Blog
LatestArticlesVideosHands-On History
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcast
Morning Brief
Books
More
AboutCharityReal EstateSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2022 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live
BLOGJuly 12, 2017

If Colluding With Russia Isn't a Crime, What Is It?

Is it a crime to meet with people on the promise of foreign interference with an election?

Glenn opened up the floor to callers on radio Wednesday to see what TheBlaze audience thinks of Donald Trump, Jr.’s emails planning a meeting to get damaging information on Hillary Clinton from the Russian state.

A story in the New York Times on Monday claimed that the younger Trump had emails about meeting with the “crown prosecutor of Russia” to learn “highly sensitive” information about Clinton because the Russian government wanted to support his campaign. On Tuesday, Trump, Jr. himself tweeted screenshots of the emails verifying that the story was accurate.

Glenn reminded people that it’s important not to wear a “term jersey” if you want to share a nuanced perspective; the country doesn’t necessarily need to hear more from people who are deeply loyal only based on partisan lines.

In today’s political discourse, people are often reactionary and subjective. Can principled people remain consistent and identify right and wrong in political scandals?

“We have to get to a place to where we ask ourselves in advance of a scandal, ‘Does it matter?’” Glenn said.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN:  Hello, America.  And welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.  Glad that you are here.  Donald Trump said yesterday that his son was open, transparent, and innocent.  He also said he was -- what was it?  A very classy boy.  What was the first thing that he said?  Something like that.

STU:  He's a high-quality guy or something.

GLENN:  High-quality.  Big, beautiful doors at his house.  High-quality.

Which was -- I thought was a funny -- very Trump statement.  He did come out later and say that he was open, transparent, and innocent.

Okay.  Open and transparent, no.  But he did release the document yesterday, about halfway through this program, that showed the emails.  But that is because -- it's important to remember -- the New York Times -- whoever is leaking these, which is a conversation we have to have.  Who leaked this email?

Who had a copy of this email?  Who leaked this email to the New York Times?  How did they get that?

Hmm.  Donald Trump Jr. had told us that Kushner and Manafort had no idea what the meeting was about.  But if you look at the email chain, in the CC was Kushner and Manafort.  So is it possible that one of them leaked this email, knowing that it was coming out, and, you know, a couple of weeks ago, knowing that they had already told the FBI about this email and so, at some point the investigation is going to lead to this, I want to make sure I look like I'm clean.

Manafort if you know -- Manafort, in the New York Times and from the -- the KGB woman or the woman who is definitely not KGB, she said Manafort was just -- he was just looking at his Blackberry or his i Pad the whole time.  He wasn't even paying attention.  And Kushner, he left within two minutes.  So both of those were -- were kind of cleared in some sort of way by the Russian woman.

I know that Donald Jr. tried to clear them, but unfortunately his email had the CC to both of them.  So they both knew what this meeting was all about.

That's not exactly -- what was it?  Open and transparent.  And, you know, when you release something because the feds are going to release it or the press is going to release it within a few minutes, it doesn't really count, "Oh, I wanted to get it out there."  You did a good job because now people are able to say, "Hey, he released this.  It didn't come from the news."  But it also works against you if you've been on the front lines saying, "Fake news.  Fake news.  Fake news."  Because we can easily say, "It's not fake news.  He released this."

So the questions we have to ask are, if this isn't a crime, if this isn't something that you're going to go to jail for, this is really just a sin.  And is this a sin of, what?  Is it a sin of commission or omission?

Is this a sin of -- of impeachable status?  Or is this just a sin that we all forgive and move on.  Or is this something that we all defend?

And that's where we have to look.  And I want to talk to you, not as a guy who -- I want to hear from you.  I don't want to tell you what to think.  I really want to have a conversation with you.  Because I want to know how you are thinking.  I want to know how you are viewing this.  I want to give you a chance to vent.  I want to give you a chance to reason and think.  So the conversation that I'd like to have with you is one where I am pushing and prodding and asking questions, but I'm going to do that on both sides.

I don't want to hear from people who are wearing a team jersey.  If you are strongly Never Trump, strongly Always Trump, strongly, you know, one side or another.  I really want to hear from people who are struggling with this or have made up their mind one way or another, that can help others.  But you're not just a robot on, I got to get Donald Trump out, I got to keep Donald Trump in.  I want to talk to real people.

Here's what I -- here's what I want to preface this with:  Before this election, I said, we have to know -- we have to -- we have to get to a place to where we ask ourself in advance of a scandal.  Does it matter?

And this comes from the Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton debacle of the '90.

Does this matter?  Here's what happened in the '90s.  As you remember, the left said, "He didn't."  We said, yes, he did.

No, he didn't.

Yes, he did.

No, he didn't.

Yes, he did.

No, he didn't.  For about eight months.  And then all of a sudden it was revealed that, "Oh, my gosh.  Yes, he did."

Then what did they do?

It doesn't matter.

Yes, it does.

No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does.

Then why were we arguing about this for so long?

Well, it matters to him personally.  This is a personal sin.  This doesn't have anything to do with him being president.

Yes, it does.  The president can't lie to the American people.

It was a personal lie.  It doesn't matter.  Yes, it does.  No, it doesn't.  Yes, it does.  Oh, my gosh.

