RADIOOctober 05, 2022

EXPOSED: The Fed & big banks to test SOCIAL CREDIT SCORES?

With record-breaking inflation, sky-high interest rates, and an economic recession, the Federal Reserve hasn’t had a lot of 2022 wins. But now, the Fed is getting even WORSE. In this clip, Glenn announces the Fed’s new ‘pilot program’ to test social credit scores HERE in America, alongside some of our biggest banks. Listen to find out what exactly this ‘pilot program’ entails and which banks are involved…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. So one of the things that is trending today, is OPEC is considering cutting oil production. To increase global prices.

Oh, my gosh. How could OPEC do this?

Because it's OPEC. They're not exactly the red crescent or the Red Cross. Okay?

They're in it for the cash. So OPEC has decided to raise the cost of oil production by reducing oil production.

Okay. That sounds fantastic for us, at the gas pump, right?

Why they're doing this, is because you're starting to see the beginning of the western world, not buying as much gasoline. You're starting to see demand destruction.

And that, again, is what the fed has been looking for. And it's so important, because they just say this, all the time. Like it's no big deal.

We just need demand destruction. That means, they need to make your life, so unworkable that you can't afford gas. So the price of gas collapses.

And you still are not going anywhere. Remember covid?

You're still not going anywhere. Because you can't afford it. Because everything is so expensive.

That's what demand destruction means. And I think it bears repeating every day. Because people, if they even listen to the fed, they see, well, they're raising interest rates.

Yes. Because generally speaking, that's to suck money back in, and have it go right to the furnace. I'm not convinced that that's what's happening.

But by raising the interest rates, everything you have becomes more expensive. And it also means that big businesses aren't going to be getting loans to expand.

Which means, laying people off. This is all thanks to the fed. Now, there's another thing that you should be aware of.

Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank are -- are suffering now, if you will, from distressed valuations at the banks.

In 2008, Lehman Brothers, the fourth largest investment bank in the U.S. collapsed and filed for bankruptcy.

Now today, Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank, two of the world's largest banks are suffering from the same kind of thing. The bank's credit default insurance levels are approaching things not seen since 2008.

Let me say that again. They're suffering from advertise distressed valuations, and the bank's credit default insurance levels are approaching degrees not seen since 2008.

The world economy is looking bad. Energy and gas prices, record highs. Inflation in many countries, is the highest in 40 years. The supply chains are fractured still. Equity markets have shed significant value. And tensions between the West and Russia, are at a nuclear level.

Now the two largest investment banks are floundering. And may go under.

That will be good. That will be really good. Now, Deutsche Bank says, nine! It will not happen. And the Swiss are like, you know how many banks we have over here?

We have so many banks. We're known for banks. We're not going to go under. So worry. Don't worry.

Don't matter. But just know, that that is actually a possibility on the horizon. And what is our fed doing today?

Our fed has made a major announcement. They're having a pilot exercise. Let's get all the pilots out, and let's have them do jumping jacks. Not that kind of pilot exercise. This one, is for ESG, social credit scores.

Now, Stu.

Help me out. A social credit score is what exactly?

STU: Have you ever seen Black Mirror?

GLENN: I have.

STU: Okay. Yeah. It's a way to rate your quality as an individual. Do you support the common goals of this society? This social -- this social contract, we all have with each other.

GLENN: Right. But it's nothing like what is happening in China.

STU: Oh, it's almost exactly what's happening in China. Yes.

GLENN: Really? They call it a social credit score? Huh. Huh.

STU: That's exactly what they call it.

GLENN: Okay. Well, the Federal Reserve announces a major pilot exercise, for ESG social credit score system.

STU: Oh.

GLENN: Six of the -- this is according to the fed. Last Thursday. Six of the nation's largest banks will participate in a pilot climate scenario, analysis, it's an exercise, to design. Or to -- designed to enhance the ability of supervisors.

And firms, to measure and manage climate-related financial risks.

Scenario analysis, in which the resilience of a financial institution is assessed, under different kind of hypothetical climate scenarios, is an emerging tool to assess climate-related financial risk. There will be no capitol or supervisory implications from the pilot.

In other words, they're just working with the big banks to monitor their ability to comply with the ruling class's preferred environmental status, technocratic tyranny. That's all they're doing.

STU: Nothing will come of it. No. They're just doing it for fun. Everyone loves to come up with a new algorithm for fun.

