Is Bachmann being told to apologize or lose her position on House Intelligence Committee?

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is getting heat from establishment colleagues over her calls to look more closely into the Muslim Brotherhood and their disturbing influence and infiltration in Congress. Glenn urged people to stand with Bachmann because she is exposing a serious threat to America - it makes one wonder, why would anyone push back?

"I want to talk to you about something of the most serious nature I think I have addressed on the air in maybe a year," Glenn said as he started the show this morning.

"Do you remember when I said social justice, and get out of churches if you're involved with social justice?" he asked. "The attacks came from all quarters."

"Today the political world is in the same kind of attack mode not against me but somebody else.  Michelle Bachmann.  For a letter she released last week, and within minutes the attacks started coming from both sides of the aisle."

Bachmann has come under fire for comments directed at Clinton aide Huma Abedin. In a letter she co-signed, she said, " "Huma Abedin has three family members -- her late father, her mother and her brother -- connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations."

Glenn said, "No one including Michelle Bachmann is saying she has been compromised. What Michelle Bachmann is asking for - as is her duty to stand and protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic - all she's asking is was there a proper check."

Glenn has learned that she is now facing pressure to apologize for her comments for be removed from her position on the U.S. House intelligence committee.

When the controversy first started over Bachmann's comments, she quickly explained: "Not once in the letter to the Inspector General of the Department of State, as you summarize, was it stated that “by extension, (Ms. Abedin), may be working on the organization’s behalf.”

She added, "That her family members are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood has been reported and referenced widely in the Arab-language media, including Al-Hayat, The Arab Times and Al-Jazeera."

"That does not mean that Huma has done anything wrong," Glenn explained.

Nevertheless, Glenn asked why it was so ridiculous to think that the same administration that allowed 9/11 Truther and former STORM member Van Jones to be the "green jobs czar" would fail at a background.

In the letter that Bachmann sent out, she had sixteen pages of footnoted information detailing evidence of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration into the United States government. You can read the full letter at the bottom of this article. On radio, Glenn went through some of the key arguments that Bachmann brought forth, and wondered why the media and other politicians were so quick to dismiss the entire document solely because of the Huma Abedin allegation.

"They're focusing on a process question - whether one woman went through the proper background check. It is what the left always does when they set out to destroy someone. The other claims in this letter, like for example The Muslim Brotherhood is attempting to infiltrate our US government, are supported by quotes from the Muslim Brotherhood itself," Glenn said.

"Michelle Bachmann is absolutely fearless and if they take Michele Bachmann out, they will take anyone out," Glenn said. "This is both in the Republican and Democratic parties. She is saying what she believes. She is saying at great peril to her life and her job in Washington."

"She is saying what she believes because she believes it's what is right for the country. And so do I. Without any hesitation, without any reservation. I warn you if you do not take the Muslim Brotherhood seriously and help people like Michele Bachmann stand in this battle, they will pick them off one at a time," Glenn said.

"There are very few people in Washington - more than you know, more than you would expect, less than you would hope - but there are those standing in Washington that are true to the constitution, true to the founding principles. True to themselves. Michelle Bachmann is one of them. She deserves and needs your support today. They are threatening - from the Republicans, Boehner and McCain - threatening Michele Bachmann that if she does not apologize for this letter today, she will lose her position on the intelligence committee. She is perfectly willing to have that happen. I am telling you that is a huge, huge mistake. And it is being orchestrated by those who either have their heads up someplace where their heads don't belong or they're getting marching orders from the very peaceful, very secular, nonpolitical, just sweet as pumpkin pie Muslim Brotherhood."

Read the full letter below:

Bachmann Letter Responding to Ellison

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

Dates:
June 15-17

Location:

Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.