Now, I want to talk to you about the aftereffects.  You most likely argued that a sin about sex in a marriage doesn't matter.  And so what happened was, we went through about eight months or a year, maybe two, of arguing about is oral sex, sex?  Depends on what the definition of "is" is.  The damage that this did to the credibility -- the reason why Hillary Clinton lost is because we didn't teach the Clintons a lesson then.

If Hillary Clinton would have said, "You know, the truth does matter," if she would have come out -- I said this when it was happening, if Hillary Clinton would have taken her luggage and put it in front of the White House and said, "He's still my president, but he's not my husband right now.  We may get back together.  No man should ever treat a woman like that.  The truth does matter."  Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton's life would be a lot different.  And Hillary Clinton may have been president in 2000.  Because she would have had credibility.  And perhaps she would have learned -- perhaps, because we are talking about the Clintons -- perhaps she would have learned that doing -- standing up for the truth pays off.

But instead, her supporters said, "Oh, it doesn't matter.  We love you anyway.  You guys can get things done."  And so the truth didn't matter.

Now, how has this affected our kids?  Pat, do you have that stat of --

PAT:  I don't have it in front of me, but it seems to me that it was about 80 percent of 12-year-olds in 2009 or 2010 that didn't believe oral sex was sex.

GLENN:  Right.  It is meaningless to them.  And they really don't believe that oral sex is sex, and they are embracing it.  What one generation tolerates, the next embraces.

Now, remember, I know how you feel about your kids.  I know how you feel about your life.  I know how you're feeling now about, I haven't had a raise.  I haven't had a job.  I can't afford my insurance.  I'm under attack with my children.  I can't even send them to school.

Right.  Right.  So I can't tell you -- I can't tell you what you need to do.  You need to do what you need to do.

But for me, if we lose the younger generation -- it's not even Generation X.  I have something that we probably won't get around to, today.  A new study on generation Z.  Have you seen generation Z?  They are a direct result of the Tea Party.  I'm convinced of it.

They are a direct result of how bad the government has gotten and how we have infused things into them, because of the Tea Party, standing up for what is right and standing up for smaller government and the truth and transparency.

Generation Z is not like Generation X.  And there's a new study out that says, Democrats, be warned, generation Z is not in your roundhouse.  They're not with you.

So what we do with our children right now makes all the difference in the world.  Now, we know how it worked out on oral sex.  An unattended -- an unintended consequence.  We thought we would teach our children about lies, and perhaps we did.  But what we actually taught them was sex is meaningless.  Oral sex is meaningless.  It means nothing.

And they learned that just from us arguing back and forth.  I don't know what they're going to learn from this.  But I know they're going to watch us and they're going to learn something.  And so I want to be really, really careful before we engage in arguments.  It's why I'd like to -- I'd like to turn down the volume of this and have a reasonable conversation.  And that's why I've asked for people with no teams.  If you're on a team, that's fine, as long as you can turn the passion down.  Because I don't want to add to the name-calling and the passion, because I don't want to set -- begin to set the example for our children, before we really know what we're doing.  Because we don't have all the facts right yet.

And I'm more concerned about the children, our children, and what we're teaching them.  Because we all know, if we lose our children, we're toast.  We already know what the left is teaching their children.  We already know what the institutions are teaching our children.  We're the last hope with our children.

youtu.be
RADIO

‘I saw it myself’: US vet describes HORROR from Ukraine's front lines

Just how cruel has the Russian military been during its onslaught against Ukraine? Chad Robichaux, a U.S. combat veteran and Founder of Mighty Oaks Foundation, tells Glenn the Russians have committed certain horrors during today’s conflict with Ukraine that he hasn’t witnessed in any other war. Recently returned from the front lines, Robichaux describes those horrors that he witnessed firsthand. Plus, he tells Glenn he hasn’t seen proof of any significant American relief there, despite the billions of dollars sent to Ukraine from the U.S. government. So where DID the money go?!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Chad, welcome to the program, sir. How are you?

CHAD: Good. This is Glenn?

GLENN: Yes. How are you, sir?

CHAD: Good. Good. Thanks for having me on, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet. Where are you now?

CHAD: I am down in the (inaudible).

GLENN: Okay. Good. Good. You're home.

I saw you about four weeks ago, and you had just come from the front lines over in Ukraine.

And I said, what are you seeing? And you said, well, I'm not seeing really any significant American relief.

CHAD: And I'm not, no. And that was the same on this trip, Glenn. And it's really -- it's not only sad and unfortunate.

It needs to be addressed. There is no congressional oversight on this money. This money is going to a black hole. And in any country in the world, it would be --

GLENN: Bad.

CHAD: It would be bad. People are people, and governments are corrupt. And it's going to end up where it shouldn't. And the money is not ending up where it's going -- it's U.S. taxpayer dollars.

Millions of dollars. Not only that, it's -- it's -- the extent, because it's needed. It's needed to save lives. And restore humanity. And it's not being used for that. So do you think that's us? Or do you think that's them, or a combination of the two?

CHAD: I think it's a combination of the two.

You know, I've been getting a lot of slack from people, why are you over in Ukraine helping? Ukraine is a corrupt country. I'm like, well, you know what else is corrupt? Washington, DC.

And, you know, governments are corrupt around the world. Certainly, Ukraine has had an issue of corruption.

And it's been a hotbed of money laundering and stuff like that. And so has Washington, DC.

