Three Things You Need to Know - January 18, 2018

January 18, 2018

WRITER

The 2017 Fake News Awards

And the award for the least shocking report on the planet goes to…The GOP and President Trump.

Yesterday, Trump and the GOP put together something called the “Highly-Anticipated 2017 Fake News Awards.”

The report was filled with unflattering headlines from the usual suspects. ABC News, The New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post.

Look, those publications are never going to be nice to the President. They are owned and operated by liberals for the most part. Why does this fact seem to escape Trump and the GOP?

You can call them out on their bias all you want, but the truth is it’s not going to make them change, believe me I know.

It’s the American people’s responsibility to use their brains and think about where their news is coming from and to read both sides of every story.

Not to mention a “Fakes News Awards” report coming from the White House makes me a little bit uncomfortable. In their effort to control the narrative on Trump, they are throwing free speech under the bus. Just because an article is negative about the President doesn’t mean it doesn’t deserve to be read or published.

Calling out fake news is what an entertainment show, like this one, does. We call out biased and bad reporting all the time. But Trump and the GOP should really have more important things to do. I would advise Trump to stop worrying about what people think of him and let his actions speak louder than their lies.

California violates first amendment aggressively promoting abortion

Free speech is on trial again at the Supreme Court. This time it’s related to abortion and the stakes could not be higher.

The case is National Institute of Family and Life Advocates vs. Becerra (Becerra is California’s attorney general). It’s about a new California law that requires pro-life pregnancy centers to post signs, in prominent places, to inform women that California offers low-cost, or in some cases free, abortions. The signs must include a phone number for abortion clinics.

California could do all the abortion clinic advertising it wants of course, but it is forcing those who are firmly against abortion to promote the abortion industry. Not only is California clearly violating free speech, it is aggressively endorsing the murder of unborn children over efforts to protect them. What have we become?

It’s kind of like forcing marriage counselors to post advertisements for hitmen, you know, that way their clients always have the option of just having their spouse murdered instead of working on the marriage.

If you crack open this legal door, imagine all the other insane positions that government could force us to start endorsing. This is the Fairness Doctrine on steroids. Imagine mandatory signs inside your church promoting atheism, except that atheist gatherings would not be required to promote your religion.

Two hundred twenty-six years after passage of the First Amendment, you’d think our freedom of speech would be secure. But apparently, the Freedom of Speech part still isn’t clear to the state of California and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. They’re only interested in protecting speech they approve. And not only protecting it, forcing people who disagree with their position to endorse it! It is absolute tyranny.

The people who run these non-profit, pro-life pregnancy centers are humble, loving, caring, genuine, hard-working people. Their mission is helping women and saving lives. They’re unsung heroes on the frontlines of the American holocaust – 21st-century Paulinas – saving people from being murdered.

Apparently, these pro-life pregnancy centers are a little too good at saving lives, because their government is going out of its way to persecute their crazy notion that the baby growing inside you is an actual human life, with inherent value, that deserves protection.

This decision should be a no-brainer for the Supreme Court. Pray that they do the right thing.

Stolen 'NOC' list brings movie plot to real life

A stolen CIA “NOC” list, it’s the plot line in almost every Hollywood spy movie. The good guys have to catch the bad guy before the names and locations of every undercover operative is outed and killed. In the movies, the good guys usually win, but this is real life.

A former CIA officer was arrested on Monday and charged with “unlawfully possessing national defense information.” He was caught red-handed with two notebooks containing the names of CIA assets and the locations of covert facilities in China. He was illegally carrying a NOC list, but he’s suspected of much worse.

The New York Times reported last year that the CIA was losing agents in China at an alarming rate. Since 2010, the Chinese government had all but completely destroyed US spying operations on the mainland. The CIA had a mole, and all the evidence pointed directly at the man arrested this week.

The damage done to the CIA in China was catastrophic, but even worse was the number of lives lost. All in all, he’s responsible for the deaths or imprisonment of twenty American agents. Say what you want about Snowden. He’s definitely a traitor enjoying the protection of Vladimir Putin, but at least he didn’t get anyone killed.

If Doc Brown and Marty McFly traveled here from the year 1985 and looked at the news headlines, they’d see a world that hasn’t really changed all that much. Now granted, the music is a lot worse and the clothes are a lot better, but they’d probably assume the Cold War was still raging.

Despite Cindy Lauper and neon shorts, the world of 1985 was kind of a scary place. Aldrich Ames was a CIA agent selling secrets to the Soviets. Because of him, multiple CIA assets were killed. Korean airlines flight zero zero seven had been shot down just two years prior. Nuclear tensions were at their highest. Both sides looked willing to press the button.

Sounds eerily familiar, doesn’t it? It’s been thirty-three years. Have we learned nothing? Three decades and life is just as cheap now as it was then. The only difference between then and today is that, with our technology, we can betray, kill and threaten each other more efficiently.

The bad guy was eventually caught, but the human toll he inflicted makes this story ultimately a tragedy. Likewise, the redundant cycle we’re in is also a tragedy. How do we break it? Both as individuals and as a nation, we can not navigate the ship following pure self or national interest. Principles and values are our true north. If we don’t make a course correction, we’re in for another three decades of nothing but the same.

