"Citizenship should have a high standard": How Scott Walker plans to fight illegal immigration

Newly announced presidential candidate Gov. Scott Walker joined the radio show Wednesday morning to discuss his stance on many of 2016’s key issues, including fighting Common Core and illegal immigration. Walker also outlined his record as a governor of a state infected with progressivism and the conservative victories he had achieved. Has anyone else been able to fight off liberals and progressives in order to push an agenda that works?

PAT: Pat Gray and Stu Burguiere. Jeffy as well for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program. He's still resting his vocal cords. Should be back, target date, August 3rd. Things are looking so far. He's well on the way to a complete and total recovery. In the meantime, today, we're really excited because on Monday, the official announcement came out that Scott Walker is, in fact -- we've been waiting for this quite a while. He's officially running for president of the United States.

STU: I was stunned.

PAT: We've telegraphed this for a while.

STU: I thought he would come out and say, nope, not interested.

PAT: Is that what you expected? A lot of people announce that they'll announce and then say no. Yeah, I decided not to.

STU: Thank you for your time.

PAT: So joining us now is Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Governor Walker, welcome to the Glenn Beck Program with Pat and Stu.

SCOTT: Hey, great to be with you guys. Hey, Stu, what did you think I would just walk out on the stage and drop the mic and say I'm not running.

PAT: Now, that would have been funny.

JEFFY: Yes.

PAT: And then come back out and pick it back up and say just kidding.

SCOTT: Sorry. Just kidding.

STU: Well, you're a welcome addition to the race, Scott. We've talked about your record before as far as Wisconsin goes. Our audience really sees you as one of the top contenders as we go --

PAT: Definitely.

SCOTT: Well, thanks.

STU: Go ahead. Go ahead.

SCOTT: I was saying, one of the interesting things is that there's a lot of great people including a number of good friends out there. People ask, well, why would you run if there's other people you know and admire and like out there? And I said, well, there's really two groups. There's people who are good fighters that have largely not won those fights, and there are other people who are good winners who largely have not taken on those fights. I think what we bring that's unique to this race is we've done both. We have fought, and we've won. Not just elections. Although, we won three elections in four years in a blue state. But we've won good, common sense conservative battles over and over again. And I think that's what people are hungry for not just in our party and our movement, but I think Americans are hungry for that.

PAT: This is an amazing year. Because there's been a lot of years where we've looked at the field and we've thought, jeez, there's nobody. Okay, maybe I could hold my nose and vote for this guy. You know, if push comes to shove, maybe I can vote for that guy. This time, though, there's 17 people that will be in this race. Eighteen or 36. Or whatever it is. And like you said, there's some good people in this. Ted Cruz we really like a lot. We like Rand Paul. Bobby Jindal is a good guy. You probably know him well as a fellow governor.

SCOTT: Very well.

PAT: So you come into this race. So what differentiates yourself and your policies from the rest of the field?

SCOTT: Well, I really think there's a hunger out there. I talked to people all over the country. I was in South Carolina today. Was Nevada yesterday. Will be New Hampshire tomorrow. Over the weekend in Iowa. And no matter where I go, there are Republican and conservative activists who are frustrated because we have a Republican House, we just got a Republican Senate, and they want people to lead in Washington.

You know, it's one thing to fight. A lot of good people, some of the folks you mentioned, great with a lot of issues out there. But they have yet to win those fights. Then there are others that are good at winning elections. But they haven't taken on the kind of fight. If someone wants proof, not just talk, they want proof that if I elect this person president, they will follow through on the common sense conservative reforms they're talking about. I think there's no one in America who has been better tested over the last four years than we have. Think about it. We not only took on the unions in one. We have right to work. We did prevail with wage reform. We cut taxes by $2 billion. We defunded Planned Parenthood and passed pro-life legislation. We passed conceal carry. My state now has a requirement now of photo ID to vote. Who would have thought that in a blue state like Wisconsin? But yet we should -- excuse me -- we showed that common sense conservative reforms can win. And if they can win in a blue state like Wisconsin, I believe we can make them work in America.

STU: You brought up having a majority in the House and the Senate for Republicans. What is the point of that? If you can't do something about this Planned Parenthood video that just came out just yesterday, where you have them on tape allegedly saying that they were essentially selling these baby parts, they're denying part of that. They're not seemingly denying the fact that they're skirting federal partial birth abortion law. I mean, they pretty much straight-out admit that that's going on in the video. What can be done about Planned Parenthood?

SCOTT: You look in the states. Others have done it as well. In the states, we've been aggressive in defunding them, which they've screamed about. Ran millions of dollars -- their supporters ran millions of dollars in attack ads. At the federal level, not only is this the right thing, but just fundamentally the right thing to do to crack down on this. So it's the right policy.

