The right must choose: Fight the real war, or cosplay revolution online



Is principled conservatism dead? And would that even be good?

Robert P. George’s resignation from the board of the Heritage Foundation last week suggests a deeper shift inside the conservative world. George is one of the most respected conservative intellectuals alive — a Princeton professor who built the James Madison Program and shaped a generation of natural-law scholarship. His departure, prompted by how Heritage President Kevin Roberts handled Tucker Carlson’s interview with Nick Fuentes, exposes a widening fracture on the right about what conservatism is and what it should defend.

The first lesson conservatives should recover: Reason and faith are not optional in the public square.

I have watched this tension escalate since what some have called Charlie Kirk’s “martyrdom.” Voices from what garden-variety conservatives call “the far right,” what liberals lump together as “the right,” and what Antifa brands “fascist” are pushing for influence inside the movement. Some insist these agitators are leftist plants sent to fracture the right. Others believe God allows the intentions of every heart to be revealed.

Whatever the explanation, the attacks now directed at George follow a predictable pattern: an “OK, Boomer” dismissal of a man who has spent his life defending the unborn, natural marriage, and the created order.

Full disclosure: When I was a graduate student studying natural law at Arizona State University, George took time to meet with me and guide my work. Later as a tenured professor, I became a fellow in the very program he founded. One of my own undergraduate professors — the great ethicist Jeffrie Murphy — said George’s work compelled him to rethink everything.

So-called far-right critics now claim George will debate and even co-author books with Cornel West, with his ties to Louis Farrakhan, but refuses to work with people “to his right.” The charge — absurd on its face — is that he is some kind of “controlled dissenter,” a token conservative tolerated by the Ivy League so long as he stays within its boundaries. From there, the speculation drifts into unfounded theories about motives and self-preservation.

George does not need me to defend him. His life’s work refutes these claims. He has never backed away from his convictions. He has never trimmed the truth to curry favor with elite institutions. He debates West because he believes reason still matters, because he believes truth can be argued in public, and because he believes even fierce disagreement does not require abandoning basic human dignity. He refuses to compromise an inch while treating his interlocutors as human beings.

That shouldn’t be so difficult to understand.

In fact, that’s the first lesson conservatives should recover: Reason and faith are not optional in the public square. They are the foundation for honest argument, and honest argument is the only way a free people can persuade and be persuaded. If we descend into conspiracy theorizing, rage, or tribal loyalty as our primary modes of engagement, we abandon the very tools that made conservatism coherent.

Here is George’s warning: Don’t become postmodernists. Don’t imitate the left’s racial essentialism or identity politics. Don’t throw out reason because some Enlightenment thinkers misused it. If you want to rethink every narrative you’ve heard, fine — do it with reason, not with the power-dialectic that dominates progressive thought.

But principles alone are not enough. Being principled does not mean being naïve. Conservatives once understood strategy and tactics — long-term goals paired with immediate steps that move us toward them. I believe the United States should acknowledge the kingship of Jesus Christ. Presidents from both parties once referred to America as a Christian nation. If that is true, then we must engage publicly, argue publicly, and fight publicly for that idea of ordered liberty.

That means getting into the trenches. It means refuting Marxism and atheism clearly and without apology. It means being innocent as doves and wise as serpents, fighting to win without surrendering either virtue.

RELATED: Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, and the war for the conservative soul

Photo by Zach D Roberts/NurPhoto via Getty Images

What we cannot become is principled losers. The enemy welcomes our gentlemanly retreats. The progressive movement wants more than policy wins; it wants to redefine the human person, the family, and the moral order itself. A party that endorses abortion at any point, supports the mutilation of healthy children, and treats scripture as hate speech leaves no moral ambiguity about which side a Christian or natural-law conservative should support.

Read George’s arguments against liberalism. Read his defense of natural law. If you disagree with him, he will debate you — he always has. But you can learn from him that a revival of natural law and natural theology is essential right now. That requires teaching the truths in Romans 1 and learning from Acts how to speak across cultures and ideologies.

We are in a spiritual war. The weapons are spiritual, but the fight is real. The stakes are real. The consequences are real.

It is far better to be fighting through the mud of Mordor than fat, complacent, and conquered in the Shire.

