Buck Sexton breaks down everything you need to know about Saudi Arabia

Glenn's in New York City for the week, and he was joined by TheBlaze's National Security Expert Buck Sexton for an in depth discussion on the Middle East and Saudi Arabia.

Below is a transcript of this segment

Glenn: How are things going to change in Saudi Arabia? Who is really going to be in charge? How is this guy’s health?

Buck: I think the Saudis, there’s a couple of dynamics that are intersecting right now, and one of them is just that the Saudis aren’t quite as important to us as they used to be, and they recognize that. The Saudis, because of shale, because of the energy revolution in this country, we don’t need them in quite the same way. They’re not going to be able to play quite the same role of oh, Saudis, up your production, we need you.

Glenn: But as a guy from Texas, where all the Texas-based oil companies are currently freaking, out saying we cannot handle this, we can’t handle this drop in the price of oil this low for this long, and the new king saying he’s going to continue dropping the price of oil—

Buck: You’ve got sort of an old-fashioned price war going on. It’s not just hurting us.

Glenn: Exactly right, and they win.

Buck: It’s not just hurting us, it’s hurting other countries. Well, hopefully the technology will get even better, and that will add into this as well, but on the security side, the real overlay across the entire Middle East now, as I see it, you have the Islamists, jihadists, sort of the hardline fundamentalists on the one side and really everybody else on the other.

You also have intertwined within that Sunni and Shia, and when you’re talking about Saudi Arabia, they are not just because, of course, it’s where you find Mecca and Medina, it’s where people go for the pilgrimage, for the Hajj, they have elevated themselves as the real clear, especially because what’s happened in Egypt, they are the clear defenders of the Sunni, so to speak.

This schism which goes all the way back to the seventh century, it goes all the way back to the earliest years after the life of the Prophet Muhammad, this schism is now playing out in conflicts that include Syria, includes Yemen. It includes Iraq. I mean, you look at everything that’s happening there, there’s a Sunni-Shia divide. Iran is picking favorites. Iran is meddling, getting involved in things.

The Saudis are doing the same, and because we’re not as clear on what we want right now, both of those states have, I think, a freer hand to do that, or at least Saudis feel that they have a freer hand than maybe they did in the past because the administration is essentially saying we don’t really have a vision. We don’t really know…this current administration doesn’t really know what the Middle East should look like.

Glenn: Some people describe Saudi Arabia as the heartland of hate. How would you describe it?

Buck: Just imagine for a second that you took, sort of to give you a sense of a corollary, if, you know, Catholics, Rome, right, Vatican, the Vatican, if you had a country, let’s say all of Italy, that banned the practice of any religion that was not Catholicism, that beheaded people for actually apostasy or for trying to spread a different religious belief system, I think the world would look very unfavorably upon that.

Glenn: Yeah, I don’t think if the pontiff who had been washed in blood who, you know, had the big machetes and beheading people there at St. Peter’s, if he died, the world would not be saying he was a reformer.

Buck: Yeah, the world has embarrassed itself in the case of Saudi Arabia or at least the world media has embarrassed itself, I think, most of it, by referring to…I mean, this is really just the sort of lowest of low expectations. I think it’s a fair way to put it.

Glenn: Don’t you think it is the racism of low expectations? I’m fascinated by the way we just accept from the Middle East that okay, yes, they’re behaving like barbarians, but they’re doing the best they can. Excuse me? I mean, what are you saying?

Buck: The left in this country doesn’t really take that tone. Their tone is well, it’s different than ours. Don’t criticize it. They’re doing things differently there, and the things that are bad are actually our fault. It would be one thing if we had clarity on the barbarity, if we were all agreed that look, what they’re doing is ridiculous, guys, and maybe we can’t change it, but what you hear actually in this country is well, no, it’s one of the three great monotheisms, and this is the seat of the religion, and they’re doing things differently, but that’s okay because the Crusades or the Inquisition or, you know, you hear this just sort of hiding of the ball all the time.

People aren’t honest about the fact that not only are the Saudis…are they doing things from a human rights perspective that are just appalling, and they are, but they have been the main exporters of virulent Islamist hate for decades.

Glenn: Okay, so let me just talk about the double standard again. The new prince, the new king, is going to continue the work on the border fence.

Buck: They apparently believe in fences. They believe very strongly in fences to the north and to the south. They think that those can keep people out who aren’t supposed to be there.

Glenn: So, we’re not supposed to have one, because that’s racist.

Buck: We say it’s not possible also, which apparently the Saudis are better at engineering than we are. I doubt that.

Glenn: The Israelis build a fence.

Buck: Well, they’ve shown that it is of course possible.

