Obama's Final Betrayal

Substituting for Glenn, John Cardillo interviewed conservative journalist Tiffany Gabbay on The Glenn Beck Program Monday. As someone of Iraqi-Jewish descent, Gabbay shared unique insights on the United States' poor relationship with Israel during the past eight years.

According to Gabbay, the Obama administration left an unsettled and agitated Israel for President-elect Trump to have to deal with.

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

JOHN: Good morning. And welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. I'm John Cardillo, standing in for the vacationing Glenn Beck, taking a well-deserved vacation.

And you must be wondering, well, who is this John Cardillo guy? Well, real quick, just a quick intro on me so you know who you're going to be listening to, for the next three hours and tomorrow morning, I actually got my start in media with Glenn. But I'm not a media guy. I wasn't a radio guy. I wasn't a TV guy. I was a New York City cop. And I started a business that grew.

And so I saw the world through two very unique lenses. One through the lens of a street cop in the South Bronx and the NYPD, the other through an executive, a private equity guy that founded a company. I was an entrepreneur. Company that grew rapidly. And we were tracking bad guys in large online communities.

And I wound up spending a good part of my life in the legislative arena. Testifying to 15, 20 state legislatures. The US Congress, US Senate, and subcommittees on pedophiles and terror fundraising online and all these bad guys and interesting topics.

And I came away with a very unique skill set that was of interest and value to people like Glenn Beck and the others on-air. And they started using me as a guest, as a guy who was coming on as a subject matter expert. And it turned out I really enjoyed it. And it was my calling. And I decided to go on-air. Give it a shot for myself.

Got my start with Glenn about three, three and a half years ago. We were doing political analysis. I loved it, and it just went from there.

And luckily -- luckily, it turned into a career for me. And I owe a lot to Glenn. And interestingly, one of the things you'll learn about me -- if you don't already know me -- I know many of you know me from Glenn Beck's show, from my radio show. I host the Morning Show down in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, where I'm based. But many of you know that I was an ardent Trump supporter from the beginning. And Glenn obviously was not. And he's still very skeptical.

But isn't that the great thing about America? Isn't that the great thing about America? That a media giant like Glenn Beck, who can be so anti a candidate, and a guy like me who can be so pro a candidate, stands in for his show. Because, see, we can be friends and disagree on an issue. And that's one of the things that's very disappointing to me. I'm watching -- this whole past year, this campaign season, people who were otherwise very good friends, having these fallings out and not speaking to each other and harassing each other. And being very vitriolic and angry with one another on Facebook and Twitter over a political candidate.

I mean, I've lost friends, colleagues in this industry, who were on the Never Trump side. And I was pro-Trump. And we don't speak. We don't -- we unfollowed each other. We blocked each other over this.

And I will say: I was never really the catalyst for that. Maybe it goes back to being a street cop in my 20s. I'm pretty thick-skinned. I don't care who you support. If you're a good American and you live your life well, I don't care who you -- well, we can disagree. I think you're misguided on issues. But I'm not going to personally dislike you.

And that's why I've always had such respect for Glenn, in that he can have a guy like me come in and guest host for him, knowing that we differ on this issue.

But being the giant in the industry that he is and being the guy that he is, want his audience to hear that opposing viewpoint. Want to educate his audience -- let his audience hear both sides. It's just a shame that more people in media aren't doing the same thing. And I think we should, not just those of us in media, but those of us in general. In general. One of my best friends is a hard-core liberal Obama-supporting Democrat. The guy is like family to me. I even call him baby Obama because he's mixed race and graduated Harvard Law School.

But our families have done holidays together for the last 30-something years. We don't let politics get away of this nonsense, of our friendship. We don't let nonsense get in the way of friendship.

And so it really bothers me when people treat their friends poorly. And I had such a great Christmas, and it's been such a great holiday season for me. And Tiffany Gabbay is in the studio with me. Tiffany had a great Hanukkah. Tiffany got her start on TheBlaze as well.

And say hi Tiffany.

TIFFANY: Hi, John. Thank you for having me on the show.

JOHN: It's a pleasure. And the reason I wanted you to be here, because you really have become one of my go-to experts on Israel. And I had a great Christmas, and you had a great Hanukkah. And we had a great holiday season. And we're going to have a great new year.

We haven't treated Israel very well. You know, going back to what I was talking about -- friends disagreeing, but ultimately backing each other up.

It's okay for the United States and Israel to disagree. But I find, what we just did to Israel at the United Nations is reprehensible. We were a very bad friend to Israel, who is one of our greatest allies in history.

