Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Bombshell Russian Email: It's ‘Worse Than I Thought’

July 11, 2017
Staff

WRITER

An alarming report in The New York Times Monday seems to have been proven true: Donald Trump, Jr. confirmed in email screenshots Tuesday that he met with a Russian attorney in 2016 to gain information that would assist the Trump presidential campaign.

Tuesday on radio, Glenn walked through the whirlwind timeline of the breaking story, analyzing the emails which were tweeted from Donald Trump, Jr.’s verified Twitter account.

“This is, I believe, worse than what I thought,” Glenn said.

In the email, publicist Rob Goldstone promised to connect the Trumps with a Russian attorney, specifically because the Russian government wanted to influence the 2016 election, saying, “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

Glenn expressed shock that concrete evidence seems to point to collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. Russian hackers infiltrated emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta in efforts to swing the election toward Trump.

“I think a lot of things about the Trumps --- no way were they involved in collusion,” Glenn said incredulously.

He pointed out that the timing was right for the meeting with Russia to take place in June 2016, just a few weeks before Wikileaks released leaked emails from the DNC servers and from Podesta’s email account.

“This is still three weeks before Wikileaks breaks, and Donald Trump acts surprised,” Glenn noted. “We all knew at the time: Wikileaks got their information from the Kremlin.”

Whether the president was aware of this meeting is unclear.

"Let's not implicate anybody else," Glenn said. "All we know is that Donald Trump Jr. knew that there was collusion. He was part of the collusion."

To see more from Glenn, visit his channel on TheBlaze and watch “The Glenn Beck Radio Program” live weekdays 9 a.m.–noon ET or anytime on-demand at TheBlaze TV.

GLENN: So let me go through this with you. This morning, two hours ago, we were talking about a hypothetical, something that the New York Times and CNN said that they had seen. And we added the caveat, if it says that, you know, they are -- they have information and he knows that it's from the Russian government, then there's a problem.

PAT: But we didn't trust the New York Times or CNN.

GLENN: We didn't trust them. This is, I believe, worse than what I thought.

Here is the first email from Rob Goldstone: Good morning, Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. Now, so you know, Emin is a very good friend of Donald Trump Sr. and is, you know, very, very close with -- with Vladimir Putin.

STU: Worked with him on the Miss Universe thing.

PAT: In Russia.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. He's a Russian citizen. An oligarch. A bad one. Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father, Aras, this morning.

And, actually, Aras is the oligarch. Emin is the son.

The crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father, Aras, this morning, and in their meeting, offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information, but it is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump. I never thought -- no way -- you -- you couldn't have --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I think a lot of things about the Trumps. No way were they involved in collusion. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information. But this is part of Russia and its government support of Mr. Trump helped along by Aras and Emin. What do you think the best way to handle this information would be? Will you be able to speak to Emin about it directly? I also can send this information to your father via Rona. But it is ultra sensitive so I wanted to send it to you first.

Thanks, Rob. I appreciate it. I'm on the road for a moment. I could just speak to Emin first. Seems like we have some time. And if it's what you say, I love it, especially late in the summer.

Meaning, coordination.

Could we do a call first thing next week when I'm back?

Yes. Don, let me know when you're free to talk with Emin by phone about this Hillary information. You had mentioned earlier this week, so I tried to schedule time and best day to you and your family. Rob.

Holy cow. That is -- there's your smoking gun. It's not just -- isn't it?

STU: I mean, first of all, again, like the -- you have to say that the New York Times report was accurate. I mean, this is exactly what they said was in it.

GLENN: This was released by Donald Trump Jr.

STU: Yes. So we know 100 percent it comes from Trump. So we know that that's accurate. I mean, you know, look, I think you can still make the argument that, hey, he got the tip from some guy he knows. Didn't think about it from a foreign -- you know, it says right in there. Was excited to get information to beat up his opponent.

GLENN: No, no. But he was coordinating -- listen -- listen, there's no way -- I mean, Stu, help me. Please, convince me. Convince me.

