The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guests: Rafer Weigel, Ben Sasse, Daniel Di Martinio & Eric Early | 2/21/19

Episode Date: February 21, 2019

Best of the Program | 2/21 - Chief Grand Jeep Cherokee Beck? -h1  - Hate Hoax Update? (w/ Rafer Weigel) -h2 - Fighting for Life? (w/ Senator Ben Sasse) -h2 - Venezuela Was My Home? (w/ Daniel Di Martino) -h3 - Suing to Block 'Inclusivity'? (w/ Eric Early) -h3  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to my TP. It doesn't take an awful lot of wum-pum to be able to join this. In fact, no wum-pum at all unless you'd like to subscribe to the white man's internet. Well, I was going to say join the tribe. This is going to be mildly offensive to some, but you should think about who started this with those with war. Maybe to me, it'll be offensive. Because you're 1.3% Native American. I found out.

BlaseTV.com slash Beck is the place to go. BlazTV.com slash Beck. Join the tribe. Get $10 off your fee to join the tribe if you use the promo code Beck. Yeah. 10% one pump off. Right now.

Sure. Okay. Well, you see, you don't, you know, as we discuss in today's show, I am 1.3% Native American. I found out from a 23 and me test, which is the greatest thing I've ever done. I'm not part of any tribe that you know of. I am part of the, I believe, Grand Cherokee tribe, the one that the Jeep was named after.

But that could be, you know, that could be wrong. Today, we talk a lot about the different things that are really concerning. If one of these things would have come up 10 years ago, we would have been freaking out about. Civil asset forfeiture, Supreme Court made a good move on that, but it's just the beginning. Also, just, Jesse Smollett. We talked to the guy, the reporter, who is the brave enough guy, to actually break this story and follow it from the beginning. We have Ben Sass, who is on Monday putting a bill in front of the Senate, and it's going to be an on-record vote. The, what is it, don't kill our babies after they're born votes.

I know it has a happier name than that, but that's basically what it is. Also, a guy from Venezuela, he graduated high school in Venezuela. He came here. He's now at the University of Indiana in Purdue, and he is majoring in economics. He has quite the story to tell about Venezuela, about socialism, the Democratic Party, and an amazing story of a group of families

that are just trying not to have their children indoctrinated into all white people are bad. Wait until you hear this lawsuit. All this. so much more in today's podcast. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Did take a DNA test.

I did. And actually, I want to talk to you seriously about this. This is one of the coolest things I've ever done. And not because I believe I, well, I am, you know, 1.3% Native American, but I do have perspective on that. That that doesn't mean that I'm Native American or part of a tribe or anything else. You are going to include it on federal documents. Oh, my gosh.

I'm going for grand. I'm going for grants. You've got to get some grants. I've got to get some grants. You should get 13 times more grants than Elizabeth Warren ever has received. Exactly right. I'm going to, you know, I've already gone to Yale, so I'm going to now apply to Harvard, and I'm going to mark Native American.

This is the plot of Soul Man, the movie from 1986. No, but what? Did he had a DNA test? He did not. He just went in blackface, and everyone in the New York Times cheered it as a hilarious romp. Yeah. Mm-hmm. In 1986. Here's the good thing is, the good thing, I found out that I'm not a carrier for any kind of genetic diseases, which is great.

It's also shocking. I mean, you seem to have every disease I've ever heard of. Yeah, no, I mean, I did look at it and go, I think this, not because of the Native American thing, because that's absolutely real. But the disease thing, you know, no real problems genetically. I don't believe that. I don't believe that for a second. So you'll believe the things that you want to believe out of the DNA report.

Maybe. Maybe. OJ did the same thing. He was like, yeah, no, that's not my blood. Sure, that's what the DNA says. But that's not my blood. It worked for him for a while. Maybe that's why my people have a problem with alcoholism.

Maybe it is because of the oppression of the white man and you giving us fire water that we can't handle. Maybe that. Oh, my gosh. I've got to, is there a civil rights attorney? Is there some, I don't even know who to go, because the white man has oppressed me so much, I don't even know who to reach out to that I could get special status because of the white man's firewater. It wrecked my life. That's probably why I'm an alcoholic.

This is now you achieving the American dream, the new American dream. Of being a victim. Of being a victim. Yes. You've achieved it. Yeah, now it might be a little offensive to some people. white people somebody

there's probably somebody out there that would be offended by this but they're not in my tribe right what I'm not by the way

I am not Cherokee I want you to know I'm not I don't know what tribe I am I suspect only because I come from such a noble line

that I am Grand Cherokee which either we were named after the Jeep or the Jeep was named after us I'm not sure but I believe

I believe I'm not Cherokee. I want to make that very clear. I'm not part of any Native American tribe. Because you have a little blood in you, does not make you Elizabeth Warren, does not make you a member of a tribe. But I do believe I'm part of the Grand Cherokee tribe. Is that above the normal Cherokee tribe? I don't want to say that.

I wouldn't say that. Some people... It has more features. Some people I'd say it has more features. It has more features. It has air conditioning. It has air conditioning. And that's, you know, that's an important thing.

in our sweat lodges, we don't sweat. We have air conditioning and automatic windows. I don't think it's a sweat lodge if you have air conditioning. Well, it's a sweat lodge because it used to be, you know, everybody used to go in there. But then the Grand Cherokee, you know, when Chief Big Bones got in there, he said, you know what we should do? The Great Spirit told me, air conditioning and automatic windows. And so we installed electric windows that just go down. You push a button.

