WATCH: Unanswered questions surrounding Boston Marathon bombing

Part 1:

Part 2:

Now, some interesting new developments in the Boston Marathon attack as well. The media, quick to latch onto the lone wolf theory – you know, well, who are these guys, really? And then they immediately went, well, it was their religion. I’m not sure what religion.

But as the investigation continues to pan out, it is becoming increasingly likely that this event being done by a couple of guys who were just radicalized solely by taking the wrong turn on Google search is as likely as Benghazi happening because of a YouTube video. That’s not the truth. Lawmakers now say the Tsarnaev brothers were trained before the attack. Here’s a Congressman, Michael McCaul, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. Watch this.

VIDEO

Rep. Michael McCaul: I think given the level of sophistication of this device, the fact that the pressure cooker is a signature device that goes back to Pakistan, Afghanistan, leads me to believe – and the way they handled these devices and the tradecraft – leads me to believe that there was a trainer, and the question is where is that trainer or trainers?

Okay, who is the trainer? Remember, this guy is a Republican. Now, let me give you the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, also revealing that the FBI is investigating persons of interest here inside the United States.

VIDEO

George Stephanopoulos: Do you know of any other people here in the United States who might have been part of this process of radicalizing Tamerlan?

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger: This is part of the investigation. It’s a domestic investigation, and it’s an international investigation. And we’re really good at this. The FBI’s very good with that, working with our other agencies. There are persons of interest in the United States.

Let me give you another Democrat. This is a Democrat Representative in the House on the House Intelligence Committee. He said he believed the Russians know more than they are telling us now.

VIDEO

Rep. Adam Schiff: But at the same time, if they were up on the mother or on someone related to the mother and listening, there’s got to be a basis for why they went up on her electronically or why they went up on one of her affiliates or associates. We don’t know that. We haven’t received that information from the Russians. I think they do know more than they’re telling us.

Okay, now here’s what’s of particular interest: the fact that the Russian authorities recorded a conversation between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his mother back in 2011. They’re talking about jihad together, and there’s a second call that was recorded between the suspects’ mother and an unnamed man under FBI investigation living in southern Russia.

The Russians just provided this information to United States over the weekend, so why were the Russians recording the phone call in the first place? What do they know? Well, again, there’s no answer yet. That seems to be the theme around many of the stories today. There are more questions than answers, but there’s something different, because it used to always take time. But there was something else that we used to also have, and that was trust for our own government, trust that eventually we would get to the meaning, trust that there were people actually trying to do the right thing.

The issue of the Miranda rights has caused all kinds of disagreement in the Boston Marathon attack investigation, and here’s where I stand. If you’re not a citizen, sorry, dude. If you are a citizen, you need to be granted those rights, no matter how big of a dirt bag you may be. It only counts when we uphold the rights of the people we really don’t want to give rights to. That’s when it’s important.

But there is controversy surrounding how the surviving suspect was Mirandized. A federal judge – her name is Marianne Bowler. She decided to go it alone. She went down to the hospital, and she rushed down there to set up a makeshift proceeding and read the suspect his rights. It’s like 16 hours into it. That’s important to remember.

According to House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers, the FBI was “not happy about it” because, “They believed they needed more time. This is not a good way to stop another bomb from going off.” The FBI reportedly was blindsided and stunned when the judge showed up. Tsarnaev was providing valuable intelligence information and then suddenly stopped after his rights were read by this particular judge.

The FBI believes valuable information now has been lost due to the actions of this judge. So who is this judge? Who is the judge? Well, the Supreme Court held that a suspect has to be brought before the judicial officer within 48 hours. You’ve got 48 hours. The suspect has to be read their rights no matter what at 48 hours.

I believe you should be Mirandized right away, but others argue that the FBI should have been allowed the full 48 hours under the law. Okay, we can go back and forth on that one all day. Are you going to get to the next bomb, if there is a bomb? Okay, the debate goes on, and everybody’s focused on this debate, but nobody is looking at this judge.

Whether or not…is this legal? Yeah, but her timing is very interesting. We reached out to Judicial Watch. We asked them, how common is it for a judge to insert themselves into a case like this? Here’s what they told us in a statement just this afternoon. “What is unusual is the reported surprise of the FBI and the other officials at the turn of events. It looks as if the DOJ went around the FBI. The DOJ reportedly coordinated with everyone but the FBI.”