The fact that this money has not been audited or accounted for. Or has any kind of oversight, just leaves room for corruption, both in Ukraine, and in Washington, DC. And I don't think -- I think it would not be difficult at all.

We have the embassy back in Ukraine now. It would not be difficult to have correct congressional oversight over these funds, and make sure they go to the right place, if needed.

I do believe, the money is needed there. I know not everyone agrees with that. I believe we should be supporting these people.

Not in the realm of the with money we are giving them. I think that was too big of a blank check. And a lot can be done with a lot less money. But actually ask where it belongs.

And, you know, I just -- at Mighty Oaks. Mercury One, you guys helped us financially, Glenn. And we just brought $20,000 in medical supplies, to the special operations on the front line. When I say medical supplies, I fax individual first aid kits that go in as troops. Because they don't have them.

And they're like, please, give us anything. So not only did we bring $20,000 worth of facts to give it to the special forces unit.

But we brought (inaudible), who trains Army Special Forces, medics. We brought him with us, to teach them how to use them.

And that's something that we did -- we did that trip. Maybe, it cost us $40,000 to do that trip. And that was -- they were so thankful for that. They were like, that's life-saving training that we were able to give them.

And, meanwhile, billions of dollars in the region. And why can't -- things like that.

GLENN: Yeah. But it's going through governments. And -- and dirty hands, every step of the way. You're also delivering something else, along with the medical care, are you not?

CHAD: That's right. We -- you know, Mighty Oaks. For U.S. service members, we've done over 400,000 active duty U.S. service members with our spiritual program. And in 2016, we decided to bring this to our ally trips around the world. We went to Ukraine before in 2017 and 2018. It's an hour back there, on the front lines. And we go there -- a typical day will be we'll give them some classes, like bailout procedures for the personal safety medical classes. We'll give them resources and supplies. Then we'll give them resources that are spiritual. The audio Bible six to them, and some other resources, to help them work on their mental and physical health.

At the end of the day, once we build their rapport with them all day. We're able to talk to them, veteran to veteran. Combat veteran to combat veteran. Peer to peer. About spiritual resiliency and mental resiliency, that way they can stay in a fight to protect their homes and families and their freedom. And we know, from our experience, as war fighters. And that's two years of war that we just went through.

That there's a lot of things that could happen on a battle field. That nothing is more essential, than having a strong spiritual foundation.

And we're able to share the gospel of Christ, with these guys.

GLENN: Chad, tell me about the -- the war crimes that you witnessed.

CHAD: You know, I've been seeing it since February. Since we've been gone there, Glenn. But nothing worse than the last few trips. Because I'm getting more into the front lines. I just was in a Zoom. I was two hours into the Zoom, which was pretty much Russia. And that was occupied for six months.

And some of the areas we saw, I'll get to the mass graves. But one of the things that's important to know, is every -- I'm not exaggerating when I say this, every home -- every hospital, every school, every structure, the -- it's almost -- it's almost impressive, as someone who has been in combat. They hit every single structure. And these aren't military targets. These are civilians.

GLENN: By the way, we're showing some videos, on Blaze TV right now.

Some of them are graphic. So look away. But I've seen these, earlier. And --

CHAD: They're apartment buildings.

GLENN: Yeah, they're apartment buildings. What you're saying is true. There's really nothing left. Nothing.

It's all rubble. And you say that's different in wars like this.

CHAD: Absolutely.

I mean, even Taliban is -- I mean, the Taliban will attack civilians. Terrorism.

They want to intimidate people. But this is an intimidation. This is -- I mean, you're talking like, those buildings in the video, looked like two buildings.

It's one building. It's a five-story building blown out to the ground. And this is women and children, and civilians living in it.

And this wasn't one that was accidental. It was every apartment building in the area. Had airdropped missiles right into the roof of that apartment building, that blew it to the ground, and killed thousands of civilians.

And this isn't really reported. I'm happy you're allowing to get this news right now. But it's not being reported.

And then, you know, day before so -- this is, again -- this is not a collateral damage. This is not, you know, indiscriminate fire. This is direct fire of civilian complexes, and civilians, which is a war crime.

And, you know, in the international courts, the ICC, the International Criminal Courts from the UN, needs to be stepping in.

Because this is not -- should never be allowed, regardless of Ukraine, Russia, political sides. Like who -- none of that. This should never be allowed in this point of our civilization, to attack civilians this way. And after we spent the day, I spent -- I was with the chief of the dean, who was the chief of the entire law enforcement, for all of Ukraine.

He would be essentially like over the FBI, CIA. Everything.

For all of Ukraine. And he was sent there by the government, to make sure they secured a Zoom, after they recaptured it. We were with him. As I drove to meet him. Myself and my partner, driving in this combat area, to meet him. And two MiG fighters flew over, and they did a gun run. Dropped bombs -- I've been over a lot of war zones. Never had air strike. Air -- enemy air over us. I mean, we always controlled the air.

So that was kind of a crazy scenario for me. We had a Hind helicopter fly by.

We get to the front. We were with them, while they're fighting this. We were getting shelled and rocketed within 100 meters of us. And this small arms fired. You probably seen from the videos -- I probably counted about 60 Russian soldiers. They were like 18, 19, 20 years old. It's sad to know, that many of them probably don't even know why they were there.

And one of the things, it gives the Ukrainians, as we were moving forward. And they were dying, Russian soldiers.

