GLENN

Sen. Mike Lee: Neil Gorsuch Is an 'Extraordinary Judge'

President Trump's Supreme Court pick, Judge Neil Gorsuch, is the kind of person that gets lawyers waxing poetic. Just ask Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) who joined The Glenn Beck Program on Tuesday.

"He's a dream to argue in front of because he's the kind of judge who reads all the briefs and reads all the statutes and all the cases cited in the briefs. He's always prepared. He knows exactly where he's going," Sen. Lee said.

Senator Lee went so far as to say Gorsuch's briefs are interesting and fun to read.

"Let's just clarify. That is Mike Lee that just said these are fun to read. So, kids, don't rush out there. It's Mike saying that," Glenn joked.

Enjoy the complimentary clip above or read the transcript below for details.

GLENN: Senator Mike Lee, welcome to the program, sir. How are you?

MIKE: Doing well. Thank you so much, Glenn.

GLENN: Can we start with -- quickly on the Muslim ban and whether that is legal or not? What is your opinion?

MIKE: The short answer is, the president has authority to suspend the entry of certain aliens coming into this country. He has that authority, under section 212F of the immigration and nationality act.

Now, there's an amendment to that that came about several decades after that one was put in place that some have read to suggest the president can't do this. But when you read the language on that one, it deals with visa issuance, not suspension on entry. And it deals with visa issuance by those who issue visas, not by the president.

That's why, on its face, I can't look at this order and say it's illegal. That's why the order to the extent it causes legal problems, will present legal problems, only in the way it's enforced.

In other words, we'll have to wait and see how this thing is implied, how it's interpreted, how it's actually utilized on the ground, before we can say it violates the law.

GLENN: Poorly written, Mike? Is that the problem?

MIKE: Not ideally. The rollout was suboptimal. The draftsmanship could have been better. But, look, these are people who have got a lot on their plate. And I understand that. That's why I hope they get the implementation right. Because if they get the implementation right, I think it will be okay.

GLENN: What did this judge up in Washington -- is he right at all?

MIKE: You know, I read his temporary restraining order. And it's been a long time since I've seen an order like that, that dealt with an issue of this magnitude with so few words. And I don't mean that in a complimentary way. What I mean is it lacks analysis. It is full of what I call conclusory assertions, where the judge just sort of found that the basis in law existed for him to issue this temporary restraining order. And so he did. But it was very short on legal analysis.

GLENN: So they're making this into a big deal because, well, he was appointed by George Bush. And so, George Bush, of course, you know, how could you possibly go against a George Bush judge?

MIKE: You know, Glenn, if I had a nickel for every bad decision made by a Republican-appointed judge or Supreme Court justice, I'd be a very wealthy man.

GLENN: Yeah.

MIKE: The fact that someone is put on a court by a Republican means absolutely nothing, in terms of his indelibility (phonetic).

PAT: Mike, real quick, before we get into the crux of this. There's a new poll out about Democrats that are concerned about Christians and Mormons being just as violent --

GLENN: And Jews.

PAT: And Jews. Just as violent as Islam. What are you doing to curb the Mormon violence in this country? Are you drafting any kind of legislation?

MIKE: Yeah, it's a big problem.

PAT: It is. It is.

MIKE: I would -- look, Mormons are known for their violent tendencies.

GLENN: Right.

MIKE: The bicycles -- the bicycles and the short-sleeved shirts with ties strikes fear on the part of all who behold. It's a big problem.

GLENN: So, Mike, 63 percent of all Democrats --

PAT: Sixty-six.

GLENN: Sixty-six feel that's true. Two-thirds of all Democrats feel that Christians, Jews, and Mormons are just as dangerous as Islamic terrorists.

PAT: Unbelievable.

MIKE: Wow. That's interesting, especially given that it would be difficult to find doctrine to support that.

PAT: Yep.

MIKE: It would be difficult to find actual statistics to support that.

One of the reasons why I find this most disturbing is that it strikes this term of moral equivalency, which I think causes a whole lot of problems. It -- there's no such thing as bad or good -- bad or worse than bad. It's just stuff people do.

And I am very curious about that study and how they reached those conclusions.

GLENN: It scares the hell out of me. Because it seems to me that we are living in a time where facts don't matter at all, to anybody, on either side.