But more importantly, an irreplaceable strategic partner in what is now the most volatile region in the world, historically speaking. I would argue that the Middle East in a nuclear age is the most historically volatile region in the world. So explain a little bit.

You've been studying this. And you've been studying it for me. Explain a little bit, a couple of points, what this resolution was, what it means, and things that we can do to mitigate the fallout of this.

TIFFANY: Of course. Well, let's make no mistake. The -- under the Obama administration, the US has not been a friend to Israel for the past eight years. And this was Obama's final back-stabbing for Israel. He wanted to basically set a fire ablaze and leave it for President-elect Trump to have to deal with, when he -- you know, when he takes office.

Essentially, the Security Council Resolution 2334 condemns Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. It considers them occupy territory -- and it talks about the 1967 borders, which we'll get into a little bit later because there are no such thing as 1967 borders. But basically what this resolution does is deem the western wall, one of Judaism's most sacred places, occupied Palestinian territory.

JOHN: Let me ask you a question about that. Because that's really important. There have been since 2008, allegations of a subconscious anti-Semitism that permeates the Obama administration. You're one of the most rational people I know. You have family in Israel. You're a Jewish woman. You're a Zionist. But you've also been very rational. I've watched you do hits on other shows. Where you've been so opinion-driven that you let the obvious fall away.

Now, with all that in mind -- and I mean that, I'm not just playing that up because we're friends and you're a colleague. Do you feel that that subconscious anti-Semitism has permeated the Obama administration? Because I do. I personally do.

I think there's always been this detest of Israel. Maybe it's come through Barack Obama's academic career. I think Samantha Power at the UN has been our worst UN ambassador. She has worked against the interest of the United States for as many years as she's been there. And John Kerry to me is kind of this moronic do-nothing figurehead caught in between power and Obama, who are ideologically identical.

So they needed a Secretary of State that wouldn't get in their way. And I think all three of them couldn't care less about the Jewish state and truly want to either be loved by the Middle Eastern Muslim nations. Or they just -- they desire to be loved by the globalist community, that European globalist mentality community that they think is cool and invites them to the really ritzy dinner parties. Am I on to something, or is this crazy conspiracy Cardillo theory?

TIFFANY: Definitely not conspiracy theory.

In fact, I think one of the things people get confused about is when they think about anti-Semitism, they think about it the way the anti-defamation league would characterize it. If you see a little green frog meme on Twitter, for example, or someone uses the term "Jew," you have particularly liberals screaming about anti-Semitism. But people do not realize that being anti-Israel is the new incarnation of anti-Semitism. And that is Barack Obama.

Whether it's because he feels sympathetic for the Islamic world and he believes that they are truly colonized and oppressed people and, you know, he looks at Israel as the little Satan and as a colonizer and subjugator of, the quote, indigenous Palestinians, which, of course, that's not true. I think that he's definitely motivated by that ideology. And, of course, there's also the cocktail party cred at the end of the day. It's fashionable and cool to vilify Israel because they're new, exotic people that the left can align itself with and act like champions of. And those are Muslims.

TIFFANY: Right. And here's what gets me though: When I -- it's always the people who purport to be the most educated, the most cultured, who have this mentality.

Because when I go and talk to my friends, the New York City cops, the firefighters -- and I've become pretty well-known media guy in the first responder community. I speak to other cops and fire firefighters and medics and military personnel from around the country. And often, I'll be on IM with those deployed around the world. We're just chatting. They listen to my show. Or they follow me on Twitter. Or they're friends of mine. They get it. They get it. It's common sense. They'll send things to me like, "Well, isn't Israel like our only friend in that neighborhood? Aren't these the guys who are holding down the fort, we share intelligence -- I mean, Jordan has been an ally to an extent. But Israel is a go-to solid ally, you know, in the vein of the UK.

But, look, we haven't treated the UK very well. Poland has been another staunch ally. Their Special Forces -- the GROM, Polish Special Forces were into not just the First Gulf War, rather this war, but also the First Gulf War in the first waves, alongside our Seals and our Delta guys. We've treated Poland like dirt. Like dirt. We've pulled their missile defenses. We've pulled money for their defense.

It seems like under the Obama administration, the nations who have been there, who have put their people on the front lines, to shed blood with ours, have been treated the worst. And the people drawing that blood have been treated the best.

And it doesn't take a Harvard Law degree to figure that out. Yet, those with the Harvard -- I'm not condemning everybody who went to Harvard Law. Some great people. But those in that cocktail party set, that liberal intelligentsia, do they not get it, or do they just not care?

