OSU Student: 'Terrorist' Attack (If You Can Call It That) Was a Misunderstanding

The very reasonable and affable Doc Thompson filled in for Glenn on The Glenn Beck Program to set a few things straight today, Wednesday, December 21.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 2 for answers to these questions:

• How is Doc like Oliver Twist?

• What is RINO Season tweeting?

• How did Obama rig wait times at the VA?

• Are you racist if you don't like Thai food?

• Do Italian and Irish lives matter?

• Is it a misunderstanding if someone purposefully tries to hit you with a car or stab you?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

DOC: Hi, there. I'm Doc Thompson in for Glenn Beck. Thanks so much for joining me today. We're taking your tweets @DocThompsonshow, as we do during my regular morning radio broadcast on TheBlaze Radio Network.

More about me, go to TheBlaze.com, click on channels. And if you would, please follow my channel at TheBlaze.com. Just again, right at the top, you'll see channels and scroll down. And please pay no attention to the picture of me.

Somehow, some way of all the press shots that they've taken over the years, they said, "Let's see if we can find the worst possible picture." Now, I'm not saying any of them are really good. I realize you're starting with this. I get that. That's cool.

Kal, have you seen the picture that they have up there on this?

KAL: I did. You look a little -- what's the word?

DOC: I look like I'm begging for gruel, like I'm Oliver Twist.

Please can I have more? Hello. Hello. Can I have some?

KAL: And the smirk on your face, I got to say, it's kind of douchey. You got a bit of a douchey smirk.

DOC: It's a very douchey smirk. It looks like I'm in pain or passing gas, like I didn't hear the question.

What? What?

KAL: Do you get final approval on the photos they use?

DOC: No. They just put it up there. It's horrible. Look at this. It's horrible.

But of all of that, somebody said -- either this was the first one in the whole series of photos, and they just said, "There's the one. Found one of Doc. Good." Or they're like, "Let's go through and find one, and somebody thinks that looks good."

If that somebody is a female around here, I really question your taste. I really -- I'm starting to think that there's somebody working against me in the company. I think somebody is like, "Let's take him down. Do everything bad. All right. First, we'll start with a really bad photo." So, please, pay no attention to the photo. And, instead, just follow the page.

The tweets coming in. It's RINO Season tweeting: And when Obama says the police acted stupidly, he was doing race relations a solid? Is that right?

Yeah, see, that's the point. He has done so many things wrong when it comes to race relations, and now he's suddenly above it, as he's leaving office, that he's done everything right.

One of the comments he made in the interview he just presented was -- and I'm paraphrasing here, but it was something to the effect of: By every measure, everything is much better now in America.

By every measure or metric, any way you could judge America, everything is better now compared to when he took office.

I could come up with a whole lot of things that are not better, a whole lot of things that are worse. In fact, I saw today, the VA -- look at the VA alone.

If he said, "Wow, we put McDonald in, and everything is great. They got those wait times."

First of all, the wait times that they're reporting are not accurate wait times. All they did -- instead of actually lower the amount of times that veterans have to wait, all they did was change the system or way that they measure them, the way they calculate it. So it seems like they're better." The people aren't actually getting in sooner. They just started measuring or counting different.

It's just a different formula that makes them look better. In fact, they rate -- there's a service that rates veterans hospitals. And they rate them one to five stars. Five being the best, one star being the worst. And there are multiple hospitals, veterans hospitals around the country that went from a certain amount of stars to lesser stars.

I know it was, off the top of my head, Albuquerque, and one in Colorado, went from two stars to one star. But by every metric, things are better in America today. Race relations. The economy.

Relations, in general, are they better today? We all getting along much better than we did in 2008? Health care, is that better? More money? By virtually no metric is it better.

I know one metric it's better in America today. It's better for Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama. It's better for them. Because they are loaded. Lots of power and lots of money.

All right. Another tweet, @DocThompsonshow from Ken Putt: I'm completely with you, but maybe it's time to switch to APR coffee, decaf.

@APRCoffee is American Pride Roasters. It's the official coffee of TheBlaze. AmericanPrideRoasters.com, they have the gift packets. It's the best coffee in America. Try it.

But he's saying maybe I switched to their decaf. And I'm sorry, it's only American Pride Roasters, and it's the Doc Thompson's Bacon Blast Coffee today. Mmm. That's good stuff.

Okay. Before the break, we had a lady challenge and say, "Okay. What's the solution?" I offered one. We need to stop paying attention to this stuff, start treating people well. And the people that don't treat you well, move on. Stop thinking that they have some ulterior racist motive. Sometimes it's a misunderstanding. But there's another way forward.

Race relations in America -- and I have expressed this on my morning radio broadcast from time to time, could be centered around food.

Who doesn't like food, and who doesn't like ethnic foods? You may not like all ethnic foods. But you're going to probably like some ethnic foods.

Kal, is there any ethnic food that you like that has nothing to do with your ethnicity or ethnic background? Anything at all?

KAL: Of course. My favorite food. Mexican. I love Mexican food.

DOC: You're not Mexican.

KAL: I'm nowhere near Mexican.

DOC: So imagine somebody said, "You know, Kal, you have to accept Mexicans along with Mexican foods. I mean, that's a package deal." Even if you were racist, wouldn't you be like? Okay. I'm going to go ahead and take the food. I'll just go ahead and accept them.

