The GOP has targeted Texas conservative Louie Gohmert - here's how he is fighting back

Republicans and Democrats both suffer from the disease of progressivism, and honest conservatives like Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) are left fighting for their lives. Gohmert has put together a PAC to support true conservatives who want to take a real stand on the issues that matter to Americans. Gohmert joined Glenn on radio today to explain what is happening behind closed doors in Washington and how he and others are standing up for the best interests of their constituents.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: The GOP is now coming after Louie Gohmert and spending GOP money. If you've sent a check ever into the GOP, stop sending them money. They have now put a campaign together to campaign against Louie Gohmert. You know, one of those, call Louie Gohmert and tell them we don't want any of his French politics in Texas. Louie, why are they spending this money against you?

GOHMERT: Well, they were aboot to smote me and now they are smoting me. It's because they don't want people rising up and saying, no, I'm going to represent my district. I'm not going to just go along to get along. We're too far along down the wrong direction to just keep sliding down this path. So you got to go along or they're going to come after you and that's what's happening to --

GLENN: How much money -- how much money have they spent trying to get to you shut up? Do you have any idea?

GOHMERT: Well, I'd seen that they spent 400,000 in an additional buy to shed 12 of us. Actually, to slap us around. They're smoting us now. I love the earlier segment. Learned a lot about pronunciation.

GLENN: Right. And God and godless animals like Stu. We like you as sitting congressmen, one we respect on record. Is Stu a godless animal?

GOHMERT: You know, there has been something very interesting coming out of the vote last week. 167 Republicans voted against allowing the amnesty to go forward when we all including our speaker said we will not allow it. We're going to fight tooth and nail. And 167 stood up and said, no, this is not what we promised. And Glenn, it's been said nationally and in the media and especially the -- the left -- or the mainstream media, whatever, but that there is a very, very small group of radical right wingers in the -- in the Republican party that are trying to hijack the party. But if you look at that vote -- now, and I understand that there were a bunch of the 167 that told the speaker, look, I'm really, really sorry, I want to vote with you, but man, I've heard from my district and I cannot -- I voted for you. I'm paying for that. I cannot vote with you on this. And there were some of the 75 that voted with the speaker whose districts are very conservative. You look at that vote and it tells you, wait a minute. Way over two-thirds are representing very conservative -- what I could call mainstream districts and so maybe it's not the right wings that -- right wing there's have hijacked the party. Maybe it's people on the other end of the spectrum that have hijacked a very conservative country and Republican party.

GLENN: No, it's the progressive Republicans and quite honestly, those kinds of -- I think there's a lot of people that get swayed. They are not necessarily progressive. I think the Jeb Bushes. World, I think there's enough to go around, the Lindsey Grahams, the John McCains that are progressive. However, there's also a number of them that get there and they listen to these political consultants. And these political consultants say look, you can't, because you're going to hurt the party in X-number of years and you've got to do this and you've got to do that. And they listen to those boobs that give us a Mitt Romney or a John McCain every single time.

GOHMERT: Yeah. And actually, that was pretty evident the morning of the vote for speaker. I was talking at two different times to people who had said to their constituents if you elect me, I will not vote for Boehner for Speaker and they're wonderful guys and they said, look, I'm really struggling what to do. I'm praying for wisdom on what to do. And I respect that, but that's not -- at midnight I'm sitting at my desk in my office and I'm thinking, I wonder what that sounded like. Oh, god, should I honest and keep my promises or should I a scumbag that breaks my promise to the first vote? I just need a sign. Should I honest or not? I don't know. I mean, how do you pray that prayer?

GLENN: I don't know. You'd have to ask Stu.

(laughing).

GLENN: So --

GOHMERT: You got to believe in God, though, before you pray.

GLENN: Yeah, I know, I know. So Louie, you've started a -- you started a --

GOHMERT: A PAC.

GLENN: What is it? Tell me about it.

GOHMERT: Well, it's GOHconservative.com. And that way you don't have to worry if it's Gormert or Gohmert. It's GOHconservative.com. And that's a PAC that helps Conservatives who are willing to stand up for what we promise we would do when we got elected. It's pretty basic. But we need people's help. We've got the establishment after us. They're trying to teach us a lesson and send the message to others, look, you can't stand up to leadership in the Republican party because they will smote you and strike you down. You better get on board. And there are people who see that and say, gee, I'm in a tough district. I can't afford to get the leadership after me. So this just lets people you know, you can get help if you do stand up for what your district wants you to do. There's help. So I can use public help.

GLENN: Here's what I would like to ask.

(overlapping speakers).

GLENN: Here's what I would like to ask the audience to do. You think of GOP Conservatives, that's grand old party conservative. They put the party first. GOH, just remember good old honesty conservative. Okay?

GOHMERT: I love that.

