Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

PolitiFact: 73 Percent of Trump's Statements Are False

March 01, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

PolitiFact has looked at Donald Drumpf's statements and finds that 73 percent of his statements are false.

"He is a sociopathic liar. He doesn't care. He may not even know he's lying anymore. He just believes whatever it is that he makes up in his own head," Glenn said Tuesday on The Glenn Beck Program. "You'll never see his income tax. Not because there's something going on there. But because the people who have worked with him closely for over ten years estimate his net value, his net worth at $150 million."

Should that be true, what would it say about the character of man who refuses to release tax returns so people won't find out his whole life is a lie?  

Additionally, it's well-documented that Drumpf quickly turns from friend to foe should he feel threatened.

"If you don't do him a solid, he destroys you," Glenn said.

Here's a sampling of Drumpf's grade school name-calling:

Erick Erickson — a total low life

Arianna Huffington — a liberal clown

Chuck Todd — pathetic

Charles Krauthammer — a loser and a jerk

Bob Vander Plaats — a phony and a con man

Glenn Beck — a dopey idiot

An article today in the Weekly Standard, written by Stephan Hayes, makes one ponder this pertinent question:

If Drumpf condemns anyone he dislikes, why does he go soft on David Duke and the KKK?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN:  It's Super Tuesday, and it's much more serious than it sounds, the responsibility on each of our shoulders today, to do our homework before we walk into our polling locations.  The fate of America rests on your shoulders.  But no pressure.  We start there, right now.

(music)

GLENN:  Hello, America.  And welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.  Today from Washington, DC, and the studios at WMAL, I want to thank 1000 KTOK for hosting us yesterday in Oklahoma City and WMAL for hosting us today in Washington, DC, as we prepare for CPAC that is happening this weekend.  We'll be broadcasting from there Thursday and Friday and talked to some of the people at CPAC.  Max Lucado is going to be on with us today, as is Ted Cruz.  

It is Super Tuesday.  25 percent of all the delegates will be assigned by tomorrow morning.  And it's going to be pretty hard to -- to stop Donald Drumpf at this point.  Not impossible.  But pretty hard to stop.  I'm looking at the news today, and I find it interesting that all of these people are coming out with these plans to stop Donald Drumpf.

And the one I keep hearing about is insanity.  And it's Marco Rubio's plan, not to win any of the -- any of the contest today.  His plan is not to win any of the contest, but to believe just to have enough delegates to go to a brokered convention.  The other plan is to have the G.O.P. kick Donald out and run somebody else in his stead.

What kind of banana republic do we live in?  I am not a fan of Donald Drumpf, nor will I vote for Donald Drumpf.  But I have to tell you, if the American people say they're going to vote for Donald Drumpf, the G.O.P. was the one that made the deal.  The G.O.P. was the one that said, "You have to run -- you can't run for third party."  You think you're going to take his delegates away and not start a civil war?  You think you're going to kick him out of the party and not start a civil war?

The G.O.P. is done.  They're just done.  They didn't get it.  They have no idea why Donald Drumpf has any kind of traction at all.  And none of their plans include the guy who is number two in the delegate count.  They refuse to look at the guy who actually is going to win some states today.  Why?

Because he's anti-establishment.  Because he will stop all of this nonsense that's happening in Washington.  So why get behind that guy?  You got to get behind the guy that doesn't win any states.  That doesn't make any sense.

Because the establishment is still all about power.  It's all about control.  We have gone down this road now of progressivism far too long.  And people don't see it.  I got up this morning and I was thinking about it.  I was watching the news and I thought, "You know, it's amazing to me -- it's amazing to me.  This guy, Donald Drumpf, would be laughed out if he was running for Democrats.  We would laugh at him.  We would all say, oh, my gosh, bring it on.  Exactly what Hillary Clinton doing."

There's a new story out about how Hillary Clinton is salivating at Donald Drumpf.  By the way, new poll out shows Donald Drumpf does not beat Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head.  And they haven't even begun.  Look at what the New York Times said yesterday.

