Here's Glenn's theory on where the economy is headed in 2015

On Wednesday's Glenn Beck Program, Stu laid out Glenn's theory for where the economy was headed in 2015. A lot of people are excited about declining gas prices, but is there something concerning happening below the surface?

Below is a transcript of this segment

Stu: So, here’s where I attempt to lay out what Glenn was hoping to lay out before he…well, he was laid out. Today, the economy, what can we expect going into 2015? There’s a lot of speculation about how America’s economy is set to perform this year. You’re hearing a lot of optimism about the supposed coming growth boom, and then they’re right. Are they? Is it a lot of wishful thinking?

Well, it’s true that America is inching very slowly forward at the moment. It won’t matter much if the rest of the globe tanks, as many were predicting is going to happen. We have to look ahead. We’ve got to look ahead at what’s to come.

Let’s look back first though to 2008 when the economy came crashing down. What was the root cause? Remember this fancy word? Oh, I missed all the constant conversation about derivatives, didn’t you? Mainly in the form of subprime mortgage loans. The economy was seemingly fine before that hit. Lots of people were getting rich. There were jobs, but there were warning signs—too much borrowing from people who couldn’t afford it.

Politicians didn’t care because they could use that to say Americans were owning homes for the first time. Look how successful we are in Washington. Seven years later, here we go again. Derivatives are back in the news. After the billions in bailouts, all the regulations, banks were supposed to increase transparency and reduce risk. They’ve done the exact opposite.

The top four banks are now holding $217 trillion in derivatives. That’s 93% of the total 233.9 trillion in derivatives held by all banks. In 2008, the number of all derivatives for all banks in the entire country was under $200 trillion. What possible incentive could banks have for taking on more risk?

One reason is because the bigger they get, the more important they get, and the more important they get, the more likely politicians will declare them too big to fail, and then they get all those fancy bailouts. Remember TARP, abandon the free market principles to save the free market system? Citibank seems to have taken this strategy to heart. They’ve gone from $1 trillion in derivatives to 70 trillion, surpassing J.P. Morgan as the top holder.

Pretty risky…or is it? Because jammed in the CRomnibus bill at the last minute was a measure that ensured the big banks would once again receive bailouts, putting taxpayers on the hook for their risky banking adventures again. Guess who helped craft this legislation…Citibank. So, that’s the first thing to watch. I mean, look at this graphic. On the left you see the Citibank ideas. This is what we think the bill should look like, and on the right you see what the bill actually looked like.

Now, you might say hey, wait a minute, the thing in green looks just like the other thing in green, and the thing in yellow looks like the other thing in yellow, and the thing in blue looks like the other thing in blue. The thing in grey looks like the other thing in gray, almost identical, but what you’re missing here is that the one and the two in the real bill are A and B, so there was a big change there. That’s what you elected your representatives for. They changed the one and two to A and B. This is something to watch. The big four banks now are holding 93% of all derivatives and adding more and more risk.

Next, oil…Glenn has said a million times on this program that we can’t sustain oil at $130 or $140 a barrel, but that theory works in the opposite direction as well. Oil has now fallen below $50 a barrel. Many countries have pegged their entire budgets to a much higher price of oil, and so the longer it stays below that number, the longer these countries hemorrhage cash.

So why is that bad for us? Famed investor Jeff Gundlach says…he warned of terrifying consequences. “If oil falls to around $40 a barrel then I think the yield on ten year treasury note is going to 1%. I hope it does not go to $40 because then something is very, very wrong with the world, not just the economy. The geopolitical consequences could be—to put it bluntly—terrifying.”

Somewhere around 15 and 20% of the junk bond market are energy-related, so when you have oil prices staying where they are for several months, which is probably likely because that’s a policy decision that some oil producers have made, some of these companies will start really running into financial troubles.

The counter argument being made is that the troubles will be confined to just the energy sector. It’s only a pocket of the economy, after all, but the problem with that argument is it’s the same freaking argument that was used about subprime mortgage loans. Because so many countries have based economies on higher oil prices, sustained low oil prices will also have a huge negative impact.

