RADIOJune 02, 2022

How the 3RD WORLD just schooled America on freedom

The Biden Administration tried desperately to expedite WHO authority by granting it INSANE powers during potential future health crises in an updated treaty. Thankfully, though, several 3rd world countries voted AGAINST such a plan…despite Western democracies choosing otherwise. TheBlaze’s Daniel Horowitz joins Glenn to break down the latest on this story, plus he explains why the Biden administration is far scarier than the W.H.O…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Welcome to the -- welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. There is a new addition to our international pandemic regulations that come from the WHO. They were -- they were meeting last week in Davos. And I wanted to bring somebody on, who has really been following this. Daniel Horowitz. He's a Blaze podcast host. Conservative Review. And senior editor for TheBlaze.com. Daniel, how are you, sir?

DANIEL: We are doing all right. Even in this perilous times.

GLENN: Yeah. Boy. I will tell you, I'm doing a show tonight, Daniel, on all of the things that are happening.

And I don't think -- we might touch on the WHO. And what they're doing. But that's not our main focus. Everything is being lined up for an emergency. And when that emergency is announced, you've got nothing. There's no emergency anywhere.

Can you talk to us about the WHO, and what they did with their new health policy?

DANIEL: Sure. There's actually a lot of positive news. And uncanny news as well. In which the east and the west have been mixed up in our lifetime. So essentially, to go over this. The Biden administration submitted 13 amendments, this international health regulation, that taken together, would serve to cancel out, all of the requirements to consult with the host country, before declaring a public health emergency in that region.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

That wouldn't be -- when you say the authority. That's -- they don't -- the WHO, would not have to talk to our president. Or Canada's prime minister, or anything else. If they wanted to declare a health emergency in the United States or Canada.

DANIEL: Exactly.

GLENN: That's crazy.

DANIEL: And you can see that cross out in the language of the existing international health regulations.

GLENN: Correct.

DANIEL: By the Biden administration. If you remember, they did it quietly, no press release, no press conference. It was discovered three months later.

But we had the most unusual results. Most of my lifetime, I'm used to criticizing the UN. And similar organizations. Because of tin pots. Third world dictators. And we're like, man, you know, this is run by the third world. We need to pull out of it.

But here's what's happening now: We have become the communists. So it's the United States. Canada and Australia really pushed it. All of the countries we would consider as the Western Democratic nations pushed for it, but they were ultimately scuttled. Why?

Because 47 African nations led by Botswana, along with India, Brazil, and Russia, said, hey. We don't want a part of this. We're concerned about this.

We're concerned about the rushed time line of this. So it was ultimately voted town, because of the third world countries.

GLENN: Isn't that -- that is incredible. Just incredible.

So how is the west going to get it done, anyway? You know, they -- it's weird. They -- they just don't take no for an answer. They just find another way to do it.

DANIEL: I think what we learned from the last two years, is we're not governed by the rule of law. We're governed by the rule of political will. And whoever wields it and controls it, wins.

Unfortunately, that's where we are. So it's not a matter of a formal treaty or even some international regulation. It's funny. The fact-checkers were all over us, saying, well, the WHO can't force you tolerance anything. Yeah. That's why I'm saying, they need to preemptively say they're not doing it.

The reason why I drew attention to this, is because it's demonstrated the intent of the Biden administration. I'm more concerned about them than the WHO.

GLENN: Yes.

But you were hit by fact-check.org. The WHO has no authority to dictate U.S. health policy. And, in fact, because you're the -- the editor-in-chief of the Blaze, you were -- you were hit. TheBlaze was hit by Facebook. When they -- when they said, no. This is not true.

Because Cy Check Digest (phonetic) says it's not true. Do you --

DANIEL: It's kind of like the Amelia Bedelia book. And they do this on purpose. They take this hyper literalist approach. When you raise a political concern: Hey, why is the Biden administration truncating all the time lines for approval, as well as initiating any requirements to consult what the host nation -- in order to declare public health emergency.

They're like, well, WHO can't do anything to you anyway. Well, yeah. That's why we're saying, we need to stand up to that.

But the broader point is, that it demonstrates the Biden administration is not done with it. They're not done with covid.

It's not like they're moving on to gun control. Or other things. I mean, they might be doing that as well.

