Buck Sexton on Obama scandal week: “there's no way that they will be able to get out of this unscathed”

Glenn spoke with TheBlaze national security editor and host of Real News Buck Sexton about the horrific week the Obama administration is having as several lies and scandals are finally becoming front page news. Most of the time the press feigns interest for a day or two and moves on - why will this time be different?

Read Buck's Op-Ed on the White House scandals HERE.

GLENN: Buck Sexton is here. He is our national security editor for TheBlaze. He just wrote a piece: Obama under siege from scandals. And it's ‑‑ you seem to be saying here, Buck, that you think this could take the administration down?

BUCK: Hey, Glenn. Yeah, there's no way that they will be able to get out of this unscathed meaning that the, at a minimum, nevermind what the actual mechanisms could be in play here for resignations and perhaps even ‑‑ I've never said that anyone ‑‑ that I thought that President Obama was at risk of impeachment. Depending on what we find out from this, I can't say that I don't think that's a possibility anymore. It depends on what these investigations show us. But the ‑‑

GLENN: Yesterday I ‑‑ yesterday I didn't call for it. I called for a thorough investigation and an independent committee to look at because let's see if they rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors provable, provable high crimes and misdemeanors. But I think he's absolutely impeachable on this if you can get enough whistleblowers to actually testify, if they don't scare them all away.

BUCK: I'm absolutely with you on that, Glenn. That's the question. What's provable here. What this administration is incredibly adept at is making sure that the bureaucracy is a place where they can hide, you know, the midlevel people and no one ever thinks that they are really going to get in trouble. It's easy to blame them and they always cut off the top level guys from that direct exposure. But, you know, the character and the intent of the administration now, I think for really any American who's ever going to open their eyes ‑‑ and there are some who won't ever do it. I know that. You know that. There's some who will just, they will be on the hope and change train until it goes off the cliff. They don't care. But anyone who's actually paying attention knows now that Benghazi has proved they will lie, the IRS scandals prove they will cheat, and the AP has proved they will steal, at least when it comes to records of journalists. So it's really astounding that all these things have come together at once and I think no matter what happens now, Glenn, nobody is ever going to be able to look at the Obama administration the same way. Claiming grotesque incompetence and negligence to get you out of scandal after scandal at some point changes people's opinion of you at a minimum if they can't prove, as you point out, that there was direct White House orders given for any of these issues.

GLENN: Okay. So let me take Benghazi. Let's play this audio from Panetta. This was the first real red flag. I mean, we were getting sources on this the night that it happened, but I ‑‑ for the regular people, if you're watching, when Leon Panetta went to congress and said, "Here's what happened on that day." Listen to this little piece of information.

PANETTA: But as to specifics about time, et cetera, et cetera, no, he just left that up to us.

AYOTTE: Did you have any further communications with him that night?

PANETTA: No.

AYOTTE: Did you have any other further communications, did he ever call you that night to say how are things going, what's going on, where's the consulate?

PANETTA: No.

AYOTTE: Did you communicate with anyone else at the White House that night?

PANETTA: No.

AYOTTE: No one else called you to say, "What ‑‑ how are things going?"

PANETTA: No.

AYOTTE: But just to be clear, that night he didn't ask you what assets we had available and how quickly they could respond and what we could do to help those individuals?

PANETTA: I think the biggest problem that night, Senator, was that nobody knew really what was going on there.

AYOTTE: And there was no followup during the night, at least from the White House directly?

PANETTA: No.

GLENN: Okay.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: So when I heard that, Buck, I thought, okay, we're in the middle of a presidential campaign. What he is saying is the president, while an ambassador was being killed and we had an embassy under siege, you want to make the president look like this robust hero. You want to make him look ‑‑ I mean, he was practically PhotoShopped into the picture in the Osama Bin Laden compound, and what do they do here? They make sure to announce clearly to everybody he was nowhere near. He had nothing to do with it, no calls, no nothing. I knew immediately, gun‑running. There's something very, very bad going on in this embassy and they know if it comes out, it will taint him. So he just disappeared that night. Am I reading this wrong?

BUCK: Yeah, I don't want to be flippant about this, but I was willing to stay up all night many times to study for sociology tests when I was in college. And the fact that the president didn't roll up his sleeves and didn't not go to sleep at all until he found out exactly what was happening with the U.S. ambassador. I mean, he's the commander this chief.

PAT: Incredible.