Russia is one country under enormous pressure because of this, and look, we know what Vladimir Putin is doing. He’s openly accusing America of gaming the economy to punish Russia. Leaders often start wars when there is pain and tension like this. Now, the probability of Russia starting war certainly with us is low, but I think the risk of Russia going off the reservation is much higher with oil at $55 or $45 or $40 than it was at 95 or 110.

Here’s another thing to consider, since 2007, Texas has created 1.2 million net jobs. The other 49 states have created 700,000 jobs combined. Energy is a huge factor in that growth. If the energy sector plummets, so will Texas. Since the rest of the country isn’t, you know, exactly doing so hot, we’re looking at difficult times if that happens. There’s a good chance that 2015 will be a difficult year for the global economy, and if that happens, America will become the scapegoat. But even more than America, capitalism itself will be put on trial.

Now, we all know capitalism is always on trial, but this will be the boot-on-the-neck attempt to put the final nail in the coffin. So, where does that leave freedom? Where does that leave you and me? It leaves the world in the hands of madmen, and the world begins to look a lot like it did in France this morning.

In the final days before the 2020 election, President Donald Trump is gaining among black voters, particularly men, because his record of accomplishments "speaks for itself" and the "façade" that President Trump is a racist "just doesn't ring true," argued sports columnist Jason Whitlock on "The Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday.

Jason, who recently interviewed the president at the White House for, shared his thoughts on why he believes many black Americans — notably celebrities such as Kanye West, Ice Cube, and 50 Cent — are breaking from the "façade" that President Trump is a "flaming racist."

"I really believe the facts are starting to speak for themselves, and that Donald Trump's record of accomplishments, particularly as it relates to African Americans, speaks for itself," Jason told Glenn. "He actually has a record to stand on, unlike even Barack Obama. When [Obama] was president, I don't think he had much of a record to stand on, in terms of, 'Hey, what did he actually deliver for African Americans?' President Trump has things he can stand on and, you know, beyond that I think black people understand when he starts talking about black unemployment rate. And America's unemployment rate. And then, when you add in for black men, the façade we've been putting on [President Trump] … you know, this whole thing that he's some flaming racist, it just doesn't ring true."

Jason suggested that Trump's fearlessness, unabashed masculinity, and record of keeping his promises resonates with men in the black community. He also weighed in on how media and social media's bias plays a huge role in convincing people to hate President Trump while ignoring Antifa and others on the Left.

"I keep explaining to people, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, they're some of the most secular places on earth. And we've reduced everyone to a tweet, that we disagree with," he added.

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Megyn Kelly is not happy about the "disgusting" media coverage of President Donald Trump, specifically pointing to Lesley Stahl's "60 Minutes" interview on CBS Sunday.

On the radio program, Megyn told Glenn Beck the media has become so blinded by the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" that they've lost their own credibility — and now they can't get it back.

"It's disgusting. It's stomach-turning," Megyn said of the media's coverage of the president. "But it's just a continuation of what we've seen over the past couple of years. Their 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' has blinded them to what they're doing to their own credibility. They can't get it back. It's too late. They've already sacrificed it. And now no one is listening to them other than the hard partisans for whom they craft their news."

Megyn also discussed how she would have covered the recent stories about Hunter and Joe Biden's alleged corruption. Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Imagine sometime next year, getting called before HUWAC – the House Un-Woke Activities Committee.

"Are you or have you ever been a member of the un-woke?"

Something like that is not as far-fetched as you might think.

Last week, Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor during the Clinton administration, now a UC Berkeley professor, tweeted this:

Since the 1970s, there have been dozens of "Truth Commissions" around the world like the kind Robert Reich wants in America. Most of these have been set up in Africa and Latin America. Usually it happens in countries after a civil war, or where there's been a regime change – a dictator is finally overthrown, and a commission is set up to address atrocities that happened under the dictator. Or, as in the commissions in East Germany and Czechoslovakia, atrocities under communism. Or, in the most famous example, South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation commission addressed the decades of apartheid that ravaged that nation.

These commissions usually conclude with an official final report. These commissions and reports have served as a means of governments trying to close a dark chapter of their country's history, or provide emotional catharsis, as a way to generally move on. Sometimes it kind of works for people, most of the time it leaves people clamoring for more justice.