They see this as a permanent great reset. And they want to codify this permanently. So whether it's in the WHO regulation or not, this is what they plan to do domestically. And certainly, when you start hearing about monkey pox, and the necklace thing.

And the pediatric hepatitis pandemic, they're talking about, you definitely know that lockdowns, masks, or therapeutics, they're not done with that.

GLENN: Yeah. In fact, one of the articles that I was reading earlier this morning, as I prepared for this interview, was the fact that the defenders of this, are saying, this is not -- you know, this is not some crazy idea. Let me read part of it. Global pandemic response had relatively little coordination. Little unity. In fact, it was more like 1983 and 2009's mini TV series. V. Where politicians, personalities, social media accounts and others seemed like they were actually trying to help the enemy.

In this case, the COVID-19. That allowed the virus to kill over 6.27 million people and counting. That's why the World Health Organization is discussing the global pandemic treaty at the upcoming 75th world health assembly.

Yet, some celebrities, a bunch of social media accounts have been trying to, guess what? Trying to argue against a treaty. Yeah. Having no global agreement in place before the next pandemic is going to work out well, right?

So it goes into, how screwed up the response was. And if the WHO would have just had authority, to make sure that everybody was doing the same thing. And the right thing. How many lives could have been saved?

But we know the WHO was incompetent itself.

DANIEL: Well, what's remarkable about all of this, is that they never take ownership for the results of their incumbency.

Well, we were not in control. I can tell you that much. We yelped about it for two years, but no one listened to us. You had some isolated areas that over time, moved away from these policies. But for the most part, whether it was formerly coordinated or not, which it's hard to tell, nearly every corner of the world, coalesced around closing schools, around masking, around masks. Vaccination. Around denying treatment. It's funny. You look at the denial of the hydroxy and ivermectin in America. I mean, that occurred in almost every corner of the world.

So they got what they wanted. And yet, we have six times more cases now, even though it's kind of offseason in the summer, than we did, this time in late May early June of 2021. Even though, all the vulnerable people, out of at least three, if not four, were shot, and it keeps going and going and going.

They never take ownership for their policies. They act as if no one is vaccinated. As if we didn't try all these things.

And as if somehow, we were in power. We had zero control over that. So, in fact, they actually did this. I think what they're saying is that they want more like the Shanghai type of response at that time. And that's what they're working on.

GLENN: Because they say, another pandemic is right around the corner.

It used to be a 100-year pandemic. Now another one is right around the corner, and we have to have all of these -- all of these things to be able to control. Daniel, do you think that this is why the Biden administration is back in court, trying to force people on airplanes, to wear masks again?

DANIEL: There's no question. I think people think that the masks have been repudiated. And they have been with the scientific literature. We have been seeing evidence of negative correlation with outcomes.

Certainly, obviously, carbon dioxide problems and many other language development, problems with children are unbelievable, the UK helps -- the education department is openly talking with that. But it hasn't been repudiated politically. And I'm saying places like Lincoln Nebraska school district, bringing it back some place. Never gotten rid of it. You still have disabled people that have to wear it, when they go to their numerous medical appointments. So this is not even over with yet.

They actively want to continue it. And it's funny. When you look at Justin Trudeau, he announced his new gun control measures this week.

They were all standing around, wearing masks. While announcing that. I think it's a very powerful tool of control and submission, they absolutely do not want to let go. And there's very few states so far, that have been.

A few of them have. The financial legislature did. But the RINO governor just vetoed it. I mean, we have our work cut out for us.

I think too many of us are moving on to the next issue. Unfortunately, there are so many issues. But this is not done yet.

GLENN: The senior editor for TheBlaze.com. And host of the Conservative Review. Podcast. Daniel Horowitz.

Daniel, thank you as always. You know, he wrote about this. And he wrote about it accurately. The one thing about Daniel is he is -- he pays a lot a lot of attention to a lot of the details, and makes sure he gets it exactly right. And this has hurt our Facebook pages. Our social media. Because they said, that he was lying. He's not lying. That is -- what he wrote is absolutely true. Now, they say, we're not going to lose our sovereignty. Really? You can't speak about things. Isn't that a loss of personal sovereignty? A loss of freedom of speech?

Don't listen to these people anymore. They are dangerous. And they're going to become more dangerous, as we get closer and closer to the next real emergency. And that emergency is going to be fuel, any kind of energy, and food.

