Glenn's civil discourse with Sean Hannity over Trump continues

Last Friday, Glenn posed an honest question for prominent small government conservatives, including Sean Hannity, who have voiced their support for Donald Trump. Hannity answered Glenn's question in a rather lengthy reply on Sunday.

On radio Monday, Glenn said he disagrees with Hannity, but - what a shock - they don't hate each other.

"Sean and I are different, obviously. Different people. And we run different shows," Glenn said.

Glenn described Hannity's show as an opportunity for viewers to see as many candidates as possible and make decisions accordingly. As for his own show, Glenn sees his role a little differently.

"There are many candidates that will not come on my show because they don't like me. And they know that I will express and assert my opinion and push back, not in an interview way, but push back as a citizen. That's not what Sean does," Glenn said.

Glenn will join Hannity's show on Fox News tonight at 10pm ET to share his thoughts on Donald Trump, insights on the 2016 Republican field and other issues.

Listen to Glenn's discussion on radio or read Hannity's full response below.

Glenn,

You are a friend and a patriot who has asked an honest and thoughtful question, and I will attempt to answer it in this post.

You asked, "Can we actually have a civil discourse based on facts? Not on emotion or feelings?" Of course we can! For all of you leftists out there in the media and elsewhere hoping this will become a "food fight," you will be extremely disappointed.

Let me first point out that I am personally UNDECIDED as to whom I I will support in the GOP primaries. The good news is the Iowa Caucus is February 1, 2016. That gives us over 5 1/2 months before the REAL process begins in deciding who the Republican presidential nominee will be. Five and a half months is an eternity in political terms.

A lot can and will happen between now and then. Some candidates will trip and fall or stumble. Some will recover and others may not. Polls will shift, debates will hopefully enlighten, and voters (that is, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE) will decide which way this is going to go.

This is not my first rodeo. I began my talk radio journey in 1987. I am about to begin my 20th year on the Fox News Channel. I have followed presidential politics closely since my early teens. I often remind both my listeners and viewers that this is a PROCESS. We do not have to decide today.

As a registered conservative in New York state, I only have one vote. From a voting perspective, I will have no say, really, in deciding who the Republican presidential nominee will be in 2016. Just as I have in past presidential cycles, I feel I can best serve both my television and radio audiences by giving them as much access as possible to all of the candidates so they can make an informed decision in the primary.

For example, in just the last 2 weeks I have had on both radio and TV Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ben Carson, Scott Walker, Carly Fiorina, John Kasich Mike Huckabee, Rick Perry, and Chris Christie.

I have given many of the candidates a FULL hour on my TV show, as well. My plan is to continue to offer all the candidates more airtime throughout the entire process.

As I mentioned, I have two jobs that I love to do every day (which is to build an audience, and to generate revenue), but that is not my primary motivation. As somebody who follows the news closely every day, I am extremely concerned about the direction of the country and the world in general.

In my view, America is at a crossroads -- a tipping point. To me, this election is not about ME OR WHO I VOTE FOR. I personally want the most CONSERVATIVE candidate (because conservatism works) with the best, most inspiring solutions for the country; someone who can passionately articulate those solutions, and win.

Which Republican candidate can offer solutions that will:

1. Create jobs and help the 93 million Americans who are out of the labor force get back to work

2. Help get nearly 50 million Americans out of poverty

3. Help nearly 46 million Americans who are on food stamps get back to work

4. Stop robbing future generations with record debt and deficits. We now have over 18 trillion dollars in debt and over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

5. Balance the budget, force the government to live within its means, and lower taxes by transforming our tax code

6. Save Social Security (because the "Lock Box" has been stolen)

7. Save Medicare

8. Repeal Obamacare, and hopefully replace it with personal healthcare savings accounts

9. Make America energy independent. This would create jobs, lower the cost of energy, and reduce our dependence on imported oil from countries that hate us.

