Shameful: Where is the leadership in Baltimore?

Glenn came on radio this morning and delivered a powerful monologue about the ongoing riots in Baltimore, Maryland. Where is the leadership? Where is the Martin Luther King Jr.'s of the world who inspired change without violence?

Glenn has long spoke of these coming tides, and these exact players. But, this is only the beginning. As Glenn said this morning, "Here are the riots, and they will only grow across the land. Police officers will be killed, God forbid. And so will protesters. And the hatred and the anger will only escalate. God forbid we repeat the assassinations of the 1960s, because we won't weather that storm like we did in the 1960s, I fear."

Listen to more of Glenn's powerful monologue below. The monologue begins around 1:20:49.

A portion of the transcript has been provided below.

Rough Transcript Below:

GLENN: What's happening in Baltimore is shameful. And Martin Luther King is truly dead. So soon will our country be, I fear.

Where is the leadership? The president at best is publicly silent. What he's doing privately, I don't know.

Can you imagine what the -- what the media would be saying about George W. Bush? Well, we don't have to imagine. Remember George W. Bush was on the phone with the mayor of New Orleans days before, the night before, begging him. Begging him. But the mayor of New Orleans decided not to do anything about it.

And yet it was George W. Bush's fault. Was the president on the phone with the mayor of Baltimore last night? If so, was he fine with the curfew starting tonight as opposed to last night? And if he wasn't on the phone, why wasn't he?

Hillary Clinton last night was tweeting about her new bumper sticker. But she was on the campaign trail telling those -- all that would listen, that we need to change our deep-seated religious beliefs. That's a quote.

Elected leaders haven't led in quite some time. But there is good news. I'll tell you where the leadership is. Because the leadership does exist.

The leadership is there. In the Crips, the Bloods, the Nation of Islam, and SCIU. Let me start with the last one. Union members, how do you feel about your union busing protesters in and funding and printing the posters for this riot? Is that what you labor for is that what your hard-earned money goes toward? To burn a city down? How do you feel about your union standing next to the Crips and the Bloods? How do you feel about your union standing and partnering with the nation of Islam? Food service workers of SCIU and anybody else in the labor brotherhood, it's time you stand up and stop this madness. Wake up, union members.

SCIU is playing an organizing role in these -- in these riots. This is how the 1960s would have ended if Martin Luther King hadn't been who he was, a God-fearing, intelligent, peaceful, rational, God-fearing man. Remember it was Malcolm X that wanted to push for guns and riots. It was Martin Luther King that stopped him. Malcolm X was the one that wanted what's happening in Baltimore today to happen on the streets all across America. It was Malcolm X who at the time was one of the leaders of the Nation of Islam. Some things never change. But when Malcolm X saw the error of his ways, the Nation of Islam had him killed.

I warned about these times. Anarchists. Socialists. Progressives. And Islamists. Would ban together. And set the streets of the world on fire.

I warned of these exact players while I was at Fox. If you're a long-time listener. I feel this is the beginning of the coming insurrection and the fulfillment of Frances Fox Piven's hope when she was asked three years ago, when she asked three years ago, where are the riots? They're here now, Frances. Job well done. And it will get worse. Our police force morale has been weakened. Our Secret Service is out of town, drunk with hookers.

Here are the riots, and they will only grow across the land. Police officers will be killed, God forbid. And so will protesters. And the hatred and the anger will only escalate. God forbid we repeat the assassinations of the 1960s, because we won't weather that storm like we did in the 1960s, I fear.

What's happening on the streets of Baltimore is as sick as when mothers who send their sons out to be martyrs in the Middle East. The radical left has become an American death penalty cult. Abortions. End of life. And now the riots. In the end, many will die. And they will forever stain our nation with disgrace.

Most of the protesters aren't looking for justice as much as they're looking for free booze, free CVS stuff, toilet paper, shoes, anything else they can take. Booker T. Washington would disown this race if he saw what was happening.

I believe Frederick Douglass would as well. What percentage of rioters can even tell me who those two great men were at any level of competence? Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King would denounce those who claim to be the men of the cloth. Who are sitting in their pulpits today silent.

Our founders in Lincoln would reject what is left of the lot who call themselves American. We will all be slaves soon because we are demonstrating to the entire world that we cannot govern ourselves anymore.

Lincoln said we'd never be destroyed from without. We would only be destroyed from within.

