Utah Senator hopes candidates appeal to Constitution during GOP debate

December 15, 2015

Editor

The final GOP presidential debate of 2015 happens tonight on CNN. Joining Glenn to talk about what he hopes happens at the debate was friend of the program, Utah Senator Mike Lee.

Lee told Glenn he would like to see a larger discussion of how we can solve our nation's problems by adhering more rigidly to the U.S. Constitution.

"The candidate who can make the best pitch for that I think will stand to gain the most from the American people," Lee said.

Glenn laughingly told Lee that sounds like "riveting television" right there, to which the senator delivered a surprisingly matter-of-fact, yet powerful response.

"Well, it is," Lee said. "There's nothing more appealing than someone who is willing to say, 'Look, I don't have all the answers. And because I don't have all the answers, I'm going to look to that 228-year-old founding document written by the hands of wise men raised up by their God to that very purpose.'"

He went on.

"That's the kind of discussion we need to have more of, and I think the American people, regardless of their traditional political ideologies and their partisan affiliations, that's where they want the discussion to go," Lee said.

Listen to more of the interview or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: One of the real good guys in Washington, DC. One of the very few that we -- we totally trust, which every time somebody burns us, we say we're never going to trust anybody totally ever again. But this guy we do. And he's the senator from the great state of Utah. Welcome to the program, Senator Mike Lee. How are you doing, sir?

MIKE: Doing great. Thank you very much, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay. So the NSA. Can we just start here? Do you think the NSA has actually ceased in your own state of Utah the data collection?

MIKE: Yes. This is what the USA Freedom Act did. I was proud to author and introduce the USA Freedom Act as a sponsor in the Senate. And that ended the process of bulk data collection. So now, rather than sucking up every American's telephone data without a warrant, the FBI goes to the court. Gets a court order, based on a showing that they need to get calling data connected to a particular number that is itself related to a terrorist investigation. Then they go to the phone company and get the data they need. There is a big difference for privacy purposes and a big difference for Fourth Amendment purposes. And the USA Freedom did a lot to correct that problem.

GLENN: So can I ask you how many billions of dollars that data collection facility in your own state cost?

MIKE: It was not cheap. I don't know the exact price. But you're correct to express it in --

GLENN: Billions.

MIKE: Words that start with a B rather than an M.

GLENN: Right.

MIKE: This is an enormous facility.

GLENN: Right. And are we using it as a storage hangar now? I mean, I just don't believe that the United States government and with all the black ops that happened and with all the black ops money that the NSA has just shut that thing down.

MIKE: No, they haven't shut it down. It's important to remember that a lot of what the NSA does has nothing to do with domestic communications. A lot of what they do involves collecting information about communications going on with people outside the United States. And that's a different category altogether. The USA Freedom Act dealt with domestic communications and metadata connected to those communications.

GLENN: So we were told that the NSA -- that this was vital. And, in fact, anybody who voted for this bill, Ted Cruz included, and I believe Ted cosponsored or coauthored with you on this.

MIKE: Yes, Ted was a cosponsor and a very hopeful supporter of getting it past. We were grateful for not only his vote, but also for his assistance in getting this -- this issue out there. Getting the argument out there, that this is a problem.

I spent years explaining why it's a problem. I even wrote part of my book, Our Lost Constitution -- it focuses on the Fourth Amendment aspect of this and how this problem has its roots going back 250 years to pre-revolutionary colonial times and at corresponding times in Britain when we had the use of general warrants underway. And why general warrants were incompatible with what we later developed as our Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.

GLENN: Okay. So Ted has been thrown under the bus. You have been thrown under the bus. Anybody who voted for this, as somebody who just doesn't support -- somebody that doesn't want to keep America safe. But I look at what happened in San Bernardino. We had all the information at our fingertips, without the NSA. But when we had the NSA, what happened to all that great technology that was supposed to save us?

