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MIKE: There is some ambiguity as to how many of the insurance regulations of Obamacare could be repealed through reconciliation.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.

VIDEOS

TPUSA's Turning Point tour LIVE with Glenn Beck

In this poignant segment of Turning Point USA's American Comeback Tour live event, Glenn Beck honors the late Charlie Kirk by revealing his private plan to name Kirk as his successor in conservative media, emphasizing Kirk's unparalleled dedication and achievements. Blending themes of faith, history, and personal resilience, Beck shares life principles on forgiveness and truth while unveiling 'George AI,' a revolutionary tool for exploring American history through digitized artifacts and interactive conversations with Founding Fathers.

RADIO

Israel and Hamas sign Trump's historic deal. Will it work?

Israel and Hamas have signed phase 1 of President Trump’s peace deal, paving the path for the release of all remaining hostages, hopefully in a few days. Glenn and Stu explain the significance of this historic deal and what it could mean moving forward.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Oh. Your initial thoughts here on the peace deal?

STU: It's an incredible opportunity. I think it is important to remind ourselves, that this -- these things typically do fall apart. That is essentially your expectation, any time anything like this happens. Part of this is going to be Hamas coming through on promises.

I have very little belief that they are typically able to do such things.

That being said. They probably also -- you know, one of the things -- a friend of mine pointed this out to me. We were going through all of this.

And he said, you know, one thing to think about it: This is, like, not the B team of Hamas. But the R team of Hamas. They've killed so many of the leadership.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

STU: These are people making decisions that were not at the top of this organization and had those ridiculous ideological beliefs that would lead you to October 7th. That's not to mean that Hamas, these people that are left are like, "Hey, you want to invite them over for Thanksgiving."

But I do think there's a possibility here that they're like, you know, maybe this life is not here for us.

GLENN: That would be nice if that were true. I don't know if that were true. But it would be really thyself.

STU: I don't know if that's true. I do think there may be a little bit lower ideological commitment, potentially. And also, the idea that some of these people might be able to make this deal and escape to another third country.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And live life there, in a different way.

GLENN: So the breaking news that just was announced, Israel, their parliament or their cabinet just met or approved phase one of the deal.

And Hamas has just come out and said, they accept phase one of the deal.

That means the hostages will be released either this weekend or Monday.

Any remaining hostage will be released.

STU: I mean, just that.

GLENN: Just that.

STU: If that occurs, it is a massive achievement.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: So far, it is already the greatest opportunity we've had.

And only possible because of his detection to this idea!

GLENN: And his deal-making.

Not just his vision.

But his ability to work all of the parties and find out what all the parties need.

And make it happen.

You know, we're not talking about peace between Gaza, you know, Hamas, and Israel.

We're talking about peace in the Middle East.

STU: Yeah. It's bigger. It's bigger than just Israel.

GLENN: I mean, it's Egypt and Saudi Arabia and -- and Jordan to some extent. And -- and Turkey. All of them getting together and saying, you know what! We'll rebuild Gaza. We want to make it into a very prosperous kind of area. I mean, think of places in Saudi Arabia that are so prosperous. That's the way Gaza could be. So they're all getting together and they're saying, "We will rebuild. We'll oversee. We will try to make everything -- you know, keep everything held."

They will put their money into it, which means they have a lot to lose if it goes awry. And they're all saying, "We can co-exist with Israel."

Three years ago, did you even think that was possible?

STU: Yeah. And, you know, look, there are a lot of places you can go and find non-stop criticism of Donald Trump. They will say terrible things he does, and everything he does is the worst thing ever.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Also, there are plenty of places you can go where you find that everything that he does is the greatest thing of all time.

I hope you realize that's not what we do here. And I -- on a -- I said this -- and you said this as well when we -- when this was unveiled.

Sometimes, you can get -- people are critical of the way Trump handles these situations.
Sometimes. And sometimes there's arguments on that.
Sometimes it's not the best approach.

You know, we were critical of him, for example, how he handled Canada. You know, probably cost Poilievre that election. And I think that's a really bad thing.

GLENN: I do on top.

STU: That being said, this is a great example of where his instincts work perfectly. This is all set up over a long period of foundational stuff from his first term. With the decision he made, to come out and just announce the agreement with Netanyahu. We agreed. We agreed to this peace deal.

