RADIO

Why a HUGE ‘migration’ of gold to Asia should WORRY YOU

Bloomberg recently published a piece called, ‘The Gold Market’s Great Migration Sends Bullion Rushing East.’ The article notes that China has imported 160 TONS of gold since April, India has added 80 tons, Turkey 62, and the list goes on. Is the U.S. — or other Western nations — selling gold to China? And if so, why wouldn’t we be buying it, instead? Carol Roth, financial expert and author of ‘The War On Small Business,’ joins Glenn to make sense of this ‘head scratcher.’ She theorizes what’s REALLY going on with gold, and she explains why the U.S.’s lack of longterm thinking regarding gold, should worry you.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All righty then. I saw a -- I saw a disturbing story from Bloomberg. Last week. And I haven't mentioned it because I wanted to make sure I had some facts on it. I called Carol Roth. I called everybody I know. And they said, that doesn't seem. Well, I don't know. Let me look into it.

Carol is here to explain this. Here's what I found in Bloomberg.

Asia has net imported gold from the West. Since April. The trade flow into China. 160 tons of gold. Into India. 80 tons. Into Turkey. Sixty-two. Thailand. 38 tons. Saudi Arabia, 20 tons. Malaysia. 4 tons. Hong Kong 3 tons.

Where did they get all this gold?

Well, the UK sold 15 tons of gold from their Treasury. 32 tons. South Africa. Canada, 33. Australia, 34 tons. And the United States of America, sold 136 tons of gold. If we send that to China, why are we selling gold when smart money would be buying gold? Hopefully, Carol will have an answer for us in 60 seconds.

By the way, as we're talking with this, let me tell you about Goldline. The United States top economists are saying, that we will enter a recession, in the coming 12 months. If we aren't already in one. The only reason why we're still debating this. Is because Republicans don't have control of the House or the Senate. As soon as they get control of the House and the Senate, I can guarantee you, we're in a recession. And it's their policies that put us into one. In fact, Joe Biden said it just this weekend, they're going to collapse the economy. That's their plan. To collapse the economy.

Oh, shut up. How do we -- I was going to say, how do we -- how do we deal with the amount of lies and smoke screens, that are put out?

Well, you just have to know what is true. What is true always has value.

The dollar won't always have value. Because it's no longer true.

There's no full faith and credit in the United States of America anymore. So what is true? What does the world always respond to?

Gold. They always -- look what China is doing. And India. And then look at what we're doing. Goldline has a deal this week, on their historic graded 5-dollar gold Indian coins. With every box of 20 of the graded coin, you'll receive 100 of the silver Mind Your Business bars at no cost.

That's a great deal. Both of these items are ideal for barter. Not that I would suggest you do this. I'm a coin collector myself. 866GOLDLINE. 866GOLDLINE or goldline.com.

Carol, please tell me I'm reading too much into this. Please tell me. Please tell me.

CAROL: So this has been a little bit of a Nancy Drew mystery for me, Glenn.

I saw this Bloomberg piece as well, and it was a little bit of a head scratcher. So I'm going to take you through some of the things I found, and hopefully we can piece this together.

GLENN: Okay. This is really weird.

Because I went to some really big brains, that know this kind of stuff. No one had an answer for me.


CAROL: Okay. So I think -- I'll wrap it in a bow first, and then I'll walk it back. But I think this is the short-term trader mindset, versus people who have a long-term view on the world. So this is short-termism, versus long-termism.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

CAROL: So the first thing that we have to understand, the thing I did was went, oh, my gosh, all this gold is flowing east. Or where is it coming from? Is our central bank that dumb, that they're selling gold?

So I pulled a chart of central banks. And central banks have been net buyers of gold, for most of the year, since April. Which is the same time period of the chart.

That's April to August. They have pretty much everybody is a purchaser of gold. There's almost --

GLENN: Including us?

CAROL: Just a tiny little bit -- every central bank in the world. Which means, even if we're not purchasing it. We're not selling any. There's almost no net sales. So that means our central bank is not the one selling this. We'll take that off the table.

GLENN: Here's what I couldn't figure out either. Is the Treasury the same as the central bank? Does the Central Bank have all of the Treasury's gold?

