Glenn Challenges Liberals to Hear His Response to Hollywood's Latest Video

It's amazing how the media are suddenly concerned with telling the truth and liberals are worried about executive power. A new video from Hollywood puts the hypocrisy of the left on full display.

After watching President Barack Obama sign executive order after executive order to bypass Congress the past eight years, they're now extremely concerned about the balance of powers created by America's Founders. Actors in the video demand that Congress stop President-elect Donald Trump from enacting policy that is racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, anti-worker, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic and anti-environmental.

"I can't take it," Co-host Pat Gray said.

"It gets worse," Glenn added.

Gearing up for tomorrow's program in which he'll give a response to the video, Glenn issued a challenge.

"I urge members of the media to listen. I urge members of the left to listen tomorrow on this program to my response," Glenn said. "Oh, man. I have so much to say. I think this will be the entire show tomorrow."

Invite your liberal friends on Twitter and Facebook who are trying to understand the world. Glenn has a very special response planned.

"The left needs to hear it. The media needs to hear it. We're going to approach it in a very, very different way tomorrow," Glenn said.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 3 for answers to these questions:

• Has Don Lemon lost his mind?

• What was Glenn's toughest job interview?

• Do liberals have any self-awareness at all?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

 

Featured Image: Actress Sally Field urging Congress to stop President-elect Trump in Hollywood's latest political video.

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

GLENN: Hello, America. And welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. We -- got a little sidetracked on this Megyn Kelly conversation. Megyn Kelly has announced that she's leaving Fox to NBC. A lot of people are only saying that she's a traitor. I don't understand that kind of language. How -- how are we going to move forward if we can't even talk or work with one another?

Is it a bad thing now if you -- when did we take our allegiance to a network? When did leaving a network mean that you're a traitor? When is having a different idea mean that you're a traitor? And how do we move forward if you have a different idea or you want to stand with other people that don't necessarily agree with everything that you say if you're going to be a traitor?

How do we not end up locking each other up into camps? How do we not head into civil war? This is a conversation America needs to have. And we're going to have it, beginning right now.

(music)

GLENN: So Megyn Kelly has said goodbye last night to her listeners at Fox. I believe she's going to be on the air until Friday. Then she's moving to NBC. Not MSNBC. But NBC.

There's some controversy online. She is -- she's taking a massive pay cut, according to some insiders. It's not about money. It doesn't seem to be about ideology. It seems to be about her children and wanting to spend more time with her children and being able to work at a place that she feels she can accomplish her personal and professional goals.

There's things I'm sure that I disagree with, on Megyn Kelly. A caller -- in fact, is he back on? Is Kevin back on?

JEFFY: No.

GLENN: He dropped off again. Okay. Kevin, when you're in a good cell area, call us.

PAT: He might be -- Kevin, are you there?

GLENN: Oh, he got him back. He got him back.

Okay. Kevin, this will be our last shot. So if you drop out, you got to move on. But you were pointing out that Megyn disagrees strongly on -- or seems to on things like non-gender bathrooms. And my retort is, "Well, that doesn't make her a traitor," and I think you agreed with that.

CALLER: Yeah.

GLENN: But you said to me, "I want to make one more point." What was that?

CALLER: Well, not a point, but a comment about reaching out to people outside your circle.

I'm a conservative Christian creationist, but a lot of the YouTubers that I listen to are what you would call more classical liberals, like, yeah, they believe in stuff like maybe something like gay marriage or abortion, but they're on point when it comes to fighting for like the First Amendment, about not demonizing conservatives, and I have no affiliation with a couple of these -- with any of these people, actually, but I'd like to just throw their names out there. I think they would be people that would be much better liberals to reach out to than let's say somebody like Samantha Bee, who I think is just a disingenuous liar.

GLENN: Okay. Who are the names?

By the way, I don't think that. I think she's -- I don't think she understands because she's never been pushed. Nobody on the left has ever been pushed. They're being pushed right now. And they're -- and they're examining. And they're doing self-exams, surrounded by people going, "Oh, well, it's not you. It's really them. They're the ones that are so misguided. You know, they just want to strip everything away from you."

If you're not in their circle going, "Wait. Wait. No, no. Don't listen to that. Don't listen to that. We are just like you. We happen to disagree with certain things." Now, you just excoriated me, you know, personally. She had me on her show, and she kept her word. She didn't excoriate me on-air. She did a remarkable job. But, you know, offline, we had a tough conversation.

My next conversation with her is, "Okay. I want to show you a couple of things that you're doing that feel to me like I must have felt to you when you were on the air." I can guarantee you she's never had that conversation with anyone ever before. Guarantee it.

So do we just dismiss them?

CALLER: Well, if she -- if she actually does this in good faith and, you know, stops demonizing conservatives, well, she'll probably be out of a job on Comedy Central, but at least it will be a good one for her character.

(laughter)

GLENN: Well, you know what, I will tell you -- Kevin, I will tell you that -- and I don't think I'm speaking out of school, she said to me, "I don't know how to do my job. I know what they expect of me. And I can't do that." And I said, "Samantha, you sound -- I hate to break it to you, but you sound exactly like me." And she said -- and she rolled her eyes, in a comedic way, "Oh, please, stop saying that."

And we laughed about it. But it is the same thing. I've been saying this on-air for I don't know how long. I don't know -- nobody in talk radio has ever tried to do what I'm trying to do. And that is, stick with my principles, even though either half of the country or maybe a third of the audience might disagree. But expect that the audience is smart enough and also decent enough and the American people are decent enough to say, "Look, I don't have to agree with everything. And I may not understand you, but I understand your basic guiding principles. And I've had enough of this. I want to be able to live next door to people and be friends with people and work with people that I don't -- don't agree with. But I want to be able to go bowling with them or go to a movie with them. I want to be able to have a relationship with them."

CALLER: Oh, I agree. I'm a young conservative in this day and age. And most people my age aren't conservative. So most of my friends particularly aren't conservative or less conservative than me. But they're still human beings, and I still want to have relationships with them. And I do. But in regards to people like --

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Wait a minute, Kevin. So you just said what you said, and I think that's really important. That you have an open and honest good conversation and relationships with people who strongly disagree with you politically, and you're open about it. It's not some hidden little secret. But you're open about it. And you're like, "Dude, I think you're nuts on that." But you're still good friends and you can still communicate. Do I have you right on that understanding?

CALLER: Yes, I have liberal friends who we talk frankly about politics with each other, and we're still friends after the conversations and during them.

GLENN: Good. Okay. Good. Now, what you've just said is vitally important and where I think everybody wants to be. However, most of the country will not allow that to happen with people who run in the media circles.

So, in other words, what you do in your personal life is you reach out to people who think differently than you do, and you have a good time with them. But Megyn Kelly moves from Fox to MSNBC -- she's got to have a job. And if she doesn't move to -- if she moves to a place where there's a bunch of people who don't like she does, she all of a sudden is somebody who is suspect.

Why can't I make you suspect, Kevin?

CALLER: Wait. Make me suspect? Suspect to who? You?

GLENN: Why aren't you suspect? Kevin, I've heard that you have -- do you now have or have you ever had friends that disagree with conservative principles?

CALLER: Of course.

GLENN: Okay. So why can't -- and in my particular case, me reaching out to Samantha Bee is not because I need a new friend. It's because I believe that we need to change our behavior and we need to model really tough relationships. And Samantha Bee, up to this point, has shown me nothing but courteousness and good faith and honor. She has kept her word every step of the way with me, which I didn't expect. But I hoped for.

So my goal is to be able to make some progress, and perhaps I get a year down the road, and she's like, "You know what, Glenn, I not only still think you're wrong, I think you're wrong that I can't -- that what I'm saying on the air is offensive to people like you. I don't really care." Well, I get to that point, and I have nothing left.

But pursuing that, why does that make me suspect? Or why does it make Megyn Kelly suspect to go work for people who don't hold her same principle?

CALLER: I don't find you suspect because I've been listening to you since I was eleven and you have a consistent track record. And I don't think you're going to wake up one morning and suddenly decide, "Hmm, I'm going to be a liberal today and betray everything I've ever said." I don't know Megyn Kelly having a record of being a consistent conservative.

What I have seen in the recent past is that she seems to have more liberal leanings, which is why I'm suspect of her, as opposed to being suspect of you for reaching out to Samantha Bee.

GLENN: Okay.

CALLER: But if there is like liberals and stuff like that who I think you want to reach out to who have -- you know, have a media presence and stuff like that -- I mean, there is this one YouTuber that I watch -- I mean, most people my age consume most of our news through YouTube.

And that would be this one channel called Sargon of Akkad. His real name is Karl Benjamin. And he probably would think himself a pretty liberal guy. But he's one of those few liberals out there who is on point with the Second Amendment, on point with fighting against social justice warriors, and, you know --

GLENN: So then he's not a -- he's a classic liberal?

