WATCH: Unanswered questions surrounding Boston Marathon bombing

Part 1:

Part 2:

Now, some interesting new developments in the Boston Marathon attack as well. The media, quick to latch onto the lone wolf theory – you know, well, who are these guys, really? And then they immediately went, well, it was their religion. I’m not sure what religion.

But as the investigation continues to pan out, it is becoming increasingly likely that this event being done by a couple of guys who were just radicalized solely by taking the wrong turn on Google search is as likely as Benghazi happening because of a YouTube video. That’s not the truth. Lawmakers now say the Tsarnaev brothers were trained before the attack. Here’s a Congressman, Michael McCaul, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. Watch this.

VIDEO

Rep. Michael McCaul: I think given the level of sophistication of this device, the fact that the pressure cooker is a signature device that goes back to Pakistan, Afghanistan, leads me to believe – and the way they handled these devices and the tradecraft – leads me to believe that there was a trainer, and the question is where is that trainer or trainers?

Okay, who is the trainer? Remember, this guy is a Republican. Now, let me give you the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, also revealing that the FBI is investigating persons of interest here inside the United States.

VIDEO

George Stephanopoulos: Do you know of any other people here in the United States who might have been part of this process of radicalizing Tamerlan?

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger: This is part of the investigation. It’s a domestic investigation, and it’s an international investigation. And we’re really good at this. The FBI’s very good with that, working with our other agencies. There are persons of interest in the United States.

Let me give you another Democrat. This is a Democrat Representative in the House on the House Intelligence Committee. He said he believed the Russians know more than they are telling us now.

VIDEO

Rep. Adam Schiff: But at the same time, if they were up on the mother or on someone related to the mother and listening, there’s got to be a basis for why they went up on her electronically or why they went up on one of her affiliates or associates. We don’t know that. We haven’t received that information from the Russians. I think they do know more than they’re telling us.

Okay, now here’s what’s of particular interest: the fact that the Russian authorities recorded a conversation between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his mother back in 2011. They’re talking about jihad together, and there’s a second call that was recorded between the suspects’ mother and an unnamed man under FBI investigation living in southern Russia.

The Russians just provided this information to United States over the weekend, so why were the Russians recording the phone call in the first place? What do they know? Well, again, there’s no answer yet. That seems to be the theme around many of the stories today. There are more questions than answers, but there’s something different, because it used to always take time. But there was something else that we used to also have, and that was trust for our own government, trust that eventually we would get to the meaning, trust that there were people actually trying to do the right thing.

The issue of the Miranda rights has caused all kinds of disagreement in the Boston Marathon attack investigation, and here’s where I stand. If you’re not a citizen, sorry, dude. If you are a citizen, you need to be granted those rights, no matter how big of a dirt bag you may be. It only counts when we uphold the rights of the people we really don’t want to give rights to. That’s when it’s important.

But there is controversy surrounding how the surviving suspect was Mirandized. A federal judge – her name is Marianne Bowler. She decided to go it alone. She went down to the hospital, and she rushed down there to set up a makeshift proceeding and read the suspect his rights. It’s like 16 hours into it. That’s important to remember.

According to House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers, the FBI was “not happy about it” because, “They believed they needed more time. This is not a good way to stop another bomb from going off.” The FBI reportedly was blindsided and stunned when the judge showed up. Tsarnaev was providing valuable intelligence information and then suddenly stopped after his rights were read by this particular judge.

The FBI believes valuable information now has been lost due to the actions of this judge. So who is this judge? Who is the judge? Well, the Supreme Court held that a suspect has to be brought before the judicial officer within 48 hours. You’ve got 48 hours. The suspect has to be read their rights no matter what at 48 hours.

I believe you should be Mirandized right away, but others argue that the FBI should have been allowed the full 48 hours under the law. Okay, we can go back and forth on that one all day. Are you going to get to the next bomb, if there is a bomb? Okay, the debate goes on, and everybody’s focused on this debate, but nobody is looking at this judge.

Whether or not…is this legal? Yeah, but her timing is very interesting. We reached out to Judicial Watch. We asked them, how common is it for a judge to insert themselves into a case like this? Here’s what they told us in a statement just this afternoon. “What is unusual is the reported surprise of the FBI and the other officials at the turn of events. It looks as if the DOJ went around the FBI. The DOJ reportedly coordinated with everyone but the FBI.”

So in other words, Eric Holder went and coordinated with this judge but nobody else. Now, that seems strange for the chief law enforcement officer, doesn’t it? “Arraignments and other court proceedings do sometimes take place in hospitals. Once he was charged by justice in a federal court, it was a matter of time before Tsarnaev would have been read his rights. Don’t blame the judges, blame the Justice Department.”