GLENN: Right. Because this is going to assist people.

This is going to help people.

STU: Helping. Yes. It's always helping.

GLENN: Okay. So you have that going for you.

So once they get this pilot program through, it's just going to sit on the shelf, and do nothing.

STU: Right. That's why every pilot program. When you -- like, for example, you create a new pilot for a situation comedy.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: You always know you're making one episode. And it's never going to be seen by anybody. You don't have a desire to get it on the air, so you can make millions and millions and millions of dollar. You just want to make that one pilot. And then put it on the shelf. You can tell your family about how you made a pilot once.

And that's the end of your story. You never want to go farther than that.

GLENN: Nope. Bank of America. Citigroup. Goldman Sachs. JPMorgan Chase. MorganStanley. And Wells Fargo. All part of the pilot program.

And that's going to begin early next year.

STU: So the pilot is being considered by ABC. NBC. CBS. Fox. HBO. Show time.

GLENN: Lifetime.

STU: Cinemax.

GLENN: All of it.

STU: They're all in. Netflix is there.

GLENN: Even the Sundance channel is interested.

STU: Sundance is in. You have Amazon prime.

GLENN: But it's never going to run. It's never going to run.

STU: No longer. It will just go right on the shelf.

GLENN: Right. So don't worry about it. They just are making sure they can -- and put this credit scoring system in, for social credit. Just to make sure that it would work.

Should they decide to ever do it.

STU: Which they won't. It's going on the shelf.

GLENN: Of course, they won't. That's a conspiracy, Stu.

STU: It is. Here's 25 speeches of all these people, describing how they want to implement this. But it's just a conspiracy theory.

GLENN: Right. Right. And anybody who, you know, looks at the words of the World Economic Forum. They're a conspiracy theorist.

For instance, I gave this news earlier, but I think it bears repeating.

During the World Economic Forum, anti-disinformation panel, last week, I United Nations representative, announced that they, quote, owned the science when it comes to climate informational. And their partnership with Google.

STU: That's kind of saying the quiet thing out loud, isn't it?

GLENN: Oh, I think so. Yeah.

But I don't think they think we're listening.

And I think they're kind of right. More people are listening. But more people have to listen. We are in a race to a wire finish.

Which one of us, is going to get our crap together, faster?

Because right now, they're panicking. Right now, if you see the World Economic Forum, they're like, so people that are starting to wake up.

And they might come with pitchforks and torches to our castles.

They're already starting to feel, you know, that the crowd is like, bring out the monster!

If that happens, they're in trouble. So they've got to move faster, and create more chaos.

I think, you know, if -- if we were playing a game of risk. Have you ever played with anybody like this?

You play a game like Risk. And all of a sudden, the tables turn.

You think you're winning. And the tables turn, and all of a sudden, you're losing.

And then that person, because they're a piece of crap. They just pick up the whole thing, and just throw it off -- you know, flip it off.

And all the pieces are on the ground. That's what I'm afraid that they might do. That they're like, oh, really?

Because chaos works in their favor. But don't worry, they've got things under control. Because people who like freedom of speech, they -- they've already -- the undersecretary general for the global communications at the UN, Melissa Fleming, said that she's already partnered. The UN has, with big tech companies, including, but not limited to TikTok and Google.

Well, those are little ones. She says, the Google search results, now prioritize what the UN wants to prioritize. And what the WEF wants to prioritize.

We've partnered with Google, for example, if you Google climate change, you will at the top of your search, the bet all kinds of UN resources.

We started this partnership, when we were shocked to see, that when we Googled climate change, we were getting incredibly distorted information, right at the top.

We're becoming much more proactive.

After all, we -- I'm quoting, we own the science.

And we think the world should know it. And the platforms themselves also do.

We also had a trusted messenger product. Project. Which was called Team Halo.

Where trained scientists around the world, and their doctors on TikTok. And we had TikTok working with us.

STU: Oh, wait. You had who? You had the Chinese Communist Party working with you? That's a real surprise.

GLENN: Yeah. No.

You're not distrusting are you?

STU: Of TikTok? No. No.

They're a great authority. Which is why, as a scientist, you should be bragging about your associations with TikTok.

GLENN: Right. Right. And then another key strategy they announced at the World Economic Forum, just last week was, we really have a key strategy to deploy influencers.

