Silence in the Face of Evil Is Evil Itself

Hello, America, from Las Vegas, Nevada.

I got up this morning, and I prayed about what I was going to say to you today. Because I have a lot on my mind. And I thought to myself, "Maybe I, maybe I don't say anything."

You know, it's really interesting. I've had an interesting 15 years. And for the life of me, I can't figure it out. I know my talent didn't get me here. I am quite possibly the worst talk show host on radio. My talent didn't get me here. My talent got me to where I was in the 1990s, and that was pretty much nowhere.

But I was on the air in WABC in New York. So the first talk show broadcast I ever did. Clinton had just bombed the aspirin factory, and Stu was my producer at the time. And I had spent the day reading the words of Osama Bin Laden because that was the target, according to Clinton. That was the target of that aspirin factory. Because he said, "Osama Bin Laden is a very dangerous man." And I didn't trust Clinton at all. And so I looked up this Osama bin Laden. I couldn't even pronounce his name. You know me with names.

I think I called him "Bean La Dean." I don't know how I even said it. It was embarrassing. But the point was, nobody was saying his name.

America really hadn't heard his name. And I spent the day reading his words. And I got on the air, and I said, "This guy is a danger. Clinton was right."

And I was accused by Republicans of trying to make the poll numbers of Bill Clinton go up by saying that. I said, "Look, you don't even know me. I'm not a fan of Bill Clinton at all. You don't know me. I want to talk to you about the facts of Osama Bin Laden." Nobody wanted to talk about the facts. They wanted to make it about politics. They just wanted that guy out.

And in frustration, after taking many phone calls, all of them accusing me of just trying to help Clinton, I snapped. And I said, "Mark my words, there will be blood, bodies and buildings in the streets of this city, New York City, within the next ten years. And the signature on those deaths will be Osama Bin Laden. Will you then care about terrorism?"

I forgot I even said that until I heard the name Osama Bin Laden about September 13th. And I looked at Stu and I said, "Oh, my gosh."

In 2004 --- late 2003 and 2004, I started talking internally and then started talking a little bit on the air because I wasn't sure, and I was afraid honestly. I was afraid of you.

I started saying on the air, "I don't, there's something wrong with the GOP. There's something wrong with the Bush administration. We're not going to be able to continue down this road. They're betraying all of the principles that we hold."

I was a big supporter of George Bush. I wasn't in 2000. But 2001 changed my mind. He got up there with a bullhorn, and all of a sudden I found myself "rah-rah. The Patriot Act. Rah-rah. Let's go kick some ass."

By 2004, the rah-rah had worn off, and I started to see what they were doing. By 2006, I saw what was happening on the border. And I had guest after guest after guest after guest on, all of them GOP, and I said, "Do you realize what's happening? Do you realize --- are you hearing, are you feeling the people out here? Because you have to change your ways because something is happening in America that I've never seen before. I can feel it." Very few understood what I was talking about.

2004, I start talking about a housing crisis, a banking crisis. By 2007, I'm ringing the bell so much, I'm losing radio stations. They're saying, "Glenn, you sound crazy." I'm on CNN. Just weeks before the crash, I have a guy on the air and he's talking about the Dow going to 33,000. In the middle of this interview, this expert that was on, beloved, everybody thought he was a genius, in the middle of the interview, I stopped and I looked right at the camera and I said, "Whatever you do, do not listen to this guy. We have a better chance in the next year of going to 5,000 than 33,000. Don't listen to this man." It didn't go well for the rest of the interview.

But more people listened to him than listened to me.

I'm putting together this crazy trip over to Israel. And I'm hearing in my prayers, "You have to announce this Monday." And I'm like, "I don't even know what I'm supposed to do."

"You have to announce it this Monday."

I fly over. Miracles happen. Open up --- we're the first Christians to ever speak at the Western Wall, ever, since Roman times. The mayor of Jerusalem is shocked. The rabbi of all of the holy places tells me he's shocked that the Lord told him, "Yes, let this Christians speak." It was a miracle. I didn't even know what was supposed to happen. I still don't know why we did it. I had to --- I had to announce it on Monday. I don't know why.

Friday, following after that Monday, Friday, Barack Obama comes out and asks for the Auschwitz lines to be reinstated, the 1968 borders. I get it.

