Jeffy’s mother-in-law has mob experience

Not the organized mob (that we know of), but rather angry mobs. While discussing the fruitlessness of violent mob tactics, Jeffy revealed his mother-in-law was the victim of an angry mob after the MLK assassination, describing a horrifying subway ride that resulted in a severe beating just because she was white.

GLENN: Okay. Let's talk a little bit about the riots.

PAT: They're blocking bridges. They're stopping people from going to work. This is starting to spread all over the country. Second night of protests.

GLENN: It's all right. This is Occupy Wall Street 2.

PAT: It is.

GLENN: That's all this is. They think they have a chance. America is not going to be with these radicals. They're not going to do it.

PAT: I hope that's true.

GLENN: It is.

PAT: I hope that the people who are protesting realize that this time, there's almost — there's bipartisan support here. There's biracial support here.

GLENN: It's important to say, we don't know what happened in the grand jury room.

PAT: They said it a hundred times yesterday.

GLENN: We don't know what happened in the grand jury room, and so you know, I don't know what they were instructed that they had to pay attention to. I don't know what the evidence was. I wasn't there. But that's — what I said yesterday is I would like to see — I mean, we need transparency here. They need to say — to the to the American people, what — why the grand jury didn't think this was wrong.

PAT: And they need to do that because we saw what happened with our own eyes.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: So —

GLENN: So it's they got it wrong and the system needs to be fixed or we don't know something that they know. Either way, we need to know that. When it comes to Michael Brown, we know that there were black eyewitnesses that did not come out in front of the American people because they were afraid for their own life and protection. But they went and they testified that, yes, the cop was right. And so that's what really set the Michael Brown thing up, was the testimony of African-Americans who went into the grand jury and said, no, Michael Brown was trying to harm the police officer. It was self-defense and it was — it was a righteous shooting. That wasn't — they weren't out in front of the press because they were afraid. But at least we know that. Here, we don't have anything but the videotape that shows this — these cops looking like they're out of control. So it's important, but you'll never get this, because de Blasio wants this kind of action on the street. So you're never going to get this. But it's important for the American people to see what happened. How was justice served in this? Tell us why that decision was made. It's important.

PAT: I think it is. You know, and here's the case where we agree with the sentiment. It looks to us to be a miscarriage of justice. But there's a right way to go about it and a wrong way to go about it and I think to punish commuters on their way to or from work is the wrong work.

GLENN: It's the wrong way.

PAT: It's just going piss people off.

GLENN: When you go back and look at the riots, the workers' world riots in the 1930s and you will see this is exactly the same kind of stuff with FDR. They set Oakland on fire. They set several cities on fire. They were beating people in the streets. I mean, it was bad. This has happened before.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh, when you talk about knowing your family history and what happened, over Thanksgiving I learned something new about my mother-in-law that I never knew before. She was here fresh in the United States from Ecuador in New York City on a subway the day of Martin Luther King —

GLENN: Hold on.

PAT: There's an important element here.

GLENN: Please tell me that somehow or another your family members here illegally and there's someway we can get you deported.

JEFFY: So anyway, the night that Martin Luther King was assassinated, she's on a subway and she was beaten almost to death for being — looking white. And the violence was just there. And a person who tried to break it up was eventually stabbed by this crowd and that was just for being on the subway and looking white.

PAT: Did he survive?

JEFFY: No, I don't think he did. She wasn't sure. She said she didn't think he didn't make it and she almost didn't make it. But at first —

GLENN: It meant a lot to her that somebody saved her life and died for her.

PAT: That's the nice way to turn this on —

GLENN: Right.

PAT: On the Jeffy clan.

GLENN: Meant so much she didn't even check to see if the guy lived.

PAT: Here he is making —

(overlapping speakers).

JEFFY: No, no.

GLENN: You're right. You're right. Those happen so rarely.

PAT: They happen so rarely.

GLENN: I didn't mean to — go ahead.

PAT: Go ahead.

GLENN: That is your moment to shine.

JEFFY: We're long gone done now.

GLENN: No, go ahead. Somebody in your family that people wanted to beat to death. What a surprise.

(laughing).

JEFFY: She wasn't part of my family then. I went out looking for people like that.

GLENN: They knew. Your daughter is going to marry somebody in the future and I know it and I got to beat you to death. So that's amazing. That's amazing.

PAT: Yeah, it is.

JEFFY: But it's just random. Doesn't matter. So that's when you stop traffic, you make people mad.

PAT: And it doesn't help the cause.

JEFFY: It doesn't help anything.

GLENN: This is what happens — honestly, this is the kind of stuff that happened with Gandhi.

