GLENNMarch 13, 2017

Mike Lee on Repealing Obamacare and His Wild Curiosity About Wiretapping

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) joined The Glenn Beck Program on Monday to talk about why the GOP won't resurrect the Obamacare repeal bill passed in 2015, his wild curiosity about evidence the administration might have about wiretapping, and why Republicans are suddenly in love with infrastructure spending.

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

GLENN: Senator Mike Lee who is at an airport getting ready to board a plane. We're glad you would take the time to hop on the phone with us. How are you, sir?

MIKE: Doing great. Thanks so much, Glenn.

GLENN: Good. Let's get to Obamacare repeal and replace. This thing is nothing like what the Republicans were promising us they would do. Nowhere even close.

Do we have a chance of getting something good out of this?

MIKE: Sure. Something good can come out of it. What happens, whether something good comes out of it, the extent to which it might be good depends entirely on how members of Congress handle this in the next few days, on how they choose to cast their votes.

Now, look, you're right. What we promised was to repeal Obamacare, as much of Obamacare as we possibly could, and then to start trying to find new ways to put the American people back in charge of their own health care.

Well, what this bill does is it doesn't repeal nearly as much of Obamacare as we could. It leaves all kinds of things intact. It leaves most of the Obamacare regulations in place. Most of -- many of the Obamacare taxes remain in place, at least for a time. It leaves expanded Medicaid intact for a period of time. And then doesn't make as many adjustments to it long-term.

Meanwhile, it comes up with a new refundable tax credit, which we don't know the cost of yet. We don't know how many people are going to take it.

There are a lot of unanswered questions, which begs the question: Why are we not just repealing? Why are we not just passing the same repeal bill that Republicans in the House and in the Senate voted for in December of 2015? That's what I'd like to see.

STU: Mike, is it true that you can't just repeal it unless you have 60 votes? You can't do it through reconciliation with just a full repeal?

MIKE: There is some ambiguity as to how many of the insurance regulations of Obamacare could be repealed through reconciliation. So there's an open question on that. But we do that know we could repeal all the taxes and all of the subsidies and possibly some of the regs through reconciliation. We know that because the reconciliation bill we passed in 2015 repealed all of the taxes and all the subsidies.

GLENN: So why aren't we doing it?

MIKE: That's a very good question. That's what I believed we were going to do. That's what many of us were told -- otherwise led to believe.

GLENN: Why aren't we doing it?

STU: He said it was a good question.

MIKE: There are those in Congress who chose to take a different path. Now, I can't speak for them. I can't speak to what their intentions are. I think the easiest, simplest way of explaining it is, they had other priorities that they wanted to attach to this. Priorities that were perhaps higher than simply achieving repeal, at least to the degree that --

GLENN: Can you give me an example of what might be more important than what you promised the American people?

MIKE: Okay. So here's how I think they would explain it, and I want to be clear, I'm always careful not to try to speak for somebody else. But I think if they were here with us, they would probably say, look, we don't want people to be in a state of too much uncertainty and doubt. We don't want them to be afraid. We want them to have a degree of confidence about what comes next after Obamacare repeal. And so we want to provide a soft landing spot for them. And that is so important. It's important enough to them, apparently, that they're willing to go a little softer on some of the repeal and provide more programs through this bill right now.

The problem with that is, it's -- it's not going to pass. And it probably shouldn't pass until they can answer more of these questions, more of these questions about why we can't repeal more of Obamacare than this bill does.

PAT: And the other problem with that, Mike, is that that's not what they promised us. That's not what they said they were going to do. They didn't say, well, we're going to think about this and provide a safe landing spot for people. It's going to take a really long time. We're going to not repeal -- it was repeal and replace. That's what they ran on. That's what they were elected to do. And now, again, as so often happens with the Republican Party, they're not doing it. Frustrating.

MIKE: Yeah, that's right. By the way, I love the Kermit the Frog imitation that both you and Glenn do.

GLENN: Thank you so much. Thank you. That's what happens when your best friend since 1980 --

PAT: Yeah.

MIKE: Well, he has, in fact, been the spokesman for the AHCA, so it's appropriate that we use his voice when doing this. But, no, you're exactly right, this is what we ran on, this is what we promised. Now, to my great dismay, to my great surprise, on many instances over the last week or so, we've had legislators from the House and the Senate somehow saying that this bill, the AHCA is somehow what we campaigned on, what we ran on. Well, that's news to me. That's news to me because we've had this bill for only a few days.

PAT: Me too.

MIKE: That's news to me if we somehow ran on this specific bill, a bill the score of which we still don't know. We still don't know how much this thing is going to cost. We still don't have any idea how many people will take this refundable tax credit. And, therefore, how much it's going to cost. So that's news to me, that that's somehow what we ran on.

What I remember that we ran on was that we would repeal every scrap of Obamacare that we possibly could, the whole thing, if we could get away with it under our procedural rules in the Senate. And that's what we should be doing.

STU: We're talking to Senator Mike Lee. And every time you're on, Mike, I like to ask you the nerdiest, most boring, uninteresting question to see --

GLENN: So please keep this answer short. Please, for the love of Pete.

