RADIOJune 05, 2023

EXPLAINED: A possible banking CRISIS & what YOU should do

Weiss Ratings rates banks, stocks, bonds, and cryptocurrencies daily, closely monitoring the movements that happen within each sector. And they’re GOOD at it. In fact, of the 539 banks that have failed since 2009, they’ve given prior notice about 535 of them. Dallas Brown, a Weiss Ratings Publisher, joins Glenn to discuss which of today’s banks currently are facing possibly failure or crisis. Should Americans be concerned about our nation’s big banks, or is it only smaller ones and credit unions facing trouble? Plus, what should YOU do if your bank is at risk…? Listen to this clip to find out why you should NOT panic about today’s uncertain banking situation…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. Welcome to the program, Dallas Brown. How are you?

DALLAS: Hey, Glenn how are you doing?

GLENN: I'm good. I'm good. So I don't know if you know much about me, but I tend to think, that we are running a shell game with our banks and our federal reserve and central bank and our Treasury.

And I think we've done such damage to our banks.

And they are just printing money to keep everything looking like it's okay.

I saw your -- so that's my point of view, so you know where I'm coming from.

And I want you to correct me, you know, and enlighten me, if you have anything better to say.

I have not heard of Weiss Ratings before. But I know you guys have been around for about 50 years. And in the last bank crash, I think you guys were the ones leading the way saying, trouble. Isn't that correct?

DALLAS: Yeah. But let me just jump in and tell you who liked this and what we've been doing. So this analysis we did isn't something that we just did one time. We rate banks and many assets. Stocks, insurance companies. Bonds.

And crypto. Daily.

And so we see the movement that happened, based on the liquidity of banks. Capitalization. Stability. And so we're very vigilant. Our analysts are very vigilant about this. And so Weiss has been doing this. They started rating banks in 1971.

GLENN: Okay.

DALLAS: So Martin Weiss is the founder. And his father, actually back in 1930, his name is Irving Weiss.

He predicted the failure of the bank of the United States.

And so that's where the catalyst of this came. So in 1971. He got together with his son. He started rating banks for safety for consumers. And so we rate every bank.

And so it's not just banks. It's also credit unions. So in 2008, you know, we -- we named in advance warning all the major banks that failed during that financial crisis.

GLENN: I mean, you were -- I think the only guys that said, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers are going.

DALLAS: Yeah. Yeah. So it was weeks before Bear Stearns, and it was like 100-some-odd days before Lehman Brothers. They're gone. It's an end game with them.

But since 2008, there have been 539 bank failures.

And we have given advanced warning on 535 bills.

And some of the other ones --

GLENN: Jeez. Okay.

DALLAS: So this isn't something we take lightly here. It's important -- it's important for consumers. But we kind of agree with you.

It's not the bank's fault 100 percent. It is the government. It is the government forcing them, to push this money out. Not letting the free market play a key role in regulating the banks.

GLENN: Right.

DALLAS: And they just keep stepping in to protect banks. Protect them from the market.

Created this monster that will be tough to fix or save.

GLENN: Right.

And it's only really benefiting, at least at this point, the big banks. Everything keeps getting folded into these banks, that we said were too big to fail. And so we have to make them smaller back in 2008.

They are just getting bigger and bigger and bigger. I mean, it feels like we're going to end up with, well, just a Bank of America.

DALLAS: Well, hopefully that doesn't happen. Because that's not good for anybody in our country at all.

GLENN: Right.

DALLAS: I was talking with a president. Of a regional bank, not too long ago.

And he was talking about a nationalized bank, and I was just like, why? Why are you talking about this?

This is not something that we -- we are discussing -- we need the privatization --

GLENN: Correct. So go ahead.

DALLAS: So this is what we found. This is what we found.

Basically, what's happening, because of how quickly they raised interest rates. Right?

There's a lot of banks that are holding bonds.

And when someone comes and does a bank run. Or we have a lot of people taking out deposits. Especially ones that have high uninsured amounts. So that's people that have over 250.

The banks are having a crisis. And if they don't have the liquidity. Or they don't have the cash to cover those. Like a typical bank run. They have to sell their abandons. And on their balance sheet, the bonds are marked, or held to maturity.

And so they have them marked, as if they were going to sell them in ten years. In 20 years. In 30 years.

But then they have to take them now. And they take a loss. And so after that, if the money that they're taking exceeds the capital, for the bank. Then somebody has to step in and save them.

We only have two options. Either we bail out regional banks. If this starts happening.

Or we sell them to the bigger banks. And we lessen the free market.

GLENN: Okay. So this is what I read, what, a week or so ago.

1210 institutions. That's banks, and what do you call them?

Credit unions.

That's 12.8 percent of our banking system. Got a red warning flag, signaling risk of imminent failure.

Three thousand received a yellow warning flag, indicating risk of failure in a financial crisis, or recession.

And 45 banks, 45 percent of all banks, and credit unions, were deemed vulnerable.

Well, if the 12.8 go down, then you have a financial crisis, or recession. And that just triggers the other three thousand, does it not?

DALLAS: So a lot of these banks are teetering, right?

They're getting loans from other banks. They're selling their assets, to be able to cover, if any type of run happens.

So what we're saying is, there are -- 12 percent, or 1210 institutions are at a point, where anybody decided to pull money out. Or we had some sort of small panic. They're not surviving. It's not happening.

