Glenn gives Harry Reid a taste of his own medicine...

Harry Reid made a wild claim with no evidence and accused Mitt Romney of being a felon. His evidence? A call he got to the office. That’s it. He then doubled down by saying that ‘the word is out there - Mitt has to prove he paid taxes’. It’s such a pathetic and false attack it’s a wonder how Harry Reid lives with himself.

Here is Reid's statement on Romney's taxes:

"The word's out that he hasn't paid any taxes for 10 years. Let him prove that he has paid them. Where is the proof that he has paid taxes? The one partial tax return shows that he has money hidden in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, in a Swiss bank account."

Writers note: If Romney released the tax return to the public that showed the accounts he holds his money in …how exactly is that "hidden"? Curious minds want to know, Harry Reid…

Reid continues…

"I'm not making that up. That's in the partial year that he gave us. Mitt Romney makes more money in a single day than the average class family makes in two years."

That last line ia about the only thing that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wasn't making up in his statements.

Just as Glenn was about to get worked up about the Majority Leader's completely unAmerican comments, an "anonymous" call came in (from someone who sounded a LOT like Stu) with their own idiotic, baseless claims…

GLENN: Hello.

CALLER: I have information.

GLENN: You have information you want to share with me? What is it?

VOICE: About Harry Reid.

GLENN: About Harry Reid?

VOICE: Yes. I can't tell you exactly how I know this.

GLENN: Okay.

VOICE: But Harry Reid is a pedophile rapist.

GLENN: He's a pedophile rapist?

VOICE: Yes.

GLENN: Wow. I mean, if somebody came before Congress and wanted to be a -- you know, somebody wanted to be a, you know, a cabinet member, you couldn't be a pedophile rapist. How long has he been a pedophile rapist?

VOICE: Approximately 25 years.

GLENN: 25 years.

VOICE: Now, I should be -- I just wanted to be clear. He is not a pedophile. He's a pedophile rapist, meaning that he's raping pedophiles.

GLENN: He's raping pedophiles?

VOICE: Right. He's a pedophile rapist. He's not a pedophile. I'm definitely not accusing him of that.

GLENN: Okay.

VOICE: But I am saying that he is a pedophile rapist.

GLENN: All right. Okay. Thank you very much for your phone call. Appreciate it.

After Glenn shared the (disturbing and baseless) claim from Stu the caller that Harry Reid is allegedly a pedophile rapist,  Pat obviously wanted to know the facts of the situation. After all, only an idiot would take seriously anything an anonymous sourced with no facts and then share the information with the public.

Right, Harry?

Glenn decided to go with it. After all, he was just using Harry Reid's own standards (i.e. reporting a baseless and idiotic claim as actual fact in front of the American people).

"So, Harry Reid should answer the charge of being a pedophile rapist. We don't know. And, you know, Harry, I don't know anything about your father. So, I have no idea, you know, whether he would be ashamed or embarrassed by you right now, but for the Senate majority leader to crawl through filth like this, the nation you serve is ashamed of you. We're embarrassed by you and ashamed of you."

Just as Glenn was wrapping up, another call came through. From Stu the anonymous caller again with EVEN MORE baseless and ridiculous accusations.

"He is a pedophile too," Stu the caller said. "Now, that's in addition to the pedophile rapist stuff. So, the way I understand it is that he's raping the pedophiles but the pedophilia is consensual."

While most might believe this was just a obvious joke to prove how insane Reid's claims on Romney's taxes are, by Harry Reid's own standards we can't be sure.

Sure, there's absolutely ZERO evidence that would ever, in a million years, lead someone to believe that Harry Reid has been a pedophile rapist AND a pedophile for 25 years, but it's out there now.

Harry Reid, live by your own standards and tell America the truth about these allegations.

Until then, we'll just have to accept it as truth until he proves otherwise. Because, in Harry Reid's America, that's how our system works.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips after he had refused to make a custom cake for a same-sex wedding. So, the Left is after him again.

Phillips says that on the same day of the Supreme Court decision, he received a call from an attorney asking him to make a cake that fades from blue to pink to celebrate his gender transition. Phillips again refused. He has also been harassed by the same attorney with multiple requests for cakes celebrating everything from drug use to Satanism. Naturally, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission is going after Phillips for discrimination. Again.

RELATED: The 'Masterpiece Cakeshop' ruling is actually a win for LGBT rights

Well, Phillips has understandably had enough. This week he filed a lawsuit against the state of Colorado. In the lawsuit, Phillips says his family lost 40 percent of its income due to the harassment he has received. He also says he and his employees were forced to complete a "reeducation program" about not exercising his faith at work.

In the Declaration of Independence, just before the list of specific grievances against King George III, Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"To prove this [talking about the king's tyranny], let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

The Left isn't interested in liberty and justice for all.

I wonder, do candid citizens in the U.S. notice that the tyranny against personal liberty, and religious liberty is not coming from the Right? Really, you would think that the Left would be all about the anything goes, to each his own kind of philosophy. "You do you," that's the typical Leftist philosophy, isn't it? It's certainly the spirit of postmodernism.

But the Left isn't interested in liberty and justice for all. They're interested in liberty and justice only for their vetted list of oppressed groups.

The Left is also pretty confident in its ownership of the "bigot" label to slap on whomever it deems necessary. But let's just go ahead and say it since no one else will – the Left is bigoted toward Christianity. This has nothing to do with the state of Colorado defending LGBT rights, and everything to do with their contempt for Jack Phillips' religious beliefs.