So in other words, Eric Holder went and coordinated with this judge but nobody else. Now, that seems strange for the chief law enforcement officer, doesn’t it? “Arraignments and other court proceedings do sometimes take place in hospitals. Once he was charged by justice in a federal court, it was a matter of time before Tsarnaev would have been read his rights. Don’t blame the judges, blame the Justice Department.”

Okay. Well, now let’s look at this here for a second, because I’ve got another theory. If you go by Judicial Watch, this is the decision of Eric Holder. But I again think we should ask who is this judge? Well, we started today just by going over her resume, and it’s fairly normal except for one part of her resume, a strange string of facts. One of her hobbies and interests include traveling overseas to Muslim countries for speaking engagements all the time.

She was the first female judge to speak in Kuwait. She also appeared at the United Arab Emirates, and let me put aside here for a second another big piece. She also visited the U.S. embassy in Belgrade, but besides that one, all of her international trips, she goes to Muslim countries to speak to them.

And here’s the last piece of this: She made a trip to Egypt last year. Now, this according to the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, she was there for a conference on cross-border financial investigations organized by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations in cooperation with the Egyptian judicial and law enforcement authorities.

Okay, so the Department of Homeland Security picks her to go because she keeps going over to the Middle East. They pick her to go and be a part of this, but that’s not the only reason why she was there. She also was to meet with the defense team and observe the trial of the six NGOs accused of receiving foreign funding and operating illegally in the country. Do you remember this?

We talked about how strange this was during the Arab Spring. All of these kids from both the Republicans and the Democrats, they were all there, and they were accused of funding street protest during the heat of the Arab Spring. Everybody was chanting for democracy, and the radical leftists rushed to Egypt to help and so did all of these kids. And they were scooped up, and they were held.

And then all of a sudden, they were just released. Yet, that’s one of the reasons why that judge was there. What is it about this judge and her particular interest in the Muslim countries? What is happening here? Is this just a coincidence? Maybe, very well may be. Why is she so eager to defend those who are fueling the riots? Oh, probably because she’s in good graces with this administration, and those weren’t riots; those were freedom fighters to help the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood.

We’ll continue to seek answers on all of the questions in the stories, but like I said, only more questions are coming, not more answers, including the crazy mother of the Boston bombing suspect. Something’s wrong here. She has said some truly outrageous things. Watch.

VIDEO

Zubeidat Tsarnaev: They already are talking about that we are terrorists. I am terror – they told that I was doing some terroristic, you know. What did they tell? Some kind of operation, I was kind of preparing here or I already did something, I don’t know. People are telling different, you know, information I get. They already want me, him, and all of us to look as terrorists. So yes, I would prefer not to live in American now. Why did I even go there? Why? I thought America was going to like protect us, our kids. It’s going to be safe for like any reason.

Yeah, it’d be safe. You could come over. You could be, you know, part of let’s say a marathon, and you wouldn’t be blown up. Yeah, I don’t know why you came here. I ain’t gonna miss you. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Here’s the amazing thing here is if you don’t like America, if you don’t trust America, she rings true to you. She rings true to you. This is important. She also told the Associated Press, “I’m sick and tired of all this nonsense that they make up about me and my children. People know me as a regular person…” Yeah, they did Lee Harvey Oswald, too.

“…and I’ve never been mixed up in any criminal intentions, especially any linked to terrorism.” Never been mixed up in crime, really? That is quite a bold statement considering we have the mug shot. She shoplifted $1,600 in merchandise from Lord &Taylor. Ironically, Lord & Taylor is the store that also had the videotape of her sons planting the bombs.

Also, we have now the taped phone conversations that she had with her son about jihad, and another person on the watch list, so it’s quite a statement to make. But again, if you listen to her, and you don’t like us, if you mistrust us, she rings true. It causes more doubt.

The reaction of the mom, the dad, the crazy aunt, all of this, immediately discredits the United States, but not just outside, here at home as well, I believe. The assumptions are so cartoonish, they’re so fake, it’s role-playing. Why would she leap to such bizarre, unsupported conclusions without any evidence at all? Why would she point the finger to America? Why would she say, “I’ve never done anything”? Because most people won’t look it up.

This is the tactic they use against Israel. We haven’t had it used here in our own country. This is the first time. This is something new for America. This has moved us into a new place, because what’s different this time is we don’t trust our own government. Back on September 11, we would all stand together, but now we have an inherent distrust of the U.S. We have an inherent distrust of the media. We know we’re not getting the truth.