You're sitting in their seat really comfortable. Some come with massage features, and you sit there and you push a little button and the windows go down. We don't want to run the air conditioning because we know better than you, white men, about the environment we care. So we first just roll down the windows

with our electric windows, and then in our Grand Cherokee sweat lodge, we'll turn on the air conditioning if it really gets bad, but we will roll the windows back up. Seems to be a little wasteful of energy for someone that loves the earth so much where you'd open up the window.

and run the air conditioning at the same time. Well, we're using green energy. Okay. We're using the power of the power of fire. We're using fire. Fire power? We're using fire power. Okay.

Yeah. Can I, I don't want to be insulting to you and your, you're newly discovered Native American. 36 hours. I wouldn't say that's new. I say that is a tradition. I say, I say, I say that is a, that's a, that's, that's, you're calling my ancestors. young? They weren't young. This has been in this has been coming for thousands of years, perhaps 80 years.

We don't know, but it's been a lot longer. But 36 hours is not just yesterday. Well, but when 20 of them were spent sleeping, I mean, that's really not extensive. Well, 36 hours isn't yesterday. You want to claim that 36 hours since yesterday? No, you were not born yesterday. You were born the day before yesterday in this particular example. Whatever. But did you, was there ever any sign? Look at the oppression. of this heritage before you got the results from this DNA test?

Was there ever anything that in your past? No, because the white man took away my way of wife. I mean, look, they took the whole Grand Cherokee Nation and they put us on this reservation, and they took away our way of life. They took away our tomahawk. They took away our bow and knife. They took away my native tongue.

Yeah. and then and then they taught the you know English to our young and and all the beads we made in you know by hand they're all now made in Japan you've never made a bead in your life. Cherokee people Cherokee tribe I mean it's you mean grand Cherokee people grand Cherokee if you say that I like to shorten it sometimes it's a little more lyrical um you know but whatever I mean Grand Cherokee Cherokee you know uh you know so proud to live and so proud to die. I mean, taking advantage of the results of a... Do you know they took the entire whole Indian nation and they locked us on this reservation? And though I wear a shirt and tie,

I'm still part red man deep inside. I'm 1.3 red man deep inside. I just want you to know that. Grand Cherokee people, grand Cherokee tribe. So proud to live, so proud to die. So your reservation is Irving, Texas. That was the reservation. you've been put on. Maybe someday. Maybe someday

when you learn. The Grand Cherokee Nation will return. We'll return. We'll return. We'll return. We'll return. Maybe. Now that's a powerful tale that you tell. Thank you. However, it does seem reminiscent of a song that your people stole, Paul Revere and the Raiders.

Yeah. Yeah, it might. It might sound a little familiar. Because they stole it. Why don't you just, you know what? I'm going to take a 60 second break. You could just wallow in your guilt. Look at, oh my gosh, look it. Hang on.

I get blowing. What are you doing to your eye? I was just thinking about trash. And I, you think about what you've done to my nation. You're blowing into your own eye. It's not working yet. It will.

See, I'm only one. 1.3% Native America. So if you were a good 2.5% the tier would just come down. Every time I thought of trash. Every time I thought of trash, it would just come right down off the face. The best of the Glenn Beck program. Rayfer Weigel is a journalist, a reporter from Fox 32 in Chicago. He was brave enough to do the work and actually report on the things that it's my understanding,

most journalists felt in Chicago, most police felt in Chicago, but no one was willing to really step up and pursue it because it was such a political hot potato. Rayfer, welcome to the program. How are you, sir? Mr. Beck, thank you so much for having me on, and I heard what you said earlier, and I just wanted to tell you that this is a personal coup for me having me on your show, because my girlfriend's family, they are huge fans of you, and give me. the fact that I work for the mainstream media, as it were. They've always been kind of looking at me with a side-eye. So this has given me a lot of street credit. That's great. The clan.

So thank you. That's great. So, Rafa, please tell me what it was like reporting on this story and what the things were that started really early on. And you couldn't have been the only one who said something's not right here. No, I mean, all of my colleagues in Chicago, the second we heard it said this doesn't sound right. You look, and at the end of the day, you know, our job as a journalist is to be skeptical, and it's the police's job to be skeptical. And, you know, we work with the Chicago police on a daily basis. We know these guys personally. And from the get-go, it did not sound right. I mean, for one,

you know, the area of the Streeterville with, you know, guys in red hats and rope and bleach and the fact that nobody would have stepped in. There would have been any, no witnesses. Nobody would have pulled out a cell phone and taken some videos. So very early on, police went on the record with saying this doesn't sound right. And we at Fox 32 were very careful to report that the headline was Jesse Smollett says he was attacked. We didn't know if he was attacked or not. We weren't there. So, you know, for anybody who went with the headline, Jesse Smollett was attacked. I mean, I, you know, I'm no partisan as a journalist. We're supposed to keep it right down the middle. But, I mean, I did re-plead at Joe Biden, who said, you know, I just said, hey, it might be best to

tone down the outrage until we know this actually happened. Because very early on, police said, you know, We've got no evidence that this actually happened. And given that location, I mean, you do have to give credit to the Chicago Police Department and the tech work that they did on it, you know, to now have this guy in custody. But no, right from the get-go, we were skeptical. Okay. So why were you the, you know, one of the very few, if not the only one, that was really on this story telling the truth?

