Soros and McCain: The unholy alliance hidden in plain sight



Have we been missing a Soros-McCain family connection in front of our very eyes all this time?

Unlike his father, George, who operated behind the scenes and dismissed scrutiny as conspiracy theory, Alexander Soros flaunts his influence openly on social media. He’s proudly posted photos with Vice President Kamala Harris, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Democratic leaders like Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) — to name just a few. He’s also showcased meetings with newer faces, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), whom he called a “rising star.” Let’s hope he’s right.

What started as a quiet alliance between George Soros and John McCain has now become a visible partnership between their heirs, Alex and Cindy.

To paraphrase “The Big Short”: Alex isn’t confessing — he’s bragging.

His photos with high-profile Democrats have grabbed headlines, but it’s his posts featuring Cindy McCain that reveal something even more telling: a decades-long relationship between the Soros and McCain families.

On May 6, 2024, Alex shared a photo with Cindy at the McCain Institute Sedona Forum. The topic of the forum was “Securing Our Insecure World,” which used the “climate crisis” as a backdrop, and had a roster of speakers that included Democrats and RINOs such as Mitt Romney, Janet Yellen, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D), David Axelrod, and former Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

In another tweet with Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Alex indicated that stopping Trump was a topic of discussion, referring to Kelly as “inspiring as ever and attentive to the threat posed in November if Trump wins.”

Alex has also shared a photo of himself with Cindy McCain and his father at the Munich Security Conference. The two also appear in a photo discussing the World Food Programme. The earliest image of them together dates back to 2020, when Cindy served as chairwoman of the board of the Munich conference and Alex sat on the advisory council, according to the conference’s annual report.

The McCains have never hidden their disdain for Donald Trump or the modern Republican Party — views that earned them the “RINO” tag and de facto exile from today’s GOP.

RELATED: Alex Soros admits he’s more powerful than elected officials

Photo by Tom Brenner/Getty Images

Their ties to the Soros network don't mark a new alliance, but they do prompt questions about how the relationship began. The answer may lead directly back to John McCain himself.

To understand the dynamic between Cindy McCain and Alex Soros, you first need to understand the relationship between John McCain and George Soros.

In 2001, McCain launched the Reform Institute — a nonprofit think tank that operated as a convenient loophole for accepting unlimited, unregulated donations. Many of the Reform Institute’s funders also contributed to McCain’s presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2008 as well as to his Straight Talk America PAC.

Hypocritically, the Reform Institute has claimed it wants to “clean up” campaign finance. In 2008, the Reform Institute even sent out a fundraising appeal blasting George Soros as a Democratic mega-donor. Yet, it was taking Soros’ money as it criticized others for doing the same.

The Reform Institute accepted multiple contributions from George Soros — some as high as $100,000 — as well as from the Soros-backed Tides Foundation. The maverick also took money from Teneo, a firm co-founded by Bill Clinton’s longtime “bag man” Doug Band.

What started as a quiet alliance between George Soros and John McCain has now become a visible partnership between their heirs, Alex and Cindy. Their shared disdain for Trump and mutual investment in globalist initiatives reveal what many prefer to ignore: Real political power often hides in plain sight — until it doesn’t.

With his ascension to the helm of his father’s Open Society Foundations, Alex Soros inherits a political infrastructure from the Democratic Party — and from RINOs like John and Cindy McCain.

Editor’s note: This article, part of a series, has been adapted from Matt Palumbo’s new book, “The Heir: Inside the (Not So) Secret Network of George Soros.”

Singularity: The elites' dystopian view of human beings



The singularity has been at the tip of many tech-savvy and global-elitist tongues as of late — and its implications are more than a little frightening.

According to Justin Haskins, president of Our Republic and senior fellow at the Heartland Institute, the definition of the singularity is a "hypothetical moment off into the future when technology advances to a point where it just is completely transformative for humanity.”

“Typically, the way it's talked about is artificial intelligence — or just machines in general — become more intelligent than human beings,” Haskins tells Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable.” He goes on to say that some people describe the singularity as the time when AI "has the ability to sort of continue to redesign itself."