And remember, back after September 11, the truthers didn’t ring true to anybody, because we would never have believed that before. The truthers are a mixed bag. It’s Ahmadinejad, radical Muslims, and Michael Moore, and all they have to do is plant the seeds of doubt whenever and wherever they can. With her and her husband’s stories changing in such a strategic way, I can’t help but wonder – is somebody coaching her?

I said this is a lot like Israel. Let me bring you up to speed on one other thing, one other thing I haven’t seen anybody talk about. On the day of the bombings, everybody lept to connect the bombings to the tax day and the Tea Party. Have you heard anybody point out that April 15 was also the 65th anniversary of Israel’s independence? I mean, given the bombers were radical Islamists…reasonable to search for the connection there?

Should we expect that the tactics of bombings and terror normally used against Israel to happen here more frequently? By the way, the White House cared about this 65th anniversary of Israel so much that they say well, because of sequester, we had to cancel the dinner celebration for the Jewish Heritage Month at the White House.

Yeah. Oh, and one other thing: here’s the bombing scene, and you’ll notice that this is the area here, and there’s the Israeli flag. I mean, is it too much to assume that maybe – has anybody looked for the Saudi on the surveillance tape from the day before? The scripts don’t match. The media is not telling you the truth. The government is also not telling you the truth.

And I have to tell you, I thought about it a lot this weekend. I thought, you know what, maybe everybody else in the media has gotten the call saying hey, look, you’re harming the investigation. That doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t make any sense at all, because they would’ve called us. Somebody would have said to us, but instead, we have law-enforcement officials calling us. We have people in the federal government who are instrumental in this case calling us saying please don’t give up on this…please, please, please.

The administration keeps downplaying the threat of Al Qaeda, downplaying – it’s crazy talk to even say anything about Saudi Arabia. They say that Al Qaeda is decimated, but yet their activities seem to be ramping up. They say nothing is happening, could possibly happen with Saudi Arabia, and yet the Saudi Arabians, their fingerprints are all over this.

We told about the incidents in Canada and Spain. Now there’s a story today about the terrorists beginning their spring offensive, something that we’ve been afraid of seeing happen here. It may just be getting started. This is something I’ve told you for years that when we would really be weak, when our enemies felt, okay I think they’re done. They’re at their weakest point, they’d say “go.” Are we there?

The way our government has gone out of their way to lend credibility to the secular and legitimate Muslim Brotherhood while denying any potency left in Al Qaeda and other spinoff radical Islamic terror organizations, we have set ourselves up for big, big trouble, and I don’t think anybody except the few in Washington and in our law-enforcement agencies really care.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not secular, and the only thing legitimate about them is the threat that they pose to you and your family. They have been exported around the world, and they go to work radicalizing people. That’s what they do. They are basically an extension of Saudi Arabia and the radicals there.

The Muslim Brotherhood is financed by contributions from their members, and many of those members just happen to be in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They fund many of these mosques, in fact, the mosque the bombers attended in Boston, the Islamic Society of Boston, the ISB, Islamic Society of Boston. They admitted to receiving millions of dollars from Saudi banks.

It’s run by the Muslim American Society, the MAS, which has been described by prosecutors as a North American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Extreme radical Yusuf al-Qaradawi, former trustee at the Islamic Society of Boston. It was founded by an Al Qaeda fundraiser who’s currently serving time in federal prison, and the current imam who also spoke at the Islamic Society of Boston said, “grab onto the shovel, grab onto the gun, and the sword.”

The list goes on and on, and this is just one mosque, the one in Boston. There are many. America cannot continue to ignore the warning signs, but it is more than just an administration failing to recognize the warning signs. This administration is aiding and abetting. They are adding to the warning signs.

Let me give you this warning sign. This is from a concerned Islamic leader. This guy is a good guy, speaking at the State Department in 1999. He said – remember ’99 – “The most dangerous thing that is going on now in these mosques…is the extremists’ ideology…because they are very active…They took over more than 80 percent of the mosques that have been established in the U.S.…A danger might suddenly come that you are not looking for…We don’t know where it is going to hit.”

Islamists call the mosques a rabat. It means “military fortress.” They’ve basically set up the radical Islamic version of the Mafia. The Brotherhood and CAIR and other legitimate organizations are then filled with the made guys. They’re completely legitimate. Uh huh. Really? I’ve seen The Sopranos. This is the Islamic version of The Sopranos. They sit around the table in the scheme while the rabats have the mob enforcers carrying out their hits. And that’s what those two kids were.

We keep going out of our way to help Saudi Arabia in times when we really shouldn’t be. Why, is the question. Why are we helping the Muslim Brotherhood? There’s a deal with Saudi Arabia, and I think we all know it. I mean, geez President Bush, I think actually kissed one of the princes on the lips. It was creepy.