They were rendering aid, and that shows who is the good guys.

These guys were rendering aid. Meanwhile, these Russians had occupied their homes, and killed their family members for six months. And the Ukrainians were still rendering aid. That really stood out to me.

GLENN: I want to play a clip from you, out on the field, where you're talking about mass graves. Here it is.

VOICE: This area is 1,200 people were missing, from this area. They found 1,100 bodies in this area, and they were burned before the -- so you can tell they tried to destroy the evidence of the mass killings. Most of the people were -- their hands were tied. Behind their backs, and executed style. So we're not just talking about ballistic missiles and shelling, which we've seen.

I've seen firsthand, driving through cities. They're just level to rebel, civilian targets, civilian neighborhoods.

But we're talking beyond that, just with indirect fire.

And this is not indiscriminate fire, because we drove through areas. Me and my teammate were driving through -- like, they strategically hit every structure, every house, every building, every school, every hospital. Now, beyond that.

Once they take these areas. They're bringing these civilians out hear, in the woods, tying their hand behind their back. And executing them.

Burning their bodies. To hide the evidence. Putting them in mass graves.

GLENN: You saw these people with their hands tied behind their backs and the -- you saw this yourself?

CHAD: I saw it myself, yeah. And there were two mass graves that we were brought to. One was 474 people.

They counted specifically. It was estimated about 1100 people. And mostly all civilians, mostly because of most of them were women, a lot of children.

And it appeared -- it appeared what they were using the graves for. When I say 1100 people. I don't think they killed 1100 people at one time. I think six months, as they arrested people, they brought them there, probably bound and handcuffed. And then would kill them. Pushed them in, as a place of disposal.

That would be my interpretation from what I saw, it happened. And then as Ukraine came in and tried to -- was retaking that area, it appeared they tried to burn the bodies, to maybe hide the evidence. But, you know, burning bodies is harder than it sounds. You have to use a lot of fuel. So then they tried to bury it.

And then they vacated the area. When I say vacated, they must have left in a hurry, because they left 74 tanks in this area.

GLENN: Chad, so what do we do?

CHAD: You know, this to me, Glenn, this is a -- this only gets worse. It -- Russia is losing, so I think Putin has to show strength.

So I think the only scenarios is that he will escalate and do something radical. Even more radical than this. Or, you know, you have the other scenarios. You have Zelinsky, who can't -- because Zelinsky in the eyes of Ukraine. They're winning. And as they're winning, he's not going to go to the negotiation table.

So it would also require Putin to do something, that would force the negotiation table.

But I think what we can do with the worlds -- and I don't mean as America. But as the world, is NATO needs to accept Ukraine, and NATO.

And/or, the UN and International Criminal Court, needs to recognize these war crimes, and these human rights violations, and hold Putin accountable. And that's what the UN is for. That's what the International Criminal Court is for.

For these exact scenarios. But we're not seeing them take action. So what we could do, you and I, is exactly what we're doing right now, is exposing this.

I believe if I would have not leaked this information to Vox. If I would have reported it, right to the United States government, or it would have been swept away. Because they don't want it to be known. Because if it's known, then they'll have to do something about it. So they have to make sure there's reporting from the front lines. Unfortunately, journalists can't make it through a lot of these areas. Because it's so volatile. And I get that.

But the reporting needs to be -- it needs to be exposed. And, you know, our government gets to be held accountable, for these billions of dollars. So that Ukraine. If our government will decide to get this money, then it needs to go where it belongs. Again, I think you and I both agree that this much money makes the problem worse.

But, you know, if we are going to give it, then give it. And have good oversight. If we're going to have international war systems, then use it for times like this.

The UN. This is what it's for. This is what the UN is for. And I also believe NATO, at this point NATO should accept Ukraine. By the way, just a couple of days ago, President Zelinsky applied again for Ukraine to be accepted in NATO.

GLENN: Chad, thank you so much for doing everything that you do. I know your heart is in the right place. I know who you serve.

And I can't imagine what this does for somebody who went through PTSD. To be over there, again, and seeing these things.

So I appreciate your service. To him and to us. So thank you so much, Chad.

CHAD: Thank you, gang. God bless. Thank you for all your support too. Couldn't have done it without you.

GLENN: You got it. Mighty Oaks foundation. He is the founder and CEO. Cofounder of save our allies. You can follow him at Save Our Allies, or SaveOurAllies.org.

youtu.be
RADIO

Russia’s MISSING nuclear submarine is capable of doing THIS

Glenn shares two news stories involving U.S. safety at sea that show how today’s current events may mirror those that led up to World War II. One of those stories, which involves a Russian nuclear submarine NATO recently said has ‘disappeared,’ will likely TERRIFY you. Glenn details just how powerful this missing submarine can be…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: My job is to warn you of things, that are coming. I don't think it is to tell you how to fix it. Although, if you -- well, let's talk about this. Are you a long-term thinker, or a short-term thinker?

STU: Try to be a long-term thinker. Many times, particularly at meals, I'm a short-term thinker.

GLENN: Yes. Okay. Me too. Ice cream is in front of me, very short thinking. Goldfish thinking, okay?

But if you're a short-term thinker, this next segment, your mood is not going to improve much.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: If you're a long-term thinker, in half an hour, your mood is going to improve a great deal. Because I don't have an answer.

