Glenn Beck: Janet Napolitano - the system worked?



Napolitano Now Concedes System 'Failed Miserably'

VOICE: What we're focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe, that people are confident when they travel.

GLENN: We're laying claim to her, too, Janet Napolitano.

PAT: Situation, the system worked.

GLENN: This woman is insane.

PAT: Okay, it failed miserably. But after the fact, afterward.

GLENN: Listen, no, listen to the two statements here. Go ahead. Here's the first statement.

NAPOLITANO: What we're focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe, that people are confident when they travel and one thing I like about

GLENN: Stop, stop, stop. Is the air environment safe when you got a guy with an underwear bomb next to you? No.

PAT: Probably not.

GLENN: Okay. Do you have confidence when you travel?

PAT: Probably not.

GLENN: I mean, feel like a stupid confidence, like what are the odds.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Not like, this thing is so safe, you look at it, now you are like, this is the most ridiculous system I've ever seen, right?

PAT: I don't feel like I'm traveling El Al, I'll tell you that.

GLENN: Yeah. That's safe.

PAT: Now that's safe.

GLENN: I've traveled El Al before, the Israeli airlines. That's safe. They give you steak knives, real steak knives. They have this theory: Let's give everybody steak knives after we found out that they're all good guys. What do you think?

PAT: I'd rather have the spork. I can't cut anything with.

GLENN: I mean, they've got the system and they do it right and I feel safe on El Al airlines. And you should feel safe because they've done it right. This doesn't make me feel safe. This makes me pissed off. What, I can't bring my shampoo? Why? You've got to be kidding me, right? I mean, it's ridiculous. It's a ridiculous system. So they failed before she's even gotten to the look, this is our job. You failed in both of them. But wait, there's more.

NAPOLITANO: What we're focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe.

GLENN: Fail.

NAPOLITANO: That people are confident when they travel.

GLENN: Fail.

NAPOLITANO: One thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked. I think the comment is being taken out of context. What I'm saying is once the incident occurred, moving forward we were immediately able to notify the 128 flights in the air on protective measures to take, immediately able to

GLENN: Wait. The system worked because we were immediately after we found out that the guy tried to set his underpants on fire, we alerted all the other aircraft. That's like George Bush coming out and saying, "You know what? The system worked on 9/11." Once those planes all blew up, we got all of the other planes safely on the ground.

PAT: We told everybody else to landify.

GLENN: I mean, no. No, the system failed, and the system failed this time as well. For the system to succeed, you would need to catch the guy with the underwear bomb before he got on the plane.

STU: Yeah. If you want to see system succeeding, see most of 2002 through 2009.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: I mean, that's where

GLENN: Let's be very clear. I'll give them you know, let's be fair, which the other side never does. This system wasn't designed by Barack Obama. They're implementing it and they are the ones now saying, hey, no, everything's great, we're doing fine. Stop blaming it on other people. They deserve the blame, but this is not the difference here is the people that take these kinds of things seriously that are in charge.

STU: Yeah, I'm not saying we had an infallible system through those times but the system working is not having an attack. It's not once the guy gets on board, he has a crappy bomb.

GLENN: No, no, but that even go back to the original statement that she made. Listen to this.

NAPOLITANO: I notify law enforcement

PAT: You want the original statement.

GLENN: Where she says the system worked.

NAPOLITANO: What we're focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe, that people are confident when they travel and one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked. Everybody played an important role here, that the passengers and crew of the flight.

GLENN: Stop, stop. Everybody played an important part? That's not part of the system! That's a private air carrier so the pilots who are not part of your jurisdiction, oh, they did their job, they played an important the passengers? You know what? Here's a luxury that I would like to have an airliners: Not having to say let's roll. That would be kind of a nice thing for me. I mean, it's exciting, but show me an action movie instead of requiring the passengers to get the terrorists and take them out.

STU: I don't want to be an active participant in a flight.

GLENN: I don't really, either. What am I paying, what am I paying you for at Homeland Security if I have to do it in the end? Jeez, they let this guy through? Great. Now I've got to put the guy's pants out. Now, here's the amazing thing to me. She's saying the system worked because the passengers and everybody did their job. You know there was an assassination attempt that was going to happen with George Washington. Now imagine if George Washington, who didn't wasn't assassinated came out and said, "There was an assassination attempt that was going to be on me but the system worked and we stopped it." How did they stop it? Guy was in jail. Heard someone else in jail talk about it. That person alerted George Washington. Well, now hang on just a second. How did that that's not part of the system. If somebody would have been in an infiltrated, if somebody would have been and listened. They required a prisoner to make a deal with the government to be able to say, "hey, by the way, got some information. George Washington, they are going to try to kill him." That's not the system.

STU: Right.

GLENN: That's a guy in prison.

STU: Right, exactly. We all have our part in it. We always talk about being vigilant and everything else and that's all necessary.

GLENN: That's not the system.

STU: But your job as the government is to make all that stuff happen without us. We're supposed to be a bonus. We're gravy in the system.

GLENN: Right.

STU: I mean, we're the ones that are like, everything you fail, we might catch something and that's great.

GLENN: Here's, even in the George Washington thing somebody sees something, they say something. And it helps. This one is, somebody saw something. The guy's dad. He then said something to not just one organization. He said it to the embassy, to MI5 and to the CIA. They did nothing. So it failed there. Then all of the security, all of the new passport technology and everything else, that fails. You've got a guy who's saying, hey, put him on a watch list, put him on a list, will you? He's been radicalized. That system fails at the airport. The guy then goes through security. That system fails. Then he gets on board. Was there an air marshal that stopped this guy or was it just passengers?

STU: Passengers.

GLENN: It was just passengers. So the air marshal system failed. How many air failures do you need before somebody in the press says, hey, Janet Napolitano, get the hell out. The system didn't fail. Please. The system is failing yet again. Every day this woman sits in office, every day the president doesn't have to account for this, the system has failed yet again. And this system, just a reminder, I know you know this. This system failing means our fellow countrymen are at risk. How many ways does this administration and do the people in Washington have to put us at risk, put our children at risk, put our country's future at risk before we say enough; we want some answers? Tonight at 5:00, tonight at 5:00, case closed. All this week on the Glenn Beck program on the Fox News Channel we're going to show you what we've said in the past. I'm tired of these smear campaigns. I'm tired of people saying that I lie, that I, you know, am a conspiracy theorist. Whatever. I'm tired of it. I'll show you what I've said. Then I'll show you what they said about me and then I'm going to give you the update. Before we move forward in 2010, we're tying together and wrapping up 2009. All this week, case closed. Not going to argue it anymore. They've had their time. The defense has been smear. If the law's on your side, you argue the law. If the facts are on your side, you argue the facts. If neither of those are on your side, you smear the other side. And that's all they've done. I lay the case out one final time. You don't want to miss it. It's one for your friends and one for the DVR. All this week, 5:00 on the Fox News Channel.

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.