KAL: Why wouldn't I accept them?

DOC: Well, I'm saying if you were a racist.

KAL: Oh, okay. So you're telling me, if I'm a racist, I could eat my favorite kind of food, Mexican food, if I accept Mexicans.

DOC: I'm just saying, you start calling the racists out. And you're like, "Okay. So you don't like certain races, whatever, but you certainly love some of their food, don't you?"

I'm saying, we don't know each other, and we start breaking bread with people -- you don't like Asian people. So you don't like that Japanese cuisine? You don't like Thai food? Really, seriously? You're racist?

See, what I'm saying? Then we get together. We start learning about it. Because food is also culture. So they start learning about people and understanding them. So I'm thinking that's part of the key. Food solves so many other problems.

KAL: Food knows no boundaries.

DOC: Right. Exactly. It solves so many other problems. I think you do, you have the food summits. That's how you need to start leading. And actually that has been the case in some ways throughout history in America.

For example, for many years, most of the immigrants to America were primarily from Europe. They were from places like Italy and Germany and Ireland. Places like this.

And the Irish are always going to fail here because Irish food basically sucks. I mean, by comparison, it's just not good. So maybe it's not going to work so good for the Irish. But -- is there a whole lot of racism against Irish people right now?

I mean, the gingers there are, but that's not exclusively Irish. Right? Okay.

But for years, there was racism against people like from Italy and people from Germany, for example.

After World War II, when you had American soldiers that were traipsing all over Europe as part of their efforts in Europe, they come back to America, and they're like, "Hey, so I have this stuff. It's called pizza, right? You got to try this stuff."

People in America didn't know what pizza was. And then they would go into areas of New York where there were -- or other major cities, where there were Italian communities, seeking out such cuisines, and they got to know about it. And how many real -- real claims of and accurate claims of racism against Italians are there in America today?

Oh, come on. Italian lives matter. You don't have that. What do you have? You have Hispanic and black primarily are the claims of racism in America. At one time, a lot of Italians claimed racism. And maybe there was.

The food helped bring us together.

My father, when he was -- grew up in the hills of West Virginia. And he was probably 15, 14, something like this. Shortly after World War II, his sister took a trip to New York. His older sister. And she came back, and she told him about this wonderful food called pizza. He had no concept of it. And she described it to him. And he said at the time, he goes, "I thought it sounded horrible. It's bread with sauce on it. I don't -- what is -- it sounds horrible." He couldn't -- he like couldn't even put it together in his head.

And, of course, pizza is one of the biggest cuisines in America. We even recognize it as pretty much an American cuisine.

So, Kal, I think that food could be one of those ways forward. Think about all the foods around the world you love. All the ethnic cuisines. That's part of the solution to it.

KAL: Totally. I think we can bring all people together with the food.

DOC: That's it.

I love food from all over the place. If I thought for a moment that it wasn't a package deal, I even learn about the cultures, or you just use food to say, "Hey -- think about all the stuff you learn about China from the fortune cookies when you're eating.

KAL: Before you even start a conversation, just, "Here, try this."

Automatically, they're going to be put in a good mood. Wow, this is really good.

DOC: This is really good. That's right. And you know whose that is? Let me tell you about these people.

So Ireland is at a disadvantage there, I admit it. Ethiopia probably at a disadvantage too.

KAL: What's wrong with potatoes? You can have fried potatoes, baked potato, mashed potatoes?

DOC: Yeah, and some of that is okay. But you got to understand, western European food, they don't cook with a lot of spices and stuff. A little bit bland. There are some exceptions. Not horrible. But, I mean, by comparison -- and, by the way, I'm of Irish and German descent or whatever, so -- but by comparison, they lose when it comes to Italian food. Am I wrong?

KAL: I mean, if you're going on full-on meals, I guess they're not as exciting.

DOC: Kal, let's go out for Irish food tonight. Kal, let's go out for Italian tonight.

KAL: I can go for some corned beef and hash and mashed potatoes. That's good stuff.

DOC: Yes, you can go for it. But, Kal, here's your choice: We go Mexican, we go Italian, we go Thai, we go Irish food. Rate those for me.

KAL: Yeah, okay. You're right. Irish is not going to be the top on the list.

DOC: All right. That's it.

All right. Students at the Ohio State University were asked recently by my friend, Faith Goldy, some questions about the terrorists. Well, of course, we had the terrorist attack in Berlin, which is still continuing to unfold this morning. Quick update on that, before I get to the Ohio State story.

Now it looks like there was two drivers or two people in the vehicle. The gentleman that was killed, likely, possibly, probably was hijacked. He was carjacked. They believe the truck, based on their tracking equipment and computers, that somebody tried to start it a couple of times and failed. Maybe without a key or whatever. Tried to get it started. And then at some point, it ended up starting.

It drove toward Berlin for an hour or so, stopped for a couple of hours, and then eventually plowed through the crowd. And then the Polish gentleman, who was likely carjacked or something, was found dead. We don't know how he ended up -- they haven't confirmed if it was self-inflicted, if the guy who carjacked him or the guy who was with him shot him, if a police officer did. They haven't told us that yet. The other guy is still on the lam. He's still out there. They say he's armed and dangerous. The gentleman that they picked up to begin with turned out to not be the guy.