Yesterday, I several times gave you a warning about something. And lo and behold, an answer appears, to show you a way to make that happen. And he'll be joining me, in just about 30 minutes.

So don't go anywhere. Now, do you ever remember merchant Marines?

I was a merchant marine. When I was a kid, I didn't even know what that was. What the hell is a merchant marine?

Is that some sort of offshoot of the marines? No, it was just someone working merchant ships. Merchant convoys. What are those?

Those are just like the big, you know -- those big, huge ships, that come in, with all the cargo on the back of it. Cargo ships. Those are merchant Marines, that are running those things.

Okay. We had a problem with merchant ships, back in the 1930s.

As things progress with the Russian war, the more this thing echoes, the buildup of World War II, I think we're somewhere between 1936, and 1938.

The invasion of the rhyme land, and the invasion of Poland. But it's interesting. Because headlines this week, have shown that a cabinet level secretary of the United States, has called for merchant convoys and armed escorts for the L&G ships going from the U.S. and Europe. That's natural gas or propane, okay? It was the Secretary of Energy, asking the Secretary of Defense, to provide increased security for private Naval vessels. Did you know that?

Now, they didn't use convoy, or escorts. But just want to make sure that the Pentagon is providing some security for these carriers, that are on their way to Europe. And they need increased security.

Now, how are we going to increase security, for liquid natural gas, with 80,000 tons of displacement, and by law, they can carry no armaments. No defensive system of any kind.

See, this is why Nord Stream was so serious. Because it's a private infrastructure. And if the Russians claim we did it. Then they can claim, well, our private infrastructure, is a target as well.

So the Naval responsibility, for all of our shipping responsibility, in the Atlantic Ocean, falls to a carrier group. A brand-new carrier, the most sophisticated carrier ever. The Gerald R. Ford carrier group.

You know, Gerald R. Ford does not instill confidence in me.

Now, this has been at sea trials, for the last two years. It's the newest of our carriers.

And it's been, some would say, plagued with issues. For their launch system. The electromagnetic launch system.

The elevators.

The radar system. It comes out of Norfolk, Virginia.

So riddle me this. Is it a coincidence, that suddenly and a few months early, based on previous announcement, the Gerald R. Ford has suddenly been declared, oh, it's combat ready?

Oh, no. You know what, we're going to deploy it. What time is it? Soon, in the Atlantic for the very first time.

When did they announce that? Literally the day after Secretary Granholm said, we need increased security in the Atlantic.

Suddenly, you know, the launching system and the radar, and all of the -- no, it works.

It's miraculous. You know what, it was just a lightbulb that was out. We just had to switch that one light. It's like a Christmas tree. We switched that one light bulb and everything went on. It's fine.

STU: Fixed the one light bulb, and all of a sudden, missiles hit their target.

GLENN: Right. Right.

Best guess is, this is all quietly and informally, the U.S. Navy, conducting training exercises, and they're going out and they're just coincidentally. They're just going to be doing a lot of these things.

You don't ride up next to the natural gas ships. That's it. U.S. Navy will open up, dedicated channels with L and G shipping companies. And they will proactively report any security concerns. Or unknown radar or sub contacts. And it won't be surprising if Shell and Chevron and Exxon all quietly decide, you know what, we'll sail right next to that carrier group. You know, it's great.

We have things to see. Ocean is a big thing. We don't see much. So we're going to do that.

Just watch the movie Greyhound. It's on Apple. Tom Hanks was in it. About the Allied convoy running through German U-boats. See, it's on Apple. You can watch it. It's really good.

But that's how it was happening in World War II. Submarines were coming out and sinking all the things that we were sending to Europe.

Which brings me to another coincidence. Oh, man. You're -- you're just not going to believe this. But one of Russia's nuclear-powered submarines has reportedly vanished from its arctic harbor.

And NATO says, it's concerned, it could be gearing up to test its advanced weapons systems. Now, it's in the Atlantic.

And it's a submarine. Pay no attention to the last story. Because it's really great. Advanced systems, in fact, the system is called the -- you're going to love this.

It is the Poseidon. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's called the Poseidon. The missile system. But it is -- it is known as the Armageddon weapon.

I love that. Oh, yeah. So what is it?

Well, the submarine is -- is top shelf, brand-new. And it has the Poseidon torpedo, which is a nuclear torpedo. And this torpedo, is kind of strong.

I mean, just to put it into perspective, put it into perspective, for you, fat man, the fat man nuclear bomb, dropped on Nagasaki by the United States.

That was 21-kilo tons. Remember that?

Vaporize. Okay.

21-kilo tons. So a mega ton, is 1,000 kilo tons.

So what we dropped with fat man, was 21-kilo tons, so it would be 21,000 mega tons, right?

I think -- I -- it's a lot. Okay? It's a lot. 21-kilo tons. A mega ton is 1,000-kilo tons.

The estimates on the weapon of the apocalypse. Have ranged from two to 100 mega tons. One hundred mega tons.

Now, that's a lot. That's a lot. But here's the thing: They're not missiles like you know them to be missiles that just go up into the sky, and then vaporize the city.

These do something special. They're Poseidon. And so they are like drones, except not in the sky. They're underwater.

And these drones can go down, be launched from the sub. And then go down, and sit on the bottom of the ocean, let's say by a shoreline.