Well, I can't speak for my colleagues. I can tell you that, you know, my managing editor also has a lot of content. with police, and so do I. And we cross-referenced our sources. You know, she would talk to her guys, I would talk to my guys, and then we would, you know, we would compare notes, and then we'd say, you know, do you feel comfortable going with this? She said, look, they're going, you know, they're giving me solid information that they're

not buying this. So, you know, I did go with it. It was, I don't know, some would have said it was a risk, but I didn't consider it a risk because, you know, my sources are solid. I mean, they've never burned me before. So, you know, I think there was other skepticism in the media here in Chicago. I didn't read as much from my colleagues. But early on, you know, they were emphatic with me at PV my sources.

That, look, this is, we're not buying this. And, you know, they said, you know, you can go on the record with me, but just, you know, quote me anonymously. And, you know, we've always heard the debate about anonymous sources, but at the end of the day, anonymous sources are the backbone of journalism. And, you know, there's a lot of criticism from both the right-hand. and the left when there's an article coming out quoting anonymous sources. But it works both ways. And in this case, my sources, you know, are reliable. So I felt comfortable sourcing them. I never said Jesse Smolett made it up. I never said he was a liar. I just said, hey, police are

skeptical. And, you know, right now there's no evidence to suggest it actually happened. And that was an accurate statement. It wasn't a partisan statement. It's just at this point, there's no evidence to suggest this actually happened. Isn't that what we're supposed to do, not just as journalists, but also as human beings, we're supposed to, say, innocent until proven guilty, and say, he has alleged this. He says he was. If it is true, it's a horrible thing, but let the police do their work. And when charges are filed, and we hear all the details, then maybe we'll be able to come to a conclusion.

But we're not those people anymore. more. You're just automatically either innocent or guilty. And the phrase is, you have a right to be believed. No, you have a right to be taken seriously. You don't have a right to be believed. Right. And especially, you know, when you're talking about, you know, something very detailed as this. I mean, I, you know, yeah, I mean, I agree. I mean, it's, you know, a lot of people, this has been a very politicized story. And I think initially on, because, you know, I look at, I'm in the trenches in the foxhole here. You know, I'm just looking at the specifics. You know, I have no partisan motivation in terms of dissecting a story. I would have done this if it was, you know,

anybody else, and police were giving me the same information. And I think maybe I personally underestimated the degree at how much this is going to be politicized on both sides. But a lot of people, you know, now they just, they want the narrative. You know, I was attacked by a Black Lives Matter activist for saying I was giving out misinformation. I just politely said, hey, well, what are your sources. What do you know? If you know what I'm saying is true, I'd like to hear it. You know, so yeah, a lot of people wanted this story to fill in a specific narrative on both the right and the left, in my opinion. And all I did was stick to the facts. And I'm, I got to say, it's a little bit odd to be, and I'm so grateful to be on your show, Glenn. And I've been doing

Hannity and Laura Ingram, but for just doing my job is all I did. And I don't know if that's a sad state of my profession, that all I did was my job, And, you know, good people like yourself are acknowledging me for that. You know, I mean, to me, this was nothing more than going in and punching a clock and going to work. But, you know, I'm an old school journalist. I grew up in journalism household. You know, the old ad is, you know, if your mother says she loves you, check it out. I mean, that's just how we're supposed to do our job.

Yeah, but we don't. Are you surprised at how the media has ignored you in this story? I wouldn't say that. I mean, I know that I work for a Fox station, perhaps. that had something to do with why other outlets didn't reach out to me. You know, I've been reached out to by conservative outlets. And, you know, mostly on Fox News, they are my parent company. So I think that makes sense.

But no, certainly at CNN called or MSNBC called, I would have gone on with them as well, you know. So I think the biggest thing I'm more concerned about is I hope this is a little bit of a wake-up call just because, you know, so many people went with the headline that this was true early on, without getting more information on the national media. And that surprised me. I'll be honest. I'm usually a huge defender of my profession.

We're constantly under siege. And, you know, I used to say the media's not liberal. It's just lazy. And, you know, I don't know if this is an example of that or political bias, but it was incorrect. So, I mean, I just hope that, you know, other of my colleague, and I'm not trying to get on a soapbox here and act like I'm, you know, I feel bad even talking this way. But, you know, at the end of the day, you got to check the facts before you run with the headline. Charlie, Riefer, Wigel, Fox 32, Chicago, Rayfer, I think is there a possibility that this combined with several other cases in recent memory where the initial narrative had changed so quickly?

And we see something that couldn't possibly be a hoax, turn into a hoax potentially here. I think there was a, there's been a pattern over the past few years where we've used that, you know, journalists always will use. the word allegedly, or at least are supposed to, in a case like this. But it almost becomes like a disclaimer. It's like you throw it in there because, you know, you have to. Shouldn't we be approaching every story? This is whether a conservative says it, whether a liberal says it, white or black anything, with a real sense of skepticism or at least an inquisitive sense, because if we don't, we can get burned like so many in the media did. This is journalism 101, what you described. I mean, and that's the journalism that I was taught.