Here's how one professor described truth commissions in an article in The Conversation last year. He wrote:

The goal of a truth commission… is to hold public hearings to establish the scale and impact of a past injustice, typically involving wide-scale human rights abuses, and make it part of the permanent, unassailable public record. Truth commissions also officially recognize victims and perpetrators in an effort to move beyond the painful past… Some have been used cynically as tools for governments to legitimize themselves by pretending they have dealt with painful history when they have only kicked the can down the road.

See, this is the problem with a lot of "Truth" commissions – they are inherently political. Even if you trust your government and give them all the benefit of the doubt in the world that their Truth commission is trying to do the right thing, it is ALWAYS going to be political. Because these truth commissions are never set up by those who have LOST power in government. They're always established by those who have WON power.

The Deputy Executive Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice says one of the main points in these Truth commissions is that "the victims become protagonists."

A Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility.

So, who are the victims in Robert Reich's America? People like him, members of the far-Left who had to endure the atrocities of four years of a president with different political ideas. What an injustice. I mean, the left's suffering during the Trump administration is almost on the level of apartheid or genocide – so we totally need a Truth commission.

There have been lots of calls for the U.S. to have its own Truth and Reconciliation commission, especially around racial injustice.

This past June, Democratic Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California introduced legislation to establish the " United States Commission on Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation."

Ibram X. Kendi – the high priest of anti-racism, and author of Target's current favorite book " Antiracist Baby" – proposes a Constitutional anti-racism amendment. This amendment would:

establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for pre-clearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.

If you think that is far-fetched, you haven't been paying attention to the Left's growing radicalism. In a Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration, a Department of Anti-racism is entirely within the realm of possibility. And of course, such a DOA would never stop at policing government.

We're in a dangerous, precarious moment in our history. Given the events of 2020, should Democrats gain the White House, the Senate, and the House, how many commissions will be in our future? They will suddenly have plenty of political capital to drag the nation through years of commission hearings.

And the Left's form of justice is never satisfied. You think it will stop at a T&R commission on race? MSNBC's Chris Hayes tweeted this month about the need for a commission to deal with Americans who are skeptical about wearing masks:

Or what about a Truth commission on religion? I mean, look at those reckless churches spreading Covid this year. Or this would be a big one – a T&R commission on climate change deniers.

The Left is highly selective when it comes to truth. That's why they are the very last group you want in charge of anything with "Truth and Reconciliation" in the title.

This is one of the most incredibly frustrating things about the Left in America today. The Left insists there is no such thing as absolute truth, while simultaneously insisting there are certain approved truths that are undeniable.

So, you can't question "Science" – even though that's pretty much what every great scientist in history did.

You can't question racism as the explanation for all of existence – because, well, just because.

You can't question third-party "Fact-checkers" – because the powers that be, mainly Big Tech right now, have decided they are the Truth referees and you have to trust what they say because they're using certified external fact-checkers. They just forgot to tell you that they actually fund these third-party fact-checkers. It's like if McDonald's told you to trust third-party health inspectors that they were paying for.

The Left thinks it has a monopoly on Truth. They're the enlightened ones, because they've had the correct instruction, they're privy to the actual facts. It's psychotic arrogance. If you don't buy what they're selling, even if you're just skeptical of it, it's because you either don't have the facts, you willingly deny the facts, or you're simply incapable of grasping the truth because you're blinded by your raging racism problem. It's most likely the racism problem.

The Left never learns from its own preaching. For the past 60-plus years they've decried the House Un-American Activities Committee for trying to root out communists, getting people canceled, ruining Hollywood careers, etcetera. But a HUAC-type committee is precisely what Robert Reich is describing and many on the Left want. It's not enough for Trump to be voted out of office. Americans who helped put him there must be punished. They don't want reconciliation, they want retribution. Because the Left doesn't simply loathe Donald Trump, the Left loathes YOU.

President Donald Trump's performance at last night's final presidential debate was "brilliant" and "the best he's ever done," Glenn Beck said on the radio program Friday.

Glenn described the moments he thought President Trump came across as "sincere," "kind," and "well-informed," as well as Joe Biden's biggest downfalls for of the night — from his big statement on wanting to eliminate the oil industry to his unsurprising gaffes as the debate neared the end. But, the question remains: was Trump's "brilliant performance" enough to win the election?

Watch the video be low to get Glenn's take on the final debate before the November 3 election:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.