MIKE: You know, they do matter to the reader. I think there are a lot of readers out there and a lot of people who listen to your program, a lot of people who actually are willing to dig beneath the surface who care. It's not always the case, that reporting those facts case. So when the people care, those who report facts that are not ringing true, can be held accountable. I think that's what we have to do.

GLENN: All right. Talk to me a little bit about Gorsuch. You met with him last -- what was it? Thursday or Friday. What did you think of him?

MIKE: Love the guy. Just fantastic judge.

Look, I already had a high opinion of him because I've argued in front of him. I was a lawyer before I became a politician.

GLENN: I argue in front of my children, and I don't necessarily have a lot of respect for them.

MIKE: This guy is good though. This guy is good. But I just highlighted two of the reasons of why -- I chose two hated professions. First lawyer and then politician. You know, I'm not sure how it could get worse than that.

But in any event, he's a great judge. He's a dream to argue in front of because he's the kind of judge who reads all the briefs and reads all the statutes and all the cases cited in the briefs. He's always prepared. He knows exactly where he's going. And he believes that our laws matter and the words used matter. And he wants to find the meaning of those words.

But then in the last few days, I've been reading a whole lot of Gorsuch. I've spent hours upon hours, reading Gorsuch opinions.

And so far, I have yet to find a bad opinion among them. This is -- this is an extraordinary judge.

His opinions, if you can believe it, are actually interesting. They're fun to read, in addition to the fact that they seem to follow the right approach very consistently, with an eye toward finding out what the law says.

GLENN: Let's just clarify. That is Mike Lee that just said these are fun to read. So, kids, don't rush out there. It's Mike saying that.

What are the odds of him getting confirmed?

MIKE: We intend to get him confirmed. And I expect we will get him confirmed.

GLENN: Without the nuclear option?

MIKE: Well, there is no reason why we necessarily have to use the nuclear option. And I think most or all of us would prefer not to. It's not clear that we'll have to, to begin with. You know, I do think that at least one Democrat will make sure that we have to get cloture, if they can. And that requires 60 votes, to bring the debate to a close.

I think it's possible that we could get those 60 votes. If we don't, there are a couple of options at our disposal, only one of which involves the use of the nuclear option.

There's another one called Rule 19, the so-called two speech rule that allows to us bypass cloture when we stay in the legislative day until everyone who wants to speak has had a chance to do so and then we go directly to the final vote, which is set at 51.

Look, this is terribly boring, arcane stuff. This from a guy who loves to read Gorsuch opinions.

GLENN: No. He loves them. Says they're fun.

MIKE: Yes, yes, they are fun. The Gorsuch opinions are fun. Rule 19 is not fun. It's quite arcane. But it's useful here. And I think it might give us a path to confirming Judge Gorsuch without deploying the nuclear option.

PAT: Mike, if you had to compare him to a sitting or former judge, who -- who would he mostly closely compare to? Would it be Scalia? Would it be Alito? Kennedy?

MIKE: I'd say he's sort of a blend between Justice Alito, my former boss, and justices Scalia and Thomas, which is exactly what we want.

PAT: Yeah.

MIKE: I had hoped the president would nominate someone in that mold. And as far as I can tell, he appears to be in that mold. This is a guy who really believes deeply that we need to follow certain principles in the law.

He's deeply wedded to textualism, the idea that the laws consist of words. The words have meaning, and you have to find out what those words mean.

And originalism, which is the idea that in order to understand the Constitution, it's important to go back and understand how the words in the Constitution were used at the time they were put in there, at the time they were drafted and ratified.

STU: As someone, Mike, who is really interested in the Gorsuch opinions, can you help -- because speaking of the Scalia comparisons, one interesting place where they seem to split, and it seems that Gorsuch is better than Scalia on, is this idea -- this Chevron deference, where we're talking about basically giving deference to federal agencies -- can you explain that and make it a slightly less boring than it sounds?

MIKE: Yes. First of all, I'm thrilled, I'm ecstatic that I get do explain Chevron deference.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. People are pulling over.

PAT: Chevron deference. I can't go to work yet!

GLENN: I'm about to wet my pants, I'm so excited.

MIKE: Okay. So Chevron deference is this legal doctrine created out of whole cloth by the devil himself within the federal court system.

And it says that the courts, rather than doing their own thinking, are just going to defer to executive branch, bureaucratic agencies, when they interpret a regulation developed by that agency. In other words, hello, Mr. Fox, here are the keys to the henhouse. Please enjoy it.