CALLER: Yes.

GLENN: Yeah. Those are the easy ones. And I'd love to talk to him. We will look him up. What's his name again?

CALLER: It's Karl Benjamin. He's a British gentleman. I believe his name is spelled with a K. K-A-R-L. And Benjamin. YouTube channel Sargon of Akkad. He's got over half a million subscribers. You can find him on YouTube.

GLENN: Sargon of a Cause?

JEFFY: Sargon of Akkad.

CALLER: Like A-K-K-A-D.

GLENN: My gosh, there are so many K's in there. It's one short from the Klan. I'm just saying.

(laughter)

CALLER: I'm sure he'll probably get a kick out of that. You should make that joke to him, if you get a hold of him.

GLENN: Thank you so much, Kevin. I really appreciate your phone call.

And this is the kind of phone call where we just disagreed with each other, but we disagreed with each other politely and we had a conversation.

PAT: Of course, we're having him killed later. But, I mean, that goes without saying.

GLENN: Yeah, the Dick Cheney people are already at the back door of his house. But it's interesting to me with the -- with the Megyn Kelly and who is going to replace -- it will say a lot. Because I think -- I do believe that there is a change at NBC. This is just my speculation, that they know that what they're doing at MSNBC is not working. And perhaps at NBC, they're thinking to themselves, "We need to have some credibility -- some real credibility with half of the country." And I think they're trying to move in that direction. I know for a fact the New York Times is trying to do that.

NBC I think is trying to do that. We should welcome anybody that is trying to reach out to the other side. And we should be reaching out to the other side.

With that being said, I don't think I've ever told you about my interview with Fox. Who do you know that could actually make it through this interview -- I mean, I want to go through the list. I want to tell you what happened in my interview and then go through the list of people and see -- and I don't know if interviews are still done this way. But I interviewed with Roger Ailes. I'm telling you, I lost 15 pounds in sweat on that interview. It was the most incredible, almost -- almost like a prank video was being done on me, it was so difficult.

We'll talk about that coming up in just a second. And the list of people to replace, two of them. In fact, one of the lead -- the number one lead on one poll is Dana Loesch. And I think 12 or three. Number two is Tomi Lahren. Both from the Blaze. So we'll talk about that coming up in just a second.

Now, this -- and, by the way, isn't that exactly what we were trying to do, was build a network that could also build a farm team for the next round of conservatives?

Now, this. When it comes to the safety of your family, SimpliSafe. SimpliSafe Home Security. They have extended their massive holiday sale one last time. Right now, you can get $200 off the best-selling defender security package. This is your final chance.

Now, this is a 17-piece system of pure protection. Around-the-clock alarm monitoring. Police dispatch. The minute your home faces fire, a broken window, somebody trying to open a door, motion inside, it immediately calls the police or the fire department.

SimpliSafe. Built by a Harvard-educated engineer. His friends were robbed. He needed to find some way to help his friends. He came up with this idea. And next thing he knew, everybody in the neighborhood was saying, "Can I get one of those?" And he started SimpliSafe. Now it's the leader.

No long-term contract. No hidden fees. Nothing to hold you back. $200 off. I think it's now $500. It's like 499 or something, with the $200 off. 399. It's like crazy inexpensive. And no contract.

Protect your house the smart way. The new way. Technology of the future in your home today. Simplisafebeck.com. That's simplisafebeck.com.

[break]

GLENN: So Megan Fox is -- or Megan Fox -- Megyn Kelly. Megan Fox, she would be great, wouldn't she?

(laughter)

PAT: Well, yeah, if you're just going to put her on a stage somewhere just to look at her, yes.

GLENN: Honey, honey, don't speak. Okay? Just --

PAT: Words aren't necessary between us. They just aren't.

JEFFY: Is today the day Megyn Fox will speak?

GLENN: Just wink at the camera once in a while, and we'll play some clip from some politician saying something. Don't worry your head about it.

Okay. Just, shh. Just sit here.

Megyn Kelly said goodbye to her Fox audience yesterday. She is leaving. And she's leaving she said because of her children. She wants to spend more time with her children. It's fascinating to me that she spent so much time -- 17 years, I think at Fox, trying to get the prime time slot. They give her the prime time slot. She worked in day time. She finally gets the prime time slot. And it's not good for her family. And she leaves and takes a lot less money. They are offering her $20 million to stay at Fox. And I don't -- it could be anywhere from eight to $15 million that they offered her at NBC. So she's not leaving for the money.

PAT: Are we positive on that?

JEFFY: Yeah. I can't see her going --

PAT: It's hard to believe.

JEFFY: That sure is.

PAT: Yeah, that's hard to believe.

JEFFY: 15, maybe.

GLENN: I have no idea --

JEFFY: Maybe.

GLENN: The story that I read was for considerably less for those who were close to the deal. Now, thinking about that, I mean, how much does Chuck Todd make? 10 million? I mean, can you look that up?

PAT: I don't know.

GLENN: And he's Meet the Press. So, I mean, how much are they paying her?

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Well, Chuck Todd is not going to make Megyn Kelly money though. I mean, right?

GLENN: But the job has to --

JEFFY: We know that. Come on, now.

GLENN: The job has to justify -- you can't just pay her $20 million or $18 million --

PAT: Yeah. You know this better than anybody. You always get your money coming in. You don't make it while you're there.

GLENN: No, I know that. But what is her job?

PAT: Chuck Todd's annual salary between 750,000 and 2 million.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

PAT: No, his annual salary is 750,000, according to this.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: And his net worth is 2 million. Wow.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Wow.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: So what they paying Megyn to do an undescribed job at this point?

PAT: I don't know.

JEFFY: If she's working for that much, she must really do love her family.

GLENN: No, she's not doing that. But I could see her leaving for 10 million.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, her husband is successful. She's been successful for a long time. You know, money is not necessarily your priority. You know, it's not like you're scraping the bottom of the barrel for $8 million a year. It's not like, "Oh, man. How am I going to make ends meet?"

JEFFY: Oh, no. But there's a big difference between 8 and 20.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, there's a huge difference. Huge difference.

But if it's not your priority -- I don't know what she's making. It was just considerably less.

PAT: She's not going to wonder where her next meal is going to come from.

GLENN: No, she's not.

PAT: Maybe it's not Fox money. It's hard to believe --

GLENN: Once again, income disparity.

PAT: Right. Right.

GLENN: Women not making as much.

JEFFY: Chuck Todd makes $750,000 a year. Peanuts.

GLENN: Wow. Wow. That's amazing is.

JEFFY: That sure is.

PAT: NBC Nightly News anchor, Lester Holt, 4 million. 4 million a year.

GLENN: She's not coming in making 15.

PAT: Not that that's terrible. But that's not great for what we're talking about here, the kinds of jobs we're discussing.

GLENN: How much is what's his name that's been at The Today Show for a million years -- what's he making?

PAT: Oh, Matt Lauer?

JEFFY: Matt Lauer.

GLENN: Yeah, what's he making?

PAT: Oh, he's got to be around 20. Right?

JEFFY: Has to be. Right?

GLENN: Yeah, so he's been there for 20 years, 25 years, and he's making 20.

PAT: According to this, 28 million. 28 million a year.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: Right. So there's no way a newcomer for an unspecified job -- unless it is something like The Today Show or something like that, that they haven't announced yet. For an unspecified -- and, oh, yeah, I'm going to be helping out on the political stuff too. You're not coming in for $15 million. You're just not.

JEFFY: She's not a beginner though.

GLENN: What is she doing? It's the job.

PAT: I don't know. I don't know.

GLENN: It's the job.

PAT: But Savannah Guthrie, right? Isn't she the co-host with Matt Lauer?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

PAT: Out this week. Is she on maternity leave now? They've got Katie Couric filling in for her.

GLENN: Holy cow. Can you imagine that?

PAT: I wonder if the daytime she's doing is The Today Show. Now, in that eventuality, she's probably making 20 million, if that's what it is.

JEFFY: Oh. Yeah.

GLENN: And having Megyn Kelly as the co-anchor of The Today Show. Huge.

PAT: Matt Lauer, Megyn Kelly.

JEFFY: That knocks that time slot out of the park.

PAT: That's gigantic. That's gigantic, if that's what this is.

GLENN: Don't know if she would do that -- if she would do that, then I don't believe necessarily the thing about the children. Because you're at work at 2:00 a.m.

PAT: Pretty early, yeah.

JEFFY: But you're home -- yeah, you're home a lot sooner.

GLENN: Yeah, and you don't get to see your kids at school plays and everything else because you're at work at 2:00 a.m.

PAT: Yeah. Right.

GLENN: Back in just a second.

