Video of the dayAugust 19, 2024

"Ezra's Eagle Prophecy" EXPLAINED: Is It About Trump, Harris, & America?

There’s a prophecy in the ancient apocryphal book of 2 Esdras that some believe is about the United States. The “Ezra’s Eagle prophecy” details a 3-headed eagle whose feathers were believed to represent a succession of Roman leaders. But “A Remnant Shall Return” author Michael Rush believes the feathers might be leaders of a powerful End Times country — specifically, America. Rush joins Glenn to lay out his interpretation of the Ezra’s Eagle prophecy, including why he believes it details the history of U.S. presidents since Herbert Hoover. But do the feathers on the Eagle’s shorter left wing represent Trump, Biden, and Kamala Harris? Was the Deep State prophesied about over 2,000 years ago? And is it even a true prophecy? Glenn and Michael break down why we may soon know for sure …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. I want to introduce to you Michael Rush.

He is an author. A Remnant Shall Return is the book that we're going to be discussing today.

And it's all about a prophecy of Ezra's eagle. And I think, Michael, you're one of the first to say, I don't know. This could all be wrong.

We won't know until, you know, it's -- it's proven right or wrong, correct?

MICHAEL: Yeah. Absolutely. In fact, I would be the first to say, that I absolutely hope that this is not true.

GLENN: Me too.

But it is -- it is pretty fascinating.

First, would you explain what the Apocrypha is, for people who don't know?

Yeah. Absolutely. So the Apocrypha is the list of 14 books.

And prior to the turn of -- just prior to the turn of the 20th century. The Church of England yanked it from all King James Bibles. But prior to that point. It was included as a supplement between the old and New Testament. From 1611, to just before the -- the 20th century. So when the Pilgrims came over, on the Mayflower. I mean, this was included in their Bible.

So it's something that, you know -- you know, a couple hundred years ago, people were much more familiar with, than they are today.

Today, you, you know, most people don't know much about it at all. The Apocrypha. Go ahead, Glenn.

GLENN: Go ahead. No, no, no. Please.

MICHAEL: Yeah. So one of the reasons why Apocrypha was called out by the Church of England, was because it has errors in it. I mean, there are historical inaccuracies and things.

So, I mean, that's one word of caution.

That should always accompany any time you're reading an Apocrypha book. It's not included in the canonite Scripture for a reason.

GLENN: Okay.

And the book of Ezra is the first book of the Apocrypha. The first and second book.

And it is a cousin or a brother of Daniel. Is that -- is that the connection?

MICHAEL: Well, so. If you look at Ezra, and Daniel, these are both people that were taken captive into Babylon. When Babylon came in and conquered Jerusalem. So they're brothers in that sense. I don't know that they're related.

But, you know, they're -- they're brothers in that Babylonian sense.

GLENN: Okay. Okay.

So there's a couple of reasons why I think people are attracted to, you know, end times prophecy.

One, because we're commanded to. To be aware of the signs of the times.

So you know what's approaching. But also, I think some people just like to dabble in this.

Because they're looking for a sign that God is aware of the situation.

And it's explainable on what's going on. Because the world makes no sense. So they're looking for a connection, to God.

So you are the only one. This -- Ezra's Eagle was known to be, or thought to be, Rome for a long time?

Is that right?

MICHAEL: Yes. That was the common belief. In fact, they attribute this to first century AD. Largely because. Because he's talking about Rome.

GLENN: Right.

But it doesn't really work for Rome. And the -- the only real question I have, on this. Is how you came up with -- well, explain what the eagle is, and what the feathers are, first.

And then we'll talk about how you assigned a date to that.

MICHAEL: Okay. So the vision starts with Ezra seeing this large eagle coming up out of the ocean. And the eagle isn't normal. It has three heads. And two massive wings. And on the right wing, it has 14 feathers. But 12 of these feathers are long. And two of them are short.

And then on the left side, there's just six little feathers. And fortunately, Ezra has this angelic guide that's with him.

And he kind of points things out to Ezra. And explains the meaning. And one of the things, that the angelic guide explains to Ezra, is that this eagle represents a powerful kingdom, that will have global domination, in the end times.

And he -- he goes on to explain, that the feathers are on the respective wings represent the leaders of this country.

And, you know, so there's -- there's 20 consecutive leaders, and they serve one after another.

So right out of the gate, you know, this is -- this is something of a time line. Have it's a countdown, beginning with the first feather, and going to a big prophetic event, that allegedly will take place in the last days.

GLENN: So it is -- it's fascinating to me, because what caught my attention, was the pegging of those feathers to US presidents, is stunning.

However, you have to take a leap of faith. Because it doesn't go all the way to back to George Washington.

I think you're the only one that has pinned. Were you the first to come up with this? To pin it to Hoover?

Yes.

MICHAEL: Yes.

GLENN: Yeah. So --

MICHAEL: Yeah. Go ahead.

GLENN: Okay. So you've -- you've pinned it to Hoover, as the first feather. And I want you to explain that. But I -- I want to make a disclosure here. This is a part where Michael and I share, and our faith.

Our faith teaches us that in the end days, there will be a secret combination. It will be, you know, basically the Deep State.

And that kind of sets the clock ticking.

And the Book of Mormon, is just history. But a -- really, an outline of what things are going to look like, as we approach the latter days.

And it's shockingly accurate, to what is happening today. And that is how you came. This is the only more mon part of it. If I'm not mistaken.

You pinning this to Hoover.

How did you get there?

MICHAEL: So really. It's pinned to Hoover because of the incredibly specific language regarding the second feather in this series. So the verbiage of the prophecies says, you know, paraphrasing, says that the second leader will serve twice as long as any other, leader of this country.

And that's before the end of his official administration.

None other would be able to serve unto the half of the time that he served

So, I mean, that's incredibly specific language. So it's really this that caused us to hone in on Hoover.

Because there's only one presence in the United States, that this could possibly be talking about.

And it's Franklin D Roosevelt. Who was elected four terms in office. He died of natural causes, in his first. Or in his fourth term.

But Congress passed the 20 Second Amendment. To the Constitution.

Before his official court term concluded, barring all future.from serving more than two years.

So, I mean, this is just what locked it in for me. Because this is incredibly specific.

GLENN: Right. Yeah. You know, when you started with FDR, and then you go through the feathers which we will in a second. It is incredibly specific. And nails our presidency, the secession of presidents, exactly.

But also, if I may, it was the council of foreign relations, that really. During the Hoover times.

That it really took a hold.

And that kind of plays a role, later. In the prophecy. When you switch to the other wing. If you will.

So explain the feathers, and how they are marked for each president.

And what lines up.

MICHAEL: Yeah. So, you know, that -- that -- it starts with Herbert Hoover.

And, you know, as you mentioned, if you Google, you know, founding members of the foreign relation. The Council on Foreign Relations.

Herbert Hoover comes up. So that's, you know, very interesting, in the context of this.

And you talked about secret combination. If you read in the Book of Revelation, in chapter 17, John sees this amazing vision of the horror of Babylon.

And I -- I think that this is what is the underlining context. Of what's going on, in this vision.

It's not so much a vision about these presidents, as it is the rise and infiltration of this country by this whore of Babylon. And that's why, it starts with Herbert Hoover in my opinion.

