BLOGMay 22, 2017

Sen. Mike Lee Explains Why a Portrait in the Capitol Rotunda Sends Chills Down His Spine

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) joined Glenn on radio Monday to talk about the news of the day and his new book, Written Out of History: The Forgotten Founders Who Fought Big Government.

"In this book, I outline the stories of a number of Americans --- who were neither rich nor white nor male, in some cases --- people who made a profound contribution to the early days of the American republic. But their narrative, their story didn't fit with our modern narrative of what happened at the American founding," Sen. Lee said.

The narrative taught in schools is, of course, that America was founded by rich, white slaveowners who did little to end the practice of slavery.

"You could go to George Washington University now and study history, and you don't to have take more than one semester of American history," Glenn said. "So there's a good chance that you go to George Washington University, and you're never taught about George Washington."

One person covered in the senator's book is Mum Bett, a slave in Massachusetts, who fought for and won her freedom in court.

"She made an early contribution to the abolition movement in America. The discussion of slavery was not just something that sort of bubbled up around or in the immediate lead-in to the Civil War. This was something that was actively debated and discussed at the time of the Revolution," Sen. Lee said.

With respect to George Washington, the senator shared a personal anecdote.

"One of the many paintings that hangs in the Capitol rotunda is one of George Washington surrendering his commission to the Continental Congress after winning the Revolutionary War. It sends chills down my spine every time I see it, every time I think about it, every time I talk about it," he shared.

Written Out of History: The Forgotten Founders Who Fought Big Government is available in bookstores everywhere.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: Welcome back to the program, Mike Lee, senator from Utah is with us. He's got a new book. A book that everybody should have on their shelf, especially if you are looking to teach your kids American history. This is written out of history by Mike Lee. These are all the heroes of the American Revolution that had been written out of history because it just didn't jive with what the story everybody wants to tell. Where do you want to start?

MIKE: You know, my interest in writing this book came about in part as a result of my work on my last book, called Our Last Constitution. I told some stories about. The formation of the republic. It came out about the same time as this certain Broadway play, a certain Broadway play that kind of lit a match with some very dry tinder.

GLENN: Hamilton. Have you seen it?

MIKE: Hamilton, exactly.

I haven't seen it. I know the soundtrack well. I've listened to it over and over again. I hope to see it at some point. But have not been able to get in so far.

That kindled something in the American people. It got them excited. It made them realize, "There is a lot to learn from our founding generation. And if we study our founding generation, we can discover some things about ourself."

GLENN: So what did you discover about us?

MIKE: What I discovered about us is that we didn't start out the way a lot of people assume we started out.

GLENN: Wait. Rich, white people that are just interested in slavery and business?

MIKE: That's the narrative. That's the narrative. Those were the only people. Everyone else in America was silent or silenced. Had nothing to say. No contribution to make to public discourse.

And in this book, I outline the stories of a number of Americans, who were neither rich nor white nor male, in some cases. People who made a profound contribution to the early days of the American republic.

But their narrative, their story didn't fit with our modern narrative of what happened at the American founding.

GLENN: Give me -- give me a couple of your favorite examples.

MIKE: Mum Bett. Mum Bett was a slave in early America in Massachusetts. She discovered that with the revolution and with the Massachusetts state constitution, as it came out, guaranteed individuals with certain rights, that all men -- and including women -- were protected by these rights. And she fought for and won her slavery in court, as a result of that.

She made an early contribution to the abolition movement in America. The -- the discussion of slavery was not just something that sort of bubbled up around or in the immediate lead-in to the Civil War. This was something that was actively debated and discussed at the time of the Revolution.

PAT: What year was this?

MIKE: This was in the late 1700s. So about the time we became our own country, but --

PAT: Wow.

MIKE: -- long before -- long before anything close to the Civil War happened. So as a result of that, she fought for and won her freedom. She had a very significant role in -- and an understanding in this country that we as individuals have certain rights given to us by God. But she was a black woman. She was a black woman who won her freedom. She didn't fit that narrative. She's been written out of history.

GLENN: When did you find -- was she ever prominent in history in America? Did we ever learn about her? Or had she always been written out?

MIKE: There was times when she was well-known. She was relatively known at the time of the revolution. And she continued to be well-known throughout the abolition effort. But overtime, her memory faded because people assumed, you know, we got a lot of rich white guys to talk about. That's all we're going to talk about.

