Donald Trump Deserves a Chance and Our Support

November 11, 2016

Writer

After a hard-fought presidential election, Donald Trump has emerged victorious. There now exists a renewed opportunity for him to unite America and lead in a constitutional way. Based on recent tweets from Trump, Glenn believes our new President-elect is evolving into a man worthy of the presidency.

"I want to read a tweet that shows he is becoming presidential, and he is trying to do the right thing," Glenn said Friday on his radio program.

Six months ago, Trump would have stirred the pot in response to the protests taking place on America's streets. Instead, he tweeted a unifying message for the country.

Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 11, 2016

With the slate already wiped clean, Glenn reasserted his support for Donald Trump.

“I’m for the office of the president of the United States, and I will stand with Donald Trump as long as I can. I’ll stand with him until he starts to say crazy, divisive things and suggest policies that are not conservative or constitutional. But until he does that, I stand with him,” Glenn said.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• How many retweets did Trump's tweet get?

• Why must we stop labeling people as groups?

• On what will Glenn not budge?

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

GLENN: Okay. So I want to show you the evolution of a man. What did Donald Trump -- what would have Donald Trump said, you know, six months ago, if protests were there. He would have -- he would have been the showman that he is. He would have been the P.T. Barnum, and he would have whipped it up.

Yesterday morning -- now, I'm going to assume that he is making these tweets. And if not, then somebody else around him is making these tweets, and that's good because he is relinquishing his power and saying, "You're more eloquent than I am, go ahead, tweet." Because you know Donald Trump has always said, "No one will corral me." So even if he didn't do it himself, no one is corralling him. We have to take him at his word, that he agrees with this. This is what he did 11 hours ago: Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters incited by the media are protesting. Very unfair.

This was 54,000 retweets.

Then this: Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have a passion for our great country. We will come together and be proud.

That is a presidential tweet. That is what we should be saying to one another. Look, it's a small group. They might look big, but it's a small group.

I saw a -- I saw an ad, if you will, for a broadcaster that said the Democrats hate us. That -- in bold red, "The Democrats hate us. Don't doubt me." And I thought to myself, "No, they don't. Some do." As Riaz said yesterday -- the gay Muslim immigrant -- what else? I mean, he's got -- Pakistani. He's got -- this guy, everybody is against.

I can't imagine this guy's life. But he came down, and he wanted to understand the right. So we spent the day together. And then he went and did something about it.

And last weekend, he went up to Alaska to sit and talk to Trump supporters. And he wrote the best defense of Trump supporters I've read.

And as he said in that, "Look, are there some people that are racist that voted for Trump?" Yes. But that's not all of the Trump supporters.

And? He followed it up. He's a Muslim Pakistani. Are some Muslims terrorists? Yes. But not all Muslims.

The same can be said -- are you a racist? You voted for Trump, are you a racist? No. Are you a Nazi? No.

Do you believe in white supremacy? No. Do you believe that there are those that believe that whites are extreme? Of course. Do you believe that there are some that voted for Trump that are Nazis? Of course. Do you believe that there are some that voted for Barack Obama that are Marxists that want to destroy the United States of America? Yes.

Do you believe there are some that voted for Barack Obama that want to see your rights taken away?

Yes. But do you also believe that the Democrats that you personally know are those people?

No. No. We have to separate and stop labeling people as groups. Or we are going to make this worse.

We are at a crossroads America. And I know this is going to become increasingly unpopular. But I will stand by any man until he loses his principles. The principles of Donald Trump right now, he is being presidential. He is saying I'm going to bring people together. And he is saying, I will do these things through Congress, through the vote.

If Donald Trump would have lost and he would have flamed the fans of these -- of riots, which he could have done, if he had lost, I would be standing against him. But he won fair and square. He is doing things the right way and constitutionally. I don't agree with everything that he wants to do, but that's America. This is who we are.

We don't -- boy, am I going to quote the song that he played at the end? You don't always get what you want. But you just might find that you get what you need. And we have to believe in that. And we have to put our sword and, quite frankly, our shield down against the average person.

When you are in -- let me tell you a story: Fordham University, I believe, turned my daughter against me. My daughter was so angry with me while she was going to Fordham University, she couldn't even speak to me at times. She -- she was convinced that I was a homophobic bigot. And I kept saying to her, "Honey, what in my life has ever given you that perspective?"

You're against gay marriage.

No. I'm against the government being involved in marriage.

I don't want to talk to you, Dad.

And she would cry and walk away. She believed that of her own father. What do you think the people going to NYU, these kids who have been raised, even by Democratic families, what do you think they believe after sitting in those universities with those professors who are tell them -- and you have to understand, New York City, especially, is an echo chamber of biblical proportions. Everything in New York points to the people who would vote for Donald Trump are nothing, but toothless hicks who hate women, who hate blacks, who just want to set the world on fire.

