Thanks, Obama: Why Guest Host Sheriff David Clarke Was in a Bad Mood Today

The outspoken and fantastically fierce Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke filled in for Glenn on The Glenn Beck Program today, Monday, December 19.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 1 for answers to these questions:

• What had Sheriff Clarke in a bad mood this morning?

• How did President Obama kick law enforcement in the teeth one last time?

• Why did Sheriff Clarke support Donald Trump?

• Will President Trump's first 100 days be peaceful?

• Is Nancy Pelosi a racist?

• How are Democrats like a colony of carpenter ants?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

DAVID: Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not in a very good mood this morning. Welcome to the program. We'll get into that a little bit. It has nothing to do with the NFL Sunday that we completed yesterday. My team did win, the Dallas Cowboys. Been a life-long Cowboys fan. They made it interesting, but won nonetheless.

Let me start with an introduction: I'm your host for today, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. You may know me. You may not know me. It's irrelevant at this point. I'm the host today.

Let me take care of a couple of housekeeping measures first. This is the Glenn Beck Program. Glenn Beck is a brand. Glenn Beck has built this brand. He's worked hard at it. He's good at what he does. Every once in a while, he allows somebody to pilot the ship. I've done it before for him. It's an honor to be with you this morning and to be a part of this brand, the Glenn Beck Program. And I'm here to the protect the brand. But at the same time, as always, TheBlaze has given me the freedom to express my views, and they may differ from some of the things that Glenn says -- not many. They may differ from some of the things that you believe and espouse and so on and so forth. And that's okay.

I don't mind discourse. But I'm here to protect the brand. Not only to me, but it's important to Glenn as well, but there may be some times, some rocky moments. But I always remind the people tuning in, don't take it out on Glenn, please. Don't take it out on TheBlaze. Take it out on me. I have big shoulders. I get blamed for a lot of stuff. I get piled on a lot. It's kind of the environment I'm in. I don't whine about it. So if I say something that rubs you the wrong way or whatever, you feel like you want to call in and talk about it, the number is 888-727-BECK. That's 888-727-2325.

What's coming up on the program today? Well, first, we're going to start out with an election wrap-up. I know the election has been over since November 8th, November 9th. And -- but there's a lot going on still. Today's a big day. The electoral college meets. That's when they truly pick the president of the United States, by the Constitution, by the law, and that will happen sometime today. All 50 states will gather. Their electors. And they'll make that determination.

If we go by the states that were won on November 8th, Donald Trump should be elected, duly elected, president of the United States, by the electoral college. But, you know, we're in some weird times. And some goofy things have happened and some goofy things will continue to happen. People continue to try to work the electors of the electoral college. Going to talk about that in one of the segments down the road.

Also going to talk about immigration. That is going to be a big issue for this upcoming Congress, the new Congress that will be seated on January 20th as well.

And the first 100 days are always talked about. A president -- a new administration comes in. Even if the president is reelected and he starts another term, the first 100 days are important. They set the tone. The first 100 days is an opportunity, if you will, for the incoming president to set the stage, set the vision for the country, get some things going. It's very important they get off to a fast start. That's why they have this concept called the first 100 days. And I'll tell you what, it can make or break an administration. If you get bogged down, you will be that way, and you will struggle. So you've got to get out of the gate fast. Donald Trump plans to do just that, as he's putting his cabinet together. But immigration is one of those things this new Congress is going to have to take up.

It was one of the major platforms of the Trump campaign. Immigration reform. Closing the border. Building the wall. So on and so forth. There's some other things that he wants to address in that first 100 days as well, the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. So we'll talk about the immigration aspect of it because it's going to be big.

And there's many facets to that, as you may know. So I want to hear from you on that. Again, that number is 888-727-BECK. 888-727-2325.