[break]

GLENN: We have something that will absolutely blow your mind that I want to talk to you about briefly. Tomorrow, I've got -- today is a day to step back and go, "Take a deep breath." And then tomorrow I'm going to present my response to something that will make blood shoot right out of your eyes. We'll touch on that coming up in just a second.

We've been talking about a few things today. One of them -- kind of got sidetracked on this Megyn Kelly thing, on a bigger topic. And that is, what should the media be doing? And where is everyone in the media headed? And are you a traitor for, you know, moving to NBC? That's what a lot of people online are saying about Megyn Kelly, that she's a traitor. We had a couple of really great phone calls on this from reasoned audience members who can see both sides of it.

I don't see the traitor thing. And I think that's frightening, that we are pledging our allegiance now to networks, as opposed to principles or even the Constitution. But wait until you hear what the other side has just pledged their life and their loyalty to in just a second.

I want to just touch on this. I don't know if I've ever shared. When I had my first meeting -- I'm sorry. My third meeting. My actual real interview with Roger Ailes, it was the toughest interview process I could imagine.

Pat, were you there afterwards? Were we up in New York, and were you staying at the hotel or something?

PAT: No, I wasn't in New York yet.

GLENN: I walked out of this interview, and I think I lost 15 pounds in sweat. I've never experienced anything like it.

Roger Ailes and I had met for dinner just casually a couple of times, once at his house and once someplace else. And we just talked about the world and ideas and things like that.

But we never really got down to really talking about things. They offered me a job. And I said no. And then I said no again. And then they -- Roger said, "I want to have dinner with you." And he didn't offer me a job there. He was doing more of like an in-depth interview.

And he started out with -- he started out with, "What did you think of the 1972 treaty between China and Nixon? Where do you stand on that?" And I looked at him and I said, "Wow, okay. Wow. 1972 Chinese treaty with Nixon. That's going back a ways for me, but think on the whole, it's kind of worked out well, maybe."

And he just kind of looked at me. And I said, "I'm not really versed on the 1972 treaty, but okay." And he didn't say anything. He just said, "Oh." And then he went and he ordered and then I think was halfway through his salad before he said another word to me.

Bill Shine was there. And Joel Cheatwood were there, the two senior vice presidents of Fox. Roger didn't even look at me. And I'm like, "Wow, this interview is over."

The next question out of his mouth was, "What do you think about the Eisenhower administration?"

Now, I had luckily been doing some reading about the Eisenhower administration, and I was able to take it to some places where I was kind of good with. But I knew it wasn't answering his question. And I stopped and I said, "You know, Roger, I have one of two ways to go here." And he said, "And what's that?" And I said, "I could either continue to bluff my way through this answer, but you're smart enough to know that I'm bluffing and I don't really know all that much about the Eisenhower administration, or I could tell you the truth and say, I don't really know that much about the Eisenhower administration or the '72 Beijing treaty. Either way, I think I blow this interview. But I'm just going to go with the, I don't know that much about China or Eisenhower on those questions."

He said, "Huh." Then he didn't talk to me again until he had about. Half of the steak that he was eating. And my third was, "So you used to be a Catholic."

Yes.

"What the hell is wrong with the Catholic church that you felt you had to run from it?"

I was like -- and that one was just, "I'm going to push your button."

PAT: I'm not even sure that question is legal.

GLENN: Oh, no, no, no. All he was doing at that point was trying to piss me off.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: That's all he was -- to fluster me, to see how quickly I would jump out of my seat. Is Glenn Beck a lunatic?

And so he was trying to find that third one. The first two I think were Willie (phonetic) bluff. And I had no idea what he was -- and so I answered the question calmly and rationally about the Catholic church, knowing that he's a big Catholic. And was like, "Okay. Well, that's a booby trap." And then it was just a constant barrage of those kinds of questions, either deep, deep questions about the founding -- he at some point said, "So what is it that -- you're, you know, a so-called expert." And I'm like, "I'm not an expert on anything. I'm not. None of them."

"Well, you talk a lot about the Founding Fathers," knowing that Roger Ailes has a bigger library than most institutions on the Founding Fathers. He started engaging me on that and going deep into the Founding Fathers. Thank God I had spent time with David Barton.

I thought for sure there was no way that he would even say -- that he would even shake my hand at the end of that interview.

And he said -- he stood up, and everybody was polite. And he looked at me and he said, "Well, young man, it is rare and refreshing to meet someone who knows what they know, knows why they know it, and is willing to say, I have no idea. Good job." That was the end of the interview.

I don't know if that's the way they do interviews at Fox anymore. I don't know if I'm the only one that got an interview at Fox like that, but that was the toughest damn interview I've ever had in my life.

What are these people facing to get Megyn Kelly's job? Because to replace Megyn Kelly is not -- there's no on-the-job training for that one

JEFFY: No. That's a big job.

PAT: I wonder what Katrina Pierson would say about the Chinese treaty that they signed with Nixon in 1972. What are her deep thoughts on that?

She --

GLENN: Well, but I didn't even have deep thoughts on that.

JEFFY: No.

PAT: But she would try to fake her way through it, I would assume, at least. Because she fakes her way through every question that she's asked. I don't even know who Brianna Keilar is. Do you?

GLENN: I don't know. No, I don't know here. There are the people on the list, apparently.

PAT: These are the people -- some of the people on one of the lists that I'm looking at. Maria Bartiromo, she'd probably --

GLENN: She'd pass. She'd know all --

PAT: Billy Bush. I don't think so. And I don't think Fox would be interested.

JEFFY: No.

GLENN: Billy Bush. No, Fox is not going to be interested in Billy Bush.

JEFFY: No.

PAT: Laura Ingraham is the lead candidate -- she's the lead vote getter on the Mediaite poll.

GLENN: She'd do well. She wouldn't have that interview because they know her. They've worked with her for a long time. So there is no interview for Laura Ingraham I don't think.

PAT: Number two in this poll: Tomi Lahren. I don't know how deep she -- she's only 24 years old. I don't know how deep she goes on history.

JEFFY: Yeah, history.

GLENN: That would be a tough interview. It was a hard interview for me at -- what was I? Forty? Forty-five? That was a tough interview for me, and that's the time where I'm reading, what? Three books a week. That was a tough interview.

PAT: Now, former White House press secretary Dana Perino would know.

GLENN: I think -- she would know. But I will tell you that I think Dana -- I mean, I think that Tomi would get that interview. I think they would want to know --

PAT: Yeah, what she knows.

GLENN: -- how deep do you go? What do you know? And they would push every button in her to see if she is a flamethrower or if that's -- if that's who she is or if that's how she does her job.

PAT: Dana Loesch, on the other poll, who leads the other poll, I think Dana knows a lot of things about history, current events. She wouldn't be intimidated.

GLENN: Yeah. Dana -- Dana -- and I think Tomi. I don't know Tomi that well, but I think Tomi. But I know Dana would not bluff. Dana would just be like, "I don't know. I don't know. You got me."

PAT: Kimberly Guilfoyle. They probably wouldn't put her through that because, again, they know her.

GLENN: They know her. They know her.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Eric Bolling, maybe the same thing there. Tucker Carlson is also with Fox already.

GLENN: He's already working. They're not going to move him. They just put him on at 7:00.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: Don Lemon. I don't think they even call Don Lemon.

GLENN: They would never even -- they would be handed Don Lemon's phone number and then immediately put it in a drawer in some other network's desk.

JEFFY: Call to see if he were sober.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. You know -- you know, I really like Don as a person. I don't know him all that well. But he's a really nice guy.

PAT: Yeah, he's a really nice guy.

GLENN: I don't know what the hell CNN thinks they're doing every -- it's like -- it's honestly like the management goes home and they say to the floor crew, "Hey, guys, set these guys up to make them look like idiots. I mean, I know you've been taking crap from them all year. Go ahead. Just keep pouring alcohol down their throats."

PAT: See if they'll risk their careers on this.

GLENN: See if they'll risk their career.

PAT: Yeah, it's weird.

GLENN: Anderson Cooper pairing with Kathy Griffith every year. I don't know a liberal friend who thinks that's funny. I don't know a liberal friend who thinks that's any good. And to me, it undermines Anderson's credibility so much. But with Don Lemon, it was sad. It was sad. He was on talking about personal stuff -- he was so hammered, he was talking about personal stuff. You know, I'm -- look I'm not --

PAT: I'm open to a relationship.

GLENN: -- that good for a relationship. I mean, it was sad.

JEFFY: It was a tough year, but I'm open to a relationship now.

GLENN: And can you imagine -- I mean, here's the duplicity of the press: Because Don is a likable guy and accepted in everybody's circle in New York, nobody will say anything.

