David Barton: We Might Be On the Verge of Revolution

The Context

The South Carolina primary was Saturday and Donald Trump came out the big winner followed by Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz who were in a virtual tie for second place. David Barton joined the program and broke down the numbers behind the votes and what he found surprised him.

“Well, I thought there would be a revolution, but not in the sense of having a physical revolution,” Barton said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program. “I'm now more of a believer that it's a real thing. The numbers I saw in South Carolina . . . I was literally shocked. I was shocked at not only the numbers, but the words that were behind some of the numbers. The questions that were literally asked and how people responded to that, it really gave me a lot of pause in a way that I have not done in recent years.”

The Bubba Effect

If you've been a listener over the past few years, Glenn has talked extensively about a term called The Bubba Effect, something he believes is now here. The Bubba Effect is when a group of people feel they have been pushed over the edge by an overbearing government, and someone responds with force or violence. Even though they know it’s wrong, the majority of people support the violence.

“The Bubba Effect, I believe, is in full effect right now,” Glenn said. “I believe Donald Trump is The Bubba Effect, and I'll explain that later, based on some of these polls that are coming in. And they are frightening. They're truly frightening when you read the exit polls and you know what you're looking for.”

What was most frightening for David Barton? The term "betrayal."

“Well, the term we'll get into later is the term "betrayal," Barton said. “[Voters] feel betrayed. And when you look at betrayal and you look at what psychologists say that represents, that's a scary term. It's not like someone has just crossed me --- betrayal is deep stuff.”

Terrorism

The number one issue for South Carolina voters according to exit polling was terrorism at 32%, but the staggering number was that 75% of voters did not want Syrian refugees. Glenn explained why that is such a significant number.

“This is America saying, 'Look, we don't buy your bullcrap that it's a peaceful religion and the Muslim Brotherhood are largely secular.' What they know is, Muslims have come in from the Middle East, not necessarily American Muslims . . . Islamists is the better way to term this. Islamists are not peaceful. Muslims can be peaceful. But we have bent over backwards to say everybody is peaceful. And this guy is just a lone wolf, when we know that's bullcrap,” Glenn said.

What’s Sticking to Cruz

There may be several factors that hurt Cruz’ performance or why Rubio and Trump did so well, but there is one thing that Glenn believes is starting to take its toll on Ted.

“So here's the other thing that's hurting Ted Cruz that is sticking: that he's running the dirty campaign and that he's a liar. I have to tell you, I mean, I would not be with a liar. And I won't make any excuses,” Glenn said.

David has been hearing the same thing over and over and it might start to be something the Cruz campaign should be worried about even if it’s a lie itself.

“It's interesting the way they've gone at it. Trump says, [Cruz is] a liar. He lies about everything. He's the biggest liar --- just lie, lie, lie. That's the word [Trump] uses over and over, and people repeat that. And I say, 'Can you give me one example?' No, but [Cruz is] a liar,” Barton said.

Common Sense Bottom Line

If the exit polls in South Carolina prove anything it’s that we are a deeply divided country and at an extremely crucial point in our history. We have been pushed by an overbearing government and we might start to see violence, but we cannot let The Bubba Effect take root in our hearts. We must continue to be like Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and serve our fellow man with love.

“And this is why I have been saying, 'Jesus, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, pick one. Pick one.' You've got to hold on to who you are, the principles that you have, and you can't fight hate with hate.” Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN:  So glad you've tuned in.  We've run out of time for Courage Boys.  We'll have to move that or hit it tomorrow.  

I have David Barton here with us.  And he's been looking at the poll numbers out of South Carolina.  And we're going to get into those here in a bit.  But, David, I wanted to talk to you a bit because I know one of the headlines is going to be, "Glenn Beck says there's going to be a revolution."  I don't think you believed that until you saw the poll numbers coming out of the last three states.

DAVID:  Well, I thought there would be a revolution, but not in the sense of having a physical revolution.  You know, I thought there would be political or something.  I'm now more of a believer that it's a real thing.  The numbers I saw in South Carolina -- you know, I told you the email shocked me.  I was literally shocked.  I was shocked at not only the numbers, but the words that were behind some of the numbers.  The questions that were literally asked and how people responded to that, it really gave me a lot of pause in a way that I have not done in recent years.

