Rand Paul pushes to defund Planned Parenthood after 'incredibly disturbing' videos

Although the attempt to defund Planned Parenthood failed in the Senate, Glenn gave credit to Senator Rand Paul for actively trying to do something about the destruction of innocent life.

The senator had some strong words to say about the “callous disregard of the doctors” as well as suggestions on how the American people can help.

"One idea I’ve had is that everybody should send a copy of the ultrasound of their baby. You know, most parents are proud of the first ultrasound of their baby. They ought to send that to their legislator and say you know what, ultrasound has been used for such good," he said.

Watch the full interview in the video below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

Glenn: Although the attempt to defund Planned Parenthood failed in the Senate yesterday, Senator Rand Paul deserves credit for actively trying to do something about the destruction of innocent life. Senator Paul joins me from the Capitol now. Senator, how are you, sir?

Sen. Paul: Very good, Glenn. Thanks for having me.

Glenn: It is extraordinarily disturbing to me that we couldn’t muster up enough even Republicans to stop this. For some reason, the people in Congress or in the Senate don’t see this as baby harvesting like I do and like you do.

Sen. Paul: Well, I think the videos are incredibly disturbing, and when I heard about them using ultrasound to manipulate the baby into a position so it can be removed a little bit at a time so they can get at the baby’s organs, kidneys, livers, and sort of the callous disregard by the doctor sort of saying oh yeah, livers are popular, it’s hard to hear that and for people not to realize these are coming from a fully formed baby. I think we rarely get the debate in such sharp relief. We often have the debate where the other side wants to call it tissue, but when we’re talking about lungs, brains, hearts, livers, I think it’s hard and should make all sort of people shudder that we’re doing this.

Glenn: Can I talk to as a doctor, not as a political guy or a candidate right now? Let me just talk to you and ask two questions as a doctor. First of all, what do you as a doctor say to those doctors that are doing this?

Sen. Paul: You know, we have an ancient oath, the Hippocratic Oath, that says first do no harm. I don’t know how you can be consistent with any kind of oath like that. Years ago they took out some of the specifics towards abortion and sort of somehow in their minds qualify and say abortion is not doing harm. I don’t know how anyone could do that day in and day out knowing that you’re pulling out the pieces of a baby. I mean, I don’t know how they do it and how they live with themselves. I think it’s a good debate for us to be having. Those on the other side of the issue should be ostracized. They should be removed from office.

The vast majority of Republicans did vote for this. Every Republican except for one and then two Democrats did vote with us. The real question as to whether the vote was important will be determined by the electorate when these people go back to the polls, and so we shouldn’t let this die. We also should vote to defund them through the appropriation process.

I’m a believer that thousands of items should be targeted for defunding, not just one or two, not just ObamaCare, not just Planned Parenthood. The power of the purse is Congress to direct funding, and we’ve gotten away from that to where people think oh, it’s extraordinary for us to tell the president. That’s actually our job to do that.

Glenn: Right. The other thing I want to ask you as a doctor is the argument on the other side is this is hurting, you’re going after—Rand Paul, and I heard this specifically, Rand Paul is going after women’s health.

Sen. Paul: Well, it’s absolutely just untrue. There are 9000 community health centers. We have thrown more federal money at healthcare than we ever have in the history of time. You can’t go a block in our country and not find something for free, and so we have 9000 community health centers funded by the government, $5 billion. We’ve doubled it in recent years, and there’s 700 Planned Parenthood clinics. So, 9000 free government clinics, 700 Planned Parenthood, the only difference is Planned Parenthood offers abortion. The other difference is Planned Parenthood doesn’t offer most of the women’s health items they say they offer. They don’t offer mammograms. The exams are not done by doctors for breast exams. You’re typically referred somewhere else. So, it’s been a crock for a long time. It’s been a front for abortion, and let’s have this debate.

They’re also huge funders of the Democrat party and huge funders of liberals, and so I guarantee they’re going to come after me and target me. They’ve also targeted Joni Ernst as well.

