Controversy erupts after unarmed black man choked to death by cops in NYC

Another unarmed black man was killed in NYC but this incident was very different from the one in Ferguson.

This time, the man was being confronted by several officers because he was allegedly selling cigarettes without paying taxes. After some discussion the officers jump on the large man and put him in a strangle hold. The footage is tragic and really disturbing, as you can hear the man struggle to say ‘I can’t breathe’ before going limp.

A grand jury cleared the officer.

Glenn, Pat and Stu discuss their disappointment in the legal system for failing to indict the officer of any charges.

GLENN: Hello, America. Let me — let me be counterintuitive, I guess, not to you. Not to the fans. Not to the people who have listened for a long time, but I would imagine to the rest of the press. Let us be counterintuitive. While I disagree with the protests and what they're doing in New York, I strongly disagree with the decision of the grand jury in New York.

PAT: No question.

GLENN: I mean, I would like to see the parameters. I would like to see exactly what they were doing. How they made this decision?

STU: And that's the most — you have to know that part.

PAT: If they couldn't charge him with anything, but murder —

GLENN: I mean, manslaughter should have been considered. I don't know exactly how this happened, but I will tell you this: The decision of the grand jury in New York on the death of Eric Garner, here's a guy who was — was not resisting arrest. Was not being a jerk. The video is very, very clear. The police put him in a choke hold. Threw him down.

PAT: Against department policy, by the way.

GLENN: Right. He has a heart attack and dies. Now, did they —

PAT: And he's crying out the whole time. Just heart wrenching to hear him say. Please I can't breathe. I can't breathe. Over and over. Then he goes limp.

GLENN: How this cop did not go to jail, was not held responsible is beyond me?

STU: Not even indicted. I think if you to get to a trial there are a lot more questions. But should he have been indicted? It seems that way.

GLENN: This is ridiculous.

STU: The jury's rationale was not made public.

GLENN: But that is important. If you're not indicting — for instance, in Ferguson, we know the rationale, we know what happened. We know there were witnesses. There were actual black witnesses that testified in favor of the cop. That said, I saw it. And what everybody is saying in the press, that didn't happen.

So we know exactly what happened in Ferguson. We know why that jury verdict came out the way it did. This one, we don't. And you got nothing, but a vacuum. We have to understand: How could you have possibly come up with this particular verdict? What went wrong?

When you look at what they did to this guy and putting him in a choke hold like that, it's inexcusable. Absolutely inexcusable.

PAT: And brutal. One of them has him in a choke hold. Knee on his head. Couple others pin him down elsewhere. Huge guy. 350 pounds. Has asthma. He's telling them, I can't breathe. Do you not at that point at least lighten up at that point. He's not even resisting. He didn't punch anybody. I've seen the video start to finish when the cops first arrive. I guess his deal is he's sold illegal cigarette on the streets.

GLENN: [Gasp]

In New York? Wait a minute. What does it mean to sell illegal cigarettes? It means the state didn't get their tax dollars. It's not that they're more dangerous than regular cigarettes. It means these were cigarettes that were purchased through the company and then sold on the street without the state getting their tax dollars. So they killed a man for their tax dollars.

PAT: That's bad.

GLENN: That makes it even worse.

PAT: It's really bad. And all he's doing at the beginning — he's not even resisting, he's just yelling at them to leave him alone. I didn't do anything. Leave me alone. Just let —

STU: Yeah. It's a light resist. It's a talkative resisting arrest.

PAT: It's not physical. When they say, put your hands behind your back. He doesn't swing on them.

STU: As soon as they take physical control of the situation. They can put his hands behind his back. They can push him to the ground. They can't do the choke hold fortunately. He doesn't do anything physical to resist. He's not even arguing about being pushed to the ground. He just says, I can't breathe. I'm about as pro cop as humanly allow allowable.

GLENN: I won't let you get away with that. We're all pro cop.

STU: I didn't say you weren't.

GLENN: I know, but you will give the benefit of the doubt to the cop in every possible scenario.

STU: I do not agree with that analysis.

PAT: Anybody who heard the show yesterday would.

STU: Again, I would disagree with that analysis. I'm fine with it. If you're going to err with the judgment on me and it's towards being pro police. That's probably too pro police. I think there are people in the audience that think that. And you guys probably think that. Which is fine. But even in this case. I don't know what the grand jury did.

GLENN: That's the problem. When you're in a grand jury, they give you specific parameters. So they say you can't consider this. You can't consider this. You can't do this. This doesn't count. And you're like, well —

STU: They may have only been going for murder and weren't allowing manslaughter.

