Did Sean Hannity and Glenn disappoint the media by not throwing mud at each other?

Glenn joined Sean Hannity on Fox News Monday night to discuss the 2016 election and the global threats facing our country. From their straightforward online exchange leading up to the interview, some in the media might have expected a verbal sparring match to break out over their differences in opinion about Donald Trump.

In reality, the conversation remained extremely cordial. Instead of dwelling on petty differences, they instead focused on issues they could unite on, particularly the threat of radical Islam we see ravaging the Middle East.

"It's craziness!" Glenn said, referencing to a recent article in The New York Times, which told of ISIS members praying before and after raping their pre-teen victims, attempting to legitimize their actions by referencing passages in the Koran.

Hannity went on to compare radical Islam with the Nazis during World War II.

"I would argue that radical mullahs coupled with weapons of mass destruction equals a modern-day Holocaust," Hannity said.

Glenn said his latest book, IT IS ABOUT ISLAM, describes how ISIS has actually learned from the Nazis and they're even worse.

"This is the Nazis times ten," Glenn said.

Watch the full exchange below.

Glenn invited Hannity on his radio show Tuesday morning, where they continued the conversation, delving into their views on the current lineup of presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle.

"Now is the time to duke it out," Glenn said. "Now is the time to really lay it out on the table and say, this is who I think we should have."

Listen to the interview or read the full transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors.

GLENN: I want to introduce you to a friend of mine. Mr. Sean Hannity.

SEAN: Mr. Glenn Beck, how are you, sir?

GLENN: Very good. How are you?

SEAN: You know, I think we disappointed people in the media if you asked a question about conservatives and Trump. And I answered. And we didn't throw mud at each other and call each other names. I think we disappointed them.

GLENN: Yeah. I think, you know, it's a good thing that conservatives -- now is the time to duke it out, you know what I mean? Now is the time to really lay it out on the table and say, this is who I think we should have. These are the principles I think wished have. Once you settle on a candidate, then you have to decide, I can either vote for the G.O.P. or I can't vote for the G.O.P. But the time to look at a candidate's makeup, any of the candidate's, is right now. And I don't agree with people who say, hey, you're going to tear the party apart. Fine. We have to have these discussions.

SEAN: No, I disagree. Yeah, listen this process is good for all of them. It will make the eventual nominee, I would argue, stronger. And they better be prepared because I don't care who the Democratic candidate is -- and it's looking more and more unlikely that it's Hillary every day, but the Democrats are going to say that you're racist and sexist and misogynist and War on Women and you want to poison the air and water and you hate children and you want to kill grandma. So you better be strong. And you better be prepared for the attacks that inevitably will come to whoever the eventual nominee is.

But you're right, we have five and a half months to vet these candidates. It's a process. And I think the process is healthy. It's the hardest job in the world.

GLENN: Do you think there's anything that Donald Trump could say that would slow this down? We were talking yesterday. He may be the one candidate who has so much out there that he's said and he handles it very well and says, yep. That's what I said. And if you don't like it, that's too bad.

SEAN: I know.

GLENN: Has he been inoculated?

SEAN: You know, it's hard to tell. But I use this term. He has been able to defy conventional political gravity more than any other candidate I've ever seen in my lifetime. Now, whether that continues, if he makes another unforced error. If he says something people don't like, it may be a point of no return for him. But he certainly up to this point have benefited from the controversies that he has started. Immigration, John McCain, et cetera. It hasn't hurt him at all. And I think people are finding him refreshing. You know, there's two reasons for this.

Number one, people are tired of political correctness. Obama has so destroyed the country that people are ready for a dramatic change, which I argue we also need. It's not a time for half measures. We need real conservatives. Liberty-loving, constitutional conservatives that will balance budgets, limit the size and growth of government, offer alternatives to Obamacare, secure the borders. All those things that you and I talk about every day. And I would argue that this is the time that we need this vibrant debate and discussion.

GLENN: It is.

SEAN: I don't mind that you don't like Donald Trump or believe Donald Trump. That's -- you know, you're a strong voice. I think people should hear your views. People should hear from Trump himself. I offer my views as warranted, you know, when I'm talking to my audience.

GLENN: Right.

SEAN: I'm not decided right now. And I don't have to decide for five and a half months. And I do have faith that the American people will pick a great candidate. I'm hopeful.

GLENN: I know you don't generally do this stuff. So I don't want to box you into a corner. So you don't have to have a name.

