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

Former agent weighs in on Secret Service sex scandal

April 17, 2012
Wilson

Writer

The Secret Service sex scandal just keeps getting worse and worse. The latest says that some of the prostitues involved were even under age and they may have even compromised the President's schedule! Dan Bongino is a former Secret Service agent who served under both the Bush and Obama administrations. What does he think about the allegations being levied at the world’s premiere protective force? Any chance this actually happened or is a set up more likely? Bongino offered his unique perspective on the scandal to Glenn on radio this morning.

Rush Transcript of Interview:

GLENN:  Investigators probing the secret service process substitute scandal are looking into whether the girls involved now were underage.  This story gets worse and worse and worse and one of the guys who I have great faith in is a -- is a decent, honorable man.  Of course, I've never asked him if he's ever been with hookers -- is Dan Bongino.  He is running for Congress in Maryland.  He is a guy who -- what?

 

STU:  Senate.

 

PAT:  Senate.

 

GLENN:  And he's -- he's -- was with the secret service, did advance work for the secret service under Bush and Obama.  Right, Dan?

 

BONGINO:  That's right, Glenn.

 

GLENN:  Okay.

 

BONGINO:  Thanks for having me.

 

GLENN:  And I'm reading this story, Dan, and I've wanted to talk to you for the last few days.  What is going on here?

 

BONGINO:  What a mess, Glenn.  I mean, personally for me, professionally, we have been out on this story from the start.  You know, we don't only do the good stories, unlike most politicians who go and hide under a rock.  We are -- this is a disgrace.  I have a brother who was on the trip who has been providing information.  Thank God he's not involved in any prostitution component of it, but has been actively involved in it and it is -- it's an embarrassment.  It's a disgrace to the secret service and I really hope and, Glenn, you know a lot of secret service agents.  We've known each other for awhile, that this does not forever tarnish --

 

GLENN:  So you're saying that all of this stuff is true, that this is --

 

BONGINO:  I don't know about all of it because I don't even know at this point who knows when something else if going to leak out or come out at this point, but, yeah, unfortunately a lot of what's come out is true and --

 

GLENN:  Do you believe that there is any kind of foreign influence that these guys were set up at all?

 

BONGINO:  I can't say.  I don't know, but I really can't say for sure, but, you know, certainly, you know, there's always potential for things like that when you get involved of situations of tremendously poor judgment.  That may be the understatement of the year.

 

GLENN:  Tremendously poor judgment.  Hang on just a second.  11 secret service agents?  Is this the kind of behavior that you saw with your comrades?

 

BONGINO:  You know, Glenn, I've always been straight with you and absolutely not.  This is a -- on the presidential protection division where I was, I gave a quote to the New York Times that these guys lived like monks and I meant it.  I meant every word it.  I mean, these guys -- all they -- they used to go to the hotel and they would be (inaudible) to work out.

 

PAT:  Did you ever -- did you ever go on a secret service trip to Columbia, Dan?

 

BONGINO:  Couple of times.  I've been to Bogota.  I've been to Cartagena, yeah.

 

GLENN:  Have you stayed at that hotel?

 

BONGINO:  No, no.  I stayed in the old city, there's a city in the new city and they were in the new city.

 

PAT:  How many hookers were you involved with?

 

BONGINO:  Oh, Glenn.

 

PAT:  Could you even count?

 

GLENN:  That's Pat.  I'm not asking that.  I want to know how many were underage, but that's a different -- that's a different story.  So, hang on just a second.  So, I you've never seen this behavior?

 

BONGINO:  No.

 

GLENN:  So, this is a wild aberration?

 

BONGINO:  Yeah, it is.

 

GLENN:  And did you -- did or did you not receive training and instructions that -- that you have to be on the straight and narrow when you're in a foreign country or even in our country because that puts you in a compromised position?

 

BONGINO:  Sure.  It's almost to the point -- with the training they give you, you've got to take a lot of the online courses and go to -- you know those courses, just click next, next, you have to read them and take tests with them, that I remember people saying, I can't remember we have to take this course again on expected behavior.  The secret service stakes its reputation, I mean, obviously --

 

GLENN:  The reputation --

 

BONGINO:  -- the President of the United States.

 

GLENN:  The reputation of the secret service under this President I contend is being so tarnished.  The limo was stuck and bottomed out.  I mean, I -- who didn't -- who didn't drive that route in advance?  Do you remember that?

 

BONGINO:  Yeah.  Actually --

 

PAT:  It was high centered?  Yeah.

 

GLENN:  It was high centered.  Ridiculous.  They're questioning a little kid up in Oregon in the Seattle area.  All kinds of stuff that have happened with the --

 

PAT:  With the unwanted guests at the parties.

 

GLENN:  Yeah.

 

PAT:  That got through security around the President.

 

GLENN:  Dan, how did that happen?  How did two guests get into the White House?

 

PAT:  Is this a whole new secret service under Obama or what is going on?  How could it have gone so far afield in just the last few years since you've been there, Dan?