is you have to be skeptical. So, I mean, yeah, the Covington boys. I mean, that was another example. And, you know, I mean, it's like we don't need any more knocks on my profession for being perceived as being, you know, biased. When things like this happen, you know, yeah, you have to show restraint. You just have to stick with the who, what, when, where, why. I don't know if it's because now there's so many different media outlets

and with social media and so forth that people are, I don't know, maybe they're fixing for clicks. I'm not sure. but at the end of the day, yes, you're 100% right. I hope this is, I mean, my journalism professor, you know, who's probably very liberal, was the one who instilled these values in me. You know, so, and so did my parents. I'm, you know, I just hope that people are a little more responsible going forward, you know,

as far as this stuff goes. So, Raffer, let me ask you one quick question. I'd take a break, and then I'd like to get an update on the other side on what the latest is. but is there any truth to the idea that the police knew who these two guys were, and they either they were waiting for Jussie to walk into the trap, or they were going to just kind of let this go until he went on Good Morning America and said, yes, that's them. And I don't know why everybody's calling me liar, but we have heard that Rahm Emanuel was outraged by that

and everybody in Chicago was outraged by that that really were just going to kind of be cool about it. And that changed things. We've also heard that they knew who these guys were and they were waiting for him to make a positive ID. And the minute he did, that's when the case broke. Or either of those true. Well, it's actually just a coincidence. They didn't know he was going to go on Good Morning America. And apparently that interview cannot be, according to my detectives, that cannot be used as evidence.

It's only what he tells them in a police interview. The police rolled this, but it wasn't because they wanted to let Smola hang himself. They did it because they knew who these two guys were, the brothers of Nigerian descent. They are from Chicago, so I want to be clear on that. They left town hours after this incident, and they went to Nigeria for two weeks. So the real motivation behind police, going slowly on this is they waited for these guys to get back in town. They were at O'Hare Airport waiting for them when they got off the plane. That's why.

And it happened to be the same day he was on Good Morning America. Yes. What a coincidence. That's amazing. Wow. Okay. Be back with Rayfer Wigel. I want to get the update because he has now been arrested.

Has he been arrested? Yeah. Jussie. Fox 32 reporter from Chicago, Rayfer Wigel, the guy who really broke this story and refused to give up on it. and the reason why we pretty much know it and was questioning from the beginning. Tell us what is happening with the Jesse Smollett case now. What's happened in the last 24 hours? Well, it was an interesting day yesterday.

So in the morning, Jesse Smollett's lawyers went in to talk with police. They tried to negotiate some kind of an agreement. No agreement was made. And so the grand jury was put in play by the assistant state's attorney. What kind of a deal were they looking for? I have no idea. I have no idea what they could have been possibly been trying to, you know, maybe clean down, perhaps. You know, it would just be speculation.

But once the grand jury was put in play, they brought in the two brothers. They testified for two and a half hours, according to their attorney. And then they got the warrant issue for his arrest. He turned himself in this morning with his attorneys. They spoke with his attorneys last night. They negotiated his surrender. He came in at 5 o'clock this morning, was processed, fingerprinted, and now it's being held by the Cook County,

at the Cook County Courthouse by the Cook County Sheriff. He's in a separate detention area. As they said, that's common for high-profile detainees. The Chicago police are coming down really hard on this guy. I mean, the superintendent Eddie Johnson just says, you know, what the guy did essentially was shameful. They, the police are describing how, I mean, these two men who allegedly, you know, who whatever,

two Nigerian brothers who were in on this or somehow, you know, met with Milet at the time, they were able to track their every move on security cameras to the cab they got into, and they were able to follow the cab to their home. I mean, they combed through every single hour of video and tracked a cab. And this was a good two-mile ride for this cab. And they got it. I mean, that's how they found out where these guys live. That's how they found out who they were.

So, I mean, they have a mountain of evidence against Jesse Smolet. Now, what they don't have is the attack. That's the thing. I mean, that's the irony of it is that, you know, if he did do this and he wanted to get it on camera, they did it in the one place where there was no video surveillance of it. So at this point, Smolet is not disputing that there was an attack. He, because of the leaks in the Chicago PD, he knows his defense. He knows what he needs to be going against, and it's his word against theirs now.

They're saying, you know, that he put him up to this, that he orchestrated, his hopes. He's saying, no, these guys just randomly attacked me and I didn't put them up to anything. So that's kind of where things are going to go. And Smolett's legal team, you know, they release the statement. They're mounting an aggressive defense. They're going to fight this thing, you know, and go 12 rounds. I think they have to. I mean, the police, you have to put a stop to this or the police are going to spend all of their time chasing down fake claims. There has to be a heavy penalty paid for for this kind of stuff. And too many. times people are just let go or they pay a fine. This is, I personally, I think this is a hate

crime. He obviously, he obviously hated people so much that he wanted to smear them, whether that was Donald Trump or whatever, but is there any truth to the fact that this was motivated by his career that he, he wrote the letter, that original letter that, you know, was hateful towards him. And I read last night that he was upset that there wasn't more of an outcry just on that letter that he allegedly had sent. Are they looking into that? Absolutely. Now, I mean, I couldn't begin to speculate into Jesse Smolett's motivation.