Also, this first hour, we're going to talk about the opioid epidemic sweeping America. Folks, I want to tell you that this thing is touching everybody. It is a crisis. It's not getting all the attention -- it's getting some media attention. But it's not getting all the attention that I think it should be. Because we're talking about a generation now of people, specifically young people, who have been gripped by this opioid and heroin epidemic. And we'll talk about that.

Also, I'll be joined by Heather Mac Donald, author of The War on Cops. Heather is a researcher, a Thomas W. Smith fellow at the Manhattan Institute. She's a contributing editor of the City Journal Magazine. She's written several books. Her latest one being The War on Cops. And we're going to talk about an article that was published in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend, how Donald Trump can change the rhetoric in the war on cops. So we'll be joined by her. And we'll have much, much more.

But here's where I want to start: This thing I opened up this program by saying I was not in a real good mood this morning. I learned over the weekend that President Obama in one final move, kicking law enforcement in the teeth by selecting an individual, Abu-Jamal. He's a cop killer. Actually, he didn't appoint Abu-Jamal. But Abu-Jamal is a cop killer, 1981, he killed Danny Faulkner in Philadelphia, a police officer who was 25 years old.

Abu-Jamal was a Black Panther. And what happened was the officer, Faulkner, made a traffic stop. A scuffle ensued. Abu-Jamal's brother was scuffling with the law enforcement officer. Abu-Jamal saw it. He came over. He shot and killed Officer Faulkner. Officer Faulkner was found face up, bullets in his back. He shot him before he hit the ground, then stood over him, straddled him, and shot him in the forehead. Very famous case.

Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced to death. And then in a turn of events, he was granted a new trial because there was an error in the jury instructions on a death penalty. So they settled the case, giving him life in prison without parole.

Anyway, there was an attorney. Debo Adegbile. Debo Adegbile was an attorney for the NAACP, the legal defense fund. He was not representing Abu-Jamal. Abu-Jamal had competent counsel, but he entered a brief into the case -- a friend of the court, talking about Debo Adegbile.

Debo Adegbile is a straight-up cop hater and a black racialist. Several times President Obama tried to jam Debo Adegbile down our throats, first by nominating him to be a federal judge and then tried to nominate him -- both of these required US Senate confirmation. He tried to nominate him to head the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice.

Now, keep in mind, Debo Adegbile is a straight-up cop hater. He's not a good fit to lead the civil rights division of the United States Department of Justice. He's also not a good fit to be a federal judge.

Because like I said, he's a black racialist. He sees everything through the lens of race. Thinks all whites are racist. The Senate struck down his -- his judgeship. And then he withdrew -- Adegbile withdrew his name from consideration for the US DOJ Civil Rights Division post because he wasn't going to be confirmed.

Well, in one last move, President Obama put this individual -- I got to be careful here. But I said I'm not in a good mood today. But he put him on the US DOJ Civil Rights Division, in an appointment that's going to last six years. A kick in the teeth to every law enforcement officer in the country.

This is who Barack Obama is. Barack Obama is also a straight-up cop hater. I've said that before. I've said that on TV, nationally. And people would ask, "Do you really believe that President Obama is a cop hater?" And I'd look them right back in the eye and go, "Yes, I do, and I can prove it." And I'd go on to state these instances. This is just one. But you remember the Cambridge, Massachusetts, case, where a friend of Obama's was arrested by Cambridge Police. And Obama said the police officers academy stupidly in arresting his friend.

No, they didn't. They were doing their job. That started it.

Obama was also very intricate in starting the war on cops. So we'll see how this goes. I think incoming US attorney Jeff Sessions would do well to find a spot, if they can't stop this move -- to find some spot in some corner office and have Debo Adegbile counting paper clips. That's kind of what needs to happen. We're going to take a break. On the other side, we're going to come back, and we're going to talk some post-election wrap-up. I'm Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Radio Program.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back to the program. I'm your host for today. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

I'm here with you tomorrow too. I don't know if that's going to be good or bad news for you. Joined us today, I think it will be good news. But I'll let you know as well. Two days, so I can get some stuff going here.

