Thanks, Obama: Why Guest Host Sheriff David Clarke Was in a Bad Mood Today

The outspoken and fantastically fierce Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke filled in for Glenn on The Glenn Beck Program today, Monday, December 19.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 1 for answers to these questions:

• What had Sheriff Clarke in a bad mood this morning?

• How did President Obama kick law enforcement in the teeth one last time?

• Why did Sheriff Clarke support Donald Trump?

• Will President Trump's first 100 days be peaceful?

• Is Nancy Pelosi a racist?

• How are Democrats like a colony of carpenter ants?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

DAVID: Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not in a very good mood this morning. Welcome to the program. We'll get into that a little bit. It has nothing to do with the NFL Sunday that we completed yesterday. My team did win, the Dallas Cowboys. Been a life-long Cowboys fan. They made it interesting, but won nonetheless.

Let me start with an introduction: I'm your host for today, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. You may know me. You may not know me. It's irrelevant at this point. I'm the host today.

Let me take care of a couple of housekeeping measures first. This is the Glenn Beck Program. Glenn Beck is a brand. Glenn Beck has built this brand. He's worked hard at it. He's good at what he does. Every once in a while, he allows somebody to pilot the ship. I've done it before for him. It's an honor to be with you this morning and to be a part of this brand, the Glenn Beck Program. And I'm here to the protect the brand. But at the same time, as always, TheBlaze has given me the freedom to express my views, and they may differ from some of the things that Glenn says -- not many. They may differ from some of the things that you believe and espouse and so on and so forth. And that's okay.

I don't mind discourse. But I'm here to protect the brand. Not only to me, but it's important to Glenn as well, but there may be some times, some rocky moments. But I always remind the people tuning in, don't take it out on Glenn, please. Don't take it out on TheBlaze. Take it out on me. I have big shoulders. I get blamed for a lot of stuff. I get piled on a lot. It's kind of the environment I'm in. I don't whine about it. So if I say something that rubs you the wrong way or whatever, you feel like you want to call in and talk about it, the number is 888-727-BECK. That's 888-727-2325.

What's coming up on the program today? Well, first, we're going to start out with an election wrap-up. I know the election has been over since November 8th, November 9th. And -- but there's a lot going on still. Today's a big day. The electoral college meets. That's when they truly pick the president of the United States, by the Constitution, by the law, and that will happen sometime today. All 50 states will gather. Their electors. And they'll make that determination.

If we go by the states that were won on November 8th, Donald Trump should be elected, duly elected, president of the United States, by the electoral college. But, you know, we're in some weird times. And some goofy things have happened and some goofy things will continue to happen. People continue to try to work the electors of the electoral college. Going to talk about that in one of the segments down the road.

Also going to talk about immigration. That is going to be a big issue for this upcoming Congress, the new Congress that will be seated on January 20th as well.

And the first 100 days are always talked about. A president -- a new administration comes in. Even if the president is reelected and he starts another term, the first 100 days are important. They set the tone. The first 100 days is an opportunity, if you will, for the incoming president to set the stage, set the vision for the country, get some things going. It's very important they get off to a fast start. That's why they have this concept called the first 100 days. And I'll tell you what, it can make or break an administration. If you get bogged down, you will be that way, and you will struggle. So you've got to get out of the gate fast. Donald Trump plans to do just that, as he's putting his cabinet together. But immigration is one of those things this new Congress is going to have to take up.

It was one of the major platforms of the Trump campaign. Immigration reform. Closing the border. Building the wall. So on and so forth. There's some other things that he wants to address in that first 100 days as well, the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. So we'll talk about the immigration aspect of it because it's going to be big.

And there's many facets to that, as you may know. So I want to hear from you on that. Again, that number is 888-727-BECK. 888-727-2325.

Also, this first hour, we're going to talk about the opioid epidemic sweeping America. Folks, I want to tell you that this thing is touching everybody. It is a crisis. It's not getting all the attention -- it's getting some media attention. But it's not getting all the attention that I think it should be. Because we're talking about a generation now of people, specifically young people, who have been gripped by this opioid and heroin epidemic. And we'll talk about that.

Also, I'll be joined by Heather Mac Donald, author of The War on Cops. Heather is a researcher, a Thomas W. Smith fellow at the Manhattan Institute. She's a contributing editor of the City Journal Magazine. She's written several books. Her latest one being The War on Cops. And we're going to talk about an article that was published in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend, how Donald Trump can change the rhetoric in the war on cops. So we'll be joined by her. And we'll have much, much more.