You know you're in for trouble any time an article begins with the following words: "These have been challenging times to be white in America."

Oh. I see where this is going:

People who aren't white may find this surprising. After all, it has been decades since white people could feel so free about loving their whiteness, or so openly celebrate whiteness, or talk about how much they relish being white and doing white activities.

RELATED: Redemption of a Grand Dragon: Can such a hateful person actually change?

Those are the opening lines of a recent NBC News op-ed- titled "Are 'white people' jokes racist? Let a fellow white person explain." I mean, it would make for incredible satire. I mean, if it were mocking the outrageous postmodern mental gymnastics of the modern Left, this article would be awe-inducing in its satirical prowess. Alas, it is not. It's real. The author, somehow, means what he's writing.

You know the routine: Racism against white people isn't a real thing. It's a clever mechanism which allows that racism against white people is purely linguistic, based on the idea that power determines who can say what.

You know the routine: Racism against white people isn't a real thing.

The idea is embodied by the entire article, but one sentence in particular smacks of it: "one of the great things about being white is that you'll never have to know what racism feels like (on the receiving end anyway)."

I think I know what it feels like. It feels like someone is judging based entirely on my skin color. Kinda like this entire article about how white people cannot be judged based entirely on their skin color. How does that not make sense?

The great censorship jihad continue'ith. And maybe one of the most bizarre developments in this war is how members of the media have formed a Caliphate to wage this jihad. There are actually beat reporters from the mainstream media, hanging on every word Alex Jones says with the hopes of catching him violating social media terms of service rules.

If these mainstream media jihadis catch Jones in the act of saying anything haram - or forbidden - they instantly charge the battlefield and pummel companies like Twitter with examples of how their rules are being infringed upon. Their strategy bared more fruit yesterday. Twitter, one of the last platforms Alex Jones still had, slapped him with a seven-day ban.

RELATED: Alex Jones BANNED?!

I just can't understand where the Media Caliphate is coming from here. When you're in the business of and count on, the free flow of information, is it not counter-productive to your business model to advocate for censorship? Do you not see the slippery slope you're on? Look, I get it. You think Alex Jones is looney tunes and maybe even dangerous, but silencing ideas and information should never be the answer.

Countering crazy and dangerous speech with rational and sane speech should be your mission… not censorship. You're helping Jones get silenced and cheering it on, but what will you do when someone comes to censor you? Because that's where this is headed.

But while the call for jihad was raised for Alex Jones, and silence now falls on his Twitter account, these accounts still have full access. The Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, Beverly Hills Antifa, Antifa Philadelphia… there are more Antifa twitter accounts than I have time to mention.

The radical Left is so well represented on Twitter, you'd think they have their own private office at Twitter headquarters right next to Jack. The Revolutionary Communist Party of America is but one still posting and calling for things like - you know - just the violent takeover of the U.S. government.

I hope the advocates for censorship enjoy these early victories because it won't be long before the monster they're unleashing turns on the master.

But the Media Caliphate isn't calling for their social media heads. They just want people like Alex Jones and Gavin McGinnis to shut up. I sure it doesn't have anything to do with - no it couldn't be - this is crazy talk, but both Jones and McGinnis work for rival media outlets and deliver rival narratives to the mainstream media.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with it. If smaller outlets like CRTV and Infowars are cutting into their viewership and stealing their YouTube and Social Media clicks, would it benefit the Caliphate to come at them full bore on a digital battlefield where they're currently getting their butts kicked? You bet it would, but that's just crazy talk.

I hope the advocates for censorship enjoy these early victories because it won't be long before the monster they're unleashing turns on the master.

How could you say no to that face?

WANG ZHAO/AFP/Getty Images

Do you trust your own ability to unplug from technology? Some people born before the 1990s are wearing it as a badge of honor now – that they quit Facebook, or they do a regular technology fast.

We like to think we're not overly dependent on technology, while posting on social media about how old-school we are. That's all well and good until the technology starts giving you puppy dog eyes and producing digital crocodile tears. What if your robot begs you not to turn it off? Will you still do it?

RELATED: Glenn's Predictions on Technology and AI for 2018

This isn't science fiction anymore. It's right around the corner. And if you're skeptical whether humans will treat robots like a family member, a new study might alter your view.

Researchers in Germany set up an experiment to examine how people treat robots when the robots act like humans. Each human participant was asked to work with a robot named Nao to create a weekly schedule and answer a series of questions.

What the participants didn't know was that completing the tasks was just a way for the researchers to find out what they were really interested in – how the participant's interaction with Nao would affect their ability to shut down the robot when asked.

Half of the participants were asked to shut down Nao without the robot protesting. But the other half of the participants heard Nao plead with them, saying: "No! Please do not switch me off! I am scared that it will not brighten up again!"

Of the 43 people who heard Nao's plea, 13 chose not to turn him off. Some said they felt sorry for him, others that they didn't want to act against his will.

The other 30 people did turn him off, but they took twice as long on average to do so than the group that did not hear the robot's plea.

Our 2018 problems will suddenly seem very quaint.

The experiment confirms previous research demonstrating that humans are prone to treat technology, especially robots with human-like traits, as living beings.

Now, take this human tendency, and fast-forward a few years in the future when robots will look, sound, and act human, and know everything about us. Our 2018 problems will suddenly seem very quaint.