That's what we do.

Now, for reasons that astound me, for reasons that sometimes allow me to argue with Justice Scalia, when I go to dinner with him, that is a doctrine that doesn't make sense. And yet, Justice Scalia wanted it in one way or another.

Judge Gorsuch appears to have real concerns, with Chevron deference. And he pointed out that this is a doctrine that runs against the doctrine of separation of powers embedded deeply in the Constitution. And I just -- I had a huge grin on my face when I was reading that opinion. It was fantastic.

STU: It essentially means if the EPA has regulation and there's disagreement about it, the legal system just says, "Eh, ask the EPA what they meant."

JEFFY: Yeah, yeah, exactly. Exactly. And if other people disagree with the EPA's interpretation of what it meant, they say, ask the EPA. And whatever the EPA says stands, stands. And that's a problem, that's really a big problem.

GLENN: Yeah. So, Mike, help me out on this, I have -- I don't have a problem necessarily with some of the direction that this president is taking.

MIKE: Oh. I was afraid you were going to tell me you didn't have a problem with Chevron.

GLENN: No.

I know. The controversy. People would have been fighting across the country over this.

STU: Mike Lee was actually legitimately excited to answer the Chevron deference question.

GLENN: I know. I know. God bless him. God bless him.

MIKE: Who wouldn't be? Who wouldn't be?

GLENN: So, Mike, my problem has been with the lack of concern on the number of -- of executive orders that are being issued. Do you have a problem with the -- with the system that we're using here with this president? Is it any different, or is it just my perception?

MIKE: It's not now. And never has been and never will be, the number of executive orders that are a problem.

I said this repeatedly throughout the eight years of President Obama's presidency. It's not the number that matters. It's the nature of the executive order, how they're used. It's whether or not they're used in a manner authorized by law.

GLENN: Right. So are these executive orders falling in line with what is authorized?

MIKE: So far, the executive orders on their face don't fly in the face of the law. So far, these executive orders could be implemented in a manner fully consistent with the law.

Now, that doesn't mean that all executive orders this president issues will necessarily, going forward, fall into that category. But I haven't seen one yet that I look at and say, "He doesn't have authority to do that."

GLENN: Oh, that's really good.

STU: That's great news.

MIKE: Yeah.

There are some ambiguities in this order we were talking about earlier. There is some language in there, that depending on how it's implemented could cause a problem. That's why I'm watching that one carefully.

GLENN: Like what?

MIKE: Okay.

You're going to yell at me for getting into this level of detail, but there -- there are subsequently enacted provisions of the immigration code --

GLENN: Hold on just a second.

Jeffy, assuming you're awake by the end of this, wake me so I can yell at him for getting into the weeds. Go ahead, Mike. What now?

MIKE: They can be read to restrict any type of effort on the part of the president to deal with the visa issuance program -- process. Depending on how the courts interpret that, that could end up creating a problem.

Likewise, depending on how they interpret this, this could cause other problems. I don't want to get into all the details of that. I don't want to pick any fights that the administration doesn't need picked.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: People are like, "Oh. Go back to Chevron deference on that one."

GLENN: One last question: Mitt Romney said he won't rule anything out, but he won't rule anything in yet. He's not sure if Orrin Hatch is going to run for Senate. How do you feel about your partner being possibly Mitt Romney?

MIKE: You know, look, Mitt Romney is a great guy. Not ruling anything in, not ruling anything out describes the entire context of the Utah Senate race coming up in 2018. Nobody knows what the heck is going on. Nobody knows who is running and who isn't.

I have absolutely no idea how to predict this thing. So I don't know what to say. I think people, before they decide they're going to get in, kind of like having their name floated out there. And they enjoy the process a lot. Sometimes that causes the process to drag out too far.

But we still don't know whether Senator Hatch is going to seek reelection. And I suspect that would strongly influence whether or not Mitt Romney decides to get in.

GLENN: Hey, do you have a second to hang on for one more -- or do you have to run?

MIKE: Hey, for you, anything. You let me talk about Chevron deference.

GLENN: I know. I know. You owe us. You owe the whole nation for that.