MIKE: Well, that's just the point. We were no safer as a result of collecting information under the old system, under section 215 of the Patriot Act. Bulk data collection didn't make us more safe. It made us less free in the sense that our privacy interest protected by the Fourth Amendment were being infringed without our knowledge, without our consent, and contrary to the spirit if not to the letter of the Fourth Amendment. But no one can point to a single instance in which that former system, under the Patriot Act, prevented a terrorist act.

And no one can point to a single instance since the passage of the USA Freedom Act where we've been made less safe. So really what it did, among other things, the old system, was it made it harder to find that needle in a haystack. They created a much bigger haystack. And our current system, the one devised by the USA Freedom Act narrowed the haystack and keeps the NSA focused on what's most relevant.

GLENN: Money runs out to fund the government I think tonight or tomorrow night. Tomorrow night. Why is it, Mike, that we keep putting ourselves in this situation?

MIKE: It -- it really is disappointing. It is one of the most frustrating things associated with serving in Washington, with being a member of the United States Senate. I knew that this place had a lot of problems. This is one that is much, much worse than I anticipated when I got here. The fact that we're operating a 4 trillion-dollar government and the fact that we operate it on the basis of one binary decision a year, we --

GLENN: Right. Fund it or don't fund it.

MIKE: Right. Fund it or don't fund it. Fund everything basically as is or fund nothing at all and shut it all down. That is an absolutely preposterous way to run any organization, especially the most powerful nation on earth and its government.

And, you know, I would like to have seen us put an omnibus spending package, if that's how we were going to do it, on the floor weeks, if not months ago to allow individual members to offer amendments to improve it so that it's an open, publicly debated process. Instead, what I'm predicting is that we'll get stuck with probably a 1500 to 2,000-page deal. One that spends roughly a billion dollars per page and that we'll only have hours, if not minutes to read it before we have to vote on it. And that's wrong. That is absolutely wrong

GLENN: Whose fault is that?

MIKE: Well, this is a process that has evolved over the course of years. We've had Republicans and Democrats who have been involved in it. But any time you've got that process moving forward, people who vote for bills like that, vote for bills that they can't possibly read, that they can't possibly know the contents of, is in one way or another responsible for the problem because that's what perpetuates the problem.

GLENN: You going to vote for it?

MIKE: Not if I don't have an adequate opportunity to review it certainly. And depending on what's in it, I may have other reasons to oppose it as well. With any bill, I wait until I see it to make a final decision. But I know in advance, if I don't have time to read it before it's time to vote, I will vote no every single time.

GLENN: Paul Ryan, is he a help, a hindrance, or nothing?

MIKE: Well, look, we will see -- we will see whether this kind of thing continues under his watch. We've got to keep in mind that before he became speaker, a lot of this was in process anyway. A lot of this was in the pipeline. And if this kind of thing continues to happen on his watch, I don't think that's going to be good for him. I -- I hope that he will make sure that this doesn't happen again. Never ever again on his watch.

GLENN: You're running for reelection. Now, let's just play this out. You're running for reelection. And you're the only person that I've -- that I've ever endorsed. And you didn't ask for my endorsement. And you could clearly tell me not to endorse you, if you think that would help you. Anything to help you. But I've never endorsed anyone before, but I've endorsed you.

Now, but let's play this out. Ted Cruz becomes president. One of the Supreme Court justices kick it. And he says, "I want you to be the Supreme Court justice." What do you say?

MIKE: Well, I don't think I know any lawyer, certainly I don't know any law gig who wouldn't be highly flattered by even a hypothetical like that being asked. And I would count myself among those who would be highly flattered by something like that. I would be very grateful. We'll see what happens.

PAT: Can you imagine, Mike, at your age, how the left would react to you being nominated for the US Supreme Court? I mean, you could have 50 years on the court, and I think they would just be delighted with that.

GLENN: Oh, I think --

PAT: Would be delighted.

MIKE: Yeah, it's interesting. I don't think I would be their first choice.

PAT: No. I don't think so.

GLENN: I will tell you, I've had a conversation with Ted about you and others. I said, "We need people like Mike on the Supreme Court, but I don't think anybody has the guts to say -- they'll look and they'll triangulate, "Well, who can I get on," where the left just doesn't move.

PAT: No.