While Haskins notes that some of the consequences of the singularity are positive — like the potential to cure cancer — it also creates all kinds of ethical problems.

“What happens when a lot of employees are no longer needed because HR and loan officers and all these other big gigantic parts of businesses can just be outsourced to an artificial intelligence system?” he asks.

In response, Haskins says, “There’ll be massive disruptions in the job market.”

Stuckey herself is wary of the small issues we have now that might grow into bigger problems.

“People have posted their interactions with different kinds of AI, whether it's ChatGPT or Grok,” she explains.

She continues, “I've seen people post their conversations of saying like, ‘Would you rather’ — asking the AI bot — ‘Would you rather misgender someone, like misgender Bruce Jenner, or kill a thousand people,’ and it will literally try to give some nuanced take about how misgendering is never okay.”

“And I know that we’re talking beyond just these chat bots. We’re talking about something much bigger than that, but if that’s what's happening on a small scale, we can see a peek into the morality of artificial intelligence,” she adds.

“If all of this is being created and programmed by people with particular values, that are either progressive or just pragmatists, like if they’re just like, 'Yeah, whatever we can do and whatever makes life easier, whatever makes me richer, we should just do that’ — there will be consequences of it,” she says.

Stuckey also notes that she had recently heard someone of importance discussing the loss of jobs and what people will do as a result, and the answer to that was concerning.

“It was some executive that said, ‘I’m not scared about AI killing 150 million jobs. That’s actually why we are creating these very immersive video games — so that when people lose their jobs, they can just play these video games and they can be satisfied and fulfilled that way,” Stuckey explains.

“That is a very dystopian look at the future,” she continues, adding, “And yet, that tells us the mind of a lot of the people at WEF, a lot of the people at Davos, a lot of the people in Silicon Valley. That’s really how they see human beings.”

“Whether you’re talking about the Great Reset, whether you’re talking about singularity, they don’t see us as people with innate worth; they see us as cogs in a wheel,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Klaus Schwab abruptly quits as WEF chair weeks after signaling a years-long wind down



Klaus Schwab indicated in an April 1 letter to the World Economic Forum's board of trustees and staff that he was stepping down as chairman of the technocratic globalist organization. The 87-year-old economist did not, however, appear to be in a rush.

The WEF told the Financial Times earlier this month that Schwab — who pushed vigorously in recent years for a "great reset" of capitalism — would complete his departure by January 2027. His exit has, however, come early.

Schwab announced Monday that he was stepping down immediately.

"Following my recent announcement, and as I enter my 88th year, I have decided to step down from the position of Chair and as a member of the Board of Trustees, with immediate effect," the technocrat said in a statement to the WEF's board.

The board unanimously appointed WEF Vice Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe as the interim chairman and established a search committee for the selection of a future chair.

Brabeck-Letmathe is the Austrian business executive who led the Nestlé Group as CEO from 1997 to 2008 and Formula One until 2016. A notable shareholder in the vaccine manufacturer Moderna at least as of 2023, Brabeck-Letmathe has served as a member of the WEF's foundation board as well as on its board of trustees.

"At a time when the world is undergoing rapid transformation, the need for inclusive dialogue to navigate complexity and shape the future has never been more critical," the WEF stated. "The Board of Trustees of the World Economic Forum underlines the importance of remaining steadfast in its mission and values as a facilitator of progress. Building on its trusted role, the Forum will continue to bring together leaders from all sectors and regions to exchange insights and foster collaboration."

'The world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies.'

Blaze News previously noted that Schwab's exit, apparently announced on the 55th anniversary of the day he began working on the borrowed concept of a "global village," followed in the wake of a probe into allegations of discrimination at the WEF.

The Wall Street Journal published a damning report alleging — on the basis of internal complaints, email exchanges, and interviews with current and past WEF employees — that "under Schwab's decades-long oversight, the forum has allowed to fester an atmosphere hostile to women and black people in its own workplace."

The report contained allegations that: multiple female employees were "pushed out or otherwise saw their careers suffer" when pregnant or coming back from maternity leave; some women were sexually harassed by senior WEF managers; Schwab "made suggestive comments to [former staffers] that made them uncomfortable"; and some black employees were passed over for promotions and subjected to objectionable racial comments.