GLENN:  And, quite honestly, if we had responsible journalists and responsible press, they would be talking to you now.  And this is why I have been saying, "Jesus, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, pick one.  Pick one."  But you've got to hold on to who and you are the principles that you have.  And you can't fight hate with hate.  And that's exactly what's happening.

And people -- the Bubba Effect, I believe, is in full effect right now.  I believe Donald Trump is the Bubba Effect.  And I'll explain that later, based on some of these polls that are coming in.  And they are frightening.  They're truly frightening when you read the exit polls and you know what you're looking for.

DAVID:  Yeah.  The numbers are scary on this.  And the terms are scary too.

GLENN:  What do you mean "the terms"?

DAVID:  Well, the term we'll get into later is the term "betrayal."  They feel betrayed.  And when you look at betrayal and you look at what psychologists say that that represents, that's a scary term.  It's not like someone has just crossed me.  Betrayal is deep stuff.

GLENN:  So I want to make sure that you hear this.  Because the media will spin this out of control.  And they'll make it into another crazy conspiracy theory.  But I just want to point out: '99, I talked about Osama bin Laden in New York and said that there would be blood and bodies in the streets and the signature would be Osama bin Laden.  And nobody believed me.  In 2006 and '7, I talked to you about financial crash, the crash of biblical proportions, based on the housing market.  I told you that there would be a caliphate, and everybody mocked that.  I'm telling you, we are on the path for revolution.  And a violent revolution.

Right now, we're talking about a velvet revolution.  But if we make the wrong choice at this point, we are -- and I'll make this case, based on the polls and what we're seeing.  And nobody in the media is going to -- they're going to mock it.  Don't mock this warning.  Please don't mock this warning.

All right.  So we'll get into that here in just a second.  And I'm actually anxious for David to hear the -- the -- the founders, the black founders, because David is the one who originally turned us on to black founders.  We had absolutely no idea.

Pat, do you know who this -- which is the black founder that we're hitting today?

PAT:  Crispus Attucks.

GLENN:  Who played a huge, huge role.  I was just up in Boston a couple weeks ago.  And I asked people, "So where is the Old North Church?"  And they're like, "You know, it's been years since I've been there.  I'm not really sure."  

So what is that memorial over there?  

That's Bunker Hill, I think.  I'm not really sure.  

I mean, It's amazing that people who live in that, with all of that history, how many people just dismiss it.  And they're just -- it becomes old hat.  I don't really -- I learned that in school.  And I don't really remember.

PAT:  Yeah, they don't pay attention.  You only pay attention kind of when you go to Boston on vacation and you're there to see the revolutionary sites and do all of that, and then you appreciate that stuff.  I think when you live there, you just kind of -- it's like living around Disneyland.  You get immune to it.

STU:  All right.  But ask them where the nearest Dunkin' Donuts is.

PAT:  Oh, they know where that is.

STU:  They will know that.  They will know that.

PAT:  Yeah.  Yeah.  Ask them what channel the Apprentice is on, and they know that.  Right?

GLENN:  I will tell you that I've never seen them -- I was seeing them from the window.  I've been to Boston a hundred times.  I've never had the opportunity -- never had the time to do it.  It's something I have to do with my kids because it's amazing.  It's all still there.  It's all still there.  And maybe we should spend a little more time learning about it.  

We'll learn something that no one in the mainstream media, no one in the educational system wants you to learn.  The history of our black founders, next.

Hour 2

GLENN:  I'll number Durango Hills today in Las Vegas.  At noon.  And 4 o'clock, I'll be in Elko, Nevada, which I've never been.  And then in Reno tonight.  Which is a beautiful city.  And then tomorrow, we'll be around another few places tomorrow in Nevada.  Just check GlennBeck.com for all the details or my Facebook page.  We'll make sure you can find out where we are.

So in South Carolina, quite honestly, it was like a kick to the gut in South Carolina.  But we learned an awful lot about what is happening in America and how high the anger is in America.  We never make a good choice -- how many times have you ever said these words, "I was so angry today, and I made the best choice I've ever made?"  We always start our apologies with, "I'm really sorry.  I flew off the handle.  I was really angry."  Never have I made a good decision when I was angry.