And one of them would do it. But they can launch many of these from one sub. And they all sit up and down the shoreline. And then they wait for the signal. And when the sub gives them the signal, they blow them up.

And it's capable of creating a 1600-foot tidal wave.

Now, the bad news is, wipe a lot of people out. The good news is, in some ways, I guess man made climate change, you know, affecting the oceans. When man puts something down. That's 7,000 degrees instantly.

Going to wipe out the shorelines.

STU: I'm against that kind of climate change for sure.

GLENN: I am too. I am too.

So they lost that submarine. It's out there some place.

STU: Well, they watch it.

GLENN: They were watching it. And then it disappeared. I love that. Coming from NATO. And they say. And this is a quote.

It disappeared. I don't think it disappeared. I would like you to try for another word.

Because I don't think it disappeared. I think you weren't watching it.

STU: Right. We were all turned around. There was a cake. There was a birthday that day. Everybody was singing happy birthday.

Candles blew out. We turned around, it was gone. And that new employee Vladimir, he had a happy birthday, but we did lose the sub.

So I would like to think, that maybe this submarine is out just -- you know, just trolling the waters, looking for the natural gas, that we're shipping.

But that's not what it does best. Not what it does best. So hopefully, their systems will work as well, as our catapult on the USS Gerald Ford.

STU: It's funny. I feel like people are acting crazy all the time. This is just a general idea -- general sense of the world right now.

Is that people are acting crazy. Part of that might be the craziness of the world.

Right? Like people are really unsure, as to what the future holds.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Unsure how to stop it. Unsure how to react.

There's nothing solid right now.

GLENN: Right. Whoa. It's almost like everything you thought was solid, is liquid.

It's true. You don't know -- you don't know any norms anymore. People are afraid to have conversation.

Because they don't know, and I have to say something that somebody all of a sudden is offended. And then my life is over. It's really not a good thing.

But the good news is, we've gone through this before.

The world has gone through this before. It doesn't usually end well. But in the end, good things happen.

In the end, after it's all over, good things happen. You just have to get to the other side.

youtu.be
RADIO

The Fed gave BILLIONS to foreign banks. THESE are the results.

Soon after COVID hit the U.S., the Federal Reserve spent BILLIONS trying to keep certain banks — ones they deemed too important to fail — afloat. But the Fed’s loans didn’t just go to American banks. They went to foreign ones as well. In fact, Credit Suisse received more than 7 PERCENT of the entire amount the Fed loaned out. So, it must’ve worked, right? All these banks are doing great now, right?! WRONG. In this clip, Glenn shares the disastrous results of the Fed’s big, and until recently, secretive payday…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now let me talk to you a little bit about something that came up over the weekend, and I have been trying to figure it out.

And talked to some experts, took me a couple of days, to get to a place to where I could really explain it to you.

One of the things that's happening in the market is you've got two big banks, Deutchse Bank and Credit Suisse that are about to default, or at least it looks like it.

Let me take you back in history. Back in March 2020, right at the dawn of the covid-19 panic, some interesting things happened on Wall Street.

March 9th, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 2,000 points. That's more than a 10 percent crash in a single day.

At the time, it was one of the largest single day declines in the US history of stocks. More than $1.8 trillion was wiped out from US the pension and retirement funds in a single day. March 10th, the very next day, the Federal Reserve began making emergency loans to what were considered to be systematically important banks. That are banks that are just too big to fail. Now, it's important to remember, that we didn't learn about these emergency loans made during March of 2020, just as the WHO and the CDC were declaring a pandemic. We didn't learn about those loans, until two years later. Because the fed isn't -- they're no longer required to tell you who they're making loans to or for how much, until two full years after it makes the loans.

So they say, that's not make sure that nobody is panicking. Well, investors, if they knew in realtime, these banks needed cash, it would cause a run on the banks. So, for example, on March 9th, the Dow lost 2,000 points, and more than ten percent of its value.

So on March 10th -- and we know this now, because two years have passed, the U.S. Federal Reserve made $112 billion in emergency loans, to 24 banks.

Stocks rebounded slightly. But then the first death started being reported from covid at retirement homes. Trump canceled the international travel. And within a couple of days, stocks were down another 1500 points, she got $4 trillion in wealth from the portfolios of Americans in just a couple of days. For its part, the fed continued lending. Distributing a total of $1 trillion, $1 trillion in emergency loans to banks in just a six-day period. Remember, this is two weeks into the pandemic. Well before businesses were shut down.

At this point, all that had really happened to the economy, was that stocks, you know, the forward-looking investment vehicle, were declining. But this was enough for the fed to print $1 trillion in new currency and loan it out to the banks, considered too big to fail. Not just our banks. No, no, no. Not just the U.S. banks. Some of the largest borrowers in the past 20 years from emergency loans from our Federal Reserve, have been foreign banks, and investment firms.

Nomura Securities out of Japan. BNC Paribas, the French Bank, Barclays Bank out of the UK.

All of these are the largest borrowers from the fed. So was the largest Swiss bank Credit Suisse?

The largest Swiss bank, Credit Suisse, were they on that list?

Oh, yeah. Just in six days, from March 10th to March 16th, 2020, Credit Suisse requested and was granted $50 billion in emergency loans, more than 7 percent of the total that the fed had loaned to 24 banks.

That was covid, right? Now, it may seem odd, that the central bank of the United States, needed to loan the largest Swiss bank, $50 billion in just a few days. Don't they have their own central bank?

