What principles do you build a business on? Glenn talks to the author of 'The Go-Giver'

Before leaving for the holidays, Glenn left a book on the desk of every employee of Mercury Radio Arts and TheBlaze. It was The Go-Giver: A Little Story About a Powerful Business Idea. The book presents a new way of doing business, one that puts the customer front and center. Glenn plans to use The Go-Giver as a model for his company in 2015, and invited author Bob Burg onto the radio show to talk about the incredible book

Listen to the interview below at 38 minutes into today's show:

Below is a rough transcript of the segment:

GLENN: I have Bob Burg on the phone. He's the author of a book that I absolutely love. It's called The Go-Giver. I don't even know how long this thing came out.

Bob, are you on the phone. How long did you put this out?

BOB: Oh, John David Mann and I wrote this in 2007, was in the bookstores in 2008.

GLENN: Okay. So I'm right on top of things. But I read this, I don't know this fall and I'm changing my company a great deal. And someone gave this to me and said, Glenn, this is what you're trying to do with your company. You have to read it. I was so moved by this book, I bought all 300 employees, I bought everybody a copy of the The Go-Giver and gave it to them for Christmas. You know, Merry Christmas.

BOB: I cannot tell you how honored I am by that, Glenn. To have one of my heroes embrace the book like that and give it out as a gift. It's beyond being honored.

STU: Now you've lost credibility.

GLENN: Shut up. I didn't know you knew who I was. But I'm flattered. But, Bob, tell the story of this book.

BOB: It's about a young up-and-comer. Ambitious, aggressive well-meaning guy who is really frustrated. As much as he's working hard, he's very much focused on himself. He's what we would call a go taker. We love go-getters because they take action. He was a go-taker. A guy focused only on himself. Who owed what to him and everything was about him. The very valuable lesson he learned was that shifting his focus from getting to giving.

In this context, when we say giving, we mean consistently and constantly providing value to each other. It's not only a nice way to live life, it's a very profitable way as well. It's the actual ultimate embodiment of a free market-based economy. It's about liberty. People willingly buying and selling and trading with one another. If you want to be successful in a free market-based economy, you have to focus on value, on thinking more about others than yourself. Bringing value to others.

GLENN: No. Capitalism done wrong is selfish. And you will never get anywhere. In the long-run it will all end. It's the reason why Goldman Sachs has fallen so far. They used to be, let's do the right thing for the client. Even if it's the wrong thing for us in the short-term, it will be the right thing in the long-term. Let's do the right thing for the client. It becomes service oriented. And capitalism at its best, how can I make somebody's life better and easier? How can I help people? And if you truly love whoever it is that your customer is, if you truly love them --

I remember my father. He used to love watching people -- he would come out in front of the bakery. My mom would run to the bank or something, he would work the counter. I remember my father used to give taste tests all the time to people. They would come in, oh, no, you have to try this. He would cut a slice of whatever and he would give it to them because he loved watching them eat it. He loved his customer. He wanted them to be happy. That's the secret to capitalism, is love the people you're serving.

BOB: You mentioned about Goldman Sachs and others -- capitalism is the best regulator. It's the best natural regulator because it punishes the bad. Punishes those who do not care about the customer and rewards those who do. This is why John and I say, money is simply an echo of value. It's the thunder to value's lightning, which means the value must come first. One of my great Libertarian heroes Harry Brown used to say, in a free market-based economy, profit is simply the result of satisfying the need of another human being.

PAT: Bob, something we've been talking about is this new net neutrality thing they're talking about and trying to regulate the internet, which is the freest medium we have in the world today.

GLENN: Never been more free or freeing.

PAT: Never. Senator Ted Cruz has been talking a lot lately about this. And he brought up the telephone and the telecommunications act of the late 1930s. And that froze any -- any sort of innovation for about 50 years. He said, oh, yeah, we did have the major innovation of touch-tone dialing. As soon as they took those regulations off, what happened? The world was revolutionized.

GLENN: We had the answering machine, the fax machine, all that within ten years.

PAT: Cell phones. Long-distance service went away. Just unbelievably revolutionized the world. How do you get it across to people that government regulations are not the way to go? The free market is the way to go.

GLENN: With that being said, how do you get it across to people that the best deal for you, if it's not the best deal for the end user, it's not the best deal for you.

BOB: Right.

GLENN: Stop thinking so short-term.