GLENN: And he just smiled at me and he said, "Well, I have the guts." And I believe him. I believe him. So I'm hoping to see you in robes some day and not a bathrobe.

MIKE: Well, thank you. That's kind of you.

GLENN: Yeah.

MIKE: They say black is a flattering color.

PAT: Slimming. I think it's slimming.

MIKE: Yes, exactly right. We all need that.

But, by the way, Glenn, I wanted to mention to you, Sharon and I read The Immortal Nicholas over Thanksgiving. We loved it. It was a fantastic book. Thank you for sending it to us.

GLENN: Oh, thank you so much. Thank you. You bet. Thank you.

Okay. So tonight, the debate on CNN, what are you hoping happens? What are you hoping that we talk about?

MIKE: I would like to see a fulsome discussion tonight of how we need to adhere more rigidly to the Constitution, of how a lot of the problems that we've got in Washington relate to the fact that we have ignored the most important features of the Constitution, namely the structural protections in our founding document. The vertical protection, which is federalism, the principle that says most of the powers should remain close to the people at the state and local level. And the horizontal protection, which we call separation of powers. We flip both of those principles on their heads. And I would like to see more of a discussion of that, of the structural deviations from the Constitution and how we need to restore those. The candidate who can make the best pitch for that I think will stand to gain the most from the American people.

GLENN: I will tell you this, Mike, that sounds like riveting television right there.

(laughter)

MIKE: Well, it is. Actually there's nothing cooler from the standpoint of the typical, rank-and-file Republican primary presidential election voter. There's nothing more appealing than someone who is willing to say, "Look, I don't have all the answers. And because I don't have all the answers, I'm going to look to that 228-year-old founding document written by the hands of wise men raised up by their God to that very purpose. And I'm going to return us to that. And here's how I'm going to do it. I'm going to put the law-making power back in Congress where it belongs, instead of delegating it to executive branch agencies, where people who are not elected by the people and not accountable to them are making them. And I'm going to put most of the power back, close to the people. If you're from Vermont and you want a single-payer health system, knock yourself out. Do it through the state system, not the national government."

That's the kind of discussion we need to have more of, and I think the American people, regardless of their traditional political ideologies and their partisan affiliations, that's where they want the discussion to go. And that's what intuitively understand when the argument is made.

GLENN: So tell me about this. Because I think we have a real problem with immigration in our country, and I think that we have really bad guys in our country and we have no idea. And my gut tells me, "Shut the system down and cleanse it all. You know, get all the -- fine all the people that have overstayed on visas. Get them out of here. Find out who is here. Then look at how we're vetting everybody and reopen the immigration system."

Donald Trump said we should -- we should stop all Muslims from coming in. Constitutionally speaking, can he even do that?

MIKE: Strictly constitutionally speaking, there have been times when distinctions have been made on religious affiliation, particularly when taking -- when agreeing to take certain persecuted religious minorities. It's also been suggested that for similar reasons, perhaps the government might be able to do that. But I don't think that is the right approach for a variety of reasons.

Number one, as you point out, you've got to fix the problem more holistically than that. And I don't think religious paths, when you're talking about solutions necessarily the way to go. In part because they're incompatible with how we've traditionally treated religion in this country. And part because they're easy to cheat. So I think what you may be suggesting, at least what I tend to believe is that given the security threats that we face right now, we ought to, at least with respect to certain regions of the world that are volatile right now, we have to just halt all immigration until we figure out how to make sure that those who are coming in from those parts of the world present no threat to us.

As some have suggested in the past, when you look at reforms like this, you might analogize it to a leaky basement. If you've got water in your basement, you got to figure out where the leak is. You got to fix the leak before you start bailing out water. And sometimes you've got to turn off the water main for a while while you diagnosis and then address the problem. And I think that's what we ought to be doing here.

GLENN: Senator Mike Lee, always good to talk to you, sir.

PAT: We should get to the real issue though before we get off the phone with Mike. And that's, of course, you attended BYU. Your father was the president at BYU. Who should be the next head coach of the football team at BYU?