We outwardly claim to have a mutual enemy in Al Qaeda, and we tell the Saudi’s, and they tell us, hey, we’re both against Al Qaeda, but in reality, we should say our enemy is not only Al Qaeda which came from within you, but the Islamic radicals that believe that jihad is more than an internal struggle also come from you.

Al Qaeda believes this. The Muslim Brotherhood believes this. Hezbollah believes this. Much of Saudi Arabia believes this. And why are we helping them? We’ve helped them in Egypt. We’ve helped them in Syria. We’re helping them now in Syria. It was Al Qaeda who was blamed for Benghazi, because we were running guns through Turkey into Syria, for what? For the Muslim Brotherhood at the request of Saudi Arabia.

We have helped fund the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood. I will tell you one thing that the press will not, nor will the administration, or the terrorists’ mom, and this is the good part; I want you to know while all of these questions are out here, I want you to know that I personally have seen patriotic Americans coming out of the woodwork in our government right now and coming out of the woodwork in law enforcement.

They will not sit down. They are warning. They are begging for someone to listen. I don’t know why the rest of the networks won’t do it. I don’t know why anybody else won’t do it, but people are being threatened with jail time now for helping. But they’re not going to sit down, and this is much bigger than you think and much bigger and different than you are being told. You keep asking questions, and know that we here at TheBlaze will continue to do the same.

The themes of healing and redemption appear throughout the Bible.

Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. — 1 Corinthians 15:43
It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. — Mark 2:17.

So, for many Christians, it's no surprise to hear that people of faith live longer lives.

Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved, for you are my praise. — Jeremiah 17:14.

But it is certainly lovely to hear, and a recent study by a doctoral student at Ohio State University is just one more example of empirical evidence confirming the healing benefits of faith and religious belief.

RELATED: MEDIA BIGOTRY: The New Yorker hates on Chick-fil-A over 'pervasive Christian traditionalism'

Moreover, the study finds that religious belief can lengthen a person's life.

A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones. — Proverbs 17:22
Lord, your discipline is good, for it leads to life and health. You restore my health and allow me to live! — Isaiah 38:16

The study analyzed over 1,000 obituaries nationwide and found that people of faith lived longer than people who were not religious. Laura Wallace, lead author of the study, noted that "religious affiliation had nearly as strong an effect on longevity as gender does, which is a matter of years of life."

The study notes that, "people whose obits mentioned a religious affiliation lived an average of 5.64 years longer than those whose obits did not, which shrunk to 3.82 years after gender and marital status were considered."

And He called to Him His twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction. — Matthew 10:1

"The researchers found that part of the reason for the boost in longevity came from the fact that many religiously affiliated people also volunteered and belonged to social organizations, which previous research has linked to living longer. The study provides persuasive evidence that there is a relationship between religious participation and how long a person lives," said Baldwin Way, co-author of the study and associate professor of psychology at Ohio State.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

In addition, the study showed how the effects of religion on longevity might depend in part on the personality and average religiosity of the cities where people live, Way said.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

And the power of the Lord was with him to heal. — Luke 5:17
Heal the sick in it and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to you. — Luke 10:9.

In early June, the Social Security and Medicare trustees released their annual report on the fiscal health of these programs, and the situation looks dire. Medicare is scheduled to run out of money in 2026 (three years sooner than anticipated), while Social Security is expected to run out in 2034. The rising national debt is only one of the well-known financial struggles the millennial generation faces. The burdens of student loan debt, high housing prices (thanks to zoning restrictions), stagnant wage growth, the rising cost of healthcare and lingering aftershocks of the Great Recession are among the biggest sources of economic anxiety millennials feel.

Progressive politicians have been very successful at courting the youth vote, partly because they actually promote policy ideas that address many of these concerns. As unrealistic or counterproductive as Senator Bernie Sanders' proposals for single-payer health care or a $15 an hour minimum wage might be, they feel in theory like they would provide the economic stability and prosperity millennials want.

RELATED: Time to reverse course: America is being corrupted by its own power

Republicans, on the other hand, have struggled to craft a message to address these concerns. Fiscal conservatives recognize, correctly, that the burden of the $20 trillion national debt and over $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities will fall on millennials. Some conservatives have even written books about that fact. But the need to reform entitlements hasn't exactly caught millennials' attention. Pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson, in her book The Selfie Vote, notes that millennials generally view protecting the safety net as more important than reducing the deficit.