If he did orchestrate this whole thing, why he would have done it. You know, obviously it was an attention-grabbing, you know, if, in fact, he did orchestrate this hoax. It was obviously an attention-grabbing thing. As far as the letter, though, that's key. And a lot of people are losing sight of that. See, the FBI and the U.S. Postal Service, they are investigating that. separately. That is federal time. That is potential terrorism charges and mail fraud. And there are

no leaks coming onto that investigation. For Chicago police right now, they're doing this. It's a class four felony he's being charged with for filing a police report. And that's also a disorderly conduct. That's one of three years in prison potentially. This letter is where the real trouble could come in. You know, so shockingly, the one thing you don't mess with is, the post office. Hang on there. Is breaking news on this, too? Yeah, this is just coming down from the Associated Press and Washington Post, among others, that the police are saying that Jussie Smollett

did send himself the racist and homophobic letter because he was dissatisfied with his salary on Empire. Now, this is just an accusation. As far as I know, has not admitted this, but this is just coming down in the last couple minutes. Do you have any idea, Rayfer, what that would add to a sentence if the post office got involved? Oh, man. I mean, that's, I mean, that's, again,

that's federal. Yeah. I mean, you'd have to ask a legal expert on that. That's real time. I mean, that's not something you're going to negotiate down. And I think that's, you know, I think that's going to be, you know, we'll see where this one plays out in terms of Chicago police and the false police report. What your colleague just said with the Associated Press is reporting, you know,

as my guys at PD have told me, that's a real problem for Jessica Schenett, potentially. Rayfer, thank you so much. Great job. Great job. And please keep us informed and up to date on any new developments. appreciate it. Rayfer Weigel from Fox 32 in Chicago. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hi, it's Glenn. If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do us a favor and rate us on iTunes? If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time. You can subscribe on iTunes. Thanks. This weekend is the first day of morning, and I think we should have more of these. I want you to go to dayofmorning.org, morning spelled with a you, morning, and asking for forgiveness for all of the deaths that have been caused through abortion,

and all of us who have set by idly and not said anything, in my case, because, to my shame, I'm carrying enough water. I can't carry that one, too. I wish I would have never said those things, because things on life revolving around life are getting worse and worse, and it seems daily. We have Senator Ben Sass with us, representing the great state of Nebraska, he has, the Democrats blocked him when he said,

I want just an up or down vote on whether we kill children after they have been born. One of the senators blocked that from happening. So he got together and put together the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. It comes up for a vote on Monday. Welcome to the program, Ben Sass. Glenn, good to be with you. Thanks for the invite. You bet.

So tell me. tell me what this prevents and what you think is going to happen. Paul, I'm as pro-life as anybody comes in the U.S. Senate. I'm an original co-sponsor of all the pro-life legislation, but this really isn't about that. This is about babies that survive an abortion. This is really a vote Monday night about infanticide. So I've been the lead sponsor for three years of the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. there's this phenomenon where when babies survive an abortion, doctors don't proactively kill them,

but they passively back away from the table and allow the babies to die of exposure. I mean, it is clear infanticide. Now, I mean, I'm sorry, I remember a story a few years ago in Chicago where they were putting babies in the closet. Yeah. Yeah, some of these places have a room for this where they just move the baby to die as she's on a cold table struggling for life. I mean, if equality and a belief, an American belief in universal human dignity mean anything, they surely mean that a baby that's fighting for life has rights and dignity and is an image bearer and we have a moral obligation to provide some care. So that's

really all this is about is once a baby has already survived a botched abortion, do you have to provide care for it, the same level of care you provide for any other baby at that stage? Or can you kill it by exposure. And bizarrely, there are states that are actively having this as a debate right now. So you say you've sponsored this for three years. Has it been rejected or has it never gotten a vote? It hadn't gotten a vote before. And then after what has happened in New York and Virginia over the last month, I pushed to get it more floor time. I've been pushing in the past to get a recorded vote. But as you know, the vast majority of whatever gets accomplished in the U.S. Senate gets accomplished 100 to 0 by unanimous consent. Senators work out their disagreements for weeks or

months or years in private. And then you bring something to the floor and you say, you know, Mr. President, Madam President, I believe we have unanimous consent. Everybody agrees we should pass this. Condemming infanticide should be done that way. It shouldn't need a recorded vote, but we need one now because a Democrat from Washington State has decided to block us from a unanimous consent passage. But this is sort of triggered in the public mind by what happened in New York and Virginia over the last month, where in New York, Governor Cuomo lit up the World Trade Center site in pink to celebrate pro-abortion legislation that repealed protections for an infant that had been born alive during an abortion. So at the moment of birth, they were stripping away protections. and New York decides to celebrate it by lighting up the World Trade Center area in pink, which has historically been the color to celebrate the persistence and grit of women who beat breast cancer.

I mean, literally the color was a symbolic color celebrating life, and now they decided to reverse it and use it to celebrate death. It's really perverse. And then in Virginia, the disgraced governor there, Northam, obviously has massive problems with human dignity across a whole bunch of dimensions. he's been on the radio defending infanticide. And so it became an opportunity to try to focus the public mind a little bit. And happily, we've been able to get through all the procedural hurdles that we get a floor vote next Monday night.

So what do you think is going to happen? I think that the abortion zealotry industry has decided to try to intimidate a bunch of Democratic senators. And I honestly don't know what the vote's going to be. I know we're going to have a bunch of people opposing it now. a number of quasi public health organizations, many of them really just abortion advocacy groups, have put out a letter condemning this born-alive abortion Survivors Protection Act as getting in the way of private health care decisions. We're talking about babies that have actually been born alive and are on a table fighting for life, trying to cry and breathe and want food and warmth.

and they're saying that's a private decision, which is truly bizarre. So I can't tell you what the quote is going to be. But the decision you made was to kill it. Okay, now it's no longer in your body. If you don't want that baby because you said kill it, that is an individual now that should be mandated to go to an adoption agency. I mean, you have to preserve that life. It's no longer connected to mom.

