Senator Ted Cruz thumps Chuck Hagel

Chuck Hagel has had a rough time trying to get confirmed as the next Secretary of Defense and leading the charge yesterday was Senator Ted Cruz. Cruz hammered away at Hagel and his flawed vision of the world in which America is the ‘biggest bully’ on the planet. Glenn interviewed Sen. Cruz on radio today.

Watch the interview at the top of the page.

TheBlaze reported on Hagel's questioning:

In some of the most talked-about fireworks to come from defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel’s Senate confirmation hearing Thursday, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) asked Hagel whether he thinks the state of Israel has “committed war crimes” — after confronting him with an old clip in which he seemed to agree with the characterization.“The caller suggested the nation of Israel has committed war crimes. And your response to that was not to dispute that characterization but indeed to describe what he said as, quote, “Well I think that’s exactly right,” Cruz said to Hagel after the 2009 clip from Al Jazeera English played. “Do you think the nation of Israel has committed war crimes?”

“No I do not, senator. I’’d want to look at the full context of the interview, but to answer your question, no,” Hagel said.

Cruz objected that the clip contained all the necessary context, then went on to say that “a suggestion that Israel has committed war crimes is particularly offensive, given that the Jewish people suffered under the most horrific war crimes in the Holocaust.”

 

The rough transcript of Glenn's interview with Senator Cruz is below:

GLENN: Yesterday I actually saw somebody in Washington D.C. earn their money. Yesterday I saw a guy who we have to keep honest. Somebody who is actually going in there and fighting the good fight. I'll tell you there's a handful of them that are pitbulls now, and they are small government, independents and liberty minded and they know the constitution, and they also know what's going on. They know what the score is. It's not like these old timers that have been in Washington for a long time, and think they're playing the same game. I talked to a congressman Glenn, it's a different world here. He's a freshman. It's Chris Stewart. I've never seen anything like that. They actually think that things are generally okay. And they actually think that it's not as bad as you think it is. You've got to strengthen these guys, and in particular one guy yesterday who made a huge, huge difference in the Chuck Hagel confirmation, and just took him apart. And even if you were for Hagel, afterwards you're like, I don't think I'm for this guy at all. Senator Ted Cruz from the great state of Texas. Hello Ted.

CALLER: Glenn, it's great to be with you.

GLENN: You are on fire.

CALLER: Thank you. And there are a lot of challenges and they're happening all at once. And stop some bad things that seem to be coming down the pike.

GLENN: There's an op-ed about Chuck Hagel. Why don't you give us the highlights why Chuck Hagel should not be the secretary of defense.

CALLER: Hagel certainly has a distinguished military career, and he's a Vietnam veteran. Volunteer anyone questions his personal courage or record. But his foreign policy views have been really extraordinary dangerous. And they have been contrary to the security of the United States.

GLENN: He would not last night or yesterday with the John McCain admit he was wrong with the surge.

CALLER: That was really quite remarkable. It was an easy opportunity for Chuck Hagel what he could have. He prominantly posed the Iraq war, and the surge was the greatest foreign blunder.

GLENN: Since Vietnam.

CALLER: McCain got him to prove that the surge proved successful. Even with the antiwar views that the Hagel had expressed on the Iraq. I was against the surge and I'm grateful that it produced success. He refused to say it. He wouldn't say anything good about prevailing, and that was -- it was certainly a remarkable exchange between him, and John McCain.

GLENN: He refused to sign a letter to Clinton and Bush. Today he says that the mosque. Hezbollah in 2006. He declined to join a group of 96 senators urging President Clinton to express solidarity with Israel with the crucial moment, and done Democrat the Palestinian campaign of violence. He has gone on al-Jazeera we are the biggest bully on the planet. He has called the military response by Israel a sickening slaughter. He is --

CALLER: That's correct. If you contrast Chuck Hagel with John Kerry. I was one of three votes against him. Kerry's views are very, very lethal. And yet Hagel's views are tremendously more radical than that.

GLENN: May I say this is not your characterization. It is mine. But I'd love to hear your response on it. They are almost anti-American.

CALLER: Well, what they reflect is the typical contempt for Americans -- I think contempt. Embarrassment for American strength that you see among the extreme. Among the radicals. You mentioned the al-Jazeera exchange. I played two excerpts from an interview he did on al-Jazeera. And Hagel heard that, and didn't dispute that characterization at all. The second which was jaw dropping which was on the al-Jazeera, and the reality that the United States was the world's bully, and he explicitly agreed, he said yes I agree that point is relevant. It's a good one. I agree.

PAT: Then he lied to you Senator about not hearing that part. It was so obvious.

GLENN: It was so clear when you listen to the audio, and you see the interview. It's up on "The Blaze" by the way. Senator Cruz's questioning is up on "The Blaze", and also we've added the video from al-Jazeera. It was so clear he knows exactly what's going on, then he strangely had the courage to look you in the eye I didn't know that. I didn't hear that. What were you agreeing with then?