Let me do a little self-promoting before I get into the first topic, which is going to be some post election results.

You can follow me on Twitter @SheriffClarke. And that's C-L-A-R-K-E. Don't forget the e, otherwise, you might get some other Twitter handle. And you'll look, and you'll say, "What the heck is this?" That's the good stuff, folks. That's the stuff the national -- the liberal media pays attention to. And they look every time I put out a tweet to try to contort it into something I did not say. But that's okay.

But it's @SheriffClarke. C-L-A-R-K-E. I also have a blog. You can follow me on my blog, and it's ThePeoplesSheriff@Patheos.com. Patheos is P-A-T-H-E-O-S. And I also have a book coming out. My first book is going to be coming out in March of 2017. But you can preorder it now at Amazon, or you can go to Barnes & Noble and get your preorder in.

What's this book about? It's called Cop Under Fire. As you may know, we've become an increasingly divided and polarized nation in recent years, growing racial tension. You have animosity toward law enforcement professionals. Government corruption and disregard for our constitutional process. There's no easy answers to these. This book is not just going to be a recitation of things that are problematic in America. I don't say wrong in America. We have some problems. We have some issues. But it's not going to be the same, you know, here are the issues facing America. But what I try to do is take those things that deeply affect us, and I point out in this book, Cop Under Fire, how we can rise above these current troubles and these issues and we can truly become that great nation in pursuit of liberty and justice from all. So, again, that's Cop Under Fire at Amazon and Barnes & Noble. You can preorder that, in you have a law enforcement friend, if you have a law enforcement officer retired or current in your family. It's going to be a must read if you -- even citizens in general. It's going to be a fascinating book, not just because I wrote it. But it comes from the heart. And anybody that has listened to me over the last, I don't know, three, four, five, years, you know, I speak from the heart. I don't pull any punches. I don't hold anything back. I just tell you the way I see it. Am I right on everything? Of course not. Do I have all the answers? Not hardly.

However, I put it to you straight. Straight talk is what you're going to get from me. Unvarnished. And I offer some things that are food for thought for a way forward.

Now, let's get into this post election, presidential election. 2016. Happened on November 8th. A lot has been said about it. Much has been talked about, but you haven't heard my perspective on this thing.

We may differ a little bit on some of the things here, but like I said, I don't shy away from that. I believe discourse, differing points of view, different schools of thought, I believe that stuff is healthy in a democracy. We should be able to politely disagree. Some spirited discourse back and forth. Nothing wrong with that. I love that. Like I said, I think it's healthy in a democracy. And it shouldn't denigrate into the name-calling and some of the other things that it does when people differ with somebody else's views. Let's just have educated conversation and skip all the other stuff. You know, I mean, if you say something -- for instance, if somebody has different views on gay marriage, all of a sudden you're a homophobe. You know, if you believe that the United States is a Judeo-Christian nation -- not to the exclusion of any other religion. Did not say that. But if you believe that the principles that this country are founded on were Judeo-Christian, if you believe that, then you're an Islamophobe. Right? That's what it denigrates into.

And you can go on and on and on. You're a racist if you believe in the Constitution, the rule of law, the Founding Fathers, the history of this nation, you're a racist. And that's what everything seems to end up -- where everything seems to end up, and it's very unfortunate. Because like I said, you know, with critical thought, we truly can move this nation forward and become this shining city on the hill that I believe we already are. But we've gotten away from some concepts that have grounded this nation and led it to be that shining city on a hill. But if we just allow people to shut down people we don't agree with, it's not going to be very good.

But, you know, the post election, I look back -- and I supported Donald Trump for president of the United States. I supported him after the primary. I stayed out of endorsing anybody in the primary, Republican primary, I'm talking about. First of all, I'm not a member of the Republican Party. I'm not a member of the Democrat Party.

