BLOGJanuary 25, 2018

Ben Shapiro: You Can Like Trump’s Policies While Admitting He’s ‘Character-Deficient’

Good Trump vs. Bad Trump?

On today’s show, Glenn asked Ben Shapiro how conservatives can navigate the minefield of supporting President Donald Trump in the good things he does while still acknowledging when he does wrong.

Ben Shapiro: ‘Nikki Haley at the UN Is Basically My Spirit Animal’

We shouldn’t feel compelled to make excuses for bad behavior, and Trump doesn’t need conservative leaders to compromise their principles to cover for him.

“If we’re not willing to call out bad when we see it even from people [when] we like what we’re getting from them, then we can’t have an honest conversation,” Shapiro said. “It turns into simply fan-boying or fan-girling.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Last hour, we were talking to a professor from George Mason and he was talking about how bad education is. And I was talking a little about the brainwashing that is going on and the activization of at least 10 percent of our college students that just want to be liberal activists. And who is doing that on the other side?

Who is activating today's youth to be able to get them to defend the Constitution and conservative principles? The answer is sitting in my studio right now. Ben Shapiro. How are you doing, Ben?

BEN: Hey. Doing well. How are you?

GLENN: Good. I know you had a great time in Connecticut yesterday. One hundred security officers to protect your speech and zero protesters.

BEN: Yeah. That's how it always goes. And you always think, why do we need these security officers, and half the time there's a riot.

But it was nice. I mean, it was 500 students who showed up. They closed it to the general public, which was too bad. They should have allowed another 5, 600 people in, because they had another 700 reservations, is what I heard. But in any case, it was a really nice event. Everybody enjoyed it.

GLENN: Did you anybody on the left that has -- because I have -- people who are hard on the left, who say, I'm really concerned about what's happening on college campuses?

BEN: I think that's a growing concern for a lot of people on the left. And I think anybody who is an honest person on the left, has to look at the way that they're cracking down on free speech and think to themselves, this is a problem. And it could reverse itself and bite us. This is not a single-edged blade.

GLENN: Right.

BEN: It's a serious problem, that they're allowing the hecklers veto to prevail here. That somebody from the community will threaten something, and suddenly 100 officers are necessary. And we ban everyone from the general public. They've now done this at northwestern. They did this at UC Berkeley. They just ban people from coming in entirely from the outside community. Whereas, last week, Anita Hill spoke at UConn, and it was completely open to the public. They barely needed security. It was totally fine.

GLENN: All right. So you're going to join us today for a few minutes on the television show. We'll do some stuff for subscribers only on TheBlaze. We'll talk about the future of the conservative movement. And what our principles are and how we navigate from here.

But I want to talk to you about kind of the news of the day. Get your point of view on, do we have the audio of the secret society? Or do you have the latest memo or piece?

Two days ago -- was it two days ago or yesterday, Ron Johnson comes out, and he said, and we have -- we have a source that says there was a secret society. Meetings that were going on. And we know we have this text message. And something didn't feel right.

I want everything released because if that is happening, but I also said, I think it was yesterday, that kind of sounds a little like McCarthy saying, I've got the names of 250 people right in my pocket. If you don't have it, you're going to destroy everything.

And here's what we found out yesterday, about what that -- that memo -- or that text message actually said. Here's the clip. Go ahead.

But we're going to have to decide --

GLENN: Sorry. Sarah, not that one. Go ahead.

STU: The single message -- again, the single text message sent the day after Trump was elected was from senior FBI lawyer Lisa Page to Peter Strzok, the top counterintelligence officer at the FBI and a key figure in the bureau's past investigation into Trump and Clinton.

Here's the quote: Are you even going to give out your calendars, Page asked Strzok. Seems kind of depressing. Maybe it should just be the first meeting of the secret society.

GLENN: Ben, that's not a secret society.

BEN: No. No. The way all Republicans are talking it up yesterday was like, this is going to be the view from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, where he looks down and there's just a bunch of people chanting. Tearing the guy's heart out and setting it on fire.

GLENN: Big fire. Cutting him up.

BEN: And what it actually ends up being is just a bunch of nerds who sit around and have beer and talk about work. But I really -- this is my big problem, is no one is waiting for all the evidence to come out, before and their narrative conclusion is Donald Trump definitely concluded with Russia, and the FBI is in the midst of one of the greatest investigations of our time that is going to uncover the real source of Donald Trump's victory. And any questions that are asked about that are completely out of line.

And then on the right, you have this counter-narrative, that the FBI is thoroughly corrupt. It has been completely run through with people on the left who don't care about the truth and are simply out to get President Trump.

