The Gift Handed to Hillary Clinton

At Sunday night's presidential town hall, Hillary Clinton had the advantage going in. Following the release of Trump's offensive comments leaked from a 2005 interview, Clinton was prepped --- and probably salivating --- at the chance to bring up Trump's loose-lipped, gilded gift. Did she capitalize on it?

RELATED: Hillary Clinton: ‘Beyond Absurd’ to Blame My Policies for Rise of ISIS

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these packaged questions:

• What canned response did Hillary use?

• Did Trump stop the free fall?

• How did the Trump tape actually get released?

• Are there more tapes of Donald Trump waiting in the wings?

• Does Donald Trump respect women more than anyone else on the planet?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

You know, we talked about Trump's performance. But Hillary, she was bad too.

STU: Wow.

PAT: I mean you've got these two terrible candidates, and they proved it again last night.

STU: I mean, she handed this gift that she probably had something to do with, which is this tape leaking. You know it's going to be the first question out of the shoot. And her prepared response to it is, to quote, Michelle Obama --

PAT: Like good friend.

STU: When they go low, we go high. That's your freaking response?

PAT: And everybody knows it's a total lie.

STU: Yeah, first of all, it's a total lie. Second of all, I understand the idea that -- because this was -- let's be honest about it, it was a prevent defense performance from Hillary Clinton last night.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Her belief is, she went into the tape up five points. Okay?

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: She went there to having the tape. And probably a large move towards Hillary Clinton after this tape. And I can give you some evidence of that.

The new Rasmussen poll has just come out. Rasmussen is one of the most Trump-friendly pollsters. When the average poll, before this tape came out was Clinton plus five, Rasmussen had it at Clinton plus one. Okay? The new poll came out today post tape, and it's 45-38, Clinton. A plus seven now, the Rasmussen report poll.

PAT: Wow.

STU: It's a pretty big move. And rarely do you see that kind of move in a week-to-week poll.

So we don't know yet. It's only one poll. We might find out that other polls show no move.

But in Hillary Clinton's mind, she went in plus five. The tape comes out. She's plus -- God only knows what now -- seven, eight, nine, ten. All she has to do is stand there and not let any event be notable in the debate, and she wins.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: That is how she appeared to think about that debate last night, which is -- I mean, any sports fan will tell you. We can actually make a sports reference today because Glenn is not here -- playing prevent defense a lot of times costs you ball games.

JEFFY: It sure does.

PAT: A lot of times. And I think it did last night.

STU: A lot of times costs you ball games.

I don't think it helped her. I think it probably -- let's look at it the other way. Let's look at it from the opposite side.

If Clinton had come into the debate and delivered a knockout punch of some sort, you probably have another two dozen Republican senators and congressmen dropping off of his campaign and no longer endorsing him. Polls are coming out, and they're swinging even further towards Clinton. It will look like a complete disaster.

Instead, I think she just -- I'll just step back. I'll show that, you know, I can talk about these things in detail. And I'll be boring. And I won't try to make any memorable moments. I don't want people to remember this. I want people to think about the debate. So let's just get through the debate. And it allowed him to be able to come in and just by being strong and not necessarily specific about his plans -- but being Donald Trump was enough to make people think, "Okay. Maybe this isn't going to destroy his campaign."

JEFFY: I mean, the best thing that Hillary could have had happen is this debate not happen at all.

STU: Right. Exactly. So I think what he needed to do was stop the free fall. And he probably accomplished that. Which is -- why would you do it, if you're Hillary Clinton? The only thing I can think of is she knows there's 14 more tapes coming out, and he's not going to be able to survive it.

You know, one of the producers of The Apprentice tweeted over the weekend that, you know, I was a producer on season one and two of The Apprentice, and believe me, there's much more where this comes from. This is not the end of this.

The reports are that he was doing this all the time in the breaks of the show, with his mic on for how many years did he host that show? Ten?

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Wow. And who has -- and NBC has all that?

STU: Yeah. And think about this from an NBC perspective for a second.

Access Hollywood was an NBC show. And they apparently didn't care enough about the things that Donald Trump was saying on Access Hollywood and on The Apprentice, a show he was also on NBC for, to fire him from The Apprentice.

They kept giving him millions of dollars a year to come in there and host. And in the breaks, apparently say the same types of things over and over again, that NBC didn't do anything. And they had this in their archives and they didn't release it.

PAT: Yeah, from what I heard, NBC had this tape for 11 years, and they sat on it the whole time.

STU: They did. Yeah. The backstory of this is pretty interesting, in that Access -- there was a story that came out from the AP that almost nobody noticed. We didn't even mention it to be perfectly honest. About people who worked on The Apprentice saying, "Hey, this is the way he talked all the time." He went after this one specific cameraman.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: And was constantly talking about her looks to her. And saying how good her butt looked. And all these sorts of -- things you've heard Donald Trump say before, so they didn't seem overly crazy. But it was a bunch of employees coming out and saying these things.

Apparently, Access Hollywood heard that story and decided, "We should go back and look at the tapes and see what he said in those breaks. Was he doing that same thing?"

They found the tape last Monday, a week ago today, and sat on it for four days. They actually wrote the story apparently. Ready to put it on Access Hollywood on Monday, which would be today. Because they didn't want to preempt the debate with it.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

STU: Apparently someone in Access Hollywood was like, "I'm not going to allow that to happen," and leaked it to the guy at the Washington Post, who has been doing all the reporting on the charity problems Trump has been having -- leaked the tape. But the tape was going to come out this week anyway. They did have it, and they were getting it ready to go.

So it happened on an NBC show. NBC employed him. NBC had the tapes. They were going to release it on another NBC show. And then got scooped by the Washington Post before they released it. You know, what arguably is the biggest story of the election, all of it happened under their watch. And now the Washington Post is the one that gets credit for it.

PAT: It's nuts. Well, it doesn't mean anything because...

DONALD: I have great respect for women. Nobody has more respect for women than I do.

PAT: You know.

STU: Oh, wow.

PAT: Nobody has more respect for women than he does. Nobody. Nobody has more respect for women. No one.

JEFFY: Clearly that's true.

STU: Yeah, is there a fact-check on that one?

Featured Image: Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton (L) and Republican nominee Donald Trump stand in front of the audience during the second presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri on October 9, 2016. (Photo Credit: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

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.