GLENN: We also have this belief -- and it's so wrong, that women didn't -- they didn't have the vote. That's not exactly right. You had to own property. So if -- if you were a woman and your husband died and you had property, you got the vote. And it was more of a family kind of vote. It wasn't against a woman. It was about, who is the owner of property, correct?

MIKE: Yes.

GLENN: And a lot of women played a very important role in the American founding.

MIKE: Including Mercy Otis Warren, another American who was very prominent at the time of the revolution, but who we've written out. Who has been forgotten.

She was well educated. She was an author. She was constantly involved in public discourse. She had some grave concerns about what our federal government might become under the new Constitution.

She was good friends with John Adams, but it became a sort of love/hate relationship. They had this back-and-forth exchange of letters, over the course of many years, in which she would raise concerns about the new government. And these discussions became increasingly heated.

She ended up having a real voice in speaking out for freedom, speaking out about the fact that, you know, when government acts, it does so at the expense of individual liberty. We have to constrain government power. But that too conflicts with the modern narrative.

So what I'm trying to do in assembling these stories is remember some of the comments that I received in connection with my last book.

On Our Last Constitution, I've gone through and read the reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. Over and over and over again, some different themes developed. People would say, in that story -- these are great stories, but these are stories I've never heard. These are stories that are not discussed in civics class or in history class, even in AP or college-level history classes. Some of these stories have been left out.

So I've tried in this book, Written Out of History, to find more of those stories. More of the people who contributed to our founding.

GLENN: You could go to George Washington University now and study history, and you don't to have take more than one semester of American history. So there's a good chance that you go to George Washington University, and you're never taught about George Washington. I mean, we're leaving George Washington out of our history now.

MIKE: And my guess is, Glenn, if you did study George Washington, it might not be the more noble aspects of George Washington's life that would be first discovered.

GLENN: Yes.

PAT: Well, he was a rich, white slave owner.

MIKE: He was indeed that. He was indeed that. He was also many other things.

PAT: Yeah, he was a guy with white privilege. We didn't establish that, but that's for sure. Right? White privilege.

GLENN: Thank you, Pat. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

MIKE: And with respect to George Washington, one of my favorite things to show people on the capitol is the portrait -- one of the many paintings that hangs in the capitol rotunda is one of George Washington surrendering his commission to the Continental Congress after winning the Revolutionary War. It sends chills down my spine every time I see it, every time I think about it, every time I talk about it.

The fact that --

GLENN: You don't have to name him. But do you see anyone that is or could be the next George Washington?

MIKE: Oh, sure. Look, I see a lot of people who have liberty in their veins, who long for liberty, who yearn for it.

Anybody who yearns for liberty has the ability to be that person.

GLENN: Yeah.

MIKE: And all they have to do is speak about it. Do something about it. Talk about it. Push back against the narrative that says that anything we do that's important has to be through government. And anything we do through government that's important must be done through the federal government and never through states and localities. Push back against that narrative, and you will help restore the spirit of America's founding.

GLENN: You talk about George Mason -- you tell the story of George Mason as being kind of a forgotten founder. Tell the story that you have in the book.

MIKE: George Mason was a remarkable human being. He was a reluctant statesman. One who was a man of business. He just wanted to live his own life, without undue interference. He got involved in government. He ended up going to the constitutional convention. He ended up having some grave concerns with the Constitution, which he ultimately couldn't support, in part because he could see that the powers created by it would one day be abused. That's one of the things that we have to remember and one of the understandings we have to restore in this country.

We talk a lot in our US history courses in school about the Federalists, about the fact that those pushing the Constitution pointed out that there were all these protections in place. We don't talk as much about the anti-Federalists. Those who warned about how this government power could be abused. Those who understood that based on human nature, human beings are by nature redeemable, but flawed. And when they get power, they tend to abuse it, unless that power is kept in check.

George Mason was one who really understood that. And he fought hard to make sure that his fellow beings, his fellow patriots would be protected. And he didn't want them to be subjects --

GLENN: Wasn't he against the Constitution as written?

MIKE: Yeah.

GLENN: But didn't he help -- he helped write it, didn't he?

MIKE: Yes. Yes. One of his -- he was very concerned that unless it outlined more areas that were out of bounds for the government. Unless there were more protections, like those ultimately provided through the Bill of Rights, for example.

GLENN: And those weren't included at the beginning. In fact, every state voted against them.

MIKE: Those were not included at the beginning. But the Bill of Rights came about in part because of the efforts of men like George Mason, who said, "We've got to constrain this government. We've got to identify a number of things that government just cannot do. Otherwise, government will do those things because people will come forward and say, look, this is important. Therefore, it must be done. And it must be done in the most efficient manner possible."

