Who is the leader of the free world?

Buck Sexton filled in for Glenn on TV Monday night, and in the opening monologue he took a hard look at Obama's poor foreign policy performance. Who is leading the free world if America's President is more interested in the job?

The below is an edited transcript of Buck Sexton's monologue:

As we hunker down across the country trying to escape freakishly inclement weather in many places, there is also a very disturbing trend playing out abroad around the globe day after day, the signs of something of a new world order, a post-American century emerging on the international scene. 

Yes, of course, there are vicious civil wars raging on – Syria, Afghanistan, now the Central African Republic, Somalia, continuously, and there are others as well.  But it’s not merely that there is conflict going on.  There will always be fighting somewhere over something.  It’s that something is missing in the background, on the sidelines.  It just feels different right now around the world.

The good guys, the cavalry, they’re nowhere to be found, and I don’t necessarily mean charging into every situation with actual cavalry tanks and planes but in words and deeds on the world stage.  In policies, pronouncements, and principles, America under this administration has gone MIA.  Our allies feel as though they must fend for themselves.  Our enemies know that they can move with impunity up to a point, and they keep pushing that line with more cunning and brashness.

Sure, look, things at home are a mess, no doubt about it.  ObamaCare is an unmitigated disaster that will only rot and fester with time, but despite all that, whether the Obama administration cares to admit it or not, the struggle for human freedom rages on, and America will either play a role or cede into the background.  Even the casual observer of events right now in Eurasia, China, and the Middle East has to wonder where the clarion call to liberty from the White House is.  It’s not there.

When will we hear the stirring words of support for those who have answered the call and in their own countries risked their lives and fortunes for a better future?  It’s not there.  And it’s not from this president, not from his cabinet.  There’s a deafening silence right now, apart from perhaps some quisling, whiny Carney remarks and some other stuff from the president that we don’t really need to hear.

Rule of thumb, whenever smarmy Jay Carney or Obama or anyone else in this administration says “let me be clear,” you know they’re about to make something up, lead you astray, obfuscate, change the subject, tell you something that you know is untrue.  The only thing clear about this administration’s foreign policy is that it’s been a total disaster and has reduced the United States into a prompter-reading paper tiger.

Now this begs the inevitable question, if no one is listening to the U.S. anymore, who is the leader of the free world?  Now, of course it should be our president, and yet Obama’s words and actions seem to indicate that he scoffs at that title.  He scorns the responsibilities it bears.  It’s as if he’s almost ashamed at the idea that America should lead the way.  Oh, too harsh?  Unfair?  People would say that, of course.  His cronies in the media will say that.  Not at all, this is a mere recognition of reality.

There were plenty of reasons to believe this before the last few months, but the debacle of the Syrian so small they can’t even feel it punitive strike, that’s just completely tipped the balance.  After a brief romance with the idea of Obama, nobody on the world stage even takes him seriously anymore.  Nobody who matters is listening to his droning, platitudinous prompter reading sessions.

His lack of clarity, character, and principle in foreign policy is blindingly obvious.  You don’t have to take my word for it.  Let’s go to the data.  A new Pew Research poll shows that America is now less powerful, less important, and less respected than when Obama took office.  Now that’s quite a feat, of course, considering that there wasn’t a whole lot of place to go except for up after George W. Bush’s low rating in the very same poll with the same question – some tough years for Bush at the end there.

But Obama has still managed to lower the bar, and once again, this week, right now, we’re seeing how that translates onto the world stage.  Let me focus on just for the time being one clash of liberty versus tyranny, one clash that is playing out as we speak.  Ukraine is on the verge of revolution.  What started out as just massive street protests against this government looks more and more like an all-out uprising. 

Now, here you see protesters, and they’re pulling down a statue of Lenin –

Yes!  That’s kind of ironic, isn’t it?  Ukrainians are pulling down statues of Lenin, but if you listen to President Obama lately, it sounds like he might want to erect a few Lenin statues here, but I digress.