What --

CAROL: So they're probably not.

But let me walk through where I think this is coming from.

GLENN: All right.

CAROL: So the second piece I went to, was the consumer market. And consumers, seeing what's going on with inflation.

Understanding that a recession is here, and that it's going to get worse next year, have also been buying.

And by the way, we can't supply them. So both here in the US, as well, particularly in the east, much more in the east. There's been an additional premium.

And I'm going, what's going on here. What you have to understand about the market for gold, is that the prices for the gold, when you call Goldline, to buy your gold, like you and I do, Glenn. You're buying physical gold, but that price isn't being set by the supply and demand of you and I buying it.

It's being set by these future markets. By these traders, who are trading contracts.

And all of these derivative products, the options, the futures, they are so much larger than the underlying product.

And, yes, if this sounds like a familiar story. It is one. But the research estimates put the sides of these futures market, at 200 to $300 trillion of value being traded. With the underlying supply of goodly. The underlying supply of gold, underlying supply of gold is like 11 to $12 trillion.

GLENN: This is why I say all the time. Don't buy paper gold. Don't do it.

Don't do it. It will be worthless in the end.

CAROL: Exactly. So let me tell you what's happening. These traders are looking at not just what's happening in the physical supply demand. They're looking at little blips on their screen. And they're saying, oh, well, historically, when we have a strong dollar, that means that's not good for gold. So we should probably get out of it, as the fed tightens their monetary policy.

They have gotten to the point, where these crazy traders are actually not short on gold. Meaning that they have sold more than they have. And this is only the third time since 2014 that this has happened. This happened in 2015. It happened in 2018. And what my researchers have told me is both of those times, as you can imagine, when you have all of these shorts out there, but this crazy macro economic environment. It's prime for a short squeeze. And that's set major floors, and there's been huge rallies involved.

So once again, we have the financialization of a product. A product that is very important to us.

You know, being bastardized by Wall Street. And what happens, in China. And India. And other parts of Asia. Is that they're smart. They go, well, the price is falling. We should load up on it.

Buy low. Sell high. So they actually create a floor for the price of gold. Because they know they can get it at cheaper prices than it's actually worth. So they go in, and they load up on it.

And that's the tenor of what's been happening here, which is just complete insanity. So my speculation, is that institutional investor's gold, that is flowing because these traders are doing the same thing that the traders always do. They're being short-termed, grubby, greedy, and not looking at the bigger macro environments.

GLENN: That means, then we are doing that. We as a nation are -- we're going to be the opposite of the big short. Right?

We're selling, when we should be buying.

CAROL: So the good news is, our central bank. Our country has -- and, again, if this is true. Right?

So I'm just going to report what's being reported. I did not go to Fort Knox and verify, that the gold is actually there.

But we actually have the most gold in the world per -- by a country.

GLENN: I do not know if I actually believe that, but they say -- they say that's 85, or 84.

CAROL: 8100 tons. Tons. Yes.

GLENN: Tons. How much is that worth?

CAROL: I knew that you would ask me that question, and it was Monday, and my calculator wasn't big enough.

GLENN: Try it.

CAROL: It's a lot. A lot.

GLENN: I looked at it, and it's in the two or three digit trillions.

STU: Give me the number one more time.

CAROL: 8100 tons of gold.

GLENN: Which is about 32,000 ounces per ton?

STU: Thirty-two thousand ounces per ton?

GLENN: Yeah. And gold is trading at about $17 an ounce.

So how much is -- if they say we have this -- to me it makes no sense.

STU: 1700 an ounce, you said?

It's a big number. Let's --

GLENN: Yeah. Go ahead. Try to figure it out.

STU: Yeah, I know. Here we go.

CAROL: This is a lot for a Monday, guys.

STU: $440 billion dollars plus.

GLENN: No, no, no. Billion. It's higher than that. It has to be trillion.

STU: I'm going by your numbers here.

GLENN: 32,000 ounces, times eight.

STU: Thirty-two thousand times 8100, times 1700. So I'll do it again. 8100 times 32,000 times 1700, is, let's see. Yeah, 440 billion.

