Glenn’s interview with Wrath and Righteousness author Chris Stewart

Glenn welcomed author Chris Stewart on radio today to talk about his amazing series of books that Glenn says make reading feel like watching a high paced, high action season of ‘24’ on TV. What makes the series tick and why does Glenn feel like it could rapidly become a history book rather than a fiction book?

Transcript of interview below:

GLENN: With everything that is happening in the world, there's got to be a way to tell the story of what is really going on in a way that is entertaining, that will connect with new people, that can help get the message out and warn people about what we're facing.

PAT: I don't think that's possible.

GLENN: You don't think so?

PAT: I don't think it can be done.

GLENN: Our job has been for the last few years not only to figure out what has been going on but then to expose it. And I've gotten a lot of heat because, "Oh, he's a clown, he's this, he's that." Well, yeah, that's what I've always been my whole life, but I'm also a responsible adult and a dad that cares about my country, and we have been smeared and maligned, and you name it. And it doesn't matter. I mean, you've gone through the same thing. If you're in a Tea Party, I can guarantee you've had the same problem, different scale but, you know, just because I'm on a national scale and you might just have happened in your office where you have been maligned and called names in your own office or in your own family. Same thing. You know the game that's being played. But it doesn't stop you from telling the truth.

We've gotten to a point to where we can't ‑‑ we're not going to bring any new people in. You know, my name now is, has been forever smeared, and I'm either a crazy man, a lunatic, you know, somebody who just is doing it for the money, whatever it is, to a good number of people. Before I ‑‑ before Barack Obama got into office, I had one of the highest what's called Q scores of anybody in the media, where it meant people might not know me that much or they may not agree with me, but people generally liked me. I don't even know what my Q score is now. But it ain't, it ain't gonna ever go back up because this is what the political process does and this is what the enemies of the Constitution do: They've got to smear you and destroy you.

Okay. So now how do we continue to get this message out? How do we tell people what's going on and get this to spread even further? There was a book that I read and there was ‑‑ there's six of them that I read on vacation. Is there how many? Seven? How many of them now?

PAT: Seven originally, yeah.

GLENN: So there's seven of them, and I read them on vacation. I think I started the first or second. And the first one was good. The second one was really good. The first one I really liked because I could see where it was going. The second one was really pretty good. By the third, I read ‑‑ I think I took the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh on vacation and I read them in a week because they're absolutely unbelievable. And Pat and I, when I got back, I said, "Pat, you have to read this stack of books." And he's like, what? "Read this stack of books." And it was ‑‑ by the time you get to the third, you cannot tell the difference between fact and fiction. You can't. It is ‑‑ it's shocking.

Last night on television, I read a quote. Now, these were written, what, five years ago, seven years ago?

STEWART: Yeah, a little more than that. Almost ten years now.

GLENN: Ten years? In one of the parts that we showed last night, one paragraph is about how the Syrian government is slaughtering all of their citizens, like they're at war. They're just slaughtering them. And there's uprisings all across the Middle East and Egypt had been lost to Muslim extremists. I mean, and it was written ten years ago. We wanted to put this book series out. If you remember listening to us over, you know, the last year or so you remember a time that Pat and I were saying on the air quite a bit, "I can't tell if that was ‑‑ is that the book we're reading or is this what's really happening in the world?" And I've had this ‑‑ I went out and I called the author and we got the rights to this series and I wanted to put it out, but I'm ‑‑ I have to accomplish two things: One, have to reach a new audience and a younger audience; and B, I think we have to get it out because it is quickly becoming a history book. The author is Chris Stewart, a good friend of the program and a good friend of mine, a former Air Force guy, is just a straight‑up guy. And the research on this book is profound.

How long did it take you to write this?

STEWART: Well, in a way I guess it probably took me, you know, 14 to 15 years because a lot of it was based on my experience as a pilot in the Air Force. And, you know, that's just kind of background, but it's really, really important background because a lot of the book ‑‑ you know, it's a techno thriller at its heart. It's kind of an interesting combination between a spiritual element and this battle between good and evil but also at its core, it's a techno thriller. It's a ‑‑

GLENN: Tim LaHaye is going to be on the TV show on Friday. We're doing an hour on this. And Tim LaHaye is going to be on the TV show and I talked to him last night.

