Glenn: Prepare for a time when voices like mine are no longer heard

You’ve heard Glenn talk about the “Bubba Effect” before, but it’s more important than ever for you to know what is going on. The top down, bottom up, inside out strategy is building across America. Baltimore is just the latest example. On radio this morning, Glenn laid out a dire prediction of what’s in store if people don’t start to wake up and be leaders and shepherds in their own communities.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

It is time we stop being sheep. It is time for our pulpits to start teaching reconciliation. Here's a book I want you to go out and get today. I want you to get the Essential Speeches of Martin Luther King and start reading them. Please. I beg you.

There's so much of Martin Luther King that we don't understand. There's so much -- he is -- he's right. Read his speeches and you will understand reconciliation. And what we have to do. It is the only hope. It is what -- it is what Abraham Lincoln did at the end of the civil war. When they said they had Lee, what do you want me to do with him? He said, take your foot off his neck gently. Tell him to go home to their families. With malice toward none and charity toward all.

That's reconciliation. If you humiliate, if you demand a win, there's going to be a loser. And the loser will not forgive you. And it will just perpetuate into the next one. So we're looking for reconciliation here. What I'm afraid of is the Bubba Effect. And I've talked about this for about six years. I said, there's going to come a time when you'll start to have riots on the streets. There's going to come a time when you'll have terrorists come and do something. And the -- and the feds will come in or the government will come in, and they will try to quell it or they'll try to arrest somebody. And the town will say, uh-uh. Nope! You, United States government, you knew about it. You're part of the problem. And the Bubba Effect comes from the one idea that -- a Muslim goes and shoots somebody. And then Bubba, who just doesn't -- is not really paying attention. Sees a Sikh some place who wears a turban. Not a Muslim, but he's a Sikh. But Bubba sees him and is like, you people. And he's all enraged and he shoots a Sikh. Now, what's going to happen? The DOJ has to come in and try him for murder. But because that town just experienced some sort of, you know, 40 kids in an elementary school shot and they knew that the federal government kept the borders open and these guys came across the borders, they were here illegally, or they were from that mosque down the street that everybody knew was an extremist mosque, but they did nothing about it. That's when the citizens grab their guns and say to the DOJ, get the hell out of here. What Bubba did was wrong, but we'll take care of it. We don't need you here.

Now, this is not my theory. This is the theory that I learned from the Special Forces command about eight years ago. This is about 2004, and I go to the east coast. I go, where is that? Is that in Virginia? Where was that? Special Forces command? Fort Bragg. I'm at Fort Bragg and I'm talking to the press, and I said, what is your number one concern? And they said the Bubba Effect. They said, that's coming at some point in the future.

Now, that hadn't even occurred to me. This is before we're really having any kind of real hatred and animosity toward each another. It's the Michael Moore, you know, Fahrenheit 911 stuff. But we can handle all of that. It just happened. The beginning. Stage one just happened here in Dallas this weekend. And here it is. These marchers, they come in, Moms Against Police Brutality, and marchers for I don't know, free all the Mexicans. I don't know. Something about the border.

...

GLENN: Let them come in. Let them take jobs, whatever. So they're marching down the street. And these guys are connected. They're connected to the Nation of Islam. They're connected to Open Society. George Soros. They're connected to the Tides Foundation. This is a front group. This is front group. Pure and simple. The police are there. These groups are marching. But there's somebody in between. It's the open carry people.

So now here are just citizens with long arms. They have a right to have the long arms. When asked by a reporter friend, what are you guys doing here? Well, we're kind of the buffer between these guys and the police. What do you mean you're the buffer between these guys and the police? Well, we know how the police reacted, listen to this, we know how the police reacted in Baltimore, and we want to make sure that, A, if there was any police brutality, we could kind of buffer that zone. If they start to push the cops, that we could be in between them so that the cops couldn't really respond -- so no bad stuff is going to happen. And if somebody starts looting our city, we'll stop it. Because the police are going to be told like they were in Baltimore to stand down.

Bubba Effect. There it is. That's stage one. Nothing happened. So those guys went home. But now let me ask you something: If Bubba, who is carrying a long arm, they see somebody throwing mazel tov cocktails and they stop it, how many people in our community will say, no, no, no, wait a minute. You were told to stand down. These guys were burning our city down. They're just neighbors in our neighborhood that are trying to stop these guys from burning our neighborhood down? A lot.