So this is what's going on. A couple of weeks ago, a few ago -- I guess it's probably close to a month ago now, at the Ohio State University, right around Thanksgiving, a guy in a car tried to pull off a -- well, I guess it was a terrorist attack. He wasn't as successful as some.

And in the car, plows into some people. Gets out of the car. Jumps out and starts stabbing people.

Faith Goldy goes there and says, "In light of what's happened there and some of these other automobile attacks, people using their car as a weapon or vehicle as a weapon, let's go talk to the people and find out what they think about this guy who, based on his rants on social media, what we know about him, and ISIS claiming responsibility for, was likely motivated by extremist beliefs. Extremist Islamic beliefs." Not that all Muslims believe this. Not that all Muslims are a part of this nonsense. They are not.

By percentage, very few are. But it's wrong to ignore the motivations to this stuff.

So she went and said, "Hey, what do you think about this? Tell me about this guy. Do you think this was terrorism?" Ask them all kinds of questions. Here's what some of the students at the Ohio State University had to say when she asked.

VOICE: I'm here at Ohio State University, which has just become the setting of ISIS's most recent terrorist attack on --

DOC: Scroll in just a little bit. Scroll in about 30 seconds or so to this.

VOICE: Multiculturalism.

VOICE: Do you feel safe on campus after the attack this week?

VOICE: Yep.

VOICE: You do?

Would you call it a terrorist attack?

VOICE: Depends on what your definition of terrorism is.

VOICE: According to your definition.

VOICE: No.

DOC: Okay. Wait. Wait. Wait. Would you call it a terrorist attack?

It depends on what your definition of terrorism is.

What -- is there another definition of terrorism I don't know? I mean, is it because he wasn't more successful?

It depends on what your definition of terrorism is.

I assume that there was really only one standard. So you mean my definition, like -- Kal, help me out here.

KAL: I'm guessing, you know, attacking, hurting, killing.

DOC: Yes, he did those things. He did all of those things. Yeah, he was responsible for that. It was based on extremist ideology.

KAL: Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Not going to say like tickling falls under terrorism.

DOC: Oh. Is there some way this wouldn't be called terrorism? If he, what? If he wasn't motivated by extremist ideology?

KAL: Perhaps.

DOC: No, it could still be likely terrorism. Okay. A little bit more from the Ohio State University students.

VOICE: No.

VOICE: Would you call what happened terrorism?

VOICE: I don't see -- I don't know what happened. I don't know what it's about. And I think we still have a lot to learn about the incident.

VOICE: ISIS has claimed responsibility.

VOICE: I do realize that. But that doesn't always mean that's what necessarily happened.

VOICE: Would you call this terrorism?

VOICE: I'm not sure.

DOC: Okay. Hold on a second. This guy, he wants to get all the answers. I don't know. I haven't read everything yet. I just want to make sure that I don't say something that's inaccurate. Get all of the facts.

Which I agree with. That's great. I wonder how he feels about Russian hacking during the election. Did he say that as well? Did he also say, "Well, we don't know for sure. Let's wait till all the information comes out?" I would guess probably not. Here's a bit more.

VOICE: I'm not sure. I've been just kind of like keeping updated with the news. I'm not sure like if they've confirmed that --

DOC: Okay. Hold on a second. So she doesn't know because she's been keeping up with the news. Didn't she just say she has been keeping up with the news, but she doesn't know?

So is that a criticism of the news? They haven't given her enough information? Okay. A little bit more.

VOICE: Yeah, so I don't know.

VOICE: Would you call what happened terrorism?

VOICE: No, I wouldn't.

VOICE: No.

VOICE: I would say it was a misunderstanding.

DOC: Okay. There's the one. It wasn't terrorism. It was a misunderstanding. That's all it was.

You know all the times that I have run people over and stabbed them, it was just a misunderstanding. That's all it was. It certainly wasn't terrorism. It was just confusion. I thought it was perfectly acceptable to run people over and stab them.

I mean, Kal, all the times you've killed people, misunderstanding?

KAL: Luckily, I haven't killed people recently.

DOC: Oh.

KAL: But I wouldn't think that that could be something that could be misunderstood though.

DOC: I'm trying to think, what type of misunderstanding could there have been?

KAL: You know, if your wife says, "Hey, pick up some lemons," and I bring home limes. Oh, I'm sorry, I misunderstood.

DOC: Right. That seems a little lighter. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

KAL: Although, I'd be in a lot of trouble. But I can't see how running people over and then getting out of the car and stabbing them --

DOC: Maybe. Maybe your wife said, "Hey, can you go to the store for lemons," and you thought she said, "Hey, can you hit somebody with your car and then jump out and stab them?" Lemons. Hit somebody with your car, jump out, and stab them. Very similar. Something like that, you know.

KAL: No. Not really similar at all, actually.

DOC: Hmm. Maybe it was like this --

KAL: I mean, I know there's lost in translation, but this is a bit much.

DOC: Could be. But I'm thinking, maybe it was something like, hey, you know, if you run into Steve today, tell him I said hi. If you run into Janice --

KAL: Oh, I could see what you're saying -- if you translate or misunderstand, you actually literally run into them.