So mom has no right to that baby if she said she wanted it killed. I mean, does she? We're talking about something pretty basic here. I mean, everybody, it shouldn't be politics. This shouldn't be right versus left. We're talking about the idea of a heart. And I mean, I think it's important to have some historical memory on this. Infanticide has been a practice through lots of human history.

It's gross and repugnant, and we should be well better than that. But the ancient Aztecs, the ancient Greeks, they would kill kids that were regarded. as undesirable by exposure. You'd take a 12-month-old baby and decide, we don't want this one anymore. She's got X problem or Y problem. Let's go leave them on the mountainside and the cold to die. That is really the practice we're talking about here. I'm sorry to interrupt. It's one of the main things that happened with the Romans and the Christians. The Christians looked so bizarre because Romans would have babies and they'd throw them on a garbage barge. And they would just die from exposure. And the Christians felt that was

wrong and they would go get those children out of the garbage barges and take them and care for them. Yeah. We have a culture that claims to believe in universal human dignity. We believe kids are image bearers. We believe they have worth and value. And the Senate is a weird place. I'm going to eight people out of the hundred there. There has never been a politician before.

There isn't a piece of legislation that will be introduced where somebody won't claim. You have to be for it because you're fighting for. for the poorest and the most vulnerable among us. And it feels like half of the Senate Democratic caucus is running for president right now. And they're constantly out there telling people they fight for the little guy. Well, here's a chance to actually prove it. Fight for the little guy and the little gal. I mean, we are literally talking about the poorest and weakest and most vulnerable among us.

When these babies are fighting for life on a cold table, you don't back away. You provide care and comfort. Senator, we have about one minute. Is there any way that Democrats could say, well, this does more. than just save babies that have been born. There's a slippery slope here, and we see what they're trying to do. Is there any legitimate complaint that they can have over this bill, or is it clear? No, no, it's clear.

There's no legitimate complaint, but the distinction they're trying to draw is that you don't need a bill to prohibit infanticide because we already have laws to prohibit murder. And so the distinction they're trying to weasel around is saying, nobody is taking a baby that survives an abortion and taking a pillow and putting it over her face and actively suffocating her to death. We're just backing away from the table and allowing the baby to die on her own. Under this logic, you could kill 12-month-olds the same way. And you can also kill people like Terry Schiavo the same way.

We're not killing her. We're just not giving her any food. We're just letting her die. I mean, it always happens on both ends of the spectrum, and we're seeing the result of this evil, evil practice and doctors that are not living their oath. Senator Ben Sash. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. A contributor to young voices and a Venezuela expatriate.

His name is Daniel D. Martino. He was born and raised in Venezuela, where he went to high school, and saw the wonderful experiences and consequences of socialism. In 2016, he left Venezuela to go to college at Indiana University, Purdue, in Indianapolis. He is a junior majoring in quantitative economics. He writes and talks about economics and politics, specifically the importance of freedom, taxes, regulations, and internal affairs. Welcome to the program, Daniel D. Martino. Hi, Glyn.

Thank you for having me. You bet. First of all, how is your family? You still have family back in Venezuela? I do have a lot of extent family and friends. My parents and my grandparents, they thankfully left at the end of 2017. now they live in Spain. What is life like now in Venezuela?

It is very, very terrible. You can hear it. You can look at it on videos, and I can tell it to you from firsthand experience that I suffered constant blackouts. I had to make lines for hours of food. I had to, well, don't even think about getting sick. Thankfully, I was young and healthy,

but many of my friends who got sick, then they got terrible treatment in the hospital. hospitals because there was just no medicine to treat them with. Now, people will say that this is just Maduro, because he's not doing socialism right, that things were different under Chavez. He did it right. True or false? Well, completely false.

I suffer from blackouts and water shortages and food shortages from way before Maduro, definitely with Chavez. And it is Chavez who implemented the policies that took us here, of course, and that have accumulated in their mistakes. Chavez was the one who took away the electricity, water, oil industries from the private hands and nationalized them. He's the one who hired masses and masses of government employees just to get their votes. And he's also the person who, with all these government control, started using it to bribe people to steal money. It was just terrible.

So as you hear our politicians here talk about socialism, they always try to tell us, we want Sweden. Sweden is not a socialist country. It's a capitalist country with a giant welfare net. Tell me the difference and tell me what you feel when you watch the Democratic Party and half of America start to embrace socialism. Is what they're saying different than what you heard politicians in Venezuela? let's say? It is not different at all, Glenn. And let me tell you what is a very, very key

difference between what would be Sweden's and their proposals of the Democrat Socialists here. They want to expand the welfare state in America, yes, but they want to expand it even beyond what Sweden has. They want to increase taxes even beyond what Sweden has. And even worse, they're not even going to be able to raise enough tax revenue for all the proposals. Sweden is a very physically responsible country, Glenn. Like their debt is under control. They don't have a large budget deficit like the United States. So if the Democrats really don't want to turn the United States into Venezuela by having

to print money and create hyperinflation, then they will have to tell Americans the truth. They want to tax poor people at 50, 60, and 70 percent rates, not just the rich. You are going to college now. You're a junior in college. I imagine that you meet a lot of young socialists. That's the rage right now. Can you tell us what the attraction is to people your age to socialism? And when you talk to them, what is the aha moment?

What is the thing that you say or start to discuss where they listen and go, oh, wait a minute. Yeah, they do understand what's going on. in Venezuela once they hear from somebody who's actually from Venezuela in my experience. I think that they believe that, you know, the Chavez, like you were saying, was a good person, and Majuru was not. But when you actually explain them what's going on, they do change their minds. Most of them, some of them are just, I would say, lost.