Okay. Well, now let’s look at this here for a second, because I’ve got another theory. If you go by Judicial Watch, this is the decision of Eric Holder. But I again think we should ask who is this judge? Well, we started today just by going over her resume, and it’s fairly normal except for one part of her resume, a strange string of facts. One of her hobbies and interests include traveling overseas to Muslim countries for speaking engagements all the time.

She was the first female judge to speak in Kuwait. She also appeared at the United Arab Emirates, and let me put aside here for a second another big piece. She also visited the U.S. embassy in Belgrade, but besides that one, all of her international trips, she goes to Muslim countries to speak to them.

And here’s the last piece of this: She made a trip to Egypt last year. Now, this according to the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, she was there for a conference on cross-border financial investigations organized by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations in cooperation with the Egyptian judicial and law enforcement authorities.

Okay, so the Department of Homeland Security picks her to go because she keeps going over to the Middle East. They pick her to go and be a part of this, but that’s not the only reason why she was there. She also was to meet with the defense team and observe the trial of the six NGOs accused of receiving foreign funding and operating illegally in the country. Do you remember this?

We talked about how strange this was during the Arab Spring. All of these kids from both the Republicans and the Democrats, they were all there, and they were accused of funding street protest during the heat of the Arab Spring. Everybody was chanting for democracy, and the radical leftists rushed to Egypt to help and so did all of these kids. And they were scooped up, and they were held.

And then all of a sudden, they were just released. Yet, that’s one of the reasons why that judge was there. What is it about this judge and her particular interest in the Muslim countries? What is happening here? Is this just a coincidence? Maybe, very well may be. Why is she so eager to defend those who are fueling the riots? Oh, probably because she’s in good graces with this administration, and those weren’t riots; those were freedom fighters to help the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood.

We’ll continue to seek answers on all of the questions in the stories, but like I said, only more questions are coming, not more answers, including the crazy mother of the Boston bombing suspect. Something’s wrong here. She has said some truly outrageous things. Watch.

VIDEO

Zubeidat Tsarnaev: They already are talking about that we are terrorists. I am terror – they told that I was doing some terroristic, you know. What did they tell? Some kind of operation, I was kind of preparing here or I already did something, I don’t know. People are telling different, you know, information I get. They already want me, him, and all of us to look as terrorists. So yes, I would prefer not to live in American now. Why did I even go there? Why? I thought America was going to like protect us, our kids. It’s going to be safe for like any reason.

Yeah, it’d be safe. You could come over. You could be, you know, part of let’s say a marathon, and you wouldn’t be blown up. Yeah, I don’t know why you came here. I ain’t gonna miss you. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Here’s the amazing thing here is if you don’t like America, if you don’t trust America, she rings true to you. She rings true to you. This is important. She also told the Associated Press, “I’m sick and tired of all this nonsense that they make up about me and my children. People know me as a regular person…” Yeah, they did Lee Harvey Oswald, too.

“…and I’ve never been mixed up in any criminal intentions, especially any linked to terrorism.” Never been mixed up in crime, really? That is quite a bold statement considering we have the mug shot. She shoplifted $1,600 in merchandise from Lord &Taylor. Ironically, Lord & Taylor is the store that also had the videotape of her sons planting the bombs.

Also, we have now the taped phone conversations that she had with her son about jihad, and another person on the watch list, so it’s quite a statement to make. But again, if you listen to her, and you don’t like us, if you mistrust us, she rings true. It causes more doubt.

The reaction of the mom, the dad, the crazy aunt, all of this, immediately discredits the United States, but not just outside, here at home as well, I believe. The assumptions are so cartoonish, they’re so fake, it’s role-playing. Why would she leap to such bizarre, unsupported conclusions without any evidence at all? Why would she point the finger to America? Why would she say, “I’ve never done anything”? Because most people won’t look it up.

This is the tactic they use against Israel. We haven’t had it used here in our own country. This is the first time. This is something new for America. This has moved us into a new place, because what’s different this time is we don’t trust our own government. Back on September 11, we would all stand together, but now we have an inherent distrust of the U.S. We have an inherent distrust of the media. We know we’re not getting the truth.

And remember, back after September 11, the truthers didn’t ring true to anybody, because we would never have believed that before. The truthers are a mixed bag. It’s Ahmadinejad, radical Muslims, and Michael Moore, and all they have to do is plant the seeds of doubt whenever and wherever they can. With her and her husband’s stories changing in such a strategic way, I can’t help but wonder – is somebody coaching her?

I said this is a lot like Israel. Let me bring you up to speed on one other thing, one other thing I haven’t seen anybody talk about. On the day of the bombings, everybody lept to connect the bombings to the tax day and the Tea Party. Have you heard anybody point out that April 15 was also the 65th anniversary of Israel’s independence? I mean, given the bombers were radical Islamists…reasonable to search for the connection there?