Glenn: I heard Hillary Clinton in a statement she recorded recently where she said I am proud to stand with Planned Parenthood, and I was struck—because I’ve seen the video, I was struck on how evil that is. I said today that I don’t think I’ve seen anything in America that is this close to Josef Mengele. Is that hyperbole?

Sen. Paul: Now Glenn, that would be the first time you had hyperbole—

Glenn: I know.

Sen. Paul: What I would say is that if you ask the general public about removing a fully formed baby and harvesting its organs, I think you’re probably going to get a 70%, 80% issue. There are some hardcore people who don’t care, but like I say, I know a lot of people from all walks of life, not just conservatives, I know pro-choice women, and you know what, they’re horrified by this. So, when we’re talking about a fully formed baby, the numbers go lopsided in our direction. It’s a rare person who thinks fully formed babies ought to be taken out.

The whole idea of third trimester abortion is kind of crazy because at that point if it’s a risk to the mother, try to save the baby, remove the baby through C-section if it’s a risk to the mother. Most third trimester babies can actually have a chance of surviving.

Glenn: I have to tell you, after I saw Cecil the lion and the outcry from the left on Cecil the lion and the silence or the acceptance of baby harvesting, am I wrong to say this is baby harvesting?

Sen. Paul: No, I think it is. It’s harvesting of baby organs, and there seems to be a neglect on their part.

Glenn: Yeah. I see this, I don’t think this, Rand, and maybe this is a new understanding for me and maybe it goes much further than just this one issue, but I don’t think this is a problem with Washington. I think this is a problem with the American people. The American people, when we care more about Cecil the lion than we care about baby harvesting, I’m afraid for our country. I really am truly afraid of what we’re becoming.

Sen. Paul: Well, what I’ve always told people is I’m known for someone standing up for individual rights, the right to be left alone, and most choices in life you should get. The thing is all those rights derive from a right to your life and to have no one physically aggress against your life. We really need to have this debate in our country when does life begin? When they had the debate a few years ago over partial-birth abortion, at least one of the Democrats was honest enough to say that if the baby did come out, was still alive, and you weren’t able to kill the baby before it came out, that really the baby wasn’t a baby until you take the baby home.

I’ve worked in a neonatal nursery. I’ve worked with babies that are a pound, pound and a half that survive and end up doing fine. We examine their eyes to make sure they don’t go blind from being born so early, but to think that that baby doesn’t really have rights until you take them home, it’s absurd, and I think most people don’t believe that. If this radical notion from these people were well known, I think we begin to win the argument a little more, and I think actually we are, but we aren’t yet there. Washington is always a decade behind the people, and people need to do a better job of hurrying up and replacing some of these legislators so we could actually get to the will of the people.

Glenn: I mean, I’ve never been a guy who—I don’t go in front of abortion clinics and protest. I don’t protest anything. I’m a slug of an American. This one so deeply bothers me, Rand. I mean, we’re doing something in Birmingham on August 28th where the slogan is all lives matter, and it’s true—black lives matter, white lives matter, baby lives matter, old people’s lives matter. What can the average person do who has never really protested and don’t see themselves standing in front of an abortion clinic? How can we help?

Sen. Paul: You know, one idea I’ve had is that everybody should send a copy of the ultrasound of their baby. You know, most parents are proud of the first ultrasound of their baby. They ought to send that to their legislator and say you know what, ultrasound has been used for such good. You can actually save babies in the womb through surgery now. Send that ultrasound and say you know what, our taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be getting ultrasounds of babies so we can manipulate them around to harvest their organs. That was one of the things that upset me about it is they talk about doing abortion under ultrasound so they can actually use this great technology not to save a baby but to actually manipulate the baby into a position so you can harvest the organs.

Glenn: Can I look at this a different way? I was talking about this on the air today on radio, and I said if I had an abortion and I didn’t have a problem with abortion, I think I would be a little upset that I didn’t get a kickback in this. How dare you take my baby from me, what is mine? I’m paying you $1000 to do it, and then you’re selling the baby?