So then it goes through. There's, as I said, there's 14 feathers on the right side.

And, you know, this -- these 14 feathers seem to be counting down.

And the specific, you know, language of the prophecy, gives some other very curious information with regards to two short feathers, that would be amongst these 14. And the specific language is that by the time you see the second of these two feathers, you'll be approaching the midpoint of this time line.

So when you look at, you know, starting with Herbert Hoover.

GLENN: Herbert Hoover. It's hard.

MICHAEL: Yeah. Herbert Hoover. I go to the 14th president, Barack Obama.

So when you look in there, for two presidents, who have -- were short feathers.

Meaning, in the verbiage of the prophecy. A short feather is someone who has had their administration cut short by contrary or nefarious, means.

And I attribute that to the -- you know, involvement of this whore of Babylon terminating their presidency, prematurely.

So you look at this list. And you go. You know, it jumps right out at you.

That you've got JFK. Who was assassinated.

Ask then you have Richard Nixon, who was force Todd resign.

Now, as you go through this time line, Richard Nixon is 45 years into it.

And the prophecy again says. When you see the second of these -- you'll be halfway through this time line.

And then you look at Barack Obama. Well, that was about 43 years later.

So that, again, just matches up, perfectly, with, you know, what Ezra is talking about here.

So not only do you have the -- you know, the FDR, and these two short -- you also have these two short feathers. And it's really hard for me to just kind of brush those things aside. And say, yeah.

This is -- this is really just talking about Rome or something else. Because it's so applicable to American history. Somewhere, yeah. And again, that doesn't mean that it's right. It just means that so far, it's nailed everything in the prophecy.

But the second part of the prophecy, when you get specifically to Donald Trump and now this administration, and then what happens from here, is stunning.

And, you know, five years ago, I would have said, well, that's going to be hard.

I could see all of this happening. I could also see it not happening.

But it's not a far stretch to think that these next few feathers, if you will. These next few events that Ezra talks about, in Apocrypha. It's -- it's plausible, and possible that it comes.

GLENN: We're talking to Michael Rush. He's an author of the book, A Remnant Shall Return. Which has been out for a long time, but has now started sweep, at least in my community, in Idaho, and people are talking about it. And they say the same thing.

Everybody says, I have no idea, if this is real. But it is fascinating, how it all lines up.

And I really appreciate Michael, your approach on this too.

That you're saying, I could be wrong.

I hope it's wrong. But it is interesting to look at.

So you get to Barack Obama. And then you start to get up to Donald Trump. And in these feathers, that are on this one wing of Ezra's eagle. It's showing all the presidents. And in the last one, on one side, would be Donald Trump.

Right?

MICHAEL: Correct. So with -- the first 14 feathers are on the right side of the eagle. And so now Donald Trump is the first feather on the left wing of an eagle.

GLENN: Okay.

MICHAEL: And the -- all of the -- the thing that all of the feathers on the left side of the eagle has is they're all short.

Meaning, if my interpretation of this is true, all of their administrations will be cut short by the machinations of this whore of Babylon.

GLENN: And Donald Trump, you could only say his -- he was cut short, if he was to serve two terms. And there was nefarious purposes. Right? Because he served his whole term.

MICHAEL: Well, so -- this is where you have to look at, what this means. To be cut short.

Does it mean, you only have one term?

Does it refer to the length of office?

And I don't think that's what defines a short feather. Because you have, you know, long feather presidents that serve one term or two terms. I think that the definition of what makes a feather short --

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

MICHAEL: -- is whether the Deep State terminated their presidency.

So when you look at -- and we're talking about a prophecy that is at least 2,000 years old. So it is so eerie how it mirrors these things. So when you look at -- go ahead.

GLENN: And especially, I don't mean to interrupt, but we will have to break in a second. Especially -- I don't know if you saw the news this week. that now they're coming out on the news on Nixon. That it looks like the Deep State and the CIA actually was responsible for the break-in. And the Nixon resignation. That it -- it actually was a Deep State operation. And they're responsible for cutting his time short. That news just came out this week. More in just a minute.

So Arlene who lives in California, used to suffer from aches and pains throughout her entire body. Pretty much all the time. Eventually, it got so bad, that she could barely get out of bed in the morning. Then one day, she heard the silver-haired just golden tones of this guy coming to her, on the radio. And he was like, I mean -- I just think he's great. And he's in the Hall of Fame and Stu isn't. Anyway, she said, if it would have been those amateurs at NPR. Or maybe even Stu. Well, she may not have even tried it.

But because it was that guy. She said, that guy is probably worth a shot. So she ordered it. And what can I say?

Within a week or two, Arlene -- she said, she was starting to spring out of her bed in the morning. Her pain was almost completely gone. That silver-tongued devil man. That radio host sure know what he was talking about. It's Relief Factor. 100 percent drug-free daily supplement, that helps your body fight pain naturally. Developed by -- Arlene didn't say any of that, by the way. It uses a unique formula of natural ingredients that addresses the inflammation. So get it right now. Go to ReliefFactor.com. 800-4-Relief.

ReliefFactor.com.

STU: And head over to BlazeTV.com/Glenn. Use the promo code Fauci lied. Get 30 bucks off.
(OUT AT 10:29 AM)

GLENN: So 2,000 years ago, there was a prophecy. By Ezra. Ezra is mentioned in the -- no. He's not. No. Ezra is the first two books of the Apocrypha. And he talked about a great empire, that is going to be destroyed, near the end times. And he describes seeing this empire coming out of the ocean. Which is interesting. And it rises out. It has three heads. And it has a bunch of feathers on one side. And very few feathers on the other side. This lines up now, according to Michael Rush. And I have read this over and over again from a really old copy of the Apocrypha, and it does line up. And if you start with Hoover, it goes and nails FDR. It -- it says, there will be -- their time in office or in control will be cut short. And that one is JFK and Richard Nixon. And then Donald Trump, cut short as well.

Now, what happens after that, Michael?

MICHAEL: Yeah. So one other thing that I think is important to bring up about this vision. Is that Ezra heard the eagle speaking. But the voice, or the sound wasn't coming from its head. So it was coming from its bowels.

And the -- and his angelic guide goes, Ezra, did you notice that? Did you notice the voice that is coming from this country's bowels?

This signifies that this country will be in a period of great distress, and at the point of collapse. So that's -- that is a very interesting additional, you know, background to what we're going to talk about next.

GLENN: Okay.

MICHAEL: So we're now talking about the first short feather on the left side of this eagle, the left wing, which would be the presidency of Donald Trump.

Which according to this vision, his presidency would have been to have cut short. And I believe, by the intervention of the whore of Babylon, or the American Deep State. So you have the 2020 election. Which, you know, whatever you think happens there. One thing is for sure. That it was the most, you know, contested election in probably American history.

You had over 10 percent of states. And alternate delegates. To the electoral college.

That's never happened at that scope before.

And their explanation? You know, they said there's widespread fraud in those states.

So it's -- if you just -- you know, oh. He started four terms. That's it. This prophecy is fake.

Okay.

But if you look at it from that perspective, then you would have to say, okay.

Trump was a short feather because this election, there was something, you know, not right with it. And it was stolen.

