GLENNMarch 24, 2017

Glenn Talks With Megan Phelps-Roper, Former Westboro Baptist Church Member

Megan Phelps-Roper joined Glenn on radio this week for an enlightening discussion about her conversion from Westboro Baptist Church member to someone focused on understanding and inclusion. Like Glenn, Phelps-Roper is a hopeful advocate for bringing people together through honest, civil conversations --- and she's laid out a four-step plan to do just that.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

Welcome to the program, Megan, how are you?

MEGAN: I'm wonderful. How are you?

GLENN: I'm good. It's really an honor to talk to you. We're big fans of what you said in your TED talk, especially from where you started, you know, in a church that is more than a little tough.

MEGAN: Yes. Absolutely.

I grew up at the Westboro Baptist Church. And my family -- the church is almost entirely my family. So around 80 percent -- there's only 80 or so people in the church. And about 80 percent are people -- my grandfather is the one who founded the church. And my mother was the de facto spokesperson for a long time. So, yeah, I grew up on the picket line.

PAT: Yeah, you actually held those hate-filled signs at funerals and other places, right?

GLENN: When you were a kid.

MEGAN: Yes. Absolutely.

PAT: Yeah.

MEGAN: It started out as a protest at a local park, and it sort of really expanded from there. As soon as, you know -- my grandfather was very aggressive, kind of hostile personality. So when people started to come out to counterprotest, everybody who was against us became a target. And eventually -- what started out as it being a protest against gay people, became, you know, we were protesting against other Christians and Jews. It expanded rapidly, until literally everyone outside of our church became a target. And so it was basically a -- you know, I was marinating in this idealogy of everybody is against us. We are against everybody because they're all against the Scriptures. You know, memorizing chapter and verse why they're wrong and why they're headed for hell. And it's our duty to go out and warn them.

STU: I'm fascinated, Megan, because I think to my childhood, and I remember fun picnics and fun trips to amusement parks and things like that. Do you have those types of memories, or is it just -- is there a competition between that and you carrying some awful sign around during a protest?

MEGAN: No. I absolutely have those memories. My -- a lot of people have a hard time understanding that they -- other than these protests and that worldview, they're -- we were a very normal -- obviously there's a lot of kids in our family. There's 11 kids in my family. And -- but we played video games and read books. And we went to public school. And, yeah, we went to amusement parks. We did all of those things, but we also -- that was all sort of organized around this nationwide picketing campaign.

So I have -- I absolutely have both, but that -- that loving family -- the nature of that is part of what makes it so, so, so hard to leave or to even consider leaving. The idea of giving it all up.

GLENN: So I just had a guy in who we're going to interview on a program that I'm working on. He was a member of the Hitler Youth. Now, he's in his 80s now. But he came of age in the Hitler Youth, until I think World War II ended, when he was 20. And he still had -- he sees the world very differently. He thinks that Churchill is a war -- should be held for war crimes. A war criminal.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: And he doesn't agree with Hitler. But he said, I never saw -- we never saw any of that. At least he said, I didn't. I was in the front row of the 36 Olympics. You know, I -- I saw all the good stuff. And the bad stuff that was thrown up, you just dismissed it because you thought it was somebody that was trying to tear us down. Is that kind of the way your childhood was in a way?

MEGAN: Well, I mean, I know -- I knew at the time -- so, for instance, the funeral picketing, I knew at the time that it was hurtful. But the way that it was framed in our church was, you know, these people don't understand that they're headed for hell, for eternal destruction. And it's a loving thing to go and warn them.

And so I saw it as a necessary evil, like we had to go do this because this was the truth and the only thing that mattered, more than anything else was the truth. And it didn't matter how we said it, where we said, or in what context, it was always a good thing. And -- and it was a point of pride for us not to consider people's feelings.

GLENN: And the people -- and the people that were coming against you, because they were screaming back in your face, it only reinforced that these are bad people.

MEGAN: Absolutely. Especially because -- I mean, there's all these passages. So, for instance, Jesus talks about blessed are ye when men shall hate you and revile you and persecute you, for my name sake. So for us, like we wanted that. It was -- we expected it. It was confirmation that we were doing the Lord's work.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Now, take us to how someone finally broke through.

MEGAN: So Twitter -- Twitter was -- and I didn't realize it at first. I didn't realize that it was happening exactly. But Twitter was an empathy machine for me.

I really hate how it's gotten such a bad rap because that platform has done more to teach me good communication and how to engage with people than almost anything else in my life.

So on Twitter, people would -- would come at me with the same kind of, you know, hateful rhetoric and loud, you know, accusations and just very bitter. And, again, I expected it.

And I would respond, you know, in kind. And -- but then some people -- and I don't know exactly why or what motivated them. I think they -- they saw -- they say that they saw something in me that maybe I would listen or something. But in any case, they stopped yelling and stopped, you know, insulting me and started to ask questions. And they were like -- they seemed like they were actually listening to me.

GLENN: They were honest questions. They were honest questions.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: They weren't questions of setup.

MEGAN: Right. Exactly.

And it made me feel -- and because, again, I thought I was doing a good thing. I thought that those words that we were preaching, I thought that was the absolute, unquestionable truth. So I wanted to share it with them. That's why I was on social media.

And so I would, you know, answer their questions and sort of -- we had these back-and-forths. But then because of Twitter, I'm also seeing the photos they post of their children and their friends. And it just became this -- this way for me to see people as human beings. And it was because of the way -- because of the fact that they stopped -- the way they engaged me.

STU: That's incredible, that that came from Twitter too. Someone tweeted the other day, Instagram, my life is a party. Snapchat, my life is a quirky TV show. Facebook, my life turned out great. Twitter, we're all going to die. When I go on Twitter, man, I just get so depressed. But it's amazing you were able to take that out of this.

MEGAN: Yeah. I know. But there's a couple of things about Twitter that were really helpful to me. So like, for instance, the character limit, it first made me give up insults. Because at Westboro, we would include these elaborate insults when we responded to questions that people sent us by email. But on Twitter, there just wasn't space for it.

And also, Twitter was just this immediate feedback loop. If I did insult somebody, I could watch the conversation just derail in realtime. I could see that I wasn't getting my point across because I was too busy indulging that vengeful little voice in my head that wanted to call people names. I mean, we all have this feedback loop.

GLENN: Megan, I will tell you, I've been doing these kinds of experiments myself over the last couple of years, where I've gotten in -- because I just stopped engaging for a while. About years ago, I decided, you know what, I'm just going to answer everybody and assume the best. And just answer the -- the worst with something kind and try to be humble and kind and nice to everybody. Really hard to do.

And it's amazing the results. It's truly remarkable. It doesn't cure everybody by any stretch. But it's remarkable.

And I've talked about it on the air. And so many people say, it's not going to make a difference. You can't engage with them. They're all crazy. They're all whatever. What would you say to that?