Vance Urges Republicans To 'Have Our Debates' But 'Focus on the Enemy'

Vice President J.D. Vance addressed the ongoing fights within the Republican Party in an interview on Thursday, giving his lengthiest answer to date on the debates raging on the right about whether to welcome racists and anti-Semites traditionally marginalized by the GOP into the coalition. While Vance encouraged debate, he also urged the GOP to focus on unity against opponents on the left.

The post Vance Urges Republicans To 'Have Our Debates' But 'Focus on the Enemy' appeared first on .

No, The Conservative Answer To America’s Affordability Crisis Isn’t Just To ‘Move’

'Conservatism,' as a political ideology, has failed to conserve anything meaningful, and that's a serious problem.

The CHILLING online trail of Trump's would-be assassin



Donald Trump’s would-be assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks’ digital footprint has been exposed — but not by the FBI. Rather, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has revealed disturbing comments Crooks allegedly made on social media leading up to his decision to fire at President Trump.

This online history dates back years and includes him engaging in conversations in YouTube comment sections where he explains that the “only way to fight the gov is with terrorism style attacks.”

Crooks' Google searches also reveal a mentally unwell young man, with searches as far back as 2019 centering around mass shootings, how to build a bomb, and “firing an AR15 as fast as possible.”

Prior to 2020, Crooks' comments appeared to be pro-Trump and against the left. But all that switched, seemingly overnight.


While the FBI has countered Carlson’s claims, BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales isn’t buying it.

“This is a guy who is not well. And I’m just wondering, with so many people on the FBI radar, and the fact that the FBI radar can be so vast at times — I mean, they can track down anyone for anything. Unless you’re the pipe bomber and unless you try to assassinate the president, then running for office,” Gonzales says.

“And all of a sudden, we can’t find anything. … I’m telling you guys, this man was on their radar,” she says. “They won’t tell you that. This is my opinion.”

Gonzales believes that the YouTube comments — where Crooks was replying to an anonymous account discussing violent attacks — point to the possibility that he was "programmed to want to kill Trump.”

Gonzales also points out that while Crooks was engaging in violent rhetoric in the YouTube comment sections, she herself was getting censored for far less.

“I know for a fact YouTube is all over their stuff because I’ve been demonetized for two years of my life, two-plus years of my life, for saying something far more benign than calling for assassination. I misgendered someone, and I almost lost my entire YouTube account,” she explains.

“We deserve answers. … We deserve more answers than, ‘Trust us, bro, we’re the FBI,’” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

Tucker dropped the Crooks files — now Glenn Beck demands answers to 6 critical questions



On November 14, Tucker Carlson released an investigative video, exposing new details about Thomas Matthew Crooks, the 20-year-old who nearly succeeded in assassinating President Donald Trump at his Butler, Pennsylvania, rally on July 13, 2024.

In the 34-minute video, Carlson made three bombshell claims:

1. The FBI spent months falsely claiming Crooks had no online footprint while hiding a years-long digital trail of extremist posts across multiple platforms, including Discord, Snapchat, and YouTube, as well as an extensive search history in the days leading up to the assassination attempt.

2. Crooks began as a pro-Trump, far-right teen advocating dictatorship and racial violence, then dramatically flipped in 2020 to virulent anti-Trump rhetoric and explicit threats of assassination, decapitations, and terrorism-style bombings.

3. Crooks was groomed online by a neo-Nazi handler linked to a U.S.-designated terrorist group, yet the FBI — under both Christopher Wray and now Trump appointee Kash Patel — continues to cover up Crooks’ full history, motive, and evidence, including physically scrubbing the crime scene.

After these revelations, Glenn Beck says there are six critical questions the American public must demand answers to.

FBI slept on Crooks’ kill list

For starters, Glenn is highly skeptical about the FBI’s dismissal of Crooks’ disturbing online activity.

During his pro-Trump era, Crooks directed violent comments almost exclusively toward Democrat officials — overtly calling for their gruesome deaths. This was happening under Joe Biden’s FBI — “a period when the U.S. government … was monitoring social media more aggressively than any other point in U.S. history,” says Glenn.

“People were arrested for memes at this time, but Crooks? Nothing … not a warning, not a knock on the door, not one single action,” he says.