MIKE: I was hoping that either you or Glenn might take it.

GLENN: Do you wear black? Because if it's slimming, I'll take the job.

MIKE: That's right. That's right. Look, our friend who is at the Naval Academy, whose name I routinely butcher --

PAT: Niumatalolo?

MIKE: Yes. I think he's an ideal candidate for the job, and I hope he takes it. I think he would do a great job.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. All right. Appreciate it.

STU: Breaking news.

MIKE: That is, if the two of you aren't willing to take it together.

GLENN: Oh, I think I'd do wonders.

PAT: I'm not sure if the university will be willing to take us.

GLENN: No, I don't think the university would be willing to take us in any capacity.

PAT: Not even allow us on campus.

GLENN: No, not even janitorial service.

Mike, thanks so much.

MIKE: They do need more of a conservative voice on the political science faculty. As an alum of that faculty, I can vouch for the fact that the student body that's fairly conservative, a faculty that is less so. So, you know.

GLENN: Big time less so. Big time less so.

MIKE: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: Thank you so much, Mike. Appreciate it.

MIKE: Okay. Thank you.

Counting cookies? Here are the CRAZIEST ways people predict the election.

Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Every four years, America faces the same question: who will win the presidential election?

Top political scientists and media companies devise elaborate polls, complex formulas, and sophisticated projections to calculate who will win the election at any given moment. Even Stu has thrown his hat in the ring with Plusecast, a one-stop shop for all your polling questions. But these methods aren't the only ways to predict who will be the next commander-in-chief.

From cookies to football, here are some unorthodox ways to predict the next president:

The Cookie Poll

Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Can cookies really predict the next president? According to Busken Bakery, they are more accurate than you might think.

Busken Bakery, has been using cookies to predict the winner of presidential elections since Regan beat Mondale in 1984, and has only been wrong once. Their method is simple: they sell cookies with the faces of both candidates and tally the sales of each. Whoever sells the most cookies is predicted to win. The simplicity of this method is its strength, and the only time it was wrong was the 2020 election. Currently, President Trump is far outstripping VP Harris, selling 23,477 cookies compared to her 8,781 cookies (as of 8/15). Busken posts daily updates on their Instagram, here.

Busken isn't the only bakery to make presidential predictions. Lochel's Bakery in the critical swing state of Pennsylvania has gained popularity recently. Lochel's has correctly predicted three of the last four elections by selling red and blue cookies printed with the names of the candidates. The current count for Lochel's is 28,212 for Trump and 2,097 for Harris. Again, Lochel's posts daily updates on their Instagram, here.

According to the cookies, this election is looking pretty sweet for President Trump!

Vegas Odds

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

It's time to put your money where your mouth is.

It's not just political scientists who cook up election predictions. Casinos and sports betting services get in on the action. What could be a better way to predict an election than by asking people to put their hard-earned dollars on the line?

The big casinos and sports betting sites all have odds on the election, and Trump tends to be the favored candidate. If you are unfamiliar with betting odds in the U.S., the simple explanation of how they work is the smaller the number the better the odds. Here is the spread for three of the big betting sites:

bet365- Trump: -138, Harris: +110

BetMGM- Trump: -137, Harris: +110

Caesars- Trump: -145, Harris: +120

While you shouldn't take this as a sign to put all your money (or any) on President Trump, it is an optimistic sign!

The Redskins Rule

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The Redskins Rule is a well-documented correlation between the outcome of the presidential election and the performance of the Washington D.C. football team, the Redskins (now The Commanders). The rule is that if the Redskins win their last home game before the election, the incumbent party will win the election. If the Redskins lose, the challenging party will win the election. This rule is surprisingly accurate and held true for every election between 1940 and 2000.

If this rule is to be believed, the determining game is on Sunday, October 27th when the Redskins/Commanders play the Chicago Bears in Washington D.C. If the Bears win, that should mean Trump will win the election. If the Redskins win, then Harris will win.

But there is the fact that the rule has been broken several times since 2000. Has the charm worn off? And does it even count anymore if the team is no longer called the Redskins? Only time will tell!

