David Brooks says Trump buried virtue. He’s ignoring the real killer.



New York Times columnist David Brooks’ recent essay in the Atlantic mourned the corrosion of America’s moral fabric. Naturally, Donald Trump is to blame.

Trump’s “narcissistic nihilism,” Brooks argues, is driven by a single philosophy: “Morality is for suckers.” Christian virtues are for the weak. Nietzschean pagan values of power, courage, and glory are for winners. And although many in Trump’s administration “have crosses on their chest,” they harbor “Nietzsche in their heart.” This “deadly cocktail” has transformed America into an entity unrecognizable from the “force for tremendous good” that, according to Brooks, was laid in its coffin on January 20, 2025.

Trump’s appeal to many wasn’t that he embodied virtue. Rather, it was that he promised to protect what remained of the institutions that made virtue possible.

Brooks isn’t the first to hurl such accusations against the president, though, admittedly, he does so in a manner that tickles my philosophical fancy. America’s moral decline has been an issue of concern long before Trump took office.

But is Trump — or any single political leader — really to blame?

Politics follows culture

Like many veterans of the political class, Brooks puts too much faith in institutions. Both parties cling to the comforting illusion that culture flows downstream from politics. Spend enough time inside the D.C. bubble, and even sincere conservatives start to believe that electing the “right” people or passing the “right” laws can do more than govern — that politics can redeem souls from moral collapse.

But pretending policy carries no moral weight is equally foolish. Ask anyone who’s lived under a truly corrupt regime. Still, culture shapes politics more than Washington bureaucrats care to admit.

Diagnosing America’s cultural decline requires more than scolding a single president or passing a bill. It means examining the social landscape that produced such politics in the first place. To understand Washington, we must first look to the soul of the voters who send their leaders there.

Yes, speaking of a national “soul” risks painting in broad strokes at the expense of nuance. Even Brooks would likely concede this much. Americans are desperately reaching for moral touchstones that the culture once upheld. Those touchstones — faith, family, tradition — have been torn down by the very ideologues Trump was elected to oppose.

Up from disillusionment

Brooks concedes a sliver of the truth, admitting that the left has built “a stifling orthodoxy that stamped out dissent.” But his diagnosis barely touches the depth of America’s moral confusion.

More than 40 years ago, Alasdair MacIntyre warned in “After Virtue” that modern society had gutted the moral framework needed to make moral language coherent. Today, we still invoke that language — justice, dignity, meaning — but with no shared foundation beneath it. Efforts to rebuild those foundations now face open hostility.

When public figures like Jordan Peterson face censure for reviving moral guidance once common in homes, churches, and civic life, it reveals something darker. Americans have lost access to the moral raw materials required to build a meaningful life.

Trump’s appeal never rested on personal virtue. It rested on his willingness to defend the institutions that make virtue possible. For millions of voters, he stood as a bulwark against moral collapse — not a saint but a protector of sacred ground. That’s what won him the loyalty of Americans disillusioned by the left’s assault on the moral structures they once relied upon.

The government’s job isn’t to redeem souls. It’s to safeguard the conditions under which people can pursue goodness, truth, and a flourishing life. That means defending the cultural space where moral frameworks can take root — and keeping vandals from tearing it apart.

Brooks calls this “narcissistic nihilism.” In reality, it’s something far rarer: hope — the hope that virtue can still grow in the soil that remains.

DOGE isn’t dead — it’s growing beyond Elon Musk



Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk’s decision to scale back his role at the Department of Government Efficiency sparked the media frenzy we all expected.

Corporate media outlets wasted no time celebrating. They’ve declared the project dead, mocking the effort that has — by every metric — cut bureaucratic waste, exposed entrenched fraud, and disrupted the comfortable routine of Washington’s permanent class.

We didn’t come this far just to hand victory back to the bureaucrats.

In just 100 days, Musk brought more transparency and urgency to federal operations than most “public servants” manage in a career. Under his leadership, the DOGE slashed bloated budgets, shut down globalist slush funds like USAID, and launched investigations into waste across the Departments of Education, Social Security, and more.

