Glenn welcomes ‘The People’s Sheriff’ David Clarke to TheBlaze Radio Network!

TheBlaze Radio Network announced a new podcast entitled 'David Clarke: The People's Sheriff', today during Glenn's radio show. Host David Clarke is the current Sheriff of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin and is an outspoken defender of individual liberties.

The weekly, one-hour podcast will launch on Saturdays beginning June 6 and will focus on law enforcement issues, knowing your rights, commentary on current affairs, racial issues, 2nd Amendment matters, and the importance of empowering individuals rather than the state.

TheBlaze Radio Network's VP of Programming, Dom Theodore, said, "Sheriff Clarke calls it like it is - with an emphasis on common sense and individual responsibility. I'm thrilled to have him join our lineup of amazing talent at TheBlaze Radio Network, where we are committed to being a leader in digital spoken word content."

Sheriff Clarke said, "What an honor to be a part of TheBlaze Radio Network! This podcast is an opportunity to add to the conversation of well-thought-out reason on issues confronting America. I look forward to being a part of TheBlaze family, working to keep the public well informed."

Sheriff Clarke joined Glenn on radio this morning to discuss his new show, the militarization of police, and more.

GLENN: Today, I want to make a major announcement on something we're doing with Blaze Radio. Blaze Radio is -- is kind of an experiment that we've been working on and really kind of kept it pretty quiet. We don't really advertise it or anything else. And it is already the 19th largest stream in the world.

It is wildly successful and allows you to be informed where you want, when you want, how you want. And we have made some additions to Blaze Radio that have been really exciting lately. And we want to make an announcement that we're adding another voice to Blaze Radio. And it's Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. He is a remarkable man and a voice that I think needs to be heard. Well-spoken, well-thought out. And we wanted to welcome him to the Mercury family now.

David, Sheriff, how are you?

DAVID: Good, Glenn. How are you doing? First of all, thank you for this opportunity. When I first came up, I said wow. I've had a lot to say recently over the last, you know, four, five, six, seven, eight years. But I've never had my own platform to do it. So it was always a situation where I had to be led by someone else's platform and whether they wanted to take a discussion. And I am so thrilled to be a part of the Blaze network, a brand that you have built, that you've grown and you've nurtured. And I simply want to add value to what you started. And participate in this larger conversation about America. You mentioned, it's not the country that I recognize anymore either.

But I think that it's important to provide pushback and a countermessage to this modern liberalism that's in full throttle, and that's what I want to do

GLENN: David, first of all, you'll add value. I've heard some of the test broadcasts that you've done. They're remarkable. My guy who used to be the head of CBS radio and Clear Channel radio, a truly remarkable man who is working with you on my behalf. He says that he believes you're one of the biggest talents he's ever heard. And that's only after the first show. You're a natural at this.

But more importantly, we're bringing you on, David, because you can speak with authority. And, you know, black lives matter. But white lives matter too. Young lives matter. Old lives matter. Blue lives matter. All life matters.

And we're getting into a place, David, that I don't -- I don't think this country has seen since the 1960s, and we're headed for real trouble with policing. With the militarization, with the disenfranchisement of the police, with the pitting of the police against the traditional supporters of the police, our cities are going to be in real trouble because I believe there's a real effort underfoot through people like the Nation of Islam and Al Sharpton and some of the friends of the president and the Black Panthers, to literally set our cities on fire. So we need a reasonable voice that can tell us and speak from a position of authority on what to do.

What do our policemen even do?

DAVID: That's kind of interesting. As you know -- many of your listeners may not -- I have 37 years of urban law enforcement experience. All my education -- my bachelor's degree is in Criminal Justice Management. My master's degree is in Security Studies, Homeland Security related to the United States Naval Academy Post Graduate School. It's been my life. It really has. I bleed blue. I tell people, if you cut me open, you won't find red. I bleed blue.

But, Glenn, I sat up and watched after the days of Ferguson, where this proud profession that I've been a part of just came under attack. And I've predicted -- and not because I'm in the prediction business. But I knew. I know cops. I know this profession. I know the importance -- cops matter. I know the importance that law enforcement and public safety has, especially in your urban centers. We have densely populated areas. You don't have all the social controls necessary for these things to work themselves out. So you need to have an intermediary. Especially in the American ghetto, that intermediary is the American police officer. White, black, Hispanic, Asian -- who else is going down into these areas? When we -- our police come under attack. It's, you know, the white cop who shoots the unarmed black guy. And our cops are racist.

