Bombshell Russian Email: It's ‘Worse Than I Thought’

July 11, 2017

WRITER

An alarming report in The New York Times Monday seems to have been proven true: Donald Trump, Jr. confirmed in email screenshots Tuesday that he met with a Russian attorney in 2016 to gain information that would assist the Trump presidential campaign.

Tuesday on radio, Glenn walked through the whirlwind timeline of the breaking story, analyzing the emails which were tweeted from Donald Trump, Jr.’s verified Twitter account.

“This is, I believe, worse than what I thought,” Glenn said.

In the email, publicist Rob Goldstone promised to connect the Trumps with a Russian attorney, specifically because the Russian government wanted to influence the 2016 election, saying, “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

Glenn expressed shock that concrete evidence seems to point to collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. Russian hackers infiltrated emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta in efforts to swing the election toward Trump.

“I think a lot of things about the Trumps --- no way were they involved in collusion,” Glenn said incredulously.

He pointed out that the timing was right for the meeting with Russia to take place in June 2016, just a few weeks before Wikileaks released leaked emails from the DNC servers and from Podesta’s email account.

“This is still three weeks before Wikileaks breaks, and Donald Trump acts surprised,” Glenn noted. “We all knew at the time: Wikileaks got their information from the Kremlin.”

Whether the president was aware of this meeting is unclear.

"Let's not implicate anybody else," Glenn said. "All we know is that Donald Trump Jr. knew that there was collusion. He was part of the collusion."

To see more from Glenn, visit his channel on TheBlaze and watch “The Glenn Beck Radio Program” live weekdays 9 a.m.–noon ET or anytime on-demand at TheBlaze TV.

GLENN: So let me go through this with you. This morning, two hours ago, we were talking about a hypothetical, something that the New York Times and CNN said that they had seen. And we added the caveat, if it says that, you know, they are -- they have information and he knows that it's from the Russian government, then there's a problem.

PAT: But we didn't trust the New York Times or CNN.

GLENN: We didn't trust them. This is, I believe, worse than what I thought.

Here is the first email from Rob Goldstone: Good morning, Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. Now, so you know, Emin is a very good friend of Donald Trump Sr. and is, you know, very, very close with -- with Vladimir Putin.

STU: Worked with him on the Miss Universe thing.

PAT: In Russia.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. He's a Russian citizen. An oligarch. A bad one. Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father, Aras, this morning.

And, actually, Aras is the oligarch. Emin is the son.

The crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father, Aras, this morning, and in their meeting, offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information, but it is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump. I never thought -- no way -- you -- you couldn't have --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: I think a lot of things about the Trumps. No way were they involved in collusion. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information. But this is part of Russia and its government support of Mr. Trump helped along by Aras and Emin. What do you think the best way to handle this information would be? Will you be able to speak to Emin about it directly? I also can send this information to your father via Rona. But it is ultra sensitive so I wanted to send it to you first.

Thanks, Rob. I appreciate it. I'm on the road for a moment. I could just speak to Emin first. Seems like we have some time. And if it's what you say, I love it, especially late in the summer.

Meaning, coordination.

Could we do a call first thing next week when I'm back?

Yes. Don, let me know when you're free to talk with Emin by phone about this Hillary information. You had mentioned earlier this week, so I tried to schedule time and best day to you and your family. Rob.

Holy cow. That is -- there's your smoking gun. It's not just -- isn't it?

STU: I mean, first of all, again, like the -- you have to say that the New York Times report was accurate. I mean, this is exactly what they said was in it.

GLENN: This was released by Donald Trump Jr.

STU: Yes. So we know 100 percent it comes from Trump. So we know that that's accurate. I mean, you know, look, I think you can still make the argument that, hey, he got the tip from some guy he knows. Didn't think about it from a foreign -- you know, it says right in there. Was excited to get information to beat up his opponent.

GLENN: No, no. But he was coordinating -- listen -- listen, there's no way -- I mean, Stu, help me. Please, convince me. Convince me.

STU: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Crown prosecutor of Russia. So that's not the girl he's going to meet with. He's saying the crown prosecutor of Russia.

STU: I thought that is the -- I thought that is who they're referring to when they say --

PAT: The female lawyer? I don't know. Because they refer to the lawyer as him in that email, right?

GLENN: Yes. Yeah. So I don't think it's the same.

PAT: So it can't be the same person. It's not the same person.

GLENN: What he's saying here is the crown prosecutor of Russia. So that's like the attorney general of Russia.

STU: Right, okay.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: The attorney general of Russia --

STU: Met with his father.

GLENN: Met with Emin's father, the good friend of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

STU: Right.

GLENN: They met this morning about whatever we don't know. And in the meeting, he offered to provide the Trump campaign -- so now, here is the attorney general going to an oligarch, saying, "Hey, you're friends with Donald Trump, right?"

Yeah.

"I want you to pass on to them that we have information at a very high level that we want to pass to them." We have official documents and information that will incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia. It will be very useful for them.