STU: Person guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when he recklessly causes the death of someone. Yeah, I think so. It's at least worth a try.

GLENN: Yes, it is. You have to remember, a grand jury is not a jury trial. It is: Here are the facts. Is there enough that says we should look into this?

PAT: And the parameters could also be: Is he guilty of only homicide or murder in the first degree? Well, obviously it wasn't premeditated. I don't think there was intent to kill. They just did.

STU: I agree. They wanted to subdue him. He's a very large guy. Maybe they thought they needed a lot of force. But what they did wasn't okay. And the guy didn't die by choking. He had asthma and he died of a heart attack.

PAT: Brought on by not being able to breathe. Panic attack.

STU: They classified it as a homicide, the coroner did.

PAT: They did...

GLENN: Here's the thing, if you were in New York and you were there for the lighting of the tree, would you listen — would you listen to these protesters if they were walking down the street holding signs that said, F the tree, and they were chanting there with your children, F the tree. And they're snarling at traffic and everything, F the tree. F the cops.

STU: Let's just judge it on the merits of the case. We don't need swearing.

GLENN: If you did what Martin Luther suggested to do, that is, they could have easily gone into that crowd singing O Holy Night, and people would have said, what is this? They're closing it down, and they're sitting in the center of the street and they're singing O Holy Night. And one person just gets up and says, this doesn't make sense to us. Americans would have stopped and listen to them. Instead, it's no justice, no peace. F the cops. F the tree. Nobody will listen to you.

PAT: It doesn't make sense.

GLENN: It doesn't.

STU: I saw his wife or fiancé — I guess his wife — on TV this morning sitting right next to Al Sharpton. Al Sharpton is an incredible liar who tried to take every other case you've heard of where the police didn't do anything wrong and envelope it into this case. Weakening the strength of this case of a guy who really died for the wrong reasons. He's like: Look, this is the same thing that happened in Ferguson —

PAT: No, it's not.

STU: You listen to three or four cases. No. It's not the same. Why can't you judge people — Al Sharpton is not out there because he cares about this person. He's out there for what he wants and power. And taking on his counsel is detrimental to her late husband. It really is. People will just not listen to you. I mean, a lot of conservatives have come out on Eric Garner's side on this. Which is not common.

Something you said conservatives are pro cop. A lot of them will give the benefit of the doubt no matter what happens except this case. This is the only one in history.

PAT: That's a little extreme.

GLENN: I think it's important as conservatives to stand up against the grand jury on this particular —

PAT: Definitely.

GLENN: — event. Yeah, it's important. If you want to have any credibility, you cannot lump Ferguson with this one. This is the New York police completely out of control. They did not murder him, but manslaughter, absolutely should have been considered. Why that wasn't considered is beyond me.

STU: We don't know.

GLENN: Right. And this is the way Americans deal with injustice. We let the system work. The system didn't work here. Now let's calmly and rationally say, why didn't the system work? What were the instructions to the grand jury, what was the evidence that they said didn't matter? Because we've seen the video. Now, explain to me how that's not manslaughter. And if you can't rationally explain it or if it's because of some loophole, we has Americans need to fix that loophole. We need to figure out what it is. But we need to do it without saying F the tree.

STU: Hopefully we can fix this case. There are other avenues we can go down. Hopefully the next one can —

GLENN: We don't shut cities down. We don't burn doughnut shops. And we don't destroy cars. That's what we don't do.

Glenn Beck can't help but wonder, "What is wrong with us?" in light of the Left's latest move — canceling six Dr. Seuss books due to "hurtful and wrong" illustrations — that takes America one step closer to complete insanity. And now, school districts are jumping on board after President Joe Biden seems to have dropped Dr. Seuss from the White House's annual "Read Across America Day" proclamation.

On the radio program Tuesday, Glenn argued that deleting books is the perfect example of fascism, and asked when we as a country will finally realize it.

"They are banning Dr. Seuss books. How much more do you need to see before all of America wakes up? ... This is fascism!" Glenn said. "We don't destroy books. What is wrong with us, America?"

Watch the video below to hear more from Glenn:


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.

Former Democratic presidential candidate and Hawaii representative Tulsi Gabbard and Glenn Beck don't agree much on policy, but they're in lockstep on principles.