Should we expect that the tactics of bombings and terror normally used against Israel to happen here more frequently? By the way, the White House cared about this 65th anniversary of Israel so much that they say well, because of sequester, we had to cancel the dinner celebration for the Jewish Heritage Month at the White House.

Yeah. Oh, and one other thing: here’s the bombing scene, and you’ll notice that this is the area here, and there’s the Israeli flag. I mean, is it too much to assume that maybe – has anybody looked for the Saudi on the surveillance tape from the day before? The scripts don’t match. The media is not telling you the truth. The government is also not telling you the truth.

And I have to tell you, I thought about it a lot this weekend. I thought, you know what, maybe everybody else in the media has gotten the call saying hey, look, you’re harming the investigation. That doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t make any sense at all, because they would’ve called us. Somebody would have said to us, but instead, we have law-enforcement officials calling us. We have people in the federal government who are instrumental in this case calling us saying please don’t give up on this…please, please, please.

The administration keeps downplaying the threat of Al Qaeda, downplaying – it’s crazy talk to even say anything about Saudi Arabia. They say that Al Qaeda is decimated, but yet their activities seem to be ramping up. They say nothing is happening, could possibly happen with Saudi Arabia, and yet the Saudi Arabians, their fingerprints are all over this.

We told about the incidents in Canada and Spain. Now there’s a story today about the terrorists beginning their spring offensive, something that we’ve been afraid of seeing happen here. It may just be getting started. This is something I’ve told you for years that when we would really be weak, when our enemies felt, okay I think they’re done. They’re at their weakest point, they’d say “go.” Are we there?

The way our government has gone out of their way to lend credibility to the secular and legitimate Muslim Brotherhood while denying any potency left in Al Qaeda and other spinoff radical Islamic terror organizations, we have set ourselves up for big, big trouble, and I don’t think anybody except the few in Washington and in our law-enforcement agencies really care.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not secular, and the only thing legitimate about them is the threat that they pose to you and your family. They have been exported around the world, and they go to work radicalizing people. That’s what they do. They are basically an extension of Saudi Arabia and the radicals there.

The Muslim Brotherhood is financed by contributions from their members, and many of those members just happen to be in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They fund many of these mosques, in fact, the mosque the bombers attended in Boston, the Islamic Society of Boston, the ISB, Islamic Society of Boston. They admitted to receiving millions of dollars from Saudi banks.

It’s run by the Muslim American Society, the MAS, which has been described by prosecutors as a North American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Extreme radical Yusuf al-Qaradawi, former trustee at the Islamic Society of Boston. It was founded by an Al Qaeda fundraiser who’s currently serving time in federal prison, and the current imam who also spoke at the Islamic Society of Boston said, “grab onto the shovel, grab onto the gun, and the sword.”

The list goes on and on, and this is just one mosque, the one in Boston. There are many. America cannot continue to ignore the warning signs, but it is more than just an administration failing to recognize the warning signs. This administration is aiding and abetting. They are adding to the warning signs.

Let me give you this warning sign. This is from a concerned Islamic leader. This guy is a good guy, speaking at the State Department in 1999. He said – remember ’99 – “The most dangerous thing that is going on now in these mosques…is the extremists’ ideology…because they are very active…They took over more than 80 percent of the mosques that have been established in the U.S.…A danger might suddenly come that you are not looking for…We don’t know where it is going to hit.”

Islamists call the mosques a rabat. It means “military fortress.” They’ve basically set up the radical Islamic version of the Mafia. The Brotherhood and CAIR and other legitimate organizations are then filled with the made guys. They’re completely legitimate. Uh huh. Really? I’ve seen The Sopranos. This is the Islamic version of The Sopranos. They sit around the table in the scheme while the rabats have the mob enforcers carrying out their hits. And that’s what those two kids were.

We keep going out of our way to help Saudi Arabia in times when we really shouldn’t be. Why, is the question. Why are we helping the Muslim Brotherhood? There’s a deal with Saudi Arabia, and I think we all know it. I mean, geez President Bush, I think actually kissed one of the princes on the lips. It was creepy.

We outwardly claim to have a mutual enemy in Al Qaeda, and we tell the Saudi’s, and they tell us, hey, we’re both against Al Qaeda, but in reality, we should say our enemy is not only Al Qaeda which came from within you, but the Islamic radicals that believe that jihad is more than an internal struggle also come from you.