And that is a lot to do with the fact that they don't have the liquidity, based on the short-term and long-term demands.

So when we rate banks, we have five different ratings. And there's 154 data points, we look at, within that rating.

And then we compare them to the stability across all of our data on those banks. And so we compare 6,000 data points to figure out what is the stability of this bank. And we rate every bank, A through E. Okay?

And so A and B are more stable. C is vulnerable.

That's the yellow flag, right? And D and E are the red flag. But there is -- there is quite a bit, even in that yellow flag. That if we hit a recession, or we come into a new financial crisis, they do not have the liquidity or the cash on hand.

To be able to survive.

GLENN: So what does that mean to the average person?

I've been telling people, don't pull your money out of a bank.

Unless, I think you're foolish for putting more than $250,000 in a bank -- a bank account, especially if you're an individual making business, I understand.

But you put -- you're going to get your money back. Now, how much your money is worth in the end, is another story.

But don't pull your money out. Because you will get that money if it fails. Right?

DALLAS: Yeah.

We don't -- first off, we don't want to cause panic. Right? That's why the FDIC. Who understood that a lot of problems with these recent bank failures, they had a lot of uninsured accounts. Right?

They were over the 250,000 dollar limit.

But the first thing is, don't hedge your bets.

Don't think that the FDIC has the Capitol to cover everybody, because they don't.

Right? When they came out and said, we will cover all accounts. I'll give you 250,000.

That just -- they're just paying lip service. That's exactly what they're doing.

GLENN: Well, I think they'll print the money. That's why I say, I wonder how much it will be worth in the end. They'll just print it.

DALLAS: So it's not the FDIC that will bail them out. It will be the US Treasury that will bail them out.

STU: Correct.

DALLAS: So the first thing I would do is never have 250,000 dollars.

GLENN: Okay.

DALLAS: Spread them out.

Because each county is actually insured. So you can have one in one and one in the other. And have a total of $500,000.

GLENN: In the same bank?

DALLAS: Yeah, as long as they're in separate accounts, it's the accounts themselves that are insured.

GLENN: Okay.

So when you say, signaling a risk of imminent failure, that means if something happens.

Or -- I mean, imminent failure usually is like DEFCON 1. A war has started.

It's coming.

DALLAS: So everybody -- anybody that is on -- listening right now. Can go to Weissratings.com. And see what their bank is rated. They don't have to do anything.

There is a search at the top. You get all the information.

You don't have to pay for it.

We do this. Just because we care about the everyday person.

And so you can go right now, and see what your bank is rated.

If your bank is rated red, there's a possibility, and I'm not going to say it's happening.

But if it's rated a D or an E.

There's a possibility, that even without a crisis, they could go under.

STU: So what do you do if you're in one of those banks?

Because I don't want people to panic or freak out, but I want them to be safe.

So what do you do if you're in one of those banks?

DALLAS: So right now, it's not an issue.

We do not have an issue. So we're not panicking. Nobody needs to panic. Nobody needs to go take their money out.

They need to be careful, right?

They need to see where their money is. See why -- because you can see right there, why the institution is -- and if it's a profit problem.

If it's a stability issue.

A lot of these -- a lot of these are really small banks. Right?

GLENN: Uh-huh.

DALLAS: And so what they need to do, is they're going to be covered.

Everything is covered. Credit unions are covered.

Banks are covered under the FDIC.

And if you're in one of these small banks. You're just going to be pushed into. Like we saw with the other banks failures that will happen.

Into the other banks that advice your assets.

Or it's taken over, until they can take them off the accounts.

So it's going to be seamless for them.

But, you know, it's -- it's -- we have them there.

Just so when people are looking to get into banks. Or looking to not have to deal with this. They know.

STU: They know.

Let me take a break. I want to ask you about Bitcoin.

I want to ask you about insurance.

But I also want to ask you about the bank big banks. Are any of the big banks in trouble? We'll go there in 60 seconds.

Stand by. Some day, we'll all have electric cars. And we won't be able to drive there. Because we won't have any of the power plants producing any of the electricity.

But the idea of going some place, you'll be able to sit in your garage. And pretend you're going some place.

It's great. Anyway, Car Shield has affordable protection plans. If you would like to keep your car running.

Yeah. It will have breakdowns. That old engine. Yeah, it's going to have breakdowns. But if it's not a computer chip, it may not break the bank.

But those things that are computer chips.

The big, big repairs. They could -- they could just sink the whole family.

I have medical insurance. Because I know if somebody in my household has cancer, it could destroy the whole family.

So let's have catastrophic health insurance.

That's what this is for cars. From Car Shield.

If something big goes, they cover more parts, than ever before.

They have different plans, that will fit any budget.

But you need your car.

Car Shield. Dedicating to protecting what you have. Get coverage like I have, on my old beater trucks at the farm.

It is Car Shield. 800-227-6100.

800-227-6100. Save 20 percent. Lock in your price. It will never go up. 800-227-6100. Carshield.com/Beck. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
Okay. Any of the big banks in trouble?

DALLAS: So I can't give you specifics right now, on individual banks.

GLENN: Okay.

DALLAS: I love to do it. But I have -- I have the overall information.

But normally, normally, I'm going to say this: A lot of the big banks, are highly rated for us.

Okay? Which means, they're -- they're a B. Or an A.

I'm looking at JPMorgan right now. They're an A-plus. They have some liquidity. They're a major bank.

