Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

EXCLUSIVE: Proof That Liberals Are Working to Remove Bill O'Reilly From Fox News

April 19, 2017
Staff

WRITER

George Soros-funded Media Matters has a history of conducting smear campaigns against conservative media figures like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

Their latest target looks to be Bill O'Reilly, host of the wildly popular and number one-rated cable news program The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News. Glenn shared on radio today an email that suggests the liberal watchdog is behind the advertiser exodus from The Factor. The email is from Mary Pat Bonner of The Bonner Group.

RELATED: If Bill O'Reilly Goes, It's the Beginning of the End of Fox News as We Know It

"The Bonner Group, according to the New York Times, was paid $6 million from Hillary For America -- or whatever it was -- and Media Matters to raise money," Glenn said. "They are the largest fundraiser for Media Matters, at least in 2013, and raised $11 million for Media Matters. This is the Hillary super PAC group and the super PAC for Media Matters. That's who Mary Pat Bonner is.

Listen to this segment beginning at mark 19:42 from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: I've only got three or four minutes here. And I don't want to start down this rabbit hole of -- of what happened to us and what's now happening to Bill O'Reilly. And I have the proof. I'll do it after the bottom of the hour break. But I do want to share with you the letter that I have from -- I have 30 seconds? So I can't share it now. I thought I had a little more time. I'm going to share the evidence that I find absolutely astounding, that Bill O'Reilly sent to everybody -- all the papers that I read said, "Well, he has evidence." Well, did you ask for the evidence? Because I know it was really super, super hard. I wrote to Bill and said, "Hey, do you have the evidence?" And then his attorney sent it to me. So I know it was really hard. But nobody's -- nobody's running with this. Why? Because it's a game that works and is being played on you. Next.

[break]

GLENN: All right. I want you to know that you need to write and call the Fox News Channel today, if you buy into what I'm about to tell you, and tell them, "You can lose your advertisers, or you can lose your viewers." But you have to put some spine back into the Murdoch family and the Fox News Channel board because you're about to lose Bill O'Reilly. And this isn't about Bill O'Reilly. This is about Media Matters. And this is about a system that I want to show you, if I have time now -- otherwise, later in the show -- has worked before.

I called Bill last night and said, "Hey, I'm reading that you guys have evidence. Can I see the evidence?" He said, "Let me call my attorney." Calls his attorney. His attorney -- I get up this morning, and I have this.

Now, I've just tweeted this. We've posted it at GlennBeck.com. And I believe a story is going up on TheBlaze soon about it.

It's from Mary Pat Bonner. Now, who is Mary Pat Bonner? Mary Pat Bonner runs what's called the Bonner Group. The Bonner Group, according to the New York Times, was paid $6 million from Hillary For America -- or whatever it was -- and Media Matters to raise money. Another source -- we're not sure. We only have one source on this -- said that Media Matters paid the Bonner Group $1.4 million in 2013 alone, to raise money. They are the largest fundraiser for Media Matters, at least in 2013 and raised $11 million for Media Matters.

This is the Hillary super PAC group and the super PAC for Media Matters. That's who Mary Pat Bonner is. So Mary Pat Bonner who is trying to raise money for Media Matters sends this out: An O'Reilly update call. Subject line. It came out Thursday April 13th, 2:53 p.m.

For years, Bill O'Reilly has been one of the worst purveyors of misinformation on Fox News. A serial misinformer, pushing many of the most extreme, sexist, racist, homophobic, and xenophobic conservative theories on TV.

PAT: Such a lie. Name one. Name one.

And she -- they don't obviously.

GLENN: Bill O'Reilly is -- he's the most moderate of conservative television.

PAT: Completely reasoned.

GLENN: He is -- he never would connect the dots. He never does connect the dots. It's one of the biggest complaints, at least of this audience of Bill O'Reilly. They're like, "Don't worry, Bill will come along once the New York Times is there." I mean, Bill is --

PAT: And he's always said, "I deal in facts. I don't extrapolate. I don't connect dots."

GLENN: Right. I don't get ahead of the news. So he's not a theorist at all.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: (sighing)

Additionally, recent bombshell New York Times investigation found Fox News and Fox host Bill O'Reilly had paid $13 million to settle with five women who accused the host of repeated sexual harassment or verbal abuse.