Can you imagine if I would have, not being an alcoholic, but can you imagine if I would have gotten on the air drunk, on even New Year's Eve when it's acceptable supposedly to be drunk and said those things? My career would have been over. Anyone on the right's career would have been over.

That's the only thing you would ever know them for. I mean, it's crazy. They just -- it's why I said earlier what I did about Samantha Bee where they're never pushed. They don't know necessarily what they don't know because nobody ever pushes them. There's no real repercussion, real repercussion for Don Lemon, in comparison to what would have happened to his career if he would have been on the right. It's astounding and tragic. Tragic. Because I don't know what they think they're doing on CNN, besides destroying their anchor's -- who do we have that has any credibility around here?

Yeah, just pour a fifth of alcohol down his throat and leave him live for four hours. What -- I mean, that is insane. That's insane to do.

PAT: And let's put some disgusting, vile woman next to him and let her make sexual innuendo to him all night. It's --

GLENN: No, you're talking about Anderson, not Brooke.

PAT: I know. But both situations are bizarre. Yeah, Brooke was fine.

GLENN: Brooke was trying to save him.

PAT: Yeah. She tried to throw him a rope every single time he started to go down those roads.

JEFFY: Yeah, she was.

PAT: And Lemon wouldn't take it.

GLENN: And every time he fashioned it into a noose. Every time.

PAT: Yes, he did.

GLENN: He was like, you could throw a piece of string, rope -- you could throw a piece of rope from a ship, that you don't even think I can lift one end, and I will fashion this it into a noose. It was crazy.

Do we have time real quick to play this for a tease for tomorrow? You do not want to miss my response on this message from Hollywood. Listen.

VOICE: Dear members of Congress.

VOICE: Dear members of Congress.

VOICE: Dear members of Congress.

VOICE: I'm mad.

VOICE: Flabbergasted.

VOICE: Furious.

VOICE: Concerned for my children.

VOICE: I'm worried for everyone.

VOICE: The majority of Americans, regardless of who they voted for.

VOICE: Did not vote for racism.

VOICE: For sexism or for xenophobia.

VOICE: And yet Donald Trump won.

VOICE: And since he won.

VOICE: Hate crimes are rising.

VOICE: Women have been attacked in his name.

VOICE: People of color, attacked in his name.

VOICE: You represent us in Congress.

VOICE: You are our last line of defense.

VOICE: So here's what we ask of our elected officials.

VOICE: No, here's what we demand.

JEFFY: No.

VOICE: To the extent that Trump pursues racist.

VOICE: Sexist. Anti-immigrant.

VOICE: Anti-worker, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic.

PAT: Oh, my gosh.

JEFFY: What?

VOICE: Anti-environmental policies.

VOICE: We demand that you vigorously oppose him.

PAT: Oh. I can't take it.

GLENN: It gets worse.

PAT: Yeah, it is worse.

GLENN: And my full response on this is tomorrow. And I urge members of the media to listen. I urge members of the left to listen, tomorrow on this program, my response.

I'm out today. I'm actually at home broadcasting because I threw my back out yesterday. And I think one of the reasons -- the doctor asked me, "What's happened to you?" And I said, about two weeks ago, I slipped and fell on the ice really badly. Other than that, nothing. And then I started thinking about it, except I was away from my Casper Mattress after that. And I think the mattress makes a huge difference to my back. Pat does too. Casper Mattress will show you improvements in your sleep and the way you feel every morning. Get up and feel good. Casper Mattress, invented with two high-tech foams that give you the support that you need. And it will guarantee that you'll get the best night's sleep ever. Try it for 100 nights risk-free. They come to your house and pick it up, if you don't love it as much as I love mine. Start having a great night's sleep and a great day the next day. Get a Casper Mattress. Go to Casper.com. Use the promo code Beck and get $50 off the purchase of your mattress. Fifty dollars may not sound like a lot if you bought a mattress at a mattress store. But when you see the price of a Casper Mattress, it will blow you away. Save $50 off your purchase of a Casper mattress right now. Casper.com. Terms and conditions do apply. Casper.com. Promo code Beck.

[break]

GLENN: Oh, man. I have so much to say. I think this will be the entire show tomorrow. And I invite your liberal friends -- please do me a favor. Tweet and Facebook your friends -- your liberal friends who -- who are -- who are trying to understand the world. I don't -- you know, don't invite Media Matters. But anybody who is trying -- anybody in the press. Make sure they're listening tomorrow. You're going to -- you're going to like my monologue tomorrow, I think. But it's not aimed at you. Because I know how you feel, after hearing what we just played from Hollywood. But the left needs to hear it.

The media needs to hear it. And we're going to approach it in a very, very different way tomorrow.

I'm not going to continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. We're going to try something new, tomorrow.

Can you remember the economic crisis of 2008 and how you felt when the news broke that Lehman Brothers had collapsed? I have found an economic threat that everyone needs to be aware of, so you can prepare yourself in case we see another 2008 type collapse. I am going to present the evidence to you and I urge you to verify everything and to form your own opinion.

What is that threat?

It is a bank called Deutsche Bank. They are by far the most dominant bank in Germany which is the world's fourth-largest economy. In 2018 they had €2.08 Trillion worth of assets and the second-placed bank (DZ Bank) had €506 Billion worth of assets. To show you how dominant this bank is, they have more assets than the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th sized banks combined.
When we review a business there are three key parts to analysis:

  • Market sentiment
  • Business numbers
  • Technical Analysis

Market Sentiment

Deutsche Bank has a long history of potential scandals including going all the way back to World War 2 and dealing in Nazi gold. Below are five recent stories which have increased the negative sentiment around Deutsche Bank.

  1. In 2007, they purchased a portfolio of loans worth $7.8 billion and purchased insurance from Warren Buffets Company. It was discovered they did not set aside enough capital to cover any potential losses. Over the course of the ten years, they lost $1.6 billion, and when they sold the loan they did not update their financial statements to include the big loss
  2. The Panama Papers are an ongoing investigation looking for many things including offshore tax havens. These investigations have resulted in several heads of state resigning including in Iceland and Pakistan. Last November, 170 police raided 6 different offices in Frankfurt looking for evidence of money laundering.
  3. Estonia is a small country in Eastern Europe. It has a population of 1.3 million people and a GDP of €26 billion. In January, it was discovered Deutsche Bank got involved with a Danish bank called Danke Bank and processed over $230 billion worth of cross country payments (including from Soviet Russia) through one bank in Estonia.
  4. There have been rumors of issues with Deutsche for a while now and one of the solutions put forth was a merger with a bank called CommerzBank. The leaders of both companies met and they even got support from politicians. In April, news broke that the merger talks had failed because over worries the risks and costs would be too great.
  5. Last week in France, Investment banking boss Garth Ritchie and others were arrested in France over illicit tax transactions.

Business Numbers

Deutsche Bank is already struggling as they are losing staff, losing market share, and bonuses are expected to be down at least 10% and further rounds of cost-cutting to come. Now imagine the impact if business costs start going up.

The banking industry works in a very simple way. They raise funds through large bonds at low-interest rates and then sell those funds to business and individuals thru products like loans and credit cards at a higher interest rate which results in a potential profit.

Earlier this year, Deutsche Bank tried raising money through several bonds. They paid 180bp (basis points) on a two-year bond and 230bp on a seven-year bond. Let me put this in context for you. There is a small bank in Spain called Caixabank which paid 225bp on a five-year bond and one of the larger banks in Spain, BBVA paid 130bp on a five-year bond.

  • How and why is a small bank in Spain getting a better deal on bonds than a huge bank in Germany?
  • Why is a large bank in Spain getting a bond 100bp cheaper than a German bank?
  • What does the market know that we do not?

Stock Price

Deutsche is also missing revenue projections which further hurt the business ability to survive and prosper. As you can imagine all of this news has a deep and lasting impact on its stock price which is in deep trouble. Before I share the stock price, I need to put this into the context of the market and the industry compared to the big economic crash of 2008. Below you will see a chart of some banking stocks from around the world with their peak price prior to the 2008 crash, the low of the 2008 recession and the price today:

As you can see from the above chart the banks in America have recovered from the 2008 recession by anywhere up 375% and JP Morgan has not only recovered its price in full but is constantly setting new high's. Ireland went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the EU/IMF following the 2008 crash and even our national bank has more than doubled its price since 2008. The worst performing bank I could find was Societe Generale which has issues but is still hovering around its 2008 low price levels.

Now let's put that into the context of Deutsche Bank. Not only has the stock not rebounded but it is over 65% below its 2008 low at $6.75.

Technical Analysis

When you are dealing with the stock market, you also have people who study pricing through technical analysis. Experts look at things like FIB sequences, trend lines, and support levels. Support levels are a key metric for a stock failing because are looking to find where it will find support and potentially bounce higher.

