Trey Gowdy’s Fiery Response on WH Staff Secretary Accused of Abuse Makes One Thing Clear

What’s going on?

Led by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), Congress is investigating why the White House employed former aide Rob Porter even though he had been accused of domestic abuse.

On today’s show, Pat and Stu talked about this story while sitting in for Glenn.

Remind me:

Porter, who served as White House staff secretary for the Trump administration for about a year, resigned last week when allegations from two of his ex-wives surfaced. One of them produced a photo of her blackened eye from the alleged abuse as evidence.

“These outrageous allegations are simply false,” Porter said in a statement, calling the claims a “coordinated smear campaign.”

What are Republicans saying?

Gowdy said his House Oversight Committee launched the investigation on Tuesday night. In an interview, he sounded determined to get to the bottom of things.

“You can call it official, you can call it unofficial — those words don’t mean anything to me,” Gowdy said in an interview with CNN. “What means something to me is I’m going to direct questions to the FBI that I expect them to answer.”

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan told reporters that he had been informed about the probe and that Porter’s employment by the White House indicated a “breakdown” in the screening process.

“If a person who commits domestic violence gets in government, then there’s a breakdown in the system,” Ryan said. “There’s a breakdown in the vetting system, and that breakdown needs to be addressed.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

PAT: Pat and Stu for Glenn. He's out with the flu today. 888-727-BECK.

Apparently Trey Gowdy has spoken out on this Rob Porter mess.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: Kind of interesting, what he had to say. Here it is.

VOICE: I'm well. Are you troubled by Rob Porter's employment in the White House?

VOICE: Yes. On two levels. Now, one is the interim security clearance issue. But even more importantly, I spent two decades believing women and children who alleged abuse, even sometimes when no one else did. So whether or not there's a security clearance at issue or not, I have real questions about how someone like this could be considered for employment, whether there's a security clearance or not. So, yeah, I'm troubled by almost every aspect of this.

VOICE: And so now that we know, according to yesterday, Chris Ray's testimony, that they told the White House four times, they gave the White House four separate -- four different installments of the report. Some of them complete. It included the allegations from the ex-wives of violence. So how could he still have a job at the White House?

VOICE: That's a great question. And one that I can't answer. I didn't hire him. But who knew what? When? And to what extent? Those are the questions that I think ought to be asked. And Congress has a role to play. I, but, quite frankly, so does the public and so does the media. Who knew, what, when, and to what extent. And if you knew it in 2017, and the bureau briefed him three times, then how in the hell was he still employed? The security clearance is a separate issue. I mean, it's an important issue, but it's separate.

How do you have any job, if you have credible allegations of domestic abuse? Again, I am biased toward the victim. I spent two decades believing them. But you don't have to be biased toward the victim to ask, how in the hell did this happen?

PAT: Wow. I mean, that's not good, coming from Trey Gowdy, a Republican. Some pretty solid points there.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: How do you -- how were you hired in the first place? When you did the background check and you should probably know about it then.

STU: Because there's two lines there, the idea that victims should be believed -- that's a weird statement to come from a guy -- a prosecutor. A guy who is involved in the legal system.

PAT: Yeah, that's not our justice system, by the way. Victims should be taken seriously. But not necessarily believed.

STU: Yeah. The opposite. Right?

PAT: It's the opposite.

STU: There should always be skepticism of an allegation.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Because it's innocent until proven guilt. Proven guilt.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, he's not necessarily talking about the legal standard here, however. And the standard of whether he should be working in the White House is a different one. The standard of what we feel as a generalized public, the court of public opinion, is a much lower standard, right? We judged things all the time on the left and the right, without all the information.

But I do think there has to be a process here. Some sort of process. It just seems that like, so far, this does not look good for him.

That being said, the -- the fact that Trey Gowdy, is out there saying, how the hell was this guy employed? I honestly think there is a good chance this leads to Kelly leaving.

PAT: Yeah, it seems like.

STU: Kelly, I think, has done a good job since he got in there. He just has not handled this one well. It would be interesting to see why that happened. Because he obviously is not incompetent. There have been people who have handled things in ways that are really incompetent. You see the people going after him. All the Lewandowskis and the Scaramuccis and all of them are going after Kelly, and a lot of them have axes to grind with him. But I think generally speaking, he's done a pretty good job for Trump. General Kelly. And he obviously has a really legitimate, you know, backstory and strong resume and history. It just seems like this one, he did not handle well. Maybe from a personal blindness of liking this guy. And not taking the accusations seriously enough early enough.

PAT: Seems that's about all it can be, right?

STU: Certainly he's not --

PAT: Maybe he believed the guy. Maybe Porter completely denied it. And he still is pretty much denying it, and Kelly believed him.

STU: Yeah. And I think that may very well be what happened here. But because it seemed like Trump had soured on him a little bit anyway. Didn't like the control. In addition to that, this did not go well, he's getting hammered in the press. He's doubled down on it. He's changed his timelines. He's not handled this well. And it may cost him his job.