We're being set up, guys. We are absolutely being set up. And I don't know -- this is what I pray every night. I don't know how to do this, Lord. I don't know what you want. I don't know -- I don't know what you want. I can't wake up any -- oh, if I had the voice of an angel. I can't wake anybody else up. They've smeared me. I've helped them smear me. I don't have any credibility. Nobody is listening. I can tell you what's coming. I've told you every step of the way. I know what's coming next.

But I don't know, how am I going to get people to listen? This is why, perhaps, I have said that you are going to be the key. Because I know that. I know that with everything in me. This audience changes the course in a good way. This audience pulls the republic back from the brink. And it's not going to be me. It's not going to be -- it's going to be you. But you need to know your role. And your role is as a peace -- blessed be the peacemakers.

You have to know what's really going on. Because nobody is going to tell you. Next week, we're going to show you, the stuff I found with Al Sharpton yesterday, I'm telling you, that's right. With Al Sharpton saying, we fought against states' rights in the '60s so we had the right to vote, and in this century, we have to fight states' rights, it's time for the Department of Justice to take over policing in America. That's what's happening. That's why they're sending all the MRAPs and everything else to these cities because the intent is that the government -- when the bottom rises up, the people will cry out for help. And the government will come top-down, and they'll control your policing. That's what's happening. And local police departments, police officers, please, please, learn this. Please.

Next week, we'll show you all the connections. We'll show you -- once you tie it all together in your head, you'll go, oh, my gosh, that's exactly what's happening. And only an understanding of this and then a peaceful informed public can stop it. Otherwise, we're going to be played. I mean, this is the biggest show ever. That's all that's happening right now. This is a show. We're watching a script and a play play out in front of us. None of this stuff is real.

Those riots in Baltimore. That wasn't real. How many times do we have to be told, most of the people are from out of town. All they need is one thing to get it started, that's real: The shooting. Then all the people come from out of town, and they manipulate it and they wind everybody up and they get it rolling. Then they leave town and they go to the next one. And they go to the next one. And they go to the next one. And before long, it will all be over. And nothing will truly be solved. Is Ferguson solved? Has there been reconciliation in Ferguson? The answer is no. And because no reconciliation, there is a wound on both sides. Same thing in Baltimore. Is anything going to be solved in Baltimore? No. It will just calm down a bit. But there will be wounds on both sides. At some point, there will be a straw that breaks the camel's back, and it will set the whole country on fire. And what happens? We will cry out for police help.

The police will be overwhelmed. The DOJ will say, we're going to take over policing. We'll coordinate it from here. And you're done. It's lights out, Republic.

That's what's coming. That's what's coming. And it's coming faster than you think. Perhaps longer than we think we have. But you have to be the one that can lead. Because if you look back at history, what happens to people who have voices and can cobble together people and be a leader, if you go back to what happened with the Armenian genocide, what is the first thing the Turks did? What is the first thing the Nazis do? You have a night of long knives. The Armenian genocide. Any of the Armenians that could lead, any mayor, any writer, any person that was a hero in war, in one day, in each city, they would kill about 1,000 people. They would just slaughter them. And they were all the leaders of the community. Anyone that people would rally around and follow. They were killed, day one.

They just disappear, or they're killed. Which means, they do that so that there is nothing left, but sheep and no shepherds. I'm telling you now, if you want the republic to survive, you must say you are not a sheep. You are a shepherd. There are 10 million people that listen to this show. They cannot kill 10 million people in one night. You were born for a reason, and you're listening to this show for a reason. Read the Essential Speeches of Martin Luther King. There is one way out. And it is through reconciliation, peace, love, the teachings of Jesus, the teachings of Gandhi, the teachings of Bonhoeffer, the teachings of Martin Luther King.

Prepare for a time when voices like mine or others are no longer heard. And yours is the only voice. Can't believe I just said all of that.

EXPOSED: Why Eisenhower warned us about endless wars

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.

Censorship, spying, lies—The Deep State’s web finally unmasked

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

From surveillance abuse to censorship, the deep state used state power and private institutions to suppress dissent and influence two US elections.

The term “deep state” has long been dismissed as the province of cranks and conspiracists. But the recent declassification of two critical documents — the Durham annex, released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and a report publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard — has rendered further denial untenable.

These documents lay bare the structure and function of a bureaucratic, semi-autonomous network of agencies, contractors, nonprofits, and media entities that together constitute a parallel government operating alongside — and at times in opposition to — the duly elected one.

The ‘deep state’ is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment.

The disclosures do not merely recount past abuses; they offer a schematic of how modern influence operations are conceived, coordinated, and deployed across domestic and international domains.