BOB: Here's the thing: I truly believe this. The biggest challenge and the most important thing to do is to always go back to the basic premises. For example, we know that capitalism has resulted in a higher standard of living than any other system ever. Unfortunately, because of the government or the public school system or if the media, the mainstream, what have you, most people in America -- not most, but many people in America today, they confuse cronyism with capitalism.

What you were talking about earlier, you know, buying special favors from government, from these bought and paid legislators and the lobbying. So I asked people, I explain what the difference is. And I often say that, you know, to make it stick, you know, cronyism is to capitalism what -- or I should say because sometimes people will say crony capitalism and I hate that term because it misleads. But crony capitalism is to what capitalism what Chinese checkers is to checkers. Absolutely nothing.

Only when you -- you know, when you can explain to someone -- we have to do it keeping in mind their ego and keeping in mind that they're probably well-meaning in what they're thinking. They have been educated in a certain way. They have a certain worldview. As we talked about it in The Go-giver, all things being equal, people will do business with and refer business to people they know, like, and trust.

First, we need to create the relationship with them where they trust us enough to say, hmm, okay, maybe I'll listen to this person and allow what they say to kind of sink in.

GLENN: So, Bob, I actually am very -- at some point I'm really pessimistic because I see people just going down this road of, you know, giving government more power and giving crony capitalists, you know, a pass time and time again. But other times, I look at the younger generation, and I think, they've never been more free. They've never had more opportunity ever in the history of the world. And I really think that the younger generation actually does get it.

They want to do -- nobody wants to go to work and just be part of a machine or a cog. They want to go to work because they want to feel like they're making a difference. They're changing something. They're doing something of value. And do you have faith that in the world as it's changing so rapidly, that without a real champion for, you know, the principles laid out in your book the go giver, that this will catch on?

BOB: No matter how much over the last 100 years, we've grown from basically a free market economy to more of a socialistic economy, no matter how much that has happened, especially of late, the entrepreneurial spirit of the American individual is so strong, that I don't think it can be denied. And that's why despite, you know, what we've seen with all the -- the business unfriendly measures that take place, the economy still continues to grow. Not like it could if capitalism was unleashed. If government fulfilled their, you know, legitimate function as article four, section four in the Constitution. Protect from force and fraud and otherwise just create the context where people can live their lives however they see fit. If that happened, of course, we would absolutely explode.

But if I think you said, the youngsters today they kind of get it and they want to be free and they know they can create. And the thing about value is when value for value is exchanged, it creates a bigger pie. It creates a pie of abundance. We don't need to redistribute a limited pie. Instead, we create a bigger pie. And that's really what I hope The Go-Giver is about. That's exactly what I believe true free market capitalism is about.

GLENN: Tell me what the big the biggest hurdle is. When people read this big, for me, it's been hardest to convince businesspeople, old, lying businesspeople that being selfless and just saying, look, you know what, I don't want to go out of business and I won't do things that hurt our company, but I'll take the hit here because it's right for them. Let's do things -- like, for instance, next year I'll give away one of my books. I'll just give it away because I know that by giving it away, it will actually become bigger. The message is more important than any money I could make on the book. So I'll just give it away. That is a hurdle to get businesspeople to say, wait. Wait. What? I need the exchange here for that.

No, you don't. You don't. You can do things differently and look for a long-term relationship of trust and decency that will far outweigh anything you can make in the short run. Is that the hardest thing to convince people of or what is the biggest hurdle?

BOB: I think the key is to act in alignment, act congruently with your values. The people that write the check for $10,000 for their local animal shelters, they're doing that because it aligns with their values. They feel better about doing that than not doing that.

I love it when people make a profit because profit helps everyone. But the key though is to make a profit by providing much more in use value than what you take in cash value.

The accountant who charges $1,000 to do someone's tax return, but through their effort, their diligence, their caring, they save that person $5,000 in taxes. They provide them with peace of mind and security, so the person who is the buyer gets much more in value than what they're paying, but the accountant is very happy to sell his or her time for a thousand dollars.

But I love the idea you're giving away the book because you also make a profit. Your profit is the joy of spreading a message that you just really love.

GLENN: In a world that is increasingly, A, you didn't build this, it was the collective that built this. And then, B, you don't deserve it, so I'll just take it. How does a book like The Go-giver make the dent?