RADIO

Glenn’s POWERFUL Nashville tragedy message: THIS is the way out

We have a truth problem, Glenn says, and the most recent tragedy at The Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee, shows just how dangerous that problem has become. So what’s causing this? Why have tragedies like this one become so commonplace? ‘It is the loss of the gold guards of our civilization,’ Glenn explains. But there IS a path forward. In this powerful message, Glenn explains ‘the way out’: Remembering our principles

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, we had yet another tragic school shooting. And so I want to start the program where we have started too often. Our hearts break for the victims and their families, and the entire community affected by this senseless act of violence.

I'm a parent. Now, I'm a concerned citizen.

All of us fear for the safety of our children and our loved ones.

We share the same goal of creating a safe and secure environment for everyone.

But especially in the places of learning and growth.

It is natural for all of us to feel anger and fear during these times.

And it may seem unnatural to rise above it, put we must. Because it's essential to remember that we have to come together as a society. We must come together and address the root causes of violence.

And it's not the gun. But rather, the misuse of them, by individuals who are mentally ill or have a criminal intent.

I for one, want to address the problem of gun violence. I am worried about this with my own children. Every American, I don't care who you voted for, feels the same. But enough is enough.

When will we address mental health? Do you know the damage that we have done to our children, just because of COVID?

The damage to their mental health. Look at the suicide rate!

What is causing all of this? It is the loss of the old guards of our civilization.

There are a few areas, I think we need to address. First, the parents and families.

I'm sorry. We love you. Our society is sick.

It is sick. And unrecognizable to most of us. Your loved ones have paid the ultimate price for that illness.

And I say, I'm sorry, because I'm part of the society that has an unwillingness to see the truth, apparently.

To the mother of the 27-year-old shooter, I've read your old posts. You've been fighting against guns in school. While we disagree, we both want this violence to end. And I've read your posts about your children, and how proud you are. And the moments of beauty. You feel like every mom and dad feels about their child. And you were right to feel that way.

Today, how confused you must be. You should know, we love you too. You lost a child as well.

You lost a child to the same society that has an unwillingness to see the truth. But you should also know, you are part of our community. And we mourn with you as well.

Now, to the political class and the media elites, you have been dividing us for years.

At first, I think I was a part of that. I've tried really hard not to be.

But you're not sincere in anything you do. I don't know. At first, maybe you saw -- maybe you thought you were right.

And then every time society proved you wrong, you just dug your heels in. Now, I don't know.

Is it just a win over your opponent. Is it just crush the other side?

Is it because you -- you believe that everyone who doesn't vote your way is evil. Or is it that you just no longer care?

I'm one American. Among, I think many, that no longer believe in you.

I can understand why thinking people vote differently than me. I can.

And those people aren't the problem. The problem begins with the people, that only care about money or power. Or so arrogant, that they think they know better than the rest of us, and they make themselves or their system, into a false God.

The arrogance. I go after the disaffected, the weak, and the hopeless. And you prey on these things, promising to be their savior.

If they will only help you gain power of -- over those who you call their enemies.

You have lied. You have lied through half-truths. You have lied through omission. You have lied through fabrications. You have distorted the truth, to where it's no longer recognizable.

You call men women, and women men.

In your world, our children are legally children, until 25 for insurance purposes. Yet, adult enough to alter their own bodies at eight.

You have called evil good, and good evil.

We do not have a gun problem in America. Per capita, there were more guns 100 years ago, than there are right now. They didn't have these problems. Is it the gun, or is it the people?

What we have in America is a truth problem. We have turned ourselves inside out. We have turned ourselves against the basic principles that gave us life and freedom.

Earmarks and the promise of a fuller life. Our women have no more children, and our men have lost all meaning, reason, and faith.

From the beginning of time, as Kipling noticed. You promised us perpetual peace. You swore, if we just give you our weapons, that the wars of the tribe would cease.

But we know, if you disarm us, you'll sell us and deliver us bound to our foe.

You know, just yesterday, the Wall Street Journal released a poll that showed, what American principles we value most.

Children, God, family. They were last in the list.

Money was in the top three. Money? Since when has money become a principle? I guess. I guess since money is the god that so many worship. Money over principles, every time a corrupt bank is bailed out. Money over principles, any time we make those who never want to pay their school tuition. Every time we make someone pay for that tuition, that didn't go to school, I guess it's money over principles. What kind of god do we worship, that make children flawed? And the gods in the surgical gowns can mutilate and sterilize them, to make them just the way they were intended.

