RADIO

Media Claims Trump Wants a “BLOODBATH,” Gets DESTROYED by the Truth

The mainstream media had a field day, claiming that former president Donald Trump threatened a “bloodbath” if he isn’t re-elected. But of course, they took him completely out of context. Glenn discusses the real context and also rolls the tape on how many times the media has used the word “bloodbath.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So I don't know about you, Stu. But I've been soaking in a bloodbath all weekend.

It's -- I can't tell you how many chickens I had to sacrifice to get the blood, enough for a bad for me. I mean, it's like a --it like a Taft.

A bathtub.

STU: That's a very nerdy joke. But I like it.

GLENN: Thank you. Thank you.

STU: Any more William Taft jokes you can break out. That's the radio program. It's always the right way to go. I like it.

GLENN: Well, Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame.

Did you hear how he expertly just tucked that Taft joke in. Not a lot of opportunities for those.

So, anyway, this weekend, apparently, according to the mainstream media, and a lot of them, they said that Donald Trump was calling for a bloodbath, if he didn't win.

Listen, cut three. Cut three.

VOICE: But as politico.com reports tonight on the, quote, bloodbath at the RNC.

VOICE: Headlines calling it a, quote, bloodbath.

VOICE: Bloodbath. Not only will it be a bloodbath. But after they leave New Hampshire, it's a bloodbath on her home turf. That's really tough.

VOICE: Trump has left a lot of corpses in his wake. I mean, we haven't counted the bodies, as part of the, quote, MAGA drive to take over Maricopa County.

And the headline refers to it as an impending bloodbath.

VOICE: Problem is Charles Blow has a new piece for the New York Times, entitled A Biden Bloodbath?

VOICE: 2018 midterms. You can bet that they 100 percent are fearing a slaughter. In fact, the word bloodbath and massacre come up frequently.

VOICE: The Republican Party will be destroyed. It's going to be a bloodbath.

VOICE: There's going to be a bloodbath one way or the other.

VOICE: Bloodbath.

VOICE: Bloodbath with Bernie Sanders.

VOICE: It's been a bloodbath.

VOICE: There's shaping up to be a bloodbath.

VOICE: Bloodbath in next year's crucial mid-terms?

VOICE: Off-year elections are often a bloodbath.

GLENN: Wait a minute.

VOICE: This week's bloodbath for Democrats.

VOICE: A bloodbath at the ballot box.

VOICE: There could be a Republican bloodbath.

VOICE: We'll talk about the bloodbath.

VOICE: There's a bloodbath. I have to talk about you and --

VOICE: It's going to be a bloodbath all day long.

VOICE: Is in for a bloodbath.

VOICE: Has it been a bloodbath on the way, Don?

VOICE: Donald Trump, bloodbath.

VOICE: Be a bloodbath.

VOICE: Predicted to be a bloodbath.

VOICE: May not be the bloodbath.

VOICE: It will be a bloodbath.

VOICE: More of a bloodbath.

VOICE: It's going to be a bloodbath in November.

VOICE: Possible Biden bloodbath this November.

VOICE: The bloodbath on Wall Street.

VOICE: There's going to be a bloodbath.

VOICE: In Alabama, into a bloodbath.

VOICE: Obviously, there's a bloodbath.

VOICE: It was a bloodbath. We're down 800 points.

VOICE: This bloodbath in the Department of Homeland Security.

VOICE: And it's a bloodbath today.

VOICE: There was going to be this bloodbath.

VOICE: Election bloodbath.

VOICE: There could be a bloodbath for --

VOICE: Bloodbath possibly.

VOICE: Bloodbath that went through with the attorney general.

VOICE: A bloodbath --

GLENN: Stop. I have to get out of this tub. I have to get out of this tub. There's just too much bloodbath. Now, this is the media. This is the media saying, using the word bloodbath.

Now, when you say it's going to be a bloodbath, Stu, what does that usually mean? What does that mean?

STU: Usually, it means something, a blowout. A defeat.

GLENN: A blowout?

STU: In a notable way with a large margin --

GLENN: What if you use the words, what if you use the word like Van Jones did, a slaughter and a bloodbath?

STU: It would also mean --

GLENN: It will be a slaughter and a bloodbath.

STU: That's an interesting question. That does change things, but not much.

Basically, it means you get a blowout. A defeat by a large margin.

Everybody knows what it means. And everybody knew what it meant, until this weekend, apparently.

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know if that's entirely true.

The -- the media, they heard Donald Trump. And here's ABC.

Cut ten. Or cut two. Whichever one you can --

VOICE: And former President Trump's campaign now on the defensive after his fiery rhetoric at a rally in Dayton, Ohio, on Saturday night. Trump warning while discussing the economy, that there would be a, quote, bloodbath, if he's not reelected in November. This after the former president kicked off the event by paying tribute to those who attacked the US Capitol on January 6th.

President Biden's campaign swiftly denouncing those comments as threats of political violence.