But here's where I want to start: This thing I opened up this program by saying I was not in a real good mood this morning. I learned over the weekend that President Obama in one final move, kicking law enforcement in the teeth by selecting an individual, Abu-Jamal. He's a cop killer. Actually, he didn't appoint Abu-Jamal. But Abu-Jamal is a cop killer, 1981, he killed Danny Faulkner in Philadelphia, a police officer who was 25 years old.

Abu-Jamal was a Black Panther. And what happened was the officer, Faulkner, made a traffic stop. A scuffle ensued. Abu-Jamal's brother was scuffling with the law enforcement officer. Abu-Jamal saw it. He came over. He shot and killed Officer Faulkner. Officer Faulkner was found face up, bullets in his back. He shot him before he hit the ground, then stood over him, straddled him, and shot him in the forehead. Very famous case.

Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced to death. And then in a turn of events, he was granted a new trial because there was an error in the jury instructions on a death penalty. So they settled the case, giving him life in prison without parole.

Anyway, there was an attorney. Debo Adegbile. Debo Adegbile was an attorney for the NAACP, the legal defense fund. He was not representing Abu-Jamal. Abu-Jamal had competent counsel, but he entered a brief into the case -- a friend of the court, talking about Debo Adegbile.

Debo Adegbile is a straight-up cop hater and a black racialist. Several times President Obama tried to jam Debo Adegbile down our throats, first by nominating him to be a federal judge and then tried to nominate him -- both of these required US Senate confirmation. He tried to nominate him to head the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice.

Now, keep in mind, Debo Adegbile is a straight-up cop hater. He's not a good fit to lead the civil rights division of the United States Department of Justice. He's also not a good fit to be a federal judge.

Because like I said, he's a black racialist. He sees everything through the lens of race. Thinks all whites are racist. The Senate struck down his -- his judgeship. And then he withdrew -- Adegbile withdrew his name from consideration for the US DOJ Civil Rights Division post because he wasn't going to be confirmed.

Well, in one last move, President Obama put this individual -- I got to be careful here. But I said I'm not in a good mood today. But he put him on the US DOJ Civil Rights Division, in an appointment that's going to last six years. A kick in the teeth to every law enforcement officer in the country.

This is who Barack Obama is. Barack Obama is also a straight-up cop hater. I've said that before. I've said that on TV, nationally. And people would ask, "Do you really believe that President Obama is a cop hater?" And I'd look them right back in the eye and go, "Yes, I do, and I can prove it." And I'd go on to state these instances. This is just one. But you remember the Cambridge, Massachusetts, case, where a friend of Obama's was arrested by Cambridge Police. And Obama said the police officers academy stupidly in arresting his friend.

No, they didn't. They were doing their job. That started it.

Obama was also very intricate in starting the war on cops. So we'll see how this goes. I think incoming US attorney Jeff Sessions would do well to find a spot, if they can't stop this move -- to find some spot in some corner office and have Debo Adegbile counting paper clips. That's kind of what needs to happen. We're going to take a break. On the other side, we're going to come back, and we're going to talk some post-election wrap-up. I'm Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Radio Program.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back to the program. I'm your host for today. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

I'm here with you tomorrow too. I don't know if that's going to be good or bad news for you. Joined us today, I think it will be good news. But I'll let you know as well. Two days, so I can get some stuff going here.

Let me do a little self-promoting before I get into the first topic, which is going to be some post election results.

You can follow me on Twitter @SheriffClarke. And that's C-L-A-R-K-E. Don't forget the e, otherwise, you might get some other Twitter handle. And you'll look, and you'll say, "What the heck is this?" That's the good stuff, folks. That's the stuff the national -- the liberal media pays attention to. And they look every time I put out a tweet to try to contort it into something I did not say. But that's okay.

But it's @SheriffClarke. C-L-A-R-K-E. I also have a blog. You can follow me on my blog, and it's ThePeoplesSheriff@Patheos.com. Patheos is P-A-T-H-E-O-S. And I also have a book coming out. My first book is going to be coming out in March of 2017. But you can preorder it now at Amazon, or you can go to Barnes & Noble and get your preorder in.