10. Protect our borders from those who do not respect our laws and sovereignty, and those who enter the country to cause us harm

11. Transform a broken educational system and replace public schools with school choice for parents and kids trapped in failing schools

12. End burdensome regulations

13. Restore constitutional order and separation of powers with co-equal branches of government as our founders intended

14. Identify by name our biggest enemy (radical Islamists) and take every step necessary to defeat this evil

15. Undo this horrific, naive, and incredibly dangerous deal with the radical Mullahs in Iran that chant death to America

16. Restore America's sacred and special relationship with Israel

17. Empower moderate nations and people in the Middle East and elsewhere to defeat enemies in the region

18. Confront Putin with strength to stop his geopolitical ambitions

19. Confront China and thwart its geopolitical ambitions and unfair trade practices

20. Commit to the idea that America is the single greatest force for good in the world, and that America's role is to lead the fight for freedom around the world

This is only a short list of challenges we now face as a country. As our mutual friend "The Great One," Mark Levin, says, we are living in a post constitutional America. I have a sense of urgency that I have never had before in my life that the "America" we love and grew up in is slipping away, literally hanging in the balance. Now is NOT the time for half measures It is time, as Reagan said, for a "revitalized second party with no pale pastels but BOLD COLORED DIFFERENCES."

I am extremely disappointed with current congressional "leadership," as they have failed to keep their most BASIC promises. They refused to use their constitutional authority of the power of the purse to defund Obamacare. They caved on their main 2014 campaign promise to stop Obama's illegal and unconstitutional executive amnesty. And they are generally weak, timid and afraid to confront Obama for fear they will be blamed for a government shutdown.

With that said I am greatly encouraged by many of the 17 candidates currently running for the GOP nomination.

Sen. Ted Cruz has shown a willingness few in Congress have shown TO FIGHT! His filibuster in 2013 was inspiring, as is his willingness to take on his own party.

Sen. Rand Paul's reminders about limited government and fidelity to the Constitution is similarly refreshing.

Sen. Marco Rubio offers an extremely bright, articulate and friendly vision of conservatism that will inspire many Americans.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum is making a strong push to rebuild the "Reagan Coalition" and is articulating how blue collar voters will benefit under conservatism.

Gov. Scott Walker has shown that a conservative can win in a blue state, and turn deficits into surpluses, create jobs, and he was willing to put his political career on the line for his conservative beliefs.

Gov. John Kasich similarly took record deficits in Ohio and turned them into record surpluses. He also created hundreds of thousands of jobs. While budget chairman in DC, Kasich was the architect of REAL BALANCED BUDGETS.

Gov. Jeb Bush's record in Florida is equally impressive. He created 1.4 million jobs, the nations first school voucher program, and produced balanced budgets.

Gov. Rick Perry, but for his leadership in Texas, America would have experienced a NET loss of jobs in Obama's first term. Obama owes Gov. Perry a debt of gratitude.

Gov. Bobby Jindal, who is young, bright, and vibrant, had massive reductions in the size of government, vouchers, and a proven willingness to take on the status quo.

Gov. Mike Huckabee deserves major kudos for his commitment to religious freedom, the Constitution and the Fair Tax, which, I believe, will transform the American economy for the better.

Gov. Chris Christie deserves credit for taking on the third rail in politics, i.e., ENTITLEMENTS! The bottom line is we have been lied to and stolen from, and unless we deal with these entitlements (which have become the majority of government spending), our kids will not have a future.

Dr. Ben Carson has articulated a version of common sense, conservatism, and courage in confronting Obama that congressional Republicans should learn from. His vision for healthcare savings accounts is the perfect antidote to Obamacare.

Carly Fiorina has been nothing short of inspiring in confronting Hillary Clinton's moral, ethical, and legal deficiencies. Her knowledge of the economy and world affairs has captivated the country.

Now, I could point out areas of disagreement and deficiencies in all the candidates ... but I will leave that to the voters and the liberal Obama-loving media. The Republican field of candidates offer a far more inspiring vision for our country than either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders. If conservative principles are implemented we can save and preserve the country for our kids and grandkids.

My hope is that the GOP candidates will all push each other to become stronger in their commitment to this conservative vision -- all of which will get this country back on track before we become another version of Greece.

Now to Mr Trump: The first debate attracted 24 million Americans, by far a cable television record. There is zero doubt in my mind that he was a big part of that record breaking debate.