So then the father asks Emin to call Goldstone, who knows Donald Trump Jr., and say, "Hey, can we get this? By the way, Aras is going to fax this through Rhonda, just to get it to your dad. But it's very high level, and I wanted to talk to somebody and let them know that it was coming."

He then says: It's very high level. Sensitive information. But it is part -- it is part of Russia and its government support for Mr. Trump, helped along by Aras and Emin.

So, in other words, somebody -- I don't even want to jump there.

We know that a good friend, an oligarch of Donald Trump has been helping the government along to support Donald Trump.

I'll send this information to your father. I will send this information to your father via Rona.

PAT: I mean --

GLENN: I mean, this is --

PAT: It's going to be a nightmare.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: The Democrats are going to --

GLENN: It's over.

PAT: They're going --

GLENN: How do you not go with this?

STU: Well, look, I think you can make an argument that it's not as bad as it feels. However, I would say -- well, because, I mean, like, look, Donald Trump Jr., he's not even --

GLENN: I will send information to your father via Rona.

STU: But he didn't, right? As far as we know at least this point. (chuckling) It went to him instead. But, of course, he's going to tell his dad about it. Right? Although he said he didn't --

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: No, no. He already said he didn't tell his dad. His dad didn't know. So don't even worry about that.

STU: I guess my point would be you -- you can argue that it wasn't -- it wasn't -- I don't know. Like, to me, I would never take a meeting with a government official, even if it was trying to sink an opponent. I -- so I can't -- I don't understand why you would do that.

But, you know what, look, remember, this is not only people who have dealt in these circles for a while and do anything to win, as they say, as they pointed out a million times. They were also, at the time, pretty desperate, if you remember right. So maybe did they bend this line and take this meeting? I think the answer to that is yes.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Yes, they did. Wait. Wait.

STU: However --

GLENN: Let's look at this. This is still three weeks before WikiLeaks breaks.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And Donald Trump acts surprised. We all knew at the time WikiLeaks got their information from the Kremlin.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: This is Russia feeding this and leaking this. So we know now that Russia was hacking in to the DNC servers. Was gathering sensitive information. And then -- this is treason. We've got a guy on the other side, in Russia, that released information, and we say it's treason. If he comes back, he'll be tried for treason. What's-his-face?

PAT: Yeah, Snowden.

GLENN: Snowden. That's treason when he's done that to us.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: So here's Russia doing to it (sic). Now, they can't be treasonous because they're not Americans. That -- they released -- they hacked, they got in, they stole the information, and then released it to the world. And Donald Trump was acting like it was a surprise and like, oh, please, Russia. Go ahead. Release the rest.

PAT: Glenn, when you put it like that, sure it sounds bad.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: I mean, do you have to put it like that? No, you don't. You could put it some other way.

STU: You could put it another way.

GLENN: I can guarantee you -- I can guarantee you everyone else will be -- no.

PAT: All the Democrats are going to put it a lot worse than that. A lot worse than that.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, no. But the Republicans are also going to -- we are witnessing, Pat, what you and I remember in the 1970s with our dads.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I remember my dad defending Nixon --

PAT: Turning into a crook and how --

GLENN: Yeah. And it was only at the very end --

PAT: Yeah. Supported him nonstop until all the evidence came out.

GLENN: Supported him -- right. Until -- right.

PAT: And then they hated him.

JEFFY: Yep.

GLENN: Tell me how you get -- tell me how you have a family that doesn't tell the president that, "Yes, Dad, the Russians were colluding with us."

PAT: There's almost no way he doesn't know. There's almost no way.

GLENN: Right.

STU: And I think you could still make an argument, look, you're trying to find information against your -- you know, to help your dad. And you take a meeting that maybe you shouldn't have taken. And -- but, you know, nothing really came of it. So you kind of blew it off in your head. You can make that argument. It's a stretch at some level, I grant you. And I don't necessarily believe it. But I think you can make that case.

It's very difficult to understand how after you've won the presidency and you're in the middle of an investigation on this topic, how this could not have been disclosed until last week.

GLENN: Right. And beyond that, how this could be disclosed last -- in the last couple of weeks, that this even happened. And before that -- and even after that, your father, the president of the United States is saying, there was no collusion.

I mean, you know, honestly, let's say that Hillary Clinton really didn't know that her husband was fooling around. We all think that she did.

But once she found out, don't you say, you son of a bitch, you did this to me?

Let's just put yourself in this situation. You're the president of the United States. Your son is exchanging emails like this. And then he leaves with your son-in-law and your campaign manager, and they start to write speeches about this kind of information.

You start tweeting stuff. And you really don't know. And then you win. Okay.

Then it starts to be investigated and you have me go out in front of everybody going, there is no collusion. I'm telling you, there's no collusion. We never did that. We didn't talk to anybody from Russia. There was never any coordination of anything.

In fact, I believe them so much, I'm telling you, our CIA and our NSA is wrong. And they'll never find anything because there wasn't anything there. And they didn't not only collude with us, they're not even trying to hack into our systems and try to affect our elections. And that's why I'm suggesting we partner up with Russia and we share cyber security together.