But also politically, strategically, I think it makes a lot of sense. Put that legislation on the president's desk. Make him veto it. And then make some of these -- particularly some of these Democrats who live in and represent somewhat vulnerable areas, for them politically, make them explain -- not just people like me who are pro-life. But I think most Americans look at that and say, that's just wrong. This is one of those where we have to get on offensive, instead of being defensive.

Same way we need to put a bill on the president's desk that gets rid of Obamacare, once and for all. That takes on one issue after another, to show Americans, this is what you get if you have a Republican House, Republican Senate, and you have a Republican as president, these are the kind of positive things from tax reform to -- to education reform to legal reform. You name it, we can do it in America. But the sooner we can show it, the more people have confidence.

Because most independents, I believe, aren't independents because they're moderates. They're independents because they're tired of being burned by candidates who promise one thing and then fail to deliver it after the election. This is why we carried our faith more than just about any government in America, and yet won independents in my state by 11, almost 12 points because they want someone to lead.

PAT: Governor, you -- if you were to win the presidency, you inherit, I mean, this guy talks about what a mess he inherited from the last guy. I mean, you look at the things that have to be unraveled that have gotten America enmeshed in such socialism and such wrongheaded policies. First of all, I mean, you have Obamacare, which you have to deal with. Is your policy to repeal Obamacare? Is it repeal and replace?

SCOTT: Repeal it entirely you have to put patients and families back in charge. I believe -- I was asked out at the Western Conservative Summit would I support going into a so-called nuclear option in the Senate? I said absolutely. We can't let rules that aren't in the Constitution, let the minority on an issue, particularly as important as this, when you have checks and balances in the House and the Senate as far as branches. We need to have an all-out attack to repeal Obamacare and put patients and families back in charge.

We need to day one, pull back on this outrageous -- we need to terminate this outrageous deal with Iran and put in place crippling economic sanctions against that country, which is the leading state sponsor of terrorism, and convince our allies to do the same. We need to get rid of this action the president has taken on illegal immigration, which is completely wrong and why I joined the federal lawsuit. But we shouldn't need a federal lawsuit to do that. We need to get rid of things like Dodd-Frank and other regulations out there. We need to do that right away, just like we did four years ago, where we took on the big reforms right away.

STU: Talking to Governor Scott Walker. Governor, obviously as a governor, you have executive-level experience, which is something obviously beneficial when you'll run a country. But the other side of that is you have not necessarily dabbled in or at least are heavily involved in foreign policy, and that's something you'll get hit on at least. You have this Iran thing that comes down yesterday. The sanctions were working against Iran which is why they're on the table, I suppose. Now that this deal is supposedly in place, what can you do to unwind it? And is there any teeth in that sort of movement?

SCOTT: Sure. Well, two parts.

First, I should point out for anyone who doubts -- in my lifetime, at least I would argue, the best president on foreign policy and national security was a governor from California. So I think it's important to remember it's all about leadership. Here's a guy who helped us rebuild the military. He stood up for our allies. He stood up to our enemies. He stood for American values without apology. That led to one of the most peaceful times in modern American history.

The bottom line is, it's not so much about the position as it is about the ability and the capacity to lead. And I think we've shown in the most difficult of circumstances, at the state level, we can lead. And we've applied that to the federal level as well. Surrounding us with a great cabinet, listening to our military leaders.

But when it comes to Iran, I really do believe that we can terminate that deal. The only good part about this is because the president doesn't have the courage to take it to Congress, particularly ratified by the Senate. The next president is not bound by it.

So as president, literally on my first day, I would terminate this deal, and I would put back in place the sanctions, even greater I would argue, crippling sanctions, economic sanctions against Iran. And I believe, unlike the Obama and Clinton doctrine of leading from behind, if we lead again, I believe major numbers of our allies would follow suit.

PAT: How do you get the allies back on -- how do you get everybody involved in these sanctions back on board?

STU: Because Russia is getting billions and billions of dollars in arms sales.

PAT: So you just do it unilaterally at that point, Governor?

SCOTT: I would acknowledge it's not easy. I've looked at this for some time, and it's not easy. In many ways, it's kind of like putting a genie back into a bottle. It would be tough with places like Russia and China, although I don't consider either of them allies. But the United Kingdom. For certainly -- think about it. Who would have thought that France would be to the right of us on this issue? But that's what happened, you know, earlier this last year and how that shook their way of life there. They saw firsthand what happens when you don't deal with elements of radical terrorism.