No comment on that. I don't know what that is. But if you're going to fire Bill O'Reilly, then you fire him based on that and be transparent. Let everyone know exactly what it was. But I will tell you, again --

PAT: We see no evidence on it. Right? Nobody has recordings. Nobody has photos. We haven't even heard the story.

GLENN: I mean, we haven't heard from Megyn Kelly -- Megyn Kelly isn't shy on what's happening.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: You didn't hit on Megyn Kelly?

PAT: If you're a serial hit-onner, you would think so.

GLENN: Yeah.

Thanks to Media Matters, O'Reilly and Fox News are now being held accountable.

Now, listen to this: Due to our advertiser education campaign, over 80 advertisers have currently dropped O'Reilly's show, and the momentum continues to build.

Stu, based on your past history, is that true or false? Eighty advertisers have already dropped.

STU: Yeah. That's usually not true. Usually not true. It's usually, you know, hey, here's some company that never wanted to be associated with this guy anyway that they've called up to make a statement about it.

GLENN: Wait. I have new information that will blow your mind from Media Matters.

PAT: That's great.

GLENN: It's worse than that. Okay? We are currently at a critical juncture in this campaign, so I hope you can join Media Matters, President Angelo Carusone, to hear about the successes of the campaign so far and our plans moving forward. We're holding an update call next week Thursday April 20th at 2:30. Please RSVP to Doug Farley at DougWalterFarley@Gmail.com. Or call 212-683-2551, and he can send you the dial-in information. I look forward to having you join on one of these critical calls. Regards, Mary Pat.

There is -- there is the evidence that Media Matters, because Bill O'Reilly is a -- what did they say? A sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic conservative.

STU: Here's the ten things that we say about everybody.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: Right. That's why they're doing it. Now, let me show you what they're doing. And I'm not going to speculate at all. I'm going to take it from the horse's mouth himself.

This is -- came out April 6th, 2017. How a veteran of Fox News boycott does it. And this is from the New Yorker magazine, not exactly a right-wing blog.

This week, a number of companies pulled their ads from Bill O'Reilly's Fox News Show after the Times reported the host and his employer paid millions of dollars to settle accusations of sexual harassment and other inappropriate behavior.

Hang on. My screen has just locked up. Please don't do that to me now.

Angelo Carusone -- or whatever you say his name -- he's the president of Media Matters now --

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: -- took the opportunity to begin tweeting from an account he set up in March 2010. Stop O'Reilly.

In 2009, Carusone's Stop Beck account pressured brands to pull the ads from the program of Glenn Beck, the conspiracy-minded conservative commentator who was then hosting on Fox News. It proved an effective tactic, partly in response to Carusone's tweets, advertisers began to disassociate themselves from Beck's show.

Now, we've always said, "That's not true. Mercedes Benz never -- never -- Kraft was never on my show." Just, it didn't happen.

Listen: Beck and Fox News parted ways in 2011, which we're going to talk about later today.

He started working then -- Carusone started working at Media Matters, the left-wing nonprofit that battles what he considers -- what he considers conservative misinformation in the media. What he considers.

Hmm. Do you want a man or one group dictating to sponsors and to media outlets what is misinformation and what is true?

He's now the president of Media Matters. On Tuesday, he spoke by phone about his Beck campaign in light of the ongoing O'Reilly situation. His account has been edited and condensed. I've never known any of this. Listen to this.

Quote, leading up to the summer of 2009, I was a second-year law student. And when you're a second-year law student in the springtime, procrastination becomes something that was the same time that Glenn Beck was on the rise. He was something different for Fox News. He was not the ideologically different, but his presentation, his manner was much more venomous and vitriolic than even the standard Fox News fare. And he was incredibly successful by all measures, in audience size, revenue, and the kinds of advertisers he was attracting.

My fear became that the market would actually create an environment where people who were doing what Glenn Beck was doing became the new norm when they should become an anathema. That's what planted the seed in my brain. Twitter had finally become more of a thing. You could access companies in a different way because your communications were very public and transparent.

I started the Stop Beck campaign right at the beginning of July saying, I'm just going to try to contact advertisers and say, "Hey, this is what Glenn Beck said today. This is what your ads are appearing next to," so that they would be able to see the association, what they were actually paying for.

