Are we watching a New World Order take shape? How ISIS and Russia are about to change the globe

March 17, 2015

WRITER

Below is a transcript of Monday's opening monologue. Scroll down for a free video highlight - and sign up now for TheBlaze TV to watch the full episode. Don't miss The Root: Armies of Armageddon Thursday at 5pm ET for more on this topic.

Well, hello, America. I’m going to lay that out a little bit more clearly for you today. That was early this morning. Welcome to The Glenn Beck Program and to TheBlaze. This is the network that you are building.

Vladimir Putin literally vanished for nearly two weeks, but nobody seemed to care. The media was more interested in the political bickering over Hillary Clinton and the emails. You would think that the president of a major country going AWOL would be a bigger story. Imagine if our president didn’t show up. Okay, well, that’s a bad example. Hang on, let’s imagine that. Ooh…okay, imagine he didn’t show up. People would be interested, right?

American news would go all Jerry Springer, and that’s really what we’re doing now. We’re just playing left and right games. We’re playing the nonsense. I really hate being the guy that brings you this really bad news, but no one else is offering any meaningful perspective, so we don’t really have much of a choice.

All week, we’re going to be wargaming what I believe is coming, and I told you this a couple of weeks ago that I feel compelled to stand on these things and tell them to you until you really understand them, because you need to understand what the power players around the globe are actually saying and doing, their words and their actions. We’ll follow the logical trail to the logical outcome.

You may disagree with us, but it’s what I believe, and it all culminates on Thursday with The Root: The Armies of Armageddon, which traces the evolution of jihad and explains how and why ethnic Fascism and Islamic Fascism are rising and how they’re tied together.

[...]

Another chalkboard that I did in 2011 when GBTV first started and came on the air was this. I wanted to bring it back because, and I want to make this very, very clear, this is 2011 that I did this. Time and order may vary wildly. I still agree with that, but I want to show you where we are on this.

This is what I said would happen to the world to establish a new world order. The Arab Spring, war and revolution would spread. The caliphate would gather with Turkey at the center. I was one country off. It is Syria. Israel the focus of the hate, I think we can say that’s true. Pressure extends to Europe and America, that’s what’s happening now over in Europe.

European fall, the civil unrest, the default and then the collapse of the euro, the riots joined by Islamic protesters, and war and civil war, this is where I really want to focus today, but then I said that we’d get the American Spring. Again, I put these in consecutive order, but this is not obviously the time. Times will vary wildly.

Network framework completed, in other words, everything that this new government that we’re building would be completed by then. All of our pressure points would hit, our military would be stretched, our people would be stretched, our churches would be stretched, everything. Poverty push, we would be discouraging people from working. Economic hardship and eventually a collapse, riots and civil war, that we’re going to leave for another time. Hopefully that never happens, but so far all of this has happened and now this.

Civil unrest, we’re starting to see that. Default and collapse of the euro, we are starting to see that. It is now in negative gain. The treasury bills for Germany, they are now offering negative interest. Riots joined by the Islamic whoever, that would be, we’re seeing that right now. Then war, this pertains to Russia.

I want to show you on this map what I mean by that, and I’ll try to explain this a little bit better than I did in that clip this morning. Russia is playing for this part of the world between these two seas right here. They want their old territory back. They want all of this back and then some. They are trying to reestablish the third Roman Empire, and the third Roman Empire was centered here in Crimea. They have already taken that.

We have just done Operation Atlantic Resolve, which means unbeknownst to most of us because our media just doesn’t care to cover important things, Operation Atlantic Resolve, we have put troops and tanks and everything else here in this area, and we have drawn a line saying as NATO you are not crossing this.

Okay, so now Putin disappears, comes back more of a hardline, and that hardline wants to take the Ukraine which is right here across that line—Russia trying to reclaim the land that they believe is there. We’ve put up our defensive line, the Operation Atlantic Resolve, and the caliphate, the caliphate is pushing another way. Here is where the caliphate is, in Syria. I said that it would actually be in Turkey.