I run as a Democrat. Sheriff in Milwaukee County. I'm elected as a Democrat. But I don't belong to a political party. I don't believe in belonging to a political party. If you do, that's your business. I don't care what your politics are. It's neither here nor there. But that's why I didn't endorse anybody in the Republican Party. I wanted the people -- we, the people, the members of that party to select a candidate. So I stayed out of the way. I had numerous candidates ask me to endorse them during the primary. I stayed out of it. I made it clear. I'm keeping my powder dry. But I made this clear to whoever comes out of this process as the nominee for the Republican Party, I will back and I will back 100 percent.

Folks, I'm a man of my word. And when I say something, you can take it to the bank. So Donald Trump obviously was the victor. And he came back around to me and asked for support. And I said to him, "Mr. President -- he wasn't president at the time. I said, "Mr. Trump, I don't know what I can do for you. But I made it clear I'd back whoever won. You are the winner. I will do everything I can. I will fight as hard as I can to help you become the 45th president of the United States. That's how I arrived at my decision.

And I just believe that after that process, the convention, which I spoke at -- that was an honor. I thought it was time for conservatives, Republicans, Libertarians, some independents, to put all that stuff aside in the name of the country. That's what I did. And that's why I supported Donald Trump. I offered no apology. I'm just trying to tell you where I came from in that decision. But you look at what's happening now with this -- this whole process. Election is over. The election is over. We have a president-elect, his name is Donald Trump. He's putting his government together. He's putting his cabinet together.

And he needs our support, folks, for the country. All right? The left even today, with the electoral college, they don't want to believe that the election is over. But it is.

We need to take a break. On the other side, we'll continue this. This is Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DAVID: I'm your host today. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Thanks for joining us.

You know, coming out of that election November 8th, there were many important aspects of why I got behind Donald Trump to become the 45th president of the United States. But I think at the end of the day, the Supreme Court. I believe that we'll get a strict constructionist, appointed by Donald Trump to replace Scalia. That was huge. If you believe in your gun rights, if you believe in the Constitution, if you believe in the rule of law -- the Supreme Court, that thing would have tilted hard left, and we would have been talking about a hard left United States Supreme Court for the next 30 to 40 years.

If you look at the age of the justices right now, the ones that Obama put up for Supreme Court justices, they're going to be around for a long, long time. Some of the ones who are getting to that point where they're starting to look -- you know, Kennedy, even Justice Thomas, a young man by age standards, but, you know, there comes a point, it's time for me to move on. Would you have wanted Mrs. Bill Clinton to appoint the next three to four Supreme Court justices? I mean, think about some of this stuff. Which is why I told people during the process -- you know, the conservatives, slash, Republicans, slash, some Libertarians, slash, some independents. I reminded them, "Put all that behind you, and look at what's at stake here." And many of you did.

But, you know, in looking at what's happening -- goes about putting his government together. He's made several cabinet appointments. I think very fine selections. But look at some of the stuff coming out of the mouth of the left on some of his cabinet selections.

You had Dr. Ben Carson, who was been nominated for Housing and Urban Development. Here's what Nancy Pelosi. The ink wasn't even dry on the memo, folks, the news release.

Ben Carson is a disconcerting and disturbingly unqualified choice to lead a department as complex and -- the country deserves a HUD secretary with the relevant experience to protect the rights of homeowners and renters, particularly low-income and minority communities and to ensure that everyone in our country can have access to safe and affordable housing without facing discrimination. There is no evidence, she said, that Dr. Carson brings the necessary credentials to hold a position.

DAVID: Take that quote I just read from Nancy Pelosi. Take Dr. Ben Carson out of that quote and insert Barack Obama in 2008. You could have said the same thing after the election of Barack Obama in 2008. Disturbingly unqualified. Disconcerting. Doesn't have the experience. No evidence that he brings the necessary credentials to hold a position with such immense responsibility and impact on families and communities across America.