You know, these are the smears that we hear. And I go, wait a minute. Who else is going down there? I don't see the politician down there. I don't see the loudmouth demagogue like Al Sharpton down there. It's the American police officer who puts his or her life on the line, is willing to sacrifice their life, if it means that, in service to who in the American ghetto? Other black people. So to hear them maligned like this really bothered me. So I decided to step up and start to fight back, like I said. Countermessage. Defend this proposition. Look, I've said -- and I know this, and everybody knows. But I'll say it anyway. Are cops perfect? Not by any stretch of the imagination. Are police departments perfect? Not even close.

However, these communities we're talking about, these are the finest they have. They go down there with the best of intentions to do right, to do it within the rules. And every once in a while, something goes horribly wrong. But then to come down and throw all the maladies and the pathologies of the urban ghetto on the back of the American police officer and say, you go down there and do something about it. Keep them from killing each other, raping, robbing, and pillaging, and, oh, by the way, if something goes horribly wrong, you know, like it did in Ferguson and in New York and in South Carolina and in other areas, including here in Milwaukee County, all of a sudden it's, oh, the cops are the bad guys now. Let's go attack the cops.

Glenn, we expect that. Because we've seen that before from cop haters. All my 37 years. I know people that just don't like the police. We expect that from that -- that cabal. What we did not expect this time around was to see it come from an unlikely source. And that unlikely source is the political class, who -- we know we need their backing. Not only for resources, but at times when, yeah, maybe we made a mistake or even if we didn't make a mistake, like in the case of Ferguson, there was no mistake made. We don't expect the political class to turn us upside down and to attack us and want us criminally indicted and so on and so forth. That's what's different this time around

GLENN: We're talking to David Clarke. He's the sheriff in Milwaukee County. And if the name sounds familiar and you can't quite place it, it's because he was the guy who was featured on radio ads in Milwaukee saying citizens should not rely on police for protection. They should arm themselves. And they should be -- they're the first responders. And we have talked to him several times. He is fearless. And speaks his -- speaks his mind. And, quite honestly, I think that's what we need.

David, you know, as -- as we're watching this -- I think the police are being set up, myself. We are now starting to see that they're not patrolling because they won't get the backup they deserve. You're also seeing the decay because of the militarization, you're seeing people like me who I'm a big supporter of the police. But I'm gravely concerned about the militarization of our police because of what this administration has stated its goals.

We have now Al Sharpton who is one of the czars with this administration coming out and saying that the Justice Department needs to take over local policing. When the president says he wants to cut back on the militarization, what he's saying is, he wants to -- he wants to just not sell them tanks. But in that executive order, and I don't know if you've read it, in that executive order, it talks about the Pentagon and the Justice Department partnering with the local police, all the way down to things like uniforms. And what their uniforms will look like. It's a very frightening thing.

How can you help bridge the gap on making sure that the cops know that the average citizen still has respect for them? But we are concerned about some of the things that they're now being required to do and some of the things this administration -- we're trying to speak out and warn and say, look, you're going to be left alone because you're being set up. Do you believe that? And how would you respond?

DAVID: First of all, let's unpack that a little bit because there's a lot there. Your concern. I share that concern. I'm not at war with my community here in Milwaukee County. And I don't think any agency -- I have said from the beginning that that 1033 Program needs better oversight. There's no doubt about that. But I don't think that the president should have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. He said some of this equipment belongs in a battlefield. And my first thought was, has he been down in the American ghetto recently? I know he lives life in a bubble.

When you hear, you know, 15 dead, 37 shot in Baltimore in a weekend -- on Memorial Day weekend. When you hear 40 people shot in a month. When you go to Chicago and you look at, in one weekend, Glenn, 15 dead, 37 injured, 40 injured, that sounds like a battlefield. That doesn't mean that we should do overkill in terms of some of the overplus equipment. I think it needs oversight. Each agency should have to make a stronger case as to why they need this equipment. Some of this equipment is missing. It's not even accounted for. So I think it needs more oversight.