GLENN: You could even not use the election. But you could talk about how he had been thwarted the entire time. By the Deep State.

And even COVID. That he didn't accomplish all of the things that he was set to accomplish. Because of the interference of the Deep State. So you could read it that way as well.

But I hate to make. You know, let's not water this down even more. You know, if it's -- if it's accurate, we'll see.

Because what happens next?

MICHAEL: So next. Again, we have some very specific language here. It says that the next short feather, which would have to be Joe Biden.

Says that his time in office. He's away, even faster than Trump was.

So when you're looking at current events.

You know, right now.

This is -- this is very timely.

Right.

There are many people who think that Joe Biden hasn't been calling the shots for a long phylum

GLENN: Right.

MICHAEL: So it's just very curious. But then the very next thing that it says, is that there will be two that -- short feathers, that think in their hearts, to be set up.

So they're just thinking about it.

In my mind, this means, they want to be the president, but they are not set up. So we're talking about. We could be talking about an election scenario here. And in that case, you would be talking about Kamala and Trump again.

And the specific verbiage is, that as they are so thinking in their hearts, the three heads of the eagle awake and devour them. And then they take control of the country from that point forward.

And --

GLENN: So does this have to happen before January 20th?

MICHAEL: Well, so January 20th would be when you would swear in the next president of the United States.

GLENN: President, right.

MICHAEL: So for Biden to be away sooner than Trump, then, yeah.

It -- if Biden, you know, completes this, then I -- I don't know how you could, you know, say on its face, that this prophecy was correct.

GLENN: Right.

MICHAEL: Again, this is -- this is from the Apocrypha.

GLENN: Right.

MICHAEL: But how it lines up, is astounding.

GLENN: Remarkable.

However, like you just said, we're going to know, one way or another, if -- if Joe Biden doesn't make it to the 20th. That's a point I guess in its favor. I hate to say, you know -- is a really bad thing.

Because then the next thing, and do they serve or not? So this would have to happen before a swearing in too. Where the Deep State would devour those two, right?

MICHAEL: Correct. So basically, what this prophecy is -- if it is real, what it's saying is that their -- you know, whoever wins the election, will not be set up as president. They will be devoured.

Something will happen. What that is, I don't know. If this is true, we'll know when it happens.

But it will put the three heads of this -- said another way. The leadership of this Deep State will now be calling the shots overtly.

GLENN: Deep State. Known to everyone.

MICHAEL: Known. Yeah. There are no more masks, they're not operating behind the scenes.

GLENN: Okay. So now if you thought that was a trip to fun land, wait until you hear what happens to the heads of the eagle.

Unpacking SCOTUS's Latest EMBARRASSING Decision On USAID Funding

In a devastating ruling by the Supreme Court that 'shocked' Justice Alito, two GOP judges sided with the Democrats to undo President Trump's executive order, which froze $2 billion in USAID funding. This is what's at stake here: $2 billion of YOUR tax dollars potentially funding anti-American agendas or worse, with no accountability thanks to the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act diluting responsibility. This raises the question—who truly controls government? Congress as the chef, the President as manager, or an overreaching Supreme Court as food inspector? President Trump MUST continue to fight back with the DOJ while eyeing a Scalia-like justice to fix a possibly rigged system. ENOUGH with these wishy-washy judges, Glenn argues. We need a BULLDOG.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. I want to dive into the US Supreme Court decision on restoring USA funding. I think this is grotesque. But it's a conversation we need to have. And it doesn't end with, we're not going to listen to the Supreme Court. It leads right to, please, Donald Trump, make sure you're finding a Scalia, as our next Supreme Court justice, if you get to appoint one.

The question is: Who really holds the reins of our government? Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruling came out, and they really didn't -- because it was a quick turnaround, it's not a full reading of what everybody was saying.

And I want to know exactly how they made this decision. But we saw justice Amy Coney Barrett side with John Roberts, and the court's liberal ring, what a surprise there, and it was against the -- Trump's administration to push to freeze $2 billion. $2 billion. You and everyone you know, maybe everyone you've ever met, everybody that lives in the same town as you, will never pay $2 billion in income tax.

So $2 billion in foreign aid.

And the dissent came from conservative justices like Clarence Thomas. Samuel Alito. Gorsuch. Brent Kavanaugh.

Now, this was -- I mean, Scalia talked a lot about this.

And let me -- let me break it down, in this way.

The federal government is like a giant kitchen.

Congress is the head chef. Okay? They write the recipes, and then order all of the raw ingredients, laws, and the budgets. Got it?

The President is the kitchen and manager of the chef, and all of the kitchen.

He decides, how do we execute this?

How do we do this?

And the Supreme Court is really, the food inspector, who is called in, when there's, you know, worry about food poisoning.

You know, botulism. Something really bad, that the restaurant was never supposed to put out. That's what it's supposed to be. In this case, President Trump on his first day back in office, he signed an executive order, to freeze $2 billion in USA funding. Okay. Why?

Because he suspects deep corruption. So the money Congress had already earmarked for foreign aid, which is their job. It gets blown out of the water. Now, his team said, let's look for waste, fraud, and abuse.

Now, that comes right from his campaign promises. That's what he was elected to do. He was very career about DOGE.

The nonprofit groups, sued. And a lower court judge ordered the funds to be unblocked. And in the Supreme Court, yesterday, 5-4 split. They upheld that order.

Now, what? The ruling said, basically, you can't just hit pause on Congress.

Okay?

They've come up with a recipe. They've ordered all the goods. Unless the law explicitly lets you, the president. Now, I think it does.

Really, so does Thomas and Alito and Kavanaugh.

They said, he's the administrator. He's the one.

He's the one who said, no, no, no, no.

Wait. I think there may be some sort of botulism in some of these ingredients.

I'm not putting them into the food. The administrator, does he have leeway to manage the funds and root out corruption? Especially, since the executive branch is tasked with, quote, faithfully executing the laws. Faithfully executing the laws.

Amy Coney Barrett, Trump appointee from last time, surprised a lot of people. Me, not so much.

She didn't write a separate opinion here, but her vote suggests a real narrow view of executive power, that I don't think the Founders ever really saw this, as.

Scalia worry alive might have dissented and gone the way of Alito and Gorsuch, because he always railed against judicial overreach. There was a court case back in the '80s. Morrison versus Olsen. He warned, letting courts micromanage executive discretion.

I'm quoting! Enfeebles the President's Constitutional role. What does that mean?

The -- the President oversees his domain.
Congress oversees their domain. And there can't be any judicial meddling in this, unless the Constitution or Congress clearly says so. Okay.

Congress allocated the funds.

And no law gave Trump the unilateral freeze button.

That's what she said!

Here's it -- here's the problem.

Here's how I think of it now. How I think you should think of it.

Think of your family.

You are running a family budget. You and your spouse, that's Congress, agree to spend $500 at a kid's summer camp. Okay?

But you and your wife, for some reason, are really busy. And so you hand the $500 over to your brother. The president.

And you're like, I want you to pay the camp director.

And send him to summer camp. And then you're out.

And then you find out, that the brother is holding on to that $500. Of course! You're like, wait a minute. I gave you the $500 to send our kid to summer camp.