That's how it started. I listened to his program every day. I tweeted out everything he was saying. Copied in sponsors. At the end of a month, Glenn Beck called President Obama a racist and said he had a deep-seated hatred of white people and the white culture. That caused a firestorm.

So you're already after -- you have nothing -- you just are looking for something to cause a firestorm. In Bill O'Reilly's case, a settlement that happened how many years ago?

Because of Roger Ailes, that was drug up again. Now we can make something of that. Big organizations got involved, which I was never ever conceived of. Who are the big organizations? People like Media Matters, George Soros. We told you this was being funded by big people, and big people were involved, including Van Jones' Color For Change. Oh, wait. Quote, I was just the Twitter guy, but Color of Change and other activist groups sent out petitions. I got a ton of new followers and new participants in my effort. And then all of a sudden, I had a blog. And Kraft, the cheese company, replied to one of my posts saying, "Hey, we're pulling our ads from the Glenn Beck Show," literally in just a comment. And that's how it all started for me.

About three months in, I was like, "Okay. Now I have a theory, but I need a strategy. What's the actual strategy for holding him accountable?" Because clearly, he was not off the air.

You'd think that if you would get X-number of big companies to leave that it's just magic he'll go away. He won't. I needed something bigger. So this is what I started to do.

Now, I want you to listen very carefully to this because it explains an awful lot. I've never known this. This is not some conspiracy theorist. This is his own words in the New Yorker last month.

You better make a decision, America. Because you're about to lose a big conservative ally and voice. And it's not just Bill O'Reilly. I'm telling you, Sean Hannity will be next. Then Tucker Carlson will be next. Until everyone complies with what they say is not misinformation, they will continue to go -- and once you have the big bear of Fox News out of the way, then they come for TheBlaze. Then they come for The Daily Wire. Then they come for all of us. I didn't say anything because I wasn't Bill O'Reilly, until they came for me, and there was no one left.

No one wants to say anything because they don't know if Bill O'Reilly is innocent or guilty on sexual harassment. I don't either. And if that's true, that's a different story.

But you need to understand there is something else going on. They're only using that.

Now, just like me, when I said that, I was thinking out loud. I'm trying -- I'm reading the -- excuse me. I was reading Obama's book where he said, "That's just the way white people will do you." Where he talked about his grandmother, you know, having a white attitude. And she was bred to not trust blacks.

Well, as I'm reading that, I'm thinking out loud, "I think this guy has a real problem with white people." Okay. That's not unreasonable to think out loud and say that, but not on television as if it's a statement. Stupid.

What happened? I gave them ammunition. What happened? O'Reilly may -- may have given them ammunition.

We've never seen it. But this is a game-changer. And I'll tell you exactly how he did it last time and how you're being played, when we come back.

[break]

GLENN: I believe we have Bill O'Reilly's attorney on. And I want to ask him about these -- about these accusations from these women because I don't want to discredit the women by any stretch of the imagination. I do not know what's happening there. But I want to tell you about what Media Matters and the Hillary campaign is doing, or I should say the Bonner group is doing to raise money and to get Bill O'Reilly off the air.

Okay. So this is how I started. This is according to the head of Media Matters. I listened to his program every day. I tweeted out everything he said to the sponsors. Blah, blah.

Hey, we're pulling our ads from the Glenn Beck show, literally in a comment.

About three months in, I said, okay. Now I have a theory. But I need a strategy. If you think you can get X-number of big companies to leave and it's magic, he goes away. But I needed something bigger. So what I actually started to do is I found a guy in the UK. Glenn Beck's show was simulcast there. He would watch the show and give me the advertisers list for the United Kingdom. Some of them were big advertisers that were never advertising on Glenn Beck's show here.

If you could get the UK division to say, "We're going to pull the ads from Glenn's," it would filter over to the states, and people would say, "Mercedes has cancelled." It became a shot in the arm for the campaign. Within a few months, every single advertiser on Glenn Beck's show in the United Kingdom had been cut off.

He didn't have anymore ads. No ads at all. They would run promos during the breaks.

What I wanted to do was make sure there was enough of an effect so if Glenn Beck was still on the air during the next shareholder conversation, Rupert would have to say there was a problem in the United Kingdom. I'll bet you the same thing is happening here.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.