RADIO

What the Fed’s interest rate hike MEANS FOR YOU

In an effort to curb rising inflation, The Federal Reserve just announced an interest rate hike of 25 basis points (one-quarter of one percent). It’s the first time the Fed has raised such rates since 2018. So, what exactly does this mean and how could it affect YOU? Carol Roth, financial expert and author of ‘The War On Small Business,’ joins Glenn to break it all down…

You can read more of Carol's take on this issue here: https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/roth-what-the-feder...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Hello, America.

Yesterday, the fed raised the -- the interest rates.

And they said, they're going to do it, I think six or seven times more this year. This could get dicey in many ways, for everyone.

And I want you to understand, what happened yesterday. And not in terms of, well, you know, us traders believe. I don't care. I don't watch CNBC. Because I only understand about half of it.

I want to know what this means to the average person. Carol Roth joins us. The author of the war on small business. She gets it. And can explain what it all means. In 60 seconds.

Carol, welcome to the -- welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

CAROL: Hey, Glenn. Lots of things to talk about.

GLENN: Yeah. Boy, I have a long list for you too. So let's start with what happened yesterday, and why people should care.

CAROL: So I want to take a step back, and talk about, you know, why the fed did what it did. In terms of raising interest rates. What we call 25 basis points, or a quarter of a percent.

100 basis points is 1 percent.

GLENN: Okay.

CAROL: And basically, they were undoing the -- at least attempting to start to undo the effects of what they in part cost.

Their monetary policy, zero interest rate policy, printing trillions of dollars, the government spending trillions of dollars, in terms of fiscal stimulus. Turning parts of the economy off, and wrecking these labor markets supply chain.

All of those things are the reasons we have inflation today, exacerbated by decisions that the Biden administration made around oil and gas, dependents and what not.

So basically, we had inflation.

GLENN: Correct.

CAROL: Which we've all been talking about. As we go to the grocery store, and certainly the fuel pumps and whatnot.

And so finally, they said, we have to do something. Now, I'm going to tell you, this is a little bit of window dressing. Because they were doing accommodation. They were in the market, purchasing securities, last week.

So last week, they were being accommodative.

But this week, we have to maintain our credibility, and we need to do something. So they decided to raise what is called the fed funds rate. It's a rate, where banks lend to each other overnight. In terms of their reserves.

And that reverberates through the market. So they brought that down to a target, of zero to a quarter of a percent. And they had held it there for the last couple of years. And they said, okay. Well, you know, inflation is getting away, we better raise some interest rates. One of our tools in order to do that. And they took the huge step of a whole quarter of a point increase, to do it.

GLENN: Wow.

CAROL: Yeah. They're very -- because they need to be credible.

GLENN: Right. So the last time we had a problem of this size, it took an interest rate of about 19 to 20 percent, if I'm not mistaken.

Raising it a quarter is really -- is a joke.

Where do you think, these interest rates should be?

Not -- not considering killing the economy.

Just where it should be. Should it -- if we were in a healthy country, still, would it be 20 percent, or more?

CAROL: So there's a couple of things to unpack there.

First of all, this is an unprecedented situation. We don't have a benchmark, because we have never had central banks, not just in the U.S. but around the world, printing trillions upon trillions of dollars. This has just never happened before. We've never had governments turn off the economy.

You never have a situation, where there's 1.7 jobs available, for every job seeker, because of what the government did.

So we're flying a little bit blind. I've always been a fan of normalized interest rates. I think it's a horrible idea, to have the fed meddling, and trying to direct things.

I want the market to set it. And so before all of this nonsense started, before the financial crisis, the great recession, financial crisis in '07 and '08, which was really the first time we went totally off the rails, with the zero interest rate policy and the purchase of securities, the interest rates were around 5-plus percent. And that seems to be, you know, a healthy place, where things should be.

We should not be in a place, where we're saying, you know, when you take risks, you shouldn't be getting rewarded for it. You know, 0 percent interest.

It makes no sense. So in reality, you're still at very historically low interest rates. And in a healthy economy, to have three, four, 5 percent, would be completely acceptable. We just have been so addicted to this easy money and this free money for so long, I'm not sure how we get out of this.

GLENN: Okay. So there's a couple of problems with 5 percent interest rates, right now. One would be that people would not be able to afford a new house, et cetera, et cetera. Because of inflation, and everything else.

But the other, that nobody ever talks about, is that we now have a national debt over $30 trillion. And that is just like buying a house. You have an interest rate, on that.

If we have an interest rate of 5 percent, how much more money do we have to pay?

CAROL: Bingo, this is the dilemma that the fed has gotten themselves into, by keeping down interest rates. They've basically given the government a free pass to just spend and spend. And to rack up more and more debt.

And we're at a point, to where the debt is completely out of control.

And, you know, has competed our level of GDP.

So if you think about 30 trillion of debt. And obviously, the fed fund rates. And the interest rate on the debt is not a 1:1 correlation. But we know that as one moves up, the other moves up. So in terms of the interest on our national debt, I want everyone to pay very close attention because this is staggering. For every 1 percent increase, that is another $300 billion, that we have to pay in interest, on the national debt.

That is our tax dollars, that are going to pay more, for things, that we have already purchased.

It is not new purchases. It's literally, a finance charge.

Almost like a credit card interest rate, on stuff we have already bought.

And this is the dilemma, the fed has. Because they know, as they raise interest rates, this is going to get out of control. The CDO. Had made a projection, than saying, this is going to get out of control. But in their projection, they said, well, we think the yield on the ten-year treasury note, gets to about 2.1 percent in 2025.

So, you know, we're going to have to really be concerned, maybe in 2029, the yield on the ten-year Treasury note is at that 2.1 percent today. So multiple years ahead of time.

GLENN: Please talk down to me like I'm in kindergarten.

I don't understand the yield thing with the Treasury. How that works. How that's affected. So can you explain that?