STU: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Crown prosecutor of Russia. So that's not the girl he's going to meet with. He's saying the crown prosecutor of Russia.

STU: I thought that is the -- I thought that is who they're referring to when they say --

PAT: The female lawyer? I don't know. Because they refer to the lawyer as him in that email, right?

GLENN: Yes. Yeah. So I don't think it's the same.

PAT: So it can't be the same person. It's not the same person.

GLENN: What he's saying here is the crown prosecutor of Russia. So that's like the attorney general of Russia.

STU: Right, okay.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: The attorney general of Russia --

STU: Met with his father.

GLENN: Met with Emin's father, the good friend of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

STU: Right.

GLENN: They met this morning about whatever we don't know. And in the meeting, he offered to provide the Trump campaign -- so now, here is the attorney general going to an oligarch, saying, "Hey, you're friends with Donald Trump, right?"

Yeah.

"I want you to pass on to them that we have information at a very high level that we want to pass to them." We have official documents and information that will incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia. It will be very useful for them.

So then the father asks Emin to call Goldstone, who knows Donald Trump Jr., and say, "Hey, can we get this? By the way, Aras is going to fax this through Rhonda, just to get it to your dad. But it's very high level, and I wanted to talk to somebody and let them know that it was coming."

He then says: It's very high level. Sensitive information. But it is part -- it is part of Russia and its government support for Mr. Trump, helped along by Aras and Emin.

So, in other words, somebody -- I don't even want to jump there.

We know that a good friend, an oligarch of Donald Trump has been helping the government along to support Donald Trump.

I'll send this information to your father. I will send this information to your father via Rona.

PAT: I mean --

GLENN: I mean, this is --

PAT: It's going to be a nightmare.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: The Democrats are going to --

GLENN: It's over.

PAT: They're going --

GLENN: How do you not go with this?

STU: Well, look, I think you can make an argument that it's not as bad as it feels. However, I would say -- well, because, I mean, like, look, Donald Trump Jr., he's not even --

GLENN: I will send information to your father via Rona.

STU: But he didn't, right? As far as we know at least this point. (chuckling) It went to him instead. But, of course, he's going to tell his dad about it. Right? Although he said he didn't --

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: No, no. He already said he didn't tell his dad. His dad didn't know. So don't even worry about that.

STU: I guess my point would be you -- you can argue that it wasn't -- it wasn't -- I don't know. Like, to me, I would never take a meeting with a government official, even if it was trying to sink an opponent. I -- so I can't -- I don't understand why you would do that.

But, you know what, look, remember, this is not only people who have dealt in these circles for a while and do anything to win, as they say, as they pointed out a million times. They were also, at the time, pretty desperate, if you remember right. So maybe did they bend this line and take this meeting? I think the answer to that is yes.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Yes, they did. Wait. Wait.

STU: However --

GLENN: Let's look at this. This is still three weeks before WikiLeaks breaks.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And Donald Trump acts surprised. We all knew at the time WikiLeaks got their information from the Kremlin.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: This is Russia feeding this and leaking this. So we know now that Russia was hacking in to the DNC servers. Was gathering sensitive information. And then -- this is treason. We've got a guy on the other side, in Russia, that released information, and we say it's treason. If he comes back, he'll be tried for treason. What's-his-face?

PAT: Yeah, Snowden.

GLENN: Snowden. That's treason when he's done that to us.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: So here's Russia doing to it (sic). Now, they can't be treasonous because they're not Americans. That -- they released -- they hacked, they got in, they stole the information, and then released it to the world. And Donald Trump was acting like it was a surprise and like, oh, please, Russia. Go ahead. Release the rest.

PAT: Glenn, when you put it like that, sure it sounds bad.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: I mean, do you have to put it like that? No, you don't. You could put it some other way.

STU: You could put it another way.

GLENN: I can guarantee you -- I can guarantee you everyone else will be -- no.