Now, in theory, we have no position to agree between these two parties. But he came out and all of the focus had been, look at all the bad things Israel is doing. Look at how bad, they're so evil. They're so bad.

And he said, we agree with Israel. Now we just need Hamas.

And so the world's attention was like, what's Hamas going to say?

Finally, he was able to focus his attention to the appropriate place. To the party that is holding the hostages, to say, hey. How about asking if they want to a freaking cease-fire for once?

He was able to do that. In a way that I think only Donald Trump could achieve. Which leads to this, over a long foundation.

GLENN: And here's another thing.

You know, this guy has walked through wall after wall after wall of fire. Everybody calling him everything. Nazi, every day.

Here's a guy who, you know, in a time period where the whole world is like, the Jews control everything. Donald Trump is run by the Jews.

He not only kept his relationship with Israel solid and helped them, when he thought they were right. But when they were wrong, in his view, he chastised them.

He knew how to do it. And still hold their respect.

And gained the respect of places like Qatar. And say, so Qatar. When he chastised Benjamin Netanyahu and Benjamin Netanyahu had to I think apologize to some degree about what they did in Qatar.

That's when the Middle East went, wait a minute.

He's not being controlled by the Jews! You know what I mean?

That should be a really big wake-up call to everybody who thinks that Donald Trump is just being controlled by the Jews.

No. No. No. He's not.

He does what he thinks is right. And he'll chastise both sides.

And he will support either side. When they're right, to get to a deal. That's good for everybody.

This deal could be amazing.

I don't have any -- and it's not because of this deal.

I happen to -- I read the end of the book. So I know how this ends.

This will not -- you know, this is not --

STU: You skipped ahead?

GLENN: I skipped ahead. I skipped ahead.

STU: Don't ruin anything.

Don't -- no spoiler alerts.

GLENN: I won't. No spoiler alerts.

Let's just say, this might last for a week. It might last for a thousand years. I don't know.

But we will be in this situation again. We all know that. We all know that. But let's take and celebrate peace while we can.

And the hostage is coming back. That is massive. Massive.

And due to Donald Trump.

Today, if you don't like Donald Trump, fine. Fine.

But how do you take this one apart?

Honestly, how do you not claim this is a massive victory, for the whole world?

STU: Well, I can tell you, that a lot of people on the left are rooting for it to collapse, which is a shockingly revealing moment. I mean --

GLENN: Wait. What?

STU: They are -- you know, they're not going to be out there like, we hope this collapse is.

But you know they hope it collapses.

They don't want to give Trump credit for it.

And they would rather have this continue. They would rather have this war go on.

Than admit that the reason it's ending is because Donald Trump was able to negotiate this deal.

That is central!

GLENN: I think anybody who has played politics with the Palestinian, you know, all that stuff. And all the stuff on the streets. That -- that has been a very effective tool for them. And so I would agree.

And they don't want that tool to be taken away.

STU: You think the Hamas wing of the party wants this? You think Rashida Tlaib is all thrilled about Donald Trump's efforts here. They will hear about Ilhan Omar -- how wonderful --

GLENN: Those are extremists.

STU: I mean that. This is a very revealing dividing line on the left. Right?

If there is anything that is ever going to happen, that Donald Trump can be given credit for. That you think this could be clear. John Fetterman. Fetterman has obviously pretty good on this issue. But Fetterman came out, gave a statement that should be basic. Basic. Like, hey, this is good. And I really hope it works. Donald Trump did a good job on this.

That's the type of stuff that should be obvious for everyone to be able to --

GLENN: That's what "Tip" O'Neill would have done. "Tip" O'Neill and Ronald Reagan, they got together. They disagreed. They fought hard, but they had dinner.

Yeah. Because "Tip" O'Neill could say, that was good. That was good. What he did was just good for all of us.

STU: That worked well. Good. I'm glad that happened. You should be glad that happened. We should all be rooting for the success here.

Even if what the -- you know, like, I rooted -- again, I have all sorts of criticisms the way Barack Obama dealt with the Middle East.

Yeah. Plenty of them. And we went over them over and over and over again.

And plenty of issues with specifically the way he went after Osama bin Laden. But on the day that it happened, really happy about.

Very happy that we were able to do it.

Now, look, it's our military that does it. They can say all this stuff too. They can say, oh, well, the real reason is. Blah, blah, blah.