STU: So I apologize in advance for this.

But when the Bush tax cuts were passed, they were passed under reconciliation. And because of that, they expired after ten years. Would the same thing happen here? If we repeal all these Obamacare taxes, in ten years, are we going to be talking about the expiration of the Obamacare repeal, and then it's going to be back into effect again?

MIKE: No, not necessarily. In fact, almost certainly not.

GLENN: Good end to that.

MIKE: Because of the fact that we were dealing with taxes in that circumstance, rather than something else. So that wouldn't be it.

STU: I thought it was a tax, which is the only reason it was constitutional. Wasn't that -- tax versus fee. Wasn't that a big conversation with Roberts?

MIKE: I'm sorry. I didn't hear that question. Can you say that again?

GLENN: Good. No, no, let's move on.

STU: Let's move on.

GLENN: So, Senator, let me ask you about the intelligence committee has given the president until this afternoon, they say they can't find any evidence that Barack Obama was spying on Donald Trump. And to present some evidence -- and we'll go pursue that. Any indication that he's going to present that evidence? And is there any reason to believe that he couldn't present the evidence if he had it?

MIKE: Okay. That's a good question. I'll answer the first question, I have no idea. I would love to see what the evidence is. I'm wildly curious about it. As to whether he could present it, that depends on what the "it" is.

I will tell you, my first reaction to this, when I very first learned about the tweet, my first reaction was, he's probably not talking about a traditional wiretap, where somebody actually goes to a judge and the judge orders a phone line to be tapped. Perhaps he's talking about a foreign intelligence surveillance court order issued pursuant to Section 702 of the FISA amendments, which would say, you know, here is an identified agent of a foreign government. Let's monitor this person's communications. And that there might have been some incidental communications with some US citizens, perhaps including people who were involved in one way or another with the campaign. That incidentally got pulled into that. That was my first reaction is that seemed the most plausible possibility. If, in fact, it's that, there might be some reasons why we might be reluctant to share that. Or --

GLENN: No, but he could share it with the intelligence committee, could he not -- or committee?

MIKE: Yes, yes, they've got the clearance to do that. So there's no reason why he couldn't share something like that with them. They've got clearance to see pretty much all of that. But as far as his ability to share that publicly, that would seem less likely if my theory is correct.

GLENN: And there's nothing that the president can't get, right? If he said, I want to show it, but, you know, this agency won't let me, you know, have access to this. There's -- everybody in in the Senate, would be like, okay. We need to see this. Behind closed doors. But you will open these books or whatever it is that he's saying the evidence is -- there's nothing the president couldn't get to, is there?

MIKE: I assume so. Because -- and, look, he's the commander-in-chief. There's nothing that he doesn't have access to. And so if he can -- if he can back this up, if he knows what it is that he's referring to, there's no reason that I'm aware of why he couldn't come up with something that he could produce to these Intel Committees. Now, whether he will choose to do so or not is a different question. Perhaps there are those close to him advising him, hey, you don't have to do this if you don't want to. But that --

GLENN: Why wouldn't you?

MIKE: -- that requires rank speculation.

GLENN: Why wouldn't you?

MIKE: I don't know. If perhaps he didn't want to set a precedent that he could just be required to answer questions every time the Intel Committee wanted to hear something. But I would think in this instance, he would want to, particularly because these questions are going to be raised from time to time.

GLENN: Right. And we're talking about national security. I mean, we're talking about something that he's accused another president of doing. And if that president was doing that, that needs to be stopped.

MIKE: Yes. Yes. Exactly. And that's -- that's -- all the more reason why I suspect he'll provide them with what they want to know because you're right. Look, this is one of the things I've been worried about for years. And I've expressed this concern on your show previously. But if you remember the Church Committee, the Frank Church Committee back in the '70s --

GLENN: Yep.

MIKE: -- conducted a series of hearings to look into abuses by our intelligence-gathering agencies, and what they concluded was startling, which was that in every administration from Ford -- from FDR through Ford and Nixon, who was in power at about the time they concluded their research, that the US government's intelligence gathering apparatus had been used to engage in political espionage. Now, look at what's happened since then. Our technology has improved dramatically. Our technological means of gathering intelligence have grown by leaps and bounds. And our laws haven't always kept up with that.

And so to me, it would be almost surprising if some of this were not occurring. That's why we need to be watchful of this. That's why I was concerned, immediately, when I saw the president's tweet was because I considered it plausible, if not likely that this kind of thing would be going on.

GLENN: One last question, let's go to infrastructure. The G.O.P. went out of their gourd -- and I believe rightly so -- for a stimulus package for roads and bridges and tunnels and everything else for $787 billion. I remember that number. It's burned -- seared into my memory of $787 billion. Now the president is proposing a trillion dollar stimulus package, and the Republicans are very excited about it. Can you tell me what made the 787 billion-dollar stimulus package an affront on the Constitution and this one a dream come true?

MIKE: Well, I can't point to any distinguishing characteristic between the two, as to why this one would be good and that one bad.