VIVEK: Yeah. It's basically how much the government has to pay on debt.

So what the market demands

And obviously, if there's a lot of demand, for Treasury securities. The price of that goes up.

Then the yield, or the interest that you demand is lower.

Because there's a lot of demand. You have to pay a lot for your debts.

GLENN: But we had been at very, very, very low --

CAROL: Very low.

GLENN: Because the fed was buying up. There was no demand for our treasuries, which is our loan.

CAROL: So let me put it in context, what we're paying currently on our national debt, in terms of a combined interest rate, is somewhere in the neighborhood of projections of 1.4 percent to 1.6 percent. So they've been able to finance that at a very low rate. But that number is starting to creep up. And with the fed increasing interest rates, it will further creep up. And every 1 percent is $300 billion.

GLENN: So if we have an interest rate of five or -- five or six percent, we're talking like between two and three trillion dollars more, the entire budget.

CAROL: Yeah. Exactly.

It's just completely untenable, at that point in time.

So I would -- I would imagine other things happened, in the interim. But this is why, when we talk about things like MMT, Modern Monetary Theory, or what I call Magic Money Tree.

That says, well, you can just print into infinity, because we can just print more. Well, we're now living through that realtime experiment. As you said, no, you can't. It causes inflation.

It has real costs for the average American, and it decreases the value of every dollar that you hold.

GLENN: All right. So the best thing you can do is get out of credit cards. You should cut those up if you can.

CAROL: Yes.

GLENN: And pay them off if you can. Get a refi right now. Because you're probably paying about 16 percent for your credit cards, correct?

CAROL: Yeah. And it could be going up.

And anything that has that adjustable interest rate associated with, some people may have something called an arm and an adjustable rate mortgage. Where it adjusts over time. Maybe it's fixed for a certain number of years. Anything that is adjustable rate debt, is going to increase in price. And if you need financing -- let's say you have a business, and you haven't taken advantage of low rates yet. You're going to want to lock that in on a fixed basis now, because it's not going to get cheaper any time soon.

GLENN: Now, the other problem is, with raising interest rates. Let's say you have a business. And you need a loan.

If the interest rates starts to go up, that kills that business. They can't afford that loan. Just like we can't afford our national debt. Or you want to buy a house. Yesterday, mortgages. New mortgages fell immediately, just on the -- on the whisper, that it was coming.

We are seeing a slowdown in mortgages. Which means people will buy fewer houses. The scary thing about this, is you don't know where that switch is. You're just going to have to kind of guess. And it might shut everything down.

CAROL: That's the needle that the fed is trying to thread, in addition to dealing with the consequences of the national debt. What happens, is as they raise interest rates. You know, their intention is to slow down the economy. I mean, that's basically what it is. They want to slow down consumer demand.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: But the question is: How do you do that, without creating a recession, or without creating reverberations for the economics of the average American?

GLENN: So can I be really, really cynical? I mean -- in fact, let me go beyond cynical. Let me go into, I'm a thriller writer. Okay? And I'm writing a thriller. And for some reason, this country needs to slow down the economy. But they can't slow down the economy, because then businesses will fail. But they don't really care about the average person. You know what I mean?

That's going to fail. We'll print more money. Put them on welfare. Tell they believe to stay home. Or whatever.

Wouldn't one way to slow the economy, for the consumer, but not slow the economy, for the big corporations, would a war do that?

CAROL: I think that would completely change the tenor of the economy. But I think that raising the interest rates does that, because kind of like we saw over the last couple of years, if you are a big corporation. You take advantage of that debt. You have that war chest. We've had that strong balance sheet. So in terms of the transfer of wealth, that is one way to do that. But the war, that would completely change the tenor of, you know, who benefits. And certainly, it would be the bigger guys versus the smaller guys. But it would be more defense, rather than the financial services industry, for example.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay. Carol, hang on. I have some more questions. And I would like you to explain a couple of other things, coming up in just a second. Give me 60 seconds. We're back with Carol Roth. The name of her book, is The War on Small Business. A must-read.

GLENN: All right. So I want to talk to you about the dollar being the world's reserve currency.

Because I'm watching these sanctions, that are being put on.

And I'm seeing things happen, to where, if I'm another country, especially Russia. I'm going to China, immediately, saying, I want to partner with you. Because they just made my money worthless. I can't get my money out of the central bank. The Federal Reserve. That's my money.

And they won't let me get to my money. If that starts to happen. And then Saudi Arabia starts to sell oil, off of the petrodollar, that's really bad news. And let's say, the West holds together. But half the world is off the petrodollar.

What does that mean for us, Carol?

CAROL: It potentially means the end of the U.S. dollar, as a reserve currency.

GLENN: Explain what that means. Because -- I mean, to the average person. Forget about, you know, the central banks and everything else. What does it mean to the average person? To have half the world get off our dollar?

CAROL: Yes. So this is why I love you, Glenn. Because we take the most complicated concepts in the world.

GLENN: I know.

CAROL: And trying to explain them, as if, you know, it's Elmo and Big Bird here --

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: The idea of being the reserve currency. Is something that's -- you know, has sort of a long history. And it means, particularly in the case of goods and services. But also in the case of oil, that everyone in the world, pretty much agreed to use dollars, for a settlement. And that puts some responsibility on the United States. There's something that is called the Triffin dilemma. And there was an economist back in the 1960s, who basically said, there's a conflict. If you are going to be the world reserve currency, you're going to have to make tough choices. And you're not always going to be able to do what's right, at home, in order to make sure you're doing what's right, in the national sphere.

GLENN: Everywhere. Yeah.

CAROL: And unfortunately, you know, this has been an issue, that's been going on for a long time.

But in recent times. As we've been talking about with the fed and the decisions they've made. They actually haven't done right by either party.

They've been screwing over the average American, with their policy. And transferring wealth. But they've been doing the same thing in the national sphere.