GLENN: No.

STU: So, again, I think maybe you're -- are you sure about that number of 32,000 ounces? I don't know --

CAROL: I will look that up.

STU: Too low.

GLENN: Look it up. Yeah, that's way too low.

It's got to be in the trillions. It's got to be in the trillions.

CAROL: It's probably somewhere I would say between 440 billion and a trillion dollars.

Again, like you said, it's just the central bank piece of it.

At any rate, the U.S. has more than any other individual country. The Eurozone, as a group, actually has more than the US.

And on a sort of tons to GDP, you know, value standpoint. You know, we are -- you know, we're not quite at our GDP, but we're in sort of a good position.

The only ones that are really stacking up via their GDP, is the Eurozone and Russia. And now China is starting to continue to add to that.

So, you know, it's a very strange situation. And it's also a strange situation, Glenn. If you think about the fact that the traders are doing this, based on, quote, unquote, dollar strength. Because they're looking at the dollar strength versus other currencies.

But they're not looking at the dollar's lack of strength at home. The dollar is not strong when you go to buy your groceries, or you go to pay your rent, or you go to heat your house.

And so that is the challenge. That is what we are. When we go and we buy physical gold, that's one of the things we're continuing to protect against. The continual debasement in the value of the dollar. So there really is a setup here. Potentially for, you know, some sort of a squeeze. Or even the collapse of some point of the paper gold market. Which means, eventually, things would change, to going off the actual spot price, of supply and demand. Which is how this should be based to start.

GLENN: Okay. So I should not be worried that Bloomberg's headline is, gold's great migration, sends bullion rushing east.

CAROL: No. I think you should be worried. And I think the reason why you should be worried is the people in Asia are taking a long-term view. And the people in the West are not. And that is going to come back to bite us. And by the way, usually this ends up flowing back. When the price goes high, in the past, it has flowed back. Because, you know, of course, we'll buy it at the higher price --

GLENN: Which is so stupid.

CAROL: Which makes no sense.

But the people I'm talking to, who really know this stuff, say not this time. We're in a new financial world order, something is going to shift here, and so don't expect that flow to come back the other way.

GLENN: Wow. One last thing, Carol. I appreciate your work on this.

Because I couldn't -- I couldn't make heads or tails of this, and our gold situation is so not transparent in America.

CAROL: It's a travesty. It really is. Something needs to change with this market, it does.

GLENN: It is. The other question is, we just sent the 101st Airborne, over to support NATO.

The Pentagon said, this weekend, we're ready to go to war if we have to go to war with Russia and Ukraine. What does war mean to our economy, if -- if it starts, with Russia?

CAROL: I mean, you know, there's obviously a bunch of layers of scenarios, depending on how bad it is. Certainly, the defense sector will be doing very well.

And it's just a question, of how much is this being fought over there? How much of what we're doing ends up being disrupted? Or does it end up being something that looks more like the recent wars that we've had in Afghanistan. And the like.

So I just it really depends on the scope. But, certainly, if we get into a big escalation here. And this becomes something that is like a world war, a true world war. I think we can all pretty much not take a pretty big leap of faith. To guess, that that is not going to be a good sign for our economy, particularly at a time when the economy is breaking down, and the Federal Reserve has been taking steps to damage the economy to do that, quote, unquote, demand destruction. To create higher unemployment. All of those things. You know, not that there's ever a good time for a war. But it will just exacerbate those issues.

GLENN: Okay. I would love for you to look into something else. Right now, Biden is saying, the G.O.P. will collapse the economy. What he's saying, they will shut down the government. That's a lie. You can shut the government down.

Pay your bills. And not go defunct. Can you not?

CAROL: I would love them -- when they shut down the government, they can't spend any money. He's basically setting this up. He knows the Republicans have a strong chance here. And he knows the economy is going into a worst condition. He's basically setting up the blame for the things he has been created. He's already pinned it on things that will happen.

GLENN: Right. I would like you to look at, how the government actually pays its bills. And you don't go into default if you're a nation, if you shut down. There are ways to do it, so you don't go into default. So we can stop this madness.