Crooks’ 2020 plot twist: MAGA → Trump assassin

Sometime in 2020, Crooks’ digital footprint, per Carlson’s documentary, reveals an abrupt ideological flip. His comments were just as violent, but suddenly, they were directed at Trump and his supporters. He began mocking Trump's handling of COVID-19, anti-lockdown protests, and conservative media figures, including Carlson himself, for downplaying the virus.

The FBI in its post-assassination attempt report, however, revealed only half of Crooks’ political leanings, omitting the anti-Trump part.

Neo-Nazi Discord daddy groomed him — crickets from FBI

Around the same time Crooks’ political leanings reversed, a shadowy online figure under the alias Willy Tepes, whom Carlson posits is a neo-Nazi Discord groomer affiliated with the U.S.-designated terrorist group Nordic Resistance Movement, began interacting with Crooks. According to the exposé, Tepes encouraged Crooks’ violent rhetoric, openly approving of his barbaric ideations aimed at government officials.

“So now you have our state department” and “our intelligence community that is monitoring people online, especially Nazis in the rest of the world and Nazis here, and yet there's nothing. Not a single red flag is triggered, not a single investigation, no monitoring, no intervention,” says Glenn, noting that this same FBI was monitoring “Catholic churches and priests.”

Further, in the days leading up to the assassination attempt, Crooks, Carlson alleged, searched Trump’s name hundreds of times, as well as Jack Ruby, bomb-making, car and sniper attacks, successful assassinations, and how to evade police gunfire.

“All of these things should ring every NSA alarm bell. Nothing — again,” says Glenn.

“They didn't stop him. They didn't prevent or try to prevent. They didn't warn anyone. Instead, as soon as he was shot, they rushed out a narrative — a very specific narrative — and then they shut down anything that conflicted with it.”

Trump’s FBI still running cover?

Perhaps the most head-scratching revelation in Carlson’s exposé is that Trump’s own FBI has continued to keep Crooks’ shocking history under wraps.

“I understand it when it's Biden's FBI, but now Trump's FBI? Now, why didn't Trump's FBI immediately come out [with this information]?” asks Glenn, noting that Dan Bongino is on record reiterating the narrative that Crooks had virtually no digital footprint.

He uses the metaphor of an iceberg for the FBI. “You see an iceberg, and you just see just the top of it. Two-thirds of that is under the water, so we're seeing the tops change,” he says.

“I'm questioning: Does anyone know how deep this goes? Because I don't think it matters who's running it.”

FBI: Fast cremation

The FBI also approved and coordinated the release of Crooks’ body for cremation just 10 days after the shooting.

“You don't do that in a presidential assassination attempt. You don't do that in a local homicide case unless you want something gone,” says Glenn.

The essential questions

1. Why did the FBI push the narrative that Crooks had a minimal digital footprint when quite the opposite is true?

2. Why did the FBI present only half of Crooks’ political history, hiding his era of Trump hatred? Who exactly was involved in the decision?

3. After the election and the appointment of Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, why did the FBI continue to uphold the original narrative? Who made that decision?

4. Given that the government constantly monitors potentially dangerous online activity, why did Crooks’ violent comments, suspicious search history, and consorting with a known Swedish Nazi group go ignored?

5. Why did the FBI clean the scene prematurely by allowing Crooks to be cremated shortly after the crime?

6. Why is it that every time our FBI and government make a mistake, it seems to point in the direction of “ignorance, negligence, hiding inconvenient data, shaping a political narrative”?

“There's something very wrong. The official story is impossible to believe,” says Glenn, calling these questions not partisan but “self-preservation” inquiries.

“You can feel the republic slipping through your fingers. If we do not correct these things, we do not have a government of, by, and for the people.”

To hear more of Glenn’s commentary and analysis, watch the video 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.

The early social media reviews of Cruz's 2028 POTUS trial balloon are in



Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) dropped out of the 2016 presidential race after his crushing defeat in the Indiana Republican primary by then-candidate Donald Trump. It seems that Cruz did not, however, drop his aspirations of one day taking the White House.

Cruz kept his powder dry during the 2020 presidential election and, in 2024, successfully ran for a third term in the U.S. Senate. Now, the 54-year-old Calgary-born senator appears to be preparing for a 2028 presidential bid.

Unfortunately for Cruz, MAGA influencers do not appear too impressed by his recent attacks on Tucker Carlson, which some regard as proxy attacks on Vice President JD Vance, who is far and away the 2028 Republican front-runner, by even Secretary of State Marco Rubio's admission.