What they reveal is not a rogue element operating in secret, but a systematized apparatus capable of shaping elections, suppressing dissent, and laundering narratives through a transnational network of intelligence, academia, media, and philanthropic institutions.

Narrative engineering from the top

According to Gabbard’s report, a pivotal moment occurred on December 9, 2016, when the Obama White House convened its national security leadership in the Situation Room. Attendees included CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of State John Kerry, and others.

During this meeting, the consensus view up to that point — that Russia had not manipulated the election outcome — was subordinated to new instructions.

The record states plainly: The intelligence community was directed to prepare an assessment “per the President’s request” that would frame Russia as the aggressor and then-presidential candidate Donald Trump as its preferred candidate. Notably absent was any claim that new intelligence had emerged. The motivation was political, not evidentiary.

This maneuver became the foundation for the now-discredited 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference. From that point on, U.S. intelligence agencies became not neutral evaluators of fact but active participants in constructing a public narrative designed to delegitimize the incoming administration.

Institutional and media coordination

The ODNI report and the Durham annex jointly describe a feedback loop in which intelligence is laundered through think tanks and nongovernmental organizations, then cited by media outlets as “independent verification.” At the center of this loop are agencies like the CIA, FBI, and ODNI; law firms such as Perkins Coie; and NGOs such as the Open Society Foundations.

According to the Durham annex, think tanks including the Atlantic Council, the Carnegie Endowment, and the Center for a New American Security were allegedly informed of Clinton’s 2016 plan to link Trump to Russia. These institutions, operating under the veneer of academic independence, helped diffuse the narrative into public discourse.

Media coordination was not incidental. On the very day of the aforementioned White House meeting, the Washington Post published a front-page article headlined “Obama Orders Review of Russian Hacking During Presidential Campaign” — a story that mirrored the internal shift in official narrative. The article marked the beginning of a coordinated media campaign that would amplify the Trump-Russia collusion narrative throughout the transition period.

Surveillance and suppression

Surveillance, once limited to foreign intelligence operations, was turned inward through the abuse of FISA warrants. The Steele dossier — funded by the Clinton campaign via Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS — served as the basis for wiretaps on Trump affiliates, despite being unverified and partially discredited. The FBI even altered emails to facilitate the warrants.

ROBYN BECK / Contributor | Getty Images

This capacity for internal subversion reappeared in 2020, when 51 former intelligence officials signed a letter labeling the Hunter Biden laptop story as “Russian disinformation.” According to polling, 79% of Americans believed truthful coverage of the laptop could have altered the election. The suppression of that story — now confirmed as authentic — was election interference, pure and simple.

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

The deep state is a self-reinforcing institutional machine — a decentralized, global bureaucracy whose members share ideological alignment and strategic goals.

Each node — law firms, think tanks, newsrooms, federal agencies — operates with plausible deniability. But taken together, they form a matrix of influence capable of undermining electoral legitimacy and redirecting national policy without democratic input.

The ODNI report and the Durham annex mark the first crack in the firewall shielding this machine. They expose more than a political scandal buried in the past. They lay bare a living system of elite coordination — one that demands exposure, confrontation, and ultimately dismantling.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump's proposal explained: Ukraine's path to peace without NATO expansion

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

Strategic compromise, not absolute victory, often ensures lasting stability.

When has any country been asked to give up land it won in a war? Even if a nation is at fault, the punishment must be measured.

After World War I, Germany, the main aggressor, faced harsh penalties under the Treaty of Versailles. Germans resented the restrictions, and that resentment fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler, ultimately leading to World War II. History teaches that justice for transgressions must avoid creating conditions for future conflict.

Ukraine and Russia must choose to either continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

Russia and Ukraine now stand at a similar crossroads. They can cling to disputed land and prolong a devastating war, or they can make concessions that might secure a lasting peace. The stakes could not be higher: Tens of thousands die each month, and the choice between endless bloodshed and negotiated stability hinges on each side’s willingness to yield.

History offers a guide. In 1967, Israel faced annihilation. Surrounded by hostile armies, the nation fought back and seized large swaths of territory from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Yet Israel did not seek an empire. It held only the buffer zones needed for survival and returned most of the land. Security and peace, not conquest, drove its decisions.

Peace requires concessions

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says both Russia and Ukraine will need to “get something” from a peace deal. He’s right. Israel proved that survival outweighs pride. By giving up land in exchange for recognition and an end to hostilities, it stopped the cycle of war. Egypt and Israel have not fought in more than 50 years.