We are very close to a key support level ($6.40) and if the price goes below this level, there is no saying exactly how low the price could go. At least one company expects Deutsche to fall below this support level, as several weeks ago UBS downgraded the stock to a sell order. This news was compounded last Friday when rating agency Fitch, downgraded their credit rating to BBB or two levels above JUNK status.

Other Information

I know you are likely reading this and thinking "this bank must have smart people in charge and surely they have a plan, right?" I am sure there is a plan and while they have kept their cards close to their chest, they have spoken in the past about the areas they foresee having growth for the company – they include business in Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt. Do they strike you as countries which are stable and will offer steady and reliable growth? Do you have to think really hard to imagine how this could go potentially very wrong?

Questions

I believe there is at least a solid case Deutsche is in a LOT of trouble. So what are possible scenarios for the future? I will lay out the key questions below but I must stress that it's impossible to say for sure what exactly will happen. One of the key numbers to remember here is they have roughly €50 billion worth of derivatives.

  • How likely is it that the bank can turn things around and survive?
  • How likely is it the bank continues to run into trouble, its stock price fails and eventually fails?
  • If you think it is likely it will fail, the question becomes what will the fallout be? Who will be affected?
  • Will they be bailed out?
  • If so, by whom? The German government, ECB, IMF, the Federal Reserve?
  • What will the German government think? Some members recently spoke out saying they would block public money for the proposed merger? Will they block funds if it failed?
  • Will other banks be exposed and affected? Will they have to take losses?
  • Will those losses be spread around or will one or more bank be mainly affect?
  • Will this affect the sentiment of the banking sector and cause a panic?
  • If there are issues and it starts affecting the stock prices, what will be the impact on other industries?

Last Question

The last question revolves solely around the banks and the regulators? How secure are the other banks? We all hear about how banks are now put through "stress tests" but how much trust do you put in those results? How much trust do you have in the regulators?

I know this may make me sound like a conspiracy theorist to some but it's an honest question. The Fed is on public record saying they want to keep this economy strong as long as possible. If a bank did not perform strongly in a stress test or even barely failed one, do you think they would report it?

Can you imagine the pressure that body would come under to stay silent? Can you imagine the rhetoric they would face with questions like, "Are you really going to fail one bank? Do you know how many people will lose their jobs if you do that?" Am I saying this is happening? No, but can you really rule it out 100% as a possibility?

I urge you to ponder on these questions, do your own research and find YOUR answers.

Update: The most freaquently asked question I have received from this column / show is how much time do we have to prepare. This is an impossible question to answer, as it could fail tomorrow, next week or might be next year. However I want to provide you a potential date for your diary – July 24th. That is when Deutsche will release their next earnings report and if it comes in below expectations, it could cause a further drop in price casting more doubt over the future viability of the bank.

Please support Jonathon's weekly podcast which is exclusive to the Blaze Media and available for FREE. He offers a unique perspective by promoting America's Founding Principles and brings every issue back to a set of core principles which are always based around the laws of nature. You can find links to his show by clicking here or by searching for Freedoms Disciple on your favorite audio platform.

Survey: Where do you stand on these conspiracy theories?

Thought Catalog / Unsplash

Have you seen this survey on the most-believed conspiracy theories in America?

It's no surprise the survey has been getting so much attention. The results are actually a pretty disturbing.

Infographic: Belief in Conspiracy Theories in the United States | Statista

I decided to put together a quick survey of my own, with slightly different wording.

Up-vote the ones you agree with and down-vote the ones you disagree with.

I believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK alone. However, I would not be surprised to find out the government sealed evidence that others were involved.

If by "deep state" you mean long-time Washington power brokers who are used to calling the shots and now feel threatened by Donald Trump not listening to their advice or council — yes, I do believe that many people like that are working against him and his administration.

Whether alien bodies are in Area 51 or not, I do believe the government knows more about UFOs than they have told us.

I do not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11, but as we know, NSA advisor Sandy Berger was caught destroying documents from the national archives related to both Bush and Clinton. All U.S. administrations have been to close to the Saudis, and the Saudis were involved in 9/11 at some level.

I believe the climate is always changing — it's natural. I would be willing to accept that man MAY play a role in this. But I do not believe in the solutions currently being discussed, nor do I believe the intention of most political activists are pure.

Any talk of the Illuminati provides the true dangers to man's freedom — like very powerful NGOS and men like George Soros — a perfect cover.

The U.S. government has done some horrible experiments on people and land — I also suspect they will do more things in the future. But I do not believe in the systematic spraying of chemicals using chemtrails.

The moon landing was real, but I see a time coming when people will not be able to trust their eyes due to deep fakes.

What do you think?

Let me know in the comments section below.

This edition features a brand new number two, a big mover in the top five, and the biggest drop since we started the power rankings.

In case you're new here, read our explainer about how all of this works:

The 2020 Democratic primary power rankings are an attempt to make sense out of the chaos of the largest field of candidates in global history. Each candidate gets a unique score in at least thirty categories, measuring data like polling, prediction markets, fundraising, fundamentals, media coverage, and more. The result is a candidate score between 0-100. These numbers will change from week to week as the race changes.

The power rankings are less a prediction on who will win the nomination, and more a snapshot of the state of the race at any given time. However, early on, the model gives more weight to fundamentals and potentials, and later will begin to prioritize polling and realities on the ground.

If you're like me, when you read power rankings about sports, you've already skipped ahead to the list. So, here we go.

See previous editions here.

24. Mike Gravel: 15.3 (Debut)

The month Ronald Reagan moved into the White House, Mike Gravel left his last government job.

He was a Senator from Alaska from 1969-1981, where he was known for his anti-war efforts and attempts to implement direct democracy. The latter is what led a couple of teenagers to attempt to draft him into the 2020 race. When I say "draft," I mean "ask him once on social media."

Gravel fought for something called the National Initiative, which would allow state style ballot initiatives to be passed on a federal level. What could possibly go wrong?

He is probably best known for one of the strangest political ads in history during his Presidential run in 2008. Entitled "Rock," the commercial begins with Gravel staring into the camera for well over a minute. Then it gets really boring. He also was a self-described "womanizer" which you might think makes him a perfect fit for the VP slot for Joe Biden— however, he's been critical about "Joe Biden's creepiness around young girls."

Gravel is 89 years old, making him one of the youngest candidates in the field.

23. Wayne Messam: 15.8 (Previous: 20th / 13.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

A full 3% of Americans have a positive opinion of Wayne Messam.

Admittedly, that sounds bad.

Coincidentally, it also is bad.

The good(?) news is that another 8% know who he is. Unfortunately, all of them have a negative opinion. Messam is the Mayor of Miramar, FL, which is actually larger than South Bend, IN — the home of Pete Buttigieg. That strikes me more as a point against Buttigieg, but we'll count it in Wayne's column for now.

And hey! He's out of last place!

22. Eric Swalwell: 20.2 (Previous: 17th / 20.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Swalwell has navigated his desperate quest for attention in campaign form with little success so far, which is unsurprising. (Even his parents are Trump voters, and it's not yet clear if they will vote for him.)

Candidates like Elizabeth Warren have rejected town halls on Fox News, but not Swalwell. He would love to have a town hall on Fox News. It's just that Fox News doesn't want him.

Running for President is hard.

21. Marianne Williamson 20.6 (Previous: 19th / 17.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

"I'm deeply grateful to the many people who expressed early support for my candidacy. Today we reached an important milestone and we can go full steam ahead from here."

This is the sort of thing you say when you've accomplished something major in a campaign. Marianne Williamson said it after this: "We just hit 1% in our 3rd poll!"

It's a microcosm of the bizarre nature of the 2020 Democratic primary experiment, but in theory, this feeble showing in the polls may be enough to get Williamson on the debate stage.

It's on that stage where she is sure to shine, as she explains the narrow logical pathway of her worldview. She is a self-described "capitalist with a conscience" but also seems to admire socialism: "What's supposed to scare me about socialism, the free health care or the free college?"

Usually, it's the 100 million dead in a century. But, when you find out how much that "free" health care and college cost, they can get pretty scary too.

20. Seth Moulton: 21.5 (Previous: 16th / 20.6)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

"America is not a socialist country." Sure, this statement used to be entirely uncontroversial (like, way back in 2018). But, Seth Moulton is saying those things in 2019, in a Democratic primary, which seems almost disqualifying. It's hard to imagine a path towards success for someone with this opinion, unless maybe your last name happens to be Biden.

"There are elements of our party that are going too far toward socialism." True enough. But, it's a little like saying "There are elements of this orange juice that are going far too close to oranges."

Warning: The orange juice is made out of oranges.

19. John Delaney: 21.8 (Previous: 15th / 20.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

John Delaney is probably one of the most moderate candidates in the field. He is even selling himself this way, arguing "to beat Trump, we need a moderate."