DOGE isn’t just a project. It’s a movement. And it didn’t start with Elon Musk — it started when the American people sent Donald J. Trump back to the White House with a mandate to finish the job.

Voters didn’t re-elect Trump just for tough talk. They sent him to dismantle the unaccountable, tax-dollar-burning administrative state that’s grown fat off politics as usual. And the DOGE delivered.

Now, Musk reducing his hours doesn’t mean the mission is over. Far from it. The next phase requires every agency leader who believes in reform, every state and local official who sees the model working, and every grassroots patriot who wants real accountability to step up.

Ignore the media narrative. CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the usual suspects are already spinning this as a defeat. They won’t say it out loud, but what they really hate is simple: Musk asked federal employees to justify their jobs.

He demanded answers. He forced Cabinet secretaries to make hard choices. That’s not chaos. That’s reform. And it scared the right people.

So now it’s up to us. Trump provided the mandate. Musk brought the firepower. The American people must now carry this momentum forward— to local government, to state agencies, and to every inch of federal bureaucracy still resisting change.

We didn’t come this far just to hand victory back to the bureaucrats. The real work is just beginning.

Glenn Beck reacts to passing of Pope Francis



Earlier this morning, Pope Francis passed away at his residence in the Vatican’s Casa Santa Marta. He was 88 years old and riddled with health issues. His replacement will likely be decided in the next 15 to 20 days by a secret conclave of cardinals, who will vote until a candidate secures a two-thirds majority.

As the world braces to find out who’s next in line, Glenn Beck has a story to tell — one that mainstream media would never dare to touch.

He keenly recalls the day Francis was announced as the next pope following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI — a “staunch conservative,” who “stood for everything the modern world wanted the Church to abandon.”

Benedict “had moral clarity; he was a traditionalist and a spiritual authority,” Glenn reflects. However, it didn’t take him long to figure out that “Pope Francis was going to be none of these things.”

As the media speculated about who would be next in line, pundits brought up Francis, formerly known as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, and claimed they knew very little about him.

However, “Within 10 minutes [of the announcement], everybody on every network started talking about how great he was going to be” and that “he was practically Jesus,” says Glenn.

That’s when he could see the writing on the wall — “They like him,” which means “this guy is going to be a nightmare.”

Contrast their celebration of Francis with their contempt for Benedict, who “would not compromise on life” or “marriage” and had “no applause for the modern world.”

“The globalists hated him, the media called him rigid, progressives called him dangerous, and the machine went to work behind closed doors because that machine is in every government, and make no mistake — the Vatican is a government,” says Glenn.

Although it will never be admitted, Benedict didn’t resign; he was removed due to “a soft coup by the progressive faction inside the Church who was eager to align Rome with Davos.”

“We've seen it in Hollywood; we've seen it in the media — it's the replacement of the immovable with those who are more malleable; the strong replaced by the inclusive, the faithful with the fashionable,” Glenn reflects.

Pope Francis is case and point. He entered the picture and “immediately everything about the Church changed.” Suddenly, there was “global applause,” “doctrinal ambiguity,” and “climate change sermons.” Overnight, the Church became “less about salvation, more about sustainability and collective salvation; less moral compass, more moral relativism.”

The deep-state mentality is pervasive, Glenn explains. It “runs in institutions, and when those institutions start to resist the world's direction, they're infiltrated, they're neutralized, and they're repurposed.”

That’s what “happened at the Vatican,” says Glenn. “I saw it.”

To hear Glenn’s wild story about his chilling encounter with the very man who was leading the opposition to oust Benedict and hear his take on where the Catholic Church is headed, watch the episode above.

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.

Neoliberalism implodes in a crisis of truth and trust



Since the Enlightenment, liberalism has aimed to remove politics from the political. Given that human history is largely defined by clashing worldviews and violent conflict, the impulse to tame this dynamic is understandable. Liberalism, grounded in secular neutrality and rule of law, sought to suppress the passions that drive men to war. Its answer was to distribute power widely enough so that no single leader’s rage or charisma could lead a nation into chaos.

This project has reached its apex in today’s managerial neoliberal regime, where secular humanism serves as the ruling creed and experts, housed in supposedly impartial institutions, are tasked with determining truth. But the cracks in this foundation began forming long ago.

