Twelve years after being rescued, Elizabeth Smart reveals how she is helping other exploited children

Twelve years ago yesterday, Elizabeth Smart was rescued from kidnappers who held her captive for nine months. Her story consumed the nation, and she has used her fame to give back and help other children who are being exploited. This morning on radio, she joined the radio show to promote her fundraiser this Saturday for the Elizabeth Smart Foundation and Operation Underground Railroad.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: It was 12 years ago yesterday that America had a happy ending to Elizabeth Smart and her saga where she had been kidnapped for her -- from her home and was missing for nine months. We all held our breath as everyone searched for Elizabeth Smart. And then we all thought, she'll never be found. Twelve years ago yesterday, she was found. She's on the phone with us now. Hello, Elizabeth, how are you?

ELIZABETH: I'm doing great, thanks. How are you doing?

GLENN: I'm good. You're one of the more impressive people I've met. I don't know how you've taken such a period of darkness in your life and turned it. And you're normal, you're functioning. You're beyond normal and functioning. You're a positive force. How did you do that?

ELIZABETH: I have had so much help and support over the years from my family and my friends and my community. I mean, I could -- I could go on forever thanking people.

GLENN: You have a foundation now, and you're working with Project Underground Railroad. And this is the reason we wanted to have you on real quick is because tomorrow you're raising money and it is at Utah Valley University in Orem. And tickets are available at UtahsStars.com. That's plural. UtahsStars.com. What's happening tomorrow, and why is it important?

ELIZABETH: An all-star show lined up filled with incredible people performing. And I'm so excited about this because this will help fund future missions for Operation Underground Railroad and help bring the Elizabeth Smart Foundation and OUR even closer together. I just can't wait because the work that we do combined is incredible. IMF being able to go out on sting operations and rescue people who have been sexually trafficked and then not just -- not just end there, but then continue to work with them and help them go through rehabilitation and help them see the future that I see so that they don't feel like they're -- they don't feel like they're less than anyone else. They know they're just as valued and just as important as everyone else and that they can do anything they want in life.

GLENN: So a couple of things. Yesterday, Tim Ballard wrote to me. He's in charge of operation rescue where they go and break up these sex rings of children. He said six arrested. Twenty-nine kids saved. The youngest were 12 and 13. The kids are getting rehab now.

You were fortunate to have friends and family. Emphasis on friends and family and faith, but some of these kids don't. What are they going through, and how are they possibly going to ever get well?

ELIZABETH: I was so fortunate because I did have that family and I did have that support. And that's actually what we try to then in turn try to give back to these children.

And we can only take it, I mean, one step at a time and we can only do as much as we can. I mean, part of it does have to come from the children themselves. I mean, they have to want to get better. They have want to move forward with their lives and leave this in the past. So it's definitely not an easy road. It's -- it's hard. It's bumpy. I mean, there are -- there are setbacks. And then there are -- you know, moments where we spring forward.

But it's a journey. I mean, it's not just you're rescued. You're out of this terrible situation where you're forced to have sex all the time. And now just move forward. I mean, it's much more than that. It's helping them to find security in their life. It's helping them to find that hope that they can be happy. It's working with them. It's not just leaving them out that they're forgotten now. That they're physically out of that situation when mentally they still may feel very, very much in that situation. Where they still might fear very much for their lives for what will happen in the future. And it's a process. I think it takes a lifetime of healing.

GLENN: Do you ever go through that still? Do you have times where you are -- that you have a flashback or a fear that's unreasonable, that comes from that place? Like what was yesterday like for you?

ELIZABETH: I'm still human. I definitely have my ups and my downs.

GLENN: What was yesterday like for you? Was that hard? Is an anniversary like that hard?

ELIZABETH: Well, yesterday that was a great anniversary because, I mean, that was -- that was the day that my life was given back to me. Everything that I thought had been taken from me. And everything I thought that I would never have again. All the experiences that I thought had been stolen from me. I mean, that was the day my life was given back to me. So, no, yesterday is a reminder of a wonderful day.

GLENN: So can you -- and I know you've told me this story before. But do you mind just telling the story about that moment of when you're walking and you -- you realize you're about to be free. Can you take us through that?

ELIZABETH: Absolutely. We had just hitchhiked back to Salt Lake from California. And I remember just even crossing the state line, how happy I was just to be back in Utah. I mean, I didn't know I was going to be rescued yet. I didn't know anything. For all I knew, I felt like I would be stuck with my captors for who knows how long. But I was so happy --

GLENN: And you had moved them to the place to convince them to go back to Utah. Right?