GLENN: Mike, I was talking to somebody the other day, and I said, "With the exception of maybe a couple -- you know, like the vice president or removal of office of the president and the taxes and prohibition, pretty much everything else in there, past the first ten, I feel like are covered by the first ten. And it's just Congress going, no, dummy, what part didn't you understand? Black people are men who are born to be free. Women are -- you know, when we said men, we meant everybody. Men, women. We meant everybody." And so it's just a reiteration of the first ten because they're so well written.

MIKE: In many respects, yes. And that's one of the things I love about the first ten amendments is they're written so carefully, elegantly, and with this simplicity that allows them to stand the test of time.

GLENN: Right.

Except for the quartering of soldiers. I mean, that's the only one. That's the only one --

MIKE: Hey, you never know when that might come in handy.

GLENN: I know.

MIKE: The day may come, Glenn, when you might --

GLENN: What do you think of the idea that in some ways, they have quartered soldiers in our home through NSA being able to listen and snoop and -- and record everything that we have. Our government is in our home all the time.

MIKE: Yes. And in that respect, I've got several chapters in my book that would interest you about that issue. James Otis, for example, would have been very concerned about that.

He pushed back on the abuse of writs of assistance, which were these roving warrants, roving commissions that could be used by the king's officers, to kick down doors, to go after any contraband goods. Pursuant to efforts to enforce laws that were themselves put in place to protect British subjects in America from counterfeit non-British approved goods.

This is not really a quartering of troops problem that you're describing. It's a Fourth Amendment problem.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, in their papers, in their homes, from unreasonable intrusive searches and seizures is what protects us, both in letter and in spirit, from the NSA undertaking surveillance on the American people without a warrant.

GLENN: It amazes me, there was a new study out that shows that I think it's 49 percent of conservative millennials say that freedom of speech, freedom of religion, yada, yada, it's all absolute, except the government has to decide what speech is okay.

Forty-nine percent of conservatives think the government has to put limits on speech and press and everything else.

MIKE: Yeah. And if you understand freedom of speech that way, what you're really saying is, "There's no such thing as freedom of speech." That's what freedom of speech is there for, is to say, "Government must stay out."

GLENN: Mike Lee, he'll be joining me soon on the television program at 5 o'clock. TheBlaze. You don't want to miss that. Mike Lee, the author of the book Written Out of History: The Forgotten Fathers Who Fought Big Government. Written Out of History. Something that should be on everybody's bookshelf. If you're trying to teach history to your kids, it's a great read. Easy to read. And stories you've never heard before. Written Out of History by Mike Lee. It's available everywhere now.

RADIO

Will Medicaid cuts KILL Americans? Glenn reveals the FACTS!

Democrats claim that the Big, Beautiful Bill will take Medicaid and Medicare away from many Americans and even “kill” people. But is any of this true? Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere review just the facts and explain who’s actually affected by the changes.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Can I address some of the hyperbole around the big, beautiful bill, just a little bit.

If there's anything in the big, beautiful bill to worry about, it's the increase in spending.

Because the spending ourself into oblivion is an actual threat.

To the country. But that's not what anybody is talking about. What everybody seems to be talking about is the tax cuts. Which were already there. Or the tax cuts like no tax for tips. Which you would think the party of the little people. You know, the Democrats. Would all be for. But they're not.

Because they're not party of the little people anymore. And those had to be offset.

Okay. Offset. By what?

Well, by cutting spending. But cutting what spending?

Not cutting spending. Let me just say this. If I said, you know, I made $250,000 a year. And this year, we were going to spend $300,000.
Okay?

And you would say, immediately, Glenn. You can't do that.

And I would say, I've been doing that for 30 years. Okay. You might say, the bank is not going to give a loan.

But then if I came to you and said, yeah. I'm spending $300,000 a year. And my wife and I make 250 or 200,000 a year. But, you know, next year, I was going to spend $500,000.

Did you get a raise? No. I didn't get a raise. I still make 250,000 dollars a year between my wife and I.

But I'm going to spend 500 and not 300. And then somebody came in, like an accountant with some muscle.

And they said, Glenn, you cannot spend $500,000 a year!

Would it make sense if I went back to spending 300, not 200, which I had.

But 300, which I had been spending every year, would it make sense to you to -- for me to say, my children are now going to starve? My children are now going to starve.

Look at the austerity program that I am on.

My gosh, they just -- no. They didn't cut anything. They must cut thinking.