In Kiev, the capital of the Ukraine, protesters have set up an encampment in the middle of Independence Square.  They’re building barricades throughout downtown.  They are hoarding brick, wood, and other debris in order to throw them at the police in a violent confrontation that could happen at any moment.  Riot police are gathering around them.  This could get very ugly, and it has implications far beyond the streets of Kiev.  That’s what we have to also focus on.

Ukraine is a country of 50 million people.  It’s a battlefield for much more than just a trade agreement.  I want to show you what I’m talking about over here on a map.  Sure, Putin bribed and pleaded and strong-armed to have Ukraine’s President Yanukovych side with Russia, a kleptocratic mafia state, mind you, over the EU.  That’s the short version of the facts, the basic facts of this case that you should know as you read the headlines, but under that surface there’s a much deeper conflict.  It’s really a continuation of the old Cold War battle lines.

Ukraine or the Ukraine, if you prefer, although most Ukrainians prefer Ukraine, means borderland.  You can see right here, it is literally and figuratively a borderland between East and West.  It sort of separates East from West, autocracy from liberty.  The Iron Curtain used to come right down here.  So it’s a battleground with two clear sides, those who want free markets and increased liberty and those who feel they would benefit from being a Russian cline state like Belarus right up here, basically a part of Russia.

The Iron Curtain may be gone, but the iron fist of Putin and his corrupt cronies, they can oppress and coerce and do whatever they want around here in Russia’s backyard, around these borders.  Now, boiled down to its essential parts, this fight in Ukraine is about freedom versus statism.  It’s really about Western democratic models versus the old authoritarian autocratic models.

Once you put it in those terms, it becomes very clear what needs to be done here.  This is a chance, a chance, for America to stand with liberty, with Western European rule of law, and for once teach that punk Putin yeah, a lesson in the bargain.  It’s about time.  He’s been smacking us around for months.  This is also a moment though for real statesmanship, for resolve, for leadership.

Even the imagery that we saw in Kiev, even the imagery that we’re seeing in Ukraine, that suggests something, doesn’t it?  It suggests the time is now.  This statue, by the way, this one here, this is a statue of Stalin that came down during the 1956 Hungarian uprising.  At first, the communist government fell, but the West did nothing, and then the Soviets at first were willing to negotiate, but then they decided to come in with tanks and crush the rebellion.  Thousands of people died, and the Hungarian people suffered under communism for decades after that.

The statue came down, but then what?  The stature in Ukraine has come down.  Now what?  For the Hungarians, by the way, who rose up in 1956, we know the West was nowhere to be seen despite their bravery on the streets.  And to nobody’s surprise today, the Obama administration is nowhere to be found.

I think the best we’ve done so far is a phone call from Vice President Joe Biden.  Ooh, I’m sure Putin and the rest are quaking in their boots.  Even when Putin makes audacious, freedom-crushing moves like he did today, he abolished the state news agency, RIA Novosti, and replaced it with a new agency designed to promote Moscow’s image abroad – he’s going global with that propaganda, baby, yeah – the president, our president, MIA on this, nothing to say while Putin is deciding to shut down media and propagate Russia’s worldview around the world.

But it’s not fair to say that President Obama hasn’t said anything about this.  I should take that back.  Scratch that one for the record, because we know that President Obama loves to give speeches, and we can find him at one of his propaganda rallies here at home peddling the same warmed-over Marxist class warfare rhetoric to the American people, anything to get them to think about something other than ObamaCare, which is canceling their health care plans and ripping their doctors away from them.

So yeah, Obama has plenty of things to say, things that you don’t want to hear but things like this:

VIDEO

President Obama:  They experience in a very personal way the relentless decades-long trend that I want to spend some time talking about today, and that is a dangerous and growing inequality and lack of upward mobility that has jeopardized middle-class America’s basic bargain, that if you work hard you have a chance to get ahead.  I believe this is the defining challenge of our time, making sure our economy works for every working American.  That’s why I ran for president.  It was the center of last year’s campaign.  It drives everything I do in this office.

