Glenn to speak Wednesday in front of the U.S. Capitol

This Wednesday, June 19, in Washington D.C. there will be an open forum that will feature “border security, anti-amnesty members of Congress.” The debate is slated for 9AM to 12PM and then again from 2PM to 5PM. In between, members of Congress will join with an already-planned Tea Party rally against the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative organizations. Glenn will be joining the event and speaking at noon.

"There are 70 Republicans now in congress that we sent there," Glenn said. "They're standing up this week and they're about to be slaughtered."

"I think there will be five people in Washington this week on Wednesday because it's, you know, it's a Wednesday. It's in the middle of the week. Who does this? It's costing me a fortune to be able to get the TV and everybody up there to be able to ‑‑ to be able to just cover it, let alone speak up there. I'm flying a few of my pastors and my priests and my rabbi friends up with me for an announcement with the Black‑Robe Regiment. That's not something I want to do. Last thing I want to do is get back on an airplane and travel up to Washington D.C. and stand there and be a part of that."

"There are many things I don't believe in anymore, and Washington is one of them. And I despise that city now. Because it has just become a symbol of corruption to me, a symbol of grotesque growth, where the rest of us are suffering in the rest of the country," he said.

"But I will go and stand, and I ask you to do the same."

Glenn has not asked people to attend an event like this in Washington, D.C. since Restoring Honor on August 28, 2010.

Later in the show, Glenn explained why he thought it was so important to be in D.C. for this event:

We're not different. We're not different than each other. We're in different places. Our country is at stake. We're not enemies of each other. We're actually winning.

The president's poll numbers with the youth down in a month 17%. Why? Don't trust anyone over 30. They see through it. They see. Finally they see this guy is just as bad, if not worse than the last guy. Everything he has said to us is a lie. But time is running out because they're also, the progressives on the Republicans and the democratic side, if we would spend less time arguing with each other on who's better, the Republicans or the Democrats, and we would start talking about the real issues which is not conservative and liberal it is constitutionalist or progressive maybe we wouldn't have had this problem. Maybe we wouldn't have this problem because we're not that far apart as people. But we have been used. By the global corporations, by the media, by those in power, by those elites, by those who think they know better, by those who look at the American people like cattle. I am not a cow. I am not a sheep. I am not on your farm. You are not my rancher. You are not, definitely not my shepherd. I do not answer to your voice. I only answer to one voice.

The American people have been betrayed and have betrayed ourselves, through our apathy and through our willingness to give other people the responsibility. I'm sorry, but the responsibility, I've been told a million times you can't run faster than a man has strength. Well, God, give me strength. And when I see somebody else step up to the plate, I will so gladly go away. When I see somebody else say "I'm going to do it" and they have the opportunity to do it and the means to do it, I will so gladly give it to them. You can have my F'in' company. You can have it. I don't care! Show up! I don't see anybody.

I thought of this last week. Somebody said... about Martin Luther King. And they said, what about Martin Luther King's lifestyle? Because Martin Luther King, he was dicey with women and everything else. Yeah, he was. That shows you how desperate God gets sometimes. That shows you how weak we are sometimes. Because I know all the good guys. All the good guys were probably saying, "I don't want all that trouble. I don't want to give all this up. I don't want to no, cause too much, it will cause too much of a hassle, it will cause this, it will cause that." And so he gets down to the list and finally he's got to go to somebody who's a philanderer, finally he's got to go a guy who's an alcoholic, finally he's got to go to somebody who doesn't know their ass from their elbow, but they'll stand up! Boy, you want to talk about making weak things strong, here we are, gang. Don't tell me about how we've got to be positive. I understand we have to be positive, with you we also have to be realists. "Hey, let's be positive. Let's make sure that everybody knows we're all going to make it." No. We're on the Titanic. Not all of us are going to make it. And unless you have some urgency, we're all going to die. We're all gonna die. How's that one? Play some music. Play some music once everybody's in the boats. Play some music. If you can play some music and help people get into the boats in a rational way, great. Play some music. But if you're playing some music just to make everybody, like, "relax, everything is good," it's not good. The boat's sinking.