They cut the increase inning spending.

That's what they cut.

And, Stu, could you please explain Medicare.

I mean, all of the people. I know they warned us.

I didn't believe the death squads would actually go out.

And, you know, they want these people off Medicare so badly.

Or Medicaid.

They just sent out death squads. Trump is not waiting for them to die, because he's not waiting for them to get their prescriptions now he just wants them slaughtered in the street.

STU: Yeah, that's the efficiency of the Trump administration. He wants these people dead so badly, he's just killing them in the streets. Actually, no, none of that is happening.

And the Medicaid cuts as you point out, are largely cuts to future increases that have not occurred.

The biggest chunk of this is the work requirements. You've heard this, Glenn.

And, you know, I went through this. And I was like, this can't possibly be what they mean.

I said, wait a minute. When they say work requirement cuts, what does that mean?

So I dove into it a little bit. Basically, what they're saying, you, if you're an able-bodied adult, so that does not include old people, does not include people who are sick and can't work. And it also does not include people who have small children, even if they are able-bodied.

And when I say small, I mean 12 and under. So if you have a 12-year-old. You're completely exempt from this.

But able-bodied adults.

GLENN: Okay. On people in wheelchairs.

STU: No. Gosh, again, I know this is tough. Yeah, this is where it gets difficult.

GLENN: Wait. I'm having a hard time following this. What now?.

STU: So you're an able-bodied adult, that does not have small children.

GLENN: No small children.

STU: You would be required to get Medicaid, to work 20 hours a week.

Now, you might --

GLENN: Twenty hours a week.

STU: Or 80 hours a month.

GLENN: Or 80 hours a month.

That's almost half a full-time job.

STU: Now, you might say to yourself. And this is actually true.

Some people can't get jobs. Right?

I'm sure, there are people trying to get part-time jobs. And maybe can't get them.

Those people will just lose their Medicaid. Well, as you may understand.

Of course not.

Because what you have to do then is go through a process, that you're basically telling them, you're attempting to get a job. Or you're volunteering somewhere, to meet that requirement.

So basically, you have to fill out -- yeah. It's like unemployment.

You have to at least fill out some paperwork here.

GLENN: It's the exact opposite.

Let me see if I have this right.

It's the exact opposite of unemployment which we've had forever.

Which if you're looking for a job, but can't get it. You can still have unemployment.

But it's the exact opposite. Right?

Especially if you're nursing sextuplets.

STU: Again, you're not very close to the truth.

You're a little bit off on this one.

GLENN: No. Huh!

STU: By the way, Glenn, you might say to yourself, wait. How is that a Medicaid cut?

Because they're not cutting anyone's eligibility here. Unless they don't want to meet the requirement.

Of course, there's always been requirements to all of these programs.

So meeting the requirements have always been part of getting on to Medicaid.

This requirement, if you decide basically not to do it. And not participate. And not fill out the paperwork.

Then, yes. You will lose your Medicaid coverage.

What they're saying, hold on. All right.

GLENN: No. I just want to make sure I have it right.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: If you are blind, you're deaf.

STU: No. Again, no.

GLENN: You have no friends, and you can't get out of the house, and you've been on Medicaid, somehow or another, you signed up for that. But now, you don't even know, because you can't hear the news. You certainly can't fill out a form. Because you have no eyes.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: They just come in and rip your Medicaid away?

STU: No. None of what you said is accurate.

Though, it is calm considering some of the accusations -- comparisons made bit left right now.

But, yeah.

So if you are an able-bodied adult that decides, you know what, I don't feel like filling out the paperwork, or I don't feel like going to job interviews, or I don't feel like volunteering, then yes. You could lose -- but that's what they're saying the cuts are.

They think 317 billion dollars worth of people will not bother doing those things. For whatever reason. Maybe because they had more money than they said. Maybe because they're lazy.

Maybe because -- I'm sure there's some case where some -- I don't know.

I can't think of the case.

GLENN: Blind person.

STU: Because the ailments are covered here.

But, yes. Maybe it's some particular skin color. Then they would reject you.

I don't know.

And it's not just that. There are other cuts. For example, some of the cuts are, they're eliminate duplicate Medicaid enrollment.

If you happen to have Medicaid.

GLENN: I can't double-dip.

STU: In two different states. They're going to try to stop you from having it in two states.

And instead, make you have it one state. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Hold on just one second.

I have two legs. I have two arms. I have two eyes. I have two nostrils. I have two ears.