Influencers who are really keen and have huge followings. But really keen to help follow our message. That we're going to serve their communities. And they were much more trusted than the United Nations or WEF. Telling them something from New York City.

Oh. Okay. Well, that's really good. And one more thing. Reason number 471, just today, on why you cannot be silent.

Why you have to stand. An Ivy League biology professor is sounding the alarm, on how Critical Race Theory is erasing the meaning and even the existence of objective truth. From classrooms.

And teaching a generation of students, to treat the truth, fast and loose, in order to obtain what you want.

We're supposed to be training people like biologists, that will become doctors, to make us healthier.

Mechanical engineers that will build bridges or skyscrapers.

This is according to the professor at Cornell University School of Integrative Plant Science, Randy Wayne.

He told Fox in a phone interview this month, if they're all trained on a foundation, that there is no truth. Nobody wants to be operated on by such a surgeon.

Or drive over a bridge, made by such an engineer. And I'm afraid, that's where our universities have gone.

Training people to treat the truth, fast and loose, in order to obtain what you want.

And in the case of universities, what they want is called social justice. And they're willing to play fast and loose with the truth to get it.

STU: This is -- I mean, this goes back to what they were constantly doing when it comes to global warming. It's okay to exaggerate. It's okay to tell big stories. It's okay to minimize your uncertainty. Because you're serving a larger upon your here. So go ahead.

That's allowed. You know, what's -- they're -- there are -- there have been many terrorist groups, that have made these sorts of justifications, where they say, hey. I know we're supposed to be very dedicated to this particular about to do. But if you need to go to the strip club, to cover, you know, that you're an extremist --

GLENN: What faith is this?

STU: I don't have any -- again, this is just a very -- membership drive is going on now.

But, I mean, this is what people do all the time. Right?

When you want to justify something greater, you have all sorts of exceptions to your morals and principles you can make.

GLENN: Here's a great thing. Heard this phrase over the weekend.

That, you know, there's all kinds of new normals.

God doesn't have a new normal. He doesn't. He's not changing. We're changing.

We're changing what truth is. But truth hasn't changed.

So you need to either accept that, or get on board for a cruise ship, that is right straight from hell. You'll look at the Titanic and go, gee. I wish I would have boarded that ship.

Will Medicaid cuts KILL Americans? Glenn reveals the FACTS!

Democrats claim that the Big, Beautiful Bill will take Medicaid and Medicare away from many Americans and even “kill” people. But is any of this true? Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere review just the facts and explain who’s actually affected by the changes.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Can I address some of the hyperbole around the big, beautiful bill, just a little bit.

If there's anything in the big, beautiful bill to worry about, it's the increase in spending.

Because the spending ourself into oblivion is an actual threat.

To the country. But that's not what anybody is talking about. What everybody seems to be talking about is the tax cuts. Which were already there. Or the tax cuts like no tax for tips. Which you would think the party of the little people. You know, the Democrats. Would all be for. But they're not.

Because they're not party of the little people anymore. And those had to be offset.

Okay. Offset. By what?

Well, by cutting spending. But cutting what spending?

Not cutting spending. Let me just say this. If I said, you know, I made $250,000 a year. And this year, we were going to spend $300,000.
Okay?

And you would say, immediately, Glenn. You can't do that.

And I would say, I've been doing that for 30 years. Okay. You might say, the bank is not going to give a loan.

But then if I came to you and said, yeah. I'm spending $300,000 a year. And my wife and I make 250 or 200,000 a year. But, you know, next year, I was going to spend $500,000.

Did you get a raise? No. I didn't get a raise. I still make 250,000 dollars a year between my wife and I.

But I'm going to spend 500 and not 300. And then somebody came in, like an accountant with some muscle.

And they said, Glenn, you cannot spend $500,000 a year!

Would it make sense if I went back to spending 300, not 200, which I had.

But 300, which I had been spending every year, would it make sense to you to -- for me to say, my children are now going to starve? My children are now going to starve.

Look at the austerity program that I am on.

My gosh, they just -- no. They didn't cut anything. They must cut thinking.

They cut the increase inning spending.

That's what they cut.

And, Stu, could you please explain Medicare.

I mean, all of the people. I know they warned us.

I didn't believe the death squads would actually go out.

And, you know, they want these people off Medicare so badly.

Or Medicaid.