And David is going to take us through some of the poll numbers and what really happened in South Carolina.  David Barton is with us.

DAVID:  You want to start with the angry side --

GLENN:  You take us where you think we need to go.

DAVID:  Well, I'll tell you the way it started for me.  I was not in South Carolina the night the results came in.  I was speaking at a big event in east Texas.

PAT:  I'm just wondering if this is the David Barton --

GLENN:  Come on.  Let's get something out.

DAVID:  What is the website, Pat?

GLENN:  Oh, jeez.

PAT:  Keepthepromise.com.

GLENN:  We got it.  Let me just say -- if you would like to help the super PAC for Ted Cruz, you can go to keepthepromise.com.  Now, can we please move on?

JEFFY:  So this is the David Barton from --

GLENN:  Stop it right now.  Please, I'm begging you guys.  Turn the mics off, Sarah, in Dallas.  

Okay.  David, tell us what happened.

DAVID:  So I looked at the result after the event that night was over, and I saw all sorts of headlines.  I saw what had happened, that Cruz had come in third.  I saw that evangelicals had abandoned him.  That they did not do well.  The conservative state did not go for him.  And so I saw all these headlines.  Then as I was with you this weekend --

GLENN:  And you were as shocked as I was.

DAVID:  I was shocked.  I was absolutely shocked.  Our numbers were not close to what the results came in as.  Really, nobody's numbers were close.  They missed Rubio by a long way.  Trump overperformed.  Cruz underperformed by what was predicted.  So it was a gut blow.  It was kind of a gut blow.

So I had not thought about it much.  You asked -- you sent me the email and said, "What happened?"  So I sent you back a few articles that had exit polls, but I hadn't really looked at them.  And so as we were talking last night, I spent time going through the exit polls.  And the headlines completely misportrayed what the numbers show.

So, for example, you take -- and let me put it in perspective and then we can talk about how things felt.  The biggest issues that were on voters' minds in South Carolina, which were really different from Iowa and elsewhere, but the biggest issues that were out there -- number one issue was terrorism.  That was the number one issue at 32 percent, followed by jobs and the economy for 28 percent, government spending 27 percent, immigration 10 percent.

GLENN:  Okay.  Listen.  Now, when it comes to terrorism, it's specifically the Syrian refugees.

DAVID:  That's right.

GLENN:  And as I explained to David last night, this is the Bubba effect.  Because David is like, where are the Syrian refugees?  How is that even a story right now?

DAVID:  And, by the way, the reason I was struck with that was 75 percent of South Carolina voters said we like Trump because he doesn't want any Syrian -- and I had no clue it would be 75 percent.

GLENN:  Right.  And why is that number so high?  And I explained to David, this is the Bubba Effect.  This is America saying, "Look, we don't buy your bullcrap that it's a peaceful religion.  And the Muslim Brotherhood are largely secular."  What they know is, Muslims have come in from the Middle East, not necessarily American Muslims and Islamists is the better way to term this.  Islamists are not peaceful.  Muslims can be peaceful.  But we have bent over backwards to say everybody is peaceful.  And this guy is just a lone wolf, when we know that's bullcrap.

So when the government is not protecting us, that is the secret of the Bubba Effect.  When the government isn't protecting, the people push back on that.  They get angry and say, "You know what, get out of our town.  We know what the truth is, and you're part of the problem."  And that's why the Syrian refugees was the -- by far, the number one concern of the people who went to the polls in South Carolina.

DAVID:  And for those folks, Trump was their guy.

GLENN:  Because he says no Muslims.

DAVID:  He says, Muslims, shut it down.  That's where they went.  Although there were these other issues, 75 percent, that was a stunning number to me.

GLENN:  Right.

DAVID:  And the other numbers that stood out to me, is I was told -- let's see if I get the numbers.  74 percent were evangelicals that voted.  As it turned out, 74 percent were not evangelicals.  That was evangelicals born again.  So in the evangelicals, Cruz did really good with the evangelicals.  But among the born agains -- and evangelicals are born agains who are serious about their faith.  So those serious about their faith, Cruz did really well with.  Those who were not serious about their faith and not very conservative, that's where Trump cleaned up.  And so the media said, oh, all the evangelicals are going for Trump.  No, not so.  There was a definite categorization difference between those who practice their faith and those who didn't.