In the liberal order, the collapse of institutional credibility marks a crisis of truth. And so far, the only answer from the ruling class has been to scream, 'Shut up!'

Our ruling class members have willingly torched the credibility of the very institutions they rely on for legitimacy — all in pursuit of temporary political advantage. That destruction has accelerated a collapse that now feels inevitable. Liberalism faced an epistemological crisis and failed to meet the challenge. Like every tradition that cannot defend its intellectual ground, it is watching its authority erode into dust.

Neutral governance comes with clear benefits. It claims to free society from bitter conflicts over religion and identity. It promises a greater scale of cooperation by stripping away regional particularities — traditions, customs, prejudices — that make governing diverse populations difficult.

Even technical differences tied to nationhood, like currency, units of measurement, or contract law, obstruct trade. But by creating institutions that claim neutrality in matters of faith, culture, and commerce, liberalism increased the scale of possible coordination. It built what amounts to a “minimum viable morality,” a lowest common denominator that allowed incompatible systems to function together.

The problem? That same minimum morality now appears insufficient to hold anything together.

Instead of serving specific peoples with particular needs, modern institutions — staffed by credentialed experts — aim to impose rational, universal standards on everyone. The promise is simple: equal treatment under a neutral system. The administrators of this system are chosen not for their biases, but for their supposed objectivity.

These institutions soon become more than arbiters — they become the final authority on truth. In the liberal order, they are the only legitimate source of knowledge. If it isn’t institutional, it isn’t real.

The economic benefits of this arrangement are obvious. Large-scale cooperation yields immense material gains. Yes, traditions and religious customs may erode in the process, but who can argue with abundance? Prosperity silences most dissent.

As long as the ruling class preserves the credibility of the institutions, the system works. Managerial liberalism turned experts into a new priestly caste — with one crucial difference: This priesthood could actually make it rain. As long as the economy grew and the promises were kept, no one questioned the myth of neutral expertise. All the boats were rising. Why complain?

Unfortunately for the liberal order, human beings are predictably flawed. The institutions were never truly neutral, and the experts were never infallible. Over time, the ruling class got greedy. They stretched their credibility to justify wars and push social engineering — even when it clearly wasn’t in the public interest.

As their grip on power tightened, they grew bolder. Those who ran the system began treating institutional trust as a political currency to be spent. They traded legitimacy for short-term advantage, eroding the very foundation that kept their authority intact.

This trend hit its apex during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Across the board — from the World Health Organization to local physicians — experts promoted obvious falsehoods to maintain power. The betrayal was staggering.

After watching that coordinated institutional collapse, the public started asking uncomfortable questions. If medical professionals — the most trusted experts in life-and-death matters — could lie, what else has the system lied about? Elections? Wars? Economics? History? Suddenly, everything is up for re-examination.

This moment terrifies the ruling class. Its members' entire strategy relied on institutional consensus to shape truth and steer public opinion. This is why disillusioned liberal voices like Sam Harris or Douglas Murray, once celebrated for challenging orthodoxy, now beg the public to get back in the box and stop asking questions.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with how we know what we know. Under managerial neoliberalism, experts — and the institutions they populate — became the foundation of knowledge itself. Truth was whatever the expert consensus declared it to be.

Philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre (no relation) argued that the survival of any tradition depends on its ability to confront and resolve an epistemological crisis. In the liberal order, the collapse of institutional credibility marks just such a crisis. And so far, the only answer from the ruling class has been to scream, “Shut up!”

MacIntyre also insisted that resolving a crisis requires more than adopting a new framework. It demands understanding why the old one failed. But the current elite show no capacity for that kind of reflection. Instead of humility, we get hysteria — mockery, censorship, and cancellation from experts who should be asking how they got it so wrong.

The global neoliberal order has hit an epistemological wall, and its expert class members lack the wisdom or self-awareness to break through it. They will continue screeching and lashing out in defense of a collapsing worldview. But the truth is unavoidable: The era of rule by experts is ending.

This crisis brings danger, yes — but also opportunity. A new paradigm is emerging. And whatever comes next, it will not be governed by the priests of consensus.