That was Barack Obama in 2008. Folks, he was a freshman senator. He was a couple years removed from being a state senator in the state of Illinois. He was in a state legislature. And now he assumes the presidency because he won the election.

You may not have voted for him. But, you know what, he won the election. But had you had said this about Barack Obama in 2008, you would have been labeled a racist.

And, you know what, the entire liberal mainstream media would have come down on you like a ton of bricks. But no such accusation toward Nancy Pelosi from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, CNN, MSNBC. No such claim that Nancy Pelosi is a racist for thinking that a neurosurgeon -- think about this, ladies and gentlemen. A guy who understands the working -- the intricate working of the human brain can't figure government out?

She's not qualified. Nancy Pelosi didn't even make this statement, or to judge the qualifications of Dr. Ben Carson. Then you have this guy from California, Democrat congressman who called on Ben Carson to withdraw his nomination as secretary of Housing and Urban Development because of his utter lack of qualification for the job.

Some two-bit congressman from California is going to stand in judgment of a neurosurgeon. You know the history of Ben Carson? Grew up in Detroit, in the ghetto of Detroit. Single mom who dropped out of the third grade, worked any job she could to raise her two sons as a single parent and successfully, she did this.

And they're saying Ben Carson doesn't understand urban issues? This is fascinating.

So we have that going on. We have the riots that ensued post November 8th. George Soros funded. Or at least purportedly. We spent millions on recounts.

One of those recounts was in the state of Wisconsin. $3.5 million Jill Stein paid for recounts in the state of Wisconsin. That works out, if you do the math, to about $21,000 a vote to recount. And guess what, Donald Trump ended up with more votes than he had on election night.

So this is the stuff going on. And now the Russians did it. It's the Russians' fault. Now they've glommed on to this because there's nothing else for them to look at, the media. And it's all the media. They're trying to stretch and make something -- fake news, ladies and gentlemen.

I'm not here to suggest that the Russians don't try to hack into cyber systems in the United States. The United States does the same thing. Remember the Stuxnet virus?

Had to do with Iran's nuclear capability. The United States did that. That's the kind of stuff that goes on. But I think it's an insult to the American people -- a total insult that we, the people didn't go out and vote for Donald Trump or that we were influenced by Russian hacking. I don't know if the Russians hacked into the -- I don't know. I mean, you're hearing stuff all across-the-board, right?

They did, they didn't. Who knows? Donald Trump was duly elected by the people of this country. It is time to put this nonsense aside because we have this thing that's very near and dear to this representative democracy, and it's called the peaceful transition of government, of administration. Peaceful. We did it in '08. People that didn't vote for Barack Obama did not take to the streets. They did not blame the Russians. They did not harass electors to the electoral college.

We sucked it up. We said, "Hey, he got elected. Time to move forward." It doesn't mean you can't oppose his policies and whatnot for the next four years. It doesn't mean you can't oppose -- or the left can't oppose and fight Donald Trump on trying to get his Make America Great Agenda happen. They can do that. That's what's great about this country. But to try to delegitimize it before he even takes office, folks, this is fascinating.

I'm Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back to the Glenn Beck Program. I'm your host today. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Again, the call-in number, (888)727-2325. It's 888-727-BECK. Talking about some post election news, some wrap-up in the November 8th election, today is a big day. Constitutionally, the electoral college meets. In all 50 states, electors will gather to cast their electoral votes. Some states, by law, that if -- if a particular individual won the state, they have to vote that way. Some states, it's a little more loose. I know in Colorado, the Democrats have gone to their state court to try to get them to overturn their law. This is how the left operates.

See, defeat is never final. They're still fighting the election. The Democrats. So they're trying to get a court to overturn the law that says the Colorado electors have to vote for particular individuals.

This is amazing.