TIFFANY: Well, they don't get it. And people make the fatal mistake of thinking that college-educated equals smart. It just means they're indoctrinated into the same school of thought.

You know, and with regard to Obama, this has been, you know, his cause from the beginning, when he went on his world apology tour. It was about cutting America's role down to size. It was about distancing ourselves from our allies. Israel. The only democracy in the Middle East. The UK. And befriending these despot I can third world regimes, like Cuba, for instance, because they're going to do so much for us.

JOHN: Right.

TIFFANY: But if you look at Obama's background, he was raised and indoctrinated through his mother, through Frank Marshall Davis, through dreams of his father into this far left-wing ideology. So it absolutely makes sense that someone with this worldview would want to align with the left entities and to bring America down to size.

JOHN: You know, and I just want to add something that has nothing to do with the Middle East. I don't know if Americans know this, but one of the things I demanded -- and I wrote the White House. I emailed the White House, and I've asked this of Donald Trump's administration as well. I had Katrina Pierson on my show, and I demanded of her.

Joanne Chesimard, aka, Assata Shakur, who murdered state trooper Warner Foerster back in the '70s, she's number four on the FBI's most wanted terrorist list. She lives openly in Cuba. Our intelligence people know exactly -- they know her address. She shops at open air markets. We have photos of her.

She lives openly in Cuba. Okay? Her name, Assata Shakur, is the name she assumed when she became a radical. Bill Ayers, Obama's best friend, named his son Zayd, Z-A-Y-D, after Zayd Shakur, her coconspirator in the murder of Trooper Foerster. Obama never demanded her return. Worse, and a lot of people don't know this, democratic congresswoman Maxine Waters, in 1998, while a sitting US congresswoman wrote a letter to Fidel Castro, calling this cop killer, this terrorist a freedom fighter, and begging Fidel Castro not to extradite her to the US.

Now, she was convicted. She broke out of prison, She is not facing trial here. She's going back to jail.

This is today's Democratic Party. But even worse Tiffany, John Kerry is about to draft another resolution that makes things even worst for Israel.

Featured Image: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Fort Knox exposed: Is America's gold MISSING?

Christopher Furlong / Staff | Getty Images

President Trump promised that we would get a peek inside Fort Knox, but are we ready for what we might find?

In this new era of radical transparency, the possibility that the Deep State's darkest secrets could be exposed has many desperate for answers to old questions. Recently, Glenn has zeroed in on gold, specifically America's gold reserves, which are supposed to be locked away inside the vaults of Fort Knox. According to the government, there are 147.3 million ounces of gold stored within several small secured rooms that are themselves locked behind a massive 22 ton vault door, but the truth is that no one has officially seen this gold since 1953. An audit is long overdue, and President Trump has already shown interest in the idea.

America's gold reserve has been surrounded by suspicion for the better part of a hundred years. It all started in 1933, when FDR effectivelynationalized the United States's private gold stores, forcing Americans to sell their gold to the government. This gold was melted down, forged into bars, and stored in the newly constructed U.S. Bullion Depository building at Fort Knox. By 1941, Fort Knox had held 649.6 million ounces of gold—which, you may have noticed, was 502.3 million ounces more than today. We'll come back to that.

By 1944, World War II was ending, and the Allies began planning how to rebuild Europe. The U.N. held a conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, where the USD was established as the world's reserve currency. This meant that any country (though not U.S. citizens) could exchange the USD for gold at the fixed rate of $35 per ounce. Already, you can see where our gold might have gone.

Jump to the 1960s, where Lyndon B. Johnson was busy digging America into a massive debt hole. Between the Vietnam War and Johnson's "Great Society" project, the U.S. was bleeding cash and printing money to keep up. But now Fort Knox no longer held enough physical gold to cover the $35 an ounce rate promised by the Bretton Woods agreement. France took notice of this weakness and began to redeem hundreds of millions of dollars. In the 70s Nixon staunched this gushing wound by halting foreign nations from redeeming dollars for gold, but this had the adverse effect of ending the gold standard.

This brings us to the present, where inflation is through the roof, no one knows how much gold is actually inside Fort Knox, and someone in America has been buying a LOT of gold. Who is buying this gold? Where is it going and for what purpose? Glenn has a few ideas, and one of them is MUCH better than the other:

The path back to gold

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

One possibility is that all of this gold that has been flooding into America is in preparation for a shift back to a gold-backed, or partial-gold-backed system. The influx of gold corresponds with a comment recently made by Trump's new Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, who said he was going to:

“Monetize the asset side of the U.S. balance sheet for the American people.”