But most of them do change their minds, and they're not radicals, and I don't think most Americans are radicals. But that's why we need to spread the war this way. And, you know, that's why I think that the... Venezuelans and victims of communism around the world are playing a very key role in the United States to fight against these lives of the Democrats. If we didn't have people who experienced socialism, how would be able to fight it here, you know? But are you making a difference in your age group?

I mean, what are the things that you say that, and if there are any, teach us how to speak to a millennial about socialism? I tell them about the facts in Venezuela. That socialism doesn't lead us to equality, which is what they want. And you have to speak to people relating to their goals. It's going to be basically impossible to change somebody's values or inherent goals for their perfect ideal society. But the reality is that socialist societies are not equal at all. They're even more unequal than capitalist society.

Right. So, but Daniel, you have to understand, at least in my opinion, that capitalism has never been about equality. It's not. It's about the free market. It's about each individual. So it's, it does create an unequal society. However, socialism, as you just pointed out, also creates, but they always say, well, that's because it wasn't done right. but it also always creates an unequal standard of living. Even if it was run honestly, the equality would be misery. It is true. It is true that capitalism's goal is not equality, and I'm not saying that that's my goal either.

But I'm saying that it's very hard to persuade somebody on one conversation and tell them that, you know, they need to change completely their worldview. Right. I think it's basically impossible. So what I do think is that you can persuade millennials, and that's what I've done by telling them the truth. Nobody will ever implement your ideas perfectly, just like there are still subsidies, just like there's still government intervention in free market societies like the U.S. or Hong Kong and any other country. So if we want to live in a mere livable world, then we need to live with a country in a country of freedom and that still allows for inequality. What does this mean to you and to your family when you see America teetering this close? We have never ever been this close to losing the free market from the inside.

Yes. It is scary. It is scary, Glenn. I came to the United States specifically because of my university that sponsored me, of course. but I could have gone to Spain with my parents, but I didn't because I think that the United States is a country where I thought, and I still think, though, that it is less likely for socialism to be implemented in the U.S. and in any other country in the world. It's like Ronald Reagan said at the Shining City on a Hill. And the only way to keep it that way is for us to fight against these murderous ideology, not just here in the United States, where everywhere, the world because Venezuela is exporting this ideology by funding socialist movements abroad in Europe specifically.

You have several Dallas Cowboys stadiums full of people listening to you right now. What should Americans know that you think maybe we don't know or understand? That the only, no country is safe from false promises and the lure of our false promises. and that not every measure that the left will propose will take us to Venezuela, but little by little, taking away our freedoms, they are going to eventually lead us into a terrible society, a society that is stagnated like in Europe, or even worse, a society that is in decline like in Venezuela.

So we need to do everything we can to vote, to protect, to speak out in favor of freedom. That means lower taxes. That means responsible government. That means freedom to immigrate, freedom to trade, all these freedoms that are necessary for a country to stay free. When you hear people talk about in America, oppression and, oh, my life has been so tough, is that hard for you to sit through and listen to? It's a little laughable, to be honest. I understand that some people, like everyone goes through very difficult things.

Yeah. But I've had people, I had even college professors tell me that what's going on in Venezuela, it's not worse than what the low-income individuals in the United States go through. And it's real laughable because the United States, yes, it has poverty, but for people in the United States even have internet, electricity, water, that's not what happens in Venezuela, right? Right. People are starving in Venezuela.

How can we help the people of Venezuela? What's the best thing we can do? The best thing the United States can do is, in part what it's currently doing. President Trump is taking the right actions by leading the world in pressuring Maduro to get out. And what's the best thing that we can do as individuals? As individuals, we need to advocate first for that not to be implemented in the United States, but also we need to advocate so that and support President Trump's actions. There are congresspeople in the United States, such as Ilana Marr, Tulsa Gabbard,

who are spreading lives about Venezuela, Glenn. They're saying that we, the opposition, are some kind of far-right-armed group. Like if we were terrorists, when in reality we have a regime that is killing us and starving us purposefully, a genocide. So what we need to do is support the change of regime. team in Venezuela with our Democratic president, who is Juan Guaido, and push the countries in the region to take even more forceful action so that Maduro can get out. Daniel Di Martino, thank you so much. I'm glad you're here in America. I'm glad your family

is safe, we pray, for your country of Venezuela. Thank you, and I hope to talk to you again. Daniel Di Martino, he is a contributor from Young Voices and a Venezuelan ex-Patriot. You can follow him in Twitter at Daniel D. Martino. You can also find him at Young hashtag, I mean, young dash voices.com. That's young dash voices.com. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. Eric Early, he is an attorney. He is actually a managing partner at his firm that is usually involved in really complex,

litigation matters focusing on business, entertainment, real estate, title, escrow-related litigation, yada, yada, yada, yada. But he also is involved in a case in California that everyone should be paying attention to. Very clear cut on the outset, but he is fighting Hydra. his clients are suing to block inclusivity teaching in the schools in California. And Eric joins us to tell about it right now. Hello, Eric. How are you? I'm good, Glenn.

Thanks for having me. You bet. All right. So the parents, they don't want to be inclusive. How hate mongering of them. Yeah, they are so hate mongering. This outfit, I was contacted about a couple months ago by a group of concerned citizens in Santa Barbara, California. They knew that I had run for California Attorney General as a Republican.