He said, our destruction in the end would be a choice to commit national suicide. Well, last night, I saw us fashion the noose and put a gun in our mouth! We've swallowed sleeping pills long before Baltimore. Do we ever get up?

We vote for corruption. We laugh at crime. We watch snuff films. The light snuff films from Hollywood for entertainment. We justify that and the games our kids are playing, saying that our kids know the difference between reality and virtual reality.

We teach our children to do as we say, not as we do while handing them an attorney's phone number. You know, should they ever be offended or not given a first place trophy.

Our marriage rate has plummeted, while divorce rates have skyrocketed. And those divorce rates are being beaten out by the out-of-wedlock bastard children rate, which at the same time is being challenged by the number of children we actually kill through abortions. Have another handful of sleeping pills, America.

While we're on killing, for 15 years, we've destroyed a generation of Americans by sending them off to war, ill-equipped. Armed with foolish PC rules of engagement that get them killed. We arm the enemy. We release the killers of Gitmo back on to the battlefield. We bring the Muslim Brotherhood, not only into the Oval Office, but into the DHS buildings that you and I couldn't get into. Then we make treaties with psychopathic killers in Iran, while they're chanting death to America. And then we ignore the daily beheadings and crucifixions of children by ISIS. Want another glass of warm milk to take your sleeping pills with? We abandon not only the Christians crying out for help, but also the troops when they cry out for help in Benghazi. And then the woman who didn't answer the phone call runs for president, and we all yawn.

Yesterday, I read that we're asking the Marines now to lower their standards because recruiting is down.

So we'll get the dregs of society, not train them. Not prepare them for what they're about to head into. And then ask them to kill in a war that most Americans can't explain or justify anymore. I mean, while at home we not only deny God, but we openly mock him. Our pulpits are silent. Because we don't -- as a pastor, we can't upset our tax exempt status. If I say something that might offend somebody, I could lose some tithing revenue. And if I didn't serve these people in this nice new church that the bank owns, who will serve them? You know, in today's world it's just best want to say the hard things. And so Christians, Jews, agnostics, atheists, turn a blind eye to the lies and the double dealings in our everyday life, in the life all around us, and in both parties in Washington.

We allow those in Washington to actually claim and enforce violations of class two lookalike firearms. That's a finger gun, if you don't know. The class two firearms in school. They're lookalike firearms. That sends our children to jail. While forcing Common Core nonsense math and testing on the remaining students so all the friends of Jeb Bush and Bill Gates can enrich themselves with the $30 per pupil testing. After we're done with that, they graduate, without the ability to reason, read, or think. And then we strap them with an out-of-control college loan that they have absolutely no chance of ever paying off.

And that's the only loan that can't be forgiven. But that loan is in exchange for a meaningless diploma for a job that doesn't or soon won't exist. Slaves, America. Welcome to slavery. Ignorant, growing hateful. Tragic and unnecessary.

Because we all pretend we're ignorant and say, what the hell is going on? What happened?

I could tell you, but the national attention span now is at about four and a half seconds. Not kidding. The attention span of a goldfish. A goldfish is longer than the attention span of most American's attention span. So I'll cut to the chase and tell you what's going on. Where there is a lack of vision, the people shall perish. The press reported the president huddled in private tonight to discuss Baltimore. What is there to discuss, Mr. President? You say you admire Dr. Martin Luther King, well, maybe you should damn well start acting like Dr. Martin Luther King, Mr. Obama. Yes, Mister. Not president. Because you're not acting like the president.

Maybe you should teach and take his oath of nonviolence. Or do you not agree with that vote of -- that oath of nonviolence? Oh, well. This time it's different. The police acted stupidly. This is sick!

It is sad. And it is a waste of life.

We as Americans should be running in to help those in Nepal. That's what we should be focusing on. We should be running in to help those Christians who are losing their children every day in the Middle East. Instead, let me be real honest. We're seeing a publicity stunt.

It wasn't started as a publicity stunt. But it will end up a publicity stunt. Probably to assist maybe Mr. O'Malley to win over the American first lady. The American royalty, Hillary Clinton.

In fear that we need somebody else besides her highness to beat the other royal that us subjects can look forward to and watch them as they enrich themselves as the Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas have. All the world is, but a stage. And we are watching theater of the highest caliber play out thanks to the labor unions.