The WEF suggested the Journal's report was "inaccurate," stating, "We are an organization that upholds the highest standards of governance, while working to address the most pressing challenges of our time with our high-performance teams, our diverse and global outlook, and an environment that values innovation, inclusion, and well-being."

After the Wall Street Journal's report made waves, the WEF hired a pair of law firms to investigate the claims of workplace discrimination and harassment.

The law firm Covington and Burling — whose members had their security clearances suspended last month by President Donald Trump — conveniently concluded with the Swiss firm Homburger that it "did not find the forum had committed any legal violations" and "did not substantiate" the misconduct allegations against Schwab.

Time will tell if Schwab's replacement will secure the future he long conspired to bring about.

In a June 2020 WEF blog post, Schwab noted that "the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a 'Great Reset' of capitalism."

Observing that populations proved willing "to make sacrifices" during the pandemic, Schwab indicated "the will to build a better society does exist."

"We must use it to secure the Great Reset that we so badly need," continued Schwab. "That will require stronger and more effective governments."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Tech elites warn ‘reality itself’ may not survive the AI revolution



When Elon Musk warns that money may soon lose its meaning and Dario Amodei speaks of an AI-driven class war, you might think the media would take notice. These aren’t fringe voices. Musk ranks among the world’s most recognizable tech leaders, and Amodei is the CEO of Anthropic, a leading artificial intelligence company developing advanced models that compete with OpenAI.

Together, they are two of the most influential figures shaping the AI revolution. And they’re warning that artificial intelligence will redefine everything — from work and value to meaning and even our grasp of reality.

But the public isn’t listening. Worse, many hear the warnings and choose to ignore them.

Warnings from inside the machine

At the 2025 Davos conference, hosted by the World Economic Forum, Amodei made a prediction that should have dominated headlines. Within a few years, he said, AI systems will outperform nearly all humans at almost every task — and eventually surpass us in everything.

“When that happens,” Amodei said, “we will need to have a conversation about how we organize our economy. How do humans find meaning?”

Either we begin serious conversations about protecting liberty and individual autonomy in an AI-driven world, or we allow a small group of global elites to shape the future for us.

The pace of change is alarming, but the scale may be even more so. Amodei warns that if 30% of human labor becomes fully automated, it could ignite a class war between the displaced and the privileged. Entire segments of the population could become economically “useless” in a system no longer designed for them.

Elon Musk, never one to shy away from bold predictions, recently said that AI-powered humanoid robots will eliminate all labor scarcity. “You can produce any product, provide any service. There’s really no limit to the economy at that point,” Musk said.

“Will money even be meaningful?” Musk mused. “I don’t know. It might not be.”

Old assumptions collapse

These tech leaders are not warning about some minor disruption. They’re predicting the collapse of the core systems that shape human life: labor, value, currency, and purpose. And they’re not alone.

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has warned that AI could reshape personal identity, especially if children begin forming bonds with AI companions. Filmmaker James Cameron says reality already feels more frightening than “The Terminator” because AI now powers corporate systems that track our data, beliefs, and movements. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has raised alarms about large language models manipulating public opinion, setting trends, and shaping discourse without our awareness.

Geoffrey Hinton — one of the “Godfathers of AI” and a former Google executive — resigned in 2023 to speak more freely about the dangers of the technology he helped create. He warned that AI may soon outsmart humans, spread misinformation on a massive scale, and even threaten humanity’s survival. “It’s hard to see how you can prevent the bad actors from using [AI] for bad things,” he said.

These aren’t fringe voices. These are the people building the systems that will define the next century. And they’re warning us — loudly.

We must start the conversation

Despite repeated warnings, most politicians, media outlets, and the public remain disturbingly indifferent. As machines advance to outperform humans intellectually and physically, much of the attention remains fixed on AI-generated art and customer service chatbots — not the profound societal upheaval industry leaders say is coming.

The recklessness lies not only in developing this technology, but in ignoring the very people building it when they warn that it could upend society and redefine the human experience.