And, frankly, a lot of countries are getting sick of it.

And so there have been predictions for quite some time, that there was going to be an event -- an adviser actually to the OECD said that it's probably not an economic event. It's a geopolitical event, that's going to expose the system. You know, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. And so a lot of folks feel like the sanctions that were made against Russia, were potentially a cover story. That we know that we'll potentially lose this reserve currency status. So we're going to say, well, we did it, because we had to take a stand.

But the reality is, you know, as we've now shown the world, you can put your money, in our central bank. And you can buy Treasuries. And U.S. dollars.

But you might not be able to access them. Which is not a really good thing, if you're going to be the world's reserve currencies.

GLENN: Correct. Correct.

CAROL: So there's a couple of potential outcomes. And I know you've been talking about this, Glenn. But, you know, one thing that folks have been talking about.

Is does China potentially step into the reserve currency position?

There is an issue around them. Because usually, if you have the reserve currency, you run a trade deficit. And we know that China is a nation of exporters. Are they really going to step into that? I'm not sure.

The other thought is, listen, we've seen so many banks. Central banks around the world. Print so much money. There's all this debt. You can't really just say, we're going to cancel it all. Because there's counterparties. There are people on the other side of the debt. So what could you do to offset that?

GLENN: Hold on. Hold on. Elmo and Big Bird has to stop. Because Elmo says, there's only 20 more seconds left.

CAROL: Okay.

GLENN: So we will come back. Because I really want to hear this -- this other new plan, and canceling debt just opens up Pandora's box, at least in my head. We'll talk about that, coming up more. Carol Roth, coming up in in just a second. Stand by. That's right. Did you get the vaccines yet?

GLENN: We're with Carol Roth. She's the author of the -- of the book, The War on Small Business.

She's a former investment banker. Don't hold that against her. She calls herself a recovering investment banker. She worked on Wall Street for years and years. Then kind of went, oh, I might be on the wrong side here.

And is trying to do everything she can, to strengthen individual businesses. Small businesses all across the country. And I love her for it.

Carol, you were just saying, that one of the options, in this nightmare scenario, which I think is unfolding in front of us. Where the world reserve currency, is not going to be the dollar.

I don't know what it is. But they're going to change the dollar, from what it is. To a digital dollar.

And I don't know how it all shakes out. But probably not very well.

But you brought up, there is all this debt within that we just can't cancel, because there's other people on the other side of that debt. So explain what you think.

That can't happen, you say.

CAROL: Well, I mean, nothing is a never scenario. Right?

GLENN: Not anymore.

CAROL: In an unprecedented situation. And, you know, for people who are students of history, despite all of the wreckage that could come from this, it's a very interest pointing in time. Especially, financially, you had the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency. You had then us going off the gold standard. Then you had us, you know -- with the petrodollar, basically saying, we will manage the dollar as good as gold for oil.

And then you had the fed, basically go completely rogue. And not do that.

And anybody who is holding reserves, that they're supposed to say, well, the U.S. dollar is safe. And it's a good store of value. We'll keep devaluing it. That's not a thing.

And so -- and, by the way, these are not my theories. I'm just communicating what is out there, from people who are far smarter than I -- everybody by writing up another asset. So is there a neutral asset, that central banks have access to, that's on their balance sheet, that maybe they have been buying, at really good prices, that all of a sudden everybody comes together, and says, well, we'll just write up the value of that?

It's like writing down the -- gold.

GLENN: Gold.

CAROL: So central banks have been buying tons of physical gold. By the way, billionaires have been buying a lot of physical gold as well. And I'm using the term physical, because it's different than the market that is traded.

GLENN: ETFs. Those are ridiculous.

CAROL: ETFs. That's done in dollars. So who is backing that?

But physical gold. So there is a theory going around, that potentially that standalone basis or a basket of neutral metals. Which was thrown out as an idea, early on. When it was pushed aside for the U.S. dollar. That maybe there is this -- meeting of the minds.

And, you know, this is the way that you make all of these other central banks. And countries full. Is you just write up the value of that gold.

So if you think that that's going to happen. And you think that the financial system is going to collapse, you know, then you want to be owning physical metals. And have a store of that.

GLENN: Because when you say, they're going to write off debt, you don't mean people's houses. You mean --

CAROL: No. This is government debt. They cannot write up government debt. Because when you take -- that's a loan, right? You owe the money back to somebody. So the other side of potentially doing some sort of. We'll have mass forgiveness.

Is that when you take something else that everybody else has. And you say, it's more valuable. Overnight. It's magic.

GLENN: That doesn't sound like --

STU: Bad magic trick.

GLENN: Yeah. It sounds like -- we're dealing with a lot of black magic.

Stu and I were talking about this story that came out of Britain. We hadn't heard anyone talk about this. Explain what happened.

STU: Yeah. Just a little background. It's in the London metal exchange.

And it's the price of nickel. Now, I know no one cares about the price of nickel. Just to give you the basis here.

GLENN: Tesla does.

STU: Yeah. That's true. If you're buying an electrical car, it's true. Basically, the last five years has bounced back and forth between 10,000 and 20,000 per metric ton. Okay?

It got up to a little bit above 20,000, in the last few weeks. Obviously, all this time going on with Russia. Russia, Ukraine. Big sources where it comes from, for all these electric batteries. It goes basically from 20,000 to 80,000, in basically a day.

Okay? So four times, in one day. So let me read this: This is from the Wall Street Journal.

GLENN: Listen to this. Have you read this, Carol?

CAROL: Oh, I know this story. I do know this story. So we can talk about this.

GLENN: Yeah, this is crazy. Listen to this, America. This is craziness.

STU: Yeah.