MEGAN: Man, I just disagree so -- so much with the idea of hopelessness when it comes to talking to people.

I had -- I had grown up, you know, being -- basically cultivating this mindset of us versus them, being wary -- like specifically being wary of people's kindness. And even though I consciously was aware and trying not to be persuaded by kindness, it was still a powerful thing.

It's really interesting because over the past few years, I've been thinking about this a lot obviously. Because it's only been four years since I left. So it's kind of been just this huge -- you know, huge event in my life. And what you're describing there, about, you know, assuming the best and, you know, changing the way you respond. So if somebody comes at you angry and you respond in kindness and angry, that's called like, non-complimentary behavior. And we as human beings are wired to respond in kind.

But like you said, it's incredibly difficult to do. But we can cultivate a more useful mindset. Like one thing you said -- well, my mom used to tell me, to make sure my behavior was appropriate, I should add the word "judge" on to the end of my sentence, as in, "Here's why I did it, Judge." And I still use that trick, except now I add the word "friend." If someone attacks me and I start to get riled up, I try to pause for a beat and add friend, as if I'm disagreeing with someone I love. And I don't do it to be a goody two-shoes. I do it because it works. It's just so much more effective than anger or insults or hostility.

GLENN: All right. I want to get to -- you say there are four steps. And I want to get to those here in a second. Let me just ask you one more question, and then I have to take a quick break.

Do you -- are you well aware of how appropriately timed your discovery and your story is for the rest of the world?

MEGAN: I -- I just -- I hope that -- I hope that I can be a voice or that the story can be something that will help other people see the value in engaging. Because honestly, my experience has -- has given me so much hope. I never thought I would leave. And at first, when I first left, I thought that my family, there was no hope for most of my family. I don't believe that anymore. And I'm still reaching out to them. I'm still trying to convince them to see things other ways. And if there's hope for me, if I changed, I think that there's a lot of hope.

You know, I know that the political climate is so polarized right now, but I can't help but feel so hopeful.

GLENN: Megan Phelps-Roper. She'll continue with us here in just a second. You need to hear what her solution is. It's really a four-step process. And it's really pretty easy. Left the Westboro Baptist Church because of kindness. You want to hear her whole story. Watch the TED video because it's quite amazing.

[break]

Megan Phelps-Roper is a former member of the Westboro Baptist Church, where people were kind to her and started to talk to her. And she says, this really works. And, you know, you could be in the cult of a political part. And I think this works. I think we need this across all lines in the world right now.

Megan, you did a TED talk. You said there are four tips on how to talk to people who you disagree with.

MEGAN: Yes. Exactly.

You want me to tell them to you?

GLENN: Yeah. Sure.

MEGAN: So the first one is -- I think it's really important -- don't assume bad intent. It's so easy to look at -- I mean, Westboro is such an easy example. They've got these neon signs. It was so clearly obvious to everyone that we were hateful and evil and awful people.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

MEGAN: But underneath it was well-intentioned people trying to do what they believed was right. So it's really easy to look at the surface and assume the worst of people, assume you understand where they're coming from. But that almost immediately cuts you off from really understanding what they're about.

GLENN: It's one of the reasons why -- I've tried to cut the word evil out of my lexicon because we use that to -- too often. And we use it about people. And I really think most people have great intent. You know, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, you can disagree with either one of them, but neither one of them think they're doing evil. They think they're doing the right thing. You just don't see it that way.

MEGAN: Exactly. I think very few -- maybe sociopaths or psychopaths. And even then --

GLENN: Right.

MEGAN: People who are deliberately doing wrong, I think they're very, very, very few and far between.

GLENN: Yes. Right. And that doesn't mean you have to go along with it, but if you say to them or their followers, you know, your guy is evil, they stop listening to you.

MEGAN: Right. Exactly. And you stop asking questions to get to the bottom of it, which is the second point. Asking questions helps you bridge the gap between your point of view and theirs. It helps you understand where they're coming from actually. And it also signals to the people that you're talking to, that you're actually listening to them.

And that is a huge benefit to the dialogue because they -- they no longer -- they don't want to yell at you. They see that you want to understand. So they're much more willing to engage. So the second point is ask questions.

GLENN: And it matters that they're honest questions, not setup questions. Not a question where I know you're going to say one thing so I can give you the Scripture quote or whatever to beat you.

MEGAN: Exactly.

GLENN: It has to be a question that's not designed for me to win. We're going to take a quick break. Come back with the last two with Megan Phelps-Roper, when we come back.

(OUT AT 10:32AM)

GLENN: Megan Phelps-Roper, somebody that we saw on TED talk, giving a great TED talk on how to bring people together. She was in the -- she's a Phelps. So she's part of the founding family of the Westboro Baptist Church. And she got online and started making friends with people who were friendly to her, not just yelling at her all the time. And she said there are four things that if you really want to change people's minds, four ways of engaging people so that real conversations can take place. The first one is don't assume bad intent. Instead, assume good or neutral intent. The second, ask questions, as opposed to accusing. Ask honest questions. It will help people let them know they've been heard. And quite often, this is all that people want.

The third is stay calm. Welcome back to the program, Megan. Explain stay calm.

MEGAN: So this one is really difficult because the natural inclination is always to respond the way that somebody is -- is speaking to you. So when somebody comes at you with hostility, the instinct is to be defensive and to respond with hostility. But that just brings the conversation to an end quickly. But if you can learn to step back, calm down and -- and try to diffuse the anger -- and you can do it in a few ways.

So, for instance, I actually ended up marrying -- my husband was one of these Twitter friends who started out as this angry, sort of insulting --

GLENN: Wow.

MEGAN: We just got married seven months ago.

GLENN: Congratulations.

MEGAN: Thank you. So what he would do, for instance, he would tell a joke or recommend a book or start talking about music. He would sort of turn away from the hostility for a minute and then come back to it -- come back to it later.

You don't necessarily -- I mean, that's -- that can be a last resort. A lot of times just staying calm and speaking as if you were addressing a friend and not somebody that you hate and that you despise that you can't -- you can't stand to hear their words. It helps so much to keep the conversation going.

GLENN: Step four.

MEGAN: Step four is make the argument.

And this one -- this one seems obvious. But there's this argument that seems to have taken hold on both the left and the right. And I think it stems from the hopelessness you mentioned earlier. Oh, they're just too far gone. They can't be reasoned with. But where does that lead us?

It leaves us at loggerheads. Deadlocked. And no one wants to be there. So you make the argument because they don't understand -- your opponent doesn't necessarily understand your thinking and the way that you're approaching the problem. And by making the argument -- if you fail to do that, you're definitely not going to change someone's mind. You actually have to articulate the reasoning and the thought process behind your position.

And there's actually a fifth point that I would have included if I had enough time -- should I tell you now?

GLENN: Yeah, go ahead.

STU: We're breaking news here. The fifth point in Megan Phelps' TED talk.