ELIZABETH: And that was a miracle in and of itself because, I mean, my captors, they never listened to what I thought would keep good. But, I mean, obviously they wouldn't because, if they did, I would have been home nine months earlier. It never would have happened.

GLENN: Right.

ELIZABETH: So anyways, we were walking up State Street in Salt Lake City, and all of a sudden, a whole bunch of police cars pulled up and surrounded us. And this wasn't a first time that we had been approached by police. We had been approached several other times. And every time, I had been so hopeful that I would be rescued. And so this time, when we were surrounded, I mean, yes, I was hopeful, but at the same time I just thought, well, I better not get my hopes up too high because this has happened before.

And I've seen it --

GLENN: Why wouldn't you say while the police were there, it's me. It's me. It's me.

ELIZABETH: I'm actually glad you bring that point up. Because I don't think I've ever met a kidnapped survivor who hasn't been asked some kind of question to that end. And I have been physically chained up, and I have been verbally chained up. And I can tell you, verbally chained up, often those chains are stronger than physical ones.

For me, my family means everything. And I was constantly being threatened that, I'll kill you, I'll kill your family, if you ever run away, if you ever do anything we don't say, you'll be so sorry, you'll wish you were dead.

And up until that point, I had every reason to believe them. I mean, he successfully kidnapped me. He successfully raped me. He successfully chained me up. Starved me. Abused me. All these things. Every time, he said he would do something, he did them, and nobody was there to stop them. So when he said that he would kill me if I ran away or he would kill my family, I believed him. I had every reason to believe him. I didn't have a reason to doubt his word.

And, I mean, I had seen police come up to us before and turn around and walk away from us being completely convinced that I wasn't me, that we were just whatever he told them. So...

PAT: But on this occasion, it was different. Right?

ELIZABETH: This occasion it was a little different. I still had those same thoughts in my head. I certainly didn't want to endanger my family. And I had made several attempts in the past to escape. But that always came at a great personal cost. And clearly I hadn't been successful up until that point.

And so when the policeman started asking questions. I mean, there were more policeman than there ever had been before, my captors starting to give answers. I was told, don't say anything. We'll do all the talking. And if I did had to say something, they had gone over a whole story of what I was supposed to say to the police. So they kept questioning. And kept questioning. And finally when the officer said, I think this girl is too scared. I think we need to separate her for a little bit and question her, you know, just by herself.

And so they took me a few yards away. And they started to question me. And at first, all I could think of was my captors and was what they had told me. That they'll kill me, they'll kill my family, that I had to do exactly what they said. Even though more than anything I wanted to scream out and say, it is me. Please take me away. Rescue me. Save me.

But at first, I just -- I couldn't because all I could hear was them telling me they were going to kill me and they were going to kill my family. But then eventually, one of the officers looked at me and said, you know, there's a girl, and she's been missing for a long time now. And her family has never given up hope of finding her. And they love her. And they miss her and they want her to come home. Don't you want to go home? And it was only in that moment that I finally found the courage to say, yes. And admit that I was Elizabeth Smart.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

ELIZABETH: And that was the moment that I knew that this was -- at least this leg of my life was over.

GLENN: So, Elizabeth, we have seen the footage. And it brings you to tears. We've seen the footage of the rescue missions that, you know, the Operation Underground Railroad has done. And we see these 12-year-old girls. And they're on the boat, you know, to go over to now perform sexual favors for strangers. And it's just so hard to get your arms around. What are they thinking, do you suppose when they're on that boat? Are they -- have they disconnected so much from themselves, what do you suppose is happening to them?

ELIZABETH: I'm -- I'm positive there are many different things going through their heads. I think, yes, for a lot of them they disconnect and they just -- they see this as their lot in life and there's nothing they can do about. And so they just resign themselves and do whatever it takes to survive. I think for so many of them they go into survival mode. And I know I certainly did when I was kidnapped. And I would just try to shut down all feeling because it was too painful for me to try to consciously feel everything that was going on. And just whatever it was, I would just do it to survive. And I know that's how so many of these girls and boys feel and do when they're in these terrible situations.

GLENN: Elizabeth, again, I have more respect for you than -- I mean, I just don't even know who I put you in the category of. I think you're an amazing, amazing woman who has taken some of the darkest stuff I've ever seen and turned it into such beauty and grace and dignity and service to others. I just have profound respect for you. And it's a joy to have you the program.

Tomorrow, at Utah Valley University in Orem, tomorrow night, it's a fundraiser for the Elizabeth Smart Foundation and Operation Underground Railroad to prevent the exploitation of children and the rescuing of children who are victims of the sex trafficking trade and there's just -- you'll tell you, there's -- there is nothing that I think God would want you to do more than rescue his little ones. And this is a way to actually make a difference.