There's a lot of people that are afraid. And, quite honestly, if you're a Republican and you're like me, I understand that. You have -- you have to admit to yourself, even those who reluctantly voted for Donald Trump, there is a part of you that said, "I don't know what we're getting here." But you give your side the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving our side the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that the office will temper and make the man. Because, quite honestly, I don't have any other choice, other than to get into the streets and be an idiot.

He won fair and square. This is the system. Now, how do we come together?

I will tell you, we won't come together -- and I'm not talking about come together and compromise our principles.

I read another story today from the right: The last thing we can do is come together. I'm sick and tired of hearing people say we need to come together with these people.

No. What are you talking about? We get together with our family every Thanksgiving, don't we? I got together -- I got together with the in-laws that -- that Tim's family, my son-in-law's family, who are wonderful people, I love them. I really do love them. We disagreed on who should be president. They were staunch Trump supporters. I obviously am not. But I know who they are. And I know they're not haters. I know they're not idiots. They live in New Jersey, and he's a cop. He's tired of everybody saying that the cops, you know, should die and being okay with it.

Did I say when they came down to visit, "You're not coming into my house?" No. And we had a great time together. We just didn't talk about the things where we knew we disagreed, because we knew where each other stood. And we're not going to do anything, but get pissed at each other. But we're family.

I don't think ill of them. And I hope they don't think ill of me. And I'm certainly not saying, "They hate America." And I hope they're not saying that either -- they're not.

Glenn is just a bad person and he hates us. No, they're not saying that.

This, I've told you for so long: A, there are going to be people -- and you're going to feel justified -- that want to tear us apart. Now, we just went through a horrible, horrible election. We have the opportunity to start all over again. We have the opportunity to not repeat the past, no matter what your enemy does to you, no matter what the person who is calling you names does to you. That has no affect on you, unless you choose to let that have an affect on you.

We are -- we have a chance to start over. We have a chance to be better people. Now, we can go down this road, and we can repeat what happened to us in 2000, which is division and name-calling and eight years of hating the other side.

Or we can do what we did in 2008. Be divided. Don't talk to each other. Hate each other. Call each other names. And make things worse.

Or we can try something new. Because this is something we haven't tried, well, since I've been voting for president. We haven't tried, "Hey, let's assume the best of our neighbor. Let's assume that the voices that are calling today in the streets, around the country for awful things, for revolution, for literally bloody revolution -- let's just assume that they are the minority, and let's politely ask -- politely ask the media to stop excusing this.

Let's not us excuse the violent behavior, but also know that there is a reason that people are afraid. It's been a tough fight.

Those people who are setting things on fire, breaking windows, those are anarchists. Those are anarchists. And if we lump anarchists into the same bed with Hillary Clinton, we would be wrong.

This is going to be hard, guys. This is really going to be hard. But this is our chance. This is the time -- you are blessed to live in this time, because we can be better. We can be leaders. This is the time where giants will come to the forefront. And you have to choose.

Are you going to be one of the 20 percent? That's what it's going to take. And that's typically only -- that's all you get, is about 20 percent. Are you going to be the 20 percent of this society that stands up and says, "I'm not going there. I'm not going there. I will not go over the cliff with the rest of humanity." Will you take the lead from your president? Your president and your president-elect.

Now, this. When you're at work, you can see that your home is safe, right? But when you're on vacation, your home and your family deserve to be protected.

[break]

GLENN: We were just talking in the break. This is really going to be hard, guys. This is really going to be hard. And we all have a choice to make because there's -- there's very few people, I think, that want to feel like we should come together.

But -- and it doesn't mean that we -- I mean, I think we just proved this. If your principles are at stake, we do not budge. But right now, the principles of peace and getting together -- Hillary Clinton -- Hillary Clinton has said he's legitimately our president, we need to support him and give him the opportunity to be successful.

Barack Obama has said the same thing. They have made the gesture of let's come together because this is the way our democracy or our republic works. The vote happens, you accept the vote.

We may not agree with it, and that doesn't mean you stop fighting. Look, if right now -- I'm having a lot of people saying, "Oh, look at Glenn, now he's for Trump." No, no. I'm for the office of the President of the United States. And I will stand with Donald Trump, as long as I can. I'll stand with him until he starts to say crazy, divisive things that are -- and suggest policies that are not conservative or constitutional. But until he does that, I stand with him.

Featured Image: President-elect Donald Trump meets with US President Barack Obama during an update on transition planning in the Oval Office at the White House on November 10, 2016 in Washington,DC. (Photo Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

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

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

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

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

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

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

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

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

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

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

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

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

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

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

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

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

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

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

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

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

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

UPDATED: On Friday, July 26th Barack and Michelle Obama officially threw their support behind Harris over a phone call with the current VP:

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.”

The fact that it took nearly a week for the former president to endorse Kamala, along with his original statement, gives the endorsement a begrudging tone.

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

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

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

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Glenn's Show Prep

Donald Trump Deserves a Chance and Our Support

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

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

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

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

Is Trump going to win the election?

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

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

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

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

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?