NYC Mayor Adams ditches Dem primary, then takes aim at the 'deep state'



New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, announced on Thursday that he will not seek the party's nomination but will run his re-election campaign as an independent candidate.

Adams, who rarely posts on his personal X account, shared a video announcing his decision. The announcement stood in sharp contrast to his two most recent prior posts from the summer of 2024, when he had voiced support for former Vice President Kamala Harris in the presidential election.

'I have never seen anyone do such a good job of defining that deep state.'

Just a few months later, Adams was effectively on the outs with Democrats, facing a federal corruption lawsuit shortly after he criticized the Biden administration for fueling the nation's illegal immigration crisis.

Adams wrote on Thursday, "I have always put New York's people before politics and party—and I always will. I am running for mayor in the general election because our city needs independent leadership that understands working people."

In his six-minute video, Adams discussed the grit of New Yorkers, the "bogus case" against him, and the other mayoral candidates.

— (@)

While he stood by his decision to call out the Biden administration for its immigration failures, he stopped short of severing ties with the Democratic Party.

"Some leaders choose rhetoric over results and fail to make working people their North Star. But the values of the working-class base — pro-public safety, pro-worker, pro-quality of life — are still there standing strong even if many who share them have left the party," he stated. "I had hoped to fight for them again in a Democratic primary for mayor."

"But the dismissal of the bogus case against me dragged on too long, making it impossible to mount a primary campaign while these false accusations were held over me," Adams continued. "Though I am still a Democrat, I am announcing that I will forego the Democratic primary for mayor and appeal directly to all New Yorkers as an independent candidate in the general election."

Adams acknowledged that the accusations against him in the corruption case "may have shaken" New Yorkers' confidence in him. He maintained his innocence, but expressed regret for "trust[ing] people I should not have."

He slammed his opponents without naming any mayoral candidates specifically.

"Some were advocating against more police, even if they are for them now," Adams said. "Some were fighting the pro-growth strategies of our administration. Some even sought to limit housing production. Some voted to give more of your tax dollars to other cities and towns in this state while refusing to change laws that let dangerous criminals run wild on our streets. And some sat at home and did absolutely nothing."

The mayor boasted his administration's record on housing, crime reduction, job creation, and benefit disbursements for low-income New Yorkers.

Adams admitted that he made mistakes.

"But it was not a mistake to invest more in housing than any other mayor. It wasn't a mistake to put a cop on every train. It wasn't a mistake to increase the value of housing vouchers and earn income tax credit to the highest levels ever," he stated.

"And it wasn't a mistake to put politics aside, defy my party when needed, and speak for the voice of working New Yorkers," Adams declared.

'Trump derangement syndrome is real.'

On Wednesday, the same day the indictment against Adams was dropped, comedian Andrew Schulz released a new episode of his podcast, "Flagrant," featuring an interview with the mayor. The two spoke about New York City's immigration crisis, Adams' decision to criticize the Biden administration, and the accusations against him.

Adams encouraged Schulz to read FBI Director Kash Patel's book, "Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy."

Schulz asked, "Is this what people refer to — and I think this word has been used too much, but the 'deep state,' or whatever it is?"

"It's not used too much," Adams responded. "It's real, brother."

"I have never seen anyone do such a good job of defining that deep state," he continued, referring to Patel. "You should have him on your show."

When asked whether legal immigrants should be afraid under the Trump administration, Adams responded by torching those on the left who have spread false rumors that Immigration and Customs Enforcement has targeted individuals with legal status.

"When I'm moving around my immigrant communities, and they share with me, 'We're afraid. We're afraid to go to school, work, church, etc.' Why are they afraid?" Adams asked. "The activists who love this hysteria are giving the impression that all the sudden ICE is going into our schools and taking our children, going into hospitals — that's just not true."

He declared that "Trump derangement syndrome is real" and expressed disappointment that the Department of Government Efficiency's efforts to root out waste and fraud had become politicized by the president's critics.

Adams also blasted the Biden administration for placing parents on the FBI watchlist for being concerned about what their children were being taught in public schools.

"I'm telling you, read Kash's book," he told Schulz.