PAT: He wrote the Left Behind series.

GLENN: Yeah. Sold, what, 100 and some million copies?

PAT: 100‑plus million, I think.

GLENN: I mean, it's crazy. And when you think of a spiritual thriller, you pretty much go there to Tim LaHaye's book Left Behind. And he was kind enough to endorse this. He read it and said it was great and I mean, I talked to him last night and he was just like, right on. Biblically it's right on, I think it's right on, on where we're going. Which scares me.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: Because his book was a little frightening.

PAT: Yeah, you really don't want real life to go where this book goes.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: You really don't.

PAT: You really don't want that.

GLENN: And the thing about this book is it shows you not only in great detail and honestly, Chris and I first met because of this book. I read it, I didn't know him, and I called him on vacation because 3:00 in the morning, 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning I sat up straight up in my bed and I had read some things and it was ‑‑ it was a warning to the people. Because you see, you know, you see the angels and you see Satan and his minions all throughout this book and it shows how they're working behind the scenes. And one of the angels said something, I don't remember, and was whispering it to one of the main characters. And I sat up in bed because it is exactly what I have heard in prayer.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: And I mean, word for word. I mean, I broke out in a cold sweat. I knew this was an inspired book when I read that. And it happened several times in this book. And the things that I have heard: Warn the people, warn the people. I don't know how to warn them about this stuff. Well, here it is. But the good thing is, is it's not just a warning. It also shows you how to prepare. It also shows you ‑‑ people ask me all the time, "What do I do, what do I do." This really does.

PAT: By the way, the name of the book is Wrath & Righteousness. And you can get the first episode, you just download it right now.

GLENN: Yeah. It's ‑‑ I think it's $2.

PAT: $3.99 ‑‑ $2.99, right, 3 bucks? $2.99.

GLENN: If you're a GBTV subscriber, it's absolutely free. Otherwise you can go to, where is it? Just Amazon or any place? Wherever books are sold.

STU: Just go to GlennBeck.com. It's the easiest thing.

PAT: Wherever e‑books are sold and just get it for $2.99. You are going to love it. It's absolutely riveting.

GLENN: The first ‑‑ what we've done is we have taken the series and we've compressed it and taken it and cut it into ten episodes over a year. Instead of coming out over six years, which most people would do, for some strange reason I've thought we should put this out in a twelve‑month period.

PAT: Hmmm.

GLENN: And so the first, the first episode there's a lot of setup but there's also a lot of spiritual setup.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: Would you agree?

STEWART: Yeah. And the first book kind of sets the tone, I think, for the series. Because as I said, it's more than just a techno thriller. You know, when we get into the series, you'll see a very real, a very just compelling threat against the United States, one that a lot of people aren't aware of. And I think the story is built around that or some element of that. But again, the first of the series shows this battle between good and evil. It shows that Lucifer, Satan and his angels, his dark angels, are seeking to destroy freedom, they're seeking to destroy individuals, they're seeking to take away people's happiness and to discourage them. It's not just Satan whispering to someone, you know, go do something bad, go kill this person or something absurd like that. It's the words of discouragement that we hear from these spirits. It's the words of fear. It's the lack of faith. And I think that that is set up in the first part of the book.

GLENN: When you ‑‑

STEWART: And that's an important part of the series.

GLENN: When you were writing, because there's some really amazing scenes with Satan and his minions and really dark. I mean, the hate yesterday ‑‑

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: ‑‑ is so visceral.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: And real. And you ‑‑ I mean, it's amazing because you see him as a real figure.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: It's not a pitchfork and horn kind of guy. You see him as a real figure. And did that bother you at all? How did you ‑‑

STEWART: You know, I've had people ask me that, you know, because after the series was released, I would talk to people and they would say, "Well, you really scared me." And the first time I heard that, I was really surprised by that. It never occurred to me that these were scary scenes, that they were, you know, like frightening, like a horror, horror book. Because that wasn't my intention at all.

GLENN: It is.