 

BONGINO:  As a matter of fact, with the change in administration, some of these agents are the same ones that were with President Bush.  I was there for the transition.  I didn't (inaudible) Bush administration in two years with President Obama.  So, those are problems -- I don't work for the secret service anymore.  I haven't been there for a year, but I have (inaudible) campaign to the former secret service agent and it was my responsibility to get out here and say, Yeah, what you're saying is true.  They've had some real black eyes and it's unfortunate this black eye cements to be the blackest eye of all and at some point they're going to have to move forward.

 

GLENN:  Is our President in danger, Dan?

 

BONGINO:  No, no, not -- although --

 

GLENN:  Well, if you have 11 -- if you have 11 secret service agents with such bad judgment that while he's in one of the most dangerous countries in the world, that they are -- they're having underage -- possible underage sex with hookers, how can we be -- how can we be assured at all?

 

BONGINO:  I know.  This is not a moment where America's proud of our secret service, but I want you to assure you that the guys, a lot of -- I mean, I missed countless birthdays.  I mean, my daughter once told me when I came home -- I was on the road 300 days one year -- you know, dad, I hope you sleep good tonight (inaudible) because I was gone so often.  I mean, these are guys that have really sacrificed, Glenn.  They've sacrificed a lot and they would (inaudible.)  And I really hope this doesn't permanently tarnish those guys.  These guys fools.  They made foolish decisions.  Again, one of them (inaudible.)  Terrible decisions, Glenn, and no one is apologizing for it, but I really hope that those guys who put in blood, sweat, and tears to keep our President alive and have been successful for decades, since the Reagan incident, I really hope this doesn't tarnish for them.  It's embarrassing for them.  It really embarrasses me.  I don't even work for them anymore.  It really stinks having to do these kind of interviews.

 

STU:  It's certainly not something to beat up the secret service and just by the evidence that we've had over the years of talking to so many people from the secret service, this is hard to believe this is anything but an exception.

 

GLENN:  A total aberration.  To me it doesn't make any sense, but then I hear this report.  This is out today and I'd love to get your comment on this.  Your phone is breaking up a little bit.  I don't know if you're moving into a bad section, but listen to this audio.

 

(Audio played.)

 

VOICE:  They don't even insist on regular physical fitness testing or regular firearms requalification testing.  Sometimes they will ask agents to fill out their own test scores on these things which is just dishonest.  All this culture filters down and I think led to this really scandalous situation.

 

GLENN:  Is that true?  Is any of that stuff true?

 

BONGINO:  No.  I think he's talking about moments where, you know, if you were at a UN, during a really busy time, United Nations where no one's in their field office, where you go to a gym at the hotel and do a fitness test because there was just nowhere around.  I mean, that's how you may have filled it out, but there's nothing unusual about it.  That wasn't a big conspiracy.  As for the firearms, if you don't -- you have to shoot every month on the presidential detail.  If you miss a month, that was it.  You were done.  (Inaudible.)  So, I never saw that.

 

GLENN:  Okay.  All right.

 

BONGINO:  But, yeah (inaudible.)

 

GLENN:  All right.  That's good news.  Help me out on one more thing and, that is, according to NBC news, the incident raised a possibility of potential security breach, telling NBC news that all secret service personnel had been given copies of the President's schedule which they were told to lock up safe in their hotel rooms.  If they had hookers in their hotel rooms, didn't that pose a danger to the President of the United States?

 

BONGINO:  You can lock up your paperwork on a secure floor (Inaudible.)  The entire floor, every room.  That's the code.  That's what you do.  If you didn't do that, of course -- and I can't say that happened on this trip.  From my source, it did not.  There was no paperwork.  I can't attest to that personally, Glenn, me not being there, but, yeah, that's wrong if that was the case and forget about a hooker.  Anyone who is a foreign national who is in your room with the President's itenary, that would be disastrous.  I'm hearing that is not the case here, that all the paperwork was properly secured.  You know, I hope, but, again, I wasn't there and I'm not privy to the investigation, but I'm speculating on that.

 

GLENN:  Dan, I appreciate your honesty and, I mean, that's why I called you, because you are a -- you are a guy that I trust.  I have seen you in action.  I've seen your honor and integrity over the years and I respect you and I respect the guys -- you know how I feel about the secret service.

 

BONGINO:  Yeah.  We've had this conversation many times.  He's not lying to you.  On the air, off the air, he's telling the exact same thing.

 

GLENN:  All right.  Thanks a lot, Dan.  God bless you.

 

STU:  He's running for U.S. Senate in Maryland.  Bongino.com is his website.

 

GLENN:  And if I were living in Maryland and had a guy to vote for, Dan Bongino would be the guy.  Did we put the thing up there about all the different people that we're -- that like Dan that I've met with personally?  Is that up at glennbeck.com?

 

STU:  I think it is, yeah.

 

GLENN:  People that I've met with -- if you're looking -- and there's only about 10 of them up there.  If you're looking for, you know, is this guy good, bad guy, I can just tell you I've met with -- I don't know -- 6 or 10 of these guys around the country and this is a list of people that I say I would feel comfortable with these guys.  I think more than comfortable with these guys.  And you can find that list at glennbeck.com and Dan is clearly one of them.

 

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?

How America’s elites fell for the same lie that fueled Auschwitz

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.

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.