However, I think the worse thing that we can do in the United States is federalize local policing. The Founding Fathers didn't want a federal police force. As far as I'm concerned, local policing is a state's rights issue. Each state is responsible for the -- securing the personal safety of their citizens in that city. There's a role for the federal government, and it's not running these agencies. It's not taking these agencies over. It's not telling these agencies, you know, one-size-fits-all. Training them. Setting up policies and standards.

And that's kind of what this whole 21st century task force that the president hastily threw together is trying to accomplish. You know, a one-size-fits-all. Every community is different. Every community's citizens -- and I think it's what you're speaking to, Glenn -- every community's citizens have different wants, needs, and standards. What they'll put up with, what they won't. So I think it needs to be left to the locals. I think it's a slap in the face of the state governments. Because if there's a problem in Ferguson with what was going on -- and there was. Okay. If there's a problem in one of these other cities as to what's going on, you have a state attorney general. You have other oversight. Each city has their own oversight board of civilians. And if they're not doing their job, well then, the state attorney general, I believe, should step in and maybe be that intermediary, not the United States attorney general and especially not the president of the United States.

GLENN: We're talking to Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke who is joining us now on Blaze Radio, Saturdays. It will be posted at noon Eastern at the Blaze.com/radio. A very outspoken guy. A guy who has been with us several times. And I want to take a quick break and come back and ask you one question. You're there in Milwaukee. I'd love to hear your impression of Scott Walker.

[BREAK]

GLENN: Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke joins us. He is the latest to join the Blaze Radio. You can find that at the Blaze.com/radio. And it will air on Saturdays. Or it will be posted on Saturdays. So you can hear him. He's fearless. He's the guy that Michael Bloomberg threw money hand over fist during his last campaign and he still won huge. He is a plainspoken guy who can speak with authority and tell you what's really going on from the police perspective. And we're proud to have him a part of Blaze Radio now because we're huge supporters of the police departments and they are coming under fire, big time.

Tell me about Scott Walker. Because we haven't -- we haven't quite made up our mind on him, David. From a distance, he seems to be good. But then there are times, wait a minute. He just kind of flip-flopped here. Is that who he is? Can you give us insight on him?

DAVID: First of all, I want to thank you again for the complimentary comments. I hope people do tune in on the Saturday podcasts. Give me a chance. I think they'll like it. As you know, I give people information unvarnished and no sugarcoating.

Full disclosure, first of all, I'm a friend of Scott Walker. We became friends because we both worked in Milwaukee government. I'm the Milwaukee County sheriff. Came in the same year that he did as County Executive, so we worked closely together. He's a strong supporter of law enforcement. Always made sure that we were properly funded.

But what I've learned about Scott Walker is he listens to people. He would come to me and say, Sheriff, I have this deal here or some funding situation. I want to know how this affects public safety. I would tell them. He's like, I don't know that I want to do that. He's very decisive, but he listens to his advisers. You can bet that he'll listen to his military commanders. You can bet that he'll listen to his economic advisers. But he will make the decision. He will not vacillate.

But the one thing I'm looking for. And I'm telling people now -- and I do have a bias about Scott Walker. But I say, vet everybody. Okay, they'll all do what you just mentioned. Every once in a while, you get a candidate, you say, hey, this guy is looking good. This woman is looking good. Then all of a sudden, boom. Oh, jeez. You know, flip-flop there. I'm not sure now.

That's what this process is supposed to do is weed all of that out. So I'm telling people. And I'll talk about this on some of my shows leading up into the 2016 election. But vet them all. They all have weaknesses. There's no perfect candidate. What I'm looking for is the person that will bring this country back to its founding principles. That's what we need right now. Leadership in that area. And I think that this process will allow us to identify that individual. I like Carly Fiorina. I like Marco Rubio. He has his issues. I like Ted Cruz. I'm not going to say I like all of them. I'm not a big fan of Rand Paul. Because he did some things that kind of insults me in meeting with Al Sharpton.

GLENN: Hang on. Okay. David, I'm out of time. But I'm hoping you'll give that story on one of your first podcasts. Thank you very much. Sheriff David Clarke new to the Blaze Radio.

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.