Trump's Achilles Heel Revealed in New Podcast Series

Want to take a deep dive into the psyche of Donald Trump? Look no further than The Run-up, a podcast "that makes sense of the most delirious stretch of the 2016 campaign." Taped before Trump's run for the presidency, the five-hour recording reveals much about the larger-than-life businessman, including his greatest fear:

The intense ambitions and undisciplined behaviors of Mr. Trump have confounded even those close to him, especially as his presidential campaign comes to a tumultuous end, and he confronts the possibility of the most stinging defeat of his life. But in the more than five hours of conversations — the last extensive biographical interviews Mr. Trump granted before running for president — a powerful driving force emerges: his deep-seated fear of public embarrassment.

In the tapes, Trump goes on record as saying he doesn't look back, focusing only on the present and the future.

"What he's saying is, I don't ask for forgiveness because I don't look back. I don't want to look back. I may not like what I find. But that is a denial of the power of forgiveness, the power of atonement, the power of sacrifice," Glenn said.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these questions:

• What does it mean if a man can't reflect on his life?

• Did something damaging happen in Trump's childhood?

• How did Trump respond to his wife publicly skiing better than him?

• What does Trump love about physical fighting?

• Will Trump ever have a day of reckoning with himself?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: There's an election podcast called the Run-up that is out right now. And Donald Trump said, "You know, this is pretty old and boring stuff, but I hope people enjoy it." That was his statement on Monday night. It's not old stuff. It's two years old. It's an interview, five hours of an interview with him right before he announced. When he was -- when he was asked, you know -- you know, look back on your life and analyze yourself. What's the meaning of life that you have found?

He said, "I don't want to think about it. I don't analyze myself because I might not like what I see."

Who do you -- do you have any heroes? Who do you look up to?

"I don't have any heroes."

Do you --

PAT: I think he's his own hero.

GLENN: Do you look at history? How do you use history to understand what's happening now?

Quote, I don't like to talk about the past. It's all about the present and the future. And for the most part, you can't respect people because most people aren't worthy of respect.

Then he talked about how he doesn't need -- he said, "I would be very happy in a one-bedroom. I don't need these three floors in the Trump building."

(laughter)

GLENN: He said, "It's very hard for someone to be married to me." He always seems to return in one form or another to the theme of humiliation. He reserves special scorn for people who embarrass themselves in front of their peers. He tells a story of an unnamed bank president who became inebriated during an award dinner at the Waldorf Astoria, a ritual of New York society.

By the end of the night, he recalls, the man was incapable of walking. He had to be carried out.

Donald Trump, "We all had an arm, a leg, a back, and we carried him out of the room that night, right after he made the worst speech you've ever heard. And I've never looked at him the same way. I've never forgot that, in the front of the room, the most important people, we had to carry him out of the room. And so things like that have an impact on me."

I think that's -- that would have an impact on me too.

There's little trace of sympathy of understanding when people lose face. Mr. Trump's reaction is swift and unforgiving. If Mr. Trump feels he has been made a fool of, his response can be volcanic.

Ivana Trump told the reporter about a Colorado ski vacation she took with Mr. Trump soon after they began dating. The future Mrs. Trump had not told her boyfriend that she was an accomplished skier. As she recalls it, Mr. Trump went down the hill first and waited for her at the bottom.

So -- this is Ivana. So he goes up and stops and he says, "Come on, baby. Come on, baby." I went up. I went. I did two flips in the air. Two flips right in front of him. I disappeared. Donald was so angry, he took off his skis, his ski boots, and walked up to the restaurant. He couldn't take it. He just couldn't take.

He had been bested in public, as he stormed off the slope, leaving behind a trail of equipment, she recalled. Donald Trump could not contain his embarrassment. Quote, she recalled him saying, I'm not going to do this for anybody, including you.

On the tapes, Mr. Trump also describes a passionate enjoyment of fighting.

Now, listen to this. Then I'm going to play you some audio from yesterday, which I think the press is being extraordinarily unfair on.