I had gotten almost a million votes. I had never run for public office before. And they contacted me, and they said, listen, we have a problem up here, and we need some help. And they told me the story that they had learned right about that time. a parent and a teacher had gone to one of these programs where they were supposed to learn about implicit bias training. And they were told they soon were separated out because they were white. They were separated out into a group separate from all the other parents there. And they started being told how they were racist.

Meanwhile, the people teaching this class had never seen them before, didn't know them. the parents said, what are you talking about? We're not racist. The more they try and fight back, the more they were attacked by these people, so-called doing the teaching. So what this is amounted to is that the Santa Barbara Unified School District has hired a group called Just Community Central Coast, and they've been working with this Just Communities Group for several years now, paid them more than the million dollars in taxpayer funds. And this group goes in and indoctrines the teachers and the students. And their programming is just outrageous. So a nonprofit called Fair Education, Santa Barbara, was formed by these concerned parents.

And we recently filed a lawsuit on their behalf in federal court here in Los Angeles against both the school district and this just community's outfit. It is amazing, Eric, is it not? How things have flipped. It's like we're back in the 1950s except white is black and black is white. I mean, that's a very good point. And things have totally flipped. And one of the ironies of our cases is that we are bringing the case based on constitutional or statutes based on the U.S. Constitution that were put in place to protect minorities such as blacks, Hispanics, Asians, et cetera. Now we're relying on those statutes to protect white people.

So when you talk about inclusivity training, what exactly are they teaching? Because they would make the argument, well, of course it's good to be inclusive. Of course these things are okay. What exactly are they teaching here? Well, just stepping back a second. This so-called implicit bias training is being taught all over the place now. It's required sort of education for federal workers. ever since sort of an executive order came down during the Obama administration as being taught more and more in schools.

So implicit bias training in and of itself is basically becoming the norm whether you like it or not. The problem with this group is it goes way beyond the pale of your standard implicit bias training. And let me read you something right from one of the documents that these parents gave us, which we've attached to our complaint. It's called Forms of Oppression, and it's a chart. And in the left column it says form of oppression, and it says underneath that racism. And then just to the right of that, there's a column says privilege group, says white people. In the target group, it says people of color.

Go back to the form of oppression column. It says religious oppression, privilege group, Christian people, target group, all others. So this is the kind of insanity that's being taught to the kids of the Santa Barbara Unified School District. And most of the parents out there we've spoken to had no clue this was going on in the schools. How your kid would have to come back. If you're talking to your kid, they would have to come back and say some of this stuff to you. Well, that's how some of these people have been finding out about it. And I've spoken to one parent, and he had, I thought it was a great.

suggestion. He said, you know, we have to sign a permission slip for our kids to go on a field trip. And we should have to sign a permission slip if we want our kids, our young kids, to sit through this kind of training. But of course, the school district basically keeps it under wraps. They'll say they don't keep it under wraps, but they basically do. And so now, thanks to our lawsuit, thanks to the attention this is getting in Santa Barbara, people are becoming aware of it. Another thing that we learned in this case that people also becoming aware of is the school board up there, which hires this group and is so enamored with this just communities group, is made up mostly of the same what I call, you know, alt-left social warrior types.

It's really, really troubling. And this is just another example of how this creeping, you know, Olinsky-esque kind of programming has been going through the schools. And this is what the kids are learning growing up. Eric, it would be bad enough if this stuff was just being taught to kids in school. But this is actually costing the taxpayers a lot of cash, too, isn't it? That's correct. Over the course of the last several years, this school district has authorized the

of more than a million dollars to just community central coast of taxpayer funds. And the latest contract that was just entered in October is for another $300,000 for the next school year. And, you know, it's remarkable. And all of this is being brought to the attention of the federal court. So, you know, we've got some really important claims. It's a strong case, and we just hope we get the right ruling. Who is that group?

Who makes up that group? Who sponsored that group? Who created that group? This just Community Central Coast? Yes. You know, it started, I believe, in St. Louis, and it spread these sort of social justice types, very left wing. And basically like a cancer, it has spread out to California. And they created a base in the Santa Barbara area. and now they're trying to spread this orthodoxy throughout the state of California.

It's very troubling, and, you know, one thing about, one thing you learn about people on the left is they are great at organizing. They're much better at organizing than the conservative folks I know. You know, conservative people I know are much more independent, believe in liberty, believe in free speech, and want the government out of our lives. but these groups on the other side are just the opposite. They want the government takeover everything, and they're just passionately organized to do what they're seeking to do. So, you know, they're putting up a fight. They're using their, you know, typical tactics have started to try and silence us,

but we won't be silenced. And I, you know, and along those lines, we have a few people that started this Fair Education Santa Barbara that are really brave people. because in this day and age, if you make these kind of arguments, I'm sure most of your listeners know the kind of attacks that we become subject to. How can we help? Well, www.faireducation.org is the website that's been set up by fair education. And I would ask your listeners to go to faireducation.org and read about what's going on and donate to the cause. It's a tax deductible donation and support us in any other way that you can think of.

Are you confident you're going to win? Well, our lawsuit is very strong. And, you know, in this day and age, in California, in the court system, you don't know what's going to happen. But if the court follows the law and the facts, we should win this case. Big F, but good luck. Yeah, good luck, Eric. And stay in touch with us, let us know what happens, okay? Great. Thank you very much.

The Blaze Radio Network, on demand.