This moment calls for more than fascination or fear. It requires a collective awakening and urgent debate. How should society prepare for a future in which AI systems replace vast segments of the workforce? What happens when the economy deems millions of people economically “useless”? And how do we prevent unelected technocrats from seizing the power to decide those outcomes?

The path forward provides no room for neutrality. Either we begin serious conversations about protecting liberty and individual autonomy in an AI-driven world, or we allow a small group of global elites to shape the future for us.

The creators of AI are sounding the alarm. We’d better start listening.

Klaus Schwab stepping down as World Economic Forum chair after investigation, collapse of globalist dream



Klaus Schwab's days as chairman are numbered at the World Economic Forum, the technocratic globalist organization he founded in 1971 that hosts an annual conference of supposed elites in Davos, Switzerland.

Schwab told the WEF's board of trustees and staff in a letter on Tuesday seen by the Financial Times that he was beginning a year-long process of stepping down, having already stepped down as the organization's executive chairman last May.

The shake-up in Davos comes between the American-led unrealization of Schwab's proposed "great reset" of capitalism and in the wake of a probe into allegations of discrimination at the WEF.

Toxic workplace

Days after his previous title-drop, the Wall Street Journal published a damning report claiming — on the basis of internal complaints, email exchanges, and interviews with current and past WEF employees — that "under Schwab's decades-long oversight, the forum has allowed to fester an atmosphere hostile to women and black people in its own workplace."

The report noted that at least six female employees were allegedly "pushed out or otherwise saw their careers suffer" when pregnant or coming back from maternity leave. Other women claimed that senior managers had sexually harassed them.

'That was the most disappointing thing.'

"It was distressing to witness colleagues visibly withdraw from themselves with the onslaught of harassment at the hands of high-level staff, going from social and cheerful to self-isolating, avoiding eye contact, sharing nightmares for years after," said Farid Ben Amor, a former media executive who worked at the WEF before resigning in 2019.

Former staffers who worked closely with Schwab told the Journal that the problems went all the way to the top, alleging that the founder "made suggestive comments to them that made them uncomfortable."

The Journal also indicated that black employees complained about managers using racial slurs as well as about allegedly being passed over for promotions. When one employee filed a lawsuit in New York last year claiming the WEF was "hostile to women and black employees," the WEF settled the lawsuit on undisclosed terms.

Cheryl Martin, head of the Center for Global Industries at the WEF, said, "That was the most disappointing thing, to see the distance between what the Forum aspires to and what happens behind the scenes."

The WEF, which routinely lectures the world about racism, the supposed "gender gap," sexism, climate change, and other perceived moral failings, characterized the Journal's report as "inaccurate," stating, "We are an organization that upholds the highest standards of governance, while working to address the most pressing challenges of our time with our high-performance teams, our diverse and global outlook, and an environment that values innovation, inclusion, and well-being."

Tom Clare, legal counsel for the WEF, suggested that the report painting the WEF as a degenerate organization led by hypocrites was both defamatory and illustrative of the Journal's "steady decline."

Toothless investigation

In the wake of the Journal's indications that those keen to control the world were unable to control themselves, the WEF had the law firm Covington and Burling — whose members recently had their security clearances suspended by President Donald Trump — investigate the claims of workplace discrimination and harassment, reported the Financial Times.

The American firm, which conducted its review in conjunction with the Swiss firm Homburger, indicated in a summary of its assessment that it "did not find the forum had committed any legal violations" and "did not substantiate" the misconduct allegations against Schwab.

'Now after the turmoil of the last months, is to recover our sense of mission.'

While the external investigators were unable or unwilling to find proof of guilt, Børge Brende, president and CEO of the WEF, indicated that there was nevertheless an internal desire to make some minor changes.

Brende reportedly noted in an email that the board committee overseeing the law firms' investigation identified "leadership and management issues ... that do not meet our established standards." In addition to affirming the organization's alleged "commitment to a workplace where all employees feel valued and respected," the leadership promised additional training for managers.