Battling the evil inequality monster, what a noble and righteous goal.  Listening to these speeches should be considered a form of torture, I think, at this point.  But don’t you just hate it when someone is rewarded for working hard and being successful?  That creates or it can create a gap, something that’s bad.  We don’t like that because everyone should be the same, homogenized, generic, uniform, equal, communal.  Merit is a foreign concept to this president in many ways.  Look at how he explains American exceptionalism on the world stage.

VIDEO

President Obama:  I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.

I’m not sure about Greek exceptionalism these days.  They’re kind of bankrupt and in a whole lot of trouble, but you get the sense there President Obama really doesn’t think that America has any reason to think that it’s got anything to teach or share with the rest of the world because we’re all just equal partners in this whole crazy planet.  No wonder Americans feel America is less important and respected in the world.  Their own president is teaching them that.  He’s literally coming out and saying it.  We’re not putting words into his mouth, everybody is exceptional.

And when he isn’t downplaying America’s role in the world or apologizing for our past, he’s just outright debasing his position as commander-in-chief in some show of pseudo-intellectual cultural sensitivity.  What is that?  What is that?

You see, the free world is no longer cool to say.  We don’t want to make the not-free world feel bad, I guess, so you can hold your tears, Kim Jong-un.  No worries, bro.  It’s all good, ayatollahs.  We got your back.  It’s fine.  Everything’s going to be cool.  We’re all going to be friends.  Everybody gets a trophy.  Every country gets a trophy, and after all, no one is exceptional.  We’re all the same, so we should get the same trophy, the same size trophy.  Sounds good to me.

See, now we’ve actually switched a huge paradigm shift in our view of America versus the rest of the world, where we stand on the planet.  We’ve switched to a concept of the world community, commune, of course, tucked into that word.  Obama likes this term much better.  He doesn’t want to be all imperialistic and whatnot, but ironically the community organizer in chief doesn’t want to organize the world community.  He just wants to be yet another member of it.

In Obama’s ideal world, America and Argentina have the same things to say because well, why not?  I mean, we just have sort of the same power and authority and gravitas and heck, what do I know?  Now, it doesn’t have to be this way.  Maybe a better question is was it always this way?  You know the answer, of course it wasn’t always this way, but as a reminder of how a real leader of the free world, how a great leader used the moment, seized it, and tried to turn the tide of history in favor of freedom, let’s take a trip back in time, shall we?

VIDEO

President Reagan:  There is one sign that the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.  General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate.  Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate.  Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

You see, Reagan got it.  He stared down the Soviets, and tens of millions of people had a chance at freedom, because when all was said and done, Reagan actually believed America was special, and that meant standing for others.  America was different.  It set an example, and it shone the light down the path to liberty for others to follow.

This core principle often referred to as exceptionalisn, that’s really just a dainty way though of saying what we really are, so let’s just get down to it.  We are the biggest, strongest, best force for freedom the world has ever known, America, us.  This is a truth that existed at the founding of our republic.  It’s a gift bequeathed to us by the Constitution, a country founded on the premise of liberty, if we could keep it of course. 

Now, this is all true irrespective of foreign policy.  It is a simple truth of what makes this America.  Now, Abraham Lincoln didn’t live in a globalized world.  He couldn’t call foreign leaders on cell phones.  He didn’t have an Air Force and a Navy that could respond to any crisis in hours if not minutes, but he understood something that this president does not.  He said it himself, “America is the last best hope of earth.”  

And it wasn’t about our place at the United Nations, which obviously didn’t exist at the time, and it wasn’t about our economic power.  It was about what America was meant to stand for from the beginning, liberty.  Now, we didn’t always live up to it.  We be honest about that always.  We fought bloody battles to achieve that ideal, and at different times it seemed we may have been lost, but we stood firm.  We pushed on, and there it remained rooted in the soul of this country.