Glenn pointed out that per a 1972 law, the gold in Fort Knox is currently set at a fixed value of $42 an ounce. At the time of this writing, gold was valued at $2,912.09 an ounce, which is more than a 6,800 percent increase. If the U.S. stockpile was revalued to reflect current market prices, it could be used to stabilize the dollar. This could even mean a full, or partial return to the gold standard, depending on the amount of gold currently being imported.

Empty coffers—you will own nothing

Raymond Boyd / Contributor | Getty Images

Unfortunately, Glenn suspects there is another, darker purpose behind the recent gold hubbub.

As mentioned before, the last realaudit of Fort Knox was done under President Eisenhower, in 1953. While the audit passed, a report from the Secretary of the Treasury revealed that a mere 13.6 percent was checked. For the better part of a century, we've had no idea how much gold is present under Fort Knox. After the gold hemorrhage in the 60s, many were suspicious of the status of our gold supply. In the 80s, a wealthy businessman named Edward Durell released over a decade's worth of research that led him to conclude that Fort Knox was all but empty. In short, he claimed that the Federal Reserve had siphoned off all the gold and sold it to Europe.

What would it mean if America's coffers are empty? According to a post by X user Matt Smith that Glenn shared, empty coffers combined with an influx of foreign gold could represent the beginning of a new, controlled economy. We couldstill be headed towards a future where you'll ownnothing.

Glenn: The most important warning of your lifetime—AI is coming for you

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Artificial intelligence isn’t coming. It’s here. The future we once speculated about is no longer science fiction—it’s reality. Every aspect of our lives, from how we work to how we think, is about to change forever. And if you’re not ready for it, you’re already behind. This isn’t just another technological leap. This is the biggest shift humanity has ever faced.

The last call before the singularity

I've been ringing this bell for 30 years. Thirty years warning you about what’s coming. And now, here we are. This isn’t a drill. This isn’t some distant future. It’s happening now. If you don’t understand what’s at stake, you need to wake up—because we have officially crossed the event horizon of artificial intelligence.

What’s an event horizon? It’s the edge of a black hole—the point where you can’t escape, no matter how hard you try. AI is that black hole. The current is too strong. The waterfall is too close. If you haven’t been paying attention, you need to start right now. Because once we reach Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI), there is no turning back.

You’ve heard me talk about this for decades. AI isn’t just a fancy Siri. It isn’t just ChatGPT. We are on the verge of machines that will outthink every human who has ever lived—combined. ASI won’t just process information—it will anticipate, decide, and act faster than any of us can comprehend. It will change everything about our world, about our lives.

And yet, the conversation around AI has been wrong. People think the real dangers are coming later—some distant dystopian nightmare. But we are already in it. We’ve passed the point where AI is just a tool. It’s becoming the master. And the people who don’t learn to use it now—who don’t understand it, who don’t prepare for it—are going to be swallowed whole.

I know what some of you are thinking: "Glenn, you’ve spent years warning us about AI, about how dangerous it is. And now you’re telling us to embrace it?" Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. Because if you don’t use this tool—if you don’t learn to master it—then you will be at its mercy.

This is not an option anymore. This is survival.

How you must prepare—today

I need you to take AI seriously—right now. Not next year, not five years from now. This weekend.

Here’s what I want you to do: Open up one of these AI tools—Grok 3, ChatGPT, anything advanced—and start using it. If you’re a CEO, have it analyze your competitors. If you’re an artist, let it critique your work. If you’re a stay-at-home parent, have it optimize your budget. Ask it questions. Push it to its limits. Learn what it can do—because if you don’t, you will be left behind.

Let me be crystal clear: AI is not your friend. It’s not your partner. It’s not something to trust. AI is a shovel—an extremely powerful shovel, but still just a tool. And if you don’t understand that, you’re in trouble.

We’ve already seen what happens when we surrender to technology without thinking. Social media rewired our brains. Smartphones reshaped our culture. AI will do all that—and more. If you don’t take control now, AI will control you.

Ask yourself: When AI makes decisions for you—when it anticipates your needs before you even know them—at what point do you stop being the one in charge? At what point does AI stop being a tool and start being your master?

And that’s not even the worst of it. The next step—transhumanism—is coming. It will start with good intentions. Elon Musk is already developing implants to help people walk again. And that’s great. But where does it stop? What happens when people start “upgrading” themselves? What happens when people choose to merge with AI?