GLENN:  And actually those who practiced their faith, it was split between Rubio and Cruz.

DAVID:  That's right.  Rubio and Cruz had the high percentage of those who were serious about their faith.

GLENN:  So here's the other thing that's hurting Ted Cruz that is sticking, that he's running the dirty campaign and that he's a liar.  I have to tell you, I mean, I would not be with a liar.  And I won't make any excuses.  I think -- you know, I think like -- what was it?  Oh, the thing in Iowa where he said, you know, they sent out fliers --

DAVID:  Ben Carson.

GLENN:  No, no.  The fliers that they sent out and said, "You're in violation of voting violation."  That's been done over and over again by the Democrats and the Republicans.  So it's nothing new.  I don't like it.  I wouldn't have done that myself.  But it's totally fair game.  Nobody has ever had a problem with that in the past.

He's not playing dirty ball.  But the problem is, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, and Donald Trump are all saying the same thing because they know, if they take him out, then the whole landscape changes.  And so he's an impediment to them.  So they're doing what they did to, you know, Mitt Romney and everybody always does.  You -- you target one, take him out.  Then you retarget another one and take them out.  So they're all targeting Marco Rubio -- Ted Cruz.

DAVID:  It's interesting the way they've gone at it.  Trump says, he's a liar.  He lies about everything.  He's the biggest liar -- just lie, lie, lie.  That's the word he uses over and over.  And people repeat that.  And I say, "Can you give me one example?"  No, but he's a liar.  

Give me an example.  

Well, he's a liar.

And it goes back to what William James said in the 1800s.  He said, there's nothing so absurd, but that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.

GLENN:  Hitler said the same thing.

DAVID:  That's right.  And that's what's been happening.  That did hurt Cruz in South Carolina.  The negatives went up on him.  We really can't trust him because he's a liar.  No evidence of that.  That's just a claim.

GLENN:  I know Ted Cruz.  That's the most incredible thing I've heard.  He's trying to be friends with everybody.  He's not taking these guys out.  He's the only one not engaging in those nasty -- you know, this nasty kind of --

DAVID:  Well, I'll tell you, when I -- when they asked me to take the super PAC and I did.  I said, "Here's the deal, I'm not going to be an attack dog.  I'm not going to do a super PAC that's going after everybody attacking.  I believe in Romans 12:21.  You overturn the evil with the good.  We'll run positive messaging.  I don't mind contrast ads.  I don't mind if someone is vote is somewhere, I'll show that.  But I'm not going to be attack dogs and demean the character of others."  And that's the way we run this thing.  And now we're liars for having run really a pretty straight-up campaign.  Now, we can't speak for everybody that does everything in the name of Ted Cruz.  But the super PAC side, our super PAC Keep the Promise.  Oh, wait a minute.  Keepthepromise.com.  Our super PAC,keepthepromise.com, we have really run a straight-up thing.  Because that's Ted's character.  That's what we want to reflect.

GLENN:  I will tell you this, David is in because he does want to raise money for the super PAC because he believes that the only reason why Kasich is still in is he wants to win Ohio.  And Ohio, it doesn't even look like he'll win Ohio.  And the super PAC needs to have the money to be able to go on and continue to fight.  So if you do believe in Ted Cruz, you can donate to the super PAC.

Now, let me switch to -- and, Pat, I don't know if you have this audio.  What Marco Rubio said this weekend on, I don't know if it was Meet the Press

PAT:  I got the Stephanopoulos audio where he was --

GLENN:  Okay.  So I want you to listen to what he said.

VOICE:  For what it's worth, PolitiFact has never been able to find -- none of us have been able to find any instance --

PAT:  That's.  Hang on a second.

GLENN:  And this is important.  Because here's the thing -- there's never been -- in modern history, there's never been somebody who has made it to the presidency without winning Ohio, New Hampshire, or South Carolina.  You have to win one of those three.  In modern history, nobody has made it without winning one of those three.  Hang on just a second.