New York Times has an off the record, confidential meeting with Donald Drumpf back in January.  Where supposedly he said, "Look, everything is negotiable.  Don't worry about it.  I know you're all freaked out."  But basically what he said -- what was it on Greta, I can be anything.  I'm going to be changing rapidly once I get the nomination.  I'll be changing rapidly.  I can be whatever I need to be at the time.  Basically he said that, apparently to the New York Times, in a confidential meeting, that everything is negotiable, and the stuff he's saying on the border, don't worry about.

Well, I called yesterday for Donald Drumpf to demand that the New York Times release that audiotape.  Because they said they will, but they can't release it because it was a confidential meeting.  And they can't release it without his permission.  But if they ask, if Donald Drumpf asks, they will release it. 

Well, I think this is an outrageous lie by the New York Times.  Donald Drumpf has said many times that he thinks one of the biggest liars is the New York Times.  I happen to agree with him.  I think that he should demand that the New York Times produce that tape.  And show that he did not indeed say those things.

Except he was on Hannity last night, talking about it.  When he spoke to Sean, he said, "Well, look, yes, a lot of things are negotiable.  But the New York Times is a liar."  Well, if the New York Times is a liar, you should -- you should demand that the tape be released and then sue them.

Don, I know you love to sue them.  You love to sue them.  Suing is a way of life with you.  Because to quote you:  You get greedy.  And you say, "Give me the money.  Give me the money."  And you grab and you grab and you grab.  That's a quote from you.  

So I know you're greedy, which is another beautiful, wonderful, uge, Christian characteristic.  But I know you get greedy and you want to grab.  So sue them.  Because you have them dead to rights.  They are hurting your reputation by saying that you are telling the American people one thing and doing the exact opposite.  Because we know you would never do that.  That's ridiculous to assume and insulting to you.

He won't call for the release of that tape.  Guarantee it.  Because I bet you my house, that what's on that tape is exactly what the New York Times says is on that tape.  Because Donald Drumpf is a liar.

Nobody wants to hear that about people.  PolitiFact has looked at his statements and 76 percent of his statements -- or, 73 percent of his statements are false.

He is a sociopathic liar.  He doesn't care.  He may not even know he's lying anymore.  He just believes whatever it is that he makes up in his own head.  You'll never see his income tax.  Not because there's something going on there.  But because the people who have worked with him closely for over ten years estimate his net value, his net worth at $150 million.

Just so you can put that into perspective, that's what -- that's about what Forbes magazine says I'm worth.  So that knocks Donald Drumpf down lots of pegs.  By the way, I'm not worth that.

But imagine if it meant something to me.  What would that say something about my character, if I was like, "No, I'm worth more than that.  Oh, man, how dare they say that I'm only worth $150 million.  I'm worth a billion dollars.  I'm worth $500 million."  What would that say about me?

I laugh at the numbers that they always quote from me because that's what my company does in revenue.  That's not what I get paid.  One of my companies hasn't even paid me in five years.

But what would it say about a man's character if you wouldn't release your tax returns because you just didn't want people to know how much you really are worth because your whole life is a lie?  

The other thing that I think Donald Drumpf, the reason why he's not releasing his tax returns, is because he's not as charitable as he says he is.  He says he's been giving money for years to vets.  My guess is, his charitable contributions are less than 2 percent.  I'll bet you that they're zero.  But definitely worth less than 2 percent.

He raises money through the Drumpf Foundation or the Drumpf -- he goes and asks other people to give money.  And then he doesn't give money himself.

And, by the way, there's people asking now, "Why hasn't he delivered on the charity funds that he promised in Iowa?"  You would think -- I don't even understand this story.  You have -- you've selected the charities, why haven't you given the money to the charities?  The money is there, you've selected the charities, why haven't you just released the funds?

Anybody see the John Oliver, just amazing monologue of 20 minutes taking down Donald Drumpf?  Stu, Pat, Jeffy, have you seen -- you saw the whole monologue?

PAT:  Yeah.  We talked about some of it yesterday.

STU:  Yeah.  We talked about some of --

GLENN:  Yeah, go ahead.

STU:  We talked about some of it yesterday.  And one of the things we talked about was that he had the exact same experience we had with Donald Drumpf, in which Drumpf also accused him and Jon Stewart of wanting him on the show and Drumpf said no.  So that's the only reason those people hate him, which is the exact same thing he said about us.  And not true in either circumstance.