GLENN: Go ahead.

(chuckling)

MEGAN: It's take heart. Changing hearts and minds is incremental work, and it takes patience and persistence. And you're not going to see results necessarily immediately, not right away, but we can't give up. You know, and you might not be the person to persuade somebody else to turn away from a bad position, but every interaction is an opportunity to help turn the tide. So stay the course, trust the process, and take heart.

GLENN: How many people -- how many people were like this to you?

MEGAN: Well, the ones who had the biggest impact -- I mean, a handful who were engaging me continually over the course of a couple of years, considering I had been in the church. I had been raised in this. And I was 24 when I got on Twitter. So I was, again, marinating in this ideology and this way of thinking. So the fact that it only took a couple of years to really affect me and how I saw things, I think that's pretty remarkable.

GLENN: So did your husband -- was there a time when your husband -- is now your husband --

MEGAN: Yeah.

GLENN: Was he falling in love with you at the time? Did that happen later? Did he say, I can't believe I'm saying this to you -- I mean, how did that happen?

MEGAN: Well, it's a -- it's a really strange -- it was a really strange dynamic because obviously I was at the church. And at Westboro, you could only marry somebody who was in the church. So we were having these discussions, and there was nothing -- it was like a Jane Austen novel, like nothing overt. Like we couldn't say how we were feeling to each other because it just wasn't acceptable. And he sensed that.

And -- but he also, again, saw that I was a human being. And he came to believe that I had a good heart.

GLENN: So would this have worked -- would this have worked without love?

MEGAN: Well, I think -- well, so here's the thing. I -- yes, I believe so. And the reason is that the very first interaction was with a friend. I mentioned him in the talk too. Jewlicious. His name is David Abitbol.

And so it was -- I think I was talking with him for a little over a year. And, again, he's asking these questions. And in the course of asking these questions, he was the one who found the first -- the first bit of internal inconsistency in Westboro's doctrines. And when I look back at how I responded to that -- so my husband -- I didn't actually start speaking to him until months after that. But when I think about how I responded to that first bit of internal inconsistency, that was when I first started to challenge, in my own mind, Westboro's doctrines.

GLENN: And you didn't let him know that.

MEGAN: No. For sure. As soon as he had made that point, I was actually terrified to speak to him again. I didn't even let on that I recognized that he was right. I just stopped speaking to him.

GLENN: Wow. What was the point, if you don't mind me asking?

MEGAN: Oh, yeah, no, not at all.

It was a sign that said "death penalty for fags."

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

MEGAN: Yeah. So, of course -- we used, you know, the verses in Leviticus and also in Romans 1 that talk about how, you know, gays are worthy of death. And he brought up -- so he's Jewish. I was really surprised that he brought up Jesus, saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

And I didn't -- I just had never connected that that was talking about the death penalty. And we thought, we're not -- we're not casting stones. We're just preaching words.

And David said, "Yeah, but you're advocating that the government cast stones."

And so that -- when I brought that point to other members of the church, the response was just to double down. They never addressed the passage that -- you know, that contradicted us. They just reiterated the passages that supported us. And so that was the first time that -- and the way that I reconciled it in my own mind was I just stopped holding the sign because I didn't know how to defend it anymore. And I didn't believe in it.

GLENN: Did they tell you to stop talking to these people?

MEGAN: I don't think -- I don't think people quite realized how much -- I mean, they knew I was very active on Twitter, but I don't think they realized how much it was affecting the way that I was thinking. I honestly didn't -- didn't understand it either.

Because in my mind -- I think I was in denial about it because -- you are not supposed to be impacted by other people. You are not supposed to be anything, but preaching to them. You're not supposed to really, you know, care -- I was going to say care about them. It was a very strange dynamic. But I was in denial about it. And I think that definitely helped it seem to others as if it wasn't really having an impact on me also.

PAT: Is anybody in your family speaking with you? Do you have a relationship with anybody anymore in the family?

MEGAN: Not anybody in the church, no. But there has been over the last decade or so, about 20 or so people who have either left or have been kicked out of Westboro. And my brother actually, the morning of my high school graduation -- he's a year and a half older than me. We woke up and went downstairs, and all of his stuff was gone. And so I have -- I didn't get to speak with him for the eight and half years between when he left and when I left. But now we're really good friends. And he's wonderful.

PAT: What was he thrown out for?

MEGAN: No, he left actually.

PAT: Oh, he left on his own.

MEGAN: He left at 19. Yeah, he also had Scriptural objections to some things. And also the extreme -- he objected to the extreme level of control because everybody in the church -- we all lived within two blocks or so of one another and did everything together and were obviously not developing relationships with people outside. But the level of control is -- is really -- really, really extreme.

GLENN: Do they -- do you think this will just die out as the family dies out, or?

MEGAN: Actually, I thought about this. My sister and I would talk about this about how could the church end in a way that just wouldn't destroy everybody on the inside?

There's still about the same level of membership as there has been. Because a few people -- a few new converts have joined. And then, of course, my generation has now -- they're having kids. But there's not many.

GLENN: What kind of people would join -- what kind of people join this? They really believe -- the newcomers that come in --

STU: It's one thing to be raised in it, but to be converted as an adult.

GLENN: Decent people. Yeah.

MEGAN: So honestly, I've speculated about this too. So, for instance, my dad -- my dad joined the church long before the picketing started. He was only 16 at the time. And, you know, his family wasn't -- I mean, his mom had been divorced. I don't think he -- he was attracted to the love and unity and connection I think in my family. In the Phelps family, I think. And I think that's a draw for some people. And it really lends credence to the idea that they're doing what they're doing out of love, out of good intentions.

And, again, some people just, I think are drawn to that defense of the idea of having all the answers and knowing for sure what you believe and how you're supposed to live. Like, it's -- that was such a powerful thing. When I left and realized like, I don't -- I don't have that anymore. I don't have that sense of -- it's a very comforting sense of certainty. And, you know, nuance and questions and uncertainty are a lot more difficult to deal with. I think some people are attracted to that part of the church.

GLENN: Next time they're out protesting, what should people do?

MEGAN: I think engaging at protests is actually not a very effective thing because they're -- on picket lines, they're already in these attack/defend mindsets. I think the internet is a much -- you know, Twitter. There's a lot of them on Twitter now. I think that's a more effective way of engaging. But if you -- if you do see them and if you are moved to go and speak to them, just remember that -- that responding with, you know, yelling and name-calling, all those things, it just reinforces what they already believe. It's adding to, you know, their certainty that they're doing the right thing.

GLENN: It is really -- it's really great to talk to you. Megan Phelps-Roper. You can find her @MeganPhelps. That's her Twitter handle. @MeganPhelps.

Really great to talk to you. And thank you for sharing this. And I think you have an important voice that needs to be heard.