So traders on the London Metal Exchange smelled blood, and nickel prices almost doubled in a short period of time. A Chinese company faced a 1 billion-dollar margin call. That exchange officials felt they couldn't meet. Rather than let it fail, which would have probably taken down several of the smaller brokers that serviced them. The London metals exchange decided to cancel all of the day's trading. More than 9,000 trades, worth about $4 billion.

It canceled the trades. Not because of a fat finger error. Which exchanges often cancel. Not because of a rogue algorithm, as regulators claimed in the 2010 flash crash in U.S. stocks, but because someone with too much leverage was going to blow up, with effects on some members of the exchange.

This moral hazard is taken to an extreme. It's always been true, that if you face a 100-dollar margin call, it's your problem. While if you have a one billion dollar margin call, it's the broker's problem. And the authorities might save them. What is almost unprecedented here. Is the exchange authorities decided to save them, with money taken from other traders, who otherwise would be sitting on fat profits.

I mean, you won. You picked the right direction. You've got these huge profits. And they cancel your trade, to save someone else.

GLENN: And it's China.

STU: And it's China.

GLENN: I mean, there is no such thing as a free market with this.

CAROL: No. This is another too big to fail scenario. It happened to be -- I believe it was an individual billionaire, who had made a short set against nickel. So he went in the other direction.

GLENN: Wow. I mean, then you don't -- you don't put the money down on the table. If you don't know what the odds are, and you're not willing to lose your money.

That's like going to Vegas, and -- and placing a huge bet, and when you lose it, you're like, hey.

You know, Caesars. I mean, this is crazy. And Caesars says, oh, we're not going to count that bet.

That doesn't happen!

CAROL: It's horrendous. And it goes back to the integrity of the market. And so many that the retail investors have been rallying against. And it's just another example. And there are big name banks involved. The exchange was actually shut down for multiple days, I believe. Before it started trading again.

And the people who made a bet, and decided to participate in the market, ended up getting screwed out of their profits. But they're never going to get the leniency, if it happens to them on the other side.

GLENN: No.

CAROL: And just the overall integrity, like you said. This is not a free market. It's not a fair market.

And we have too many of these big guys, who are being saved, at the expense, sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively, of the small guys, over and over and over again.

GLENN: And that's what I think people are so sick of.

And when they see this next crash. Especially with Janet Yellen saying, it will be equitable. When we reassemble, it will be equitable. What the hell does that mean? Probably stuff like this. And when they see the rich getting richer. And I don't mean a person who runs a business and may have a million dollars.

I mean the rich.

The elite of the elite. The BlackRocks of the world.

The banks of the world.

I just -- when their debt is being bailed out and real Americans are paying huge money for their food and their gas. And then their home is taken, there's trouble. That's real trouble.


CAROL: Yeah. And unfortunately, that is the scenario. There's one thing to become wealthy, because you earned it in a fair playing field. That's something that we want to celebrate. But we do not want to celebrate, when the playing field is tilted. When somebody has their thumb on the scale. When we have this transfer of wealth from Main Street to Wall Street. Which has been going on for, you know -- in a very large part, for a decade and a half. But it has accelerated over the last year and a half. And, you know, we talk about all of this coming to fruition. And us losing reserve currency status. It's going to mean a slower economy for us. Because we are not in a position. We don't have the strong manufacturing face. Or a competitive pricing. To be able to export. So all these people are like, oh, that's great. We'll reshore the job. They're not thinking in context of the existing economic structure. It will be unfortunately, very painful. But just to have a moment of hope here, Glenn. Because this is really doom and gloom. Is you have to remember, in any time of pain, there's always opportunities. So it is incumbent upon you, to find where those opportunities are. And what --

GLENN: So average person is saying, what is that opportunity?

CAROL: Yeah. It's finding the things that have inelastic demand. Meaning, people will pay prices even when they're continuing to increase and making investments and those kinds of things. Or retooling your business. To be servicing those markets. It's those kinds of shifts, where you have to look for those hidden opportunities.

In what could be a completely new economic scenario for us, going forward.

GLENN: I -- I think what you just said, translates to what I just told my kids.

You get into the job market. You have to be the most effective, efficient, and hard-working employee. Even if you're not at the top of the food chain, you have to be the one that the boss says, oh, we can't.

Because he'll do everything. I mean, he's a little bit. I mean, he works like crazy. You have to be that person. Right?

CAROL: Absolutely. Absolutely. Invest in yourself. And make yourself indispensable to a customer or to somebody that you're working for.

It's a huge competitive differentiation that will only get more important.
GLENN: I would love to have you on, maybe early next week. I just had one of my producers put some stats together on inflation.
And what that actually means to people. I mean, when Biden got in, a hamburger. An average hamburger was $4.40.

Today, that average burger is 601. And if we look at what they say, things are going to be, you know, with -- with the -- what are they saying? 7.9 percent inflation.

That number is going to be $7 force a burger by the time of the next election. I don't think that stat is right. You want to compare apples to apples. Look at how they measured it back in the 1970s and '80s, when we hit it before. That would mean that that hamburger would go from $4.40, to almost $8 by the time we hit a presidential election.

I just want to talk to you about inflation. And how to beat that.

CAROL: Plenty to talk about, would love to.

GLENN: Thank you very much, girl. Appreciate it. Carol Roth. The name of the book is War on Small Business. Make sure you pick it up.

RADIO

I have a theory about Trump's nuclear testing…

President Trump recently ordered the Pentagon to resume nuclear testing after Vladimir Putin announced a new underwater nuclear device. Are we heading towards a potential nuclear war, or does Trump have another goal? Glenn Beck explains his theory: Trump just won this fight...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, President Trump said yesterday, truly great meeting with President Xi.

This is a the problem. So much is hyperbole is -- truly. Like everybody said that meeting couldn't happen. It happened. And they said couldn't be done. It was done.

I got up this morning. People said I couldn't open the door, and I opened the door. Okay? It was the greatest door opening I've ever seen.
But from all accounts, this was a really, really good meeting.