And your brother says, wait a minute!

The camp is way overcharging.

Or worse, it's a scam!

Or even worse, they actually stand against everything your family, you, your son. Everything you tried to teach him.

Everything you want!

I couldn't in good conscience, give this $500 to them. Because it's corrupt!

Are you cool, or are you mad that your -- I told you, it had to be spent on this!

Are you going, thank God, or do you say, you have no right to do that!

I want my money going to that corrupt camp. Even if they're abusing my child. Of course not!

That's the oversight of the administrator! That's this case, in a nutshell. That's what Trump is arguing. And that's what Trump should be giving. The problem is, it's not a family of three or four or five. It's a family of 330 million people. And the cash is yours!

Do you want it to go to anti-American or changing mice, you know, one sex to the other? Do you want that?

Because I, as a family member, and 330 million people, I'm kind of pissed of that. Maybe you're not. I am.

STU: Glenn, at any point, the mom and dad can send that money directly to the camp.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: All they have to do is instead of doing this BS thing that they're doing.

Which is like, here's a big pile of money. And we want generally, this thing to happen.

They can just write in the laws, that they passed. Exactly where the money needs to go. And what needs to go there. That is complete.

They have the power. The Congress has all of this ability.

GLENN: As according to the Constitution. But the progressives, the progressives have changed all of that!

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: They passed in 1946, the Administrative Procedure Act. I don't know what that is. You ever heard of that?

Really, super important. It creates a fourth branch of government that's neither executive or legislative. It's just kind of out there in limbo. Why?

Because it dilutes the power of president. And it takes Congress out of the hot seat. They don't want to be blamed by you for something.

They -- is anyone taking responsibility for the cash that we know is being funneled into, you know, nefarious purposes?

Nobody in Congress is being held responsible for it.

Why? Because they did exactly what Stu said!

I was just giving to that agency. I don't have anything to say about the agency. I said, we should send it over there, because I thought they were doing this.

And then if the president doesn't have the power to say, wait a minute, you're not spending that money. Then you can't even blame him. Who do you blame?

Who is responsible for earmarking that money to go to those specifics groups?

Somebody you've never met. Somebody whose name you have never seen. Somebody who will never go to jail or be held responsible, even if they're funneling it to nefarious camps.

That's what this is really all about.
And when the people truly understand that, and realize, there is no check on the judicial branch. The judicial branch is supposed to just make the decisions. No, that's not in the Constitution.

But instead, we've changed all of these things, through law. That are -- those laws are unconstitutional.

Because they -- they destroy the checks and balances of the three branches.

But what are we going to do? Are we going to be like the Democrat?

Nope! Just do it anyway!

We say to the president of the United States right now, you let the DOJ, if they force you to spend this money. You sic the DOJ on them, and you track every dollar. You find anybody who is wasting our money. Anybody who is doing anything nefarious.

And you march them out in orange jumpsuit in shackles, and you throw their ass in jail. And then you wait for one of these people, in the Supreme Court, to die of natural causes!

Did you hear that, lefties? To die of natural causes.

And then you find the biggest constitutional pit bull. And you put them on the court!

That's the way Americans handle it.

Glenn Beck’s Reaction to Trump’s REVOLUTIONARY Speech to Congress

In his first speech to Congress as the 47th president, Donald Trump made it clear that America is back! And the polls reflect it, with CBS News finding that 76% of respondents approved of Trump’s speech. Glenn and Stu discuss why this number may be so high: maybe more Republicans watched, or maybe it was just a great, optimistic speech. But many Democrats in Congress and the Legacy Media still deny that Americans gave Trump a mandate to restore America in the 2024 election. So, Glenn and Stu review the data. Plus, they highlight some other big moments during the speech, including Trump’s decision to list out the many, many crazy things that DOGE found our government is funding.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Anyway, he came out and he said, it's unbelievable. America is back! And it just felt that way.

STU: Seems like the audience thought that too.

I mean, the polls. Every guest on the show has mentioned the CBS poll today.

GLENN: Mainly because it's very satisfying.

STU: Yeah. I would say usually those polls typically don't work well for Republicans. Like, who won the debate? It's almost always Democrats, even when it's obvious Republicans won the debate. That was one of the reasons you knew Trump won the debate against Biden so easily. Because the polling actually showed he won it.

Even when -- if it's -- if a Republican wins, it usually just shows Republicans still win those polls.

GLENN: I know.

STU: It's kind of the same feeling I had with this one. And I'm part of it. I think there's several factors. Let me run these by you real quick, on this.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: So one is one of the first things people saw in that speech, was Al Green disrupting it. And people hate that. They --

GLENN: They do.

STU: Yes. The hard-core super AOC fans will like it.

And Al Green will get lots of donations because of his, quote, unquote, bravery. Standing up. Resistance.

Blah, blah, blah. It will work for Al Green. But the incentives here are screwed up. It works against his party. And it works for Donald Trump as well.

GLENN: It had. It does.

STU: So I think part of the reason, a lot of people probably watched the first 15 minutes, and that's it.

And they saw that, and they were annoyed by him.

GLENN: Yeah, they were annoyed. It's the same crap.

STU: Let it go. Let's see what he says.

You're wasting my time!

GLENN: I feel like that on the applause.

I hate the applause. I rather have the cut version with all the applause out.

Because I get it. I get it. I get it.

Just please. I want somebody to say, ladies and gentlemen, the president of the United States. Please save your applause to the end.

STU: Yeah, I would like the first line of that speech to be from the President. To be like, look, I've got a lot to get through. Please, don't applause, but it's hard. It's a trapping of that thing.

GLENN: I know. I know.

STU: Secondarily, people are speculating, just like when we don't really want to watch the Biden State of the Union, maybe a lot of Democrats didn't tune in. So the group watching it were more Republican. CBS did this poll. They should be correcting for that. I have not gone through the methodology of that poll. It shouldn't be the factor. If it is the factor, it's a really sloppy job by CBS. The other thing though is I think what you're getting at, is that number one, it was pretty optimistic. It wasn't the American carnage speech from 2017. It was a really optimistic speech.

GLENN: Right.

STU: You know, as much as we -- you know, as jaded media members get a little tired of, oh, here's 19 people in the audience. Who will tell their stories.

I do think that connects with people. A lot of those stories are really compelling.

GLENN: Those did.

GLENN: And inspiring.

STU: Yeah. So I think it was -- I think he did a good job which was part of it. Maverick and also, I think the democratic opposition as it usually does, backfired.

GLENN: So -- in a big way.

Because this is one of the things they are saying.

This is what Al Green is talking about. He said, he didn't have awe mandate.

That's what he was shouting from the floor. Because I didn't know. Nor, did I know what he was saying.

You don't have a mandate. And I have my cane. And I will scream at the moon, any minute.

But he said, you know, you don't have a mandate. This is something that the left is -- is trying out. That there was no mandate. Listen to Stephen A. Smith, as he schools The View on the mandate thing.

VOICE: And he's been going around with his cronies, touting his so-called landslide and blowout. When? When you get 1.5 percent popular vote, one of the smallest ever. And he won the general election by less than 15 percent. So what kind of mandate is this really?

