Rand Paul responds to critics: ‘My position is the same as it always has been’

As the 2016 presidential election draws nearer, the behavior of potential candidates is under particularly intense scrutiny. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is one such individual, and many have been speculating he is attempting to broaden his base by taking a less libertarian stance on certain issues. Rather than speculate about Paul’s motives, Glenn decided it was best to go straight to the source, and he spoke to Paul on radio this morning about a myriad of topics.

To begin, Glenn asked Paul to layout his position on the United States’ strategy against ISIS. Paul was adamant his position on American intervention overseas has not changed:

“Well, my position is the same as it always has been. With regard to foreign policy, I think that anytime we go to war that you need the authority of Congress. This is what the Constitution says. This is what our Founders said in the federalist papers that the president has to come and ask permission. He doesn't consult with us. He has to ask our permission… So that's the first thing.

We haven't been doing that right for quite a while – particularly with this president in Libya and now with the attacks in Iraq. When you come to Congress, Congress has a debate and that debate is: Is there a vital American interest? And I think that depends on the facts on the ground, and the facts on the ground do change over time.

I've said repeatedly, and I still say, that the facts were not there for an American interest in the Libyan Civil War or in the Syrian Civil War. I do think, though, because of our involvement and the involvement of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar, and Turkey in the Syrian Civil War, that they created a safe haven for ISIS. ISIS has grown stronger, and it is my judgment now that ISIS is a threat to our consulate in Erbil and potentially to our embassy in Baghdad. We know they're a danger to citizens that have been trapped in the crossfire with the beheadings of American citizens. So I think there's an argument to be made that there's an American interest.”

One of the primary issues with the conversation surrounding an American military response to ISIS is the lack of a clear strategy from the Obama Administration. While Obama vowed to “degrade” and “destroy” ISIS, his “counter-terrorism strategy” raises more questions than answers. Glenn asked Paul if he believes we are going to war.

“I think [ISIS has] declared war on us. They're beheading innocent civilians. They have said, if they get a chance and when they get a chance, they will come to New York. So I think they've really declared war on us, and they are a significant threat,” Paul said. “Look at how rapidly they took Mosul – in the space of a day or two… So I think there's a case to be heard that our consulate could be at risk and overrun, and I think it would be inexcusable.”

While Paul sought to focus on the U.S. consulate in Erbil and why he would support U.S. intervention should the consulate be attacked, Glenn pressed Paul for a straight answer as to whether or not he supports arming the Syrian rebels to defeat ISIS. Paul was clear that he does not support the strategy:

“I'm not in favor of that. I've never been in favor of arming any of the Islamic rebels in Syria, and I think it's a mistake and counterproductive and still will be. Most of the arms we've sent in there, even when we've allegedly sent it to the moderate rebels, have wound up in the hands of ISIS. And I think that everything we've done to try to fight Assad, weakens his ability to wipe out ISIS and makes ISIS stronger.

So I think all of those – Republican and Democrat – who have favored arming the Islamic rebels in Syria have actually done us a disservice and have emboldened ISIS and made the problem worse. I think as the facts have evolved on the ground that ISIS is a potential threat to us and that we do have to do something.

I favor air strikes in coordination, but I think the battle on the ground needs to be fought by those who live there. I think the Iraqis need to step up, quit running, and defend their country. I'm sick and tired of the Saudis sitting on their haunches, funding radical Islam and doing nothing. I'd like to see the Saudis at the front of the line in the first round of fighting and the last round of fighting… Qatar, Kuwaitis, Turks, they need all to fight. It's their country, their land.

I want to see them fighting ISIS hand to hand, and I'm willing to support that with air support, with intelligence, with some weaponry in Iraq. But I'm not willing to support the so-called moderate rebels because I don't believe that they're a real fighting force.”

“I think you're in step with… where we are… I don't know where the American people stand on stuff now,” Glenn concluded. “I think he answered to my satisfaction.”

Fox News host Greg Gutfeld joined Glenn on "The Glenn Beck Podcast" this week to talk about his new book, "The Plus: Self-Help for People Who Hate Self-Help."

Greg admits he is probably the last person who should write a self-help book. Nevertheless, he offers his offbeat advice on how to save America during what has become one of the most tumultuous times in history, as well as drinking while tweeting (spoiler: don't do it).

He also shares his "evolution" on President Donald Trump, his prediction for the election, and what it means to be an agnostic-atheist.

In this clip, Greg shares what he calls his "first great epiphany" on how dangerous cancel culture has become.

"I believe that cancel culture is the first successful work-around of the First Amendment," he said. "Because freedom of speech doesn't protect me from my career being ruined, my livelihood being destroyed, or me getting so depressed I commit suicide. Cancel culture is the first successful work-around of freedom of speech. It can oppress your speech with the scepter of destruction. We don't have freedom of speech anymore."

Watch the video clip below or find the full Glenn Beck Podcast with Greg Gutfeld here.