Let me just say this: He's getting ready to meet with Putin. And with what Putin has done in the last couple of days, and now everybody is upset.

Oh, my gosh. Donald Trump said he's going to start testing nuclear weapons again!

Yeah. Yeah.

You know why?

Well, China is testing them.

And Russia is testing them.

We've had a moratorium on that. And here's what he's really doing. If I -- if I heard the news. And I was in the Donald Trump White House, I would be -- I would have walked in, after I heard the news, especially yesterday.

That Vladimir Putin has a new nuclear missile, that he can shoot 6,000 miles away.

Underwater. And it can navigate, and then blow up like a hydrogen bomb under the water, just off the coast of California, which would create a radioactive tsunami. This is what I would tell the president. Congratulations, Mr. President. You've won.

Now, why would I say that?

Because Vladimir Putin is not going to do that.

He's not going to do that. It would make him the pariah of the entire world. You're not going to set off a nuclear, radioactive tsunami to cover Los Angeles.

Because here's -- if I'm the president, and maybe this would make me a very bad president. But if I'm the president. And I hear that he has just launched a nuclear missile, towards Los Angeles, my decision is: Do I stop it?

Yes, I do everything I can to try to stop the missile from hitting. Do I respond before it hits?

All unconventional wisdom is, you've got to launch now, Mr. President. You have to launch now!

Hmm. Now, maybe this makes me a very bad president. I don't know.

I think it probably does. But I would say, no.

I'm not launching. Let it hit. And then I'm going to say to the rest of the world, immediately after it hits, this man just bird Los Angeles, killed all of these people, by launching a missile, a hydrogen bomb, underwater. God only knows what it's done to the environment.

But here's what it's done to people. And here's what it's done to Los Angeles. I give the world an hour before I respond.

I don't want a nuclear war. Because we all know what that means.

But rest of the world, you need to condemn him, and he needs to go on trial for crimes against humanity.

Nothing -- nothing warrants that kind of abuse of nuclear weapons.

That's what I would do as the president. Because I know the rest of the world, would not be kind to anyone who launched a nuclear weapon at the West Coast.

Wouldn't. If we launched a nuclear weapon, you know, even if we blew up Israel, with a nuclear weapon, the world would be like, look at what America has just!

They've killed all these Jews. Wait a minute. I'm so confused right now, what I'm for and what I'm against. But they would still condemn it.

Nobody can get away with that. He knows. Putin knows, the president is the most concerned about nuclear weapons. So what does he do?
He describes two nuclear weapons he has.

He's pulling out all -- there's nowhere to go from there. What are you going to do next? I'm going to blow up the moon?

He's just used everything in his bag of tricks. There's no place bigger that he can go. Other than actually launching those things. Mr. President, Congratulations, you've just won. So that's what I think is happening with -- with what Donald Trump has done this week. And the way Putin is now reacting. And he's about to turn his sites on Putin and Ukraine.

So let's start and see what happens.

RADIO

Why this Deep State spy campaign is the WORST scandal of my lifetime

According to the records released now by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and the House Judiciary Committee, The Biden era DOJ and special counsel Jack Smith drove an investigation that sprayed subpoenas like a firehose. There were 197 subpoenas sent to 34 people, over 160 businesses, and vacuumed up communications tied to more than 400 Republican individuals and entities. Fox News, Turning Point USA, OAN, all engulfed in what has been called "Operation Arctic Frost." And all this was predicated on NEWS CLIPS?! Glenn explains why this Arctic Frost is MUCH worse than Watergate.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: While we're talking about winter, let's talk about Arctic Frost. That's the code name. And according to -- according to the records released now by senator chuck Grassley and the -- and the House Judiciary Committee. The Biden era DOJ and Special Counsel Jack Smith drove an investigation that sprayed subpoenas like a firehose. We now know, there were 197 subpoenas, spanning more than 1700 pages. Sent to 34 people. One hundred sixty-three businesses, and then vacuumed up communications, tied to more than 400 Republican individuals and entities.

Okay? That's reaching into everything. They reached into media companies. CBS, Fox, Fox Business, NewsMax, Sinclair, into financial institutions, into political organizations.

Even members, employees, and agents of the legislative branch. So now you have congressmen and senators being vacuumed up into this whole thing.

This is not a precision rifle shot. This is a net and a very big dragnet.

Okay? This is not the way justice in America works. You do not go after, you know, an entire party, 400 people? Now, what were they looking for? How did it start?

Well, let me say, the opening memo to justify Arctic Frost is to call -- does in legal terms, it would be called the predicate.

And it was stamped sensitive investigative matter, okay?

And it's cited. And I love this. Listen to this language. It's cited, evidence suggest a conspiracy around alternate electors.

I'll get to that here in just a second. But it -- it relied on -- leaned on news clips. News clips!

To vacuum all these people up, to get the -- to get the engine turning. News clips were used.

Suggesting, not proving. Suggesting, and it just rose up the ladder.

Ray, Garland, Monaco, even coordination with the White House counsel's office. It surfaces now in the record. This went all the way to the top.

This is not my language. This is what the documents now on the table imply.

Okay? Now, let me just pause for a minute, in the reading room of American memory. What is this all about?

Alternate electors. That's not a Martian invention. Okay?

That's not something completely foreign. We've seen it before. 1876, and 1960. They were messy. Contested. Deeply political moments that produced zero criminal prosecutions for their existence of rival slaves.

In fact, Al Gore, if he didn't set an alternate slate of electors, he was counseled, and I've talked to Dershowitz about this.

He said, they're counseled to have an alternate set of electors. Because once -- if you don't do that, and the tables turn and you're like, you know what, there was a problem -- if you haven't ceded those electors before a certain time, you have no case. You can't change anything. So it has to happen. And it has happened two times before, I think three, but definitely in 1876 and 1960.
In Hawaii, in 1916, Democrats signed certificates while a recount was still underway. The recount flipped. So it was ultimately certified. The democratic slate was certified. Ugly? Yes. But that's the way it worked.