STU: And I will say, Megan, will you confirm this, because we got the fifth point out of you, we are 25 percent better than your TED talk.

MEGAN: Yeah, for sure.

GLENN: Megan, can we pay you an off-handed compliment. Stu wanted to say this, we said it during the break. And it's weird because it's exactly what we're talking about. We don't know each other. We don't talk to each other.

We look at people in the Westboro Baptist Church and think that their kids just must be dumb as a box of rocks. And just, oatmeal! Every answer is, oatmeal! (chuckling) And you're so articulate. I mean, it's amazing just to have that view shattered.

MEGAN: Thank you.

I will say -- I mean, another thing that's not so well-known about the church, education was really important in my family. Most of the people there -- many lawyers, people who work in health care, and IT. And they're very well educated.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Wow.

MEGAN: Which is partly I think what makes it so much more difficult for them to see outside of it. This is like a psychological thing where, by -- by having these very strong mostly internally consistent arguments, they -- they think they're so certain that they don't even question the -- they don't even question it.

GLENN: Amazing.

MEGAN: But, yeah, anyway...

GLENN: Thank you so much. @MeganPhelps. Thank you so much, Megan. Appreciate it.

MEGAN: Thank you. Thank you for having me.

GLENN: You bet.

RADIO

AI military drone maker reveals the FUTURE of warfare

The next war will look VERY different, now that we have AI. Glenn speaks with Brandon Tseng, co-founder and president of Shield AI, a company making AI-powered drones and autonomous planes for the US Military. Brandon discusses his drone planes like the X-BAT, and also gives his take on new foreign weapons, like Putin’s new nuclear-powered cruise missile: "It sounds dumb."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The cofounder and president of Shield AI, Brandon Tseng is with us. He's a former Navy SEAL. How old are you? You look like you're 14. How old are you?

BRANDON: I'm 39.

GLENN: Thirty-nine. Anyway, you have -- you are making a huge the difference in the AI world, especially with defense. Especially well the expat. A new plane. Do you call them drones, or are they planes?

BRANDON: Expats are a vertical takeoff launch and land AI-piloted fighter jet. Sometimes when people think drones, they just think quad copters. Except, there's a whole world of drones.

GLENN: It's weird. You either think of the quad copters, or you just think of those gigantic gray drones.

BRANDON: Yeah. The Predators and Reapers, yeah.

GLENN: And we're not like that anymore, either. Right? Have we updated those?

BRANDON: No. So Shield AI builds a miniature version of said drone. That's also vertical takeoff launch and land. It's called the Vbat, weighs about 180 pounds. But it's meant to do the mission of these $40 million drones for a fraction of the cost. And so we've been using that with US forces, oh, man. Now, probably since 2019, but most recently, we've been working with the US Coast Guard. We've interdicted billions of drugs in the Caribbean. So you just set a record with the US Coast Guard, interdicting 20 tons --

GLENN: Are you blowing up the boats, or are you just --

BRANDON: Shield AI is not blowing up any boats. But, yeah, the Coast Guard is setting them on fire after the whole thing is said and done.

GLENN: Wow. So -- so let me -- let me go into the -- the future of warfare.

Because it -- it's a little freaky. And I don't even know. There's a story that just came out today. Because we're negotiating with Russia.

And Russia is always beating their chest. And they have something new.

This one, just sounds crazy. CNN, this morning. Putin claimed successful test of long range nuclear-powered cruise missile, amid diplomatic breakdown. And what this cruise missile is, you launch it. It's not just nuclear-tipped. It's nuclear-powered as well.

So the idea is, it would just stay up in space. And it will just stay up there until it's directed to hit something. Which I guess, you not only blow a city up.

But you also have the China syndrome happening at the same time. I don't even get it. What do you think of this weapon?

BRANDON: Yeah. It sounds crazy. It sounds dumb. It sounds overengineered. I mean, it actually reminds me of some of the things the US was doing in the '50s. I don't know if you know this. We had something called the Davey Crockett nuclear rocket. Which was a hand-held nuclear rocket launcher. They said, only a Navy rocket would be crazy enough to shoot this thing. Because you're firing a nuclear bomb over your shoulder. And you hope it goes far enough.

That's --

GLENN: 1950s were kind of scary.

BRANDON: Yeah. You can Wikipedia this stuff. It's in there. Kind of scary. Right with the nuclear-powered cruise missile. Fifteen hours. Like, okay. Now, why do you need it to be up in the air for 15 hours?

You're seeing where this thing is. It becomes an easier target for people to shoot down. And then to the point, now, what do you have if this thing actually blows up, at any point, whether we take it out, or they take it out. Now you have nuclear material over some area?

Like, again, something I could see. Some crazy scientist and engineers working on, something that I believe has near zero utility on the battlefield in any -- like, even -- even by the Russians.

GLENN: What about the hypersonic missiles now?

BRANDON: Yeah, no, the hypersonics are -- look, what I'm a big proponent of is first principles of warfare. So like mass, maneuver, speed is another principle of warfare. And so what the hypersonics are getting after is that first principle of the speed.

It's like, look, if you can hit your targets faster than they can react. There's something to do that. In that range, at that standoff, at that offset, that is something that is pretty interesting. Now, the challenge that the United States has had. Has been around to getting these to a feasible level.

And I know there's some efforts to bring down the cost of hypersonics. But it's also what makes it incredibly difficult, is when you start to go hypersonic. You know, multiple interdicts of Mach 1.0, to Mach 2, 3, 4. That is a hard, hard, hard, hard physics problem.

GLENN: Right.

You know, I've always felt like, whenever we saw something, you know, when you -- when you first saw the stealth bomber, we were probably on the second iteration. You know what I mean?

We were always -- we didn't always just show what we had.

Is that true anymore?

Do we have things that the world doesn't know, that --

BRANDON: I don't think we have too many things that the world doesn't know about.

Certainly, there are classified programs.

And I think the US does have a couple -- not technologies. You know, up its -- its sleeve. Just like, you know, concepts. Operating concepts.

Is what I would say. We still are like pretty good at.

And so what you're seeing today is in the military world.

You see a lot in the -- you know, just the consumer software world. Where industry is really leading, in this day and age.

So you see industry leading the customer, more than what I would say in the past, right?

In the '80s. '90s. Early 2000s. You would seat customer leading industry to what --

GLENN: We want to do this.

BRANDON: Yeah. Exactly.

GLENN: Are we -- are you concerned at all, with -- with AI and technology being so readily available, and cheap?

You know, everywhere.

That everybody can -- can do some really bad damage. You know, you don't have to be a -- you don't have to be the United States of America.

BRANDON: Yeah. Look, I think every new technology is a double-edged sword. It can produce a ton of value for the world. It can do a lot of value for the world. And at the same time, we put that technology into the wrong person's hands, it can do damage to the world. And so I think the same was true of the internet.