But now it is not merely our liberty that is at stake.  Today, we drift slowly and surely into a post-American world.  It’s a digital dark ages, one in which aggressive authoritarian regimes harness 21st century technology to oppress their own people and intimidate their more liberal neighbors.  Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, those are really the most obvious offenders.  There are going to be others.  More will join along.

To borrow from this administration’s favorite phrase, let me be clear, Mr. President, if you don’t pick up the torch of liberty and sound the clarion call, tyranny will triumph.  If you continue in your apathy with the decline of freedom, you’ll have the distinct dishonor of being the first president in American history, even among the most progressive presidents like FDR, who didn’t have the backbone to call evil by its name.

As other nations cry for our help, for our friendship, or merely encouragement, those calls increasingly are unanswered because well, we wouldn’t want that darn inequality monster to rear its ugly head, would we?  We wouldn’t want another nation to feel bad about how it approaches the world.  That, Mr. President, is cowardice.  Is that clear enough for you? 

Perhaps the president will miraculously wake from his somnambulant state and realize we need to be as a country once again the leader of the free world.  For if not us, then who?  We are indeed the last hope, and we are running out of time.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.

The tides have turned — and now the very same banks that were pushing heavy-handed environmental, social, governance rules are running away from them.

In a significant victory, a federal judge in Texas has ruled that employers and asset managers cannot use environmental, social, and governance factors in employee retirement accounts. If this ruling holds up — which is likely, given the conservative composition of the appellate court — it will dramatically shift the balance of power between corporations and their employees.

This decision represents one of the most substantial blows to the ESG agenda to date. Companies that have been steering employees into ESG-focused investments, which prioritize progressive values over financial returns, now face legal repercussions. Continuing such practices would directly violate federal law. The ruling forces companies to re-evaluate their commitment to ESG initiatives, and many may withdraw from these funds before the case even reaches the appellate court.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying.

The impact of this ruling could very well be the beginning of the end for the ESG movement as it’s been pushed by elites.

In even better news, BlackRock, a major player in the ESG movement, has officially left the United Nations’ International Association of Asset Managers. This is a direct rebuke of the global push for ESG initiatives and a major sign that the tide is turning. In contrast to the Glasgow Net Zero Conference in which the Global Financial Alliance for Net Zero — an organization championed by global elites — was pushing for ESG to be a central focus, BlackRock’s departure from the group signals that even those who were at the forefront of this movement are starting to distance themselves.

But it doesn't stop there. Every major U.S. bank has now announced that they too are leaving the U.N.’s Association of Net Zero ESG Bankers, another key part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance. For years, we’ve been warning that ESG in banking was one of the primary ways elites like Biden, the Davos crowd, and others were planning to reset the world’s economy.

The tides have turned — and now those very same banks are running away from ESG, a powerful signal of things to come. They know they’re on the losing side, and they’re scared that a new administration will come down hard on them for their involvement in these globalist initiatives.

In another win, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unveiled a shocking new rule that, if it survives, would prohibit many financial institutions from de-banking customers based on their political or religious views, or even certain types of speech. While the rule is not as comprehensive as we need it to be, it’s a step in the right direction — and it includes concerns raised by our allies about the dangers of ESG. The Trump administration has promised to come down even harder on the banks with tougher rules, and this is a very good start.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying. Some are running for cover while others are desperately trying to ingratiate themselves with the powers that be. It’s clear that the backbone of these companies is made of rubber, not steel. They don’t really believe in the ESG values they preach — they’re just playing the game to get in bed with the political elites.

Now that Trump is back in town, these corporations are showing their true colors. They never cared about their customers or the values they forced upon them. It was always about the power they could acquire through catering to those in power at the time.

No company should be afraid of the president of the United States. But they’re not afraid of Donald Trump. They’re afraid of the return of the rule of law. They know that fascistic public-private partnerships between the government and corporations are on the way out. That’s a victory for freedom and a victory for the American people.

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