CAROL: And we can bust this. I have this great deficit myth, when you have a $1.4 trillion deficit on 40 percent more spending. Would love to chat about that with you.

GLENN: Okay. Good. Thank you very much. Carol, we'll have you on maybe later on this week.

We'll cover both of those things. That's Carol Roth. You can follow Carol, @CarolRoth. CarolRoth.com/Glenn is where you will be taken to her page, where you can find all the information she does with us. CarolRoth.com/Glenn.

RADIO

Jasmine Crockett just DEFENDED this Jeffrey Epstein claim?!

Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett recently claimed on the House floor that Republicans, including EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, had taken money from “somebody named Jeffrey Epstein.” But it wasn’t THE Jeffrey Epstein. Glenn and Stu review this incredibly dumb attempt to smear Republicans and the even more insane excuses she gave to CNN.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's start with Jasmine Crockett. Yesterday, she came out, and she said that Lee Zeldin was receiving money from Jeffrey Epstein!

And Lee Zeldin is like, what?

No, I didn't!

Now, he knows that he did get money from Jeffrey Epstein. Just not the Jeffrey Epstein. Another Jeffrey Epstein.

Here is -- here is Jasmine Crockett trying to spin her mistake, on CNN last night.

Listen to this.

VOICE: Senate Democrat, who has been on defense over Jeffrey Epstein is Stacey Plaskett. She represents the Virgin Islands. She was texting with Jeffrey Epstein the day of Michael Cohen's hearing. Her questions pretty closely followed the text messages between the two of them to ask about Rhona Graff, Trump's long-time assistant. You were defending her today and in recent days, yesterday. And you talked about Republicans taking money from a Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what you said.

VOICE: Who also took money from somebody named Jeffrey Epstein, as I had my team dig in very quickly. Mitt Romney, the NRCC. Lee Zeldin. George Bush. When (inaudible). McCain/Palin. Rick Lazio.

VOICE: You mentioned Lee Zeldin there. He's now a cabinet secretary. He responded and said, it was actually Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, who is a doctor that doesn't have any relation to the convicted sex trafficker. Unfortunate for that doctor. But that is who donated to a prior campaign of his.

And do you want to correct the record on --

VOICE: I never said that it was that Jeffrey Epstein. Just so the people understand when you make a donation, your future is not there. And because they decided to spring this on us, in real time. I wanted the Republicans to think about what could potentially happen.

Because I knew that they didn't even try to go through FEC. So my team, what they did was they Googled. And that is specifically why I said agent, because unlike Republicans, I at least don't go out and just tell lies.

Because it was -- when Lee Zeldin had something to say, all he had to say was it was a different Jeffrey Epstein. He knew he did receive donations from a Jeffrey Epstein. So at least I wasn't trying to mislead people. To find out who this doctor was --

GLENN: Can we stop for a second. There's so much to digest.

We have to stop for just a second.

You weren't misleading people. Because you didn't see it was the Jeffrey Epstein.

You said it was a Jeffrey Epstein. What is the problem with getting money from Jeffrey Epstein?

There's no problem. That would be like, and Stu Burguiere has been taking money from Bob Stevenson. And?

What's the problem?

He's been working for Bob Stevenson for years. He was delivering papers as a kid to Bob Stevenson's front door! Who is Bob Stevenson?

There's not a problem with that. Why would you go out and say -- if she had come out and said, you know what, Lee Zeldin was also taking money from Bob Stevenson and Jim Furstenbergersteinberg.

I mean, then it would be fine.

You clearly were smearing. Not misleading? Not misleading?

STU: Oh. I --

GLENN: What's the problem from taking it from -- other than poor Dr. Jeffrey Epstein. Oh, my gosh.

STU: First of all.

GLENN: I feel bad for that guy.

STU: That life sucks.

If you're Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, you got to think about a name-change.

But there's hundreds of Dr. -- not doctor, but hundreds of Jeffrey Epsteins across the country.

GLENN: Hundreds.

STU: And I -- I mean, she was designed in a lab to make me happy. Jasmine Crockett.

I -- I love her so much.

GLENN: True. I do too. I do too.