PAT: And since Kelly has been in there, he doesn't like the control, but things have been more normal. So, yeah, it's too bad.

Glenn Beck can't help but wonder, "What is wrong with us?" in light of the Left's latest move — canceling six Dr. Seuss books due to "hurtful and wrong" illustrations — that takes America one step closer to complete insanity. And now, school districts are jumping on board after President Joe Biden seems to have dropped Dr. Seuss from the White House's annual "Read Across America Day" proclamation.

On the radio program Tuesday, Glenn argued that deleting books is the perfect example of fascism, and asked when we as a country will finally realize it.

"They are banning Dr. Seuss books. How much more do you need to see before all of America wakes up? ... This is fascism!" Glenn said. "We don't destroy books. What is wrong with us, America?"

Watch the video below to hear more from Glenn:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Former Democratic presidential candidate and Hawaii representative Tulsi Gabbard and Glenn Beck don't agree much on policy, but they're in lockstep on principles.

On "The Glenn Beck Podcast" this week, Tulsi spoke with Glenn about one of her last acts in Congress, introducing the "Protect Women's Sports Act," which she says would "strengthen, clarify, and uphold the intent of Title IX to provide a level playing field for girls and women in sports." But since then, the Biden administration has gone in the opposite direction, and has supported allowing biological men to compete in women's sports.

Watch the video clip below to hear why Tulsi took a stand for female athletes:

Watch the full interview with Tulsi Gabbard here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Later this week, former President Trump will attend CPAC and give his first major policy appearance since leaving office. Sources close to the President reveal he will focus on "the future of the Republican Party and the conservative movement."

The future of the GOP is a question that demands real discussion before elections in 2022 and 2024. Right now, I can see three possible answers for how you act:

  1. Those in power and senior positions will ignore the reasons behind Donald Trump winning in 2016. They will be vindicated in their minds because they outlasted him, as they view DC as a job for life. These leaders will go back to business as usual and seek forgiveness from the left, hoping for unity and acceptance in the future.
  2. The second outcome is another section of the party that is understandably very angry over the left's Presidents treatment. They still support and believe in Trump. They think it's time to take off the gloves and treat Biden/the left exactly how they treated Trump.
  3. The few policy positions offered in public will be centered solely around opposing the left. They will also make the case how the left suck, are dangerous, and how you need them in power. The next four years are merely a countdown for Trump to run again and right the wrong of 2020.
  4. The third outcome is very similar to the second, but with one key difference. While they appreciate everything Trump accomplished while in office, they feel it's time to unite behind another candidate.

Which of these three positions will work best for the American people? Which helps built a political base for elections in both 2022 and 2024?

If you seek to help save America, it is critical to do some soul searching. Whether you love or hate him, Donald Trump got 75 million votes and made advancements in key demographics. What did he do well that you can develop further? In what areas was he poor, and how can you improve?

I want to raise six principled points everyone on the right should be forced to consider in the run-up to 2024.

1 - Understanding American Exceptionalism

FACT: America is an exceptional nation. If you read enough of world history, you will find ample evidence that America acted in ways that made it unique and significantly different from other countries in the past and modern times. These reasons must be understood and promoted through the culture and body politic.

One of those reasons is the layout of your Declaration of Independence. If you look around politics today, you will see people on all political sides telling you what they hate, why the other side is the enemy, and how they must be defeated.

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson also made that case against the English when he listed 27 grievances against the King. So how is the layout key? It took Jefferson 357 words to get to those grievances. Your Declaration is your mission statement: it tells everyone in the world what America aspires to be. It states the belief that all were created equal, all had certain rights that come directly from God, and that it is the government's job to protect rights -- not give people rights.

The left is successfully painting everyone on the right to be a terrorist who enjoyed the Capitol Hill riots. If you ever want to win another election, it will be critical to explain what you stand for to the American people.

After all, ask yourself which makes you the most passionate to vote - removing someone from office or voting for a vision and change you believe in?

2 - The Constitution

Is there a better place to start this vision than the Constitution? Yes, it is mostly ignored today by those in power and is only referenced by politicians and media when it fits a narrative.

The Constitution is a beautiful and complex document but is primarily based on a straightforward principle. The government should be extremely limited in its power, but it should be as close to the people as possible where there is a clear need for government. Who can argue with this principle?

Who wants someone they have never met, dictating how they live their life?

This is why the Constitution grants the President no real power, and gives Congress 18 clauses of power, listed under Article 1, Section 8. Any and every power not mentioned there belongs at the state level.

3 - Finances

The power structure in DC has changed many times over the last twenty years, with both parties having the opportunity to rule the different federal branches. There have been two periods where one party controlled all the power in DC:

  • 2008-2010: Obama / Dem
  • 2016-2018: Trump / GOP

Despite these changes, your government continually grows, you continue to spend money you don't have, and in ten out of the last thirteen years, you have added over $1,000,000,000,000 to your national debt, which now sits just under $28 trillion. Does this seem sustainable to you? Of course not, but sadly your finances only get worse.