SEAN: Go ahead, I can handle it.

GLENN: Is there anybody there that you say I will not vote for? Out of the 18, is there anybody that you just wouldn't vote for?

SEAN: We can be honest. Lindsey Graham is not going to be the nominee. So is Pataki. I like the guy personally. He's not going to be the nominee.

GLENN: Yeah, I'm not saying that. For instance, Lindsey Graham, I could not pull the lever for. I just couldn't do it.

SEAN: I'm glad we're not going to have to face that. But that would be really hard for me because I think he's part of what's wrong in Washington.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, he's part and parcel of it.

SEAN: Think of the frustration though, Glenn. This is warranted. They made a promise this past election cycle.

GLENN: Oh, I know.

SEAN: They absolutely would not allow Obama's illegal executive amnesty -- unconstitutional amnesty to go through, and they ended up funding it.

GLENN: I didn't get a chance to talk about this yesterday. I'm going to talk about it today. I wrote a piece this weekend on Mike Lee. There was a --

SEAN: Yeah.

GLENN: There was a hit piece on Mike Lee in the New York Times this weekend where McConnell said, you know, he's out with his Tea Party buddies. And he's going to have to decide -- at some point he's going to have to face the music and choose. Well, he's already chosen. He's chosen the Constitution. And I wrote a deal about McConnell. He's part of the problem.

SEAN: Listen, I've been saying this for well over a year. Maybe even two years. I don't remember when I first said it. That Boehner needs to go. And that we need a clean sweep of leadership in Washington.

Now, I say this, I'm a registered conservative. I believe conservatism works. I believe we need a revitalized second party, as Reagan said. And when I look at the Republican Party as timid and weak and ineffective and afraid of their own shadow and afraid of getting blamed for a government shutdown, I'm disappointed.

Now, on the other hand, I see Republican governors -- and I'll mention names. Scott Walker was one of them. Rick Perry was one of them. And John Kasich has done some good work in the state of Ohio. And Rick Scott in Florida is another one. These guys have done great work, taking high deficits and turning them into surpluses. Getting their budgets balanced. And implementing, like Bobby Jindal in Louisiana, vouchers. And they've gotten people -- high unemployment rates down to low unemployment rates. John Kasich, I think since he's been governor, 300,000-plus jobs in the state of Ohio alone. These guys are working hard. Rick Perry, one and a half million jobs in Texas while he was governor.

GLENN: Why do you think Scott Walker was the guy and now has fallen off the map?

SEAN: You know, I don't think -- I don't think the polls really mean a whole hill of beans to be honest at this point. I think that we're going to have more debates. We're going to have more interviews. They'll have more time to interact with voters. And I don't think we can predict who the nominee is going to be.

GLENN: I agree with you on that.

SEAN: And one other point. Let's go back to the summer of 2007. I think it was --

GLENN: Let's not.

SEAN: Who do you think was leading the Republican field with 33 percent of the vote and who do you think was in second place with 20 percent?

GLENN: I don't remember. Probably like Newt Gingrich.

SEAN: Rudy Giuliani.

GLENN: That's right.

SEAN: Right? And those are big numbers.

GLENN: Yeah. We've been talking lately that we don't want our guy number one. I'm happy he's number two or number three in the polls right now. Cruz is the guy I really like.

SEAN: I like Ted Cruz a lot.

GLENN: Yeah, several I would vote for, but that guy I would walk through a wall of fire for. And I don't want him to be number one right now.

SEAN: What a hero he was when he stood up to his own party recently. What a hero he was in 2013, and every Republican had promised they would repeal and replace Obamacare and he stood alone in a filibuster to fulfill the promise that he made to his constituents and the rest of these guys not only caved, but then they turned on him for daring to do what they should have been doing.

GLENN: So let me switch topics here. You said just a minute ago that you think it's looking less and less like Hillary is going to be the nominee.

SEAN: Yep.

GLENN: Does that put Bernie Sanders there? Or do you see -- Pat and Stu think Al Gore is going to ride in on a white horse.

SEAN: By the way, I think it could happen. I think there are four people to watch out for -- my thoughts -- Biden, Gore, Elizabeth Warren, and believe it or not, Comrade de Blasio, the mayor of New York. He has a huge ego.

GLENN: Yeah. De Blasio, I think he's considering it. Yeah, yeah.

So what do you think is going to happen? I think even if she goes -- which is not going to happen. But even if she went to jail, I think they would still vote for her. Might help because people would be like, I wouldn't have to listen to her. She's in jail.