By comparison, the first Republican debate of the 2012 cycle hosted by Fox News in May 2011, drew just 3.2 million viewers, according to Nielsen. Its highest-rated Republican debate (in 2012) drew 6.7 million viewers.

Kudos to Donald Trump for creating an audience that not only benefitted him, but every other candidate and the entire country. He single handedly made politics refreshingly fun, unpredictable and interesting. That is a great benefit to the country.

Now to your specific points, because you said you "really want to understand."

First you wrote:

"I get that Trump is reflective of what people are feeling; secure the border; fight to win; don't give in to China, etc. I really do understand that he is saying things that people are feeling. Justifiably.

I get the fact that he is saying that America is a great place and that we can be great again. That is rare and refreshing.

I understand that he is seen, and has the proof in New York City, as a guy who can get things done. I understand and like the fact that he just says what he is thinking. No politically correct BS, no focus groups, and he does it with out apologizing."

My only comment to this, Glenn, is ... you are answering your own question in many ways. These are not insignificant things. Why, at this early stage, would you be so dismissive?

1. Fight to win

2. Stand up to China

3. Make America great again

4. Trump has a track record of getting the job done

5. Secure the border 6. Straight talking, non-politically correct politician!

To address what you say you do not understand:

1. "He is part of the problem when he, by his own admission, buys politicians":

How refreshingly honest that he admits what we all know. I asked him about this and he answered by saying he "hates" the system, wants to change it, but as a businessman he played the game. I applaud the honesty and desire to change it.

2. Trump "identifies his policies more as a Democrat; he makes President Obama look truly humble..."

If you are looking for humble, Trump is not your guy.

As for his political views I asked him a number of times about it, including this week. He was clear that he was once a Democrat and changed his views. You will have to decide for yourself how sincere he is. My sense is that he is sincere. He is correct in pointing out that Reagan was was a pro-choice Democrat who also evolved.

Glenn, one of the things I admire about you is how you have changed. Your life story is extremely compelling because of the significant changes you have made in your life.

You are not shy about pointing out how you once led a pretty fast life. (I did, too, when I was young, as we have all sinned and fallen short), how you found your faith, how you changed your politics, and how your thinking evolved by studying our founders and framers. I read that you recently became a libertarian. I like the changes you have made and your willingness to share those things with your audience. Are you a better person as a result of these changes? My guess is you are.

3. Trump was very pro-abortion until very recently.

His answer at the debate was extremely compelling, about how his views changed. He said he changed his mind because of a child that was going to be aborted, but then wasn't. That is believable to me. Do you think he is lying about that?

4. He still says, "Don't defund planned parenthood ..."

I asked him about that this week, and he was very clear that funding would be dependent on whether Planned Parenthood gets out of the abortion business. Personally, with our debt situation, and with what Planned Parenthood has done, I wouldn't give them a penny.

5. Trump is pro- "assault weapon ban ..."

He said to me he that he "was" for the ban, past tense. He now has a pistol carry-permit in NYC and said he believes law-abiding Americans should have the right to "carry."

6. He is in favor of a wealth tax that would just "take money out of people's bank accounts ..."

I also asked him about this earlier this week. He said when he supported this one-time tax on the very wealthy that we were at a point when, if implemented, the tax would have paid off the entire federal debt. He wanted this coupled with a balanced budget amendment. My impression of this was that it would be meant as a patriotic gesture by those who have greatly benefitted from the American Dream. Misguided, well intentioned, perhaps. But he says he is against it now.

7. Trump "says he is for boots on the ground in Iraq, and for 'taking the oil' from the Iraqi people..."

Mr. Trump and I disagreed about the Iraq war; I was for it and he was against it. But I loved his idea of making Iraq pay for its own liberation. I also love the idea of Iraq paying the families of nearly 5,000 Americans who were killed fighting in that war. They deserve that money. They deserve millions of dollars. Similarly, so do those soldiers and families that suffered severe injuries. It's the least Iraq should do for them.