GLENN: Okay. Stop for a second. Stop for a second. Stu, can you -- can you take this -- can we take this? Play this again. And I want to take it step by step. Because this sounds like something entirely different than what everyone in the media has said, themselves, over and over and over again.

Right?

About a bloodbath.

Let's take this apart. Because this sounds very dangerous. And very different.

Go ahead. Play it from the beginning.

VOICE: And former president Trump's campaign, now on the defensive after his fiery rhetoric at a rally in Dayton, Ohio, on Saturday night. Trump warping while discussing the economy that there would be a, quote, bloodbath, if he's not reelected in November.

GLENN: Stop. Holy cow. Holy cow, Stu. He's on the defensive now, because he said something that maybe he shouldn't have said. So he's on the defensive, and his fiery rhetoric, is saying here from the stage, that if he's not elected, there will be a bloodbath. Wow. See, because it's -- if you're elected, in a bloodbath. That means that you would, of course, what?

You would slaughter them. You would -- not literally, as we've learned from the media. But a bloodbath would be something that you would just -- you would -- you would either win or lose at a great, great number.

But if he's elected, or if he's not elected, and then there's a bloodbath, that's -- right? That's different, Stu.

STU: It's really not. He's talking, of course, about the economic competition specifically as it's related to China. And automobiles.

GLENN: No. No. No.

No. You're not.

No. You don't understand.

STU: I don't.

GLENN: He's elected. If he's not elected, there will be a bloodbath.

That's what she said. Now, let's listen on.

VOICE: After the former president kicked off the event by paying tribute to those who attacked the US Capitol on January 6th. President Biden's campaign.

GLENN: Holy -- stop for a second.

Holy cow. Now I think you see the connection. He said, if he's not elected, there will be a bloodbath, in the same speech within where he opened up, praising those crazy people, from January 6th.


STU: Wow. Now I've been turned around. Yeah. This is rhetoric.

GLENN: Right. He was talking about the dangerous people of January 6th. And then somehow or another, he went right into bloodbath. If he's not elected.

STU: You said, right into. He went right into.

GLENN: Well, pretty close.

PAT: Well, there were throw ellipses. Anyway, go ahead. Listen to the rest was the report here.

VOICE: Swiftly announcing those comments as threats of political violence.

GLENN: Stop. There you go. There you go.

So the president immediately sprung it. No. It wasn't. It wasn't, Stu. It wasn't five ellipses. It was three. And the president knows. Because the president immediately denounced those words as -- as violent rhetoric. Okay?

So what more do you need from this story?

STU: I mean, I -- I don't know. Maybe the context?

Would it be too much too to ask to sea the context of the comments. Like, maybe the lines proceeding it?

GLENN: It's not going to change anything. But here's cut 18.

TRUMP: China now is building a couple of massive plants where they're going to build the cars in Mexico. And they think they will sell those cars into the United States, with no tax at the border. Let me tell you something, to China, if you are listening, President Xi -- you and I are friends, but he understands we had a deal. Those big, monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now, and you think you're going to get that, you're going to not hire Americans, and you're going to sell the cars to us, no, we're going to put a 100 percent tariff on every single car that comes across, and you're not going to be able to sell those.

If I get elected. Now, if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole -- that's going to be the least of it. It will be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it. But they're not going to sell those cars. They're building massive factories.

GLENN: So wait a minute. I'm trying to figure that out. So China is building cars. And he says he will put a tariff on. If he's elected. If he's not elected, then somehow or another, there will be political violence everywhere. And his people will do a January 6th on the whole country.

And then he says, and they're not going to sell those cars. You know, Joe Biden is right when he came out this weekend, when he says, he's not fit to be president. He's not making any sense there, Stu, what does the political violence have to do with China and the sales of cars?

STU: You know, it's interesting, that wouldn't make any sense at all.

If attorney just convert back and forth between those things without introducing the forever does the topic whatsoever.

You think maybe, and this is the way human speech works suspect when you introduce a topic, and then comment after that topic, without introducing a new topic. People generally think, that the statements you've made relate to the previous topic that has been discussed. But when you delete.

GLENN: But that's not how human nice mustaches works.

STU: See, that's what you did just there. Is normal. I think you just said nice mustaches. See, that's strange. Normally, the way people do is they string multiple sentences together on the same topic, unless, they specifically introduce a new topic. And if you kind of go by this old-school analysis, what you think is maybe he's talking about an economic bloodbath, if China is allowed to import cars with the penalties not associated.

GLENN: That seems entirely Campbell soups inconceivable.

STU: Again, Campbell's soup. What you're doing is not normal.

GLENN: Well, all I know is that's the way they teach it in journalism school.

Now, in other news, when we come back, I'm going to tell you all about how the administration, is putting together a cute little effort through USA ID. To make sure that you aren't given false or misleading information.

Because they say, during this election, some people, will try to give you mis or mal or disinformation, and they need to be there to protect you from that.

Otherwise, it could be a bloodbath. And I'm soaking in one right now.

Well, that, and -- well, cream of chicken soup.

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

RADIO

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.

RADIO

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.

TV

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.