You know, you heard me talk about the criticism of Donald Trump's cabinet, of which I have none by the way. Zero. But here's another one, this is from the Mercury News: Trump's White House, how white will it be? So far, all five of Trump's first picks for key White House advisory cabinet posts have been white men, several of whom who have been accused of being racist or anti-Muslim.

First of all, if you're on the right, by their standards, we're all anti-Muslim and we're all racist, including me. I mean, that's what -- that's how they look at us. That's how they view us. So that means nothing to me.

But check out these first couple of paragraphs here. From the moment Donald Trump first uttered his slogan about making America great again, his critics countered that what he really wanted was to return to an era when white man ran the ship of state.

It goes on to say that so far, the president-elect is doing little to dispel their fears. Trump's first five picks for key posts are all white males, several of whom are causing chills to run down the spines of several Libertarians.

Let me stop there for a minute. Has anybody asked themselves what the people on the left, liberals, Democrats, have against white people?

I know I don't. I don't have anything against white people. You noticed when I talked about Ben Carson, I didn't call him a black neurosurgeon. I call him a neurosurgeon. I don't view everything through the prism of race. Every once in a while, from time to time, you'll hear me refer to myself as a black conservative. But that's not to point out my race. It's to point out how and why the left reviles me. Because, it's bad enough -- if you're on the left, it's bad enough to be a conservative, but if you're a black conservative, you're a conservative of the worst type, the worst kind.

I remember when Jeff Sessions was announced to be the nominee for the next attorney general. Again, before the ink was dry on the Trump transition news release, Senator Elizabeth Warren demanded that Trump withdraw the nomination. I mean, it was -- it was within the first five minutes of the announcement.

This is what we're going to be up against, for four years. Because remember for Democrats, defeat is never final. The fight is never over. Never over. That's why I've likened them to being a colony of carpenter rats.

Put "carpenter rats" in your favorite search engine, and look at some of the stuff -- they're amazing -- they're amazing species. They constantly just build the nest. That's all they do, continually. You can't get rid of them. You can call an exterminator. You may temporarily slow them down. But then they move on and build a new nest. That's how the Democrats operate. It's never over.

So the electoral college meets today. You have these people in the electoral college being harassed.

Folks, that is a violation of federal law.

And it's 18USCS594 (phonetic), it says, "Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person who is voting for president, vice president, or presidential elector, shall be fined or imprisoned for one year or both." Where is the DOJ investigation because if this happened in 2008, there would be an investigation started? Where's the FBI?

The campaign is over. You cannot coerce. You cannot threaten. You cannot intimidate presidential electors. But it's going on -- Obama hasn't said anything about it. Loretta Lynch hasn't said anything about it. And Comey hasn't said anything about it.

This is fascinating. Just -- you know, rewind back to 2008. If this same thing were happening, you know there would be screams by the left for investigations of prosecutions and imprisonment. I'm Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program. Coming up on the other side of the hour, we're going to talk to Heather Mac Donald.

Featured Image: Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke (L) exits elevators after meetings with President-elect Donald Trump November 28, 2016 at the Trump Tower in New York. (Photo Credit: EDUARDO MUNOZ ALVAREZ/AFP/Getty Images)

What happens if Trump wins from prison?

Rob Kim / Contributor | Getty Images

If Donald Trump is sentenced to prison time, it will be the first time in American history that a former president and active presidential candidate is thrown behind bars. Nobody knows for sure what exactly will happen.

With the election only a few months away, the left is working overtime to come up with any means of beating Trump, including tying him up in court or even throwing him in jail. Glenn recently had former U.S. DoJ Assistant Attorney General and Center for Renewing America senior fellow Jeff Clark on his show to discuss the recent resurrection of the classified documents case against Trump and what that could mean for the upcoming election. Clark explains that despite the immunity ruling from the Supreme Court this summer, he thinks there is a decent chance of a prison sentence.