I know my answer. I won’t cross that line. But you’re going to have to decide for yourself. And if you don’t start preparing now, that decision will be made for you.


The final warning—act now or be left behind

I need you to hear me. This is not optional. This is not something you can ignore. AI is here. And if you don’t act now, you will be lost.

The next 18 months will change everything. People who don’t prepare—who don’t learn to use AI—will be scrambling to catch up. And they won’t catch up. The gap will be too wide. You’ll either be leading, or you’ll be swallowed whole.

So start this weekend. Learn it. Test it. Push it. Master it. Because the people who don’t? They will be the tools.

The decision is yours. But time is running out.

The coming AI economy and the collapse of traditional jobs

Think back to past technological revolutions. The industrial revolution put countless blacksmiths, carriage makers, and farmhands out of business. The internet wiped out entire industries, from travel agencies to brick-and-mortar retail. AI is bigger than all of those combined. This isn’t just about job automation—it’s about job obliteration.

Doctors, lawyers, engineers—people who thought their jobs were untouchable—will find themselves replaced by AI. A machine that can diagnose disease with greater accuracy, draft legal documents in seconds, or design infrastructure faster than an entire team of engineers will be cheaper, faster, and better than human labor. If you’re not preparing for that reality, you’re already falling behind.

What does this mean for you? It means constant adaptation. Every three to five years, you will need to redefine your role, retrain, and retool. The only people who survive this AI revolution will be the ones who understand its capabilities and learn to work with it, not against it.

The moral dilemma: When do you stop being human?

The real danger of AI isn’t just economic—it’s existential. When AI merges with humans, we will face an unprecedented question: At what point do we stop being human?

Think about it. If you implant a neural chip that gives you access to the entire internet in your mind, are you still the same person? If your thoughts are intertwined with AI-generated responses, where do you end and AI begins? This is the future we are hurtling toward, and few people are even asking the right questions.

I’m asking them now. And you should be too. Because that line—between human and machine—is coming fast. You need to decide now where you stand. Because once we cross it, there is no going back.

Final thoughts: Be a leader, not a follower

AI isn’t a passing trend. It’s not a gadget or a convenience. It is the most powerful force humanity has ever created. And if you don’t take the time to understand it now, you will be at its mercy.

This is the defining moment of our time. Will you be a master of AI? Or will you be mastered by it? The choice is yours. But if you wait too long, you won’t have a choice at all.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Trump's Zelenskyy deal falls apart: What happened and what's next?

SAUL LOEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump offered Zelenskyy a deal he couldn’t refuse—but Zelenskyy rejected it outright.

Last Friday, President Donald Trump welcomed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Washington to sign a historic agreement aimed at ending the brutal war ravaging Ukraine. Joined by Vice President J.D. Vance, Trump met with Zelenskyy and the press before the leaders were set to retreat behind closed doors to finalize the deal. Acting as a gracious host, Trump opened the meeting by praising Zelenskyy and the bravery of Ukrainian soldiers. He expressed enthusiasm for the proposed agreement, emphasizing its benefits—such as access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals for the U.S.—and publicly pledged continued American aid in exchange.

Zelenskyy, however, didn’t share Trump’s optimism. Throughout the meeting, he interrupted repeatedly and openly criticized both Trump and Vance in front of reporters. Tensions escalated until Vance, visibly frustrated, fired back. The exchange turned the meeting hostile, and by its conclusion, Trump withdrew his offer. Rather than staying in Washington to resolve the conflict, Zelenskyy promptly left for Europe to seek support from the European Union.

As Glenn pointed out, Trump had carefully crafted this deal to benefit all parties, including Russia. Zelenskyy’s rejection was a major misstep.

Trump's generous offer to Zelenskyy

Glenn took to his whiteboard—swapping out his usual chalkboard—to break down Trump’s remarkable deal for Zelenskyy. He explained how it aligned with several of Trump’s goals: cutting spending, advancing technology and AI, and restoring America’s position as the dominant world power without military action. The deal would have also benefited the EU by preventing another war, revitalizing their economy, and restoring Europe’s global relevance. Ukraine and Russia would have gained as well, with the war—already claiming over 250,000 lives—finally coming to an end.

The media has portrayed last week’s fiasco as an ambush orchestrated by Trump to humiliate Zelenskyy, but that’s far from the truth. Zelenskyy was only in Washington because he had already rejected the deal twice—first refusing Vice President Vance and then Secretary of State Marco Rubio. It was Zelenskyy who insisted on traveling to America to sign the deal at the White House. If anyone set an ambush, it was him.