We're all in this together. We're all in this together. We really are. And we will make it as long as we have each other. As long as we don't tear each other apart.

Here's a question unique to our times: "Should I tell my father 'Happy Father's Day,' even though he (she?) is now one of my mothers?"

Father's Day was four days ago, yes, but this story is just weird enough to report on. One enjoyable line to read was this gem from Hollywood Gossip: "Cait is a woman and a transgender icon, but she is also and will always be the father of her six children."

RELATED: If Bruce was never a he and always a she, who won the men's Olympic gold in 1976?

Imagine reading that to someone ten — even five — years ago. And, honestly, there's something nice about it. But the strangeness of its having ever been written overpowers any emotional impact it might bring.

"So lucky to have you," wrote Kylie Jenner, in the Instagram caption under pre-transition pictures of Bruce Jenner.

Look. I risk sounding like a tabloid by mere dint of having even mentioned this story, but the important element is the cultural sway that's occurring. The original story was that a band of disgruntled Twitter users got outraged about the supposed "transphobic" remarks by Jenner's daughter.

But, what we should be saying is, "who the hell cares?" Who cares what one Jenner says to another — and more importantly and on a far deeper level — who cares what some anonymous Twitter user has to say?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob? Because, at the moment, they've got it pretty good. They have a nifty relationship with the mainstream media: One or two Twitter users get outraged by any given thing — in this case Jenner and supposed transphobia. In return, the mainstream media use the Twitter comment as a source.

Then, a larger Twitter audience points to the article itself as proof that there's some kind of systemic justice at play. It's a closed-market currency, where the negative feedback loop of proof and evidence is composed of faulty accusations. Isn't it a hell of a time to be alive?

These days, when Americans decide to be outraged about something, we really go all out.

This week's outrage is, of course, the Trump administration's "zero tolerance" policy toward illegal immigration along the southern border. Specifically, people are upset over the part of the policy that separates children from their parents when the parents get arrested.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

Lost in all the outrage is that the President is being proactive about border security and is simply enforcing the law. Yes, we need to figure out a less clumsy, more compassionate way of enforcing the law, but children are not being flung into dungeons and fed maggots as the media would have you believe.

But having calm, reasonable debates about these things isn't the way it's done anymore. You have to make strong, sweeping announcements so the world knows how righteous your indignation is.

That's why yesterday, the governors of Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island and Connecticut declared they are withholding or recalling their National Guard troops from the U.S.-Mexico border until this policy of separating children from their parents is rescinded.

Adding to the media stunt nature of this entire "crisis," it turns out this defiant announcement from these five governors is mostly symbolic. Because two months ago, when President Trump called for 4,000 additional National Guard troops to help patrol the border, large numbers of troops were not requested from those five states. In fact, no troops were requested at all from Rhode Island. But that didn't stop Rhode Island's Democratic governor, Gina Raimondo, from announcing she would refuse to send troops if she were asked. She called the family separation policy, "immoral, unjust and un-American."

There's so much outrage, we're running short on adjectives.

The governors of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York all used the word "inhumane" in their statements condemning the Trump administration policy. There's so much outrage, we're running short on adjectives.

In a totally unrelated coincidence, four of these five governors are running for re-election this year.

I've made my position clear — separating these children from their parents is a bad policy and we need to stop. We need to treat these immigrants with the kind of compassion we'd want for our own children. And I said the same thing in 2014 when no one cared about the border crisis.

If consistency could replace even just a sliver of the outrage in America, we would all be a lot better off.

I think we can all agree, both on the Left and the Right, that children who have been caught up in illegal immigration is an awful situation. But apparently what no one can agree on is when it matters to them. This past weekend, it suddenly — and even a little magically — began to matter to the Left. Seemingly out of nowhere, they all collectively realized this was a problem and all rushed to blame the Trump administration.