The same is true of now providing compute power into massive amount of compute power into someone's hand, just via an IPhone or an android phone. And so I don't look at AI -- like, I don't worry about AI and autonomy.

And I think it's wrong to prohibit the advancement of a technology, simply because, you know, some wrong can be done with it.

GLENN: Right.

BRANDON: There's a ton of things, where a lot of wrong, we've seen this.

A lot of things can be weaponized. Whether it's an airplane. Whether it's a car. Whether it's the internet. You name it.

But these technologies aren't bad for the sake of being a new technology.

GLENN: Yeah.

I've talked to the president about this several times. The one thing that freaks him out, keeps him up at night is nuclear world. He said, I rebuilt the nuclear arsenal. And he said, you don't even want to understand what we can do. He's like, it's -- it's always been bad. He said, it's -- it's colossally bad. And once it starts, it's over.

And he's really -- he does, I think -- what little sleep he does get, I think there are times where he has lost sleep over war on nuclear, with nuclear weapons.

Is there any of this new technology, is there anything about AI or any of this stuff that freaks you out, that you think, this is really scary, if it -- if it goes wrong or whatever?

BRANDON: Yeah. The way I think about it is, look, nuclear deterrence, has deterred nuclear war since we -- since 1945.

GLENN: Yes. Right. Yeah.

BRANDON: And that largely stopped world wars for the past 80-plus years.

GLENN: Right.

BRANDON: And so our conventional deterrence has been dominated by our aircraft carriers and our submarines in terms of how we deter large state-on-state conflicts in this day and age. It's with these -- along with the number of other, you know, levers that we pull. Economic levers. Diplomacy levers. But the military lever has been dominated by our aircraft carriers, our air power, and our submarines.

GLENN: Sure.

BRANDON: So where I see the world going. It's like AI and autonomy is enabling this next generation of deterrence. Because our legacy weapons systems, they're not as well-respected. Our aircraft carriers are not as respected as they once were. Right?

GLENN: I'm a sitting duck.

BRANDON: Yeah, when the enemy has antiship missiles that outrange what these carriers can launch with our jets.

And they have surface-to-air missile systems that can target any fuel tanker, like, that's when you see your conventional deterrence capabilities start to erode.

AI and autonomy is that massive unlock for the military, for our allies.

It enables, you know, the United States to feel millions of drones. You can't feel millions of drone pilots.

We don't have enough people.

Aren't enough people signing up.

What you can do is enable small groups of people to feel these drone swarms that I believe will be the most strategic conventional deterrence for the next 25 years. And again, that's why I started Shield AI. We have the tag line. The greatest victory requires no war.

It is about having such a dominant military that any adversary thinks twice before starting, either a straightforward conflict or an asymmetric one.

GLENN: Are you concerned about -- you know, Elon Musk says. And I don't know how true this is.

But Elon Musk says we are the new Grok.
I think it's five or six that is coming. Is 60 percent close to AGI. Are you concerned about AGI and ASI? And what that might mean?

BRANDON: I'm not concerned about AGI, but I'm an eternal optimist. And so I put that disclaimer out there. It's really hard to say what 60 percent of AGI means.

GLENN: Right.

BRANDON: What I do think is really interesting, really fascinating.

It's now what is possible in this day and age with AI and autonomy. And I'll share something cool that I looked up the other day, and why I'm an optimist around it.

I asked Grok 4, I said, "What was the economic impact of the internet from 2000 to 2025 on global GDP by a cumulative basis?" Its estimate was 134 trillion dollars' worth of economic value, attributed to that core underlying technology, being the internet.

A ton of value created for the world. I then asked it, what is the value of AI and autonomy going to be for the world from 2025 to 2050, estimated that. It's estimate -- maybe it's biased if it's AI estimating itself.

Was -- yeah. Yeah. Four and a half quadrillion dollars, forty times bigger than the internet. And so that world. Again, I'm a techno optimist. I get excited about that.

It's hard to really understand or fathom what that world looks like, but I think it's going to be a net positive for the world in a way that so many underlying core technologies of life have been.

Now, it doesn't mean that there's -- it's all sunshine and -- and rainbows. There's going to be some bad actors out there with it for sure.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. So last question, I hate to ask you this. But I have to ask you this: Being a guy who is in into drones, everything else. What we saw last year over New Jersey, what the hell was that?

BRANDON: I -- I don't understand know what it was in New Jersey.

But I don't like the idea that there was anybody able to fly drones at all.

GLENN: Yeah. Those were large too.

BRANDON: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't know if it was another state.

I don't know if people were pulling pranks. Like they've done in the past. I don't know what it was.

GLENN: But do you think it could have been us?

BRANDON: No. I think it was someone else. Is what I think it was.

GLENN: That's a little frightening.

BRANDON: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I don't know what it was though. So, yeah.

GLENN: Have you ruled out extraterrestrial.

BRANDON: I probably haven't paid enough attention to it. But, yeah. I don't know what it was.

GLENN: That's a little frightening. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

We'll be watching.

You bet.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

He Hunted SATANIST Mexican Cartels and SURVIVED | Dave Franke | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 272

Dave Franke stared down the cartel in Mexico’s blood-soaked Zacatecas — and lived. Now he tells Glenn the unfiltered truth: The cartels are “absolutely” operating inside the United States. Through raw, firsthand accounts, he rips the veil off the narco-satanic cult of Santa Muerte — the Saint of Death — and the savage brutality it fuels. Trump calls the cartels “the ISIS of the Western hemisphere,” and his Homeland Security Task Force has already seized thousands of terrorists and cartel operatives, two million fentanyl pills, and 70 tons of narcotics. But Dave warns: We’ve barely “scratched the surface.” Facing entrenched corruption, human trafficking, and a highly profitable drug trade, Glenn and Dave debate a radical fix — legalize drugs — and ask the explosive question: Does our government let the cartels thrive in exchange for intel, just like in "Ozark"? It’s the story that neither Fox nor CNN would let Glenn tell finally coming to the light, but is it already too late?

RADIO

I asked Vance and Rubio about 2028. They told me the SAME THING...

Will Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio team up for a 2028 presidential run? Glenn Beck asked them both, separately, and shockingly, they gave him the SAME answer. Glenn reveals what they said, as well as what they said about President Trump...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Blaze.com has a news story out: J.D. Vance responds to the possibility of a Vance/Rubio presidential ticket. Responds to a --
I -- I love his response. He was speaking on Pod Force One. It's a podcast from the New York Post. And they asked him about, you know, how do you feel about a Vance/Rubio ticket?

And he said, it -- well, you know, we get along really, really well. The reason why we're successful, is because all of us work together really well.

STU: Which is not necessarily the case of the first term. You cannot say that about the people working in the White House.

GLENN: No. And most. Most.

I mean, I was saying this to a friend of mine, we were talking. And he asked me about a Vance/Rubio ticket. And I said, I talked to J.D. Vance and Rubio in the hallways of the White House. Just recently.