But we can still be happy, that this occurred. And you can still be excited and give credit where credit is due.

GLENN: This is a win for all humankind. For humanity!

For life!

Stopping Hamas from torturing. You know, torturing kidnap victims.

Stopping the bloodshed that was happening because of the war on both sides.

That is a win. Having the possibility of a stable Middle East, at least for a while. That's a win!

That's a win all the way around. Everyone should be happy. I don't care if you like the president or not.

Everyone should be happy that mankind, put one on the chalkboard for all of mankind today.

This is a huge -- never seen -- this is on the good side. Never seen this one before. Didn't see this one coming.

I mean, we should all be able to say, wow!

And thank you. Because he's the -- I really, truly believe, when it comes to negotiating things like this, there is nobody better.

I mean, that's what he does for a living.

And he knows it. He knows how to read people. He knows how to it.

And this is evidence of it.

STU: And he will do things that are so out of the norm. That it resets everybody's thinking. You know, I mentioned --

GLENN: If he wouldn't have done that. If he wouldn't have done that, we wouldn't have all the Middle East signing on to a peace deal.

STU: I respect. What would they have done in a situation like Trump was with Netanyahu?

Their advisers would have said, "Look, this is great. You guys are together on this. Let's go to Hamas. We'll talk to them. We will see if we can get something done. We don't want to ruin it by announcing it publicly. There are times, where that tactic cannot work. But it worked really well here."

He forced them to basically say, "No, we don't want a cease-fire," or, "Okay. We'll go along with this."

And, by the way, you go down this list, there's a lot of stuff -- this is Hamas never, ever having control of this region ever again is built into this agreement. Now they've only talked about -- they're only on phase one here. So we don't know that we get all of this stuff. But like, there's a lot here that really improves the lives of Israelis, of --

GLENN: Palestinians.

STU: Arab Israelis in the region. You know, Palestinians. Other Arabs in the region.

GLENN: Saudi Arabia. Everybody.

STU: Yeah. Not to mention, just globally.

Right? This is a positive.

GLENN: Look what this does.

That's Turkey. So that separates Turkey from Syria, which is right in bed with -- with Iran.

I mean, think about how this box is. If you have the entire Middle East, now operating with Israel, and saying, we have a right to exist. Think about what that means, for this block, now to Iran. Iran doesn't mind being a pariah.

But now, everyone is officially saying, aisled do business with them.

STU: We will choose business over these guys.

That's a big statement in that world.

GLENN: That's a big deal. Big deal.

RADIO

Big investors buying gold: What does this mean for your dollar?

Gold has reached a record high price of over $4,000 an ounce. So, what does that mean for your dollar? Financial expert Carol Roth joins Glenn to explain why this news is so concerning and why many big investors have started to buy gold.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, Carol Roth, welcome to the program. How are you?

CAROL: I'm doing great, Glenn! I'm actually celebrating my 26th wedding anniversary today, so it's a blessed day.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Congratulations! Congratulations! It's weird. I'm coming up on my 26th on January.

CAROL: Oh, fabulous. Fabulous. It's a good amount of time to be married, yes.

GLENN: It is. It is. So, Carol. Let's talk about the price of gold hitting --

CAROL: It's over 4,000.

GLENN: Which is nuts. And I don't think people really understand. I don't think the average -- this is my guess, and I want you to correct me. I don't think the average person is buying gold. I think this gold-buying is happening from sovereign funds and central banks, mainly. Also, Asian markets. I don't think Americans really understand what $4,000 an ounce means. Can you explain it?

CAROL: Absolutely. I think the world both, investors and central banks are catching up to the things that you and I have been talking about for years. So, you know, we're ahead. We warned everyone. And now this is a little bit of catch-up. Interestingly, you know, as you noted, the average American is very behind in terms of what gold means.

When you look at Chinese households. When you look at Indian household. There are estimates that each one of those country's households owns up to 30,000 tons of gold at this point. Which to put that in context, the US government owns 8,133 times.

GLENN: So the Indian households, all of them combined, 27,000 tons.

CAROL: Right.

GLENN: What we say we have, is he 8100. Wow!

CAROL: So the households in China and India are really ahead of the curve. When you look at data for the US, it's a little bit hard to get good data. But from what I've seen, the estimates are only about ten to 11 percent of US households at all, have exposure to gold.

