'Armageddon': New evidence reveals ISIS looking to provoke a nuclear war between Pakistan and India

Filling in for Glenn on radio Wednesday, Buck Sexton exposed new plans of ISIS to initiate chaos in South Asia with the goal of drawing the U.S. into the conflict, ultimately leading to an apocalyptic ending. According to a recently translated document shared by Sara Carter of the American Media institute, part of this plan involves provoking a nuclear war between Pakistan and India to start a "chain reaction" across the Middle East.

"If ISIS can take control of Pakistan and, for example, its nuclear arsenal, this is sort of the nightmare scenario," Buck said. "You can see how quickly those two countries spin out of control. While the Obama administration is sitting around trying to tell us that they have things well in hand and it's going to be fine. Our enemies are mobilizing and they are executing on a strategy that they tell us about. They've made very clear to us time and again."

With guest Sara Carter on the phone, Buck delved into some of the ramifications if such a plan were to be carried out. Watch a clip of the interview here:

Below is a rush transcription of this segment, it may contain errors:

BUCK: Islamic State recruitment document seeks to provoke end of world. This is the piece in USA Today. Let me just give you a little excerpt from it.

An apparent Islamic State recruitment document found in Pakistan’s lawless tribal lands reveals that the extremist group has grand ambitions of building a new terrorist army in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and triggering a war in India to provoke an Armageddon-like “end of the world.” The 32-page Urdu-language document obtained by American Media Institute (AMI) and reviewed by USA TODAY details a plot to attack U.S. soldiers as they withdraw from Afghanistan and target American diplomats and Pakistani officials. AMI obtained the document from a Pakistani citizen.

All right. We have the author of this piece, Sara Carter. She's of the American Media Institute. She's an investigative journalist and a friend of mine. Sara, thank you very much for calling in.

SARA: So glad to be with you here with you Buck. Thank you.

BUCK: Sara, this piece is really astonishing. Tell us how this all came together.

SARA: You know, I've been traveling in and out of the region since 2008, and I've been able to build up a lot of sourcing. And, as you know, these sources have got to be protected. They have to be protected. Their security and safety is of the utmost concern. So I can't go into the details of how this document was given to me, but all I can say is that the document is relatively new. It is written in Urdu, which is significant because according to US intelligence as well as European intelligence and other officials who have had the opportunity to review the document, it signals that the Islamic State is making inroads inside South Asia and able to garner high-level and educated officials on their team. So that's why this document is so significant. Also, it lays out their battle plan for the region. And it's something that lawmakers should be paying very close attention to.

BUCK: Yeah, there's been the expansion, relatively recent expansion, Sara, of al-Qaeda into South Asia. That they now have a branch that is al-Qaeda in South Asia. They're trying to accomplish that. There's also the ISIS affiliated expansion in the Afghanistan Pakistan corridor. When you read through this document though, it seems like they've really thought out the next steps here. Explain to us a little bit of the strategy. They'll attack US troops as they're drawing down on Afghanistan. They'll hope to create instability and chaos there. I would assume assert some level of control and then push into Pakistan. And from there, attack into India. Walk us through the sort of blueprint from the document about what the strategy is.

SARA: Well, it appears that their strategy and part of their recruitment is going after those within the Taliban that are now willing to break ranks with the Taliban and join their side. In the document, it says and it warns, that preparation for Ghazi Ihan (sp) are in full swing and soon the Ummah will hear the tidings of victory on that front as well.

What they're talking about here and Mustafa Samdani is the Urdu translator that helped me translate this 32-page very detailed document. They're referring to an attack in prophecy. Now, it's prophesied there will be a great war or an attack-- some kind of movement in South Asia-- before the final battle, which is where this Armageddon-like battle, will occur. So in order for the leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, to move forward with this great battle against the West, he first has to create or start some type of battle within the South Asia region, particularly in India. That attack in India will instigate, and, as you know, both nations, India and Pakistan, both Indian nations, the instability there will be untold. It really will force the West to choose sides. And it will really spread us thin. We're already spread thin. We still have troops in Afghanistan on the ground training. We have Islamic State on the rise in Syria and Iraq throughout North Africa. So this is highly significant that this battle plan was -- was discovered early on. And I think this is the reason why this leaked. This information leaked to me.

I also have some breaking news for you. I'm waiting right now to find out mullah Omar. (?) that he may have been killed. He's leader of the Afghan Taliban. Right now, a source of mine is awaiting -- I'm awaiting comment from the Taliban. But they are saying, now, this is according to sources I have in the region that mullah Omar was suffering from hypertension and (?) diabetes, and he had suffered severe kidney problems for the last four years. This has not been reported yet. It's not out in the media. As far as whether he's alive or dead, I'm still waiting for the statement from the Taliban spokesmen on that.

