The Power of the Founding Documents

Read anything from Woodrow Wilson, 28th president of the United States, about the Declaration of Independence, and you'll learn that he despised it. When he wasn't ridiculing this Founding document, he would say it was great for its time, but no longer relevant.

He was wrong.

"The Declaration of Independence is the idea of America. The Constitution is the engine on how to make it work or the framework . . . the fence around the idea. The Constitution means nothing without the idea. And the idea is that all men are created equal," Glenn said Wednesday on his radio program.

All laws signed by the president of the United States are dated and noted with the number of years from July 4, 1776, the date of the Declaration of Independence. Laws aren't signed and dated going back to 1789 for the Constitution or 1791 for the Bill of Rights. All laws signed by the president date back to July 4th.

"Quite honestly, anybody on the left, you have to love the Declaration of Independence because it freed the slaves. It was the Declaration of Independence that was used as the argument to free the slaves. It was the argument used by Martin Luther King that all men are created equal. And it's time our country lives up to that standard," Glenn said.

We come together when we start talking about the principles of America, outlined in our Founding documents. They are the bridge that can bring us back together.

Listen to this segment, beginning at mark 24:02, from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Let's go back to this caller who called in yesterday and I think makes such a great point on the power of speaking softly, evenly, and the power of friendship, of somebody not giving up on you. This was a guy who said he was so progressive, he was almost a communist, and an atheist.

His friend read my book Liars, gave it to him and said, "You just have to read this chapter. It will blow your mind." He did. He now considers himself a constitutionalist and a religious guy. He's now reading the Bible.

I asked him yesterday, "So what was the turning point? What happened?" Listen to the power of our founding documents. Listen to this.

CALLER: I --

GLENN: Is there -- is that it?

PAT: He just said I.

GLENN: That was a shorter clip than I thought.

STU: And he did not get into the Constitution at all.

JEFFY: You feel the passion though.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: All right.

CALLER: I had always heard the statement of, I believe it was Stalin, that said, "In order to make an omelet, you got to crack a couple eggs."

GLENN: Yes.

CALLER: And I never really took that to heart, until I read your book. And I realized that it was true, that by hook or by crook, a progressive will get whatever they have to get done, done. And whatever weight stays behind them or who stand in front of them, it doesn't matter.

And what you were talking about, just a second ago, if I may guide -- I don't want to veer too far off. But what you were talking a second ago, about, you know, what would make you a progressive in your face, the first question that came to my mind -- because I -- you know, when I read that book, I was awe-struck. And I said, "None of this fits without something making it so."

GLENN: Hmm.

CALLER: What I mean by that is, you can't have these rights if they didn't come from anywhere.

PAT: Uh-huh.

CALLER: So I read -- I said, "You know, there's got to be somewhere this starts." So I read -- I went and got a pocket copy of the Constitution. And I said, "Let's start from the beginning."

GLENN: Jeez, Josh, do you realize how remarkable you are?

PAT: And rare.

GLENN: I mean, you are just so rare to, A, have the open mind, to, B, be willing to challenge the things that you hold dear, to see -- then go do the actual work is remarkable.

CALLER: But the thing is the communists don't hold those things dear. That that's the problem. They don't know what to believe in, so they believe in nothing but the state. That's what I was. That's where I was. I had nothing to believe in, Glenn.

And then I said, "Okay. These rights come from a creator." And when I watched your video, I said, "I have to find that creator. I have to find where this all began."

GLENN: It is -- I have been saying for a while now, and I've been saying it -- I just got a call from somebody last night who said they saw me on NBC election night, and they said they hadn't heard me for a while. A big conservative guy. And he said, "We were watching NBC." And he said, "You come on. And then you get off." And I didn't see it. I didn't watch what they said afterwards, but apparently Tom Brokaw and everybody else verified total voice of reason. And he said, "My wife and I looked at each other and went, Glenn Beck is the voice of reason? Glenn Beck?"

STU: We don't even say that and --

GLENN: Right. And this is a friend of mine. This is a friend of mine. Glenn Beck is the voice of reason? How upside down is the world?

But the point I've been trying to make to the New York Times and to everybody else, and to you, we have much more that we agree on than we disagree on, if we say, "Let's build a road back to each other." What is it that we can agree on that's big? That's not about policies. That's big.

Well, I think we all find a few things total common sense that we don't even -- where we're never taught. They just are true. That we were created and that each of us were given certain rights.

And everybody knows the minute you're born, you have rights. Yeah, but you can't just do whatever you want to that baby. That baby has rights. That baby has a right to have a life, to explore life the way it decides to explore, to go and make its way in the world, and nobody can take any of that stuff away from it.

We know that. Well, that's we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certainly inalienable rights. Among them, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And that government is instituted among men, that we created this government for the sole purpose -- its primary purpose is to protect the rights of that child, to make sure that child has no one telling that child what to do. That that child has every right, from the moment of birth, to the moment of death, that those certain inalienable rights remain with that child.

That's why we've put government together.

And when a government becomes opposed to that or becomes a threat to those rights, that the people have got to abolish it or alter it. And most importantly, not fall into chaos, not just say, "We're going to burn the thing down." You have the right to alter or abolish and replace that government with a government that will protect those rights.

Who disagrees with that?

See, the reason why we're arguing is because we're not talking about principles anymore. You'll know the right way to vote. You'll know the right way to go when we can all agree on that.

The progressives want to take and destroy -- I know this sounds like hyperbole, but it is true, and you can look it up.

Read anything from Woodrow Wilson on the Declaration of Independence. He despises the Declaration of Independence. And when he -- and when he isn't out and out ridiculing it, when he's trying to play up to an audience that might love the Founders, he'll say, "It was a great document for its time, but it has no relevance today."