Great reset

Schwab is apparently convinced that the WEF has yet to recover its "sense of mission," saying as much in his April 1 letter to trustee board members, including Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva, failed U.S. presidential candidate Al Gore, and Tharman Shanmugaratnam, president of Singapore.

"I am deeply convinced that in today's special context the forum is more important and relevant than ever before," wrote Schwab. "It is also financially very well equipped thanks to successful financial management since its beginning. What is essential now after the turmoil of the last months, is to recover our sense of mission."

The WEF told the Financial Times that Schwab's departure should be completed by January 2027.

Schwab reportedly suggested it was personally significant that he made his announcement on April 1, as it marked the 55th anniversary of the day he began working on the concept of a "global village" — a term coined several years earlier by Canadian intellectual Marshall McLuhan.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump’s fight against online censorship quickly goes global



Flanked by some of the Big Tech executives whose companies had suppressed the views of his supporters throughout his predecessor’s term, President Trump on Jan. 20 declared the days of such speech policing over.

Hours later, the president put action behind his words, signing an executive order prohibiting the federal government from engaging in, facilitating, or funding “any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”

'Americans are free people, and we do not take infringements upon our liberties lightly. The time has come for resistance and to reclaim our God-given right to free expression.'

The move was celebrated by those who see it as a blow against the censorship industrial complex. Others cast the executive order as giving dangerous license to “misinformation” and “disinformation.”

What is clear is that this is just the latest salvo in an ongoing war over the digital public square, pitting the Trump administration and like-minded Republican congressional allies against not only domestic opponents but the global counter-disinformation ecosystem.

The global speech-policing effort is looking like an early target. Trump himself seemed to convey that when he touted his order in a remote address on January 23 to the World Economic Forum in Davos. The elite global conclave had recently declared “misinformation and disinformation” the leading short-term risk to the globe for the second-straight year, “underlining their persistent threat to societal cohesion and governance by eroding trust and exacerbating divisions within and between nations.”

Two days after his inauguration, Trump’s secretary of state, Marco Rubio, released the “Priorities and Mission of the Second Trump Administration’s Department of State.” The short document included the charge that Foggy Bottom “must stop censorship and suppression of information.” Rubio continued:

The State Department’s efforts to combat malign propaganda have expanded and fundamentally changed since the Cold War era and we must reprioritize truth. The State Department I lead will support and defend Americans’ rights to free speech, terminating any programs that in any way lead to censoring the American people.

It is not yet known whether and to what extent Rubio’s approach will affect the reorganized successor to the State Department’s recently shuttered Global Engagement Center, whose efforts defenders had called essential to combating foreign propaganda. Critics have dismissed the reorganization — of an office that funded entities targeting disfavored domestic speech — as an effort to simply rebrand and persist.

The State Department did not respond to RealClearInvestigation’s inquiries in connection with this story.

A vast, well-funded network

The global “counter-disinformation” ecosystem encompasses research centers at top academic institutions and think tanks, fact-checkers, news raters, and like-minded for-profits — often funded or promoted by government agencies and powerful foundations, and operating and seeking to influence governments both stateside and across the Atlantic.

RealClearInvestigations, which recently previewed the censorship fight, emailed questions to other United States agencies and departments believed to be involved, directly or indirectly, in speech suppression on social media or otherwise likely to have a role in implementing the order.

These included the Department of Justice and the FBI; the Department of Homeland Security and its Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security sub-agency; Departments of Defense and Health and Human Services; National Science Foundation; and Office of Management and Budget.

“The Department of Defense will fully execute and implement all directives outlined in the executive orders issued by the president, ensuring that they are carried out with utmost professionalism, efficiency, and in alignment with national security objectives,” a Pentagon official told RCI. The department has previously come under fire for providing funding to news rating entities like NewsGuard seen by critics as biased against conservative and independent outlets.

A National Science Foundation spokesman told RCI that the agency was “reviewing all the executive orders carefully and implementing them accordingly.” In a December 2024 report, the House Judiciary Committee asserted that the foundation had “poured millions of taxpayer-funded grant dollars into the development of AI-powered tools to mass monitor and censor online content.”