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Use code UNMASKED to save $20 on one year of BlazeTV.

Dr. Simone Gold joined Glenn Beck on the radio program Thursday to set the record straight about hydroxychloroquine -- what it is, how it works, and the real reason for all the current controversy surrounding a centuries-old medication.

Dr. Gold is a board certified emergency physician. She graduated from Chicago Medical School before attending Stanford University Law School. She completed her residency in emergency medicine at Stony Brook University Hospital in New York, and worked in Washington D.C. for the Surgeon General, as well for the chairman of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources. She works as an emergency physician on the front lines, whether or not there is a pandemic, and her clinical work serves all Americans from urban inner city to suburban and the Native American population. Her legal practice focuses on policy issues relating to law and medicine.

She is also the founder of America's frontline doctors, a group of doctors who have been under attack this week for speaking out about hydroxychloroquine during a news conference held outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington D.C.

On the program, Dr. Gold emphasized that the controversy over hydroxychloroquine is a "complete myth."

"Hydroxychloroquine is an analogue or a derivative of quinine, which is found in tree bark. It's the most noncontroversial of medications that there is," she explained.

"It's been around for centuries and it's been FDA-approved in the modern version, called hydroxychloroquine, for 65 years. In all of that time, [doctors] used it for breast-feeding women, pregnant women, elderly, children, and immune compromised. The typical use is for years or even decades because we give it mostly to RA, rheumatoid arthritis patients and lupus patients who need to be on it, essentially, all of their life. So, we have extensive experience with it ... it's one of the most commonly used medications throughout the world."

Dr. Gold told Glenn she was surprised when the media suddenly "vomited all over hydroxychloroquine", but initially chalked it up to the left's predictable hatred for anything President Donald Trump endorses. However, when the media gave the drug Remdesivir glowing reviews, despite disappointing clinical trial results, she decided to do some research.

"[Remdesivir] certainly wasn't a fabulous drug, but the media coverage was all about how fabulous it was. At that moment, I thought that was really weird. Because it's one thing to hate hydroxychloroquine because the president [endorsed] it. But it's another thing to give a free pass to another medicine that doesn't seem that great. I thought that was really weird, so I started looking into it. And let me tell you, what I discovered was absolutely shocking," she said.

Watch the video below for more details:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

According to the mainstream media's COVID-19 narrative, the president is "ignoring" the crisis.

On tonight's "Glenn TV" special, Glenn Beck exposes the media's last four months of political theater that has helped shape America's confusion and fear over coronavirus. And now, with a new school year looming on the horizon, the ongoing hysteria has enormous ramifications for our children, but the media is working overtime to paint the Trump administration as anti-science Neanderthals who want to send children and teachers off to die by reopening schools.

Glenn fights back with the facts and interviews the medical doctor Big Tech fears the most. Dr. Simone Gold, founder of America's Frontline Doctors, stands up to the media's smear campaign and explains why she could no longer stay silent in her fight against coronavirus fear.

Watch a preview below:

In order to watch tonight's episode, you must be a BlazeTV subscriber. Join today to get a 30-day free trial, and get $20 off a one-year subscription with code UNMASKED.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

It's high time to leave the partisan politics behind and focus on the facts about face masks and whether or not they really work against COVID-19.

On the radio program Tuesday, Glenn Beck spoke with Drs. Scott Jensen and George Rutherford about the scientific evidence that proves or disproves the effectiveness of mask wearing to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Then, Dr. Karyln Borysenko joined to break down where the massive political divide over masks came from in the first place.

"I think if we were to talk about this a couple months ago, I might have said, 'Well, there's the science of masks, and there's the emotions of masks.' But, unfortunately, there's something in between," Jensen said. "I would have thought that the science of masks would have to do with the physics of masks, so I did a video a couple months ago where I talked about the pore side of a cotton mask or a surgical mask."

He explained that properly worn masks can help reduce the spread of virus particles, but cautioned against a false-sense of security when wearing a mask because they are far from providing complete protection.

"If you have a triple-ply mask, the pore size will end up being effectively five microns. And five microns, to a COVID-19 virus particle, is 50 times larger. That's approximately the same differential between the two-inch separation between the wires of a chain-link fence, and a gnat," Jensen explained.

"But now what we're seeing is if we have some collision of COVID-19 viral particles with the latticework of any mask ... if you're breathing out or breathing in and the viral particles collide with the actual latticework of a mask, I think intuitively, yes, we can reduce the amount of virus particles that are going back and forth."

Dr. Rutherford said masks are essential tools for fighting COVID-19, as long as you wear them correctly. He laid out the three main reasons he believes we should all be wearing masks.

"So, we're trying to do three things," he said. "First of all, we're trying to protect the people around you, in case you are one of the 60% of people who have asymptomatic infection and don't know it. The second thing we're trying to do is to protect you. The third thing we're trying to do is, if you get infected, you'll get infected at a lower dose, and then you're less likely to develop symptoms. That's the threefer."

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.