CALLER: It was really remarkable, and it's worth under scoring. This is a man who is being put forward to be the secretary of defense for the chief civilian officer of the United States military, to go on al-Jazeera a foreign network that is broadcasting propaganda to countries that have extraordinary hostility to us.

GLENN: No, Al Gore says they're for us.

CALLER: To explicitly agree with the statement that American is the world's bully. That statement undermines the legitimacy of the young men and women that are protecting our rights. For our secretary of defense to say that I think it is the sort of leadership specs from a secretary of defense.

GLENN: Is he going to be confirmed?

CALLER: I don't -- that depends on the 100 Senator. It depends on two thing. I hope Republicans stand together. I think his views on Israel make him the most antagonistic Senator to Israel in the time he served. And I think his views on national security, on terrorism put him as a "The Washington Post" at the fringe. Republicans need to stand together. And number two, I hope that some Democrats I was disappointed at the hearing yesterday that none of the Democrats seemed to be willing to give him any scrutiny. I understand it is hard to oppose a nominee from your own party when your President has put him up. There are a lot of Democrats who sincerely and genuinely care about insuring that Iran doesn't get nuclear weapons capacity, and I hope that the Democrats will look closely at his record. I think Chuck Hagel's record is.

GLENN: A message for firearms, and manufacturers from the Chicago Rahm Emanuel. Texas welcomes you. And gun control invited executives to consider the warmer friendlier climate of the Lonestar state of the Bank of America, and TD /PWAFRPBLG. And Smith & Wesson. In Texas we have a more modest view of government. You are inviting the arms manufacturers to move down to Texas.

CALLER: That's exactly right. This was in response to the widely reported letter that the Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel sent to two major banks urging them to cut off the lines of credit to two venerable gun manufacturers. Smith & Wesson. And Ruger, and pressure them into supporting President Obama's aggressive gun control agenda. When Rahm Emanuel wrote that letter. I think that letter was abusive. I don't think that's the proper role of an elected official to be trying to bully private companies to enlist in a political lobbying campaign. So my response was to write a letter to those gun manufacturing companies, and to the Rahm Emanuel in Texas we have the view and that elected officials work for the people. The people don't work for the elected officials. And I encourage the banks if they want to bring more business to Texas, and bring more jobs to Texas there's a reason a 1,000 people a day are moving to day. I'm proud that one of you was you Glenn.

GLENN: Move to Texas for the freedom. Not the jobs. I mean if you're coming here just for a job I don't want you here. If you're coming here because you understand that the jobs are being created because we are free in this state, come to Texas. Because this is the last -- this is the last bastion of real freedom.

PAT: Don't come here just for a job, and turn it into a New York.

GLENN: There's a reason that Texas is creating 50% of all of jobs in America. There's a reason for it. It's freedom.

CALLER: I think you're exactly right, Glenn. I have joked as you know know I'm very worried about border security, and at times I'm concerned about our western border. And all of the Californians if they're coming here to embrace freedom. There should be an entrance exam when someone is fleeing another state, and do you understand what has happened from the place you're fleeing, and not to bring those misguided policies, and ruin the freedom.

PAT: For me that's not tongue and cheek at all.

GLENN: I'm dead serious on that. But I'm glad to say hear it was slightly tongue and cheek.

CALLER: I have to tell you that the Hagel hearing yesterday, some liberal activist on Twitter sent was my favorite tweet of the entire day. Which is that this individual said now Cruz is going all Glenn Beck in the hearing. Which I took that as a high, high compliment. I guess it was that I tried to intrude on the hearing with facts, and put Chuck Hagel's own record and words on the stand.

GLENN: That is a real compliment. I'm sorry they used me to try to smear you.

CALLER: I was honored by the comparison.

GLENN: Thank you very much, Senator. Keep up the good work. You just shout out. If somebody is trying to corner, if somebody -- if you start to feel like I'm --

PAT: Darkness is closing in.

GLENN: It will it will absolutely close in around you. Know that there are millions of Americans that are praying for you, and praying for other senators and Congress none must not just like you. Just don't lose your soul, and cry out for help.

CALLER: Well Glenn, in three weeks the "New York Times" to attacking me. Rachel mad oh, and morning Joe seems to devote to attacking me. And I'll tell you that I view that as a sign we're doing something right.

GLENN: We're trying to fast and furious without getting in bed with the drug lords like our administration has. We're working as fast as we can to build an alternative network that is beholden to parties and not beholden to any kind of liberal nonsense.

CALLER: I appreciate that. And you're being lifted up by the prayers of men and women across America, and all of us and what you're doing, and what I'm doing. We're fighting to save our country. I feel incredibly to have an opportunity to make a small difference.

GLENN: I respect what you're doing. I will leave it at that.

CALLER: I appreciate you, and thank you and let's get it done together.

GLENN: Thank you. Senator Ted Cruz from Texas. If you haven't seen what he did yesterday, go to the website

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.