Glenn: Right, but that fence is racist. That fence is akin to the Holocaust, right?

Buck: The fence that the Saudis are building, of course, is keeping out other Arabs, so that’s the justification for it is that this is just hey—

Glenn: The world is completely silent. It’s an enormous fence, enormous.

Buck: And it’s going to be getting bigger too. They recognize that the instability that exists on the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen and also to the north in Iraq, that’s not going away.

Glenn: So, the president has to go meet the new king. Was he called and told? I mean, because honestly I don’t think the president at this point cares all that much.

Buck: I don’t think he cares all that much either, and I think that part of this might just be the sting of the condemnation that came for the administration after not sending anyone to that march. Remember, it didn’t have to be Obama. This was, I think, where the criticism was fair. Biden, the Secretary of State, somebody you would think should be there, and nobody was there. People said well, the French ambassador was there. Yeah, the French ambassador could hop in a cab and go the ten minutes or whatever it was to the march.

Glenn: Eric Holder was there, but he left.

Buck: Yeah, didn’t have time or didn’t have the inclination.

Glenn: Right.

Buck: So the president, I think, wants to, again, because, you know, ego does factor into this too, and legacy, wants to seem like he’s on top of things, he’s going there. Look, we have this very strange alliance, this bedfellows relationship with the Saudis that we’re not about to abandon, and quite honestly—

Glenn: Should we?

Buck: We can’t.

Glenn: I don’t buy that.

Buck: Oh, I mean, we say abandon it entirely, I mean, what would that really even mean at this point?

Glenn: I mean we as a nation. If I’m President of the United States, and I said to you, you’re an advisor, I say Buck, here’s the thing, by the end of my administration, I want the cord cut as much as I possibly can from the Saudis. I don’t trust them. I don’t want their stinking oil. We have enough resources here. I’m not going to be held hostage by these guys anymore. They’re bad people. They oppress women. They stone homosexuals. They kill you if you’re a Christian. I’ve got nothing in common with these people. I don’t want more enemies, but they’re not exactly our friends. I don’t want any more enemies, I want out. What do you tell me?

Buck: I would tell you that the levers you have to try to prevent them, prevent not just the royal family or the regime there but try to prevent Saudi Arabia and the Arabian Peninsula from being even more so than it is sort of the wellspring of this global ideology that’s very dangerous and destabilizing all over the world, you’d rather have some input into this than no input, and then also when you add the energy issue into it, you’d rather try to steer them in directions that are useful to U.S. policy in the region than not.

Does it feel good? Does it smell good? Are we okay with this? No, but it’s going to continue. Look at Republican, I mean, this is one issue where the scorn is bipartisan. For anybody who’s going to say well, that’s just silly talk, Republicans on this issue, they are “What’s up, Abdullah? We’re all pals.”

Glenn: You know what it is? This is the biggest key that opened up my mind, and I am so glad to see so many people understand this now. When people are like oh, you know, talking about liberals, stop talking about liberals. I can live side by side with a liberal. I can live side by side with a liberal. Progressives are in both parties, and it is this idea of whether it is the UN that controls everything or the United States and its military that controls everything, that’s the progressive idea. The true independent, the true classic liberal wants nothing to do with either one of those.

Buck: This is why I won’t call them liberal. I mean, I just refuse to call progressives liberal. I hate that they’ve appropriated that term.

Glenn: I agree.

Buck: I think it should be a movement in this country to stop referring to people who are statists, who want control of the apparatus, who want to take your stuff, who want to tell you what to do, as liberal. They’re the antithesis of liberal.

Glenn: That’s why we are misunderstood in Europe, because they gave us the conservative title, which we’re classic liberals. We’re classic liberals.

Buck: And we haven’t come up with a term that is as useful or as accurate for the beliefs of people like you and me who are classic liberals in this country. It’s been appropriated by the other side. It really does hurt, I think, the discussion, because you don’t know who’s on what side. It muddies all the waters. But the Saudi problem is very real, and look, until 9/11, by the way, we had no cooperation from them on a lot of these issues. It was only after 9/11 happened that we’re like we like your oil, we know you behead people…we’re serious now, where are the bad guys?

Glenn: Are we really serious though?

Buck: We were. Are we as serious now? Probably not.

Glenn: What happens? What do you see? Give me a look five years down the road with the jihadis all around the world. What does the world look like in five years?