And about that. And I said, and they both said exactly the same thing.

Let's get through the next three and a half years. Things could change quickly in the next three and a half years.

STU: It's true.

There is a feeling I think on the right. That there's a lot of exciting things happening. Many of them positive.

GLENN: Three and a half years say long way.

STU: We are a long ways away. We are a long way away from the midterm elections.

I mean, think about this. We are what know.

We are -- to this point, closer to Trump's inauguration, than we are to the midterms.

GLENN: To the midterms.

STU: That seems impossible!

GLENN: I know. Impossible.

STU: In my head. But that's true to this moment.

GLENN: It's true. So it's crazy how much could change in the next four years, let alone the next one year.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: And things are going really, really well.

STU: That's for us. I know you're moving on to something else. The left hates this more than they've hated anything ever. Every person I've known on the left has been driven completely insane by this.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. By all of this, or by all of the leadership. Of the other side?

I mean, what -- what is really driving them insane

STU: They're totally driven by Trump. I'm not revealing anything new here. I think it's more extreme now, than it was in the first term.

GLENN: It is. But it's not -- they're not driven insane by Donald Trump.

I mean, Donald Trump does -- he does help them along, because he likes toying with them.

STU: Sure. Sure.

GLENN: So that doesn't help.

However, it is -- the response from the media. And the response from the Democrats that have made him into Hitler.

Not Donald Trump.

STU: No. I mean, their analysis of Donald Trump is that he's the worst human being of all time. I think that's helped along by leadership. Helped along by the media.

GLENN: They would elect Pol Pot over Donald Trump.

At this point.

STU: Pol Pot implemented a lot of policies that they liked.

GLENN: That's true. That's true. We should all be against the killing fields. But at this point, I'm not sure they would be against the killing fields.

STU: I don't know if the Hamas wing of the democratic party is against the killing fields.

I'm not sure about that. But I will say, if you look at overall. You look at approval ratings of Donald Trump. They're not at their highest point right now. That's not just Democrats.

That's the entire country.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So if that were to continue, if a couple things go wrong, if the economy turns down.

We talked a lot about the economy being at risk, especially outside of the AI bubble.

I was reading something yesterday about, you know, the AI situation. It's funny. It's basically giving us all of these gains. It's almost all AI-related. All these -- we talked to experts about this. It's almost all a bunch of money being passed in between like seven companies.

And at the end of the day, let's just say that were to collapse. It would hurt our economy. And who knows where we would be.

GLENN: Even if it doesn't collapse, think of all the jobs that are probably going to be lost in the next three years. We're starting to see jobs lost because of AI now. It's going to become very, very unpopular.

And AI I think is going to become very, very unpopular. And those who, you know, are using AI. This is getting very dicey for me. I'm starting to regret everything that I've done in the last two years.

But it's going to become very, very unpopular, because it will take jobs. If companies decide to use it as people, and not as a tool for people. But, anyway, let's -- let's move on.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: The one thing. The one thing that they said, that is the point I wanted to make on this was, and they say it in TheBlaze article.

A lot of the good work we've done is because we do it as an administration, and we're all able to work together. What both of them said to me, on separate occasions, when I said this was, I said to Rubio and to Vance. You are killing it!

You're just killing it right now. And they both said, no, no, no. Both of them separately. No, no, no, no. He's killing it. Pointing to the Oval Office, "He's killing it. We're just following what he is directing us to do."

And I'm like, "Yeah. But you're also doing a very effective job at doing that. I've seen presidents give orders. I saw Donald Trump trying to give orders last time. And it didn't work out well."

And he's like, "No. We're a great, great team."

STU: That's good to hear.

GLENN: Yeah, but what I wanted to say was, I can't think of a time in my lifetime, I mean, I was not around the White House of the Reagan years. So I don't know. But I can't think of a time where I have seen honest credit, given by the top leadership in hallway conversations, to the president.

You know what I mean?

It was -- because it was honest. It was real. It wasn't like, you know. Oh, no.

It's not me. It's him. It was real.

No, no, no. You don't understand. His grand strategy amazing.

And we're just following it.

You know, that told me a lot.

A lot.

And told me a lot about the quality of people around him.

STU: And to be honest about it. It's also the right answer.

You didn't get the sense that they -- they are saying the thing they know is going to keep them in the good graces.

GLENN: No, I didn't. I didn't.

STU: That's good. That's really good.

GLENN: Yeah, I don't think either of those guys would have said -- they would have said thank you. It wasn't like that. It wasn't like that. It was no, no, no, no. You don't understand. He is running the show.

STU: I think the Venezuela boat situation is an interesting highlight of this.

Again, we've talked about all the questions about it. There's some stuff to discuss.

However, like, that is something that is super important, to Marco Rubio. Like, that is -- I would say, central to his -- that entire situation is very central to his belief system.

And his --

GLENN: Yes. Freeing the people of Venezuela.

STU: Really important to him. And the fact that Trump really takes that seriously. And is doing something about it, is really important to Rubio. I think it's --

GLENN: But I don't think -- see, that's the way I think most administrations would look at it, like I want to help Rubio out. I know you're really passionate about this. Let me do this. And I agree with you. But I really think, it's the other way around. I think Donald Trump is like, here's why this is important.

STU: Oh, I think --

GLENN: And it's a little bit with Rubio, what you're dealing with, what you're thinking. Let me show you the grand strategy of how it has to happen. And I think the big, big vision is coming from Donald Trump.

And it accomplishes everything that everybody else is looking to do. But it's much bigger vision.

The big vision is coming from him, I think.

STU: Yeah. I think, the other thing that is very central to Donald Trump belief system. Besides the idea that he doesn't want people coming across the border illegally. He's very against illegal subs. Not just a crime, that is associated with them.

But he's like, obviously, been really hard against that -- his entire life.

GLENN: No. I think -- I mean, I think -- I mean, you wouldn't do this, because of the Constitution.

But I think if he could, I think you would be like, yeah. Drug dealers. Execute.

STU: Well, he's kind of said that. What was the guy in the Philippines?

GLENN: Yeah, kind of like that. Look, he just kills them.

STU: And that's what some of the criticism is over the boats. Right?

Surprised to hear, there's not a lot of great trial attorneys involved in the process, when -- there's not defense being presented when -- when the drone is overhead. They believe these are threats. They believe they have this -- this -- that's going to go through the courts. It's going to be challenged.

GLENN: I know.

STU: And they will have to deal with that. But he is -- he is -- more importantly than stopping those drugs from coming in. Because you see the boats. You're like, well, what could that even do to our country? Swallowed up like -- that wouldn't even get through a Washington, DC, cocktail party, the amount of drugs they could carry on one of those boats.

GLENN: Well, if Hunter.

STU: If Hunter is there obviously.

GLENN: Or somebody else from the Biden administration.