'Cruz is gonna have a tough time.'

On Monday, Axios highlighted a number of signs that Cruz is indeed "laying the groundwork" for a 2028 bid, such as hitting the speaker circuit, endorsing midterm candidates, and securing a date to host a big donor retreat next year.

The liberal publication suggested further that it's clear from his recent salvo against Tucker Carlson that Cruz is simultaneously courting powerful pro-Israel donors, some of whom aligned themselves with Nikki Haley in her humiliating 2024 GOP primary run against Trump; "staking out turf as a traditional, pro-interventionist Republican"; and setting the stage for a battle with Vance, who is not only a Carlson ally but unmistakably at odds with the tack taken by the George W. Bush-era GOP.

RELATED: Vance, Banks come out swinging against reporter attacking Tucker Carlson's son

Photo by Al Drago-Pool/Getty Images

Axios stated that "by poking at Carlson's isolationist foreign policy views, accusing him of anti-Semitism and more, Cruz is putting himself on a collision course with Vice President Vance."

Vance, like Carlson, has criticized the protraction of the war in Ukraine; cautioned against new regime-change wars; emphasized that the U.S. is "not at war with Iran"; and noted that American and Israeli foreign policy are not always aligned.

Cruz has indicated that similar foreign policy views expressed by Carlson are "bat-crap crazy" and "off the rails."

Cruz, who is reportedly set this week to address the Jewish Federations of North America's General Assembly, has also blasted Carlson for his October interview with Nick Fuentes, whom he labeled a "little goose-stepping Nazi," suggesting that Carlson was wrong and "complicit in evil," not for platforming Fuentes but for failing to adequately cross-examine him.

"We have a responsibility to speak out even when it's uncomfortable," Cruz said in a statement to Axios. "When voices in our own movement push dangerous and misguided ideas, we can't look the other way. I won't hesitate to call out those who peddle destructive, vile rhetoric and threaten our principles and our future. Silence in the face of recklessness is not an option."

While Vance — whom Fuentes routinely attacks for having a wife of Indian descent — has made expressly clear that he thinks Fuentes is a "total loser" who does not belong in the MAGA movement, others have attempted in recent days to smear Carlson and Vance with a single stroke.

Cruz's office did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment.

A number of MAGA influencers criticized Cruz on Monday over the poor timing of the Axios piece and/or his apparent punches in Vance's direction.

Human Events senior editor Jack Posobiec highlighted that Cruz's latest dig at Carlson came just hours after President Donald Trump signaled continued support for Carlson, claiming reporters "can't tell him who to interview" and that "ultimately, people have to decide."

Political strategist and commentator Alex Lorusso wrote, "Right after President Trump says you can't tell Tucker Carlson who to interview, Ted Cruz says we have a 'responsibility' to speak out against him. He has a rude awakening coming if he wants to run for president in 2028 by positioning himself against DJT."

Normalcy advocate Robby Starbuck wrote, "Breaking: Ted Cruz will lose the 2028 primary. He has absolutely no chance against JD Vance."

"It's all about principle you see," tweeted BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre, "and that principle is power."

The popular X user Swig noted, "Ted Cruz’s bizarre attacks on Tucker Carlson are simply a proxy attack on JD Vance. Extremely transparent game he is engaging in."

"Judging by top MAGA influencers, Cruz is gonna have a tough time," concluded Axios' Marc Caputo.

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

Vance, Banks come out swinging against reporter attacking Tucker Carlson's son



Buckley Carlson, son of Tucker Carlson, works in Vice President JD Vance's office as deputy press secretary. There appears to be a campaign underway to have him removed over the perceived sin of having Tucker Carlson as a blood relation.

Amid mounting pressure on the young man to disavow his father or at least denounce some of his father's remarks, Vance and other conservatives have made abundantly clear that they will not throw Buckley Carlson to the wolves.

'You don’t assign your hate for his Dad to him, and you don’t ask sons to disavow their fathers or mothers.'

Vance stressed in a multipart defense of his staffer on Sunday, "I have an extraordinary tolerance for disagreements and criticisms from the various people in our coalition. But I am a very loyal person, and I have zero tolerance for scumbags attacking my staff."