The reason why I said it would be in Turkey is because the other important iconic place in the world was in Turkey, Istanbul. That was another that used to be Constantinople. It was a very important religious, for Christians, religious center point. Most people think of Rome as the Christian empire, but it’s not. It is now.

It was here, here, and at the time when the Arab world was sweeping through the Middle East and coming up here, they were stopped in Paris. It was in the 1300s that the French pushed them back through Spain. So, if you think like somebody who was, you know, stuck in the 1300s, you would want these guys. This is a Rome to you. This is Rome to you. We have to start thinking like they think.

Now, what happened, Moscow is destabilizing Europe by funding the neo-Nazis, PEGIDA, the Golden Dawn. There’s Nazis here. There’s Nazis here. There’s Nazis here. There’s Nazis here, and all of that money is coming in from Moscow. This is a collision course with Putin and the West, and this is what you have to understand, what Putin is doing here is Putin is sending all of this money over to Europe because he’s saying the Christians have lost their way. The United States of America is not standing up our Christendom anymore. Who is really standing up?

Because in the caliphate and because we’ve destabilize the Middle East, all of this has been destabilized, and where are all of the refugees going? They’re all going up into Italy. Two hundred thousand refugees and illegal immigrants have come up into Europe just in what, the last quarter, 200,000. Can you imagine having a bunch of people from Tunisia or Libya or Egypt or Syria coming through your border, 200,000 of them?

That’s why you have the neo-Nazis starting to rise up, because just like our governments, their governments aren’t doing anything about it. They’re not stopping any of the illegal immigration. So, what’s going to happen, I believe, is they’re going to hit Paris, and that will excite all of the people to come up here and here and up through here. It will start to squeeze Europe.

When that happens, as I said, this line of NATO will fall back around here, and Moscow will push this way and this way. Then we’re going to be left with a question that we had in the 1940s, do we fight the Fascists and the Communists or do we side with the Communists to beat the Fascists? We decided we would band with the Communists. So, this time it will be, oh geez, Russia is a really bad guy again, the Fascist there. Do we side with the Fascist or do we side with ISIS? We will pick Russia.

Russia and ISIS are the two driving forces steering the globe closer to the edge of world war. Let me take you to Russia. Let me give you an update on what has happened with Putin. He finally reappeared this morning, and he joked about the gossip surrounding his disappearance, but he never disclosed what the actual reason for his ten-day escape was. So, why was he gone?

Well, let me show you a few things that have happened, because I don’t have the answer, but let me give you a few things that bother me. Before the disappearance, a Putin critic, we’ve shown you, got whacked. Now, this is the guy who was on our side. This is the only guy that if Putin was going to get whacked himself we would say, “Okay, whew!” but he got whacked in an obvious hit job. At the same time, you have the head of the military, Igor Girkin, saying that Putin is going to end up like Czar Nicholas or Milosevic if he doesn’t straighten up. Those ended in a coup and death.

Then Putin goes missing. Wild rumors began to circulate—he’s dealing with a love child, there’s a coup, he’s had a stroke, he’s dead. While he’s missing, and this is important to notice, the state media—remember that—the state media released a documentary where Putin said Russia was ready to go nuclear if need be. This was a message to the West. Then this morning Putin returned. He joked about being gone for a while, and the first thing he did was order a massive scale military drill over the polar cap.

Why would you do it over the polar cap? Because the polar cap allows you to come over into the NATO territory. So, let me put this into context of Operation Atlantic Resolve. In response to Russia’s recent aggression in the Ukraine, the U.S. Army launched a massive military convoy stretching over 1,000 miles through six European countries, forming the defensive line against Russia.

We warned in our special The Root: Red Storm Rising that this would end in one of two ways, either Putin would get more aggressive or Putin wouldn’t be aggressive enough, and extremists would grow impatient and seek a coup. So, the missing Putin, was this a warning to Putin to say “Do as we say” or was it just about a love child?