And it will be here by the fall. Make sure you're prepared. Tonight, I'm going to show you, on my Wednesday night TV show, the disasters that are coming. And they are Biden-made disasters. And how they will cripple us. Ask what the administration in the bureaucracy is already laying the foundation for. Because they're not only just creating it. They have a solution for those problems. And I don't think you're going to like them.

And you didn't the vote for any of them. Tonight, famine and blackouts. 9:00 p.m. you don't want to miss. Only on Blaze TV.

The Globalist Elites' Dystopian Plan for YOUR Future | Glenn Beck Chalkboard Breakdown

There are competing visions for the future of America which are currently in totally different directions. If the globalist elites have their way, the United States will slide into a mass surveillance technocracy where freedoms are eroded and control is fully centralized. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to break down exactly what their goal is and why we need to hold the line against these ominous forces.

Watch the FULL Episode HERE: Dark Future: Uncovering the Great Reset’s TERRIFYING Next Phase

Barack & Michelle tried to END divorce rumors. It DIDN'T go well

Former president Barack Obama recently joined his wife Michelle Obama and her brother on their podcast to finally put the divorce rumors to rest … but it didn’t exactly work. Glenn Beck and Pat Gray review the awkward footage, including a kiss that could compete for “most awkward TV kiss in history.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, let me -- let me take you to some place. I think kind of entertaining.

Michelle Obama has a podcast. Who knew?

She does it with her brother. Who knew? It's -- you know, I mean, it's so -- it's a podcast with two brothers. Right?

And -- and it -- they wanted to address the rumors, that they're getting a divorce. And this thing seems so staged.

I want you to -- listen to this awkward exchange on the podcast.

Cut one please.

VOICE: Wait, you guys like each other.

MICHELLE: Oh, yeah. The rumor mill. It's my husband, y'all! Now, don't start.

OBAMA: It's good to be back. It was touch-and-go for a while.

VOICE: It's so nice to have you both in the same room today.

OBAMA: I know. I know.

MICHELLE: I know, because when we aren't, folks things we're divorced. There hasn't been one moment in our marriage, where I thought about quitting my man.

And we've had some really hard times. We've had a lot of fun times. A lot of adventures. And I have become a better person because of the man I'm married to.

VOICE: Okay. Don't make me cry.

PAT: Aw.

GLENN: I believed her. Now, this is just so hokey.

VOICE: And welcome to IMO.

MICHELLE: Get you all teared up. See, but this is why I can't -- see, you can take the hard stuff, but when I start talking about the sweet stuff, you're like, stop. No, I can't do it.

VOICE: I love it. I'm enjoying it.

MICHELLE: But thank you, honey, for being on our show. Thank you for making the time. We had a great --

VOICE: Of course, I've been listening.

PAT: What? No!

GLENN: They're not doing good. They're not doing good.

Okay. And then there was this at the beginning. And some people say, this was very awkward. Some people say, no. It was very nice.

When he walks in the room, he gives her a hug and a kiss. Watch.

Gives her a little peck on the cheek.

PAT: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Does that --

PAT: Does that look like they're totally into each other?

GLENN: Well, I give my wife a peck on the cheek, if she walks into a room.

PAT: Do you? If you haven't seen her in months and it seems like they haven't, would you kiss her on the cheek? Probably not.

GLENN: No, that's a little different. That would be a little different. But I wouldn't make our first seeing of each other on television.

PAT: Yeah, right, that's true. That's true.

GLENN: But, you know, in listening to the staff talk about this. And they were like, it was a really uncomfortable -- okay.

Well, maybe.

PAT: I think it was a little uncomfortable.

GLENN: It was a little uncomfortable.

It's still, maybe. Maybe.

But I don't think that rivals -- and I can't decide which is the worst, most uncomfortable kiss.

Let me roll you back into the time machine, to Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley. Do you remember this kiss?
(applauding)

GLENN: He turns away, immediately away from the camera. Because he's like.

PAT: He was about to vomit. Yeah.

GLENN: It was so awkward. When that happened, all of us went, oh, my gosh. He has only kissed little boys. What are we doing? What is happening?

He doesn't like women, what is happening?

And then there's the other one that sticks out in my mind of -- and I'm not sure which is worse. The Lisa Marie or the Tipper in Al Gore.