BUCK: It's so beyond the pale of what's acceptable and even the ideas that you've laid out now about how he may have been ‑‑ I think there were two things going on. There was a panic, if you will, a panic that came from the possibility that maybe things would come to light that they did not want to come to light and, you know, I'm being circumspect about these things on purpose. There's also the other side of this which is just the recognition that if the president accepted the fact, accepted his responsibility that he was in ‑‑ he was the head of the military that night, he is the leader of this country, then he would have to make decisions that would be attributable to him. Instead ‑‑ because you understand how the machinery works ‑‑ he allowed subordinates to handle this. I'm sure he gave them direction, don't get me wrong, but he just left enough plausible deniability so that we are where we are now, which is a place where we recognize all these decisions that were made were political. We left people out there to die. We did not call in the cavalry but, oh, the president, we don't know what he was doing then. They managed to do what they intended to do that night.

GLENN: I tell you that doesn't make any sense to me and here's why: Because, you know, if somebody is on the scene of the ‑‑ now, here's the scary thing. It doesn't seem to matter to America. But if you're really, if you're the president of the United States, it is better to have tried and failed than to not try at all. And our president walked away and said, "I'm going to bed, guys. Goodnight." I'm telling you, what they did was they had to isolate.

Buck, I know you're being circumspect of all of this stuff, and it's the right thing to do, but I'm telling you we were running guns and missiles over to Turkey. We know about the boat, we know about the captain, we know about all of it. Between what was happening with the ambassador and what was happening with gun‑running ‑‑ and I'll let the press figure that one out ‑‑ between those two things, they told the president, "You can't be anywhere near this." He knew. He knew. So Buck, you have faith that this is ‑‑ this somehow or another is actually going to be pursued, that the media is not somehow or another, they actually get it this time?

BUCK: Glenn, if it's not now, it's never. If the American people, if the media specifically in this case ‑‑ I mean, this isn't a shot across the bow for the media. I mean, this is a full volley into their hole. I mean, this is absolutely a declaration that you have no rights whatsoever under the First Amendment as a press organization. If the federal government believes that you have this was that it wants, it's going to get it, and it doesn't matter if they bring in a whole lot of innocent people in the process. There is so little dignity left, I think, Glenn, for the big media. And by the way, I know you must have felt a tremendous amount of pride, I know I did just being a member of TheBlaze team when this IRS story breaks and we're like, "Hey, yeah, TheBlaze, we were writing about this over a year ago. We were telling you about this, you know, this organization that's relatively new compared to the New York Times. And they now, if they want to get any shred of credibility back, if they want anyone to think that they are, in fact, worthy of the title "journalist," they will go after this like it is the D‑day invasion. I mean, they will put all their resources into exposing the administration on this.

Will they do it, Glenn? At this point it's hard for me to be disappointed in the media and it's hard for me to be disappointed in honestly Americans who just refuse to accept what this administration is, which is an administration that is completely lacking in character, that politicizes everything, and views its hold on power as the single most important end that it has.

GLENN: Real quick I've only got about a minute but there is one other factor in them not covering things and that is fear. This administration is going after whistleblowers and they are destroying. And you being a guy in the CIA and have worked at the White House, you know what happens to everybody underneath. You just said it: They take care of everybody on top an they destroy anybody underneath.

BUCK: It couldn't be any easier, Glenn, for them to intimidate. You said whistleblowers coming forward, you are absolutely right. There are people right now I think who have information that could fill in the blanks that could change our ‑‑ already, I mean the perception, how much worse can it get? Oh, it can get worse.

GLENN: Oh, it's much worse.

BUCK: But there are people right now with that information who are facing financial ruin, the loss of their career and the loss of their freedom. They are not above doing that. They will put people in federal prison who speak out of turn, and they have ways of doing this. I mean, they can hold over. They can say, "We're not going to bring the charges now. We're going to bring them in a year when no one's paying attention to this issue." So anybody who comes out is taking a tremendous personal risk, they know that, and they threaten people. They threaten people all the time in the bureaucracy. And what do you have? You're a guy, you're not making that much money. You're going to go up against the federal government. They get paid to ruin your life. They don't care how much it costs. Meanwhile you've got a family to feed. So Glenn, this he know that they can probably stifle some whistleblowers but at this point some people may just say, "You know what? America's too precious and I don't even care anymore." And that's the wild card that they can't account for.

GLENN: I hope you're right, Buck. Thank you very much. The article is up on TheBlaze now: Obama under siege from scandals by Buck Sexton, why he thinks that this will neuter and forever change, scar, and neuter the White House, if not kick them out of the White House. Thanks, Buck. Talk to you again.

BUCK: Thank you.

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.