Well, yes, it does. First of all, all laws that are signed in by the president, date -- the date and then say, "Two hundred and X-number of years from July 4th, 1776." All laws signed in don't go to 1791 for the Bill of Rights, or 1789, the Constitution. All laws signed in with the president's signature date back to July 4th, the Declaration of Independence.

And why is that important? Because the Declaration of Independence is the idea of America. The Constitution is the engine on how to make it work or the framework or the -- the fence around the idea. The Constitution means nothing without the idea. And the idea is, is that all men are created equal. It's why the government didn't fall apart, and it's why, quite honestly, anybody on the left, you have to love the Declaration of Independence. Because it was the Declaration of Independence that freed the slaves. It was the Declaration of Independence that was used as the argument to free the slaves. It is the argument used by Martin Luther King, that all men are created equal. And it's time our country lives up to that standard.

Because that's the idea. And it says in there, "And among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." And then the Constitution furthers that and says, "Okay. There are these top ten." And then it has to go further because, "Okay. All right. You weren't ready at the beginning. Freedom -- freedom. No slavery is a right that I guess we have to write down for everybody."

We come together when we start talking about the principles of America. And you saw it happen right there. You saw it happen with the guy who started with Liars and went, "Wait a minute, I can't believe that -- this is the truth on progressives? It can't be. It's coming from a book by Glenn Beck." Let me go to the back. Look up the footnote. Let me just Google search it. Let me just see if that's true. Oh, my gosh, it is true.

Well, why doesn't this work? And it leads you back to the things that we hold self-evident.

Featured Image: John Trumbull's painting, Declaration of Independence, depicting the five-man drafting committee of the Declaration of Independence presenting their work to the Congress. The painting can be found on the back of the U.S. $2 bill. The original hangs in the US Capitol rotunda.

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:

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?

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

What we DO and DON'T know about Thomas Matthew Crooks

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

It has been over a week since 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks narrowly failed to assassinate President Trump while the president gave a speech at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennslyvania. Despite the ongoing investigations, we still know very little about the would-be assassin, which has left many wondering if the agencies involved are limiting the information that Congress and the public are receiving.

As Glenn has pointed out, there are still major questions about the shooter that are unanswered, and the American people are left at the whim of unreliable federal agencies. Here is everything we know—and everything we don't know—about Thomas Matthew Crooks:

Who was he?

What we know:Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Parks, Pennsylvania, approximately an hour south of Butler. Crooks went to high school in Bethel Parks, where he would graduate in 2022. Teachers and classmates described him as a loner and as nerdy, but generally nice, friendly, and intelligent. Crooks tried out for the school rifle team but was rejected due to his poor aim, and reports indicate that Crooks was often bullied for his nerdy demeanor and for wearing camo hunting gear to school.

After high school, Crooks began work at Bethel Park Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center as a dietary aide. In fact, he was scheduled to work on the day of the rally but requested the day off. He passed a background check to work at the facility and was reportedly an unproblematic employee. Crooks was also a member of a local gun club where he practiced shooting the day before the rally.

It was recently revealed that sometime before his attempted assassination, Crooks posted the following message on Steam, a popular computer application used for playing video games: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds." Aside from this, Crooks posted no warning or manifesto regarding his attack, and little other relevant information is known about him.

What we don't know:It is unclear what Crook's political affiliations or views were, or if he was aligned with any extremist organizations. Crooks was a registered Republican, and his classmates recall him defending conservative ideas and viewpoints in class. On the other hand, the Federal Election Commission has revealed he donated to a progressive PAC on the day Biden was inaugurated. He also reportedly wore a COVID mask to school much longer than was required.

Clearly, we are missing the full picture. Why would a Republican attempt to assassinate the Republican presidential nominee? What is to gain? And why would he donate to a progressive organization as a conservative? This doesn't add up, and so far the federal agencies investigating the attack have yet to reveal anything more.

What were his goals?

What we know: Obviously we know he was trying to assassinate President Trump—and came very close to succeeding, but beyond that, Crooks' goals are unknown. He left no manifesto or any sort of written motive behind, or if he did, the authorities haven't published it yet. We have frustratingly little to go off of.

What we don't know: As stated before, we don't know anything about the movies behind Crooks' heinous actions. We are left with disjointed pieces that make it difficult to paint a cohesive picture of this man. There is also the matter that he left explosives, ammo, and a bulletproof vest in his car. Why? Did he assume he was going to make it back to his car? Or were those supplies meant for an accomplice that never showed up?

The shocking lack of information on Crooks' motives makes it seem likely that we are not being let on to the whole truth.

Did he work alone?

What we know: Reportedly, Crooks was the only gunman on the site, and as of now, no other suspects have been identified. The rifle used during the assassination attempt was purchased and registered by Crooks' father. However, it is unlikely that the father was involved as he reported both his son and rifle missing the night of the assassination attempt. Crooks' former classmates described him as a "loner," which seems to corroborate the narrative that he worked alone.

What we don't know: We know how Crooks acquired his rifle, but what about the rest of his equipment? He reportedly had nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bulletproof vest, and several homemade bombs in his car. Could these have been meant for a co-conspirator who didn't show? Did Crooks acquire all of this equipment himself, or did he have help?

There's also the matter of the message Crooks left on the video game platform Steam that served as his only warning of the attack. Who was the message for? Are there people out there who were aware of the attack before it occurred? Why didn't they alert authorities?

We know authorities have access to Crooks' laptop and cellphone that probably contain the answers to these pertinent questions. Why haven't we heard any clarity from the authorities? It seems we are again at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy, which begs one more question: Will we ever know the whole truth?