So they're -- what they're saying right now is that he has been suffering from hypertension and diabetes for the last four years. And this led to kidney problems. So we still don't know yet whether or not mullah Omar is alive or dead. Obviously, we do know is that he's been very ill over the last four years. I think that's significant. Because it shows there's been a breakdown in the Afghan Taliban. We've seen a breakdown with the TPP. (?) so we have a wide faction looking for leadership and ISIS -- Islamic State is certainly filling that void. This is a cause for concern among US intelligence. Officials. As well as others who are operating in this region.

BUCK: I have to say, based on all the false reports we tend to see or reports that turn out to be premature, inaccurate or however you want to describe it about other senior leaders, Sara, the smart money is always on, no, he's still alive. We'll see if that's the case with mullah Omar. How many times was Osama bin Laden. Dead. Well, czar herey is still alive. We'll have to see on that. (?) the information is health. It's not out in the media. That's also of high interest. Because if -- he's been a figure that's sort of uniting the Taliban for a long time to his banner. When someone like that goes away, there's a high likelihood of factional infighting. As we know there are these other jihadist entities that are trying to pull (?) that would be interesting I think from the perspective of ISIS recruitment at a minimum.

I also want to pull back to the strategy and the strategy outlined in the document. It seems to line up with some of the Hadiths, Sara, that are well-known about the area of Khorasan and that the black flags will come from the east led by mighty men with long hair and beards, their their surnames are taken from their hometowns. Their first name is Acunia. If you see coming from Khorasan, go to them immediately, even if you must crawl over ice, because among them is the Calif, Al-Mahdi. This is all ends of time theology. Interesting to me, this ties into what's already known about jihadist lore and legacy. But also, the idea that they're going after South Asia specifically shows they have an understanding of where the real seams are. Jihadists hate polytheists, which is how they refer to Hindus. Even though it has a massive Muslim population, as a Hindu majority state, it would be something that the world would be completely unprepared for if they were able to start this war in Pakistan. Which has already been something that the jihadist groups have discussed in the past and thought about. It seems like this is going to focus energies of the Islamic State on exactly that, igniting wars between India and Pakistan.

SARA: Absolutely. You hit it right on the nose, Buck. I mean, this is -- this is a strategy that is so incredible because while everybody is focused on Iraq and Syria, while all of our focus has shifted towards that region of the world, they are planning, al-Baghdadi is planning an attack in India. And imagine what this would do to all of the plans. To everything that the US and other European officials and intelligence officials and governments have been trying to do to quell the growth of the Islamic State. It would solidify. It would solidify their presence in South Asia and recruitment would go up extraordinarily, according to the sources that I've spoken to. I mean, this is -- what Bruce Rydell (SP) calls in my story, (?) the holy grail for south -- you know, for south Asia and jihadists in the region. If the Islamic State is able to conduct such an attack, such a massive attack that it would throw South Asia into war, it would really tumble across the entire planet. So, yes, it certainly affects our national security. The document -- and you've brought up some very, very good points here. The Hadith that deal with the end times. The prophecies in the Koran about the end times. This is what al-Baghdadi is centered on. This is his expertise. The document explicitly states that. That was not in my story. But it is in the document. I will be writing about that in the upcoming days. But this is where al-Baghdadi focuses all his attention. And, in fact, in one area of the document, it talks about how he's an expert at inciting violence. He understands that this type of violence, these gruesome, gruesome, brutal atrocities that are being committed all serve a purpose. And they all serve a purpose in the end. Not only to strike fear into our hearts and the hearts of the people that they are ruling over, but it's to lead towards this apocalyptic ending. This shift in world power. It's a little different than Christianity. Because if you think of Christianity, we think about an Armageddon. Christians believe that an Armageddon will come to this end of the world where Jesus will return. While in the mind of Baghdad, according to the document and according to those I spoke to, it's not that same kind of end times. What he wants to see is the caliphate rule the world. And that the West will be submissive. (?)

BUCK: The end of the world as we know it. Not the end of the temporal human world. It's the end of the world where the Islamic State or the caliphate isn't in control of every last bit of territory.

SARA: Absolutely.

BUCK: Sara, also the possibility of the sectarian in the Indian skub continent. (?) India and Pakistan are separated because of sectarianism. Pakistan was founded as a Muslim nationalistic experiment. (?) if they can exploit the fissures in Syria, we'll see what we see in Iraq, but on a much larger scale with a billion people on the subcontinent and nuclear weapons pointed at each other. (?) it's a terrifying strategy. From their perspective, it's very devious. It's something we should pay attention to.

Sara, your piece is great. It's in USA Today. Sara Carter. Islamic State Recruitment Document Seeks to Provoke End of the World. Sara Carter, the American Media Institute, thank you very much for joining.

SARA: Hey, thank you, Buck, for having me on. And if you want to keep up with my stories, @SaraCarterDC, you can follow me on Twitter.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.