PAT: And you've said it a million times, this is why MLK won because it was peaceful.

GLENN: And it's why Gandhi won. It's important to understand, Gandhi did not win because he was doing a hunger strike against England or against the oppressors. He didn't. He did a hunger strike on his own people. You want violence? You want to beat people in the streets? You want to bring a gun? You want to burn something down? I'm not with you. And he was so beloved. He said I will starve to death — I will not eat. I will starve to death before I will stand with you. And if you decide to disarm, if you decide to be peaceful, I'll eat. I'll have water. But until that time, no. Now, where is Jessie Jackson? Where is Al Sharpton? Can you imagine if anybody on that side would have so much credibility that they would stand and up say, until you come to the table, I will not eat. Not preaching — Gandhi was not preaching to the man. He was preaching to the people on the streets. That's the difference. That's the difference.

VP debate recap: A Vance victory

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This might have been the most consequential VP debate in recent memory.

For those of you who missed the debate, it was a decisive victory for J.D. Vance and the Trump-Vance team as a whole. Vance presented a calm, collected, and considerate side of the Republican party that compliments Trump and helps to make their platform more palatable. Meanwhile, Tim Walz had a lackluster, though certainly not catastrophic, night. He had a few embarrassing gaffes and came across as overly nervous, but like Vance, kept it civil.

Both VP candidates entered the stage as relative unknowns to most Americans, and by the end, both men had given an accurate representation of their characters. Here is a brief recap just in case you missed the debate:

J.D. Vance looked great

ANGELA WEISS / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance came out of the gate swinging, with a stellar opening statement that helped set the stage for the rest of the debate. He delivered a concise yet compelling recap of his life, which framed him as everything Walz claims to be: a relatable veteran from humble beginnings who earned his position through hard work and service. He then went on to deliver a clear and palatable defense of Trump's platform and mission while cooly drawing attention to the failures of the Biden-Harris administration.

Overall, J.D. Vance looked incredibly presidential. He presented himself not just as a capable vice president, but as a strong successor to Trump and as a valid replacement if anything should happen to the former president between now and the end of his hypothetical second term. Vance also successfully dispelled the notion that he is "weird" as Walz called him, and if anyone looked strange during the debate, it certainly wasnot Vance.

Tim Walz's gaffes

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

While Tim Walz certainly didn't have an awful night, he did not stack up well against Vance. Walz had a major gaffe around halfway through the debate when asked to explain the change in his position on assault weapon bans. Walz then claimed that he had befriended school shooters during his time in office. While that was clearly not the intention of what he was saying, it was embarrassing nonetheless.

Another weak moment was when the moderators asked Walz to explain a claim he had made regarding being in Hong Kong during the infamous Tiananmen Square protest in 1989, which has since been proven false. Walz gave a long-winded, rambling answer about taking students to visit China and how Trump should have joined in on those trips, before being called out by the moderator for dodging the question.

Vance fact-checked the fact-checkers

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

One of the conditions of the CBS debate was that the moderators would not fact-check the debaters live, but instead rely on after-the-matter fact-checking. But, CBS couldn't keep to its own rules. While Vance was describing the migrant crisis that has swelled during the Biden-Harris administration, one of the CBS moderators, Margaret Brennan, chimed in with a "fact check." She claimed that the Haitian migrants in Ohio have legal status, to which Vance clapped back by calling Brennan out for breaking the rules of the debate, then proceeded to correct her, explaining that they only had legal status due to overreach by the Biden-Harris administration.

Dockworker strike: Everything you need to know

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

At midnight on September 30th, dockworkers across the East Coast went on strike, effectively cutting the country's import and export capabilities in half.

Don't go out and panic buy a pallet of toilet paper and instant ramen just yet. It's going to take some time for the full effects of the strike to be felt and hopefully, the strike will be good and over by then. But there are no guarantees, and this election cycle could get significantly more insane as we draw near to the election. And even if the strike is settled quickly, it shows growing cracks in our infrastructure and industrial capacity that needs to be addressed if America wants to maintain its global dominance.

Here is everything you need to know about the dockworker strike:

What do the dockworkers want?

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

As with most strikes, pay is the driving factor behind this situation the country now finds itself in. The longshoremen want more pay, and with rising inflation who can blame them? After all, working the docks is hard and dangerous business, and fair compensation only seems... fair. But when you compare the wage of a dockworker, which is around $100,000 to $200,00 a year to the average income in America of $56,000, suddenly they seem significantly less sympathetic.