What's this book about? It's called Cop Under Fire. As you may know, we've become an increasingly divided and polarized nation in recent years, growing racial tension. You have animosity toward law enforcement professionals. Government corruption and disregard for our constitutional process. There's no easy answers to these. This book is not just going to be a recitation of things that are problematic in America. I don't say wrong in America. We have some problems. We have some issues. But it's not going to be the same, you know, here are the issues facing America. But what I try to do is take those things that deeply affect us, and I point out in this book, Cop Under Fire, how we can rise above these current troubles and these issues and we can truly become that great nation in pursuit of liberty and justice from all. So, again, that's Cop Under Fire at Amazon and Barnes & Noble. You can preorder that, in you have a law enforcement friend, if you have a law enforcement officer retired or current in your family. It's going to be a must read if you -- even citizens in general. It's going to be a fascinating book, not just because I wrote it. But it comes from the heart. And anybody that has listened to me over the last, I don't know, three, four, five, years, you know, I speak from the heart. I don't pull any punches. I don't hold anything back. I just tell you the way I see it. Am I right on everything? Of course not. Do I have all the answers? Not hardly.

However, I put it to you straight. Straight talk is what you're going to get from me. Unvarnished. And I offer some things that are food for thought for a way forward.

Now, let's get into this post election, presidential election. 2016. Happened on November 8th. A lot has been said about it. Much has been talked about, but you haven't heard my perspective on this thing.

We may differ a little bit on some of the things here, but like I said, I don't shy away from that. I believe discourse, differing points of view, different schools of thought, I believe that stuff is healthy in a democracy. We should be able to politely disagree. Some spirited discourse back and forth. Nothing wrong with that. I love that. Like I said, I think it's healthy in a democracy. And it shouldn't denigrate into the name-calling and some of the other things that it does when people differ with somebody else's views. Let's just have educated conversation and skip all the other stuff. You know, I mean, if you say something -- for instance, if somebody has different views on gay marriage, all of a sudden you're a homophobe. You know, if you believe that the United States is a Judeo-Christian nation -- not to the exclusion of any other religion. Did not say that. But if you believe that the principles that this country are founded on were Judeo-Christian, if you believe that, then you're an Islamophobe. Right? That's what it denigrates into.

And you can go on and on and on. You're a racist if you believe in the Constitution, the rule of law, the Founding Fathers, the history of this nation, you're a racist. And that's what everything seems to end up -- where everything seems to end up, and it's very unfortunate. Because like I said, you know, with critical thought, we truly can move this nation forward and become this shining city on the hill that I believe we already are. But we've gotten away from some concepts that have grounded this nation and led it to be that shining city on a hill. But if we just allow people to shut down people we don't agree with, it's not going to be very good.

But, you know, the post election, I look back -- and I supported Donald Trump for president of the United States. I supported him after the primary. I stayed out of endorsing anybody in the primary, Republican primary, I'm talking about. First of all, I'm not a member of the Republican Party. I'm not a member of the Democrat Party.

I run as a Democrat. Sheriff in Milwaukee County. I'm elected as a Democrat. But I don't belong to a political party. I don't believe in belonging to a political party. If you do, that's your business. I don't care what your politics are. It's neither here nor there. But that's why I didn't endorse anybody in the Republican Party. I wanted the people -- we, the people, the members of that party to select a candidate. So I stayed out of the way. I had numerous candidates ask me to endorse them during the primary. I stayed out of it. I made it clear. I'm keeping my powder dry. But I made this clear to whoever comes out of this process as the nominee for the Republican Party, I will back and I will back 100 percent.

Folks, I'm a man of my word. And when I say something, you can take it to the bank. So Donald Trump obviously was the victor. And he came back around to me and asked for support. And I said to him, "Mr. President -- he wasn't president at the time. I said, "Mr. Trump, I don't know what I can do for you. But I made it clear I'd back whoever won. You are the winner. I will do everything I can. I will fight as hard as I can to help you become the 45th president of the United States. That's how I arrived at my decision.

And I just believe that after that process, the convention, which I spoke at -- that was an honor. I thought it was time for conservatives, Republicans, Libertarians, some independents, to put all that stuff aside in the name of the country. That's what I did. And that's why I supported Donald Trump. I offered no apology. I'm just trying to tell you where I came from in that decision. But you look at what's happening now with this -- this whole process. Election is over. The election is over. We have a president-elect, his name is Donald Trump. He's putting his government together. He's putting his cabinet together.

And he needs our support, folks, for the country. All right? The left even today, with the electoral college, they don't want to believe that the election is over. But it is.

We need to take a break. On the other side, we'll continue this. This is Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DAVID: I'm your host today. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Thanks for joining us.