In fact, look, when I look at the Constitution, I see the powers of Congress being limited. They're enumerated powers, most of them in Article I, Section 8. And they talk about things like the power to provide for our national defense, to declare war, to regulate trade between the states with foreign nations and with Indian tribes. I don't see anything in there that says that it's the prerogative of Congress to create all infrastructure.

Now, look, it's one thing if we're talking about an interstate corridor here or there. But it's another thing entirely if we're talking about wholesale, top to bottom, soup to nuts transportation infrastructure, even intrastate projects.

I think whether we're talking about under the Obama administration or any subsequent administration, headed by a Republican or a Democrat, I think we've got to look carefully at what we're doing there. Not every transportation infrastructure is necessarily outside of Congress' authority. Because some of them do involve a distinctly interstate function. But where they don't, we have constitutional problems.

GLENN: Mike Lee, always good to talk to you. Thank you so much, sir. Appreciate it.

MIKE: Thank you very much, sir. It's good to be with you.

STU: So positive.

GLENN: Yeah. He is. Boring as snot.

STU: Thank you very much.

Oh, I love him. He is saving my hope in the entire country right about now.

GLENN: He is so good and so smart. And, you know, he's just tickled pink by, you know -- I love -- I love because you know he's accurate. But when you're talking to him -- because he's like this all the time, well, I mean, in section 508, subsection B, paragraph four --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- you'll see -- and he did that like four times during this. You just have to get used to, that's the way he is.

STU: He's that guy.

GLENN: And that's why he is so good and so needed in the Senate. Want to give you this from the New York Post today. Bank fees rise to an all-time high. The average customer now pays $666 a year in banking fees.

STU: Satan.

GLENN: Right. Right.

STU: This is how it happens.

GLENN: The overdraft revenue from the top three banks has surged from 5.1 billion to $5.4 billion. That's what they make if you overdraft.

$5.4 billion. Does anybody remember that we're providing them? It's a service that we're providing them as well. We're giving them our money.

JEFFY: No. No.

GLENN: So they can loan it out to other people. No, they don't care anymore.

JEFFY: No, they do not.

RADIO

Unveiling the DARK side of artificial intelligence

Artificial intelligence is being sold as the ultimate tool for progress and convenience, but at what cost? Glenn Beck sits down with investigative journalist Whitney Webb to uncover how Big Tech and government powers are quietly constructing a “digital prison” that feeds on human data, erodes individual freedom, and conditions society into passive dependence. Webb exposes how the seductive promise of comfort and automation masks a deeper agenda: cognitive manipulation, emotional engineering, and a move toward a post-human future.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Whitney Webb HERE

RADIO

Glenn Beck's eye-opening findings on AIPAC and US laws

Glenn Beck was recently asked a question during his TPUSA speech at the University of North Dakota: Is the fact that AIPAC doesn’t have to register as a foreign agent under FARA evidence that Israel has unprecedented control over the United States? Glenn did his homework and presents his findings: It looks like the real issue is our own laws…

Watch Glenn's TPUSA speech HERE

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There is a -- a phrase that is carved into the marble at the Supreme Court, and it says "equal justice under the law." Equal justice under the law.

That is the one thing that we've really forgotten about here in America it seems. You want special justice. You want justice for this group or that group. But, no, I want equal justice. It's why justice is blindfolded. Justice should never see who is at the bench.

They should see, what are the facts of the case? And who is at the bench should not make a difference. I don't care if you're rich or you're poor, you're homeless, or you're Bill Gates. I don't really care. I want to know the facts. And then we judge that, not looking at the person.

That's the closest we can come to perfect justice. And the farther -- the more we take that blindfold off of justice, the more corrupt justice becomes, and we know this. Because that's why if you were black back in the day, you couldn't get a fair hearing. A fair trial. Because justice wasn't blindfolded, okay? That's why it's up on the Supreme Court.

Equal justice under the law. And it's not a suggestion. It's not a slogan. It is the beating heart of the American experiment. You know, no man. No movement. No institution. No creed stands above the law!

Now, the reason why I bring this up, is because last week I was in a turning point event in North Dakota, and I said all the way through, "I hate these question and answer things."

Because I don't believe -- hate conflict. And I also don't believe anybody is doing anything other than trying to win. When you're in a crowd, somebody is trying to win. I don't play that game. I don't like that game.

I like honest questioning. And you also have to have a debate, where you can talk about -- you can talk about subtle things. You know, you can -- you have to be able to look at things, not everything is black and white.

There is right and wrong, yes. But now, how do we get there?

For instance, last week -- yesterday, I talked to you about AI. Earlier, this seems like last week already. Earlier in hour number one, in the podcast. I was talking to you about AI.

And I don't know the right answer on that yet. We have to have that debate.

But an honest debate on things. So last week, I started taking questions, and, boy, did they take these and selectively edit. Interesting.

But I was asked, you know, Glenn, how come AIPAC -- that's the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee -- how come they don't register as a foreign agent under FARA, the Foreign Agents Registration Act? Well, I know that Hunter Biden was supposed to register under that. Or was he?

Now, I said at the time, I don't know anything about it. I haven't looked into that. But I will do my homework on it. Because I want to know. And my guess is: If they don't, then there's something wrong with our law! Okay?