To quote Poe, the play, the tragedy called man. And its hero. The conqueror worm.

The actor should know how it ends. The actor should also never forget that it is -- it's a union house. So don't touch anything without the members of the local stagehand guild. Just do as you're told and everything will be fine.

When I was growing up, I voted for my first president. I remember that president at one point said, it's morning in America.

It's sundown in America. Are we brave enough? Are we smart enough? Are we humble enough? Are we committed enough to make it through the long darkness? To renew our promise to each other and our country. So the next generation can greet the morning sun when it is morning in America again.

The truth behind ‘defense’: How America was rebranded for war

PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff | Getty Images

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by signaling a rebrand of the Defense Department — restoring its original name, the Department of War.

At first, I was skeptical. “Defense” suggests restraint, a principle I consider vital to U.S. foreign policy. “War” suggests aggression. But for the first 158 years of the republic, that was the honest name: the Department of War.

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

The founders never intended a permanent standing army. When conflict came — the Revolution, the War of 1812, the trenches of France, the beaches of Normandy — the nation called men to arms, fought, and then sent them home. Each campaign was temporary, targeted, and necessary.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Everything changed in 1947. President Harry Truman — facing the new reality of nuclear weapons, global tension, and two world wars within 20 years — established a full-time military and rebranded the Department of War as the Department of Defense. Americans resisted; we had never wanted a permanent army. But Truman convinced the country it was necessary.

Was the name change an early form of political correctness? A way to soften America’s image as a global aggressor? Or was it simply practical? Regardless, the move created a permanent, professional military. But it also set the stage for something Truman’s successor, President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, famously warned about: the military-industrial complex.

Ike, the five-star general who commanded Allied forces in World War II and stormed Normandy, delivered a harrowing warning during his farewell address: The military-industrial complex would grow powerful. Left unchecked, it could influence policy and push the nation toward unnecessary wars.

And that’s exactly what happened. The Department of Defense, with its full-time and permanent army, began spending like there was no tomorrow. Weapons were developed, deployed, and sometimes used simply to justify their existence.

Peace through strength

When Donald Trump said this week, “I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too,” some people freaked out. They called him a warmonger. He isn’t. Trump is channeling a principle older than him: peace through strength. Ronald Reagan preached it; Trump is taking it a step further.

Just this week, Trump also suggested limiting nuclear missiles — hardly the considerations of a warmonger — echoing Reagan, who wanted to remove missiles from silos while keeping them deployable on planes.

The seemingly contradictory move of Trump calling for a Department of War sends a clear message: He wants Americans to recognize that our military exists not just for defense, but to project power when necessary.

Trump has pointed to something critically important: The best way to prevent war is to have a leader who knows exactly who he is and what he will do. Trump signals strength, deterrence, and resolve. You want to negotiate? Great. You don’t? Then we’ll finish the fight decisively.

That’s why the world listens to us. That’s why nations come to the table — not because Trump is reckless, but because he means what he says and says what he means. Peace under weakness invites aggression. Peace under strength commands respect.

Trump is the most anti-war president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter. But unlike Carter, Trump isn’t weak. Carter’s indecision emboldened enemies and made the world less safe. Trump’s strength makes the country stronger. He believes in peace as much as any president. But he knows peace requires readiness for war.

Names matter

When we think of “defense,” we imagine cybersecurity, spy programs, and missile shields. But when we think of “war,” we recall its harsh reality: death, destruction, and national survival. Trump is reminding us what the Department of Defense is really for: war. Not nation-building, not diplomacy disguised as military action, not endless training missions. War — full stop.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Names matter. Words matter. They shape identity and character. A Department of Defense implies passivity, a posture of reaction. A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

So yes, I’ve changed my mind. I’m for the rebranding to the Department of War. It shows strength to the world. It reminds Americans, internally and externally, of the reality we face. The Department of Defense can no longer be a euphemism. Our military exists for war — not without deterrence, but not without strength either. And we need to stop deluding ourselves.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

Narrative engineering from the top

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

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

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

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

Institutional and media coordination

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

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

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

Surveillance and suppression

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

ROBYN BECK / Contributor | Getty Images

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

A machine, not a ‘conspiracy theory’

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

Peace requires concessions

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

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

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

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

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

Peace or bloodshed?

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

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

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

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

Outsourcing presence

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

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

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

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

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

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

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

Reclaiming our humanity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.