And so they seem safe.

But the issue here is, it's not that they're in trouble or not.

It's a catalyst system. Like when we saw in 2008, it's a catalyst.

Like people end up holding back for other people.

GLENN: Correct.

DALLAS: On bad days. We have some interesting things happening shortly. Like, the commercial lending industry is going to go through a little bump in the road.

GLENN: Yeah. I don't think that's a little bump in the road.

DALLAS: Yeah.

GLENN: There's a lot of big commercial debt, especially in these giant cities.

Who is going to -- who is going to fund these things?

And then what kind of interest rate, is it going to be?

I mean, I just -- highway you are going to renew all this commercial debt?

DALLAS: Yeah. There's a lot of issues. Terms coming. There's a lot of issues with cap rates just getting annihilated.

And so we're -- we're going to see big discounts. We're going to see big discounts on commercial properties.

And the thing is, I was -- I was listening to a pundit the other day. Not to quote some of the others that I am listening to. But they were saying, they foresee -- there's so much cash out there.

And people are being hesitant about getting into these commercial deals.

They may not even get the foreclosure. They will just be bought on discount, to other investors. Because they haven't been wanting to jump in the last year. Because of the crazy interest rates.

GLENN: Wow.

DALLAS: And so. I don't know.

I can't forecast. I'm not an expert.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Just your ratings -- so tell me do you rate Bitcoin? I've been concerned about Bitcoin.

DALLAS: We do rate Bitcoin.

GLENN: Because with everything that's going on with the Federal Reserve and the government, how do you rate Bitcoin?

DALLAS: So we have Bitcoin rated now as an A-minus.

GLENN: Okay.

DALLAS: So you have to understand, we individually rate each asset.

So because Bitcoin is an A-minus. Does not mean that it's better than Apple as an investment.

So we rate things within their own industry. And so we rate all cryptocurrencies, around cryptocurrencies.

We rate all banks, around just banks. We have individual algorithms for each one. So insurance is another one, we've been dealing with the mess in Florida.

Which you probably know about. With the insurance.

And we downgraded the -- the back stock insurance company

For the state of Florida. Because its citizens. Because it -- it's a mess over there.

They're losing money.

And, you know, it's another big hurricane season, just is damaging to the current state.

And right now, we've been currently working with the ledge a little bit.

To try to help them out. To fix this issue. But it's a large issue.

We're basing for it. We care about that.

GLENN: Dallas, thank you very much for coming on and being a voice of reason. And also of warning and not causing any panic from anybody.

But just sharing the information. I appreciate it. Thank you.

DALLAS: Yeah. No problem.

GLENN: Weissratings.com is where you can go. And you can see the ratings of your insurance companies, your banks, et cetera, et cetera. How stable are they.

Do not panic. Do not pull your money out of banks. I mean, if you have more than 250,000 in an account, split it up. But don't pull your money out of the bank.

It will be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Weiss. W-E-I-S-Sratings.com.

Has Elon Musk Gone TOO FAR with Insane New 'GROK 4' AI System?

Elon Musk's new Grok 4 Artificial Intelligence has again accelerated the technological arms race which may soon become beyond our control. Glenn Beck breaks down what’s coming in the next year with AI, which even Elon Musk called “terrifying.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Last night, Elon Musk is touting this -- this AI.

And all of the solutions.

And then he says.

Hmm. Probably three times.

Something like this.

And I'm quoting. This is one of them.

It's somewhat unnerving to have created intelligence that's greater than our own.

He then goes on to call it terrifying, twice.

Now, this is a man who has launched rockets, you know, into orbit.

Going to Mars.

And he says, twice!

You know, after he sees the results of it. He says, you know, it's really -- in a way, quite terrifying to see what it's doing.

But we just have to make sure that it remains good!

Oh, okay.

All right. Sure.

Now, the key point in the announcement was the mention of ARC-AGI.

I had never heard of ARC-AGI. I had no idea what it was. But I noticed AGI. And I went, uh-oh. That sounds important. So this is the gold standard. The bench mark testing for artificial general intelligence.

Okay.

As I've said before, AGI. Artificial General Intelligence is a machine that matches all human cognition, across all domains.

Reasoning, creativity.

Problem solving. Not just specialized tasks like playing Go or analyzing x-rays. Everything. For instance, Musk said by mid-next year to the latest end of next year, it will be able to create a full length movie, just from a text prompt.
And do it all at once!

So, in other words, it will say, create a movie, and you just explain the Godfather.

It will do the casting. It will do the writing. It will do the filming, if you will. It will -- score the music, and it will happen that fast.

Almost in realtime. We are nowhere near the computational power now, to do that separately.

But this will do it all at once. It will make a movie with all of it, simultaneously.

So the arc AGI system is the benchmark on how close we are to AGI. Remember, scary things happen at AGI.

Terrifying things happen at ASI. ASI could be a matter of hours, or days after we hit AGI.

Grok 4 scored 16.2 percent on the ARC-AGI scale.

Why is that important? You're like, well, only 16 percent away.

Because last time, it barely broke 8 percent.

And that -- they took that test, last time with Grok three.

And it took us forever to get to 8 percent.

Now, what is it? A year later.

We're at 16 percent. Remember, these things are not linear. The next time, we could be at 32, we might be at 64.

We are on the verge. This is the last year of -- I can't believe I'm saying this. Of normalcy. Okay?