On the other side, Bill Clinton didn't win anything until Georgia, which was March 1st.  So I want you to remember the comeback kid.  He did win South Carolina.  But South Carolina came later.  It came March 6th.  The first time he won any state was March 1st.  So no matter what's happening at this point, it doesn't matter.  You can win with the momentum.  So don't be discouraged if you happen to be for a candidate.  You know, I think you'll have a hard time -- anybody who hasn't won any of those three states.  That's the only thing that's an impediment.  This is truly a two-man race.  Okay.  Go ahead play the audio.

VOICE:  Three big contests so far.  You've come in third, fifth, and now second in South Carolina.  The big question for you is:  Where do you win?

GLENN:  Now, listen to this.

MARCO:  Well, when we get to these winner-take-all states, we have to start winning because they award all their delegates to one person.  And if you look at what we're doing now, we're going to be doing a national campaign.  I mean, I'm in Tennessee today.  Then I'm going to Arkansas.  Then we finish up in Nevada.  And tomorrow, more of the same.  We're campaigning everywhere.  

So the way this process works, for people that are watching is, these states right now are awarding delegates proportionally.  And -- and -- but come March 15th, if you win a state, you get all of their delegates.  That's when it's really going to start to matter, and we'll be in real good shape for that.

VOICE:  And Florida needs to be a win?

GLENN:  Okay.  Stop.  

Go ahead.

MARCO:  Well, I think that's true for everyone in this race, and it's always been true.  We feel real good about Florida.

VOICE:  True for everybody in this race.

GLENN:  Okay.  Stop.  True for everybody in this race that you have to win Florida.  He is currently polling third in his home state.

DAVID:  And notice he was asked what state can you win, and he hasn't named one.  He's naming where he's going to be, he's naming what they're going to work for, he hasn't given a state where he can win.

GLENN:  Right.  And if his strategy is, I'm going to win in Florida.  It's too late.  That was the -- what's-his-name's strategy?

DAVID:  Jeb Bush.

GLENN:  No.  Not only Jeb Bush, but Giuliani.  It doesn't work.  It just doesn't work.  So I don't know what that strategy is.  But you can't win if you say I'm going to win in Florida and you're polling third and it's your home state.  Imagine if, you know, Ted Cruz was polling third in Texas.  By the way, how is he polling in Texas?

DAVID:  He's polling first in Texas.

GLENN:  First in Texas.  Yeah, I mean, you just can't do that.  You just can't poll third in your own state at this point.  Rubio is not -- is not a winner.  He's just not a winner.  People are looking at him and saying, "Well, he can win in the general."  I'm not so sure.  

Featured Image: Supporters cheer as the South Carolina primary is called for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at his election night party February 20, 2016 in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The New York businessman won the first southern primary decisively. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Exposed: The radical Left's bloody rampage against America

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

For years, the media warned of right-wing terror. But the bullets, bombs, and body bags are piling up on the left — with support from Democrat leaders and voters.

For decades, the media and federal agencies have warned Americans that the greatest threat to our homeland is the political right — gun-owning veterans, conservative Christians, anyone who ever voted for President Donald Trump. President Joe Biden once declared that white supremacy is “the single most dangerous terrorist threat” in the nation.

Since Trump’s re-election, the rhetoric has only escalated. Outlets like the Washington Post and the Guardian warned that his second term would trigger a wave of far-right violence.

As Democrats bleed working-class voters and lose control of their base, they’re not moderating. They’re radicalizing.

They were wrong.

The real domestic threat isn’t coming from MAGA grandmas or rifle-toting red-staters. It’s coming from the radical left — the anarchists, the Marxists, the pro-Palestinian militants, and the anti-American agitators who have declared war on law enforcement, elected officials, and civil society.

Willful blindness

On July 4, a group of black-clad terrorists ambushed an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Alvarado, Texas. They hurled fireworks at the building, spray-painted graffiti, and then opened fire on responding law enforcement, shooting a local officer in the neck. Journalist Andy Ngo has linked the attackers to an Antifa cell in the Dallas area.

Authorities have so far charged 14 people in the plot and recovered AR-style rifles, body armor, Kevlar vests, helmets, tactical gloves, and radios. According to the Department of Justice, this was a “planned ambush with intent to kill.”