It's not criminal. And history has said no. It's not criminal.

But it doesn't matter, when it's about Donald Trump. So let me go back to Arctic Frost thousand. As the subpoenas flew, the FBI reportedly snooped phone records of Republican members of Congress!

The scope widened to donor analytics. Broad financial data. Trump world advisers.

The lawyers. The media contacts. We said, during January 6, we said, internally, if you don't think they are going after a massive tree, because remember, this is -- this is what the Patriot Act allows you to do now.

You go after one person. If anybody is calling somebody else, well, that person now can be Hoovered up. And who has that person called?

So you can get pretty much everybody that you want, with one subpoena.

But that's not where they stop. They didn't stop with one subpoena. Okay?

When the state casts a dragnet over the opposition's political ecosystem with the authority to seize all their communications, compel testimony, and chill the donors, that's not tough politics.

Okay?

That is the government, with badges and grand juries, leaning its full weight into one side of the national scale.

Watergate. Please!

Watergate. Let me compare Watergate. You know what Watergate was?

Watergate was a gang of political operatives who broke into an office to get information. They weren't even. They weren't even losing the election. Nobody even knows why they would even do this. It is so stupid that they would even do this. But it was a local office. They broke in. They wanted to get some information that was there, you know, on the -- on the candidate and on the race.

And then they covered it up.

And they tried to keep the public from the truth.

It was wrong!

It was criminal.

And it forced a president to resign. And people went to prison over it. But Watergate was a private burglary, executed by a campaign, and covered up. By the White House.

Terrible!

Awful.

That's not the DOJ blanketing the opposing party's entire world, with federal subpoenas while citing news hits as the predicate.

Do you see the difference?

Watergate was an attempt to weaponize a campaign. Arctic Frost, if the emerging records hold, was the attempt to weaponize the entire state against a political party.

The difference there is the whole ball game. Under a constitutional republic.

You don't have a constitutional republic, if that's allowed to happen.

In America, the state is supposed to be the neutral referee. Not a sideline enforcer wearing one team's colors under the stripes.

And don't even start with me on, well, what about Donald Trump?

We'll play that game all day long. And you know where that gets us?

Nowhere. You want to make a charge against Donald Trump and what he's doing.

Good. Let's take that separately.

Let's do that. I'm willing to. Let's take that separately. Let's deal with this one, first. Okay? The moment the referee picks up the ball and starts running, the game is over!

It's not a fair game anymore. And if it can be done to them, today. It will be done to you, tomorrow.

That's not a slogan. That's a law of political gravity.

Yeah. But Trump did -- okay. Let's have that conversation.

But can we at least have it honestly?

Because if you think this is about, whataboutism. You believe so see the nose on the front of your face.

You're completely missing this.

You cannot make a weaponization of a government, a partisan inheritance that each side can claim when it holds power.

If any president, any prosecutor red, or blue, uses federal power to criminalize political opposition, rather than prosecute clear crimes.

It is an offense gets an equal protection under the law. So let's -- let's lay down a standard here, that I'm willing to apply to Donald Trump and to Joe Biden and any other president that comes our way. Because if we don't lay this clear standard down, we're done.

The predicate. Predication. It has to be real. Not rhetorical.

Evidence suggesting via TV interviews, is circular sourcing, at its best.

It's not something that you launch a sprawling investigation on into a presidential rival's universe. If you can't articulate the crime, specifically, you don't get to launch a dragnet on the people that are running against you!

The scope has to be narrow, and tied exactly to the alleged crime!

Not a sweep through media organizations, and donor records, and opposition infrastructure, under vague theories, that come from TV reports!

Journalism.

Political advocacy.

Fundraising.

All of those things are protected activities. Separation from the White House, also must be unmistakable. If the White House Counsel's office is coordinating device transfers into an investigation of its chief political rival, alarms should clang in every corridor of every main justice call hall.

Everywhere! The alarm -- the Claxton should be going off right now. Also, historic practice matters!

If prior episodes -- by the way, this was all thrown out by the Supreme Court. So you know. Okay? Nothing there.

If prior episodes, 1876, 1960, and I believe 2000. If they were treated as political, not criminal, especially where alternate electors were explicitly conditional, then you need compelling new legal theories and clean facts to criminalize it now.

You can't just say, yeah, well, history, never did anything about it before. And, actually, they said it was fine.

But now, now it's going to be a crime.

Wait. Can you be specific on what has changed? Well, we really just liked the people that are doing it this time. That doesn't count. That doesn't count.

Now, before anybody clips this monologue and screams, so Glenn Beck said, nobody -- the Trump administration did anything wrong. Well, I don't think so.

But that's not what I'm saying, because I'm not the judge. I'm not your juror. I'm the guy insisting that the rules are rules, and they should be applied to everyone on all sides.

Smith has his report. He says, he wants to tell his side. Great! Put him under oath. If he didn't do it, then he should be set free.

But it should be on a clear set of laws! What's happened in the Biden administration, they just kept changing laws. Well, yeah. I mean, the bank said there was no crime. But Donald Trump. And so all of a sudden, there was a crime.

Nobody has ever been prosecuted. Ever before that. Even the bank said, this is ridiculous.

There's no crime here.

It didn't matter.

That's not justice.

I want real justice. Smith says he has a side, let's hear it. Bring forward the memos. Publish the predicate. Let the country see where weather we had a criminal case or an election cycle dragnet. Because that's what it looks like. If the emerging picture looks like, if the Arctic Frost opened up on thin evidence, escalated on political pressure, and metastasized into a government-wide sweep of the sitting president's chief rival and his entire ecosystem, then this is not just like Watergate. This is much, much, much worse than Watergate. In kind.

Not just degree.