Glenn joined Trump for an eventful weekend in the Southwest

Rebecca Noble / Stringer | Getty Images

We are mere weeks away from the election, and President Trump has been making every day count.

This last weekend, Trump held two rallies back to back in the southwestern corner of our country—one just outside Coachella, California, and the other in Prescott Valley, Arizona. Glenn joined Trump in Arizona, along with thousands of other Americans, to support the former president in his final push towards election day. The polls still show a very tight race. Every vote matters, and with so much at stake, Trump has to finish strong.

Catch up with Trump and Glenn's busy weekend below:

Coachella

On Saturday the 12th, thousands of Donald Trump supporters flocked to Calhoun Ranch, an area not far from the famous Coachella fairgrounds, and braved the heat, drawn by Trump's promise to "Make America Great Again."

The headlining event of the rally was the alleged third assassination attempt on President Trump, although the Trump campaign doesn't see it that way. The action started when the alleged assassin, Vem Miller, was arrested while trying to enter the rally using allegedly fake press credentials and was charged with illegal possession of a handgun, a shotgun, and a high-capacity magazine. Miller has not admitted to an attempted assassination, and in fact, claims to have been a strong Trump supporter since 2018. Miller claims the firearms were purchased as a defensive measure after he received death threats linked to his work in the media. He also claims that the press credentials are not fake, and the mix-up was caused by the fact that he uses a different name on his press credentials as a safety precaution.

The Trump campaign, Secret Service, and FBI do not believe this was an assassination attempt, but in this heated political climate, one can never be too safe.

Prescott Valley

As soon as his rally in Cali was over, Trump hit the road to prepare for his next rally. On Sunday the 13th Trump held a rally in Prescott Valley, Arizona, where both Glenn and U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake gave opening remarks.

In Glenn's short, yet powerful speech, he emphasized the importance of this election and highlighted all that was at stake— this is a battle of good and evil. He brought up the Left's attempt to erase women through transgender ideology and how that ideology encourages the predation of children. Glenn furthered the case of good versus evil by citing the Left's obsession with abortion. Glenn called abortion the sacrifice of a child's body for the convenience of the parents, a perversion of Christ's sacrifice of His body for us. Glenn called for God's Army to stand up and fight back against evil, using our voices and most importantly, our vote.

Glenn also lambasted Kamala for a recent interview where she admitted she wouldn't have changed anything if she had a chance to do her term as VP over again. He laid into her for marketing herself as an agent of change, while simultaneously defending the status quo. Glenn pointed out that if anyone wants to change the country for the better, Trump is the man to do it: Trump is the candidate for change, not Kamala.

Glenn: What I saw on the ground in Asheville gave me hope

Melissa Sue Gerrits / Stringer | Getty Images

The government can’t save us. Washington is too slow and too bureaucratic, and quite frankly, the government doesn’t care.

I’ve seen a lot of destruction in my life. I’ve walked through war zones and cities torn apart by riots, and I've stood at the sites of natural disasters that leave communities devastated. But what I saw in Asheville, North Carolina, after Hurricane Helene was unlike anything I’ve ever witnessed.

Houses were washed down rivers, upside down and crushed. Train tracks, strong enough to support locomotives, were left suspended in midair after the earth beneath them was eroded away. Semi-trucks, rolled by the force of the floodwaters, now lie like children’s toys, tossed and overturned hundreds of feet from the road. Whole towns have been uprooted and scattered — debris from homes miles away, stacking up like dominoes, bridges that stood for decades washed out by water so high that it flowed six feet over their tops.

'You tell everybody you know — even if they don’t care — we’ll take care of our own damn selves if nobody shows up.'

I stood there, looking at this idyllic small town in the Blue Ridge Mountains, and I thought, “This will take years to rebuild. Maybe even decades.” But I didn’t just see destruction. I saw something far more powerful than nature’s wrath: the resilience of the American spirit.

My expectations for the government’s assistance were low before I arrived in Asheville, given its failing track record in previous natural disasters, but its response to Hurricane Helene victims — or lack thereof — was a new category of negligence. But the people in Asheville weren’t waiting on FEMA or the federal government to swoop in. They knew no one was coming.