And my tendency is to think that there's a lot of in between there, and it's probably somewhere in the in between. Meaning, that there probably are people like Strzok and Page, who don't like Trump. We don't really know the impact that they've had on this particular investigation. One of the texts that people seem to be ignoring on the right is the text from Strzok to Page, saying, it's going nowhere.

STU: Right. There's no there there, right?

GLENN: No, they're actually -- yeah, the right is now starting to use that and say, look, even this guy said, there's no there there. Well, you can't have it both ways. You can't say he's an evil guy trying to take him down, oh, and he didn't want to join.

BEN: None of it makes any sense. And all of these propositions can be true. It can be true that the FBI was politicized by the Obama administration. Most clearly in the Hillary Clinton investigation. There's no question that the FBI was political in that investigation.

GLENN: Yes, correct.

BEN: It's also true there are bad apples in the FBI. It can also be true that the investigation right now is doing what it's supposed to do. It can also be true that that investigation has gone beyond its original bounds and is now moving into obstruction, which seems to me a lot more of a stretch.

Right. All these things can be true at once. But people are not waiting for all the evidence to come out, before they jump to whatever facts support the conclusion that they want. Either the FBI is thoroughly corrupt, or the FBI is thoroughly pristine.

STU: And to find the real conclusion here. Doesn't the theater hurt? This idea that everyone comes out and screams about how we know we have a security society. And we know Russia has colluded with Trump.

Doesn't that really hurt the search for the actual truth?

BEN: It does. And one of the biggest problems that I have here is that there is information that could easily be declassified and is not being declassified.

President Trump is the president of the United States. He is the chief executive. That means that he actually gets to declassify, for example, the FISA application on Carter Page. One of the big complaints from people on the right, I think quite -- quite -- quite possible this is true -- is that the FISA application on Carter Page was based on the Steele dossier, the Fusion GPS dossier that was funded by the Democrats and was essentially based on Russia disinformation.

Okay. If that's the case, then why not just release the application? Right? The FISA application, Trump can do that. He can do that right now.

And I've been told by people, well, he doesn't want to look like he's politicizing the investigation.

How does he not look like he's politicizing the investigation? I mean, the guy tweets about Jeff Sessions and Andrew McCabe and James Comey every five minutes.

All I want, you know, just as an American, all I want is more information and less conjecture. Because all I'm getting is conjecture and posturing. And now you've got -- the Democrats are putting out their memos. So now we have a memo fight. We have these secondhand memos that are not even based on the classified intel fighting with each other. It's all stupidity to me. I don't understand --

GLENN: Yeah. The classified memos -- even the people who are writing memos about them haven't seen the classified memos.

BEN: This is what the DOJ says. And if that's not true, then wouldn't you expect Devin Nunes to say, no, I have seen the classified material, and my memo was based on that classified material? But the DOJ emailed Devin Nunes, sent them a letter yesterday, and they said, listen, don't release that classified memo.

Because number one, a compromise to national security. But number two, you actually haven't seen the underlying classified materials you're talking about. So why are we reading a memo, not based on the classified materials that are actually at issue, especially when a lot of those classified materials could become declassified by the president?

All this says to me -- here's where I think this is going, based on the evidence that's on the table. Where I think this is going is I think Robert Mueller is going to try to establish a pattern of obstruction against President Trump. He's going to suggest that President Trump was trying to fire James Comey and go after his own DOJ and go after Andrew McCabe in order to stop an investigation into him. Because whether or not Trump is innocent, he thinks he's innocent. And, therefore, he was trying to, quote, unquote, obstruct the investigation. This is the problem with obstruction as a charge, there doesn't actually have to be an underlying crime in order for you to obstruct. Right? If you're obstructing an investigation, it doesn't matter whether there's actually underlying anything that went bad.

The problem is, I think we're going to get the worst-case scenario. Because I've become a pessimist, that we always get the worst-case scenario.

GLENN: Yes.

BEN: The worst-case scenario here is that, there is no actual legal obstruction. Right? Because the actual statutes and obstruction do not cover President Trump firing James Comey, or even saying to Andrew McCabe, who did you vote for? That doesn't -- obstruction is a legal charge.

As a lawyer, these charges in the US code do not apply to what President Trump has done. It doesn't matter.

The left seizes on Mueller's suggestion that there has been some sort of informal obstruction. And then they launch an impeachment push against President Trump. And then Republicans are forced into the position of having to defend some of the stupid and I think dismal things that Trump has done, from firing Comey, which I think was dumb, to demanding a loyalty oath. All these sorts of things that are not illegal, but are not smart.

And so we're sitting around, defending those. And then the Democrats are browbeating us and saying they need impeachment. It just -- it ends up being a battle over bad behavior, as opposed to a battle over criminality. And the left will charge that the right is fine with criminality. And the right will say that the right is trying to use the law in the wrong ways.