And it wasn’t an isolated incident. It’s part of a growing pattern of continuous violent left-wing incidents since December last year.

Monthly attacks

Most notably, in December 2024, 26-year-old Luigi Mangione allegedly gunned down UnitedHealth Group CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan. Mangione reportedly left a manifesto raging against the American health care system and was glorified by some on social media as a kind of modern Robin Hood.

One Emerson College poll found that 41% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 said the murder was “acceptable” or “somewhat acceptable.”

The next month, a man carrying Molotov cocktails was arrested near the U.S. Capitol. He allegedly planned to assassinate Trump-appointed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and House Speaker Mike Johnson.

In February, the “Tesla Takedown” attacks on Tesla vehicles and dealerships started picking up traction.

In March, a self-described “queer scientist” was arrested after allegedly firebombing the Republican Party headquarters in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Graffiti on the burned building read “ICE = KKK.”

In April, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s (D-Pa.) official residence was firebombed on Passover night. The suspect allegedly set the governor’s mansion on fire because of what Shapiro, who is Jewish, “wants to do to the Palestinian people.”

In May, two young Israeli embassy staffers were shot and killed outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C. Witnesses said the shooter shouted “Free Palestine” as he was being arrested. The suspect told police he acted “for Gaza” and was reportedly linked to the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

In June, an Egyptian national who had entered the U.S. illegally allegedly threw a firebomb at a peaceful pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado. Eight people were hospitalized, and an 82-year-old Holocaust survivor later died from her injuries.

That same month, a pro-Palestinian rioter in New York was arrested for allegedly setting fire to 11 police vehicles. In Los Angeles, anti-ICE rioters smashed cars, set fires, and hurled rocks at law enforcement. House Democrats refused to condemn the violence.

Barbara Davidson / Contributor | Getty Images

In Portland, Oregon, rioters tried to burn down another ICE facility and assaulted police officers before being dispersed with tear gas. Graffiti left behind read: “Kill your masters.”

On July 7, a Michigan man opened fire on a Customs and Border Protection facility in McAllen, Texas, wounding two police officers and an agent. Border agents returned fire, killing the suspect.

Days later in California, ICE officers conducting a raid on an illegal cannabis farm in Ventura County were attacked by left-wing activists. One protester appeared to fire at federal agents.

This is not a series of isolated incidents. It’s a timeline of escalation. Political assassinations, firebombings, arson, ambushes — all carried out in the name of radical leftist ideology.

Democrats are radicalizing

This isn’t just the work of fringe agitators. It’s being enabled — and in many cases encouraged — by elected Democrats.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz routinely calls ICE “Trump’s modern-day Gestapo.” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass attempted to block an ICE operation in her city. Boston Mayor Michelle Wu compared ICE agents to a neo-Nazi group. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson referred to them as “secret police terrorizing our communities.”

Apparently, other Democratic lawmakers, according to Axios, are privately troubled by their own base. One unnamed House Democrat admitted that supporters were urging members to escalate further: “Some of them have suggested what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.” Others were demanding blood in the streets to get the media’s attention.

A study from Rutgers University and the National Contagion Research Institute found that 55% of Americans who identify as “left of center” believe that murdering Donald Trump would be at least “somewhat justified.”

As Democrats bleed working-class voters and lose control of their base, they’re not moderating. They’re radicalizing. They don’t want the chaos to stop. They want to harness it, normalize it, and weaponize it.

The truth is, this isn’t just about ICE. It’s not even about Trump. It’s about whether a republic can survive when one major party decides that our institutions no longer apply.

Truth still matters. Law and order still matter. And if the left refuses to defend them, then we must be the ones who do.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

America's comeback: Trump is crushing crime in the Capitol

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Trump’s DC crackdown is about more than controlling crime — it’s about restoring America’s strength and credibility on the world stage.

Donald Trump on Monday invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, placing the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control and deploying the National Guard to restore law and order. This move is long overdue.

D.C.’s crime problem has been spiraling for years as local authorities and Democratic leadership have abandoned the nation’s capital to the consequences of their own failed policies. The city’s murder rate is about three times higher than that of Islamabad, Pakistan, and 18 times higher than that of communist-led Havana, Cuba.