On "The Glenn Beck Podcast" this week, Tulsi spoke with Glenn about one of her last acts in Congress, introducing the "Protect Women's Sports Act," which she says would "strengthen, clarify, and uphold the intent of Title IX to provide a level playing field for girls and women in sports." But since then, the Biden administration has gone in the opposite direction, and has supported allowing biological men to compete in women's sports.

Watch the video clip below to hear why Tulsi took a stand for female athletes:


Watch the full interview with Tulsi Gabbard here.

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.

Later this week, former President Trump will attend CPAC and give his first major policy appearance since leaving office. Sources close to the President reveal he will focus on "the future of the Republican Party and the conservative movement."

The future of the GOP is a question that demands real discussion before elections in 2022 and 2024. Right now, I can see three possible answers for how you act:

  1. Those in power and senior positions will ignore the reasons behind Donald Trump winning in 2016. They will be vindicated in their minds because they outlasted him, as they view DC as a job for life. These leaders will go back to business as usual and seek forgiveness from the left, hoping for unity and acceptance in the future.
  2. The second outcome is another section of the party that is understandably very angry over the left's Presidents treatment. They still support and believe in Trump. They think it's time to take off the gloves and treat Biden/the left exactly how they treated Trump.
  3. The few policy positions offered in public will be centered solely around opposing the left. They will also make the case how the left suck, are dangerous, and how you need them in power. The next four years are merely a countdown for Trump to run again and right the wrong of 2020.
  4. The third outcome is very similar to the second, but with one key difference. While they appreciate everything Trump accomplished while in office, they feel it's time to unite behind another candidate.
Question

Which of these three positions will work best for the American people? Which helps built a political base for elections in both 2022 and 2024?

If you seek to help save America, it is critical to do some soul searching. Whether you love or hate him, Donald Trump got 75 million votes and made advancements in key demographics. What did he do well that you can develop further? In what areas was he poor, and how can you improve?

I want to raise six principled points everyone on the right should be forced to consider in the run-up to 2024.

1 - Understanding American Exceptionalism

FACT: America is an exceptional nation. If you read enough of world history, you will find ample evidence that America acted in ways that made it unique and significantly different from other countries in the past and modern times. These reasons must be understood and promoted through the culture and body politic.

One of those reasons is the layout of your Declaration of Independence. If you look around politics today, you will see people on all political sides telling you what they hate, why the other side is the enemy, and how they must be defeated.

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson also made that case against the English when he listed 27 grievances against the King. So how is the layout key? It took Jefferson 357 words to get to those grievances. Your Declaration is your mission statement: it tells everyone in the world what America aspires to be. It states the belief that all were created equal, all had certain rights that come directly from God, and that it is the government's job to protect rights -- not give people rights.

The left is successfully painting everyone on the right to be a terrorist who enjoyed the Capitol Hill riots. If you ever want to win another election, it will be critical to explain what you stand for to the American people.

After all, ask yourself which makes you the most passionate to vote - removing someone from office or voting for a vision and change you believe in?

2 - The Constitution

Is there a better place to start this vision than the Constitution? Yes, it is mostly ignored today by those in power and is only referenced by politicians and media when it fits a narrative.

The Constitution is a beautiful and complex document but is primarily based on a straightforward principle. The government should be extremely limited in its power, but it should be as close to the people as possible where there is a clear need for government. Who can argue with this principle?

Who wants someone they have never met, dictating how they live their life?

This is why the Constitution grants the President no real power, and gives Congress 18 clauses of power, listed under Article 1, Section 8. Any and every power not mentioned there belongs at the state level.

3 - Finances

The power structure in DC has changed many times over the last twenty years, with both parties having the opportunity to rule the different federal branches. There have been two periods where one party controlled all the power in DC:

  • 2008-2010: Obama / Dem
  • 2016-2018: Trump / GOP

Despite these changes, your government continually grows, you continue to spend money you don't have, and in ten out of the last thirteen years, you have added over $1,000,000,000,000 to your national debt, which now sits just under $28 trillion. Does this seem sustainable to you? Of course not, but sadly your finances only get worse.

America has revenue of over $3.2 trillion every year, yet DC has not passed a budget since 2008. Can you imagine any business running that way? Do you think Apple, Amazon, or Disney have a budget? It is time to get America on a path to financial sustainability, work towards a balanced budget, and explain to the American people how you will achieve it.

4 - Taxes

Do you remember discussing taxes during the Tea Party?

We used to make the simple moral case to the American people: any money you earn is yours, you should use it to plan your life, and the government has no right to take it from you. This was so successful around 2012 that Herman Cain ran for President with one primary policy: the 9-9-9 plan.

