Glenn Beck: Ed Whelan about the Sotomayor nomination

M. Edward Whelan III


President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center

GLENN: 888 727 BECK, 888 727 BECK. I'm sorry but my eyes don't work as well. I go into the break and I start to quote this, I look over to quote this from Oliver Wendell Holmes and I can't even see it because my microphone is away from the screen. This comes from a case, Barack Obama said that you know, he quoted Oliver Wendell Holmes and said, you know, we need people who are of great experience, we need people who have life experience to be able to do it. That's why Oliver Wendell Holmes, that's why he went to the Supreme Court. He had had life experience. He was a great guy. Everybody loved him.

There was this case, Buck versus Bell where there was this woman, her name is Carrie Buck. She was in an institution and she was institutionalized because she was considered sexually promiscuous. She was committed there to a state institution because she had she was promiscuous, they didn't know something was wrong with her, et cetera, et cetera, and they knew this because she became an unwed mother at the age of 17. She had been raped. The daughter was diagnosed as being not quite normal at the age of six months. So what did Oliver Wendell Holmes, a guy that Barack Obama quotes today as saying we need somebody that, as Oliver Wendell Holmes said, somebody of great experience for this role. Oliver Wendell Holmes, the Supreme Court justice, said that it is better for all the world if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for a crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit for continuing their kind. Three generations of imbeciles are enough; sterilize her. By the way, as it turns out they were wrong about her and as it turns out Oliver Wendell Holmes was wrong about eugenics. But why even get into eugenics when we have the progressive philosophy being touted now by a whole new class of politicians.

We have now somebody who says, "I hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion as a judge than a white male who hasn't lived that life." We heard about her experiences. Quite honestly her experiences tell me she shouldn't be a progressive! Her experiences tell me this woman should be more in line with the Constitution than anything else. She comes here, her parents can't speak English, her father dies. She works hard. Her mother goes and buys the only set of encyclopedias that she can get in the entire neighborhood. She teaches her children to speak English, that you can do it. The brother goes on to be a doctor, she becomes a judge, she gets scholarships from Princeton and, is it Harvard? Yale? I mean, yeah. It looks like there's some people who take their adversity and break their spirit and for some reason those people are constantly the ones telling everybody else that they can't make it.

Well, what does Oliver Wendell Holmes say? Three generations of imbeciles are enough. How many generations do we have to buy into this progressive line before we say enough?

We have Ed Whelan. He is the president of Ethics and Public Policy Center, also with the National Review. Ed, tell me what you think of the appointment and the speech that just happened.

WHELAN: Well, I think President Obama has followed through on his threat to pick someone who will indulge her own biases, her own policy preferences. We see that with Sonia Sotomayor in a big case that's before the Supreme Court right now. We'll get a ruling in the next few weeks where lo and behold firefighters who are risking their lives to defend us were not recipients of her empathy. These are firefighters who passed an exam, had been carefully vetted, didn't like the racial profile of the results and threw out the exams and the promotions and what's worse, Sotomayor not only ruled against them, they tried to bury their claims in a way that no one would ever know what's going on and right now the Supreme Court's deciding that case.

GLENN: Okay, well, she actually if I'm not mistaken, she actually punted and she said, well, it doesn't look like there's any discrimination here because, well, I mean, they didn't, they didn't advance anyone, the city didn't advance anyone.

Can I ask you a question, Ed? If the city would have had a test to find out who advances and in this case all of them were white or Hispanic and not African American and then the city would have come out and said, if it was reversed and they would have all been black and the mayor was black and he said, you know what, we're just not going to we're not going to advance anybody or if the mayor was white, wouldn't be a case of racism there that, well, we don't that's not the race we want; so we're not going to take it. We're just going to dismiss this test and we'll do some other test later. If that happened in the South, it would have been racism.

WHELAN: Well, that's what happened here. It's clear the City of New Haven threw out the results of the promotional exam because they didn't like the race of those folks did well on the exam which, by the way, included one Hispanic firefighter. This was a test that had been carefully vetted, that folks spent thousands of dollars and lots of hours studying for and when the city didn't like the result, they said too bad, you are not going to get the promotion. Well, how is that honoring people who put their lives at risk in public service and, look, at 9/11 we understood for a while what firefighters do. We understood the importance of having people who know how to do their job right, the importance of exams and making sure we have the right leadership and Sonia Sotomayor, you know, sacrificed all of that on the altar of political correctness and racial quotas.