I come back, and all I can think of was Restore Love. Restore Honor, that was in Washington, D.C. Then Restore Courage. That was in Israel. And as soon as that's done, Restore Love.

I didn't realize at the time all I was doing was faith, hope and charity. Where does honor come from? Where does courage come from? Where does love come from? How do you put them into practice? Honor, courage, love.

And nobody wants to hear me talk about Martin Luther King. Not a damn person. Nobody wants to hear me talk about Gandhi. Not a damn person.

Every time I talk about Gandhi, I hear from Christians, "Why don't you talk about Jesus." Every time I talk about Jesus, "Why are you talking about Jesus?" Every time I talk about Martin Luther King, "Why are you talking about that communist?"

Nobody wants to hear that. Nobody.

But I do as I'm told. (See, I told you he had Zionist masters.) Well, if you consider the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob my master, you'd be right. And I say we must not allow hatred to conquer our hearts.

At the time, internally, I'm telling people, "I don't even know why we're saying this. We're not Martin Luther King. We're not Gandhi. We're a million miles away from that kind of anger. There's no real oppression happening."

You most likely were saying the same thing. The same time . . . I read the words of the people in the Middle East. And the people in Washington were all saying this is a wonderful revolution in the Middle East. The Arab Spring. It's a new era. It's Jeffersonian. I read the words of the people in the Middle East. It felt an awful lot like 1999.

And I say the Muslim Brotherhood is not a peaceful organization. The people in Washington like Grover Norquist that have brought the Muslim Brotherhood into our society, have brought some of the worst people into our government, into the highest levels, into the Oval Office. They should not be held up on a pedestal. They should be shunned. They shouldn't be on the board of directors of CPAC. Grover Norquist should not be at CPAC. Grover Norquist should not be on the board of directors of the NRA. We'll find out if anybody listens to that. They're trying to pull him off the board of directors of the NRA now with a recall vote. Do you belong to the NRA? You have until this weekend to vote. Your ballot is in the magazine. It's already come out. You have to have it in by March 1st. That's Tuesday.

I talk about the caliphate. Nobody wants to listen to the caliphate. I'm mocked by the right. I'm mocked by the left. I'm mocked by the media. Nobody wants to hear it.

I didn't get here by my talent. I know what I'm capable of. Why does God give you a voice if you can't do anything about it? Why does God tell you what is coming when you can't do anything about it?

I got up this morning, and I thought, "What am I going to say to people?" Tuesday is your last chance, America. Super Tuesday is your last chance. Everybody is making this about politics. Everybody thinks I'm sitting here talking about Ted Cruz because, I don't know, I get money from Ted Cruz, and I just don't like Donald Trump because I was in his office asking him for money, or whatever the hell his excuse his.

I'm not standing for Ted Cruz. I'm standing for the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm standing for the principles we all swore to each other, to our families, and to ourselves on September 11th, we would never forget.

There is a storm coming of biblical proportions, a storm coming beyond your recognition. When the economy collapses, when our currency is worth toilet paper, who do you want, who do you want handling our nation? You want somebody who has divide us, who is grooming Brownshirts? I was at the caucus last night. I had never seen anything like it. These Trump supporters were beyond recognition as anything I've ever seen --- rude, vile, nasty.

I don't want to say all of them. But there's enough of them. And the ones that I met that were nice, I don't how you can stand in the same room with them. I don't know if you look --- how do you look at those people and say, "Wait a minute. That's what my guy is encouraging." I have some audio to play for you from yesterday. "That's what my guy is encouraging." Everybody said the same thing, "I want change." Boy, America, you are going to get change.

Don't you even hear yourself when you say that? Because you were the ones that stood up and said, "Change to what? Hope and change, Mr. Barack Obama. Mr. Barack Obama supporters, change to what?" I just want change. Oh, dear God.

Why is a man given a voice? Why is a man given the vision of what is to come if he can't do a damn thing about it?

As I wondered what to say to you this morning, and I still don't know, all that went through my head over and over again --- and I know what this means for my business, and I know what this means for my friends, and I know what this means for my family. Because Dana Loesch is going to the FBI because she's getting death threats. I know another very famous media reporter that is also on the highest level of security because of the death threats that's coming in on them.

I know what all of this means. Just in your business, I know what it means. In your popularity, I know what it means. But all I heard this morning was, "Silence in the face of evil is evil itself."

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.