VOICE: Oh, it is a mandate. And I am going to explain why, and I don't mind the -- I'm no supporter of Trump. I'm a supporter of truth and the facts. And here's the facts: The man won every swing state. He increased in terms of his voter turnout in his favor, from the standpoint of blacks, Latinos, and young voters. He increased his numbers in that regard from 2020. Eighty-nine percent of the counties shifted to the right. That's a mandate. We can sit around play around all we want to. In 2020, they didn't -- Trump didn't win the popular vote. He didn't win the electoral vote. As a matter of fact, the Republicans hadn't won the popular vote if I remember --

VOICE: Twenty years.

VOICE: -- since 2024. But they did this year. So 20 years after they last one a popular vote, they won the popular vote. They won the electoral college vote. The man won every swing state, and on top of that, 89 percent of the counties. Shifted gears. I don't understand how people can look at that and say, there's no mandate. There's a mandate.

VOICE: Well, it's a different definition of a mandate, I guess.

GLENN: It's my definition of a mandate. You know, you've got to go with mandate. We're The View. We make up our own definitions for words.

STU: I mean, I think two things can be true of this too. I think you can recognize, it was a relatively close election. It wasn't Reagan versus Mondale. It's not what it was.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: But it can still be a mandate.

He did shift all these democratic groups.

Firm correctly, every single state, shifted towards him.

Now, that doesn't mean he won all the states obviously.

But the states shifted towards Republicans.

So, you know, that's a big movement.

And I think a mandate is fair in this context.

He did win every swing state. Again, those swing states weren't blowouts.

It wasn't a 12-point victory in Michigan.

VOICE: 89 percent of the counties moved his way.

And look, you have to add one thing to this.

And that is, that's after an eight-year period of everyone, with any kind of voice or power, saying, he's a criminal. He's a sex abuser.

Whatever they could come up with.

That's all they said about him.

And his support grows!

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Can you imagine if they would have just treated him, like they treated Ronald Reagan. Which they treated Ronald Reagan poorly. She's stupid. He didn't get it.

Blah, blah, blah. But he never did this. Nobody has ever gone through this. For that to move and him to grow. And him to have the whole thing just kind of switch over. Win the popular vote.
Win the electoral college. That is a mandate.

STU: I think that's totally fair.

You know, I think if you look at it. I think Biden won in 2020, the popular vote by something like four, four and a half percent, something like that. And it moved to 1.5 percent for Trump. Six-point move.

The current American system, which is pretty polarized when it comes to party. That is a massive shift. That is not a tiny little thing. And I think that totally qualifies as a mandate. That doesn't mean, it wasn't a close election.

Again, Trump had to win, one of those blue wall states. The biggest blowout of the blue wall states was 2 percent. We could have been stuck with Kamala Harris right now. That was not crazy. It was close.

That can said, what he's done here, and I think how -- the way he did it, which was as Stephen A. Smith points out, moving a lot of demographic groups, that don't normally consider Republicans, as part of that large move toward him. I think it would be silly to deny him. They want to do that because they want to deny that anything happening is supported by anyone, other than evil Nazis. But that's not the reality here.

GLENN: Yes. And it's not even Donald Trump. You know, you could say some of that movement came because the Democrats are so out of step with reality.

STU: Yeah. I think it's a big part of it.

GLENN: People are like, I can't vote for the other side.

STU: I think that's a huge part of it.

GLENN: I think that's huge, and they're just doubling down on it again.

STU: And we're talking about an election, where we have, what? A two-seat majority in Congress.

You know, it's close, relatively close in the Senate.

This is -- you know, we're at a very divided time in government. And I don't mean that, as far as -- everyone is polarized.

I mean, like, it's close. We are in a close period.

And that's kind of one of the things, that's been remarkable about this first six weeks.

He's been able to get through a lot.

Maintained his popularity, generally. Even though, we're in a situation that is that divided.

And that's one of the most impressive parts of the first six weeks.

GLENN: Let me show you, again, one of the reasons why I think he was so effective last night.

He's not -- he's not vengeful.

He's not making enemies lists. He's not doing anything like that.

He's just speaking the truth.

Listen to this, where he's talking about Joe Biden.

DONALD: And we've ended weaponized government. Where as an example, a sitting president is allowed to viciously prosecute his political opponent, like me. How did that work out? Not too good. Not too good.

GLENN: I mean, that is fantastic. Fantastic.

He -- the other thing I think is -- was so good. And I want to play both of these on my sheet. It's cut 24. Trump lays out some of the waste DOGE is discovered. I want to play this. Because I think the guy could be a comedian, and a really good comedian.

His timing is so incredibly good. His ad libs are hysterical. Listen to him talk about the waste.

DONALD: Just listen to some of the appalling waste, we have already identified. $22 billion from HHS to provide free housing and cars for illegal aliens.

$45 million for diversity, equity, and inclusion. Scholarships in Burma. $40 million to improve the social and economic inclusion of sedentary migrants. Nobody knows what that means.

$8 million to promote LGBTQIA+ in the African nation of Lesotho, which nobody has ever heard of.

GLENN: This is so good.

DONALD: $60 million for indigenous peoples and Afro-Colombian empowerment in Central America.

GLENN: Afro-Colombian.

DONALD: $8 million for making mice transgender. This is real.

$32 million for a left-wing propaganda operation in Moldova. $10 million for male circumcision in Mozambique. $20 million for the Arab Sesame Street in the Middle East. It's a program. $20 million for a program.

$1.9 billion to recently created decarbonization of homes committee, headed up, and we know she's involved, just at the last moment. The money was passed over, by a woman named Stacey Abrams. Have you ever heard of her?

GLENN: I think they're going to investigate. I think she might go to jail.

DONALD: A 3.5-million-dollar consulting contract for lavish fish monitoring. $1.5 million for voter confidence in Liberia. $14 million for social cohesion in Mali. $59 million for illegal alien hotel rooms in New York City.

These are real state -- he's done very well. 250,000 dollars to increase vegan local climate action innovation. In Zambia. $42 million for social and behavior change in Uganda. $14 million for approving public procurement in Serbia. $47 million for improving learning outcomes in Asia. Asia is doing very well with learning.
(laughter)
I don't know what we're doing. We could use it ourselves. And $101 million for DEI contracts at the Department of Education. The most ever paid, nothing even like it. Under the Trump administration, all of these scams and there are far worse. But I didn't think it was appropriate to talk about them.

GLENN: It's -- it was an amazing, amazing list that common sense ruled the night, including when he talked about the border. Listen to this.

DONALD: The media and our friends in the Democrat Party kept saying, we needed new legislation. We must have legislation to secure the border.

But it turned out, that all we really needed was a new president.
(laughter)

GLENN: Unbelievable.

STU: The listing quickly of all of the different things went on and on and on and on. And it reminded me of Family Guy. You know the cartoon Family Guy? There's a scene where there's a dead frog in his room. He's trying to scoop it up, and push it out the window like a piece of cardboard. And every time he does it, the frog kind of flops off and keeps coming down. And it goes on and on and on and on. And after a while, it just becomes so funny, because it goes on so long. And that's how I felt in that moment. He could have used three of those examples, and made a point. But he just beat it into your head. This is insanity and it has to stop.