Which, by the way, the president earlier this year proclaimed that the greatest challenge to future generations is climate change. And I would say, respectfully, Mr. President, I disagree. The greatest challenge to future generations is radical Islamic terrorism. That's not just ISIS. Iran is part of that problem. They're the chief state sponsor of terrorism in the world, particularly in that region, whether it's with Hezbollah or Hamas, certainly what they're doing with Syria and connected to Assad there. What they're doing with the Houthis in Yemen. What they're doing with the Shiite-based militias in parts of Iraq. These are bad actors that have not changed back from the days when they held 52 Americans for 444 days. We should not be doing business with them.

STU: The foundational issue with all this stuff is that we put a lot of the wrong people in control for a long period of time. Part of that goes back to our education system. Our audience is very passionate about Common Core. They do not like it at all. Can you tell us what the status is in Wisconsin about Common Core and what -- how do you see this developing going forward?

SCOTT: You know, we passed the budget. I included language that removes any requirement for the state -- or, excuse me -- that the state has on local school districts. So they're no longer bound by Common Core. That's completely out. It was put in place before I was governor. We finally got the legislature to approve that as part of the budget I proposed. We got rid of the funding for the so-called Smarter Balanced Tests.

But I think even more importantly, not just what I'm doing in the state and others are trying to do in Washington, even though it clearly is not a federal law, that's what proponents -- it's not a federal law, but it has become a federal policy in part because of the Department of Education interweaving that into their funding issues for state and for schools across the country. It's yet one more reason why I believe the country would be better off if we took money and power out of Washington, particularly when it comes to education, and send it back not to just our states, but our schools, where local decisions are better made by local parents, tax payers, teachers, families, instead of the bureaucracies in our nation's capitol. It's much more effective. Much more efficient. And definitely more accountable. No Common Core. No nationwide school bar.

PAT: Okay. And finally, probably the hottest topic going right now especially with the sanctuary city situation and the tragic death of that young woman in San Francisco, and I imagine in Wisconsin I'll bet Madison and Milwaukee are probably both sanctuary cities which you don't have control over, obviously. But what -- what do you do about the out-of-control illegal immigration situation? I mean, I would suspect the first thing is we secure the border. But then what do you do with the sanctuary city policies that are nationwide, with the illegal aliens that are estimated anywhere from 11 to 30 million here, what do you do about that?

SCOTT: Yeah, well, in specific, sanctuary cities, you have to enforce the law. I've said that about all our immigration, particularly when it comes to these sanctuary cities. And if they're dealing with someone, particularly violent criminals -- I mean, these cases where we've had these tragic occurrences, that typically involve situations where someone has been in and out of the criminal justice system.

They're not assisting -- I think there's huge problems with that. But even before you get to those specific examples, I believe you secure the border. I took Governor Abbott on his request earlier this year, and I went to the border, not only up in the air and on the ground, but saw the videos, spoke to not only federal officials, but state and local officials. And it is -- I knew there was a problem, but it was so eye-opening.

I talked to others in Arizona and other states as well about this. It is so eye-opening. Because what you have are -- you have international criminal organizations penetrating our land-based borders in a way that if it was happening on our coast, on the east or west coast, we would be sending in the Coast Guard, if not the Navy out here.

So it's people trying to bring over drugs, they're bringing over firearms. They're bringing over people, not just people that work, they're bringing over people to (inaudible). So we have to deal with that issue. People say, oh, you can't secure the border. That's nonsense. We can do it both through infrastructure, but also through technology and personnel.

I was -- earlier this year, I looked at the fence that they built and staffed and monitor in Israel, and after they were effective, it's about 500 miles. For a small country, that's a lot of fencing. They saw something like a more than 90 percent reduction in terrorist-related activities by having a secure fence there.

We have a border four times that, but we're a lot bigger country. We have plenty more assets. We should be able to secure the border. Along with that, enforce the law. No amnesty. Citizenship should have a high standard. And then when people want to talk about legal immigration, my priority is this, we should be looking out for Americans, working families and their wages in a way that will continue to improve the American economy.

STU: Governor Scott Walker.

PAT: Too bad there's not a place people could go and help your campaign.

SCOTT: ScottWalker.com.

PAT: That's an amazing coincidence. There is a place.

STU: Governor, we only have time for a one-word answer. Are you going to go see Brett Farv (phonetic) retire?

SCOTT: Absolutely. I'm looking forward to the big event on Thanksgiving. It will be a lot of fun.

STU: Thanks, Governor Scott Walker. ScottWalker.com.

PAT: ScottWalker.com.

Featured Image: LAS VEGAS, NV - JULY 14: Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker speaks at Red Rock Harley-Davidson on July 14, 2015 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Walker launched his campaign on Monday, joining 14 other Republican candidates for the 2016 presidential race. (Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

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.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.