Now, I know that your audience is very sophisticated and is ahead of the curve. And I would imagine blows through that number. But just shows how sort of unprepared US households are in general.

GLENN: When you're looking at Indian and Chinese households that own gold. Does that include all the gold jewelry?

CAROL: Yes. Yes. That's actually, particularly in India. One of their preferred ways of procuring gold. Yeah.

GLENN: Okay. So gold has -- gold has shot up over $4,000 in record times. I mean, breathtaking time. What is causing that?

CAROL: Okay. So there are a confluence of factors, and I think the two most important factors, which, of course, are linked. Are what Wall Street is now calling the debt debasement trade. Which they're just caught up. And gave it a cute name.

And changing the global financial order. And they're very much linked.

GLENN: Yeah. Tell me, what is it? The debt debasement? What is that?

CAROL: They're doing the debt debasement trade, which is just basically what you and I have been talking about, which is our unsustainable fiscal position.

GLENN: All right.

CAROL: And what all of the money printing that we've seen over the past 17 years, what that has done to our purchasing power, and how that's going to catch up to us.

So as a reminder, our debt to GDP is at emerging market crisis levels. We were at 120 police levels of GDP.

We're running deficits equivalent to a war-time level. Or recession level, while we still have growth.

Which is crazy. We have interesting interest rate -- or interest payments that are outpacing defense spending.

So everyone is now finally catching on to the fact that this is an unsustainable financial position.

And it is going to be very difficult to get out of. Without there being some sort of additional debasement of our currency. Which is a fancy way of saying, a diminishment of your purchasing power.

What's really crazy. There's a chart that's been going around, and they did kind of a comparison of different asset classes. Price in US dollars, price in gold.

So if I look from the end of September 2018, out seven years, and you look at the top 100 NASDAQ nonfinancial companies. It's called the NDX. In US dollar terms, that is up 236 percent. So you think you're super rich, right?

But in gold terms, solid money that doesn't -- you know, that doesn't have its value debased. It's only up 4.7 percent.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

CAROL: Yeah. Of course. The S&P 500 up 133 percent over that period in dollar terms. It's down 27.6 percent in gold terms.

And what's called the Case-Shiller Home Price Index, which is the value of homes, the way that's measured. Dollar terms, 60 percent. Oh, houses. So expensive In gold terms, it's down 50 percent.

In fact, right now, it takes less gold in terms of ounces, to buy the median single-family house, than it has in decades and decades and decades.

So it goes to show, that even though we see these dollars. They're buying less and less. And now, you and I were talking about this forever.

But now Wall Street is catching on. Oh, that's not a great thing. And so in terms of preserving the hard-earned capital, we need something that is that -- that hedge. That mutual hedge that is going to retain its value.

And that's why more investors, institutional investors. Funny enough, a lot of millennials, more than anyone starting to really get in to gold.

GLENN: You know why? Because millennials have not been trained their whole life. Trust the system!

CAROL: Yes.

GLENN: And they see it clearly. And they look at it, and they're like, well, this doesn't make any sense at all. And they're going to spend this.

And they will wreck the dollar and everything else. They just see it without being trained over and over and over again. Like, trust the system. They don't trust the system.

And once you realize, the system is rigged in a million different ways. And the system is not telling you the truth.

I mean, that is amazing. When you look at the stock market. And you say, it's actually down, when you compare it in US dollars. To gold!

What's happening -- let me explain this to the audience. What all that means is: Gold is only going up in dollars. It's staying -- it's staying stable. But it's costing you more because of inflation. The dollars are buying less! So it looks like you're paying more, but you're really not. It looks like the stock market is going up, but it's really not! It's what it costs to get in with dollars. If you're going in with gold. You'll actually see that if it was all done in gold, the stock market is down. The price of housing is town.

It's the dollar. It takes more dollars to buy, than it does with gold, which holds its value.

That is -- if people could understand that one thing, that changes all the conversations of, the government has to do something to make housing more affordable. No, they don't. They have to stabilize the dollar. They have to stop spending so much money.

CAROL: Yeah, I mean, if you think of the three definitions of money, it is a medium of exchange. You know, how you helped to exchange goods.

It's a unit of account, which we say, things are priced in dollars, and it's supposed to be a store value. The unit of account, that you just talked about. My friend Steve Forbes has a great analogy, and he talks about other measurements.