GLENN:  Yeah.

PAT:  Can you imagine thinking so much of yourself that if somebody -- if you tell somebody you're not going to do an interview with them, that that's the sole reason that they don't like you from then on.  I mean, that's -- you think a lot of yourself when it's just, "Wow, he didn't do an interview with us.  So now we hate his guts and we're going to destroy this man."  It's so pathetic.

GLENN:  Not only how much do you think of yourself, what do you think the world is like?  I mean, what kind of world do you live in, where because -- it's usually self-diagnosis.  You know, when somebody like this says something about you.  They're usually diagnosing themself.  They see the things in others that is in them.

So he is like that.  If you don't do him a solid, he destroys you.  And so he thinks that everybody else -- because you won't do an interview.  I won't do an interview.  You must want to destroy me.  No, that's you in your sick, twisted world.  That's you, man.

STU:  Yeah.  And the Weekly Standard had a great point on this today, which is -- I mean, we all know the way -- what Drumpf does with people he doesn't like.  What does he do to people he doesn't like?  Erick Erickson, a total low-life.  Arianna Huffington, a liberal clown.  Chuck Todd, pathetic.  Charles Krauthammer, a loser and a clown.  Bill Kristol, a sad case.  Bob Vander Plaats is a phony and a con man.

PAT:  Jeez.

GLENN:  Jeez.

STU:  We already know, the things he's called Glenn fills up a whole page of the New York Times insult list.  In fact, the New York Times provided a catalog of the 199 people, places, and things Donald Drumpf has insulted on Twitter.  A complete list, which, of course, is not actually a complete list.  

But here's the point from the Weekly Standard which is brilliant today:  After a year of his candidacy, the political world knows well what it looks like when Donald Drumpf wants to offer an unequivocal condemnation.  When it comes to David Duke and the KKK, we still haven't seen one.  

He hasn't called David Duke a loser.  He hasn't called David Duke a scumbag.  He hasn't called David Duke a jerk or a phony or a con man.

PAT:  Right.  And why?  Because he supports him.

STU:  Because he supports him.

GLENN:  What do you think about Rush Limbaugh's excuse for this?  He said yesterday that Donald Drumpf was on the Sunday shows, and they have more gravitas.  They get more play than just the Megyn Kelly or Sean Hannity or something like that.  And so he was on those Sunday shows and he was worried about the poll numbers because the debate didn't go well.  And so he just didn't want to alienate anyone who might vote for him.  So it's not really an excuse.  I mean, it's still really bad.  But it's at least a reason why he didn't do it.  Do you buy into any of that?

STU:  I actually kind of do.  But the -- it's funny because people are saying, "Well, this is an excuse he's providing."  Actually it's the accusation.  The accusation is that he's pandering to white supremacists.

PAT:  That's not a good excuse.

STU:  It's not an excuse.  It's actually we're accusing him of.  

GLENN:  Yes.  Yes. 

STU:  And I think that is exactly what he's doing.  I mean, I don't know that anyone is saying that he -- while there is certainly long-term evidence and it will be exploited like crazy that he has bad racial tendencies, I don't think he's throwing a hood on him Friday nights.  That's not what I think Donald Drumpf is doing.

GLENN:  No, he's not a Klan member.  He's not a Klan member.

STU:  But he's pandering to these people like crazy.  And that's not a positive.  That's actually the negative we're accusing him of.  So I don't know if Rush framed that as an excuse.  But it's actually the thing I'm complaining about.

PAT:  I think the hoodies are for Tuesdays and Thursdays.  Not Fridays.

STU:  Okay.  Sorry.

GLENN:  Let me give you one thing real quick, and then I have to take a break.  

There's a new poll out in Florida.  38 percent of Floridians believe that Ted Cruz might be the Zodiac Killer.  The serial killer from, what?  A decade ago?  Or two decades ago?  The serial killer in Florida.  

38 percent of Floridians believe that Ted Cruz is the Zodiac Killer.  We'll get into it in a second.  But I just want to say this, even with Floridians believing that he's the Zodiac Killer, he still beats Marco Rubio in Florida. (laughter)

Featured Image: Screenshot of The Glenn Beck Program broadcasting from WMAL in Washington, D.C.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.