STU: If you could formulate the perfect Democrat. I think I would just have to put her out there.

She just says the dumbest.

Like, she can't even get her bad defense right over this.

Like, she's trying to say, well, I didn't lie. Like, that's your defense in theory. I threw this in here. I noticed it, at the time. We talked about it, I think yesterday.

That she said -- yeah. She did.

She knew -- which actually makes it worse. She knew she was lying. She knew there was a good chance this wasn't Jeffrey Epstein.

But the last thing in the world --

GLENN: It's not a problem if you would have said -- it wouldn't be a problem if you would say, look!

All of these people have taken money from a Jeffrey Epstein.

Doubt that it's the same Jeffrey Epstein. Might be.

Might not be.

STU: I mean -- what value would be that?

GLENN: I know. I know.

It would be no value. But at least you can say, I'm not trying to mislead people.

STU: Right.

GLENN: I am trying to create doubt in people's minds.

But I'm not saying he's taking money from Jeffrey Epstein.

You know, when she just lists all of these people.

I mean, let's look at her donation. Let's see if she's ever taken money from a Charlie Manson.
(laughter)

You know what I mean? She's taken money from a John Wayne Gacy.

Hello!

A Ted Bundy has been seen around her house.

I mean, it's crazy! It's crazy!

And she knew exactly what she was doing.

And I hope that she continues. I hope that she continues to gain power.

STU: Yes!

GLENN: And love and respect from the Democrats. Because she is insane.

She's insane? She's so reckless. She's insane.

STU: She is. And, by the way, this is the person that we are told that should be the face of the party, that they should lean into the way she talks.

Because she's such a good communicator.

And she gets on all these shows, Glenn. This is a massive problem in our politics. And it affects the left more than the right.

It affects both sides to some degree. We're incentivized. The entire system is set up to reward people like her.

Who just say the dumbest things possible. And the most irresponsible and reckless things possible. And get all the clicks.

This woman has been on Colbert. Why?

She has been a complete nobody who is wrong all the time. She's getting on all these massive shows. She's getting booked everywhere. She's living the ultimate life of today's modern congressman.

And what is going to stop her?

The incentives are right there for her to continue.

GLENN: Do you think she doesn't know that she's dead.

Because didn't a Crockett die at the Alamo. Is that her?

I think that's her.

I know a Crockett died at the Alamo.

I'm not really sure. I'm not really sure.

I mean, just, what a dope.

JASON: Can I just point out? It's like, I'm a part of her research team, because she put her team on this.

GLENN: But quickly. But quickly.

JASON: Yeah. I always thought, especially Congress research would have these amazing tools.

GLENN: No, they don't.

JASON: And we, like -- our team struggles over this. We're constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve.

GLENN: And the last thing we do is Google. Google.

JASON: Google searches. That's what you do in Congress.

GLENN: Yes. Yes. That is what you do. That is what you do.

STU: Don't you have to fire your whole team after this.

GLENN: I would. I would. No. But she -- I don't think.

I have a feeling that her team briefed her.

It's why she did say, A, Jeffrey Epstein.

They briefed her, and said, this is probably not the same guy.

It might have even said, if you're Googling, it might have said, Dr. Jeffrey Epstein.

Why wouldn't it?

If that's who gave that money, it most likely said, Dr. Jeffrey Epstein.

And so they would say, it's not the Jeffrey Epstein. Yes, but that's okay.

I mean, she clearly knew. So who is she going to fire? This is what she wanted. Just the smear.

STU: Do we have time to play the rest of this clip? Because there's more to this. It's amazing.

GLENN: Yeah. Go ahead.

VOICE: So I will trust and take what he says. Is that it wasn't that Jeffrey Epstein. But I wasn't attempting to mislead anybody. I literally had maybe 20 minutes before I had to do that debate.

STU: So good.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop. Stop.

So you don't say it!

I literally had 20 minutes. So I -- I didn't know, that the sky wasn't on fire, that that was actually the sun.

I only had 20 minutes before I said, my God, the whole sky is on fire!

STU: This is why I love her.

GLENN: What were you thinking?