You know, imagine that your clock, you know, one day, at 12 o'clock, you know, means midnight. And another day, 3 o'clock means midnight. Or 6 inches to measure a curtain one day. And then the same measurement is like a foot, a different day.

You can't have -- a consistent measurement if the unit of account continues to change. And that's what we've been seeing here with the dollar. And unfortunately, it has not been to our favor.

Which means, that when you work really hard to earn something and it's valued in a dollar, that over time, that -- that work that you put out, your productivity is worth less and less.

And so what gold is meant to do. It's meant to be Capitol preservation. It's not a risk asset. It's not meant to take on risk. And maybe go up a ton. And maybe go down a ton. It's really meant to be a counterbalance to what you have earned. So that you can preserve your purchasing power.

GLENN: You know, I've been saying this for a long time. That you put your money. And I have money in the stock market. You put the money in the stock market.

If things really go awry, go ahead. You're going to cash out for an awful lot of money. But those dollars. It will be paid back to you in dollars.

Those dollars will be worth less, even though there's more of them stacked up, than that ounce of gold, or, you know, that 10 ounces of gold, or whatever you had!

The stock market is paid in dollars. And so as the inflation goes up.

But gold keeps its value!

Keeps its value and hold it steady.

So, yeah. You will be paying more in dollars if you try to sell your gold. But that will continue to increase while stock markets will go down. Am I right?

CAROL: It's a counterbalance. So if things were to shift, and for some reason, you know, things were to change with the dollars, which we would need a lot of different catalysts. Then your gold goes down. It's a counterbalance, which is why it's important to have that diversification in your portfolio. And to have the gold hedge.

What's interesting, Glenn. Just the history, we're talking about millennials.

You know, they went through the great recession. Financial crisis.

They're kind of keyed into this. But if you think about when we came out of the '70s with this crazy inflation. We came out of the gold standard. It used to be very commonplace for a financial adviser to sit down and say, okay.

We've been through this. And so you should be putting, you know, five to 10 percent of your portfolio in gold. As the stock market took off in dollars. And became this big thing.

And they started seeking fees. That went away. Financial advisers, who don't get paid sometimes at all, when you allocate to gold. Stop recommending it.

GLENN: Yep.

CAROL: And now we're seeing a shift back, now we're seeing, you know, oh, yes. You should have some. Some of the big names out there saying, even more.

GLENN: Ray Dalio just came out and said, 15 percent.

CAROL: Yes, we've seen big names like that, anywhere from ten to 20.

And when they surveyed high net worth investors, which are $250,000 in assets or more, they're averaging right now, 21 percent of their holdings in gold.

So it's a very big flip in recent years, on how this is being viewed bit people who have accumulated those dollars and are worried about them.

GLENN: Okay. So let me just summarize here before we move on. On to some other questions.

That is exactly what my grandfather who lived through the great depression said. What are the people with big large amounts of money doing?

I want to do that. And if I did do that. I would be better off in the great depression.

You just heard it, 20 percent or more, right?

From big dollars.

They're investing in gold. 20 percent!

You should -- you should have some!

CAROL: And it's interesting. Some of the portfolios we're seeing is coming from not only the equity peace, but from the fixed-income peace, which is pretty interesting too.

GLENN: Amazing.

Unmasking Antifa: The Dark Truth Behind Its Well-Funded Network | Glenn TV | Ep 461

The cities of Portland and Chicago are turning into war zones. Federal agents have been ambushed, police have been ordered to stand down, and mayors are defying the Constitution. It’s insurrection in plain sight. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to uncover the hidden support and funding networks propping up Antifa. Glenn debunks the myth that Antifa is decentralized and leaderless, tracing connections from Soros to Tides and other shadowy nonprofits. Plus, independent journalist Nick Sortor joins from outside an ICE facility in Portland, where he was wrongfully arrested by police following attacks by Antifa members.

Glenn's Show Prep

Mike Lee on Repealing Obamacare and His Wild Curiosity About Wiretapping

TPUSA's Turning Point tour LIVE with Glenn Beck

Israel and Hamas sign Trump's historic deal. Will it work?

Transcript

Big investors buying gold: What does this mean for your dollar?

Transcript

Unmasking Antifa: The Dark Truth Behind Its Well-Funded Network | Glenn TV | Ep 461