VOICE: The kiss. The famous exchange during the 2000 democratic convention was to some lovely, to others icky.
(laughter)

GLENN: That's an ABC reporter. To some lovely, others icky.

And it really was. And it was -- I believe his global warming stuff more than that kiss.
(laughter)
And you know where I stand on global warming.

That was the most awkward kiss I think ever on television!

PAT: Yeah. It was pretty bad. Pretty bad.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

So when people who are, you know -- these youngsters.

These days. They look at Barack and Michelle. They're like, that was an awkward kiss.

Don't even start with me.

We knew when we were kids, what awkward kisses were like.

PAT: The other awkward thing about that.

She claims, there was not been one moment in their marriage.

Where she's considered reeving him.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: She just said a while ago. A month or a year ago, she hated his guts for ten years. She hated it.

GLENN: Yeah. But that doesn't mean you'll give up.

PAT: I guess not. I guess not. Maybe you enjoy being miserable.

I don't know.

GLENN: No. I have to tell you the truth.

My grandmother when I got a divorce, just busted me up forever. I call her up, and I said, on my first marriage.

Grandma, we're getting a divorce.

And my sweet little 80-year-old grandmother, who never said a bad thing in her life said, excuse me?

And I said, what?

We're getting a divorce.

And she said, how dare you.

I said, what's happening. And she said, I really thought you would be the one that would understand. Out of everybody in this family, I thought you would understand.

And I said, what?

And she said, this just -- this just crushed me when she said it.

Do you think your grandfather and I liked each other all these years? I was like, well, yeah.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Kind of. And she said, we loved each other. But we didn't always like each other. And there were times that we were so mad at each other.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. Uh-huh.

STU: But we knew one thing: Marriage lasts until death!

PAT: Did she know your first wife?

GLENN: Okay. All right. That's just not necessary.

No, Trump’s tariffs ARE NOT causing inflation

The media is insisting that President Trump's tariffs caused a rise in inflation for June. But Our Republic president Justin Haskins joins Glenn to debunk this theory and present another for where inflation is really coming from.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins is here. He is the president of Our Republic. And the editor-in-chief of stoppingsocialism.com.

He is also the coauthor with me at the Great Reset, Dark Future, and Propaganda War.

So, in other words, I'm saying, he doesn't have a lot of credibility. But he is here to report -- I don't even think you're -- you're -- you were wrong on this, too, with the tariffs. Right?

JUSTIN: Well, at some point, I was wrong about everything.

GLENN: Yeah, right. We are all on the road to being right.

But this is coming as a shock. You called yesterday, and you said, Glenn, I think the tariff thing -- I think the president might be right.

And this is something I told him, if I'm wrong. I will admit that I'm wrong.

But I don't think I'm wrong.

Because this goes against everything the economists have said, forever.

That tariffs don't work.

They increase inflation.

It's going to cost us more.

All of these things. You have been study this now for a while, to come up with the right answer, no matter where it fell.

Tell me what's going on.

JUSTIN: Okay. So the most recent inflation data that came out from the government, shows that in June, prices went up 2.7 percent. In May, they went up 2.4 percent. That's compared to a year prior. And most people are saying, well, this is proof that the tariffs are causing inflation.

GLENN: Wait. That inflation is -- the target is -- the target is two -- I'm sorry.

We're not. I mean, when I was saying, it was going to cause inflation. I thought we could be up to 5 percent.

But, anyway, go ahead.

JUSTIN: So the really incredible thing though. The more you look at the numbers. The more obvious it is, that this does not prove inflation at all.

For starters, these numbers are lower, than what the numbers were in December and January.

Before Trump was president. And before we had any talk of tariffs at all.

So that is a big red flag right at the very beginning. When you dive even deeper into the numbers, what you see is there's all kinds of parts of the Consumer Price Index that tracks specific industries, or kinds of goods and services. That should be showing inflation, if inflation is being caused by tariffs, but isn't.

So, for example, clothing and apparel. Ninety-seven percent, basically.

About 97 percent according to one report, of clothing and apparel comes overseas, imported into the United States.

GLENN: Correct.

JUSTIN: So prices for apparel and clothing should be going up. And they're not going up, according to the data, they're actually going down, compared to what they were a year ago. Same thing is true with new vehicles.