BOB: I have to say, that was a discouraging thing to hear from our president. To actually say something like that. I was hoping that was taken out of context, Glenn.

[laughter]

GLENN: I remember when I was young and naive too.

BOB: Yeah, that was like three months ago for me. And just, you know -- when candidates -- Hillary Clinton, you know, a couple of months ago states make no mistake about it, businesses don't create job. I mean, oh, my goodness, gracious. You know what, I just hope -- and The Go-Giver has sold about 500,000 copies. And John and I both really want to just keep moving it. We really think the message of free markets, of kindness, of doing the right thing, because you're really authentically want to be part of the solution and be part of the value giving process. I speak at a lot of sales and leadership conferences, and I always within the messages of the The Go Giver want to -- I want to point out the people like John Allison, the CEO now of the Cato Institute. The Libertarian think-tank.

And John Allison for 20 years, he led BB&T. Hugely profited. One of the few, one of the few banks in the country, one of the few banks that did not participate in subprime lending, making only conventional loans. Why? Because it was contrary to the values of the bank, which was to provide value for their customers, and he knew that didn't.

He knew that the fiddling between government and the government-sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae as well as the cronyism, he knew it wasn't beneficial. He did the right thing. When the cards came crumbling down, he didn't need or want the bailout. The tax funded bailout money. Of course, they made him take it under a veiled threat. There are a lot of people doing the right thing. I want to focus on them and use them as examples of how go givers really do better.

GLENN: Bob, I'd love to have you back on television, maybe spend an hour, and you can go through the five laws. If you really want to be part of the solution and not part of the problem and you just want a new way of looking at business, I can't recommend highly enough the The Go-Giver: A Little Story About a Powerful Business Idea

. It's how I'm building my company and resetting things. As I said, I bought 300 copies and gave it to every employee at Christmas. The Go-giver by Bob Burg and John David Mann. Thank you so much, Bob, I appreciate it.

BOB: Glenn, I'm totally honored. Thanks for having me on.

GLENN: God bless. We'll talk to you again.

Crazy enough to be true? The connection between the Cybertruck bomber and cryptic drones

WADE VANDERVORT / Contributor | Getty Images

Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation.

A chilling story has emerged: A whistleblower, claiming to possess knowledge of advanced military technologies and covert operations, took his own life in a shocking explosion outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas. He left behind a manifesto filled with claims so extraordinary they sound like science fiction. Yet if even a fraction of them prove true, the implications are staggering and demand immediate attention.

This whistleblower alleges that the United States and China developed “gravitic propulsion systems,” technologies that manipulate gravity itself to enable silent, undetectable flight at unimaginable speeds. According to his claims, these systems are not theoretical — they are operational, deployed both in the United States and China. If true, this would render conventional defense systems obsolete, fundamentally altering the global balance of power.

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever.

Imagine aircraft that defy radar, heat signatures, and missile defense systems. They carry massive payloads, conduct surveillance, and operate without a sound. If such technologies exist, they pose a national security threat unlike any we’ve faced.

But why haven’t we been told? If these claims are false, they must be debunked transparently. If true, the public has a right to know how such technologies are being used and safeguarded.

The whistleblower’s manifesto goes farther, claiming that with this technology, the United States and China developed and deployed the infamous drones that were seen across the United States starting late last year. He alleged that China launched them from submarines along the U.S. East Coast, calling them “the most dangerous threat to national security” because of their stealth, ability to evade detection, and unlimited payload capacity. He ties this advanced technology to other surveillance systems, creating a network so advanced it makes our current intelligence capabilities look primitive.

These claims may sound far-fetched, but they highlight a deeper issue: the cost of government secrecy. Not knowing — and not being told — fuels distrust and speculation. Without transparency, these incidents dangerously erode public confidence in our leaders and institutions.

The cost of secrecy

Beyond technology, the manifesto also alleges moral failures, including war crimes and deliberate cover-ups during U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan. In one particularly harrowing claim, the whistleblower describes attacks in Afghanistan’s Nimroz Province in 2019. He alleges that 125 buildings were targeted, with 65 struck, resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths in a single day. Even after civilians were spotted, he claims, the strikes continued knowingly and deliberately.

The United Nations investigated similar incidents and confirmed civilian casualties during these operations. However, the whistleblower’s accusations go farther, implicating high-ranking officials, the Department of Defense, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Central Intelligence Agency, and even top military generals in a broader pattern of deceit, eroding the moral integrity of our military and government.

