He's a gaffe machine that churns out mistake after mistake, hoping only to have his flubs excused by his unending charisma. But, will that work without the use of his legendary groping abilities? Only time, and a few dozen unnamed women, will tell.

Also, yes. Robinette is really his middle name.

If only Karl Marx were alive today to see his wackiest ideas being completely paraded around. He would be so proud. I can see him now: Sprawled out on his hammock from REI, fiddling around for the last vegan potato chip in the bag as he binge-watches Academy Awards on his 70-inch smart TV. In between glances at his iPhone X (he's got a massive Twitter following), he sips Pepsi. In his Patagonia t-shirt and NIKE tennis shoes, he writes a line or two about "oppression" and "the have-nots" as part of his job for Google.

His house is loaded with fresh products from all the woke companies. In the fridge, he's got Starbucks, he loves their soy milk. He's got Ben & Jerry's in the freezer. He tells everyone that, if he shaved, he'd use Gillette, on account of the way they stand up for the Have-Nots. But, really, Marx uses Dollar Shave Club because it's cheaper, a higher quality. Secretly, he loves Chic-Fil-A. He buys all his comic books off Amazon. The truth is, he never thought people would actually try to make the whole "communism" thing work.

RELATED: SOCIALISM: This is the most important special we have done

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism. They use their status as corporations to spread a socialist message and encourage people to do their part in social justice. The idea of companies in America using socialism at all is as confusing and ridiculous as a donkey in a prom dress: How did this happen? Is it a joke? Why is nobody bursting out in laughter? How far is this actually going to go? Does someone actually believe that they can take a donkey to prom?

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism.

On the micro level, Netflix has made some socialist moves: The "like/dislike" voting system was replaced after a Netflix-sponsored stand-up special by Amy Schumer received as tidal wave of thumb-downs. This summer, Netflix will take it a step further in the name of squashing dissent by disabling user comments and reviews. And of course most of us share a Netflix account with any number of people. Beyond that, they're as capitalist as the next mega-company.

Except for one area: propaganda. Netflix has started making movie-length advertisements for socialism. They call them "documentaries," but we know better than that. The most recent example is "Knock Down the House," which comes out tomorrow. The 86-minute-long commercial for socialism follows four "progressive Democrat" women who ran in the 2018 midterms, including our favorite socialist AOC.

Here's a snippet from the movie so good that you'll have to fight the urge to wave your USSR flag around the room:

This is what the mainstream media wants you to believe. They want you to be moved. They want the soundtrack to inspire you to go out and do something.

Just look at how the mainstream media treated the recent high-gloss "documentary" about Ilhan Omar, "Time for Ilhan." It received overwhelmingly bad ratings on IMDb and other user-review platforms, but got a whopping 93% on the media aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.

This is exactly what the media wants you to think of when you hear the word socialism. Change. Empowerment. Strength. Diversity. They spend so much energy trying to make socialism cool. They gloss right over the unbelievable death toll. BlazeTV's own Matt Kibbe made a great video on this exact topic.

Any notion of socialism in America is a luxury, made possible by capitalism. The woke companies aren't actually doing anything for socialism. If they're lucky, they might get a boost in sales, which is the only thing they want anyway.

We want to show you the truth. We want to tell you the stories you won't hear anywhere else, not on Netflix, not at some movie festival. We're going to tell you what mainstream media doesn't want you to know.

Look at how much history we've lost over the years. They changed it slowly. But they had to. Because textbooks were out. So people were watching textbooks. It was printed. You would bring the book home. Mom and dad might go through it and check it out. So you had to slowly do things.

Well, they're not anymore. There are no textbooks anymore. Now, you just change them overnight. And we are losing new history. History is being changed in realtime.

RELATED: 'Good Morning Texas' joins Glenn to get an inside look at Mercury Museum

You have to write down what actually is happening and keep a journal. Don't necessarily tell everybody. Just keep a journal for what is happening right now. At some point, our kids won't have any idea of the truth. They will not have any idea of what this country was, how it really happened. Who were the good guys. Who were the bad guys. Who did what.