STU: She had no idea whether the accusations she was making was true.

And she didn't even consider not saying it. The only thing that she could come up with in her brain, whatever information that comes in, in this rushed time period, just go with it.

And it's like --

GLENN: Do you know why?

STU: Why?

GLENN: Do you know why?

And I don't know if she's smart enough to know this. But you can say whatever you want as a congressman on the floor of Congress, and you cannot be held liable.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: You could say the worst thing. You could say, he was having sex with 4-year-old with his Jeffrey Epstein.

And it could be a complete lie. And you could not be held responsible because you said it, on the floor of the house.

That's why the standards are so low.

The standards are absolutely so low for these Congress -- she could say whatever she wants. If she would have said, not on the floor of the house. Lee Zeldin would sue her.

You could say, you knew what were you doing. You were smearing me and my reputation, intentionally. You knew exactly what you were doing so you couldn't sue.

She could have said, and he was having sex with a 4-year-old.

As long as he said it on the floor of the House, not a problem.

STU: This is the --

GLENN: Yeah. That is how bad our Congress is out of control.

They've you written all these laws for themselves to protect them. So they can be completely irresponsible, and it's fine.

STU: Yeah. I mean, I don't know if it's that, or if she's just a dunce.

It's hard to know with her.

GLENN: She's just dishonest. She's just dishonest.

STU: Yeah. She's dishonest and bad at it. And that's one of the things that I love about it.

There's no wool being pulled over anyone's eyes. It's just pathetic.
GLENN: No. No.

Is there more to this?

Play the rest of it out.

VOICE: Make it sound like he took money --
VOICE: I did not know. I just heard registered sex offender.
VOICE: I literally did not know.

When you search FEC files, and that's what I had my team to do. I texted my team and said, listen. We're going up. They're saying the sheets --
VOICE: Similar to saying, well, your team should have done the homework to make sure it wasn't the convicted sex trafficker.

VOICE: Within 20 minutes, you couldn't find that out. The search on FEC. So number one, I made sure that I was clear, that it was a Jeffrey Epstein.

But I never said it was specifically that Jeffrey Epstein. Because I knew that we would need more time to dig in.

VOICE: Well, Stacey Plaskett was texting the Jeffrey Epstein, talking about -- you voted against the censure for her, to remove her from her committees. You know, we pressed the -- the minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries on this last night.

Maybe you don't think she should be removed from her committees. Why do so many Democrats seem unwilling to say, it's inappropriate to be texting with a registered sex offender about what you're going to ask a witness at a Congressional hearing?

VOICE: So I'm not going to say that was necessarily the case. Now, this was someone who was a former prosecutor. Now, I haven't sat down and talked about all the specifics of why Stacey was doing what she was doing.

I know that when she got up, and she spoke. She talked about the fact that this is one of her constituents. At the end of the day, what I know with prosectors, is that they are typically talking to codefendants. They're typically talking to the people who had the best information.

What you had was the former attorney for the president that was sitting there. And honestly, we knew. Or she knew or at least Jeffrey Epstein presented that he was very cozy with the president.

He had more information, registered sex offend or not. The bigger question is why is it that the president was so cozy with a sex offender. Even if he after ultimately ended up with some of his convictions.

And seemingly he absolutely was on the plane with him. We know about the birthday card. The bigger question is why is the president of the United States not the one in the hot seat for his relationship instead of us saying, oh, you know what, we're going to take her off of her committee.

Because he decided to text her.

GLENN: Stop. Stop.

I can't take this. I can't.

STU: Literally, none of the stuff she said was true.

GLENN: None of it is true. And she's presenting it as absolute fact.

CNN is presenting it as absolute fact. And the latest is the smear last week on the Epstein stuff.

It shows that Epstein that the reason he was going to jail or going through all of the problem is because Donald Trump was the whistle-blower!

I mean, it's -- it's incredible, what they can get away with.

It's absolutely incredible.

STU: All of those happened before this conviction happened. I don't know that she doesn't know that happened. It's so fascinating to watch CNN's response to that.

GLENN: Which is nothing.

STU: How many times they said, Donald Trump said this without evidence.

