Rumors Fly Following Sudden Departure of Two Trump Team Members

Filling in for Glenn on radio, former New York City police officer John Cardillo offered his commentary on the controvertial departure of two Trump transition team members A.J. Delgado and Jason Miller.

"This situation seems to have sorted itself out the way it ought to have sorted itself out," Cardillo said. "It's going to be very, very interesting to see how this plays out."

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

JOHN: Good morning. Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. I'm John Cardillo. Sitting in for Glenn Beck while he's on a well deserved vacation. And if you're just tuning in, I'll tell you a little bit about myself. So I got my start in media with Glenn. But I am not a media guy by training. I was a New York City cop, and I was an entrepreneur. Started a company where we provided security services to large online communities and wound up spending more time in the legislative arena and really got a front row seat at how law enforcement and our legislative process worked and realized our country was kind of a mess.

And so when I was in a position to do so, needed to expand my platform -- decided to expand my platform so I could get some of this information out to you.

And, luckily, Glenn Beck found me about three -- three and a half years ago. I was like a little shelter dog, but Glenn found me. We had a great conversation on air. We did a segment -- we did a political analysis segment.

We went on to profile some of the radical groups in the US and created a very nice relationship. And I went on to host my own show, down here in Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, and was so flattered, when I was asked to stand in for Glenn today and tomorrow on the Glenn Beck Show.

And being a guy who was pro-Trump -- and Glenn was so anti-Trump. It was even better. It was even better. Because it proved to me there are still some great people in this industry who want their audiences to hear all sides. And it also showed me how we can be friends and disagree on an issue. Isn't that a novel concept?

We don't have to get into these knockdown drag-out grudge matches where we lose friendships over political candidates. We lose colleagues. We lose professional relationships. It's silly. Don't do it. Don't do it.

But there is a bit of turmoil in the Trump campaign right now. I don't know if you've seen the stories on this. But a couple of days ago, the Trump communication director Jason Miller resigned to spend more time with family.

Now, I've got an unfair advantage on this one because one of the players in this little drama is A.J. Delgado -- and you've probably seen A.J. out there. She's -- she was a South Florida -- and then a national surrogate for the Trump campaign.

And prior to that, A.J. was a conservative pundit. You would see her frequently on Fox News, many, many radio and television programs. And she wrote a column.

But I had a front row seat to many of the goings on with the Trump campaign in South Florida, as a member of the media. I was at every rally. And what this is shaking out to be -- and I've got impeccable sources still inside the transition.

And what's happening here -- and you're getting pieces of this in the print media. But I was on the phone all last night, and this might be the first place right here on the Glenn Beck Program that you're going to hear what's really happening from sources inside the transition.

It looks as if -- and now what it's shaking out to be that A.J. Delgado and comes director Jason Miller were having an affair. And it makes it all the more troubling in that Miller is married with children, a child or children. And I believe his wife is also expecting.

Now, I will tell you, from personal experience, I had been at two rallies where A.J. Delgado was present. And I am not a moralist. I'm not a moral cop. I really don't care. But I go to political rallies. I go to events. I don't care who the candidate is. I go to business functions. There's an appropriate way to look, act, and dress. And I will say, that A.J. Delgado was dressed, in my opinion, highly inappropriately for these events. It was a skin, skin, skintight dresses, six-inch heels.

No other women, even the young attractive women were not dressed the same way. But even worse, it was -- and I was with an adviser, very close adviser to the Trump campaign. He was a friend of mine. And he and I were sitting during one of the rallies -- the rally in Miami, down in the Brickell area of Miami at the night center.

I think it was the last rally that Donald Trump held in South Florida before the election. And he and I were sitting there. And people were leaving the VIP, the closed area where the candidate was, where Donald Trump was.

And about 15 people who had come out complained about the way A.J. Delgado was acting. And no one understood why. No one understood how this girl who was picked up as a surrogate and was supposed to just be out there, doing her part in the media, when -- when she was asked to, was all of a sudden acting like she was senior campaign staff.

And I saw it, as an on-air guy down in South Florida and as somebody that was working with the RNC coms people and the Trump coms people, as a conservative radio host, I could not guests booked. We couldn't get guests booked. When Miller was running coms, it became nearly impossible.

Now, the people that were running coms prior to Miller and that team, it was very easy to get good guests booked. So I started seeing a difficulty in getting guests booked.

And then every time I turned on the television, turned on radio, or read something in print, A.J. Delgado had apparently replaced everyone else on the campaign as the premier spokesperson, spokeswoman. It was very weird to me.

Quite candidly, I never saw this coming. We thought maybe she had a relationship with one of the daughters or one of the daughters-in-law, or maybe she had done some legal work for some people previously or she had a patron that was a donor.