And, you know -- both will be half right, and both will be half wrong. And it will just be awful. It will be awful all the way around.

GLENN: That's good. Good. Good.

STU: That's optimism.

BEN: The good news is I honestly don't think the impeachment tribe will go anywhere. And I think people will survive.

Honestly, I don't think people care that much about this, other than the diehard political fanatics on the right who think Trump is absolutely innocent of everything and has never done anything wrong. And people on the left who think that Trump is absolutely guilty of everything and is going to be impeached. They're waiting for the deus ex machina to come in and just remove Trump from office, which is not happening.

GLENN: So I think we're in the same area. I talked about it a few weeks ago and said, I don't think anything is going to happen with the Trump information. But sadly, what I think is going to happen is we're going to miss the mark on Russia. This whole investigation --

BEN: Russia, we haven't mentioned that in 15 minutes.

GLENN: Russia. I know. This is not about -- look, I think Hillary Clinton was absolutely corrupt. And the FBI has mountains of evidence of lots of people in -- in our government in Washington, that were corrupt with Uranium One. Why haven't we seen any of that evidence? Now, whether she was personally corrupt, sure looks like it. But I don't know.

When it comes to Donald Trump, I don't like the meeting in Trump Tower, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But I don't know if there's any crime there that's been committed.

I do know this, the FBI has known things about Russia. And they have not -- they have not followed through. Why? Is there someone that is saying, you know, kind of like, what's his name that went in and took the documents out of the library of Congress, or the --

STU: Sandy Berger.

GLENN: Yeah. The national archives. Both sides were kind of like, no, that's pretty okay. I'm pretty okay with that. Because both sides are dirty with Russia. We need to know, can we trust our Justice Department? Yes or no?

Can we trust them to do independent investigations? And the second thing is, how bad are things with Russia? How could is the influence and the bribery and the scandal with his Russia? And let the chips fall where they may. I don't think it's going to happen.

BEN: I agree with a lot of this. And I also don't think it's going to happen. I think everyone -- if you're on the side of what the FBI is doing right now, then you're going to stand up for the FBI no matter what.

If you don't like what the FBI is doing right now, then you're going to suggest they're a nefarious institution in the pay of the opposite side.

GLENN: How do either of these not accomplish the goals of Vladimir Putin, of destroying our republic?

BEN: Well, I mean, I think that Putin was very smart. He realized that all he had to do was drop a hint of conspiratorialism into American politics, and everybody would jump on it with both feet.

And he was right. It's worked. We're at each other's throat over essentially -- I'm not sure there's much there there. And I think that's particularly true. If you look in another area, where Russia was supposedly nefarious, I really don't think that Russian bots were manipulating people's information hold during the last election cycle. I think people are jumping on that because they find it politically useful. So Russia interfered in the election. But I think what they've done even more -- to more success even, is they've allowed that impression that they interfered in the last election cycle to now create the basis on which everything else moves.

So, for example, the release of the memo hashtag that was trending last week, suddenly Dianne Feinstein and Adam Schiff are suggesting the reason it's trending is because of Russian bots. And they're calling on Facebook and Twitter to actually crack down on these nonexistent Russian bots that were supposedly sending this trending. Daily Beast did a report yesterday, and they said it wasn't Russian bots. That was just a bunch of Republicans who were hashtagging -- the point that Dianne Feinstein and Schiff are doing is -- what they are doing is they want Facebook and Twitter to crack down on right-wing media outlets, claiming that's a way of cracking down on fake news. So they're using the Russia bot stuff and they're using the Russia stuff as a proxy of getting to a political goal they want to get to. I swear, every day, I wake up and I think -- I'm cynical enough about politics today. And then by that night, I'm thinking, my God, I need to be twice as cynical as I was this morning. Because it just doesn't work.

GLENN: Back with more Ben Shapiro here in a second. Markets are beginning to price for potential interest rate hike in March. If you missed the show last night. I did a chalkboard. And it was really interesting.

Because I know I did this chalkboard a couple of times when I was at Fox. One that was similar. And I said, look, this is what I'm looking for. This is where we're going to start to have trouble. If these things happen.

Well, now, these things have happened. If you missed the chalkboard last night, make sure you watch it on TheBlaze.com/TV. Become a subscriber. And please, watch the first ten minutes of last night's show, because you will be prepared for what I believe is coming. And it's all due to math and history.

GLENN: Talking to Ben Shapiro, who I think is the leader of the future movement of the conservative -- of conservative thought in America.

He is everywhere on college campuses and everywhere online, where it counts with the youth.

We were -- we're in a weird situation right now, to where we have a president who is, in many ways, giving us as conservatives, things that we haven't seen since maybe Reagan. Okay? We have a great Supreme Court justice. Israel, for the love of Pete. Reagan didn't even do that.

BEN: Yep.