They just sent out death squads. Trump is not waiting for them to die, because he's not waiting for them to get their prescriptions now he just wants them slaughtered in the street.

STU: Yeah, that's the efficiency of the Trump administration. He wants these people dead so badly, he's just killing them in the streets. Actually, no, none of that is happening.

And the Medicaid cuts as you point out, are largely cuts to future increases that have not occurred.

The biggest chunk of this is the work requirements. You've heard this, Glenn.

And, you know, I went through this. And I was like, this can't possibly be what they mean.

I said, wait a minute. When they say work requirement cuts, what does that mean?

So I dove into it a little bit. Basically, what they're saying, you, if you're an able-bodied adult, so that does not include old people, does not include people who are sick and can't work. And it also does not include people who have small children, even if they are able-bodied.

And when I say small, I mean 12 and under. So if you have a 12-year-old. You're completely exempt from this.

But able-bodied adults.

GLENN: Okay. On people in wheelchairs.

STU: No. Gosh, again, I know this is tough. Yeah, this is where it gets difficult.

GLENN: Wait. I'm having a hard time following this. What now?.

STU: So you're an able-bodied adult, that does not have small children.

GLENN: No small children.

STU: You would be required to get Medicaid, to work 20 hours a week.

Now, you might --

GLENN: Twenty hours a week.

STU: Or 80 hours a month.

GLENN: Or 80 hours a month.

That's almost half a full-time job.

STU: Now, you might say to yourself. And this is actually true.

Some people can't get jobs. Right?

I'm sure, there are people trying to get part-time jobs. And maybe can't get them.

Those people will just lose their Medicaid. Well, as you may understand.

Of course not.

Because what you have to do then is go through a process, that you're basically telling them, you're attempting to get a job. Or you're volunteering somewhere, to meet that requirement.

So basically, you have to fill out -- yeah. It's like unemployment.

You have to at least fill out some paperwork here.

GLENN: It's the exact opposite.

Let me see if I have this right.

It's the exact opposite of unemployment which we've had forever.

Which if you're looking for a job, but can't get it. You can still have unemployment.

But it's the exact opposite. Right?

Especially if you're nursing sextuplets.

STU: Again, you're not very close to the truth.

You're a little bit off on this one.

GLENN: No. Huh!

STU: By the way, Glenn, you might say to yourself, wait. How is that a Medicaid cut?

Because they're not cutting anyone's eligibility here. Unless they don't want to meet the requirement.

Of course, there's always been requirements to all of these programs.

So meeting the requirements have always been part of getting on to Medicaid.

This requirement, if you decide basically not to do it. And not participate. And not fill out the paperwork.

Then, yes. You will lose your Medicaid coverage.

What they're saying, hold on. All right.

GLENN: No. I just want to make sure I have it right.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: If you are blind, you're deaf.

STU: No. Again, no.

GLENN: You have no friends, and you can't get out of the house, and you've been on Medicaid, somehow or another, you signed up for that. But now, you don't even know, because you can't hear the news. You certainly can't fill out a form. Because you have no eyes.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: They just come in and rip your Medicaid away?

STU: No. None of what you said is accurate.

Though, it is calm considering some of the accusations -- comparisons made bit left right now.

But, yeah.

So if you are an able-bodied adult that decides, you know what, I don't feel like filling out the paperwork, or I don't feel like going to job interviews, or I don't feel like volunteering, then yes. You could lose -- but that's what they're saying the cuts are.

They think 317 billion dollars worth of people will not bother doing those things. For whatever reason. Maybe because they had more money than they said. Maybe because they're lazy.

Maybe because -- I'm sure there's some case where some -- I don't know.

I can't think of the case.

GLENN: Blind person.

STU: Because the ailments are covered here.

But, yes. Maybe it's some particular skin color. Then they would reject you.

I don't know.

And it's not just that. There are other cuts. For example, some of the cuts are, they're eliminate duplicate Medicaid enrollment.

If you happen to have Medicaid.

GLENN: I can't double-dip.

STU: In two different states. They're going to try to stop you from having it in two states.

And instead, make you have it one state. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Hold on just one second.

I have two legs. I have two arms. I have two eyes. I have two nostrils. I have two ears.

I can't have two Medicaid coverages. It's insane!

STU: I know.

It's really, really brutal.

GLENN: I have two kidneys. I can only have one kidney now, you know, repaired?