It's an interesting window into the state of the Democratic party. If the introduction of a $4 trillion global warming tax and spend scheme makes you moderate, what makes you a liberal?

18. Tim Ryan: 24.3 (Previous: 14th / 20.7)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Tim Ryan was elected as a pro-life Democrat. Now he's thanking NARAL and Planned Parenthood for convincing him that some babies just shouldn't be alive.

Essentially, your local drive-thru abortion hut won the moral reasoning battle against the Pope, which is an interesting decision for a Catholic: "I believe my faith supports my position because to me being Catholic, to me being Christian, to me following the teachings of Jesus is about being compassionate and an open-hearted toward people who you shouldn't be judging."

Someone should tell Ryan and his other deeply religious Democratic colleagues that judgment of behavior is actually pretty central to faith in general.

Religion may be a lot of things, but it is not about being "open- minded." The foundational book of Christianity is most famous for its list of "commandments."


"Thou shalt…or shalt not, whatever you want to do…let me know." -Exodus 20:9024325 or something.

17. Bill de Blasio 24.9 (Debut)

No one loves Bill de Blasio more than… well, no one loves Bill de Blasio. After his announcement, the New York Post ran the headline "Everyone Hates Bill."

Bill de Blasio is essentially a socialist, but that's not why New Yorkers hate him. They're fine with the left-wing craziness. They just want someone who can at least do his job half as well as he promotes himself.

De Blasio is so disliked in New York that even left leaning publications like New York Magazine admit they struggle to find one person who actually supports him for president. He begins his run with the highest unfavorables in the entire field, an amazing accomplishment considering his late entry into the race.

If you want to find something positive for Bill, it probably comes in the form of cash. As Donald Trump used to describe business life in New York, he would routinely donate to Democratic politicians he didn't like, because it helped grease the wheels for his company. De Blasio will likely get a considerable amount of cash from people who hate his guts, but realize that a hefty "donation" is a great way to get favorable treatment from a powerful socialist.

16. Steve Bullock 27.7 (Debut)

On paper, Steve Bullock could be a strong Democratic candidate for president. He's one of a few governors around the country that fit a very popular profile: in a deep red state, he's a Democrat, but tries to be seen as a "sensible" one. Larry Hogan, Republican from Maryland, has the same approach from the other side.

Bullock ran for governor of Montana with promises of streamlining the regulatory system, fighting prescription drug abuse, tax refunds, protecting the coal industry, and the baby sister to America first— "hiring Montanans first."

This approach had Bullock win reelection in a red state that Trump won by over twenty points. He was also the 4th most popular governor in America with an approval rating of 66%, with only 19% disapproving.

However, there are plenty of hints that Bullock is no moderate. He blocked multiple bills to restrict late-term abortion, supported DACA, supported net neutrality, and is deeply in the pocket of the unions, including wanting to force unwilling participants to pay dues until it was ruled unconstitutional.

Policies aside, Bullock seems to lack a certain je ne sais quoi. If you don't speak French, it's kind of hard to describe why, but basically most people find it difficult to pay attention to him.

Bullock is trying to sell moderation with a wink. The idea that one can sound moderate to get elected, then run the country as a relatively strong progressive, similar to the package he delivered to Montana. In the era of "shout your abortion," it seems like a difficult message to connect with primary voters.

Maybe there's a VP window for Bullock, but if you do want the moderation with a wink approach, it's unclear why you wouldn't just go with Biden at the top of the ticket.

15. Andrew Yang 28.3 (Previous: 12th / 27.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Andrew Yang continues to have the highest buzz-to-poll results ratio in the race. This is partially because of his embrace of issues well off the normal path of politicians. I.e., pennies must go!

Yang does have some legitimate credibility when it comes to our governments pathetic technology infrastructure and is capable of talking about issues like AI, cryptocurrencies, and probably Fortnite. He's embraced meme culture and has a way of going viral that eludes other candidates who try way too hard to do it (see Booker, Cory and Gillibrand, Kirsten.) Unfortunately, you can't tweet yourself into the White House. (Most of the time.)

14. Michael Bennet 28.8 (Debut)

Michael Bennet grew up in Washington D.C. and went to a high end prep school and is currently serving as a U.S. Senator from Colorado. A political outsider, he is not.

He was appointed to the Senate in 2009 and went on to a somewhat surprising victory over Ken Buck in the Tea Party wave election of 2010. He's a Democrat from a purple state that outperformed Hillary in 2016. And it's not the worst thing in the world for his candidacy that his little brother is the editorial page director of the New York Times.

But Bennet is one of a handful of little known, unremarkable, pseudo-moderates in this race that have no chance to win unless Joe Biden slips his hand up a female moderators skirt in the middle of a debate.

The best part of Bennet's candidacy is the fact that he was born in New Delhi, India. Who's ready for another cycle of the media highlighting every random Facebook users posts about birtherism! I know I am!

13. Tulsi Gabbard 28.8 (Previous: 13th / 25.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

The Las Vegas shooting was just a distraction for the Harvey Weinstein scandal.

Russia didn't hack the DNC.

The Parkland shooting was a false flag.

Pizzagate is real.

Bill Cosby was framed.

Is this a grouping of opinions from Alex Jones? Well, probably yes, but they also happen to be the views of the biggest online fundraiser for Tulsi Gabbard.

As pointed out in her candidate profile, Gabbard is a bit of an odd bird as a Democratic option for president. But the main reason for her support among conspiracy theorists and racists like David Duke, seems to come back to her role as supporter and excuse factory for Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.

Tulsi was able to get herself on the Joe Rogan podcast, which has brought a lot of attention (along with no poll number increase) to her campaign. While there, she mentioned her affection for South Park—the Human Centipede episode in particular.

However, Gabbard does not endorse turning people into human centipedes, that we know of...as of this writing.

12. Jay Inslee 30.4 (Previous: 11th / 30.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Jay Inslee is trying to branch out from his single issue climate change campaign.

Forget sanctuary cities, Jay wants sanctuary states. He's also signed a public option add on to Obamacare in Washington, which was part of Obama's original plan. (Also, not part of his plan was an individual mandate, but I don't see many Barack originalists in the Democratic party on that point.)

Inslee has hit the magical 65,000 donor level to get him into the debates, but has made as much of an impact in this race as his favored amount of carbon emissions: zero.

11. John Hickenlooper 32.0 (Previous: 10th / 32.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Is John Hickenlooper a moderate? He wants America to think he is… but he wants Democratic primary voters to know that he isn't.

"You can have progressive ideas, but you have to present it to them in a moderate way."

This is a very typical Democratic politician approach, or at least it used to be. Today, Hickenlooper couldn't avoid being unmercifully booed for daring to say that socialism isn't the answer… when it comes to beating Donald Trump. In other words, you can have the terrible ideas, but don't tell everyone about it.

Hickenlooper's CNN town hall did beat Beto's town hall in the ratings, which unfortunately says more about Beto's failure than it does about Hickenlooper's success.

10. Julian Castro 34.5 (Previous: 10th / 35.7)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

I usually write these things in order from worst to first, and it's always around Julian Castro where I have the same thought: I've been writing too long to just be at Julian Castro. However, this is a race in which some polls show 17 of the 24 candidates are at zero or one percent, allowing an enormous disappointment like Castro to still squeak into the top ten.

One bandwagon that Castro has jumped on is the "fight for $15"— an attempt to try to force McDonald's to pay its employees $15 per hour. Of course, there are plenty of high-end restaurants/coffee shops/political campaigns that cater to left-wing audiences that don't pay $15 an hour, but McDonald's seems to always be the target.

This is bizarre, considering McDonald's is known for its high-volume, low-margin business model, making it among the most easily damaged by higher minimum wages. It, also, already has technology available to have kiosks replace workers, which can easily be more widely distributed.

Of course, the "fight for $15" is much more about grabbing attention than helping workers. Now, I'm hungry for McDonald's.

9. Kirsten Gillibrand 36.7 (Previous: 9th / 38.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Kirsten Gillibrand is not good at this. One of many examples: she was asked during her Fox News town hall why she flip-flopped from pro-gun to anti-gun after leaving her conservative district for the more liberal audience statewide.

Her answer was to explain that her previous district was more conservative and wanted more gun rights, but the state as a whole was not.

That was the accusation against you. It's not supposed to be the same as your excuse.

When asked what gun policies would have stopped the recent shooting in Virginia Beach, she said we should "stop being beholden to the NRA." This quality analysis wouldn't get you an internship under a low-level editor at Think Progress, but somehow she's a Senator and running for President.

But if you think that's bad, look at her fundraising. "Gillibrand raised less money from small contributors in her first quarter as a presidential candidate than she had in six of the eight previous quarters when she wasn't running for president."