"And yes, *everyone* who I've seen attack Buckley with lies is a scumbag," added Vance.

While Laura Loomer and others have concern-mongered in recent months over the presence of a Carlson in the vice president's office, Vance was responding to comments by Jennifer Sloan Rachmuth.

Rachmuth, a Republican operative and journalist who was arrested last year on a cyberstalking charge that was quickly dismissed, stated in a viral Saturday post on X that "racism and antisemitism is a Carlson family trait."

"Is Tucker's son Buckley, who serves as JD Vance's top aide also a vile bigot?" Rachmuth asked, after claiming that Tucker Carlson's brother idolized Nick Fuentes. "America deserves to know how deep the Carlson's family ethnic and religious hatred runs."

RELATED: Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, and the war for the conservative soul

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Rachmuth, who previously suggested that Vance's ties to the Carlson family are "indefensible," hinted on Monday that this pressure campaign might have less to do with Vance's staffer and more to do with the front-runner for the 2028 Republican nomination.

After accusing Tucker Carlson of being "America's most prolific antisemite," Rachmuth noted, "The vice president is close friends with Tucker and yet, he hasn’t weighed in on his targeting against Christians and Jews."

Rachmuth noted further that "when senior aides like Carlson contribute to national policy discussions, clarity regarding his stance on equality and minority protections will maintain public trust in Vance’s policymaking."

Rachmuth, Tucker Carlson, and the vice president's office did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment.

Vance did not mince words when responding to Rachmuth, writing, "Sloan Rachmuth is a 'journalist' who has decided to obsessively attack a staffer in his 20s because she doesn't like the views of his father. Every time I see a public attack on Buckley it's a complete lie. And yes, I notice ever [sic] person with an agenda who unfairly attacks a good guy who does a great job for me."

"Sloan describes herself as a defender of 'Judeo-Christian Values.' Is it a 'Judeo-Christian value' to lie about someone you don't know?" continued Vance. "Not in any church I ever spent time in!"

Republican Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana similarly defended Buckley Carlson, noting that the young man had worked for him for years and was "one of the smartest, most trustworthy and loyal staffers I’ve ever had."

"These personal attacks are disgusting and don’t serve your cause well," added Banks.

Some critics of Rachmuth's attack characterized it as a spillover of venom intended for Tucker Carlson.

Normalcy advocate Robby Starbuck, for instance, noted, "Attacking Buckley is really messed up. Even if you don’t like Tucker, you don’t assign your hate for his Dad to him and you don’t ask sons to disavow their fathers or mothers. Come on."

"They can't bring down Tucker so they're going after his son," wrote conservative commentator Megyn Kelly.

Christina Pushaw, an aide to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), noted, "If us political staffers are accountable for everything our uncles might post online, we're all in trouble," adding in a separate post that it's a "good thing blood-lines don't predetermine our views, and good thing we live in America where we reject the concept of blood-guilt."

Tucker Carlson has been the target of intense criticism in recent weeks over his interview with Nick Fuentes, a rightist provocateur who routinely attacks both Vance and Israel.

When asked about Tucker Carlson on Sunday, President Donald Trump said, "You can't tell him who to interview and if he wants to interview Nick Fuentes — I don't know much about him — but if he wants to do it, get the word out. ... People have to decide. Ultimately, people have to decide."

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

EXCLUSIVE: We Tracked Down the Demon Who Attacked Tucker Carlson in His Bed and You'll Never Believe What He Had to Say About the Jews

Tucker Carlson, the edgelord podcaster and former Swiss boarding school student, made headlines this week for several reasons. He risked his life by agreeing to interview "chemtrail" expert Dane Wigington, one of the only men on Earth with the knowledge and fortitude to expose the global plot to manipulate weather patterns with airplane-guided geoengineering. He followed that up by valiantly defying the outdated convention wisdom surrounding Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran pastor jailed for speaking out against the Nazi regime and executed for allegedly plotting to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Carlson shrewdly denounced Bonhoeffer as a "great man in some ways" who was nevertheless a bad Christian for trying to kill a fellow Christian who was just trying to solve a problem and defend his country from the Jewish-backed imperial aggression of Winston Churchill.

The post EXCLUSIVE: We Tracked Down the Demon Who Attacked Tucker Carlson in His Bed and You'll Never Believe What He Had to Say About the Jews appeared first on .