Why Trump MUST PREPARE for AI to TRANSFORM Warfare

Artificial intelligence, especially once it hits ASI, will change the world as we know it, including warfare. So, why is the Pentagon investing so much in designing new weapons when AI will make everything obsolete in the blink of an eye? Glenn makes the case that there are smarter things for the Trump administration to invest in to prepare for the AI revolution that’s right around the corner.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Who creates jobs. What's happening with the economy. We will get into that here in a second. But Stu, when we went off the air here, in the commercial break, he was like, I don't know if I agree with you on what I'm saying is, freeze all of the big spending. Do not start any new airplane design at the Pentagon that is a ten-year contract. That most likely will be a waste of money!

Because AGI and ASI is coming! And that will change everything. It will change warfare. Just will!

Drones, five help you dollars each, have already changed warfare. We have to be preparing for the future. And that future is much more nimble, much smaller, and I have a feeling, much cheaper.

STU: Are you concerned about a bridge here, though? We don't know when this is coming, we don't know how it's going to develop. We don't know what it will look like. No one does.

So, you know, we still need the best planes while planes are important.

GLENN: Right. But you don't need to start any new. Fix what we have. You know, finish what you've got in production.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But you don't need to sit down and okay a new design for a new fighter jet.

STU: It's a big bet though. You are making a big bet on ASI and AGI with no backup plan. Why wouldn't you still want to have the best planes in your arsenal?

GLENN: I think, you know, look, let's look at it this way. Our generation's Manhattan project is AI, ASI.

Back with when FDR was convinced by Einstein. He didn't believe it could happen.

And Einstein came in and said, listen. I'm from Germany. They will do it! And so he convinced him. Go ahead. Build this bomb.

It was magical.

Nobody knew that we could even get there.

You know, we could split the Atom, but what does that mean? Can we actually make a bomb that can work? We put everything we had into it, and we continued to build planes and everything else. Because we were currently fighting a war. And we didn't know if that would happen. Up until the very last moment, when they said, dear God, what have we done?

Okay? This yen radiation, it's going to end the same way. In three to five years. Except, this time, we know it's going to happen. Almost everybody who was a naysayer on ASI, almost all of them are now saying, oh, dear God. Yes. It's coming. And it's coming much faster than we thought.

It will be here by 2030. Most likely, it will be here in the next three years. Now, if that time continues to collapse, I mean, just in the last five years, it's gone from 2050, maybe.

To now 2028, 2029.

If that continues to collapse like that. We're -- we're at the event horizon of the singularity. So we know it's going to happen.

Our job is to just bridge the gap as much as possible. But don't build things that we don't know are -- here's what -- here's what our Pentagon should be doing right now.

Building nuclear power plants. Our army Corps of Engineers should be building those little teeny nuclear power plants. Build as many as they possibly can. You don't even to have start them up yet.

Just have them ready to go. So when the server farms are ready. When everything. When AI is there, we can power it.

We won't have the power to be able to have ASI think and affect. We have to start thinking towards the future. Not what's the next generation of fighter jet look like?

There ain't going to be one, attitude. There's just not. At least with a person in it.

STU: Right. Because it will still have -- I mean, AI will probably come up with something that flies.

GLENN: Yeah. It will be hypersonic. It might even be of a new material.

Here's what people don't understand.

ASI will look at the period okay table of elements. And say, guys, shuffle the deck this way. And you have a material that will go 900 miles an hour. It will hold up under the heat and the friction. It won't bend.

It's perfect!

And it's only a quarter of the weight!

And, by the way, here's the formula. And you don't to give and test it for two years. It's correct! Do it!

I mean, that's how fast things are going to happen, once they start happening. And, Stu, this scares the hell out of me. Because you know how I feel about AI.

STU: Yeah, I was going to ask you, because AI obviously has a lot of potential negative consequences. And if we're putting the government. The military in control of that. Does that scare you?

GLENN: No. I'm not saying that we put the government in control of it.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: We have to balance all of this. But the government is already involved in it.

I'm saying, let the government build like power plants. Build the things that we know the country is going need to, the infrastructure, to be able to handle this.

Build the things that we say, we've got it, we can turn it opposite

STU: Yeah. Get prepared for whatever is coming here. I think, I guess, I'm concerned. This is from a guy I have talked to for 20 years, who continually repeats the phrase. I'm always wrong about timing. I'm concerned about that bridge period.

Because I think you're probably coming. It is coming really, really fast. But if something happens. If something goes off course.

You don't know. We need to be prepared for that bridge period.

PAT: How do we spend 877 billion dollars every single year, every year, China spends 200 some billion dollars every year.

And it's that close? If it's that close, you know, we have other problems.

STU: You're just saying, we should sort of rest on our laurels a little bit and just say, hey, we already have the best technology. We already have the best military. Let's not try to develop new things until this AI thing comes.

GLENN: Right. They're developing new stuff as well. Great. Great.

Let's give some time to AI. Let's not double our work. Let's not spend money, now on things that most likely. Don't build another aircraft carrier. Don't design another F57. Tonight do it. It's not going to. You have no idea what's coming!

Fix the stuff we have.

Make sure we have the amnesty. Make sure we have the latest and the greatest, that's already here! Don't do R&D on that stuff.

Don't do it!

And, by the way, you can't tell me, that again, $900 billion overlet's say 250. Or let's say 300 for China.

Okay. We spend three times the amount every year. And we're not competitive?

I don't believe that. And if it is, everybody in the Pentagon should go to jail.

STU: I do think, we're certainly competitive.

GLENN: Of course, we are.

STU: To me, I think there's a lot of bolder projects. There's a bunch of crap in our military.

That tough is our higher priority target, let's put it that way. Then eliminating potential limitations in these fields.

Even though, I know what you're saying. They might be obsolete in a few years.

GLENN: And you will to have come in front of a committee, that is like filled with Elon Musks. And say, here's the pitch!

I don't want the decision to be made by the senators or the generals at this point.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Here's the pitch. Here's why we think this fits with tomorrow's technology.

STU: And they won't be in an adviser role. But we do have a system of government to follow.

GLENN: Yeah. I know. But they should be the ones saying, don't do that, Senator. Don't do that. That's stupid. If they want to do that. We'll vote them out.

We will all know which ones are doing it. Because they're funneling money to their friends.

STU: Part of this comes to the way I think about government spending. Government spending is always worse than the private sector.

GLENN: Huh.

STU: Which is a very basic conservative point. Right?

I think though, the one time, that you -- obviously, constitutionally, you have certain powers, the government spends.

Defense is one of them.

That they will typically be responsible for.

The way I look at it, is government can do some things relatively well.

If you don't care about efficiency. Businesses do. Right?

So they will -- they will not take certain risks, that, you know, have a low percentage chance of paying off.

And the idea that maybe you come up a nuclear bomb.

And you're able to stop global wars for multiple decades.

You know, a private company. You know, like -- very -- certainly, they shouldn't be coming with nuclear bombs. You know what I'm saying. That type of risk. That type of expenditure. That will likely fail. Is the type of thing that the government can take on.

Because when you don't care about efficiency. When you don't care about. Hey, we tried 25 things. Twenty-four of them failed. That's okay.