On the tapes, he describes a passionate enjoyment of fighting which started during his adolescence in Queens. It didn't matter, he said, whether the altercation was verbal or physical, he loved it all the same. Quote, I was a very rebellious kind of person. I didn't -- I don't like too talk about it actually. But I was very rebellious and very set in my ways. In the eighth grade, I loved to fight. I always have loved to fight. Physical fights. Any kind of fights. All types of fights. Even arguments. Any kind of fight, I love it, including physical.

Now, he then talks about how he was a real troubled kid. And at the age of 13, he had to be sent off to the New York Military Academy because his parents couldn't deal with him anymore.

He said, "I'm standing there in the military academy, and this guy comes out. He's like a bulldog, a rough guy. He was a drill sergeant. Now they call him Major Dobias. But he was a sergeant then. When I knew him, Sergeant Dobias. Right out of the Army. And he was a rough guy. Physically rough. Mentally rough. He also was my baseball coach. And he used to say things like, "Stand up." And I would say, "Give me an, expletive, break." The guy came at me. You would never believe what he did. I mean, he came at me. It was really fantastic.

Did he rough you up?

Oh, yeah. Absolutely.

He grabbed you by the shirt?

Oh, yeah. But it doesn't matter. It's not like what it happens today. You have to learn to survive. It was tough, not like today. Those were rougher times. These guys go back to some of those old drill sergeants, they can't even understand what's going on in this country. I loved the old days.

Now, listen, he loves to fight. Listen, now, the press has this so unfair against Donald Trump: Joe Biden threatened -- said I want to take him out behind a bar.

STU: The gym is what he said.

GLENN: Yeah, the gym. I want to take him behind the gym. Basically he's threatening. I want to take him out and beat him up.

Here's two losers, two guys who think they're 13 years old, threatening violence against each other. The press doesn't report that the vice president just threatened violence on Donald Trump. They only report that Donald Trump threatened violence on Joe Biden. But it was a response to Joe Biden's threat.

STU: Right. They've handled that completely unfairly.

GLENN: Oh, completely unfairly. But here's Donald Trump's response.

DONALD: Did you see where Biden wants to take me to the back of the barn? Me. He wants it. I'd love that. I'd love that. Mr. Tough Guy. You know, he's Mr. Tough Guy.

You know when he's Mr. Tough guy? When he's standing behind a microphone by himself. That's when -- he wants to bring me to the back of the barn. Oh. Some things in life you could really love doing.

Our nation has lost -- and, by the way, if I said that, they'd say, "He's violent. How could he have done that?"

PAT: And they did say that.

STU: That's true.

PAT: They did say it, anyway, even though it was Biden who said it first.

GLENN: Yep, yep.

STU: Yeah. Totally unfair.

GLENN: Okay. So the next thing that's on these tapes that's very interesting --

PAT: I'd pay a lot of money to see that fight, by the way.

GLENN: I think Donald Trump would kick --

PAT: Oh --

GLENN: Oh, Donald Trump would --

PAT: Destroy him.

GLENN: Yeah. That would be like a scene out of the Sopranos. He would just be beating and beating and beating.

(laughter)

JEFFY: Yes.

GLENN: Anyway, in these -- in these tapes that Donald Trump says, really old -- two years old -- and -- and kind of boring. So far, they're very interesting.

He says he can still recall the thrill of a newspaper mentioning his name for the first time.

Quote, I said, I love it. I love it. It's the first time I was ever in the newspaper. I was a young kid, right? I was probably a sophomore in high school. I don't think anything is wrong with that. I thought it was amazing. It felt good. Donald Trump was hooked. But it wasn't enough for Mr. Trump to be the object of media fascination. He took pleasure in knowing that such coverage was denied to almost everyone else.

When Mr. D'Antonio said that it was exciting for anybody to be mentioned in a newspaper, a seemingly wounded Mr. Trump interrupted and explained why his experience was special. Quote, well, most people aren't in print though. Don't forget, I mean, how many people are in print? Nobody is in print.