Several departments did not respond to RCI’s inquiries. Others referred questions to the White House. It did not respond.

Even as the new administration seeks to end government and government-supported censorship efforts, the more controversial part of Trump’s executive order may be its directive to identify those who quelled speech in the past.

The directive calls on the attorney general and other executive department and agency heads to probe federal government activities violative of the order that took place during the Biden years, whereby the administration “trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms” and to prepare a report for President Trump “with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions.” It is not clear if such remedial actions will include prosecutions.

Dangers ahead?

Columbia University law professor Philip Hamburger, founder and CEO of the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which represented several plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case Murthy v. Missouri — a case that exposed federal collusion with social media companies to suppress disfavored speech — told RCI that Trump’s action did not go far enough.

“The executive order, although very welcome, would have been even more valuable if it had waived qualified immunity for officials at CISA, the FBI, and other relevant agencies for purposes of free speech violations.”

Alex Abdo, litigation director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, also at Columbia University, offered an opposing view. Abdo wrote in Just Security that any probe of the Biden administration’s actions would be in bad faith, since the order prejudges the prior administration to have engaged in illicit conduct.

“Worse, the report may very well serve as an outlet for the Trump administration’s own censorial desires,” Abdo wrote. “If, for example, the report further targets researchers engaged in First Amendment protected research, then the administration will be doing exactly what it has accused the Biden administration of doing.”

The House Judiciary Committee is poised to undertake a complementary effort this session. A spokesman told RCI the panel “will continue its oversight work of the Department of Justice and the FBI, in addition to investigating the threat foreign censorship laws pose to American speech.”

The role of law

Trump has previously called for enacting “new laws laying out clear criminal penalties for federal bureaucrats who partner with private entities to do an end-run around the Constitution and deprive Americans of their First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights.”

To that end, the Judiciary Committee spokesperson told RCI that the panel would “move quickly to reintroduce legislation that will protect Americans’ First Amendment rights, such as the Censorship Accountability Act and the No Censors on our Shores Act.” The former would provide a right of action against federal employees for First Amendment violations. The latter would render any foreign official who engages in censorship of American speech inadmissible and deportable.

In the Senate, two days after the release of President Trump’s order, Kentucky Republican Rand Paul reintroduced the “Free Speech Protection Act.”

Consistent with the executive order, the legislation aims to bar federal employees from directing platforms to censor protected speech and prohibit grants “relating to programming on misinformation or disinformation.” It also imposes penalties on those who violate the law, including disciplinary action, a civil penalty of not less than $10,000, ineligibility for retirement benefits, and permanent revocation of any applicable security clearance. The bill would also allow those who believe their rights have been violated to bring a civil action against the allegedly offending agency and employee who committed the violation.

“Americans are free people, and we do not take infringements upon our liberties lightly. The time has come for resistance and to reclaim our God-given right to free expression,” Sen. Paul wrote in reintroducing the bill.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and made available via RealClearWire.

Trump destroys global elites at the World Economic Forum — could this be their end?



For the past four years, Americans have listened to the globalists of the World Economic Forum tell them what they’re supposed to say and believe — and Trump has wasted no time letting them know their time is up.

“On day one, I signed an executive order to stop all government censorship. No longer will our government label the speech of our own citizens as misinformation or disinformation, which are the favorite words of censors and those who wish to stop the free exchanges of ideas and, frankly, progress,” Trump said in a virtual address to the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Trump didn’t stop there, going on to call out the Bank of America CEO for de-banking conservatives.

“I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives, because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank, and that includes a place called Bank of America. They don’t take conservative business,” Trump said.


“I don’t know if the regulators mandated that because of Biden or what, but you and Jamie and everybody, I hope you’re going to open your banks to conservatives, because what you’re doing is wrong,” he continued.

“You know that everybody in Davos is going to be so upset because misinformation and disinformation was their top priority last year,” Jill Savage of “Blaze News Tonight” comments, adding, “He’s not painting with the pale pastels. He’s coming with the bold colors, if you will, Ronald Reagan.”