Buck: What’s different now or what’s different at this phase of the game is that they are playing for control of nationstates. This isn’t just a question of their hitting out at the U.S. and at Israel, and they’re trying to sort of wage this global insurgency, which is really what the jihadists are trying to do. Now they’re saying okay, where do we have a strong enough foothold that we can actually run it, we can be in charge? Because the moment you do that, and we’re seeing this with the Islamic State…why can’t we get rid of the Islamic State? Well, it’s not a bunch of guys in training camps. It’s guys that are controlling cities.

In the case of Mosul, Mosul has about 2 million people that live in that city, so to take that back, there’s no nonconventional, unconventional way to take that back, and so if they can establish control of the infrastructure of an actual state, of a country, whether it’s Libya, whether it’s Syria, Iraq, Yemen, I mean, go down the line, they’re getting more and more opportunities to do this, that changes the whole game.

The reality is that if they can do that in a couple of places, they think they can do it all across the Middle East, and that’s not…once you start to look at what the landscape is of a nuclear Iran on the one hand and this rising Sunni jihadism on the other hand in Syria, Iraq, all these other countries, who’s going to stand up again? We always hear about the moderates, and they’ll point to some blogger that nobody’s heard of in Cairo. That’s not going to cut it.

Glenn: So, if I’m President of the United States, my phone bill, my international phone bill, is mainly made up of phone calls to Israel because they’re the only ones that have the same kind of ideology that we have. You could disagree with them on a lot of things, and I do disagree with a lot of things on Israel, but they’re the only ones that have a clue as to what the Western world believes in and follows, and yet, Benjamin Netanyahu is coming, and we’re peeing all over him.

Buck: Well, the White House is.

Glenn: Yes.

Buck: The White House is.

Glenn: The White House is.

Buck: Unsurprising given the president’s antipathy. Look, if you’re a man of the academy in this country, I mean, if you’re somebody who your background comes from the university, it comes from a campus, right, which is the really, with the president, I mean, I know he’s a politician, but before then he’s really a guy of the academy, you tend to be anti-Israeli. That’s now taught.

Glenn: But let me ask you this. He is a man of the campus. He’s a well-educated man. He campaigned as a guy who was a constitutional scholar, so there’s no excuse for derailing the Constitution on him. He knows exactly what he’s doing. You cannot be…and this I felt on the Paris thing, you don’t send anybody? That doesn’t occur to you to send anybody? You don’t want to go to our oldest ally? There’s nothing that crosses your mind?

Buck: It wasn’t that he forgot—

Glenn: No, he chose not to.

Buck: And he chose because this administration does not want to be seen in any capacity ever as taking something that could even be construed as critical of Islam.

Glenn: So there’s no way you’re this wrong on this many things. There’s no way. You could play the odds, man. You cannot make this many mistakes, you can’t, and have it come out in favor of jihadists.

Buck: You’d be right by accident sometimes.

Glenn Once in a while you’d be like okay, well that one fell in our favor. It is falling to the jihadists and to the caliphate every single time. So, I’m Benjamin Netanyahu, is the American administration an enemy of mine?

Buck: The American administration is not an enemy, but they can’t count on—

Glenn: Show me why they’re not. Show me the time that they have said “Buddy…”

Buck: I think the administration is apathetic, and you could say that apathy in the face of rising threats all around Israel, which are clear and obvious, I don’t think anybody would disagree on what’s happening in Syria and the prospect for what will happen, by the way, probably soon in Egypt and what’s happening in Iraq, that it’s a dangerous neighborhood that’s getting more dangerous.

Glenn: And you’re making it, as the administration, you’re making it more dangerous.

Buck: I have to say I’ve always had a tough time, because there is a healthy dose of incompetence at the upper reaches. Look at the people that are making a fair amount of the administration’s decisions.

Glenn: I believe they’re all like 14 years old, I know.

Buck: I mean, there’s a healthy amount of incompetence too, and I don’t want to make it seem like they all have these Machiavellian schemes that are playing at every step of the way.

Glenn: Some do.

Buck: The president does play a lot of golf. I mean, some of these things are true.

Glenn: But they also have people like Samantha Power, who knows exactly what she is doing. She’s well thought out.

Buck: She’s well thought out. I think it’s interesting that her whole ideology of responsibility to protect, somehow that’s I don’t really know who we’re protecting, but this is what she came into office, or came into her position rather, espousing. The Israelis have, and under Netanyahu I think there’s a recognition that they’ll take care of themselves, or they have to. They will have to if things get really ugly, and I think at least right now they would agree that they can, but that could change.

Demographically speaking, Israel is very small, and the Arab world is very large, and we’ve seen United Arab armies in the recent past trying to eliminate the state of Israel. The moment you throw a nuclear Iran into the mix, I think things change pretty dramatically. That’s what the Israelis believe.

The great switch: Gates trades climate control for digital dominion

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.