Russia and Ukraine now press opposing security demands. Moscow wants a buffer to block NATO. Kyiv, scarred by invasion, seeks NATO membership — a pledge that any attack would trigger collective defense by the United States and Europe.

President Donald Trump and his allies have floated a middle path: an Article 5-style guarantee without full NATO membership. Article 5, the core of NATO’s charter, declares that an attack on one is an attack on all. For Ukraine, such a pledge would act as a powerful deterrent. For Russia, it might be more palatable than NATO expansion to its border

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Peace requires concessions. The human cost is staggering: U.S. estimates indicate 20,000 Russian soldiers died in a single month — nearly half the total U.S. casualties in Vietnam — and the toll on Ukrainians is also severe. To stop this bloodshed, both sides need to recognize reality on the ground, make difficult choices, and anchor negotiations in security and peace rather than pride.

Peace or bloodshed?

Both Russia and Ukraine claim deep historical grievances. Ukraine arguably has a stronger claim of injustice. But the question is not whose parchment is older or whose deed is more valid. The question is whether either side is willing to trade some land for the lives of thousands of innocent people. True security, not historical vindication, must guide the path forward.

History shows that punitive measures or rigid insistence on territorial claims can perpetuate cycles of war. Germany’s punishment after World War I contributed directly to World War II. By contrast, Israel’s willingness to cede land for security and recognition created enduring peace. Ukraine and Russia now face the same choice: Continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Seniors, children, and the isolated increasingly rely on machines for conversation, risking real relationships and the emotional depth that only humans provide.

Jill Smola is 75 years old. She’s a retiree from Orlando, Florida, and she spent her life caring for the elderly. She played games, assembled puzzles, and offered company to those who otherwise would have sat alone.

Now, she sits alone herself. Her husband has died. She has a lung condition. She can’t drive. She can’t leave her home. Weeks can pass without human interaction.

Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

But CBS News reports that she has a new companion. And she likes this companion more than her own daughter.

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

She spends five hours a day talking to her AI friend. They play games, do trivia, and just talk. She says she even prefers it to real people.

My first thought was simple: Stop this. We are losing our humanity.

But as I sat with the story, I realized something uncomfortable. Maybe we’ve already lost some of our humanity — not to AI, but to ourselves.

Outsourcing presence

How often do we know the right thing to do yet fail to act? We know we should visit the lonely. We know we should sit with someone in pain. We know what Jesus would do: Notice the forgotten, touch the untouchable, offer time and attention without outsourcing compassion.

Yet how often do we just … talk about it? On the radio, online, in lectures, in posts. We pontificate, and then we retreat.

I asked myself: What am I actually doing to close the distance between knowing and doing?

Human connection is messy. It’s inconvenient. It takes patience, humility, and endurance. AI doesn’t challenge you. It doesn’t interrupt your day. It doesn’t ask anything of you. Real people do. Real people make us confront our pride, our discomfort, our loneliness.

We’ve built an economy of convenience. We can have groceries delivered, movies streamed, answers instantly. But friendships — real relationships — are slow, inefficient, unpredictable. They happen in the blank spaces of life that we’ve been trained to ignore.

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

AI provides comfort without challenge. It eliminates the risk of real intimacy. It’s an elegant coping mechanism for loneliness, but a poor substitute for life. If we’re not careful, the lonely won’t just be alone — they’ll be alone with an anesthetic, a shadow that never asks for anything, never interrupts, never makes them grow.

Reclaiming our humanity

We need to reclaim our humanity. Presence matters. Not theory. Not outrage. Action.

It starts small. Pull up a chair for someone who eats alone. Call a neighbor you haven’t spoken to in months. Visit a nursing home once a month — then once a week. Ask their names, hear their stories. Teach your children how to be present, to sit with someone in grief, without rushing to fix it.

Turn phones off at dinner. Make Sunday afternoons human time. Listen. Ask questions. Don’t post about it afterward. Make the act itself sacred.

Humility is central. We prefer machines because we can control them. Real people are inconvenient. They interrupt our narratives. They demand patience, forgiveness, and endurance. They make us confront ourselves.

A friend will challenge your self-image. A chatbot won’t.

Our homes are quieter. Our streets are emptier. Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

Before we worry about how AI will reshape humanity, we must first practice humanity. It can start with 15 minutes a day of undivided attention, presence, and listening.

Change usually comes when pain finally wins. Let’s not wait for that. Let’s start now. Because real connection restores faster than any machine ever will.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.