I continue to believe that Gillibrand will drop out long before Iowa casts a vote.

8. Amy Klobuchar 41.9 (Previous: 8th / 45.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Klobuchar's campaign hasn't exactly been lighting the world on fire so far. That's the bad news. The good news is there isn't a long list of gaffes on the campaign either. (Bonus! She hasn't abused any underlings on camera!)

This formula probably isn't enough for her to compete for the nomination, and she claims the third largest point drop from our last power ranking.

But this news is not entirely terrible for Klobuchar either, who is likely still a top tier VP candidate. She's been working on entirely controversy-free legislation like securing tax breaks for Gold Star families. If she can look competent in the debates, show some gravitas, and not light an interns torso on fire in front of gasping kindergartners, she might be fine.

Klobuchar's best path to success continues to be avoiding mistakes and hoping Joe Biden wins the nomination.

7. Cory Booker 51.6 (Previous: 6th / 54.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Cory Booker is your white knight, ladies.

Swoon.

Cory wants you to know that men are the problem, which is why he wrote an open letter to all men. The topic? How men need to fight alongside women who are facing new restrictions in their moral crusade to make children more available for expiry. How can a society possibly demand women to endure "lengthy 72-hour waiting periods?" (Yes, it's a real quote. You see, 72 hours sounds long. Three days sounds short.)

Booker wants to heal our divisions about abortion by… what else?... creating yet another government bureaucracy. All hail the "White House Office of Reproductive Freedom."

There is some stunning evidence that voters seem to like Booker, challenging the virtue of democracy, and perhaps our civilization as a whole.

6. Robert Francis O’Rourke 52.8 (Previous: 5th / 60.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Beto's campaign is falling apart. His 7.4 point drop from our previous power ranking is the largest drop since the rankings began.

However, a high-profile launch, followed by a complete fizzle does not always mean the death of a campaign. John McCain's 2008 run began the same way, even leading to a mass firing of campaign executives before relaunching and capturing the nomination.

But McCain was a well-known D.C. power player with massive name recognition and political connections. O'Rourke is essentially a viral video about Colin Kaepernick and a travel blog to find himself wrapped into an Irish guy pretending to be Hispanic.

O'Rourke doesn't have to win to give himself a future in politics (as we've already seen), but he does need to avoid complete embarrassment. This is something he should keep in mind next time he decides to live stream his own haircut.

5. Elizabeth Warren 53.4 (Previous: 7th / 45.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

It shocks (and pains) me to say this, but Elizabeth Warren is having a little bit of a moment. Her 8.1 point rise leads the field in this edition of our rankings, and she has created a nice little niche for herself. She's claimed the progressive high ground on policy, with her somewhat effective but twice as annoying "she has a plan for that" mantra. In another era, the idea that a politician has a way for government to be involved in every aspect of your life would show up in an opposition commercial. But today the left eats it up.

To be clear, none of them have actually read any of these proposals. And they all rest on an impossible to pass, completely unenforceable, and almost certainly unconstitutional wealth tax on the rich.

But her combination of a furious technocratic pace, along with her individual outreach to voters (Elizabeth Warren called me!) has lifted Warren out of her self-imposed gaffe-a-thon and back into a serious contender.

We now estimate that Warren has a 1 in 1,024 chance to win the presidency.

4. Kamala Harris 65.9 (Previous: 3rd / 68.6)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If you're going to make a massively misleading statistic one of the cornerstones of your campaign, you should probably understand how the statistic is calculated.

Kamala Harris is supposed to be one of the intelligent options in the Democratic field, but at times, one is amazed at her ignorance of basic facts.

Literally anyone who has studied or debated the gender pay gap is familiar with the massive problems with the statistic. It simply averages all women working and compares it to all men working. It doesn't account for experience level, choice of industry, education level, and so on.

Harris said to Stephen Colbert "In America today, women on average are paid 80 cents on the dollar of what men are paid for the same work." She then doubled and tripled down on the "same work" aspect of the claim. It is most certainly not a measure of different pay for the same work. We should also note that, of course, Harris is paying women in her campaign less than men. But you probably guessed that one already.

This isn't about the gender wage gap, which can be easily explained in the book 'Why Men Earn More,' for example. It's more of a study of the early disappointment of the Harris campaign. She just occasionally blurts things out that make you crinkle your forehead.

Another example: "Very few people can get by and be involved in their communities or society or in whatever their profession without somehow, somewhere using Facebook." This was said in an explanation about regulating Facebook as a utility. But about a third of adults don't use Facebook at all. One could not say the same about electricity, water, or sewage.

These are minor examples of a potential larger issue. Harris needs to know what she's talking about a little more often. To quote Tim Malloy of Quinnipiac polling, "I don't know why she's not caught fire. But she hasn't."

3. Bernie Sanders: 67.2 (Previous: 2nd / 68.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Most people who follow politics realize that Bernie Sanders is a Democratic Socialist. But, the democratic primary has brought his pro-communist and anti-American views of the past into a new light. This has left many Democrat friendly media sources to discover that conservative media has pretty much been correct all along. The New York Times wrote about his past support for communist governments in Central America, including the Nicaraguan Sandistas.

"The Times shows that Sanders went well beyond mere opposition to funding the war. He wrote to Sandinista leaders that American news media had not 'reflected fairly the goals and accomplishments of your administration.' On a visit to the country, he attended a Sandinista celebration at which the crowd chanted, 'Here, there, everywhere, the Yankee will die,' and complained that American reporters ignored 'the truth' about Nicaragua's government, telling a CBS reporter, 'You are worms.'"

Sanders "…at times crossed over from mere opposition to American policy to outright support for communist governments." This isn't from the Blaze. It's from New York Magazine.

"Any politician is going to frame issues selectively, but Sanders is presenting a spin on the controversy so selective it completely fails to convey any of the points relevant to the controversy."

Ouch.

It's getting harder to see Sanders actually winning the nomination, given what seems like a ceiling in his support. The thinking goes, why pick Bernie, when you can get Bernie's policies in a much more attractive package from almost anyone else in the race?

The answer may come down to how dumb, uninformed, and oblivious the primary voters are… at least, according to NBC news:

2. Pete Buttigieg 68.8 (Previous: 4th / 62.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

It's completely shocking to see the mayor of South Bend, Indiana at number two in a 24-candidate field. This is a guy that 31% of Democratic primary voters have still never even heard of.

In fact, I had recently been under the impression that the Buttigieg bump had started to fade away. But the numbers say what they say, and Mayor Pete has pushed himself all the way to number two in our rankings.

The first time we ran these numbers, Buttigieg had a candidate score of 30.8, now he's at 68.8. He's moved more than any other candidate, and it's not even remotely close.

Why?

Given this is a Democratic primary, one would be committing a crime against the obvious if we didn't note that identity politics are playing a role. But Buttigieg is an obviously smart, well-spoken candidate that plays well in this particular moment.

In short, he's the polar opposite of Donald Trump—in demeanor, in age, in his interest in hooking up with female supermodels from the Eastern Bloc.

Buttigieg gives Democrats exactly what they're looking for—a candidate to signal to everyone around them that they're more tolerant, more intelligent, more reasoned, and just generally better than those Neanderthal Republicans.

He's basically a Prius in the form of a candidate.

1. Joe Biden 82.3 (Previous: 1st / 78.8)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Saying that Joe Biden is the "leader" or the "favorite" in this primary doesn't really do him justice. Biden is in a tier by himself. Sure, he continues to hold massive leads in the polls, but perhaps more importantly, those leads are affording Joe the ability to execute the perfect Joe Biden game plan.

1. Run away and hide in the polls

2. Run away and hide in real life

Biden has near universal name recognition and access to the very valuable 2012 Obama campaign voter list. He doesn't have to be seen in public to lead the polls. When he does have to show his handsome face, he's on prompter, and he's keeping his hands to himself.

Most analysts don't think that Joe Biden will simply cruise to a 20-point victory. He will be challenged by someone as this race gets closer. He will be forced in front of cameras. He will say that television was invented in 1593, and he will inhale the follicles of a passing pre-teen. We all know this--and more--will happen at some point in this campaign.

The question is, does Joe have enough in the tank to protect this lead? Can Joe defend himself over what will be uncovered from his political past?

For instance, video emerged of Joe Biden joking about "panty raids" that he once participated in. Can a party constantly talking about male privilege nominate a candidate who once stormed female dorms, only to steal their undergarments?

The fact that Biden made the comments in the 80s, about the 60s, while in his 40s, does not exonerate him.

It somehow makes it even more creepy.

Today is the 75th anniversary of D-Day, the largest amphibious invasion in history.

The Allied invasion force included 5,000 ships and landing craft, 11,000 planes, and almost three million allied soldiers, airmen and sailors. Despite such numbers, the location and timing of the invasion was still an enormous gamble. The Nazis fully expected such an invasion, they just didn't know precisely when or where it would be.