Mr. Trump refused to let the subject go, emphasizing over and over again how unique it was and how he had been mentioned in the newspaper. By the time he was an established businessman, Donald Trump hired a service to compile the swelling number of references made of him in the media. Which he then reviewed. He told on tape, "There are thousands of them. Thousands. Every day, thousands. Thousands a day." He quickly figured out the media attention was free advertising. "I could say no, and then I could advertise a project I'm doing, like Doral or something, and spend half a million dollars on it or a million dollars. Or I can do a show and spend nothing and be on for a lot longer." Do you understand what I mean? So I've always felt it was a positive thing.

No matter the newspaper, magazine, or show, Mr. Trump has always been keeping score, how positive coverage was and how often he was featured, just as he does today.

Unfortunately, Mr. Trump fears more than anything else being ignored, being overlooked or being irrelevant.

This is why I bring this up. Because this is -- this is the trait in him that makes Putin such a dangerous foe. That's how he saw Arsenio Hall in the 2000s, as forgotten and ungrateful for his time on the Celebrity Apprentice.

There was a time when he recalled his favorite song during our interview. It was performed by Peggy Lee. Is That All There Is.

Trump: It's a great song because I've had these tremendous successes, and then I'm off to the next one. Because it's like, oh, is that all there is?

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: He is -- he is a tragic figure. He's a sad figure, I think.

That's a great song, actually. That's an interesting song, especially sung by her, because she had such a troubled life.

But he quickly retreats from the moment, declining Mr. D'Antonio's invitation to further explain how the song makes him feel about himself. Saying, "I don't know if I'll like what I discover."

Of this, however, Mr. Trump is certain: He needs the world's attention and the embrace. A life force that has sustained him for decades. He recalls walking into a giant room and watching the crowd surround him as if he were a magnet attracting everything around him.

Mr. D'Antonio asked him when that first started.

Oh, a long time ago. It's really always been that way.

Did it ever unnerve him, the author wondered.

No, Trump said. I think what would unnerve me is if it didn't happen. I find that an interesting look -- I think Donald Trump is one of the more interesting guys, if you could ever break down the wall. Because I think there is something -- something at 13. Something -- I don't know. Something in his youth that had to have happened that cemented this need for attention. And I think he is a very frightened man. Like the Peggy Lee song. Is that all there is?

And anybody who is an alcoholic -- now, Trump has total self-control on alcohol and everything else. But if anybody is an alcoholic, you know that that's the way you feel.

You'll have a success. And you'll have a high. Or you'll have whatever. And you'll be -- is that it? And you're always looking for the next great whatever. And it never happens. You get there. And you think, that's going to make me happy. That's going to make it. And it doesn't. And you're more empty inside.

And eventually, you crash. He's never had the crash. And he doesn't want to look backward.

You know, when he said, "I don't ask for forgiveness because I don't need to ask for forgiveness," this interview shows that's not true. What he's saying is, I don't ask for forgiveness because I don't look back. I don't want to look back. I may not like what I find. But that is a denial of the power of forgiveness, the power of atonement, the power of sacrifice. He -- none of us like what we find in our past. None of us like what we have, you know, the things that we've done. That's why we have to have that forgiveness.

And he doesn't understand that. And some day -- I mean, I don't know if you can teach old dogs new tricks. I mean, how much more time does he have before -- you know, ten, 15, 20 maybe years before he can have that moment where he can go, "Oh, man, why was I fighting so hard all these years? Why was I doing that? I didn't need to run from my past."

JEFFY: Oh, you think he has one of those moments?

GLENN: I hope so. I hope so. For his own happiness, I hope so. Because I don't think he's happy. He might think he's happy, but I don't think he really is. I used to think I was really happy, but it was only because I was running so hard. You know, it says something that he can't -- he has to have somebody around him at all times. He has to be occupied by something at all times. He's not -- to me, that's a sign -- if you can drive in your car by yourself and turn the radio off and be alone with your thoughts --

STU: Outside of this time slot. Another time slot.

GLENN: Yeah. Another time slot. You can -- to me, that's a sign that you're pretty healthy. But if you can't be alone with your own thoughts, that's a problem.

Featured Image: Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump pauses during a campaign event September 6, 2016 in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Trump participated in a discussion with retired Army Lieutenant General Michael Flynn. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.