I can't have two Medicaid coverages. It's insane!

STU: I know.

It's really, really brutal.

GLENN: I have two kidneys. I can only have one kidney now, you know, repaired?

STU: Now --

GLENN: Is that what you're saying?

STU: That's not what I'm saying. But, yes. I'm sure that's what's being reported out there by Dana Bash.

Another one, I will give you here, Glenn. They talked about immigrants.

You know, immigrants getting on their Medicaid cut. Now, this is tough. What this bill does, I want you to hold on to your hat here, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: If you have green card holders and other certain immigrants, some will lose their coverage. Or actually, sorry, eligibility will -- retain for those people.

Certain other immigrants may lose their coverage. The current law says, all who are lawfully present.

That will kick in after a -- how many year waiting period?

Let me guess, it's a five-year waiting period.

So it will be the next president who has to deal with this, when future Congress will just put it right back in. And it's not a savings at all.

And then you have Medicaid death checks. They're going to require --

GLENN: They're checking on whether your debt? Look at this! It's crazy.

STU: It's brutal. It really is.

GLENN: You're going to kick all of the immigrants off in five years.

STU: No.

GLENN: And then you're checking to see if old people are dead!

When will you leave these people alone?

STU: I know. So, anyway, we can go through this stuff all day. But as you point out, most of this stuff is not at all, what the left is saying it is.

It's not the desperate Medicaid cuts that are going to ruin everybody's lives. A lot of them are just really common sense stuff, making sure you don't have them in two states. I don't know what the positive argument is for that. But they'll make it.

GLENN: Well, they don't have one. That's why they don't make it about that.

RADIO

Liz Wheeler BLASTS Pam Bondi’s Epstein deception

The Department of Justice and FBI are now claiming that there NEVER was any Epstein client list and nobody else needs to be charged. But what about Attorney General Pam Bondi’s previous claim that the list was on her desk?! BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler, who had been given one of Bondi’s ill-fated “Epstein Files” binders, joins Glenn Beck to discuss how the MAGA movement should react to the claims made by Bondi, Kash Patel, and Dan Bongino.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Liz Wheeler. Liz wrote to me early today. Let me see if I can -- may I quote you here, Liz?

LIZ: Yes, you may. Thanks for having me, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay. Yeah. You bet. She said, give me one good reason why I shouldn't scream for Pam Bondi to be fired today? And this was at 5 o'clock in the morning. And I said, I'm sleepy. But I don't think I can.

I don't think I can give you a reason not to -- not to call for her firing today. But I want you to explain, why do you feel this way?

LIZ: It's not something that I say lightly. I didn't say it immediately after the White House, Epstein binder debacle. And I want to very prudently and judiciously make this case to you today and to make this case to President Trump too. Because Pam Bondi has become a liability to her administration, despite her loyalty in other areas. So let's start with the announcement from the Department of Justice last night.

A lot of us have a lot of questions about this announcement. It just doesn't ring true with a lot of us. We see a lot of evidence before our eyes that contradicts what we're being told without evidence to believe by the FBI and the Department of Justice. And it grates on us.

Because like you mentioned, we are friends with Kash Patel and Dan Bongino.

They're the good guys. We trust them.

And yet, we have to use our critical thinking faculties and look at the evidence before our eyes.

So it smells fishy. You'll notice it says nothing about whether Jeffrey Epstein was an intelligence asset.

Which, as you mentioned, Alex Acosta, the attorney who cut the sweetheart deal originally with Epstein. Said he was, before Accosta's emails mysteriously disappeared. So we have questions about that.

There are also outstanding, important questions about Kash Patel and Dan Bongino's definitive pronouncement, that Epstein killed himself.

I'm sorry. I don't think the video that they released proves definitively that they were stating that case.

GLENN: Why?

LIZ: Because it does not show what's happening in the cell. It just shows the cell door. We don't actually see him kill himself.

GLENN: Right. But we know that nobody came in.

LIZ: Through that door.

GLENN: Where are they going to go true, the little bars? Little drag la? A little bat.

LIZ: I don't know what the internal cell looks like. I don't know what they have. I don't know if they have fire escape routes. I don't know if they have adjoining doors. I don't know if they have emergency exits. I don't know if that video was doctored or not.

I don't know enough about that, to simply take that one piece of evidence.

GLENN: Okay. So that's a good point.

Just show us the room. Show us what's inside the room.

LIZ: Yes. We need more evidence.

GLENN: That's reasonable.

LIZ: One piece of evidence.

It's not enough.