GLENN: Let me play this piece of audio and get your thoughts on it. Go ahead.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

SOTOMAYOR: All of the legal defense funds out there, they are looking for people with court of appeals experience because court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know, and I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law, I know. Okay, I know. I know. I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it. You know. (Laughter).

GLENN: She's just recognizing that that's true.

WHELAN: Well, it's an unguarded moment where she says what folks on the left think which, their job is to use judicial robes to make sound policy and the law is largely a vessel for them to fill with their own preferences. And that's you know, that's again what she's clearly shown. The firefighters case, that's what she's shown, discussing her understanding of her role as a judge and as a Latina. And that's not the proper understanding of the role of the courts.

GLENN: You think she's going to sail through or there's going to be a fight.

WHELAN: Well, obviously the Democrats have an overwhelming majority in the Senate. I think the challenge is to make sure Americans understand what's at stake here. When she was confirmed in the second circuit, there were some 29 votes against her including from Republicans like current Republican leader Mitch McConnell and the ranking member of the judiciary committee, Jeff Sessions. I think there will be scrutiny and there ought to be and folks will be looking carefully at her record and at her statements and figuring out is this really what we need on the court, folks who indulge their own policy preferences, who make up the law as they go along.

GLENN: Ed, what is the one thing that people should take away from this today? What is the thing that you say, gosh, if America would just understand this or if they would just ruminate on this one thing, what would it be?

WHELAN: Well, I would ask folks to take a careful look at this New Haven firefighters case and just see what happens when unbridled empathy is permitted to be indulged here. Sonia Sotomayor wielded her empathy in one direction for those firefighters who didn't pass the exam and she sacrificed the interest of those who had worked hard and did pass the exam. So what we see is empathy is a wild card as your example of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes directed and we shouldn't have entrenching in the law.

GLENN: And I wonder what her folks would say if she had worked hard but somebody else had gotten her scholarship to Princeton that was less qualified because Princeton had said, well, no, but she just doesn't fit the mold. I wonder what her parents would have said. I wonder what she would have said.

WHELAN: Well, she's obviously been a beneficiary of these gender and ethics policies along the way. So I wonder whether she's really thought very carefully about that. Again I would hope the firefighters case would force her and others to reflect on what fair treatment really consists of.

GLENN: Ed, what is at the end of I mean, I've never seen a president have you ever seen a president talk about empathy like this with a Supreme Court nominee?

WHELAN: I think Barack Obama's statements go far beyond what any president has ever said. Now, he's trying to walk them back now. He is trying to make it seem as though his proposal is more modest than it is. But you look back at what he said when he opposed John Roberts for the Supreme Court. You look at what he said at the Planned Parenthood action when he was running for President.

GLENN: Wait, wait, tell me what he said.

WHELAN: Exactly what he said on his vote about John Roberts was that in difficult cases and here's an exact quote for you a critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart. He said that, again in these cases, the results only to be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works and the depth and breadth of one's empathy.

GLENN: Did he say that in a bipartisan fashion, though?

WHELAN: Well, he said in an in a bipartisan fashion of voting against the nomination of chief justice Roberts. So that doesn't seem to be very bipartisan.

GLENN: And then what did he say about Planned Parenthood, did you say?

WHELAN: Sure, very much along the same lines, talking about what he calls the criterion but which selecting judges. He said we need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it's like to be poor or African American or gay or disabled or old. He's talking about selective empathy here, invoking empathy on behalf of particular parties, not others. Favoring those, exactly what Sonia Sotomayor did in this New Haven firefighters case. That's not a justice being neutral. It's favoring one party over another, tipping the scales, and that's not what the Supreme Court ought to be about.

GLENN: Ed, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Back in a second.

Nearly two years after the January 6 riot at the Capitol, the mystery of who planted two pipe bombs outside the Republican and Democratic National Committee offices remains unsolved. Thankfully, the bombs were found and disabled before they could cause any harm, but with their potential for devastating consequences — not to mention the massive investigations into all things relating to Jan.6 — why does it seem like this story has practically fallen off the face of the earth?

No one in the corporate media has even tried to look into it, and the government's narrative that the bombs were meant to be a diversion for the Capitol riot doesn't make sense when you look at the timeline of events.