This year is -- we're going to look back at this year, probably two years ago, gosh, remember the good old days, when everything was normal.

And you could understand everything.

This is how close we are!

Everything you and I talked about last night, Stu, about what we're doing in January, make -- put -- does it make it even more critical that that happens like, oh, I don't know.

Right now.

STU: Yeah. For sure.

GLENN: You are going to need to know your values, your ethics, your rights.

You are going to need to know absolutely everything.

Now, Grok 4 is not true AGI yet.

It lacks the full autonomy and the generalized reasoning of a human mind. But it is the closest that we've come.

It's a system that can adapt, innovate, at a level that outpaces specialized AIs by a wide margin.

This is a milestone. This is not a destination, but it's something that should jolt everybody awake. So here's what's coming over the next six months. By December 2025, that's this Christmas!

December 2025, he believes, Musk, that Grok 4, will drive breakthroughs in material sciences.

So, in other words, imagine a new -- brand-new alloy, that is lighter than aluminum. Stronger than steel.

And it revolutionizes aerospace and everything else, or a drug that halts Alzheimer's progression, tailored to a person's DNA.

Grok will drive breakthroughs through material science. So brand-new materials that nobody has ever thought of.

Pharmaceuticals that we never thought could be made.

And chemical engineering, putting together chemicals that no man has ever thought.

That's going for happen by December.

Imagine a chemical compound that makes carbon capture, economically viable. The climate change stuff, that's over.

It will be over.

Because this will solve that! These are not fantasies.

This is Grok 4.

Musk said something that he never thought. He believes that within the next year, by 2027, Grok 4 will uncover new physical laws.

So that will rewrite the understanding -- our understanding of the entire universe.

That there will come -- like there's gravity. Hey, you know what, there's another law here that you never thought of. Wait. What?

That, he says, will come by 2027. This is going to accelerate human discovery, at an unprecedented scale.

I told you, at some point. I said, by 2030. It might be a little earlier than that.

Things will be happening at such a fast rate, you won't be able to keep up with them.

And it will accelerate to the point to where you won't even understand what all of this means.

Or what the ramifications are!

Are you there yet?

Trump just made a MAJOR CHANGE to his Russia & Ukraine strategy

President Trump just threatened Russia with a massive increase in tariffs if it doesn’t reach a ceasefire deal in 60 days, and also announced a new shipment of weapons to Ukraine through NATO. Glenn Beck and former Department of Defense intelligence analyst Jason Buttrill explain why this is a negotiation tactic, not a push for more war.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The president is giving a -- a press conference right now. Very severe tariffs coming on Russia, if no Ukraine cease-fire deal is within 50 days. He's also sending weapons to Ukraine via NATO.

Which I don't know if that makes it better, does it, Jason?

JASON: No. It's basically the same thing.

GLENN: I guess it's not -- we know they're not going to be sold into corruption.

It won't go to some Nazi.

JASON: Right.

GLENN: That's an upgrade.

JASON: It's actually a very good point.

Because there was no transparency at all.

GLENN: None.

JASON: Just talk about chain of custody. I saw, was it Lindsey Graham over the weekend, talking about he was expecting an announcement today?

I don't know if this was what it is or not.

GLENN: Yeah. I think it is.

JASON: We all know at the core what President Trump is about.

Which is stopping war. Which is not having it happen.

I've seen a lot of negotiating power shifting in his corner.

Especially after the-Israel thing.

GLENN: Yes.

JASON: He's definitely got the -- I don't know. It's hard to describe his negotiating.
Or the way he does foreign policy. It's almost like shock. Shock --

GLENN: It's Overton window.

JASON: They don't really know what to expect.

I think this is feeding into that. I think that's part of it.

We know Trump is not wanting to go to war.

But now Vladimir Putin is not so sure.

So I think this is the president testing the waters here. Letting that, you know, what he's done, especially with Iran and Israel.

Let that speak for itself.

And see --

GLENN: This is one of the things that kills me about the critics of Donald Trump.

The ones who like him.

I heard all kinds of people saying, oh, now, look, we're going to go to war. Do you really think that's what Donald Trump is doing.

Do you really think he spent his whole life talking about two things.

His hatred for foreign war. And his love for tariffs.

That's been a lifetime ruse, just so he could get in, and then bring us to war?

He -- he is doing everything he can to stop this war.

You -- you saw it in the frustration he had, what was it?

A week ago. Where he let the F bomb go be into the reporters with his he's going into Marine One.

He just thinks, this is just stupid. This is just stupid in Israel and Hamas and Iran. And also, with Ukraine and Russia.

But he's got to -- you know, you -- peace through strength.

He's not going to send, you know, a pallet of cash to our enemy.

Not going to be like, hey, Glenn, you're Putin. Look what showed up on your tarmac. A trillion dollars, and expect that to work.

It's not going to work. It's not going to work.

He knows that has to be tough.

And that's what's got to happen.

I don't like sending arms to Ukraine. I guess I'm better with them going to NATO.

But then NATO will give them to Ukraine.

And what difference does that make. And I don't understand that one.

I will tell you, he is meeting with the NATO secretary general of the White House right now.

And he's talking about this.

And, you know, you've got to give the guy some credit on being a negotiator.

GLENN: Oh. Absolutely.

He's -- he set all of this up, through how he's dealt with all of our situations that has come before this one.

He's actually in a very, very good position. He's shown that he's willing to -- not only willing to -- but prefers to go to the negotiating table.