One source close to Adams told the New York Post, "Now that this case is gone and he's running in the general, you're going to see a very 'f*** you' mentality from him."

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

'Election interference': FBI silenced internal discussion of Hunter Biden laptop prior to 2020 election



Weeks ahead of the 2020 election, the New York Post dropped a possibly election-altering bombshell report about the discovery and damning contents of Hunter Biden's laptop, which the FBI authenticated nearly one year earlier.

A 2022 poll found that the supermajority of Americans believed that President Donald Trump would have won re-election that election cycle had voters known the Post's report was accurate. Apparently aware that the report could have this kind of impact, the liberal media, social media platforms, a cabal of former intelligence officials, active CIA contractors, and other politically motivated forces worked to discredit and suppress the story.

The FBI was a major player in this campaign to gaslight the American people.

According to chat logs shared by Republicans on the House Committee on the Judiciary, the bureau not only misled social media companies into believing the Post story was Russian disinformation but actively worked to prevent employees from discussing the laptop's authenticity, going so far as to impose a "gag order" regarding discussions of Hunter Biden's laptop.

In chat messages dated Oct. 14, 2020 — the date the Post's story was published — an individual whose name was redacted informs Elvis Chan, the assistant special agent in charge of the San Francisco FBI field office's cyber program, of the "gag order."

— (@)

An October 2024 congressional report released by the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government identified Chan as the "primary point of contact at the FBI" for the meetings between the bureau and Big Tech that "led to the prebunking of the laptop story in 2020."

When asked, "Anyone discussing that NYPost article on the Biden's?" Chan responds, "Yes we are. c d confirmed an active investigation. no further comment."

'It failed to disclose that it possessed and had authenticated the laptop — a key fact.'

Michael Shellenberger's investigative outfit Public, which first reported on the FBI chat messages, noted that "c d" was likely shorthand for the bureau's Criminal Division.

Chan then asks, "Actually what kind of case is the laptop thing?" adding, "Corruption? campaign financing?"

Another FBI employee whose identity was redacted responds, "CLOSE HOLD —" followed by a blacked-out response.

Chan responds, "oh crap," then notes, "ok. It ends here."

In another series of messages, one FBI employee can be seen telling another, "Nobody on call is is [sic] authorized to comment upon NY Post story," to which another employee responds, "gotta love it."

A bureau insider made clear: "do not discuss biden matter."

— (@)

It is clear from the messages that the FBI was aware of active efforts to discredit the story. One FBI employee noted, for instance, that "twitter is treating [the story] as disinformation."

In the days following the publication of the Post story, the FBI clammed up, refusing to provide censorious social media companies with more details and repeatedly leaning on the response "no comment" as indicated by the newly released chat messages.

The Judiciary report noted that "while the FBI clarified that it had no specific evidence of a Russian hack-and-leak operation [in communications with social media platforms], it failed to disclose that it possessed and had authenticated the laptop — a key fact that likely would have ended any justification for censorship."

The report emphasized that "if the FBI's intent was truly to help social media companies combat actual foreign influence operations, the FBI should have shared the single most important fact: the influence-peddling allegations in the Post story were based off of real, credible information, including information in the FBI's possession. The FBI failed to do so."

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) said in response to the revelations about the gag order, "The FBI's groupchats revealed they were directly involved in election interference," adding, "Where is the outrage?"

"When will there be a criminal investigation?" asked Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton.

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

Biden-Era ‘Lawfare’ Target Says He’s Now Running ‘Most Important Agency’ You’ve ‘Never Heard Of’

'Many people thought I was completely dead'

I called out the CIA on X — and then my account disappeared



Some say the Central Intelligence Agency is the world’s leading cause of “coincidences.”

This might be another one. Just as the government released thousands of JFK assassination files, I — a former CIA officer turned whistleblower — was suddenly blocked from posting reform proposals on social media.

The experience showed just how powerful X has become in the fight against deep-state corruption. Americans want their country back from those who have taken control.

I post regularly on X, sharing updates on CIA activity and government corruption. My account has 125,000 followers and delivers unfiltered information without paid promotion.

After 17 years in the CIA, including high-level assignments across multiple global stations, I know how the agency operates — and how often it violates the U.S. Constitution without consequence.