Then you read today and you really are innocent, you had nothing to do with it -- you're president of the United States. Do you not go in and say, "Son, excuse me, but you son of a bitch. What the hell were you thinking? You let me spend the last nine months, eight months telling the American people -- I just met with Putin, and you knew that he was colluding with you. And I suggested cyber security partnership, when they were the ones that hacked into the DNC. And you knew it."

Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: This -- this is very, very close to treason.

PAT: Well...

STU: You could look at it from the Trump perspective -- from the Donald Trump Sr. perspective, if you want to look at this as we know it right now, we don't have evidence that Donald even knew about this meeting, right? We know that Kushner -- but Kushner left two minutes into it, reportedly. And Manafort didn't say anything in the meeting.

GLENN: We do know -- we do know -- Rob Goldstone said, I can send this information to your father via Rona.

STU: We don't know that that happened. He just suggested it as a possibility.

GLENN: We don't know if that happened, but...

STU: But, again, like, for example, Kellyanne Conway was out on the air a few weeks ago or maybe a few months ago saying no meetings happened from anyone in the campaign with anyone from Russia. That is absolutely false. It never happened. You guys just keep saying fake news and saying it happened.

GLENN: When did she say this?

STU: It was on --

GLENN: Was this the weekend?

STU: So, no, they brought her back on this weekend and said, "Hey, wait a minute. Actually, there were meetings, weren't there?" And she said, "Well, it looks like those disclosure forms have been updated." So, yes --

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STU: But imagine taking -- sending your own people out, knowing that information.

GLENN: Yeah, no. Very bad.

STU: And telling them to deny it.

PAT: It's unbelievable. It's unbelievable.

GLENN: Donald Trump Jr., by himself -- let's not implicate anybody else. All we know is that Donald Trump Jr. knew that there was collusion. He was part of the collusion. Very bad. Very bad. And should go to jail.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.

Glenn: Texas judge deals a crushing blow to ESG agenda

The tides have turned — and now the very same banks that were pushing heavy-handed environmental, social, governance rules are running away from them.

In a significant victory, a federal judge in Texas has ruled that employers and asset managers cannot use environmental, social, and governance factors in employee retirement accounts. If this ruling holds up — which is likely, given the conservative composition of the appellate court — it will dramatically shift the balance of power between corporations and their employees.

This decision represents one of the most substantial blows to the ESG agenda to date. Companies that have been steering employees into ESG-focused investments, which prioritize progressive values over financial returns, now face legal repercussions. Continuing such practices would directly violate federal law. The ruling forces companies to re-evaluate their commitment to ESG initiatives, and many may withdraw from these funds before the case even reaches the appellate court.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying.

The impact of this ruling could very well be the beginning of the end for the ESG movement as it’s been pushed by elites.

In even better news, BlackRock, a major player in the ESG movement, has officially left the United Nations’ International Association of Asset Managers. This is a direct rebuke of the global push for ESG initiatives and a major sign that the tide is turning. In contrast to the Glasgow Net Zero Conference in which the Global Financial Alliance for Net Zero — an organization championed by global elites — was pushing for ESG to be a central focus, BlackRock’s departure from the group signals that even those who were at the forefront of this movement are starting to distance themselves.

But it doesn't stop there. Every major U.S. bank has now announced that they too are leaving the U.N.’s Association of Net Zero ESG Bankers, another key part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance. For years, we’ve been warning that ESG in banking was one of the primary ways elites like Biden, the Davos crowd, and others were planning to reset the world’s economy.

The tides have turned — and now those very same banks are running away from ESG, a powerful signal of things to come. They know they’re on the losing side, and they’re scared that a new administration will come down hard on them for their involvement in these globalist initiatives.

In another win, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unveiled a shocking new rule that, if it survives, would prohibit many financial institutions from de-banking customers based on their political or religious views, or even certain types of speech. While the rule is not as comprehensive as we need it to be, it’s a step in the right direction — and it includes concerns raised by our allies about the dangers of ESG. The Trump administration has promised to come down even harder on the banks with tougher rules, and this is a very good start.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying. Some are running for cover while others are desperately trying to ingratiate themselves with the powers that be. It’s clear that the backbone of these companies is made of rubber, not steel. They don’t really believe in the ESG values they preach — they’re just playing the game to get in bed with the political elites.

Now that Trump is back in town, these corporations are showing their true colors. They never cared about their customers or the values they forced upon them. It was always about the power they could acquire through catering to those in power at the time.

No company should be afraid of the president of the United States. But they’re not afraid of Donald Trump. They’re afraid of the return of the rule of law. They know that fascistic public-private partnerships between the government and corporations are on the way out. That’s a victory for freedom and a victory for the American people.

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

Glenn's Show Prep

Bombshell Russian Email: It's ‘Worse Than I Thought’

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

Strategic Military Position

Untapped Resources

Polar Silk Road

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

The Election

Georgescu's Platform

What Happens Next?

Glenn: Texas judge deals a crushing blow to ESG agenda

The tides have turned — and now the very same banks that were pushing heavy-handed environmental, social, governance rules are running away from them.

Watching these corporations squirm as they try to backtrack and avoid legal repercussions is ever so satisfying.