He tried to force Vladimir Putin, which he did a little bit. Got some concessions.

But they did something that they have not done since Russia invaded Ukraine. They sat down and talked.

GLENN: Yeah.

JASON: If anything, he should get credit for that right there.

But now, since this is not really working.

He's also showing, that he's willing to get tough.

He's willing to say, okay.

Fine, that's not working.

This has to work. Now the Russians will have to weigh these two things.

I don't want to see a B2 flying over some area. Any time in the near future.

No one wants to see that.

Maybe we should start looking at this negotiating thing a little bit more.

Now, all of the options appear to be on the table. And that's a good thing. The confusion is a good thing on the Russian side.

GLENN: So there's a lot of talk about, you know -- from our side.

On Donald Trump, and he's really -- and I've got to tell you. I don't see it this way.

I see Pam Bondi making some bad. And, you know, maybe I'm signaling her out, unfairly.

I don't think so. But maybe I am.

I see a real problem on that. Real problem.

And that's not a problem they can't correct. They just have to do it.

But I see, you know, now people are saying, see, he's just getting us into a foreign war.

You really -- maybe it's just me.

You don't understand what this guy is doing.

And, quite honestly, tell me one thing that is easy for him to solve?

How is he going to solve -- how do you solve the immigration thing?

How do you solve that?

He's already solved.

Nobody is coming in.

He solved that. Now he's got to fight with these kangaroo courts, all over the country. Where the Supreme Court said with be you can't do it.

You're still doing it.

You're dealing with actual Marxists and communists. Who are funded by our own government, in some cases. Who are putting radicals on the streets to burn things down. And to cause havoc and chaos.

You have -- you have people now in the press who would rather take down Donald Trump, and start a -- some sort of a ground war against ICE, by using video of children running from ICE, most likely not because of ICE. But because they were trying to escape. They were there without any parents.

They were there, as individual children.

God only knows what these people have -- what these kids have gone through.

And they were working illegal in the pot fields.

So I mean, it's bad enough, California. You have pot fields.

On top of that, now you have children.

You know, picking the pot fields for you?

And you're still standing with the communist radicals?

I mean, what do you do?

What do you do?

I mean, it's easy for an authoritarian. They say, he's an authoritarian.

He's, you know, Mussolini, he's Hitler. No, Hitler would have had all of this taken care of a long time ago. Trains would have been running on time by this point.

He's not. He's doing everything he can constitutionally. And, I mean, tell me the thing that is going on his way.

We wouldn't have to -- we wouldn't -- he wouldn't have had to waste his time, today, on Ukraine. In Russia.

He wouldn't have to waste his time on Iran, and Israel.

Had Biden not screwed both of those places up!

He's been working on other things.

Look how much time it's taken. And they love it. They love it.

And they love it, that we're tearing each other apart.

It's hard. You have to question these things. But you have to question them in a way, that you're not tearing them apart. And I don't know how to do that. I don't know if I'm doing a really good job or a bad job.

I don't know if, you know, you perceive me as a giant sellout. Or, you know, too tough.

I have no idea. No idea.

I don't really care. Because I'm just saying what I believe to be the right thing.

But the one thing I don't want to do is cause more problems. Because look at the problems, that the left is causing. And, no, we were not paying attention to it. We're not paying attention to it. We've got Mamdani.

Who is -- is -- he might be the next -- he's a communist! They're shooting themselves if the foot, over and over and over again.

I don't know. I don't know.

I don't -- I mean, you know, we talked earlier about, there are some things that we can do.
That we should be doing.

VOICE: I think that you always said to me way back when I started doing this job. When I was just -- came on with the chief researchers.

When you were finally -- if you're stuck, just start following the money.

GLENN: Yeah.

VOICE: That will tell you so much.

I feel like right now, we are stuck with the Epstein thing. Whether it's because of chain of custody.

Whether it's because it's been 15 years. Whatever it is.

I think that's something that a special counsel. And a grand -- a grand jury focused on weaponization of government, as a whole, so Russia-gate. Everything. I think a lot of the Epstein stuff will come out with that. I think if you just started following the money just on the Epstein stuff.

We can block out a lot of the other things that seem suspicious. Let's say the intelligence connections. Things like that. That we can't prove.

We probably will never prove.

We all think are there. Let's not go there for now. Let's just concentrating on following the money.

That could lead us to the intelligence connections.

That could lead us to a lot of the other things. Look at Epstein's financial network, for instance. It is a maze.

This is not how things are supposed to go. Offshore Shell companies?

These are facts. Offshore Shell companies in places like Bermuda, where we get money coming in by the millions. Then we get black. They're black coming in. They're black going out.

Why is that, Glenn?

Isn't that something that our financial experts, nerds can say, wait a minute. Let's focus on that. Maybe that will lead us --

GLENN: Yeah. The question to the Treasury, were there any warnings from banks. Because banks were supposed to warn. That's what happened with Hunter Biden.

Remember, there were 80 some.

Or 180 some warnings to the treasury, from banks, saying, this looks like money laundering.

I would like to know from the treasury.

Were there any warnings on that?

Because with that many offshore accounts.

That's what those are for.

You know, it's either sheltering money against taxes, or something really nefarious is going on.

Money is going in and out, that shouldn't be going in and out.

And where is this money coming from?

And where is this money going to?