Sen. Paul: Well, the investigation ought to be what kind of consent is actually being obtained. I’m guessing when this consent is being obtained that no one is telling them we are going to harvest your baby’s organs. And actually they might say tissue, but they’re not going to admit that the procedure you’re going to get is going to have a baby with arms, legs, kidneys, livers, lungs, and that there’s a different price for each organ. I don’t think that’s being discussed. I would very much imagine that that is glossed over and that people are being run through, and it’s just a little extra money making to make expenses for Planned Parenthood.

Glenn:: I’m not a lawyer, and I’m not a law man. I’m not in your position. I’m just an average American who sits here and looks at this stuff, and I think these people should go to jail. Do you think they’ve crossed the line of jail time possibly?

Sen. Paul: There are laws about already from the partial-birth abortion. There are laws saying you’re not supposed to manipulate the baby in order to harvest organs, and so that’s a question. The woman online when they ask her about it, she says oh yeah, there’s some laws, but that’s just for lawyers to figure it out that there are some laws. She doesn’t say partial-birth abortion, I think, in the video, but she admits that there are some laws. Yeah, that’s why it should be investigated. Really the question ought to be whether or not real consent is being obtained or is this occurring, the sale of the body organs occurring without really an adequate consent.

Glenn: Rand Paul, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Sen. Paul: Thanks, Glenn.

On Wednesday's TV show, Glenn Beck sat down with radio show host, author, political commentator, and film critic, Michael Medved.

Michael had an interesting prediction for the 2020 election outcome: a brokered convention by the DNC will usher in former First Lady Michelle Obama to run against President Donald Trump.

Watch the video below to hear why he's making this surprising forecast:

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

On Thursday's "Glenn Beck Radio Program," BlazeTV's White House correspondent Jon Miller described the current situation in Virginia after Gov. Ralph Northam (D) declared a state of emergency and banned people carrying guns at Capitol Square just days before a pro-Second-Amendment rally scheduled on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Jon told Glenn that Gov. Northam and the Virginia Legislature are "trying to deprive the people of their Second Amendment rights" but the citizens of Virginia are "rising up" to defend their constitutional rights.

"I do think this is the flashpoint," Jon said. "They [Virginia lawmakers] are saying, 'You cannot exercise your rights ... and instead of trying to de-escalate the situation, we are putting pressure. We're trying to escalate it and we're trying to enrage the citizenry even more'."

Glenn noted how Gov. Northam initially blamed the threat of violence from Antifa for his decision to ban weapons but quickly changed his narrative to blame "white supremacists" to vilify the people who are standing up for the Second Amendment and the Constitution.

"What he's doing is, he's making all all the law-abiding citizens of Virginia into white supremacists," Glenn said.

"Sadly, that's exactly right," Jon replied. "And I think he knows exactly what he's doing."

Watch the video to catch more of the conversation below:

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

Ryan: Trump Louisiana Finale

Photo by Jim Dale

Part One. Part Two. Part Three.

At the end of Trump rallies, I would throw on my Carhartt jacket, sneak out of the press area, then blend in with everyone as they left, filing out through swinging doors.

Often, someone held the door open for me. Just 30 minutes earlier, the same person had most likely had most likely hissed at me for being a journalist. And now they were Sunday smiles and "Oh, yes, thank you, sir" like some redneck concierge.

People flooded out of the arena with the stupidity of a fire drill mishap, desperate to survive.

The air smacked you as soon as you crossed the threshold, back into Louisiana. And the lawn was a wasteland of camping chairs and coolers and shopping bags and to-go containers and soda cans and articles of clothing and even a few tents.

In Monroe, in the dark, the Trump supporters bobbled over mounds of waste like elephants trying to tiptoe. And the trash was as neutral to them as concrete or grass. They plodded over it because it, an object, had somehow gotten in their way.

It did not matter that they were responsible for this wreckage.Out in the sharp-edged moonlight, rally-goers hooted and yapped and boogied and danced, and the bbq food truck was all smoke and paper plates.

They were even more pumped than they had been before the rally, like 6,000 eight year olds who'd been chugging Mountain Dew for hours. Which made Donald Trump the father, the trooper, God of the Underworld, Mr. Elite, Sheriff on high horse, the AR-15 sticker of the family.

Ritualistic mayhem, all at once. And, there in Louisiana, Trump's supporters had gotten a taste of it. They were all so happy. It bordered on rage.

Still, I could not imagine their view of America. Worse, after a day of strange hostilities, I did not care.

My highest priority, my job as a reporter, was to care. To understand them and the world that they inhabit. But I did not give a damn and I never wanted to come back.

Worst of all, I would be back. In less than a week.

Was this how dogs felt on the 4th of July? Hunched in a corner while everyone else gets drunk and launches wailing light into the sky? configurations of blue and red and white.

It was 10:00 p.m. and we'd been traveling since 11:00 a.m., and we still had 5 hours to go and all I wanted was a home, my home, any home, just not here, in the cold sweat of this nowhere. Grey-mangled sky. No evidence of planes or satellites or any proof of modern-day. Just century-old bridges that trains shuffled over one clack at a time.

And casinos, all spangles and neon like the 1960s in Las Vegas. Kitchy and dumb, too tacky for lighthearted gambling. And only in the nicer cities, like Shreveport, which is not nice at all.

And swamp. Black water that rarely shimmered. Inhabited by gadflies and leeches and not one single fish that was pretty.

Full of alligators, and other killing types. The storks gnawing on frogs, the vultures never hungry. The coyotes with nobody to stop them and so much land to themselves. The roaches in the wild, like tiny wildebeests.

Then, the occasional deer carcass on the side of the road, eyes splayed as if distracted, tongue out, relaxed but empty. The diseased willows like skeletons in hairnets. The owls that never quit staring. A million facets of wilderness that would outlive us all.

Because Nature has poise. It thrives and is original.

Because silence is impossible. Even in an anechoic chamber, perfectly soundproofed, you can hear your own heartbeat, steady as a drum. A never-ending war.

I put "Headache" by Grouper on repeat as we glided west. We were deadlocked to asphalt, rubber over tarface.

And I thought about lines from a Rita Dove poem titled "I have been a stranger in a strange land"

He was off cataloging the universe, probably,
pretending he could organize
what was clearly someone else's chaos.

Wasn't that exactly what I was doing? Looking for an impossible answer, examining every single accident, eager for meaning? telling myself, "If it happens and matters the next year, in America, I want to be there, or to know what it means. I owe it to whoever cares to listen."

Humans are collectors and I had gone overboard.

Because maybe this wasn't even my home. These landmarks, what did they mean? Was I obvious here? When I smiled, did I trick them into believing that I felt some vague sense of approval? Or did my expressions betray me?

Out in all that garbage-streaked emptiness — despite the occasional burst of passing halogen — I couldn't tell if everything we encountered was haunted or just old, derelict, broken, useless. One never-ending landfill.

Around those parts, they'd made everything into junk. Homes. Roads. Glass. Nature. Life itself, they made into junk.

I cringed as we passed yet another deer carcass mounded on the side of the road.

As written in Job 35:11,

Who teaches us more than the beasts of the earth and makes us wiser than the birds in the sky?

Nobody. Look at nature and you feel something powerful. Look at an animal, in all of its untamable majesty, and you capture a deep love, all swept up in the power of creation. But, here, all I saw were poor creatures who people had slammed into and kept driving. Driving to where? For what reason? What exactly was so important that they left a trail of dead animals behind them?

So I crossed myself dolorously and said an "Our Father" and recited a stanza from Charles Bukowski's "The Laughing Heart"

you can't beat death but
you can beat death in life, sometimes.
and the more often you learn to do it,
the more light there will be.

Out here, nothing but darkness. Needing some light, by God. Give me something better than a Moon that hides like an underfed coward.

Jade told me about some of the more traumatic things she'd seen while working at the State Fair.

"Bro, they pull roaches out of the iced lemonade jugs and act like nothing happened."

"All right but what about the corn dogs?"

"You do not want to know, little bro."

She looked around in the quiet. "Back in the day, the Louisiana Congress refused to raise the drinking age from 18 to 21," she said. "They didn't want to lose all that drunk gambler money. So the federal government cut off funding to highways."

We glided through moon-pale landscape for an hour before I realized what she had meant. That there weren't any light poles or billboards along the road. Nothing to guide us or distract us. Just us, alone. And it felt like outer space had collapsed, swallowed us like jellybeans.

Like two teenagers playing a prank on the universe.

In the cozy Subaru Crosstrek, in the old wild night, brimming with the uncertainty of life and the nonchalance of failure, we paraded ourselves back to Dallas. Alive in the river silence that follows us everywhere.

New installments come Mondays and Thursdays. Next, the Iowa caucuses. Check out my Twitter. Email me at kryan@blazemedia.com

The Iowa primary is just around the corner, and concerns of election interference from the last presidential election still loom. Back in 2016, The Associated Press found that a majority of U.S. elections systems still use Windows 7 as an operating system, making them highly susceptible to bugs and errors. And last year, a Mississippi voter tried multiple times to vote for the candidate of his choice, but the system continuously switched his vote to the other candidate. It's pretty clear: America's voting systems desperately need an update.

That's where blockchain voting comes in.

Blockchain voting is a record-keeping system that's 100% verifiable and nearly impossible to hack. Blockchain, the newest innovation in cybersecurity, is set to grow into a $20 billion industry by 2025. Its genius is in its decentralized nature, distributing information throughout a network of computers, requiring would-be hackers to infiltrate a much larger system. Infiltrating multiple access points spread across many computers requires a significant amount of computing power, which often costs more than hackers expect to get in return.

Blockchain voting wouldn't allow for many weak spots. For instance, Voatz, arguably the leading mobile voting platform, requires a person to take a picture of their government-issued ID and a picture of themselves before voting (a feature, of course, not present in vote-by-mail, where the only form of identity verification is a handwritten signature, which is easily forgeable). Voters select their choices and hit submit. They then receive an immediate receipt of their choices via email, another security feature not present in vote-by-mail, or even in-person voting. And because the system operates on blockchain technology, it's nearly impossible to tamper with.

Votes are then tabulated, and the election results are published, providing a paper trail, which is a top priority for elections security experts.

The benefits of blockchain voting can't be dismissed. Folks can cast their vote from the comfort of their homes, offices, etc., vastly increasing the number of people who can participate in the electoral process. Two to three-hour lines at polling places, which often deter voters, would become significantly diminished.

Even outside of the voting increase, the upsides are manifold. Thanks to the photo identification requirements, voter fraud—whether real or merely suspected—would be eliminated. The environment would win, too, since we'd no longer be wasting paper on mail-in ballots. Moreover, the financial burden on election offices would be alleviated, because there's decreased staff time spent on the election, saving the taxpayer money.

From Oregon to West Virginia, elections offices have already implemented blockchain voting, and the results have been highly positive. For example, the city of Denver utilized mobile voting for overseas voters in their 2019 municipal elections. The system was secure and free of technical errors, and participants reported that it was very user-friendly. Utah County used the same system for their 2019 primary and general elections. An independent audit revealed that every vote that was cast on the app was counted and counted correctly. These successful test cases are laying the groundwork for even larger expansions of the program in 2020.

With this vital switch, our elections become significantly more secure, accurate, and efficient. But right now, our election infrastructure is a sitting duck for manipulation. Our current lack of election integrity undermines the results of both local and national elections, fans the flames of partisanship, and zaps voter confidence in the democratic system. While there's never a silver bullet or quick fix to those kinds of things, blockchain voting would push us much closer to a solution than anything else.

Chris Harelson is the Executive Director at Prosperity Council and a Young Voices contributor.