So, on this week's episode of "Glenn TV," Glenn Beck broke down the timeline of events that led up to the discovery of the bombs and how the facts appear to point toward one sinister conclusion:

  • Security footage reportedly shows that the two pipe bombs were planted in front of the DNC and RNC the day before the riot.
  • Neither bomb was concealed.
  • Then-Vice President-elect Kamala Harris entered the DNC headquarters at approximately 11: 30 am on January 6.
  • At approximately 12:40 pm on January 6, the first pipe bomb was discovered sitting in plain sight outside the DNC headquarters, raising questions as to why the incoming vice president didn't have better security.
  • The pipe bomb had a one-hour kitchen timer that had apparently stopped with 20 minutes left on the timer. (Remember, the bombs were planted on January 5.)
  • The Secret Service reportedly erased their communications from January 5t and January 6 by "accident."

"It doesn't really hit you unless you look at it as a timeline, and then you're like, 'wait a minute that doesn't seem right.' The unsolved mystery of the pipe bomb has been used by the government to show that January 6 riot was part of a larger coordinated attack ... that the bombs were a diversion to get the Capitol police away from the Capitol," Glenn explained.

"But the bomb had a one-hour timer and it was planted at 8 p.m. the night before. So the bomb would have to go off the night before at about 9 p.m. on January 5. How's that a diversion? It's not physically even possible."

Watch the video clip below to hear more or find the full episode of "Unsolved Mysteries: 7 Deep-State SECRETS Biden Wants Buried" 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.

The Biden administration has weaponized the federal government against the American people. But officials have hidden most of their attacks behind a secretive and cavernous bureaucracy.

There are so many unsolved mysteries that Joe Biden and the Democrats not only refuse to answer, but in some cases appear as though they are ACTIVELY trying to cover up. Like what happened on January 6? Who is Ray Epps? Who planted the pipe bombs? What’s in Biden’s executive order on elections? What happened to the SCOTUS Dobbs leaker? What’s the COVID origin story? What’s happening with crypto, FTX, and the Central Bank Digital Currency?

These are just a few of the unsolved mysteries that we need to DEMAND answers on. On his Wednesday night special, Glenn Beck outlines a chalkboard that will leave you convinced the DOJ and FBI are LYING to the American people. The more secrets the Deep State holds, the more its power over us grows.

Watch the full episode of "Glenn TV" below:

Unsolved Mysteries: 7 Deep-State SECRETS Biden Wants Buried | Glenn TV | Ep 238

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.

'I NEVER thought I'd talk about this': Was Glenn Beck's CHILLING dream actually a WARNING?

(Left) Photo by Charles McQuillan/Getty Images/(Right) Video screenshot

On the radio program this week, Glenn Beck decided to share a very unusual, extremely vivid dream he had ten years ago — a dream he thought he'd never talk about on the air until he began to see it as a warning that we should all know about.

"I never ever thought I would talk about this on the air, but I feel compelled to tell you that seasons have changed again, and it is becoming more and more apparent. You need to know what you're dealing with," Glenn began.

"If you are a long-time listener of this program, you know that one of the reasons I left New York ... was that I had a medical condition. Part of it was brought on by no REM sleep for about 10 years ... and for 10 years, I never had a dream," he explained. "However, during this period I had what could be described as a dream. I do not believe it was."

"In this 'dream' ... I am in a hallway of the White House. And I'm walking into a big room where there's a bunch of cubicles, and people look up like, 'who's walking in?' There are people behind me, but I don't know who they are yet. I just know I'm being pushed forward by them," Glenn continued. "I realize that everybody in the White House is terrified of who's ever behind me ... I glance back and I see people that are in uniforms that I've never seen before. I have seen them since, but that will be for some other time...."

"So, these guys in the uniforms are in the hallway, and one guy says, 'him, him, and him, take them out' ... and I'm the only one still sitting at the table. They go out ... then I hear three gunshots and they say, 'yeah, that happened pretty quickly for them. However, you, we're going to get to know ... because you really have no idea who you're dealing with.' And that's when one of them ... ripped off his face and he was Satan. Or, he was a demon, okay? Horrifying. Then I wake up."

Glenn went on to explain that, while the dream was so vivid and disturbing that he thought about it almost daily for well over a year, it was what happened next — during a discussion with a prominent religious leader — that really hinted his "dream" might actually have been a vision of the future and a warning.

"I will never forget it, and I will never dismiss it," Glenn said of what he learned. "I'm sharing it with you today because you must not dismiss what you're dealing with. We are not in a battle [of] politics ... our whole culture has become evil."

"You have to get to a point where you are going to choose a side. There will be no one left on the benches, and if you think you can sit it out you will end up on the wrong side. I urge you to know who you serve. This is a different time in human experience. This is not normal. None of this is normal," he warned.

Watch the video clip below to hear more from Glenn. Can't watch? Download the podcast 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.