JASON: Yeah. Banks that were supposedly. Turning a blind eye to some of these transactions.

Maybe we look at some of those.

What about the charities. This is another thing.

I want to put some of these things -- maybe we can share it on Wednesday, on TV show.

Just the money alone. Is just a total mine screw.

It's insane. But like charities. Why were major billionaires, going to Epstein, to then funnel money.

Not -- I don't want to say funnel money.

But to have Epstein do major contributions to some of these charities.

Why?

Why would major billionaires. After Epstein has already been outed through a case.

What was that?

2008. 2009.

He's already been outed as this person. Which you then go to this guy. And then say, let's funnel money into some of these charities.

Why?

Unless you're trying to hide money. Unless you're trying to direct it many ways.

Again, these are tangible things that you can follow. This is money!

It tells a story. We can follow it. Now, why isn't the mainstream media concentrating on that?

Why isn't the New York Times saying, Bermuda?

There's money. And show companies in Bermuda.

The US Virgin Islands.

This makes no sense.

This is like cypress. And gangsters. And Ukraine. For crying out loud.

GLENN: Which they also didn't cover.

JASON: It's right there. Which they didn't cover. Come on, guys!

GLENN: I know. I know.

Well, we'll cover it, on the Wednesday night special.

Don't miss it. This Wednesday. Only Blaze TV.

And my YouTube channel. YouTube.com/GlennBeck.

Everything the FBI is investigating about Democrats EXPLAINED

“Just The News” CEO and Editor in Chief John Solomon joins Glenn to explain the FBI’s new investigation into an “ongoing conspiracy by the Deep State and the Democrats” over the past 10 years. Could this investigation finally give us justice and answers on stories like the Russian collusion narrative, the raid on Mar-a-Lago, and the cover-up of Joe Biden’s mental decline? It might come down to Pam Bondi, he argues …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: John Solomon, welcome to the program. John.

JOHN: Good to be with you.

GLENN: Hey, I just looked at the last time you were on with me was 2023. And I keep thinking, we have to have John Solomon on, more than that.

JOHN: I would love it. Count me in, any time you want.

GLENN: You are the best.

Okay. So I saw this report, and give me some hope. I so desperately want to believe, John.

Give me some hope.

JOHN: Yeah. Listen, this is a very real thing. The FBI has opened a predicated investigation. That means, there's enough evidence to support a belief that crimes occurred.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

JOHN: Viewing the last ten years as an ongoing conspiracy, an ongoing conspiracy by the Deep State Democrats to protect Democrats from possible criminal prosecution, people like Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.

And to foist upon Donald Trump and his supporters. Investigations that weren't warranted by the evidence. And when I go through that, you can cycle through this. At the end, put a very clear pattern and time line.

Hillary couldn't get that off, on the email cases, even though the FBI got new intelligence early. Just a few weeks ago, before James Comey cleared her. That said, maybe there was a criminal matter. They ignored it.

They cleared her, on the same day, they start working towards putting Donald Trump under the boat. This Russia collusion investigation.

Fast forward to 2020.

There are three events that protect Democrats

The effort to call Hunter Biden's laptop disinformation, the impeachment scandal to make it look Donald Trump had a Ukraine problem when it was Joe Biden. And in August of 2020, the FBI gets an extraordinary piece of evidence, that China is trying to hijack the election. By creating bogus mail-in ballots for Joe Biden.

And they don't investigate. They pull back. And actually turn a blind eye to it.

Then you go all the way down to 2022. Jack Smith stuff. Joe Biden. Sticking the prosecutors on Donald Trump. When he himself has a classified document. And instead, they will project that on Donald Trump.

And you go all the way to '24, where Joe Biden's mental decline is covered up by the White House, to try to influence the election. Kash Patel's document. Or the FBI's document treats this as an ongoing conspiracy. Now, why is that important?

It allows you to go back and charge events that are outside the statute of limitations. And you can do this in DC. Many of the overt acts occurred in Florida, with the raid of President Trump's home. So you could potentially have a grand jury in the trial in Florida, where the jury is probably more likely to consider the evidence fairly.

GLENN: Okay. I don't want to get my hopes up. John, I heard this in the ongoing conspiracy, that that is remarkable. That will take care of everything that we have -- I mean, because nobody has been prosecuted. For anything.

And you just -- and you just list a lot of really important possible crimes.

And most of those are past the statute of limitations. But if they say this is an ongoing conspiracy, they can go all the way back, past that statute of limitations. And charge everybody.

However -- oh. And the other good part is, you could possibly do it in Florida.

So if you're not doing it in Washington, DC, or New York, you have a chance of actually a fair trial.

But we have been let down over and over and over again.

JOHN: Oh, yeah, many more times, than we've ever been given -- a moment --

GLENN: Right.

JOHN: I think this is going to turn on two very important events, in the next week or two. The first is, well, Pam Bondi appointed a special prosecutor, to give them the full authority and resources they do. You can't do this at the FBI, while you're also trying to stop criminals.

GLENN: Yes.

JOHN: You have to break this off. Give a person to focus on this full-time to do it. You panel that grand jury, and then treat this as a real investigation.

The second is there are two pieces of evidence.

It's remarkable given all the Russiagate. And other documents that we've gotten.

That these two highly classified documents have ever been released. But they are the admission point.

They are the events that would help the jury understand the beginning of the repetition of this pattern. In -- there is a set of documents. The inspector -- DOJ, inspector general report. Hillary Clinton being let off, in the email scandal.