Either they're giving special favors that they shouldn't, or many people are getting special favors, and they shouldn't. Everyone should have to obey the law. And equal treatment.

Justice is blind. Okay. So let me tell you now.

I went home. I did my homework. Let me tell you what I found on AIPAC. First of all, it is bigger than AIPAC. Much bigger. It is a mirror held up to an uneven application of American law. Let me tell you what FARA is supposed to do. It was passed in 1948, to stop the Nazi propaganda. People were -- there were lots of Nazis here in America. And it requires anyone that is working on behalf of a foreign government, to register as a foreign agent.

Seems simple.

But is it?

It requires transparency and accountability. But here's where it gets murky in the law: AIPAC is an American lobbying organization, registered under the lobbying disclosure act, not FARA.

Because it's funded and run by American citizens, not a foreign government. Now, that's the legal line. Now, I don't agree with this. But that's the legal line.

But AIPAC is not the only one running this. So why are we only hearing about the Jews controlling the government, when -- and AIPAC doing it, when they're not the only one.

Did you know the National Iranian-American Council, the Armenian Assembly of America, the Turkish Heritage Organization, even Saudi Arabia's ARAMCO, their subsidiary, Motiva operate under exactly the same -- you want Saudi Arabia and ARAMCO?

Why are they not paying it? Why are they not registered under FARA? Now, some people will defend this. Because they say, these are groups of diaspora. They are US-based subsidiaries. They have domestic roots, et cetera. I don't buy any of that bullcrap. I mean, that's me. I mean, we can argue it, but I don't agree with that. Because I think it's a really dangerous loophole that allows quiet foreign money to come in and influence and hide behind a US address.

But here's where it gets serious. This is not just a legal issue. This is about truth.

When you and I or anyone else, begin selecting only the facts that make our point, while ignoring those that don't, we stop doing research, and we start doing propaganda.

If you've listened to voices that pick and choose data, to inflame your anger, you have to start asking yourself this question. Is my source being honest.

I ask you all the time, do your own homework.

I'm the guy who I think popularized that with the youth now.

Do your own homework.

Don't take my word for it. Do your own homework.

But that requires that you do homework on all fronts. You ask honest questions. Am I wrong?

Is this wrong?

I want to read the opposite side. And I want to see what's credible on both sides and bring it together.

Example, once you learn that the Iranians, Cubans, Saudis, Armenians, and Turks all have the same objection, yet it's only the Jewish organization that is accused of secretly controlling Washington, do you see -- a disturbing pattern here.

Because the -- the argument starts to sound less like a legal concern, and more like something far older and darker. And that was my point. I said, look, you don't to have agree with Israel.

I don't want to fight their wars. I don't want to do anything. I support them in their right to defend themselves as they see fit.

I don't support anything like genocide. I don't believe they're doing genocide.

I do believe Hamas is. And I do believe you can make a very, very clear case, that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran are evil.

And I said, look, you don't have to accept Israel. And you don't -- you don't have to accept Hamas. You can say nobody is a good guy in this. But when you look at things like AIPAC. If there's more, and this is what I said, if it's about something legal, then we have to correct that. And the argument would be over.

I could say what I'm saying today, and say, look, we should have listened to Tom Cotton. He introduced legislation on this. All of this has to stop.

So let's do that. Why are we dividing ourself on an ancient Jews control the world thing, when that's not even true about AIPAC, okay?

Because everybody else is doing that too. The problem isn't Judaism. It's not Islam. It's not any one nation. Quite honestly, if you want to be honest, the problem is our laws and our politicians.

Equal justice under the law. It must be our demand every day. Jew, Muslim. Gentile.

Hunter Biden. Everyone -- everyone should be the same under the law. What's happened instead, is that this loophole has become a weapon.

And people twist it, to their own, you know. Their own the light.

To suggest that AIPAC, you know, runs the US government and the Pentagon and the president, which is laughable, especially this week. That is laughable.

Just look at the events of the last few days. Do you really think that Donald Trump is being controlled by Israel?

Have you heard what he has said to Benjamin Netanyahu?

Have you seen all of the Egyptians and the Saudis and everybody else and the Arab world, all now lining up for this peace?

When he bombed -- when he bombed Iran, he's not fighting Israel's war.

When he bombed Iran, it wasn't for Israel. Any more than it was for I didn't want and Saudi Arabia. You found out yesterday, that the one thing they all unite on, is that Iran is the real problem there.

And what he did was a -- a show of peace through strength. The same principle, that ended the decades of stalemate between Arab nations, and Israel.

And here's another thing. When you stop sending pallets of cash, to your enemies, and you start saying, don't do that anymore!

And I'm serious. They tend to listen.

And what was the result?

You could speculate, and I worried at the time.

I said it, on the air. I'm worried that this could slate things.

But it didn't. So what is the result?

The result was not an endless war where we're over fighting in the Middle East. I don't want that. And neither do you.

The result was true Arab Israeli peace. The first chance of true peace in -- in a millennia.