As Michelle Obama said. Barack knows. We have to change our history. Well, that's exactly what's happening. But it's happening at a very rapid pace.

We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased.

I first said this fifteen years ago, people need clay plots. We have to preserve our history as people preserved histories in ancient days, with the dead see scrolls, by putting them in caves in a clay pot. We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased. And I don't mean just the history of the founding of our country. I mean the history that's happening right now.

And the history that's happening right now, you're a problem if you're a conservative or a Christian. You are now a problem on the left, if you disagree and fall out of line at all. This is becoming a fascistic party. And you know what a fascist is. It doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican or an independent. If you believe it's my way or the highway, if you believe that people don't have a right to their opinion or don't have a right to their own life — you could do be a fascist.

Christianity might seem pretty well-protected in the U.S., but that's not the case in many parts of the globe.

On Easter Sunday, suicide bombers made the news for killing 290 innocent Christians in Sri Lanka and injuring another 500. On Tuesday, ISIS claimed responsibility for the massacre. Of course, the Western world mourned this tragic loss of life on a holy day of worship, but we forget that this isn't an isolated incident. Indeed, Christians are discriminated at extreme levels worldwide, and it needs to be brought to light. And whenever we do highlight brutal persecutions such as the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka, we need to call them what they are — targeted attacks against Christians. Sadly, many of our politicians are deathly afraid to do so.

RELATED: Hey media, there is absolutely a war on Christians!

A 2018 Pew Research Center study found that Christians are harassed in 144 countries — the most of any other faith — slightly outnumbering Muslims for the top of the list. Additionally, Open Doors, a non-profit organization that works to serve persecuted Christians worldwide, found in their 2019 World Watch List that over 245 million Christians are seriously discriminated against for their religious beliefs. Sadly, this translates into 4,136 Christians killed and 2,625 either arrested, sentenced, imprisoned, or detained without trial over the year-long study period. And when it comes to churches, those in Sri Lanka were merely added to a long list of 1,266 Christian buildings attacked for their religion.

These breathtaking stats receive very little coverage in the Western world. And there seems to be a profound hesitation from politicians in discussing the issue of persecution against Christians. In the case of the Sri Lanka bombings, there's even a reluctance to use the word "Christian."

After the horrific Pittsburgh Synagogue and New Zealand Mosque shootings, Democrats rightfully acknowledged the disturbing trend of targeted attacks against Jews and Muslims. But some of these same politicians refer to the Sri Lanka bombings with careless ambiguity.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face?

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, for instance, certainly did — calling the incursions "attacks on Easter worshippers." Understandably, the term confused and frustrated many Christians. Although, supporters of these politicians argued the term was appropriate since a recent Associated Press report used it, and it was later picked up by a variety of media outlets, including Fox News. However, as more Democrats like 2020 presidential candidate Julián Castro and Rep. Dan Kildee continued to use the phrase "Easter worshippers," it became clear that these politicians were going out of their way to avoid calling a spade a spade.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face? For starters, Christianity in democratic countries like the U.S. is seen differently than in devastated countries like Somalia. According to Pew Research, over 70% of Americans are Christian, with 66% of those Christians being white and 35% baby boomers. So while diverse Christians from all over the world are persecuted for their faith—in the U.S., Christians are a dominant religion full of old white people. This places Christians at the bottom of progressives' absurd intersectional totem poll, therefore leaving little sympathy for their cause. However, the differing experiences of Christians worldwide doesn't take away from the fact that they are unified in their beliefs.

By refusing to name the faith of the Sri Lankan martyrs, politicians are sending a message that they have very little, if no, concern about the growing amount of persecution against Christians worldwide.

Martyrs don't deserve to be known as "Easter worshippers." They should be known by the Christian faith they gave their lives for. Decent politicians need to call the tragedy in Sri Lanka what it is — a vicious attack on the Christian faith.

Patrick Hauf (@PatrickHauf) is a writer for Young Voices and Vice President of Lone Conservative. His work can be found in the Washington Examiner, Townhall, FEE, and more.