DOC: Right. Literally ran into Paul or Steve.

Can you do me a favor? You know, if you run into Steve, give him this information.

I don't know how the stabbing comes in. Maybe it's, hey, if you run into Steve, jump out of the car and stab him a couple of times. Maybe it's something like that. Hmm. So it's a misunderstanding.

KAL: I don't think this guy knows what the definition of misunderstanding is.

DOC: I don't know how you would ever misunderstand such things.

Okay. I'm going to get a break in. We'll come back with more of what the students of the Ohio State University believe about this terrorist on this the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DOC: Students at the Ohio State University asked by Faith Goldy a bunch of questions about the guy who jumped -- ran people over with his car around Thanksgiving. Jumped out of the car and started stabbing people. Whether or not it's racist. And the last gentleman said, "No, it was just a misunderstanding."

They had this -- as I touched on at the beginning of the show, they had a -- a memorial service for all people of color that have been killed recently, within months or whatever, by police officers. And they said, just because somebody has done something wrong, it doesn't mean that police officers should execute them. Paraphrasing. But that was the point of it. That police shouldn't just try them. But what they're missing about this case was, police weren't just trying him they were stopping him from killing other people. It didn't matter. I'll share that story with you in just a minute. It's Doc Thompson in for Glenn Beck at the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DOC: Doc Thompson in for Glenn today. Thank you so much for joining me. Coming up on my radio broadcast in the morning on TheBlaze Radio Network, Friday morning, I'm going to let the cat out of the bag and tell a bunch of company secrets.

Until they stop me. So coming up Friday morning -- there's been a lot of questions about what's going on with the radio network. A lot of good stuff. But I'll tell you, some of the stuff going on, cat out of the bag, Friday morning. So please make an appointment now. Friday morning, Blaze Radio Network. 6:00 to 9:00 Eastern time. Just go to TheBlaze.com. Click on radio.

So the Ohio State University Coalition for Black Liberation, whatever that is, headed this memorial for people of color that were killed by police officers recently. And a young lady stood up and read this: She said, in some cases, the deceased may have committed acts of violence against others before they were killed. Perhaps they were domestic abusers. Perhaps they were threatened or killed other people. She said, this possibility is not something to shy away from. The protest against police brutality extends to the innocent and the guilty alike, because we know no matter the crime, justice and due process do not come from a cop's bullet. Which is true. That's the reason that police do not just go out and execute people.

And they didn't execute this guy. The guy who drove his car into a group of people and started stabbing people was stopped by a police officer.

Did she miss that piece of the story? So it would have been better for the police officer to allow him to go on stabbing people, or does she believe they should have subdued him a different way? I love when they say, well, you didn't have to shoot him. You know, like deadly force. Can you just shoot him in the leg? Can you shoot him in the arm or something to stop him? No, you can't.

That's not how it works, folks. Police officers are trained. If you pull your gun and you shoot somebody, you shoot to kill and that's it. There's no wound them. This isn't Hollywood. You watch too many movies.

And if your loved one or you were being stabbed, would you really concern -- now, hang on, police officer. Oh, I'm being stabbed -- hang on. Don't. No, don't shoot him. No, no, no. Try -- just wing him. Hold on. No, no. Use your Taser.

No! You're going to say, "Stop this guy." And that's what they did, and that's what they were supposed to do.

There is an associate professor of English. Her name is (sound effect). She said --

KAL: I'm sorry. What was that?

DOC: (sound effect). That's her name.

KAL: Is that the professional pronunciation?

DOC: Yeah, it's a foreign name, so it's not going to make sense to you. (Sound effect). She said, you can understand where an act of violence comes from without condoning it.

I was like, "Okay. I guess you can understand that. You know, right. Nobody wants to be a criminal. And you could say, hey, this guy (inaudible)."

But that doesn't mean you lead with, hey, this guy had a rough life, don't shoot him. He's stabbing people, so let's think about it before we shoot him.

No, stop him from hurting people. And then you don't lead with, okay. Now let's talk about how rough this guy had it. You talk about what was wrong. What he did wrong. The fact that it was terrorism. The motivation for the terrorism. The victims.

You talk about all these things before you go, "Wow, this guy probably sucked." Right?

Then she called what he did a tragic, tragic mistake. He drove into the people and it was just a tragic mistake.

Stephanie Clemance Thompson -- cousin Stephanie who is an associate director of residency there said that the gentleman in question, the terrorist (sound effect), was a Buckeye. This was --

KAL: Sorry, one more time?

DOC: (sound effect). Again, a foreign name, Kal. You're not going to understand it.

She posted on social media: He's a Buckeye, a member of our family. If you think it's okay to celebrate his death and/or share pictures of his dead body -- if I see it in my time line, I will unfriend you. Because he's a Buckeye. #Buckeyestrong, #BlackLivesMatter.

So that's her concern? That you're posting pictures -- you're mocking him. You know why people are posting pictures and mocking him? Because they're upset, they're frustrated, they're scared, they're angry. All of these things, based on his actions. Not on his race. His ideas. His religion. None of this stuff.