When DC is in chaos, it sends a message to the world that America is weak.

Theft, assaults, and carjackings have transformed many of its streets into war zones. D.C. saw a 32% increase in homicides from 2022 to 2023, marking the highest number in two decades and surpassing both New York and Los Angeles. Even if crime rates dropped to 2019 levels, that wouldn’t be good enough.

Local leaders have downplayed the crisis, manipulating crime stats to preserve their image. Felony assault, for example, is no longer considered a “violent crime” in their crime stats. Same with carjacking. But the reality on the streets is different. People in D.C. are living in constant fear.

Trump isn’t waiting for the crime rate to improve on its own. He’s taking action.

Broken windows theory in action

Trump’s takeover of D.C. puts the “broken windows theory” into action — the idea that ignoring minor crimes invites bigger ones. When authorities look the other way on turnstile-jumping or graffiti, they signal that lawbreaking carries no real consequence.

Rudy Giuliani used this approach in the 1990s to clean up New York, cracking down on small offenses before they escalated. Trump is doing the same in the capital, drawing a hard line and declaring enough is enough. Letting crime fester in Washington tells the world that the seat of American power tolerates lawlessness.

What Trump is doing for D.C. isn’t just about law enforcement — it’s about national identity. When D.C. is in chaos, it sends a message to the world that America is weak. The capital city represents the soul of the country. If we can’t even keep our own capital safe, how can we expect anyone to take us seriously?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Reversing the decline

Anyone who has visited D.C. regularly over the past several years has witnessed its rapid decline. Homeless people bathe in the fountains outside Union Station. People are tripping out in Dupont Circle. The left’s negligence is a disgrace, enabling drug use and homelessness to explode on our capital’s streets while depriving these individuals of desperately needed care and help.

Restoring law and order to D.C. is not about politics or scoring points. It’s about doing what’s right for the people. It’s about protecting communities, taking the vulnerable off the streets, and sending the message to both law-abiding and law-breaking citizens alike that the rule of law matters.

D.C. should be a lesson to the rest of America. If we want to take our cities back, we need leadership willing to take bold action. Trump is showing how to do it.

Now, it’s time for other cities to step up and follow his lead. We can restore law and order. We can make our cities something to be proud of again.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Can Trump make D.C. great again?

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

For years, Washington, D.C., has been a symbol of everything wrong with big government—riddled with crime, manipulated stats, and soft-on-crime policies that let gangs terrorize innocent citizens while the elite turn a blind eye. Now, President Trump is stepping up, deploying federal agents after a savage attack on a hero like Edward Coristine, vowing no more "Mr. Nice Guy" as he promises to jail criminals, clear out the homeless encampments, and restore order just like he sealed the border. This isn't just a crackdown; it's a reclamation of our capital from the chaos liberals have unleashed.

Glenn has already covered this on his radio show, exposing how legacy media and Democrats twist crime numbers. They claim that there was a 35% drop in crime while ignoring FBI data showing only a 10% decline, and murders are still sky-high compared to pre-pandemic days. Trump's policies draw parallels to the 1990s, when Congress took control and turned things around, proving that strong leadership can counteract progressive failures. With Democratic mayors crying "power grab" in failing cities like Chicago and Baltimore, it's clear: Trump's bold move is a lifeline for liberty, not a threat. Our capital should be a shining example of America, where leaders can work in peace and foreign representatives can see what this nation stands for without fearing for their lives.

Our nation's heart is at risk from the gaslighting establishment that benefits from disorder, absurdly framing Trump's actions as a "military takeover." Is this the leadership America needs, or will we let the swamp dictate the narrative?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Can we trust the media's spin? Should Trump expand this fight? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you support President Trump's deployment of federal agents to crack down on D.C. crime?

Do you believe liberal media and Democrats are manipulating crime stats to undermine Trump's efforts?

Is Trump's plan to jail criminals and relocate the homeless a necessary step to restore order in our capital?

Do you see Democratic policies as the root cause of rising violence in cities like D.C., Chicago, and Baltimore?

Should Trump extend this federal intervention to other failing blue cities to protect American liberty?