Clearly, Republicans have a problem. They need to craft solutions that address the millennial generation's struggles, but they can't seem to sell entitlement reform, their biggest policy preference that addresses those problems. The Republican approach to wooing millennials on policy is failing because talking about stopping the debt from reaching an unsustainable level is long-term and abstract, and offers few immediate tangible benefits. A new approach to both pave the way for entitlement reform and give millennials an immediate financial boost is to first reform not entitlement spending, but the payroll tax: specifically, by partially (or wholly) replacing it with a value-added tax.

Under the current Social Security model, workers pay for the benefits of current retirees through the payroll tax. This system creates the illusion of a pension program, in which what you put in is what you get out, but in reality Social Security is a universal safety net program for the elderly paid for by taxes. The payroll tax falls on workers and is a tax on labor, while the value-added tax (VAT) is a tax on consumption imposed at every part of the production process. Assuming that this policy change is revenue-neutral, switching to a VAT will shift the responsibility for funding Social Security and Medicare away from workers, disproportionately poorer and younger, and onto everyone participating in the economy as a whole. Furthermore, uncoupling Social Security funding from payroll taxes would pave the way for fiscal reforms to transform the program from a universal benefit program to one geared specifically to eliminating old-age poverty, such as means-testing benefits for high-income beneficiaries, indexing benefits to prices rather than wages or changing the retirement age.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences. As the Tax Policy Center notes, the change would actually make the tax system more progressive. The current payroll tax is regressive, meaning that people with lower incomes tend to pay a higher effective tax rate than people with higher incomes. On the other hand, the value-added tax is much closer to proportional than the payroll tax, meaning that each income group pays closer to the same effective tax rate.

For Republicans, such a change would fit conservative economic ideas about the long-run causes of economic growth. A value-added tax has a much broader base than the payroll tax, and therefore would allow for much lower marginal tax rates, and lower marginal tax rates mean smaller disincentives to economic activity. According to the Tax Foundation's analysis of a value-added tax, the VAT would be a more economically efficient revenue source than most other taxes currently in the tax code.

Not only would replacing part or all of the payroll tax provide an immediate benefit to millennial taxpayers, it would also open the door for the much-needed entitlement reforms that have been so politically elusive. Furthermore, it would make the tax code both more pro-growth and less regressive. In order to even begin to address the entitlement crisis, win millennial support and stimulate the economy in a fiscally responsible manner, Republicans must propose moving from the payroll tax to the VAT.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate. His writing has appeared in Townhall and The Federalist. He is a federal policy intern at the Tax Foundation. Opinions expressed here are his only and not the views of the Tax Foundation. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Glenn was joined by Alanna Sarabia from "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios on Thursday for an exclusive look at Mercury Museum's new "Rights & Responsibilities" exhibit. Open through Father's Day, the temporary museum features artifacts from pop culture, America's founding, World Ward II and more, focusing on the rights and responsibilities America's citizens.

Get tickets and more information here.

Watch as Glenn gives a sneak peek at some of the unique artifacts on display below.

History at the Mercury Museum

Alanna Sarabia interviews Glenn Beck for "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios.

Several months ago, at the Miss Universe competition, two women took a selfie, then posted it on Instagram. The caption read, "Peace and love." As a result of that selfie, both women faced death threats, and one of the women, along with her entire family, had to flee her home country. The occasion was the 2017 Miss Universe competition, and the women were Miss Iraq and Miss Israel. Miss Iraq is no longer welcome in her own country. The government threatened to strip her of her crown. Of course, she was also badgered for wearing a bikini during the competition.

RELATED: Media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam bias sweeps THIS fact under the rug

In an interview, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, said:

When I posted the picture I didn't think for a second there would be blowback. I woke up to calls from my family and the Miss Iraq Organization going insane. The death threats I got online were so scary. The director of the Miss Iraq Organization called me and said they're getting heat from the ministry. He said I have to take the picture down or they will strip me of my title.

Yesterday, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, posted another selfie with Miss Israel, during a visit to Jerusalem.

In an interview, she said that:

I don't think Iraq and Israel are enemies; I think maybe the governments are enemies with each other. There's a lot of Iraqi people that don't have a problem with Israelis.

This is, of course, quite an understatement: Iraq, home to roughly 15,000 Palestinians, refuses to acknowledge Israel as a legitimate country, as it is technically at war with Israel. The adages says that a picture is worth a thousand words. What are we to do when many of those words are hateful or deadly? And how can we find the goodness in such bad situations?