MORE 3 THINGS

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

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheatle steps down

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

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

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

Who was he?

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

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

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

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

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

What were his goals?

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

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

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

Did he work alone?

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

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

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

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

Who will be Kamala Harris' VP pick?

JIM WATSON / Contributor, Chris duMond / Stringer, Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Over the weekend, President Joe Biden officially dropped out of the 2024 presidential election and put forward his endorsement behind his Vice President Kamala Harris.

Glenn recently predicted that Biden would step down due to the mountain of pressure within his party to do so. But now that we are here we are faced with an all-new line of questions, like, who will be the candidate on the Democratic ticket? Who will be their pick for vice president?

As of now, the answer to the first question seems to be Kamala Harris, who received the support of the president and several prominent democrats. It's still too early to call for certain, and Glenn doesn't think it's likely, but assuming Kamala becomes the Democrat nominee, who will her VP pick be? There are endless possible options, but there are a 5 big names that could prove beneficial to Harris' campaign:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom

Bill Pugliano / Stringer | Getty Images

Governor Newsom has spiked in popularity within his party since his taking office in 2019 due to his scathing criticisms of President Trump and other Republicans. Newsom has been a popular contender as a possible Biden replacement, and a future presidential bid seems likely.

His widespread recognition may be a boon to Kamala's ticket, but the California governor comes with a dark side. Newsom was famously nearly recalled as Governor in 2021, hanging on to his office by a narrow margin. He also faced criticism for his hypocrisy during the COVID lockdowns, attending large gatherings while the rest of his state was locked inside. There's also the issue that both Newsom and Kamala are from California, meaning that if they were to appear on the same ticket, that ticket would lack geographical balance and would potentially lead to a Constitutional issue that would force the duo to forfeit all 54 of the states' Electoral College votes.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro

Tom Williams / Contributor | Getty Images

Another prominent Democrat Governor, Josh Shapiro has also been floated as a potential VP pick. Governor Shapiro has become a viable pick due to his well-received performance as Pennslyvania's Governor. The governor has good support within the swing state due to his handling of the I-95 bridge collapse, the train derailment in East Palestine, which had effects on his state, and the assassination attempt on the former president last week. Shapiro would bring much-needed support from the swing state if he was put on the ticket.

That being said, Shapiro has little time to build nationwide name recognition before the DNC in August and the November election. This would be Shapiro's debut on the national stage, and he would find himself in the most unforgiving situation possible.

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg

FREDERIC J. BROWN / Contributor | Getty Images

Former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and opponent of Biden during the 2020 Democratic primaries, "Mayor Pete's" name recognition might be what Kamala needs on her presidential ticket. Buttigieg rose to popularity during the 2020 election due to his youth and status as "openly gay." Buttigieg has served as the Secretary of Transportation during the Biden administration for the past four years and has formally endorsed Harris.

Nevertheless, Buttigieg has some dark spots on his resume. The East Palestine train derailment disaster has besmirched his reputation as Secretary of Transportation. And while his youth may work in his favor when compared to the other elderly members of our federal government, it also means Buttigieg lacks the experience and prestige that other politicians enjoy.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer

Noam Galai / Stringer | Getty Images

Yet another governor of a crucial swing state, Whitmer was elected in 2018, two years after President Trump was elected, helping secure the state for the Democrats. Whitmer is known for her strong opposition to Trump, both during his presidency and his reelection campaign. Whitmer serves as co-chair for the Biden-Harris campaign and as vice chairperson of the DNC, which gives her influence over the Democratic party, something that would come in handy as a Vice President. Gov. Whitmer also established the Fight Like Hell PAC, which is dedicated to helping Democrats get elected and to stopping Trump by any means.

On the other hand, in a statement following Biden's resignation from the election, Governor Whitmer stated that her role “will remain the same.” It is also worth noting that if she were to be chosen as Kamala's VP, that would make their ticket all-female, which may foster some "woke points," but is politically risky.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear

Lexington Herald-Leader / Contributor | Getty Images

Andy Bashear has seemingly beaten the odds twice, having been elected and reelected as the Governor of Kentucky, despite the deep-red nature of the state. Beshear, who has moderate tendencies, would be a boon to the Harris campaign as he has a track record of reaching rural, typically conservative regions where Democrats tend to struggle. He is also known for his propensity to talk about his Christian faith and willingness to work with Republicans, which are traits that might help win over moderates.

But, like Gov. Shapiro, Bashear has very little time to whip up national support and recognition. He also is unlikely to be very much help for the Harris campaign in winning over important swing states.

Five times Glenn had J.D. Vance on his show and where he stands on key issues

CHANDAN KHANNAMANDEL NGAN / Contributor | Getty Images

We finally have an answer to the long-awaited question of who Trump will pick for his running mate, and it's none other than Ohio Senator and friend of the show, J.D. Vance. At the RNC in Milwaukee, Trump officially accepted the party's nomination as the Republican candidate and announced J.D. Vance as his running mate.

Glenn has had Senator Vance on the show several times to discuss everything from DEI to the Southern Border. If you are looking to familiarize yourself with the next potential Vice President, look no further, here are five conversations Glenn had with Trump's VP pick:

Glenn's Show Prep