Watergate tried to steal the information. That's it. They potentially attempted to steal legitimacy to criminalize opposition by wielding the sword of the state.

That violates, you know, more than statutes. That violates our creed, that free men govern themselves by consent, and the process is sacred. And the law is the wall that even presidents and prosecutors can never climb over. If proven, the remedy is not a sternly, terse letter, or an op-ed, and a shrug.

The remedy is the full force of the law. Inspector general referrals. Special counsels where appropriate, prosecution where crimes are clear. Statutory reforms to bar this from ever happening again from -- from press clippings?

Being your predicate? Bright lines need to be drawn. Protections for the press, for donors, and legislators in political cases. Sunlight. All the sunlight on how this began, who approved it, and why no one in the administration said stop.

And to my friends saying, well, Trump is doing the same thing. I hear you. I don't agree with you, but I hear you. Why don't we codify the guardrails right now?

So when emotions are high and temptations are strong, the republic doesn't survive by trusting that our guys will be angels. It survives on the chains on power. Everyone's power.

You know, when I hold a founding sermon in your hand, when you read the ink of Washington scratched in the margin notes of James Madison. You discover that America's miracle wasn't that we selected saints. It's that we built a system where even the sinners are fenced in by law.

That's the process. When justice is blind, to banners and bumper stickers and political parties, that's when America is America. Arctic Frost. If the record stands, it took a blowtorch to that fence.

So the choice is really simple. Retreat into teams. Each side cheering for its prosecutors. And its dragnet. Or you can do the harder, nobler thing, just like our founders did. And insist that the same rules that bind all power, especially when it's aimed at people that we dislike, are enforced. That's how you keep a republic.

That's how you make sure that there's not a second Watergate. Because we learned the lesson the first time. But it we?

Because if we haven't. If we don't learn it this time, and by God, we are done!

The story of America is not a story of who got whom. It's a story of the people who refuse to let the government become a weapon. And if that spirit still lives in us, then this cold wind called Arctic Frost will pass. And the Constitution will withstand. Because you stood for equal justice. For due process. For truth. That doesn't bend to politics.

And that, that is how we relight the torch of America!

RADIO

Disease-Infested Monkeys LOOSE in Mississippi?!

A truck carrying 21 'aggressive' monkey's allegedly infected with contagious diseases such as COVID-19, herpes, and Hepatitis C crashed in Mississppi, causing the monkey's to be let loose. While most of the threat was taken care of, one monkey is reported to still be on the loose. This sounds eerily similar to the beginning of an outbreak movie...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Big thing some good news. Let's start with some good news.

President Trump has just -- is touring Asia and making all kinds of deals.

Donald Trump is single-handedly reshaping the earth!

He really is. He is reshaping everything. Single-handedly.

STU: Big job.

GLENN: I know. He's done more than The Great Reset did with all of that money. All of the campaigns. Everything that they were doing.

Listen to this. What he's just done. Signed a framework agreement, August 28th, between Trump and the Japanese Prime Minister, mutual stockpiling of rare-earth elements, REEs. Okay?

To ensure supply security. That's Japan. Cooperation with international partners, US allies, to shield the supply chain from disruptions.

The goal is to reduce China's 90 percent control over the global rare earth minerals.

For tech, EVs, defense, and AI. Okay. They have a 90 percent stranglehold.

So that's what he did in Japan. Now, also bundle that with the 550 billion dollar strategic investment from Japan, in the US. Including a 490 billion-dollar launch phase. 200 billion for nuclear AI and energy projects, small modular reactors with Westinghouse and Mitsubishi, and supply chain boosts in critical minerals.

Trump tied that to the tariffs. Japan got an auto import tariff slashed from '27 to 15 percent in exchange for the investments. In two weeks in the last two weeks, listen to what he has done. He has made multiple pacts with allies. Australia, critical minerals framework, mining processing, and rare earth mineral recycling scrap. Then in Japan, I just told you, Malaysia, he just did a memo of understanding on critical mineral diversification. In Ukraine, a ten-year access to titanium and rare earth minerals.

In Thailand, an MOU on rare earth mineral supply. Add that to what else he has done. He is -- he is outflanking China. He is trying to break the back of China! He is friend shoring, is what he's actually doing.

He is -- he is putting all of this emphasis on rare earth minerals. He's cutting Asia away from China.

He's cutting Europe away from China. He's cutting South America away from China. He has moved all of the resources of rare earth minerals to us. Anything outside of China, is coming our way now!

That is massive! Massive! We were sitting ducks with rare earth minerals, six months ago, a year ago. Total sitting ducks! They had everything coming their way. We were not doing any kind of -- any kind of strategic thinking on this, at all!

And this isn't piecemeal. This is operation warp speed for rare earth minerals. He is -- the guy is so ahead of everyone else. He is reshaping global trade and permanently, hopefully, sidelining China.

So we are never having to put our hand out to China.

It's remarkable, what is happening. Just remarkable! Now, let me give you another story.

A truck halling 21 monkeys to a testing facility in Florida, overturned in Mississippi.
(laughter)

STU: How did -- how did we make this jump? Has he signed a memorandum of understanding with the monkeys?

GLENN: Nope. Nope. They're still negotiating. According to the Jasper county sheriff's office, the accident occurred on Interstate 59, near the 117 mile-marker just north of Heidelberg. Six recess monkeys from Tulane University escaped. Officials said, five of the six that escaped have now been destroyed.

We've been in contact with an animal disposal company to help handle the situation. The Mississippi Department of Wildlife Fisheries and Parks and I guess now monkeys is still looking for one diseased monkey, still on the loose.

STU: A hundred percent, the beginning of an outbreak movie. That's exactly how it happens. The one gets away. Oh, we've got five of the six. What's the big deal?

GLENN: What was the one. What was the movie with -- oh. What's his name?

Tommy -- remember, he was the escaped convict. He was the doctor, and they were hauling him. He was the doctor from Ohio.