You know, coming out of that election November 8th, there were many important aspects of why I got behind Donald Trump to become the 45th president of the United States. But I think at the end of the day, the Supreme Court. I believe that we'll get a strict constructionist, appointed by Donald Trump to replace Scalia. That was huge. If you believe in your gun rights, if you believe in the Constitution, if you believe in the rule of law -- the Supreme Court, that thing would have tilted hard left, and we would have been talking about a hard left United States Supreme Court for the next 30 to 40 years.

If you look at the age of the justices right now, the ones that Obama put up for Supreme Court justices, they're going to be around for a long, long time. Some of the ones who are getting to that point where they're starting to look -- you know, Kennedy, even Justice Thomas, a young man by age standards, but, you know, there comes a point, it's time for me to move on. Would you have wanted Mrs. Bill Clinton to appoint the next three to four Supreme Court justices? I mean, think about some of this stuff. Which is why I told people during the process -- you know, the conservatives, slash, Republicans, slash, some Libertarians, slash, some independents. I reminded them, "Put all that behind you, and look at what's at stake here." And many of you did.

But, you know, in looking at what's happening -- goes about putting his government together. He's made several cabinet appointments. I think very fine selections. But look at some of the stuff coming out of the mouth of the left on some of his cabinet selections.

You had Dr. Ben Carson, who was been nominated for Housing and Urban Development. Here's what Nancy Pelosi. The ink wasn't even dry on the memo, folks, the news release.

Ben Carson is a disconcerting and disturbingly unqualified choice to lead a department as complex and -- the country deserves a HUD secretary with the relevant experience to protect the rights of homeowners and renters, particularly low-income and minority communities and to ensure that everyone in our country can have access to safe and affordable housing without facing discrimination. There is no evidence, she said, that Dr. Carson brings the necessary credentials to hold a position.

DAVID: Take that quote I just read from Nancy Pelosi. Take Dr. Ben Carson out of that quote and insert Barack Obama in 2008. You could have said the same thing after the election of Barack Obama in 2008. Disturbingly unqualified. Disconcerting. Doesn't have the experience. No evidence that he brings the necessary credentials to hold a position with such immense responsibility and impact on families and communities across America.

That was Barack Obama in 2008. Folks, he was a freshman senator. He was a couple years removed from being a state senator in the state of Illinois. He was in a state legislature. And now he assumes the presidency because he won the election.

You may not have voted for him. But, you know what, he won the election. But had you had said this about Barack Obama in 2008, you would have been labeled a racist.

And, you know what, the entire liberal mainstream media would have come down on you like a ton of bricks. But no such accusation toward Nancy Pelosi from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, CNN, MSNBC. No such claim that Nancy Pelosi is a racist for thinking that a neurosurgeon -- think about this, ladies and gentlemen. A guy who understands the working -- the intricate working of the human brain can't figure government out?

She's not qualified. Nancy Pelosi didn't even make this statement, or to judge the qualifications of Dr. Ben Carson. Then you have this guy from California, Democrat congressman who called on Ben Carson to withdraw his nomination as secretary of Housing and Urban Development because of his utter lack of qualification for the job.

Some two-bit congressman from California is going to stand in judgment of a neurosurgeon. You know the history of Ben Carson? Grew up in Detroit, in the ghetto of Detroit. Single mom who dropped out of the third grade, worked any job she could to raise her two sons as a single parent and successfully, she did this.

And they're saying Ben Carson doesn't understand urban issues? This is fascinating.

So we have that going on. We have the riots that ensued post November 8th. George Soros funded. Or at least purportedly. We spent millions on recounts.

One of those recounts was in the state of Wisconsin. $3.5 million Jill Stein paid for recounts in the state of Wisconsin. That works out, if you do the math, to about $21,000 a vote to recount. And guess what, Donald Trump ended up with more votes than he had on election night.

So this is the stuff going on. And now the Russians did it. It's the Russians' fault. Now they've glommed on to this because there's nothing else for them to look at, the media. And it's all the media. They're trying to stretch and make something -- fake news, ladies and gentlemen.

I'm not here to suggest that the Russians don't try to hack into cyber systems in the United States. The United States does the same thing. Remember the Stuxnet virus?

Had to do with Iran's nuclear capability. The United States did that. That's the kind of stuff that goes on. But I think it's an insult to the American people -- a total insult that we, the people didn't go out and vote for Donald Trump or that we were influenced by Russian hacking. I don't know if the Russians hacked into the -- I don't know. I mean, you're hearing stuff all across-the-board, right?