STEWART: And it's really not in that sense. It's not a book of horror. And, you know, I realize I wrote some of these things at 2:00 in the morning sitting in my basement office. Was I ever scared? And I really never was. And ‑‑

GLENN: Your wife told me she thought you were under spiritual attack.

STEWART: Yeah, she did. She said there was about a six‑month period there where we were‑‑ wrote the first part of the series that she says, "I didn't recognize you, you became a different person." And there were some things that happened to us that were really unusual and ‑‑

GLENN: And you got a blessing.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: And it broke it; is that right?

STEWART: Yeah, and it really made a difference for us. So I mean ‑‑

GLENN: And you didn't remember being that way?

STEWART: No, I didn't. But I see now when I look back, I can go back and read some of the things that I had written at the time and I realize that it was out of character for me. It was an unusual experience. So...

GLENN: It's an unusual book and I believe it was ‑‑ Chris will never say this. He's never said it to me. I've asked him several times. I believe it was divinely inspired. Do you believe that, Pat?

PAT: Oh, yeah. Yes.

GLENN: Yeah. Divinely inspired. I believe it is a message. I mean, I've never purchased somebody else's book. I've never ‑‑ I've never done this. This does not help me.

PAT: You mean you've never purchased or published?

GLENN: Yeah, to publish. I've never ‑‑ this was really hard to figure out a way to get it out because it wouldn't fit in the schedule. It was six years. Chris and I have gone over this now for a year and a half, how do we do it, how do we get it out, how do we get it out fast enough for it to help people. But if you really want to see what's in my head and what I have felt and what I have ‑‑ I'm just being straight up with you.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: What I have heard in promptings on what I need to warn you about, what I believe is a real possibility of happening, not going to necessarily happen this way or the players, but it is ‑‑ it involves Israel, it involves Iran, it involves good and evil. You want to see what the world can look like quickly? Read Wrath & Righteousness, Episode 1. It's free if you're a Glenn Beck subscriber. You can go to MercuryInk.com/Wrath or wherever e‑books are sold. When does it start to ‑‑ when does ‑‑ I'm not going to give anything away because they really talk about what happens in America pretty early, don't they?

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. So America's hit by an EMP and then it is ‑‑ when you get to ‑‑ I won't reveal anything but when you get to the scenes like with the farm, I think it's in Oklahoma, you get there, you see real people.

STEWART: Yeah. I mean, imagine you're driving along one night as some of the characters were out on the freeway and it's evening and everything just goes dark around you. Your car stops, the freeway is ‑‑ you know, there's no vehicles, there's no light on the horizon because everything is ‑‑ has changed in that moment.

PAT: And that's not something that Americans have really contemplated.

STEWART: No.

PAT: Because we don't know that much ‑‑ most people don't know about an electromagnetic pulse ‑‑

GLENN: I have up on my ‑‑

PAT: ‑‑ and what it would do.

GLENN: I have up on my desk now a Senate hearing report ‑‑

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: ‑‑ on the likelihood of an EMP. I mean, it is something that the government is truly worried about.

STEWART: Yeah. And, you know, it's surprising to me that most Americans are unaware of it. But a couple of things about that very quickly. According to that Senate report in the first three months 100 million Americans starve to death. I mean, nearly a third of us in the first three months. It's something that technologically is very, very possible.

GLENN: Very possible.

PAT: Because our food supply.

STEWART: Yeah. And I mean, and that's ‑‑

PAT: It is, it's all ‑‑

GLENN: There's no way to get it ‑‑

PAT: Short‑term. It's short‑term because we ‑‑

GLENN: You can't plow ‑‑ who owns a horse and a plow anymore?

STEWART: Yeah. We're instantly transferred back to 1880 and ‑‑

PAT: And we're not set up for that.

STEWART: No, not at all. Heavens no. I mean ‑‑

GLENN: No, Jeremiah. Only ‑‑

PAT: That's a bad thing.

GLENN: Only the Amish are.

PAT: The Amish are set up for that.

STEWART: That's right.

PAT: The Amish survive.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: And that's what you find out at the end of the book and I hate to spoil it.

GLENN: We're all Amish?

PAT: But the Amish rule the world in the end of the book.

STEWART: Well ‑‑

GLENN: But nobody knows.

PAT: Nobody knows.