And now, he's taken that credibility of saying, look, I'll be tough on the Arabs. I'll be tough on the Iranians. I'll be tough on the Jews. I'll be tough on Hamas.

However, I will say, Hamas, you do these things.

And I'm with you. He yesterday invited Iran into the League of Nations.

Look, just because we bombed you, it doesn't mean we hate you. We want you to have peace.

So come on in. Now he's taken that same credibility, and now he's turning it towards Russia and Ukraine. And he's doing that.

He's meeting with the leadership of Ukraine, on Friday.

And he's going to apply the same exact principle.

And here's what's going to happen.

The same people who said he was once a Russian puppet, will now accuse him of getting us into a war with Russia, and do Ukraine's bidding.

Which one is it?

Which one is it?

May I suggest a third reason? Maybe, just maybe, for the first time I believe in my lifetime, we are seeing America -- an American president doing America's bidding.

Trying to broker peace. Trying to keep us out of these endless wars.

Because honestly, isn't that what all of us want. I don't care who you voted for. Do you want more foreign wars?

Because I don't.

I'm tired of it.

Do you want to see more blood and treasure spilled in some unknown country?

Wants that -- isn't that what we all want is an end to these wars. No more young Americans spilling their blood in distant deserts or frozen tundras, for somebody else's freedom, who I don't even know if they really want freedom?

I want freedom here.

I want to -- I want to able to show the world, what people who actually understand what freedom is.

Know what the high price is, that we have to pay for our own freedom. Not your freedom.

Our freedom. What we can do in that freedom.

We want to be a shining city on the hill.

That everyone can look at, and go, look at those guys. I want to be more like them.
Not going over to other countries and jamming it down their throat. I want peace, but peace grounded in strength and honesty.

And the unbreakable, carved in stone, promise of equal justice under the law.

That's what we have to do, to restore faith in the republic.

We have to stop taking little bits and pieces. Look at the whole thing and say, what's corrupt? Well, what's corrupt here might have started as a good thing. But it's no longer a good thing.

We have to change the law. Equal justice under the law.

I'm sorry. If you are doing the bidding, Hunter Biden or AIPAC. Or the Iranian Council or Armenian Council, or whatever. I'm sorry.

We have to tighten this down. Because money has changed. It's changed!

Things that were happening in 1945, 1955. '85. '95. So that I have.

It's changed, and I don't want any foreign influence coming into this country, unless we know exactly you're -- you're influencing for a foreign country.

Because this is what makes us different than every other country that has come before. And that's not ideology. That's not party. That's not tribe.

That's how we have to define America again. If we're going to survive.

So you may not like it. I'm sorry.

But you asked me to do my own homework on AIPAC. There it is!

RADIO

China vs. US: The battle for rare earth minerals and AI dominance

There is a quiet war brewing between China and the US over rare earth minerals and AI. We CANNOT lose this war, Glenn Beck warns. But can we win it without destroying ourselves in the process? Glenn Beck explains why we must have this conversation and connects 4 stories from around the world that reveal what’s coming…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. I told you about gold here. Record highs.

And it is telling us something. Usually, it would tell us if the dollar is in real, real trouble. I think, and I am guessing at this now.

But I think what this is telling us, is that the whole world, the system is in trouble. And let me give you an example. I'm going to talk to you about something to try to make sense of it here. But I do have a good answer. Because we're not having these conversations. I have told you for almost 20 years, when it comes to AI. We must have these conversations now, because the world is going to change overnight. And we are at that point! We are at the point of singularity. Where there is no turning back. And we haven't had these conversations. Do you want to win the AI war?

I will tell you, we cannot lose it. But to win it, we may have to sacrifice so much on the altar of liberty, that I don't want to fight it!

So what do we do?

Let me explain. Something has shifted in the world. And most people cannot feel it yet.

But if you're paying attention, you understand, there is something on the horizon. One day soon, we're going to wake up, and we're going to realize, uh-oh. I think we crossed the line here. Quietly, silently. While no one was paying attention, everything changed.

Over the past few days, while the world was paying attention on what's going on in Israel and the Middle East. There's a couple of other really important headlines that caught my attention.

And at first, they all seemed unrelated. Just random stories from around the world. But when you look closer. And this is what I think I do best.

I take things that are seemingly unrelated. And say, wait a minute. Wait a minute.

I think they all fit into this category.

So let me give you some threads here.

First thread is China. Beijing just tightened its grip on rare earth elements. These are the minerals that make absolutely everything possible. Your smartphone. Your electric car. Your missile defense system. Your refrigerator. Everything depends on these rare earth minerals. China, because of our inaction and stupid policies over the last couple of decades, control now, 80 percent of the world's supply chain. That cannot stand. Now, what they're doing, is they're choking it off! They're now closing it up, and they are threatening the West. No more rare earth -- rare earth minerals. If that happens, we cannot defend ourself.

Do we have rare earth minerals? Yeah. We have lots of them. But we're not mining them.

It will take a decade to start mining them, up in Alaska. Where they mainly are.

That's why Donald Trump was saying, we need Greenland!

That's what he was saying. Rare earth minerals. Because they're already mining them there. And we cannot lose them!