What would that even look like if it happened? This is a completely unprecedented series of events and virtually every step is filled with potential unknowns. Would the Secret Service protect him in prison? What if he won from his jail cell? How would the American people respond? While no one can be certain for sure, here's what Glenn and Jeff Clark speculate might happen:

Jail time

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

Can they even put a former president in prison? Jeff Clark seemed to think they can, and he brought up that New York County District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, had been talking with the New York jail system about making accommodations for Trump and the Secret Service assigned to protect him. Clark said he believes that if they sentence him before the election, Trump could be made to serve out his sentence until his inauguration, assuming he wins. After his inauguration, Clark said Trump's imprisonment would have to be suspended or canceled, as his constitutional duty as president would preempt the conviction by New York State.

House arrest

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Another possibility is that Trump could be placed under house arrest instead of imprisoned. This would make more sense from a security standpoint—it would be easier to protect Trump in his own home versus in prison. But, this would deny the Left the satisfaction of actually locking Trump behind bars, so it seems less likely. Either in prison or under house arrest, the effect is the same, Trump would be kept off the campaign trail during the most crucial leg of the election. It doesn't matter which way you spin it—this seems like election interference. Glenn even floated the idea of campaigning on behalf of Trump to help combat the injustice.

Public outrage

Jon Cherry / Stringer | Getty Images

It is clear to many Americans that this whole charade is little more than a thinly-veiled attempt to keep Trump out of office by any means necessary. If this attempt at lawfare succeeds, and Trump is thrown in jail, the American people likely will not have it. Any doubt that America has become a Banana Republic will be put to rest. How will anyone trust in any sort of official proceedings or elections ever again? One can only imagine what the reaction will be. If the past is any indication, it's unlikely to be peaceful.

POLL: What topics do YOU want Trump and Harris to debate?

Montinique Monroe / Stringer, Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Does Kamala Harris stand a chance against Donald Trump in a debate?

Next week, during the second presidential debate, we will find out. The debate is scheduled for September 10th and will be hosted by ABC anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. This will be the second presidential debate, but the first for VP Kamala Harris, and will feature the same rules as the first debate. The rules are: no notes, no chairs, no live audience, and the debater's microphone will only be turned on when it is his or her turn to speak.

This will be the first time Trump and Harris clash face-to-face, and the outcome could have a massive effect on the outcome of the election. Trump has been preparing by ramping up his campaign schedule. He plans to hold multiple rallies and speak at several events across the next several days. He wants to be prepared to face any question that might come his way, and meeting and interacting with both voters and the press seems to be Trump's preferred preparation approach.

With the multitude of issues plaguing our nation, there are a lot of potential topics that could be brought up. From the economy to the ongoing "lawfare" being waged against the former president, what topics do YOU want Harris and Trump to debate?

The economy (and why the Biden-Harris administration hasn't fixed it yet)

The Southern Border crisis (and Kamala's performance as border czar)

Climate change (and how Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement)

The "lawfare" being waged against Trump (and what Trump would do if he were thrown in prison) 

Voting and election security (and how to deal with the possibility that illegal immigrants are voting)

3 ways the Constitution foils progressive authoritarianism

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor, Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Pool / Pool | Getty Images

This is why it is important to understand our history.

Over the weekend, the New York Times published a controversial article claiming the Constitution is a danger to the country and a threat to democracy. To those who have taken a high school American government class or have followed Glenn for a while, this claim might seem incongruent with reality. That's because Jennifer Szalai, the author the piece, isn't thinking of the Constitution as it was intended to be—a restraint on government to protect individual rights—but instead as a roadblock that is hindering the installation of a progressive oligarchy.

Glenn recently covered this unbelievable article during his show and revealed the telling critiques Szalai made of our founding document. She called it an "anti-democratic" document and argued it is flawed because Donald Trump used it to become president (sort of like how every other president achieved their office). From here, Szalai went off the deep end and made some suggestions to "fix" the Constitution, including breaking California and other blue states away from the union to create a coastal progressive utopia.