Whether these specific claims hold up, they underscore a larger issue: Secrecy breeds corruption. When people in power hide their actions and evade accountability, they break trust — and everyone pays the price, not just those at the top but also the citizens and soldiers they serve.

Transparency is an imperative

America’s founders warned us about unchecked government power. Today, their warnings feel more relevant than ever. From the COVID-19 pandemic to the Capitol riot on January 6 to the potential misuse of advanced technologies, the American people have been kept in the dark for too long.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and sunlight is coming. Transparency must become our rallying cry. As we look to the future, we must demand accountability — not just from those we oppose politically but from all leaders entrusted with power. This isn’t about partisanship; it’s about preserving our nation from self-destruction.

As we enter a new chapter in our nation’s history, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Whether it’s uncovering the truth about advanced technology, holding perpetrators of corruption accountable, or seeking justice for war crimes, we must act. This isn’t just a call to action — it’s a moral imperative.

Our strength lies in our unity and our resolve. The powerful fear an informed and vocal citizenry. Let’s prove them right. By demanding transparency and accountability, we can restore trust and ensure that the government serves the people — not the other way around.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Mark Zuckerberg's recent announcement to lift content moderation policies across all of Meta's platforms and end the company's reliance on third-party fact-checkers, at first glance, is an incredible left turn given the platform's long-term participation in online censorship. However, does their shift signal a genuine change of heart, or are there more selfish motivations at play?

On the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn and Stu looked at both perspectives. On the one hand, Zuckerberg's announcement, adding UFC President and avid Trump supporter Dana White to Meta's board of directors indicates major progress in America's pushback against online censorship. However, Glenn also posited that Zuckerberg's intentions are chiefly to win the good graces of the incoming Trump administration in order to maintain Meta's controversial work in virtual and augmented reality technologies (VR/AR).

There is evidence for both perspectives, and we lay it all out for you below:

Did Zuck have a genuine change of heart?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Zuckerberg’s bombshell announcement, at face value, suggests that Meta recognizes the greater demand for free speech on online platforms and growing discontent against content moderation that has censored non-mainstream political opinions, including Glenn and Blaze Media. Zuckerberg described this shift as an authentic attempt to return to the company’s roots of promoting free expression, acknowledging past mistakes in suppressing voices and content deemed politically controversial. Moreover, Meta's new adoption of community-driven content flags similar to X positions itself as a platform that values user input rather than the biased perspective of any single third-party "fact-checker."

Additionally, Zuckerberg’s evolving views on Donald Trump strengthen the argument that his "change of heart" is genuine. Before the 2024 election, Zuckerberg expressed admiration for Trump, even calling him a "badass" after the first assassination attempt, noting how the event changed his perspective on the then-presidential candidate. Moreover, his embrace of new board members, such as UFC President Dana White, a staunch Trump supporter, further suggests that Meta may be diversifying its leadership and welcoming a more inclusive approach to varied political opinions. In this context, Meta’s move away from fact-checking can be interpreted as a commitment to fostering an environment where free speech and diverse political perspectives are genuinely valued.

Or is it about self-preservation?

DREW ANGERER / Contributor | Getty Images

While it is tempting to view Meta’s policy change as a sincere commitment to free speech, there is also a compelling argument that the company’s motivations are rooted in self-preservation. Glenn suggested Meta’s financial interests, particularly in virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) technologies, indicate its pivot may be less about principle and more about ensuring continued government contracts and capital flow. Zuckerberg’s significant investments in VR/AR technology, which has already cost the company billions, may be driving his need to align Meta’s policies with the political climate to safeguard future funding from both the government and private sectors.

Moreover, the company’s financial projections for the coming years show a sharp increase in advertising revenue, driven primarily by Facebook’s dominance in social media. This revenue helps sustain Meta’s ambitions in the VR/AR space, where it faces significant losses. The government’s involvement in funding military and tech projects tied to VR/AR underscores the importance of maintaining favorable political relationships. For these reasons, many view Zuckerberg's policy change as an attempt to position Meta for maximum political and financial benefit.

POLL: Is GLOBAL WARMING responsible for the fires in L.A.?

Apu Gomes / Stringer | Getty Images

As wildfires sweep across California and threaten to swallow up entire neighborhoods in Los Angeles, one question is on everyone's mind: What went wrong?