That's an ancient god that I don't recognize. We all know the words that it were written.

In the summer of 1776.

We hold these truths. But other words, were written later that year. When things weren't so sunny. It was December 21st.

These are the times that try men's souls. That turned our nation around. These are the times that try men's souls. And the modern day patriots, the lovers of truth and justice. Justice for all!

All men -- all women. And, yes, we can define that. We must stand firm in the face of an ever growing storm of disinformation, scored, division.

The weak hearted are not going to be able to weather the storm. But those with the courage to fight for what is true. Will emerge victorious.

We live in a time when you're faith in institutions, our faith in everything we know, where our very ten months. Our republic is under siege.

The way out is to remember the principles. We are drowning in a sea of lies. Cling to the life raft! Cling to the enduring belief in life and liberty.

Truth and justice. We'll only be able to find our way out, if we can rekindle the flame of unity. And embrace the American spirit, that carried us through so many crisis before. We've been here before.

But this time, our American crisis, we have to constantly remind ourselves that it's not an external enemy that we conquer. But the internal divisions that are threatening to tear us apart. And those divisions that are created by monsters of men.

Who are not just tearing us apart individual to individual, but tearing us and our children out from the inside out.

America, it is high time to refer -- reaffirm our commitment to our values that define us as a people. It is our collective responsibility, as free people, to stand up for those principles of truth.

The seeds of division, have been sewn by those who seek to manipulate and exploit us for their own gain.

They shatter our trust in one another.

To instill fear and hatred, where there should be understanding and compassion.

Truth is now clouded by conspiracy. The lines between fact and fiction have been blurred.

Truth is a light. Everything we face is not insurmountable. But now is the time, to return to truth and decency and justice for all.

Our kids are the ones who are going to pay the highest of prices for what we do now.

RADIO

David Sacks: The Banking Crisis Is Even WORSE than You Think | Ep 178

The world may be on the cusp of a serious banking collapse, but many “experts” in the government are insisting that everything is fine (while also moving us closer to a central bank digital currency). On this episode of "The Glenn Beck Podcast," “The Diversity Myth” author David Sacks warns that the banking crisis is even WORSE than you think. As the co-host of "The All-In Podcast," a founding COO of PayPal, and a venture capitalist, Sacks has seen how our “weird” banking system works up close. He gives clear answers about how we can survive this crisis, including why we must have “NO bailouts for banks.” He also breaks down the biggest questions being asked: Who owns our money? Is a Federal Reserve-controlled CBDC the endgame? Who’s to blame for this banking collapse? How will the everyday American be affected? Glenn and Dave also discuss AI, his friendship with Elon Musk, Biden’s reliable incompetence, whether we’re living in a simulation, whether we’ll end up in a war with China and Russia, and why he thinks we WILL figure out who bombed the Nord Stream pipelines.

RADIO

EXPLAINED: How the Fed’s FedNow program WILL end in a CBDC

The Federal Reserve’s new service for banks, called FedNow, promises increased flexibility, faster transactions, and instant payments with one, small cost: The potential END to your financial freedom. In this clip, Glenn is joined by Justin Haskins, co-author of their new book, ‘Dark Future.’ Haskins explains how — despite what the Federal Reserve may say — this new service is NOT an alternative to a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)…rather, it’s a giant stepping stone toward it. Watch Glenn tackle this topic further in his upcoming Glenn TV Wednesday Night Special, airing on YouTube and BlazeTV.com on March 29th.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins is with us. Justin is the -- he's with the socialism research center, at the Heartland Institute, where he is the director. He has been working tirelessly on stopping socialism.

He is also -- he was one of our main contributors to our Arguing With Socialists book.

He is also my coauthor of the book, The Great Reset. And our fourth coming book. We're all going to die.

I'm not sure exactly -- what did we name it, Justin?

That was my working title for quite some time.

JUSTIN: Are we telling people? Is this the first time?

GLENN: I don't know. Can we?

Check Amazon, see if it's up for sale.
If it's up for sale, we'll announce it. It's supposed to be in the next few days.

JUSTIN: The name of the book.

GLENN: Don't say it. Don't say it.

So, Justin, you wrote to me something kind of disturbing.

Last hour, I played these happy little commercials from the Federal Reserve about the Fed Now.

It's a new service for all of the banks, which will -- which will make the transfer of funds, you know, whether you're out shopping or you're a business owner, or you're doing bank-to-bank transactions.