GLENN: Look. Private industry should be doing this, leading this. But the government is already in bed. DARPA is already doing this. The CIA is the one who helped fund the Silicon Valley in the 1960s. Please, let's get over our little illusion, that they're not involved in any of this.

Let me give you an example, on something the president I hope will talk about tonight: The private sector versus big government and Biden spending spree. What Trump is doing, and what Biden did.

The president has been in for 40 days. I've never seen anything like this, in 40 days.

So he's been in office for 40 days. And the numbers he's bringing into the economy, are staggering. Yesterday.

Taiwan, semi conductors. Which is the greatest news you could possibly hear, if you understand what this means. Taiwan makes all of the best semi conductors and super conductors. And they're dropping $100 billion to build chip factories here in America. Apple, 500 billion over four years, to crank up its manufacturing.

Think Texas server plants, not sweatshops.

SoftBank is in for 100 billion on AI. UAE is tossing 20 billion into data centers. That's $700 billion in private sector commitments. Now, some people are saying that it's as high as 1.7 trillion.

But I can't track those numbers, and get -- I can get a lot of rumors. A lot of, yeah, maybe.

But I don't have -- this is real. This is almost a trillion dollars. Remember, our -- the investment for Barack Obama, the reinvestment act. Was 787 billion. This is 720 billion. All coming, want from tax dollars. Not coming from government IOUs. But real money from companies all over the world. That are betting on America.

This number, like I said, can be verified. And they're not handouts.

Now, just the investment from TCMC, could mean 40,000 construction jobs.

And 6,000 high-tech gigs. Apple, thousands.

This is the private sector.

Not because Uncle Sam wrote a check. But because Trump demanded the same rules on tariffs, for everyone.

We're going to charge you, what you charge us!

That is fair on any playground, anywhere in the world!

And then he sweetened the deal by cutting the red tape and the tax advantages that no other country will offer. And said, build it here.

Bring those jobs here.

We're a stable country. We're the future.

Financial Expert WARNS: Why Trump’s Tariffs are a Risky Game

Inflation is still up, prices are still high, GDP is now predicted to decrease, and the Legacy Media is, of course, blaming President Trump and his tariffs. But financial expert Carol Roth makes the case that they KNEW this was coming. The economy is still reeling from Biden-era spending. That’s why Glenn advises Trump to demand in his first Address to Congress that Congress pass a budget with a bare minimum of a trillion dollars in cuts. But Carol also gives a warning: she believes that DOGE’s cutting and Trump’s tariffs could “explode the deficit” and alienate our allies if they are not done surgically.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right let me go to Carol Roth. Hello, Carol. How are you?

CAROL: Yeah. Glenn, I've just found that we've only been in this administration for a month and a halfish, and I feel like it's been 16 years.

GLENN: Yeah. I know. I know.

CAROL: There's so much going on. I'm trying to process it now. When somebody said, it's only been a month and a half. I went -- you know, my mind was blown.

GLENN: Yeah, we're 40 days into this administration. You're looking into this. And it's breathtaking at what has been done. Last -- last month, we had I think 1800 encounters at the borders.

A year ago, last February, it was 1009000 encounters.

That's how much of an impact he has made on that. We have all these things that he has done. But when it comes to the economy, Congress has to move on some of his things. He hasn't really done anything with the economy. Except, perhaps, for DOGE. Which you've been warning about on this program, for a while now.

What's happened?

CAROL: Yeah. Yeah. So we've talked about before, that the economic situation, is not really what it was presented to be. You know, we heard under Biden and certainly during election season. What a wonderful economy we had. All of these really great statistics, on employment and growth.

And it's become very clear. Well, it was very clear to all of us, before. We've talked about it. Something that Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent talked about a couple of weeks ago. Is that really, the economic foundation is incredibly fragile. And what we've had the Biden administration do, which was exceptionally nefarious. Is that they decided that they were going to spend to paper over the weakness of the economy.

So if you remember, I think it was back in 2022, we had those two down powers of GDP. Which is a technical recession.

For some reason, by the way, they said, was not a recession. I'm sure if Trump had to down quarters, they would say it was.

GLENN: Right. Depression.

CAROL: But it had a D in front of it, so it wasn't. Then we came out of it. Then it was pretty clear that we were going to go into this double dip recession.

So what did they do to increase government spending, which is very inefficient spending, and we have been running deficits as a percentage of GDP. That are at wartime levels.

We're talking six to 7 percent of GDP, the historical average is somewhere around three, or three and I half percent.

So about double, you know, what you might see, on average. Not -- well, you have a good economy. You would actually expect that to be much lower. Because you're getting more receipts.

That's what happened. We had more receipts. We were taking $5 trillion. And they're spending even more. They're spending almost $7 trillion. So that was done to mask the weakness in the economy. Now that we don't have the ability to continue to kick up even more and more to show growth, the consumer continues to be tapped out from all the Biden Arab policies. And the fact that we have DOGE. Which is trying to cut down government spending. We're at a situation where things could get uglier. Before they get better. Or they could get uglier. And they could take away the political will to make them better.

That's this delegate dance that we've been talking about. Why we need this careful choreography.

The craziest thing that has happened over the past several days. Is that the Atlanta Fed. One of the branches of the Federal Reserve. Has a tool that predicts GDP each quarter.

They went over the last four weeks. Okay. Four weeks time. From predicting we would have almost 4 percent GDP growth in the first quarter. To now negative 3 percent, in the first quarter.

GLENN: That's impossible.

CAROL: A seven percentage point difference in four weeks! Which, A, just goes to show what a joke any of this reporting. And these tools and this data are.

But I think also shows, hey. We've got, you know, somebody else at the helm here.

So now we don't need to doctor these numbers in a way that seem a bit more friendly.

And it's so -- we potentially could be seeing something ugly. Which is something that we've talked about many, many times.

And this has been a setup, that they knew was come.

If you go back to the middle of last year, you had a bunch of, quote, unquote, noble economists. That put out a piece that said, Trump was going to create inflation. He was going to do all these things to the economy. And I called it right out, there is will it. This is a setup. They know this is coming, right then. They are setting the groundwork to blame this on Trump.

Get ready for the talking points.

Trump has been in there for only six weeks.

He hasn't even really had a chance to do anything about the economy. Congress certainly isn't helping. And yet, we're already getting the rhetoric that, oh, look what he did to our really great economy.

GLENN: Correct me if I'm wrong here, Carol. But the Biden administration, while they spent a lot of money, they did it in ways to cover things up, et cetera, et cetera.

But that -- that big 2021, you know, $1.2 trillion bill. And then the 836 billion for roads and bridges. And broadband. And then the 144 in the Inflation Reduction Act. It's well over a trillion dollars.

And it's my understanding, that only 17 percent of that money has been sent. Spent. So what happens if we don't stop the spending, of just the stuff that is already on the books from Biden. Wouldn't that cause our inflation to go through the roof.

CAROL: Yeah. It absolutely would cause our inflation to go through the roof. Because even with the cash in and cash out that we have. As you said, we're running these wartime deficits. And, by the way, we're financing those at high interest rates. Not necessarily in the historical context. But in the context of the last 15 years. And in a way that we have now made the interest expense, on our debt, you know, what we're paying for stuff we've already bought.