STU: Now --

GLENN: Is that what you're saying?

STU: That's not what I'm saying. But, yes. I'm sure that's what's being reported out there by Dana Bash.

Another one, I will give you here, Glenn. They talked about immigrants.

You know, immigrants getting on their Medicaid cut. Now, this is tough. What this bill does, I want you to hold on to your hat here, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: If you have green card holders and other certain immigrants, some will lose their coverage. Or actually, sorry, eligibility will -- retain for those people.

Certain other immigrants may lose their coverage. The current law says, all who are lawfully present.

That will kick in after a -- how many year waiting period?

Let me guess, it's a five-year waiting period.

So it will be the next president who has to deal with this, when future Congress will just put it right back in. And it's not a savings at all.

And then you have Medicaid death checks. They're going to require --

GLENN: They're checking on whether your debt? Look at this! It's crazy.

STU: It's brutal. It really is.

GLENN: You're going to kick all of the immigrants off in five years.

STU: No.

GLENN: And then you're checking to see if old people are dead!

When will you leave these people alone?

STU: I know. So, anyway, we can go through this stuff all day. But as you point out, most of this stuff is not at all, what the left is saying it is.

It's not the desperate Medicaid cuts that are going to ruin everybody's lives. A lot of them are just really common sense stuff, making sure you don't have them in two states. I don't know what the positive argument is for that. But they'll make it.

GLENN: Well, they don't have one. That's why they don't make it about that.

Liz Wheeler BLASTS Pam Bondi’s Epstein deception

The Department of Justice and FBI are now claiming that there NEVER was any Epstein client list and nobody else needs to be charged. But what about Attorney General Pam Bondi’s previous claim that the list was on her desk?! BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler, who had been given one of Bondi’s ill-fated “Epstein Files” binders, joins Glenn Beck to discuss how the MAGA movement should react to the claims made by Bondi, Kash Patel, and Dan Bongino.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Liz Wheeler. Liz wrote to me early today. Let me see if I can -- may I quote you here, Liz?

LIZ: Yes, you may. Thanks for having me, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay. Yeah. You bet. She said, give me one good reason why I shouldn't scream for Pam Bondi to be fired today? And this was at 5 o'clock in the morning. And I said, I'm sleepy. But I don't think I can.

I don't think I can give you a reason not to -- not to call for her firing today. But I want you to explain, why do you feel this way?

LIZ: It's not something that I say lightly. I didn't say it immediately after the White House, Epstein binder debacle. And I want to very prudently and judiciously make this case to you today and to make this case to President Trump too. Because Pam Bondi has become a liability to her administration, despite her loyalty in other areas. So let's start with the announcement from the Department of Justice last night.

A lot of us have a lot of questions about this announcement. It just doesn't ring true with a lot of us. We see a lot of evidence before our eyes that contradicts what we're being told without evidence to believe by the FBI and the Department of Justice. And it grates on us.

Because like you mentioned, we are friends with Kash Patel and Dan Bongino.

They're the good guys. We trust them.

And yet, we have to use our critical thinking faculties and look at the evidence before our eyes.

So it smells fishy. You'll notice it says nothing about whether Jeffrey Epstein was an intelligence asset.

Which, as you mentioned, Alex Acosta, the attorney who cut the sweetheart deal originally with Epstein. Said he was, before Accosta's emails mysteriously disappeared. So we have questions about that.

There are also outstanding, important questions about Kash Patel and Dan Bongino's definitive pronouncement, that Epstein killed himself.

I'm sorry. I don't think the video that they released proves definitively that they were stating that case.

GLENN: Why?

LIZ: Because it does not show what's happening in the cell. It just shows the cell door. We don't actually see him kill himself.

GLENN: Right. But we know that nobody came in.

LIZ: Through that door.

GLENN: Where are they going to go true, the little bars? Little drag la? A little bat.

LIZ: I don't know what the internal cell looks like. I don't know what they have. I don't know if they have fire escape routes. I don't know if they have adjoining doors. I don't know if they have emergency exits. I don't know if that video was doctored or not.

I don't know enough about that, to simply take that one piece of evidence.

GLENN: Okay. So that's a good point.

Just show us the room. Show us what's inside the room.

LIZ: Yes. We need more evidence.

GLENN: That's reasonable.

LIZ: One piece of evidence.

It's not enough.

GLENN: Yeah.