As I said, yesterday afternoon, I get just this text from Tim: Six arrested. Twenty-nine kids saved. Youngest 12 and 13. All well. Kids getting rehab now. My team out of route of the country. It's just amazing. We're just seeing miracles happen. And you can help do that and have a good night tomorrow by going to this fundraiser. And it's not going to be a drag. There will be a lot of people there. It's an entertainment thing. Utah stars. UtahsStars.com. If you want to get tickets. Thank you so much, Elizabeth. Great talking to you.

ELIZABETH: Thank you.

GLENN: God bless.

Wow, she's amazing.

PAT: Yeah. That's an incredible story. If you've read her book. You know that harrowing and miraculous in many ways story of what she went through.

GLENN: And the way she's so smart. The way she manipulated them, you know. I mean, she's just a brilliant, brilliant girl.

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Durham annex EXPOSES Soros, Pentagon ties to Deep State machine

ullstein bild Dtl. / Contributor | Getty Images

The Durham annex and ODNI report documents expose a vast network of funders and fixers — from Soros’ Open Society Foundations to the Pentagon.

In a column earlier this month, I argued the deep state is no longer deniable, thanks to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. I outlined the structural design of the deep state as revealed by two recent declassifications: Gabbard’s ODNI report and the Durham annex released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

These documents expose a transnational apparatus of intelligence agencies, media platforms, think tanks, and NGOs operating as a parallel government.

The deep state is funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

But institutions are only part of the story. This web of influence is made possible by people — and by money. This follow-up to the first piece traces the key operatives and financial networks fueling the deep state’s most consequential manipulations, including the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

Architects and operatives

At the top of the intelligence pyramid sits John Brennan, President Obama’s CIA director and one of the principal architects of the manipulated 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. James Clapper, who served as director of national intelligence, signed off on that same ICA and later joined 50 other former officials in concluding the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation” ahead of the 2020 election. The timing, once again, served a political objective.

James Comey, then FBI director, presided over Crossfire Hurricane. According to the Durham annex, he also allowed the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server to collapse after it became entangled with “sensitive intelligence” revealing her plan to tie President Donald Trump to Russia.

That plan, as documented in the annex, originated with Hillary Clinton herself and was personally pushed by President Obama. Her campaign, through law firm Perkins Coie, hired Fusion GPS, which commissioned the now-debunked Steele dossier — a document used to justify surveillance warrants on Trump associates.

Several individuals orbiting the Clinton operation have remained influential. Jake Sullivan, who served as President Biden’s national security adviser, was a foreign policy aide to Clinton during her 2016 campaign. He was named in 2021 as a figure involved in circulating the collusion narrative, and his presence in successive Democratic administrations suggests institutional continuity.

Andrew McCabe, then the FBI’s deputy director, approved the use of FISA warrants derived from unverified sources. His connection to the internal “insurance policy” discussion — described in a 2016 text by FBI official Peter Strzok to colleague Lisa Page — underscores the Bureau’s political posture during that election cycle.

The list of political enablers is long but revealing:

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who, as a former representative from California, chaired the House Intelligence Committee at the time and publicly promoted the collusion narrative while having access to intelligence that contradicted it.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), both members of the “Gang of Eight” with oversight of intelligence operations, advanced the same narrative despite receiving classified briefings.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, exchanged encrypted text messages with a Russian lobbyist in efforts to speak with Christopher Steele.

These were not passive recipients of flawed intelligence. They were participants in its amplification.

The funding networks behind the machine

The deep state’s operations are not possible without financing — much of it indirect, routed through a nexus of private foundations, quasi-governmental entities, and federal agencies.

George Soros’ Open Society Foundations appear throughout the Durham annex. In one instance, Open Society Foundations documents were intercepted by foreign intelligence and used to track coordination between NGOs and the Clinton campaign’s anti-Trump strategy.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control.

Soros has also been a principal funder of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, which ran a project during the Trump administration called the Moscow Project, dedicated to promoting the Russia collusion narrative.

The Tides Foundation and Arabella Advisors both specialize in “dark money” donor-advised funds that obscure the source and destination of political funding. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was the biggest donor to the Arabella Advisors by far, which routed $127 million through Arabella’s network in 2020 alone and nearly $500 million in total.

The MacArthur Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation also financed many of the think tanks named in the Durham annex, including the Council on Foreign Relations.