STU: Right. Who knows who it could have been, with all the cocaine in the White House. But, I mean, the point there is, the message.

The message is quite clear what -- what they're sending to -- to Venezuela. Which is not just don't send boats. It is stop everything you're doing. By the way, did you notice that very large ship off your coast?

Like, we are sending all sorts of messages to them.

Much deeper than a please stop delivering some cocaine here.

GLENN: Do you think the fact that we sent one of our biggest bombers from North Dakota to just buzz the coastline. Just in the international waters.

STU: It's a beautiful coastline. Some sightseeing.

GLENN: Did you see this?

Two of our bombers from the air base in North Dakota ran what I would describe as -- and I think they want him to describe it in Venezuela, the same way. As a trial run!

Two times, now, we have sent two bombers. Big bombers. Right to the line of Venezuela. Right to international waters.

They flew all the way down from North Dakota. Down, made that run.

And then headed on home!

He is sending all -- the guy is brilliant.

He is sending all kinds of signals.

You guys should take care of him.

STU: What you know signal he's saying to me?

That he doesn't care about global warming. He see not care about the emissions from that plane.

GLENN: Hold on just a second.

Doesn't that feel good?

RADIO

Why Trump’s “BAILOUT” of Argentina is actually AMERICA FIRST

Why did President Trump recently do a currency swap with Argentina and make a deal for Argentinian beef imports? Financial expert Carol Roth joins Glenn to explain why she believes these deals are actually America First and in our national security interests. Plus, Carol and Glenn discuss the effects of Trump's tariffs and the government shutdown.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Carol, welcome to the program.

CAROL: Hi, Glenn. How are you?

GLENN: Good. Can you tell me what's going on in Argentina?

First of all, the currency swap. We didn't make a loan to Argentina. We made a currency swap. Which I'm not really -- I'm not really fond of the -- what is it? The piece zero. What is their currency down in Argentina?

CAROL: The Argentinian peso. You don't have a bunch of those in your vault with all your gold and silver?

GLENN: No. No. I don't. I don't.

But we do now, because we currency swapped, right? What's it mean?

CAROL: Yes, so this is -- this is not -- you know, just giving known Argentina for its government to spend. This is a financial support, which, by the way, currency swaps are not something that is unusual.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: You know, we do this all the time with our allies, with Japan and Canada and what not. What is unusual in this particular situation, is how it's affected.

So basically, what happened is that we gave the Argentinian Central Bank dollars. We took as collateral the peso, and that is meant to support the Argentinian peso and help to stabilize this currency.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: And a couple of things of note, one is how it was done is interesting. Because normally when we do currency swaps, and we have these lines, it's done through the Federal Reserve, or central bank.

This time, it was not. It was done through the Treasury, through something called the ESF. The Exchange Stabilization Fund, which is sort of a black box fund that allows Treasury to move quickly. You don't need Jay Powell. You don't need the approval of Congress in order to do these things.

GLENN: And that's what it was built for, to stabilize currency in friendly countries?

CAROL: And in the US, by the way,
because I can talk about the history and how we've used it in the US before. But just to kind of get to the Argentinian point. We did this, you know, before the election to help, you know, stabilize things for Milei, so that his government could win.

But we didn't do this because we think Milei is a good guy, or he has fabulous hair, even though we do think that.

The reason we did that is to secure our interests. Because you know who has been making a play in Argentina and throughout Latin America? You know who has had a long-term currency swap with Argentina. It's another country, I'll give you all a hint, and it rhymes with China. China's influence all around the world with their Belt and Road Initiatives where they're trying to dominate traditional infrastructure, digital infrastructure, financial infrastructure, we are trying to kick out their influence. For national security reasons. Also, it just so happens, that Argentina has the second largest reserve of lithium, as well as a smaller set of reserves of other rare-earth elements, that we need access to, for our economic and national security.

So that is what is underpinning all of this. It's because we don't want to be speaking mandarin one day.

GLENN: It's amazing how Donald Trump. People just don't understand this.

Everything he's doing in south marker, he's realigning the globe.

CAROL: Yes.

GLENN: He's doing -- he's doing his own version of America first, Great Reset, and he's just doing it by himself.

I mean, it's pretty incredible, isn't it? Carol?

It really is.

This is why, remember, when we first had the discussion by Scott Bessent.

And I eased everyone ever seen concerns.

Scott Bessent made his fortune on foreign currency exchange. There is nobody who understands the machinations of how you use currency to support countries, and also, you know, the impact on political influence. Like Scott Bessent.

So he has been side by side with President Trump. Who has said, you know. China's influence in South America is a national security issue.

It's a priority.

And, you know, at the time, when we're seeing a reset of the global financial order, and you had China making this very big play. At the same time, when we really have a serious issue with our fiscal foundation. At a minimum, we need to make sure that we have our hemisphere, locked down, before we can do anything else.

And China has really been focused on making inroads in Latin America, and that is what this is all about. And it's not just about the currency swap.

You talked about the importation of Argentina beef. That's a piece of it as well.

And we have to support US ranchers. We have to make it easier for them to do business. We have to remove regulation. This extra piece from Argentina, this is a long-term play. And I know that it's hard for people who are ranchers and who are dealing with this day to day. But this is a long-term play for national security. Because otherwise, it's not going to be Argentinians. It's going to be China that owns everything.

GLENN: Yeah. So I'm looking at Venezuela. What's happening there.

And I don't think that's about drug running. I mean, you know, it is about drug running. But it's not.

It's about, again, taking control of this hemisphere. True or false?

CAROL: Absolutely. And, I mean, this a -- this isn't even you or I guessing about this. This has been a stated goal of the Trump administration.

One of the great things about the Trump administration is Trump, whether he intends to or not. Is incredibly traps parent

He will tell you, what -- he will tell you the things he will do, even if they're couched, you know, in a different record. You can look through that record, and see what that candy is on the inside. And he told us about that candy. So he's been very clear, in addition to the commodities, and the -- the words, the elements, and all these things that are very plentiful in South America. We need to make sure that we have within our allies control so we can have access to.

You do not want China to have military relationships, and other very strong relationships. Within South America.

Because we know what that means long-term for the United States.

GLENN: How is Trump doing overall?

CAROL: So I think overall, I think he's doing quite well. I think from a foreign policy perspective, and I said this during the last administration. Think of him as a business guy. But from a foreign policy perspective, he's an absolutely just killing it. Crushing it. He's been doing a great job in terms of securing the borders. Obviously, we would like to see more deportations. But they're certainly trying and have some roadblocks. And I think from an economic standpoint, the fact that he has this long-term lens, even though some of the machinations I don't agree with, these are the important things. This is finally an administration who says, wait. Our military stockpile is at risk. Because we don't have the components and the supply chain to be able to make products.

We're dependent upon other products in other countries. And assuming they're going to sell us those products, so that we can be able to defend ourselves against them. That doesn't make any sense.