Durham annex exposes Hillary’s hand in Russiagate deception

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Newly declassified documents show that Hillary Clinton approved the Russia hoax strategy — and that the Obama White House was briefed from the beginning.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) last week declassified a 29-page document known as the Durham annex. Its publication has received remarkably little attention from major media outlets, despite containing one of the most significant intelligence disclosures since the origins of the Russiagate investigation.

The Durham annex is not conjecture, analysis, or political spin. It is a collection of sensitive intelligence reports, internal memos, and declassified emails compiled by the intelligence community and withheld from public view for years under the pretext of “source protection.”

The Durham annex reveals that the FBI ignored evidence in 2015 and 2016 suggesting that foreign governments were attempting to collude not with Trump, but with Clinton.

The declassified document offers a clearer view of what many Americans have long suspected: that the narrative surrounding Trump-Russia collusion was not only politically motivated but deliberately constructed by the Clinton campaign, facilitated by sympathetic actors within U.S. intelligence agencies, and ultimately endorsed by senior members of the Obama administration.

This trove of documents does not merely reinforce existing criticisms of the FBI’s conduct during the 2016 election. It provides evidence that the Clinton campaign approved a strategy to discredit Donald Trump by promoting a false association with Vladimir Putin. And it does so using intelligence collected from foreign surveillance of American political actors — surveillance that the CIA deemed credible enough to brief President Barack Obama directly.

The cover-up unraveled

Central to the Durham annex is a source codenamed “T1” — a foreign intelligence asset who intercepted Russian cyber-espionage activity targeting American entities, including George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, the Clinton campaign, and U.S. think tanks. The reports T1 relayed to U.S. intelligence included detailed assessments of internal American political strategy. In effect, T1 was watching Russian spies watch us — and reporting back.

T1’s identity remains classified, but strong circumstantial evidence points to a Dutch intelligence source. The Netherlands reportedly gained access to Russian cyber operations as early as 2014. Regardless of who provided it, U.S. agencies treated the intelligence from T1 as credible.

Then-CIA Director John Brennan quickly briefed President Obama, Vice President Biden, FBI Director James Comey, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Those briefings included memos indicating Hillary Clinton had personally approved a plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian election interference.

One memo, dated 2016 and reportedly obtained through Russian surveillance of George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, outlined a Clinton campaign strategy: “Smear Donald Trump by magnifying the scandal” over Russia’s preference for Trump. That memo laid the groundwork for the Trump-Russia collusion hoax now known as Russiagate.

Intelligence running Clinton’s interference

The CIA labeled the intelligence “sensitive” and credible. The FBI rejected it. Agents claimed it relied on hearsay, appeared exaggerated, and might have suffered from translation errors.

That kind of skepticism might seem reasonable — if the FBI had applied the same scrutiny to the Steele dossier. Instead, they accepted that now-debunked document without verification and used it to justify surveillance warrants.

The inconsistency runs deeper than analysis. The Durham annex reveals that the FBI ignored evidence from 2015 and 2016 showing that foreign governments weren’t courting Trump — they were cozying up to Clinton.

One memo, written before Trump even announced his candidacy, described a foreign intelligence operative preparing to meet with a Clinton associate to discuss a “plan.” The operative was acting on direct orders from a foreign head of state

Gilbert Carrasquillo / Contributor | Getty Images

The precise content of the plan is redacted, but the FBI’s field office viewed it as serious enough to request a FISA warrant. That request, however, was left to “languish in limbo” by senior FBI officials, who subsequently warned Clinton in a defensive briefing.

Frayed trust, no accountability

The documents suggest a coordinated operation — one in which political, bureaucratic, and media institutions aligned to discredit a political opponent using information they had strong reasons to believe was false. The CIA deemed the intelligence worth a presidential briefing. The FBI discarded it. The media ignored it. And Clinton operatives implemented it.

This is not merely a scandal of partisan excess. Nearly 10 years after the first Hillary Clinton email leaks, and eight years after Trump’s unexpected victory, we are only now beginning to see the scope of institutional complicity in the Russiagate deception. The political cost may never be fully calculated, but the institutional damage — to the FBI, to the intelligence community, and to the trust of the American people — is already done.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.