GLENN: Yeah.

LIZ: The other thing, I wonder with Kash Patel and Dan Bongino are relying too much on the FBI's prior investigation to the FBI of old is a reliable narrator. I don't know who conducted those investigations, or if it was done soundly. I doubt it was done soundly.

GLENN: So may I just interject here.

LIZ: Yes.

GLENN: I talked to Dan Bongino a few weeks ago about this off-air. And, Glenn, we are turning over every stone. We are going to get to the bottom of it.

We are -- so, I mean, he led me to believe that, and I believed him. And I still do.

That he was using new resources. Opening the investigation in -- in a new way. Following it closely.

And I do believe Dan Bongino is one of the good guys.

LIZ: I do too. And I've been told the same thing by high-ranking officials in the FBI. Who I trust. They're trustworthy people.

I do think, that it might not be possible at this point, to piece together everything, because we know there have been reports of evidence, destruction.

So my issue with that definitive statement was the definitive nature of it.

This 100 percent happened this way. Epstein killed himself. Instead of saving, we don't have enough evidence to piece this together, or the evidence we have points to this.

All that being said, though, I want to talk about what happened last night.

Because this brings to us attorney general Pam Bondi, who just months ago said she had the Epstein client list on her desk.

When I went back to look at that video, the clip of her on Fox News, again, this morning, to make sure that there was not context that I was lacking, that there was not bungled phraseology, maybe nerves being on the air.

I went back and listened to it. She said definitively, she had the Epstein client list on her desk.

Now, fast forward to yesterday, she says that it doesn't exist, that they don't have it.

That is a really big problem. If I'm president today --

GLENN: Okay. Let me play this, from Bondi. This is back in February. Here is the actual statement she made.

Listen.

VOICE: The DOJ may be releasing the list of Epstein's clients. Will that really happen?

VOICE: It's sitting on my desk right now, to review.

That's been a directive by President Trump. I'm reviewing that. I'm reviewing JFK files. MLK files. That's all in the process of being reviewed, because that was done at the directive of the president from all of these agencies.

VOICE: So have you seen anything, that you said, oh, my gosh?

VOICE: Not yet.

VOICE: Okay. Well, we'll check back with you.

GLENN: Okay. So now let me take you back to Kash Patel. Because something similar was said to me. Here he is. Cut 12.

So who has Jeffrey Epstein's?

VOICE: Black book? FBI.

GLENN: But who?

VOICE: Oh, that's under direct control of the director of the FBI. Just like the manifesto from the Nashville school shooting. The Catholic school. We still haven't seen that, right?

It's not the Nashville police or PD saying, we don't want this out. The FBI airmailed into that operation and said, this is not getting out. Because they do that because this is another government gangster operation.

All these local law enforcement communities get funding from the DOJ and FBI from local programs. And if you don't cooperate, you're not getting your million dollars for this.

That's a lot of money from these local districts. That's how they play the game. That's why you don't have a black book.

GLENN: Because the black book, it's not just sitting. That's Hoover power times ten.

VOICE: And to me, that's a thing I think President Trump should run on. On day one, roll out the black book.

And not just that, on day one, all the text messages and communications we were told were deleted. On day one, play the rest of the video of the pipe bomber.

You know, he needs -- one of the reforms I talk about in government gangsters.

Is you need a central node to be continuously declassifying. This is another thing they do. They overclassify.

They are not telling you -- as a former number two in the IC, they overclassify 50 percent of the stuff there to protect the Deep State.

Oh, no.

You can't see that. Nothing to see here.

Gina was a master at it. Of doing it. And we haven't seen half of the Russiagate report we wrote. Still under lock and key.

On how the ICA was originally constructed. We went -- we put 10,000 man-hours against John Brennan's team that did it.

And we found out why they came up with their bogus conclusions. We couldn't sell it with the world.

Because we couldn't talk about it. And the government cancers came in and buried it.

All of these things, there needs to be a continuing central power whether it's the White House or off-site that says, every request that comes in.
Just right out the door. As long as it's not awe major threat to national security.

VOICE: Liz, they're both very clear.

It existed. But Pam Bondi did not say, she had any names in it.

She kind of made me feel like she hadn't really looked at it.

Kash Patel gave me the impression, he had seen it. Or at least he knew about it.

So how do we go from here?

VOICE: Yes. Listen.

People care deeply about the Epstein files because there was a grisly crime that we know for a fact that was committed.

Epstein was convicted of that.