So finally, we have people who are addressing the long-term problems.

And I think the most important thing for a country right now subsidy that we have the runway.

Because we cannot, in three years. Or three and a half years, turn over the reins to another set of people, who want to undo all of this, who hate the United States. Who want to walk that back.

We need people like President Trump. Like the people he's developing. Who understand the long-term issues, that we face that have been built up over many years.

From this broken fiscal foundation. From both parties. But that's where we are today. And he is doing the hard work to try to fix that.

And it's not necessarily apparent to everyone who doesn't understand at this level. But it is so critical, for this very important reset that we're going to have.

GLENN: So I know that you're not a fan of tariffs. I'm not a fan of tariffs.

CAROL: Correct.

GLENN: However, the things that have been happening, the tariffs are not doing what everybody thought they would do.

Why is that?

CAROL: Well, I don't necessarily agree that they're not doing what people thought they would do.

I think that they're -- there has been a bit of overhype on how things are presented.

So do tariffs make it more expensive for businesses and consumers to buy certain goods and services? Yes.

And that has happened. And I've seen it with my own eyes. With my own company. In joy venture partners and small businesses across the country.

There are small businesses that have major burdens. These are the things we thought would happen. And they are happening. In terms of creating runaway inflation, I don't think anybody said that at the levels they are.

They said that when he kicked them up to 100 percent. Which he walked back.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: But we also know when you look at inflation data. That the way that calculated. There's a lot of picking and choosing and substitutions. So, of course, when you say, oh, well, this particular product is being hit too much.

Some of it is substituted to this. Of course, it's not going to show up in the same way, as it affects people in their day-to-day lives. So, again, I think it's that nuanced understanding.

It's the same thing, you know, when people said, hey, why am I at the grocery store? And everything is 30 percent higher. And they're telling us that inflation under Biden is 4 percent. We know that has to do with the calculation.

So I think that tariffs are causing some issues. And some pain.

And hopefully, that can be sorted out in time.

But, you know, absent that particular strategy, I think other things that he's doing, on the American front, to shore up our security from an economic and national security standpoint, make a lot of sense.

STU: And, Carol, I think a lot of people lose sight. Just because it was such a big issue.

Look, trade is important.

But it's also not a huge part of our economy. Imported good news are about ten percent of our economy.

Does that number sound about right?

CAROL: You know, it's a small percent.

I would want to go back and verify the neighbor.

I have so many things rolling around in my head today. That's not top of mind.

But it's not a meaningful percent of our direct -- where does impact, there's a component, where it flows through the economy. And it affects domestic goods and services.

So even, if, you know, on a headline basis, it doesn't seem like it's that important, it can flow through the rest of the economy and create a drag and create some issues there.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: I want to take a break. And, Carol, I want to come back.

Carol Roth is the economist I trust. She's a former investment banker. And really has a clear eye, on not Wall Street. But on Main Street.

I want to talk to you about the shut down. We're about to see possible delays at our airport. Our air traffic controllers. SNAP is about to expire. What happens here. When his the average person begin to really feel the shutdown. And is there a -- is there a line where it just has gone too far.

GLENN: So, Carol, tell me where we are on the shutdown.

CAROL: Well, it's tough. And I think I've said to you before, Glenn. As somebody who would love to see many parts of the government be shut down permanently. There's part of me that goes, this is fantastic. And I hope it goes on forever.

GLENN: Me too.

CAROL: Obviously, there are people who -- you know, we want to make sure that we get paid. We want to make sure the military get paid. We want to make sure that air traffic controllers get paid. So there's a little bit of give and take. Probably the most surprising thing that has come to light is how many people are on food assistance in this country.

GLENN: Yes.

CAROL: When we have something that's supposed to be a safety net, it's almost in my mind, supposed to be like under the tightrope. The trampoline under the tightrope. You fall, and then it pushes you back up. And it's a temporary solution. I feel like we've turned that net into a hammock, where people are just taking a nap. And sleeping in it long-term. And, you know, that is something that even though devastating for the families who truly need to be on it. The fact that this is getting some light on it, I think, you know, that could be a small silver lining here. And I think that will put pressure on the Democratic base. The Democrats are holding out for a bunch of insanity, for illegals over trying to feed the people who are actually in their base. So I'm hoping that puts enough pressure for everybody else though. I think when this really starts to flow through the economy and becomes a drag on numbers and becomes a drag on the stock market, is where you're going to -- to see a little bit more --

GLENN: Any idea when that happens?

CAROL: It's hard to say. Because as we know right now, with the government shutdown. We're not even getting numbers.

GLENN: Right. Right. Right.

CAROL: But, you know, we cannot afford for GDP to contract. We cannot afford for the consumer, which is 70 percent of the economy.

To feel like they cannot spend. Because that flows through tax receipts. And if we have lower tax receipts. It will blow up the deficit. If we blow up the deficit, we can end up in a debt spiral. So that's the big issue here.

GLENN: Well, the food stamps. If you look the at the SNAP program through ethnicity. 45.6 percent of Afghans who have been imported here in America, are on food stamps. Forty-two percent of the Somali community. Thirty-four percent of the Iraqi community, and 23 percent of the Haitian community. That just can't happen!

That just can't happen.

CAROL: Yeah. You know, in terms of those numbers. I think there's a common sense approach that we need to take here. In terms of immigration.

Which I've raised the question with AI. You know, how much immigration do we actually need?

But to the extent that we do invite great people into our country, who share our values. We need to means test that, and you should not be allowed to come here and then be a dependent on the government.

That should be a position of coming to this country.

And I think that's something that seems like it would maybe a 20 or 90/10 issue. So, again, shining light on these things at the point of people who are actually willing to do the hard work and address this problem, is a net benefit.

Is a silver lining, even though the backdrop. You know, we don't want people who actually need this, to go without food.

But, you know, it brings into question, the system. You can get people beans. You can get people rice. You can get people staples. And have them be well-fed in a fraction of the cost, that it's currently costing. And keep out the dodos and the candies and the people who just arrived here to take advantage of the system.

GLENN: Yeah. Carol, thank you. As always, God bless.

CAROL: Always a pleasure.

GLENN: You bet. Buh-bye. Carol Roth. She is just -- I just love Carol. I looked for somebody like Carol for a long time, that understood Wall Street, understood the banking, and then also understood Main Street. CarolRoth.com.

You can find her at the website. Carol Roth. Or follow her on X @CarolJSRoth.

Glenn's Show Prep

Glenn Talks With Megan Phelps-Roper, Former Westboro Baptist Church Member

AI military drone maker reveals the FUTURE of warfare

Transcript

He Hunted SATANIST Mexican Cartels and SURVIVED | Dave Franke | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 272

I asked Vance and Rubio about 2028. They told me the SAME THING...

Transcript

Why Trump’s “BAILOUT” of Argentina is actually AMERICA FIRST

Transcript