Now, they're choking it off, and rare earth stocks exploded overnight.

Because whoever controls those minerals, controls the future. Now, here's the second threat, the Pentagon.

Out of nowhere, they made a billion dollar emergency order for those same rare earth minerals. That's not normal. That's not paperwork. That is the sound of the military quietly preparing for something, a shortage. Possibly in a storm. Like I said, we are -- because of what Biden did in Ukraine, we are -- are wholly unprepared for any kind of military action. We don't have the materials.

And at the same time, everything is changing to high-tech. We don't have the rare earth minerals, and the chips now, to make our guided missile systems.

The third threat, JP Morgan Chase. One of the most powerful institutions on the planet, just announced this week, a $1.5 trillion investment plan. In what they call security and resilience.

That's not going to mom and pop shops. That's not going to community loans. That money is being funneled straight into AI, defense manufacturing, and critical minerals.

It's as if the Pentagon and Wall Street just linked arms and decided to build a fortress economy together.

Then came the fourth threat. Nobody paid attention to this one. In Europe, the Dutch government just seized control of the Chinese-owned chip maker on their own soil.

They invoked emergency powers and nationalized the company to stop the Chinese influence over the semiconductor industry. That's not good. Four stories, four continents, four quiet tremors in the ground. When you weave them all together, that's when you begin to understand what all of this means. So let me try to do that.

The old world, as we know it is dying! Pragmatism the world of free markets. The world of open trade. Individual enterprise.

The world that lifted billions out of poverty, is being replaced now, slowly, but surely by something new.

And this one is being done in the name of security.

And I don't have an answer for this. This is why we must pay attention, and talk about it now!

Corporations now are aligning with state power. Before, we had the tech industry, aligning itself with the government to control speech.

This is the government aligning themselves with tech rare earth minerals, et cetera, et cetera. To be able to win the AI war.

This -- this -- all of this is a single unspoken motive. And that is, the race to dominate artificial intelligence. This is the new arms race. This is the nigh Manhattan Project. The new nuclear weapon. Except, this is a million the times more enslaving than nuclear weapons could ever hope to be.

Whoever masters this first, whoever gets to AI and AGI first will control the economies, the information, even your thought itself.

Every rare earth mineral, every chip, every line of code, they're all ingredients in that same contest. And the nations are moving fast. They're hoarding materials now.

They're beginning to seize companies.

They're building walled off supply chains. This is happening on their side. And on our side.

And the free market in this particular place, is no longer free. It's being drafted into a digital Cold War. Now, that sounds bad, but now let me tell you the danger that nobody seems to get.

When nations go to war, even an economic war, freedom always becomes a casualty. We tell -- we tell ourselves, we're fighting for liberty. And we are!

Because we don't want to live if had a society like China, right?

I don't!

But when survival is on the line, governments tighten control for our own good. They regulate. They ration. They censor. And one day, you look up, and you realize, the line between democracy and technocracy is gone. If the -- if the West wants to win this AI war and we must, then we have to have a conversation.

Why are we even fighting this war?

Because if in winning it, we become China. Why not let China just win?

If we adopt the same top-down control. The same surveillance. The same emergence of government and corporate power. Then what did we actually win?

Didn't we just trade one master for another?

The old global system, free enterprise, open markets, individual liberty.

It is being rewritten in real time.

And the threads are now all coming together. And they are -- they are weaving a new tapestry.

I don't know what the tapestry looks like. I can guess what that tapestry looks like.

And I don't like it.

Will it be woven, from freedom, or will it be woven from fear?

If we lose sight of who we are -- look, our global leadership, it's already lost sight for who we are. They don't care. They don't care.

None of them care. They'll get to this global dominance over the individual, one way or another, in their book. You must care. You must stand for freedom. You must be at the head of having this conversation. Because if we lose sight of who we are, it -- this tapestry is going to be strong, efficient, and unbreakable.

But it will not be free. Some take can, historians will look back at this moment, and they will go, what happened?

They're going to see these quiet headlines. These invisible decisions that are being made right now. And they will realize, this is when the new world began. They will be able to look at this point and say, this was it!

Why didn't people see it?

Hmm.

The answer to that is office.

We have -- we're overwhelmed with everything that we have to do. Everything we're looking at.

This has been a very well-planned takeover of freedom.

You have to ask yourself: When the weaving is done, whose pattern will we be living in? Because that is what is coming.

There's a story in the show prep today, that I really want I to live. I will talk to you about it in a second. Western executives who visit China are coming back terrified. You don't have any idea how far China is ahead of us.

And you can say, well, I don't want to be China. Well, you will be China, and China will be controlling you, if we don't push back.

But how do we push back, without becoming China.

Listen to this next story.

You can find it in our headlines. If you just go get the free email newsletter, at GlennBeck.com.

Western executives are visit China are coming back terrified.

I will explain it to you, coming up in a second. First, our sponsor this half-hour, it's JASE Medical. Headlines, this week. Have been a mix of relief and reality. Good news, in some places, in chaos and uncertainty, still just one turn away.

If there's one thing the past few years have taught us.