America has revenue of over $3.2 trillion every year, yet DC has not passed a budget since 2008. Can you imagine any business running that way? Do you think Apple, Amazon, or Disney have a budget? It is time to get America on a path to financial sustainability, work towards a balanced budget, and explain to the American people how you will achieve it.

4 - Taxes

Do you remember discussing taxes during the Tea Party?

We used to make the simple moral case to the American people: any money you earn is yours, you should use it to plan your life, and the government has no right to take it from you. This was so successful around 2012 that Herman Cain ran for President with one primary policy: the 9-9-9 plan.

If America is to return to prosperity after Covid, lower taxes and a simpler tax code must be a central theme.

5 - Cutting Government

Look at the size of the US government in 2021. Are you happy? Can you name the numerous departments? Is it now the freedom-loving Americans' position that agencies like Education, Energy, EPA, and Commerce are constitutional bodies of government and are well-run?

How about the IRS, which targeted Tea-Party groups under President Obama? Do they deserve support, or is it time to start sharing a vision of the departments that should be abolished?

This principle used to be a big part of the Conservative platform. It played a massive role in 2012 when Rick Perry ran for President. His campaign was destroyed in 45 short seconds when he could not remember the three agencies he would abolish.

Maybe it's time to refresh this debate but change the parameters. How about we discuss the agencies that should be kept?

6 - Bill of Rights

Today, the Bill of Rights is under constant attack. The far-left/woke mob hates free speech, and they seek to cancel anyone with an opposing view. However, the attacks on the Bill of Rights don't always come from the left.

America has a second amendment that guarantees you the right to bear arms. The last time the GOP held both houses of Congress and the Presidency, they banned bump stocks - but who really NEEDS a bump stock?

As the years have passed, some have admitted they are open to red flag laws. Is this still the case?

While the second amendment may be under attack, it is clear the fourth amendment is dead. Regardless of which party holds power in DC, the NSA is given continuous ability to spy on Americans. The simple, principled case from Rand Paul of "get a warrant" always falls on deaf ears.

The Bill of Rights should be a unifying document for most Americans, as the principles are self-evident and a significant part of any freedom platform going forward.


America will face significant challenges over the coming years. As the government continues to grow, the far left get more hostile, and central planners seek a great reset. If you share my concern, then now is the time to forget our tribes and ignore the debate on who should be President in 2024.

It's time to work hard to build a platform by raising a banner of bold colors, not pale pastels. We must share a clear vision to the American people of a bright future where they are free, prosperous, and can pursue their happiness.

When the platform is built and successful, people can identify the best candidate to run in 2024.

"First, you win the argument, and then you win the election." — Margaret Thatcher

Jonathon Dunne is a keynote speaker, weekly podcast host on Blaze Media, and published author on major platforms such as The Blaze, Glenn Beck, Libertarian Republic, Western Journalism, and Constitution. Since 2012, he has reached millions with his message of American exceptionalism.

You can find him on social media – Facebook, Twitter, MeWe

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is under fire for questioning President Joe Biden's nominee for an assistant health secretary position, Dr. Rachel Levine, about her alleged support for giving children puberty blockers and sex-change surgeries.

During a confirmation hearing Thursday, Paul pointedly asked Levine, who is a transgender woman, about her support for allowing children to change their sex, and whether she believes children are capable of making such life-altering decisions.

Levine evaded the question, answering instead with a vague statement about the complexities of transgender medicine, which she would again reiterate for Paul's subsequent questions.

Watch a video clip of the confirmation hearing here.

Predictably, Paul has been labeled "transphobic" and accused of trying to derail Levine with "transphobic misinformation" by the leftist media.

On the Glenn Beck Radio Program Friday, Paul said his questioning Levine had nothing to do with who she is or the fact that she is a transgender adult, but was about the question of gender changes for children.

"The interesting thing is, none of it was directed towards her personally or who she is. It was directed towards the question of whether children can consent. And this is an intellectual question. It's not an inflammatory question. It's a question of serious consequences," he explained. "Most people would argue that children can't really make an informed consent. You know, we have laws against a man having sex with a 12-year-old, even if the 12-year-old says 'yes', because we don't think a 12-year-old is capable of consenting. They just aren't old enough to make the decision."

Paul went on to add, "I guess the danger is, you have to have some chutzpah. You have to have some guts, some courage to stand up because it is a culture out there where ... everybody is saying I made transphobic comments yesterday. All I did was ask whether a minor could consent to this kind of dramatic surgery. Nothing I ever said was hateful. I said nothing hateful about these people. I said nothing hateful about adults who choose to do this. But the culture is out there is so strong that so many in office are afraid to speak out. And it's getting worse.

"There's a handful of us that will speak out in the Senate. There's a handful in the House, and we just have to grow our ranks. But we have to resist or it just will roll over us. And we'll live in this terrible cancel culture world where nobody speaks out, and everybody is afraid to say anything."

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.