Since I began publicly exposing CIA corruption in 2010, I have created documents and posted videos about CIA misconduct. My computer crashes frequently — twice in the past four months — destroying all my data. Even my backup account on Carbonite failed to save this information. Recently, “someone” accessed my primary computer through the router and specifically targeted and corrupted only the files and videos related to the CIA, rendering them inaccessible.

My account on X has been a quick and protected way to get this information to Americans. In my book, “Twilight of the Shadow Government: How Transparency Will Kill the Deep State,” written with my courageous co-author Kent Heckenlively, we reveal the CIA’s criminal and unconstitutional operations for everyone to see. “Light dispels darkness,” as so many have observed. In the book, Kent and I lay out 12 steps that must be taken to reform the CIA.

Two weeks ago, on my X account, I spelled out 13 additional radical steps to reform the CIA and end its tyranny of secrecy once and for all. I posted each step back-to-back. These reforms are lethal to the CIA’s control over all three branches of our elected government — and the fear of reprisal against anyone who challenges its power.

Maybe it was the 13th step that annoyed the agency the most: “Legally indict and charge CIA officials who engage in a criminal conspiracy to silence whistleblowers, block information from Congress, or violate U.S. and constitutional law.” It just wouldn’t be the same old CIA any more if they couldn’t lie to Congress or our duly elected president.

The day after I posted the 13 steps, I received a warning from X stating I had violated its guidelines and was being suspended for multiple copyright violations. I was unable to log in and access my account. Four attempts to appeal the suspension resulted in a boilerplate response instructing me to log in to my account for further information.

Of course, I was unable to log in to do so.

What’s more, I could not follow any other X users or post comments on their pages. It was an endless loop of blockages. This occurred just as 80,000 pages of JFK assassination documents were released — a critical moment. I had prepared evidentiary posts indicating the CIA was involved in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. My position as a CIA officer who had worked in all four agency directorates — as well as being the only one to publicly challenge the state secrets privilege and publish a book about the history of the CIA without the agency's approval — made me unique among commentators.

Finally, I contacted my dear friend Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — who has reached the same conclusion regarding the CIA's culpability in the murder of his uncle — spelling out what had just happened. Since he is extremely busy with his new Cabinet post at Health and Human Services, I was unsure whether I would receive an answer.

Within a matter of hours, I received a text back from Bobby. He advised me that he had passed my text to James Musk — Elon’s cousin and an X executive. James responded immediately. After researching the matter, James advised me that X had not suspended @kevin_shipp. Some entity — perhaps the CIA? — had created a fraudulent @kevin_shipp account, which caused an override of the true account and sent me a fictitious X community guidelines violation along with multiple copyright violation claims on the 13 steps to CIA reform.

James uncovered this malicious attack in just under two hours. Following his guidance on how to regain access to the real account, @kevin_shipp was back up, and all 13 steps were there and open for comments.

What a relief to see my first post go live again — just one word: “Test.” My co-author quickly shared the story on X, paying to boost the post. It reached 1.6 million people.

The experience showed just how powerful X has become in the fight against deep-state corruption. Americans want their country back from those who have taken control.

Watching Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and James Musk respond so swiftly and boldly to a targeted attack on my account was inspiring and reassuring. That night, I slept peacefully, knowing I wasn’t alone in standing up for our republic.

This fight isn’t mine alone — it belongs to all of us. And with people like Kennedy and Musk stepping up, we’re finally pushing back.

Your taxes funded lavish vacations, luxury cars, and fake jobs



A little-known agency in Washington perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with our bloated, corrupt government: the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. It should be the poster child of everything that Elon Musk is exposing.

The agency was established in 1947 under the Labor Management Relations Act to serve as an independent agency mediating disputes between unions and businesses — a noble mission, perhaps. But like so many government institutions, it has rotted into something far removed from its original purpose.

The FMCS goes beyond mismanagement into blatant corruption and theft.

What was once a mechanism for labor stability has morphed into an unchecked slush fund — an exclusive playground for bureaucrats living high on taxpayer dollars.