It's that supply chain systems and stability can change overnight.

And when that happens, the most fragile link are the ones we take for granted. Our access to the medications our family needs.

JASE Medical was created exactly for that reason. They put emergency antibiotics and essential medications into your hands, before you need them. You just fill out a simple online form. A licensed doctor will review it.

And your JASE case will arrive. Filled with real prescription-grade medicines. For life's what I forget moments. It's not fear. It's responsibility.

Because being prepared is not paranoia. It's what keeps small problems from becoming emergencies.

Whether that's a storm or delay or crisis halfway around the world, your family deserves the peace of mind that comes with JASE Medical and their JASE Case. Be ready for before the world reminds you why you need to be ready.

When you order your JASE Case today, use the promo code Beck. B-E-C-K. You'll get a discount on it. Go to JASE. J-A-S-E.com. Get a discount, at JASE.com. Promo code Beck.

Ten-second station ID.
(music)
I am in Washington, DC. I'm actually at the Rush Limbaugh studios at the Heritage Foundation. I can't help them enough for the short notice, I was invited at the White House, over the weekend, to join the president and -- in honoring Charlie Kirk on his 32nd birthday today.

My receiving the freedom medal, and I'll be there along with a lot of other people. And I really can't wait to experience that. And hope to have some time with the president later today, and talk about some other things.

There's a lot of things going on. By the way, you can watch this ceremony, at TP USA. Turning Point USA YouTube. And the channels at 4:00 p.m. Eastern time.

And I hope to see you there. And I'll be back in the studios in Dallas tomorrow, to give you more about that, as we -- as we continue.

Okay. So let me give you this story. Western executive visit China, who are coming back. Quote, it's the most humbling thing I've ever seen, said Ford's chief executive about his recent trip to China. After visiting a string of factories, Jim Farley was left astonished by technical innovations being packed into Chinese cars from self-driving software to facial recognition.

The cost and quality of their vehicles is far superior to that on which I see in the West. We are in a global competition with China, and it's not just EVs. If we lose this, listen carefully, there is no future at Ford! If we lose this, there is no future at Ford.

Another executive: This one from the EU says, I can take you to factories in China now, where you'll basically be alongside a big conveyor belt, and the machines come out on the floor and begin to assemble parts. You're walking alongside this conveyor, and after about 800 meters, a truck drives out, and there are no people involved.

Other executives describe a vast dark factory, where robots do so much of the work alone, that there's no need to even turn on lights for humans.

We visited a dark factory, producing some astronomical numbers of cell phones.

The process is so heavily automated, that there were no workers on the manufacturing side, just a small number who are there to make sure a plant was working.

You get this sense of change, where China's competitive has gone from government subsidies and low wages, to a tremendous number of highly skilled, educated engineers, who are innovating like mad. Between 2014 and 2024, the number of industrial robots deployed in the country, rocketed from 189,000 to more than 2 million. It is -- just give you -- just let me give you this. Last year, China added 295,000 robots. Germany added 27,000.

The US 34,000. The UK, 2500.

The UK is over. I mean, it's just absolutely over. It boasts 567 robots for every 10,000 manufacturing workers. 449 in Germany for every 10,000. And 307 for the US.

So this is not -- this is -- I'm not preaching this because this is, you know, good for the country. It's bad for workers. It's bad for workers.

But China is doing it for a couple of -- a couple of things. First of all, their policy is known. I can't pronounce it in Chinese. But it translates to replacing humans with machines.

In China, they don't need to have a Patriot Act.

A really, super great thing for auto workers. No.

Replacing humans with machines, is the name of the policy.

Okay.

And it is -- it's happening everywhere. Everywhere. They can develop and execute models in probably half the time, that most European car makers can make.

And they're doing it, partially because they're seeing the decline in their birthrates. And they know, we're not going to have the workers to be able to do this.

But what's disturbing is. All of these robotics, are needing power.

They also need AI.

So they are building these gigantic server farms, which we are still breaking ground on. They're building them. They're building new power plants. One power plant, coal-fired power plant every week. And I think 40 -- can you look this up, Stu?

I think it's 40 nuclear power plants a year.

We're not building anything!

We're not building anything.

We're breaking ground on it.

Trump has already said, he's cutting all of the regulations.

But we're still far, far behind.

And we are getting close to the point where they win, we lose.

Again, I don't know what to do about it. Except, have a conversation about it. Because I've read the conversations from the left. I've read the conversations from World Economic Forum. And they don't care. They will take you and literally put you in a drug -- a drugged state, and put you online, and you're just going to play video games, your whole life. That is honestly their plan for a large number of people in the West, that will be just no longer usable. Undesirables. Well, I don't like those labels.

RADIO

The FBI knocked on my door to talk about Antifa...

The FBI showed up to Glenn's house to discuss his TV show exposing Antifa's network. Glenn shares what he learned from his "surreal" meeting and warns any member or funder of Antifa: you should be a little concerned because the FBI is SERIOUS about investigating you.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me tell you something else that's changed.

Let me start with this. Cut five here.

Here are the new talking points for the media on Antifa.

Listen to this.