Where is that on the Jasmine Crockett allegations here?

GLENN: Right.

STU: How about the situation with Caitlin Collins, who at least -- I would say at least kind of asks questions here.

But she can't even take responsibility for them. She's like, oh, well, some people are saying, you shouldn't blurt out obvious lies in the middle of a House session.

Like, what do you mean some people are saying? You never say that when it's the president of the United States.

RADIO

How a Scandalous Political "Reporter" REALLY Got Her Juicy Stories | Olivia Nuzzi Exposed

Washington’s media bubble is imploding after explosive revelations that reporter Olivia Nuzzi carried on an emotional affair with RFK Jr. while covering him during the presidential race. The scandal has spiraled into leaked love letters, a derailed engagement, allegations of multiple political affairs, and a sudden firing that exposes the collapse of journalistic ethics in D.C. As new details surface involving Mark Sanford and Keith Olbermann, the story reveals a deeper truth about how power, access, and media influence really work behind the scenes.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Okay. Olivia Nuzzi. Do you know who she is?

GLENN: She's a reporter, right?
STU: Okay. Yes. Reporter. Very famous, inside DC, New York circles famous reporter.

GLENN: Lover, intellectual lover of RFK, if I'm not mistaken. Intellectual lover.

STU: Okay. Exactly. Yeah. So you remember the story.

GLENN: Not a lover lover.

STU: The story you don't know -- if you don't remember this, Glenn is referring to, is she was engaged to another reporter, Ryan Lizza, and it was revealed during this most recent presidential campaign that she was having an emotional affair of sorts with RFK Jr. Who as we -- you know, certainly has meant much to him during his life, but he is also married.

So he is -- so, I mean, he's a Kennedy. What do you expect here?

GLENN: He's a Kennedy. Yeah. Yes.

STU: He apparently, they were going back and forth, they had some sort of emotional affair going on.

And this is after she had written a profile about him.

So obviously, journalistically, there are ethical problems. As if they cared about ethical problems in journalism anymore.

This one rose to the level where she was fired. She's canned from her job.

She had this stratospheric rise in the media. She was -- remembering the time line right. She was hired. She wrote -- she was working for a campaign at one point.

She then wrote kind of an exposé of that campaign, that she worked for. And it got published in the New York Daily News.

Based off of just that, she was elevated to the main, like, political reporter at the Daily Beast, which shows you their particular standards.

She was 22, at the time, Glenn. Like, super young. This does not happen.

She wrote for a while there. People kind of like her writing. She also has the sort of throwback style. Very pretty. Kind of -- she has that mystique about her. And it was to the extent that they brought her to, I think, it was New York magazine. She wound up getting the lead political reporter job at that -- or, lead political columnist. A job they created for her. A position that did not exist previously.

And she's like 24 years old.

How has this happened?

GLENN: I think RFK has probably came up with other positions for 24-year-olds that didn't exist as well.

STU: Certainly, factually, accurate. Whether you want to say it or not, is another story, I suppose.

So, anyway, she goes through, and she breaks a lot of big stories. She's always getting odd amount of access to politicians, that you don't understand. You know, all across the spectrum.

She breaks big stories. She always has these big details about it. She writes very colorfully about all these interactions with these politicians. Anyway, this whole scandal blows up with RFK Jr.

Her -- her engagement breaks off. She kind of goes into hiding. For a year.

In that year, she's apparently writing a book. And the book comes out today.

Now, all of this could be just already an amazing salacious story. However, on the day before her book release, her ex-fiancé, also a reporter, releases a story about how he found out about all of -- all of the nonsense. Okay?

GLENN: Oh, good.

STU: And he writes that she comes back from a trip. And he uncovers some napkins from a hotel with a bunch of writing on it. Which turn out to be a love letter to the politician.

Which, again, in her book.

GLENN: Written by her.

STU: Written by her. In her book, she never says RFK Jr's name. She describes his relationship in detail. Never says the name. Just calls him "the politician."

Because I assume, because he might sue or whatever. Who knows?

You know, she doesn't want to be -- she doesn't -- she doesn't want to call him out by name. Every detail is quite clear in the book. It's quite clear it's about him.