I will tell you up until I found out that he was gone for 11 days, I bought the love child thing. I thought okay, if he’s gone for three or four days, but the love child thing I have a hard time from the guy who I hunt bears and sharks in my underpants without a shirt with my bare hands. I just don’t see him fazed by his love for children for 10 or 11 days.

So, Russia continues to destabilize the region and itself. Here’s the problem, if men like Dugin and Girkin are publicly supporting a hostile military takeover, which they are, we are in for a very dark times. One of the possible candidates is Sergey Shoygu. He is the most hardline of the hardliner Fascists, and he possesses all three prerequisites needed to pull off a successful coup. He has access to lots of money. He controls the Russian state media, you know, the one that just released an old tape of Putin taking a hard line. He is also the head of the military.

If he takes over, it would make Putin look like Mother Teresa. Any Russian restraint would be snuffed out. Russia’s march to reclaim the third Roman Empire would be on big time. This is very scary stuff, especially if you understand what the caliphate is after. We can only cross our fingers and hope that it was the love child, which indeed it might have been, but let me give you the update now on ISIS.

I saw another story that made my blood run cold. A few weeks ago, I said on the air that France was in real danger. Watch.

VIDEO

Glenn: Because of what is happening, I believe London, France, Germany, Greece, I believe these things could be destroyed in what is coming and especially because remember who you’re fighting against. You’re fighting against Islamic extremists. The places that they will target will be places like the Cathedral of Notre Dame. You could go back to France in 15 years from now, and it might be free. It might not be. It might be free, but the Cathedral of Notre Dame may be gone.

So, this weekend when I saw this headline on TheBlaze, I froze: “ISIS Vows to Bomb White House, Big Ben, and the Eiffel Tower.” I thought for a while now that it was France, especially with the massive illegal immigration problem that it would take the center stage. I will tell you that I have an interview coming out with Tim Ferriss on his podcast that I did a week ago. I think it comes out in three or four weeks, and he asked me, “What do you see for Europe?” I told him in that interview maybe a week, two weeks ago, that it’s going to be France, and it’s going to be the Cathedral of Notre Dame.

He looked at me, and I felt a little awkward because it was strangely specific and out of the blue, but now that I see ISIS is all but declaring Paris their number-one target, I believe this is important for you to understand.

On a side note, the young kid who executed the so-called spy that ISIS caught, he’s from France, they believe. The kid couldn’t have been more than 11 or 12 years old. That’s how scary this is getting. I know people have mocked ISIS on Twitter for saying that they were going to conquer Rome, but I don’t believe they look at Rome the way you look at Rome. Maybe they do. Again, they are coming through Italy as well.

Can they do it? I don’t know. Will they try? Well, bin Laden in 1999 said that he was going to bomb the skyscrapers of New York. I would suggest that we take these people at their word. You have to think like a 13th century person and the Crusades to understand their words. Remember, ISIS keeps talking about fighting the armies of Rome. Back in the Crusades days, the caliphate was dominating, and it was France that pushed the Moors out of Spain and put a stop to it.

So, what does that have to do with the armies of Rome? Here’s where it gets interesting. Pope Clement V in the 13th century relocated the seat of the Catholic Church to Avignon, France. Most people don’t remember. Believe me, the Muslims do. It was Pope Clement who gave the order to send the Crusades out to the Levant, as in the L in ISIL.

So, to them they would be fighting the armies of Rome when they target France. Their symbolic target I don’t believe will be the Eiffel Tower. I think they will go for something sacred like the Cathedral at Notre Dame or maybe something in Avignon. I don’t know. They’ll hit what they can. After all, ISIS wants to conquer a small town in Dabiq just because they believe it will initiate the literal countdown to the apocalypse. These people are looking for religious symbolism.

The globe continues its march toward war. The media continues to fail to give us perspective, so we will stay on this.

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.

5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Glenn's Show Prep

Are we watching a New World Order take shape? How ISIS and Russia are about to change the globe

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven't)

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November?

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?