How much money are they asking for? For most Americans, a three percent raise is considered high, but the unions are asking up to 15 percent, depending on location. On top of that, they are asking for a 77 percent raise over the next six years. The West Coast dock workers recently made off with a 36 percent raise and were considered lucky. These increases in costs are just going to be transferred to the end consumer, and we'll likely see a jump in prices if these terms are accepted.

The other major ticket item is protection against automation. Autonomous ports are quickly becoming a reality, with major ports in China that are capable of handling vast amounts of cargo being run by a single office, not an army of dock workers. Naturally, the longshoremen are concerned that their jobs are at risk of being replaced by machines that can work harder, longer, for cheaper, and without risk of injury.

How will it affect Americans?

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

Don't panic yet!

It is going to take some time for consumers to feel the effects of the strike and it is possible that a resolution could happen at any time.

Week one should be pretty much business as usual. It might be a good idea to stock up on fruit and other perishables, but there is no need to go COVID-lockdown-crazy yet.

Week two is when you'll first start feeling the pinch. Fresh fruits and veggies will become scarce, along with other imported goods like shoes, toys, and TVs. Prices will start to creep up as the shelves will start to look a little sparse. The supply of tools, lumber, and other hardware materials will also begin to dry up.

By week three, the cracks in the system will really start to show. Entire industries will begin to slow down, or even stop. Factory workers will get furloughed and sent home without pay. Stores will have to ration items, prices will be sky-high, and online orders will come to a standstill. At this point, the strike will have escalated into a full-blown crisis, and even if it was resolved immediately, it would still take weeks to restore everything to working order.

At the four-week mark, the situation will have developed into a national security crisis, and as Glenn describes, a poly-crisis. Small business will be closing their doors, entire brands will be out of stock, and everything that remains will be so expensive it is unaffordable. By this point, the holiday season will be drawing near and there will be a rush on any sort of gift or decor items left. At this point, irreparable damage to our economy will have occurred and it will be months if not years before it can be mended.

While that sounds bleak, with the election just around the corner, it seems unlikely that the Biden-Harris administration will let it get that bad. That being said, their administration has not been characterized by good decision-making and reasonable policy, so there are no guarantees.

What can be done?

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The big question is "Why hasn't Biden already done something?"

President Biden, who ran on the image of a blue-collar, union-worker, has been uncharacteristically absent from the issue. Despite his earlier involvement in a train strike, Biden has declared that involvement in union fights is not a presidential issue unless it getsreally bad.

So where's the line? At what point will he step in? He has to understand that an economic crisis right before the election will reflect poorly on Kamala.

Join Glenn TONIGHT for BlazeTV's exclusive VP debate coverage!

Anna Moneymaker / Staff, Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Join Glenntonight for Vice Presidential debate coverage you do not want to miss!

Tonight is the first (and only) Vice Presidential debate, and it will be hosted by CBS News. But don't be reliant on CBS News or any other mainstream media channel for their biased coverage. Join the BlazeTV live stream tonight to get the uncensored truth alongside top-quality commentary from Glenn and the rest of the world-class panel.

Glenn is joined by Megyn Kelly, Liz Wheeler, Allie Beth Stuckey, Steve Deace, Jill Savage, Dave Landau, and more to cover the CBS News Vice Presidential Debate. Blaze Media subscribers gain access to live chat with the fantastic panel of hosts! If you subscribe today by visiting BlazeTV.com/debate you will get $40 off of your annual subscription with code DEBATE. This is the largest discount ever offered, so take advantage NOW!

See you TONIGHT at 8 PM ET for an event you do NOT want to miss it!

POLL: Can the VP debate affect the election?

DOMINIC GWINN / Contributor, Dia Dipasupil / Staff | Getty Images

The first (and likely only) Vice President debate will be held on CBS News on Tuesday, October 1st.

The debate takes place at 9 p.m. Eastern Time and will be the first time we see J.D. Vance and Tim Walz face off in person. Typically, the VP debate is little more than a formality, and rarely does it affect the election in any significant way. But this is no ordinary election. The stakes are higher than they have been in years, and Trump and Harris are still in a razor-thin race, according to the polls. Both Vance and Walz are relative newcomers to the national stage and still have room to make an impression on the American people, and with the race as tight as it is, that might make all the difference.

So what do you think? Can this VP debate make an impact on the election? Are you going to tune in? And what sort of questions and issues need to be brought up? Let us know in the poll below:

Will this VP debate be important in the overall election?

Are you going to watch the VP debate?

Should the debaters be asked about the Biden-Harris administration's failing economy?

Should the debaters be asked about climate change and energy policy?

Should the debaters be asked about the rise of globalism?