RELATED: These 3 things need to happen before we can fix our border problem

Here's Rachel Maddow yesterday:

I seem to remember getting mocked by the Left for showing emotion on TV, but I'll give her a pass here. This is an emotional situation. But this is what I can't give her a pass on: where the heck was this outrage and emotion back in 2014? Because the same situation going on today — that stuff Maddow and the rest of the Left have only just now woken up to — was going on back in July 2014! And it was arguably worse back then.

I practically begged and pleaded for people to wake up to what was going on. We had to shed light on how our immigration system was being manipulated by people breaking our laws, and they were using kids as pawns to get it done. But unlike the gusto the Left is using now to report this story, let's take a look at what Rachel Maddow thought was more important back in 2014.

On July 1, 2014, Maddow opened her show with a riveting monologue on how President Obama was hosting a World Cup viewing party. That's hard-hitting stuff right there.

On July 2, 2014, Maddow actually acknowledged kids were at the border, but she referenced Health and Human Services only briefly and completely rushed through what was actually happening to these kids. She made a vague statement about a "policy" stating where kids were being taken after their arrival. She also blamed Congress for not acting.

See any difference in reporting there from today? That "policy" she referenced has suddenly become Trump's "new" policy, and it isn't Congress's fault… it's all on the President.

She goes on throughout the week.

On July 7, 2014, her top story was something on the Koch brothers. Immigration was only briefly mentioned at the end of the show. This trend continued all the way through the week. I went to the border on July 19. Did she cover it? Nope. In fact, she didn't mention kids at the border for the rest of the month. NOT AT ALL.

Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not?

Make up your minds. Is this an important issue or not? Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not? Do you even care to fix it, or is this what it looks like — just another phony, addicted-to-outrage political stunt?

UPDATE: Here's how this discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Glenn gives Rachel Maddow the benefit of the doubt

Rachel Maddow broke down in tears live on her MSNBC show over border crisis.

Progressives think the Obamas are a gift to the world. But their gift is apparently more of the metaphorical kind. It doesn't extend to helpful, tangible things like saving taxpayers money. Illinois has approved $224 million to pay for street and transportation upgrades around the planned site of the Obama Presidential Center. The catch is that Illinois taxpayers will have to cover $200 million of that cost. For a presidential museum.

Eight years of multiplying the national debt wasn't enough for Barack Obama. Old fleecing habits die hard. What's another $200 million here and there, especially for something as important as an Obama tribute center?

RELATED: Want to cure millennials' financial woes? Reform the payroll tax.

That's all well and good except Illinois can't even fund its pension system. The state has a $137 billion funding shortfall. That means every person in Illinois owes $11,000 for pensions, and there is no plan to fix the mess. Unless Illinois progressives have discovered a new kind of math, this doesn't really add up. You can't fund pensions, but you're going to figure out a way to milk the public for another $200 million to help cover the cost of a library?

It's hard to imagine who in their right mind would think this will be money well spent. Well, except for maybe Chicago Mayor and former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who said, "The state's… investment in infrastructure improvements near the Obama Center on the South Side of Chicago is money well spent."

Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

The spending has already been signed into law, even though the Obama library has not received construction approval yet. Part of the holdup is that the proposed site is on public land in historic Jackson Park. That doesn't seem very progressive of the Obamas, but, you know, for certain presidents, you go above and beyond. It's just what you do. Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

Here's the thing about taxing the peasants so the king can build a fancy monument to himself – it's wrong. And completely unnecessary. The Obamas have the richest friends on the planet who could fund this project in their sleep. If the world simply must have a tricked-out Obama museum, then let private citizens take out their wallets voluntarily.

As the Mercury Museum proved this weekend, it is possible to build an exhibit with amazing artifacts that attracts a ton of visitors – and it cost taxpayers approximately zero dollars.