“He’s just coming in and telling them what he thinks, and he’s just being Trump, and he doesn’t care. And increasingly, I think people are realizing that maybe they shouldn’t care so much about this organization and what they do and say,” co-host Matthew Peterson agrees.

“I think you’re going to see a fracturing of the confidence and cohesion of this global elite that likes to get together and pretend they all control everything,” he adds.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Milei boldly slams UK jailing citizens who call out Muslim rape gangs



On Thursday, Argentinian President Javier Milei addressed the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland. In addition to addressing Argentina’s stunning economic recovery, he spent time eviscerating the World Economic forum for it’s “barbarity” in radically enforcing its global woke agenda.

Milei started his case by eviscerating European leaders for destroying the foundations of Western civilization in favor of mass immigration:

Since the West is supposedly the root cause of all of the world's evils in history, it must redeem itself by opening its borders to everyone, which leads to a form of reverse colonization that resembles collective suicide.
So, this is how we now see images of hordes of immigrants who abuse, assault, or even kill European citizens, whose only sin was not adhering to a particular religion. But when someone questions these situations, they are immediately labeled racists, xenophobic or even Nazis.

After calling out the WEF member institutions in particular for their embrace of radical sexual perversions and identities, he went straight at the government of the United Kingdom.

Milei said:

Is it not true that right now, as we speak, in the U.K. citizens are being imprisoned for exposing horrifying crimes committed by Muslim migrants, crimes that the government seeks to conceal? Or didn't the bureaucrats in Brussels suspend Romania's elections simply because they didn't like the party that had won?
— (@)

He continued:

Faced with each of these discussions, wokeism’s first strategy is to discredit those of us who challenge these things first by labeling us and then by silencing us. If you're white, you must be racist. If you're a man, you must be a misogynist or part of the patriarchy. If you're rich, you must be a cruel capitalist. If you're heterosexual, you must be heteronormative, homophobic, or transphobic.
For every challenge, they have a label, and then they try to suppress you by force or through legal means. Because beneath the rhetoric of diversity, democracy and tolerance that they so often preach, what truly lies is their blatant desire to eliminate dissent, criticism and ultimately freedom, so they can continue to uphold a model in which they are the main beneficiaries.

Watch the whole speech here.

The British press rushed to the defense of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s left-wing government by accusing Milei of echoing the erroneous accusations of Elon Musk.

This is the second year in a row that Milei has gone after the global elites at Davos in person. With the ascension to the presidency of the United States of Donald Trump on Monday, he is no longer a lone voice.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Klaus Schwab stepping DOWN from WEF; which global villain will replace him?



World Economic Forum founder and executive chairman Klaus Schwab has shocked the world by announcing that he's stepping down from his role running the WEF.

Schwab had founded the global gathering in 1971 and was operating as the executive chairman until now — though he won’t be leaving his brainchild. Rather, Schwab will be transitioning to a role as a nonexecutive chairman pending approval by the Swiss government.

While his successor has yet to be named, Glenn Beck and comedian Eric Hollerbach aren’t wasting the opportunity to poke a little fun at the global villain.

“Hello my slave, Glenn Beck-ing-hamming, how are you today,” Hollerbach says, impersonating Schwab’s fictional son, who they joke will now be running the WEF.

“I’m good,” Glenn laughs. “It’s interesting that you would agree to come on this particular program. I’m not sure how your father feels about people like me.”

Hollerbach, aka Klaus Schwab’s heir, tells Glenn that he hopes to make some “conversions” from Glenn’s side and that Schwab’s brain “is analog at this moment, and it will go to digitalization.”

“So, he was just kind of getting the upgrade,” Hollerbach jokes, adding, “It’s more of a lateral movement.”

When Hollerbach explains what the role of the WEF is, Glenn can’t help but laugh.

“We do certain rituals to ensure that we go up the food chain, closer and closer and closer to the great architect of the universe. And we are the embodiment to inherit earth incorporated,” he explains.

“People, like the average people, how are they going to benefit?” Glenn asks.

“Well, their slavery will be more like digital token. They will have equitable access to making labor or jails,” Hollerbach answers, embracing his power hungry character.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.