If America is to return to prosperity after Covid, lower taxes and a simpler tax code must be a central theme.

5 - Cutting Government

Look at the size of the US government in 2021. Are you happy? Can you name the numerous departments? Is it now the freedom-loving Americans' position that agencies like Education, Energy, EPA, and Commerce are constitutional bodies of government and are well-run?

How about the IRS, which targeted Tea-Party groups under President Obama? Do they deserve support, or is it time to start sharing a vision of the departments that should be abolished?

This principle used to be a big part of the Conservative platform. It played a massive role in 2012 when Rick Perry ran for President. His campaign was destroyed in 45 short seconds when he could not remember the three agencies he would abolish.

Maybe it's time to refresh this debate but change the parameters. How about we discuss the agencies that should be kept?

6 - Bill of Rights

Today, the Bill of Rights is under constant attack. The far-left/woke mob hates free speech, and they seek to cancel anyone with an opposing view. However, the attacks on the Bill of Rights don't always come from the left.

America has a second amendment that guarantees you the right to bear arms. The last time the GOP held both houses of Congress and the Presidency, they banned bump stocks - but who really NEEDS a bump stock?

As the years have passed, some have admitted they are open to red flag laws. Is this still the case?

While the second amendment may be under attack, it is clear the fourth amendment is dead. Regardless of which party holds power in DC, the NSA is given continuous ability to spy on Americans. The simple, principled case from Rand Paul of "get a warrant" always falls on deaf ears.

The Bill of Rights should be a unifying document for most Americans, as the principles are self-evident and a significant part of any freedom platform going forward.

Conclusion

America will face significant challenges over the coming years. As the government continues to grow, the far left get more hostile, and central planners seek a great reset. If you share my concern, then now is the time to forget our tribes and ignore the debate on who should be President in 2024.

It's time to work hard to build a platform by raising a banner of bold colors, not pale pastels. We must share a clear vision to the American people of a bright future where they are free, prosperous, and can pursue their happiness.

When the platform is built and successful, people can identify the best candidate to run in 2024.

"First, you win the argument, and then you win the election." — Margaret Thatcher

Jonathon Dunne is a keynote speaker, weekly podcast host on Blaze Media, and published author on major platforms such as The Blaze, Glenn Beck, Libertarian Republic, Western Journalism, and Constitution. Since 2012, he has reached millions with his message of American exceptionalism.

You can find him on social media – Facebook, Twitter, MeWe

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is under fire for questioning President Joe Biden's nominee for an assistant health secretary position, Dr. Rachel Levine, about her alleged support for giving children puberty blockers and sex-change surgeries.

During a confirmation hearing Thursday, Paul pointedly asked Levine, who is a transgender woman, about her support for allowing children to change their sex, and whether she believes children are capable of making such life-altering decisions.

Levine evaded the question, answering instead with a vague statement about the complexities of transgender medicine, which she would again reiterate for Paul's subsequent questions.

Watch a video clip of the confirmation hearing here.

Predictably, Paul has been labeled "transphobic" and accused of trying to derail Levine with "transphobic misinformation" by the leftist media.

On the Glenn Beck Radio Program Friday, Paul said his questioning Levine had nothing to do with who she is or the fact that she is a transgender adult, but was about the question of gender changes for children.

"The interesting thing is, none of it was directed towards her personally or who she is. It was directed towards the question of whether children can consent. And this is an intellectual question. It's not an inflammatory question. It's a question of serious consequences," he explained. "Most people would argue that children can't really make an informed consent. You know, we have laws against a man having sex with a 12-year-old, even if the 12-year-old says 'yes', because we don't think a 12-year-old is capable of consenting. They just aren't old enough to make the decision."

Paul went on to add, "I guess the danger is, you have to have some chutzpah. You have to have some guts, some courage to stand up because it is a culture out there where ... everybody is saying I made transphobic comments yesterday. All I did was ask whether a minor could consent to this kind of dramatic surgery. Nothing I ever said was hateful. I said nothing hateful about these people. I said nothing hateful about adults who choose to do this. But the culture is out there is so strong that so many in office are afraid to speak out. And it's getting worse.

"There's a handful of us that will speak out in the Senate. There's a handful in the House, and we just have to grow our ranks. But we have to resist or it just will roll over us. And we'll live in this terrible cancel culture world where nobody speaks out, and everybody is afraid to say anything."

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.