But let's just chalk it up, to yet another covid emergency. We had to do something. We had to bail out the largest banks in Japan, Switzerland, France, UK, I mean, it was a pandemic. So now, fast forward to 2022.

All those banks got their covid bailout. In January 2022, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, hit a new all-time high. So clearly, the bailouts worked. And the banks made all this money. The banks were able to recover and get past the pandemic, right?

I mean, those trillions in loans to banks, skyrocketed inflation. And, you know, added to the currency circulation. And inflation is twined by, you know, too much currency. Too much money, chasing too few goods. But we saved the banks, right?

We restored the stock market, and set ourselves out to a record recovery. Well, yesterday, Credit Suisse, flagged as the too big to fail bank, by the U.S. Federal Reserve, their stock hit an all-time low.

They shed more than 65 percent of its value, losing 20 percent of its value, in one day.

Worse, investors are effectively betting now, that Credit Suisse. That Credit Suisse, will go belly-up next year.

We know this, because of -- I hate to bring this word up, credit default swaps. Not going to get, you know -- I'm not going to get all big short on you.

But this is, when you have the bonds, and you think, uh-oh. I think we might lose the -- the bank might go out. I buy an insurance policy.

Okay?

Credit default. And I swap. I swap, what I'm holding, I give it to you, and I get the insurance money. Okay?

Credit default swaps. It's a way to bet on the down. It's horrible. But now, 30 percent -- it went up. The price to insure went up, 25 percent yesterday. Yesterday.

30 percent of people are now betting that Credit Suisse is going to collapse.

So what's going on?

Why would it collapse? Again, I'm not going to go into all of this stuff.

I just need you to understand the big points, and you will understand.

This will take your breath away.

Again, remember we all talked about credit default swaps, and derivatives. Oh, derivatives. Oh, that's horrible.

Without if we go to into all of that, remember when we said, that the global delivery -- derivatives market, after 2008, started going back up again.

And it surpassed what happened in 2008. And the global derivatives marketed was about $100 trillion. And we were like $100 trillion. That's horrible.

And we raised the alarm. They haven't learned anything. In fact, it's gotten worse.

Then it rose to $500 trillion, just a couple of years ago. And we raised the alarm again. Any idea, where the derivatives market is right now.

After two years of pandemic. Two years of Bidenflation. And after stocks have lost 20 persuasive of their value since January, where is the derivative market?

One quadrillion dollars.

No way out.

$1 quadrillion. That's one thousand trillion dollars.

That's what's held by the 24 largest banks in the world. $1,000 trillion.

You haven't even begun to feel the pain of what these people have done. Derivatives have been around since the 1920s. But we have gone insane. Now, last year, when a private wealth fund defaulted, it cost the global banks more than $11 billion in derivative losses. More than 5 billion was absorbed by Credit Suisse bank.

That's nearly half the global losses. Of one firm. That just had 11 billion.

We're -- we have one quadrille John.

Now, if I'm you, I could easily say, it's a -- you know, German bank. Or Swiss bank. And it's not my problem.

But it is your problem. Because it is your dollar. Your currency provided by your Federal Reserve. Why are there not people standing in front of the Federal Reserve, demanding answers, and holding signs up, $1 quadrillion?

Where does inflation come from?

You think it's all government spending?

Collectively, since the fed started emergency lending operations in September of 2019.

And note for you conspiracy theorists out there. September 2019 was five full months, before there was a single positive covid case in the US. And we were talking about it in September of 2019.

The foreign banks have collectively borrowed 6 trillion dollars, from the Federal Reserve.

Now, here's the funny thing: $6 trillion has already gone out.

$1 quadrillion.

If the Federal Reserve decides to lend Credit Suisse another $500 billion today or tomorrow to bail itself out of whatever mess it's in. You, the one who is actually paying for this, you won't know for another two years.

Because under Dodd-Frank, you know, the one that was going to fix everything, the fed's reporting requirements now allow for a two-year delay.

So if we are bailing out Germany and Switzerland today, make sure you tune in to this show on October 4th, 2024. To find out what it costs you.

youtu.be
RADIO

WATCH: 2 videos clearly show who America’s REAL fascists are

The far-left continues to perpetuate their new favorite lie: That conservative Americans, or ‘MAGA Republicans,’ are a dangerous threat to not only the nation, but to overall democracy as well. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, in this clip, Glenn plays two videos that prove conservative principles are the TRUE American ones. So, which political side do YOU think is harboring the real fascists?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We are -- we are entering a time right now, where Europe is going to -- I think Europe is going to collapse before we do.

I think Europe is going to head for some real, real problems, in the next few months.

Perhaps this winter. And we also have people that are pushing for violence here in the United States. Cut three.

VOICE: This means war. That is where we are. We are at war with these people. These folks are evil.

VOICE: There is an ultra right MAGA contention, and this country that wants to overthrow the U.S. government.

VOICE: It is a danger to our democracy. It is a danger to our way of life.

VOICE: The MAGA movement is a threat.

VOICE: The extremists that we're dealing with every single day, we have to kill and confront that movement.

VOICE: To the elite, this is literally a call to arms.

VOICE: Obviously, Republicans I think are the biggest threat to democracy. We don't separate right-wing extremists and the Republican Party anymore.