GLENN: So we have some great things. And then we're also in this position of having a guy who we -- is real -- lives a despicable life, if those porn star things are true. Okay? And I tend to believe they're true.

So you look at this, and for some reason, we can't say, I -- bad Trump, good Trump. Don't like that Trump. Like that one.

BEN: Yes.

GLENN: You have to buy into all of it. And I think that's killing us.

BEN: I totally agree. I mean, during the last election cycle actually coined the good Trump, bad Trump framework. I actually had sticks with faces of Trump on them. And when he would do something good, I would hold up the happy Trump. When he would do something bad, I would hold up the sad Trump.

We had -- we actually had the jingle on my podcast. Good Trump, bad Trump. Which one will it be today?

And that is -- I think the biggest problem I have right now with the way American politics are going, it really is not about Trump. It's about us. Because if we're not willing to call out bad when we see it, even from people that we like what we're getting from them, then we can't have an honest conversation.

It turns into simply, fanboying or fangirling for a particular political figure. You see this on the left too. They can't call out -- they couldn't call out Obama when Obama was engaged in obvious corruption with the IRS, for example. While saying, we like Obamacare. But we don't like what he's doing with the IRS. You see this on the right now, with regard to Trump's character.

Look, Trump is character deficient. There's just no question that the man is -- you would not have him babysit your children. Right? You have a list of people. He's near the bottom of the list in terms of people he would be responsible for like my one and a half-year-old son.

GLENN: Yes. My 13-year-old son.

BEN: May be more dangerous for the 13-year-old actually. You don't know what will pop up on the pay-per-view.

GLENN: Let's not even talk about him. People I really respect and like. Tony Perkins. What the hell was this?

STU: Interesting phrasing of that question.

GLENN: Yeah.

BEN: Yeah, so do I.

I think, again, we have to learn to live with cognitive dissonance. You can like a lot of the things he's doing. And as an evangelical Christian, or as an Orthodox Jew, as I am, I think you can stand and say, listen, this guy is standing up for religious liberty, with the judges that he's appointing. He's standing up for Israel. He's standing up for -- he spoke at the March For Life. He's standing up for a lot of religious priorities that I really like. And all of that is wonderful, and all of that is good. Also, you shouldn't have sex with porn stars while you're married and your wife just gave birth.

GLENN: If you're a religious leader, I think you should leave it at, you shouldn't have sex with porn stars, unless it's your wife.

(laughter)

Then you should talk to her about not being a porn star.

BEN: But the fact that we feel compelled to make excuses for bad behavior is something that I think leads people who are in the middle, not even on the left, people in the middle to say, well, you're not being intellectually honest about your own side. And you lose your own moral credibility in that line.

I'm not worried about Trump losing his credibility. Trump is a big boy. He can protect himself. He's shown that he's fully capable of kicking back of kicking back against people who criticize him. He does it all the time. He doesn't need people playing defense for his personal failings. And, by the way, his personal failings don't damage him politically.

I mean, I have an entire theory of what damages Trump politically. And the answer basically is what we call the -- the -- the strong efficient markets theory. Right? That when it comes to the stock market, there's a theory. That you cannot beat the stock market because everything is already priced in. Right? You have analysts who are all day sitting there and looking at companies and determining what their value is.

So unless there's a new piece of information, it's not going to change the stock price of any given stock. So you can't beat the market. I think that that holds true, particularly for Trump, even to the extent that new information doesn't change what you feel about Trump.

If you think Trump is despicable, you're still going to think Trump is despicable. If you think he's wonderful, you're still going to think he's wonderful.

Which suggests to me, that when he does something bad, we don't to have stand around and defend him. Like this is going to destroy his political career. The man won an election after being caught on tape, talking about -- bragging about grabbing women by the genitals. I don't think he requires your defense at this point. I think he'll be just fine. But I'm not sure that you will be just fine. Right? It's really about you. It's about what you are willing to say is good or bad. And what your friends think about you, and what people think of as a person, based on what you are willing to condemn and what you are willing to accept.

GLENN: But you can accept the policies and despise the actions in personal life.

BEN: 100 percent.

GLENN: And it's perfectly okay. But people aren't willing to embrace that. Tonight, 5 o'clock, Ben Shapiro will be joining us on TheBlaze.com/TV.

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

“He’s killing it”: The truth about Trump’s 2028 power team

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 currency swap could CRUSH China’s grip on South America

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

Ben Shapiro: You Can Like Trump’s Policies While Admitting He’s ‘Character-Deficient’

Ben Shapiro: ‘Nikki Haley at the UN Is Basically My Spirit Animal’

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

“He’s killing it”: The truth about Trump’s 2028 power team

Transcript

Why Trump’s currency swap could CRUSH China’s grip on South America

Transcript