The FMCS is a textbook case of government waste, an agency that no one was watching, where employees didn’t even bother showing up for work — some hadn’t for years. And yet they still collected paychecks and spent government money — our money — on their personal luxuries.

Luxury cars and cell phone bills

The Department of Government Efficiency discovered how FMCS employees used government credit cards — intended for official business — to lease luxury cars, cover personal cell phone bills, and even subscribe to USA Today. The agency’s information technology director, James Donnan, apparently billed taxpayers his wife’s cell phone bill, cable TV subscriptions in multiple homes, and personal subscriptions.

FMCS officials commissioned portraits of themselves and hung them in their offices, and you footed the bill. They took exotic vacations and hired their friends and relatives to keep the gravy train rolling.

The FMCS goes beyond mismanagement into blatant corruption and theft — and it went on for decades, unnoticed and unchallenged.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order to abolish the FMCS — a necessary and long-overdue move. But the FMCS is just one of many agencies within the federal government burning through billions of taxpayer dollars. How many more slush funds exist in the shadows, funneling money into the pockets of bureaucrats who produce nothing? How many government-funded NGOs operate in direct opposition to American interests?

Perhaps the most disturbing question is why Americans tolerate such corruption. Why do so many Americans tolerate this? Why is the left — supposedly the party of the people — defending the very institutions that rob working-class Americans blind?

Corruption beyond bureaucracy

The recent rallies led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), and their socialist acolytes claim to be a grassroots uprising against corruption and greed. But GPS data from these rallies tells a different story. The majority of attendees aren’t ordinary citizens fed up with the status quo. They’re professional activists — serial agitators who bounce from protest to protest.

Roughly 84% of devices tracked at these rallies were present at multiple Kamala Harris events. A staggering 31% appeared at over 20 separate demonstrations, tied to Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and pro-Palestinian causes.

Many of these organizations receive federal grant money — our tax dollars — and they’re using those funds to protest the very policies that threaten to cut off their financial lifeline.

This isn’t democracy in action. This is political theater — astroturfing perfected. And the American taxpayer is funding it.

Rooting out corruption

Trump was a battering ram against this corrupt system. Elon Musk is a surgeon, meticulously exposing the infection that has festered for decades — and that’s why the leftists hate him even more than they hate Trump. Musk threatens to dismantle the financial web that sustains their entire operation.

When we allow the government to grow unchecked and our leaders to prioritize their own wealth and power over the good of the nation, figures like Trump and Musk are necessary. Rome didn’t fall because of an external invasion but rather due to internal decay that looked an awful lot like what we see today.

We must demand better. We must refuse to tolerate this corruption any longer. The FMCS may be gone, but the fight to root out this deep-seated corruption is far from over.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Trump REVOKES security clearances from leading deep state operatives



In another move toward making America great again, President Donald Trump has stripped top security clearance from several prominent Democrat and deep state operatives, including Hillary Clinton and Joe and Hunter Biden.

“There are people who would say that President Trump’s just being vengeful and mean to Joe Biden,” Sara Gonzales of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” comments. “Actually Joe Biden did it to him first, because if you recall back in February of 2021, Joe Biden revoked Trump’s security clearances for what he called ‘erratic behavior.’”

“Because, you know, you look at Joe Biden and you’re like, ‘Boy, that is a paragon of stability; that is a stable man right there. He should definitely have the security clearances and read all of our top secret stuff,’” she continues.


While the panel members of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” are pleased, they’re a little confused as to how Hunter Biden ever had a top security clearance in the first place.

“I still don’t understand how Hunter Biden, with any stretch of the imagination, got security clearance. Like why?” Matthew Marsden asks.

“The left always tries to make it out to be some like vengeful enemies list, and I don’t think that’s right. Like these people were misusing our intelligence for their own political purposes, many of them, and breaking the law in many cases,” Stu Burguiere jumps in.

“I don’t know what Hunter Biden was doing, getting a discount at the local escort services? I don’t know what he was doing with this information,” he continues, adding, “I can’t imagine why he would have that clearance.”

Alvin Bragg and Letitia James also had their security clearances revoked — but again, no one knows why they had them in the first place.

“Why would they have security clearance for the entire country?” Gonzales asks.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.