You just run everything through the Federal Reserve, and it will happen fast. And I thought --

JUSTIN: Yeah. Isn't that exciting?

GLENN: Very exciting. Now, they're claiming that this is the alternative to a CBDC, which is a Central Bank Digital Currency.

It doesn't really sound so much like an alternative, as much as, I don't know, a system to run that on.

JUSTIN: Yeah. Basically, this is -- this is like Jason Buttrill, your head researcher. Because he and I are now best friends. We exchange emails all the time.

He came up with this great analogy.

This is like the drug dealer, who is new on the block. And he will not just start injecting people with heroin. That's not how you sell lots of drugs. That's not how you do it.

First, you get them hooked.

You just give them a little taste. And then after they get a little taste, now they're hooked. Then you can start really pushing the hard stuff. That's what this is all about.

The Federal Reserve is basically a drug pusher. Okay?

And this is the start of it.

Normally, regular folks like you and me, and people in the audience, we don't interact with the fed. We're not used to that.

We don't like the fed.

We don't trust them very much. And so what they want to say is, just have a little taste. You'll see. It will be great.

Just have a little taste. This is a steppingstone to a CBDC.

This is our first interaction to using the fed directly.

So that we can become more comfortable with it. So it's normalized. And then after this, you'll get a central bank digital currency.

We already know this, because there's a billion government reports talking about how they'll design it, what it will look like.

Why people should use it.

What the principles should be, behind it. All of that kind of stuff.

So we know a CBDC is coming. This is just the first step in that process, to try to normalize people interacting directly with the fed in this sort of high-tech instant transfer payment portal.

GLENN: So we've been talking about the uniform commercial code, which is complicated. And it's -- it's usually nothing anyone should ever have to think about. However, they have included central bank digital currency as the new definition of money.

But money makes us think of money, that you can take from the bank. That you own it. You get paid. You get to do what you want with it.

But central bank digital currency, is not really money. Correct?

JUSTIN: Yeah. What's happening in more than 20 states across the country right now, and it's going to happen in all 50 states eventually. Is lawmakers are looking at updating the Uniform Commercial Code so that a foundation is being laid for a future central bank digital currency.

And not just any kind of central bank digital currency, but a central bank digital currency that is programmable, trackable. That you won't have any privacy with the things that you're doing with the CBDC, that it can be controlled and manipulated. This kind of thing is being manipulated into the code. They don't use the world central bank digital currency. But they outline it, in such a way so that that has to be what they're talking about. So it's not creating the CBDC. That's not what this is aiming to do. It's just laying the foundation to make it easier to use it in certain kinds of commercial transactions.

GLENN: So people know, and this is what you really have to understand. This is not like Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is such a danger, because you get to do with it, what you want to do with it.

And the Federal Reserve is not aware of anything, and can't do anything.

You have the ultimate power with your money. The opposite is true with the fed coin, that they will be introducing. And this is what makes it so dangerous. Not just the tracking.

They're not -- they will not just know absolutely everything that you spend. But Justin said a key word that most people don't really understand. It's programmable. Meaning, it is programmable for the individual. So, in other words, if the government decides that they're going to -- you know, we need to get -- we need to cut down on fat, fat, fatties. Then my digital coin, will not allow me to buy fatty foods. I wouldn't be able to go to McDonald's. I'm using this as an example. There's not anything in the works to do this.

Except, this is what programmable means. They can program it, so if they say, you know what, nobody is going to work. You're not an essential employee.

Your coin will not buy gas.

So you can go to -- try to fill up. But when you put your digital card in the fed, it will say denied. And you won't have any way, other than that card, to be able to buy what you need. It's absolute control of your life.

JUSTIN: Yes. That is exactly right.

And there actually have been things. Statements that have been made by the Biden administration itself. Where it is said, as part of its reports, studying CBDCs and the benefits of it. And how it would be designed.

If they were to make a CBDC, even though they've haven't committed to doing that exactly. They have done all of the groundwork for it.

They've said flatout, that a CBDC needs to account for climate change. It needs to have financial inclusion built into it.

It needs to have equity built into it.

It needs to have concerns about pollution, built into it. They have worked with hundreds of stakeholders. And we all know what that means. Nonprofit groups. And labor organizations and others.

GLENN: Community activists.