LIZ: The other thing, I wonder with Kash Patel and Dan Bongino are relying too much on the FBI's prior investigation to the FBI of old is a reliable narrator. I don't know who conducted those investigations, or if it was done soundly. I doubt it was done soundly.

GLENN: So may I just interject here.

LIZ: Yes.

GLENN: I talked to Dan Bongino a few weeks ago about this off-air. And, Glenn, we are turning over every stone. We are going to get to the bottom of it.

We are -- so, I mean, he led me to believe that, and I believed him. And I still do.

That he was using new resources. Opening the investigation in -- in a new way. Following it closely.

And I do believe Dan Bongino is one of the good guys.

LIZ: I do too. And I've been told the same thing by high-ranking officials in the FBI. Who I trust. They're trustworthy people.

I do think, that it might not be possible at this point, to piece together everything, because we know there have been reports of evidence, destruction.

So my issue with that definitive statement was the definitive nature of it.

This 100 percent happened this way. Epstein killed himself. Instead of saving, we don't have enough evidence to piece this together, or the evidence we have points to this.

All that being said, though, I want to talk about what happened last night.

Because this brings to us attorney general Pam Bondi, who just months ago said she had the Epstein client list on her desk.

When I went back to look at that video, the clip of her on Fox News, again, this morning, to make sure that there was not context that I was lacking, that there was not bungled phraseology, maybe nerves being on the air.

I went back and listened to it. She said definitively, she had the Epstein client list on her desk.

Now, fast forward to yesterday, she says that it doesn't exist, that they don't have it.

That is a really big problem. If I'm president today --

GLENN: Okay. Let me play this, from Bondi. This is back in February. Here is the actual statement she made.

Listen.

VOICE: The DOJ may be releasing the list of Epstein's clients. Will that really happen?

VOICE: It's sitting on my desk right now, to review.

That's been a directive by President Trump. I'm reviewing that. I'm reviewing JFK files. MLK files. That's all in the process of being reviewed, because that was done at the directive of the president from all of these agencies.

VOICE: So have you seen anything, that you said, oh, my gosh?

VOICE: Not yet.

VOICE: Okay. Well, we'll check back with you.

GLENN: Okay. So now let me take you back to Kash Patel. Because something similar was said to me. Here he is. Cut 12.

So who has Jeffrey Epstein's?

VOICE: Black book? FBI.

GLENN: But who?

VOICE: Oh, that's under direct control of the director of the FBI. Just like the manifesto from the Nashville school shooting. The Catholic school. We still haven't seen that, right?

It's not the Nashville police or PD saying, we don't want this out. The FBI airmailed into that operation and said, this is not getting out. Because they do that because this is another government gangster operation.

All these local law enforcement communities get funding from the DOJ and FBI from local programs. And if you don't cooperate, you're not getting your million dollars for this.

That's a lot of money from these local districts. That's how they play the game. That's why you don't have a black book.

GLENN: Because the black book, it's not just sitting. That's Hoover power times ten.

VOICE: And to me, that's a thing I think President Trump should run on. On day one, roll out the black book.

And not just that, on day one, all the text messages and communications we were told were deleted. On day one, play the rest of the video of the pipe bomber.

You know, he needs -- one of the reforms I talk about in government gangsters.

Is you need a central node to be continuously declassifying. This is another thing they do. They overclassify.

They are not telling you -- as a former number two in the IC, they overclassify 50 percent of the stuff there to protect the Deep State.

Oh, no.

You can't see that. Nothing to see here.

Gina was a master at it. Of doing it. And we haven't seen half of the Russiagate report we wrote. Still under lock and key.

On how the ICA was originally constructed. We went -- we put 10,000 man-hours against John Brennan's team that did it.

And we found out why they came up with their bogus conclusions. We couldn't sell it with the world.

Because we couldn't talk about it. And the government cancers came in and buried it.

All of these things, there needs to be a continuing central power whether it's the White House or off-site that says, every request that comes in.
Just right out the door. As long as it's not awe major threat to national security.

VOICE: Liz, they're both very clear.

It existed. But Pam Bondi did not say, she had any names in it.

She kind of made me feel like she hadn't really looked at it.

Kash Patel gave me the impression, he had seen it. Or at least he knew about it.

So how do we go from here?

VOICE: Yes. Listen.