They did, they didn't. Who knows? Donald Trump was duly elected by the people of this country. It is time to put this nonsense aside because we have this thing that's very near and dear to this representative democracy, and it's called the peaceful transition of government, of administration. Peaceful. We did it in '08. People that didn't vote for Barack Obama did not take to the streets. They did not blame the Russians. They did not harass electors to the electoral college.

We sucked it up. We said, "Hey, he got elected. Time to move forward." It doesn't mean you can't oppose his policies and whatnot for the next four years. It doesn't mean you can't oppose -- or the left can't oppose and fight Donald Trump on trying to get his Make America Great Agenda happen. They can do that. That's what's great about this country. But to try to delegitimize it before he even takes office, folks, this is fascinating.

I'm Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back to the Glenn Beck Program. I'm your host today. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Again, the call-in number, (888)727-2325. It's 888-727-BECK. Talking about some post election news, some wrap-up in the November 8th election, today is a big day. Constitutionally, the electoral college meets. In all 50 states, electors will gather to cast their electoral votes. Some states, by law, that if -- if a particular individual won the state, they have to vote that way. Some states, it's a little more loose. I know in Colorado, the Democrats have gone to their state court to try to get them to overturn their law. This is how the left operates.

See, defeat is never final. They're still fighting the election. The Democrats. So they're trying to get a court to overturn the law that says the Colorado electors have to vote for particular individuals.

This is amazing.

You know, you heard me talk about the criticism of Donald Trump's cabinet, of which I have none by the way. Zero. But here's another one, this is from the Mercury News: Trump's White House, how white will it be? So far, all five of Trump's first picks for key White House advisory cabinet posts have been white men, several of whom who have been accused of being racist or anti-Muslim.

First of all, if you're on the right, by their standards, we're all anti-Muslim and we're all racist, including me. I mean, that's what -- that's how they look at us. That's how they view us. So that means nothing to me.

But check out these first couple of paragraphs here. From the moment Donald Trump first uttered his slogan about making America great again, his critics countered that what he really wanted was to return to an era when white man ran the ship of state.

It goes on to say that so far, the president-elect is doing little to dispel their fears. Trump's first five picks for key posts are all white males, several of whom are causing chills to run down the spines of several Libertarians.

Let me stop there for a minute. Has anybody asked themselves what the people on the left, liberals, Democrats, have against white people?

I know I don't. I don't have anything against white people. You noticed when I talked about Ben Carson, I didn't call him a black neurosurgeon. I call him a neurosurgeon. I don't view everything through the prism of race. Every once in a while, from time to time, you'll hear me refer to myself as a black conservative. But that's not to point out my race. It's to point out how and why the left reviles me. Because, it's bad enough -- if you're on the left, it's bad enough to be a conservative, but if you're a black conservative, you're a conservative of the worst type, the worst kind.

I remember when Jeff Sessions was announced to be the nominee for the next attorney general. Again, before the ink was dry on the Trump transition news release, Senator Elizabeth Warren demanded that Trump withdraw the nomination. I mean, it was -- it was within the first five minutes of the announcement.

This is what we're going to be up against, for four years. Because remember for Democrats, defeat is never final. The fight is never over. Never over. That's why I've likened them to being a colony of carpenter rats.

Put "carpenter rats" in your favorite search engine, and look at some of the stuff -- they're amazing -- they're amazing species. They constantly just build the nest. That's all they do, continually. You can't get rid of them. You can call an exterminator. You may temporarily slow them down. But then they move on and build a new nest. That's how the Democrats operate. It's never over.

So the electoral college meets today. You have these people in the electoral college being harassed.

Folks, that is a violation of federal law.

And it's 18USCS594 (phonetic), it says, "Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person who is voting for president, vice president, or presidential elector, shall be fined or imprisoned for one year or both." Where is the DOJ investigation because if this happened in 2008, there would be an investigation started? Where's the FBI?

The campaign is over. You cannot coerce. You cannot threaten. You cannot intimidate presidential electors. But it's going on -- Obama hasn't said anything about it. Loretta Lynch hasn't said anything about it. And Comey hasn't said anything about it.

This is fascinating. Just -- you know, rewind back to 2008. If this same thing were happening, you know there would be screams by the left for investigations of prosecutions and imprisonment. I'm Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program. Coming up on the other side of the hour, we're going to talk to Heather Mac Donald.

Featured Image: Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke (L) exits elevators after meetings with President-elect Donald Trump November 28, 2016 at the Trump Tower in New York. (Photo Credit: EDUARDO MUNOZ ALVAREZ/AFP/Getty Images)

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?