JUSTIN: To help design the CBDC. So why are they doing all of that? Because it is going to be programmed, so that you can use it in certain ways, so that it can be prohibited in other ways.

And it can change on a dime. See, that's the other important thing.

It's not -- when it's programmable, they can change the rules whenever they want. It's not as though, they set the rules at the beginning, and that's the rules forever.

They can change the rules as they go. That's the threat of a programmable currency. So it's a huge threat to liberty.

GLENN: And all they will concentrate on is the one fact, and mark my words, this is the way it's going to happen.

We'll have a banking collapse.

Because there's a banking collapse, that will cause the dollar to skyrocket in inflation, possibly hyperinflation. Because you won't be able to have a supply chain anymore.

So many people will be unemployed. There's so much money awash, that if you want to buy something, well, you have 100 bucks?

Yeah. I'll buy that for $100. And it might be something that was worth $4 before the collapse.

And people will pay it. Hyperinflation will go crazy.

The fed will say, look, we have to stop it. Inflation is too much.

We will give you digital currency. It's already in a bank with your name.

All you have to do is sign in, and it will give you the money. And that is what will change inflation.

How do we know about that? Because we wrote about it, in a arguing -- I believe it was in Arguing with Socialists. A chapter we almost didn't put in about Modern Monetary theory. And Modern Monetary theory, is what we're operating on.

We can spend as much money as we want, don't worry about inflation. If they have digital control of everyone's spending.

JUSTIN: Right. Exactly right. We talked about it both in Arguing with Socialists and The Great Reset.

It's a huge part of both socialist plans and Great Reset's elites plans. And those are not necessarily the same group. But there's no doubt about it, that that's the goal.

So why are there 20-some-odd states in the United States right now? Many of them are red states. Texas, Kentucky, Arizona, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Missouri, Montana, Arkansas, et cetera.

Why are they all doing whatever they possibly can, on the UCC code, updating it to make it at least a little bit easier for a CBDC to be utilized in the future. When a CBDC doesn't even exist yet.

Why would they be doing that? That is a really, really important question. But it's much worse than everything we've said so far.

And that's -- having worked with these lawmakers across the country. We have started to discover things in the UCC.

In the commercial code, that are incredibly, incredibly disturbing. Things that most of us just didn't realize were true. And if CBDC's happen, we're in for a world of hurt, that we didn't see coming.

And the reason for that, is under commercial code. When you take money, like if you have cash right now, under the current code. And you go to the bank, and you put money into the bank.

That money is no longer your money. That money is actually now owned by the bank.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

This is why you -- and this changed. Part of this changed in 2008. You are the lender of last resort, right?

You are the last person in line, to get money, if you have deposited into the bank. Because the bank, when you give them that money, and deposit it. They are then taking that money.

They don't have to ask for permission to loan it out.

They take that money as theirs. And they loan it out.

So what happens to your money?

Well, you don't have money. You -- what you have is a number in the bank, that the bank can now give back to you, or if they go belly-up? Well, then, you lose your money because it wasn't yours anyway. Correct?

JUSTIN: Yes. It's not your money. It's owned by the bank now.

Now, you can go to the bank and say, I want my money back. And then they hand you the money in cash, and you can walk out the door. And that money is yours.

You own that money. But here's the thing about a central bank digital currency: And this is what we're beginning to learn.

How the commercial code deals with that. When you -- you can't put Central Bank Digital Dollars, okay? Digital fed coin. You can't put that in your pocket, and walk out the door. Can you?

It has to be somewhere. It can't be in your actual possession. And because of that --

GLENN: Well, wait. Bitcoin, you can put on a thumb drive. And so you can walk away with it. But digital currency, central bank, no.

JUSTIN: Yes. Correct. They're not going to design it so you can put it into a hard drive or something like that.

But even if -- even if they did, the uniform -- that's why they're updating the uniform commercial code the way they are.

They're putting rules into place, so that you could use a CBDC, even if it is possible to download it on to a hard drive or something like that.

But the layers behind the uniform commercial code, acknowledge in their various meetings and comments and other things, that it's highly unlikely that a CBDC would ever be designed in that way.

It's not -- you will have to put it into some kind of account. So what does that mean?

What it means in effect is that all of the money. All of the CBDC money that exists in society. Will be owned by whoever owns the account.