That shows, that just before James Comey cleared her, the intelligence came in and suggested there was a serious criminal matter. And the FBI chose under James Comey not to investigate them.

The Democrat gets off in the face of perhaps really damning evidence. The second piece is a document --

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait.

Do we know what that evidence was?

JOHN: We only have the description of Chuck Grassley in one letter. Chuck Grassley has spent eight years trying to get this information released, and I think he is about succeed with President Trump. But basically they say, our intelligence came in. The FBI should have investigated, and it didn't. Instead, it just waved a magic wand and exonerated Hillary Clinton.

We don't know more than that. It's highly classified.

I believe it's top secret, compartmentalized level, so it's sensitive. But I think Chuck Grassley may have the president's attention, and this may happen. Now you know that maybe Hillary Clinton, there's another piece of evidence, that we didn't know about that Hillary Clinton perhaps got off on -- in fact, she might have been prosecuted. That establishes Democrats getting off, like Hunter Biden afterwards. All the other things happening. The flip side is that a piece of evidence. That John Durham, the special prosecutor, who tried to indict on DC but couldn't get them convicted. He writes in his final report about the Clinton planned intelligence. It's an intercept of the United States intelligence. Intercepted, in July, before -- before the FBI opened up the clearly corrupt crossfire hurricane investigation.

An unwarranted investigation of Russia collusion. A couple of days before that, the US intelligence community intercepts that Hillary Clinton had personally approved a plan, to hang a Russian shingle on Donald Trump's campaign. So basically create a scandal, to make it look like Russia is trying to help Donald Trump win the election, so they can get by Hillary Clinton's own Russia problems.

Remember, Bill Clinton, the 500,000-dollar speech fee from Russia. They got all the money for the foundation from Russian interest.

So the government knows before it opens up on Donald Trump, before it opens up on Donald Trump, that Hillary Clinton is concocting the very thing they are about to investigate.

And they go ahead and proceed with that.

Now, we don't know what the intercept is specifically. But if we get that released, and John Durham clearly was begging for it to be released in his report.

Those two pieces give us the ignition of this recurring cycle. Of let Democrats off. And pin down Republicans with a bogus scandal.

GLENN: The FBI has both of those?

JOHN: They do.

Well, they're both, believe it or not, in classified annexes of the report.

So the first one is in the possession of the justice department inspector general. He got access to that -- that intelligence. And that would be the easiest place to declassify from.

Pam Bondi and the president could do that. The second is in the John Durham Report.

He also created a classified annex to his report, that has that explosive Clinton planned intelligence. So Pam Bondi and the president could do that. The FBI is well aware of this.

It's part of the reason why Kash Patel and the FBI opened up the conspiracy case. But unless you can share it with the grand jury because it's declassified, you can keep the grand jurors in the dark in what may be two of the most explosive pieces of evidence, we haven't had!

GLENN: What makes you believe -- I'm really trying. I'm trying -- I'm trying to keep hope alive here.

What -- what makes you believe that this will actually happen.

JOHN: Oh, listen. I'm a reporter.

I start with a cynical look on everything. I do not know that if it will happen. I do know the events that they identify in the story, have happened.

Now, the investigation was opened about three months ago, by the FBI.

I had talked to some people that were consulted by the Justice Department.

Would you consider being a special counsel. Or deputy special counsel.

Now, remember, special counsels have to be Senate-confirmed so it would be better to have the US attorney and if you don't have a US attorney, maybe you go and name someone who is a cabinet secretary, who is a former prosecutor. Lee Zeldin at the EPA was a prosecutor earlier in his life.

He's Senate-confirmed. He was part of the team that broke the Russia collusion, delusion, out in the public.

GLENN: Wow.

JOHN: What if you named him and you just sped things up?

Those are the things that have happened. Now, the only reason I will believe it is if Donald Trump declassifies and Pam Bondi appoints the special counsel. Well, see if they do that, it won't take long.

Listen, this is not rocket science.

They can do this tomorrow, if they chose to.

GLENN: Do they have to do it before the statute of limitations runs out on people?

JOHN: Well, a lot of the events. Comey it goes back to '16. They would be wrapped into a conspiracy.

You can bring them forward.

There are plenty of events that have occurred in 2022, '23, and '24 that keep the statue alive for several years.

The raid on Mar-a-Lago, over the objections of the FBI. That could be an -- the -- there's a very small window left. On the China intelligence. The China intelligence comes in, in August.

That's still about six or eight weeks out.

If you open the investigation now, you might be able to toll the statute on that.

But there are several events that occurred between 2022 and 2024. The cover-up of Joe Biden's mental decline. That keep a long window for a special prosecutor to bring the whole kitchen in. This is basically a kitchen sink conspiracy case.

But that's how you point out to the mob, back in the '80s and '90s with Rudy Giuliani. You can tie them together. There are several years of statutes that are part of the alleged conspiracy. So they have time to do this.

But time is ticking, and it's up to President Trump and Pam Bondi. If they want to pursue what Kash Patel started. Just announce it this week. Get it going!

GLENN: Is there any reason you can think of, that Donald Trump would not want to do this?

JOHN: I haven't talked to him yet. I will try to interview him the next day or two, if they will allow me to. But I would like to find out. Would you declassify it?

What do you think about it?