The bridges were out, roads were destroyed, and the mountains had isolated them from outside help. But instead of despair, I saw hope. Instead of panic, I saw action. People were taking care of each other, and that is the America I remember, like in the days after 9/11 when we came together regardless of political party, race, or background. We didn’t care about who voted for whom. We just saw our neighbors hurting, and we asked, “Are you OK? What can I do to help?”

I saw that again in North Carolina. I saw it in the man who turned his Harley-Davidson dealership into a helicopter landing zone, shoveling mud out of his showroom just so rescue teams could land. I saw it in the volunteers flying missions across treacherous terrain, getting the elderly and the injured out of danger. They weren’t asking for government permission. They were doing what needed to be done.

Adam Smith, a retired Special Forces veteran who is coordinating the landing of helicopters in Asheville, told me that the FAA is trying to shut down the operation because it isn’t federally regulated. He told the feds that they’re going to leave because he has a helicopter landing in a few minutes that will actually help people while they are barking orders from Washington.

One story stood out to me. We landed to help evacuate an elderly woman with a broken hip and a severe infection. She just had surgery, but because her family didn’t have insurance, the hospital pushed her out as fast as it could. Her wound became infected, and her leg was on fire. We helped airlift her to get her desperately needed antibiotics and treatment. There were no government resources to help her to an emergency room.

As we loaded the woman into the helicopter, her grandson turned to me and said, “You tell everybody you know — even if they don’t care — we’ll take care of our own damn selves if nobody shows up.” That hit me hard because it’s the truth. It’s the way America used to be, and it’s the way we need to be again.

As I flew through those mountains in the helicopter, I couldn’t help but think of Billy Graham. I’d visited Asheville about 10 years ago to see him, and I remember thinking how beautiful and peaceful the town was. Today, it’s unrecognizable. The destruction is overwhelming. But the people are stronger than ever.

The government can’t save us. Washington is too slow and too bureaucratic, and quite frankly, the government doesn’t care. I saw it firsthand. We found a FEMA truck parked under a tree, its workers sitting at a card table in the shade. They weren’t doing anything to help.

But we’re Americans. We can take care of ourselves. We don’t need Washington to save us. We need each other. This is the America that Billy Graham spoke to me about — the America that will rise again in times of trouble. And while the government might fail us, we will not fail each other. And that’s exactly what I saw in North Carolina — Americans stepping up, taking care of their neighbors, and rebuilding their communities.

This is what I told the people of Asheville: You are not forgotten. There are millions of Americans who love you, who are praying for you, and who are ready to help. Because that’s what we do. We don’t wait for permission. We roll up our sleeves and take care of our own.

And to the rest of America, I say this: It’s time to remember who we are. It’s time to stop looking to Washington for solutions and start looking at each other. Because when the chips are down, it’s not the government that’s going to save us. It’s you and me, and if we stand together, nothing — no hurricane, no flood, no disaster — can break us.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

UPDATE: Will Florida survive Hurricane Milton?

Handout / Handout / Getty Images

For the second time in two weeks, Florida is in the path of a major hurricane.

Hurricane Milton is expected to make landfall sometime tonight, Wednesday, October 9th, somewhere near Tampa Bay. This will mark the first time in a hundred years the city has been hit directly by a hurricane, raising concerns about the preparedness of the city's infrastructure. Milton, which was rated a category five hurricane earlier this week, has been reduced to a category four as it approaches land and is expected to make landfall as a powerful category three.

The Sunshine State has already begun to feel the effects of the historic storm, with strong winds and heavy rains battering Tampa Bay this morning. Many are still trying to evacuate or prepare for the storm as conditions worsen. Highways have slowed down, and gas has run short. Residents are preparing for the worst.

The federally recognized "Waffle House Index" is in red, meaning that several Waffle House locations in the Tampa Bay area will be shut down. Waffle House prides itself on being open 24/7, no matter the conditions, so for them to shut down, if only for a brief time, indicates that severe damage to the area is anticipated.