People care deeply about the Epstein files because there was a grisly crime that we know for a fact that was committed.

Epstein was convicted of that.

It wasn't speculative. He was convicted of that. People feel that there's evidence of a cover-up. Not -- we're not inventing a conspiracy. There's evidence of a cover-up of this crime.

Pam Bondi as attorney general has exacerbated this trust. And it gives me no pleasure to say this. Because I like to give the benefit of the doubt to people that are on our side.

But going back to that day in the White House, this February. I haven't told this part of the story before.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, when we met with her. We weren't at the White House to meet with her. We just met with her while she was there.

Pam Bondi bragged to us about making that cover sheet on the binder, the one that read the most transparent administration in history.

She said, she had made it. She had printed it. She was proud of it. She placed it on that binder.

Glenn, to call that a severe lack of judgment would be the understatement of the year. There is no way, in my mind, and I've tried every way to Sunday, to square that behavior with the announcement that we got last night with the Department of Justice.

Pam Bondi told us at the time, she said, I've requested the Epstein files, the files in the binder, were the ones given to me. Nothing was in them, she told us at the time. Then a whistle-blower told her, she told us. And said the FDNY was hiding other files. That's the story she had told us, that there's been a Deep State cover-up. So at the time, after we were given these binders, we waited. Right? You give your side the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Pam Bondi will come up with the goods, even though the rollout was botched to say the least.

But she -- this is another thing I have not discussed publicly before. She said, she had not seen the FDNY documents at the time that she was telling us about them.

I asked her directly that day in the White House. When she said, a whistle-blower told us about these truckloads of FDNY documents. I said, have you seen them? She said no, she sent the request and they're brining them to her.

So contextualizing all of this, suddenly this seems like unforgivable behavior.

How could she give the American people -- not just me. I don't care about how this impacts me. How can she give the American people those binders that contain nothing, while at the same time, bragging about the cover sheet that she made.

The most transparent administration in history. And tell us that the FDNY had the real goods, that the binder was just proof of a Deep State cover-up. That was the real story she told us. Only now to say, sorry, there's actually nothing.

So it leaves us with this situation. What are the options? The options are, well, was she herself set up by some Deep State FBI officials trying to make a fool of her? It's possible, maybe even probable.

GLENN: Possible.

LIZ: But here's the thing, if you're smart, if you're savvy, if you're sharp enough to be Attorney General of the United States, you verify such information.

You don't assume its veracity and publicize it for clicks. And that's what she did.

So then we get to the point, that we think, okay. Well, what does this say about her judgment?

Is she just click thirsty? Is she wanting to be a Fox News star? Did she get out over her skis, trying to make news, being a mega champion with those binders, that maybe she had not verified the contents of, and she definitely hadn't verified the contents of the FDNY truckload. You can't square this announcement with the binders. With the binders in February, unless you allow for the idea that Pam Bondi could be operating in a way that is unacceptable, when on Fox News. Said she had a client list on her desk to review, when she hadn't looked at the documents.

And was just saying that to be a television star. I say this. In somewhat sorrowfully. If I'm President Trump, I would not tolerate this behavior anymore. She's become a liability to the administration. I think the administration is probably just now coming to the realization of how much goodwill this whole debacle has cost them with their voters.

And Pam Bondi is not worth it. She's a liability. It's time to move on.

The INCREDIBLE TRUE Story of Benjamin Franklin

Was Benjamin Franklin the greatest and most modern Founding Father? This July 4th week, “The Greatest American” author Mark Skousen joins Glenn Beck to tell the incredible and true story of Benjamin Franklin.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Dr. Mark Skousen, friend of the program, friend of mine. America's economist.

He is -- he has written a new book on the greatest American and the greatest American, he says is Ben Franklin. And I tend to agree with him. He's at least in the top five greatest Americans. Welcome to the program, Mark. How are you?

MARK: I'm doing well. We're out here in the Mediterranean Sea right now on a cruise, but isn't it great technology that even Ben Franklin would love?

GLENN: You know, I don't think people really understand the genius of Ben Franklin. I mean, there's this great article in the times of London.

I don't remember when. But he was going back to London. He was going to challenge the king.

And he was going back. And they said, don't let his boat come in to dock.

Because he's been working with electricity, and he has a ray gun, and he will vaporize, you know, all of London.

I mean, he was -- he was the Elon Musk of his day, but he was almost more magical, because people didn't understand it.