VOICE: I see this as a party, a MAGA party that is no longer confident that they can win elections with votes. And so now they're seeking to enact their political will through violence.

VOICE: This is literally what conservative white folks do, when they don't get their way. They turn violent.

VOICE: Today's GOP is no longer a political movement, it is a fascist movement.

VOICE: And this is why it could be more dangerous than 1860 or the 1930s.

VOICE: To the elite, you know, this is a -- literally, a call to arms.

VOICE: Maybe now it is, all about the violence.

It all is about an insurrection.

It all is, in his mind, about a Civil War.

VOICE: It feels like we're not at the brink of a Civil War. But that one has already begun.

VOICE: The fact that the base is getting smaller. It makes it more dangerous in a lot of ways. Because those are the people willing to do things like take up arms, and press the tactics that lead to Civil War.

VOICE: This is one who held that office, who is basically saying to Americans, there should be Civil War.

VOICE: Look at what he's doing last night, as you know. That, you know, more or less salutes that either QAnon or almost look like Naziism.

VOICE: You saw the rally in Ohio the other night. Trump is there, ranting and raving for more than an hour. And you have these rows of young men with their arms raised.

VOICE: These crazed, deranged folks, who want to impart evil in every facet of our society.

VOICE: To the elite, you know, this is a -- literally, a call to arms.

GLENN: Okay. Stop.

STU: Literally.

GLENN: Literally. That one was selected to play over and over again because there's no two ways to take that. She says literally, a call to arms.

This is what's washing over your neighbors who are not paying attention. This is what they're seeing, almost 24/7. Drumbeat of this.

Here's the good news. Here's Telemundo. Cut four on elections, with Hispanics, and Latinx. Otherwise known as Latinos.

VOICE: Latinx are the largest -- the fastest growing group of votes, and the numbers are there.

We -- the Latino voters represent -- make up about one out of every ten voters.

But they're also very happy. I mean, the pandemic hit them very hard. The economy is hitting them very hard. Inflation is hitting. They are unhappy about the job quality, and you see the main issues Latinos care about, their rights, their economy, the job quality. So, yeah. This is a concern. And this can make things very difficult for Democrats. And also, the way Republicans are gaining -- that gap between Democratic -- Democrats and Republicans.

GLENN: All right. I want to play two things, and I want to ask you, which one reflects your belief?

Don't answer for anyone else. Just you. Which one reflects you?

Here's cut six. Kamala Harris.

VOICE: It is our lowest income communities, and our communities of color, that are most impacted, by these extreme conditions. And -- and impacted by -- by issues that are not of their own making. And so we -- absolutely.

And so we have to address this, in a way that is about giving resources based on equity. Understanding that we fight for equality, but we also need to fight for equity. Understanding that not everyone needs to start out at the same place. And if we want people to be in an equal place, sometimes we have to take into account those disparities and do that work.

STU: Please clap.

GLENN: Okay. That is -- that's Kamala Harris talking about how FEMA should approach the hurricane. With equity in mind. Instead of let's just help people that are in need.

If you're in need, I don't care what color you are, let's help. Does that reflect your view? Now, the guy who is called a fascist, has just said this, about people who are going in, and take advantage of people who are affected by the hurricane. DeSantis, seven.

VOICE: The other thing that we're concerned about, particularly in those areas, that are really hard hart. Is, you know, we want to make sure we're maintaining law and order.

Don't even think about looting, don't even think about taking advantage of people, in this vulnerable situation.

And so local law enforcement is involved. And monitoring that. You know, I told Kevin, the state needs to help as well. You can have people bringing boats into some of these islands.

And trying to ransack people's homes.

I can tell you, in the state of Florida, you never know what may be lurking behind someone's home. And I would not want to chance that, if I were you, given that we're a Second Amendment state.

GLENN: Which -- which one is the America that you know? The America that you stand for? Which one?

The one that says we're going to help people affected by the hurricane, based on equity, or the one that says, roll up your sleeves, when you see someone who needs help, help them. We don't need to ask them questions. We don't need to know where they live. We're just going to go in and help people.

Which one is the America? Which one is the America that you know? The one that questions and demands honest answers to hold our government responsible, or the America that holds you responsible, but they are never held accountable.

The one that can lie to you over and over, over and over again. And then, eventually, just come out and say it, and there's no repercussion for it.

The NIAID, which is headed by Anthony Fauci, just delivered a brand-new grant, to EcoHealth Alliance.

The grant delivers now five years of funding, for Peter Daszaks, controversial nonprofit group, to research, quote, the potential for future bat coronavirus.

Now, if you remember, it was a conspiracy theory, to say that any of this was happening.

The potential for future bat coronavirus, certainly, Fauci said, we don't do that. That's gain of function. We don't do that. EcoHealth doesn't do that. And it certainly didn't have anything to do over in China. And we showed you the paper trail. We showed you the facts. Now, without any fanfare, without any questions, the government comes out, and does it again.

Not learning from past mistakes. Denying that they do this, and then doing it out in the open, again!

Which is the America that you want to live in

Which is the America that is worth saving? Which is the one that you should be standing for? The one that lies to its citizens, or the one that has the government accountable to its citizens?

One is fascistic. The other is not. Because America seems to be so confused by fascism, the one that is pushing for limited government, and a government that responds to its people, and is held accountable by its people, that's not the fascist one.