She said, "I pray you will find compassion for his life, as troubled as it clearly was. Think of the pain he must have been under to feel his actions were the only solution."

Now, I mentioned the Brock Turner thing. Do they say the same thing when it comes to Brock Turner or rapists? Do they ever say, "Wait a minute, let's give the racist some credit here. I'm sure they don't want to be racist. What are they going through in their life? They must have really been jonesing for some strange in order to go out and rape somebody, right? They were just looking for a hookup." No, they don't say that. They say, "No, it's wrong. No means no." They never say nice things about it, "Let's take their past into consideration." They never say any of that stuff. They say simply, "It's wrong." Why the double standard? Because it doesn't fit the agenda.

These people say they need safe spaces from perception. Their perceptions of you and me and things you say. Perceived slights. Perceived insults. No, I mean, sometimes they actually are insults. But their safe spaces have not been strictly limited to that. And many times, in many cases, they'll say, "Well, I think he meant this, or I believe that, or I thought I heard."

So they need safe spaces from the perceived harsh words that you or somebody else present. But terrorists, they don't need safe spaces from that. He needs to be understood. Don't shoot him because that's just executing him.

So their safe spaces are for words. Meanwhile, when they are actually in danger and in jeopardy, they don't need a safe space, it's good.

What kind of twisted logic is that? What kind of nonsense is that?

I cannot wrap my head around it. So I was taught sticks and stones break my bones, words won't hurt me. Theirs is completely flipped around. It is: Words will hurt me, and a knife and a car will not. Vehicular assault, that's good. That actually won't hurt me. Come on, kids.

You were just run over and stabbed. Pick yourself up, dust yourself off. What do I tell you? Words and names may cause you pain, but cars and knives, they won't hurt you. So just suck it up.

It's just bizarre.

Hey, did you see the Oscars have a possibility, for the first time in history, of having somebody win both the male and female best acting categories?

(laughter)

Somebody has been nominated for both the male and female best acting category. Kelly Mantle was born a male, but plays a transgender prostitute in Confessions of a Womanizer. Whatever that is. And Mantle calls himself an actor on Instagram, but also appeared in RuPaul's Drag Race. Whatever that is. And has also said that he -- she is gender fluid. Not just transitioning. Because transitioning would say, "I was born a man, but I've always known I'm a woman." So he would only be by their progressive Hollywood logical a female and, therefore, eligible for the female category.

But he's gender fluid. So at any given moment, he could be male or female. He just vacillates back and forth. So I imagine if they nominate him for both categories, at any moment, he may not fit that category. But he may again in a minute, a day later. So I imagine it would go like this.

He -- this person is in the audience. Right? Okay. The best actress award goes to -- and at that moment, he's probably female, making him eligible to win. And then he would win it. And, yes, I won. But then as they get ready to read the male winner, probably gender fluid over to the male category. He's gender fluid.

Producers say they weren't sure what category to put him in because when they years ago split the reminder list -- this is a list that they send out to all the people that vote in the Academy, this little controlled group, into male and female categories. And he fits both since he's gender fluid.

So they said, "Just put him in both. Just easier. Just put him in both since he's gender fluid. We don't know what he is today. Throw him in both. And who knows, he may fit that."

You know, I don't agree with or fully understand people that say they are transgender. I try to, and I say, "Wow, that must be really horrible, if you feel this -- you know, you've always been trapped in somebody else's body." I can empathize -- sympathize with them and say, "That sucks. I don't wish you any ill will. You have a right to live your life. I don't want to keep you down. Go forth with personal freedoms and personal responsibility and live your life. And if you grant me the same respect, we'll have a fine relationship."

I can -- it must suck if you want to go into a certain restroom. I get all that. The simple solution to restrooms are you just make them all unisex. One person. One bathroom. And there you go. Move on. So we can move on.

But gender fluid, I got to call foul on. That one I'm calling foul on. That's BS. That is definitely BS. If you're gender -- let me help you out, if you're gender fluid or believe you're gender fluid, you're female. No, no, if you cannot make up your mind, you're female. Guys can make up their mind. No guy is saying, "You know, today, I'm just feeling kind of effeminate. Today, I just need help. Today, I just need some understanding and chocolate, okay? I just need that. I'm not looking for you to solve my problems. I just want to you listen." No guy is saying that.

Guys know -- males know, even women who say they've been transitioning to a male always felt like they were trapped in a female body, but they identify as male, they know. They know they're male. Women don't know. Women are the ones who, "Today I just need to be held." The other, "You know, if you think you can keep me down, what do you think I need a male? I need a man like a fish needs a bicycle." You're the one vacillating. Right? That's what I'm saying.

If you believe you're gender fluid, help me out, you're female. You're gender female. That's just how it is.

Kal, based on your experiences as a married man, do you dispute what I say?

KAL: No. No, not at all. Pretty much -- you nailed it down right there.

(laughter)

No misunderstanding.

DOC: No misunderstandings.

Does your wife ever not fully have an answer, or is she ever undecided, Kal?

KAL: No.

DOC: Does she ever change her mind? Is she ever fluid about where you're going to go to dinner, where the couch in the living room should go, what you're buying for Christmas, where you're vacationing, how to rear the child?

KAL: If she's asking that question, no, she always knows. If you're asking that question, eh, sometimes there's some variations. There's some questions.