Based on a true story. And he -- they're hauling him. And he escapes. He has to try to prove himself innocent. Remember?

STU: Fugitive?

GLENN: Fugitive. Yeah. That's right.

STU: I was looking for a deep cut there.

GLENN: Fugitive. Sorry, I couldn't remember. It's a fugitive, and outbreak. That's what this is.

STU: That would be a good movie. I wouldn't want this in real life.

GLENN: I prefer a lot of this to not happen in real life.

STU: What are the diseases? We have help C going on?

We have COVID. I think there's three of them. Help C. COVID. And what was the other one? Herpes.

What happens if we combine all three into one monkey, and then release it into the wild?

What could possibly go wrong?

GLENN: Let me tell you something.

You know, we are in real trouble. I mean, I hate to bring this up too. Okay. Did you need diseased monkeys on the loose today from me?

No. No. Can I make it worse?

Absolutely, I can make this worse.

You know when we have the COVID thing. And we were all like, we shouldn't have these labs everywhere, you know.

STU: Oh. Like the labs.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Gain-of-function research, and things like that.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

We've built hundreds of new labs now. Hundreds of new labs. There are more than 35 hundred BSL3 and over 110BSL4. Bio safety level four laboratories. And all of them are now working on pathogens that could kill all of us.

So a 2025 journal of public health study reveals over90 percent of the countries that operate these labs have no oversight whatsoever!

STU: All of them are working on diseases that can kill us all?

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: There's not one that is doing yogurt flavors or something?

There's not one.

GLENN: No. There's not. There's not one. I wish there were!

You know, they keep saying, these are shields from -- no. These are match sticks. That's what these labs are. These are giant match sticks.

And we're sitting in a bunch of kindling -- they're -- they say they're developing vaccines. But what they're really doing is enhancing the viruses. Which, when I say enhancing, what that really means, they're weaponizing viruses. So don't worry. You know, it's just gain of function, which translated is, loss of sanity.

STU: I mean, because the research makes me very nervous. I mean, the fact that we have more labs that have higher safety standards. In theory, should be -- that was one of the problems with the COVID outbreak. Right?

They were doing research that should have been done at a BSL4. BSL1 and BSL2.

So, I mean, having more fours, that could be good, right?

GLENN: Eh. Did you see the BSL4 in China? In Wuhan?

STU: Well, I think that was the issue, it wasn't a BSL4.

GLENN: I think they called it a BSL4, and then it wasn't one.

STU: I don't think it was. Do we have a BSL4 for monkey research? I think really --

GLENN: I'm not really sure -- I know Georgia.

STU: Don't transfer it. Keep it in one place. You don't need to transfer them anywhere.

GLENN: In Atlanta, they're doing -- they're building another 150,000 square feet of a BSL4 in -- in Atlanta. So that's the place, oh, yeah, where all the zombies will be. Can I just tell you a quick little story? 1979. Soviet Union.

You know, they're trying to maintain this BSL4. They're not very good at it. Because, you know, they're not good at anything in 1979 in Russia.

STU: Except for nuclear power.

GLENN: Exactly right.

Okay. So there was a cloud released from this bio safety level lab four.

No flames. No alarms. Just a faint, invisible mist. It's kind of like hmm, my teenage son's farts. It's invisible, and it's deadly.

STU: Okay. Hmm.

GLENN: And it was carrying anthrax spores, okay? From the weapons lab.

Well, people began to die, clearly. We don't know how many. They think hundreds. Entire families suffocated because the bacteria devoured their lungs. And they were like, I have no lung!

GLENN: Okay. And the Kremlin was like, not happening. What do you say?

People were eating tainted meat. That's what's happening.

And it's eating their lungs.

STU: They Chernobyled it.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

So for a decade, nobody really knew what was going on, until the fall of the Soviet Union, and then people were going in. And they were like, oh! Here's what happened.

In one of these bio safety labs, a technician failed to replace an air filter properly.
And that was -- that -- just that allowed this microscopic storm of death to be released into the air.

I don't know! I mean, if your air filter not being installed properly can kill a bunch of people. And only tainted meat. McDonald's. I don't know. I don't -- I don't really think that we should -- we have them all over. 149 nations have them now.

149.

STU: There's definitely not 149 nations that should have stuff like that.

GLENN: You don't think so?

STU: No. I don't even think I can name 149 nations.

GLENN: Try this one. In India, the labs now are experimenting with the Crimean Congo viruses. Fatality rate of 75 percent.

In Russia, under its sanitary shield initiative, they are building 15 new BSL4 sites. In Brazil, Project Orion, a high-containment complex integrated with its particle accelerator.

Oh. And as I said, Atlanta, 160,000 square feet.

Apparently, we don't have enough room for all the monkeys that we're releasing in all the wild. And eventually, we'll find. And put them in there.
And torture them. Or do whatever it is we do. No international body tracks or regulates what's happening in any of these fortresses. What the hell is wrong with us?

STU: We should note an international body does not necessarily solve the problem.

I mean, as we've seen -- when they do monitor it, they usually import people to rape the citizens around the facilities.

GLENN: Exactly right. But you know what I'm really sick of it? There's no international body that does anything, except just let these people put really bad things into our body!

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Can we -- can we stop with this?

STU: We're good with this on our own. Put all sorts of things in my body. That should not have been in there.

We're good at doing that.

As Americans, on our own. We don't need your help.

GLENN: I really -- just stop.

The arrogance. The arrogance of these -- hey, you know what, we need to fiddle with some more viruses. And let's make a digital God that we can't control!

What the hell is wrong with us?

STU: Especially when the digital God that we can't control can make new viruses.

GLENN: Exactly right! Exactly right.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And maybe -- maybe -- maybe what we do, is we put it into a self-driving car. And it directs. And monkeys just start flying out of everyone ever seen butt.