Here are three of the "flaws" Szalai pointed out in the Constitution that interfere with the Left's authoritarian dreams:

1. The Electoral College

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The New York Times article brought up the fact that in 2016 President Trump lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College, and thus won the election. This, as Szalai pointed out, is not democratic. Strictly speaking, she is right. But as Glenn has pointed out time and time again, America is not a democracy! The Founding Fathers did not want the president to be decided by a simple majority of 51 percent of the population. The Electoral College is designed to provide minority groups with a voice, giving them a say in the presidential election. Without the Electoral College, a simple majority would dominate elections and America would fall under the tyranny of the masses.

2. The Supreme Court

OLIVIER DOULIERY / Contributor | Getty Images

President Biden and other progressives have thrown around the idea of reforming the Supreme Court simply because it has made a few rulings they disagree with. Glenn points out that when a country decides to start monkeying around with their high courts, it is usually a sign they are becoming a banana republic. Szalai complained that Trump was allowed to appoint three justices. Two of them were confirmed by senators representing just 44 percent of the population, and they overturned Roe v. Wade. All of this is Constitutional by Szalai's admission, and because she disagreed with it, she argued the whole document should be scrapped.

3. Republicanism

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

To clarify, were not talking about the Republican Party Republicanism, but instead the form of government made up of a collection of elected representatives who govern on the behalf of their constituents. This seems to be a repeat sticking point for liberals, who insist conservatives and Donald Trump are out to destroy "democracy" (a system of government that never existed in America). This mix-up explains Szalai's nonsensical interpretation of how the Constitution functions. She criticized the Constitution as "anti-democratic" and a threat to American democracy. If the Constitution is the nation's framework, and if it is "anti-democratic" then how is it a threat to American democracy? This paradox is easily avoided with the understanding that America isn't a democracy, and it never has been.

Kamala Harris' first interview as nominee: Three SHOCKING policy flips

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Thursday, Kamala Harris gave her first interview since Joe Biden stepped down from the race, and it quickly becameclear why she waited so long.

Harris struggled to keep her story straight as CNN's Dana Bash questioned her about recent comments she had made that contradicted her previous policy statements. She kept on repeating that her "values haven't changed," but it is difficult to see how that can be true alongside her radical shift in policy. Either her values have changed or she is lying about her change in policy to win votes. You decide which seems more likely.

During the interview, Harris doubled down on her policy flip on fracking, the border, and even her use of the race card. Here are her top three flip-flops from the interview:

Fracking

Citizens of the Planet / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2019, during the 2020 presidential election, Harris pledged her full support behind a federal ban on fracking during a town hall event. But, during the DNC and again in this recent interview, Harris insisted that she is now opposed to the idea. The idea of banning fracking has been floated for a while now due to environmental concerns surrounding the controversial oil drilling method. Bans on fracking are opposed by many conservatives as it would greatly limit the production of oil in America, thus driving up gas prices across the nation. It seems Harris took this stance to win over moderates and to keep gas prices down, but who knows how she will behave once in office?

Border

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

In her 2020 presidential bid, Harris was all for decriminalizing the border, but now she is singing a different tune. Harris claimed she is determined to secure the border—as if like she had always been a stalwart defender of the southern states. Despite this policy reversal, Harris claimed her values have not changed, which is hard to reconcile. The interviewer even offered Kamala a graceful out by suggesting she had learned more about the situation during her VP tenure, but Kamala insisted she had not changed.

Race

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

When asked to respond to Trump's comments regarding the sudden emergence of Kamala's black ancestry Kamala simply answered "Same old tired playbook, next question" instead of jumping on the opportunity to play the race card as one might expect. While skipping the critical race theory lecture was refreshing, it came as a shock coming from the candidate representing the "everything is racist" party. Was this just a way to deflect the question back on Trump, or have the Democrats decided the race card isn't working anymore?