DOC: Uh-huh. So today she knows exactly how she wants the living room setup, right? The couch goes in a certain corner.

KAL: Yes, she does. Uh-huh.

DOC: Is that static? Will she have that same idea six months from now?

KAL: No. She will --

DOC: So she is feng shui fluid?

KAL: Yes. Very feng shui fluid.

DOC: Okay.

KAL: Feng fluid.

DOC: She is interior design fluid?

KAL: Yes.

DOC: And what about what you should be consuming and what she is going to consume, what you're going to have for dinner tonight? Is she ever -- is she always static about her decisions?

KAL: No.

DOC: Okay. See, same thing. Hence, women don't make up their mind. They're fluid about many things. If you believe you're gender fluid, you are simply gender female. Quick break. Back with more on this. The Glenn Beck Program.

(OUT AT 9:50AM)

DOC: Hey, if you would, please follow me on Twitter, it's @DocThompsonshow. I'm pretty active on Twitter, so I'll engage with you, even after the program. @DocThompsonshow. Please follow me. Mickey Dunn tweeting, @DocThompsonshow and @Kal79. That's K-A-L79 for Kal, who is the producer today in New York.

Clearly, the students at Ohio State misunderstand what terrorism is. Yeah, they've had a misunderstanding -- which is more likely, they misunderstand what terrorism is, or the terrorists misunderstood? Yeah.

@DocThompsonshow from inseparable on Twitter. Women have the ability to ask what you want for dinner and inform you that you are wrong at the same time.

Yeah, that's true. How many times have you had this conversation, Kal? What do you want for dinner? I don't care. I don't care. So you're like, "Okay. I'll make a decision. How about we just go get that?" No, I don't want that.

KAL: That's every night.

DOC: I know. It's like -- I will -- I just tell her, "Whatever you want. Whatever you want." And finally, if she keeps saying -- I finally go, "Okay. Do you want me to make a decision or not? I'll make a decision."

KAL: I get this. She'll pick something, and then we'll go. And maybe it's not the greatest. And she's like, "This is why I don't pick. See. Because every time I pick, it's something bad."

DOC: Okay. But does she always automatically go along with what you say?

KAL: No. No.

DOC: Exactly. That's what I said. They're fluid when it comes to that.

MacAvoy tweeting: RuPaul's Drag Race has nothing to do with fast cars.

Can you imagine how confusing that would be? If I was RuPaul, I would actually invite friends to a drag race, to a NASCAR -- no, NASCAR is not drag, I guess. But to a car race.

KAL: A literal drag race.

DOC: A literal drag race between race cars and say, "Meet me down -- I had no idea this is what you meant."

KAL: They show up dressed up, it might be --

DOC: They look fabulous though. By that, I mean fabulous!

Micky Dunn @DocThompsonShow @Kal79, I feel like I'm a rock, but I'm trapped in the wrong body. I blame Krispy Kreme.

Yes, I have the same trouble. The same trouble.

All right. Calls coming up. We got a bunch of people that want to chime in. We'll get to your calls next. It's 888-727-BECK. 888-727-BECK. And also, a way that you can help out the little snowflakes who have been so upset since Donald Trump got elected. The ones who need those safe spaces. A way that you can help them out. You are going to love this.

Featured Image: Getty Images

The Deep State's NEW plan to backstab Trump

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

We cannot make the same mistake we made in 2016 — celebrating victory while the deep state plots its next move.

In 2016, Donald Trump shocked the world by defeating Hillary Clinton. Conservatives cheered, believing we’d taken back the reins of our country. But we missed the bigger battle. We failed to recognize the extent of the damage caused by eight years of Barack Obama and decades of progressive entrenchment. The real war isn’t won at the ballot box. It’s being waged against an insidious force embedded deep within our institutions: the administrative state, or the “deep state.”

This isn’t a new problem. America’s founders foresaw it, though they didn’t have a term for “deep state” back in the 1700s. James Madison, in Federalist 48, warned us that combining legislative, executive, and judicial powers in the same hands is “the very definition of tyranny.” Yet today, that’s exactly where we stand. Unelected bureaucrats in agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Justice hold more power than the officials we vote for. They control the levers of government with impunity, dictating policies and stifling change.

This is the fight for the soul of our nation. The founders’ vision of a constitutional republic is under siege.

We’ve felt the consequences of this growing tyranny firsthand. During COVID-19, so-called experts ran our lives, crushing civil liberties under the guise of public safety. Our intelligence agencies and justice system turned into weapons of political warfare, targeting a sitting president and his supporters. Meanwhile, actual criminals were given a pass, turning American cities into lawless war zones.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1816 that “the functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty and property of their constituents.” Today, we see Jefferson’s prophecy fulfilled. The deep state exercises unchecked power over our freedoms, and information itself is controlled by the fourth branch of government: the legacy media.

Even when we win elections, the deep state doesn’t concede defeat. It switches to survival mode. Trump’s first term proved this. Despite a historic mandate to dismantle the bureaucracy, the deep state fought back with everything it had: leaks, investigations, court rulings, and obstruction at every turn. And now, with the possibility of Trump returning to office, the deep state is preparing to do it again.