So far over 45 square miles of the city have been scorched, while the intense smoke is choking out the rest of L.A. Thousands of structures, including many family homes, have been destroyed, and many more are at risk as firefighters battle the flames. Many on the left, including Senator Bernie Sanders, have been quick to point to climate change as the cause of the devastating fires, citing the chronic lack of rain in L.A.

Others, including Glenn, have pointed out another potential cause: the severe mismanagement of the forests and water supply of Los Angeles and California in general. Unlike many other states and most other forested countries, California does not clear out the dead trees and dry vegetation that builds up on the forest floor and acts as kindling, fueling the fire as it whips through the trees.

On top of this, California has neglected its water supply for decades despite its crucial role in combating fires. The state of California has not built a new major water reservoir to store and capture water since the 1970s, leading to repeat water shortages in Southern California. To top it off, Gavin Newsom personally derailed a 2020 Trump order to divert water from areas of the state with excess water to parched Southern California. Why? To save an already functionally extinct fish. Now firefighters in L.A. are running out of water as the city is engulfed in flames. At least the fish are okay...

But what do you think? Are the wildfires a product of years of mismanagement? Or a symptom of a changing climate? Let us know in the poll below:

Is climate change responsible for the fires in L.A.?

Are the L.A. fires a product of years of mismanagement? 

Do you think controlled burns are an effective way to prevent wildfires?

AI Singularity? ChatGPT rates Glenn's 2025 predictions

KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV / Contributor | Getty Images

On this week's Glenn TV special, Glenn divulged his top predictions for 2025. While some of his predictions spelled hope for current geopolitical issues like the war in Ukraine, others took a more harrowing turn, from AI reaching singularity to a major banking crisis and a "Summer of Rage 2.0."

But what does ChatGPT think? Glenn's head researcher asked ChatGPT about the likelihood of each of Glenn's predictions, and the results spell trouble for 2025.

Which of Glenn's predictions did ChatGPT say will come true? Find out below:

1. The internet will be destroyed and reborn through AI.

Summary: AI will restructure the internet, centralize control with tech giants, and raise concerns over censorship.

ChatGPT Probability: 90%

Further Explanation:

Glenn began with a harrowing fact: the internet, as we know it, is slowly dying. We don’t truly have access to "the internet" in its entirety, but rather, we have a small sliver curated by those who control the indexes and brokers of the web. The slow decline of the internet is evident in the increasing irrelevance of many existing pages and documents, with countless dead links and broken websites. This issue demonstrates the growing problem of content disappearing, changing, or becoming irrelevant without updates to reflect these changes.

To address this growing problem, experts suggest that a massive "reboot" of the internet is necessary. Rather than continuing to patch up these issues each year, they argue that a thorough cleaning of the digital space is required, which is where AI comes into play. Google has already proposed using AI to scour the web and determine which content is still relevant, storing only active links. Glenn worries that we will embrace AI out of convenience to fix the problems facing the internet but ignore the widening door to the potential dangers that such convenience brings.

2. AI and ChatGPT innovations will be integrated into everyday life.

Summary: AI will dominate search engines, become personal assistants, and spark regulatory battles over ethics.

ChatGPT Probability: 70%

Further Explanation:

Glenn predicted that AI systems like ChatGPT will increasingly serve as gatekeepers, determining what information is accessible and valid. While this centralization will enhance user convenience, it raises serious ethical concerns about bias, manipulation, and censorship. These innovations mark the beginning of an expansion in the concept of "being human," with AI digital assistants becoming integrated into everyday life in ways that could significantly change how we interact with technology. However, these advancements will prompt regulatory battles, as governments push for stricter AI oversight, especially in light of concerns over privacy and "misinformation."

3. AI will attain singularity.

Summary: AI progress will remain uneven, with no imminent singularity expected despite rapid advancements.

ChatGPT Probability: 20%

Further Explanation:

The prediction that AI will reach "the singularity" in 2025 means that it will surpass human intelligence, leading to rapid, exponential growth. Glenn pointed to AI’s rapid progress, such as ChatGPT’s growth from 0% to 5% in four years, and an expected jump to 87% by the end of the year. However, the debate about benchmarks for achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) remains muddled, as there is no clear definition of what constitutes "the singularity." Glenn believes one key indicator will be the unemployment rate in key industries, which could become a major indicator of AGI's impact by 2026.

