What really happened to the German gold housed in the United States?

Last January, Glenn covered the story that the German Central Bank was planning to repatriate its gold reserves from the United States and France. Ultimately, it was agreed upon that Germany would only actually take a fraction of its holdings back. Why the sudden change of heart? Glenn opened Wednesday's Glenn Beck Program with a disturbing report about what really happened when the Germany Central Bank decided to repatriate its gold reserves.

Tonight, I want to start here, and this is probably something that we’re going to have to talk about several times because it’s really hard to understand. But we’ve talked about it once before over several months, but I think things have gotten significantly worse, and let me explain. Last January, Germany started asking if they could just come into the Federal Reserve and look at their stash of gold.

This is the gold that the Feds supposedly hold, and the Fed said no. Germany was like I’m sorry, what? Huh? Well, not surprisingly, Germany announced soon after that they wanted their gold back. Because they weren’t even allowed to see their gold, that got them a little nervous. They said we want to repatriate our gold from the Fed.

VIDEO

Bundesbank to bring gold home, plans to hold 50% of gold reserves in Frankfurt by 2020, so 300 tons are going to leave New York, 374 tons from Paris. Well, not quite clear why.

It’s German politics.

Is that what it is?

They want to have it, right? They moved it out of Germany because of the Cold War, right, the threat the Russians would take it? It’s just the same reason most of the gold is sitting in the basement of the New York Fed. In World War II, Europeans moved their gold over here to avoid the war, and now they’re moving back.

What a bunch of bull crap. This is the biggest bunch of bull crap I’ve ever heard. Why does anybody watch these guys? I have no idea. The reason why they moved the gold over to the United States is because we said we would be the gold standard. Yes, they wanted to move the gold over here for security reasons, etc., etc., but we promised them that we would never go off the gold standard, and we didn’t until the 1970s.

Why do they want to move them over? Well, there’s something to tangible gold. Well, no, not if you believe in this. What’s the difference? But if you say hey, can I get into that bank and see my money, and the bank says no, huh uh, I don’t think so, don’t you say I want to take my money out of that bank, and I’m going to store it someplace else?

So the gold supposedly has been sitting in the vaults since the 1950s, and you know, it shouldn’t take any more than a little bit of Swiffering before you send it back. But the Fed said that it’s going to take until 2020 before they can return that gold, seven years. Now, why would it take seven years to dust something off and ship it out? I mean, we have FedEx. I know you’re not going to send FedEx, but we have cargo planes.

Now, that’s what they said last year. They were going to make their first payment on that over the holidays, and they did, but something happened along the way. Apparently we had to melt their gold bars down. The Fed claims that about 6,700 tons of gold from Germany is in their vaults. What Germany is asking to get back is 300 tons, 5% of their stack, shouldn’t be a problem.

It’s been a year since they requested, and the U.S. has just sent back 37.5 tons. That’s 50 tons short of what we need to send each year to meet Germany’s request by the deadline. We didn’t even hit the first payment. Okay, if I’m German, that makes me nervous. Wait a minute, you promised you’d send all of the first year, and you only sent half of it. What’s the problem here?

And here’s the disturbing part, even more disturbing. The reports that are coming out now is that the gold we sent them over the holidays was melted down and recast. This is important. It begs the question why? I can think of several reasons, but none of them really make sense, except the situation is worse than even I thought it was when I talked to you about rehypothecation.

I think there’s a good chance that there’s not a lot of that gold left. But how did that happen? I mean, do we have another Sandy Berger loose, you know, stashing gold bricks in his socks? No, the answer is partially rehypothecation. Now, this is something we talked about on this program before, if you remember.

VIDEO

Glenn: It’s why when they’re taking the gold, and Germany says, I want the gold, return our gold, it’s ours, the Federal Reserve says, Okay, but we’ll return 10% in seven years. Well, how hard is it to return our gold? It’s got the German Republic stamped on it. Give us our gold. The reason why – this is my theory – the reason why they’re not returning that for seven years is because a little phone call came in, and they said to the Germans, hey, rehypothecation dude. If you take your gold, there’s not enough gold here.

We were playing a game. There’s only so many assets, and so we just keep building on those assets in a bogus way. So once people demand their hard asset back, the entire thing collapses, and that’s the last phase of what we’re headed for. Rehypothecation, learn it.

Okay, that’s really important. Let’s start at the basics. The Federal Reserve is a collection of banks. We don’t know whose banks they are. We’re not allowed to look at their books or anything else. They’re the ones that we put the gold in, and then they give us this instead. They print our money. But we’re not allowed to see…we just gave them all that gold? Yes, that unfortunately is the way it works. It sounds like a scam already, doesn’t it?

The money has to be backed by something. It needs to be backed by gold, so we put all of our gold into the Federal Reserve, just a giant bank, and they gave us a stack of cash. And then we said okay, this is the cash the Federal Reserve has. Remember, it’s all backed by gold. Then we convinced that the entire world, not just the U.S. but the rest of the West. Germany gave it to us, Japan, the UK. Everybody gave us their gold to hold like in a safety deposit box for the entire world, okay? Safety deposit box, let me stop there for a second.

I want you to think of the vaults down at the basement of the Federal Reserve in Manhattan as a safety deposit box. You go in. Say you have jewelry, I have my wedding ring. It’s my anniversary today. This is the ring we had made for me. It’s the Klimt, The Kiss on it, and it’s special to me. And if I go to a safety deposit box, I put it in there with all the other, you know, lovely plastic jewelry that I have, and I bring it to the bank. And I say I want to put this in a safety deposit box.

They give me a receipt. They give me a key. I go in, and I put it all into the safety deposit box. I see it the whole way. Anytime I can walk in and say I want to see my stuff in my safety deposit. Yes sir, Mr. Beck. Do you have your key? Yes, I do. We both unlock it. There we have it. We each have a key, and I can see it anytime.

Now, at some point if I go back and I say I want my wedding ring back, and I want all my jewelry, they say, oh, I can’t let you see that – wait a minute, what? What do you mean I can’t see that? And then if they give me not this ring, but they give me another wedding ring, might weigh exactly the same, but it’s not my wedding ring, wouldn’t you ask some questions?

Let me explain rehypothecation one time and then back to what happened to Germany. Why I said originally they weren’t going to give their money back to them for seven years is because rehypothecation is exactly what happened to our housing crisis, and it’s happening to our gold because everybody got greedy. Everybody was greedy in the housing market, not necessarily you but the banks.

Here’s what happened: Let’s say these were just houses. Jeremy here wanted to buy a house. I was a bank. I said okay, I’m going to need your house as collateral. You continue to pay for that, but I’m holding that collateral. But then me as the bank, I need a loan, so I go over here to Germany. And I say hey, Germany, I have this house over here. If you’ll just give me some money for this house, then we’ll be square, but if I don’t pay you, then you can take this house.

Well, wait a minute, I can’t really do that because then he becomes the owner of this house, but I’m the owner of this house as well. And then he says he needs some money, so he sells this same house to Japan and then to England. And we keep selling everything to each other over and over again. There’s no real asset. If he defaults and doesn’t pay me, I default. And because I default, he says I’m going to default, and he says give me the house.

Well, I’m sitting for the house. I need it from him. He needs it from me, but he needs it from him. And he needs it from him, and it goes back around. It doesn’t work. This is what’s happening with gold. I believe rehypothecation, the West wanted a fat and sassy lifestyle that none of us could afford, so the Federal Reserve and the central banks all around the world sold our gold over and over and over again.

We took our gold, and we said okay, we’ve already printed all that money for United States, what the heck, Japan, how much do you need? We’re going to take, and you’re going to make a loan on this gold for Japan. And then Japan said okay, Germany needs some money, and we’ll give it on America’s gold and then England. It’s happening over and over again. That’s rehypothecation. That’s a Ponzi scheme that I believe happened at the Federal Reserve, and it’s starting to fall apart.

Now, picture this deal happening over and over and over again since 1950, hundreds and thousands of times. Subprime crisis, do you remember that? Imagine that crash on a global scale and instead of houses, it’s gold which backs all of our money and gold that is not really owned by anyone. Our money becomes worthless. Not a good Ponzi scheme, right? Everything collapses.

The Fed’s no different right now, but I believe it’s worse than this. I believe not only did they rehypothecate all of the gold, but they also said you know what, I’m going to sell this to somebody else because I as the bank also want that money. Oh, and I’m going to take the German money, this gold, and I’m going to sell this one to somebody else too because I as a bank need some money.

Forget about the countries. We’ve already sold the gold to each other over and over again, but then they just started taking the gold and selling it themselves. Wait a minute, the Federal Reserve, remember what got me here is the Federal Reserve cannot pay Germany back a relatively little sum that happens, a little sum, not this big box, just a little box of their gold. They can’t do it. And when they start asking for it, they stall.

And then something weird happens, nobody’s allowed to peek into the vault. Do you remember Geraldo at Al Capone’s vault when nothing was there, and it was kind of a letdown? This time it won’t be a letdown if nothing’s there. A German reporter with over three decades of experience in financial reporting asked on December 27 Germany’s Bundesbank, their central bank, why the Federal Reserve melted down the gold that was returned.

Here is his e-mail: “Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: I am an independent financial journalist. In connection with the transfer of 37 tons of Bundesbank gold from New York to Germany, I came across the news that the bars were a melted before the transfer. May I kindly ask you the following information: Why were the bars melted at all? And why couldn’t that wait until the bars arrived in Frankfurt? Kind regards, Lars Schall.” Great question, Lars.

The bank’s answer wasn’t really an answer at all. They explained that they have a new storage concept to ensure that certain specifications are met. They claimed the bars had to be melted to meet these specifications – uh huh. Why in the world would you need to melt it down before it got to Germany? Have you ever seen the movie The Italian Job? What’s on that bar? It’s stamped with a dancer, right?

Now, I don’t know what Germany’s has on it. I don’t know, maybe a big beer stein or something, but they’re all stamped. And why are gold bars stamped like that? Do you remember in the movie? What did they say? Everybody knew. Remember, that’s why the one guy got it in the head because he was like oh, this is – BOOM! Everybody knew who owned that gold. That’s why every country stamps it, to authenticate the weight and the purity.

Let’s talk about purity for a second. A few years ago, several years ago, the Fed had to respond to reports that damage had happened to Britain’s gold when Britain asked for some of its gold back and left it with a purity of just 91%. What does that mean? Again, I go to the bank, I give them this, and then I say what’s the purity of this? It was 99.9% pure when I gave it. If it’s 91% pure, there’s a problem.

When you melt down these bars and send them back, you negate the authenticity. We’re not able to send them the right amount of gold at all. We’re not able to send them their actual bars of gold. That’s a red flag to me, and it should have every American and every press organization up in arms asking questions. I believe what’s happening is far worse than rehypothecation.

Not only were the Feds playing the Ponzi scheme of rehypothecation, a game on each other over and over and they all knew it, all the central banks, but I believe they’re also physically selling everyone’s gold. And now they can’t reproduce the stamp, and so they’re coming up with whatever they can.

Remember, when Britain complained that their money was repatriated gold, it was returned with a small piece of impurity. Well, when you have access to that much gold, skimming it becomes quite tempting. Does anybody have a quarter on them? Nobody actually carries any cash anymore. If you think about a quarter or a dollar, you know, an actual coin – you have a quarter? Somebody actually uses the drink machine.

When you think about a quarter, I want you just to think about the thin part for just a second, this part. Pull in as tight as you can, this part, the edge. Is it smooth, or does it have ridges like Ruffles? It’s ridgy, right? Why? Why are those ridges there? Because if you skim it, it becomes less valuable. Think of it like the scene from Indiana Jones. Do you remember this scene? Do we have this? Yeah, remember?

This is the most ridiculous thing because you know how heavy that would be if it was pure gold? But anyway, he takes the sand. It’s not quite enough, so he has to pour a little bit out. Now, what people used to do is they would skim a little bit. This is a very old coin. This is from the time of Christ. This is from the year of the crucifixion. This is a piece of silver.

If you look at this coin, you can see – pull in as tight as you can. If you look at this coin, you can see that it is uneven. Pull in. There you go. It is uneven, and parts of it are cut off. The back is even better to see. Parts of the stamping have been cut off. Why? Because over 2,000 years because it’s solid silver, people would take a little bit and just shave a little bit off. That’s why those ridges are on the quarter, they shaved just a little bit off.

That’s what happened to England when they got 92%. They just shaved a little bit. The world needs to demand accountability from the Federal Reserve. I don’t think it’s going to end well when we do. In fact, I think it ends horribly for everyone but better face the facts right now. The world needs to demand to see proof that America still has its gold, and we still stand for something.

Now, maybe this is just a giant mix-up, and all of it can easily be explained by coincidence. I can’t think of a way it does. My gut tells me that’s not the case. It tells me the more likely scenario is the Fed is playing games, more specifically stealing through a massive Ponzi scheme, and when the rest of the world who has been in on part of that, the rehypothecation, realizes that the Fed and U.S. government perhaps has been taking the gold, not just theirs, yours as well, to fund their addiction to spending or to give the banks more money, there is nothing of value in those vaults, and there is nothing that anyone will put any trust in. The chickens come home to roost.

We have never seen theft like this before. How would you feel if you went to the bank, and they couldn’t give you back anything, your wedding ring, or any of your other valuables? When you got back, they handed you this, except it really was plastic, but it wasn’t plastic when you gave it to them. That’s what’s happening, I think, right now, and it’s happening to Germany. And it will at some point happen when people all over the world and hopefully our country start demanding to see the vaults and the gold.

When the people busted down the doors only to find nothing, what happens to those bankers? What happens to Americans? You will be blamed for stealing the world’s treasure. America is the globe’s banker, and it is only a matter of time before all of the world and the rest of us as well find out we’ve got nothing. Who does?

Did Democrats just betray fair elections? The SAVE Act controversy explained

DOMINIC GWINN / Contributor | Getty Images

One of President Trump’s key campaign promises, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, faces fierce opposition from Democrats in the Senate.

The SAVE Act recently passed Congress for the second time and is now headed to the Senate. This voter security bill mandates proof of U.S. citizenship for all federal elections. It garnered unanimous Republican support in Congress but was backed by only four Democrats, consistent with last year’s Senate rejection of the bill.

Glenn has repeatedly emphasized the urgency of securing our elections, warning that without reform in the next four years, free and fair elections may become a thing of the past. However, the SAVE Act faces significant hurdles. Republicans lack the Senate votes to overcome a filibuster, meaning the bill’s fate hinges on bipartisan support—something Democrats have been reluctant to offer.

So, what exactly does the SAVE Act do? Why are Democrats opposing it? And how can you help ensure its passage?

What the SAVE Act Entails

Stefan Zaklin / Stringer | Getty Images

The SAVE Act is straightforward: it requires voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship before casting a ballot in federal elections. This measure responds to reports of voter fraud, including allegations of noncitizens, such as illegal immigrants, voting in past presidential elections. Acceptable forms of identification include a REAL ID, U.S. passport, military ID, birth certificate, or other specified documents.

Additionally, the bill mandates that states remove noncitizens from voter rolls and lists of eligible voters. It also establishes criminal penalties for officials who fail to comply with these new guidelines.

Democrats’ Opposition to the SAVE Act

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Democrats have strongly criticized the SAVE Act, arguing it discriminates against women, transgender individuals, and minorities. They claim that people who have changed their names—such as women after marriage or transgender individuals—may struggle to vote if their current ID doesn’t match their birth certificate. However, the bill allows multiple forms of identification beyond birth certificates, meaning affected individuals can use updated IDs like a REAL ID or passport.

The argument that minorities are disproportionately harmed is slightly more substantiated. A recent survey showed that 93 percent of voting-age Black Americans, 94 percent of voting-age Hispanics, and 95 percent of voting-age Native Americans have valid photo IDs, compared to 97% of voting-age whites and 98 percent of voting-age Asians. However, in 2024, only about 58 percent of the voting-age population cast ballots—a trend that has been consistent for decades. There’s little evidence that Americans are prevented from voting due to a lack of ID. Instead of opposing the bill, a more constructive approach would be to assist the small percentage of Americans without IDs in obtaining proper documentation.

How You Can Make a Difference

Melissa Sue Gerrits / Stringer | Getty Images

The stakes couldn’t be higher—free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy. Conservatives must rally to ensure the SAVE Act becomes law. Contact your Senators to express your support for the bill and highlight its importance in safeguarding electoral integrity. Grassroots efforts, such as sharing accurate information about the SAVE Act on social media or discussing it with friends and family, can amplify its visibility. Local advocacy groups may also offer opportunities to organize or participate in campaigns that pressure lawmakers to act. Every voice counts, and collective action could tip the scales in favor of this critical legislation.

"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

-Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park

The monstrous Dire Wolf, extinct for 10,000 years, has returned. This larger, ancient wolf species—popularized by HBO’s Game of Thrones—was resurrected by Colossal Laboratories, a Dallas-based bioscience company. Colossal utilized both preserved ancient Dire Wolf DNA and modern gray wolf DNA combined with some clever gene-crafting and a healthy pinch of hubris to create three approximations of the ancient canine.

While the wolves posed for a photoshoot alongside Game of Thrones props and its creator, Colossal’s broader plans remain unclear. However, what Glenn recently uncovered about the company is far more monstrous than the wolves will ever be. Glenn revealed that the CIA, through a nonprofit group known as In-Q-Tel, is funding Colossal's endeavors to bring back all sorts of extinct beasts. With the recently released JFK Files exposing the CIA’s unchecked power, Glenn warns of the dangerous potential behind this genetic manipulation—and the rogue agency’s possible motives.

Here are the top three most horrifying uses the CIA could have for this technology:

Dual-Use Technology

Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

Colossal and other biotech firms advertise a variety of "civilian" uses for bioengineered beasts, including research subjects, exotic zoos, and even climate restoration. As dubious as those uses are, Glenn revealed that the CIA could be cooking up something much worse. Gene-editing tools like CRISPR are inherently dual-purpose and easily adaptable for military use. As one of Colossal’s major investors, the CIA gains prime access to cutting-edge biotech, likely eyeing its potential for warfare.

Frankenstein’s Spy Lab

Like AI, one can only guess at the maximum capabilities of this gene-editing technology. On air, Glenn speculated about bioengineered resilient organisms, animals with tweaked senses designed for espionage or combat in areas inaccessible to drones or humans. Playing God to create new weapons of war sounds right up the CIA's alley.

Even worse than man-made mutant mutts, Glenn pointed out that these augmentations are by no means limited to animals. We could see (or rather, hear unverified rumors of) the rise of the next generation of super soldier projects. Human experimentation is not outside of the CIA's scope (think MKUltra), and genetically or chemically augmented humans have been a pipe dream for many a clandestine organization for decades. Is there anything more horrifying than an agency with as little oversight as the CIA in control of something as powerful and potentially devastating as gene-augmentation?

Eco-Warfare Unleashed

MARCELO MANERA / Contributor | Getty Images

Why attack a single target when you could attack an entire ecosystem instead?

Anyone who has had to deal with the destructive effects of fire ants knows how dangerous an invasive species can be to the human, plant, and animal inhabitants of any given region. Now imagine genetically engineered Dire Wolves or Woolly Mammoths unleashed by the CIA to cripple an enemy’s agriculture or environment. Such a weapon could inflict irreparable damage from a distance. Even the mere threat of eco-warfare might serve as a deterrent, though its unpredictability could reshape the world in ways we can’t control or repair.

Trump’s Liberation day unveiled: 3 shocking takeaways you need to know

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

President Trump’s new tariffs have sparked global outrage, and even conservatives are divided over the merits of his plan.

On Wednesday, April 2, 2025, President Trump declared "Liberation Day" to usher in a new era for the American economy. This bold initiative began with the introduction of sweeping tariffs on most—if not all—countries trading with the United States. These tariffs are reciprocal, meaning the percentage charged to each country mirrors the tariffs they impose on U.S. goods. The goal was to level the playing field between America and its trade partners.

As Glenn predicted, these tariffs have caused some immediate damage to the economy; the stock market has been hit hard, and China has already imposed a retaliatory tariff. While many fear that a recession is inbound, along with a global trade war, others are trusting in Trump's plan, keeping their head and preparing to ride out this rough patch.

So, what exactly are these "Liberation Day" tariffs, and what happened on April 2? Here are the top three takeaways:

Baseline Tariff

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

To kick off Liberation Day, the White House unveiled a baseline tariff affecting all imports to the U.S. Starting April 5, 2025, every good entering the United States will face a 10% tariff, regardless of its country of origin. While some nations face additional tariffs on top of this baseline, others—like the UK, Australia, and Argentina—only pay the 10% rate. These countries enjoy this leniency because they impose relatively low tariffs on American goods.

Reciprocal Tariffs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

For the countries that levied heavy tariffs against America, Trump hit them back hard. Cambodia, for instance, now faces a steep 49% tariff, while China contends with 34%, the EU with 20%, and Iraq with 39%. While these tariff rates may seem steep, they are all a good bit lower than the rates they apply against the U.S (see the full chart here). Trump’s strategy is to make foreign goods prohibitively expensive, encouraging manufacturing and jobs to return to American soil. Whether this gamble succeeds remains to be seen.

Canada and Mexico

Aaron M. Sprecher / Contributor, Chris Jackson / Staff | Getty Images

Notably absent from the "Liberation Day" tariff list are Canada and Mexico, America’s closest neighbors. That’s because Trump already imposed tariffs on them earlier this year. In February 2025, he slapped a 25% tariff on most goods imported from both countries to pressure them into curbing the flow of fentanyl across U.S. borders. Exceptions include agricultural products, textiles, apparel, and other items protected under NAFTA.

Does France's latest move PROVE lawfare is on the rise?

Sam Tarling / Stringer | Getty Images

An all-too-familiar story unfolded in France this week: the is law being weaponized against a "far-right" candidate. Does that ring a bell?

Glenn was taken aback earlier this week when he learned that Marine Le Pen, a popular French conservative, had been banned from the 2027 election following a controversial conviction. The ruling shocked French conservatives and foreign politicians alike, many of whom saw Le Pen as France’s best conservative hope. President Trump called it a "very big deal," a view shared by French commentators who fear this marks the end of Le Pen’s political career.

But this isn’t just about France—it’s a symptom of a larger threat looming over the West.

A double standard?

Fmr. President Sarkozy (left) and Fmr. Prime Minister Fillon (right)

BERTRAND GUAY / Contributor, Chesnot / Contributor | Getty Images

As of Sunday, March 30, 2025, Marine Le Pen led the polls with a commanding edge over her rivals, offering French conservatives their strongest shot at the presidency in years. Hours later, that hope crumbled. Found guilty of embezzling EU funds, Le Pen was sentenced to two years of house arrest, fined €100,000 ($108,200), and banned from public office for five years, effective immediately.

Glenn quickly highlighted an apparent double standard. Former President Nicolas Sarkozy and former Prime Minister François Fillon faced similar—or worse—corruption charges, yet neither was barred from office during their political runs. So why Le Pen, and why now? Similar to Trump’s "hush money" trial, legal troubles this late in the election cycle reek of interference. The decision should belong to voters—France’s largest jury—not a courtroom. This appears to be a grave injustice to the French electorate and another crack in democracy’s foundation.

This is NOT about France

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

This pattern stretches far beyond France; it’s a tactic we’ve seen before.

In early 2025, Bucharest’s streets erupted in protest after Romania’s Constitutional Court annulled the first round of its presidential election. Călin Georgescu, a rising conservative, had clinched an unexpected victory, only to have it stripped away amid baseless claims of Russian interference. His supporters raged against the decision, seeing it as a theft of their voice.

Both Georgescu and Le Pen echo the legal barrage President Trump endured before his 2024 win. The Left hurled every weapon imaginable at him, unleashing unprecedented lawfare. In America, the Constitution held, and the people’s will prevailed.

Now, with Tesla vandalism targeting Elon Musk’s free-speech stance, a coordinated pushback against freedom is clear—spanning France, Romania, the U.S., and beyond.

The war on free will

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Trump’s 2024 victory doesn’t mean lawfare is dead; Europe shows it’s thriving.

France and Romania prove its effectiveness, sidelining candidates through courts rather than ballots. Glenn warned us about this years ago—when the powerful can’t win at the polls, they turn to the gavel. It’s a chilling trend of stripping voters of their choice and silencing dissent, all the while pawning it off as justice. The playbook is polished and ready, and America’s turn could come sooner than we think.