SEAN: Yeah. I don't know what it is. Look, it's funny. We often get accused of being party people. I don't have any problem, and I've never had any problem speaking out against -- you know, I end up usually voting for the Republican because there's not a conservative party. I mean, it's a coalition party of conservatives, establishment. The Democrats have a coalition party. I don't ever see Democrats break ranks. I do see conservatives that will challenge the -- the establishment in their party. You do it. I do it.

GLENN: So you're saying that you don't think -- isn't that what's happening with Bernie Sanders right now?

SEAN: Yeah, I think so. Hillary is not going to -- Hillary is not a big enough socialist for them.

GLENN: I think this is -- I think this is actually a good sign -- I mean, a bad sign for America. But a good sign for the Democrats. At least they're recognizing they're tired of the same old crap where they're lying. They just want someone to come out and say, yes, I'm a socialist. What's wrong with that?

SEAN: I think the Scoop Jackson Democrats. The Reagan Democrats have almost become extinct in the Democratic Party.

GLENN: I agree on that.

SEAN: Hillary does not have the political skills of her husband. She does not have the speech-giving ability of Obama. I think she is intimately unlikable. I don't think she likes people. Which is why they have ponied up all of these public appearances of hers. And they keep on putting Democratic plants because she's not really capable of relating to real people. And I think she has nothing, but disdain and contempt for going out and eating pork chops and fried Twinkies and actually shaking people's hands and listening to what their real concerns are. I think she's an ambitious politician and a very poor to mediocre one, at that. And I think with all these recent revelations, she is in a heap of trouble, even with Loretta Lynch as the attorney general.

GLENN: Sean, you and I have talked off the air quite a bit. And the -- nobody in this audience would be surprised that when I'm on the phone, that it would go to very dark places. But I think people might be surprised that you also feel we are in life and death -- you can be as depressing as I am.

(laughter)

SEAN: Stu and Pat there.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: They're not going to help you.

PAT: Nobody is as depressing as you, Glenn.

SEAN: By the way, I'm friends with all three of you guys. You're all good guys.

Here's my take. I vacillate back and forth. You know, we're a country. Think of what we've been able to overcome: The Revolution that founded this country. A civil war that tore us apart. A Great Depression. Two world wars. The '60s. Vietnam. Jimmy Carter. And we will overcome the disaster that is known as the Barack Obama presidency. We are a resilient people. We can bounce back.

What I'm most afraid of, the dark thinking that you're asking about, is that the numbers now don't add up anymore.

GLENN: Yeah. It's not the Barack Obama administration. It's -- it's the mistakes of the last really 70 or 90 years since we started giving away stuff for free.

PAT: Well, and we vacillate too between thinking, hey, we're going for make it, and there's no way out. We're done as a people. You can't help, but do that with the ebb and flow of this --

GLENN: And when you say we've made it. A, we didn't have the numbers that we have now. And, B, we had the moral backbone. I mean, Sean, do we even have the moral backbone now to pull out of this?

SEAN: Here's the problem. Is now decades of socialist indoctrination in our schools. People that come to this country that don't want freedom and liberty and opportunity and with it, responsibility. But too many people have been mentally conditioned to think that they have a right to health care. A right to housing. A right to dental care. A right to day care. And they think that it's the government's job to take from one group of people. They'll empower the government to take from one group of people and redistribute to another group of people.

My concern is this: I don't care who the Democratic nominee is. You can pretty much count on at least 47, if not 48, if not 49 percent of the American people that will vote for whoever the Democrats put up. For a Republican to win, you know, you start out without New York, New Jersey. Most likely, without Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan. But you might be able to put Michigan and Wisconsin in play. I'll leave that open. On a long shot, maybe Pennsylvania. But you don't have California, Oregon, or Washington. And for a Republican to win, think about this, you have to take the purple state of Florida. You got to take the state of Ohio, which went for Barack Obama in the last election -- I think the last two. Then you have a battleground with North Carolina --

GLENN: See what I'm saying. I know. I know. I get it. I'm going to go load my gun now and blow my brains out.

But, Sean, we got to run. I thank you so much. And god bless you.

SEAN: All right. Love -- love the dialogue. Good to talk to you.

GLENN: Thanks. Good to talk to you.

SEAN: And you starting this was a good thing.

GLENN: God bless you. Thanks, man. Sean Hannity.

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.