Exceed, the financing charges exceed what we're spending on defense. Nile Ferguson has a great sort of maxim, if you will. That basically, I'm paraphrasing here.

But, you know, nations that spend more on interest, versus debt, don't, you know, remain great nations for very long. That seems to be pretty obviously, something that everybody can wrap their heads around. That we've -- we don't want to be spending all of our money paying for stuff that we, quote, unquote, already bought. And we certainly, at these levels, cannot afford to do that. If we continue to do that, and, you know, this kind of goes into another conversation that we've had before, Glenn, too. That central banks around the world who used to be our friends in support of the US being the world's reserve currency, used to just buy Treasuries, as kind of part of the deal here on an ongoing basis. Over the past 11 or so years, they have been net sellers of Treasuries. They have actually replaced that with gold on their balance sheet. So if we don't have central banks that will just buy Treasuries, whenever, because that's part of the geopolitical deal, that means you have to find people, who are, you know -- looking at the price. They're looking at the price of the treasuries. And basically, you know, at these levels, of even though, they've come off a little bit. And we can talk about that too.

But they're saying. Overall, they're saying, yeah, we're not going to do that. You know, we need to have a reprice here.

And, you know, when you don't have enough demand. You end up seeing our yields go higher. To the extent, they add you up too high. Which we were dangerously close to a few years ago. We've come off now.

If you hit that. That could end up causing a debt spiral.

End up causing a mismanagement.

Or not a mismanagement.

A throwing up, if you will, of the Treasury market. And have global implications. Let me explain this, so the average person understands what you just said.

You are -- you are wanting to buy a new house.

And the interest rates are up at 8 percent.

You say, honey, I don't think we should buy a new house.

The interest rate is too high.

And somebody says, historically not. Yeah. Historically, you might be right. But we're not buying in the 1980s right now. We're buying today, with our financial situation. So I don't think we're going to buy the house.

That's what a normal person would do. And you can start saving known buy a house later.

That's not what the government is doing. They're saying, let's buy the house at the high interest rates anyway.

But when you have poor credit, really good banks are going to say, no. I'm not going to take your loan.

That's what she's talking about with the central banks. They're like, I don't want it. I would rather buy gold.

Because I don't trust that you guys are ever going to get out of debt.

And so what happens? Loan sharks step in.

This is what she's saying about the yield going up. The loan sharks step in.

And they say, I can make this deal for you. It will cost you 12 percent.

You're like, 12 percent. That's outrageous.

You're going to do it, or you're not going to do it. What do you want?

So we're bigger ourselves with lone sharks. That's why, I believe, the president needs to say, tonight. Congress must pass a budget.

It must have cuts. I would love him to say, it must have a trillion dollars, bare minimum, of cuts. To show the rest of the world, that we're serious.

I don't know why Javier Milei can do these things, but we can't.

CAROL: However. However, however, Glenn, if we cut as we talked about, a trillion dollars. And we cut it up very carefully. And we don't choreograph it like Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, and then we don't have that in our GDP, then we have a shrunken economy. We're taking in less receipts, and we actually explode the deficit, which could end up in a debt spiral.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: So, yes. Congress needs to do their part. But it needs to be done very surgically, and that's the ultimate challenge.

That's the mess that the Biden administration left for Trump.

GLENN: If I were king of the world today, and I could go in and say, Congress, this is what you're going to do.

I would say to them, you're going to cut a trillion dollars. Plus, you're going to pass a flat tax. Or 15-15-15. What the president has talked about. And you're going to cut 15 percent of all regulations. Cut them right now. And you're going to pass the REINS Act. That would change the dynamics of the economy.

Yes. We would have all of that spending going away from our GDP. From the government.

Good, but money would flow into our country, and jobs would be created.

And we would he go night the engine at the same time. That's what has to happen! But that's not going to be the president's fault, if it doesn't happen. What a surprise! It will be the lame ass G.O.P. that will screw this up.

He has to get them back on path. Back in just a second with Carol Roth with some good news.

GLENN: Okay. Is there anything else that we need to hit here, on the economy, before we get to some good news?

CAROL: I mean, this was probably going to be a whole other segment, at some point we need to have a discussion about the tariffs. It's probably not the time now.

GLENN: No. Okay.

CAROL: But we need to have a discussion about these tariffs.

GLENN: Okay. Let's do that now. Let's start there.

CAROL: All right. So basically, what did the American people hire Trump to do? Right?

They hired Trump to stabilize prices. To get things more normalized.

And, yes. We have these issues around the world. In terms of where we stand by trade.

However, as we have been talking about, we just talked about, this needs to be very surgical. We need to have Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers doing choreography. We don't need to have a bull in a China shop.

And the tariffs situation, given the precarious economic situation that Biden has left us. And the fact that the citizens of the United States want priced ability is absolutely maddening.

I understood Art of the Deal. I understood the first time around, that we're trying to put some pressure. Show who is the big dog, and people to come to the table. But now, we're going after our allies.

We're trying to kind of separate ourselves from China. Well, we have country. Companies who decided to move manufacturing from China to Mexico.

So that they could be more aligned with the United States and North America. And now we're putting these crazy tariffs on it. This is -- this is something that, frankly, nobody in any economic circle, that I know, understands the strategy.

GLENN: Okay. So here's. And it does not seem to be consistent with what I have been talking about.

GLENN: Okay. Donald Trump has been playing many different games all at once. And the strategy that comes with Canada and Mexico.

I don't think really has anything to do with the economy.

It has everything to do with the border.

He is saying, help us with the border.

Help stop the flow of illegals. Stop fentanyl. And recognize that your cartels are terror organizations. Work with us. If you don't want to. That's fine!

You will get a tariff. He's not saying, you know, we -- you're charging us too much for our milk. And not enough for your milk.

Or whatever. That is part of it. But that's not really what he's after, I believe, on the tariffs with Canada and Mexico!

CAROL: I agree. That was the first time, we tried this.

And he got them to the table. And now we need to have sort of a different situation. Because the reality is that, as you said, he's made huge strides.

We have a tiny fraction of the encounters at the border.

So that is moving in the right direction. But things like pricing ability. Is not necessarily moving in the right direction.

And to throw this into the mix, at a time that is so precarious from an economic situation. Even if that is the ultimate outcome, it seems like the wrong tactic to take, because the situation on the economic front is so volatile. Find another path to do that! That's all I'll have to say on that.

STU: Yeah. And just to back up Carol's point on the border, I mean, we're down -- this is the lowest month we've had in at least 25 years of border crossings.

GLENN: Since 1968 or something crazy like that.

STU: Yeah. The only other close month was April 2017. Right? After Trump came in the first time. But that was much more about just tone, and it did slow things down.

This seems to be backing up with action.
And, you know, I -- I tend to agree on the tariffs with Carol here.

GLENN: Yeah, I'm against tariffs. I'm for even playing field tariffs.

STU: But, again, and that is defensible logically. Not what's happening with Canada, with being in agreement. There's no tariffs.

It was his agreement. He designed it. And now he's putting the tariffs on.

GLENN: I know.

CAROL: That's going back with the surgical part, if it was something very specific, I could understand. But across-the-board, at these levels, seems really insane at this point.