VOICE: This is an entirely imaginary organization. There's not an Antifa.

VOICE: Look, I don't even know what Antifa is.
VOICE: There is no growth.

VOICE: It's not even like far right groups, like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, compared to right-wing extremists, Antifa-linked violence is rare and limited.

VOICE: It is an organization.
It is -- it is in many ways mythology.

VOICE: It's not like the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers. You know, they're defined terrorist organizations, the leadership that led -- that, you know, leads violence.

VOICE: It's not a highly organized movement. It's a moniker. It's not even a group like the Proud Boys are.

Things like Antifa are things that are thought up.

VOICE: These guys are going after Antifa, which is nothing. There's no organization called Antifa.

VOICE: Nobody is a member of Antifa because it doesn't exist! They are just claiming existence to something that doesn't exist.

VOICE: There is no Antifa organization, so maybe that's good for social media.

But it really has -- is nonexistent.

VOICE: They exist on the internet and chat rooms.

And in 4chan.

GLENN: Okay.

VOICE: And places like that. Where they run discussion boards. Trade tactics.

Documents. Things like that.

But none of them are called Antifa.

STU: What!

GLENN: I don't even know what they're talking about.

You want to talk about living in a different world.

But that's what's going around.

Now, let me just tell you this: Last week, I did a TV show that apparently got the FBI's attention.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: The topic was -- was initial investigation. A jumping off point, shattering the myth that Antifa just -- oh, it's -- it's just leaderless. And decentralized. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

We thought, no. It's really not. So we dove in. Head first.

And we analyzed the Antifa network. And we went from the street thugs, to the support groups, eventually, to the funding.

Okay?

To say the FBI was interested in this might be an understatement.

Let's just say, the FBI is turning over every single stone.

It is so clear to me, that they are exploring all angles of this. And they are talking to anyone and everyone that can give them think kind of information.

How do I know?

Saturday, I get a phone call.

The director would like to send over some agents to speak to you, Glenn.

And I'm like, the director?

The FBI agents?

Yes, you said, some things that they need to talk to you about.

Well, good things or bad things? "They'll be over."

Three agents sat in my living room on Saturday afternoon for almost two hours. And I immediately called Jason. I'm like, Jason, you're the researcher. It's your fault. I'm going to throw you under the bus. You better get your butt over here.

So Jason was there. My wife and I sat there, and it was surreal at one point. I talked to them for about 15 minutes just going over the Tides Foundation. And saying, if you understand Tides, you'll understand how difficult your job is going to be. And this is information that I first gave on Fox years ago.

Let me just say this: Finally, we have an administration and an FBI director, that is willing to go in deep. Not surface. But deep!

I could only imagine what we could have avoided, if anyone in an administration, would have done this, in 2011.

But if I were in that, imaginary group, of Antifa, which, by the way, has imaginary leaders. Leaving the country to go maybe to imaginary countries outside of the US right now. I would be very concerned. If I were a part of anything that was sending money their way or assistance their way.

I don't know!

I might be a little concerned, because the FBI is deadass serious.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Donald Trump, Kash Patel, and all of the agents at the FBI.

GLENN: We're covering from Allie Beth Stucky's big event, six or 7,000 women showed up this weekend for a weekend conference. It was -- it was unbelievable.

STU: Really, I saw the crowds. It was incredible.

GLENN: Yeah. She did a great, great job. I'm so proud of her. She's just killing it. But we will try to get to some of those clips because they're really, really good. We'll get to those later on in the program. You know, Stu and I were talking about how Antifa doesn't exist. And, you know, that's like saying -- it's like saying Al-Qaeda doesn't exist. Well, you're right.

There is no way, you know, 501 Broadway, you know, where you go to al-Qaeda's office. That doesn't happen, but it does exist, and it's an ideology.

And while they may not -- they may not take their direction from the same person at the office, I don't know. There's no HR. So they don't exist. They exist!

They exist. And they're loosely affiliated. And sometimes, they are getting money. You know.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And for the press and everybody else to say -- when you're watching them all over the country, and they're doing exactly the same thing, same tactics. Every -- everywhere.

You know, to say, they don't exist is just infantile.

STU: Yeah. It's like a -- it's -- I don't know what the word -- there should be a word for this, if there isn't.

But there's a real point used in an intentionally dumb way to mislead.

Is that malinformation? Is that what that is?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: It really is. There's a real point to it. They're disengaged from a centralized thing. This makes them more dangerous. This is how you had to deal with terrorist cells back in the day. However, they're using it in a way that makes it seem like it's not a threat, which is not accurate. And they know it's not accurate. And they're trying to mislead people with a piece of --

GLENN: Why would you -- why would you support -- why would you try to brush Antifa under the rug? I mean, it's just perplexing.

Glenn's Show Prep

Mike Lee on Repealing Obamacare and His Wild Curiosity About Wiretapping

Unveiling the DARK side of artificial intelligence

Glenn Beck's eye-opening findings on AIPAC and US laws

Transcript

China vs. US: The battle for rare earth minerals and AI dominance

Transcript

The FBI knocked on my door to talk about Antifa...

Transcript