Obviously, there were huge tariffs put on foreign vehicles, not on domestic vehicles. So it's a little bit more mixed.

But new vehicle price are his staying basically flat. They haven't gone up at all. Even though, there's a 25 percent tariff on imported cars and car parts. And then we just look at the overall import prices. You just -- sort of the index. Which the government tracks.

What we're seeing is that prices are basically staying the same, from what they were a year ago.

There's very, very little movement overall.

GLENN: Okay. So wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.

Wait.

Let me just -- let me just make something career.

Somebody is eating the tariffs. And it appears to be the companies that are making these things. Which is what Donald Trump said. And then, the -- you know, the economist always saying, well, they're just going to pass this on in the price.

Well, they have to. They have to get this money some place.

So where are they?

Is it possible they're just doing this right now, to get past. Because they know if they jack up their price, you know, they won't be able to sell anything. What is happening?

How is this money, being coughed up by the companies, and not passed on to the consumer.

JUSTIN: Yeah, it could be happening. I think the most likely scenario, is that they are passing it along to consumers. They're just not passing it along to American consumers.

In other words, they're raising prices elsewhere. To try to protect the competitiveness with the American market. Because the American market is the most important consumer market in the world.

And they probably don't want to piss off Donald Trump either, in jacking up prices. And then potentially having tariffs go up even more, as a punishment for doing that.

Because that's a real option.

And so I think that's what's happening right now.

Now, it's possible, that we are going to see a huge increase in inflation. In six months!

That's entirely possible.

We don't know what's going to happen. But as of right now, all the data is suggesting that recent inflation is not coming from consumer goods being imported, or anything like that.

That's not where the inflation is coming.

Instead, it's coming from housing.

That's part of the CPI at that time.

Housing is the cause of inflation right now.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. It's not housing, is it?

Because the things to make houses is not going through the roof. Pardon the pun. Right?

It's not building.

JUSTIN: No. No. The way the CPI calculates housing is really stupid. They look basically primarily at rent. That's the primary way, they determine housing prices.

GLENN: Okay.

JUSTIN: That so on they're not talking about housing costs to build a new house.

Or housing prices to buy a new house.

They are talking about rent.

And then they try to use rent data, as a way of calculating how much you would have to pay if you owned a house, but you had to rent the same kind of house.

And that's how they come up with this category.

GLENN: Can I ask you a question: Is everybody in Washington, are they all retarded?
(laughter)
Because I don't. What the hell. Who is coming up with that formula?

JUSTIN: Look. I mean, sort of underlying this whole conversation, as you -- as you and I know, Glenn.

And Pat too. The CPI is a joke to begin with.

GLENN: Right.

JUSTIN: So there's all kinds of problems with this system, to begin with.

I mean, come on!

GLENN: Okay. So because I promised the president, if I was wrong, and I had the data that I was wrong, I would tell him.

Do I have to -- out of all the days to do this.

Do I have to call him today, to do that?

Are we still -- are we still looking at this, going, well, maybe?

JUSTIN: I think there's -- I think there is a really solid argument that you don't need to make the phone call.

GLENN: Oh, thank God. Today is not the day to call Donald Trump. Today is not the day.

Yeah. All right.

JUSTIN: And the reason why is, we need -- we probably do need more data over a longer period of time, to see if corporations are doing something.

In order to try to push these cuts off into the future, for some reason. Maybe in the hopes that the tariffs go down. Or maybe -- you know, it's all sorts of ways, they could play with it, to try to avoid paying those costs today.

It's possible, that's what's going on.

But as of right now, that's not at all, what is happening. As far as I can tell from the data.

GLENN: But isn't the other side of this, because everybody else said, oh. It's not going to pay for anything.

Didn't we last month have the first surplus since, I don't know. Abraham Lincoln.

JUSTIN: Yes. Yes. We did. I don't know how long that surplus will last us.

GLENN: Yeah. But we had one month.

I don't think I've ever heard that before in my lifetime. Hey, United States had a surplus.

JUSTIN: I looked it up.

I think it was like 20 something years ago, was the last time that happened. If I remembered right.

It was 20 something years ago.

So this is incredible, really.

And if it works.

You and I talked about this before.

I actually think there is an argument to be made. That this whole strategy could work, if American manufacturers can dramatically bring down their costs. To produce goods and services.