PAT: All the Democrats are going to put it a lot worse than that. A lot worse than that.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, no. But the Republicans are also going to -- we are witnessing, Pat, what you and I remember in the 1970s with our dads.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I remember my dad defending Nixon --

PAT: Turning into a crook and how --

GLENN: Yeah. And it was only at the very end --

PAT: Yeah. Supported him nonstop until all the evidence came out.

GLENN: Supported him -- right. Until -- right.

PAT: And then they hated him.

JEFFY: Yep.

GLENN: Tell me how you get -- tell me how you have a family that doesn't tell the president that, "Yes, Dad, the Russians were colluding with us."

PAT: There's almost no way he doesn't know. There's almost no way.

GLENN: Right.

STU: And I think you could still make an argument, look, you're trying to find information against your -- you know, to help your dad. And you take a meeting that maybe you shouldn't have taken. And -- but, you know, nothing really came of it. So you kind of blew it off in your head. You can make that argument. It's a stretch at some level, I grant you. And I don't necessarily believe it. But I think you can make that case.

It's very difficult to understand how after you've won the presidency and you're in the middle of an investigation on this topic, how this could not have been disclosed until last week.

GLENN: Right. And beyond that, how this could be disclosed last -- in the last couple of weeks, that this even happened. And before that -- and even after that, your father, the president of the United States is saying, there was no collusion.

I mean, you know, honestly, let's say that Hillary Clinton really didn't know that her husband was fooling around. We all think that she did.

But once she found out, don't you say, you son of a bitch, you did this to me?

Let's just put yourself in this situation. You're the president of the United States. Your son is exchanging emails like this. And then he leaves with your son-in-law and your campaign manager, and they start to write speeches about this kind of information.

You start tweeting stuff. And you really don't know. And then you win. Okay.

Then it starts to be investigated and you have me go out in front of everybody going, there is no collusion. I'm telling you, there's no collusion. We never did that. We didn't talk to anybody from Russia. There was never any coordination of anything.

In fact, I believe them so much, I'm telling you, our CIA and our NSA is wrong. And they'll never find anything because there wasn't anything there. And they didn't not only collude with us, they're not even trying to hack into our systems and try to affect our elections. And that's why I'm suggesting we partner up with Russia and we share cyber security together.

Then you read today and you really are innocent, you had nothing to do with it -- you're president of the United States. Do you not go in and say, "Son, excuse me, but you son of a bitch. What the hell were you thinking? You let me spend the last nine months, eight months telling the American people -- I just met with Putin, and you knew that he was colluding with you. And I suggested cyber security partnership, when they were the ones that hacked into the DNC. And you knew it."

Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: This -- this is very, very close to treason.

PAT: Well...

STU: You could look at it from the Trump perspective -- from the Donald Trump Sr. perspective, if you want to look at this as we know it right now, we don't have evidence that Donald even knew about this meeting, right? We know that Kushner -- but Kushner left two minutes into it, reportedly. And Manafort didn't say anything in the meeting.

GLENN: We do know -- we do know -- Rob Goldstone said, I can send this information to your father via Rona.

STU: We don't know that that happened. He just suggested it as a possibility.

GLENN: We don't know if that happened, but...

STU: But, again, like, for example, Kellyanne Conway was out on the air a few weeks ago or maybe a few months ago saying no meetings happened from anyone in the campaign with anyone from Russia. That is absolutely false. It never happened. You guys just keep saying fake news and saying it happened.

GLENN: When did she say this?

STU: It was on --

GLENN: Was this the weekend?

STU: So, no, they brought her back on this weekend and said, "Hey, wait a minute. Actually, there were meetings, weren't there?" And she said, "Well, it looks like those disclosure forms have been updated." So, yes --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STU: But imagine taking -- sending your own people out, knowing that information.

GLENN: Yeah, no. Very bad.

STU: And telling them to deny it.

PAT: It's unbelievable. It's unbelievable.

GLENN: Donald Trump Jr., by himself -- let's not implicate anybody else. All we know is that Donald Trump Jr. knew that there was collusion. He was part of the collusion. Very bad. Very bad. And should go to jail.

Faith, family, and freedom—The forgotten core of conservatism

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

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.