GLENN: Just good old honesty conservative. This is what we need, some people who are honest. Now, this is a PAC that will help the Conservatives that are actually standing and help them fight the GOP. I've said this before. Defund the GOP. Stop writing checks to the GOP. Stop it. The party has so lost its soul, that it really thinks that Jeb Bush and giving the president all the rope to hang us, not him -- all the rope to hang us with amnesty and with -- with ObamaCare and everything else. They think that's a good idea. I'm done playing the game. Don't write another check to the GOP. And if you want to help the guys who are Republican to help them stand and fight, just remember, good old honesty conservative. GOHconservative.com -- is it org?

GOHMERT: Com.

GLENN: Dotcom.

GOHMERT: Yep. I couldn't have set it beard. -- said it better. Holy cow, I couldn't have said it that good. But thanks, Glenn. There are Republicans across the country, they're the good guys. And they're just so frustrated that they keep sending people to Washington and they can't believe that they get there and are not doing what they promised. And it's --

GLENN: So what's going to happen with amnesty? Louie?

GOHMERT: Well, it's -- it's unfortunate, but the members -- the Republican members that voted for this are putting all their stock in one United States district judge in the southern district, Andrew Hanen. He was one of the tops in his law class. He's a brilliant guy. Was with one of the best firms in Houston. And I just -- just a terrific guy. You want to read some good reading, read his 123-page opinion. But they're putting all their stock in the Judge Hanen. A law school classmate, by the way. He's doing his job when we failed to do ours. We had the power to stop this and several years ago a Supreme Court justice just said off the cuff, you know, you guys are not going to do your job you know, in keeping the branches in line, don't come running, crying to us. You know, you've got the power to do something. And we should.

GLENN: Um, the -- DHS. That was a home run. Can you tell us what happened at the last minutes with the DHS thing?

GOHMERT: With it passing?

GLENN: Yeah, I mean, no, no, no, wait, no, no. They had it. And then the -- the Republicans decide, yeah, we're not going -- we're not going to actually hold you to that. And then John Boehner comes back and does another one, which makes the Republican -- I think makes the Republicans look bad. What happened at the last minute, Louie?

GOHMERT: Well, we did have it. We were standing --

GLENN: You were winning.

GOHMERT: But, you know, the thing is, this was -- this was all cast back in actually September when the Republican leadership said, you know what, let's just put this off until December 11th. And many of us in September, were going, no, not until December 11th because we may win the Senate. Let's put it off to January. The end of January. And we could -- then we can get it strained it out -- straightened it on it. And some of us were going, no, you do it until December 11th and we know where this is going. So December 11th comes and we said okay, we're going to fund everything from the Department of Homeland Security. And many of us were going, no, you don't take hostage what you care about. You take hostage who the other people don't -- don't want you to take hostage, like the EPA, like the czars, like golf outings. You know, you go after the things that they care about. We're the ones that care more -- most about home blend security. So in other words -- Homeland Security. So in other words, people say we took a hostage that the other side wanted us to shoot. Like the Danny Devito movie where they kidnap his wife Bette Midler and they called and said you have to pay the ransom. No, kill her, go ahead. Let's go ahead and shoot her. I don't care.

GLENN: That's right.

GOHMERT: That's what we did here. We took the wrong hostage. We took the thing we care body and the president called the bluff and we knew going back to September, this is how we -- we were afraid it would play out. But then in November our leaders were saying we're going to fight tooth and nail. We're not going to give in. And as recent as like four days before the Speaker of the House said, we are not gonna let the Senate jam us and got this huge rousing ovation. And then just a matter of a few days later, well, we don't have any choice. We're going to have to let them jam us and take it.

GLENN: Gees.

GOHMERT: Is really is disheartening when you watch that play out.

GLENN: Last question, net neutrality.

GOHMERT: Oh, boy.

GLENN: I know.

GOHMERT: If there was one shining spot in the country freedom, it was in the Internet. And yes, I understand that the people that seem to have made the most money innovating on the Internet were giving to the democrats. I don't care. It's freedom. So obviously the government -- some in the government couldn't stand the thought of an area it didn't control, so it had to come after that.

GLENN: Are you going to be able to yank that back.?

GOHMERT: We have to stop that.

GLENN: You can you yank that back at all?

GOHMERT: Yes, we can, but it will take people standing up to do it, and if you're afraid of standing up, yeah, we're not going to be able to pull that off. But I still believe we can. You know, you and I both still have that hope that springs eternal and we're not gonna give up.

GLENN: Louie, I appreciate talking to you and I just love you and I think you're really truly one of the good guys and you really have a spine. You know, you were a judge and a good one. And you have gone in and done all of the hard work and I just love you and I --

GOHMERT: I love you too, Glenn, and it means so much but someone say I'm a porcupine Christian. That's someone that's got a lot of good points but you don't want to get close to him. But I'm working on it.

GLENN: I'm proud to stand shoulder to shoulder and as close as I can to you as a porcupine because I think you're one of the good guys.

GOHMERT: Thanks so much.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.