Progressives are laying out their attack plan — and they’re not even hiding it.

U.S. Rep. Wiley Nickel (D-N.C.) recently boasted about forming a “shadow cabinet” to govern alongside the deep state, regardless of who’s in the White House. Nickel called it “democracy’s insurance policy.” Let’s be clear: This isn’t insurance. It’s sabotage.

They’ll employ a “top down, bottom up, inside out” strategy to overwhelm and collapse any effort to reform the system. From the top, federal judges and shadow officials will block Trump’s every move. Governors in blue states like California and New York are gearing up to resist federal authority. During Trump’s first term, California filed over 100 lawsuits against his administration. Expect more of the same starting January 20.

From the bottom, progressive groups like the American Civil Liberties Union will flood the streets with protesters, much as they did to oppose Trump’s first-term immigration reforms. They’ve refined their tactics since 2016 and are prepared to unleash a wave of civil unrest. These aren’t spontaneous movements; they’re coordinated assaults designed to destabilize the administration.

Finally, from the inside, the deep state will continue its mission of self-preservation. Agencies will drag their feet, leak sensitive information, and undermine policies from within. Their goal is to make everything a chaotic mess, so the heart of their power — the bureaucratic core — remains untouched and grows stronger.

We cannot make the same mistake we made in 2016 — celebrating victory while the deep state plots its next move. Progressives never see themselves as losing. When they’re out of power, they simply shift tactics, pumping more blood into their bureaucratic heart. We may win elections, but the war against the deep state will only intensify. As George Washington warned in his Farewell Address, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force; and force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”

This is the fight for the soul of our nation. The founders’ vision of a constitutional republic is under siege. The deep state has shown us its plan: to govern from the shadows, circumventing the will of the people. But now that the shadows have been exposed, we have a choice. Will we accept this silent tyranny, or will we demand accountability and reclaim our nation’s heart?

The battle is just beginning. We can’t afford to lose.

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

Drone mystery exposes GLARING government incompetence

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone issue is getting way out of hand.

Earlier this month, Glenn first reported on the mysterious drones stalking the night sky over New Jersey, but the situation is increasingly concerning as the sightings have escalated. Not only have drones been seen across the Northeast Coast, including over New York City, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, but recently, they have been spotted over the night skies of San Diego and other parts of Southern California.

It doesn't take an expert to identify the potential dangers and risks that dozens of undetectable, unidentified six-foot or larger drones pose to national security. Yet, our government's response has been one of unimaginable incompetence, leaving us to speculate on the origin and intention of these drones and wonder in astonishment at the government's ineptitude. Here are three examples of the government's lackluster response to the mystery drones:

Iranian Mothership and Missing Nuclear Warheads

- / Stringer | Getty Images

After several weeks of hubbub, New Jersey Representative, Jeff Van Drew gave an interview on Fox News where he claimed that the drones originated from an Iranian "mothership" off the East Coast of the United States. This theory has since been disproven by satellite images, which show that all Iranian drone carriers are far from U.S. shores. Another theory suggests that drones may be equipped with sensors capable of detecting nuclear material and that they are looking for a nuclear warhead that recently went missing! With these apocalyptic theories gaining traction in the absence of any real answer from our government, one can't help but question the motive behind the silence.

Pentagon's Limp Wristed Response

Alex Wong / Staff | Getty Images

In a recent press conference, national security spokesman John Kirby responded to reporters demanding answers about the government's lack of transparency, which has caused increasing public anxiety. He insisted that the drones did not pose a threat and were not assets of a foreign power, such as from Iran or China--even though he is still uncertain about their identity and origin. He also claimed that many of the sightings were simply misidentifications of normal aircraft.

This lackluster answer has only further inflamed national anxieties and raised even more questions. If the government is unsure of the identity of the drones, how do they know if they are a threat or if they aren't foreign assets? If they aren't foreign, does that mean they are U.S. assets? If so, why not just say so?

The Pentagon has also stated that they are leaving it up to local law enforcement to spearhead the investigation after concluding that these drones pose no threat to any military installation. This has left many feeling like the federal government has turned a blind eye to a serious issue that many Americans are very concerned about.

Where's Pete Buttigieg?

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

We are in the closing weeks of the Biden administration, and with the finish line in sight, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg probably figured nothing else could go wrong on his watch—but boy was he wrong. As Secretary of Transportation, Buttigieg is in charge of the FAA, the agency responsible for managing all air traffic across the nation. One would think that mysterious, 6-foot-long, seemingly intractable drones are invisible on radar and flying above major cities would pose a serious threat to the myriad of legal aircraft that traverse our skies. Yet, Buttigieg has been silent on the issue, adding another failure to his resume which includes: malfunctioning airplanes, the train derailment in Ohio, and the Baltimore Key Bridge collapse, just to name a few.

Glenn: How Alvin Bragg turned hero Daniel Penny into a villain

Michael M. Santiago / Staff | Getty Images

We cannot allow corrupt institutions to punish those who act to protect life and liberty.

America no longer has a single, shared understanding of justice. Two Americas now exist, each applying justice differently depending on who you are and where you live. One America, ruled by common sense and individual courage, praises heroes who stand up to protect others. The other, driven by political agendas and corrupted institutions, punishes those same heroes for daring to act.