Federal funding pipelines

Parallel to the private networks are government-funded influence operations, often justified under the guise of “democracy promotion” or counter-disinformation initiatives.

USAID directed $270 million to Soros-affiliated organizations for overseas “democracy” programs, a significant portion of which has reverberated back into domestic influence campaigns.

The State Department funds the National Endowment for Democracy, a quasi-governmental organization with a $315 million annual budget and ties to narrative engineering projects.

The Department of Homeland Security underwrote entities involved in online censorship programs targeting American citizens.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Pentagon, from 2020 to 2024, awarded over $2.4 trillion to private contractors — many with domestic intelligence capabilities. It also directed $1.4 billion to select think tanks since 2019.

According to public records compiled by DataRepublican, these tax-funded flows often support the very actors shaping U.S. political discourse and global perception campaigns.

Not just domestic — but global

What these disclosures confirm is that the deep state is not a theory. It is a documented structure — funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control. It launders narratives, neutralizes opposition, and overrides democratic will by leveraging the very institutions meant to protect it.

With the Durham annex and the ODNI report, we now see the network's architecture and its actors — names, agencies, funding trails — all laid bare. What remains is the task of dismantling it before its next iteration takes shape.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The truth behind ‘defense’: How America was rebranded for war

PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff | Getty Images

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by signaling a rebrand of the Defense Department — restoring its original name, the Department of War.

At first, I was skeptical. “Defense” suggests restraint, a principle I consider vital to U.S. foreign policy. “War” suggests aggression. But for the first 158 years of the republic, that was the honest name: the Department of War.

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

The founders never intended a permanent standing army. When conflict came — the Revolution, the War of 1812, the trenches of France, the beaches of Normandy — the nation called men to arms, fought, and then sent them home. Each campaign was temporary, targeted, and necessary.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Everything changed in 1947. President Harry Truman — facing the new reality of nuclear weapons, global tension, and two world wars within 20 years — established a full-time military and rebranded the Department of War as the Department of Defense. Americans resisted; we had never wanted a permanent army. But Truman convinced the country it was necessary.

Was the name change an early form of political correctness? A way to soften America’s image as a global aggressor? Or was it simply practical? Regardless, the move created a permanent, professional military. But it also set the stage for something Truman’s successor, President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, famously warned about: the military-industrial complex.

Ike, the five-star general who commanded Allied forces in World War II and stormed Normandy, delivered a harrowing warning during his farewell address: The military-industrial complex would grow powerful. Left unchecked, it could influence policy and push the nation toward unnecessary wars.

And that’s exactly what happened. The Department of Defense, with its full-time and permanent army, began spending like there was no tomorrow. Weapons were developed, deployed, and sometimes used simply to justify their existence.

Peace through strength

When Donald Trump said this week, “I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too,” some people freaked out. They called him a warmonger. He isn’t. Trump is channeling a principle older than him: peace through strength. Ronald Reagan preached it; Trump is taking it a step further.

Just this week, Trump also suggested limiting nuclear missiles — hardly the considerations of a warmonger — echoing Reagan, who wanted to remove missiles from silos while keeping them deployable on planes.

The seemingly contradictory move of Trump calling for a Department of War sends a clear message: He wants Americans to recognize that our military exists not just for defense, but to project power when necessary.

Trump has pointed to something critically important: The best way to prevent war is to have a leader who knows exactly who he is and what he will do. Trump signals strength, deterrence, and resolve. You want to negotiate? Great. You don’t? Then we’ll finish the fight decisively.

That’s why the world listens to us. That’s why nations come to the table — not because Trump is reckless, but because he means what he says and says what he means. Peace under weakness invites aggression. Peace under strength commands respect.

Trump is the most anti-war president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter. But unlike Carter, Trump isn’t weak. Carter’s indecision emboldened enemies and made the world less safe. Trump’s strength makes the country stronger. He believes in peace as much as any president. But he knows peace requires readiness for war.

Names matter

When we think of “defense,” we imagine cybersecurity, spy programs, and missile shields. But when we think of “war,” we recall its harsh reality: death, destruction, and national survival. Trump is reminding us what the Department of Defense is really for: war. Not nation-building, not diplomacy disguised as military action, not endless training missions. War — full stop.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Names matter. Words matter. They shape identity and character. A Department of Defense implies passivity, a posture of reaction. A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

So yes, I’ve changed my mind. I’m for the rebranding to the Department of War. It shows strength to the world. It reminds Americans, internally and externally, of the reality we face. The Department of Defense can no longer be a euphemism. Our military exists for war — not without deterrence, but not without strength either. And we need to stop deluding ourselves.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.