While AI is advancing quickly in specific areas, like natural language processing, vision, and robotics, ChatGPT cautions that achieving AGI, and thereby the singularity, is still far off and that continuous, unbroken exponential growth in AI innovation is also unlikely. Therefore, ChatGPT concludes, that while significant advancements in AI are expected, the idea of an unimpeded, straight-line trajectory toward the singularity within the next year is unrealistic.

4. There will be a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine.

Summary: A temporary ceasefire will freeze borders but will leave future conflict inevitable.

ChatGPT Probability: 80%

Further Explanation:

Both Ukraine and Russia are exhausted, depleting their manpower and munitions. With Donald Trump’s return to the political scene, Glenn predicts that his involvement could lead to negotiations and a temporary ceasefire. While the borders may remain as they are for the time being, the unresolved tensions would likely leave the door open for renewed conflict in the future. This temporary resolution would provide both sides with the breathing room they need, but it could set the stage for continued instability down the line.

5. There will be a second 'Summer of Rage.'

Summary: Anti-Trump protests will escalate into violent riots, targeting infrastructure and triggering martial law in areas.

ChatGPT Probability: 75%

Further Explanation:

Anticipating a summer of intense protests, Glenn predicts that groups like Antifa, BLM, and Occupy Wall Street, likely collaborating with formal unions and socialist organizations, will escalate their opposition to Trump’s policies. As protests grow, Trump will be vilified, and the right will be labeled fascist, with predictable media images depicting the separation of families and the chaos unfolding in major cities.

This prediction envisions a scenario similar to the Summer of Rage in the 1960s, with violent riots and widespread destruction in over 100 major cities. College campuses will be sites of massive protests, police stations may be directly targeted, and critical agencies like ICE, Border Patrol, and Homeland Security headquarters could be assaulted. As tensions escalate, National Guard troops may be deployed, and parts of Washington, D.C., could experience a "martial law" atmosphere. While the prediction sees the protests turning violent and disruptive, the real question is how suburban "soccer moms" will react when these riots hit closer to home.

6. The largest anti-Western 'caliphate' will emerge.

Summary: Middle Eastern factions may consolidate to control energy routes, destabilizing global markets.

ChatGPT Probability: 60%

Further Explanation:

Following Biden's controversial tenure and failures in handling the Middle East, a new anti-Western Caliphate will emerge, as various terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, the Houthis, and the Taliban unite under several leaders rather than one. These groups will receive support from Russia, North Korea, and China, creating a formidable alliance. Their objective will be to control approximately 30% of the world’s energy supply by seizing key oil routes through the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and the Red Sea. This would give them dominion over critical global trade routes, including the Suez Canal. As alliances among these groups form, the longstanding Sunni-Shia conflict will be momentarily set aside in favor of unity against common enemies, with the U.S. and its allies as primary targets.

Europe will be too fractured to intervene, leaving the U.S. and Israel to confront this rising threat alone. The involvement of Russia and China will further complicate the situation, as both nations seek to undermine U.S. influence in Ukraine and Taiwan while securing access to energy markets in the Middle East. This prediction suggests that Biden’s foreign policy decisions will leave a lasting legacy of instability in the region. The necessity for the U.S. to increase domestic energy production, through policies like increased drilling, will become a national security issue in the face of this emerging threat.

7. China will invade a neighboring country.

Summary: China could target weaker nations under the guise of peacekeeping to assert dominance.

ChatGPT Probability: 55%

Further Explanation:

After years of military posturing, China’s aggressive rhetoric and actions have begun to lose their credibility, with the world perceiving its military buildup as a paper tiger. As the U.S. faces increasing isolation, and global conflicts in Europe and the Middle East divert attention, China will seize the opportunity to strike. However, it will target a country that is unlikely to mount a significant defense or provoke a strong reaction. This eliminates major regional powers like Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines from the list of potential targets.

Countries such as Kyrgyzstan, Nepal, Laos, and Vietnam may become focal points for Chinese aggression. Vietnam and Bangladesh are particularly compelling targets, as they are emerging alternatives for U.S. and Western companies shifting manufacturing away from China. A Chinese invasion of these nations could impact U.S. interests by compelling tactical responses, such as deploying ships for air superiority and missile defense.

8. The U.S. stock market will collapse and ensue a banking crisis.

Summary: Rising rates and layoffs may trigger a stock market downturn and small business disruptions.