This stark division couldn’t be clearer than in the case of Daniel Penny, the Marine whose trial in New York City this week drew strong reactions from both sides across the divided line of justice.

If we let this slide, we accept a world in which heroes are treated as criminals and the law is a weapon for ideological warfare.

Penny was on a subway train last year when Jordan Neely — a man suffering from severe mental illness and reportedly high on drugs — began threatening passengers, saying, “I’m going to kill you all.” The fear on that subway car was palpable, but nobody moved. Nobody, that is, until Penny did what needed to be done. He took action to protect innocent lives.

In the America many of us used to believe in, Penny’s response would be heralded as heroic. His actions mirrored the courage of Todd Beamer on Flight 93, who, on September 11, 2001, rallied others with the words, “Let’s roll,” to prevent further tragedy. But in New York, courage doesn’t seem to count anymore. There, the system turns heroes into villains.

Penny subdued Neely using a chokehold, intending only to restrain him, not kill him. Tragically, Neely died. Penny, filled with remorse, told the police he never meant to hurt anyone. Yet, instead of being recognized for protecting others from a clear and present threat, Penny stood trial for criminally negligent homicide.

In Alvin Bragg’s New York, justice bends to ideology. The Manhattan district attorney has made a career of weaponizing the law, selectively prosecuting those who don’t fit his narrative. He’s the same prosecutor who twisted legal precedent to go after Donald Trump on business charges no one had ever faced before. Then, he turned his sights on Daniel Penny.

A jury may have acquitted Penny, but what happened in New York City this week isn’t justice. When the rule of law changes depending on the defendant’s identity or the prosecutor's political motives, we’re no longer living in a free country. We’re living in a state where justice is a game, and ordinary Americans are the pawns.

The system failed Jordan Neely

It’s worth asking: Where were activists like Alvin Bragg when Neely was suffering on the streets? Jordan Neely was a tragic figure — a man with a long history of mental illness and over 40 arrests, including violent assaults. The system failed him long before he stepped onto that subway train. Yet rather than confront that uncomfortable truth, Bragg’s office decided to target the man who stepped in to prevent a tragedy.

This isn’t about justice. It’s about power. It’s about advancing a narrative where race and identity matter more than truth and common sense.

It’s time to demand change

The Daniel Penny case — and others like it — is a wake-up call. We cannot allow corrupt institutions to punish those who act to protect life and liberty. Americans must demand an end to politically driven prosecutions, hold DAs like Alvin Bragg accountable, and stand up for the principle that true justice is blind, consistent, and fair.

If we let this slide, we accept a world in which heroes are treated as criminals and the law is a weapon for ideological warfare. It’s time to choose which America we want to live in.

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

CEO Brian Thompson's killer reveals COWARDICE of the far-left death cult

Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Early on the chilly morning of Wednesday, December 4th, Brian Thompson, CEO of health insurance giant, UnitedHealthcare, was walking through Midtown Manhattan on his way to a company conference. Suddenly, a masked and hooded figure silently allegedly stepped onto the sidewalk behind Thompson, drew a 3-D printed, silenced pistol, and without warning fired multiple shots into Thompson's back before fleeing the scene on an electric bicycle. After a multiple-day manhunt, a 26-year-old lead suspect was arrested at a McDonald's in Altoona, Pennsylvania after being recognized by an employee.

This was not "vigilante justice." This was cold-blooded murder.

As horrific as the murder of a husband and father in broad daylight in the center of New York City is, the story only gets worse. Even before the murder suspect was arrested, left-wing extremists were already taking to X to call him a "hero" and a "vigilante" who "took matters into his own hands." Even the mainstream media joined in on the glorification, as Glenn pointed out on air recently, going out of the way to show how physically attractive the murder suspect was. This wave of revolting and nihilistic fanfare came in response to the findings of online investigators who surmised the murder suspect's motives to retaliate against healthcare companies for corruption and denied coverage. The murder suspect supposedly underwent a major back surgery that left him with back pain, and some of his internet fans apparently viewed his murder of Thompson as retribution for the mistreatment that he and many other Americans have suffered from healthcare companies.

The murder suspect and his lackeys don't seem to understand that, other than depriving two children of their father right before Christmas, he accomplished nothing.

The murder suspect failed to achieve his goal because he was too cowardly to try.

If the murder suspect's goals were truly to "right the wrongs" of the U.S. healthcare system, he had every tool available to him to do so in a constructive and meaningful manner. He came from a wealthy and prominent family in the Baltimore area, became the valedictorian at a prestigious all-boys prep school, and graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a master's in engineering. Clearly, the murder suspect was intelligent and capable, and if he had put his talent into creating solutions for the healthcare industry, who knows what he could have accomplished?

This is the kind of behavior the far-left idolizes, like communists on college campuses who wear shirts that celebrate the brutal Cuban warlord, Che Guevara. Merchandise celebrating the UnitedHealthcare CEO murder suspect is already available, including shirts, hoodies, mugs, and even Christmas ornaments. Will they be sporting his face on their T-shirts too?

This macabre behavior does not breed creation, achievement, success, or life. It only brings death and risks more Americans falling into this dangerous paradigm. But we still have a chance to choose life. We just have to wake up and take it.