As far as Trump's plan against Isis of creating a perimeter around the oil fields, which is their main financial source for terror? I like that idea, if it is a part of a more comprehensive plan of defeating them. Americans died in Mosul, Ramadi, Fallujah and Tikrit, cities now controlled by Isis. They are modern day Nazis and are getting stronger and richer and more evil every day. I have one caveat: IF AMERICA FIGHTS ANY WAR, WE MUST WIN IT AND WIN IT QUICKLY. NO MORE POLITICALLY CORRECT WARS THAT ARE POLITICIZED AND THEN ABANDONED.

This out of the box thinking is refreshing. Why didn't Iraq pay our military heroes?

8. Trump is a progressive "Republican ..."

He says he is a conservative. It's up to you as to what you want to believe.

9. He says single payer healthcare works; he would give people more than just Obama care ...

Again, this week, in his interview with me, Trump went into great detail about how he supports healthcare savings accounts to replace Obamacare. I have been an advocate of healthcare savings accounts since reading the book by the Cato institute, "Patient Power." A GREAT IDEA.

10. The First Lady would be the first to have posed nude in lesbian porno shots ...

I thought you were libertarian? Also I go back to the fact that you have changed. Trump's wife is a mother and what she did in the past doesn't make my top 10,000 list of problems we face as a country.

11. He said he keeps all the Bibles he is given in a "special place," outside the city -- and he only goes to church on Christmas and Easter ...

I have met atheists and agnostics who seem more in awe of and dazzled by the majesty of God's creation than those who can cite every chapter and verse. To me, religion is a deeply, deeply held personal issue that involves the heart. I am a Christian but a deeply flawed one who regularly needs forgiveness. Having been raised a Catholic, I also have issues with the "church" since sex scandal. I have never lost faith in God. The Bible does say, "... The Kingdom of Heaven is within us," and instructs us to "go into our closets and pray." I hope for Trump's sake, and for everybody's sake, that he has peace in his faith; I know I do.

12. Trump is generally not a likable guy ...

The polls show Republicans like Trump at this moment more than the other candidates. I have known him for years and have found him to be extremely likable and engaging.

13. He has around 16 percent favorability with Hispanics ...

I also saw a poll where he was leading with Hispanic voters in Nevada. IMHO, it's too early to conclude where that settles out.

14. He has gone bankrupt four times.

I thought his explanation at the debate was extremely solid. He never went bankrupt personally, and of the hundreds of business deals he has been involved in, four of them didn't work out well. Shouldn't that be balanced out with all of the deals he has made that have been successful? I think that is only fair. How many jobs has he created over the years? How many careers were made because of his risk taking. Also the proof is in the pudding. He has by every measure been an extremely successful businessman who has made billions of dollars. Not something many people can pull off. I admire success stories. If Trump was president, and he made hundreds of decisions and only four of them went badly, we would likely be in pretty good shape.

15. Just based on his favorability ratings, he could never win in a general. Research shows that he may be near his ceiling now ...

In the end, that's up to the American people to decide, not us.

In conclusion, Glenn, I repeat ... I am personally undecided at this point. But I am glad Donald Trump is in this race. I like his straightforward outsider's view of politics. His personality and background are impressive and refreshing. I like anybody who is not politically correct.

I hope his outspokenness and his courage rubs off on his fellow Republicans, who have all become stale, timid, weak, and generally (especially in DC) useless. Many Republicans can learn a thing or two from Trump.

We have 5 1/2 months until the Iowa caucuses. My promise is to dig deeper into the questions you and others have raised that deserve answers. I also promise to give Mr. Trump and every other candidate a fair shot to explain their views in detail. I think a FAIR SHOT is the best way to serve my audience. Then it's up to the American people, as it should be.

My hope and prayer is that we elect a bold, inspiring conservative visionary who will undo the damage caused by Obama and leftist politicians, and that we can work together to save the country we both love.

Best always,

Sean

Featured Image: NEW YORK, NY - APRIL 21: Host Sean Hannity on set of FOX's "Hannity With Sean Hannity" at FOX Studios on April 21, 2014 in New York City. (Photo by Paul Zimmerman/Getty Images)

The great switch: Gates trades climate control for digital dominion

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The new currency of power

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

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

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

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

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

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

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

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

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

The forgotten way

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

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

Both are traps.

The only way

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

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A restoration, not a renovation

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

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

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

The selective guardians of history

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

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

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

The real desecration

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

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

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.