So that they can be competitive.

And I think that advancements in artificial intelligence. In automation. Is going to open up the door to that being a reality.

And if you listen to the Trump administration talk. People like Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Commerce. They have said, this is the plan.

The plan is, go all in on artificial intelligence.

Automation. That's going to make us competitive with manufacturers overseas. China is already doing that.

They're already automating their factories. They lead the world in automation.

GLENN: Yeah, but they can take half their population, put them up in a plane, and then crash it into the side of the mountain.

They don't care.

What happens to the people that now don't have a job here? How do they afford the clothes that are now much, much cheaper?

JUSTIN: Well, I think the answer to that is, there's going to be significantly more wealth. Trillions of dollars that we send overseas, every year, now in the American economy. And that's going to go into other things. It's not as though -- when this technology comes along, it is not as though people lose their jobs, and that's it. People sit on their couch forever.

The real danger here is not that new markets will not arrive in that situation. And jobs with it. The problem is: I think there's a real opportunity here. And I think this is going to be the fight of the next election, potentially. Presidential election. And going forward.

Next, ten, 20 years. This is going to be a huge issue. Democrats are going to have the opportunity, when the AI revolution goes into full force. They will have the opportunity like they've never had before.

To say, you know what, we'll take care of you. Don't worry about it.

We're just going to take all of the corporate money and all of the rich people's money.

And we will print trillions of dollars more. And you can sit on your couch forever. And we will just pay you. Because this whole system is rigged, and it's unfair, and you don't have a job anymore because of AI. And there's nothing you can do. You can't compete with AI. AI is smarter than you.

You have no hope.

I think that's coming, and it is going to be really hard for free market people to fight back against that.

GLENN: Yes.

Well, I tend to agree with you.

Because the -- you know, I thought about this.

I war gamed this, probably in 2006.

I'm thinking, okay.

If -- if the tech is going to grow and grow and grow. And they will start being -- they will be responsible for taking the jobs.

They won't be real on popular.

So they will need some people that will allow them to stay in business, and to protect them.

So they're going to need to be in with the politicians.

And if the politicians are overseeing the -- the decrease of jobs, they're going to need the -- the PR arm of things like social media. And what it can be done.

What can be done now.

I was thinking, at the time. Google can do.

But they need each other.

They must have one another. And unless we have a stronger foundation, and a very clear direction, and I will tell you. The president disagrees with me on this.

I said, he's going to be remembered as the transformational AI president.

And he said, I think you're wrong on that.

And I don't think I am.

This -- this -- this time period is going to be remembered for transformation.

And he is transforming the world. But the one that will make the lasting difference will be power and AI.

Agree with that or disagree?

JUSTIN: 1,000 percent. 1,000 percent. This is by far the most important thing that is happening in his administration in the long run. You're projecting out ten, 20, 30 years ago years.

They will be talking about this moment in history, a thousand years from now. Like, that will -- and they will -- and if America becomes the epicenter of this new technology, they will be talking about it, a thousand years from now, about how Americans were the ones that really developed this.

That they're the ones that promoted it, that they're the ones that does took advantage of it.
That's why this AI race with China is so important that we win it.

It's one of the reasons why. And I do think it's a defining moment for his presidency. Of course, the problem with all of this is AI could kill us all. You have to weigh that in.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

Well, we hope you're wrong on that one.

And I'm wrong on it as well. Justin, thank you so much.

Thank you for giving me the out, where I don't have to call him today. But I might have to call him soon. Thanks, Justin. I appreciate it.

The ONLY Trump/Epstein Files Theories That Make Sense | Glenn TV | Ep 445

Is the case closed on Jeffrey Epstein and Russiagate? Maybe not. Glenn Beck pulls the thread on the story and its far-reaching implications that could expose a web of scandals and lead to a complete implosion of trust. Glenn lays out five theories that could explain Trump’s frustration over the Epstein files and why Glenn may never talk about the Epstein case again. Plus, Glenn connects the dots between the Russiagate hoax, the Hunter Biden laptop cover-up, and the Steele dossier related to the FBI’s new “grand conspiracy” probe. It all leads to one James Bond-like villain: former CIA Director John Brennan. Then, Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA operations officer, tells Glenn why he believes his former boss Brennan belongs in prison and what must happen to prevent a full-blown trust implosion in American institutions.