Despite the enormous logistics involved, the gamble worked and by the end of June 6, 1944, 156,000 Allied troops were ashore in Normandy. The human cost was also enormous – over 4,900 American troops died on D-Day. That number doubled over the next month as they fought to establish a foothold in northern France.

There were five beach landing zones on the coast of northwestern France, divided among the Allies. They gave each landing zone a name. Canada was responsible for "Juno." Britain was responsible for "Gold" and "Sword." And the U.S. had "Utah" and "Omaha."

The Nazis were dug in with bunkers, machine guns, artillery, mines, barbed wire, and other obstacles to tangle any attempt to come ashore. Of the five beaches, Omaha was by far the most heavily defended. Over 2,500 U.S. soldiers were killed at Omaha – the beach so famously depicted in the opening battle sequence of the 1998 movie, Saving Private Ryan. The real-life assault on Omaha Beach included 34 men in that first wave of attack who came from the same small town of Bedford, Virginia. The first Americans to die on Omaha Beach were the men from Bedford.

amp only placement

America has a national D-Day Memorial, but many people don't know about it.

America has a national D-Day Memorial, but many people don't know about it. Maybe that's because it wasn't a government project and it's not in Washington DC. It was initiated and financed by veterans and private citizens. It's tucked away in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, in the small town of Bedford, Virginia. Why is the memorial for one of the most famous days in modern world history in such a tiny town? Because, as a proportion of its population of just 3,200 at the time, no community in the U.S. sacrificed more men on D-Day than Bedford.

There were 34 men in Company A from Bedford. Of those thirty-four, 23 died in the first wave of attacks. Six weeks after D-Day, the town's young telegraph operator was overwhelmed when news of many of the first deaths clattered across the Western Union line on the same day. Name after name of men and families that she knew well. There were so many at once that she had to enlist the help of customers in the pharmacy's soda shop to help deliver them all.

Among those killed in action were brothers Bedford and Raymond Hoback. Bedford was the rambunctious older brother with a fiancée back home that he couldn't wait to return to. Raymond was the quieter, more disciplined younger brother who could often be found reading his Bible. He fell in love with a British woman during his two years in England training for D-Day. Like in that opening sequence of Saving Private Ryan, Bedford and Raymond barely made it down the ramp of their Higgins Boat in the swarm of bullets and hot steel before they were cut down in the wet sand.

Bedford and Raymond Hoback's mother, Macie, learned of both their deaths from two separate telegrams, the first on a Sunday morning, the second the following day. Their younger sister, Lucille, remembered her mother's devastation, and her father walking out to the barn to cry.

The day after D-Day, the killing field of Omaha Beach was already transforming into the massive supply port that would help fuel the American drive all the way to Berlin over the next year. A soldier from West Virginia was walking along the beach when he saw something jutting out of the sand. He reached down and pulled it out. He was surprised to find it was a Bible. The inside cover was inscribed with: "Raymond S. Hoback, from mother, Christmas, 1938." The soldier wrote a letter and mailed it with the Bible to Raymond's mother. That Bible, which likely tumbled from Raymond's pack when he fell on D-Day, became Macie Hoback's most cherished possession – the only personal belonging of her son that was ever returned.

Of the 23 Bedford men who died on Omaha Beach, eleven were laid to rest in the American cemetery in Normandy.

These men, many of them barely out of their teens, didn't sign up to march to the slaughter of course. They had hopes and dreams just like you and I. Many of them signed up for adventure, or because of peer pressure, and yes, a sense of honor and duty. Many of the Bedford Boys first signed up for the National Guard just to make a few extra bucks per month, get to hang out with their buddies, and enjoy target practice. But someone had to be first at Omaha Beach and that responsibility fell to the men from Bedford.

Over the last several years, the D-Day anniversary gets increasingly sad. Because each year, there are fewer and fewer men alive who were actually in Normandy on June 6, 1944. The last of the surviving Bedford Boys died in 2009. Most of the remaining D-Day veterans who are still with us are too frail to make the pilgrimage to France for the anniversary ceremonies like they used to.

It's difficult to think about losing these World War II veterans, because once they're all gone, we'll lose that tether to a time when the nation figured out how to be a better version of itself.

Not that they were saints and did everything right. They were as human as we are, with all the fallibility that entails. But in some respects, they were better. Because they went, and they toughed it out, and they accomplished an incredibly daunting mission, with sickening hardship, heartbreak, and terror along the way.

So, what does the anniversary of D-Day mean in 2019?

In one sense, this anniversary is a reprimand that we've failed to tell our own story well enough.

In one sense, this anniversary is a reprimand that we've failed to tell our own story well enough. You can't learn about the logistics of the operation and above all, the human cost, and not be humbled. But as a society, we have not emphasized well enough the story of D-Day and all that it represents. How can I say that? Because of an example just last weekend, when common sense got booed by Democratic Socialists at the California Democrats' State Convention. When Democratic presidential candidate John Hickenlooper said during his speech that "socialism is not the answer," the crowd booed loudly. When did telling the truth about socialism become controversial?

Sure, socialists, and communists and other anti-American factions have always been around. America certainly had socialists in 1944. But the current socialists trying to take over the Democratic Party like a virus don't believe in the D-Day sacrifices to preserve America, because they don't believe America is worth preserving. They are agitating to reform America using the authoritarian playbook that has only ended in death and destruction everywhere it is followed.

Ask a Venezuelan citizen, or an Iraqi Christian, or a North Korean peasant why D-Day still matters in 2019.

The further we move away from caring about pivotal events like June 6, 1944, the less chance of survival we have as a nation.

At the same time, the D-Day anniversary is a reminder that we're not done yet. It's an opportunity for us to remember and let that inform how we live.

Near the end of Saving Private Ryan, the fictional Captain Miller lays dying, and he gives one last instruction to Private Ryan, the young man that he and his unit have sacrificed their lives to rescue in Normandy. He says, "Earn it."

In other words, don't waste the sacrifices that were made so that your life could be saved. Live it well. The message to "earn it" extends to the viewer and the nation as well – can we say we're earning the sacrifices that were made by Americans on D-Day? I cringe to think how our few remaining World War II veterans might answer that.

Honor. Duty. Sacrifice. Gratitude. Personal responsibility. These used to mean a lot more.

Honor. Duty. Sacrifice. Gratitude. Personal responsibility. These used to mean a lot more. I don't want to believe it's too late for us to rediscover those traits as a nation. I want to believe we can still earn it.

The challenge to "earn it" is a lot of pressure. Frankly, it's impossible. We can't fully earn the liberty that we inherited. But we can certainly try to earn it. Not trying is arrogant and immoral. And to tout socialism as the catch-all solution is naïve, and insulting to the men like those from Bedford who volunteered to go defend freedom. In truly striving to earn it, we help keep the flame of liberty aglow for future generations. It is necessary, honorable work if freedom is to survive.

The end of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address is remarkably relevant for every anniversary of June 6, 1944. This is what D-Day still means in 2019:

"It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion – that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Letter from Corporal H.W. Crayton to Mr. and Mrs. Hoback – parents of Bedford and Raymond Hoback who were both killed in action on June 6, 1944

Álvaro Serrano/Unsplash

July 9, 1944 Somewhere in France

Dear Mr. & Mrs. Hoback:

I really don't know how to start this letter to you folks, but will attempt to do something in words of writing. I will try to explain in the letter what this is all about.

While walking along the Beach D-day Plus One, I came upon this Bible and as most any person would do I picked it up from the sand to keep it from being destroyed. I knew that most all Bibles have names & addresses within the cover so I made it my business to thumb through the pages until I came upon the name above. Knowing that you no doubt would want the Book returned I am sending it knowing that most Bibles are a book to be cherished. I would have sent it sooner but have been quite busy and thought it best if a short period of time elapsed before returning it.

You have by now received a letter from your son saying he is well. I sincerely hope so.

I imagine what has happened is that your son dropped the Book without any notice. Most everybody who landed on the Beach D-Day lost something. I for one as others did lost most of my personal belongings, so you see how easy it was to have dropped the book and not know about it.

Everything was in such a turmoil that we didn't have a chance until a day or so later to try and locate our belongings.

Since I have arrived here in France I have had occasion to see a little of the country and find it quite like parts of the U.S.A. It is a very beautiful country, more so in peace time. War does change everything as it has this country. One would hardly think there was a war going on today. Everything is peaceful & quiet. The birds have begun their daily practice, all the flowers and trees are in bloom, especially the poppies & tulips which are very beautiful at this time of the year.

Time goes by so quickly as it has today. I must close hoping to hear that you receive the Bible in good shape.

Yours very truly,

Cpl. H.W. Crayton