GLENN: Because there's no TVs or anything.

PAT: So it's fine.

STEWART: Well, they only survive until someone discovers they have food and then things are bad for them as well because, yeah, they turn ‑‑ the world turns into a very hostile place.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Really fast, if you want to know ‑‑ remember that feeling that we all had on 9/11 where we all were really petrified and we were like, oh, my gosh, we could lose this? Freedom is so fragile, we could lose this in the blink of an eye? This takes ‑‑ this series takes that the next step: Yes, and let me show you what it looks like after the blink of that eye.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: You know, people who are saying ‑‑ you know, the Occupy Wall Street people who were out saying, "We want to take down the government," well, let me show you what it looks like when there is no government. Let me show you how fast people turn.

STEWART: And, you know, it's important to note this, too: The bad guys know this. You know, there have been ‑‑ there's intelligence that very clearly show the Iranians practicing what is essentially an EMP attack.

GLENN: Yep.

STEWART: They launch their missiles in a trajectory which mimics the EMP profile. They have done it from frigates in the Caspian Sea which allow them to move the frigates off the east or West Coast and allow them to attack the United States from 60 miles off our coast. It's impossible to defend against. They understand that the worst thing they could do us is to launch this EMP attack. You launch a nuclear attack on Washington D.C. or New York, that's a bad deal, and lots of people are hurt or killed by that. But it's nothing like happens if you do an EMP attack where virtually everyone is immediately affected and you don't kill 100 million people with one attack in any other way other than through an EMP.

PAT: That's a first strike that effectively ends life as we know it in the United States of America. Immediately.

GLENN: It changes the rest of the world.

PAT: Really bad.

GLENN: I mean ‑‑

PAT: Really bad.

GLENN: I think in the third book ‑‑

PAT: It's chilling.

GLENN: ‑‑ a very likely scenario on how the world would deal with Israel.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: A very likely scenario on how to have the entire world turn against Israel and what is I think extraordinarily likely, this style of attack.

STEWART: Yeah.

GLENN: And this plan. And you see it. And they take Israel and then they take the United States of America and the West is over.

PAT: And when Glenn and I were obsessed with this book a year, year and a half ago, whenever it was and talked about it almost every day on the air, listeners wanted it so badly, they wanted to know where it was, how they could get it. Well, here's your chance now. And if you ‑‑

GLENN: We wanted ‑‑

PAT: ‑‑ are a subscriber to GBTV, you can get it for free. Otherwise it's just three bucks.

GLENN: And it is, you can ‑‑ it's a ten‑episode book. So you'll get all of the episodes over the next year, and I'm telling you, you've never read anything like it. I wanted to make this into a TV show but it would have been ‑‑ to do it right would have been way too expensive for me right now, but I needed you to have this information. And ‑‑

STEWART: Well, and I'm so glad we're doing it the way you wanted to, Glenn. I mean, when you first suggested that, I was a little bit reluctant because I didn't quite see the vision. But I think you were right. I think you were brilliant. I think it was the right thing to do to get this out so folks can have it all right now rather than over several years.

GLENN: You are ‑‑ you're far too humble to see your own work and what it is, and I'm telling you, Chris, it's divinely inspired. And it is a message that has to get out and has to get out now, and it's Wrath & Righteousness. Go to Mercuryink.com/wrath or wherever e‑books are sold and grab it. If ‑‑ go to Mercuryink.com/wrath if you're a GBTV subscriber and you'll just get it for free. But sign up now. The first book is a lot of setup, I warn you, a lot of setup, a lot of spiritual stuff but then it starts to kick up. The next episode and the third episode will boggle your mind. If this was a miniseries or a series, we would have done a two‑hour episode and given you so by the end.

STEWART: Yep.

GLENN: All right. Thanks a lot, Chris.

Unveiling the Deep State: From surveillance to censorship

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

Narrative engineering from the top

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

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

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

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

Institutional and media coordination

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

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

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

Surveillance and suppression

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

ROBYN BECK / Contributor | Getty Images

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

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

Peace requires concessions

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

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

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

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

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

Peace or bloodshed?

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

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

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

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

Outsourcing presence

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

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

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

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

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

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

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

Reclaiming our humanity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.