The EU can't help Ukraine

JUSTIN TALLIS / Contributor | Getty Images

After clashing with Trump and Vance, Zelenskyy wasted no time leaving D.C. The Ukrainian president should have stayed, apologized to Trump, and signed the deal. Given Trump’s enthusiasm and a later comment on Truth Social—where he wrote, “Zelenskyy can come back when he is ready for peace”—the deal could likely have been revived.

Meanwhile, in London, over a dozen European leaders, joined by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, convened an emergency meeting dubbed the “coalition of the willing” to ensure peace in Ukraine. This coalition emerged as Europe’s response to Trump’s withdrawal from the deal. By the meeting’s end, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a four-point plan to secure Ukrainian independence.

Zelenskyy, however, appears less than confident in the coalition’s plan. Recently, he has shifted his stance toward the U.S., apologizing to Trump and Vance and expressing gratitude for the generous military support America has already provided. Zelenskyy now says he wants to sign Trump’s deal and work under his leadership.

This is shaping up to be another Trump victory.

Glenn: No more money for the war machine, Senator McConnell

Tom Williams / Contributor | Getty Images

Senator McConnell, your call for more Pentagon spending is as tone-deaf as it is reckless. The United States already spends more on its military than the next nine countries combined — over $877 billion in 2023 alone, dwarfing China ($292 billion), Russia ($86 billion), and the entire EU’s collective defense budgets. And yet here you are, clamoring for more, as if throwing cash at an outdated war machine will somehow secure our future.

The world is changing, Senator, and your priorities are stuck in a bygone era.

Aircraft carriers — those floating behemoths you and the Pentagon so dearly love — are relics of the past. In the next real conflict, they’ll be as useless as horses were in World War I. Speaking of which, Europe entered that war with roughly 25 million horses; by 1918, fewer than 10 million remained, slaughtered by machine guns and artillery they couldn’t outrun.

That’s the fate awaiting your precious carriers against modern threats — sunk by hypersonic missiles or swarms of AI-driven drones before they can even launch a jet. The 1950s called, Senator — they want their war plans back.

The future isn’t in steel and jet fuel; it’s in artificial intelligence and artificial superintelligence. Every dollar spent on yesterday’s hardware is a dollar wasted in three years when AI upends everything we know about warfare. Worse, with the Pentagon’s track record, every dollar spent today could balloon into two or three dollars of inflation tomorrow, thanks to the House and Senate’s obscene spending spree.

We’re drowning in $34 trillion of national debt — 128% of GDP, a level unseen since World War II. Annual deficits hit $1.7 trillion in 2023, and interest payments alone are projected to top $1 trillion by 2026.

This isn’t sustainable; it’s a fiscal time bomb.

And yet you want to shovel more taxpayer money into a Pentagon that hasn’t passed a single audit in its history? Six attempts since 2018, six failures — trillions unaccounted for, waste so rampant that it defies comprehension. It’s irresponsible — bordering on criminal — to suggest more spending when the DOD can’t even count the cash it’s got.

The real threat isn’t just from abroad, though those dangers are profound. It’s from within. The call is coming from inside the house, Senator — and not just the House, but the Senate too. Your refusal to adapt is jeopardizing our security more than any foreign adversary.

Look at China’s drone shows — thousands of synchronized lights painting the sky. Now imagine those aren’t fireworks but weaponized drones, each one cheap, precise, and networked by AI. A single swarm could cripple our planes, ships, tanks, and troops before we fire a shot. Ukraine’s drone wars have already shown this reality: $500 drones taking out $10 million tanks. That’s the future staring us down, and we’re still polishing Cold War relics.

Freeze every bloated project.

Redirect everything — every dime, every mind — toward winning the AI/ASI race. That’s the only battlefield that matters. We’ve got enough stockpiles to handle any foreseeable war in the next three years and a president fighting to end conflicts, not start them. Your plea for more spending isn’t just misguided — it’s a betrayal of the American people sinking under debt and inflation while you chase ghosts of wars past.

Or is it even that senator? Perhaps I have buried the lede, but I am not sure if the following stats will help people understand why this op-ed might have been written by someone in your office.

Your state, Kentucky is:

  • 45th in GDP Per Capita
  • 44th in Employment
  • 42nd in High School Diplomas

And 11th in Defense-related defense contract spending

Who are you actually concerned about, Senator? The safety of the American people or your war machine buddies?

Thanks, but no thanks.