But what really crystallized for me that there was something else going on, was when she became the representative to the Cuban American community, which is a very important, very significant voting bloc in South Florida.

And when I was interfacing with some of the old guard -- and these were the solid conservatives. They go to Versailles Restaurant, and they hold court there. And if you don't know what Versailles is -- if you're ever in Miami and you watch any political campaign, whether it be presidential, gubinatorial, congressional, senatorial -- when you want the Cuban vote -- and believe me, you need it if you're going to win Florida. You go to Versailles. It's a restaurant down in Little Havana. That really is the kingdom. That's where you need to hold court and meet with the old guard.

And when I started talking to those guys and those women, they didn't know who she was. They said, who? Huh?

There were so many prominent Cuban Americans that should have had that role, and many of them were dismayed that A.J. Delgado, a young girl in her 30s, who really came out of nowhere, who was a columnist and, you know, commentator, pundit about the media, took a role that many, many other people were better suited for. Well, now it all makes sense.

Now, look, I'm not the moral police. So I'm not here to judge anybody. But campaign affairs happen. And people who work on campaigns know they happen. And typically, both sides are smart enough to know that that affair ends when the campaign is over. People go back to their life.

They take jobs in the administration. There's more -- there's more scrutiny on the players at that point, on the ancillary staff. During the campaign, it's all on the candidates. There's limited airtime. The candidates are dueling it out. They're duking it out. But when the campaign is over, they start looking at staff, right?

Because if you're the left-wing media and you want to hurt a candidate, well, you have vetted that candidate to hell and back during the campaign. So barring them doing something really stupid or really egregious, there's not much more to report, other than your normal hit pieces and attacking their policy positions. And in the case -- Donald Trump, they beat him up on his tweets, which I happened to like, but I'll tell you why later.

But you look at the staff. And so Miller was a smart enough guy to realize, "Hey, they're going to be looking at me. This was a fun fling. Now it's time for real work. Now we are the candidate. Now we've got to go govern. Okay. Playtime is over. Let's get back to work."

Well, apparently this didn't set too well with Ms. Delgado. Now, what I've been told is an email went out to all of the major players on the transition team, depicting and detailing the affair.

Hell hath no fury like a Cubana scorned. I mean, from what I'm hearing, it was pretty bad.

She then took to Twitter with a series of tweets. And one of them referenced a -- and it's almost embarrassing for me, as a grown man, to say this on air, a baby daddy, which seemed to imply there was a little more to this affair and she had directed this at Jason Miller.

Well, her whole Twitter feed gets deleted. And I was told yesterday that both she and Miller were fired. Miller was allowed to quietly resign and save face. And A.J.'s face was quietly killed and she was made a pariah. And I was told she is on the, quote, unquote, warpath by someone very senior on the campaign.

But my point of bringing this to light, we have a duty -- right? Whether we're in the conservative media, the liberal media, when we get information like this, we've got a duty to let you know who the players are.

And I think -- I personally -- Donald Trump is going to be a very good president. And I'm going to tell you why in the next hour. I'm going to explain to you why his rhetoric and his style never scared me. It didn't bother me, as much as it did to other people. But I'll explain why I understand that it did bother and offend and scare some people.

But when -- when I looked at people that worked around this campaign -- and let me tell you, there was some of the hardest working, most honest, most diligent people, working on this campaign. And I knew them. And in the south Florida region -- and Florida on the whole, many of them were friends of mine.

It was very disappointing to me to see people taking the limelight. A.J. Delgado was one of those people. And A.J. Delgado and I haven't -- don't really know each other. She blocked me on Twitter a couple of years ago. I think I disagreed with her on -- she was pro Common Core, because she was a moderate. A center moderate. Quote, unquote, conservative. And then she became this newly minted conservative. I just think it was -- she's replaced Chuck Schumer as the person that is most dangerous between them and a camera.

But I -- I need to bring this out because a lot of good people were hurt by these grandstanders. Hard-working people. And I don't care where you stand politically. People that do work, people that are the grinders that have the ethic, that are doing the work and that don't want the thanks shouldn't be treated poorly by those who seek glory.

And karma is an interesting thing. Divine intervention is a really interesting thing. And all I'll say -- and I'll leave you with, this situation seems to have sorted itself out the way it ought to have sorted itself out. It -- it's going to be very, very interesting to see how this plays out.

But progressives also don't live by this standard. They think they're impervious to any critique. To all the rules. And can act in any way they want. And that was really -- really made evident when two gay men attacked a mom and her children on a JetBlue flight a couple of days before Christmas.

Featured Image: Julie Dermansky/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.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

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.