It wasn't speculative. He was convicted of that. People feel that there's evidence of a cover-up. Not -- we're not inventing a conspiracy. There's evidence of a cover-up of this crime.

Pam Bondi as attorney general has exacerbated this trust. And it gives me no pleasure to say this. Because I like to give the benefit of the doubt to people that are on our side.

But going back to that day in the White House, this February. I haven't told this part of the story before.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, when we met with her. We weren't at the White House to meet with her. We just met with her while she was there.

Pam Bondi bragged to us about making that cover sheet on the binder, the one that read the most transparent administration in history.

She said, she had made it. She had printed it. She was proud of it. She placed it on that binder.

Glenn, to call that a severe lack of judgment would be the understatement of the year. There is no way, in my mind, and I've tried every way to Sunday, to square that behavior with the announcement that we got last night with the Department of Justice.

Pam Bondi told us at the time, she said, I've requested the Epstein files, the files in the binder, were the ones given to me. Nothing was in them, she told us at the time. Then a whistle-blower told her, she told us. And said the FDNY was hiding other files. That's the story she had told us, that there's been a Deep State cover-up. So at the time, after we were given these binders, we waited. Right? You give your side the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Pam Bondi will come up with the goods, even though the rollout was botched to say the least.

But she -- this is another thing I have not discussed publicly before. She said, she had not seen the FDNY documents at the time that she was telling us about them.

I asked her directly that day in the White House. When she said, a whistle-blower told us about these truckloads of FDNY documents. I said, have you seen them? She said no, she sent the request and they're brining them to her.

So contextualizing all of this, suddenly this seems like unforgivable behavior.

How could she give the American people -- not just me. I don't care about how this impacts me. How can she give the American people those binders that contain nothing, while at the same time, bragging about the cover sheet that she made.

The most transparent administration in history. And tell us that the FDNY had the real goods, that the binder was just proof of a Deep State cover-up. That was the real story she told us. Only now to say, sorry, there's actually nothing.

So it leaves us with this situation. What are the options? The options are, well, was she herself set up by some Deep State FBI officials trying to make a fool of her? It's possible, maybe even probable.

GLENN: Possible.

LIZ: But here's the thing, if you're smart, if you're savvy, if you're sharp enough to be Attorney General of the United States, you verify such information.

You don't assume its veracity and publicize it for clicks. And that's what she did.

So then we get to the point, that we think, okay. Well, what does this say about her judgment?

Is she just click thirsty? Is she wanting to be a Fox News star? Did she get out over her skis, trying to make news, being a mega champion with those binders, that maybe she had not verified the contents of, and she definitely hadn't verified the contents of the FDNY truckload. You can't square this announcement with the binders. With the binders in February, unless you allow for the idea that Pam Bondi could be operating in a way that is unacceptable, when on Fox News. Said she had a client list on her desk to review, when she hadn't looked at the documents.

And was just saying that to be a television star. I say this. In somewhat sorrowfully. If I'm President Trump, I would not tolerate this behavior anymore. She's become a liability to the administration. I think the administration is probably just now coming to the realization of how much goodwill this whole debacle has cost them with their voters.

And Pam Bondi is not worth it. She's a liability. It's time to move on.

RADIO

The INCREDIBLE TRUE Story of Benjamin Franklin

Was Benjamin Franklin the greatest and most modern Founding Father? This July 4th week, “The Greatest American” author Mark Skousen joins Glenn Beck to tell the incredible and true story of Benjamin Franklin.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Dr. Mark Skousen, friend of the program, friend of mine. America's economist.

He is -- he has written a new book on the greatest American and the greatest American, he says is Ben Franklin. And I tend to agree with him. He's at least in the top five greatest Americans. Welcome to the program, Mark. How are you?

MARK: I'm doing well. We're out here in the Mediterranean Sea right now on a cruise, but isn't it great technology that even Ben Franklin would love?

GLENN: You know, I don't think people really understand the genius of Ben Franklin. I mean, there's this great article in the times of London.

I don't remember when. But he was going back to London. He was going to challenge the king.

And he was going back. And they said, don't let his boat come in to dock.

Because he's been working with electricity, and he has a ray gun, and he will vaporize, you know, all of London.

I mean, he was -- he was the Elon Musk of his day, but he was almost more magical, because people didn't understand it.

Back then. What did you find in writing this book about Ben Franklin, that you think most people just don't know?

MARK: Well, this is the thing. So when I wrote the greatest American, I thought to myself, everybody -- lots of books have been written on his biography.