At the end of the day, the president usually will keep my hands off the Justice Department. So it will come down to Pam Bondi, who has had a bumpy start to her tenure, for sure.

GLENN: You think?

JOHN: But at the same time, you know, she is smart. She understands things.

This could be a gift horse just showed up at her door. And if she runs with it, I think the American public will get an accounting that they've never gotten for it. Potentially, some of these bad actors, who had a fight, but they just kept going over and over again. Commit a crime.

Adjust the crime on the other guys. Create a false scandal. They did that several times.

Now is that time to unravel that. Great punishment so it doesn't -

GLENN: John, I -- I started the podcast earlier today with a phone call from somebody who I think really expressed what a lot of us are feeling.

About the Pam Bondi, you know, debacle here on Epstein.

And he said, look, there's nothing more important than crimes against children.

And all of our guts are saying, this is -- there's something really wrong here.

And now we're being told to shut up and sit down.

And we're -- and we're being told this, without giving us, as he said, help me believe. I want to believe.

Help me believe. What is your take on the Epstein thing? And why it's -- I mean, is it just Pam Bondi that has bungled this thing, or was it?

JOHN: Listen, the FBI has turned in everything it has. There's no doubt about that. I've done reporting on that.

I think Pam Bondi simply raised the expectation of this, maybe to have a Fox News moment, or just to have one of those excitement moments.

And wasn't well-prepared. And so overstated what was there. And then they've been rolling backwards ever since.

Now, I think there are two places that president Trump, Pam Bondi, and the American public could benefit by focusing on.

We focused on what the FBI got.

But probably the most interesting evidence is still under seal in the grand jury and the southern district of New York.

GLENN: Yes.

JOHN: Every time you see someone talking about this. Those documents aren't mentioned.

I think that's what people like -- the lawyers for Epstein were talking about Alan Dershowitz. They were talking about it the other day.

I think you look at the grand juries. There's two grand juries. And there's one in the Southern District of New York. State of Florida is out of Pam Bondi's control now. Though, it would have been in her control back then.

Get that information out. Get the information at the Southern district of New York.

Create a bond index of all the documents so that the people see, what's been releasing, what's not being released, the reason it isn't being released.

You have a moment of transparency, that would reboot the confidence of the American people. The trust going forward.

The second place to look, is that it is clear that Jeffrey Epstein had some interactions with the United States intelligence. I do not believe he was an asset. He wasn't a knock. He wasn't a controlled source for the CIA.

But at various times, he would have had interactions with the CIA, and the people around the CIA. By Jeffrey Epstein's own admission in an interview he did several years ago, before his death.

He admitted that he was working with the Saudi Arabian businessman named Khashoggi back in the 1980s, when Khashoggi was the main man for the Iran-Contra transactions between the Reagan administration in Iran and Contra rebels. It's impossible that Jeffrey Epstein, that level of relationship, didn't run into the CIA. And most likely, ran into the CIA.

Excuse me. Again, a few times, and my sources say, there were a few other interactions. But check that out too.

He's dead. There's no reason behind this information. So Florida Grand Jury.

Southern District, New York grand jury, it's unsealed. And whatever the CIA has on Epstein.
I think that would give great accountability.

Would get Pam Bondi and Donald Trump. And the FBI focused on other bigger things than this.

I don't think it's going to be a lot of surprises, but the lack of trust that they have created can be easily fixed with that.

GLENN: Thank you. Thank you.

This is why I had John on today.

Thank you. You gave me hope on Friday. You gave me hope today.

Thank you, John, I appreciate it. You've got it. John Solomon.

Just the news.

If you don't follow his reports. You should, justthenews.com. Justthenews.com.

He's also on X. J Sullivan reports. He worked for the New York Times and the Washington Post.

And the Wall Street Journal.

And he finally said enough is enough.

And he left. And he started his own thing. Because they wouldn't let them cover things.

And he does an outstanding job. An outstanding job. That's what we should be asking for. I wrote those things down.

Those are the things that we should be asking for.

And I think we should also perhaps start to ask the president and Pam Bondi, to open a grand jury on a grand conspiracy.

They'll know exactly what we're talking about.

And the FBI has done all the groundwork.

Now it's just up to Pam Bondi and the president to allow those two documents to be unsealed. Or to be declassified.

When it comes to Epstein, unseal the documents. In the courts!

And I don't need to know everybody's name. You can redact all of the names.

You know, when it comes to -- anybody who is a possible victim, just X out their names. I have no problem with that. I don't think anybody wants to know that.

We just need -- help us help you. Please.

Help us, help you. Because there is a real lack of trust. And if we don't repair this, the republic is once again at stake. As much and if not worse, than it was before.

Because we're now taking all of the people who believe in the country, and we're dividing them even more.

We can't continue to divide!

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Jeffrey Epstein's SHOCKING connections to intelligence agencies | The Glenn Beck Podcast REPLAY

Journalist Whitney Webb has worked to uncover some of the most dangerous stories of our lifetime, and she joins Glenn to reveal just how eye-opening it’s been. Her new two-volume book, “One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Crime that Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein,” examines Epstein’s elaborate network of corruption and power, from Bill Clinton to Ghislaine Maxwell and many more. Her research into transhumanism has given her a terrifying perspective on the World Economic Forum and tech elites, including Elon Musk. And she tells Glenn the dark truth about Biden’s push for electric vehicles that she noticed while living in Chile.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Whitney Webb HERE