ChatGPT Probability: 50%

Further Explanation:

In a bid to boost the economy for the 2024 election cycle and secure a Democratic victory, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, along with key figures from major banks, kept interest rates and policies favorable to financial institutions. This led to a temporary surge in stock prices just before the election. However, the anticipated economic boost failed to materialize due to broader political dynamics. Now, Powell is advocating for tighter policies, raising interest rates to cool an economy that he claims has become overheated, setting the stage for a stock market crash and a federal government funding crisis.

Glenn predicted that this manufactured crisis will have far-reaching consequences, starting with major disruptions on Wall Street and spilling into Main Street, resulting in layoffs, bankruptcies, and widespread economic instability. The Fed's role in shaping these events will dominate political discussions, and the economic fallout will force President Trump to take ownership of the crisis. Small businesses are advised to fortify their supply chains and secure favorable long-term contracts to mitigate the risks of rising prices and potential disruptions as the financial situation worsens in 2025.

9. North Korea will provoke South Korea.

Summary: Small-scale attacks by North Korea will distract from larger conflicts involving China and Russia.

ChatGPT Probability: 40%

Further Explanation:

In a potential move orchestrated by China to divert global attention from its own ambitions, North Korea may provoke South Korea with a calculated attack. This could involve a limited strike, such as firing ballistic missiles at a South Korean naval vessel, claiming it had intruded into North Korean waters, or attacking a military base along the border under the pretext of border violations or espionage. The primary goal of North Korea’s actions would be to test the waters and assess the West's reactions, particularly the U.S.'s willingness to intervene.

10. Those connected to Sean 'Diddy' Combs and Jeffery Epstein will be revealed. 

Summary: Investigations into scandals face resistance from powerful players, making progress unlikely.

ChatGPT Probability: 15%

Further Explanation:

Glenn predicts that the lists of individuals connected to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein and hip-hop mogul Diddy will be released. The release of these lists would likely trigger a significant public outcry, as it could implicate high-profile figures in serious scandals. However, the investigation and disclosure of such lists would require substantial evidence and resources and may face significant resistance from powerful industry players.

While media pressure and public opinion could push for transparency, the political and legal complexities surrounding such a release might hinder progress in the investigations. Given the challenges involved, ChatGPT says this prediction holds a relatively low probability, but it remains a topic of speculation and intrigue in the ongoing fallout from the Epstein case.

11. Trump will appoint 2 Supreme Court justices.

Summary: Retirements could allow Trump to reshape the court further right, but it's unlikely within the year.

ChatGPT Probability: 25%

Further Explanation:

Gless predicts that the aging U.S. Supreme Court may see retirements or unexpected vacancies, potentially allowing President Donald Trump to appoint two more justices. If such vacancies occur, it would shift the balance of the court further to the right. However, ChatGPT says this prediction is less likely due to the unpredictable nature of retirements and the political challenges associated with confirming Supreme Court appointments, particularly if the Senate is divided or controlled by a party opposing Trump.

12. The U.S. will establish a special relationship with Greenland.

Summary: Strengthened ties with Greenland are possible but forcing a special relationship is improbable.

ChatGPT Probability: 35%

Further Explanation:

Donald Trump has previously shown interest in Greenland, particularly in 2019 when he proposed the idea of purchasing the island, sparking significant controversy. Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, holds strategic geopolitical and resource-based importance, making it a key area of interest for the U.S., especially in light of its proximity to Russia. However, ChatGPT says attempting to force a "special relationship" with Greenland would be difficult, as both Greenland's government and Denmark would likely resist such overtures, considering the complexities of sovereignty and international relations. Despite the strategic importance, this prediction holds a moderate probability due to political and diplomatic constraints.

13. The U.S. will take control of the Panama Canal. 

Summary: Re-negotiating Panama Canal control is highly unlikely due to political and diplomatic realities.

ChatGPT Probability: 10%

Further Explanation:

The Panama Canal, which was transferred to Panama’s control in 1999 following the Panama Canal Treaty, has remained under Panama's sovereignty ever since. Glenn, however, says he believes Trump's efforts to renegotiate control over the canal will succeed. However, ChatGPT says that given the historical context and the sensitivity of national sovereignty, the likelihood of Trump successfully regaining control of the canal is quite low.

To learn more, can watch the entire GlennTV special here: