Could Reddit Bombshell Deliver Another Impeached President Clinton?

In the wormhole that is the Hillary Clinton email scandal, the burrowing has deepened into an unknown space-time continuum. News broke yesterday that Paul Combetta, the Platte River Networks technician working for Hillary Clinton’s IT provider, was a fan of Reddit, a social news aggregation and discussion website. Combetta, also the technician who pleaded the Fifth about wiping Clinton's server clean, is now suspected of reaching out to the tech community on Reddit about covering the tracks of a certain VIP.

RELATED: Hillary’s IT Guy Paul Combetta Wouldn’t Chat With Congress, but Is This Suspicious Reddit Post Talking?

"I'm telling you right now, if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will either retire due to health, or she will be impeached her first term. This is all mounting. You know what this feels like? This feels like Watergate," Glenn said Tuesday on his radio program.

That would be an unfortunate similarity for Clinton, as Richard Nixon resigned the presidency following the Watergate scandal.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to this cornucopia of questions:

• Who had more pre-scandal popularity --- Hillary Clinton or Richard Nixon?

• If elected, will we see a second President Clinton impeached?

• Should I post on a public forum about covering my tracks?

• Is "stonetear" a clever name for a Reddit user, city street or Etsy account?

• Can you make money crocheting in a jail cell?

• How VIP is very VIP?

• Are there more emails that prove Hillary sold guns to ISIS?

• Does anyone in the media like Hillary?

• How does President Kaine sound?

Listen to this segment, beginning at mark 2:25, from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: I'm telling you right now, if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will either retire due to health, or she will be impeached her first term. This is all mounting. You know what this feels like? This feels like Watergate. The election right before the Watergate scandal. Remember, Pat? You are old enough to remember. Watergate felt just like this. Everyone knew he had done something wrong, but his own supporters were arguing, "There's no proof of this. There's no way he did that. Move on. You're just trying to -- whatever.

STU: Go out on a limb and say that she does not carry 49 states, however.

GLENN: Did he carry 49 states?

STU: Right. Wasn't it 49? Yeah. It was 49 states against McGovern, right? '72?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Yeah, he lost Massachusetts.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: And DC.

GLENN: Right. So she's not going to carry the 49 states. She won't be as popular as Nixon was.

STU: Actually, not -- not DC. Sorry. There was that one unfaithful elector that voted for the Libertarian in that election. But it was a blowout. Let's -- electoral count 520 to 17.

GLENN: Okay. Holy cow. Holy cow.

JEFFY: Wow.

STU: That's amazing.

PAT: Good thing he broke into the hotel to find out his campaign strategy.

GLENN: Yeah, couldn't beat that guy.

(laughter)

PAT: Wow. That was razor-thin.

STU: Yeah, Massachusetts and DC. That's it.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: And we even do have Russia hacking in to find her campaign strategy. This is 1972 all over again. And she's not going to make it. Look at the scandals that are coming out today. By the way, more on the IRS scandal too. Did you see this? Democratic documents now have been leaked, where Democratic senators were saying, "How can we not just go arrest these guys? We got to go arrest these Tea Party people." And it was a conversation between senators and the IRS. "Why can't you go out and get these guys?"

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: I mean, it's bad.

Okay. So let's see. Tell me how she survives. We'll put the DHS scandal off to the side here. Tell me how she survives just these two. Just these two. Because, remember, the press hates her.

Once you have Donald Trump out of the way -- this is the press' thinking -- once you have Donald Trump out of the way, they don't like her. They will -- she will be the bad guy. She will be the bad guy.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: She will not be able to get anything done. Nothing!

Listen to this: Hillary's IT guy wouldn't talk to Congress, but now Reddit has posts that they say are his. And it's circumstantial evidence, but the circumstantial evidence is pretty -- pretty amazing.

Let's see: We're in weird times. 2016. This is Reddit. It was only about a month ago before her collapse at a 9/11 event that asking about Hillary Clinton's health put one firmly in the deplorable conspiracy theorist basket, at least according to many in the mainstream media.

So it's best to tread lightly when approaching the news that Paul Combetta, a technician with Hillary's IT provider, Platte HEP River Networks, left behind a few incriminating crumbs on the internet, ironically when asking about how to cover someone else's tracks.

Have you heard this?

STU: One way not to cover your tracks is to post on a public forum about covering tracks.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Hey, can somebody help me out?

Let's just for now, that the US News HEP and World Report has taken an interest, as has Major HEP Garrett of CBS News. US News staff writer Steven Nelson notes the requests match neatly with publicly known dates related to Clinton's use of a private server while Secretary of State.

How soon before the cable and broadcast networks pick up the story? Never.

Reddit calls itself the front page of the internet, which might sound like an empty boast for those not familiar with the site. It's a huge discussion board, covering every topic in existence. It's ugly as sin, with none of the candy-colored buttons or graphical trappings of a HEP Web 2.0 or whatever web now we're on, which makes it a paradise for computer nerds and geeks of all stripes. Ask anything and someone will answer.

Some are claiming to have evidence that Combetta, who is reportedly the technician who, oops, obliterated Hillary Clinton's email archive using BleachBit HEP software and then pleaded the Fifth before the House Oversight Committee last week, popped onto a Reddit discussion board in 2014 to ask how to remove or replace -- this is quoting -- the to and from address on archived emails.

A lot of theory depends on attaching Combetta to the user name stonetear. Is it stonetier or tear? But it looks like internet detectives have now done just that. A good thing people captured screens while they could. It looked like stonetear's Reddit history has been wiped like with a cloth or something.

STU: And in realtime, as they were discovering this. So like people were like, "Wait a minute. Is this the guy?" And started talking about it. And as they were doing it, they would refresh the screen, and there would be less posts this guy had because he was deleting them as they were doing it. That's how -- and, you know, the circumstantial evidence is pretty interesting. This guy does have accounts on other websites with this name. You know, it's from a couple years ago.

GLENN: Yep.

STU: And he, I believe, has a house that is on that street.

GLENN: Right. And he is -- he went to a wedding with a friend. And what is it? Let's see here.

This image confirms stonetear user name, Hillary, Paul Combetta, he's granted immunity, blah, blah.

But he was at a -- he was at a party of some sort, and it's him with a friend. And they're like, "Look how tall stonetear is."

STU: Oops.

GLENN: Oops. You might want to be a little more clever with your names.

STU: He also has an Etsy page.

GLENN: Yes, that's right.

STU: So in case you want to order arts and crafts, you can apparently do that.

JEFFY: Crocheting in the cell?

GLENN: So what he did was --

PAT: Didn't he say something about I'm deleting for a very --

GLENN: Yes. I am --

PAT: I can't say anything, but whose husband used to be president.

(laughter)

GLENN: Of another -- of a company.

STU: Here's the quote: I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP, parentheses, very VIP -- in capitals -- email address from a bunch of archived email.

PAT: She's a Democrat, and it's rumored she may run for president.

(laughter)

So ridiculous.

GLENN: I mean, it is almost -- it is -- you could almost convince me this is a setup. Is this guy that stupid?

PAT: Maybe.

STU: I mean, I don't know enough about Reddit to know if you can back date posts. I would think the answer to that is no, or that that would have been pointed out in any of these articles. But that's the only thing that makes any sense.

GLENN: And it correlates. They ask for something. And that day, he goes on and posts on Reddit. I mean, all of the dates -- this is why US News, World Report, this is what they're doing. They notice all of the dates fit exactly with him.

STU: Right. And this is the guy who had the OS moment. Oh, crap moment. That has been described in the testimony. And so in March 2015, he had to implement a 60-day email retention policy. But he had -- he theoretically was supposed to do that earlier and forgot. So later on came to do it.

And the dates with his posts about a 60-day email retention policy line up with when he initially posted about it.

So like, it was initially supposed to happen in December. He posted about it in December, but then forgot to do it until March. But he posted about it at the time when they were discussing it. And, again, like, I don't know, could a hacker do this? Go back and --

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know.

STU: I don't know. Maybe. I just don't know the site well enough.

But, I mean, if these things exist, none of the media sources covering it are pointing it out. Like if you could backdate posts or if you could go in and somehow manipulate the boards --

GLENN: Right. Is there anybody who is, you know, expert enough on this to be able to tell us, can you back-date stuff? You would think that that would have been one of the first things people would have said.

STU: Right. I got to imagine that's not true. And, you know, it's amazing. Because this is the guy who used BleachBit to get rid of these --

GLENN: Right. And didn't he also do something on Reddit about BleachBit?

STU: I don't know -- I think that was his initial ask was about how to remove --

GLENN: BleachBit. I mean, this is crazy. So this is all coming undone.

Now, let me give you another one. Now he's announcing that Hillary Clinton and her State Department -- this is a political insider. WikiLeaks confirms that Hillary sold weapons to ISIS.

He's announcing now -- insider -- that Hillary Clinton and her State Department were actively arming Islamic jihadists, which includes the Islamic State in Syria.

Clinton has repeatedly denied these claims, including during multiple statements while under oath in front of the United States Senate. WikiLeaks is about to prove that Hillary deserves to be arrested.

In Obama's second term, the Secretary of State authorized the shipment of American made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood, to the friendly Libyan rebels, in an effort to topple the Libyan Gadhafi government, and then ship those arms to Syria in order to fund al-Qaeda and topple Assad in Syria.

I just want you to know, this is exactly what we said they were doing four days after Benghazi. Do you remember?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: We said they were trying to get all of those American arms back out of the arms of the people that they gave them to. And that's why they were there. They were making deals with warlords to try to get those armaments back. And then they were shipping them over to Syria through Turkey.

Gee. Who was right?

Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called Friends of Syria to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria.

That explains why they were protected by the CIA and nobody else.

Under oath, Hillary Clinton denied she knew about the Weapon's shipments. In an interview with Democracy Now, WikiLeaks' Julian Assange is now stating that 1700 emails contained in the Clinton cache directly connect Hillary to Libya, to Syria, and directly to al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Here's the transcript. Let's see here. Let me see if I can just get the Julian Assange.

WikiLeaks has become the rebel Library of Alexandria. It's the single most significant collection of information that doesn't exist elsewhere in searchable and accessible, citable form about how modern institutions actually behave. And it's going on to set people free from prison, where documents have been used in their court cases to hold the CIA accountable for rendering programs, feed into election cycles, which have resulted in the termination of some cases or contributed to the termination of governments. In some cases, taken the heads of intelligence agencies, ministers of defense, and so on. So you know, our civilizations can only be as good as the knowledge of what our civilization is. We can't possibly hope to reform what we don't understand.

So those Hillary Clinton emails, they connect together with the cables that we have published of Hillary Clinton, creating a rich picture of how Hillary Clinton performs in office. But more broadly, how the US Department of State operates. For example, the absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gadhafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS, of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS. That's there in the emails.

There's more than 1700 emails in Hillary Clinton's collections that we have released just about Libya alone.

How does she survive?

STU: Well, I mean, in normal circumstances, right? The Democrat just gets -- they lay down cover and they survive from the media.

GLENN: And they're going to lay down cover for the next 50 days.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: Once that's over -- once the bogeyman is gone, she has no more cover. I'm telling you, if she wins, she's a one-term president that is either impeached or leaves because of health reasons. You're looking at President Kaine.

PAT: She won't be impeached, I don't think.

GLENN: I think it will mount and she will do exactly what Nixon did. She won't want to be -- both Clintons being impeached from office? No way.

PAT: Yeah, they wouldn't want that label.

GLENN: They would not want that. It's over. And that's not even counting the Clinton Global Initiative. That thing is so dirty. They haven't even started on that yet.

PAT: Do people care?

GLENN: Yes, they do.

PAT: You think they do?

GLENN: Yes, I do. I think not now. Not now. Because we're in the political fog of war.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But once -- once the --

PAT: Like if she wins, you think they will care?

GLENN: Yes, they will. Because they will like Kaine more than Hillary. They don't like Hillary. And they'll want her to pay a price. They're not going to let her get away with it.

JEFFY: Bill already explained the Foundation issue, right? I mean, people did give money. They probably expected to get some kind of influence. But, hey, the State Department -- he expected the State Department to do what was right.

(laughter)

PAT: Of course, he did.

GLENN: Right. And they were expecting him to do right.

Featured Image: Featured Image: Original cartoon created by Pat Cross Cartoons for glennbeck.com. Pat Cross loves drawing, America and the Big Man upstairs.

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.