So what I did was I came up with 80 chapters on how he is the most modern of all the Founders. And how he could talk about the modern issues of today, whether it's trade or taxes or inflation or war. Discrimination. Inequality.

I have a chapter on each one of these, in the greatest American.

And, you know, he was a Jack-of-all-trades.
And the master of all, on top of it!

So one of the things I thought would be really cool, if you put my book, on every coffee table in America, and people came in to visit, they would look at this book. And there might be an argument, as you say, as to who is the greatest American. Whether it's George Washington or Elon Musk, or what have you.

GLENN: Whatever.

MARK: When they see the picture of Ben Franklin, they sit there and nod their head. And say, wow. This is the guy I want to sit down with and talk to.

And have a beer with.

Because if you sat with some of the other Founders, they would get in an argument with you. Or they would refuse to answer the question. Or what have you.

But Franklin was willing to talk to a janitor, as well as the king of France. And that's pretty unique.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. He could.

He was an amazing guy. So tell me, in your research of him, you know, you always hear that, oh, Ben Franklin was a notorious womanizer, and everything else.

And he abandoned his wife. Deborah? Was that her name?

MARK: Yes. Deborah. That's correct.

GLENN: Did that -- what's true, or what's not true about that?

MARK: So he certainly was the most liberal-minded when it came to the sexual revolution.

That's why I say, he's the most modern of the Founders. Because he was not prudish like John and Abigail Adams, who thought he was a reprobate. And sinner. And not a churchgoer. And stuff like that.

GLENN: Right.

MARK: So, yes. He was -- the ladies loved him. And he loved the ladies.

There's no question about that, that he was a bit of a playboy. And, in fact, he even admits in his autobiography, of having an illegitimate child, William. But then he settled down. He married Deborah. And, yes, Deborah and him, they did separate because -- and it was really more her fault than his, because when he went to London as a London agent, she had extreme aversion to going out on this -- the seas. It was a dangerous time period.

So it's kind of like people don't like to fly on airplanes today. So they did grow apart. There's no question about that.

But they maintained their -- their love for each other.

And, as a matter of fact, when Franklin died, he's buried right next to Deborah. So I think that's an indication of their -- their love and so forth. But they were very different personalities. She was very focused on -- on more of the home issues. She was not a public intellectual.

She would not feel comfortable in the same conversations that Franklin would have with scientists.

And with public thinkers, and stuff like that. So they definitely differed in their personality.

GLENN: The -- the story about his son William is one of the saddest chapters.

I mean, you know, Thomas Paine kind of looked at him as a father figure. And he -- you know, Ben Franklin did have a son, William, as you said. And they -- they had a really bad falling out.

Can you quickly tell that story?

MARK: Yeah. So I have a chapter on that very issue. Because who were his enemies, and he did have a number of enemies, including John Adams, at one point. But in the case of William, he, Franklin, arranged for William to be the governor of New Jersey. And he maintained his loyalty. He was a loyalist. Billy was throughout the American Revolution!

And at the end of the American Revolution, or during the American Revolution, Franklin writes his son and he said, it's one thing to -- we can differ on various issues.

But when you actually raise money, raise armaments to attack me, this was beyond the pale.

This is not something that you should have done. And then at the end of his letter, he says, this is a disagreeable subject!

I drop it. So you can feel that emotion, that anger.

And, yes. He removed him from -- from his will.

So there -- there -- Franklin got along with almost everyone.

And I have a whole chapter on how to deal in the greatest American. How to deal with enemies and be how to make your enemies, your friends.

But this was one example where he just couldn't cross over and forgive him. For what the -- for what we had done.

GLENN: I don't think --

CHIP: Just like you are saying.

GLENN: I think I would have a hard time doing that too if my son was raising funds and military against me. It would be kind of hard to forgive.

Mark, thank you so much for your work. It's always good to talk to you.

The name of the book is by Mark Skousen. And it is called The Greatest American. It's all about Ben Franklin. If you don't know anything about Ben Franklin, you will fall in love with him. You will absolutely fall in love with him. Mark Skousen is the author. The name of the book again, The Greatest American.

Glenn's Show Prep

Sen. Mike Lee Explains Why a Portrait in the Capitol Rotunda Sends Chills Down His Spine

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's Connections to Intel Agencies

Will Medicaid cuts KILL Americans? Glenn reveals the FACTS!

Transcript

Liz Wheeler BLASTS Pam Bondi’s Epstein deception

Transcript

The INCREDIBLE TRUE Story of Benjamin Franklin

Transcript