Back then. What did you find in writing this book about Ben Franklin, that you think most people just don't know?

MARK: Well, this is the thing. So when I wrote the greatest American, I thought to myself, everybody -- lots of books have been written on his biography.

So what I did was I came up with 80 chapters on how he is the most modern of all the Founders. And how he could talk about the modern issues of today, whether it's trade or taxes or inflation or war. Discrimination. Inequality.

I have a chapter on each one of these, in the greatest American.

And, you know, he was a Jack-of-all-trades.
And the master of all, on top of it!

So one of the things I thought would be really cool, if you put my book, on every coffee table in America, and people came in to visit, they would look at this book. And there might be an argument, as you say, as to who is the greatest American. Whether it's George Washington or Elon Musk, or what have you.

GLENN: Whatever.

MARK: When they see the picture of Ben Franklin, they sit there and nod their head. And say, wow. This is the guy I want to sit down with and talk to.

And have a beer with.

Because if you sat with some of the other Founders, they would get in an argument with you. Or they would refuse to answer the question. Or what have you.

But Franklin was willing to talk to a janitor, as well as the king of France. And that's pretty unique.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. He could.

He was an amazing guy. So tell me, in your research of him, you know, you always hear that, oh, Ben Franklin was a notorious womanizer, and everything else.

And he abandoned his wife. Deborah? Was that her name?

MARK: Yes. Deborah. That's correct.

GLENN: Did that -- what's true, or what's not true about that?

MARK: So he certainly was the most liberal-minded when it came to the sexual revolution.

That's why I say, he's the most modern of the Founders. Because he was not prudish like John and Abigail Adams, who thought he was a reprobate. And sinner. And not a churchgoer. And stuff like that.

GLENN: Right.

MARK: So, yes. He was -- the ladies loved him. And he loved the ladies.

There's no question about that, that he was a bit of a playboy. And, in fact, he even admits in his autobiography, of having an illegitimate child, William. But then he settled down. He married Deborah. And, yes, Deborah and him, they did separate because -- and it was really more her fault than his, because when he went to London as a London agent, she had extreme aversion to going out on this -- the seas. It was a dangerous time period.

So it's kind of like people don't like to fly on airplanes today. So they did grow apart. There's no question about that.

But they maintained their -- their love for each other.

And, as a matter of fact, when Franklin died, he's buried right next to Deborah. So I think that's an indication of their -- their love and so forth. But they were very different personalities. She was very focused on -- on more of the home issues. She was not a public intellectual.

She would not feel comfortable in the same conversations that Franklin would have with scientists.

And with public thinkers, and stuff like that. So they definitely differed in their personality.

GLENN: The -- the story about his son William is one of the saddest chapters.

I mean, you know, Thomas Paine kind of looked at him as a father figure. And he -- you know, Ben Franklin did have a son, William, as you said. And they -- they had a really bad falling out.

Can you quickly tell that story?

MARK: Yeah. So I have a chapter on that very issue. Because who were his enemies, and he did have a number of enemies, including John Adams, at one point. But in the case of William, he, Franklin, arranged for William to be the governor of New Jersey. And he maintained his loyalty. He was a loyalist. Billy was throughout the American Revolution!

And at the end of the American Revolution, or during the American Revolution, Franklin writes his son and he said, it's one thing to -- we can differ on various issues.

But when you actually raise money, raise armaments to attack me, this was beyond the pale.

This is not something that you should have done. And then at the end of his letter, he says, this is a disagreeable subject!

I drop it. So you can feel that emotion, that anger.

And, yes. He removed him from -- from his will.

So there -- there -- Franklin got along with almost everyone.

And I have a whole chapter on how to deal in the greatest American. How to deal with enemies and be how to make your enemies, your friends.

But this was one example where he just couldn't cross over and forgive him. For what the -- for what we had done.

GLENN: I don't think --

CHIP: Just like you are saying.

GLENN: I think I would have a hard time doing that too if my son was raising funds and military against me. It would be kind of hard to forgive.

Mark, thank you so much for your work. It's always good to talk to you.

The name of the book is by Mark Skousen. And it is called The Greatest American. It's all about Ben Franklin. If you don't know anything about Ben Franklin, you will fall in love with him. You will absolutely fall in love with him. Mark Skousen is the author. The name of the book again, The Greatest American.