Al Qaeda believes this. The Muslim Brotherhood believes this. Hezbollah believes this. Much of Saudi Arabia believes this. And why are we helping them? We’ve helped them in Egypt. We’ve helped them in Syria. We’re helping them now in Syria. It was Al Qaeda who was blamed for Benghazi, because we were running guns through Turkey into Syria, for what? For the Muslim Brotherhood at the request of Saudi Arabia.

We have helped fund the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood. I will tell you one thing that the press will not, nor will the administration, or the terrorists’ mom, and this is the good part; I want you to know while all of these questions are out here, I want you to know that I personally have seen patriotic Americans coming out of the woodwork in our government right now and coming out of the woodwork in law enforcement.

They will not sit down. They are warning. They are begging for someone to listen. I don’t know why the rest of the networks won’t do it. I don’t know why anybody else won’t do it, but people are being threatened with jail time now for helping. But they’re not going to sit down, and this is much bigger than you think and much bigger and different than you are being told. You keep asking questions, and know that we here at TheBlaze will continue to do the same.

Mark Carney's bombshell victory: Is Canada doomed under his globalist agenda?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.

PHOTOS: Inside Glenn's private White House tour

Image courtesy of the White House

In honor of Trump's 100th day in office, Glenn was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Naturally, Glenn's visit wasn't solely confined to the interview, and before long, Glenn and Trump were strolling through the majestic halls of the White House, trading interesting historical anecdotes while touring the iconic home. Glenn was blown away by the renovations that Trump and his team have made to the presidential residence and enthralled by the history that practically oozed out of the gleaming walls.

Want to join Glenn on this magical tour? Fortunately, Trump's gracious White House staff was kind enough to provide Glenn with photos of his journey through the historic residence so that he might share the experience with you.

So join Glenn for a stroll through 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with the photo gallery below:

The Oval Office

Image courtesy of the White House

The Roosevelt Room

Image courtesy of the White House

The White House

Image courtesy of the White House

Trump branded a tyrant, but did Obama outdo him on deportations?

Genaro Molina / Contributor | Getty Images

MSNBC and CNN want you to think the president is a new Hitler launching another Holocaust. But the actual deportation numbers are nowhere near what they claim.

Former MSNBC host Chris Matthews, in an interview with CNN’s Jim Acosta, compared Trump’s immigration policies to Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust. He claimed that Hitler didn’t bother with German law — he just hauled people off to death camps in Poland and Hungary. Apparently, that’s what Trump is doing now by deporting MS-13 gang members to El Salvador.

Symone Sanders took it a step further. The MSNBC host suggested that deporting gang-affiliated noncitizens is simply the first step toward deporting black Americans. I’ll wait while you try to do that math.

The debate is about control — weaponizing the courts, twisting language, and using moral panic to silence dissent.

Media mouthpieces like Sanders and Matthews are just the latest examples of the left’s Pavlovian tribalism when it comes to Trump and immigration. Just say the word “Trump,” and people froth at the mouth before they even hear the sentence. While the media cries “Hitler,” the numbers say otherwise. And numbers don’t lie — the narrative does.

Numbers don’t lie

The real “deporter in chief” isn’t Trump. It was President Bill Clinton, who sent back 12.3 million people during his presidency — 11.4 million returns and nearly 900,000 formal removals. President George W. Bush, likewise, presided over 10.3 million deportations — 8.3 million returns and two million removals. Even President Barack Obama, the progressive darling, oversaw 5.5 million deportations, including more than three million formal removals.

So how does Donald Trump stack up? Between 2017 and 2021, Trump deported somewhere between 1.5 million and two million people — dramatically fewer than Obama, Bush, or Clinton. In his current term so far, Trump has deported between 100,000 and 138,000 people. Yes, that’s assertive for a first term — but it's still fewer than Biden was deporting toward the end of his presidency.

The numbers simply don’t support the hysteria.

Who's the “dictator” here? Trump is deporting fewer people, with more legal oversight, and still being compared to history’s most reviled tyrant. Apparently, sending MS-13 gang members — violent criminals — back to their country of origin is now equivalent to genocide.

It’s not about immigration

This debate stopped being about immigration a long time ago. It’s now about control — about weaponizing the courts, twisting language, and using moral panic to silence dissent. It’s about turning Donald Trump into the villain of every story, facts be damned.

If the numbers mattered, we’d be having a very different national conversation. We’d be asking why Bill Clinton deported six times as many people as Trump and never got labeled a fascist. We’d be questioning why Barack Obama’s record-setting removals didn’t spark cries of ethnic cleansing. And we’d be wondering why Trump, whose enforcement was relatively modest by comparison, triggered lawsuits, media hysteria, and endless Nazi analogies.

But facts don’t drive this narrative. The villain does. And in this script, Trump plays the villain — even when he does far less than the so-called heroes who came before him.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.