GLENN: Yeah. She might find him in the bottom of a river.
(laughter)

GLENN: I'm just -- I'm just saying. I don't know what else could happen.

STU: The thing I love about this particular segment is that I would love to give you this story at any time.

The fact that you're deep on back medication right now is the perfect time for you to --

GLENN: I'm not on medication. I'm actually not on medication.

I'm just in so much pain, I just don't care.

STU: Whatever is making you delirious, I love it.

GLENN: Right. Got it.

STU: So the Ryna Lizza piece comes out. It's called How I Found Out. He goes through the whole details. He finds the napkins, finds the love letter, written on the napkins.

Okay. And in the love letter, it says, if I swallowed every drop of water from the tower above your house, I would still thirst for you.

Now -- I just love it.

Now, they live in DC, Glenn.

As you may know, not a lot of water towers in their home in DC. She realized, this is not a love letter to me, but someone else.

Finally, she starts going in and realizing, this is about a famous politician.

We go through the same -- goes through the whole story and finds out, there's a lot of detail about everything.

This is going to blow up their life. He realizes, it's going to be a problem. He calls his publicist, of course. This is what you do when you're one of these DC insider reporters, you call your publicist. And he says, we have a big problem.

Olivia is sleeping with Mark Sanford, a totally different politician.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STU: This is a totally different affair.

GLENN: Mark Sanford. Wasn't he -- he was in Virginia, wasn't he?

STU: No, South Carolina.

GLENN: South Carolina, that's right. That's right. Who went for a walk one day, and just never showed up.

STU: Yes! And remember, he was like, oh, he's out on the Appalachian Trail, and then they found out he was actually.

GLENN: That's right.

STU: He was actually hooking up --

GLENN: Yeah. Under a water tower.

STU: Right. With a person he called his soul mate. Which I guess that was true for a time. They got together after that old relationship got broken up. Then they got back together.

And he got together with the soul mate. Then that broke up. And then he's rerunning for president if you remember, Glenn, in 2020, against Donald Trump. And making the pitch that, you know, I'm -- I've turned my life around. At that time, apparently, allegedly, sleeping with this reporter who profiled him, same exact thing that happened with RFK Jr. Except that, you know, we don't know. At least, there's no allegations that they actually wound up consummating the RFK Jr relationship.

In the story, however, in addition to all of this, we also get additional details of a relationship that Olivia Nuzzi had when she was 21 years old with Keith Olbermann.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh.

STU: I mean, the story is almost too good to tell.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. So she's like -- what was the spy's name, you know, that was sleeping with everybody -- like Whory Harriet or something like that. I mean, is that how she gets the stories? She just sleeps with these people?

STU: I don't know. Seemingly, this does occur on a pretty regular basis in this situation.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: And, you know, we ran out of time. Tomorrow, we should do the Olbermann's part of the saga, which is absolutely fascinating.

GLENN: Oh, we must.

STU: They seem to be accusing him of something in this piece. Which is above and beyond just hooking up. So that's something we should talk about tomorrow as well.

GLENN: Oh, I will -- I'll just write it down now. I'm scheduling -- scheduling the Keith Olbermann segment for tomorrow.

TV

A Secret Cracker Barrel Warehouse Holds the Truth About the Remodel Scandal | Glenn TV | Ep 470

When Cracker Barrel began remodeling select locations and stripped away the nostalgic décor that defined its brand, customers erupted in outrage, asking: Has the poster child of Americana gone woke? The intense public backlash and financial fallout forced executives to pause their modernization plans. For the first time since the backlash, Glenn Beck gained exclusive access to the center of the controversy and Cracker Barrel’s massive warehouse of Americana antiques in Lebanon, Tennessee. There, Joe Stewart — the man tasked with telling America’s story through the chain’s iconic wall decorations — shares his reaction to the controversial remodel. Plus, Glenn unveils an exclusive first look at his no-holds-barred interview with Cracker Barrel CEO Julie Masino in her first on-camera appearance since her "Good Morning America" interview.

Watch the full interview Thursday, November 20, on BlazeTV and Glenn’s YouTube channel.