Which means the fed, or the bank. Or whoever is designated by the Federal Reserve Bank to operate that system.

But you, the individual person, will not own the money.

The money will belong to someone else. It will not belong to you. You will not own it. Under the commercial code, as it is written right now.

Forget about what they're advising it to. Under right now, you would not own any money.

It would all belong to someone else. So forget about whether it's programmable from a design perspective. In practice, it will not be your money anyway.

And so how can you not think of that famous article for the World Economic Forum, we've talked about a thousand times.

In the future, you will own nothing.

And you will have no privacy. Well, it seems like that's what the purpose of this is. So it is not enough to simply kill the UCC bill updates that we're talking about all across the country. That is essential. But we need to do more than that. We need to rewrite that code so that CBDCs cannot be used in a variety of other contexts as well.

GLENN: All right. Stand by. Stand by.

I think that we have to -- we have to really, truly get down to a basic line here, that you have to do in your own state.

And I'm not sure. And I want to talk to Justin. That the UCC code is enough.

And we'll talk about it here, in just 60 seconds.

You know, some people have a hard time falling asleep. I have a hard time falling asleep.

And what? Three times in the last seven days probably. I took Relief Factor sleep. It works wonders for me.

When you -- when you don't get your sleep, you fall asleep in meetings.

Oh, that's really good. When you don't get your sleep, you're not performing at your best. Relief Factor sleep is 100 percent drug-free. It's a blend of natural ingredients.

And it promotes healthy sleep by reducing anxiety and distress and improving mood. Promoting relaxation. My wife and I, we were in Costco yesterday, and we were loading up on, you know, just different medicines and things like that.

And I said, honey, because Rafe used to take melatonin. I said, you want to get some extra melatonin? She said, no, it doesn't work.

Relief Sleep is much better. And it's true. If it doesn't work for you, this is the same kind of thing as melatonin, except it's better, and it's all 100 percent natural ingredients.

So unleash the power of great sleep by calling 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief. Do it now. Or go to relieffactor.com.

Read all about it. Try it. It's really remarkable. And you are left refreshed. You don't feel it in your system at all. Dream big, sleep tight. Relief Factor sleep at ReliefFactor.com. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: All right. Justin, we have -- we have been talking about the UCC code. And we've been telling people not to allow it to pass. Now you've been working with legislatures, all over the country. And these legislators are telling you, no. There's much more to the code. We have to change it.

Would it be better just to go for states passing law, that CBDCs can't be used for commerce?

JUSTIN: So it's a really complicated question because there are all sorts of issues related to the Constitution and who has the authority to regulate money.

And whether or not a state can even pass a law, that outright rejects the use of -- of an established form of money, at the federal level.

Because it's a federal responsibility, to coin money.

Of course, there are people who say, well, yeah. But coining money means physical money, not digital money.

And so maybe they are allowed to do it. And so I think there are a lot of open questions about that, that we don't necessarily know.

I think that the most effective thing that legislators can do.

And legislators actually do not know a lot of the things I've told you today. I've gotten that from a lot of UCC lawyers, actually.

But what they need to do. They need to focus first, in my opinion.

I think Americans would be much better off, if lawmakers killed the UCC bills. Okay?

If they killed the UCC bills to update them right now, they would be much better off.

But then they also need to update the UCC and all other state laws that they can possibly find, in ways, that would make it so that a central bank digital currency, is undermined in the state, in financial transactions.

For example, can you use a CBDC? A programmable digital currency, when you're using -- for collateral and a loan, let's say.

Okay?

State laws dictate some of that, and they can undermine that.

They can do things like that, to undermine the use of a CBDC, and I think that's what they have to do.

RADIO

Why Glenn Beck DELETED @BlazeTV’s TikTok Account

The Chinese-owned social media app TikTok faced scrutiny after CEO Shou Zi Chew testified in a congressional hearing, finally convincing Glenn to delete the official BlazeMedia TikTok account for good. On today’s Friday Exclusive, Glenn responds to the critiques he received for his anti-TikTok stance and explains why the app is a danger to American privacy. But first, our economy continues to crash as bank stock declines worldwide. Glenn discusses the consequences of the Biden administration’s economic decisions that worsen the problem. Lastly, Glenn shares his insight on actress Amanda Bynes’s recent psychotic episode and exposes the ‘toddlers to train wreck’ environment in Hollywood for childhood actors.